My Trojans kick off Thursday night. So here we go.
1. Boise St. (they got one first place vote in the AP poll; no, I am not that vote)
2. TCU (I essentially see Boise and TCU as interchangeable; I like one of them to run the table, the other one to lose one, win their bowl game, and finish second)
3. Ohio St. (number two in both major polls; I'd argue they're the most talented team in the country)
4. Florida (I think of Florida, Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma in a lump one could re-order in any way one liked; I was surprised Bama got the top spot in both polls given how similarly I see them)
5. Alabama
6. Texas
7. Oklahoma
8. Virginia Tech (my lowest ranked team that I wouldn't be surprised if they won the title)
9. Oregon (their over/under is 9 wins; if you do worse than push betting the over that would be a surprise)
10. USC (14th on the AP poll, not eligible on the coaches poll; they won't get any poll breaks this season, but I think we win ten games)
11. Nebraska
12. Penn St. (why 19th on the writers poll? 9 win team, right?)
13. BYU (biggest disparity between my rankings and the other polls; BYU and Texas Tech are unranked by both writers and coaches - BYU over/under is 8 wins, that's a number I like - I don't love any of the win/loss numbers, except maybe..maybe USC since we play 13 games and the number is below 10, but I understand that number. I'm not advising mortgaging anything)
14. Texas Tech
15. Wisconsin
16. Iowa
17. West Virginia
18. Clemson
19. Cincinnati
20. Boston College
21. Pitt
22. Utah
23. LSU
24. Georgia
25. Houston
There are a few season win totals that you should consider.
Oregon (over 9)
Florida St (under 7.5)
Texas A&M (under 7)
Michigan (under 7)
BYU (over 8)
USC (over 9.5)
TBOR Athlete of The Month - August 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
Josh Hamilton
Runners-up: Brandon Morrow, Alex Rodriguez, Adam Wainwright
Hamilton joins the other 7 monthly winners in the race for TBOR Athlete of the Year. You can get to them here.
Back in '97, that winner was Tiger Woods. He won the AP award as well.
Jan - Desmond Howard (Natrone Means, Dorsey Levens, Desmond Howard)
Feb - Dominic Hasek (Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, Mark Jackson)
Mar - Mike Bibby (Keith Van Horne, Tony Gonzalez, Bobby Jackson)
Apr - Tiger Woods (Larry Walker, Kenny Lofton, Wayne Gretzky)
May - Roger Clemens (Tino Martinez, Tim Hardaway, Karl Malone)
June - Michael Jordan (Mike Vernon, Ernie Els, Tony Gwynn)
July - Martina Hingis (Pete Sampras, Roger Clemens, Justin Leonard)
Aug - Jeff Gordon (Roy Jones, Davis Love, Mark McGwire)
Sept - Barry Bonds (Ken Griffey, Charles Johnson, Mark McGwire)
Oct - Livan Hernandez (Gary Sheffield, Orel Hershiser, Charles Johnson)
Nov - Charles Woodson (Nick Van Exel, Barry Sanders, Terrell Davis)
Dec - Barry Sanders (Corey Dillon, Jerry Rice, Brian Griese)
1st and Ten: The Weekly Tendown August 22-28 2010
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Dear Internet:
There are segregated middle school class elections in Mississippi. In 2010.
Here's Tendown 41.
First: The Simplest of Jacks
Glenn Beck's I Have a Dream Speech was yesterday; it's hard to get overly agitated by Beck; he seems so transparently craven. If the American public wants to buy his John Birch society wine in new bottles, I suppose they can.
Except his aren't just simple arguments about American history; they're outright falsehoods, like the separation of church and state was a myth; I had a conversation with a student awhile ago who believed such, she offered quotes from Madison and Jefferson that didn't seem remotely plausible, and it turns out they're fabricated by David Barton, Glenn Beck's "historian". The student disbelieved this, instead taking the position that my education at "secular schools" disabled my ability to see the truth.
