Will the Christian Right Speak Out Against This Politicization of Our Public Schools?

Tomorrow, thousands of students across the country will take part in the “Pro-life Day of Silent Solidarity” by wearing red duct tape over their mouths or on their arms on behalf of all the babies who have been aborted.

Some kids may also wear shirts gleefully proclaiming their ultimate goal of controlling what women can do with their bodies:

Lovely, no?

Anyway, it’s a student-led event and it’s perfectly legal. It’s also taking a political issue and bringing it inside the classroom.

Personally, I don’t care. The duct tape won’t make any difference in how I teach my classes tomorrow.

Just to be clear, no atheist group is making a big deal about this. If anything, I suspect most of them would support the students’ right to free speech. As long as they’re not being disruptive, they are allowed to make a statement like this.

So why bring this up at all?

Because no Religious Right group is condemning this event.

That means they must not have had a problem during the almost-identical Day of Silence protests (on behalf of LGBT students), right?

Of course not.

Here’s David Smith of the Illinois Family Institute criticizing the Day of Silence:

These political events are used to get the attention of all students and implicitly convey the message that participating schools support homosexual behavior.

Here’s Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute doing the exact same thing:

We don’t object to Day of Silence participants saying what they want during non-instructional time or thinking what they want anytime.

We are asking parents to keep their children home if schools are permitting a political action — that is, a silent protest — during instructional time.

Here’s Liberty Counsel instructing parents on what they can do to limit the effects of the Day of Silence (PDF).

Here’s the American Family Association telling parents to pull their kids out of the classroom:

You can help de-politicize the learning environment by calling your child out of school if your child’s school allows students to remain silent during instructional time on the Day of Silence.

They’ll keep their kids home if there’s anything going on at school that blatantly or “secretly” suggests that LGBT students should be treated respectfully. But they remain completely silent when it comes to the pro-life event that operates in the exact same way.

These Christians are hypocrites, pure and simple.

They don’t give a damn about “politicizing” the classroom as long as it promotes their personal agenda.

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the editor of Friendly Atheist, appears on the Atheist Voice channel on YouTube, and co-hosts the uniquely-named Friendly Atheist Podcast. You can read much more about him here.

  • C Peterson

    From a purely practical standpoint, I don’t think it is possible for a Christian to not be a hypocrite. The convoluted and contradictory dogma, combined with massively unrealistic behavioral expectations, force Christians into hypocrisy. Sometimes it is fairly subtle, sometimes gross (as in this case). But it’s always there. It’s one of the most important reasons that Christianity leads to poor ethical choices.

  • http://twitter.com/FelyxLeiter Felyx Leiter

    “Roe v. Wade WILL NOT SURVIVE ME.  Nor will thousands of mothers, sisters, wives, teachers, role models and friends as a result.”

    Hey, stand true, right?

  • Octoberfurst

     This is one of the things that pisses me off most about the Religious Right. They have no problem when schools cater to their religious/political agenda. After all we are a “Christian nation” and it’s all about freedom of religion, etc. “Pro-life’ events, straight pride days, teachers teaching creationism, prayers over the PA system–it’s all good!
    But if the school is involved in something they DON’T like–well, that’s just WRONG!  You know, like teaching kids that gays are human beings deserving of respect, that evolution is true, that there are other religions in the world besides Christianity.  Schools shouldn’t be involved in such propaganda they screech! You’re persecuting Christians you Godless heathens!   Whine! Whine! Whine!  Yes indeed, don’t expose little Johnny to anything other than my bigoted, Bible-thumping world-view. Why? Because he might question his beliefs and we can’t have that now can we?  Idiots.

  • The Captain

    Hitler survived Roe V Wade too. I swear these people make the stupidest arguments.

  • Drakk

    Make it a point to direct questions at the people with duct tape over their mouths?

