In God We Trust, but not Anonymous Emails

I recently received this email:

Payback is fun!!!!!!!!!!!!! WRITE IT ON THE BACK OF YOUR ENVELOPES or front! WE THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA. WE'LL START WRITING IT ON THE FRONT OF OUR ENVELOPES, TOO! ! Including Bills You may have heard in the news that a couple of Post Offices in Texas have been forced to take down small posters that say 'IN GOD WE TRUST ,' The law, they say, is being violated. Anyway, we heard proposed on a radio station show, that we should all write 'IN GOD WE TRUST' on the back of all our mail. After all, that's our National Motto, and it's on all the money we use to buy those stamps. We think it's a wonderful idea. We must take back our nation from all the people who think that anything that offends them should be removed. If you like this idea, please pass it on and DO IT. The idea of writing or stamping! 'IN GOD WE TRUST' on our envelopes sounds good to us WE'RE HAVING A STAMP MADE TOO! Lets use it as our signature on e-mails too! It's been reported that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore, we have a very hard time understanding why there's such a mess about having 'In God We Trust!' on our money and having God in the pledge of Allegiance. Could it be that WE just need to take action and tell the 14% to 'sit down and shut up'? If you agree, pass this on, if not, delete!!! BUT REMEMBER IF YOU DELETE THIS, that's 1 reason why this world is in the mess we're in now. WE SIT BACK & LET IT HAPPEN!!

These kinds of things should always be checked out at Snopes.com. Sure enough, it's there, and the story didn't exactly play out as implied in the email. There's a lot of information left out. It is true that several small post offices in Texas had to remove their "In God We Trust" posters. It was not because anybody had a problem with the message, and it was not because the "law was being violated" as claimed in the email. It was because the posters were provided by a private citizen (Frank P. Williamson) and postal regulations don't allow display of private material. The "In God We Trust" posters were removed at the request of the local postmaster, not because of some anonymous and intolerant "they."

Here is the relevant portion of the postal regulations:

"Depositing or posting of handbills, flyers, pamphlets, signs, posters, placards, or other literature (except official postal and other governmental notices and announcements) on the grounds, walks, driveways, parking and maneuvering areas, exteriors of buildings, and other structures, or on the floors, walls, stairs, racks, counters, desks, writing tables, window ledges, or furnishings in interior public areas on postal premises is prohibited. This does not apply to the following:
a. Posting notices on employee bulletin boards as authorized by 39 CFR 243.2.
b. Interior space assigned to tenants for their exclusive use."

Now if people still want to write "In God We Trust" on their mail and bills, more power to them! It's a great use of free speech to express your beliefs. But as for telling the 14% to 'sit down and shut up' I do have a problem with that. This country thrives on diversity, and in my opinion it is the unique genius of this nation that all views get heard. In this case, the person who wrote this - the person who wants those not like him to shut up - was just plain wrong. Sadly it is too often the case that those who want others to shut up would benefit the most by listening.

Ms. Goose Says...

Early voting has begun in Florida and the lines are huge. This is great news. Unfortunately, the news media is portraying the long lines as a symptom of problems. People are complaining about having to wait two or three hours to vote. In reality, the long lines mean nothing more than that turnout is high, and the majority are exercising their right to vote. It means that early voting is working, because trying to process all these people in one day on election day would be impossible. And, as Ms. Goose says "If they can wait an hour in 95 degree heat for a ride at Disney, they can wait on a nice day to vote!" I have to agree.

Barack HUSSEIN Obama

Some Republicans allow themselves to see some insidious meaning in Barack Obama's middle name - Hussein. It's used as a kind of code at rallies, as we saw recently in Florida when Sheriff Mike Scott introduced Sarah Palin at a rally. The idea is that Obama's true loyalties reside within his middle name. It's clearly a bad idea, in this time of national danger, to allow a man with this middle name to lead the war on terror. The Moose Goose Gazette thinks having Obama in charge during the war on terror would be as bad as having a guy with a Native American middle name be commanding general during the Indian Wars of the late nineteenth century (William TECUMSEH Sherman). Or as bad as having a man with a German last name lead the armies against Hitler (Dwight David EISENHOWER). Or to have a man with an Arabic last name lead the fight against Al Qaeida in Afghanistan and Iraq (John ABIZAID). A curious person may wonder why, of these and other examples, only Barack Obama is being portrayed in a suspicious light.
The point is this: conservatives have plenty of policy differences with Barack Obama to justify not voting for him. Demonizing him on top of these legitimate issues only promotes divisiveness, stunts honest debate, and is ultimately harmful to our country.

Winning The Post-Debate

Senator Obama may have won the debate by some arguable margin, but won the post-debate by an unarguable landslide. Two things happened after the debate that, if they get any media traction, can move undecided voters to Obama.
The (Perceived) Snub: Liberal blogs are all upset over John McCain refusing to shake hands with Barack Obama while they were working the crowd together. I think there's a lot more smoke than fire on this one. They shook hands right after the debate, while Tom Brokaw complained that they were blocking the view of his closing lines on the teleprompter. In the snub video, McCain clearly approached Obama so that Barack and Cindy could exchange pleasantries (Which is odd, given Cindy McCain's claims earlier in the day.) McCain simply didn't expect Obama to extend his hand, and so had an awkward moment. We've all had them... well, at least I have. So, while it's no secret that McCain isn't fond of Obama, I don't see a snub here. Still, if it gains traction in the media, it could hurt McCain.
A Man of the People: Far more telling was what happened next. John and Cindy McCain worked the crowd, walking around the room right to the exit and out the door. Barack and Michelle Obama worked the crowd and stayed. And stayed. And stayed. For at least 20 minutes, while the talking heads were dissecting the debate, the backdrop video showed Barack and Michelle simply spending time with the people. Talking, and smiling, and having pictures taken. The impression was that John McCain came for the debate, while Barack Obama came for the people. It doesn't matter if those interpretations are accurate, the impression is there. America got a great big dose of unscripted Barack and Michelle, mingling with the Joe Sixpack's the McCain campaign is appealing to...and enjoying it. For an undecided voter asking "Who understands the needs of everyday people?" it would be hard to pick the absent McCain over the engaged Obama.
The Moose Goose Gazette gives the post-debate to Obama as a clear winner.