Archives for November 2004

November 29, 2004

ID making scary degree of headway

School boards in 24 states have now adopted some form of Intelligent Design to fit into its science curiculum, according to USA Today. This article also serves as a decent summing up of the controversy as it has evolved (ha!) of late. One interesting fact I'd not realized is that the largest Discovery Institute (home of all ID spin, located in Seattle) donor is Bill Gates.

posted by scott pilutik at November 29, 2004 05:36 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 24, 2004

creationism vs. evolution - the poll

A poll taken by CBS suggests that 65% of Americans want creationism taught alongside evolution. Of all the disturbing results, however, none are as disturbing as the last in the article - that 60% of Evangelical Christians favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools entirely. Note also that the poll respondents based their opinions on a Creationism alternative as opposed to Intelligent Design. My guess is that most Americans don't know what ID is. If you presume that ID is 'softer' than Creationism (and many would) these results suggest ID has a lot of room to, er, evolve.

God created humans in present form All Americans - 55% Kerry voters - 47% Bush voters - 67%

Humans evolved, God guided the process
All Americans - 27%
Kerry voters - 28%
Bush voters - 22%

Humans evolved, God did not guide process
All Americans - 13%
Kerry voters - 21%
Bush voters - 6%

FAVOR SCHOOLS TEACHING:

Creationism and evolution
All Americans - 65%
Kerry voters - 56%
Bush voters - 71%

Creationism instead of evolution
All Americans - 37%
Kerry voters - 24%
Bush voters - 45%

*sigh*

posted by scott pilutik at November 24, 2004 08:44 AM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 23, 2004

A day in the life at faith-based law school

From the New York Times today:

The school, part of Liberty University, whose chancellor is the Rev. Jerry Falwell, is for now a makeshift affair in a vast industrial building that used to be a cellular phone factory. Its students compensate for the surroundings by dressing well - many of the men wore jackets and ties - and by showing attentive enthusiasm, even for a heavy dose of civil procedure at 8 a.m.

The school, which says its mission is to train "ministers of justice," is part of a movement around the nation that means to bring a religious perspective to the law and a moral component to legal practice.

"People are realizing that some of the biggest issues of the day are being decided in the courts - the 2000 presidential election, the question of what is marriage, abortion, stem-cell research, cloning,'' said Jeffrey A. Brauch, the dean of Regent Law School, which was founded in 1986 in Virginia Beach by Pat Robertson, the television evangelist. "And maybe there are eternal principles of justice that will tell us how to approach these questions."

The new law schools say they are a sort of counterweight to the views that dominate the legal academy.

"The prevailing orthodoxy at the elite law schools is an extreme rationalism that draws a strong distinction between faith and reason," said Bruce W. Green, Liberty's dean.

...

The Liberty School of Law offers no courses in religion as such, and most of its classes are rigorous, practical and conventional. Like law students everywhere, students at Liberty spend much of their time reading and discussing judicial decisions. But where mainstream law professors tend to ask questions about judges' fidelity to precedent and the Constitution, Liberty professors often analyze decisions in terms of biblical principles.

"If our graduates wind up in the government," Dr. Falwell said, "they'll be social and political conservatives. If they wind up as judges, they'll be presiding under the Bible."

Many of the dozen students who chatted with a reporter over two days at the school, representing a fifth of the school's first and only class, said they were drawn to its emphasis on fundamental and enduring truths.

"We study the law that's written on the heart, the things that no one can deny," Brian Fraser said.

posted by sangwyn at November 23, 2004 01:42 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 15, 2004

Making No Sense in Defense of Nonsense

Dr. Gerry Lower at Axis of Logic makes so much sense today that he probably requires a warning sticker on his forehead declaring as much. In reviewing the current push towards 'stickering' grade school science text books with warnings that evolution is only a 'theory', Lower makes the case that the Creationists simply don't deserve to voice opposition to a theory that they can't or haven't or won't bother to counter. Lower also points out that the Creationists are playing semantic games - scientific 'fact' doesn't exist per se, by its very own rules of construction, and so everything is, in essence, a theory. But while Evolution is a theory backed by reams of undisputed, empirical evidence, 'Intelligent Design' is not even a theory.