There is an agreement we need to make about facts; as members of an academic community, as citizens of a democracy, as thinking reeds; there have always been those on the fringe of American thought who wore tinfoil hats, now we put them on Fox News and call them real Americans.
The guts of Beck's March on Reality yesterday are his stated claim that King didn't fight for economic justice; you can see over and over again Beck's argument that the entirety of the King legacy is about color blindness (and who better to deliver that message in 2010 than the man who said the first African-American President has a "deep seated hatred for white people"). This is just factually incorrect. At the time of King's assassination (he was in Memphis supporting a garbage strike, a month before he spoke to 1300 striking sanitation workers, "Don’t go back on the job until the demands are met. “Never forget that freedom is not something that is voluntarily given by the oppressor. It is something that must be demanded by the oppressed....If we are going to get equality, if we are going to get adequate wages, we are going to have to struggle for it.) he was organizing the Poor People's Campaign:
King spent the last months of his life organizing a popular movement aimed at disrupting the machinery of the United States until the passage of an Economic Bill of Rights;
“The dispossessed of this nation—the poor, both white and Black—live in a cruelly unjust society. They must organize a revolution against that injustice, not against the lives of their fellow citizens, but against the structures through which the society is refusing to lift the load of poverty.”
These are not King quotes that you would have heard from Beck's stage yesterday.
The flaw is not entirely, or even largely, Beck's. Our national consciousness has almost entirely erased King's economic radicalism, focusing only on the elements of his civil rights work now largely considered benign; King's a commodified, beatified marker for the notion that all men are created equal. A notion that, when it comes to race, is accepted by even the most fact-free of the Simple Jack nation.
Except in Mississippi, that is, where the middle school class President has to be a white kid.
Like Muhammad Ali, King's had his edges dulled. Our collective understanding of him has been limited to a greeting card, "gosh, wouldn't it be great if little black boys and little white boys could hang out together and stuff and there'd be no more fighting. Boo on fighting! I have a dream where people won't be mean anymore."
And we can all get behind that. Corporations, elementary school teachers, Tea Partiers, Simple jack. You. Me. We're all against mean people in the abstract. Thanks, Dr. King.
But the guy who said:
“It is a tragic mix-up when the United States spends $500,000 for every enemy soldier killed, and only $53 annually on the victims of poverty.”
and
The profit motive, when it is the sole basis of an economic system, encourages a cutthroat competition and selfish ambition that inspires men to be more concerned about making a living than making a life.
and
A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.
and
True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice.
and
Any religion which professes to be concerned with the souls of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them, and the social conditions that cripple them, is a dry-as-dust religion.
That's a voice we could use more of in our national debate in 2010. Not to mention in Mississippi middle schools and tea party rallies on the Washington mall.
And in Tennessee - where they set fire to the mosque site last night. Probably though, Howard Dean will tell us that's due to good faith issues that good, well intentioned Americans have with the placement of a mosque at...er....Ground Zero...in Murfreesboro. Where they've had a mosque. For 30 years. Without incident. Until now.
After the jump - the rest of Tendown 41
There are segregated middle school class elections in Mississippi. In 2010.
Here's Tendown 41.
First: The Simplest of Jacks
Glenn Beck's I Have a Dream Speech was yesterday; it's hard to get overly agitated by Beck; he seems so transparently craven. If the American public wants to buy his John Birch society wine in new bottles, I suppose they can.
Except his aren't just simple arguments about American history; they're outright falsehoods, like the separation of church and state was a myth; I had a conversation with a student awhile ago who believed such, she offered quotes from Madison and Jefferson that didn't seem remotely plausible, and it turns out they're fabricated by David Barton, Glenn Beck's "historian". The student disbelieved this, instead taking the position that my education at "secular schools" disabled my ability to see the truth.
There is an agreement we need to make about facts; as members of an academic community, as citizens of a democracy, as thinking reeds; there have always been those on the fringe of American thought who wore tinfoil hats, now we put them on Fox News and call them real Americans.
