Category Archives: Election

A Modern Fable

Once upon a time, a tortoise and a hare were running for president. The hare ran rings around the tortoise, who griped, “yeah, sure he’s fast, but can he lead?” “Sure he’s a celebrity, but can he lead?” “Sure, he’s beating me, but can he lead?”

The hare didn’t listen the tortoise. (Truthfully, he was so far ahead he could scarcely hear the old crank.) He ran on, steady and true, to the cheers of the massive crowds near the finish line.

Miles, back, the tortoise’s few supporters grumbled. “This tortoise isn’t slow enough.” “He’s shuffling in the wrong direction.” “I miss the prince who turned into a turd.” The tortoise didn’t listen. (He couldn’t really hear all that well.) He plodded on, grumbling about how unfair it was to race a hare with all the advantages hares naturally have in a society dominated by old tortoises.

Closer to the finish line, angry turtles appeared among the crowd. “He’s a celebrity, he can’t lead.” “He’s biased against tortises!” “He hates what we love and loves what we hate.” “The biased media shows him closer to the finish line.” “Tax! Tax! Tax!”

The race was over: the better runner won. It seems celebrity and inspiration aren’t bad ingredients for leadership, whereas whining is for losers. Meanwhile, the tortoises gathered over a cup of old turtle soup to argue how best to undermine the winner. peace, mjh

I Feel the Incentive to Give this Guy the Finger

Michael Boskin, former head of the President’s Council on Economic Advisers under Present George H.W. Bush, concludes that Senator Obama’s proposed increased top tax rates would decrease the incentive to work and cause serious problems in the economy.

Huh. I thought being stinking rich decreased one’s incentive to work. If you’re poor, you have the greatest incentive to work: starvation. Unless, of course, you’re completely demoralized by the belief that only the Rich have rights and opportunities.

Are Republicans and Independents really going to swallow the whole Tax and Spend bullshit yet again? Can they really ignore the fact that, indeed, we *need* to spend some money on something besides endless war, and, gasp, maybe the Rich are in a position to help? peace, mjh

I’m an atheist neo-Darwinist

The Radical and Religious Right may appear as weak and laughable as Duhbya, but they will be around longer and they are relentless in their mission to dominate this nation. peace, mjh

New legal threat to teaching evolution in the US – opinion – 09 July 2008 – New Scientist by Amanda Gefter [7/9/08]

The [Louisiana Science Education Act] is designed to slip ID in “through the back door”, says [Barbara] Forrest, who is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University and an expert in the history of creationism. She adds that the bill’s language, which names evolution along with global warming, the origins of life and human cloning as worthy of “open and objective discussion”, is an attempt to misrepresent evolution as scientifically controversial. Forrest’s testimony notwithstanding, the bill was passed by the state’s legislature – by a majority of 94 to 3 in the House and by unanimous vote in the Senate. On 28 June, Louisiana’s Republican governor, Piyush “Bobby” Jindal, signed the bill into law. The development has national implications, not least because Jindal is rumoured to be on Senator John McCain’s shortlist as a potential running mate in his bid for the presidency.

Born in 1971 to parents recently arrived from India, Jindal is a convert to Roman Catholicism and a Rhodes scholar – hardly the profile of a typical Bible-belt politician. Yet in a recent national television appearance he voiced approval for the teaching of ID alongside evolution. He also enjoys a close relationship with the Louisiana Family Forum (LFF), a lobbying group for the religious right whose mission statement includes “presenting biblical principles” in “centers of influence”. It was the LFF which set the bill in motion earlier this year.

“We believe that to teach young people critical thinking skills you have to give them both sides of an issue,” says Gene Mills, executive director of the LFF. When asked whether the new law fits with the organisation’s religious agenda, Mills told New Scientist: “Certainly it’s an extension of it. …

The strategy being employed in Louisiana by proponents of ID – including the Seattle-based Discovery Institute – is more subtle and potentially more difficult to challenge. Instead of trying to prove that ID is science, they have sought to bestow on teachers the right to introduce non-scientific alternatives to evolution under the banner of “academic freedom”.

“Academic freedom is a great thing,” says Josh Rosenau of the National Center for Science Education in Oakland, California. … “To apply ‘academic freedom’ to high school is a misuse of the term.”

“It’s very slick,” says Forrest. “The religious right has co-opted the terminology of the progressive left… They know that phrase appeals to people.” …

So far, representatives from six states have taken up the idea. In Florida, Missouri, South Carolina and Alabama, bills were introduced but failed. An academic freedom bill now in committee in Michigan is expected to stall there.

Louisiana is another story. A hub of creationist activism since the early 1980s, it was Louisiana that enacted the Balanced Treatment Act, which required that creationism be taught alongside evolution in schools. In a landmark 1987 case known as Edwards vs Aguillard, the US Supreme Court ruled the law unconstitutional, effectively closing the door on teaching “creation science” in public schools. ID was invented soon afterwards as a way of proffering creationist concepts without specific reference to God. …

When Jindal was elected governor last year, the stage was set. The LFF approached Ben Nevers, a state senator, who agreed to introduce the Louisiana Academic Freedom Act on their behalf. “They believe that scientific data related to creationism should be discussed when dealing with Darwin’s theory,” Nevers told the Hammond Daily Star in April. The bill was later amended and renamed the Louisiana Science Education Act. Its final version includes a statement that the law should not be taken as promoting religion.

That way, those who wish to challenge Darwinian evolution have “plausible deniability” that this is intended to teach something unconstitutional, says Eric Rothschild of the Philadelphia-based law firm Pepper Hamilton, which represented the parents at the Dover trial. “They are better camouflaged now.”

