The Republican love affair with Hitler continues

This time it's Virginia Republican gubernatorial candidate Jerry Kilgore

A commercial featuring death penalty proponent Stanley Rosenbluth has him looking into the camera and saying: "Tim Kaine says Adolf Hitler doesn't qualify for the death penalty. This was one of the worst mass murderers in modern times." [CNN]

Rosenbluth, whose son and daughter-in-law were murdered by Mark Sheppard in 1993 during a drug deal gone awry, was more than a willing participant in one of the two ads Kilgore plans to blanket the state with criticizing Tim Kaine's personal and religious views against the death penalty because Kaine was second chair in Sheppard's appeal after his law firm was appointed by the court to represent the murderer's appeal. The other ad featured the widow of a slain police officer stating "When Tim Kaine calls the death penalty murder, I find it offensive."

During a conference call Kilgore staged with Rosenbluth, Kilgore stated

"Everyone is entitled to [legal] representation, but not every activist defense attorney is entitled to be governor of Virginia." [Richmond Times Dispatch]

Kaine has been involved in the representation of 3 murderers in capital cases all, according to Kaine and his staff, by court appointment. The Kaine team has already issued response ads in which the Democratic candidate and current lieutenant governor of the state states that despite his religious convictions against the death penalty, he will follow state law which permits executions and will exercise the right of granting clemency sparingly.

The Kilgore camp defends their use of the Hitler reference because Rosenbluth was "speaking from his heart" and because Kaine had previously been asked about his views during an interview with the Richmond Times Dispatch in which he was questioned specifically about Hitler, Stalin and Idi Amin

Your conviction is so deep that you cannot name one person in history, who because of his malefactions and criminal behavior, deserved the death penalty?

KAINE: No, I -- again, the way I answered your question is -- they may deserve -- yeah. They may deserve it. Of course they may, for doing something heinous. They don't deserve to live in civilized society. They deserve the death penalty. I just -- you know, I look at the world. Most nations have decided not to have a death penalty. And -- and many are very safe. I don't think -- I don't think it's needed to be safe. [Richmond Times Dispatch]

As someone who is not against the death penalty (I believe it, sadly, has it's place it certain cases - especially since a sentence of life without parole, does not really mean no chance of parole), I can't help but notice that the ad featuring the Hitler reference is the one starring Rosenbluth. Call me cynical but I have a feeling Kilgore's cronies thought they were safe from Jewish criticism for using Hitler for their own political purposes, well, Rosenbluth is the one who uttered the reference. I also think it rather ironic that someone from a party that demands the imposition of conservative Christian views on secular law would use ads to attack the religious views of another candidate. Kaine, for his part, has stated his committment to uphold state law even though the law is inconsistent with Catholic doctrine. Lord knows the Freepers would be jumping all over Kaine were he to suggest that he think it appropriate for elected officials who are Catholic should follow the dictates of the Vatican (Republicans only support that for the issue of abortion and imposition of "Christian morals" & symbols in public schools and government grounds - and they limit the latter to those that just happen to be consistent with fundamentalist Christianity).

Kaine has served office in the way envisioned by our founding fathers: living in accordance with his own religious beliefs without imposing them on others. This is government service that is consistent with our constitution. It's truly a pity that Republicans are so averse to upholding the constitution they feel the need to attack someone obviously committed to its advancement.

Tags: politics; religion; death penalty; Virginia

Sphere: Related Content

Indiana judge doesn't like parents, nullifies adoption

The state of Indiana is proving yet again that it has made the mistake of empowering the most ignorant of people who feel they have a right to impose their personal moral views and beliefs to the detriment of children and families. The latest salvo comes from a judge in the Morgan Juvenile Court which nullified the adoption of a little girl by the couple who'd been raising her since 2004, when the state asked them to provide a home for the 2-day old abandoned infant and to consider adopting her. The couple are licensed by the state as pre-adoptive foster parents and have successfully served as foster children in the state over the years but when the judge supervising the child's foster care placement found out the foster parents planning to adopt her were lesbians, she ordered the State child welfare agency to find the child a home with a married heterosexual couple instead. A heterosexual couple was not located to foster/adopt the child for several months and in the time it took to locate a new heterosexual family, Becki Hamilton & Kim Brennan were granted an adoption of the little girl by the Marion Superior Court. Despite Repubevangelical state senator Patricia Miller's defunct attempt to capitalize on public outrage over a surrogacy case & legally declare that single people are unfit parents by virtue of the fact they are not married, Indiana law does not prohibit homosexuals from acting as foster parents or adopting children. This case is further proof that the religious right is actually the biggest threat to American families as they continue to prove that their primary goal is imposing their religion regardless of the damage they are doing to children and the continuous undermining of the sanctity of marriage by trivializing the institution and non-fundamentalist families.


Tags: gay marriage; Indiana; adoption; politics; religion; something being imposed on the public; something else being imposed on the public; that code word for gay or Jew or whoever the fundies are hating on this week

Sphere: Related Content

WH administration illegally abrogate responsibilities for handling classified information

As the specter as indictments loom over various WHIGsters, I'm starting to hear yet another emphasis on whether Turdblossom, Scooter, Darth Cheney, et al knowingly transmitted classified information to those without the right and clearance to access such information. If peons like you or me had provided classified information (or confirmed the accuracy of classified information obtained from another source), whether we had known that the information was classified would be germane to legality of our actions. The folks in BushCo have an additional component to their legal obligations in the handling of classified information. People at federal agencies, including WH administration officials, have obligations delineated under Executive Order 12598 (and Bush's 2003 amendment to this order) that considers any knowing, willful or negligent dissemination of classified information to be a violation of that order. As I noted back in July, training on what is an impermissible disclosure is mandated and is verified as part of the "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" (SF-312) signed by all administration officials. Section 3 of the Nondisclosure Agreement states [emphasis mine]:

I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of the information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.

