Let's Bring Back the USSR!

It seems the Right Wingnuts really need a boogey man and when they lost the USSR as the US version of the "Great Satan", they set about finding a new one. In their desperation, they chose Muslims and the Islamic religion. It doesn't matter that the vast majority of Muslims are peace loving types who simply want to work hard, put food on the table and live a blessed life. That makes no difference to the Culture of Hate that needs something, anything to feed on.

Cal Thomas recently wrote "

From the rapid construction of mosques and Islamic schools across the country -- many of which are financed by Saudi Arabia -- to the use of front organizations as conduits to channel money to terrorist groups abroad, a "fifth column" has been opened in the United States.
For those unfamiliar with the term "fifth column," it usually refers to a group of people who are assumed to have loyalties to countries other than their own, or who support some other nation in war efforts against the country they live in.

So, now those who practice Islam are "fifth columnists" (Cal had to define the term to his readers. I guess it's not enough that they know how to read?)

So, to Cal Thomas, every Muslin is a potential traitor to the US! Why does this remind me of WWII and the movement to place Japanese living in the US in "internment camps"? The assumption then was that because they were of Japanese ancestry, they must be in league with the Japanese government. Likewise, just because some Muslim extremists are acting out politically, they must all be terrorists. Gosh, this means that all Christians are religious fundamentalists intent on overthrowing the US government for their version of Old Testament "sharia"!

I wish we had the USSR back again. At least the wingnuts had an enemy that was identifiable and quantifiable. I don't like their recent choices at all!

-devon

U.S. quietly declares war on Iran.

This will be short and to the point. I have no love for Joe Lieberman. He is was a DINO when he claimed to be a democrat, now he's a IINO. The man, like a 3 year old trying to reach a candy bar, has been BEGGING for us to make war on Iran.
Well, he's snuck in the amendment in recent legislation, which now has authorized us to take "Armed intervention to the regime of Iran, using tools of the military."

You know why he's doing this patheticness. Because he KNOWS he's not getting re-elected. Still, the damage has been done.
It's off to war we go! Again! Can I kill myself yet?

-Matt

Bushism of the Month: "Childrens do learn"

Childrens do learn, but Bush do not. From Reuters:

"Childrens do learn," Bush tells school kids

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Offering a grammar lesson guaranteed to make any English teacher cringe, President George W. Bush told a group of New York school kids on Wednesday: "Childrens do learn."

Bush made his latest grammatical slip-up at a made-for-TV event where he urged Congress to reauthorize the No Child Left Behind Act, the centerpiece of his education policy, as he touted a new national report card on improved test scores.

The event drew New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Education Secretary Margaret Spellings plus teachers and about 20 fourth and fifth graders from P.S. 76.

During his first presidential campaign, Bush -- who promised to be the "education president" -- once asked: "Is our children learning?"

On Wednesday, Bush seemed to answer his own question with the same kind of grammatical twist.

"As yesterday's positive report card shows, childrens do learn when standards are high and results are measured," he said.

The White House opted to clean up Bush's diction in the official transcript.

Bush is no stranger to verbal gaffes. He often acknowledges he was no more than an average student in school and jokes about his habit of mangling the English language.

Just a day earlier, the White House inadvertently showed how it tries to prevent Bush from making even more slips of the tongue than he already does.

As Bush addressed the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, a marked-up draft of his speech briefly popped up on the U.N. Web site, complete with a phonetic pronunciation guide to get him past troublesome names of countries and world leaders.""

-Matt

Sen Ted Stevens (R-AK) caught in FBI sting

The Republican Senator from Alaska, Ted Stevens has been caught in FBI sting. No further details at the moment.

-Matt

Iran Assault Plans

I think the words "Here we go again" are most appropriate.

The question I have to ask is, what are we gonna do to STOP it this time?
When will protests not be enough for us to stop the crimes of this Bush regime?

I don't have the answer, but it's worth asking....

-MAtt

Ron Paul Make Sense?

I came across this...

http://www.care2.com/news/member/544256115/461413

It's a great message! I was all set to say "I made a mistake" when I called him a "crackpot" but then the fantasy wore off and common sense came into play.

See. Ron speaks a great line... "Let's make it all real simple..." (like it was in 1850). There was no "big gobment". There were no foreign wars. There were few constitutional questions. There was a gold standard and we only printed as much money as we had in gold. There was no federal income tax and no IRS. There was no "welfare" (even to corporations)! The states generally did what they wanted and the federal government just stood around looking pissed.

Here's the problem, Ron. This is 2007 and slavery is no longer legal. The globe is so small that an astronaut circled it in a matter of minute. Commerce is world-wide and global now. We chat via the internet with people who don't even live in the same hemisphere with us! The Civil War decided that it was not a question of "State's Rights" anymore. We have been the United States of America --- a Federal Republic --- for over 150 years! There are Constitutional issues that are still being debated as times move forward (aka "Progress") and there will always be issues that must be decided by the Supreme Court. It's hardly time to shut it down.

Ron would like us to remain stuck in the past but, trust me, the past ain't all it's cracked up to be! I'm just over a half century old and even I recall separate drinking fountains, bathrooms, and waiting rooms for white and "colored". I recall white sheriffs who ruled entire counties like fifedoms. I recall state governors who barred the door of black students trying to attend schools and state govenments blocking free elections (worse than Florida and Ohio!). I recall the Federal Government having to post National Guardsmen to protect the rights of citizens against state despotism. I recall people being denied jobs and education because of race and sex!

Sure, I'd like to go back to some point in the past. I'd be younger, healthier and a lot smarter. Perhaps I'd meet Ron Paul and convince him that America is not such a bad place that we have to put out the chonological anchor to some other century.

He's well meaning. He's a doctor and surely would like to cure all our ills. But putting our head in the proverbial sand won't accomplish much. After all, Ron, like many other Repugnicans is running on the platform that we should get rid of the Federal Government. I question the sense of electing someone to lead the Federal Republic who wants to destroy the Federal Republic!

So, as much as Ron almost seems sensible, he's hardly that. He's contrarian and anachronistic. As President, he'd be almost as bad as Bush! Naive and demented! I guess I was right then after all in my initial assessment. He's a "crackpot".

Repugicans Find a Way Out for 2008!

From MSNBC.com and Associated Press:

ORLANDO, Fla. - A Republican political consultant and two other men were found dead in a home in an apparent double-murder and suicide, authorities and relatives said.
Authorities have not determined a motive for the deaths of Ralph Gonzalez, 39, his roommate, David Abrami, 36, and a friend, Robert Drake, 30.

-------
Maybe more Repugnican "consultants" will take this way out to avoid the 2008 debacle!?

Perhaps a "lover's triangle"? It's imaginable. After all, the most notorious "closet queens" in history are Repugnicans!

Next it'll be Rudy and Mitt having a tiff and bitch slapping each other to death?

-Devon

Fox "News" and Giuliani

Remember the good ole days when the news programs had integrity? Remember when they would carefully step over the tricky issues of personal preference when it came to candidates? When there was a "fairness doctrine" that forced them to carefully walk a tightrope when it came to giving one candidate more exposure over another? Well, the Repugicans did away with most of that and the result is that we're blessed with their idea of "fair trade" versus "fairness".

For example, Fox "news", in a study by MediaMatters.com has given Giuliani more airtime than any other candidate, Repug or Democrat. And when you look behind the curtain, here's a interesting tidbit from MSNBC.com that might explain it...

“Roger [Alies] explained that every time a candidate is given a microphone, he’s getting $100,000 worth of publicity,” Mr. Giuliani wrote in his book. After he became mayor, Mr. Giuliani spoke at a reception in 1994 when Mr. Ailes was introduced as the new president of the new CNBC business news network. The mayor listed for the crowd gathered in the Rainbow Room Mr. Ailes’s many accomplishments as a producer of television comedy specials and documentaries, including the Emmy Award-winning “Television and the Presidency.”
“I am personally gratified to see that Roger has reached a new pinnacle in a remarkable career, because Roger has played an important role in my own career,” Mr. Giuliani said, according to a draft of his speech.

----

Should Roger and Fox "news" account for a political donation of $100,000 for each appearance by Rudy on their "network"? It would seem that they've already placed that value on the act. They should have to "own up" to you, dontcha think?

But alas, the Justice Department and Election Commission are under the political control of the Bush Regime and they are too busy prosecuting Liberal churches for political organizing and Democrat candidates for election law violations to look at real crimes! It's a shame and, yet another fact, that history will record in this decade of shameless, political plundering masterminded by Rove and Cheney and recorded as the "Bush Presidency".

If Congress is in session, our rights are in danger!

This weekend as we all slept in and relaxed, our Congress was "hard at work" undermining our Constitutional Rights and Civil Liberties.

------- From DailyKOS.com

The 227 to 183 House vote capped a high-pressure campaign by the White House to change the nation's wiretap law, in which the administration capitalized on Democrats' fears of being branded as weak on terrorism and on a general congressional desire to proceed with an August recess. ...

Privacy and civil liberties advocates, and many Democratic lawmakers, complained that the Bush administration's revisions to the law could breach constitutional protections against government intrusion. But the administration, aided by Republican congressional leaders, suggested that a failure to approve what intelligence officials sought could expose the country to a greater risk of terrorist attack. ...

"There are a lot of people who felt we had to pass something," said one angry Democratic lawmaker who requested anonymity, citing the sensitivity of caucus discussions. "It was tantamount to being railroaded."