The Louisiana Science Education Act

WHAT THE LAW SAYS:

The state… shall allow and assist teachers, principals, and other school administrators to create and foster an environment… that promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied, including, but not limited to, evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning. (Section 1B)

WHAT OPPONENTS FEAR:

Any Louisiana school official is now free to present evolution and other targeted topics as matters of debate rather than broadly accepted science. Books and other materials that support this view can be used in class alongside standard science texts. The onus will be on parents to spot violations of the rules on separation of church and state.

New legal threat to teaching evolution in the US – opinion – 09 July 2008 – New Scientist

PS- The notion that Jindal will be VP is crazy. He’s less experienced than Obama and he’d cost McCain the racist vote.

The 2nd Biggest Asshole in America?

The Page – by Mark Halperin – TIME

Speaking to National Right to Life in Virginia, the top GOP strategist says:

“This is a man who stands up and says he is going to bring Republicans and Democrats together….How can you claim to do that if you are at the same time supporting the divisive practice of using taxpayer dollars to fund abortion?”

Obama team: “Senator Obama is running for president to bring the country together and end the type of divisive politics perfected by Karl Rove.”

The Page – by Mark Halperin – TIME

Think Progress

Think Progress is a frequently updated accounting of the American political scene. Take your meds before you read it. peace, mjh

Think Progress » American Spectator: Obama would lead to ‘fascism’ in America.

In a recent American Spectator article, former Reagan White House political director and QubeTV founder Jeffery Lord gives his vision of what “America would look like in an age of Obama.” According to Lord, “The word is fascism“:

What freedoms will next be targeted with that deadliest trademark of an Obamalander — moral superiority? What do we have when the sole purpose of the government as run by the chilling principles of Obamaland is to “use the political process” to remove freedoms large and small one by one by one?

Someone needs to speak it plainly.

The word is fascism.

Lord isn’t the first conservative to make such wild claims. Last month, former Newt Gingrich aide Tony Blankley wrote in the Washington Times that Obama might be a “dictator” in waiting. (HT: Andrew Sullivan)

Think Progress » American Spectator: Obama would lead to ‘fascism’ in America.

Think Progress » WSJ Editorial Page Ludicrously Claims That Obama Is Running For ‘George Bush’s Third Term’

bushmccain.jpgIn an editorial this morning, the Wall Street Journal stretches the limits of credibility and audaciously claims that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) is the candidate running for “George Bush’s third term.”

Think Progress » WSJ Editorial Page Ludicrously Claims That Obama Is Running For ‘George Bush’s Third Term’

Think Progress » McCain gets ‘visibly angry’ when challenged on whether military experience prepares him to be president.

McCain is notorious for his short temper. Just the person you want with the launch codes. peace, mjh

ABC News’ David Wright reports that when he asked John McCain to “explain how his Vietnam experience prepared him for the presidency,” McCain “became visibly angry”:

mccain.gifMcCain became visibly angry when I asked him to explain how his Vietnam experience prepared him for the Presidency.

“Please,” he said, recoiling back in his seat in distaste at the very question.

McCain allies Sen. Lindsey Graham stepped in to rescue him. Graham expressed admiration for McCain’s stance on the treatment of detainees in US custody.

It’s a legitimate question. In 2003, McCain said, “I absolutely don’t believe that it’s necessary” to have military service in order to be president. He also said military service alone is not a sufficient qualification to be president.

Think Progress » McCain gets ‘visibly angry’ when challenged on whether military experience prepares him to be president.

Casting Bibles in Glass Houses Upon the Waters

Dobson accuses Obama of `distorting’ Bible – washingtonpost.com

Dobson took aim at examples Obama cited in asking which Biblical passages should guide public policy _ chapters like Leviticus, which Obama said suggests slavery is OK and eating shellfish is an abomination, or Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, “a passage that is so radical that it’s doubtful that our own Defense Department would survive its application.”

“Folks haven’t been reading their Bibles,” Obama said.

Dobson and Minnery accused Obama of wrongly equating Old Testament texts and dietary codes that no longer apply to Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament.

“I think he’s deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own worldview, his own confused theology,” Dobson said.

“… He is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter.”

Joshua DuBois, director of religious affairs for Obama’s campaign, said in a statement that a full reading of Obama’s speech shows he is committed to reaching out to people of faith and standing up for families. “Obama is proud to have the support of millions of Americans of faith and looks forward to working across religious lines to bring our country together,” DuBois said.

Dobson reserved some of his harshest criticism for Obama’s argument that the religiously motivated must frame debates over issues like abortion not just in their own religion’s terms but in arguments accessible to all people.

He said Obama, who supports abortion rights, is trying to govern by the “lowest common denominator of morality,” labeling it “a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution.”

Dobson accuses Obama of `distorting’ Bible – washingtonpost.com

James Dobson should know a fruitcake when he sees one (every damn day in the mirror). While I would be uneasy with Obama finding biblical justifications for anything other than doing away with the War Department, Dobson’s insistence that only Dobson knows the truth should be all anyone needs to turn their back on him and run away. Judge not, Jimmy. peace, mjh

Obama dismisses Dobson criticism about Bible
By SARA KUGLER, Associated Press Writer

Asked about Dobson’s assessment, Obama said “somebody would be pretty hard-pressed to make that argument” that he was distorting the Bible.

Obama supporters also responded to Dobson.

The Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell, a Methodist pastor from Texas and longtime supporter of President Bush who has endorsed Obama, said Tuesday he belongs to a group of religious leaders who, working independently of Obama’s campaign, launched a Web site to counter Dobson at http://www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com. The site highlights statements from Obama and Dobson and asks visitors to compare them.

Caldwell said he has great respect for Dobson’s advocacy for families, but said the criticism of Obama was “a bit over the top” and “crossed the line.”

See also Evangelical Leader Blasts 2006 Obama Speech, by Barbara Bradley Hagerty, NPR