Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Liberal Absolutes and a victory for Christmas

Those of us on the right tend to call it "twisting" when it comes to liberal responses to simple questions. Actually, the root cause of their seemingly emotionally charged, warped responses come from a practice of seeing things in absolutes.

And sometimes they just don't get the point.

When someone on the right indicates that we can't leave Iraq the left says, "So we must stay in Iraq forever?"

If that's what will protect freedom, and our nation, then I suppose so. Depends on the need. Hear that? Depends. No absolute. Try it on other things, leftwingers. Look at the world from the point of view that things may change, and all plans don't always work out exactly as expected.

That is not defeatism, as one commenter on the left may say. Abandoning a nation that will fold faster than South Vietnam did once we are gone is defeatism.

How about the War on Christmas issue? They seem to think that saying Merry Christmas is offensive. They seem to think that Christians want to force everyone to say Merry Christmas. In the words of Bill O'Reilly, we don't care whether or not you decide to say Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, or whatever. What we have a problem with is when government agencies or employers order people not to say anything with the word Christmas in it. It is wrong to take away someone's right to say Merry Christmas, or to celebrate it with Christmas decorations.

By the way, speaking of Christmas and Bill O'Reilly, he announced tonight that the Christmas Trees are back in the Seattle Airport. The public outcry was enough for them to return the trees.

That, my friends, is a victory for Christmas.

On another note, I have an interview of a fellow blogger in the works, probably to be posted Thursday night. Stop by to read it. I expect the interview to be educational and thought provoking.

God Bless.


Anonymous said...

So if it's not an either or for you, than what's your definition of victory?

And please answer this question: Since we, the greatest military in the world today, obviously haven't quelled the increasing sectarian violence, the Bathist insurgent violence, nor the terrorist violence that Bush always claims is behind all his/the troubles in Iraq, what makes you think we can train the Iraqis to do it?

Anonymous said...

No one thinks saying Merry Christmas is offensive - it's you and Oh Really who think saying "Happy Holidays" is offensive.

Anonymous said...

testing testing..sure hope this works and thanks for the help with the comments!

Anonymous said...


Your excellent point fall on deaf ears.

Just a side note, if you go into Blogger and change the settings on your blog under comments you can make it so that only registered users can post comments. It might help clean up some of the trash around here of late.

Anonymous said...


Douglas has his rights to allow mudkitty to say what she wants even though she may not agree with yours or Doug's opinions or mine for that matter, but that is a form of censorship and I would prefer not to be in amongst censorship. If you don't like what mudkitty says than just ignore it and write what you wanted to write to Doug or anyone else posting on the article.

It's called freedom of speech Christopher.

Anonymous said...

Douglas has every right to do as he pleases on his blog, agreed.

I am fully aware of what Freedom of Speech is, so don't condescend to me. Censorship is certainly not blocking someone from commenting on your blog. If Mudkitty wants, she has the right to create her own blog and speak freely all she wants.

This is, as you point out, Douglas' forum. He can choose to allow or deny anyone to post comments at his discretion.

So I can sit here all day and tell Doug to block Mudkitty. STOP trying to censor my free speech!

Anonymous said...


I am not being condescending to you so don't even go there.

That is outrageous that you would tell someone to go and create their own blog just because you don't want to let mudkitty to say what she wants.

Like I said if you don't agree with what mudkitty writes then just ignore it and it seems to me that you are the one who has a problem with ignoring those you don't agree with.

You go right after some one you don't agree with and that is wrong to begin with. Ignore it if you don't agree with it but mudkitty has every write to say what she wants. Otherwise you are Censoring her freedom of speech.

No one is censoring your free speech, But I think that it is better left to Doug to decide, what I was referring to is that if Doug had wanted to block mudkitty don't you think that he would have done so before now?

Besides, if you tell mudkitty to go and create her own blog just because you don't agree with what she writes then the same can be said for you.

Anonymous said...

Out of respect for Doug, I really do not want to turn this into an all out argument here. But I would like to reply.

I never told anyone to start a blog, I was rebutting your comment about free speech, period.

Go after? I'm sure there are hundreds of comments here that I disagreed with that I did not "go after" the writer, but don't let facts stand in the way of your attack on me. In fact, I'm sure mudkitty posted many things I disagreed with before I said one word.

I made a suggestion that is completely Doug's decision, and you attacked me for it.

Didn't Douglas already make a significant post about the types of "comments" that mudkitty makes that have no value other than to spark argument? And did he not already say he would moderate comments if it continued? I would rather see one troll blocked than everyone suffer for it by being moderated.

I don't have a problem ignoring anyone. I have a problem with anyone here who is not the owner of this blog telling me what I can and cannot say while blabbering on about censorship and free speech.

Physician heal thyself.

