Move on from Moveon already...

I saw a clip today of representative Marsha Blackburn (R - TN) denouncing the MoveOn.org ad. I was speechless. I thought the interviewer did a great job of putting this fool in her place.

I don't understand any of this. I'm also really tired of hearing republicans tell me how offended they were. I'm offended you keep trying to tell me how to live my life, but I digress. I actually used to LIKE republicans. Before they found that jebus guy. He seems to ruin everything he touches.

After watching this ad several points came to mind:

1. Does the democratic party control MoveOn? I'm a voting democrat and MoveOn never asked me about the ad. Personally I think it was fine (but then again I'm one of the silly few who still seem to think the 1st amendment should apply). I simply don't think the government should be in this business of censoring what we are allowed to print, more and more that seems to make me unAmerican (wtf?).

I don't think they should control Fox News either, I simply don't watch it. Don't like the ad? Don't look at it. Don't want to support the NYT? Don't buy their paper. That is democracy in action baby.

Democracy is NOT you controlling what everyone else gets to see and read. If you think that ad shouldn't have been run, then you should have to give up your rights. I'm sorry, but if you feel this way you are the problem in this country. Get out of my rights and my life.

Who are you to tell me what I am and am not allowed to read? Who are you to tell a newspaper, or magazine, or television show, or book what they can or cannot use their resources to publish?

2. If the representative for any district anywhere is spending time on a television show bickering about newspaper ads while ignoring the troops in their district they should be tarred and feathered. Republican or Democrat. I'm equal opportunity about this.

Also, other representatives not knowing does not make this OK. She's a big girl and makes her own decisions. I somehow doubt she was threatened with physical violence to go on the show.

Furthermore, she is clearly well informed and closely following an ad that ran in a newspaper. If any of you think that a representatives time is better spent denouncing ads in newspapers than helping out their constituents (whom she is sending to war) then off yourself. Seriously.

I'll wait.

3. It was an ad. I don't think my teeth are going to fall out if I don't buy colgate. I don't think Petraeus is or is not doing anything based on the ad. I know who MoveOn is just like I know who colgate is. They're selling me something, so I take ads with a grain of salt. You'd think we were printing this in an encyclopedia to hear the whining.

Did this change any ones mind? It did not for me. I have not read that it did for anyone else. So who cares? They bought an ad, they ran it, it is done. Can we please not all stop and look at the sparkly object? Pretend that we respect the Bill of Rights and our right to say whatever we want?

4. You fundies are going to find this bizarre I know, but freedom of speech applies to EVERYONE. This includes the NYT. If they want to run an ad at a special price that should be their decision (assuming for a moment any of that part is true... not that I would accuse the republicans of being anything other than honest with us). It's their paper. I don't see the government telling Fox they can't have tools like O'reilly on, so who are they to deem what is and is not appropriate?

5. The majority of Americans agree with the ad (at least in spirit). We don't like what we are doing in Iraq. We do not like that we are there, we do not like how we got there, and we do not like that we are being constantly told we are all children and our opinion's do not really count for anything. Oh, but please keep sending us your taxes.

That's reality people. So the NYT running an ad that reflects the mood of the general populace is not completely invalid just because of who it came from. I'm not saying it was in great taste, but neither is anything I've heard O'Reilly say (have we passed any resolutions about him yet?).

Just because you don't like reality, doesn't mean censoring ads in newspapers is the answer.

Maybe if the fundamentalists spent a little less time being condescending, and a little more time actually HELPING people who need it, we would not be having this conversation at all?