Bob Larson: Over the Shoulder Thanksgiving
Thursday, November 29th 2013
Okay, so I'm a day late. But looking back over my shoulder at Thanksgiving I have a simple observation: Why must we rob yet another Christian holiday of its true significance? By now, most informed Americans know that when President Obama recently video-taped special comments in memory of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address that he opted out the recognition that our nation is "under God." His underlings blamed it on a text that he was given which omitted this significant recognition. Even if his schedule was busy and he didn't notice the omission, he could have apologized and reaffirmed his belief that we are a nation under God. But no, that would upset too many Progressives.
Now it's Thanksgiving that has taken a hit. When the original proclamation by President Lincoln was given in 1863, it stated that American's blessings "should be solemnly, reverently acknowledged." Lincoln declared, "I do therefore invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are at sea and those who are sojourning in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens." So much for our obsession with today's Black Friday. Sadly, we've exchanged recognition of Divine guidance with politically correct contrivances. (If I hear one more person say "Happy Holidays" I think I'll puke!) So what were we supposed to be thankful for yesterday? God and his grace which has been shed on our Land. Anything less is a disgrace!
The image he uses for his " blog comes from here:
And the image comes from this web site of royalty free images:
The number is #22300459
Guess this time BL tried to avoid sloppily violating the copyright of another. Gee, wonder who showed him how risky it is to " borrow" from others? (( innocent look)).
I should note that Larson chose NOT to use a graphic where Native Americans rescued the Pilgrims from starvation-- the basic image that is the root of America's celebration of Thanksgiving.
As with the Halloween image he used, my finding this one was easy with Google. I admit I liked looking through the various Thanksgiving images , and some of them IMO were far better choices than the turkey with Pilgrim hat he used. Some were nicely classic 19th Century era ones, including Lady Liberty with a flag cloak motif.
As to his " blog" entry, interestingly I agree with a point or two, but BL mixes in a few deceptions in his comments-- no surprise.
" Okay, so I'm a day late. But looking back over my shoulder at Thanksgiving I have a simple observation: Why must we rob yet another Christian holiday of its true significance?"
One could ask him why he omitted the PAGAN Native Americans and the first " thanksgiving" feast. If you do some actual reading on the origin and traditions of Thanksgiving, while it does have a " Christian" element to it, Larson seems to omit the fact that Lincoln, whom he quotes here, was certainly not the type of Christian he would recognize as a "believer." Technically Lincoln was a Christian, but he had a bit of racism and he allowed his wife to hold seances at the White House-- something that if one believes Larson, a Christian should avoid at all costs.
As for its " true significance", I find that claim rather blind of him. But then, I doubt he or his "church" held a feast for the needy and homeless, as many churches did yesterday.
Then there's another attack on President Obama:
"By now, most informed Americans know that when President Obama recently video-taped special comments in memory of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address that he opted out the recognition that our nation is "under God." His underlings blamed it on a text that he was given which omitted this significant recognition."
Actually the truth is a bit different. The fact is that there is more than one version of the Gettysburg Address, and Larson conveniently "forgot" to mention that the event in question had a few celebrities reading from the different versions of the GA. Larson is just regurgitating the FOX" news" claim that the President supposedly omitted " under God" a second time. BTW nice choosing of " underlings" for " aides". Gee no bias there, huh, Bob?
"So much for our obsession with today's Black Friday. Sadly, we've exchanged recognition of Divine guidance with politically correct contrivances. (If I hear one more person say "Happy Holidays" I think I'll puke!) "
The first sentence I agree with him. The second sentence is just plain crap. And the third sentence is silly. So he'll vomit if anyone wishes him a " Happy Holidays"? Dimes to donuts he'll pull out the hyped up " War on Christmas" drum beating.
I should mention that Happy Holidays is INclusive, includes Christmas. But then it also includes the various other celebrations including Kwanza, Yule ( Pagan) and OC Hannuka. And, may I add in the state he currently resides, the Hopi and Dine have there various Katchina ceremonies.
So basically " Happy Holidays" is for EVERYONE and this claim that it robs Christians and Christianity is IMO garbage.
"So what were we supposed to be thankful for yesterday? God and his grace which has been shed on our Land. Anything less is a disgrace!"
The first sentence has an obvious answer. We should be thankful for what we have in America, if we are lucky to be employed, to have a home, family, friends, and so forth. Part of Thanksgiving is about sharing our bounty with others less fortunate, thus the various churches holding feasts for the needy. Something I rather doubt Larson himself would honestly think of doing while he sits in his mansion in Scottsdale. Ironically he talks about Black Friday ( a greedy event) while he himself won't do anything without money being put in his hands.
The second sentence is the " Christian" " God is withdrawing his blessings" claim that I see in letters to the editor written by robots who want everyone to " turn back to God", diss atheists, " Progressives" and claim America has become immoral. IOW the Christian Taliban propaganda.
As for " disgraceful", I find it ironic and hypocritical he uses the word " disgrace" considering his own history and various exploitations and sensationalistic claims over the years.
The " encouraging word" is puff fluff, OC.
On a side note, I was curious why Larson, who years ago on his radio show had a number of shows on Charles Manson, seems to have overlooked the news that Manson is about to marry a young lady-- a very young lady. Guess Lady Gaga blinded him to that bit of news.
I'm still amused that he called Maddie O'Hair a " jezebel'.