"Is the appointment of Chaplains to the two Houses of Congress consistent with the Constitution, and with the pure principle of religious freedom? In strictness the answer on both points must be in the negative. The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them, and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does this not involve the principle of a national establishment...?"
— -- James Madison, "Essay on Monopolies" unpublished until 1946, cited in Brant, Irving, The Bill of Rights, 1965, from Albert J. Menendez and Edd Doerr, The Great Quotations on Religious Freedom
Indians are fine, and so are cowboys
Did you ever stop to think that the best anti-bigotry TV show had Archie Bunker? That show must have cleaned up a lot of language, and perhaps led to political correctness, which became correct to the point of being down and dirty political.
As we are being caught up with Edwards' blogger flap, I think we are in for a lot more heat and little light. It's too complicated for me to post what's on my mind to an appropriate forum, relating your take on Republicans/Montanans/AngryMen to what bloggers are doing. But I think the Jan 30 article in Salon has a lot to ponder. Here's the opening paragraph:
Jan. 30, 2007 | You, gentle and not-so-gentle readers, have been on my mind lately. You vast and invisible online throng, slouched in front of thousands of computer monitors, have done something revolutionary. You have forever altered the relationship between writer and audience. The Internet has turned what was once primarily a one-way communication into a dialogue -- or maybe a melee. From a cultural perspective, the new democracy of voices online is a wonderful thing. But writers have an odd and ambiguous relationship with their readers, and the reader revolution is having massive consequences we can't even foresee. Writers are being pulled, or lured, down from their solitary perches and into the madding throng. This has opened useful debate and made writers accountable. But it has also thrown open the gate to creeps, narcissists and wannabe Byrons who threaten to damage the fragile, half-permeable membrane writers use to keep the world from being too much with them.