In a sole substantial concession to Democrats, the administration agreed to a provision allowing the legislation to be reconsidered in six months. ...

Tonight, several Democrats said the bill would "eviscerate" the Fourth Amendment. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) said that lawmakers were being "stampeded by fearmongering and deception" into voting for the bill. Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) warned the bill would lead to "potential unprecedented abuse of innocent Americans' privacy."

------

Tragically, even when the Demcratic Party is in control, they can be bullied and railroaded into doing something they know is NOT in the best interests of the American People. THAT'S how dangerous this White House Regime can be! Perhaps we need a law that prohibits Congress from voting on the weekends when we're not paying attention. Or perhaps we need a law that the American people have to pay attention? Or perhaps we need a party with the courage to say, "NO!" to the White House!

- Devon

Impeachment for Incompetence?

It's become apparent to even the most dull-witted citizen that incompetence seems to prevail in the government. The Attorney General is clearly way in over his head. His latest attempts to lie or claim ignorance before the House and Senate investigating committees is shamefull and embarrassing. The Secretary of State was hardly competent as the National Security Advisor and "overlooked" the warning about BinLaden's plans to attack the US. Then she was "promoted" to another level and is in over her head once again. The only thing that's saved her is that she's not done much to bring dishonor to her office, like the Attorney General. The Vice President has pressed his political agenda into areas of the government where he shouldn't and the result a general breakdown in the credibility of governmental review and reporting. Likewise Carl Rove's hand has been found in governmental and legislative "cookie jars" where no adviser to the President has gone before. Even the President has left his fingerprints on various disasters such as the infamous occupation of Iraq and the generally terrible reputation of the US in international affairs and the continued fall of the once mighty US dollar as the "gold standard" of internation currency to second behind that of the Canadian Dollar!

The question is: Does incompetence stand as reason enough to Impeach? Do we have to find their incompetence was also linked to illegal acts? In the case of the AG, it sure looks like he intentionally ignored the Civil Service Laws even against the best advice of those few underlings who warned him against that. That should be enough to impeach but the dilemna is that the AG is so incompetent that the question becomes blurred. Was he too incompetent to know he was doing something wrong? Or, did he do something wrong because he was incompetent? Or, did he do something illegal and is now hiding behind the defence of "ignorance" and "poor recall"?

Is ignorance an excuse? If you or I were hauled in front of a judge and asked about something we did that was illegal, could we simply respond with, "I don't recall" or "That's a matter of priviledge"? I don't think so. After a few of those responses, we'd be hauled off to jail, I'm sure. But for Presidential Advisors, members of the Cabinet, and members of the Justice Department, these excuses seem to be the perfect defense.

As much as I'd like the President to have "Executive Priviledge", it simply is a courtesy granted by the Congress, a "priviledge", because there is no Constitutional basis for it. It was given to George Washington and others because Congress wanted to give the President some room within his office to side-step their questions. However, since Richard Nixon, "Executive Priviledge" has become a "Get out of Jail Free" card to be played as much as often as the President and his staff deemed necessary. In this administration it's been expanded to include private citizens called to testify under subpeona by Congress, a step beyond any previously taken.

So, must we wait until the evidence falls on us like a Minneapolis highway bridge before we impeach the President, Vice President, Attorney General, Secretary of State, etc., etc.? Or can we dispense with the formalities and impeach for imcompetence? Because, if these people can't seem to provide concrete, believeable answers to even the most simple questions, they should be impeached. And if they use Executive Privledge, to evade answering the simplest questions, they should be impeached. If they are impeached perhaps then their memories will sharpen and we'll get the answers to our questions. It seems to be the only way we'll get answers.

IMPEACH!

Free Religion!

From Slate.com and an article about Why Germany hates Secientology... http://www.slate.com/id/2171218/nav/ais/ <--- click to read

"Some German officials believe Scientology's ideology is rooted in a kind of political extremism—a bit of a sensitive area for Germany since World War II. They also argue that Scientology is not a religion but a business, since local churches operate like franchises of the main organization. "

------

My two cents...

I truely believe all religions should have the right to practice their belief, even Scientology. After all, who is to say they aren't totally correct and we're all wrong? But arguing that Scientology is a "business" and not a "religion" totally misses the mark for excuses not to call it a "religion"!

Come on, crowd! Look at any religion and, in spite of all the ritual and faith and belief structure, they are ALL businesses! The Baptists send money to the HQ like any other franchise and, although they claim the individual churches are "independent", if they screw up enough, they are ostracized by the leadship of the HQ. Same with Methodists, Lutherans, Episcopal, etc.

But, of course, it's the Catholic Church that is a best example of a franchising operation. All decisions come down from Headquarters (the Pope and the Vatican) and that includes every nook and cranny of the Catholics' world. Even the professors at Catholic Universities are under the HQ's thumb. Teach or write outside the dictates of the Central Office and boom... no job.

So, if you're going to pick on Scientology for being a business, you must go after ALL the other religions. They are ALL businesses and at their core, their interest is money, money and more money, like like McDonalds, KFC, Pizza Hut, etc.!

Saudi Problems!

From the NY Times... http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/27/world/middleeast/27saudi.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin

Basically, the stuff is hitting the fan with George the Witless' robed buddies. Someone's figuring out that his former playmates are really just terrorists of another ilk. Rather than fight us directly and risk losing the revenue from their oil, they support the Islamic extremists and play both end against the middle so they don't offend anyone!

George is caught in the middle because he's handholding buddies with the Saudi prince Bandar and because his Daddy and other family members are in business (deeply) with the Saudi's and King Abdullah. So, he has to tread lightly when it comes to representing US interests to these former goat herders.

But now and then some truth comes to light and... well, this is one of those moments.

The solution? Get as far away from middle east oil as we can through alternative fuels (make that our National Priority!) and get out of the middle east and let them kill each other if they must.

-Devon

The New White House Cat!

From Charlotte.com, an intriguing article about a cat who can sense the next to die in a nursing home. (Click here to read it). It seems the cat curls up with the patient and within a couple hours, they pass away.

------

I think this cat needs to visit the next Presidential Cabinet meeting. I suspect it'll head right for Attorney General Gonzales!

-Devon

Cornyn's Day's are Numbered!

An atricle from Rio Grande Guardian...
(click here to read it) carries news of the entry of two Democrats into the race to take the Senate seat of John Cornyn, R-Texas, in the 2008 election.

One of the candidates is State Rep. Rick Noriega from Houston. Noriega is a five-term member of the Texas House. A lieutenant colonel in the National Guard, he served one year in combat in Afghanistan. His connections to Laredo and the Valley are strong thanks to his service in the National Guard. In Laredo, he was sector commander for Operation Jump Start for five months. He has been in the operational cell for three Operation Lone Star projects. And, he has worked closely over the years with the 3rd Battalion, 141st Infantry at Weslaco.

-------

and, of course, my two cents...

If this is the sort of candidate we're going to field in 2008, then it sure looks like Texas is turning BLUE as the people realize their current representation has been nothing more bagman and bagwoman for the Bush Regime.

As Noriega put it, his intention was to “speak truth to power” over the coming months on behalf of millions of Texans who have not had proper representation in the U.S. Senate for the past six years. “This senator (Cornyn) decided early on to represent one Texan – the President of the United States. He has carried George Bush’s brief case. He has not represented the 22 million people that live in the state of Texas,” Noriega said.

I can't wait until Texans can scream, "FREE at LAST! Free at Last!"

-Devon

Worse than Nixon?

from MSNBC.com

WASHINGTON - President Bush is a competitive guy. But this is one contest he would rather lose. With 18 months left in office, he is in the running for most unpopular president in the history of modern polling.

The latest Washington Post-ABC News survey shows that 65 percent of Americans disapprove of Bush's job performance, matching his all-time low. In polls conducted by The Post or Gallup going back to 1938, only once has a president exceeded that level of public animosity -- and that was Richard M. Nixon, who hit 66 percent four days before he resigned.

--------

My two cents? Jesus! What can I say that this doesn't already say?

-Devon

The Perfect Analogy

from MSNBC.com article regarding US troops picking up garbage in Baghdad...

The rotting waste presented enormous dangers not just for Iraqi trash collectors and for local residents exposed to the risk of disease, but for U.S. troops. Corbin said many of his unit’s civil affairs missions in Baghdad were connected in some way to the city’s garbage problem.
“If we didn’t pick up the garbage, then al-Qaida would put explosives in the garbage to kill us,” he said. “And if the streets are full of trash, the Iraqi people are going to be upset and blame us. … Everything is linked.”

I think that's the perfect analogy to the situation our Troops are in. It's a shame. If they don't do what the Iraqi's should be doing, they either get complaints or blown up! It's a total no-win situation and that's why we have to pull back to the fringes and let the Iraqi's do what needs to be done within their own country.

We shouldn't be risking our troops lives to pick up someone else's garbage. George, if you think it's necessary for us to be there, hire Halliburton to do it with your own money. The Republican National Committee should be able to loan you some money!

-Devon

Congress needs to grow some "Big Ones"

There's a excellent article at Slate.com about "Executive Priviledge" and how Congress should respond to the White House in this matter. Click here to read it.

The author offers a idea involving the formation of yet another layer of technology to combat the abuse of executive power but that's adding another layer to the problem rather than peeling away a layer to solve the current problem. As a technician, I'm always wary of "adding another layer" because it tends to complicate matters more often than solve them.

