Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
This is a story of Laura Bush decorating a Christmas tree, and one of the artists commissioned did a rather anti-Bush ornament.
It's nice, scandalous, and funny. It's not anti-American. People are allowed to express their opinion, and many people who think of themselves as patriots really disagree with the President. It's a free country, and people are free to hold such opinions without making them anti-American.
It's not a religion vs. secularism debate. It's a friggin' Christmas ornament. The truth is that people do nasty things, and they find any convenient excuse to do those nasty things. Sometimes, it is in the name of the country. Sometimes, it is in the name of the people. Sometimes, it is in the name of science. And sometimes, it is in the name of religion.
I grew up in the South, and hated the overly smug Christian fundamentalist religious zealotic jerks that surrounded me. When I was in college, I joined the Skeptics Society and found my self surrounded by overly smug secular fundamentalist zealotic jerks.
I really can't blame the Bushies on this one. Deborah Lawrence really can't believe that her ornament would be hung from the official White House Christmas.
Then again, why in the heck did they choose Deborah Lawrence to do an ornament in the first place. What did they expect her to do? It's like commissioning Tom Tomorrow to do the official White House Christmas cards.
Then again, who is doing the White House Christmas cards this year?
I prefer to think of it as a "Too Dumb to Vote" list.
I can understand why Laura Bush would not display the subversive ornament even though I agree with the artist's sentiments. It is naive to expect that this White House would break from their penchant to squelch dissenting opinions---yet how tacky to require patriotic ornaments in the first place! Can't we, just once, get away from all the phony patriotism! Bush bandied around the word, democracy, until he gave it bad name. Everything he does is slathered over with pretense and I am so tired of it. I utterly can't wait until he is out of office. He has sullied America's image and it is going to be very difficult to restore our good name.
What is it about Salon lately that has me, ME, defending George Bush? I hate George Bush. I even hate Laura Bush. She wasted 8 years as First Lady doing nothing more than...well..than decorating Christmas trees.
But you know what I hate more?? Artists with a political bent who want nothing more than to embarass someone, and then complement themselves on how important the mesaage of their art is. Maybe we should have video screens posted around the White House showing performance artists burning Bush images in effigy.
Let this woman hang her political ornaments on her own fuckin' tree. Of course, no one would write an article about her if she did that.
And by the way, the ornanament was NOT pretty. Maybe it wasn't hung because she's not a very good artist.
I'm a raving left liberal myself but you have got to be f****ing kidding me if you think people should have one iota of sympathy for Deborah Lawrence.
So she is crestfallen. I am personally pissed off that both she and George Bush use a Christmas Tree with such profound disrespect towards my God, whose birth this tree is meant to celebrate.
I fully support her creating any kind of ornaments she wants, and to give or sell them to anybody she wants. But to be crestfallen because Laura Bush decided she didn't like it -- that's her right, as well. Get over it.
Since they all seem jumbled together into a big mess. But, I will bravely try to sort out your issues...
@BS...yes, I do dare. Understanding that women are human beings with the same right to control their bodies, lives, careers, etc does not automatically turn men into spineless wimps.
So if men understand and accept women are as you say, then the men are not wimps? This makes no sense.
Are you implying that feminism does not affect men? OR do you mean that if men understood feminism they would not be wimps? Do you mean that feminists only teach good and holy things and can never be wrong or bad? Do you mean that all things women do to men are not wrong or bad unless feminism decides not to endorse them?
You confuse me. I guess you yourself are not clear on what the issues are.
Unless, of course, you consider oppressing other human beings to be a sign of strength.
Well, no, but I do think women and feminists are exceedingly skilled in this area, talented and subversive oppressors of men as they are.
Waiting for the inevitable spiel about how it's actually evil feminists who are oppressing men by insisting women have the right to determine their own destinies....
Can men determine their own destinies? For instance, could a man REFUSE to be sent off to Nam in the 70s? WITHOUT RECOURSE BY SOCIETY? One can plausibly argue that men protect a society that largely is designed to serve not men's but women's needs.
so where do you want to go with this? We have already determined that we dirty inadequate men, as oppose to you perfect untouchable women, are forced to deal with situations that determine our destinies that we are not in control. So are you saying women are not subject to the same rules as men are? Or are you saying you are a liar?
"And in 1995, the Clinton administration refused to censor an ornament depicting Newt Gingrich's stocking filled with lumps of coal."
Do you think the Clinton administration would have allowed an ornament with him filling Monica Lewinsky's stocking with a cigar?
"America cannot regain its moral leadership in the world if America cannot hold its leaders accountable for their actions at home, without accountability, a Democracy will fail."
Did that happen after the Senate failed to hold Bill Clinton accountable for committing perjury and obstruction of justice? (He also said Iraq had WMD and ties to al Qaeda, but the left forgets that.)
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
