|photo by Richard Strauss|
Paul Scott writes a blog called "No Warning Shots Fired," which I reccomend to all. He makes an excellent point in a recent post on the Beck Event. I think he's fine with me quoting it:
Can you imagine Sean Hannity holding one of his Freedom concerts at the site of the 1972 Wattstax Music Festival which commemorated the Watts Rebellion of 1965? Or do you really believe that Glenn Beck would hold an event on October 16 to commemorate the 1995, Minister Louis Farrakhan led, Million Man March/Day of Atonement and have a million white men gather to beg forgiveness for their crimes against non-white humanity?
Of course not. These events are pretty much off limits. However, the March on Washington is ripe for the pickin'.
It's about time to start realizing that the best thing sensible people can do right now is just try to keep the totally crazy right wing part of the population away from the levers of power, i.e., trying to keep some pitiful Democratic Party majority in the two Houses of Congress. Of course the Democrats are muddled and really form a segment of The Rich Party more than anything else. But it's a matter of compromise, which is just where politics tends to live anyway. Over on the right they're talking about how Social Security and Medicare are "unconstitutional." You scoff? That's exactly what Heidi Harris said on the Ed Show this week. She's not even a big time right wing radio pundit (which is why she bothers to appear on the Ed Show).
Update. Gosh, those thought experiments seem to the all the rage this weekend. Scott at world-o-crap blog quotes a character named Robert Meyer, then paraphrases his alleged argument on the mosque not at ground zero elegantly:
Muslim’s are certainly within their constitutional rights to build a mosque there if they desire. The question is whether they ought to. The issue is one of propriety, not religious freedom. Until pro-mosque apologists get past that fact they have yet to make a legitimate counter argument.According to Earl Warren, Negroes are within their constitutional rights to attend the same school as my children if they desire. The question is whether they ought to. The issue is one of propriety, not equal protection. Until integrationists get past that fact they have yet to make a legitimate counter argument.
I think Scott's "drift" here is accurate enough to get an astronaut to the moon. I presume any readers who happen by here understand that Brown V. Board of Education is not under review under any circumstances, no matter what the current Raleigh, NC, school board might hope.