The solution to the abuse of Executive Priviledge is for Congress to grow some "Big Ones" and assert it's oversight authority. After all Congress has the powers granted to it by the Constitution which include oversight and, yes, the I-word, Impeachment. Congress has the authority and responsibility for oversight. For five years, they dropped the ball and let it bounce around while the White House cast a blind eye to its actions which included getting the US involved in the Iraqi Civil War and Occupation. Subsequent to the 2006 elections, the hearings have begun but many are too late to hope for any good to come of their efforts. Meanwhile, the core of the problem lies within the offices of the Vice President, the Senior Adviser, Karl Rove and the Justice Department's head, Alberto Gonzales. And the biggest problem has been the reluctantance of Congress to move forward with some action of disapproval. There are many possible actions but it's time to consider the big one: Impeachment!

Ever since the Clinton Impeachment, I believe the Democrats, especially, have been uncomfortable bring this up because they don't want to look like they are abusing it as the Republicans did against Clinton. They see it as a very serious alternative and wish to reserve it for the most appropriate moment. However, there is a tool available to Congress that could come before Impeachment and will trump the flaccid argument of Executive Privledge. It is called Inherent Comtempt. Congress can compell the testimony of anyone it wants and hold court within its chambers to prosecute anyone it wants, including those mentioned above, to force them to testify of be jailed for comptempt... impeachment to follow, I am sure. It's currently considering Contempt charges against Harriet Myers for not complying with the subpoena to appear. But this is BB-shot compared to what it really MUST do.

If there is any basis for Impeachment in the US Constitution, the actions of the Bush Regime have certainly warranted such action. They've been bold in their resistance to the requirements to report to Congress when requested and lied when they did. They have subverted law and law and skated on the edge of laws, flauting their spirit, if not their letter. Nothing in US history can compare to their absolute disrespect for the Congress, Laws, Traditions, Sanctity, and People of the United States as this adminstration! Nothing! If Congress does not move to Impeachment against Bush, Cheney and Gonzales then they should just "whiteout" the references to it in the Constitution and wait until January 2009 for the nightmare to be over.

Republicans are not happy...

The latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that nearly a quarter of Republicans are unwilling to back top-tier hopefuls Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, John McCain or Mitt Romney, and no one candidate has emerged as the clear front-runner among Christian evangelicals. Such dissatisfaction underscores the volatility of the 2008 GOP nomination fight.

I said the other day that Republicans are not happy with the field of candidates running for their party's nomination and now the AP Poll seems to bear that out. I'm not suprised. Look at the field. The choices are nut-cake Christian fundamentalists and morally bankrupt has-beens who have little more claim to fame than they were alive on September 11, 2001! There's even a nut-case from Surfside Texas (population about 25 rundown trailers and more oil storage tanks than street signs who thinks the federal government shouldn't have no more authority than a PTA --- like the Civil War never happened!

Anyway... with the slew of losers funded by so many counter-democracy self-interests, what would you expect. The Republican party has a hole in it and it's leaking interest and support. Good!

-Devon

Oops.... wrong Al-Qaida!

from MSNBC.com

President Bush acknowledged that al-Qaida is strong today, but he said it's not nearly as strong as it was prior to Sept. 11, 2001 because the United States has kept the pressure on — worked to "defeat them where we find them" — so they won't attack America.

"Al-Qaida would have been a heck of a lot stronger today had we not stayed on the offensive," Bush said in the Oval Office after meeting with U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. "And it's in the interest of the United States to not only defeat them overseas so we don't have to face them here, but also to spread an ideology that will defeat their ideology every time — and that's the ideology based upon liberty."

-------
George "I wonder how you get so confused" Bush,

Lemme sit you down once again and explain things in the simplest way so maybe you can understand geopolitics, terrorism, and Al-Qaida. See... there's a several Al-Qaida groups. On 9/11/01, the Al-Aqaida group led by a Saudi Arabian named Osama bin Laden in Afganistan attacked the WTC because of US presence on Saudi Arabian soil. You went after the Taliban for hiding and aiding him, remember. Then you abrubtly dropped the hunt for Osama and invaded Iraq to get at Sadam who had nothing to do with international terrorism or Al-Aqaida. Because of the US occupation of Iraq, a group calling itself Al-Aqaida in Iraq was formed and they are now causing trouble there to protest our presence.

So, it's not so much a matter of you "finding" Al-Qaida. They seem to find us and we can't seem to find them in spite of our best efforts. The form because we are occupying Arab land. They are proof of the proverb, "The enemy of my brother is my enemy, too."

Will "they" attack America? Not the Al-Aqaida in Iraq! They are mostly concerned with US occupation of their country and lack the resources to go outside Iraq. However, the original Al-Aqaida led by Osama? Yes, they will probably attack again. Why? Because we are still occupying Arab soil AND, more imporantly, they've had several years to regroup and reorganize because you haven't been persuing them! While we've been spending 12 Billion dolllars per month in Iraq and all our available military power there, Osama's been regaining strengh and planning.

So, don't fool yourself, George. While you've been lining your defense contractors' pockets, the enemy's been building their offense and sooner or later, they'll unleash it and we won't be ready, thousands will perish, and it'll be just like 9/11/01 again. Who's to blame? You, George and no one else.

Also, W, you have a very twisted sense of "Liberty". But, I'll get into that another time. Your poor lil brain can only take so much as at one time.

-Devon

Scarboro and the Crazy Christian Right!

From RightwingWatch.com...

Recently we noted the blatant double standard exhibited by religious-right groups in the case of Albemarle County, Virginia schools’ “backpack mail” program: Last year, Liberty Counsel told the school that if it distributed secular materials by giving them to students to take home, it had to allow religious materials as well. The school complied. But when a summer camp for “atheists, freethinkers, [and] humanists” used the “backpack mail” program, Rick Scarborough’s Vision America pounced, directing its supporters to flood the school superintendent’s e-mail account and eventually causing the school to drop “backpack mail” altogether.

Scarborough declared a “major victory” for Vision America, but lamented that the victory was only partial: He would prefer that the school reject material from atheists while continuing to distribute material from Christian programs. Scarborough explained:

"People for the American Way says we’re hypocrites who want to establish a different standard for Christians and atheists.

Hypocrites, no. Different standards? Yes. Again, the court said the district didn’t have unbridled discretion, not that it shouldn’t exercise any discretion.

Why should a fringe minority have the same status as Christians? This country was not established by secular humanists. The Declaration of Independence appeals to the "Creator" and the "Supreme Judge of the World" -- not to Buddha or Mohammad or Madalyn Murray O’Hair.

Christians constitute 90% of the American people. The people whose taxes pay for the Albemarle County School System are overwhelmingly Christian."

------
My two cents...

So Joey feels that he's justfied in silencing any minority because... well, they're a minority. I believe that's called Mob Rule. And because they are a "fringe minority" (whatever that means) they don't have the same rights as the "fringe majority"? I could go on and on and on but simply, Joe fell off the end of the diving board on this one and did a tragic belly flop.

And just the other day, I will feeling sorry for him. He lost his show on MSNBC (but they still have that idiot Tucker Carlson) and I was feeling like perhaps that wasn't fair. "I mean, he was not as bad as Tucker", I thought. But after reading this drivel, I confess I was totally wrong. Joe Scarboro is WAY out of the loop. Anyone who can hold these beliefs is unfit for public consumption. He is logically brain-dead. None of this makes a bit of sense and is counter to everything on which America was founded. There's a right to free speech but when you are just plain stupid and fundamentally flawed in your logic, you lose that right. To justify overriding the rights of a minority because you are in the majority? That's WRONG, Joey! That's ABUSE of your rights. You abuse them, you lose them!

One Texas Liberal In Japan.

Not really politics, but I should note that I am in Japan until August 9th. I will be staying in Houya, Nishitokyo, Tokyo. And it's all Monsoony!

I'll probably be severely out of the loop. I checked in CNN earlier, to see that Bush just got bitch-slapped by the report, and again by Iraq's PM. Who knows! The war could be over by the time I get home! One can only hope.

Anyway, folks, I'll post here again soon someday.

Ja! Mata!

Matthew (currently lost in translation)

I shouldn't have to say this...

George.... yeah, you, with that "caught in the headlights" look on your face. Let me sit you down for yet another chat about politics in the good ole US of A.

See, way back in the olden days, a group of citizens got together and overthrew the despot king of England (curiously also named George) and created the USA. The had a document called the Constitution and it started with the words, "We, the People...". It didn't start with, "I, the President..." or with "We, the Congress" or with "Us, the Corporations...." and there is a very good reason for that. See, the power of the govenment (which includes all THREE branches [and the Cheney Branch, no matter how he sees himself in the scheme of things]) is "derived" from the People. In simple terms, that means you get your authority from the People and not from any other entity such as Congress or Corporations. Without the consent of the People, you have no power.

Now, you spent the previous 4 and a half years of your time as President just doing as you pleased because no one told you that you couldn't. But, in 2006, the People elected a Congress that is now telling you, "no". I know that comes as a shock but just because Congress didn't say it for four and a half years, doesn't mean it was okay. It wasn't okay and you should have known that. It's like just because there's no cop at an intersection, doesn't mean you can run the Stop sign, does it?

The Congress is made up of ladies and gentlemen elected to represent the People. So, like you, they "derive" their power from.... yeah, you're getting the idea... The People. Yesterday, House of Representatives voted yet again to tell you to start packing your toys and get out of Iraq. Your response? Well, it wasn't very good. You pouted and held your breath then said, "Congress shouldn't be directing the war effort". But see, you've had five years to clean up your room, so to speak, and you haven't done it in spite of repeated requests from many, many People. So, now the time has come for Congress to start laying down some rules.

