Skip to main content

The Daily News' War Against Philly's War On German Christmas

Philadelphia's City Hall finally capitulated in the War on Christmas, and thank goodness. The end of the "controversy" means that today should be the last day we get saturation coverage of the "controversy" -- like, say, the Daily News' three opinion columnists lambasting officials for getting the "controversy" started in the first place. Luckily, all three columnists played precisely to type, indicating that you probably never have to read them again in order to know their feelings on a given subject.

Stu Bykofsky, of course, went the Muslim-blaming route: "If the words "Christmas Village" offend you, what is the basis of your offense? Are you anti-Christian? Remember those offended by the "Ground Zero mosque"? Their feelings didn't win out. Oh, that's different. Islam is a minority religion here, but it's OK to disrespect a majority religious belief."

Michael Smerconish went with dripping sarcasm: "And that creche they moved from the front of the Municipal Services Building to the JFK Plaza is what, just some baby bunking down in the hay? And how about that "holiday tree" set to be lit this afternoon? I haven't seen it, but something tells me it's not a bonsai or a fig. Maybe it's part of Mayor Nutter's Greenworks Philadelphia sustainability plan. And the Nat King Cole classics providing the village's soundtrack? Maybe the city can get the name of "The Christmas Song" changed to "The Winter Number.""

Christine Flowers let loose with pure rage against political correctness and a bit of Philly-hating: "IF SANTA HADN'T already been turned off by this city after getting pelted with snowballs at Franklin Field way back when, Mayor Nutter has guaranteed that he'll be avoiding this mediocre metropolis like the plague on a permanent basis. ... I didn't think that Philadelphia's warped experiment with diversity could sink any lower than the subterranean depths it reached with the crusade against the Boy Scouts. Was I ever wrong. The City of Brotherly Love had decided to show a little less love toward the roughly 75 percent of its citizens who celebrate a holiday that has, at its core, the principle of peace. I'm sure that made the remaining 25 percent happy, but was it really worth it?"

No. I'm pretty sure I can speak for all of us when I say it wasn't.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Yoga

I've been making some life changes lately — trying to use the time I have, now that I'm back in Kansas, to improve my health and lifestyle. Among the changes: More exercise. 30 minutes a day on the treadmill. Doesn't sound like a lot, but some is more than none, and I know from experience that getting overambitious early leads to failure. So. Thirty minutes a day.

One other thing: Yoga, a couple of times a week. It's nothing huge — a 15-minute flexibility routine downloaded from an iPhone app. But I've noticed that I'm increasingly limber.

Tonight, friends, I noticed a piece of trash on the floor. I bent over at the waist and picked it up, and threw it away.

Then I wept. I literally could not remember the last time I'd tried to pick something off the floor without grunting and bracing myself. I just did it.

Small victories, people. Small victories.

Liberals: We're overthinking this. Hillary didn't lose. This is what it should mean.

Interesting:
Nate Cohn of the New York Times estimates that when every vote is tallied, some 63.4 million Americans will have voted for Clinton and 61.2 million for Trump. That means Clinton will have turned out more supporters than any presidential candidate in history except for Obama in 2008 and 2012. And as David Wasserman of Cook Political Report notes, the total vote count—including third party votes—has already crossed 127 million, and will “easily beat” the 129 million total from 2012. The idea that voters stayed home in 2016 because they hated Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton is a myth. We already know the Electoral College can produce undemocratic results, but what we don't know is why — aside from how it serves entrenched interests — it benefits the American people to have their preference for national executive overturned because of archaic rules designed, in part, to protect the institution of slavery. 

A form of choosing the national leader that — as has happened in …

I'm not cutting off my pro-Trump friends

Here and there on Facebook, I've seen a few of my friends declare they no longer wish the friendship of Trump supporters — and vowing to cut them out of their social media lives entirely.

I'm not going to do that.

To cut ourselves off from people who have made what we think was a grievous error in their vote is to give up on persuading them, to give up on understanding why they voted, to give up on understanding them in any but the most cartoonish stereotypes.

As a matter of idealism, cutting off your pro-Trump friends is to give up on democracy. As a matter of tactics, cutting off your pro-Trump friends is to give up on ever again winning in a democratic process.

And as a long-term issues, confining ourselves to echo chambers is part of our national problem.

Don't get me wrong: I expect a Trumpian presidency is a disaster, particularly for people of color. And in total honesty: My own relationships have been tested by this campaign season. There's probably some damage…