Who else is tired of this type of hypocracy??

I am so tired of organizations that deem themselves part of some noble cause, but then when it is time to show that a noble cause does not depend upon the politics of the people involved, they fall flat on their face from their own hypocracy. Two examples of what I mean: The National Organization for Women ("NOW") is practically slipping in their own drool over Nancy Pelosi becoming the first Speaker of the House of Representatives stating that it is a seismic event in the history of women in politics. This may be true, but I could stomach their celebration more easily if they had made the same BIG DEAL when Condoleeza Rice was appointed to the positions of Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense. For that matter, I also didnt hear the NAACP, or the Congressional Black Caucus celebrating that she was the first black woman to be elevated to such a high and important posiiton in our gov't. Why? Because Condi Rice is a Republican, thus not fitting into NOW's or the NAACP's idea of what "TYPE" of woman they should celebrate.

Another example of this blatant hypocracy is the infamous (to me) ACLU. In November, 2006 the San Francisco Board of Education voted to throw out ALL ROTC programs from the area's public High Schools. Where was the ACLU and their flock of lawyers threatening to sue??? Imagine if the SF Bd of Ed had voted to throw out all Socialist Clubs, or Gay Rights Clubs; man we would hear about it then. But since the ACLU loathes the military, as does the SF Bd of Ed, they are not interested in "Civil Liberties" when it comes to protecting the liberty of entitites, or their members that they despise. They champion the free speech rights of Nazi's, the KKK, and child molestation groups (NAMBLA) but not of students who happen to be proud of the prospect of serving their country? This is grade-A "BS" to me, and makes these organizations just another partisan machine looking to further ONLY their own political agenda. At least I would respect them more if they would just admit that is what they are, and not try to sell us this garbage about championing the interests of ALL people.

..lol..guess you liked what I said

I understand your point, but the hypocrisy is still very real. Rice was the first African American woman to serve as Secretary of State. The NAACP, Conressional Black Caucus, and almost all black journalists (and liberal white journalists) were completely silent about the accomplishment. Condi was the second African American (after Colin Powell), and second woman (after Madeleine Albright) to serve as Secretary of State. Again, not much celebration.

As to NOW they have a well known history of this type of double standard. I recall Paula Jones who Clinton dropped his draws in front of, and Monica Lewinsky, who everyone knows about. NOW was alternately silent, or vocally critical of both women. Imagine if the President had been a Republican. The indignation and condemnation by NOW would have been deafening. It is clear these types or organizations are political arms, as opposed to being impartial and fair organizations.

I could write 3 pages in response to your e-mail, but ill be brief. Once upon a time the ACLU did try to meet its mission to defend all people and all interests, decades ago. The ACLU now is a fringe left wing radical organization. With the ROTC what about the rights of those students who wanted to be a part of an organization that they believe in? I guess they dont count because they dare have aspirations of serving their country. Where was the ACLU when it was discovered that the American Govt was surveilling illegally the Minutemen who try to protect our border since our own govt wont do it? Oops, sorry the Minutemen prevent illegal border crossers from getting here, and the ACLU believe such people have rights to be in this country, even if it they break the law to do it.

The ACLU is there everytime there is what they believe a religious display on public property, or when a Courthouse wants to display the Ten Commandments on the Courthouse steps. (They appear in the supreme court courtroom!). Congressional meetings often begin with a religious prayer.

The ACLU is there to defend every fringe group, yes including child molesters, they defend the "rights" of terrorists to have access to our Courts, etc. They defend every cause that is contrary to what the majority of Americans desire. This is the new tyranny: the tyranny of the minority. The ACLU sued the Boy Scouts of America claiming it was (gasp!) a religious organization, which is an obvious lie. The ACLU claimed in a suit that it was racist for the State of Carolina to screen Hurricane katrina evacuees. Turned out that 55% had criminal records, Oops. The ACLU champions the causes of drug dealers and terrorists by claiming that common sense based profiling is just blind racism, another crazy delusion. In the past 30 years I cant remember too many terrorists named Robert, Joe, or Sharon. I do recall a ton of Mohammads, and Osamas, and other middle eastern names. But what does the ACLU care about our being safe as long as we ignore reality and keep checking the baggage of 67 year old grandmothers, that dire threat to our country.