The guts of Beck's March on Reality yesterday are his stated claim that King didn't fight for economic justice; you can see over and over again Beck's argument that the entirety of the King legacy is about color blindness (and who better to deliver that message in 2010 than the man who said the first African-American President has a "deep seated hatred for white people"). This is just factually incorrect. At the time of King's assassination (he was in Memphis supporting a garbage strike, a month before he spoke to 1300 striking sanitation workers, "Don’t go back on the job until the demands are met. “Never forget that freedom is not something that is voluntarily given by the oppressor. It is something that must be demanded by the oppressed....If we are going to get equality, if we are going to get adequate wages, we are going to have to struggle for it.) he was organizing the Poor People's Campaign:
King spent the last months of his life organizing a popular movement aimed at disrupting the machinery of the United States until the passage of an Economic Bill of Rights;
“The dispossessed of this nation—the poor, both white and Black—live in a cruelly unjust society. They must organize a revolution against that injustice, not against the lives of their fellow citizens, but against the structures through which the society is refusing to lift the load of poverty.”
These are not King quotes that you would have heard from Beck's stage yesterday.
The flaw is not entirely, or even largely, Beck's. Our national consciousness has almost entirely erased King's economic radicalism, focusing only on the elements of his civil rights work now largely considered benign; King's a commodified, beatified marker for the notion that all men are created equal. A notion that, when it comes to race, is accepted by even the most fact-free of the Simple Jack nation.
Except in Mississippi, that is, where the middle school class President has to be a white kid.
Like Muhammad Ali, King's had his edges dulled. Our collective understanding of him has been limited to a greeting card, "gosh, wouldn't it be great if little black boys and little white boys could hang out together and stuff and there'd be no more fighting. Boo on fighting! I have a dream where people won't be mean anymore."
And we can all get behind that. Corporations, elementary school teachers, Tea Partiers, Simple jack. You. Me. We're all against mean people in the abstract. Thanks, Dr. King.
But the guy who said:
“It is a tragic mix-up when the United States spends $500,000 for every enemy soldier killed, and only $53 annually on the victims of poverty.”
and
The profit motive, when it is the sole basis of an economic system, encourages a cutthroat competition and selfish ambition that inspires men to be more concerned about making a living than making a life.
and
A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual doom.
and
True peace is not merely the absence of tension; it is the presence of justice.
and
Any religion which professes to be concerned with the souls of men and is not concerned with the slums that damn them, the economic conditions that strangle them, and the social conditions that cripple them, is a dry-as-dust religion.
That's a voice we could use more of in our national debate in 2010. Not to mention in Mississippi middle schools and tea party rallies on the Washington mall.
And in Tennessee - where they set fire to the mosque site last night. Probably though, Howard Dean will tell us that's due to good faith issues that good, well intentioned Americans have with the placement of a mosque at...er....Ground Zero...in Murfreesboro. Where they've had a mosque. For 30 years. Without incident. Until now.
After the jump - the rest of Tendown 41
2010 Emmy Predictions
Thursday, August 26, 2010
The Emmys are Sunday. I have thoughts.
Best Drama
Will Win - Mad Men
Should Win - Breaking Bad
If There's an Upset - The Good Wife
Mad Men had a terrific year; its best season, and probably I've written someplace that it's the best show on TV. It's not that it's clearly behind Breaking Bad; it's more of a horses for courses situation - I'll take the emotional punch of the stripped down, barebones Breaking Bad over the more stylized Mad Men. They're solidly the two best dramas on television; were Mad Men to win, that would be 3 straight - only two dramas have ever won 4 straight (guess! guess what they are! it's guessing time! All right, fine. Hill St. and West Wing.)
If there is an upset - I think the portion of the electorate desirous of a mainstream network drama to win the award might be able to sneak through a Mad Men/Breaking Bad splinter vote and give the trophy to the Good Wife. It's not likely - Mad Men is at even money, but there's value in the Good Wife at 9-1.
