I never suggested either activity should be banned, just observed that if a stack of Bibles was burned the religious Right would lose their minds.

{{cough}} {cough} US Military burns bibles {{cough}} {{cough}}

http://www.examiner.com/christian-in-louisville/military-burns-bibles-sent-to-troops-afghanistan

:D

I don't think I heard a peep out of anyone over this until Muslims around the world got all cranky about their Koran being burned..

Regardless, the simple fact is this...

Yes, you can express your anger at your holy book being burned. Yes, you can get mad and protest and write letters to your representatives...

But what you CANNOT do is hurt other people or destroy property just because someone doesn't treat your holy book with the same respect that you would..

It's not allowed in a civilized society.

It's really that simple.

Michale.....

So, as is common here in CW land, logic and rational discourse win the day.. :D

We are all agreed that Looney Tunes down here in Florida is perfectly within his rights to burn the Koran and no one can say dick about his RIGHT to burn the book...

Common ground is such a wonderful thing...

Kevin, I don't mind that Muslims are offended if their holy book is burn..

My problem is how they express that offense.. By burning and pillaging and butchering and beheading people, they PROVE beyond any doubt that everything said against Islam is true and factual...

My simple point is that there are people who are as devoted to their flag as religious people are devoted to their holy book...

And NO ONE has the right to sit in judgment and tell those people that they are wrong and the religious fanatics are right...

For those (like me) who are religiously agnostic, one is as bad as the other...

That's a simple difference of opinion.. But as long as we agree on the RIGHT to do it, I can live with that... :D

Michale......

Nicely phrased. I agree with all your points. My original comment was merely answering Michale's question of what the difference was between the two acts. I thought they weren't really comparable and said so. I too should have made the holocaust connection. I never suggested either activity should be banned, just observed that if a stack of Bibles was burned the religious Right would lose their minds. God forbid (pun intended) that followers of Islam should be offended by the burning of their Holy book.

apology accepted ;)

i think the quran burner does have the right to burn anything he pays for, just like imam whats-his-face has the right to build a mosque wherever zoning laws allow. however, everyone else has the right to our own free expression on both matters. whether or not we support either individual's political view is irrelevant to their civil liberties, which should not be in question. in a sense, we're fortunate to have both issues come up in such close proximity, in order to draw a parallel. in my view it would be the height of hypocrisy to be for the rights of one and opposed to the rights of the other.

the previous point being a given, i don't think flag burning and book burning are equal. book burning is not just symbolism, it's a form of coercive censorship, while flags are solely symbolic. let's assume the books being burned were something like the kkk handbook; in my view this would still be worse than flag burning, because it goes against the american value of a free market of ideas, good or bad. furthermore, book burning has a special association with the holocaust that flag burning does not.

none of this means i believe either ought to be illegal - just publicly disdained and decried, to varying degrees.

Geithner has been on the "right track" for almost two years...

And yet, we're worse off now than before...

Gods help is if the Obama administration continues on this "right track".....

Michale.....

You know, it's really easy to distort the facts of this matter when the issue is not fully understood.

Very few people commenting in the blogosphere have an adequate understanding of what should be done about the Bush tax cuts.

Suffice to say that Geithner is on the right track and I hope he sets the president straight ... and soon!

It's my understanding that, if the Bush tax cuts expire, those individuals and businesses who make more than 250K a year will see a tax increase.

The administration likes to tout the figure of "That the new taxes will only affect 3% of small businesses"..

That is a bogus figure because it counts anyone and everyone who ever filed as a business, because they sold some things on EBAY or CraigsList..

The fact is, the reinstatement of these taxes will affect almost 50% of small businesses...

And it's the small businesses that are the very backbone of private sector jobs..

In other words, the Obama administration is targeting for a tax increase almost half of the most successful of small businesses thereby PREVENTING them from hiring more people...

It seems to me that, by RAISING taxes on almost half of the small businesses, the administration is bringing about the very crisis that they hope to avoid..

Once again, one is left to wonder if Obama et al really WANTS to create jobs or not.

Because there really isn't any indication that he does...

Michale.....

The problem with your tax example is that the business making 5 million per year is not going to be paying "tons more in new taxes" ... not by a long shot!

Do the math - what we are taling about here is an increase in taxes of about three to four percent.