I know it's hard for you to operate under rules. You didn't have any for so long. Daddy George and Momma Barb were rarely the "enforcer" types when you were growing up. You pretty much did as you pleased. But, now, you are President of the United States and that's a tough job (you've said it a thousand times!) and the PEOPLE are your boss. You're not the boss. You're not the Decider. You're not the Commander. The PEOPLE are all those things and since your cabinet and advisors aren't keeping you informed of what the People want, the People sent Congress a message to give to you.

Now, I shouldn't have to tell you this but, you screwed up and continue to screw up in Iraq and you have to get out. (Read my blog from yesterday for specifics of what to do). I also shouldn't have to tell you to listen to Congress but I am and you need to do as they say beause those are the PEOPLE talkng to you through their elected officials. Remember, it's "We, the people..."! Okay? good boy. Here's a penny for some candy. Now go and play well with the others. Ignore that Bully Dick Cheney. He'll only get you into more trouble.

Aside: You know it's a shame that the President of the United States is such a poor student of history and politics that he doesn't understand the first thing about his job. I really have to blame the voters for that.... Yes, you, because you bought a "pig in a poke". You bought the sizzle but got no steak. He "looked Presidential" and "acted Presdential" you said. Look, anyone can swagger and wave but you should have questioned his credentials, his educations and his experience. In this next election, dig below the surface, and let's find the right man... or woman... for the job based on their experience and character, okay? I shouldn't have to say that either!


-Devon

On the Eastern Front...

In response to W's speech today re: the latest, bleak Iraq Occupation Report...

Harry Reid, D-Nev., responded. “It is time for the president to listen to the American people and do what is necessary to protect this nation. That means admitting his Iraq policy has failed, working with the Democrats and Republicans in Congress on crafting a new way forward in Iraq, and refocusing our collective efforts on defeating al Qaida,” he said in a statement.

--------

My two cents...

George, it's time to get the heck out of Iraq and return to the first objective: Getting Al Qaida. Remember them? They were the fellows that attacked the World Trade Center in 2001. Does that ring a bell? 9/11?

Some historical input: If you hadn't slept through your high school and college years, hung over from too much booze and coke, you might have heard about WWII. I know... it's a long story so I'll cut to the chase. See, Hitler thought he could fight a war on two fronts, the Eastern front against the Soviets and the Western front against Europe and the US. (Even the Japanese knew enough not to do that and they avoided a confrontation against the Soviets for just that reason.) Well, Aldolph discovered that fighting on two fronts was a bad idea because in war people don't play by a set of rules and it strains the economic and military resources to try to fight multiple enemies at the same time.

Iraq was a minor enemy and lacked the ability to attack the US. Now, because of your occupation, there's a Civil War, and an Insurgency, and it's a hot bed of terrorism. Where we had one impotent dictator firing a rifle from a balcony, we now have Sunnis killing Shiites (and vice-wersa), we have Turkey invading Kurdish terrority, we have several powerful insurgent forces doing battle with the government and we have a more powerful terrorist network than ever existed in Afganistan. All the while, those arms and bombs that you should have protected first, rather than the oil fields, are being converted to IED's and used to kill US troops and innocent civilians. Plainly, it's a mess George, and you created it all by yourself.

George, you got yourself into a war on several fronts... even more Hitler... if you consider the domestic and political wars in the US, too. You haven't succeeded and it's been over 1500 days since you declared "Mission Accomplished" when, in fact, nothing's been "accomplished" except getting your feet stuck in the Iraqi mud. You need to decide which front you're going to fight on and pull out of the others. I suggest you pull out of Iraq, focus back on Afganistan, get the Taliban cleared out of there, set about finding Osama bin Laden (remember him?) and bring him to justice, in one form or another. Then, if you still, really, want to go back to Iraq, get international support from the UN and try again.

Dumbya, you have 500 days to get this resolved before you get returned to citizenship. Get at it. Stop talkin' and get actin'. You have learned firsthand, that "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

-Devon

A billion here, a billion there...

From Salon.com (Julia Dahl)...

If you weren't already angry enough about the war in Iraq, we've got more fodder for your fury: the Associated Press is reporting that, according to the Congressional Research Service, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are now costing the U.S. approximately $12 billlion every month. Ten billion in Iraq, two billion in Afghanistan.

As the cost of the war in Iraq creeps toward half a trillion, it's alternately hilarious and heartbreaking to harken back to the good old days of early 2003 when the Bush administration was dismissing reports that a war in Iraq might cost more than -- gasp! -- $60 billion.

----
My two cents...

Can you imagine what we could have done with the money George II and his Repugnican Congress spent on Iraq?? Like HEALTHCARE for ALL US Citizens? Reduce the US Debt? Or reduce Taxes?!

As we come up to the partisan battle over letting Bush's tax breaks for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans expire, let's remember what the Repugnican's did to destoy the surplus left by Bill Clinton and how much they spent while they hid under their cloak of "conservative spending". They already started attacking the Democratic Congress for "tax and spend" but somehow the media keeps a straight face as they report the Repugicans accusing Democrats of the "largest tax increase in US History"! Who the hell taught Repugnicans Math? The 109th Congress outspent Reagan for God's sake and I didn't think that was possible! Another 109th Congress would have bankrupted the US! It'll take two generations on Democrats in control to get the finances straightened out as it is!

-Devon

Pope Stabs the Church

From MSNBC.com

LORENZAGO DI CADORE, Italy - Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document released Tuesday that says Orthodox churches were defective and that other Christian denominations were not true churches.

Benedict approved a document from his old offices at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith that restates church teaching on relations with other Christians. It was the second time in a week the pope has corrected what he says are erroneous interpretations of the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the church.

On Saturday, Benedict revisited another key aspect of Vatican II by reviving the old Latin Mass. Traditional Catholics cheered the move, but more liberal ones called it a step back from Vatican II.

My two cents...

It seems the Pope, a former Nazi Youth member, has taken a page from the Gingrich Republican Playbook and decided that the 1960's reforms, known as Vatican II, are "erroneous". In other words, the "infallible" Popes made a mistake in trying to create a "big tent" that includes other sects under the banner of "Christianity". Just like Gingy and his henchment culled the wheat from the chaff and created the "neocons" from the conservatives, Benny wants to separate Catholics into "true Christians" and those who are not.

We all saw what happened to the Neocon moment of the 1990's. It rode for a while on the back of Ronald Reagan and then on George the First and finally George the Second where it fell off in 2006 and has been in a paralyzed state since those elections. It should die a quiet death in 2008.

Based on that experience, I expect Pope Benny will stir the pot for a while and perhaps make some waves but eventually most people will come to the realization that Catholicism is a religion, lead by fallible humans, and it has no valid claim to be the "true Christian church" any more than any other sect on the globe. Why? Because when it all comes down to the sizzle, Christianity is how you act, not how you believe or who founded your particular group.

That's the problem the Muslems are working through. They are so tied up with who founded their particular group that they feel entitled to kill a fellow Muslem because they are a member of a Muslem group established by someone else. They totally lost sight of the fact that they are all Muslems who should be practicing the teachings of their prophet, Mohammad, and not killing each other.

So, Benny, drives a knife into the Catholic Church in a attempt to carve out some core believers and generate some excitement in an otherwise dying institution racked with bankrupcy, both financial and moral? Yeah, that will really help! NOT!

BTW... the "Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith"? It used to be called "The Inquisitor's Office". It's comforting to have that "resurrected", isn't it? Look for great things to come from this Pope. NOT.

-Devon

Banned Interview with Bush. Shows his True Nature.

Bush breaks down under the heat.

"LET ME FINISH! LET ME FINISH!"

-Matt

Oversight and Executive Priviledge

Wonderful article by John Dean about the struggle for Congressional Oversight and the Presidential claim to Executive Priviledge! Very well written, insightful, a Must read!

Click Here to read it.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Richard Nixon II!

Well, whodathunk it! With Bush's crime regime getting backed into a corner, and hearings ripping one criminal after another to shreds, the next action to further the impeachment of these imperialists has come to pass.

Underreported, but still true, is the Bush administrations ignoring of filed subpoenas against many of their top people. This "standoff" can only end two ways. And I'm going to word this in an open letter to President Bush. (which he will never read.)

Mr. President

As you no doubt have noticed, the congressional Democrats, who you so coyly said are "failing at their jobs" have begun proceedings that have no doubt caused your administration grievance. When you said on a seperate occasion "I always win", such the dogma of a tantrumous 2 year old, I doubt you would have ever dreamed of the day your precious rubber stamp thugs in the congress would have been ousted in such a way, replaced by your loyal opposition who for the most part, have gone pretty easy on you these past few months. Alas, these times must be difficult, sir. Having to fear the coming of the next morning, fearing new committees, new justices long overdue. And yet, through all this, you "valiantly" stood your ground against the questioning, hearings, and inquiries of the Democratic party. Taking the "I'm the most powerful part of the government role" to truly autocratic extremes. Surly your puppeteer Karl Rove has briefed you on that "quaint" little thing called checks and balances, but surly as you see things, those just mean bits of paper and scales. But here's the problem, Mr. President. When those "failing" Democrats offered a nifty little thing called a Subpoena to your ilk, and you decided to instigate this pathetic little standoff with them, you're really lining yourself up for your own destruction, sir. You see, while you were asleep during basic congressional law, sir, there's one little aspect to the whole process that you perhaps, forgot, or never learned in the process. Here's how things have worked, and are going to work from now until another man like to drags our great country into an Empire state. Step 1: You or someone in your administration does something wrong. Step 2: The Democrats learn about it and question you. Step 3: If you remain uncooperative, we offer you subpoenas.
And if you for some reason feel that you are above these subpoenas, as you obviously think you are, then we get to hold you, and your administration, in complete, and utter CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS And sadly for you, this is an not only an unavoidably impeachcable offence, but we haul you, Dick, Karl, and everybody else off to JAIL

So here's how it's going to work, George. You cooperate with us, or we, as democrats, are going to impeach your ass and throw you in jail, effectively destroying your thief presidency.

