True, actually. Yet in another active thread going on right now Madman is actually defending Falwell.

Of course, that's my point about him. He and I can agree about Rosie O'Donnell, Al Franken, M. Moore, etc. Yet he appears to be totally clueless when it comes to the Pat Robertson, Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, etc. types.

See, this is where you show your lack of objectivity.

As I pointed out in the other thread, there is no equivalent of RO for her particular media platform and the exposure that platform provides. It just doesn't exist. It doesn't exist because of purposeful and intentional reasons. For some reason that fact eludes you.

Your claim of "not necessarily disagreeing" with my assessment of her doesn't necessarily imply any complete agreement either. Especially not when your immediate instinct and response was to turn the discussion against some, or any, right wing media figure in any media outlet with a far inequivalent degree of exposure. All within the same sentence.

We really should be going back to the topic of the thread which is Jerry Falwell.

But then again, RO said that some Christians are just as bad as radical Islam. I don't know how many people Falwell beheaded, but I'm willing to bet it wasn't any.

I apologize to the thread starter for getting off track.

I'm not making an outright defense of him. I stated he has been treated unfairly.

I acknowledge he has said some stupid things. But he has also done some good things with his life and that is being overlooked by those who just hold him in contempt for political reasons.

I rarely make unqualified admissions or statements. I suppose that's the lawyer in me.
However, a qualified agreement with your views regarding RO is a far cry from defending her and her views on 9/11. Surely you can see that.

Now you're right - let's get back on topic. Tinky Winky is clearly out to destroy the moral fiber of our children.

I've never really thought that you personally were in the RO camp of left wing lunacy and 9-11 conspiracy theories. Your immediate attempt at possibly deflecting her political extremism and the applied "labeling" of her towards others is what seemed disconcerting.

I guess we will agree that we saw the exchange in a different manner.

Quote:

Now you're right - let's get back on topic. Tinky Winky is clearly out to destroy the moral fiber of our children.

That is an example of something on which Falwell probably made very stupid remarks. At least how he went about it.

I don't know much about the whole TeleTubby issue or how Falwell derived at his conclusions. I don't even know if he clarified, updated, or retracted what he said.

The only thing I know about the TeleTubby show is that by personal observations it looked like it was made for people tripping on acid.

Does it seem impossible these days with everything that is going on that someone would think a purple colored children's show character who has a triangle above his head and carries a purse could have been a representation of a gay or "transgendered" character?

Maybe those 12 year old kids whose school recently showed them "Brokeback Mountain" without parental permission were kids who grew up on TeleTubbies.

But then again, there is no agenda by any educators, children's book writers, or TV show producers... Right?

Jerry Falwell was always wrong and always the bad guy... Right?

Um...huh? Does anyone speak autistic douchebag? 'Cause I'm having a hard time cracking Snuffy's code over here.

What the FUCK are you talking about?

Oral Roberts and is still around...just not very vocal these days.

God hasn't threatened to take him away lately...wonder why that is?

Obviously you are just as ill informed and ignorant as many people who prefer to remain that way because of their own personal and political prejudices. I'll explain it to you.

Falwell was attacked very unfairly because of the Teletubby, Tinky Winky thing. His political enemies just seized upon the issue and never revealed the truth surrounding the whole thing.

Long before Falwell wrote an article about the character on the children's show, the gay community had already claimed the Tinky Winky character as one of their own. Long before Falwell wrote his article, the Washington Post wrote an article about Tinky Winky being gay. Long before Falwell wrote his article, the homosexual writer of the Village Voice wrote an article claiming Tinky Winky as a gay character.

The British producer of the show (the show came from England) even said the character was created with the intent to teach children the virtues of boys carrying handbags and the breakdown of stereotypes.

CNN declared the Teletubby character a "gay icon" before Falwell wrote a single word about it.

So yes... Falwell was unfairly attacked regarding the issue.

And regarding the other comment I made... Some teacher in Chicago forced a class of 12 year olds to watch the movie "Brokeback Mountain". No prior parental notification. Besides the obvious reasons for the teacher doing so, the movie isn't even rated for kids of that age.

Why can't you quit Tinky Winky?

What do you call two gay guys named Bob?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Oral Roberts.

har de har har.

I gotta agree with Madman on this one. Preteen kids are too young to understand sexuality, whether it be Gay or otherwise, and I think it's far too young for them to have that agenda pushed on them through gay TV characters in kids' shows to seeing movies about gay lovers.

I thought Falwell was far to extreme on the religious right end of the spectrum, but I don't disagree with him on this one.

Let kids be kids. Let's not confuse them with why one man is ass jamming another.