Included as part of that training is a notice that

confirming the accuracy of classified information, or calling attention to classified information that has appeared publicly, is considered just as much a violation as an unauthorized leak. Persons with access to classified information need to be informed of this obligation.

In other words, anyone in the administration was required to confirm whether information regarding Plame's status at the CIA was classified to ensure it was not classified prior to so much as acknowledging her status even if it had already appeared in the public domain.

Tags:turdblossom; Valerie Plame; politics; The Bushevik Revolution; we're America, we own the world; BBA; conservatism; media; Downing Street Memorandum; Novakula; media; matt cooper; Lewis Scooter "Leaky" Libby; Iraq; Judy "I never heard a BushCo lie I couldn't support" Miller

Sphere: Related Content

Is U2 supporting Santorum fundraiser or does CNN owe them an apology?

I've never been much of a U2 fan, to be honest I've always thought that Bono was way to full of himself and a niggling sensation that many of his good deeds were as much about self-promotion as they were for charity. Today, a story was passed on via CNN that U2 will be performing a fundraiser for Repubevangelical senatorial candidate Rick Santorum. The story at NewsMax is a little different

On Sunday, October 16, a unique political event will take place.

At a concert of the legendary rock group U2, Senator Rick Santorum will hold a fund-raising event for one night only.

The thousand-dollar-a-seat fund-raiser has been put together by Sean and Ana Wolfington, and it will take place at the Wachovia Center in Philadelphia in support of Santorum's reelection. [NewsMax.com]

It goes without saying that the members of U2, all proclaimed as born again Christians, may share the bulk of Rick Santorum's views but that doesn't mean they're willing to alienate many of their fans by being public about it. In response to the news stories, the band has posted a statement regarding political fundraising activity on their web-site [emphasis mine]

11.10.2005
Political Fundraisers (Not) DATA have posted a statement reacting to 'inaccurate media statements on U2 shows as political fundraisers.'

We're posting the statement here because we've had a number of emails expressing concern about certain media stories people have read.

Jamie Drummond, Executive Director of DATA (debt AIDS trade Africa), the Africa Advocacy group co-founded by Bono said this earlier today:

'Throughout the U2 tour, politicians from both sides have been organizing fundraisers at the venues or around specific shows. Neither DATA or Bono are involved in these and they cannot be controlled. The U2 concerts are categorically not fundraisers for any politician - they are rock concerts for U2 fans.'

Don't believe everything you read! [U2.com]

The NewsMax piece makes it clear that the Santorum fundraiser is an event scheduled at the concert not the concert being used as a fundraiser, but the folks on CNN's Situation room (I thought it was Jack Cafferty, but didn't see who was speaking) included a quote from Bono that implied that he was supporting Santorum's run and that this was a fundraising effort that Bono was involved in based on shared religious views (I've asked Media Matters to do some research on this and provide a transcript for clarification).

If the statement is inaccurate or originally made in a context other than the fundraiser, shouldn't CNN be quick to include a retraction and apology on it's web-site?

Tags: Rick "man on dog" Santorum; politics; U2

Sphere: Related Content

Not all hoaxes are funny

Good reason to reinforce that the terror alert was raised due to info from non-credible sources. As it turns out, the whole thing was a hoax. The more we raise the specter of doom in the face of outdated data and/or unreliable sources, the more likely we are to disregard any warning when there is a credible threat.

Tags: politics; Iraq War; Bushevik Revolution; Foreign Policy; BBA; Downing Street Memorandum; terrorism; turdblossom; Valerie Plame/PlameGate; conservatism; media

Sphere: Related Content

come out, come out, wherever you are

Pam notes that today is National Coming Out Day. Since this year's theme is "talk about it," I figured I would take the liberty to babble on the subject.

I think, for the most part, most straight people take their heterosexuality for granted - we live in what is now called a "heteronormative" society (just as we have a christonormative and caucasonormative society), those who are in the majority really have no idea what it's like to be a minority (especially not a reviled one) and no incentive to even try to understand.

I'm not sure when I became openly "gay friendly". To be honest, I'm not sure when I even started thinking about it or identifying/recognizing people as gay. I can't imagine that I was always open and understanding of people being gay but, to be honest, I don't recall ever being particularly concerned or freaked out by people being gay. One thing I do recall is the sudden realization that the sister of one of my best friends was gay. D was much older than Brooke and me (still is, especially since I've started lying about my age) and she wasn't around a whole heck of a lot but she was around often enough that most of Brooke's friends knew her and had a good rapport with her. I'm guessing D was out, because I do remember her "friend" Joann being around on occasion - as a matter of fact, D & Joann chaperoned a bunch of us on a camping trip and none of us thought anything of it. About a year later I remember starting to remark that D reminded me of the character Frankie (a butch lesbian) on the Australian soap Prisoner Cell Block H. I vividly remember Brooke cutting me off with a "don't say it" and a look that I now recognize as a fear that in saying it, I would be acknowledging something Brooke didn't want anyone else to notice (we were 13 and it was the late 70s). I was really only commenting on the physical resemblance and was so oblivious I hadn't quite caught on to the rest, so I'm not sure how long it took before I had the lightbulb moment. Frankly, it didn't matter. D and Joann were the same people and guess I never thought there was any reason to think anything of their relationship. That sort of "Oh, OK" reaction pretty much sums up my reaction to people being gay. I don't see why it's a big deal to anyone not directly involved in the relationship any more than a straight relationship would be, I never have and, barring head injury, never will.

