I feel bad. Mostly for myself, but also for the readers of one of WND's newest baby conservatives, the painfully named Chrissy Slatterfield. While looking for new material, I stumbled upon one of her columns. As so often happens with car wrecks, I couldn't look away. I'm not going to get on my high horse and say something silly like, "I don't understand how anyone under thirty can be a conservative Republican." I respect that there are younger folks who are just as committed to their beliefs as folks on the left are. However, I do find Chrissy's lectures-- particularly those where she targets fellow young folks-- rather tiresome.
For instance, Chrissy really doesn't like criminals. Fair enough, I suppose. Except that she then uses any defense of "criminals" as a link to bludgeon her political opponents over the head.
Tony Papa, a communications specialist, whatever that is, finds it troubling that the U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the world. Really? I find it troubling that you spent years in the big house for what you claim to be a "first-time nonviolent offense." I'll bet there's more to your simpleton story than you claim. Don't blame the War on Drugs for your mistake; you look like a crybaby. Are we supposed to just let people break the law? Hey, you want to smoke some crack in the library? Go right ahead! What kind of country would this be if that were the case? What about thieves and rapists? Isn't incarceration a violation of their human rights as well? It's only fair that we allow everyone to live their life however they choose, right? Or do you want to light up so badly, without fear of arrest, that your judgment has been clouded?So... someone who was incarcerated for a first-time drug offense must: A- be lying about why they were sent to jail, B, is a pussy, C, therefore thinks that all drugs should be done anytime, anywhere, and D, is apparently a drug addict. Nothing like some fun character assassination to start your day.
Wow, that's some slippery slope you've got there, Chrissy. I guess it's kind of like how since Dick Cheney supports same-sex marriage, he must therefore also support gay orgies in front of schoolkids. In a church. On Easter Sunday. Why not.
Another example? What luck, I found one!
Everyone is chattering about the new Arizona law that was signed by Gov. Jan Brewer on April 23. The law is so controversial that even Meghan McCain and "Saturday Night Live" shelled out their "legal expertise" on the matter.
This law makes illegal immigration, without proper registration documents, a crime. Many people are shocked by this law, but shocked at what? Oh Em Gee, illegal immigration is a crime!
...Bottom line, anyone living in the United States illegally should be deported. It's not a race thing, it's a criminal thing. Arizona has decided to take action against a heinous crime that is raping our nation of its right to flourish safely. Do I think all illegal immigrants are criminals? Yes! To a certain extent, they all are criminals, hence the "illegal" part.
Oy. So not only should all illegals be deported immediately, they're also rapists. I guess this is what you get when you put your "transportation analysis" degree to good use writing political commentary.
And if you disagree with her? Well the answer's obvious, isn't it?
For those who do not support Arizona's efforts, riddle me this …Why are you against punishing criminals? Should we allow burglars to wander the streets? Yes, I am comparing illegal immigrants to burglars because a crime is a crime is a crime.Now see, it's interesting, because while in theory Miss "Tough on Crime" Chrissy would want to lock up or deport all criminals (Download music? That'll be 15 to Life), she seems to be flexible as long as they share her belief system. Imagine that.
Never would I encourage vandalism, but in this case I think I'll let it slide. Atheists have been vandalizing my beliefs for years, so it's about time the shoe was on the other foot. When asked about the vandalism, William Warren, the spokesman for Charlotte Atheists and Agnostics, said, "It was done by one or two people off on their own who decided their only recourse was vandalism rather than having a conversation." Hmm. That's interesting, because the Charlotte Atheists and Agnostics felt its only recourse was to deliberately insult those who understand the importance of "Under God." They probably figured that because the Bible teaches Christians to turn the other cheek, we'll just take their abuse forever. We will only take so much before we stand up against our oppressors. Besides, I can't count how many times an atheist and I have had a "conversation." They're not as calm and passive as Warren suggests.
...What did this group think would happen? They placed this controversial message on a billboard that just so happens to be on a street named after Rev. Billy Graham. Did they expect the response to be positive? The group claimed that the billboard was not meant to disrespect Rev. Graham, but for some reason I don't trust them. This billboard campaign was a calculated insult to Christians, and the atheists thought it was appropriate. That shows you how spiteful this organization is. They took an American celebration and made it about them.Got that? So anyone that engages in a crime-- any crime-- is a heartless scumbag... but if all you're doing is messing with atheists, it's totally justified, because they're mean and they had it coming. I mean, the street was named after a preacher, for God's sake!
Chrissy later backtracked from this, claiming she agreed with the vandals' message, not their methods. Yeah, I can see how readers would be confused after reading this:
I would like to extend my deepest thanks to the man or woman responsible for this vandalism. I appreciate the action you took. Thank you for reminding me that I'm not alone. It took a lot of guts to do what you did – and the fact that you haven't stepped forward to take credit makes you a hero. It shows everyone that you are more devoted to the message than you are to the spotlight. I encourage you to keep your cover. Don't give the secular world a reason to call your name; instead, let them call for our God.