  • Foster

    “These Christians are hypocrites, pure and simple.”  Not necessarily.  A similar case occurred at the Vice Presidential debate earlier this month.  Vice President Biden repeatedly (and obnoxiously, in my opinion) interrupted both the moderator and his opponent during their speaking times.  Rep. Ryan asked Biden to stop interrupting, in the interest of clarity of expression of either side to the American people.  But Biden did not stop.  So Ryan began interrupting as well.  We might label Ryan a hypocrite, or we could (as I do) say that while he would prefer no interruptions, if there must be interruptions, then it is better that both sides have equal opportunity to speak while interrupting than that one candidate obscure the other’s message and then experience no consequences while they speak.  I believe that after Ryan started interrupting as well, Biden was a bit more conservative with his rude outbursts.  Similarly, while the Christian right might prefer that there be no political expression in schools, it is not hypocritical to take advantage as well as one can of what one cannot change, in this case, by having your voice heard as well as the LGBT voice.

  • CelticWhisper

     The Simpsons lampshaded and lampooned this at least once.  Ned Flanders’ house gets destroyed and he’s talking to god, saying “I’ve tried my best to please you.  I did everything the bible says, even the parts that contracdict the other parts!  Why did this happen to me?”

    It’s a wonder more christians haven’t ended up in mental hospitals, insane from trying to unravel the spaghetti that is the doctrines of their religion.

    If only the writers of the bible had commented their code…

  • CelticWhisper

     I would definitely do that, and points would be docked for refusal to answer.

    Practice whatever politics you want, but interfere with my lessons and your ass is grass.

    Maybe it’s good that I’m not a teacher.

  • RobMcCune

    This is different since any political statement by students “politicizes” schools. Debates, in contrast are not trying to get rid of speech. In a debate the idea is for both sides to be able to express themselves equally in a limited time, interrupting steals time, so responding in kind can be an attempt to balance the scales. If someone does not want to have “political” messages in schools, but insists on having their own political message day, then they are  hypocritical since political messages are what they are trying to get rid of. That is if their objection is principled, and not just rhetoric.

    Given the religious rights reaction to the chick-fil-a boycott after calling for numerous boycotts of business for things like LGBT non-discrimination policies, or Ellen as a spokes person, my money is on hypocrisy.

  • Question Everything

    This makes no sense at all, I’m sorry.  When an organization says, quite clearly, “We are asking parents to keep their children home if schools are permitting a political action — that is, a silent protest — during instructional time.”, then doesn’t decry another silent protest in the same way, they obviously aren’t against political action or silent protests.

    The day of silence has been going on for a number of years, and has been condemned by religious right groups the whole time.  They’ve had plenty of time to change their minds or put out other points of view, but they just keep condemning the one they disagree with.

    Tell you what, though, if next year they don’t condemn the day of silence because they kept quiet on this one, I’ll take back everything I just said and offer an apology.

  • Glasofruix

    Wait wasn’t Ryan lying like a hooker on meth during the entire debate? I consider that not interrupting him while he’s spewing bullcrap would have been kind of rude.

  • Archaeopteryx1861

    Rowe v. Wade was after Hitler’s time…..but we get your point. 

  • The Captain

    Perhaps that’s how he made his narrow escape, being born before 1973, that crafty son of a bitch.

  • RobMcCune

     Given what we’ve seen from the people above, you don’t think christianity has unraveled their minds? Two posts ago, they took an anti-clique day as part of the ‘homosexual agenda’. Any slight factoid will lead them to a stream of consciousness, free association, rant about how everyone is against them. I’m pretty sure an unraveled mind gets the listened to, not committed.

  • Gringa

     Nor was he born in the US, but ok

  • Baal

     Please go re-watch the debate.   “So Ryan began interrupting as well.”  You’re pulling a ‘greedo shot first’.  (hint, it was Han)

  • coyotenose

     “Similarly, while the Christian right might prefer that there be no political expression in schools…”

    You HAVE to know that isn’t true. It’s only been mitigated as much as it has because of people fighting them.

  • coyotenose

     You may not grasp that when someone is lying in an argument, allowing them to continue to lie and to build up more lies is, in the eyes of the onlookers, tantamount to conceding that what they’re saying is accurate. Romney and Ryan lied an order of magnitude more often than Obama and Biden. They flat-out made up things. Biden did a bad job of calling Ryan out on his lies, but they needed to be called out.

