In a resounding victory, Christmas threw off all opposition and was able to make an appearance for the entire day, December 25th 2005.

In a prepared statement, Christmas said:

Christmas went on to say it was ready for the expected battle next year, which it anticipated would be just as bad.

Christmas’s opponent, Code Named Scrooge, was disappointed but optimistic, saying:

Observers admit the battle was fierce, but still acknowledge that victory was assured. One observer noted that:

Lately I have read a practically constant stream of articles about the assault on Christmas in America. Radio talk shows, tv commentaries and even blog comments all dive into this daily.

What concerns me is the misunderstandings and mischaracterizations being popularized by the various people. To explain my views on this, let me introduce a few popular perceptions as labeled by the various proponents or opponents.

The first groups is commonly the conservatives, and they are made out to be religious zealots, who want Christmas an everyday word and nativity scenes in every yard. They claim that the secular world is stamping out Christmas as a further attempt to stamp out religion.

The liberals are commonly seen as the aggressors and the defenders against the accusations. They are commonly accused of persecuting Christians by making their faith and celebrations essentially illegal, and hidden from sight. For their part they claim that they are trying to improve diversity, by preventing one faith from dominating the season.

Neither side is quite what they appear, and I will come back to that.

Something has been bothering me for some time now, and that’s the game the politicians are playing with numbers, in several different ways. The first concerns the death toll in Iraq. On one hand you have democrats making it a magic number. As soon as it hit 2000 US troops killed, the bells started tolling. Is there something significant about 2000? Who decided that 2000 was a serious benchmark? And the Republicans answer by showing how this war is actually cheap, compared to other wars. And looking at the stats, they are right. Compared to the horrorific death toll of WW2 and the Civil War, Iraq even at double the current death rate would have go centuries to achieve parity. But at the same time they also trivialize the deaths of people, by making it sound like no big deal. I don’t think this is necessarily an intentional act, but the result is that a couple thousand lives is ok compared to freeing millions. Maybe that is indeed true, but even one life lost is still a loss. A liberal debate board I post to saw the following comment recently: "…Before you start waving the bloody flag about the 367 casualty video-game war you are a veteran of… " The context was actually just a shot across the bow from a liberal poster to a conservative who was a Gulf War vet, but the implication is clear: not enough people died in Desert Shield/Storm to qualify it as a real war, and make it worthy of claiming. Now I don’t know if the person this was directed at had ever used his service to make a point, but the fact is that people still died there, and they and those who fought deserve a little respect. Should the 14 people killed on the USS Cole be forgotten because their deaths were smaller in overall tragedy then 9/11? To me, in evaluating the war in Iraq, the measure of the value of the human lives spent there is based not on some sensationalistic raw numbers, but on comparison to the value achieved. Here the democrats contradict themselves because the seem to deny any value given to anyone for the lives lost. The lives were wasted, they claim, even as the soldiers and Iraqis seem to have a different opinion. Shouldn’t those being asked to put their lives on the line, and the ones they are fighting for have a say in this? The recent polls or soldiers on the ground in Iraq show consistent support for the war, but a stronger number is the amount of troops both enlisting and reenlisting recently. Troop strength is not suffering as is being reported. Those are the survey results of the soldiers: Their continued voluntary service. There is also an ABC News poll showing that the Iraqi’s indeed have strong feelings about the US occupation. Both sides take the same poll and cherry pick their numbers that they claim represent the facts on the ground in Iraq. Republicans cite: "Despite the daily violence there, most living conditions are rated positively, seven in 10 Iraqis say their own lives are going well, and nearly two-thirds expect things to improve in the year ahead." while Democrats crow: "Fewer than half, 46 percent, say the country is better off now than it was before the war. And half of Iraqis now say it was wrong for U.S.-led forces to invade in spring 2003, up from 39 percent in 2004. " Republicans counter: "There are positive political signs as well. Three-quarters of Iraqis express confidence in the national elections being held this week, 70 percent approve of the new constitution, and 70 percent including most people in Sunni and Shiite areas alike want Iraq to remain a unified country." Democrats respond with: "Two-thirds now oppose the presence of U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, 14 points higher than in February 2004. Nearly six in 10 disapprove of how the United States has operated in Iraq since the war, and most of them disapprove strongly. And nearly half of Iraqis would like to see U.S. forces leave soon. " The Republicans retort: "Specifically, 26 percent of Iraqis say U.S. and other coalition forces should "leave now" and another 19 percent say they should go after the government chosen in this week’s election takes office; that adds to 45 percent. Roughly the other half says coalition forces should remain until security is restored (31 percent), until Iraqi security forces can operate independently (16 percent), or longer (5 percent)." After a while my head hurts. What I can say definitively is this: This poll, when the raw data is examined could pretty support anyone’s position, and both sides display the same measured focus on what they like about it to project their political agenda. Politics… Meanwhile they are voting in Iraq today. Their 3rd democratic election in less then 12 months. That to me is a slightly more impressive set of numbers, and one that is hard to confuse, spin or ignore.