Best Comedy
Will Win - Modern Family
Should Win - 30 Rock
30 Rock's won 3 straight (Fraiser won an unconscionable 5 straight) it's still the best comedy on television, despite the pretty clear desire to annoint a new king, and I'd vote it first and Curb second, were I to have a ballot. But Modern Family is pretty darn good and has a truckload of nominations - it would be a solid surprise if it didn't win.
Best Actor - Drama
Will Win - Michael Hall
Should Win - Er...ah...I'm going to say Jon Hamm
Bryan Cranston's won consecutive years, and three straight for a show no one watches seems a little heavy, but it wouldn't break my heart. I'm rooting for Kyle Chandler; he won't win, but FNL has a little engine that could aspect I appreciate - Hugh Laurie and Michael Hall get to do the most scenery chewing and neither has won; I'd lean Hall takes the prize, but Laurie would be almost as likely to walk across the stage. I'd vote for Hamm - he's Don Draper; too often the more subtle performances are overlooked in favor of histrionics, his is the heartbeat of the most awarded drama on the air.
Best Actress - Drama
Will Win - Juliana Marguiles
Should Win - Connie Britton
Britton has no chance to win, but this is an easy category for me; FNL is a decided step behind the two AMC shows in quality, but that puts it a step ahead of the rest of the field, and this is the recognition that I'd like to see it get. Glenn Close has won consecutive years; she doesn't win again - it's a two horse race between Marguiles and Kyra Sedgwick; I'm going to say the full force of the networks comes into play here to give it to Marguiles.
Best Actor - Comedy
Will Win - Tony Shalhoub
Should Win - Steve Carell
The appeal of Monk is lost on me - but not on voters who have given Shalhoub 3 previous Emmys and I'm going to say he takes a 4th. Carell has no chance, but his was a more consistently funny performance to my eyes this season than was Baldwin's and they're really the only two contenders for my vote. I picked Parsons last year, and if Shalhoub doesn't win he will; he's good, Big Bang is good, but it's too broad to compare, for me, to the elite performances in the category.
Best Actress - Comedy
Will Win - Edie Falco
Should Win - Amy Poehler
-Is Nurse Jackie a comedy? Falco's going to win; she'll be the first woman ever to win for leads in both comedy and drama - I wouldn't vote for her as a thirty minute show should no more automatically be considered a comedy than a 60 minute show (like Glee) should be considered a drama. Collette won last year; if Falco somehow doesn't win (which strikes me as really, really unlikely) she does. Poehler gave the best comedy performance of the group, and Parks went by the Office this season as the number two network comedy; it's not a hard vote for me.
And the rest:
Supporting Comedy - Jane Lynch, Eric Stonestreet
Supporting Drama - Terry O' Quinn, Christina Hendricks
Reality Comp - Amazing Race
Late Night/Variety - The Tonight Show w/Conan
TV Movie - Temple Grandin
Mini Series - The Pacific
TV Movie Actor - Al Pacino
TV Movie Acress - Claire Danes
TV Movie Supporting - Patrick Stewart, Susan Sarandon
Best Drama
Will Win - Mad Men
Should Win - Breaking Bad
If There's an Upset - The Good Wife
Mad Men had a terrific year; its best season, and probably I've written someplace that it's the best show on TV. It's not that it's clearly behind Breaking Bad; it's more of a horses for courses situation - I'll take the emotional punch of the stripped down, barebones Breaking Bad over the more stylized Mad Men. They're solidly the two best dramas on television; were Mad Men to win, that would be 3 straight - only two dramas have ever won 4 straight (guess! guess what they are! it's guessing time! All right, fine. Hill St. and West Wing.)
If there is an upset - I think the portion of the electorate desirous of a mainstream network drama to win the award might be able to sneak through a Mad Men/Breaking Bad splinter vote and give the trophy to the Good Wife. It's not likely - Mad Men is at even money, but there's value in the Good Wife at 9-1.
