CAROL OF THE SHILLS
MONOLOGUE WRITTEN BY CLYDE LEWIS
The old song says that Christmas is the most wonderful time of the year; however, this year Christmas is becoming unbearable in a nation that is divided to the point of incredulity. While I always dread the Yuletide arguments and the political weaponizing of the holiday, I am always subjected to the so-called War on Christmas arguments and how the secularists are trying to destroy the holiday by trying to remove Jesus from the equation.
Every year we hear about a controversial argument about whether or not it is politically correct to say Happy Holidays or Merry Christmas to strangers. I have always felt that is as silly as arguing over whether or not toilet paper should roll under or over.
Either way, it all gets wiped in the end.
Americans are divided over whether it is more appropriate for stores and businesses to greet customers with “Happy Holidays” or “Seasons Greetings” instead of “Merry Christmas” out of respect for people of different religious faiths: 47% say they should, while 46% say they should not. Attitudes on this question are largely unchanged over the last six years. This issue sharply divides the public by political affiliation, religious affiliation, and age.
This argument will never die and new arguments have emerged created by the shills and snowflakes that melt equally over the open fires of Christmas Logic.
I think the first sign that we were headed for a winter of discontent was when the media reported a controversy surrounding the airing of a Holiday favorite, “A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving.”
You may remember that social media went postal over the seating arrangements at a table where Charlie Brown and the rest of the Peanuts gang enjoyed toast, jelly beans, and ice cream.
It seems that Peppermint Patty, Charlie Brown, Sally, and even Snoopy were sitting on one side of the table and Franklin, the only black character in the group was sitting alone on the other side in a rickety old lawn chair.
People declared on Twitter that they were not going to watch the classic cartoon anymore because they saw it as racist.
They even added that the scene is so pathetic that one point, poor lonesome Franklin topples over in his half-broken chair.
Well, it is really sad that this scene sparked a race controversy especially when in historical context we know how hard Charles Shulz fought against the racist censors by putting Franklin in the dinner scene in the first place and later in the cartoon we see that the whole gang including Franklin were invited to Charlie Brown’s grandmother’s home for the real feast.
Schulz, reportedly demanded a black character be added to the Charlie Brown cast in 1968 following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. Schulz was inspired to do so after receiving a letter from a teacher named Harriet Glickman.
When asked by the head of the cartoon’s publisher, United Feature Syndicate, if he was sure he wanted to add a black character, Glickman says Schulz replied, “Either you run it the way I drew it, or I quit.”
As I pointed out when I discussed the American outrage in this country, it has to be repeated that if we cry “social injustice” where it doesn’t exist, we’re less likely to be heard when we call out instances of it that are real.
The division and the pathetic cries about political correctness out of context are really symptoms of something more troubling in our country especially when the holidays roll around. It can bring out the best in people and it can bring out the worst in people.
Christmas seems to be the holiday that breeds thoughts of victimization and superiority. It is a time where both the left and the right take a moment to look in the mirror and think I am so much smarter and better than my enemies! And they are so wrong, and I am so right.
However, those who stoop to the low of weaponizing Christmas don’t stop and think of how stupid they are or how moronic and self-serving the whole exercise is.
I certainly agree with the old song by Tom Lehrer where he says that Christmas time is here by golly disapproval would be folly and even though the prospect sickens, it’s time to kill the turkeys, ducks, and chickens, mix the punch, drag out the Dickens.
And even then traditional Christmas stories have been seen as offensive to those justice warriors who believe that we are being influenced into being Christmas fascists after reading things like Clement C. Moore’s 18th century Christmas poem, T’was The Night Before Christmas.
A self-published author has taken it upon herself to edit the classic and remove all mention of smoking from Clement Clarke Moore’s 1823 masterpiece.
Canadian publisher Pamela McColl changed the poem to “save lives and avoid influencing new smokers,” according to statements on her website.
McColl’s new version, which she released through her own publishing company, cuts two lines that describe Santa smoking: ‘The stump of a pipe he held tight in his teeth, / And the smoke, it encircled his head like a wreath;’ and she also omits the iconic illustration of Santa holding the pipe between his teeth.
