Monitor sinks to new low...publishes anti-semitic rant letter

Stunning n/t (4.00 / 3)

---

by: JimC @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 09:06:41 AM CST

this letter actually made me feel nauseous (4.00 / 4)

sad.

Campaign Manager,

www.KusterforCongress.com

---

by: Colin Van Ostern @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 09:34:15 AM CST

Sunlight is a good disinfectant (4.00 / 8)

I don't think the Monitor is condoning the writer's views by any stretch of the imagination. While publishing letters-to-the-editor is often a judgment call, my guess is that this letter was printed to show the patent insanity of the writer. Since the only thing the letter lacks is a quote from the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, the writer is clearly unhinged and is being shown as a "bad apple".

These sorts of people are out there. Pretending they don't exist doesn't change things.

America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand. -Harry Truman

---

by: Peter Sullivan @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 09:39:54 AM CST

That Is A Disgusting Letter To The Editor... (4.00 / 1)

..and I agree with Peter Sullivan that sunlight to those kinds of views is good.  Remember, those who hated and killed during the Nazi Era had no media coverage, and did their deeds at night or in secret.  Throwing the light on them might have prevented the horrors of that time.  

I'm not Jewish but I'd be flattered if anyone thinks I am.  The Irish in me gets a-boiling when I read ignorant or hateful comments.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 10:14:37 AM CST

[ Parent ]

what? I can't hear you over my bullshit alarm is going off (4.00 / 2)

Nazi Era had no media coverage, and did their deeds at night or in secret

This is a no mea culpa zone...people frikking knew their relatives were being hauled off and slaughtered,they knew about Kritallnacht,Jews organized and visited Roosevelt a number of times en masse to no avail.Check your facts.

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 11:00:37 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Of Course Many Knew... (4.00 / 2)

...but there wasn't the light thrown on it that was needed.  I agree with you fully, and I think it is so important to let all of us know these views still exist, and take them on -- as we are in this Blog.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:12:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Well, I am Jewish (4.00 / 7)

And I also believe in the first amendment. It protects the free speech of everyone, not just those I agree with. The antidote to letters like the one in the Monitor is more letters calling attention to Alison Caldwell's bigotry. Perhaps the editor should have weighed the pros and cons of printing such an inflammatory letter at this time of year, but I would rather have this discussion out in the open than in undertones and whispers.

---

by: Lenore Patton @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 11:14:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Agreed (4.00 / 2)

Back in my Hill days, we once used on-line writings to get tax-exempt status removed from the largest Holocaust denial organization in the world.  They exposed their own bigotry, and did our research for us.

Know thy enemy.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 11:46:34 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Come again? (0.00 / 0)

What organization was that, and why did it have tax-exempt status in the first place?

---

by: JimC @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 11:50:14 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Institute for Historical Review (4.00 / 3)

It had 501(c)(3) status as an "educational and charitable" institution that sought to present an "alternative view" of the Holocaust.  We found an affiliated -- and virulently racist and anti-Semitic -- book-selling operation that funded most of its activities, and submitted our research to the IRS.

After an IRS review, the organization lost the portion of its tax exempt status related to the book-selling operation, and, as a result, was forced to shut down its monthly Holocaust denial journal as well.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:02:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks (4.00 / 1)

Jeepers ... I'd like to know who granted that status in the first place.

---

by: JimC @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:09:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

That's not the worst of it (4.00 / 5)

Many virulent racist groups obtain tax exempt status as churches in the "Christian Identify Movement" (which, not surprisingly, condemns Christianity).  This is an enormous loophole, as politicians and regulators fear the political consequences of imposing ideological standards for religious institutions.

My original point: The Internet is a double-edged sword for hate groups.  While it allows them to recruit in anonymity, it also enables groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League to track their activities with ease.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:23:44 PM CST

[ Parent ]

thanks lenore (4.00 / 2)

Nothing to disagree with surely.
But don't you think there is a line between free speech and hate speech ? The only thing that keeps this from being unprintable is that he doesn't mention a specific person he hates...just all things Jewish, as he defines them, from Menorahs to Madoff to Israeli policy(I have some of Bernie's gelt stahsed in my attic)...but to me its basic antisemitism, which I define as hate speech.
The editor just called me back. She's Jewish, and of course she knows how 'some people' might feel about the shock value of this kind of "pandering to hate".(my words) She'll write about her decision later this week, "if enough people call".


