6 thoughts on “Apollo 8 Christmas Bible Reading fallout

  1. I’m a little confused by the exed-out Santa in the picture… maybe even a Smurf santa, as there is blue on the face (although I don’t know anything about Smurf culture or whether such a character would wear a blue hat rather than red). That kinda reminds me of Steve saying, at his site, that he hates Christmas.

  2. I didn’t pay attention to that little picture. It was the content of the report itself that was important rather than the visual embellishments someone added on top of the video.

  3. I guess that’s a planet (earth) inside a Santa getup.

    It makes sense that you were focusing on the main content, particularly because it was nice to hear the astronaut reading from Genesis in the previous post. I don’t hate Christmas (even while I have found much frustration with it or its implementation) — maybe don’t because it just doesn’t seem to work out to try and reject it (in full). But I did identify with some of his examples (I don’t remember if there were any I didn’t).

  4. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/roger-ailes-america-bridge-nixon-trump-article-1.3176623

    Roger Ailes was the direct line from Richard Nixon to Donald Trump.

    The Fox News mastermind, whose death was announced Thursday [before Trump was announced the GOP nominee], hatched a television pitch under Nixon that would reshape the Republican Party and the American media landscape in his own image. He worked with or brazenly promoted every Republican President since Nixon and in the process, year by year and one election at a time, crafted a world that would allow a President Trump to happen.

    Ailes began his political career working with Nixon and played a pivotal role in getting the down-and-out political scrooge elected to the presidency in 1968.

    Nixon took over a divided nation with populist appeals that Trump would echo, sometimes word-for-word, decades later. ……

    https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2017-05-18/how-tvs-roger-ailes-transformed-richard-nixon-in-his-own-words-from-1970
    …..

    Q Mr. Ailes, just what do you do for President Nixon?

    A I produced and directed Mr. Nixon’s television programs in the 1968 campaign. Since then, I have been called in informally as a consultant, an adviser on communications–specifically on television broadcasts at the White House.

    Q All of them?

    ……

    A Not all of them. In the beginning, when the Administration was taking shape, I was called in quite often. For example, when the President made a televised speech on Vietnam last May, I was asked to help. Among other examples of occasions when I was asked to assist were the presidential telecast the night the astronauts landed on the moon–which presented a tricky technical problem–and the dinner Mr. Nixon presided over in Los Angeles, honoring the Apollo 11 crew.

    Another major telecast for which I was called in was the President’s introduction of the man he had chosen to be the new Chief Justice, Warren Burger.

    For additional details, one might want to read Lawrence O’Donnell’s new book [not a subject of these articles], “Playing with Fire.” Something interesting is that Ailes was employed on an afternoon network talk show when someone (a guest) talked him into focusing on politics, starting with Nixon. [I haven’t read the book, but it has to do with the ’68 campaign.]

    I had been thinking that it seems like some people have, for decades, been holding a grudge about Nixon being discovered as crooked… to a bizarre extent of wanting to be able to revisit such a circumstance and react differently (more stubbornly). So, this topic interests me.

    http://www.historytoday.com/richard-cavendish/soviet-union-first-moon
    ……

    The scientific results of Luna 2 were similar to those of Luna 1, but the psychological impact of Luna 2 was profound. The closest any American probe had come to the Moon at that point was 37,000 miles. It seemed clear in the United States that the timing had been heavily influenced by the fact that the Soviet premier, Nikita Khruschev, was due to arrive in the US immediately afterwards, to be welcomed by President Eisenhower. Luna 2’s success enabled him to appear beaming with rumbustious pride. He lectured Americans on the virtues of communism and the immorality of scantily clothed chorus girls. The only way of annoying him seemed to be by refusing to let him into Disneyland.

    ……

  5. It might have been better to put the December 27th post under the “unto us a child is born” thread — where I posted a video that includes some bizarre history as well as current events connected to Christmas and its use in politics and self-aggrandizement. I think the reason I put the above post in question here was that it has to do with media presentation and the way at least my country [particularly — as to the manifestation for relatively recent history by comparison to the longer history which is all in tandem here — as I said, particularly the Ailes and now Breitbart/Bannon, etc. acolytes… who seem to embody Evangelicalism or speak for Evangelicals as well as through them] uses subject matter that might seem good to tweak it so it’s off (maybe just a bit but then more). It’s one thing to make a mistake or a bunch of silly connections in the realm of personal life; it’s another to manipulate and play up traditions and wishes until there’s a level of animosity and imagined threat that contrasts in fact to the associated threatening to the well-being of anyone (or specific anyones or general types of anyones) who’s othering and defeat or subjugation is indeed desired thereby.

    In my country (the U.S.), there is a lot of pride taken in the Space Program. Then, connect that up with anti-communism (which communism used to be more heavily linked in the psyche also with Jews and may have subsided to be more subconsciously so linked while at the same time there is non-Soviet Russia, both before the revolution and after the U.S.S.R., to remember) and anti anything that doesn’t confirm my habitual trajectory (my being a “my” of the perceived majority or power structure or malleable [pliant, pliable, complaisant but available as defensive and sometimes militant] masses) as opposed to facts. I do think it’s telling that the argument for Bible reading (and taking offense at someone questioning a Bible reading in a certain circumstance) has a small subconscious signal attached. How dare they question us? it seems to say. Of course, the book of Genesis isn’t Christian. But it is useful to get people (the majority of whom see themselves as Christian and telling many Santa fables to prove it) on your side so you might steer them by referencing something with which they vaguely know they ought to identify and they do grab as their own via replacement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s