“I just really don’t think Santa should be smoking in the 21st century,” McColl was quoted as saying in a telephone interview.
She took refuge behind her website to release the following statement: “I have edited out a few words and lines that reference Santa smoking and removed the cover illustration of his pipe.
The omission of these few words do not change the material intent of the author nor do they infringe on the reader’s understanding or enjoyment of this historically-rich story, but by removing these words we may save lives and avoid influencing new smokers. I think these edits outweigh other considerations.
If this text is to survive another 200 years it needs to modernize and reflect today’s realities. I want children to celebrate the spirit of giving and to reflect proudly on the holiday traditions that shape their childhood, and the best way to honor Santa and this story is to make him smoke-free.”
The American Library Association has gone on record that the changes amount to “an act of censorship that denies the audience access to the author’s authentic voice.”
“A lot of people my age have lost someone to smoking,” McColl said, herself a former smoker, “And I thought, ‘Oh my. This is a great project.’”
So, with illustrators Elena Almazova and Vitaly Shvarov, McColl put out the new version in Spanish, English, and French with a note from Santa on the back flap that says he has “…decided to leave all of that old tired business of smoking well behind us.”
Well, all I can say is thank God Santa still dinks Coca-Cola who knows maybe someone will be offended by that or maybe they will realize how much of a hipster Santa is or if you squint he looks more Muslim than Christian and if you rearrange the letters or if you are dyslexic you will notice Satan is an anagram for Satan.
I remember when I was told that I could not wear a Santa suit to a Christmas party at a college I worked for when I asked why, Human Resources said that he was a Christian icon and that it would be inappropriate to wear the suit around people of different faiths. Meanwhile, trees with Angels and other religious icons were festooned throughout the office.
This is about the time I embraced Krampus as a Christmas icon.
He was a product of my German aunt who used to scare us about Krampus and how he was the guy who watched us when we were bad and would come and beat us if we ever became unruly.
Krampus was created as a counterpart to kindly St. Nicholas, who rewarded children with sweets and gifts. Krampus, in contrast, would swat “wicked” children, put them in his bag or basket and send them to Hell.
With all of the trumped-up Christmas controversy, there are times that I wish that Krampus was real and would visit the cheerless and give them a few Season’s beatings.
As Christmas years there are traditional TV specials that we remember fondly from childhood like the 1964 Rankin Bass stop-motion cartoon, Rudolf the Red Nosed Reindeer.
Viewers may recall its simple plot: The reindeer is mocked and cast away by the majority of his peers when they discover his glowing red nose. Even though Rudolph ultimately returns to save the day, using his glimmering snout to guide Santa through poor weather — there’s no denying the verbal attacks Rudolph endures early on.
After all in the classic song by Gene Autry – all of the other Reindeer would laugh at him and call him names.
However, recently social media has commented that both the song and the classic TV show promote racism, homophobia, and bullying.
“Rudolph” is not the only holiday classic being reexamined in a more contemporary context. Last a week, listeners of a Cleveland radio station voted to remove the song “Baby, It’s Cold Outside,” in which the man in the song works to persuade a woman to stay with him for the night by saying it is cold outside.
People are now saying in the era of the hashtag #metoo movement that the song is a little rapey. In fact, some have called it Harvey Weinstein rapey.
The song’s lyrics describe a night of booze and questionable consent. She wants to go home, he wants her to stay; she says “no,” he says, “What’s the sense of hurting my pride?”
The track has more than 1.7 million plays on Spotify.
However, the PC police are also looking to ban other Christmas songs from their playlists and while many people claim that censorship is aimed at taking Christ out of Christmas, there is a concerted effort to attack some of the more secular songs as well.
Perhaps no embattled carol more perfectly bears the burden of the P.C. tug-of-war on Christmas than the poor, hundreds-of-years-old “Deck the Halls.”
At issue is the lyric: “Don we now our gay apparel.”
Family Values Vultures claim any invocation of the word “gay” inches us all closer to homosexual world conquest indoctrination; over in the Safe Space corner, liberal-leaning “Those Who Know Best” take issue with the notion that anyone should impose the idea that “gay apparel” exists.
Is gay apparel fetish leather, or assless chaps, anything pink?
How silly is this argument?