This stuff is really not that complicated but those who are arguing for a permanent extension for all of the Bush tax cuts are attempting to make it so.

I'm not aware of any cogent, reality-based argument for extending the Bush tax cuts on the top earning businesses but I'm open to reading all about it if one exists.

Again, let me point out that I am not the economist that most people are here..

But, it seems to me to be a pretty simple concept.

Let's say you own a business that makes $5 million dollars a year. You have had this business for 30 years and you employ, oh say, 50 people.

Now yer sitting on a hoard of cash.. For the sake of the argument, let's say 50 million dollars..

You want to expand your business and hire another 100 people. But you are waiting for the government to quit dicking around and make tax policy so you know how much you have to set aside for taxes. That's logical, right?? I mean, doesn't it make sense to wait and see what's going to happen before you rush in, spend 50 million dollars and then find out you are going to need it for taxes?? Makes sense, right?? Especially if you have investors who are breathing down your neck so THEY don't lose any money...

So, finally, the government lays out it's tax plan and you find out that you are going to have to pay tons more in new taxes...

So, you nix the idea for expansion and hiring more people and just put that money away to cover the taxes for the next 20 years or so...

All of that seems logical and rational, right??

It seems to me, business-ignorant that I am, that a very good case can be made for keeping the taxes low for businesses. Even if they make more than $250K a year...

Michale.....

http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/offbeat/uk-teenager-banned-from-america-for-life-over-obscene-obama-email-091310

Apparently, if you call Obama a prick, you get banned from the US for life.

Wonder what would happen if I emailed Obama and told him he was a prick??

Deported??? :D

Michale.....

Glad to read your thoughts on this. And you hit the nail on the head. This IS an issue of rights.

The Left wants to deny the RIGHT to burn a Koran to this loon down here in Florida.

Susan Estrich writes in her commentary that burning a Koran is akin to yelling FIRE in a crowded theater. This is a stretch and would open up a whole plethora of unintended consequences.

But my point is simple. The Left, in general, supports the RIGHT to burn an American Flag. Sure, there are specific people on the Left who do not, as you have pointed out. But, by and large, one of the very foundations of the Left's platform is supporting the right to burn an American flag in protest.

However, from reading other blogs and comments, in THIS case, the Left is totally against even the RIGHT to do it.. One comment from a reader in another blog suggested that some of these "freaks" should be "capped" so that the other "freaks" will take a lesson from that.

Get that?? These people who want to perform a legitimate protest should be killed so that others won't even think about protesting in this manner.

Another Lefty Blog'er/Dictator (the illogical one who banned me.. :D) pointed out gleefully how this FL loon's website was taken down. Of course, if it was HIS blog that was taken down for hateful speech (as it does constantly against conservatives and the GOP) this same blogger would scream hysterically about censorship and gestapo tactics!

These actions are, by far, the common theme running thru comments from the Left on this issue. Blatant and complete hypocrisy.

"I disagree strongly with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
-Voltaire

This is a concept that appears to be completely and utterly dead in this country today.

Now everyone knows that here at CW.COM, we are more reasoned and enlightened individuals who pride ourselves on logic and rational discussion... :D

But even here, it appears that some would want to deny the right because burning an American flag is much much different than burning a holy book. (as an aside, NYpoet & Kevin, if I misstated your position, please accept my apologies and feel free to correct me)

So, to sum up, it is this issue of the RIGHT to do A or B that is at the heart of my point.

As far as I have seen from the Left, it supports the right to do A (burning an American Flag) but does NOT support the right to do B (burn a Koran).

And this is blatant and indefensible hypocrisy..

There is a pattern developing whereas the Left is charging in to be religious warriors, defending a religion from the evil American public without even checking to see if such defense violates one of the Left's defining tenets....

Oh yea.. JAGS WON!!!!!! :D

Michale.....

Let me take a stab at it. I think you're (either intentionally or unintentionally, I have no idea) conflating "being for" and "standing up for your right to".

For example, there were many conflicted Democrats in the flag-burning hot-button-issue era (say, roughly the 1990s), but I bet you cannot find one quote by an elected Democrat back then which baldly states that they are "for" or "support" burning the flag. I bet that every single one of them says they support the "right" to burn a flag, but without once offering support for anyone who does so.