Legal council for the Atlanta school district said that the "warning" stickers on biology textbooks were meant to "encourage critical thinking." This again is an argument that makes no sense in defense of nonsense. Critical thinking requires, after all, knowing something about the relationships between ideas, facts, hypotheses and theories. Critical thinking requires, after all, knowing something about natural philosophy and its historic American role in overcoming religious despotism two centuries ago.

There is and can be no intelligent or meaningful compromise between science and religion on this issue. As with arguments over the motions of the planets and the causes of human disease, ultimately one side will be accepted, i.e., "proven," and one side will be rejected as being inadequate to the job at hand. Creationism will be kindly requested to take its religion back home where it belonged all along in a democracy guaranteeing religious freedom. Its very presence in governmental and academic deliberations is an affront to the separation of church and state.

After all the idle debate, it comes down to a matter of human self-concept. The real issue here is whether we, as a people, ought base our views of life on supernatural conjecture (to become transcendentalists, supernaturalists and self-righteous fundamentalists) or on empirical reality (to become empiricists, realists, and thoughtful, caring, responsible citizens). In the end, the choice is ours, to have a view of life based on faith in faith itself or a view of life based on what we know and what we care about.

posted by scott pilutik at November 15, 2004 02:45 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 12, 2004

Welcome to the Retronaissance, Take 2

A fundamentalist Christian who dismisses evolution as "just a theory" has persuaded a Pennsylvania school board to mandate the teaching of "intelligent design" in high school science classes, to "balance" lessons on evolution:

When talk at the high school here turns to evolution, biology teachers have to make time for Charles Darwin as well as his detractors. With a vote last month, the school board in rural south-central Pennsylvania community is believed to have become the first in the nation to mandate the teaching of "intelligent design," which holds that the universe is so complex that it must have been created by an unspecified higher power.

Critics call the change in the ninth-grade biology curriculum a veiled attempt to require public schoolchildren to learn creationism, a biblical-based view that credits the origin of species to God. Schools typically teach evolution, the theory that Earth is billions of years old and that life forms developed over millions of years.

The state American Civil Liberties Union chapter is reviewing the Dover Area School District case. Its Georgia counterpart, meanwhile, is fighting a suburban Atlanta district's decision to include a warning sticker in biology textbooks that says evolution is "a theory, not a fact."

"What Dover has done goes much further than what's happened in Georgia," said Witold Walczak, legal director of the Pennsylvania ACLU. "As far as we can tell, Dover is the first school district that has actually mandated intelligent design."

The district enrolls about 2,800 students. It encompasses the small, rural community of Dover borough, about 20 miles south of Harrisburg, and a patchwork of farmland and newer suburban developments in several surrounding townships.

The revision was spearheaded by school board member William Buckingham, who heads the board's curriculum committee.

"I think it's a downright fraud to perpetrate on the students of this district, to portray one theory over and over," said Buckingham. "What we wanted was a balanced presentation."

Buckingham wanted the board to adopt an intelligent-design textbook, "Of Pandas and People: The Central Question of Biological Origins," as a supplement to the traditional biology book, but no vote was ever taken. A few weeks before the new science curriculum was approved, 50 copies were anonymously donated to the high school.

Although Buckingham describes himself as a born-again Christian and believes in creationism, "This is not an attempt to impose my views on anyone else," he said.

Two of the dissenting board members, Carol Brown and her husband, Jeff, were so upset that they resigned after the 6-3 vote on Oct. 18.

"We have a vocal group within the community who feel very strongly in an evangelical Christian way that there is no separation of church and state," Carol Brown said. "Our responsibility to is to represent the viewpoints of all members of the community."