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/ Kevin_Of_Bangor

    I’m so glad most of this type of bullshit doesn’t happen at my daughters school.

  • viaten

    I wonder how the pro-life people would defend this protest if any pro-choice people were to express outrage over this.

  • http://fontofliberty.blogspot.com/ Rarian Rakista

    Not all pro-lifers are Christian  that is fallacious.  

  • http://itsmyworldcanthasnotyours.blogspot.com/ wmdkitty

    What a bunch of hypocrites.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

    Unless you’d be willing to do the same for people staying silent on the Day of Silence, that’s not cool. 

  • A3Kr0n

    Tell the students that the adhesive on the tape causes zits. Problem solved! 

  • brianmacker

    Biden lied and lied and lied, yet Ryan didn’t interrupt his lies. Biden “flat out made things up” as in lied. He lied about Syria. He lied about Benghazi Libya. Lied about Obmacare. Lied about his war vote (he voted for both). Etc.

    The lies were overtly transparent like claiming Palin had talked about death panels during the 2000 presidential debate when in fact Obamacare wasn’t even a wet dream yet. Biden was smirking, lying and laughing at the most inappropriate points in the debate like a jackass.

    An article over at Salon are claiming Ryan’s biggest lie was when he made the dig bipartisanship about “you guys not wanting to make deals”. Which anyone paying attention knows is about Obamacare which was passed with zero republican votes, and 34 democrats opposing. If that was his biggest “lie”, and it wasn’t a lie, then I’m not impressed.

  • brianmacker

    You are thinking of Biden.

  • brianmacker

    Are you talking about when Biden overran his time and couldn’t shut his grinning trap?

  • A Reader

    In theory, yeah, go free speech. In practice, I live in a really conservative area and I really hope no one at my school is doing this. There’s enough political BS going on right now without adding pro-birth whining to it.

  • brianmacker

    Not how I remember. Let me watch again.

    Biden when first and during his first segment Ryan didn’t make any facial expressions nor did he speak.

    The first interruption was by Biden when he whispered “not true” when Ryan was accurately describing Romney’s position on Bengazi as being the same as Obama’s on the day democrat biased newspapers were attacking him. Romney’s position was a criticism of the throwing under the bus of free speech rights by the embassy which in fact is part of the Obama administration, but later in the day Obama took the same position. So it was true, making Biden’s interrupting whisper false, and BTW a lie.

    Still during Ryan’s first segment for speaking he starts talking about defense cuts and Bidenstarts grinning again and interrupts again. This time with a full voice mumbled question which I can’t make out, after which he laughs to himself. Ryan continues answering the question ignoring the jackass when Biden again interrupts saying, “With all due respect that is a bunch of malarky”, making this his third interruption, and second lying interruption. The moderator had NOT turned to him with any question when he did that.

    Then the moderator asks him “Why’s that?” rewarding his bad behavior. The then lies again saying that everything Ryan said was not true. Everything? Not true and it sounds like a little kid, and the moderator had to ask him to be specific.

    I’m not going to watch the whole debate again but I’m going with my memory that he continues on and on with smirking, laughing, interrupting, while Ryan patiently puts up with this nonsense, and the weak moderator, for most of the debate. That’s why even Democrat pundits and left leaning news sources have panned Biden for his smirky and rude performance.

    I betcha you didn’t even watch the debate. You probably read about it at from some slanted source.

  • 3lemenope

    I betcha you didn’t even watch the debate. You probably read about it at from some slanted source.

    And so are you like a personal case study in what happens when you are your own slanted source?

    As a person who strongly dislikes Biden for many of the things he’s done during his career, and as a person who intends come November to vote for neither of them, I thought it was pretty damn clear that Biden got the better of Ryan during the vast majority of the debate. It wasn’t even close. 