We hope you will make the right decision.

Sincerely,

-Matt

Followup to "I accuse"

In my opinion Olbermann's best moment.

I accuse...

I can't say it much better than Keith Olbermann...

"I accuse you, Mr. Bush, of lying this country into war.

I accuse you of fabricating in the minds of your own people, a false implied link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11.

I accuse you of firing the generals who told you that the plans for Iraq were disastrously insufficient.

I accuse you of causing in Iraq the needless deaths of 3,586 of our brothers and sons, and sisters and daughters, and friends and neighbors.

I accuse you of subverting the Constitution, not in some misguided but sincerely-motivated struggle to combat terrorists, but to stifle dissent.

I accuse you of fomenting fear among your own people, of creating the very terror you claim to have fought.

I accuse you of exploiting that unreasoning fear, the natural fear of your own people who just want to live their lives in peace, as a political tool to slander your critics and libel your opponents.

I accuse you of handing part of this Republic over to a Vice President who is without conscience, and letting him run roughshod over it.

And I accuse you now, Mr. Bush, of giving, through that Vice President, carte blanche to Mr. Libby, to help defame Ambassador Joseph Wilson by any means necessary, to lie to Grand Juries and Special Counsel and before a court, in order to protect the mechanisms and particulars of that defamation, with your guarantee that Libby would never see prison, and, in so doing, as Ambassador Wilson himself phrased it here last night, of becoming an accessory to the obstruction of justice."


-Devon
for Keith's entire comment... click here

Outrageous!

The only reasonable response to Bush's commutation of "Scooter" Libby's prison sentence is to IMPEACH him and his Vice President! That's all I have to say about this issue. IMPEACH or forever hold your peace.

-Devon

Inching Towards Presidential Directive 51, As Bombing Threat In U.S. Grows

You know? I wonder what happens when those bombers who *KEEP* failing to bomb various areas in Britain and the U.S. manages, God forbid, to bomb the U.S. Or get caught in the process. Do you think that will be the "Catastrophic" event Bush needs to toss out the election and assume absolute power?

Well, with Bush's impatience, who knows.

Pray for safety, folks. We can't afford any more of this chaos.

-Matt

Bye Bye Blair, Ol' Blighty gets Brown.

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Gordon Brown is the UK's new prime minister after replacing the outgoing Tony Blair on Wednesday.

"This will be a new government with new priorities, meeting the concerns and aspirations of the whole country. Let the work of change begin," said Brown as he arrived at 10 Downing Street following an audience with Queen Elizabeth II in which he was asked to form a new government.

Hours after stepping down, Blair was appointed to serve as a special envoy to the Middle East by the Mideast Quartet.
In a joint written statement, the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations confirmed the appointment.

Earlier, Blair addressed lawmakers in the House of Commons for the final time after more than a decade in power.

He was then photographed with his family outside No. 10 before leaving for Buckingham Palace to tender his resignation to the queen.

"I wish everyone, friend or foe, well and that is that, the end," he said in a fulsome and emotional tribute to his parliamentary colleagues following a good-humored session of Prime Minister's Questions.

Blair, who is set to become an envoy for Mideast peace, received a standing ovation as he stepped down from the dispatch box.

Opposition Conservative leader David Cameron led praise for his outgoing rival, hailing his "remarkable achievement" in serving as prime minister for 10 years and highlighting his commitment to the Northern Ireland peace process and to world development.
"For all of the heated battles across this dispatch box, for 13 years he has led his party, for 10 years he has led our country, and no one can be in any doubt in terms of the huge efforts he has made in terms of public service," said Cameron.

Democratic Unionist Party leader Ian Paisley, Northern Ireland's first minister and a key player in the peace process, said Blair had always treated him with "the greatest of courtesy" -- and wished Blair luck in his anticipated new role representing the Mideast Quartet.
"I just want to say to the prime minister this one word: He has entered into another colossal task," said Paisley.

"I hope that what happened in Northern Ireland will be repeated and at the end of the day he will be able to look back and say it was well worthwhile."

'Truly sorry'

Blair stands down after a decade in which Labour won a party-record three straight general elections, in which lasting peace was brought to Northern Ireland and the British economy enjoyed a record sustained boom.

But the Iraq war, the cash-for-honors row and his government's perceived preoccupation with media spin damaged Blair's reputation.

With anti-war protesters gathered outside Downing Street on Wednesday, Blair was once again forced to address the issue of Iraq as he paid tribute in parliament to UK soldiers killed in action during the past week.

"I am truly sorry about the dangers that they face today in Iraq and Afghanistan," Blair said.

"I know some may think that they face these dangers in vain; I don't and I never will. I believe they are fighting for the security of this country and the wider world against people who would destroy our way of life.

"Whatever view people take of my decisions, I think there is only one view to take of them: they are the bravest and the best."

One protester, Donna Mahoney, whose husband, Peter, committed suicide after serving in Iraq, said she was ecstatic that Blair was quitting.

"I needed to see him leave to prove that he is gone now and to close another part of this chapter," she told the UK's Press Association. "But I can't believe that he is going to be a peace ambassador."

Change of style

Prior to his re-election in 2005, Blair had vowed to serve a full third term. But political infighting within Labour ranks culminated in a political coup last year that saw him pledge to leave office early, honoring a long-standing pact to make way for Brown.

CNN's European Political Editor Robin Oakley said Brown would introduce a different style of government, restoring a more serious tone to British politics after the "sofa-style" decision-making of the Blair years.

"He is a very serious, committed politician very much driven by the values that he learnt from his Presbyterian minister father. We're going to see a lot less glitz and glamour," said Oakley.

"It will be very much a more 'get on the with the job' style of government," said Oakley. "There will be a lot of serious purpose."

"People are hopeful there is going to be a change of mood and a change of pace very quickly," Labour lawmaker Jeremy Corbyn, an outspoken critic of Blair and the Iraq war, told Reuters.

"The first priority of Gordon Brown has to be recognizing the disaster of the strategy in Iraq and making plans for the withdrawal of our forces."

The end of Romney's campaign.

From CNN

BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- An ever-present aide to Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney took a leave of absence Friday after he became the subject of investigations in two states for allegedly impersonating a law enforcement officer.

His attorney denied the charges.

Jay Garrity, who serves as director of operations and is constantly at the side of the former Massachusetts governor, is accused of leaving a lengthy message with the answering service of a plumbing company on Mother's Day, identifying himself as "Trooper Garrity" of the Massachusetts State Police and complaining about erratic driving by a company driver.

The district attorney in Boston is investigating the call, which was tape recorded by an after-hours operator. Impersonating an officer is a misdemeanor charge carrying a fine of up to $400 and one year imprisonment.

"Listening to the message, it sounded like he was calling control and speaking back and forth to people," said Dot Barme, whose Burlington company, Wayne's Drains, received the call. "I had my husband listen to it and he said, 'He's not talking to anybody; he's talking back and forth to himself," Barme told The Associated Press.

Stephen Jones, an attorney representing Garrity, said his client did not make the May 13 call, first reported by The Boston Globe, and has no connection with the cell phone to which it was traced.

"He has insisted since he's heard about this to have a voice analysis done to exonerate him or prove he did not do this," Jones said.

Jake Wark, spokesman for Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley, confirmed the investigation.

"We're looking into a phone call placed to an area business by an individual who represented himself as a state trooper," Wark said. "We do not believe the person who made that call is a state trooper and we are working to determine his identity."

Meanwhile, Garrity also has been accused of telling a New York Times reporter who had been following Romney's motorcade in New Hampshire last month that he had run the license plate of the reporter's rental car, and that he should break away from the caravan.

The New Hampshire attorney general's office is investigating that incident after the reporter, Mark Leibovich, recounted the May 29 events in a story about Romney last weekend. New Hampshire law prohibits citizens from accessing the state's license plate database.

"Jay has taken a leave of absence from the campaign to address these complaints," said Romney spokesman Kevin Madden.

Jones, the Garrity attorney, disputed the sequence of events. Leibovich has stood by his version of the story.

In 2004, Garrity was cited and fined by Massachusetts officials after a Ford Crown Victoria registered to him was found to have lights, a siren, radios and other law enforcement equipment -- including a baton -- after it was parked illegally in Boston's North End. At the time, Garrity was paid $75,000 annually as Romney's gubernatorial chief of operations.