I have just about had it with religious intolerance in the name of political correctness. It seems like you cannot turn around without seeing something in the paper about it, and frankly it’s approaching the point of ridiculousness. Here are a couple examples. First we go to Medina, WA: http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/224577 Medina Elementary School officials took down a Christmas-themed "giving tree" Monday after a parent complained about its religious connotations. Chris Metzger, office manager at Medina, said the spiral, lighted Christmas tree with a star on top was up for about a week before it was removed. The tree had mittens on it with a different gift idea attached to each. The idea was for students to take a mitten, get the gift listed, wrap it up and return it to school along with the mitten. After the tree was taken down, the mittens were taped to a counter in the main office so the gift-giving could continue. "Now we just have a giving counter," joked Metzger, who knew that putting up the tree was "kind of iffy" because of a district policy that provides direction on the place of religion in the curriculum. It was a friggin tree, not a nativity scene, not an alter….A tree. Oh My GOD, it had a star on top! Last time I looked you didn’t have to be a member of a Christian church to have one, and this was for a good purpose: Giving. Well hopefully the table stays, unless maybe someone objects to it being a Professional wrestling prop and complains its too violent. Next we go to Glendale, WI: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47749

Religious-liberty attorneys have contacted a Wisconsin school district that consistently forbids Christian Christmas carols from being sung in music programs but finds nothing wrong with Hanukkah songs. A statement from Liberty Counsel tells the story of Barbara Wheeler, whose 9-year-old daughter attends school in the district. In 2003, when the district’s music programs excluded religious Christmas songs, Wheeler complained about their absence. School officials said they would get back to her, but they reportedly never did. Last year, Wheeler voiced complaints to the district in mid-November, but school officials said the songs already were set. This year, when the school’s music program contained Hanukkah and secular Christmas songs but no religious Christmas songs, Wheeler again objected. That’s when the mother was referred to the district’s written policy: "Music programs given at times close to religious holidays should not use the religious aspect of these holidays as the underlying motive or theme. No songs should be sung which contain dogmatic religious statements." According to Liberty Counsel, Frances Smith, the district administrator, says the Hanukkah songs are more cultural than spiritual and thus are OK to sing. Tell that to a practicing Jew, that his or her faith is just cultural. Even as their songs are permitted, they are subtly insulted. Last, we go to the UK: http://tinyurl.com/9qyhw School bans girl from wearing cross. A mother accused her daughter’s school of discriminating against Christians yesterday after the teenager was suspended for refusing to take off a crucifix necklace. Sam Morris, 16, was sent home from Sinfin Community School in Derby for breaking a school policy that bans jewelry. Last night her mother, Debra, said that Sikh children were allowed to wear a steel bracelet, known as a kara, for religious reasons and said her daughter had every right to express her faith. Education officials were unrepentant, however, and said that Sikhs are required by religion to wear items of jewelry, whereas Christians are not. Mrs Morris, 37, said: "Sam has worn this necklace for more than three years. No one has told her to take it off before, and she doesn’t want to remove it. But just to show that intolerance is an equal opportunity employer, here is an odd bit of intolerance from the other side of the faith aisle. From Palm Coast FL; http://tinyurl.com/8emre Witch says fellow pagan out to get her It was close to midnight on Sunday and Jill Pagan — who practices paganism and calls herself a witch — was getting settled into bed when she heard a crash. It sounded like something might have fallen. Upon investigation, Pagan discovered that her home’s white aluminum door had a large gash in it. And just to the right, a large chunk of concrete was sitting in a flowerpot with a note attached to it by rubber bands. She immediately recognized a handwritten note in an ancient language called Theban, which she said is used almost exclusively by witches. Pagan called a Flagler County sheriff’s deputy to her family’s home, but no report has been filed on the incident, sheriff’s office spokeswoman Debra Johnson said Monday. Pagan later translated the message as, " ‘You’ve been warned. Stop what you’re doing,’ " she said Monday. And it was a way to scare her, her husband and daughter. Pagan thinks the suspect is someone known to the local pagan community —- perhaps another pagan familiar with Theban script. Interesting twist. All I can say is that bigotry is on the rise in the world. In the name of tolerance it has become vogue to be intolerant. The last example may not totally fit that definition, but in practically all arenas there is this stubborn streak of bigotry and hatred towards those who disagree with you, and I refuse to marginalize it by claiming its the liberals, or the conservatives, or the atheists or the Christians or whatever identifiable affiliation you want. The trouble is that rather then trying to live together in harmony and respect, it is turning into a titanic shoving match, where every new move sets Newton’s 3rd law into operation: For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, which is similar to my last blog, on action and consequence. These all may seem like trivial and harmless examples, but as they build up we get to a point where the reactions become retribution and revenge, otherwise known as overreaction, and take on a life of their own increasing in scope and magnitude. That draws amplified counteractions and on we go. Lather, Rinse and Repeat. And all of this is ironically happening while they take down signs that say "Peace on earth and good will to mankind"…that’s too religious of a message.

Letters and Blogs from the people actually there paint such a different picture of the war in Iraq, that I plan to post as many as I can find to as many places as I can.

Prefacing this letter, I give you a few interesting articles (links only)

First, this report from the Army on why a pullout timetable is a bad idea:
http://tinyurl.com/1hs

Of course Senator Murtha would surely dismiss it as faulty, as he has stated publicly that the Army is “broken, worn out” and “living hand to mouth”…
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/01/D8E7H2EG0.html

The next link is from Sen Joe Liberman, (D Conn) where he makes the case for staying to finish the job, proving that not all Democrats are willing to recant their votes for the war.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007611

The Liberal Blogsphere is ready to hamstring him and turn him to the Lions, all because he won’t toe the party line. A second link concerning Joe reports his comments about WMDS:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/12/2/132602.shtml