I have wondered for time to time, usually in that misplaced time between sleep and awake, why the ACLU and like minded organizations have not targeted Thanksgiving as they have Christmas and Easter. I supposed the true answer is somewhere between the attention the holiday gets, and the thought that most people don’t really remember what Thanksgiving is all about.

Well, along with my heart felt Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family, please accept this little slice on what Thanksgiving is all about. The following is a quote from George Washington on what is, likely, the first official government recognition of the Thanksgiving holiday.

October 3rd, 1789:

Whereas it is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly implore His protection and favor; and whereas both Houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me to recommend to the people of the United States a day of Public Thanksgiving and Prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness.

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the twenty-six of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that Great and Glorious Being, who is the Beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country, previous to their becoming a nation; for the single manifold mercies, and the favorable interposition’s of His providence, in the courage and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enabled to establish Constitutions of Government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now instituted; for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also, that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the Great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private institutions, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people, by constantly being a government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discretely and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us) and to bless them with good governments, peace and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science, among them and us; and generally, to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

May God Bless you and your loved ones this season, and fill your hearts with thankfulness to Him.

CBS, if you would remember, was hit hard by the FCC a few years ago for Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction. I thought they would pay the fine and walk away, but it seems CBS now things it has a First Amendment right to broadcast indecent content.

From the Hollywood Reporter:

CBS told a federal court Monday that the government’s new “zero tolerance” policy for indecent broadcasts is threatening to choke off free speech.

In its opening brief with the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, CBS contends that the commission’s policy “is flatly inconsistent with the bedrock principle that First Amendment freedoms require breathing space to survive.”

The case is one of two legal battles this month that will go a long way to deciding whether the government can slap broadcasters with a big fine and threaten their licenses to operate because of a slip of the tongue. The other case is in the New York circuit and involves Nicole Richie’s use of the word “shit” during the 2003 Billboard Music Awards, which aired on Fox.

On Sept. 22, 2004, the FCC said that CBS and Viacom, its parent company at the time, knew or should have known that Janet Jackson’s breast would be exposed during a halftime show at the 2004 Super Bowl. CBS, MTV — which produced the show — Jackson and fellow performer Justin Timberlake have all said that the moment was unplanned, though Jackson and her choreographer added a “wardrobe reveal” just before the show aired, according to commission and court documents. The FCC proposed fining all 20 of CBS’ owned-and-operated stations the maximum $27,500 for the indecent broadcasts.

“The orders at issue in this case cannot be reconciled with either the prior three decades of FCC precedent or, more importantly, the decisions of federal courts articulating the First Amendment limitations” of the FCC’s power over indecent speech, CBS said.

Now that, my friends, is a load of crap. First off, in both the Fox/Richie and CBS/Jackson incidents the networks claimed the incidents where accidents, and not intentional. Claiming First Amendment coverage on something you never intended to do is a bit of a stretch. Secondly, the FCC decency laws are well published and documented, so retroactive relief from judgements should not even be on the table.

The core issue that CBS is trying to capitalize on is the line between obscenity, which is not protected by the first amendment, and obscenity which is.

The Family Research Council weighed in on the topic yesterday:

As they see it, CBS has a “right” to air primetime smut. In its 76-page suit, the network states that the “blink and you miss it” nature of the episode was “largely unrecognized for most of the broadcast audience.” Tell that to FCC Chairman Kevin Martin, who spent weeks sorting through thousands of complaints from families–all demanding that CBS be held accountable. Stung by the $550,000 fine, CBS now claims the agency is choking its First Amendment Rights. Meanwhile, families are the ones in a stranglehold, trying desperately to hold the line on network pollution with little help from broadcasters. Fortunately, the FCC is backed by a law that reminds the networks that their definition of “free speech” is going to cost them.

Corporate (or non-individual) free speech is always a touch subject, and one not to be dismissed or taken lightly. It appears to me that CBS is only try to wiggle its way free of 1/2Million FCC fine, and set the stage for future push back against the FCCs stated policies. It is sad but true that “Sex Sells” and CBS and related networks see the opportunity to cash in any weakening of the FCC indecency laws.

I found this car at a local shopping center while picking up some last minuet needs for our Thanksgiving calibration.

My first thought was something along the lines of “Here is the guy that voted for all the things I voted against” followed shortly there after by a snort of irony at the “Smile, God Loves You” sticker in the middle of all that liberal (read: pro-choice, pro-homosexual, anti-christian) stuff.

Then I noticed the sticker on top.

Hillary 2008, “End the Insanity”? Oh heaven help us, the battle cry has started already, and the sheep are lining up to follow that democrat party over a cliff.

I have to wonderif the slightly bent corner is because the driver had a fit of sense after standing back and looking at the back of his or her car.

Not surprising, but both sad and scary.

In a press release posted Tuesday on Wal-Marts news site, Wal-Mart has taken a stand to not support either side in controversial issues. This is exactly the course of action I recommended corporations like Wal-Mart and Ford to take - any other course of action polarizes the customer base.

Respect for the individual is one of the core values that have made us into the company we are today. We take pride in the fact that we treat every customer, every supplier and every member of our individual communities fairly and equally.

We are working hard to make our corporate contributions reflect the values of our customers, communities, and associates. As Sam Walton said, “Each Wal-Mart store should reflect the values of its customers and support the vision they hold for their community.

Wal-Mart will not make corporate contributions to support or oppose highly controversial issues unless they directly relate to our ability to serve our customers.

Wal-Mart does not have a position on same sex marriage and we do not give preference to gay or lesbian suppliers. Wal-Mart does have a strong commitment to diversity among our associates and against discrimination everywhere.

Wal-Mart is also making note of their support for the Salvation Army, specifically allowing them to be outside any Wal-Mart stores. A move that is likely aimed directly at there main competition, Target, who will not permit the seasonal Salvation Army collection stations at their stores.

Good move Wal-mart. My wife is happy she can now shop at your stores without sacrificing her values.