-Matt

The Ideology War

There's that old saying "There are two sides of every coin". Many people don't think of a coin by it's two sides, but by the coin as a whole. When you reach into your pocket, and pull out a quarter, say, at a vending machine, you don't ask yourself "Which side should I have facing up when I use it?" You just take the coin, and put in the the machine. Many people who claim to be outside of the system, describe politics in this manner. Those who pretend not to be alligneed with a particular party, who say that "Democrats, Republicans, they're all apart of the same dirty coin." But I find that to be probably one of the biggest cop-outs of all political reasoning. Perhaps the DINOS and RINOS that dominate the system today are quite alike, the the true essence of Democrats, Liberalism, and the true essence of Republicans, Conservatism, are about as alike as a flower, and a bullet. And in fact, the proof they are so different, is how hard the fight eachother. How nasty things can get.
How is it, that people can look at two polar opposites, and claim they are similar? Here's how. Because the people who claim it, are part of one of the sides, and they always use it to distance themselves from the crimes of their ideology. Ironically, the only, and I mean the ONLY people in this country who make this pathetic cop-out, are the conservatives!
Many right-wing talking heads call what's going on here a culture war. This isn't a culture war. This is an Ideology War.
Many people use the term "Good and evil" as a tag for this Ideology war, and every Conservative loves to take the higher ledge over the Liberal. But what happens when the Liberal claims the higher ledge over the Conservative, the Conservative, who are so mentally assured of their own superiority, that they become so upset at anything that takes a whisper against them.

In the 1960's, Nixon laid the framework for the modern Republican. Since Nixon, every Republican has assumed the role, as a power starved, bomb happy, megalomaniacal madman. Nixon, Reagan, Bush 1, Bush 2, they've all followed the pattern. Demonizing all that's Liberal, and in the same breath, each of them bringing the country to it's knees. Nixon once said that "Liberals like to claim Ideology was their own, but it isn't" But when you see the horrors inflicted on this country by every Republican that has ever touched power, how can one even think what Nixon said was true? When Conservatives can do so many purley evil things, things that no Liberal has ever even dreamed of, one has to draw the simple conclusion that ideologically speaking, we, as Liberals, must take the stance of political morality. But we live in such an immoral country. THATS the problem. In a country that is so in love with the idea of war, of power, of uneducation, and of Christian extremism, that nobody who stands for what's actually right and good in this country, is given the time of day.

This is a war folks, declared by the conservatives when they took power. For the longest time, we haven't fought back. Perhaps rightfully so, but look what has happened. When the schoolyard bully beats our faces in, we rely on the fact that he'll soon just walk away in disgust with himselves, but Conservatives don't work that way. They'll just keep coming, and coming, spitting on our constitution, raping our laws. And they dare to claim the moral high ground, because we believe in a woman's right to choose. In this world, the good grow weak, and the evil terrorize all. Thankfully, recently, we've started to fight back. And that's what we must do. The Neocons respond only to one thing. Action. Many of my liberal friends are calling on all of us, to stop fighting, and to just bear the onslaught of Conservative bullying. I say now, that I totally disagree. Conservatives, are weak. But since we became weaker, in contrast, the Conservatives became strong, but they are still weak. So when someone tells you to just deal with Conservative evils, just say "No." We've dealt with this crap from them long enough. If we can fight fire with water, then the American people will realize who is truly right in this Ideology war. Anybody with the sense God gave a slightly rubbed rhubarb branch knows this answer. I know the answer. Do you?

-Matt

Let The Revolt Begin

What could drive the Neeks to call the Bush Administration " Fiasco's" and 'Traitors"?
Well, with the seams of the RNC supperating and festering at an amazing rate, the last thing the Neocons need to do is eat their own. But with that magical immigration bill, it has sent the Bush Suckers in what could lead to the ultimate downfall of the Bush Crime Regime.
From CNN

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Different conservative blogs have different pet issues -- government transparency, federal judges, Fred Thompson, to name a few.

But no issue in recent memory has united conservative bloggers like the debate over immigration. Their frustration has culminated in a full-scale revolt against the Bush administration and a Senate bill that activists say does little to solve the country's border security problems.

President Bush's pledge to support $4.4 billion in additional border security funds has breathed new life into the bill, but the drumbeat against the legislation shows no signs of quieting. (Watch how senators revived the immigration bill )

It's increasingly clear from Web postings and interviews with top conservative bloggers that the immigration bill has done serious damage to the president's credibility among the conservative netroots, the grassroots bloggers on the Web.

Erick Erickson, managing editor of the popular conservative blog RedState.com, says he receives between 800 and 900 e-mails a day from readers, most of whom are "enraged" by the White House's immigration efforts.

"Of all the issues the president has picked to make his hill to die on, he has picked the one that has divided his base," said Erickson, who lives in Macon, Georgia. "I am shocked by the anger and outrage out there ... You've got war against the president within the Republican party."

When details of an immigration compromise were announced this spring, conservative bloggers were immediately incensed. Michelle Malkin labeled it "a White House betrayal."

Another popular blogger, Hugh Hewitt, called the bill a "fiasco" and wrote: "this push for this bill is a disaster, Mr. President."

Bloggers: Secure the border first

Conservative bloggers make various arguments against the bill. Some say the bill grants amnesty to illegal immigrants who have already broken the law. Others say normalizing millions of new workers would depress wages and harm American workers.

Most conservative bloggers see border enforcement as the priority, an issue they say the president can enforce on his own without having to push a bill through Congress.

According to several top conservative bloggers, Bush simply has a credibility problem when it comes to border security.

"The administration has not done anything to fix the border or the visa program," said Ed Morrissey, the Minnesota-based founder of the blog Captain's Quarters. "It's a huge gap in national security. It's been six years past 9/11 and the administration has done nothing to fix either one."

Many bloggers said they are disappointed the president has pushed so hard for the immigration bill while letting the war and other issues conservatives care about fall by the wayside.

"The White House will go out and zealously promote Harriet Miers [the former White House counsel who Bush unsuccessfully nominated for the Supreme Court], defend [Attorney General] Alberto Gonzales, promote this bill, but will not take a firm stand on the war," said Erickson. "I know people who are boiling with rage that the president has been beating up his own side over this bill but won't take the bully pulpit to beat up Democrats over the war."

Bush did little to help his relationship with bloggers on May 29, when he told a crowd in Glynco, Georgia, that critics of the immigration bill "don't want to do what's right for America."

Kathryn Jean Lopez at the National Review asked, "Is the White House just not paying attention?"

The blog Ace of Spades HQ called Bush "incompetent" and "embarrassingly dimwitted" and urged him to retire.

Blogs and anti-immigration organizations used the Web to tap into the growing discontent over the immigration bill, using the Internet to organize phone and fax campaigns to urge senators to vote against the bill. It was a plugged-in show of force that would have been beyond comprehension a decade ago.

"The support for this issue has always been there, but the Internet is the platform the issue has needed to become a force in American politics," said David All, a Republican online strategist based in Washington.

Blogosphere ready for round two

When the bill was stymied by a procedural vote on June 7, the blogs claimed victory. A straw poll of conservative bloggers conducted by the Web site Right Wing News showed that 96 percent of bloggers surveyed were "pleased that the Senate immigration bill did not pass."

Now that the bill is back for a second round in the Senate, Bush could have a difficult time making new friends online beyond a relative handful of the bill's supporters.

"It will be very difficult for him to recover with conservative bloggers," said Robert Bluey, director of the Center for Media & Public Policy at the Heritage Foundation. "When Bush is on to his next issue, I'm not sure if bloggers are going to be there to back him up."

Which begs the question -- is Bush a lame duck among bloggers?

Said Morrissey: "I think that they are going to continue to support him on the war on terror. As for the rest of it, they are looking for ways to reshape the party agenda going into the next election. That's a nice way of saying they are going to consider him irrelevant."

Has America become a McDonalds? Because I'M LOVIN' IT!

-Matt

Mail-in Rebates

This is not a poltical issue but one that is relevant nonetheless... here's a link to an aticle dealing with "Mail in rebates". I have never liked these. For all the paperwork involved, it's a rare event that I ever get a check back from them. The simple fact is, don't buy anything based on a mail-in rebate or never expect to see anything back from one you do mail in!

click here

-Devon

Around the Water Cooler

In the break room, I was talking to a collegue who is a Republican, about our representation in Washington. In this case, he comes from Tom Delay's part of the world and voted for him every time. But now, he confessed, he'd like to see Delay stipped of his shirt and flogged daily for his crimes against the people of his district and the US in general. He also suggested a creative use of "waterboarding" for Tom as a daily punishment. When I mentioned Delay's "my extramarital affair wasn't as bad a Newt's affair", he didn't even know that! Trust me, he had even more to add to Tom's punishment schedule with that additional information!

Obviously, the Repugnican party is falling apart at the seams. They are losing their base and alienating all their friends. This lifelong Republican, for all his good intentions and sky high ideals, was severely let down by poor leadership. I sense he will be vary wary of who he votes for in the next few elections. I've heard that it will be almost another generation before the Republicans outlive this travesty and, I sense it just might be the case.

-Devon

Marchant Votes to Stem Stem Cell Research

Hot off the press... in the recent vote regarding Stem Cell Research that was proposed once again by the Democratic Party, here's how "Representative" Marchant voted. Of course, it was AGAINST Stem Cell Research! In spite of his vote, the measure passed by a good majority. Once again, Kenny is behind the times and out of step with reality and progress.

Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act - Vote Passed (247-176, 10 Not Voting)
The House voted to expand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research.
Rep. Kenny Marchant voted NO....

Isn't it about time that Kenny gets a long, long vacation from Federal office?

Who Are They Going to Hate Now?

