Got St. Nick? Suffer.
Okay, so it's a contrived anagram.
But here's my take on a non-issue pushed by Friend of Bill
John Gibson in his book [sic] "The War on Christmas"
If you scan through the reviews of this book on Amazon.com, you'll find some pretty interesting stuff. Mostly sensible people who recognize this as a complete-bullshit "cause." My own take on it (repeated below). A lady who claims Gibson ruined her Xmas by showing up to her family's meal blitzed out of his mind. And conservatives so dim they don't recognize their own irony, like T.R. Lombardo from Texas, who begins his supportive review with, "Is it just me, or is everyone getting offended by SOMETHING these days?"
News flash to the curious conservative actually perusing my site: the fact you guys bitch and moan about this issue, and SELL BOOKS SPECIFICALLY BASED ON IT, proves you're the crybaby, knee-jerk, hypersensitive folks looking to exploit your sense of offense.
Phenomenal imagery
by Ben Hillman.
But I picked up the book, nonetheless, so I could fairly critique it.
Simply put -- this book is a big lump of shoddy "evidence" to support one side of a non-controversy.
Gibson's methodology is the same as Bernard Goldberg's in his successful, but scientifically dubious "Bias" -- he's noticed some stuff that, when presented with selective emphasis and contradictory stuff omitted -- bolsters his "case." For instance, he cites a handful of local governments who push its employees to veer away from religion-specific greetings. What he doesn't tell you is Arizona et all also prohibited their government workers from referring to Kwanzaa or Hanukkah. Never mind the whole picture; this is Confirmation Bias at its worst.
But let us, for a moment, suppose Gibson is arguing something relevant to the day. It's 1877, Christmas has
been a nationally recognized holiday for five years, and some sacrilegious sorts are ruining the religious observance by decorating fir trees with colorful ribbons and shiny trinkets, drinking alcohol w/eggnog, giving each other unsolicited gifts, and telling stories about some fictional character who flies around in a sleigh powered by flying reindeer! In this situation MAYBE what Gibson is saying would pass for a valid topic of debate.
But this is the 21st Century. In the team effort of making Christmas a popular holiday Jesus was officially benched as a major player when Woolworth's had its first Xmas sale and Norman Rockwell chose to feature Santa Claus, Christmas trees, and shiny giftboxes -- instead of Jesus -- in his holiday Saturday Evening Post offerings. That was, what, 1932?
How many iPods have been sold by salesmen reminding their customers the reason they're spending $100 on the latest electronic gadget for junior is the birth of Jesus of Nazareth? How many liquor stores wish their eggnog purchasers a "happy Jesus' birthday!"? How many grocers remind their patrons the glazed ham they're buying is a sin to consume, according to The Book of Leviticus, 11:6-8?
Arguing that Christianity is being removed from the holiday season is like arguing 12" vinyl at 78rpm is superior to 7" vinyl at 45rpm. It's like arguing the automatic transmission is ruining the automobile industry... or that Betamax is superior to VHS.
Next time you want to champion a "controversy" John, make sure it's one the rest of us didn't settle several decades ago.