If this becomes a trend, expect to see a whole new crop of home-schooling parents: those who want to ensure their children receive a reality-based education, rather than thinly veiled religious indoctrination.

posted by sangwyn at November 12, 2004 11:51 AM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 11, 2004

Frank Rich quells social conservative agenda hype

Frank Rich makes a great point - America is no stranger to Republican-spearheaded symbolic wedge issues in election years, only to see those issues die cold lonely deaths in election-year winters. While it's true that their most useful function for Republicans is as Democratic tar-pits, Rich may be giving Bush too much credit. Even as Kevin Drum points out that Bush's first verbally stated initiatives have nothing to do with a social-conservative agenda, it seems clear that the line has moved somewhat. I mean, Tom Coburn is closer to a moderate Fred Phelps than a moderate Republican and would never have ascended to a Senate seat in a less divisive environment. And no, Newt is Chomskyesque next to Coburn. Even scarier than the headline grabbing Coburn is South Carolina's Jim DeMint, who is a member of the "The Fellowship" DC insider jebus-cult, best known for their sponsorship of the "National Prayer Breakfast". So while I appreciate Rich's tempering of the current hypewave, I'm less quick to shove my fear of a nationally supported evangelical agenda away in a corner for four years, for the simple reason that for the first time, we have a president who listens to these lunatics with an unjaundiced and uncynical ear.

Update: More about the super-creepy Fellowship Foundation here and here.

posted by scott pilutik at November 11, 2004 11:49 AM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 10, 2004

The 80s Strike Back: Falwell launches Moral Majority v2.0

According to CNSNews.com, televangelist superstar Jerry Falwell has already figured out how to capitalize on the culture war with a brand new lobby group:

he Rev. Jerry Falwell is launching a new organization called The Faith and Values Coalition, which he describes as a "21st century resurrection of the Moral Majority."

The new coalition will lobby for pro-life judicial appointments; a federal amendment barring same-sex marriage; and the election of another conservative president in 2008.

Falwell, now 71, said he would serve as national chairman of the new coalition for four years.

"Following the sweeping re-election of President Bush and a new generation of conservative lawmakers nationwide, a new organization, The Faith and Values Coalition (TFVC), has been launched," Falwell announced Tuesday from his headquarters in Lynchburg, Va..

He said the group would capitalize on the momentum of the November 2 elections "to maintain an evangelical revolution of voters who will continue to go to the polls to 'vote Christian.'"

[...]

"One of our primary commitments is to help make President Bush's second term the most successful in American history," Falwell said. "He will certainly need the consistent prayer and support of the evangelical community as he continues to spearhead the international war on terror and the effort to safeguard America."

Three priorities

Falwell said the new organization has a three-fold platform:

-- the confirmation of pro-life, strict constructionist U.S. Supreme Court justices and other federal judges;

-- the passage of a Federal Marriage Amendment;

-- the election of another socially, fiscally, and politically conservative president in 2008.

And, for anyone in the audience who wondered whether the forces of Falwell and company have put the whole apocalypse/tribulation/rapture/lake of fire agenda on the backburner, fear not: Dr. Tim LaHaye, "theologian" and co-author of the disturbingly popular _Left Behind_ series has signed on as chairman of the board. Because, after all, it's not a party until Jesus comes back and kicks a little liberal ass.

Update: This Associated Press story on the New, Improved Moral Majority reads suspiciously like someone just summarized Falwell's press release.

posted by sangwyn at November 10, 2004 01:10 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 09, 2004

Sticker Shock (as seen from across the pond)

The Guardian weighs in on the battle over whether Bible-based creation theory belongs in secular science classes in Atlanta, Georgia:

A suburban American school board found itself in court yesterday after it tried to placate Christian fundamentalist parents by placing a sticker on its science textbooks saying evolution was "a theory, not a fact".

Atlanta's Cobb County school board, the second largest board in Georgia, added the sticker two years ago after a 2,300 strong petition attacked the presentation of "Darwinism unchallenged". Some parents wanted creationism - the theory that God created humans according to the Bible version - to be taught alongside evolution.