Now that Falwell has passed the mantle... or rather it's being ripped from his cold, dead hands... the question remains: Where do they go from here? One "candidate" is Frank Page of the Southern Baptist Convention who is trying to "play nice" by putting on his best "sheep's clothing" and appear "moderate" but he's got a problem with the term "moderate". It's, well, "too moderate".

Frank S. Page, 54, is president of the 16 million-member Southern Baptist Convention, the country's largest evangelical "organization". He has explained his election as "a mandate for change". Of course, for those not on the inside, we're wondering what sort of change to expect.

Says Page, "I would not use the word 'moderate,' because in our milieu that often means liberal. But it's a shift toward a more centrist, kinder, less harsh style of leadership. In the past, Baptists were very well known for what we're against. . . . Instead of the caricature of an angry, narrow-minded, Bible-beating preacher, we wanted someone who could speak to normal people."

So, of course, Mr. Page has appointed himself the one to "speak to normal people". That begs the question, who is considered "normal" when compared to the membership of the Southern Baptist Convention? Obviously, they are catching on that they are not the best standard for what is "normal". It only been in recent years that they have dropped their stands against black membership and racial integration (and you thought the Mormons were alone in this?) and their stand against dancing, movies, and other sins of "the Devil".

With members of an older generation of evangelical leaders, including the Rev. Billy Graham, the Rev. Pat Robertson, psychologist James C. Dobson and the Rev. D. James Kennedy, ailing or nearing retirement, Page is one of many pastors and political activists tugging conservative Christians in various directions.

Others include the Rev. Rick Warren and the Rev. William Hybels, megachurch pastors who are championing the fight against AIDS in Africa. David Barton, head of a Texas-based group called WallBuilders, stumps the nation decrying the "myth" that the Constitution requires separation of church and state. The Rev. Joel Hunter of Orlando urges evangelicals to see climate change as a serious religious issue, because "our first order in the Garden was to take care of the Earth."

"The evangelical movement as a political force is in a serious state of transition," Page said. "With the passing of Jerry Falwell, evangelicals are struggling to try to find the kind of cohesion he represented. That was going on even before he died."

When Falwell dissolved the Moral Majority in 1989, the leadership torch was picked up by Robertson at the Christian Coalition. After that group ran into financial and management problems in the late 1990s, leadership passed to Dobson's radio ministry, Focus on the Family.

The absence of a national evangelical political leader was masked in recent years by the presence of President Bush, who served as a rallying point. But the Rev. Richard Land, head of the Southern Baptists' Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said the only candidates in 2008 with wide appeal to evangelicals are ones, such as former governor Mike Huckabee (R-Ark.) and Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kans.), who do not appear able to win.

Polls suggest that evangelicals under 30 are just as staunchly opposed to abortion, and almost as concerned about "moral standards" in general, as their elders. But a February Pew survey found that younger evangelicals are more likely than their parents to worry about environmental issues; 59 percent of those under 30 said the United States was "losing ground" on pollution, compared with 37 percent of those over 30.

Acceptance of homosexuality is also greater among young evangelicals. One in three under 30 favors same-sex marriage, compared with one in 10 of their elders.

Redeem the Vote, a group formed in 2004 to register young evangelicals to vote, is campaigning with black churches in Alabama for capping the interest charges on short-term "payday" loans, which can hit 400 percent a year. The group's founder, physician Randy Brinson, said he finds that young evangelicals are intensely interested in practical ways to help their communities and are little swayed by issues such as same-sex marriage.

"These kids have gone to school with people who happen to be gay, and they don't see them as a direct threat. They may think that lifestyle is wrong, but they don't see it as something that really affects their daily lives," Brinson said. "The groups that focus only on a narrow agenda, especially gay marriage and abortion, are going to decline."

So, what's in the future? The political arm of the religious right will eventually evolve (I love the irony!) into more socially responsive lobby groups focusing more and more on the real problems in their congregations and less on issues that don't directly effect them. They'll turn from being ChristoNazi's who yelp and bark at pro-Choicers, Gun Control Advocates, and Gays hiding in the trees and focus on the more tangible issues such as jobs and economic security (for their congregants and not just for their own self-serving needs). And this will happen very quickly over the next five years. Why? Mostly because the great icons of the ChistoNazi Movement are falling by the wayside and a new generation is coming into power. Falwell is dead and Pat Robertson may as well be dead. Ralph Reed the others like him discredited themselves in scandals. The rest? Well, the religion of Hate turns people off and eventually devours those who venture too close for too long.

Just be patient...

The Kid Who Was Told "Think For Yourself" And Became Liberal.

Probably the best advice my parents ever gave me was before I chose a Side, Religion, Moral System, etc, I had to study every side thorougly. Which has lead me to an interesting realization. Probably one of the sole reasons I am who I am, is because I was never indoctrinated into a way of thinking. Having a Democrat Mother, and a Republican Father, the side was really for me to take. And in any other situation, I could have, if in any other family, been born, and bred and indoctrinated into a NeoCon with as strength and furvor I have as a Liberal. The biggest difference was that in my life, I was given a choice, and was allowed to let my humanity judge which "Side" I agreed with. And during my period of choosing, I always kept a journal of my political and religious quest, and I'd like to take this opprotunity to delve into that old book that was given to me in the fall of 1998. (I was 9 years old).
First off I'll skipp the first few dates, since alot of it is hard to read, and many of it is really just talking about Bill Clinton. It amazes me how little I did know about the world back then. But I'll start off on one of my more educated, informed, and decisive (and perhaps easiest to read) entrys, dated 5.9.99. I'll start and quote the first paragraph with corrections of spelling.

"Was a long day. I got a chance to see the news today. There is something I don't get. There are bunches of people talking about the President. And wow, tons of books about him too. I remember when they were talking about him and Monica a year ago. But I thought that was over. There was a woman talking about him. She seemed very mean. She had called President Clinton typical something. I can't remember the word. Maybe I'll ask mom. But I didn't like the woman. Even though a lot of people are mad at the President, because he lied, that woman seemed really mean. And I don't think she knew what she was talking about. She kept calling him some word. Anyway, I'll figure out what it is."

Okay, doesn't sound like much, but this is actually a somewhat momentous occasion. Not only was my first exposure to the Painfull Pundit Ann Coulter, but as you'll see, there's another revalation I learned the next day. Halfway through the next entry.

"...Oh and by the way. I found out what that woman was calling President Bill. She kept calling him a "Liburel" (Yes that's how I spelled it), but I'm confused now. I looked up the word. Liburels sound like really nice people. I think liburels care for people alot. I don't think the man who hates the President, Newt, is a Liburel, because he is always hating people. I think mom is a Liburel too. I wonder if I am."

I think that really is a pivotal point in my life, when I begin to figure things out. I may post more on this later, but here's a small snippet of something much later, in May of 2000.

"Governer Bush is running for President. I don't like him. I think he's stupid, because he has trouble talking. I hope he doesn't become president."

I'd be willing to bet that if I gave this journal to a political analyst and a scientist, they'd probably be able to find some pretty interesting things about how people become various political stances.

-Matt

See! I told ya!

From MSN.com...

COLUMBUS, Ohio - The man picked as Adam by a museum based on the Bible's version of Earth's history led quite a different life outside the Garden of Eden, flaunting his sexual exploits online and modeling for a line of clothing with an explicit mascot.

Registration records show that Eric Linden, who portrays Adam taking his first breath in a film at the newly opened Creation Museum, owns a graphic Web site called Bedroom Acrobat. He has been pictured there, smiling alongside a drag queen, in a T-shirt brandishing the site's sexually suggestive logo.

The museum's operators, informed Thursday by The Associated Press of Linden's online appearances, acted swiftly to suspend airing of the 40-second video in which he appeared.

The clip is one of 55 featured on tours of the museum, near Cincinnati in Petersburg, Ky., which tells the Bible's version of Earth's history that the planet was created in a single week just a few thousand years ago.

"We are currently investigating the veracity of these serious claims of his participation in projects that don't align with the biblical standards and moral code upon which the ministry was founded," Answers for Genesis spokesman Mark Looy said in an e-mail statement.

----------------

See! I told you this "museum" would generate some real laughs for us! I mean, after all they call it a "museum". That was only the beginning. In this latest episode, they discover they hired a porn dealer and model for their "Adam"! ROFLMAO!

It reminds me of the former Soviet Union that constantly tried to convince not only their citizens but the rest of the world that they invented things they never invented, produced goods they never produced, grew crops they never grew. They succeeded only at self-deception and, that for only 80 years before the house of cards fell in on them. So, the crazy-ass fundamentalists will eventually implode from their lies and deceptions. In the meantime, we get a good laff! Thanks Gods!

-Devon

Embryonic Stupidity

Spoiling for a veto fight, Congress cleared legislation Thursday easing restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

The House vote to send the measure to President Bush was 247-176, 35 short of the level needed to override a second veto in as many years on the issue.

“For many, embryonic stem cell research is the most promising source of potential treatments and cures” for debilitating disease, said Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., the bill’s leading advocate.

“Unfortunately, because of the stubbornness of one man — President Bush — these people continue to suffer as they wait,” she added.

The president was unpersuaded.

“If this bill were to become law, American taxpayers would for the first time in our history be compelled to support the deliberate destruction of human embryos,” he said in a statement in Germany, where he was attending a summit of world leaders.

“Crossing that line would be a grave mistake. For that reason, I will veto the bill passed today,” he added.

Bush’s written statement echoed criticism leveled in an hour-long debate on the House floor, where opponents of the measure said the research requires the destruction of human embryos, and that alternatives have shown more promise.