4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:05:36 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Good Job... (4.00 / 1)

...starting this conversation.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:15:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

in today's Conway Daily Sun (4.00 / 4)

There are two letters calling for good, evangelical christians to sign the Manhattan Declaration, because they must protect marriage from homosexuals. One also veers off into a diatribe about Nikita Kruschev and socialism. He's obsessed with gay folks, abortion, and male Christian dominance.

Another letter warns that affordable housing will mean slums coming to your town. Last week he wrote a letter full of lies about the positions of Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter.

Earlier in the week there was a letter from a writer who referenced (as he does so often) Feminazis, which is his term for any woman who dares to have an opinion that conflicts with his own - the opinions of a short, angry Republican man.

There is an op-ed columnist who frequently rants about homosexuals, and once had some legal troubles, because he was screaming insults at a gay man in a parking lot. This columnist is a teacher in Maine.

This is all business as usual in the Conway Daily Sun. I can understand why an anti-Semitic rant would be upsetting - but sunlight is the best disinfectant. The crazy man rants, and others are sickened by him - and that's the way it should be.  

member of the professional left  

---

by: susanthe @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:17:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I have my own prejudices (0.00 / 0)

we all do...but the difference is a proven movement that acts on them by genocide...Hitler was just a crazy man until he got traction

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:52:30 PM CST

[ Parent ]

OK, I'll Call. (4.00 / 1)

---

by: Lenore Patton @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 13:01:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The Line (0.00 / 0)

But don't you think there is a line between free speech and hate speech ? The only thing that keeps this from being unprintable is that he doesn't mention a specific person he hates...

I think you hit it pretty close to the head in regards to the line. They are entitled to say whatever the Monitor allows them to say, as are you,  and both you and they should be allowed to do so unless the Monitor decides otherwise or it is intended to inflict some kind of harm on people.

And if they only want to display the other side, i'd be happy to join you in boycotting them and asking others to do the same.  

---

by: Andrew Sylvia @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 13:53:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

This isn't about the first amendment. (4.00 / 1)

People can write and the Monitor can publish whatever they want.  It's just unfortunate that they chose to publish this.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 19:03:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

not pretending Peter (0.00 / 0)

google his name and Concord Monitor...its like he has a regular column there in the letters department...if they published one crazy tome I'm with you...but there is a distinctly unpleasant pattern...like its to get clicks and sell papers, not free speech. "Free Blech"

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 10:56:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't fault the Monitor for printing this. (4.00 / 2)

They printed as an op-ed Dick Marple's rambling explanation of why ladies are not constitutionally entitled to be elected President, for goodness' sake.

It is not always unwise to allow idiocy to be voiced, if only to remind the rest of us that it yet exists, and to bring forth a crushing wave of repudiation.

---

by: Tim C. @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 10:46:07 AM CST

Ahh, Dick Marple (4.00 / 2)

He once implied that I had accepted a title of nobility from the Queen of England because I use the professional "Esq." after my name.

When I pointed out that one grandfather was jailed by the British for subversive activity and the other was a runner for Michael Collins, he dropped the argument.

America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand. -Harry Truman

---

by: Peter Sullivan @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:03:37 PM CST

[ Parent ]

A matter of policy (4.00 / 2)

I tried to find the Monitor's letters policy online; no luck.

In general, though, most newspapers would hesitate to publish a letter with views like this. Letters to the editor are a "moderated forum," and papers take wide discretion in editing them.

I'm sympathetic to the free speech angle and letting it all hang out there in the marketplace of ideas, but that is not what newspapers generally do, and it's not the expectation a reader brings. If this became a news story, then the paper would be obligated to pursue it and air this person's views. But the paper is not obligated to provide the forum for those views (or any other views, really).

I suspect this letter spurred internal debate at the Monitor, and I'll be curious to see if they have any comment on it.

---

by: JimC @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 11:03:18 AM CST

I'm just astonished (4.00 / 1)

that someone was comfortable putting their name to that letter.  Unfortunately, a lot of people hold closet prejudices, but you have to really go off the deep end to publish your name at the end of a letter like that.  My guess is that Allison Caldwell's (former?) friends, neighbors, co-workers and so forth, some of whom are probably Jewish, are better off knowing this.

---

by: FrankLloydMike @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 11:10:00 AM CST

He is a well known nut job (4.00 / 2)

they publish his letters regularly on many topics ...like it's some kind of cottage industry cutsie antisemitism

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 11:15:35 AM CST

[ Parent ]

A Boy Named Allison? (4.00 / 2)

America was not built on fear. America was built on courage, on imagination and an unbeatable determination to do the job at hand. -Harry Truman

---

by: Peter Sullivan @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:04:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

;-) n/t (0.00 / 0)

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:06:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

His aim is not true. n/t (4.00 / 1)

---

by: cmnh @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 18:38:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

are you implying (0.00 / 0)

that soon they'll be dragging the lake?