I have a second cousin who's gay that had a mutually exclusive, monogamous relationship that lasted 18 years (with a healthy, well-adjusted son no less). During that time, many of my cousins got married and divorced. A former boss of mine has been with his partner for over 25 years. An old friend, who spent years identifying her [bisexual] self as a lesbian, is now marking the 7-year mark with her husband (truth be told, she had lousy taste in women). Shockingly, none of those relationships (straight or gay) has has had any impact on the sanctity of my parents marriage of 46 years or the marriages of anyone else. None of those relationships has brought the destruction of society, induced beastiality obsessed fundamentalist men to marry donkeys, caused girls to be sluts or affected the polygamy practiced by Mormon sects. We don't define or limit straight people by how or with whom they have sex, there's no legitimate reason do so for people who aren't straight.

Tags: Politics; something being imposed on the public; conservatism; gay; sex

Sphere: Related Content

Supreme Infatuation

When I first learned of Harriet Miers nomination to the Supremes and started looking into who she was, I couldn't escape the feeling that she some sort of deep, abiding, crush on Dubya and that her feelings may well be pathological enough that she would do not only anything to protect him, but pretty much anything he says. This story in Mississippi's Sun Herald just reinforces my gut feeling

You are the best governor ever - deserving of great respect!" she wrote in 1997, in a belated birthday note that was typical of the tone she used in her correspondence with then-Gov. Bush.

As a professional woman with more years of experience than I care to admit, I've been in many working relationships with men - good men - as my mentor, as colleagues and as subordinate employees. Many of those relationships have become personal over the years, even to the point that we may have known a bit too much about each other's professional and private lives. I've given positive feedback to those who have commanded my respect and admiration, but gushing in those circumstances is just not something I've encountered except in instances where the gusher has one colossal crush (except when a mentee has kicked serious ass and outperformed wildest expectations, then you kvell like a mother).

People in crush mode, even the most intelligent and normally rational ones, tend not to make their own decisions when the object of their affection wants a specific outcome/delineate the "right" decision (s)he; they have a habit of disregarding common sense and abandoning all objectivity in favor of pleasing their crush. This concerns me, especially as the President reassures the fundamentalist movement that he knows "her heart". This just adds to my anxiety that the reason for Miers' nomination to the court was to ensure a Stepford Justice, which will not serve the purposes of the court or our country.

Above all else, a supreme court justice must be fluent in constitutional law and objective in evaluating cases in context with the constitution. A justice must be able to put aside personal feelings (religious and otherwise) to properly evaluate a case in an unbiased fashion and then rule in accordance with the law even when rendering that ruling directly contradicts doctrinal teaching and offends their own moral sensibilities. Anyone incapable of separating the two and ruling consistent with the law when secular law and personal beliefs/wished are diametrically opposed has no right sitting on the bench. So far we've seen no evidence that Miers fits that description or that she is anything but a (potentially infatuated) crony to do Bush's bidding.

Tags: Politics; something being imposed on the public; The Bushevik Business Plan; King George; conservatism; supreme court; Harriet Meirs

Sphere: Related Content

You know you're in a fascist state when

When Pravda points out that the Bushevik era seems reminiscent of the days of blacklisting and then references the corruption & incompetence of your government you know you're in trouble

Such high frequency of scandals testifies to another outburst of anti-espionage activities in the USA. The first stage of the espionage-mania occurred in the 1950s, and became known in history as the period of "McCarthyism" when US special agents were jailing a lot of people for their reluctance to see Russian spies practically everywhere. The mastermind of the "anti-spying campaign," Congressman Joseph McCarthy, eventually turned out to be a corrupt, alcohol-addicted official.

[snip]

The CIA's and FBI's "success" in the struggle against spies can probably be interpreted as an attempt of the services to put a good face on things against the harsh criticism of unprofessional work in connection with the investigation of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. More and more reports about the background of the horrendous attacks surface in the USA, casting doubts on the official version of the tragedy.

(via Blondsense)

Tags: Politics; something being imposed on the public; The Bushevik Business Plan; turdblossom; Valerie Plame; The Bushevik Revolution; we're America, we own the world; BBA; conservatism; Downing Street Memorandum; robert novak; media; matt cooper;lewis libby; Iraq; Judy Miller

Sphere: Related Content

only tears left

The news this week-end has been pretty depressing. Flooding and mudslides may have killed thousands in Central America and Southern Mexico, more than 30,000 are feared dead from the earthquake in Pakistan and the gulf region has barely begun recovery efforts from hurricanes Katrina and Rita. A school teacher in Panabaj pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter

"There are no words for this. I have only tears left," said teacher Manuel Gonzalez, whose school was destroyed.

To make matters worse, after the outpouring of financial support for the gulf region and the pitiful handling of donations by FEMA and the Red Cross, those who don't suffer from donor fatigue may not trust relief organizations who still need funding to continue their work. If you can donate, I'm sure the many of the agencies I have listed in the Katrina section of my sidebar will be involved in international relief efforts, other agencies to consider donating to include:
World Manna, Mazon & Médecine Sans Frontières.

Sphere: Related Content

LIA/R blames QAC (again)

In the lawsuit filed by Love in Action claiming they don't need to be licensed because they are a faith-based ministry, they defend themselves by accusing QAC of a laundry list of complaints, among them publicizing Zach Stark's blog entries.