    And for what it’s worth, being “smirky” or rude can be a tactical decision when you want to leave the audience with the impression that your opponent isn’t worth being on the same level as you; given that the optics of the thing were a guy who looks like a archetypal statesman was debating against a guy who looked like he got lost coming out of a grad school seminar, I think it was a good tactical call, esp. since it made it that much harder to imagine Ryan, of all people, being ready at a heartbeat’s notice to assume the leadership of the free world.

  • Baby_Raptor

    No, he’s thinking of Ryan. Google is your friend. So is the truth…The actual truth.

  • http://twitter.com/InMyUnbelief TCC

    Are you mental? Obamacare was the Republicans’ plan – just because they then refused to vote for it because the Democrats supported it doesn’t mean that it was a failure to gain bipartisan consensus. What you are apparently ignoring is the Republicans’ efforts – often expressly stated – to undermine the Democrats even when those policies were ones that they had previously supported and in some cases even devised themselves. It was absolutely a lie that the Obama administration has not tried to be bipartisan; at a certain point, they wised up to the fact that reaching across the aisle doesn’t do a damn bit of good if the other side only wants to see you fail.

  • brianmacker

    No, and your comment is totally off track like you didn’t even understand what I clearly wrote. I never once addressed who “won” for instance. Liars often win get the better of debates. I was addressing the fact that Biden was the first to interrupt, and in fact was so glaringly smirky and rude that even some of those in his corner thought it was a bad move.

    Of course it will look like strength to those with a bias, and inability to see it as an independent like me would. Smirking and making guffaws during a discussion of Iranian nukes doesn’t make one look strong to the undecided. Makes you look like a jerk.

    My comment about a slant to his source was in regards to his false belief that it was Ryan, not Biden who started with the interruptions, and smirking, and mugging for the camera. I was wondering if he was filming a denture commercial on the side at one point. Biden was acting like honey boo boo on steroids. Ryan at no point did any of these distracting visual antics although he did start to interrupt at some point.

  • brianmacker

    Are you stupid? Nice try but ridiculous. I can’t believe people like you who think they are serious thinkers. It’s obvious you don’t understand the legislative process. You actually believe that ObamaCare is an unaltered Republican plan written just the way they wanted it and then they voted against it just out of spite? Someone told you that and you bought it hook, line, and sinker? What a maroon.

    I guess those 34 Democrats that voted against it with the republicans were the ones you’d label partisan for voting against a “Republican Bill”.

    Talk about twisted rationalizations.

  • 3lemenope

    Of course it will look like strength to those with a bias, and inability to see it as an independent like me would.

    You are a genuinely amusing person.

  • brianmacker

    I am an independent. Never registered as a Republican, and used to be registered democrat as a kid. Even voted for Jimmy Carter. What’s amusing is that you are clueless as to how independents think. We are independent because we hate the bullshit from both parties.

    I’m like an anti-mirror. Liberals read my replies and assume I’m a wing nut. I just got called that during the weekend. Conservatives read my replies and assume I’m a liberal. Libertarians think I’m a socialist. So on, and so forth.

    This is because I tend to correct their mistakes, and liberals tend to be bias towards lying about conservatives, and vice versa. I’ve never had to have a discussion about Obama’s birth certificate with a liberal but I have had to disabuse a conservative or two of the idea he is a foreigner or Muslim.

    I tend to piss everyone off with my usually polite corrections of their various idelogical delusions.

    If independents disrportionately vote against Obama/Biden that will be your wake up call to the fact I am an independent. Why would I join a party that has presidential candidates claiming I’m not worthy of citizenship because I’m an atheist? Why would I join the other that advocates and implements policies which are and will turn the US into an economic basket case?

    Notice how the one commenter pointed out that Ryan lies, which is true of all politicians, so I point out how Biden also lied. See how that works. I revealed a glaring blind spot for the whiner. There are certain facts liberals are oblivious too also, like the overwhelming bias of the print media and school systems in your favor. I have to actually go out of my way to learn actual conservative viewpoints, but the airwaves, print, and education system is saturated with the liberal point of view. Unfortunately, you guys are wrong about half the time, just like the conservatives.