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 20:14:56 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Mr. Caldwell's homophobic slurs are most common theme (4.00 / 2)

of his wacky letters to the editor. He has been writing them for years and years.

Have you written a letter to the editor today? Have you donated today? Have you put up signs? Have you made calls? Have you talked to your neighbors?

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 16:45:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

goes right along with the Nazi hate message no ? n/t (0.00 / 0)

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 21:24:46 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Bigots hate everyone. (4.00 / 2)

They don't discriminate.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 01:51:07 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Caldwell (4.00 / 3)

They publish him occasionally--everyone knows what he is--he only makes himself look foolish--and the Monitor likes to insure that its comments section will be active. One positive outcome is that right and left wingers are joining hands in the comments section and singing Kumbaya in response to Caldwell's screed.

---

by: michael57 @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 12:05:33 PM CST

Lieberman bringing out the racist left... (4.00 / 1)

Thanks for posting proof that we still have such idiots among us.

Another troubling item I've seen has been some not-too-subtle anti-semetic postings by those angry with Joe Lieberman & his wife over his/their role in ruining the senate health care package. Regardless of your feelings about him on health care or even over the manner and extent to which he supports Likud policies in Israel, it's no more appropriate to attack him on his ethnicity than it was for the right to attack Obama for not being a "real American" either for being either black or the son of an immigrant.

Check out the comments on Kathleen Parker's WaPo article about Haddassah Lieberman for a taste if you're interested--I feel no need to repost the comments.  

---

by: Sage Thrasher @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 14:26:23 PM CST

Barely withholding a troll-rating here... (4.00 / 1)

Racist left? Really?

Really?

Really?

Really?

Really?

Really?

Really?

Really?

Really?

(2MB pdf file, see page 44) Really?

You see an anti-Semitic asshole, and your first thought is, "Hey, there's some leftist?"  Really?

And Kathleen F'ing Parker?  Really?

---

by: Tim C. @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 16:53:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I don't think Sage was thinking that at all n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 21:46:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Then Sage was recklessly unclear. (0.00 / 0)

When he says

Lieberman bringing out the racist left...

and

Thanks for posting proof that we still have such idiots among us.

it certainly appears that he was saying that.  When, posting on this blog, he cites

some not-too-subtle anti-semetic [sic] postings by those angry with Joe Lieberman & his wife over his/their role in ruining the senate health care package

it certainly seems, given the many not-too-subtle anti-Lieberman postings here by those angry with Joe Lieberman & his wife over his/their role in ruining the senate health care package, that he is speaking of this blog and those of us who frequent it.  And saying

Regardless of your feelings about him...it's no more appropriate to attack [Lieberman] on his ethnicity

implies that he is chiding people among whom he finds himself, as opposed to some addle-pated crackpots pissing away their time and their puny mouldering intellects commenting on national news websites.

If the initial offense here was a Klan cross-burning, and he took it as an opportunity to say, "You know, it's not appropriate for Democrats to attack Michael Steele on his ethnicity," it would be no more rational or relevant a comment.

Handling explosive charges haphazardly is negligent and irresponsible.

Incidentally, the WaPo article in question now has, for whatever reason, zero comments.  

---

by: Tim C. @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 09:12:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks for sharing (0.00 / 0)

Thanks Tim, I hope your spleen doesn't explode--you ought to have it checked for bile overload, at least if you have health insurance. There also must be something wrong with your browser: the article currently has 766 comments, some of which do in fact simultaneously attack Lieberman for ruining the health care bill and for being Jewish. Apparently you draw different conclusions from that than I do, but I'll refrain from having a coronary over our disagreement; I hope you can do the same.

Rate me as a troll if you want to; but taking the mote out of one's eye first is always good policy. Have a nice day!

---

by: Sage Thrasher @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 10:42:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Always happy to spread the wealth. (0.00 / 0)

It just read 771 comments, I refreshed it to get the latest total to cite, and it now says 0 comments Be the first to comment.  Now, without refreshing, it says 771 again.  Refreshing it again, it returns to 0, then switches to 771 after about 15 seconds.  So it's a WaPo HTML issue, not, as I was guessing, the result of all the comments being yanked, scoured, and reinstated.