I had heard of Queer Action Coalition from the odd mainstream media newstory on gay issues (that's how I know about PFLAG and GLAAD too) but never had any reason contact the organization until this past June after I posted this. The people at Love in Action are human, and like all of us, susceptible to human failings that include anger, retribution and cruelty. I was concerned that the firestorm that had erupted over Zach Stark could lead to a degree of overzealousness in treatment to make an example of Zach or lead someone losing their temper and crossing the line in treatment of him - neither of these would be acceptable. Shortly after posting, I sent the following email to QAC

I’m glad you guys are doing everything you can on the behalf of gay kids subjected to the emotional abuse that is “Refuge”, and those of us in the blogosphere are behind you 100% as you can tell from the flurry of posts over the week-end. My only concern now (well, not my only one, but my biggest one) is that those wingnuts will actually manage to get even more overzealous in their treatment of Zach in an effort to make an example of him as payback for the [deserved] bad press they’re getting. If there’s anything you can do to ensure that doesn’t happen (including putting a bug in someone’s ear just to raise the specter they could do even more damage to him), please do so.

Keep up the good work

-Pamela

about an hour later I received the following response [emphasis mine]

Pamela,
Thank you for your email. We are feeling the same concern that you are
that actions will be taken against him to make his time spent in LIA
even worse than it has to be. We are attempting to defray any
unneccessary focus upon any one teen in the program; we are asking and have asked that bloggers not link directly to Zach's blog. We do understand, however, that it is much easier for the public to latch onto a story with an identity, so all of our attempts may not be successful. Thank you for sharing your concern, and rest assured that we are doing our best to make sure nothing bad comes to Zach because of our actions. In the meantime, if you see anything that you deem to be questionable or personal about Zach, feel free to email us with the website's address.
Thank you,
Carly
QAC

As a result I contacted about 15 bloggers with the following message (with Carly's email attached)

I'm writing to you (some of whom I know, some of whom I'm just starting to read) because we all share a common concern about human rights, tolerance and, most recently, a concern about a 16 year old Tennessee boy whose parents are more concerned about him being gay than about his actual emotional well-being. I'm sure we're all glad to see the blogosphere reacting to get Zach's story out and hope something good can come from publicizing the plight he shares with too many people in this country.

Unfortunately, as I read & watched the coverage, I was gripped by a sudden horror that the folks at LIA/Refuge (whatever bullshit inaccurate name they use to call themselves) could decide to make Zach an example. I posted as much earlier today and then shot an email to the folks at the Queer Action Coalition to express my concerns (with hopes they would tell me I was overly paranoid and instructions to take off the tin hat). Unfortunately, they too are concerned with the potential for retribution. We've already helped put his identity out there (with the best of intentions), but based on the following, maybe we can broaden our future discussion of the topic to address at risk teens and additional programs.

Thanks

Maybe an overreaction, maybe not. [Bear in mind you, the only reason I (and many other bloggers) know Zach's last name is because his father made his full name public knowledge in an appearance on CBN.]

I can also state that I am the one (though I don't know if anyone else did it) who contacted the insurance division about the possibility of insurance fraud based on statements I'd read by Tommy Corman (I linked to the one I had a written reference for) and other stories in which I'd heard that various groups (not limited to LIA/R) that offer some sort of "reparative therapy" had claimed to have successfully submitted for reimbursement from health insurance agencies (or encouraged family members to do so) usually submitting with the code for psych disorder NOS since homosexuality is not a medical or psychological disorder (which means it's not covered by insurance). Insurance fraud is bad enough when a licensed practitioner does it, but it's even worse when a non licensed agency does it and, knowing that insurance companies pass the cost on, it irked the shit outta me.

Look, if these people thing homosexuality is a sin that's their prerogative. Their churches can preach about the evils of homosexuality til the cows come home and, while I don't agree with them and don't like how it marginalizes non-adherents, I will support their right to practice their religion.

To devout fundamentalist Christian parents faced with a child who thinks (s)he is gay, Love in Action's Refuge program looks like a godsend for what they see as the fight for their child's very soul. The problem is, the description of the Refuge program doesn't fit a typical praise Jesus retreat or youth group program that's part of a faith based ministry, and they billed themselves as though they did (do) offer counseling coupled with ministry and spiritual guidance. LIA/R is mixing treatment with ministry in an unhealthy manner. The descriptions posted on Zach's blog makes it seem cult-like in its control of communication and access to information about the outside world.

I'm not trying to shut down churches and ministries, I'm not trying to prevent people from adhering to their moral beliefs or live in accordance to the doctrine of their religion. I support their right to reject homosexuality, choose not to socialize with homosexuals and boycott private organizations that don't operate in what they consider a manner acceptable to or consistent with Christianity. What I do not support is them trying to impose those views and actions on the rest of us or endangering the mental and physical welfare of a minor by offering services that exceed the boundaries of religion and encroach on a regulated field unless the meet the state and federally mandated requirements to do so.

Who raised the stink about LIA's programs is inconsequential. The state of Tennessee's department of mental health has deemed that Love in Action does, indeed, offer services that fall under their jurisdiction and the fact that they are a religious organization whose primary purpose is spiritual does not and should not allow them to operate outside the laws and guidelines that programs which offer similar regulated services adhere to.

Tags: gay; christian; evangelical; mental health; love in action; reparative therapy; insurance fraud

Sphere: Related Content

Scientology accused of encouraging immoral premarital sex

I know I shouldn't, but I found this story about the fetal TomKat amusing

At least one foreign newspaper has called into question the role of the Church of Scientology in the deflowering of Holmes.