[...]

The controversy began when the school board's textbook selection committee ordered $8m (£4.3m) worth of the science books in March 2002. Marjorie Rogers, a parent who does not believe in evolution, protested and petitioned the board to add a sticker and an insert setting out other explanations for the origins of life.

"It is unconstitutional to teach only evolution," she said. "The school board must allow the teaching of both theories of origin."

Her efforts galvanised the fundamentalist community.

"God created earth and man in his image," another parent, Patricia Fuller, told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "Leave this garbage out of the textbooks. I don't want anybody taking care of me in a nursing home some day to think I came from a monkey."

Wendi Hill, one of the parents who signed the petition, said: "We believe the Bible is correct in that God created man. I don't expect the public school system to teach only creationism, but I think it should be given its fair share."

[Emphasis added to, alternately, give us reality-based monkeykin something to snicker over, or send us into a fugue state of depression. Also, make a mental note to avoid discussing science in nursing homes in Georgia.]

posted by sangwyn at November 9, 2004 12:12 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

Teach No Evil

A plan to bowdlerize sex education textbooks in Texas could dictate lesson plans for the rest of the country, reports the Christian Science Monitor:

Presidential politics isn't the only realm where the Texas way prevails. As a heavyweight in the $4.3 billion textbook market, the state puts its stamp on materials bound for many of the nation's classrooms.

On Friday, two messages came through loud and clear as the State Board of Education voted on a new list of approved health books: That abstinence should be taught without any textbook discussion of contraception. And that the books should be explicit about marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Texas is one of 21 states with a centralized process to review textbooks, but it's the second-biggest market. "If [interest] groups can be successful in California and Texas in getting some restrictions as to what content is covered, that will have a major influence on textbooks that are sold nationally," says Martha McCarthy, chancellor's professor of education at Indiana University in Bloomington.

Everything from evolution to multiculturalism has come up for scrutiny in textbook debates over the past century. But the origin of the state-approval process dates even further back to just after the Civil War. Southern states organized to keep out textbooks that they saw as disparaging the Confederacy, so Northern publishers began sending separate books with more palatable references, like "the War for Southern Independence," according to a September report on textbooks by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute in Washington.

The report criticizes states that dictate what books schools can purchase, saying the practice "entices extremist groups to hijack the curriculum, and papers the land with mediocre instructional materials." Textbook publishing is ripe for reform, it argues, because students spend somewhere between 50 percent and 90 percent of class and homework time focused on textbooks.

In hearings before Friday's vote in Texas, the debate centered on the discussion of abstinence and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) in four high school books. Protect Our Kids, a coalition of educators, health experts, parents, and religious leaders, raised concerns that three of the books don't talk about condoms or other contraceptives at all, while one mentions latex condoms briefly.

Instead, all the books teach that abstinence is the only 100 percent effective way to prevent pregnancy or STDs. One offers strategies such as going out in groups, avoiding alcohol and drugs, and getting plenty of rest to avoid having "to make a tough choice when you are tired."

(Read the full article here.)

Fellow editor Scott points out that, while the abstinence-only mandate is no less unsettling than the move to drive evolution out of the classroom, it does, at least, represent an legitimate point of view that isn't in flagrant conflict with reality.

However, let's transpose the argument made by the pro-abstinence "educators" to another high school staple. It is entirely accurate to state that the only way to completely prevent death or injury in a car crash is to never set foot in a car. However true this may be, though, it wouldn't make for much of a driver's ed class.

Once again, we see a clash between ideology and belief, and the reality that all the pro-abstinence messages in the world will not stop some teenagers from having sex with each other. Strategic editing of textbooks does not make teen sex, teen pregnancy, or same-sex relationships disappear. (In fact, it is far more likely to increase the incidence of teen pregnancy, in which Texas already leads the nation amongst 15-17 year old girls.

And don't forget -- market pressures may result in the same material being taught to students across the country.

