Happy Christmas (The War [on Christmas] is Over)

As usual John Stewart ends up presenting things I would like to, and in a much better way. So, I defer to his commentary on the War on Christmas. Beyoind pointing out the obvious that Christmas is a cultural holiday (I'll save my Robert Bellah analysis for later), I would just like to emphasize that religious freedom is much better today than it was in America's past. It is this freedom and its resulting multiperspectivism that is leading to the reactionary fabrication of the war on Christmas. It doesn't really exist. The conservatives who long for the return of America's Golden Days are deluding themselves and creating some Matrix-style memory construct that isn't real for the purpose of advancing their selfish agenda. Progress makes things better. Fighting it by creating a culture war to benefit one side only leads to mess we are in (NDAA and SOPA for easy examples). So Merry Christmas, or Happy Holidays. Us liberals really don't care what you call it.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
War on Christmas - Historical Fact-Checking
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

And Then There Were (Six)

I hate to jump in with 11 months to go but after tonight"s Republican debate I have to solidify my position.  As the Circus is down to six candidates (no Huntsman here), here are my reactions:
Perry: the poor man's Bush Clone.  He was an Air Force pilot, but yet doesn't know what is and isn't a Predator drone.  But then he seems confused about everything.  Not a person to have on the button.
Paul: beside being the real life version of Jeff Dunham's Walter, he seems genuine and his political theory seems consistent.  But it's not coherent.  Not with the real world. 0% taxes, yeah that's going to work.  Given his isolationist stance, I can't believe he's accepted as a Republican.  Sure, with great power comes great responsibility.  That doesn't mean we should give up our influence on the world.  As a sole superpower, we owe it to ourselves and others to do what we can when we really think it will improve the world.
Santorum: One word - santorum.
Romney: My guess for nominee.  With $10,000 to casually bet, he really showed how out of touch he is with the working class.  I wouldn't expect much out of him.  The shots taken at him about being liberal were right (for a conservative).  His healthcare law is more liberal and works better than Obama's.  That may be a plus if he wins.
Bachmann: Uh, well, let's see, she attacked Obama's tax cuts on the middle class.  Aren't Republicans pushing for lower taxes?  Not when the cuts aren't theirs. I don't recall social security being in a lockbox, so any cuts come out of the general fund, regardless of source.  Can't she just move back to Iowa, that's all she talks about anyway.  She certainly hasn't done anything for her constituents. Don't get me started, let's move on before I have an aneurysm.
Gingrich:  The only "old-school" republican left.  He showed his inability to separate theory from practice, his mean-spirited disposition and his lack of self-discipline.  As a "Reaganite he was a pain in the country's ass in 1993 and still is (see my previous remarks about him and his inconsistency following capitalist principles)  Accused of being overly academic, it's interesting that anytime a liberal proposes a solution based on real world data, they get labeled as part of left-wing academia, too smart for the country.  I think Newt's academic outlook will be his undoing, but if any Republicans actually support him, they either have to answer for their anti-intellectualism or be a (I'll let you fill in the blank).  He let's his ideology overcome knowledge and given his disposition doesn't seem to be a good choice for the button either.

I'm glad I'm not a Republican, it would be a hard choice to support any of these candidates.