England's The Sun reported that Holmes was encouraged by members of the church, often described as a cult, to start a family with Cruise before their nuptials in December. [The Australian]

Tags: Herr Professor Tom Cruise; Scientology; stupid shit

Sphere: Related Content

Tell me about it

John Howard has a must read commentary about Dubya's attempt to change the country's attitude about the war. (via Shakes)

The statement John addresses isn't the only telling tidbit G-d's little helper makes

In this new century, freedom is once again assaulted by enemies determined to roll back generations of democratic progress

Take this statement out of the context of the war in Iraq, and the Preznit could be describing what's going on here at home.

Tags: politics; King George; conservatism

Sphere: Related Content

Time for the Dems to give more consideration to Pennacchio

Bob Casey, Jr. is ahead of dark-ager Rick Santorum in the polls with a 52 - 34% lead according to the latest Qunnipiac poll.

Sen. Santorum has a split 43 - 41 percent job approval, his lowest ever and down from a 51 - 35 percent approval rating July 13. Pennsylvania voters split 41 - 42 percent on whether he deserves to be reelected. Santorum's politics are "about right," 40 percent say, while 29 percent say he is "too conservative," and 9 percent say he is "too liberal."

Casey has a huge lead everywhere but Pennsyltucky (probably that 9% that thinks he's too liberal).


If the 2006 election for Senator were being held today, and the candidates were Bob Casey Jr. the Democrat and Rick Santorum the Republican for whom would you vote?

                        Tot     Rep     Dem     Ind     Men     Wom



Casey                   52%     22%     81%     52%     50%     54%
Santorum                34      67       8      29      40      28
SMONE ELSE(VOL)          1       -       1       3       2       1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)         2       1       2       3       2       2
DK/NA                   11      10       8      14       6      15

                        Alghny  Philly  NE    SE      NW  SW    Cntrl



Casey                   56%     64%     51%   57%     50%  57%   41%
Santorum                28      20      33    31      39   33    44
SMONE ELSE(VOL)          1       3       -     1       1    2     1
WLDN'T VOTE(VOL)         6       -       1     1       2    2     1
DK/NA                    9      13      14    10       8    7    13

Tags: Rick "man on dog" Santorum; politics; Bob Casey, Jr.; republican; democrat; Chuck PENNacchio; Pennsylvania state politics

Sphere: Related Content

ID text: creationism wrapped in a new book cover

During her testimony in the Federal lawsuit about the Dover school board's decision to require ID references in biology classes teaching evolution, Philosophy Professor Barbara Forrest confirmed that ID is just creationism retitled as a stealth method of taking US science education back to the dark ages. Forrest, who was involved in the review of early drafts of the texbook that would become the ID centered science fiction Of Panda's and People, testified that the evolution of the text for the book originally titled Biology and Creation included replacing use of the term creationism with the words intelligent design in the final product.

She said her conclusion is that creationism and intelligent design "are interchangeable, that they are virtually synonymous."

[snip]

The book, published by the Texas-based Foundation for Thought and Ethics, was titled Biology and Creation in a 1986 draft. But its authors, Dean Kenyon and Perceval Davis, shifted to intelligent design after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 1987 banned the teaching of creationism in public schools, Forrest said. [Inky]

The ID folkies had filed a losing motion to prevent Forrest from testifying on the grounds that she is not a scientist but the judge presiding over the case allowed her testimony calling her a "unique hybrid" expert. Her involvement of reviewing the early drafts of the text book when an open attempt at infusing religion into public school education turned into a clandestine one allows her to provide a unique first hand report of the genesis of the ID movement.

Pam notes the Discovery Institute has found 85 scientists to sign a friend-of-court brief supporting the school district stating, in part, they agree that "protecting the freedom to pursue scientific evidence for intelligent design stimulates the advance of scientific knowledge." They seem to forget that nobody is fighting against scientific research to support the ID theory, the fight is against using public school science classes as a petri dish in which to foster a belief in the theory before proponents supply legitimate & testable scientific research with evidence supporting hypothesis. We didn't start teaching Linus Pauling's embarassing triple helix theory in 1953, we shouldn't teach ID now. To paraphrase Discovery Institute senior fellow David DeWolf: this should be resolved in the laboratory, not the [public school] classroom.

Tags:evolution; Intelligent Design; Religion; fundamentalism; christianity

Sphere: Related Content

Indiana condemnation pending

Well if Shakes' can be the bearer celebrity split news, I can be the bearer of celebrity child-bearing news:

Tom and Katie are expecting. The couple is *gasp* engaged but has not yet legally married, so it's a good thing they don't live in Indiana where the Republicans want to make marriage a requirement for motherhood. For the time being, criminal penalties in the draft bill only apply to those who try to get pregnant via ART; but then there are those pervasive & persistent rumors about Tommy & Katie did pledge to remain a virgin until marriage. . . Either way, the couple would do well to avoid Hoosierland.

Who wants to take bets that in about 10 months, Cruise will be splashed across the headlines with stories about how Scientology cured Holmes' of an "extreme case of post-natal depression" without any medical intervention?

Tags: Herr Professor Tom Cruise; Scientology; stupid shit

Sphere: Related Content

new era of juror selection not to be delayed

Based on this morning's Houston Chronicle, I'm guessing that in addition to asking about religious beliefs and other things jury experts like to know, potential jurors in a trial against Tom DeLay will be interrogated about their political party affiliation and voting record. After reporting DeLay attorney Dick DeGuerin's accusation that the indictments against DeLay are baseless and politically motivated, the paper obtained a list of grand jurors along with enough voting record information to note that 7 of the 12 grand jurors voted in Democratic primaries.