In any case, I scanned about 200 comments (the first and the last), most of them filled with rage and contempt for Lieberman, and for anti-semitism found exactly one (1) comment saying he and his wife were "jews who give their first and only loyalty to Israel" and one (1) comment mocking his wife's name as a stereotype, and asking whether his kids were named Moishe and Klezmer.  Neither odious comment referred in any way to policy.  I will take your word that there are others that do, but I think you're seeing a stunningly minuscule phenomenon and perceiving it as something far greater.

The fact that Lyndon LaRouche, technically a Democrat, has a thing for putting little Hitler moustaches on Obama pictures does not mean that Democrats are in dire need of scrutinizing their ranks for Obama portrait Hitlerizers.

---

by: Tim C. @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 13:21:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Look at the context, Tim (0.00 / 0)

Tim,
I am not assuming they are left because they are anti-Semitic, and I don't think I implied that. I am assuming that they are left because they are attacking Lieberman for opposing real health care reform. That they are using Antisemitism to do it shows that racism is not restricted to the right, much as we might pretend otherwise.

---

by: Sage Thrasher @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 08:42:51 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Not Parker.... (0.00 / 0)

And to be clear, it wasn't Parker making any inappropriate remarks. It was the people leaving comments on her article who were racist.

---

by: Sage Thrasher @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 08:47:39 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Please comment on WaPo (0.00 / 0)

at WaPo.  Someone could interpret your comment as referring to something on BH.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 12:49:21 PM CST

[ Parent ]

More Allison Caldwell: (4.00 / 2)

Concord Monitor, Oct. 19, 2009

Thousands of so-called gay rights activists marched on Washington, D.C., over the Columbus Day weekend. Their message is they want the president to take a more aggressive role in pushing their agenda, namely, allowing gays to serve in our armed forces.

No, I don't think gays in our military are going to be a good thing for America. Gays would serve our adversaries' army much better.

Or how about this one?

All I can say is, free Demjanjuk and ship Polanski back to Los Angeles to finish his sentence.

---

by: Jennifer Daler @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 16:08:27 PM CST

"Gays would serve our adversaries' army much better." (0.00 / 0)

Really? OUR adversaries? Because Hitler, Stalin, and the Taliban are so accepting?

Bigotry = ignorance = stupidity.

--
"Don't lose your grip on the dreams of the past; you must fight just to keep them alive!"

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 19:22:00 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I find this comment thread fascinating. (4.00 / 2)

It really shows the double standard that exists for traditional media and new media.

Imagine that this LTE was instead a blog post on the front page of this site.

I and the other admins would be excoriated for keeping it up. Someone on the right would use it against us in guilt by association.  The traditional media would have another reason to tut-tut about how blogs bring out the worst of people, etc...  

But many here think it's fine for the Monitor to publish it.

I think the risk of lending the content legitimacy through the publishing of it easily outweighs the reward of the "sunlight" argument.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 18:37:21 PM CST

Too Often We Don't Know People Hate Us... (4.00 / 1)

...until they tell us they hate us.  I'd rather "out" the haters, the ignorant, and the insane.  When they out themselves, it makes our job easier.  Besides, I think that really is what democracy is all about.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 18:45:23 PM CST

[ Parent ]

there's also a difference (4.00 / 1)

BH is a progressive blog. The anti-semitic rant would be right at home at any number of conservative blogs. Before the "faggot" episode, it would have been right at home at GraniteGrok.

The Concord Monitor does not bill itself as a progressive newspaper. There's a separation of viewpoints on blogs  but that separation doesn't exist for much of the print media.  

member of the professional left  

---

by: susanthe @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 19:55:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Broader Audiences Bring More Eyeballs (0.00 / 0)

Print media is having a hard enough time surviving without reducing its readership.

For better or for worse, most newspapers are going to do what brings them the most advertising dollars, and that will probably entail trying to include as broad an audience as possible.  

---

by: Andrew Sylvia @ Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 14:57:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The comparison is flawed (4.00 / 2)

A LTE is not a front page story or an op-ed, thus they are never assumed as an editorial endorsement but rather correctly assumed solely the views of the individual writer.

By hypothetically 'front-paging' it, you are at least endorsing the controversy, if not the sentiment of the letter.  

A better hypothetical example would be if Mr. Caldwell posted a normal thread, on the right side of the homepage.  In this case, you, as editor, choose to keep it there, but do not endorse its sentiments, the same way that the editors of the Monitor did not endorse the sentiments of the LTE.

Personally, I say print it!  The more people realize that hate still exists in our society the more pro-active they will be to combat it.  The more we keep it bottled up, the more likely that the bottle will violently burst.

