Although we've had a few sneak previews this year, Fox News Scrooges have finally finished unpacking their Christmas animosity from summer storage. They are ready to start the holiday season with a fresh round of attacks, divisiveness and, of course victimhood, as they go scouring the country for people who don't celebrate Christmas the way Fox thinks they should. This year, Santa's ambusher and Fox Nation editor, Jesse Watters, has provided a helpful map for Fox Hitler Youth elves to help track people he'd like to ridicule, smear, whatever. However, in a nice turnabout, a swarm of commenters have descended on the site to say this not exactly what Jesus would have wanted.
When I started this post, the War On Christmas story was at the top of the Fox Nation page, it is no longer. Perhaps these comments are the reason.
And my personal fave, commenting on an ad for Bill O'Reilly's new book about Jesus that was also on the page:
Of course, that would mean admitting that he adapted a term that, at the time, was being used in arguments claiming that minorities are shock troops in the “Catholic Culture War on Jesus.” Hey, isn’t Bill a Catholic?
Well, Lakeview Greg, since paper didn’t get to this area of the world until several hundreds of years after Christ’s time, Pampers were then made of stone, which made them unwieldy to transport over long distances. and because the Wise Guys were already carrying so much gold, frankincense and myrrh, the probably figured it would be easier to pick some up locally.
Maybe BillO and the rest of FoxNoise could do some investigating on that? I can just see BillO’s next book title: “Jesus and the Missing Foreskin: Why Liberals Hate Christianity.”
(Note: I’m joking about the bar mitzvah since that didn’t become a regular practice of Judaism until well after the time of Jesus. But still—the bris question persists. That was mandatory of all Jewish boys, even in the time of Jesus. Unless, of course, Jesus was born without a foreskin—since Jesus is supposed to be God and God wanted foreskins as a symbol of the “covenant,” it doesn’t really make sense that God would want, or need, His “own” foreskin for the collection—or he had some sort of magical foreskin that regrew. Maybe THAT was Jesus’s first REAL miracle—the regrowth of the foreskin—and Gospel writers and later Biblical authorities felt it might be a bit too embarassing to be included as part of the canon.)
NHP