  • brianmacker

    I watched the debate so I don’t need google to know that your average hooker is more honest than Biden. Biden pretty much lied during everynsegment of the debate. I did catch Ryan making mistakes, and an occasional lie but Biden won the debate in terms of the magnitude and seriousness of his lies, and lies of omission.

    Ryan did things like claiming the French ambassador was guarded by Marines, which is sorta true in that they are at that embassy to guard document, and thus can’t help but be guarding the place including the ambassador. The truth is that there is a separate detail for the ambassador. This is more a nit than a lie. Biden on the other hand was straight out lying on the Benghazi issue.

    I’ve heard bullshit retorts that Ryan voted to cut funding for such guards but likely in some comprehensive bill of which he was hardly likely to know every detail. Plus general cuts for such guards does not mean that the Obama administration cannot intelligently apply the resources he has. The resources that were probably not cut, and probably had Democrat votes to. None of that implies a lie.

    On the other hand Biden and Obama have been lying about this issue for something like a month, so when asked about it and he layers on riveting responses that’s more lying. Ryan correctly stated that the Obama administration knew about requests for more security months in advance and did nothing. Plus they were briefed right after the attack about such requests as testified to by this responsible. Biden’s claim of “we didn’t know” was a typical not response response and a lie of omission. He failed to specify a “we” or a “when” allowing him to be able to claim he was communicating the truth when he wasn’t. The context was the claim by Ryan, not some other context Biden had in mind.

    We know that Obama and Biden continued to push the you tube video narrative for a week or more after they were briefed (the day after the event) that is was not a protest. Did you know a fifty foot wide hole had been blown in the wall around the compound long before this event, and was one of the reasons the now dead ambassador was requesting more security? Obviously the Obama administration knew about this, Hillary, Biden, Obama or someone they appointed.

    Obama loves to blame his fuck ups on others, and he is trying to pin this on anyone but himself. I think Hillary will end up under the bus. The buck never stops with him except when someone else’s efforts come to a successful fruition it seems. Like when the army got Bin Laden. How long has he been blaming Bush for his economic failures while acting like Bush on steroids, with a large dash of stifling socialism? Four years.

  • Glasofruix

     Oh please, ryan lies pretty much on everything, in fact i can’t even find a single time whe he wasn’t lying.


  • Baby_Raptor

    So…You have one thing that he lied about, if you spin what he said a certain way. Meanwhile, Mitt and Ryan have been lying every time they open their mouths for months. But apparently that’s fine with you, because they’re Republicans.

    “When the Army got bin Ladin.” You mean NAVY Seal Team 6? And Obama was the one who made the call. Bush and his Republican administration went out of their way to not get bin Ladin. He made multiple statements saying they weren’t even looking. 

    Obama blames Bush for the economy because the economy was his fault. Meanwhile in reality, taxes are at their lowest since Reagan, the deficit has been LOWERED, and is expected to go even lower thanks to Obamacare, and the country isn’t anymore Socialist than it was under Bush. Seriously. Turn off your bias and look at the facts. They aren’t on your side. 

    Edited because Discus decided to eat my spacing the first time.

  • 3lemenope

    I’m like an anti-mirror. Liberals read my replies and assume I’m a wing nut. I just got called that during the weekend. Conservatives read my replies and assume I’m a liberal. Libertarians think I’m a socialist. So on, and so forth.

    This particular conservative is simply amused by your protestations of neutrality. Personally I hope you aren’t actually neutral in a substantive sense in politics, because I tend to associate actual neutrality in that realm with abject idiocy. Fairly or not, but in my experience mostly fairly; one has to work hard to manage to not decide between clear alternatives, of which there are several, on a matter of profound practical concern like “how should our society be run?” and “how should our resources be allocated?” and “how do we achieve peace?” and even “how should we prepare for war?”.

  • Guest


    In the interest of reducing double standards and hypocrisy in the atheist/secular community I need to ask you some questions and bring up an issue that appears to be a conflict of interest and an example of a double standard on your part. I am sure it will ruffle some feathers, but so be it. If we are to talk the talk, we must then be ready to walk the walk.

    You are a public school teacher, correct? You believe in a separation of church and state, correct? I do. And that means in all ways. So, I have to ask you, how can you justify being prolific on your blog, a blog designed to promote a world view (yes, I am an atheist and know the meaning of the word, so the semantics may be a little tricky here) that borders on dogmatic, during public school hours?

    The problem is thus:

    You are being paid with public money. You are also being paid to teach children, not promote one world view versus another. Over the last month you have averaged four postings a day on this blog during school hours – the time you are being paid on the public dime. This is a conflict of interest and a double standard. Weeks ago you posted about Texas cheerleaders waving bible verse placards at a public school event. I agree that it is wrong for them to do this, but it is equally wrong for you to waste the public money updating and posting a blog for your world view during public school hours. 

    Also, are you using the school’s WiFi or Internet connection to upload? This is a conflict of interest as you are using public resources to promote a dogmatic world view.

    If we are to hold the moral high ground, you should not be doing your blog during the public school hours – even if it is between classes or during assigned study hall monitoring/quiet time. We must act above things as this so we may call out those who try to go th other way with bible versus etc.

    The other issue is your time is being paid to guide and teach children. Even if you spend only a few minutes of time during the day to promote the blog, those are still minutes you are not doing your job.

    It is for this reason I have organized a formal complaint to the school where you teach and the school district. I have written many letters to schools asking them to stop the promotion of one religious or world view over another on school time, and to not do so here would be hypocritical. We must be above this church/state connection, even when it is one we agree with.

  • NoDoubtAboutIt

    Of course it is.  The Day of Silence people are standing up for the rights of those oppressed by disgusting Jesus Nazis.  The duct tape morons are standing up for their right to oppress other people in the name of some jewish slut’s kid.

  • Anti Ryan

    Anyone who would lie about a marathon time tells me he will lie about anything. Ryan is a scummy little man who wears his insecurities like ribbons and bows.

  • Guest

    Why do you think hookers lie all the time? You have some experience there slick?

    You are the prime example of “ignorant American”.

    Suffering from rectal-cranial inversion is an awful cross to bear.

  • RobMcCune

    Hemant writes his posts on his own time, but sets his blog up so they will be available the following day. Problem solved. Well I guess that puts an end to your feigned outrage, right?

  • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/ Hemant Mehta

    Yep. That’s correct. Guest doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

  • Glasofruix

    Are you sure you aren’t that crazy chick from that family institute thingy? There’s an awful similarity here.

  • http://www.facebook.com/eukota Darrell Ross

    I think I must have watched a different debate between Biden and Ryan. Or maybe I was in an alternate universe.

    Yes. That must be it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/eukota Darrell Ross

    Do you intentionally drop underhanded insults left and right? Reminds me of this acronym a coworker of mine likes to use in jest:

    ISBIOTTMCO – It Should Be Immediately Obvious To The Most Casual Observer
    In my opinion, folks who are undecided are amazing. Pray tell, why are you undecided?

  • http://www.facebook.com/eukota Darrell Ross

    I like making fun of religion. But calling Mary a slut is way too far.

    Calling women sluts is hypocritical because of the whole “slut vs stud” bit. You know, how it’s good to be a stud and sleep with lots of women but bad to be a slut and sleep with lots of men? Can you say patriarchy?

  • brianmacker

    They are not intended as insults.  They are intended as a diagnoses.     If you watched Biden and didn’t notice that he interrupted first, made distracting animations on his face, and continued to interrupt repeatedly 80 or more times in 90 minutes then you are biased.

    The problem with the people that I am replying to goes deeper.   They have a limited capacity to understand and distinguish word meanings.   They therefore keep interjecting red herrings.

    In fact you just did that.  Did I ever say I was “undecided”.  No.  I said I was independent.    Did I ever say I was “neutral” no, and hell I didn’t even claim not to be biased, because calling someone else for acting biased in a situation does not require any claim about the speaker.

