If you intresting in sport Buy trenbolone and Buy testosterone enanthate you find place where you can find information about steroids
  • Resources

  • Book of the Month

  • Shopping on Amazon? Use this search box and support Dangerous Talk at the same time.
  • Blog Directories

    blog search directory Religion Top Blogs
  • AdSense

Republican Political Correctness

Traditionally Political Correctness has been viewed as a liberal thing but quite frankly, I don’t see it. While it is true that Democrats usually try to play nice and look down on those who use racial and sexual slurs, Democrats don’t usually push for laws restricting free speech and when they do whine about “hurtful words” I tend to denounce that point of view in favor of free speech.

If you remember Janet Jackson’s now infamous “wardrobe malfunction,” it was the Republicans leading the censorship charge on that day. Religious fundamentalists whined about moral standards with righteous indignation. I will grant you that Democrats went along with that, but the effort was lead by Republicans.

When Congress wanted to raise FCC fines against broadcasters for “indecency” it was again Religious Right Republicans whined and cried about dirty words and sexually explicit language who lead the effort to increase those fines astronomically. At a time of war, they even tacked this resolution on a defense spending bill to insure 100% support from the Senate.

Now, Governor Sarah Palin is leading the latest anti-free speech campaign against jokes she considers in “poor taste.” After late night talk show comedian and host David Letterman told a few jokes about Palin, her daughter, and Democrat Eliot Spitzer, Governor Palin went on the warpath. Aside from her blatant mischaracterization of Letterman’s joke, Palin then insinuated that Letterman was a pedophile.

Here are the jokes that Sarah Palin found “offensive”:
Joke 1: “[Sarah Palin] Bought makeup at Bloomingdale’s to update her ’slutty flight attendant’ look.”
Joke 2: “An awkward moment during the seventh inning, her [Palin] daughter [Bristol] was knocked up by Alex Rodriguez.”
Joke 3: Palin having problems keeping Eliot Spitzer away from her daughter [Bristol].

Palin claims that the jokes were focused on her 14-year-old daughter Willow, but Willow wasn’t the one who has been in the news for being “knocked up” out of wedlock. That would be Bristol. So while Willow was the daughter at the game, the joke was clearly in reference to the older daughter. The joke just wouldn’t make sense if it were about Willow Palin. Governor Palin (who didn’t even understand the joke by her own admission) claims that it was aimed at Willow so that she can use the joke to claim that Letterman was joking about rape (presumably she meant statutory rape) and then insinuating that he could be a pedophile. When questioned about that insinuation, Palin attempted to back off that statement with the claim that her daughter Willow might use violence toward the talk show host. It was a pretty weak back track since her original meaning was very clear and obvious and even the new spin could be considered “over the line.”

While we could just laugh this off as that wacky Sarah Palin trying to get back in the news, she has gotten other Republicans to speak out against Letterman and his jokes. The head of the Republican Party is even calling for a boycott of Letterman’s show and I won’t be surprised if some sort of legislation is introduced because of Letterman’s jokes.

While Letterman tried to explain himself and defuse the controversy by inviting Palin on his show, Palin won’t have it. Instead, she and her religious fundamentalist base have stepped up the rhetoric and have taken the rest of the Republican establishment with them. It seems that the Alaskan Governor sees this as an issue she can capitalize on to elevate her status within the GOP.

As a free speech activist, I support David Letterman and his jokes. If Letterman had made jokes about the President’s daughters, I wouldn’t have a problem with that either if they were in the news. When Bush’s daughters were in the news for binge drinking, there were plenty of jokes being thrown around. Bristol Palin has become a public figure because of her mother’s abstinence only policies. Bristol of course got “knocked up” and paraded around during her mother’s failed VP campaign. Willow on the other hand has not made the news and had Letterman’s joke attacked her, I might be more inclined to take to her defense.

Now however, Sarah Palin has moved Willow into the spotlight so she is now fair game. What did the Alaskan Governor say to the mob of homosexuals when her witchdoctor pastor was visiting? “Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as [is] good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.” -Genesis 19:8

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
  • Robb

    Par for the Republican course.

  • KAH

    This reminds me once again that I have somehow found myself hopelessly imprisoned on insane asylum planet earth. And while I suppose I used to be a crazy myself, it would be nice if there were some sort of review board that would now allow me release to some less maddening, or shall I say mad, version of reality.

  • KAH

    oh, and perhaps a blog about what morality and immorality really are and why the religious nut jobs are obviously ludicrous with their limitations, would be nice. I’d write one but I have no readers.

    • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks
      • KAH

        Oh – you already did! And now I commented on it. Perhaps you could respond even though its an old blog?

  • Linda

    I used to like Palin until I heard she was a member of a church whose pastor hates Jews.

  • Tomkinson

    Sarah Palin is an idiot and is the reason McCain lost my support but Letterman is being disingenuous. Why, if she was seriously offended, would she go on his program and boost his ratings? That would be illogical.

    But aside from this TOTALLY irreverent kerfuffle I am glad that Staks is a free-speech activist. I hope I’ve found another donor for http://www.thefire.org/ but seeing as he doesn’t think libs “push for laws restricting free speech” I doubt it.

  • TheresaEmilyAnn

    Too much is brought to the public eye in terms of peoples personal lives. People then pay too much attention to things that are not their business, and comment when they should stay silent. Freedom of speech IS a good thing, but Letterman was mean.

    • http://www.dangeroustalk.net Staks

      Letterman told a JOKE!!!No one cried went Laura Ingrate called Meghan McCain fat and that was not a joke. That was mean. So spare me the righteous indignation.