Restrictions on sexual offenders post-prison are a constant source of litigation by the ACLU. Those child rapists have rights g-dammitt!!!!! Forget reasonable panhandling ordinances in local municiaplities. If a vagrant wants to pee in front of your store, (ya know the business that you poured your life savings into to try to earn a living and support your family), well dang it, he has the right!!!! I could go on and on and on, but my fingers are tired. I appreictae your good intentions vis a vis the ACLU, but to me they are a reckless, extortionist and dangerous organization. I would be in favor of completely banning them, but that unfortunately won't happen.

As far as Condi Rice your argument is naive and a nice diversion from the truth. I too crave the ending of our "hyphenated-American" society, and just celebrating accomplishments withour reference to ethnicity. But that is not the way it is now. In a country now where we are asked to take note of the first african american this, asian that, first muslim this, first hispanic that...the glaring silence about Condi smacks clearly of just what I said it did, political black listing of who gets noticed and applauded. Just ask any black republican what I am talking about. They will be glad to tell you about ostracization, and ugly rhetoric sent their way. I cant remember when Clarence Thomas was honored by the Congressiional Black Causcus, can you?????

Well of course we remember the late McVeigh. And many people use him as the example of why we need to check every single person going through the airport screening process. But that is an exception that does not disprove what appears to be the rule.

You tell me that this scenario makes sense: a rule that allows the police to check 1 in 5 people entering the NY subway system. A transit cop sees 5 people on line. One is a 19 year old asian college student. The other are 4 middle eastern men in their early 30's with back packs on, sweating and acting in a nervous manner. Since they have just checked the 19 year old, they must ignore the 4 middle eastern men. Then the next person they can check happens to be a 67 year old black woman with a walker. Behind her are other middle eastern men. Sorry, she gets checked ( maybe she is hiding a bomb in the legs of her walker??), they get ignored. Feeling safer yet??? Do you think telling me about Tim McVeigh changes the absurdity of the REAL situation Ive described?? NOT IMHO.

Zizzou'smom, I respect your opinion but you are ignoring the fact that what the ACLU is doing with regard to criminals, terrosist, and pedophiles DOES affect all americans and in obvious and crucial ways. I would be quite certain that the vast majority of americans want criminals to have less rights, they want our govt to protect them, and they dont give a hoot if the Guantanomo Bay inmates are allowed to pray toward Mecca 5 times a day, etc etc.

The NAMBLA case is often cited because it represents what the ACLU is about these days. If you can show me one offical statement from the ACLU stating that they regret representing NAMBLA I would indeed be truly curious to see it and what it said. How do you explain the ACLU complaining about the rights of pedophiles to not be restricted in the monioring of their movements , and in complying with sexual predator registration laws? How do you explain ACLU suing over the fact that when some Mansfield Correctional facility death row inmates had to be transferred, that their new cell would be too small ??!!?? And the panhandling case was from Pittsburgh.

I do not see the ACLU as harmless one bit. Pls keep in mind that when the ACLU drags some hapless municipality into Court that happens to have $15,000 budgeted for legal fees that year, many of the ACLU's rediculous claims cannot be defended due to expense, which makes the ACLU a strong arm orgaization. The municpality must cave in. When they do sue large a organization or govt entity, they wind up with million dollar fees having to be reimbursed to that loopy organization, which comes from taxpayer dollars. Sorry I would rather fund an after school program for 2 years, then pay the ACLU to "defend the people's rights".

Yes I would vote to ban them....yesterday if possible.

I couldnt disagree more with you on just about everything you just said. Would you as a parent want to know if a child rapist has just moved next door to you??? I would and I would daresay that 98% of other people would. I hope that you would too. But the ACLU it seems is concerned about the rights of this "poor" child rapist, as opposed to the people around him, inclduing small children that could be harmed. People's rights dont exist in a vacuum; one person's "right" to do something may affect deeply somebody else's right to live.

In any event I enjoyed this debate.