Thanks, Texas!

posted by sangwyn at November 9, 2004 12:01 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 08, 2004

Herbert - it's the stupidity stupid

For all the hand-wringing over Values being the pivotal factor in this year's election, Bob Herbert reminds us of the real reason Bush was reelected:

I think a case could be made that ignorance played at least as big a role in the election's outcome as values. A recent survey by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland found that nearly 70 percent of President Bush's supporters believe the U.S. has come up with "clear evidence" that Saddam Hussein was working closely with Al Qaeda. A third of the president's supporters believe weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. And more than a third believe that a substantial majority of world opinion supported the U.S.-led invasion.

This is scary. How do you make a rational political pitch to people who have put that part of their brain on hold? No wonder Bush won.

Herbert is right, of course. But he could've go one step further to remind us why we're all so stupid - the free ride his paper, amongst others gave the Bush administration in the run-up to the war. And while I do see occasional splotches of blue sky between the more frequent clouds, I'll believe the media is actually doing its job when they start calling this administration's lies for what they are.

posted by scott pilutik at November 8, 2004 10:44 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

Kinsley

Michael Kinsley gets to the heart of the matter in asking whose values actually impose on the others':

I mean, look at it this way. (If you don't mind, that is.) It's true that people on my side of the divide want to live in a society where women are free to choose and where gay relationships have civil equality with straight ones. And you want to live in a society where the opposite is true. These are some of those conflicting values everyone is talking about. But at least my values — as deplorable as I'm sure they are — don't involve any direct imposition on you. We don't want to force you to have an abortion or to marry someone of the same sex, whereas you do want to close out those possibilities for us. Which is more arrogant?

We on my side of the great divide don't, for the most part, believe that our values are direct orders from God. We don't claim that they are immutable and beyond argument. We are, if anything, crippled by reason and open-mindedness, by a desire to persuade rather than insist. Which philosophy is more elitist? Which is more contemptuous of people who disagree?

posted by scott pilutik at November 8, 2004 06:44 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

Inherit the Warning Stickers?

A court in Georgia has set the stage for a revival production of the infamous Scopes monkey trial - only this time, it is the opponents of evolution on the defensive:

A warning sticker in suburban Atlanta science textbooks that says evolution is "a theory, not a fact" was challenged in court Monday as an unlawful promotion of religion.

The disclaimer was adopted by Cobb County school officials in 2002 after hundreds of parents signed a petition criticizing the textbooks for treating evolution as fact without discussing alternate theories, including creationism.

"The religious views of some that contradict science cannot dictate curriculum," American Civil Liberties Union attorney Maggie Garrett argued Monday before U.S. District Judge Clarence Cooper. The trial is expected to last several days.

But a lawyer for Cobb County schools, Linwood Gunn, held up a copy of a textbook's table of contents Monday that showed dozens of pages about evolution.

"The sticker doesn't exist independently of the 101 pages about evolution," Gunn said. "This case is not about a sticker which has 33 words on it. ... It's about textbooks that say a lot more than that."

The stickers read: "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered."

One of the parents who filed the lawsuit, Jeffrey Selman, said the stickers discredit the science of evolution.

"It's like saying everything that follows this sticker isn't true," he said.

Next on the agenda, perhaps: warning stickers affixed to the first page of all future editions of the American classic "Inherit the Wind"?

posted by sangwyn at November 8, 2004 12:37 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 07, 2004

Wisconsin district to teach creationism

Perhaps a deal could be worked out that'd keep everyone happy: anyone who disagrees with evolution can do so. However, they must conversely reject all historical advancements which were borne from the scientific method. Picking and choosing between Science and Faith will not be tolerated. 'Oh, you're getting chemo for your cancer? I'm sorry, that's Science, it'll have to go. But you've got Faith - so chin up!'

My point is that it's just flat out hypocritical that an entire community can come to agree on so many things that were produced as a result of a method that clearly works. But when that method evidences a scenario which conflicts with religious dogma, it is not the method that is attacked, but the evidence.