Best Comedy
Will Win - Modern Family
Should Win - 30 Rock
30 Rock's won 3 straight (Fraiser won an unconscionable 5 straight) it's still the best comedy on television, despite the pretty clear desire to annoint a new king, and I'd vote it first and Curb second, were I to have a ballot. But Modern Family is pretty darn good and has a truckload of nominations - it would be a solid surprise if it didn't win.
Best Actor - Drama
Will Win - Michael Hall
Should Win - Er...ah...I'm going to say Jon Hamm
Bryan Cranston's won consecutive years, and three straight for a show no one watches seems a little heavy, but it wouldn't break my heart. I'm rooting for Kyle Chandler; he won't win, but FNL has a little engine that could aspect I appreciate - Hugh Laurie and Michael Hall get to do the most scenery chewing and neither has won; I'd lean Hall takes the prize, but Laurie would be almost as likely to walk across the stage. I'd vote for Hamm - he's Don Draper; too often the more subtle performances are overlooked in favor of histrionics, his is the heartbeat of the most awarded drama on the air.
Best Actress - Drama
Will Win - Juliana Marguiles
Should Win - Connie Britton
Britton has no chance to win, but this is an easy category for me; FNL is a decided step behind the two AMC shows in quality, but that puts it a step ahead of the rest of the field, and this is the recognition that I'd like to see it get. Glenn Close has won consecutive years; she doesn't win again - it's a two horse race between Marguiles and Kyra Sedgwick; I'm going to say the full force of the networks comes into play here to give it to Marguiles.
Best Actor - Comedy
Will Win - Tony Shalhoub
Should Win - Steve Carell
The appeal of Monk is lost on me - but not on voters who have given Shalhoub 3 previous Emmys and I'm going to say he takes a 4th. Carell has no chance, but his was a more consistently funny performance to my eyes this season than was Baldwin's and they're really the only two contenders for my vote. I picked Parsons last year, and if Shalhoub doesn't win he will; he's good, Big Bang is good, but it's too broad to compare, for me, to the elite performances in the category.
Best Actress - Comedy
Will Win - Edie Falco
Should Win - Amy Poehler
-Is Nurse Jackie a comedy? Falco's going to win; she'll be the first woman ever to win for leads in both comedy and drama - I wouldn't vote for her as a thirty minute show should no more automatically be considered a comedy than a 60 minute show (like Glee) should be considered a drama. Collette won last year; if Falco somehow doesn't win (which strikes me as really, really unlikely) she does. Poehler gave the best comedy performance of the group, and Parks went by the Office this season as the number two network comedy; it's not a hard vote for me.
And the rest:
Supporting Comedy - Jane Lynch, Eric Stonestreet
Supporting Drama - Terry O' Quinn, Christina Hendricks
Reality Comp - Amazing Race
Late Night/Variety - The Tonight Show w/Conan
TV Movie - Temple Grandin
Mini Series - The Pacific
TV Movie Actor - Al Pacino
TV Movie Acress - Claire Danes
TV Movie Supporting - Patrick Stewart, Susan Sarandon
1st and Ten - The Weekly Tendown: August 15-21 2010
Sunday, August 22, 2010
Dear Internet:
First: Hey, did you hear they're building an Islamic cultural center in New York in an old Burlington Coat Factory?
This, apparently, is bothersome to people.
About this, I have two thoughts.
1. Why?
2. So what?
Here's the piece from last December in the NY Times that first brought to national attention the "ground zero mosque." The clerics behind the project said then what they have consistently said since, that it was an attempt to demonstrate the commitment to peace that most Muslims have, "We want to push back against the extremists." Here was the statement from Bloomberg's director of immigrant affairs: "We as New York Muslims have as much of a commitment to rebuilding New York as anybody."
Why isn't that taken at face value? Why is the building of a mosque not viewed as a sign of harmony? Here was George Bush, in 2007:
"Well, first of all, I believe in an Almighty God, and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. That's what I believe. I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace. And I believe people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives aren't religious people, whether they be a Christian who does that – we had a person blow up our – blow up a federal building in Oklahoma City who professed to be a Christian, but that's not a Christian act to kill innocent people.
