U.S. Bridge Team Dixie Chicked
14 November 2007 9:00 am by Taylor Marsh
 |
At issue is a crudely lettered sign, scribbled on the back of a menu, that
was held up at an awards dinner and read, “We did not vote for Bush.”By e-mail, angry bridge players have accused the women of “treason”
and “sedition.”“This isn’t a free-speech issue,” said Jan Martel, president
of the United States Bridge Federation, the nonprofit group that selects teams
for international tournaments. “There isn’t any question that
private organizations can control the speech of people who represent them.”Not so, said Danny Kleinman, a professional bridge player, teacher and columnist.
“If the U.S.B.F. wants to impose conditions of membership that involve
curtailment of free speech, then it cannot claim to represent our country
in international competition,” he said by e-mail. … ..
What is it with people wanting to muzzle women these days?
The U.S. Bridge Foundation is threatening the Dixie Chicks of the bridge world
with a one-year suspension. So in the spirit of all things Bush, they’re trying
to crack the team by dividing and conquering the women. Jon
Swift again:
Thank goodness the USBF does know something about American values. Drawing
on the best of American tradition, they have had their lawyer, Alan Falk,
send the women a questionnaire trying to get them to snitch on the team member
who first broached the idea of holding up the sign and he has threatened them
with worse punishment if they don’t cooperate. Already three players, Hansa
Narasimhan, JoAnna Stansby and Jill Meyers, have started to crack, expressing
regret that the action offended some people. But Debbie Rosenberg, Jill Levin,
and Irina Levitina–the Huey Newton, Eldridge Cleaver and Stokely Carmichael
of the Bridge team–remain defiant. … ..
TBogg
weighs in and Ms. Malkin is center stage, of course. Because if an issue
has anything to do with censuring someone, throwing them behind chain link fence,
or just generally having dissenters shut up, she’s the queen bee of the bandana
gag team.
Maybe if our learned leaders on Capitol Hill hadn’t taken the one means of
holding Bush accountable off the table the
people wouldn’t still be so angry. And I say this as someone who has always
been against impeachment while our troops are in harm’s way in Iraq. But at
this point the case sure can be made that not only is Bush’s impeachment worth
discussing, but it actually might heal this nation.
In short, Bush hatred is not a rational response to actual Bush perfidy.
Rather, Bush hatred compels its progressive victims–who pride themselves
on their sophistication and sensitivity to nuance–to reduce complicated events
and multilayered issues to simple matters of good and evil. Like all hatred
in politics, Bush hatred blinds to the other sides of the argument, and constrains
the hater to see a monster instead of a political opponent.The Insanity
of Bush Hatred
Our politics suffer when passions overcome reason and vitriol becomes virtue.
What Mr. Bush has done to this country at home and around the world, not to
mention what he’s done to our force structure is unpardonable. There’s a reason
the American people are angry, which includes a lot more than just lefties,
trust me. That some still don’t see it and respect that people who love this country
remain furious, because Bush has still not been held responsible for anything is the main reason we can’t join hands and move forward. Someone
needs to be held accountable still. Our leaders have robbed the people of that justice. They’ll likely take that anger into the ‘08 elections.