There is a difference. Now, I know some folks who might be inclined to torch a flag if they thought the situation demanded it, I'll admit. But I can support their right to do so, even if I think it's a stupid thing to do (would depend on the circumstances). Just like I'd support a Tea Partier's right to do the same thing, even if I thought that was a stupid thing to do, too. Same as I can support the right of the idiot in FL to torch a few Qurans on his own property -- while still condemning him for doing so.

There really are two issues. Just because you support someone's rights, doesn't mean you support their actions or their movement. I support the right of Tea Partiers to get out and march and make some noise. I think I've been pretty consistent on that, personally. But it doesn't mean I agree with them one tiny bit, just that I support everyone's right -- equally -- to get out and protest. Or "assemble peaceably" and "petition the government for redress." So I can cheer them on for protesting, even if I viciously attack their political positions.

Some might see it as "Orwellian doublethink" but to me, at least, there are two issues which remain separate. On the rights one, I'm pretty much an absolutist. On the "support" issue, I take it case by case.

I don't know if any of this helps or not, but I just thought I'd toss it into the mix.

-CW

I think this does one of the best jobs I've seen of summing up the Republican campaign strategy:

- Convince independents you have the moral high ground; this is why you hear so much talk about freedom, the good of the marketplace, liberty, etc.
- Don't talk about ideas because then it starts to look like you're saying the same thing as Republicans past
- Paint Democratic ideas as bad. Very bad. VERY, VERY BAD.

The truth always works best in campaigns.. :D Well, usually.

In this case, the GOP doesn't have to work too hard to convince Independents that the Democrat's ideas are bad.

Independents already know this...

Sure, it would be really nice if the GOP had better plans...

But, right now, the GOP plan is to stop Democrats from further bankrupting this country.

And the vast majority of Independents and NPAs are on board with that.

But I guess politics is kinda like the NFL. If you're able to run it up the middle. Keep running it up the middle.

How's that for a segue into the kickoff of football season :)

Sports metaphors are always fun.. :D

Just waiting for the start of the JAGS game here.. :D

Michale.....

Michale.....

I'm not sure what this means, CB, but it sounds cool. Congrats!

Are you a token conservative? ;)

Given the current state of affairs, that oh so important INDEPENDENT voter would rather have NO ideas than a continuation of BAD, VERY BAD ideas.

I think this does one of the best jobs I've seen of summing up the Republican campaign strategy:

- Convince independents you have the moral high ground; this is why you hear so much talk about freedom, the good of the marketplace, liberty, etc.
- Don't talk about ideas because then it starts to look like you're saying the same thing as Republicans past
- Paint Democratic ideas as bad. Very bad. VERY, VERY BAD.

But I guess politics is kinda like the NFL. If you're able to run it up the middle. Keep running it up the middle.

How's that for a segue into the kickoff of football season :)

-David

Just to set the record straight. Heh.

I don't think this is conclusive proof that the White House doesn't READ CW.COM..

It just means that, for whatever moronic reason, they decided not to follow your advice this time. :D

Their loss.. :D

Michale.....

I had a big long response posted on this, but I deleted it all because I really don't want to drag this commentary to that particular discussion.

Suffice it to say that I know of many men and women who are as devoted to the symbol of our country (our Flag) as religious people are devoted to the symbols of their religion.

When one gets right down to it, our flag is but a piece of cloth and the koran and the bible are nothing but trite and cliched fantasy novels.

But both can be very powerful symbols of devotion to the people that follow them.

And NO ONE can sit in judgment and state that one devotion is not as important as another devotion to the people who are devoted.

I won't get into the legal question, as the law is clearly on my side. The SCOTUS has ruled that burning an American flag is protected speech. I am certain that this ruling would cover the koran, the bible, the torah and even Action Comics #1, the first appearance of Superman.

Michale.....

that's why.

in my temple at rosh hashana, we had a bit of a debate about how one ought to respond to the quran burning. my rabbi was quoted in the miami herald, where there's also some other relevant information about the pastor.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/09/09/1815036/religious-leaders-slam-plan-to.html

Not to be nitpicky, but Hillary Clinton once sponsored a flag-burning amendment. Maybe she's just against burning stuff, I dunno...

Nit pick away.. This is your place.. :D

While I am sure that there are a few Lefties who oppose Flag burning, I am sure you will concede that the vast majority of the Left (both hysterical and rational) support the concept of Flag Burning as a legitimate protest..