“You’re talking about spare embryos now but if it ever did work ... it would require the killing of millions of embryos,” said Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J.

He also said a recent report by the U.S. Catholic Conference listed numerous breakthroughs involving research conducted on adult stem cells, cord blood and amniotic fluid, none of which involve the destruction of a human embryo.

The measure drew the support of 210 Democrats and 37 Republicans. Opponents included 16 Democrats and 160 Republicans.

-----------------------
My two cents...

It's amazing how this President sat on his hands for five years as the Repugnican Party looted the US treasury with one spending bill after another and he never vetoed ONE! He sat by as the Repugnican lead Congress tore out large parts of the US Constitution and didn't veto ONE. But Stem Cells that can save lives and end suffering? BOOM! He drops the Veto Bomb like it was the capital of North Korea. And he does this because he believes it would "cross a moral line". Such self-righteous nonsense coming from a man who historically only seemed to repect the white powdery line that would ultimately go up his nose?!

Then, Repugnican Parrots like Chris Smith take it one further step beyond stupidity with the "argument" that stem cell research, if it's successful, may lead to the "killing of more" embryos!

Let's jump back a couple decades and look at transplanting body parts. If it's found that a human heart can be transplanted sucessfully, then ultimately we'll be killing people to harvest their hearts. Or kidneys. Or Lungs.

Chris, it ain't gonna happen. Women aren't donating embryos for research and if they did, so what? It's a zygot for God's sake! Men donate sperm and no one cares! Biology 101... go to a used book store... Oh forget it... Just keep track of the idiots like Chris and make sure they get voted out of office in the next election. As soon as I found out how our local "representatives" voted, I'll pass it along. Personally, I won't be shocked.

-Devon

Post Debate Roundup: Matthew's Rankings

Okay, here are my rankings of the candidates after watching the debates, from best to worst.

#1 (Tie) John Edwards, and Mike Gravel.

#2 Barack Obama

#3 Dennis Kusinich

#4:Joe Biden

#5:Hillary Clinton

#6:Chris Dodd

#7: Bill Richardson

Here's why:

First off, Mike Gravel blew the rest of the candidates out of the water. Literally. He wasn't afraid to tell the others that they were as responsible for the war as Bush, for (most of them) voting for it in the first place. Also, Gravel set out a solid plan for what he would do in the first 100 days. The sheer and absolute outrage that I personally felt was how he was practically segrigated from the other candidates. In the second part of the debate, he was literally seperated from the other candidates by a whole table, in the far left hand corner of the "cresent" of the chairs. That was to me, so crass. An outrage even. Now, in terms of his electability, that's why he needs to be level with John Edwards. John, also, made some extremely good points. He was able to answer questions smartly and promply, and he's electectable, intelligent, and dammit people like him.


Barack came in a close second. His plans for the future, and his intelligence was admirable to say the least. His healthcare plan is paletable, and it seems he has his act, for the most part, together. He was able to answer the tough questions without getting tricked into some of the setup questions that (Former U-Boat Commaner) Vulf Blitza sneaked in.
Dennis Kusinich, is probably the ultimate liberal. And that helps him, and hurts him in the same swipe. One of the problems he had was when he was asked "If you were given the opprotunity to take out Bin Laden, with some civilian casualties, Dennis basically said "No." Wishing to take a more "Diplomatic" approach to it, putting Osama in front of a court. Now, everyone disagreed with him, be that a good thing or a bad thing. But, other than that, Kusinich made some eccelent points, which leads me to believe he would make the best Vice President this country has ever had (save, perhaps, for Al Gore).


Joe Biden.....well, Personally, I can never forgive him for continuing this war. But that aside, he had great conviction, and had some of the best One-Liners of the whole group, bringing me to agree with him on some (not nearly all) of his points. He made very good the case for continuing to fund the war, though I still greatly disagree with him. That said, One thing Biden has going for him is an amazing talent as an Orator. He would be one of the best speaking presidents this country would know for a while. But so did Gravel for that matter.


Hillary Clinton....again, I'm not very keen on her, but she did do a little better than last time. My problem with her is that her approach to many things are too conservative, and too indirect. If she can take a more affirmative stance on many things, then I may take a kinder look on her, but the biggest, most prominant, most screaming thing she has going against her (apart from her general un-likability) is that she is (yes...) a woman. And I of all people hate to say this, but America just isn't ready for a Woman to be president. I'm sorry. That's just a fact. As much as I think a Woman would make such a great president, with the mental capacity, reasoning, and dexterity that no man could possibly possess, it's just not Hillary. (Yet, anyway) That, and she needs to STOP saying "I was the senator of New York) again, and again, and again, and again. Hillary, WE KNOW!!!!!


Chris Dodd, for me, was one of the more dissapointing candidates. While many points he had were good, and valid, there were a few instances where he just didn't answer the questions, either intentionally or accidentally, some very important questions were practically dodged by Dodd. Now, this is reconcillable, but for now, I'm pretty dissapointed with Dodd at the moment. I truly hope that for the next "Debate", he can rectify his mistakes.


Bill Richardson... now here was someone whom I really really wanted to do well. But after the debacle of a debate he gave the first time, I was really hoping (even moreso) that he would do better. Alas, even after things seemed to be going well, he had to screw it all up, by saying that the first thing he would do as president, would not be ending the war, would not be balancing the budget, eliminating corruption, or re-establishing America's rightful place as Moral center for the world, not even ending the geonocide in Darfur, which all other candidates said they would in a heartbeat. no...none of those. He said the first thing he would do is "Reform Education." WHAT?!?!?!?!?! With a Campaign of Extermination going on in the world around you, with Darfur, Iraq, you want to worry about EDUCATION?! Yes, I agree, the education system needs reformation, but my god, man! One would think that some other, slightly more pressing issues would take PRIORITY over reforming EDUCATION! Bill Richardson, my advice to you is either get your act together and work out a more solid and workable plan for your presidency, or get the hell out of the race. And I really, truly hate to say that, since Richardson is an immensly qualified man to lead this country. But if you keep royally screwing up debates like this, then don't expect to get the nomination.

That's my say. I welcome other opinions as well.

Sounds Like Eleanor to me!

“This is a woman who led a camouflaged life and continues to,” Cerl Bernstein told TODAY host Matt Lauer on Friday in an exclusive interview. “This book takes away that camouflage.” The book, which he called the first “real biography” of Hillary Clinton, will be available on June 5.

To tell the story of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s journey from a humble childhood marked by abuse at home to the White House, and later the U.S. Senate, Bernstein talked to about 200 close friends and advisers to the Clintons. Bernstein said he learned a lot about Hillary Clinton, including steps she took to try to silence the various women linked to her husband throughout his political career.

Bernstein mentions the women and the relationships in the book, but avoids the steamy, sensational details about Bill Clinton’s dalliances other books cover. If a reader wants those details, he told Lauer, they should “go to another book.”

“There’s not a sex act mentioned in this book,” he added. “What is important is Hillary savaging the women he was with, forgiving Bill repeatedly throughout their married life, but not forgiving the women he was with.”

Bernstein’s book also explores Clinton’s strained relationship with her disciplinarian father, the development of her religious convictions, and her political ideals that took shape during her studies at Wellesley and Yale Law School. The author goes on to disclose, among other things, that Bill Clinton fell in love with another woman while becoming a rising political star in Arkansas, and quotes insiders who say Hillary Clinton wouldn’t give him a divorce.

Philippe Reines, Hillary Clinton’s spokesman, dismissed the relevance of Bernstein’s work, saying the book is intended to make the Clintons look bad for profit, yet again. Lauer said Reines told TODAY: “Is it possible to be quoted yawning? This is an author’s agenda to take an old story and rehash for cash.”


------------
of course, my two cents...

All this sounds so much like the dedicated woman who managed the Domestic Front while he husband fought a World War in the Atlantic and Pacific Theaters. It sounds like Eleanor Roosevelt and, by God, we really will need someone like that in the next decade as the US tries to undo the damage done by the Bush regime. So she handled Bill's sexual issues and "girl friends" like... well... a good, loving wife, committed to her marriage. So, she rose from abuse and poverty to become a successful attorney, First Lady and Senator. So, she has the ability to "camouflage" herself. That should help in the Foreign Affairs as she tries to repair our tarnished reputation around the globe. Dang! Good for her and good for us if she elected President!

-Devon

Creation's Kentucky Funhouse

from DEFCON (The Campaign to Defend the Constitution) at http://www.defconblog.org/

This Memorial Day, the religious right will launch one of the most outrageous campaigns to date in their war on science: the $27 million “Creation Museum” in Petersburg, Kentucky.

The “Museum,” which was built by the religious right organization Answers in Genesis (AiG), is dedicated to the falsehood that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, claims that humans and dinosaurs coexisted a few thousand years ago, and has but one goal: to institutionalize the lie that science supports these fairytales.

While AiG has the right to spend $27 million promoting a lie, it is imperative that as concerned citizens we let America know the true dangers of their nefarious campaign.

------ and now for my .02

You know, 27 MILLION is a LOT of Money but one good thing about this project is that's 27 million they won't be spending on fighting Hate Crime legislation or other lobbying efforts to gain control of the government! My suggestion is that we all visit the "museum" and have a good laugh at their expense. I mean it's gotta have some REALLY amusing exhibits as they try to put the square peg of Biblical myth into the round hole of scientific fact.

-Devon