"And I just simply don't subscribe to the idea that murdering innocent men, women and children – particularly Muslim men, women and children in the Middle East – is an act of somebody who is a religious person."
George Bush. Voice of religious tolerance.
Look, from my perspective, Islam is largely a force of oppression and superstition. Just like Christianity - I'm not a fan; if you ask me, "on balance, has organized religion been a force of good or bad" - I'd say bad; I'd say it confidently and without much hesitation. Religion undermines our ability to think critically and pushes us instead to magic.
But I'm on the fringe. I get that. I live in Florida, where Christians bomb abortion clinics, kill obstetricians, have made gay couples ineligible to adopt and are planning a giant Koran burning to commemmorate 9-11. But despite my inclination to impute the very worst, most destructive, most bigoted, most terroristic behavior of Christians to all Christians - when I see a church, I don't really believe that everyone therein is engaged in systemic hostility.
George Bush is right (?) Tim McVeigh bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City in the name of Jesus, and yet churches have been built near the site. And that seems not unreasonable to me. Sure, I could connect a direct line from the language of the Bible to the violence committed in the name of Christianity, and discuss how the lack of outrage from moderate Christians at, say, the decades long messages of hate that come from the Pat Robertsons of the world emboldens the more outrageous actions of the terroristic Christian fringe; and I could further discuss how there has been a mainstreaming of the worst, most intolerant, most xeonophobic elements of the right wing, such that the President most married to conservative Christianty in US history could have, just 3 years ago, taken a position that, in 2010, would draw howls of derision on Fox News.
I'm, to use O'Reilly's epithet, a "secular progressive." But I recognize the worst elements of Christianity are not all elements of Christianity.
And even if I didn't, so what?
Howard Dean's argument this week was we really need to listen to Americans who are sincerely bothered by this Mosque.
No, we don't.
Here's the Maryland Toleration Act of 1649:
That whatsoever person or persons within this Province and the Islands thereunto helonging shall from henceforth blaspheme God, that is Curse him, or deny our Saviour Jesus Christ to bee the sonne of God, or shall deny the holy Trinity the father sonne and holy Ghost, or the Godhead of any of the said Three persons of the Trinity or the Unity of the Godhead, or shall use or utter any reproachfull Speeches, words or language concerning the said Holy Trinity, or any of the said three persons thereof, shalbe punished with death and confiscation or forfeiture of all his or her lands and goods to the Lord Proprietary and his heires.
Deny Jesus - and we'll kill you.
That was colonial America. That was the exact reason for the separation of church and state. That's why the establishment clause - that the US has no state religion - is first among all of the freedoms protected in the Bill of Rights. And it's why Christian identity groups like the KKK have rightly been moved to the dustbin of history. Christians don't stand with the Klan - they disavowed them decades ago. And here's why - from a 1999 FBI report:
Christian Identity also believes in the inevitability of the end of the world and the Second Coming of Christ. It is believed that these events are part of a cleansing process that is needed before Christ’s kingdom can be established on earth. During this time, Jews and their allies will attempt to destroy the white race using any means available. The result will be a violent and bloody struggle -- a war, in effect -- between God’s forces, the white race, and the forces of evil, the Jews and nonwhites.
"The view of what Armageddon will be varies among Christian Identity believers. Some contend there will be a race war in which millions will die; others believe that the United Nations, backed by Jewish representatives of the anti-Christ, will take over the country and promote a New World Order. One Christian Identity interpretation is that white Christians have been chosen to watch for signs of the impending war in order to warn others. They are to then physically struggle with the forces of evil against sin and other violations of God’s law (i.e., race-mixing and internationalism); many will perish, and some of God’s chosen will be forced to wear the Mark of the Beast to participate in business and commerce. After the final battle is ended and God’s kingdom is established on earth, only then will the Aryan people be recognized as the one and true Israel."
"Christian Identity adherents believe that God will use his chosen race as his weapons to battle the forces of evil. Christian Identity followers believe they are among those chosen by God to wage this battle during Armageddon and they will be the last line of defense for the white race and Christian America."