In 2013, Hallmark attempted to take the gay out of the song by swapping it out on a Christmas ornament for “fun.”
They got a lot of heat for it.
The Song “I saw mommy kissing Santa Claus” by little Jimmy Boyd has been controversial and considered for banning as far back as 1952 as the Catholic church once said that the song promoted incestuous voyeurism. Jimmy Boyd had to have a meeting with the Archdiosese to explain the song, It was then the ban was lifted.
Spike Jones did his own parody called “I Saw Mommy Screwing Santa Claus.”
Comedian Kip Adotta had a minor hit with his response to the controversy with his non-PC song, I Saw Daddy Kissing Santa Claus. Ru Paul did a cover of the song as well.
A made-for-television movie based on the song was released in 2001.
In 2013, the website Mommyish wrote: “In addition to hating the song’s narrator, I truly hate the song, too. It’s exceptionally gendered to an insane degree. The narrative includes the mom kissing Santa, the mom tickling Santa, but makes no mention of Santa sitting here with a giant boner in his Santa suit.
Is the mom raping Santa in this situation? Of course not. Santa is a willing participant in the adult sexual experience, but for some reason we’re only spying on Mom here. This is blatant shaming of a woman for experiencing and acting on sexual desire while we paint the man as just standing there, a victim of her sexual wiles.”
Santa Baby, by Eartha Kitt, later covered by Madonna is also on the hit list by the PC crowd as it allegedly depicts women as sluts and gold diggers.
“Think of all the fun I’ve missed/Think of all the fellas that I haven’t kissed/Next year I could be just as good/If you’ll check off my Christmas list.”
At issue is the implication that the protagonist is “saving” herself for Santa—and that kissing other fellas would be “bad.” That, according to those sounding the outrage Alarm- is “slut shaming.”
I am not kidding.
Then, of course, we cannot forget last year’s big controversy about the so-called, “Whitewashing of Christmas.”
Arguably, it began with then Fox news commentator Megyn Kelly said on her show in 2013 that Santa Claus was white.
She commented on a 2013 Slate piece with the headline, “Santa Claus Should Not Be a White Man Anymore.”
“When I saw this headline I kind of laughed, and I said, ‘This is so ridiculous. Yet another person claiming it’s racist to have a white Santa,’ “Kelly, then a Fox News personality, said at the time. “And by the way, for all you kids watching at home, Santa just is white. But this person is just arguing that maybe we should also have a black Santa, but Santa is what he is, and just so you know, we’re just debating this ’cause someone wrote about it, kids.”
“Just because it makes you feel uncomfortable doesn’t mean it has to change,” added Kelly later. “Jesus was a white man, too… He was a historical figure, that’s a verifiable fact, as is Santa. I just want the kids watching to know that.”
For Kelly, it was a question of “how do you just revise it in the middle of the legacy, of the story and change Santa from white to black?”
Needless to say, she had to go on an apology tour – later, of course, she was fired at NBC for appearing to defend Blackface as a legitimate Halloween disguise.
In 2014 after Mariah Cary performed White Christmas on a TV special from New York – The PC brigade flew off the handle saying that the song is an attempt to Whitewash Christmas yet again. Even though the song refers to the white snow – some people were quick to point out that the song promotes blatant racism.
In 2017, Newsweek ran a headline “How Trump and the Nazis stole Christmas to promote white nationalism.” The Writers of NEWSWEEK several academics linked Trump’s repeated Christmas wishes to a desire to exclude other religions and foment a culture war.
Again, commentary by Don Lemon of CNN promoted the notion that when Donald Trump says Merry Christmas it is a dog whistle for white nationalism.
The problem with the song White Christmas according to critics is that it promotes a “White Santa, a White Jesus and White Supremacy.
Wow, and that is just a small bit of what is offensive to a small group of joyless vociferous scrooges that make Christmas awful and take us from the idea of a War on Christmas to making it a weapon of anger.
It sets up a double standard when people claiming to promote tolerance and diversity seek to homogenize Christmas to their various agenda.
So now you know what we are up against and how the shills are out to destroy your Christmas cheer – we can use the next 20 days before Christmas to debate whether or not the Bruce Willis film Die Hard is a Christmas movie.