Douglas, I apologize if any of this banter bothers you. And I stand by my position - it's your blog. If you don't like what I've posted I take no offense at you deleting my comments.

Anonymous said...

And one other thing Night Rider.

I do take offense at your baseless assertion that I go around like some kind of thug attacking people with whom I do not agree.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Perhaps if you did a little research before you spoke you might know that I do not simply "go after" people as you put it.

Anonymous said...

Christopher wrote this after the one below: I never told anyone to start a blog, I was rebutting your comment about free speech, period.

I am fully aware of what Freedom of Speech is, so don't condescend to me. Censorship is certainly not blocking someone from commenting on your blog. If Mudkitty wants, she has the right to create her own blog and speak freely all she wants. And what was that line from, not from me.

Anonymous said...

Wow. I am sure everyone else here understood clearly what I was trying to say, except you. So I will, in the simplest terms I can muster, try to explain it for you.

1. You said that blocking someone from commenting on this blog was censoring them and denying them the right to freedom of speech.

2. I replied by stating that mudkitty was free to start a blog if she wanted, merely indicating that she was still able to exercise her right to free speech even if she could not comment here.

I did not mean to tell mudkitty to start her own blog literally. I was using it as an example to prove a point in rebuttal to your claims.

And now, I am going to practice that which you claimed I was incapable of by ignoring you from now on.

Anonymous said...


Christopher wrote: I did not mean to tell mudkitty to start her own blog literally. I was using it as an example to prove a point in rebuttal to your claims.

If you didn't mean it that way then why did you say it that way.

Anonymous said...

"No one thinks saying Merry Christmas is offensive'

Another great insight.
I have to start saving these...


Anonymous said...

Rider...I always knew you were/are a gent. Along w/DG, (and so many others whom I encounter on my various tours of rightwing sites.)

As I always say, I may be a troll, but I'm your troll. (And trolls have more fun than blondes.)

No question about it...DG can take care of his own concerns.

Anonymous said...

Now, let us not talk about me for a change. (I'm a boring middle aged, married lady, with twenty extra menopause pounds - Mudcat still likes me, though.)

Douglas V. Gibbs said...

Interesting exchange, Christopher and Night Rider, and in a sense you both had valid points. I don't mind the banter, that's what this is for. Few things bother me enough to delete and Mudkitty knows what those things are. I'm pretty open to comments, but even I have my limits.

Douglas V. Gibbs said...

Now to answer Mudkitty's Questions. First, definition of victory. I really don't think that there can be a clear cut, absolute victory in the Middle East for freedom, ever. However, we can lose. A loss can be achieved by abandoning the region. As for the fact that we haven't quelled the sectarian violence, I think that we have diminished it greatly - - It is not up to us to train the Iraqis to eliminate that violence, but to control it to perameters not beyond ridiculous levels. Perhaps that's not possible, perhaps it is, but regardless, just because it may not be achievable does not mean we should give up. As a writer I've been told a number of times how nearly impossible it is to get published. Since I haven't achieved publication, should I quit? Should I not teach others what I have learned in the process?

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I agree, the concept of "victory" in the middle east is hippiesque utopianism.

Believe me, DG - you can get published. You have street cred, and you are a good writer, even if I don't agree with 90% of your premises.

You need an agent...you need to perfect your "quehry" writing skills (which for you, would be a snap.) As for publishers, have you contacted Regenry, just for starters?

Listen, I'm published. If I can get published...you can.

Talk to me more about this offline (well, off site, anyway) and we can get this publishing thing going for sure. Do you have a book idea? You certainly have an essay collection.

Douglas V. Gibbs said...

Thanks, Mudkitty, for the kind words. I know about the agent thing. This year I have 73 rejections from agents. The query letter is still evolving (fascinating word for a Christian to use, don't ya think?) as is the manuscript. I have written dozens of novels, nearly a hundred shortstories, and over a hundred poems. I've been writing all my life. Part of the reason for my web presence is simply to create that buzz so that when I do get published, I have an audience already. Dave of MyPoint Radio has compared my style to that of David Baldacci's. If you want to talk further about this, e-mail me at douglasvgibbs at yahoo dot com.

Anonymous said...

Ah...for some reason I thought you were talking about non-fiction. Fiction is very difficult to get published. But you can't give up.

Fiction - boy, that's a tough one.

Here's what I would do. I would research novels that are similar to yours in subject matter/tone/style...and I would find out who their editors are, and write to them.

The other thing I would do, is publish some non-fiction first which will get your foot in the door, and give you some credibility and authority.

Another thing I would do is adapt your manuscript into a screenplay...people love the "one, two punch."

I know...it's a lot of work. Nobody ever said the writing life was easy (except for the sitting part.)

Heard of Baldacci, haven't read him, but now I will.

Have you read the Neo-con interviews in the Jan. Vanity Fair?