Congressman John Yarmuth understands that it's important to keep on good terms with the "nutroots" -- those far left blogs like Page One, where Andrew Horne announced his candidacy today.
So when Page One castigated Congressman Geoff Davis for co-sponsoring a Congressional Resolution "recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith," Yarmuth took note.
Congressional Resolution 847 provides in pertinent part:
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) recognizes the Christian faith as one of the great religions of the world;
(2) expresses continued support for Christians in the United States and worldwide;
(3) acknowledges the international religious and historical importance of Christmas and the Christian faith;
(4) acknowledges and supports the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization;
(5) rejects bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide; and
(6) expresses its deepest respect to American Christians and Christians throughout the world.
That doesn't sound particularly controversial. Yet Yarmuth refused to vote for it. Nor did he have the courage to oppose it. Instead, he voted "present." Thankfully, the rest of the Kentucky delegation got it right and voted "aye."
Yarmuth's refusal to support the Christmas resolution is particularly troubling in light of some of his other votes.
In early October, Yarmuth voted "aye" for a resolution in favor of Ramadan, the Islamic month of fasting. A few weeks later, Yarmuth voted in favor of recognizing the "religious and historical significance of Diwali." (Diwali, for the uninitiated, is a Indian and Nepalese holiday associated with the religions of Hinduism, Jainism and Sikhism.)
Page One complained that the resolution "recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith" is akin to a "resolution supporting our favorite puppies and rainbows."
Here's news for Yarmuth and Page One. Christians are being persecuted in China, India the Mid-East and Africa, among other places. Some Christians are subject to "forced conversions." Others are just murdered.
For Page One to compare their martyrdom to "puppies and rainbows" trivializes the violation of human rights -- a cause the left likes well enough when it's applied to terrorist detainees.
Page One rationalized its opposition to the Christmas resolution: "can you even imagine what would happen if someone tried to pass a resolution recognizing the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world?"
The thing is, we don't have to imagine. Nor need we imagine Yarumuth's voting record in response: Ramadan, "aye." Diwali, "aye." Christmas, "present."
Showing posts with label nutroots. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nutroots. Show all posts
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Horne Announces -- On a Left-Wing Blog
Andrew Horne announced that he will run against Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell for Kentucky's U.S. Senate race. No doubt setting the tone for his campaign, Horne announced on a left-wing blog.
Horne has not filed officially, just announced his intent to run. His timing may have been moved up in light of a sit-down with potential candidate Greg "rich guy" Fischer scheduled for later in the week.
It will come as no shock that Horne reminds the voters in his press release of his military connections -- no less than eight times.
Make no mistake, Horne is to commended for serving his country in the military. But as Tom Brokaw noted in The Greatest Generation, the vets who talk about their service the most generally are the ones who did the least. It's the vets who are reticent to talk about their time in combat who have the most to say.
Moreover, the left's joy at the prospect of a Horne candidacy -- did you know he's a vet?! -- is a sad reminder that he is an aberration: we don't think of the Democrats as the party of national defense. In a race to surrender, the Democrats might actually beat the French.
The cheap shot of Horne's announcement: "Simply put: Mitch McConnell carries George Bush’s water on Iraq; I carried a rifle in Iraq.”
Horne's accusation that McConnell -- who spent two years bed-ridden with polio as a child -- should be faulted for not carrying "a rifle in Iraq" is beyond bizarre; it sounds like the sort of talk that Democrats are always trying to criminalize as hate speech.
Horne has not filed officially, just announced his intent to run. His timing may have been moved up in light of a sit-down with potential candidate Greg "rich guy" Fischer scheduled for later in the week.
It will come as no shock that Horne reminds the voters in his press release of his military connections -- no less than eight times.
Make no mistake, Horne is to commended for serving his country in the military. But as Tom Brokaw noted in The Greatest Generation, the vets who talk about their service the most generally are the ones who did the least. It's the vets who are reticent to talk about their time in combat who have the most to say.
Moreover, the left's joy at the prospect of a Horne candidacy -- did you know he's a vet?! -- is a sad reminder that he is an aberration: we don't think of the Democrats as the party of national defense. In a race to surrender, the Democrats might actually beat the French.
The cheap shot of Horne's announcement: "Simply put: Mitch McConnell carries George Bush’s water on Iraq; I carried a rifle in Iraq.”
Horne's accusation that McConnell -- who spent two years bed-ridden with polio as a child -- should be faulted for not carrying "a rifle in Iraq" is beyond bizarre; it sounds like the sort of talk that Democrats are always trying to criminalize as hate speech.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)