Earle has indicated that the initial grand jury only found he had enough evidence to indict on conspiracy charges, but not for the new indictment issued Monday. Earle seated a new grand jury, whose political affiliation make-up is most certain to be scrutinized, on Monday to review new evidence he obtained over the week-end. Earle's declined to provide any additional information at the moment, but one can speculate the source based on the froth coming from DeGuerin's mouth

DeGuerin criticized Earle at a Houston news conference, accusing him of offering "a sweet deal" to DeLay's co-defendants, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis, to get them to testify against his client.

Ellis' lawyer, J.D. Pauerstein, of San Antonio, said prosecutors made offers but they were inadequate.

"I didn't perceive anything they offered as acceptable, let alone sweet. They were talking in terms of wanting to put these poor guys in jail," Pauerstein said. [Houston Chronicle]

This is not the first time DeLay has been on the receiving end of ethics charges (heck it's not the second, or third or . . .) and it's far from the only current investigation in which the senator has been implicated. Between Abramoff's penchant for bragging (I wonder how well he sings) and the British authorities now involved and questioning Maggy Thatcher, only a megalomaniac would be conducting business as usual.

If Earle (and any other potential prosecutor) really has the goods on DeLay I fully expect his dream team to seat a bunch of poor, put-upon Republicans to ensure for jury nullification ala OJ.

Tags: politics; House Ethics Czar Tom DeLay; The Bushevik business plan

Sphere: Related Content

Harriet Miers: closer to Coulter than O'Connor

According to Joshua Frank, there's enough poop on Harriet Miers to clearly validate her credentials as a card carrying Bushevik. While Miers is touted as a trailblazer for her role at the helm of Dallas-based Locke, Liddell & Sapp, the firm represented Russell Erxleben for his foreign currency trading Ponzi scheme. Erxleben pleaded guilty to securities-fraud & federal conspiracy charges, his co-conspirators paid a $22 million settlement after being charged with aiding him in his scheme [emphasis mine]

When Houston attorney Janet Mortenson was named permanent receiver for
Russell Erxleben's failed Austin Forex International one year ago she
became privy to the work product from the lawyers who had advised the
former University of Texas star kicker.

Mortenson's lawyers, from Austin's Bickerstaff, Heath, Smiley, Pollan,
Kever & McDaniel, allege she found notes and memos indicating that
Erxleben's lawyers aided him in defrauding investors in his currency
trading company.

Now Mortenson and investors who lost at least $ 33 million have joined
in a suit against two prominent law firms, four individual lawyers, an
accounting giant and a California currency trading company.

"We think we can prove what happened basically through the writings of
the lawyers themselves," says Bickerstaff partner Michael Shaunessy.
"[Mortenson] has the unique advantage of having certain privileged
information that investors wouldn't have on their own."

The suit, filed Oct. 13 in Travis County, names Locke Liddell & Sapp and Sheinfeld, Maley & Kay, along with four lawyers who work or formerly worked for those firms. They are Locke Liddell partner Curtis Ashmos of Austin, former partners Daniel N. Matheson III and Jane Matheson, and Sheinfeld, Maley shareholder Lee Polson.

[snip]

In April 1997, AFI hired Locke Purnell Rain Harrell, today know as Locke
Liddell & Sapp. That month, the petition alleges, Dan Matheson wrote
after meeting Erxleben: "Funds not segregated but pooled w/ the funds of
others . . . & allocated on basis deemed to be fair and reasonable by
AFI, but solely at AFI's discretion."

That, the petition alleges, shows the lawyers knew or should have known that AFI was an issuer of securities. An October 1997 letter from Ashmosto Erxleben confirmed that registration was not necessary. The petition claims that the letter was used to assure investors that AFI was not selling securities.

That same month, according to the petition, Jane Matheson learned of
AFI's substantial losses as she was working on a life insurance trust
for Erxleben. "Jane Matheson was told that AFI had 100 investors who had invested $ 5 million with the company. She was told that of this amount $ 1 million was in negative positions," the suit alleges, referring to a memo in the exhibits.

Despite this knowledge, Locke Purnell lawyers signed off on a brochure that touted annual returns of 100 percent, the petition alleges. [Class Action Reporter]

Frank also notes that Meirs not only helped Bush dodge questions about his National Guard Service, she allegedly bought the silence of Benjamin Barnes - the man who had some scoop on how W avoided service in Viet Nam

At roughly the same time Miers was helping Bush dodge National Guard questions; Bush had named her chair of the Texas Lottery Commission, which had been scandal-plagued for years. The chief issue before Miers and the commission was whether to retain lottery operator Gtech, which had been implicated in a huge Texas bribery scandal.

According to the Philadelphia Daily News, Gtech's main lobbyist in Texas in the mid-1990s was none other than Benjamin Barnes, who just happened to have the low-down on how Bush got into the National Guard to avoid going over to Vietnam.

Gtech fired Barnes, in 1997. A short time after Barnes was fired, Gtech had its lottery contract renewed even though two companies had bid-lower than Gtech had.

On the side of social conservatism, it's noted that Meirs opposed repealing the Texas sodomy law that was ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2003 and "unequivocally opposed making abortion legal." As I said yesterday, the devil's in the details and Bush made it clear today that he knows those details

"I've known her for more than 10 years. know her character. She's a woman of principle and deep conviction."

Openly providing assurance that his nominee will use the court to outlaw abortion and break down the barriers between church & state could sink her nomination; the blank slate approach works in her favor.