"He who loves correction, loves knowledge.  He who hates reproof is stupid." - Proverbs 12:1

---

by: jdblanch @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 20:40:54 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The moderation (4.00 / 1)

is the key difference. The newspaper can play it either way. Some of the comments on Boston.com (a "newspaper" for all intents and purposes) are heinous. Some people don't like it, but they recognize that it's democratic in that anyone can chime in, so they accept it (generalizing broadly here).

I can imagine a similar policy for a printed newspaper, but I think the standard is closer to what I described above.

---

by: JimC @ Wed Dec 16, 2009 at 21:57:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Excoriate (0.00 / 0)

I and the other admins would be excoriated for keeping it up.

Didn't Jon excoriate the editor of the Monitor?

---

by: Andrew Sylvia @ Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 14:54:27 PM CST

[ Parent ]

no (0.00 / 0)

I tried but her response diminished me as being in a group of "Two (who) vowed to cancel their subscriptions". I hate hate.

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 16:20:01 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Two Is Greater Than Zero (4.00 / 1)

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent"

-Eleanor Roosevelt

Whether we agree or disagree, you're always gonna be the Emperor to me as long as we can respect each other.

Hate is like fire. Hating hate is sending firefighters in with a flamethrower.

Borrow some of my water, bud. Lord knows that i'm flammable.  

---

by: Andrew Sylvia @ Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 16:49:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

new link up top (4.00 / 1)

the paper's letters column was full of disgust  

http://www.concordmonitor.com/...

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Thu Dec 17, 2009 at 19:37:32 PM CST

A la dee dah answer from the Editor (0.00 / 0)

underneath all this is the concept of community standard. The editor moved here and encountered hatred her first day, and she is seeing to it that it still has a place in the paper. She must have felt she was upholding a community standard. I don't think this would be acceptable in any metropolitan community. I guess where there are more Jews there are different community standards.  

I wish you read and refute my thoughts, but as logical and nice as this seems, I am reminded of a comment
made on my FB page by a Gay political activist in CA.
@Zach Newman:" Disgusting and all too common. There's been a contingent on the left for quite some time that apparently thinks it's cool and progressive to use Israeli foreign policy and the Israel/Palestine conflict as an excuse to let loose w antisemitism. That's not 'progressive'--just stupid hateful bullshit. Keep up the fight Jon!"

http://www.concordmonitor.com/...
Here's why we published it
Caldwell debate is heartening
By Felice Belman Monitor editor
December 18, 2009 - 7:15 am

I first encountered Allison Caldwell before I even lived in New Hampshire. I was in Concord for a job interview at the Monitor in the spring of 1988. In the letters to the editor column that afternoon was a piece from Caldwell warning readers to beware of "slick Jew propaganda" and implying that whether the Holocaust had even happened was an open question.

Quite a bracing introduction to local life.

Two decades later, Caldwell's views have not moderated. His letters to the editor appear in my mail frequently. Many never make it into print, but some do. In recent months, he has written disparagingly about gay soldiers and African refugees and in support of accused Nazi war criminal John Demjanjuk. In 2008 he described a "worldwide Jewish plan of cultural engineering." His letter in Wednesday's newspaper, in which he called the Hanukkah menorah outside the State House a "Jewish monstrosity," drew a quick and angry response from readers.

Many people rightly called Caldwell out for his bigotry. Several readers - in letters and phone calls - also questioned why the Monitor would even publish such a letter. Two vowed to cancel their subscriptions.

Our philosophy on letters to the editor is simple: We print all we can. The premise is that an open forum must allow for the expression of all views. It's easy to defend the publication of a mainstream opinion; the real test of free speech is defending the expression of unpopular, sometimes vile, views

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 12:12:44 PM CST

Garrison Keeler and his 'leave Christmas alone' rant (0.00 / 0)

Unbelievable...garrison wants us off his lawn.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne...

From his piece, "Nonbelievers, please leave Christmas alone"
snip(how appropriate)

Unitarians listen to the Inner Voice and so they have no creed that they all stand up and recite in unison, and that's their perfect right, but it is wrong, wrong, wrong to rewrite "Silent Night." If you don't believe Jesus was God, OK, go write your own damn "Silent Night" and leave ours alone. This is spiritual piracy and cultural elitism, and we Christians have stood for it long enough. And all those lousy holiday songs by Jewish guys that trash up the malls every year, Rudolph and the chestnuts and the rest of that dreck. Did one of our guys write "Grab your loafers, come along if you wanna, and we'll blow that shofar for Rosh Hashanah"? No, we didn't.

4

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Dec 18, 2009 at 13:52:40 PM CST