Which begs the question....

Why is Flag burning a legitimate protest but Koran burning is hysterically sacrilegious???

Again, I really don't want to turn this into one of those threads, but I think it is a fair and rational question..

That question got me banned from another Lefty/Echo-Chamber blog... :D

Another notch for the ole' gunslinger... :D

Michale....

I'm not saying anything 'til you congratulate me for my shiny new Huffington Post Pundit badge.

What d'ya want - a medal or a chest to pin it on?

That's me trying to be funny.

Not to be nitpicky, but Hillary Clinton once sponsored a flag-burning amendment. Maybe she's just against burning stuff, I dunno...

Chris1962 -

I have to admit, I am somewhat clueless about HuffPost's whole badge thing myself, but congratulations nonetheless! I don't even think I have one of those pundit ones, but I'm DQed for a lot of them because I'm not on Facebook, I think.

-CW

Given the current state of affairs, that oh so important INDEPENDENT voter would rather have NO ideas than a continuation of BAD, VERY BAD ideas...

Michale....

Wooot!!! Operation: INFILTRATE HUFFPO has begun!! :D

HP must be REALLY desperate for writers!! hehehehehehe

Just kidding, CB.. :D Congrats.....

Michale.....

Here's a good one from OH-8.

In a recent interview w/ the Cincinnati Enquirer editorial board (talk about your softball audience) John Boehner introduced his 2-point plan to fix the economy.

Yes. His 2-point plan. It's so simple it can all be solved with just 2 points. From the horse himself:

http://johnboehner.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=205278

But it gets better.

One of the points is a 2-year extension of all the Bush tax cuts. Not sure how this is new. Not to mention paid for.

So basically, he's got a 1-point plan. And I bet you can guess what his 1-point plan is.

You got it. Cut all the stuff that Republicans don't like. Social security,

So to repeat. His 2-point plan is (1) the Bush tax cuts, which squandered away a surplus and (2) cut all of the programs that help everyone but the wealthy.

No ... new ... ideas. Not even a good recycling of old ideas. About the one thing you can say about Boehner is, at least he knows who writes his checks.

Cheers
-David

But I do check out FTP early Sat..

Which is why I've been refusing to acknowledge the guy, or otherwise write about him. He doesn't deserve it, what he deserves is to be quickly forgotten.

I think the bigger point that comes from this loon is how it lays bare the complete and utter hypocrisy of the Left (present company excepted, of course :D ).

The Left is well known for the supporting to the hilt the right to burn sacred objects in protest to further a point or an agenda.

Apparently that right doesn't extend to conservatives.

Why doesn't the Left just come right out and say it?? They want complete and unfettered rights for all on the Left?? On the Right?? All of them on the Right should be condemned to Gitmo and water-boarded daily...

That seems to be the attitude of the Left these days... Once again, present company excepted..

Personally, I WANTED to see the Koran burning go on.. Not because I harbor any deep resentment of Islam.. Well, not beyond any resentment.... no, make that contempt.. not beyond any contempt that I hold for ALL religions..

But I am sick and tired of how Muslims are always "offended" by the actions of Americans, yet Muslims do their damnedest to prove just how savage and uncivilized Muslims are..

Just let me say that respect and tolerance are TWO way streets. Muslims need to learn this, if they want to be part of the civilized world.

That's all I am going to say about this, as I don't want this thread to turn into another Pro-Muslim/Anti-Muslim ping-pong match...

Since the rest of your missive seems to concentrate on economic issues and news, I really don't have much to add...

Plus, I got to get to work anyways. :D

Michale.....

I've been a bit distracted tonight and I just now read your glowing review of the beleguered and unsung treasury secretary's performance on the esteemed PBS Newshour ... oh, I kid the Newshour ...

I can hardly wait to see the reaction to this Honourable Mention from the friendly folks at HP. That fun will just have to wait until tomorrow, though.

Incidentally, how many times do I have to tell you that you have a number of fans in the White House and beyond. This is no joke!

I just had a thought - you should suggest that Geithner make better use of his blogging privileges at HP to explain a few things and set the record straight. Wait ... that may be too much fun than I could possibly be expected to handle ...

I didn't get past the Geithner surprise - the rest will have to wait until tomorrow ... or later today ...I'll be back! :)

C'mon, I said nice things about Geithner and everything!

:-)

-CW