That's the Klan.
I'm sure they believe it. I'm sure they have genuine, good faith concerns and beliefs that motivate them to oppose the building of an Islamic cultural center at the site of the Burlington Coat Factory.
But so what? We have a history in this country of persecution of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities. Which, more than we haven't, we've been able to overcome. I couldn't be elected President without a professed belief in Jesus - but I can go to Baltimore and not get stoned. So - upgrade.
You don't like mosques. So what? Don't go into one. But the rights of a religious minority to practice no more depend upon your comfort with that practice than the rights of Christians to practice depend on my comfort. If I walk to First United Methodist down the street and suggest they close their doors because of my disagreement with the murder of obstetricians what do you suppose will be the reaction I'll receive?
Incidentally - the above FBI report from '99 discussing Christian identity groups was about domestic terrorism concerns around the turn of the millennium. Those views = terrorism back in 1999.
What would Tea Partiers think about that passage in 2010? How about Sarah Palin. Or Sharron Angle?
Is it still domestic terrorism - or a too often neglected view of many Americans that we need to pay attention to? Sometimes, in the aftermath of Obama's election as we've heard the right wing say "we want our country back" - I've responded by asking "from whom?" - but perhaps the better question is "and who are you who have lost your country?"
Who are you - right wing? Who are you in 2010?
Me - I'm a guy teaching 10 courses now. So, as long as that's the case - I got one thought and then nothing but links. After the jump - the rest of Tendown 40.
First: Hey, did you hear they're building an Islamic cultural center in New York in an old Burlington Coat Factory?
This, apparently, is bothersome to people.
About this, I have two thoughts.
1. Why?
2. So what?
Here's the piece from last December in the NY Times that first brought to national attention the "ground zero mosque." The clerics behind the project said then what they have consistently said since, that it was an attempt to demonstrate the commitment to peace that most Muslims have, "We want to push back against the extremists." Here was the statement from Bloomberg's director of immigrant affairs: "We as New York Muslims have as much of a commitment to rebuilding New York as anybody."
Why isn't that taken at face value? Why is the building of a mosque not viewed as a sign of harmony? Here was George Bush, in 2007:
"Well, first of all, I believe in an Almighty God, and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. That's what I believe. I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace. And I believe people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives aren't religious people, whether they be a Christian who does that – we had a person blow up our – blow up a federal building in Oklahoma City who professed to be a Christian, but that's not a Christian act to kill innocent people.
"And I just simply don't subscribe to the idea that murdering innocent men, women and children – particularly Muslim men, women and children in the Middle East – is an act of somebody who is a religious person."
George Bush. Voice of religious tolerance.
Look, from my perspective, Islam is largely a force of oppression and superstition. Just like Christianity - I'm not a fan; if you ask me, "on balance, has organized religion been a force of good or bad" - I'd say bad; I'd say it confidently and without much hesitation. Religion undermines our ability to think critically and pushes us instead to magic.
But I'm on the fringe. I get that. I live in Florida, where Christians bomb abortion clinics, kill obstetricians, have made gay couples ineligible to adopt and are planning a giant Koran burning to commemmorate 9-11. But despite my inclination to impute the very worst, most destructive, most bigoted, most terroristic behavior of Christians to all Christians - when I see a church, I don't really believe that everyone therein is engaged in systemic hostility.
George Bush is right (?) Tim McVeigh bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City in the name of Jesus, and yet churches have been built near the site. And that seems not unreasonable to me. Sure, I could connect a direct line from the language of the Bible to the violence committed in the name of Christianity, and discuss how the lack of outrage from moderate Christians at, say, the decades long messages of hate that come from the Pat Robertsons of the world emboldens the more outrageous actions of the terroristic Christian fringe; and I could further discuss how there has been a mainstreaming of the worst, most intolerant, most xeonophobic elements of the right wing, such that the President most married to conservative Christianty in US history could have, just 3 years ago, taken a position that, in 2010, would draw howls of derision on Fox News.