I also need to extend a thank-you to some people in Sacramento and Detroit. In February, 10 atheist billboards were defaced in the Golden State and a slew of atheist bus ads were vandalized in Detroit. My dose of honesty this week: I am not happy that vandalism seems to be the only way to get an atheist's attention. I'm happy that I can count on other Christians to stand up for themselves and for Christians everywhere. It gives me hope.Also confusing is the fact that the "but you made conservatives mad!" argument seems to come up in other columns, as well.
For instance, in 2007 a restaurant owner pissed off a veteran by flying two flags above his restaurant. The issue: the Mexican flag was above the American one. This, as Chrissy laments, is unfortunately not against the law (darn, there goes her trump card!)
There are strict protocols for flying Old Glory, but they apparently are only optional and hold no consequences for disrespecting the Red, White and Blue.Uh yeah, because we're not in the military? Hence millions of people doing disrespectful, anti-patriotic things like daring to fly the flag at night. Too bad we can't jail or deport them like the rest of the criminals, right?
Anyway, the veteran went to the restaurant and cut down the two flags, then stole the US flag and took it with him. He's alternately been condemned as a vigilante and praised as a hero. Chrissy, of course, is trying to have it both ways again:
Let me be perfectly clear: I do not support the actions of Mr. Brossard; I do, however, understand his reasons. The restaurant owner might as well have given the U.S. the finger. Hey buddy, if you'd like to fly the Mexican flag over the American flag, move to Mexico.
… why do people come here, become citizens and then disgrace all that we as a nation stand for? It pains me that some people applauded the restaurant owner as though he'd done some great act. He said he was "flying the flag as a mark of solidarity with the Hispanic community." Don't fool yourself into thinking it was for some "greater cause," because it wasn't. He wanted to make a point and show his disrespect for this great land of ours. You know what really sucker-punched me? The fact that he is a citizen. Yikes!
... I don't believe all immigrants or naturalized citizens want to disrespect this country or the American flag. I do believe, however, that if you're going to come here for that better life, maybe you should be a little more appreciative; maybe you should be shaking the hand of that veteran and every other man and woman in uniform.
...Legally, the restaurant owner is a citizen of the United States, but should he be? Anyone who thinks it's OK to fly Mexico's flag or Canada's flag or the Confederate flag or any other flag above the American flag should be escorted out and sent packing back to the country they still have feelings for.Here's my question: does all the spleen-venting over flags only happen if the US flag is underneath another one? What if he had only been flying the Mexican flag? Is that also grounds for having your citizenship or patriotism questioned? Also, where would you propose deporting Confederate flag wavers? Brazil?
Being an American citizen is a privilege, not a right. You shouldn't be able to call yourself an American just because you were born here or because you took a citizenship test. There's so much more to it than that. We need to show our loyalty to this country by treating her with respect. We need to prove our devotion by lifting America up. It's not too much to ask.Especially not when you're purposefully as vague as possible. I like how we've decided, incidentally, that this guy absolutely despises every single thing about America based on which flag was on top of his flagpole.
By the way, if you're a celebrity who disagrees with Chrissy, I hope you've steeled yourselves with a bite gag and some good whiskey, because she considers you... gasp... "Celebutards." I know, try to work through the pain.
The biggest Celebutard of the moment is apparently Lady Gaga. And the reason? Being upset about Arizona's immigration law. Her biggest crime, according to Chrissy? Citing a human example of people the law was going to affect. That bitch!
It was reported, "During Saturday's concert, Lady Gaga told the crowd about a boy she met earlier in the day whose home was raided over 'a parking ticket or something,' and whose brother was deported to Mexico." I like the "or something" part. It allows liberal dingbats to glaze over important details, while at the same time leaving their opinions full of holes. Gaga has no hard evidence that this family was torn apart over a parking ticket. It tells me that a) this boy probably doesn't exist; b) if he does exist, she obviously wasn't paying attention to his story; and c) she doesn't care to know the whole truth. Again, because she has a microphone in her hand she thinks her story is automatically valid. You should get your facts straight before you put Arizona on blast, Gaga.What I love is that Chrissy, while blasting Gaga for not getting her facts straight, does not apparently seem interested in finding the facts out for herself, either. As with the Anthony Papa story before, she just decides the story is false because she disagrees with the politics behind it, and goes from there. Which, funnily enough, is the mirror image of the same intellectual shallowness she accuses liberals (and the Celebutarded) of suffering from. Two words, Chrissy: Google. Search. You can still question the accuracy of the story's details, but I think you'd at least have to concede the kid exists. By the way, not only is he undocumented, he's also gay. Just think, if you hadn't been so invested in claiming he was imaginary, you could have had two bones to pick with him.
More on Chrissy, the Patron Saint of Fact-Optional Self-Righteousness, next time.