TROUBLE IN KANSAS

Here are some excerpts from an article in the Clay Center Dispatch:

When it comes to teaching evolution, minority rules in the Kansas State Board of Education. While 17 scientists and science educators have revised and updated Kansas science education standards, the conservative majority seated on the Board would prefer to approve the Minority Report submitted by eight proponents of Intelligent Design Theory.

"We are not going to give up until the standards say what we want them to say," said Kathy Martin, District 6 Board member. "Some naturalistic [evolutionary]opinion is correct, but not all of it is."

Martin said, "Evolution has been proven false. ID is science-based and strong in facts."

"Of course this is a Christian agenda. We are a Christian Nation," said Martin."Our country is made up of Christian conservatives. We don't often speak up but we need to stand up and let our voices be heard," said Martin.

AP PICKS UP "JEEBUS" STORY

Dems booted from N.C. church over politics

WAYNESVILLE, N.C. (AP) -- A pastor of a small Baptist church led an effort to kick out church members because they didn't support President Bush, members said.
The nine members were voted out at a Monday meeting of the East Waynesville Baptist Church in this mountain town about 120 miles west of Charlotte. WLOS-TV in Asheville reported that 40 other members resigned in protest.
"It's all over politics," said Selma Morris, the church's treasurer. "We've never had a pastor like that before."
Pastor Chan Chandler had told the congregation before last year's presidential election that anyone who planned to vote for Democratic Sen. John Kerry should either leave the church or repent, said Lorene Sutton, who said she and her husband were voted out of the church this week.
"He's the kind of pastor who says do it my way or get out," she said. "He's real negative all the time."
Morris said some church members left after Chandler made his ultimatum in October.
Chandler didn't return a message left by The Associated Press at his home Friday, and several calls to the church went unanswered. He told WLOS that the actions were not politically motivated.
North Carolina Democratic Party Chairman Jerry Meek sharply criticized the pastor Friday, saying Chandler jeopardized his church's tax-free status by openly supporting a candidate for president.
"If these reports are true, this minister is not only acting extremely inappropriately by injecting partisan politics into a house of worship, but he is also potentially breaking the law," Meek said.

JEEBUS NO LIKE DEMS

Religion and Politics Clash Religion and politics clash over a local church's declaration that Democrats are not welcome.

East Waynesville (NC) Baptist asked nine members to leave. Now 40 more have left the church in protest. Former members say Pastor Chan Chandler gave them the ultimatum, saying if they didn't support George Bush, they should resign or repent. The minister declined an interview with News 13. But he did say "the actions were not politically motivated." There are questions about whether the by-laws were followed when the members were thrown out.
(posted at 7:30am, 5/6/05)

SOURCE

WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE WMD LIES?

Well, we can contact members of the House Judiciary Committee:

CHAIRMAN F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr. (202) 225-5101
RANKING MINORITY MEMBER John Conyers, Jr. (202) 225-5126

REPUBLICANS
Henry J. Hyde (202) 225-4561
Howard Coble (202) 225-3065
Lamar S. Smith (202) 225-4236
Elton Gallegly (202) 225-5811
Bob Goodlatte (202) 225-5431
Steve Chabot (202) 225-2216
Daniel Lungren (202) 225-5716
William L. Jenkins (202) 225-6356
Chris Cannon (202) 225-7751
Spencer Bachus 202 225-4921
Robert Inglis 202-225-6030
John N. Hostettler (202) 225-4636
Mark Green (202) 225-5665
Ric Keller (202) 225-2176
Darrell Issa 202-225-3906
Jeff Flake (202) 225-2635
Mike Pence (202) 225-3021
J. Randy Forbes (202) 225-6365
Steve King (202) 225-4426
Tom Feeney (202) 225-2706
Trent Franks 202-225-4576
Louie Gohmert (202) 225-3035

DEMOCRATS
Howard L. Berman (202) 225-4695
Rick Boucher (202) 225-3861
Jerrold Nadler 202-225-5635
Robert C. Scott (202) 225-8351
Melvin L. Watt (202) 225-1510
Zoe Lofgren (202) 225-3072
Sheila Jackson Lee (202) 225-3816
Maxine Waters (202) 225-2201
Martin T. Meehan (202) 225-3411
William D. Delahunt (202) 225-3111
Robert Wexler (202) 225-3001
Anthony Weiner (202) 225-6616
Adam Schiff (202) 225-4176
Linda T. Sanchez (202) 225-6676
Adam Smith 202-225-8901
Chris Van Hollen (202) 225-5341

TURNING POINTS, ALWAYS WITH THE TURNING POINTS

From The Rude Pundit:

July 24, 2003 (from the New York Times, after the deaths of Uday and Qusay Hussein): "White House officials however exuded determination they had turned a corner in the increasingly difficult task of restoring order from chaos in Iraq."