    There is some other guy on another thread here who doesn’t understand the definiton of bipartisan.   He called me crazy or some such, so I called him stupid, and pointed out why.  I don’t usually insult unless the other party starts in with it first.

    If you say, “Ryan interrupted first” you are shown to be biased either because you know it is false and are lying for Biden, believed a biased source and are therefore communicating bias, or watched it and have a biased brain that filtered out the truth.

    This is such simple to understand reasoning that I don’t know how to diagnose you without it sounding like an underhanded insult.   Yes, I understand that “diagnose” is insulting in this context but that is what I am doing much of the time.   I have to play doctor (or detective) and try to diagnose (or detect) what possibly went wrong with your thinking process that would cause the response I got.

    Now that may sound paternalistic, and that is because in a way it is.  I also understand that it sounds pretensious from you point of view.    Here I am trying to teach you something, how haughty. 

    Now how could you possibly communicate that to me without sounding insulting in some underhanded way.

    I only ask that you think a little longer, or work on your thinking skills before you reply.   Think of all the other possibilities before you automatically conclude that I am “undecided” in the sense that I can’t make up my mind, because that is the only interpretation of the word “undecided” which should make one “amazed”.  My mind is made up and I hate every single candidate the Republicans and Democrats have put up for President and Vice President.  

    I’m amazed by peole who think the choice is clear when there are so many dimensions of concern, issues of trust,  complications on implementing strategy, evasiveness, etc. all boiled down to a single X or Y choice.    

    I’m amazed that someone who uses an underhanded insult like calling undecideds “amazing” is complaining about underhanded insults.  It’s ironic.

  • Guest

    What time was it you responded to this, and from where?

    And for all who think this is false indignance, shame on you. Just because you like Hemant does not recuse yourselves from examing the reality.

    And according to records received from his school, he has a clear pattern of uploading, and responding to, this blog using the school’s WiFi and resources.

  • brianmacker

    I didn’t claim nutrality.  I claimed to be an independent.  Independents tend to dislike both parties.  Any other red herrings?
    Please learn word meanings and work on your deductive skills, because pointing out obvious bias on the part of someone in a particular situation does not require any claims about the self, and especially when the claim is supported by fact.  Now, had I said, “You are wrong and biased about him interrupting because Ryan is my brother in law, and Biden is your crazy uncle.” then it is fine to argue the way you are.   I didn’t do that.

  • 3lemenope

    Like I said, a funny guy. 

    Or did I say “amusing person” and is that substantively different than “funny guy”? I’m sure you’ll tell me as you lecture me on how to read and understand your thigh-slappingly hilarious arrogation to the role of Corrector of Everyone’s Ideological Delusions, which you yourself of course don’t have, because apparently in your world that’s what “independent” means.

    Man, do a circuit. You could make real bank in clubs and concert halls with the routine.

  • brianmacker

    More red herrings.  I never claimed that independent means without ideological delusions.  Have fun inventing positions for me and laughiing at them.

  • brianmacker

    I betcha you didn’t even watch the debate. You probably read about it at from some slanted source.

    “And so are you like a personal case study in what happens when you are your own slanted source?”

    That referred to the fact that Baal didn’t know that Biden interrupted Ryan first, because Baal never made any claims about who won.    You need to check the context of the conversation to know what is going on.

    You are a personal case history in red herrings, failure to understand the definitions of words, and reading comprehension problems.

    If you want to switch to the topic of dominating the debate.  Sure that might work the way you say with Democrats but they are biased and already voting for him.  Biden needed to convince independents and he is polling very poorly with that group on this debate.


    I have to laugh at your attempt at political analysis, and inability to actually understand the context of a conversation.   You state, “It wasn’t even close. ” yet polls show Ryan winning.  LOL.

  • brianmacker

    I amend that statement to “I betcha didn’t even watch the debate, period.”  after watching this hilarious  video of Jimmy Kimmel asking people who won the debate before it even happened.     You have any words defending these people too?  LOL