Chad

According to Cal Thomas, many may think so.<a href="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20020628.shtml" target="_blank">Cal Thomas on Pledge ruling</a>

galiel

He opens the article with the following statement:

"On the eve of our great national birthday party and in the aftermath of Sept. 11, when millions of us turned to God and prayed for forgiveness of individual and corporate sins and asked for His protection against future attacks, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has inflicted on this nation what many will conclude is a greater injury than that caused by the terrorists."

The rest of the article is just to nauseating to read, so I wanted to spare my kindred nonbelievers the pain by quoting the (ir)relevant part <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Toto

Is Cal Thomas nuts?

Politically, this case could be bigger than the O.J. Simpson murder trial.

. . . except that there are no mysteries, no sports heroes, cocaine users, interracial sex angles, etc. And I don't think that the OJ case was very big politically outside of LA.

And what was he thinking when he said:

Recall the scene in the film "Miracle on 34th Street" in which the district attorney is trying to prove there is no Santa Claus. He's forced to give up the case when his own son testifies to his belief in Santa and the U.S. Post Office, "an agent of the federal government," in the words of the defense lawyer, brings hundreds of letters addressed to Santa to the courtroom where one "Kris Kringle" is on trial.

So belief in God is analogous to belief in Santa? Cal Thomas said it.

Bill Snedden

Cal "Used to run the moral majority" Thomas is a useless waste of human skin that somehow managed to get a job writing the worst sort of drivel imaginable for the consumption of other like-simple-minded morons such as himself.

Cal proves the exception to the common creationist argument because one would have thought that the odds against any intelligent human being actually finding his pap interesting and hiring him to write for a syndicate much, much, much, higher than the odds against a 747 being assembled in a junkyard by a windstorm.

Regards,

Bill Snedden

[ July 01, 2002: Message edited by: Bill Snedden ]</p>

galiel

All true, but:

A) Millions of people read him, he is very, very well-connected, and,

B) It is better to know what the enemy is up to than to just ignore them and be surprised by the consequences.

Berenger Sauniere

And I'm sure there were people in the early 1960s who thought the court ruling to ban prayer from school was worse than Pearl Harbor. So what's your point Mr. Thomas?

hezekiah jones

Cal Thomas doesn't know shit from shinola.

Stephen Maturin

Cal sez:

The boy's a liar, an idiot or both. The court did not "outlaw" the Pledge. Continuing to recited the Pledge will not turn anyone into a "lawbreaker." If I had a dollar for every time I've had to say that since the decision was announced - well, I'd have a whole lotta dollars.

Tabula_rasa

Cal Thomas:
"... If the government appeals the decision (and you know it will) and arguments occur in the fall, the case will attract national attention at the start of a new school year and just before congressional elections. The political timing could not be better for the GOP."

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but I am very cynical. My cynical side says: How fortunate for the GOP that this decision was made this year. How fortunate for the GOP that one of the two judges was appointed by Richard Nixon. In a bid to win back the Senate, I think this is a very timely and fortunate decision for the GOP. Almost seems a coincidence.

Splat

And how fortunate it occurred while Dubya's trying to create a cabinet department with the power to do all sorts of nastiness with immunity from the Freedom of Information Act AND the Whistleblowers Act. THAT is scarey.