August 13, 2003 (from Fox "News" show Special Report With Brit Hume, Fred Barnes speaking): "Now, Paul Bremer says -- who's over there running the American regime in Iraq, where they've turned the corner in defeating the Baathists and so on and most of the country is safe and stable, says we don't need more troops...I think Bremer also said it was only about 100 terrorists have come in from...outside the country from Iran. And that's not really that many. So I don't think it's that big a problem."

January 1, 2004 (from ABC News, after a bomb blew up at a Baghdad New Year's celebration): "Last night's attack came at a time when coalition officials were cautiously beginning to feel that they had turned a corner here in Iraq."

June 2, 2004 (from CNN's Inside Politics, then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice speaking): "The reason that we've turned a corner and, more importantly, that Iraq has turned a corner and the Iraqi people have turned a corner is that they now have a government in place broadly representative of, broadly capable, I think, of representing the views of the Iraqi people that can now accept sovereignty and can be a full partner in trying to secure Iraq and in accelerating its reconstruction. The Iraqis don't like occupation any more than we would like occupation. And it is time for that occupation to end."

September 14, 2004 (from CNN's Newsnight With Aaron Brown, Senator Lindsay Graham speaking): "And between now and our November election and between now and January there will be hell to pay in Iraq because the stakes are very high but, if we can make it through January, Aaron, then I think we've turned the corner."

February 9, 2005 (from CNN's Wolf Blitzer Reports, Senator Lindsay Graham speaking after the Iraqi - and American - elections): "If we think we've turned the corner, this is a misreading of what happened. The attacks are going to continue."

April 15, 2005 (from Fox "News" show The Big Story With John Gibson, Richard Perle answering a question about whether or not a corner has been turned in Iraq): " I believe we've turned a corner. And that was -- that corner was turned when 8.5 million Iraqis braved death to cast their first votes. Now a government is being formed. The Iraqi people are invested in the future of their own country. And that was the critical turning point." The next question Gibson asked Perle was whether or not he ever felt like saying "we were right."

MY LTE GETS A REPLY

I agree with the May 2 letter "Why believe Bush?" that the president's news conference was disappointing and unconvincing. I also strongly disagree with Republicans who defend Bush's incoherent public appearances by stating it really does not matter that the president is not a polished professional speaker.
Fact is, the president often comes across as unable to string two intelligent thoughts together, and appears bewildered and confused unless reading from a scripted message about how America is advancing freedom across the globe by killing people.
Bush's limited communications skills mean that conservative ideas on important issues like Social Security reform are not fully understood, simply because the president is unable to present arguments in a clear, concise manner. His limitations also mean that vital messages to our allies and adversaries cannot be delivered by the "most powerful man on Earth." What a tragedy!
John W. Lillpop
San Jose, Calif.

RADIO TIDBITS

Last Friday I caught part of the Michael Savage Show. It was a repeat but what was relevant was the interview with one of our mullahs, either Falwell or Robertson. The mullah stated that only born-again Christians are worthy of salvation and Savage, somewhat surprisingly, strongly disagreed with him.

Several times in March, Bill Bennett was pushing the line that China was becoming serious threat to the United States. I thought this was a bit odd but since I didn't hear any more about it, I guessed that he was merely on "a frolic of his own." No longer. On Sunday, Matt Drudge interviewed Bill Geertz (Washington Times) about the looming China threat so I now believe that the Republicans will try to use China to scare us into voting for them.

IT TOOK A WHILE BUT....

I FINALLY GOT AN LTE PUBLISHED!

Why believe Bush?
Re: the April 29 article "Bush plan cuts Social
Security benefits for top earners."
Two years ago, Bush said, "Mission accomplished" in Iraq; days ago, it was said the insurgency was as strong as ever.
Two months ago, Bush said we needed a plan to prevent benefit
cuts in Social Security. Bush's plan: cut benefits.
Two weeks ago, Bush said the Treasury bonds held by Social Security were empty IOUs. Now they are safe investments.
Why does anyone still believe him?
Steven J
Tucson

BRITISH MEMO, JULY 2002

The secret Downing Street memo
SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY


IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY
C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.
The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult.