I was all set to get ravingly pissed off at this wind-bag. But after doing a little research I see where he is coming from, and I really shouldn’t expect any sort of tolerance or compassion from him.
But this article was in my daily fucking paper and it pissed me off.
Today’s piece (which if you’d like to read it) can also be found here.
He goes on and on about how the media has an agenda and refuses to present two sides to an argument. Meanwhile he (a member of the media) does just what he is accusing. His rhetoric is peppered with assertations of what is absolutely right and wrong.
His tone of voice comes through loud and clear with his strategic use of quotation marks:
He might as well write “so called” before those instances.
And then there is this beauty yanked out of his ass:
If he were a Doper, I’d be screaming “CITE!!!”
Now personally, I don’t two truncated turds about Rosie O’Donnell, but the underlying issue being addressed by this human scrotum, is important. And I fail to see why my daily newspaper saw it fit to run this syndicated shit, knowing full well that it can’t really be debated, because the author will never see a letter anyone might write to the editor.
I guess the only thing left is to rant and rave here.
And now I’ve got it all off my chest and I leave it to others to yay or nay.
ABC wanted an interview with Rosie, and they had to agree to her terms. This bothers him, but I don’t really see where they have to present ‘both sides of an issue’ - wasn’t it basically a personal interview?
And I never heard of him before this, but I wonder why if he’s so set against gay adoptions, he didn’t present any of the “compelling arguments.” Oh well.
My mother watched the special. I didn’t, as I absolutely cannot STAND Rosie O’Donnell. But she was most moved, she said, by the couple who had taken in several children with HIV.
No one else wanted these kids. These two men were the ONLY ones who had opened their hearts to them.
What – you’ve never had the pleasure of reading Cal Thomas before? I envy you.
His column gets carried regularly (or at least used to, I’m not sure anymore) in my local paper. I used to read him every so often so I could (1) keep tabs on what the lunatic fringe was up to and (2) give my spleen a nice workout.
My favorite part of the article, regarding the kids who were taken in by the two gay men:
Yeah, Cal. Ya got 'em there. I can just see ABC doing a followup piece showing how terrible their lives will turn out having been raised by a gay couple, and how much better things would have been if only they had been left in the comparative paradise of a foster care sytem in which, in your own words, “nobody wanted” them.
Also:
I notice you didn’t either, Cal. But keep reading those Chick tracts and watching that continuous loop of the 700 Club you’ve got on your TiVo. Maybe you’ll come up with something.
The man lacks both a heart and a brain. How he manages to operate the computer to write his columns is a mystery.
Whoa, somebody’s only now learning of Cal Thomas? I have a sneaking suspicion he and Ann Coulter are actually the same person, what with their reasoned approach to politics and public discourse. I think ol’ Cal is on the downside of his career, however. He had a book out around 1995 that went nowhere, and I don’t really see his column in too many papers these days.
Well, I don’t go seeking too many syndicated columnists, nor many editorials, period. And those I do seek are of a more liberal bent. I just happened to be waiting for a sandwich at a subshop, reading my paper when this popped out at me. I couldn’t believe a fairly balanced newpaper (The Portland Press Herald) would print this.
If it had been presented with more debate tactics and less, I don’t know, bullshit, I’d have understood and let it slide.
From 1993 to 1998, I read his column twice a week in the Bristol (VA/TN) Herald-Courier; before that, I had the misfortune of making his acquaintance in The State (Columbia, SC).
After awhile, I stopped getting mad, and it became my T/Th morning ritual to see how many major problems I could find with his logic in that morning’s column.
One thing that can be said for Cal Thomas - he seems to have backed off from some of his earlier ravings about the need for government to be a major promoter of (Christian) morals, in favor of something approaching what most people would regard as a healthy separation between church and state.
I see from the link that he’s still upset about the “gay agenda”. As am I. What is this “agenda” that gays are privileged to have? I picture Esprix and others as getting these really nifty leather-bound* agendas with spaces for appointments, addresses and of course their Master Plans for controlling the universe. It’s really unfair that Cal and the rest of us don’t have our own agendas.
*apologies for any inadvertent stereotyping.
Let’s not be too tough on Ol’ Cal. In many ways he is a remarkable person. Early on, when his column first appeared in “The Newspaper that Likes to Think It Is the Newspaper All Iowa Depends On” it was pretty clear that when ever he wished to take a position on some newsworthy issue he would consult first with the Heritage Institute and then fervently pray for Devine guidance. In almost every case he found that the Lord God Almighty shared Cal’s position and wholeheartedly agreed with him. Of late, however, Cal seems to have assumed the support of Heritage and taken it upon himself to channel God. It saves a lot of time that way and allows Cal to speak with much more authority.
A guy who can do that is rare and should be regarded as a treasure. Such a treasure, in fact, that we should consider putting him in a safe place with the other treasures. The third sub-basement of the gold depository at Ft. Knox comes to mind.
I’m unclear as to how my name came up in this thread. Did you see my name on an adjacent thread?
For the record, I’m not that closely aligned with CT’s Christian-type of conservatism, although we’re both conservatives. I do not have any opinion on gay adoption, not having any knowledge of the topic.
I do think that media ought to present both sides of issues like this. I also think it would be desirable to study the long-term effect of gay adoptions and find out how well it works, as compared with other available options.
It’s been done. Findings? Kids turned out no more or less gay than any other kids, and generally more well-adjusted. (I’ll find the cite when I can.) Love is love is love, doesn’t really matter who it comes from.
**december, ** your name came up exactly how it was in my post. I was looking at the forum. This thread was immediately above one that you’d posted, so with my poor eyesight, I saw it as you being the poster, found that amusing.