Tag: supreme court; politics; GOP lifestyle choice; The Bushevik Revolution; contraception; abortion;reproductive rights; religion; christian; fundamentalism; conservatism

Sphere: Related Content

I, too, want to be excommunicated

The Catholic church has frequently been accused of showing a blatant disregard of women by relegating them to the role of brood mares and, due to a heinous child molestation scandal complete with organized cover-up, shown more concern about outward appearance and maintaining power than it does for children. The case of a young Nicaraguan girl combines the lack of respect for the rights of women and children that seems to be endemic to the church hierarchy.

As "Rosa" and 2 cousins walked to school in Costa Rica, 8-year old Rosa was attacked and raped by a neighbor. She became pregnant as a result of the rape and her parents decided to seek an abortion for the girl. Due to the pervasive control of the church in Latin American countries, Rosa's family had to fight with the governments of two countries before they were able, with the assistance of women's health activists, to obtain an abortion for the girl who was, by then, 9 years old and 4 months pregnant. The church noted anybody involved in the abortion, including Rosa's family, was automatically excommunicated from the church. When interviewed about the case, the Archbishop of Managua, Cardinal Obando Y Bravo, told the BBC he couldn't see why it would ever be unsafe for a 9-year old to continue a pregnancy and give birth [emphasis mine]

Well there is a case, something that happened in El Salvador if my memory serves me rightly, of a child aged 9 who gave birth without harming the child – meaning the mother – and without damage to the baby she'd conceived. So in this light, it's not the norm for a child of 9 years to give birth, but if this child had the misfortune to be raped by someone and then became pregnant, it's always possible, according to doctors who are experts in this field, to save both lives. [BBC]

According to Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo of the Pontifical Council for the Family, the Vatican supports this stance as consistent with official doctrine [emphasis mine]

I have followed these events personally. I am writing to the Cardinal personally to express to him in all sincerity my support because public opinion was quite confused with regard to that case. It did not spare a
thought to defending the rights of unborn babies who are people who have a right to live. The church wanted to help this young girl, who she'd have been helped up until the birth of her child. But it also came out and stated the truth. And the truth is that human life is inviolable. [BBC]

The Vatican makes it clear that it supports subjecting females to a high likelihood of enormous risk to health and life even in cases where the chances of a viable birth are low regardless of the mother's age or circumstances. Rosa's case illustrates that, unlike the zygote, embryo or fetus, a mother's life is far from sacrosanct in the eyes of the church.

The story sparked a furor in countries in which it was covered with more than 30,000 people emailing the Vatican with messages that said "I, too, want to be excommunicated". I doubt the church would have had the sheer audacity to interfere and make the public statements it did in Rosa's case had it occurred in the US. The publicity would have probably caused further polarization of American Catholics still reeling from sex scandals & disagreement over whether religion should play a role in limiting civil rights - things that ultimately may threaten the church financially, should American Catholics leave the church in droves.

Americans are still privileged in that secular law is (for the most part) separated from religious law. Unfortunately, the Vatican and fundamentalist Christians would like to see that change. Rosa's case, documented Philadelphia film-makers Barbara Attie and Janet Goldwater, is a prime example of why we should not ever allow religion to have such a strong position in our governance/legislation as it does in other religion dominated countries. Attie & Goldwater's documentary, Rosita, will have a free screening at Drexel University on Thursday.

Tags: health care; contraception; abortion; reproductive rights; religion; catholic; christian; fundamentalism; conservatism

Sphere: Related Content

L'shana tova: new indictment for money laundering against DeLay

MSNBC is reporting that Tom DeLay has been indicted on charges of money laundering. DeLay's attorney, Dick DeGuerin, filed a motion to dismiss the charges stating there was no such crime as conspiracy to circumvent Texas election law in 2002. On this evening's Abrams Report, DeGuerin accused Earle of quickly seating a new grand jury in order to return a new indictment in response to his motion.

Tags: politics; House Ethics Czar Tom DeLay; The Bushevik business plan

Sphere: Related Content

LIA/R fights TN

As expected, the folks at LIA/R, which received a deferral from the state of Tennessee to address their lack of licensure, has decided to fight the state claiming that as a faith-based ministry they don't need to be licensed as a mental health facility. It's reported that the organization's residential facilities (2 in the Memphis area) do house people with diagnosed and pharmacologically treated disorders and the staff controls access to/dispenses medications prescribed to residents. This qualifies the homes as a health care facility that requires licensing under Tennessee state regulations despite LIA/R's sudden turn from a facility that offered addiction counseling and "reparative therapy" into what is now touted as a faith-based ministry.

Among the more curious issues would be how/why a faith-based ministry limited to spiritual programs would encourage and assist families of "clients" to submit for reimbursement from their health insurance carrier if they were not touting themselves as providing counseling services. Additionally, some of the limitations of those in residence and/or enrolled in their gay conversion "spirtual" program seem odd for a strictly religious program outside of a cult setting:

• restricted communications with family & other associates
• home/lodging rules that do not allow for discussion of "therapeutic issues" outside the program
  
• proscription of continuing education while in the program (education is limited to those children that are home schooled and only with prior permission of staff; other children are pulled out of school)

Hopefully the state of Tennessee will continue to hold this residential program to the same standards and licensing requirements as appropriate. Allowing LIA/R to continue to operate as they choose because they are a religious organization would have wide-ranging negative implications that patients and general public can ill afford to risk.

Tags: gay; christian; evangelical; mental health; love in action; reparative therapy; insurance fraud; Tennessee

Sphere: Related Content

Missing Monday: parental abduction

4-year old Erik Buran represents a case of an insiduous form of child abuse: parental abduction. Erik's parents separated 6 weeks after his birth, subsequently divorced and fought a nasty custody battle. For a while they had joint custody but Erik's father, Robert Buran, gained full physical twice over a 2 year period due to Erik testing positive for illicit drug use (exposure via his mother's breast milk) and later due to concerns of (physical) child abuse by his mother's boyfriend Steven Allen Streight.