I'm, to use O'Reilly's epithet, a "secular progressive." But I recognize the worst elements of Christianity are not all elements of Christianity.
And even if I didn't, so what?
Howard Dean's argument this week was we really need to listen to Americans who are sincerely bothered by this Mosque.
No, we don't.
Here's the Maryland Toleration Act of 1649:
That whatsoever person or persons within this Province and the Islands thereunto helonging shall from henceforth blaspheme God, that is Curse him, or deny our Saviour Jesus Christ to bee the sonne of God, or shall deny the holy Trinity the father sonne and holy Ghost, or the Godhead of any of the said Three persons of the Trinity or the Unity of the Godhead, or shall use or utter any reproachfull Speeches, words or language concerning the said Holy Trinity, or any of the said three persons thereof, shalbe punished with death and confiscation or forfeiture of all his or her lands and goods to the Lord Proprietary and his heires.
Deny Jesus - and we'll kill you.
That was colonial America. That was the exact reason for the separation of church and state. That's why the establishment clause - that the US has no state religion - is first among all of the freedoms protected in the Bill of Rights. And it's why Christian identity groups like the KKK have rightly been moved to the dustbin of history. Christians don't stand with the Klan - they disavowed them decades ago. And here's why - from a 1999 FBI report:
Christian Identity also believes in the inevitability of the end of the world and the Second Coming of Christ. It is believed that these events are part of a cleansing process that is needed before Christ’s kingdom can be established on earth. During this time, Jews and their allies will attempt to destroy the white race using any means available. The result will be a violent and bloody struggle -- a war, in effect -- between God’s forces, the white race, and the forces of evil, the Jews and nonwhites.
"The view of what Armageddon will be varies among Christian Identity believers. Some contend there will be a race war in which millions will die; others believe that the United Nations, backed by Jewish representatives of the anti-Christ, will take over the country and promote a New World Order. One Christian Identity interpretation is that white Christians have been chosen to watch for signs of the impending war in order to warn others. They are to then physically struggle with the forces of evil against sin and other violations of God’s law (i.e., race-mixing and internationalism); many will perish, and some of God’s chosen will be forced to wear the Mark of the Beast to participate in business and commerce. After the final battle is ended and God’s kingdom is established on earth, only then will the Aryan people be recognized as the one and true Israel."
"Christian Identity adherents believe that God will use his chosen race as his weapons to battle the forces of evil. Christian Identity followers believe they are among those chosen by God to wage this battle during Armageddon and they will be the last line of defense for the white race and Christian America."
That's the Klan.
I'm sure they believe it. I'm sure they have genuine, good faith concerns and beliefs that motivate them to oppose the building of an Islamic cultural center at the site of the Burlington Coat Factory.
But so what? We have a history in this country of persecution of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities. Which, more than we haven't, we've been able to overcome. I couldn't be elected President without a professed belief in Jesus - but I can go to Baltimore and not get stoned. So - upgrade.
You don't like mosques. So what? Don't go into one. But the rights of a religious minority to practice no more depend upon your comfort with that practice than the rights of Christians to practice depend on my comfort. If I walk to First United Methodist down the street and suggest they close their doors because of my disagreement with the murder of obstetricians what do you suppose will be the reaction I'll receive?
Incidentally - the above FBI report from '99 discussing Christian identity groups was about domestic terrorism concerns around the turn of the millennium. Those views = terrorism back in 1999.
What would Tea Partiers think about that passage in 2010? How about Sarah Palin. Or Sharron Angle?
Is it still domestic terrorism - or a too often neglected view of many Americans that we need to pay attention to? Sometimes, in the aftermath of Obama's election as we've heard the right wing say "we want our country back" - I've responded by asking "from whom?" - but perhaps the better question is "and who are you who have lost your country?"
Who are you - right wing? Who are you in 2010?
Me - I'm a guy teaching 10 courses now. So, as long as that's the case - I got one thought and then nothing but links. After the jump - the rest of Tendown 40.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)