      • Tomkinson

        I don’t remember too much of a brouhaha when the Golfer said he had a picture of the white house dog and then showed a picture of Chelsea Clinton either but there were fewer 24/7 “news” channels back then.

  • http://markmwangi.me.ke/ Mark Mwangi

    Things never change. So now it was Gods will for those children to be murdered?

    • http://twitter.com/Kibiego Kevin Kibiego

      isn’t it his will that all things be done?

  • http://www.facebook.com/JoshSaucier79 Joshua Saucier

    i read the ” School shootings caused by ‘Under God’ in pledge” and it was as brilliant as this one.

  • nothingsperfect

    So ”God called them all home” by knowingly creating the person who murdered the children. What a wonderful father? Why did he create them in the first place? Why worship such an sadist? To hell with the father, son and holy spirit!

  • http://twitter.com/BobAkimbo Bob Akimbo
  • Zardoz

    I can’t honestly be too critical of President Obama for saying this, mostly because it is one of those sayings ingrained in Christian culture. They don’t even think about what the actual words mean anymore because they all know what is meant ie. God is looking after them now. This, presumably, is a way of coping with the loss.

    There are hundreds of sayings in the culture which are either abhorrent or make no sense if you take the words literally.

  • http://www.facebook.com/april.trotter.9 April Trotter

    I don’t see why this is so surprising. When the shit hits the fan is when most people feel the most religious. Unless you’re a staunch Atheist then you are probably feeling a little religious right now with kids dying all over the place and The “Mayan Apocalypse” right around the corner. None of this is surprising. Religious people need to make sense of tragedies and this is how they do it. This is how they have always done it. I don’t see a reason for the outrage, this kind of thing goes on all the time.

  • http://www.facebook.com/judy.lynne.42 Judy Lynne

    What!!! Oh, really. Keep your religious errors out of your public statements! You’re our President, not our National Pastor!

  • Ronlawhouston

    OK – let’s say that you’re a parent of a 6 year old killed by the shooter. Do you want the President of the United States to come to your town and say ” Dude, it sucks to be you. Some random asshole came to your town and killed your kid.” The POTUS might be right but sometimes speaking reality is not what we want from our leaders.

    In many ways the whole statement is merely a reaffirmation of psychological projection. The parents wish they could have done more to protect the children. In their minds they failed, perhaps miserably. The statement that “God took them home,” is a statement to assuage the parent’s guilt. Even if they were powerless to protect the child, some bigger parent was there to “take them home” and look out for them.

    Honestly folks, stop analyzing things to the extreme from an atheist perspective and perhaps consider than when confronted with things that are difficult for the rational mind to accept people sometimes rely on less than rational explanations.

    Love them, don’t judge them.

  • DisqusMs.

    For God’s sake … How can you people make such mountains out of molehills?
    I am so sick of the nitpickers making sh*t up every time they turn around. So sick.

  • http://twitter.com/TreeroyWoW Keir

    Any believer in a just and merciful god does not believe in Hell.
    Unfortunately, this is not the case.

  • http://skepticink.com/dangeroustalk Dangerous Talk

    They’re not home. They’re dead. That means that they will never go home again.

  • http://www.facebook.com/JoshSaucier79 Joshua Saucier

    nothing

  • http://www.facebook.com/Cheesecakeczar Andrew Van Marm

    True but irrelevant. What he said was simply Christian, not offensively Christian. He didn’t say it was God’s plan for them to die, but that they are now in heaven, as innocent children are usually accepted to go. The act of God “calling them home” was after the shooting.

  • http://skepticink.com/dangeroustalk Dangerous Talk

    I think it is pretty offensively Christian. As I pointed out in the article.

  • nothingsperfect

    Where in the Bible does it say ”innocent children” go to heaven? Jesus says that he’s the only way to heaven (John 14:6) and it’s only those who ”has the Son” (1 John 5:12) that get to heaven.

    So it’s only those who believe and accept Christ as their Lord and Saviour that get to be in heaven. Children who haven’t made this commitment get to be in hell, so it seems.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Cheesecakeczar Andrew Van Marm

    Matthew 19:14: Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

    This verse is usually interpreted to mean that little children already have salvation, since they are innocent in their young age. This of course depends on whether one believes in original sin, which really lacks any biblical basis. Even if it weren’t in the Bible, it could be assumed that they are not old enough to be fairly judged.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Cheesecakeczar Andrew Van Marm

    Also, to have the Son can have multiple interpretations. One can consider having the Son as just by being a good person as he was, whether or not one recognizes his supposed divinity.

  • nothingsperfect

    Why would ‘god’s word’ be so comfusing by having ”multiple interpretations”? How can we understand what god is saying if the meaning is not clear to everyone? It makes no sense.

  • nothingsperfect

    If the biblical god loves ”little children” he would not have drowned them all at the time of the flood (Gen. 6-8) or order them to be killed (1 Sam. 15:1-3), etc. And for Christians this god is Jesus. Yes, Jesus!
    I think that the god who would do such terrible things to ”little children” would send them to hell. Salvation is an act of faith in the work of Christ and that applies to children. It’s something that the person must do: ”What must I do to be saved?” says Acts 16:30-31 for example. I know it makes no sense, but we’re talking about the Bible don’t forget.

  • rg57

    That would appear to rule out Christianity. Jesus apparently talked about everlasting fire and gnashing of teeth for Jews, nonbelievers, and other undesirables like us. The Gospel authors, who were presumably the primary sources for information of Jesus and Christianity, wanted to portray this as very important. (Matthew 13:41-42 for example)