On April 21, 2005, Erik was abducted from his Reno, NV home by Streight and his non-custodial mother, Karen Ann O'Grady (she has also gone by the last names of Streight, Hallsted, O'Grady-Hallsted, Buran, Akers and Ligone).

The couple fled with Erik from their Fernley, NV home in a recently purchased 1979 "Jamboree" Class C motor home on a Dodge Truck chassis on April 25, 2005. Erik is registered with NCMEC and there is a website dedicated to finding Erik that has additional background and pictures.

Since last month, both Shaista Bano & Daniel Bruynell have been removed from the NJ state missing persons list (I assume this means they've been located). I've not been able to find any updates on Shenier Denton (the 15-year old honor student who disappeared from her Queens neighborhood in August, she is not registered with NCMEC so I'm working on the assumption that she, too, has been located).

Unfortunately, 27-year old Taneke Daniels and LaToya Byrd (see side bar) are still missing. Also missing is 15-year old endangered runaway Samantha Gail Garcia (see side bar) and 15-year old Whitney Stewart, who ran away from her Carlisle, PA home September 16th. Whitney is 5' 3", weighs approximately 145 pounds.


If you have any information on the missing children, please contact the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children at 1-800-THE-LOST (1-800-843-5678).

If you have any information about Taneke Daniels' disappearance or her whereabouts, please contact the Philly PD at 215-686-3013/3014 and refer to DC# 05-17-023905 and SDD# 05-4342.

MORE INFO

• For more about Missing Monday, please check out the background Pax has posted
• Links to today's MM posts by Philly Bloggers are at Philly Future
• Wiki @ Missing & Abducted

Tags: Missing Persons;Taneke Daniels; Latoya Byrd; Erik Buran; Whitney Stewart; Samantha Gail Garcia

Sphere: Related Content

His personal attorney

The devil's in the nomination of 59-year old Harriet Miers to the Supremes. Clever boy the Preznit, he learned that the lack of paper trail is the way to go and what better way to get a Stepford nominee through than to appoint someone with no judicial experience who just happened to be his personal attorney until her recent appointment as WH counsel.

Tag: supreme court

Sphere: Related Content

well somebody's pants are on fire

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Sphere: Related Content

To put it bluntly, Dreier may have been a safer choice for the GOP

I guess Tom DeLay, et al wanted to make sure that during the hammer's visit to the toolshed, business continued as usual in more ways than one. While DeLay faces ethics charges in Texas, a consultant hired on the payroll of successor Roy Blunt will be facing charges as one of DeLay's co-conspirators. Despite the long-term investigation and recent indictment, Blunt's PAC (Rely on Your Beliefs Fund) continues to employ Jim Ellis as consultant. Blunt's actions have raised eyebrows in the past: just hours after DeLay gave him the House Majority Whip position, Blunt tried to insert a provision benefiting Philip Morris (a company to which his ties are so close, he married the tobacco company lobbyist he dated during his election campaign) into the bill creating the Dept. of Homeland Security. It seems as though if the GOP were really interested in clearing its image of pervasive corruption, they'd have realized David Dreier may have a much tidier closet than the sorcerer's apprentice.

Tags: Tom DeLay; Roy Blunt; Ethics; Republicans; David Dreier; politics; GOP lifestyle choice

Sphere: Related Content

Waiting for the Soylent Green Medicare Plan

Bill Bennett's getting some serious slammage for his egregious misrepresentation of a postulation from the book Freakonomics in a response during his radio talk show on Wednesday. The defenses of Bennett's statements are weak. There are those who point out that Bennett did continue to say he thought the idea of aborting black babies to lower the crime rate would be ludicrous and "morally reprehensible" but they miss the point that Bennett unnecessarily & inaccurately turned a socio-economic theory into a racial one. Applying the same logic, Lindsay makes quite the formidable case to support of sterilizing Republicans. While she does not advocate doing so forcibly (it would, after all, be morally reprehensible & impractical) she does make it clear that decreasing the Republican sub-culture would be a quick fix to the white-collar crime problem in this country.

In response to the flap, the integrity-challenged Rush Limbaugh took his defense a bit further by lying to claim that Bennett was taken out of context and that Bennett should be applauded for his statement (Limbaugh also seriously and irresponsibly misrepresents the director of an Arkansas Clinic by claiming he is encouraging women displaced by Hurricane Katrina to terminate pregnancies by providing abortion services free of charge).

Bennett himself made matters worse by directing people to the events surrounding hurricane Katrina as some sort of sound rationale for his statement and referencing the satire of Jonathan Swift.

The important point is that during the broadcast, Bennett twisted the non race-based Freakonomics theory that the more children raised in poverty by single mothers a society has, the higher the crime rate into one in which it is the size black population, regardless of socioeconomic status or stability in upbringing, that is a significant causal factor in the rate of crime. His comments were not, as Bennett claims, mischaracterized to make it appear as though he was supporting abortion to reduce crime rate; his comments are accurately characterized as ignorant, racist and misrepresentative of the theory he cited. Considering Bennett's company, K12 Inc., makes a substantial amount of money from urban school districts which frequently have sizable black populations, a comment indicating a belief that race is a primary factor in the determination of furture criminal behavior may cost him: parents and education activists are already demanding that Philadephia school district terminate its contract with Bennett's company.

Tags:education;Patron Saint of Virtue, Gambling & Racist Remarks; crime; racism; politics

Sphere: Related Content