by David Safier
The conservative blog, Sonoran Alliance, gave a shout out down to BfA for my reference to Rep. Biggs' comment, "Education does not create jobs. Entrepreneurs and businesses create jobs." Apparently, according to SA, Biggs got it right.
A few posts earlier, SA applauded something I was planning to point out in a slightly less positive light.
It seems Jon Kyl is hosting the screening of the film, Fitna, for members of Congress and their staff. Nothing wrong with that.
The film, according to the Hill's blog, the Briefing Room, was made by Geert Wilders, who is in the Dutch Parliament and compares Islamic Terrorism to Naziism. Again, that's his opinion. Nothing wrong with that.
Wilders, who will be at the screening, is a controversial figure.
Wilders has said he would ban the Quran, the Muslim holy book, according to the London Telegraph.
Now I think there's definitely something wrong with that. And while I don't deny Kyl's right to host the event, I definitely question his judgement. Why would Kyl give his stamp of approval to someone who would ban another religion's most sacred text?
Nonetheless, Kyl's spokesman defends his boss' courage, saying,
"When controversial views cannot be expressed in the United States, it will be only a matter of time before all forms of free speech are threatened."
And I agree. If Wilders wants to rent a hall and show his film, or a private organization wants to arrange a showing, that's fine. I'm certainly glad we're not banning him from entering like the UK did. It's equally OK with me for a holocaust denier to speak and show his film, no matter how despicable I might consider his views. But having a Senator choose to host the event? That doesn't sit well with me. But I guess it's his right to be as wrong as he wants to be.
Here's the funny part though. Even though Kyl is a free speech kind of guy,
The screening will take place in the LBJ Room, but is closed to the media.
Say what? The media won't be able to watch the film, see who is present or report on the speeches and conversations? Free speech behind closed doors, eh? Maybe all the goings on will be super duper classified top secret stuff. We wouldn't want to endanger national security by letting that kind of thing leak out, would we?
They have a new blog called Political Arizona that has the “look and feel” of The Drudge Report. I can only assume they’ve gotten permission or else they could be liable for damages under the trade dress provisions of the Lanham Act.
Obama has publicly stated that he wants to make more overtures for diplomacy in the Middle East.
So if Obama wants something, Republicans want something different, which is why Kyl is sponsoring a film that will anger many, and thus make Obama’s job more difficult. This is the job of the “loyal” opposition.
It’s also a down payment on the Republican strategy for foreign policy, which is to hope for a terrorist attack on American interests, so they can follow-up with the “We told you so”s.
Heck, we can write the RNC press release today.
It’s just adorable how Republicans have newly discovered “free speech”. Along with “fiscal responsibility” and “accountability” and various other concepts that seemed alien to them for the past 8 years.
I guess this means Obama is free to invite Rev. Wright to the White House, since the GOP is so tolerant of controversial views being expressed, and all.