Anyway, expect to see more stories like this one now that prophet-elect Bush has his mandate.

posted by scott pilutik at November 7, 2004 08:24 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 06, 2004

What Would Jesus Raze?

Very disturbing report from AFP:

Men with buzzcuts and clad in their camouflage waved their hands in the air, M-16 assault rifles laying beside them, and chanted heavy metal-flavoured lyrics in praise of Christ late Friday in a yellow-brick chapel.

They counted among thousands of troops surrounding the city of Fallujah, seeking solace as they awaited Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's decision on whether or not to invade Fallujah.

"You are the sovereign. You're name is holy. You are the pure spotless lamb," a female voice cried out on the loudspeakers as the marines clapped their hands and closed their eyes, reflecting on what lay ahead for them.

The US military, with many soldiers coming from the conservative American south and midwest, has deep Christian roots.

In times that fighting looms, many soldiers draw on their evangelical or born-again heritage to help them face the battle.

"It's always comforting. Church attendance is always up before the big push," said First Sergeant Miles Thatford.

"Sometimes, all you've got is God."

No wonder there are no atheists in foxholes -- who'd admit to such a thing surrounded by ritualistic battle rites like this?

posted by sangwyn at November 6, 2004 10:34 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 04, 2004

friedman - two nations under god

Tom Friedman is disillusioned for all the right reasons but time will tell if he's saying the same thing in a few months. Friedman was one of the main Iraq war-pushers from the center-left, so it'll be awhile before I'll trust him. But he makes some sense here, in pitching the election as a referendum on 'which America?' --

Is it a country that does not intrude into people's sexual preferences and the marriage unions they want to make? Is it a country that allows a woman to have control over her body? Is it a country where the line between church and state bequeathed to us by our Founding Fathers should be inviolate? Is it a country where religion doesn't trump science? And, most important, is it a country whose president mobilizes its deep moral energies to unite us - instead of dividing us from one another and from the world?

posted by scott pilutik at November 4, 2004 10:51 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

yeats summarizes election results

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all convictions, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

The Second Coming -- W. B. Yeats

posted by scott pilutik at November 4, 2004 10:02 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

concession speech

I wish I'd written this. I'll post the entire thing, but the original, written by Adam Felber, can be found here. (found originally at thepoorman)

Concession Speech

[Former candidate Felber, flanked by his family and supporters, steps up to the podium in the bright autumn sunlight. Cheers and applause are heard.]

My fellow Americans, the people of this nation have spoken, and spoken with a clear voice. So I am here to offer my concession. [Boos, groans, rending of garments]

I concede that I overestimated the intelligence of the American people. Though the people disagree with the President on almost every issue, you saw fit to vote for him. I never saw that coming. That's really special. And I mean "special" in the sense that we use it to describe those kids who ride the short school bus and find ways to injure themselves while eating pudding with rubber spoons. That kind of special.

I concede that I misjudged the power of hate. That's pretty powerful stuff, and I didn't see it. So let me take a moment to congratulate the President's strategists: Putting the gay marriage amendments on the ballot in various swing states like Ohio... well, that was just genius. Genius. It got people, a certain kind of people, to the polls. The unprecedented number of folks who showed up and cited "moral values" as their biggest issue, those people changed history. The folks who consider same sex marriage a more important issue than war, or terrorism, or the economy... Who'd have thought the election would belong to them? Well, Karl Rove did. Gotta give it up to him for that. [Boos.] Now, now. Credit where it's due.

I concede that I put too much faith in America's youth. With 8 out of 10 of you opposing the President, with your friends and classmates dying daily in a war you disapprove of, with your future being mortgaged to pay for rich old peoples' tax breaks, you somehow managed to sit on your asses and watch the Cartoon Network while aging homophobic hillbillies carried the day. You voted with the exact same anemic percentage that you did in 2000. You suck. Seriously, y'do. [Cheers, applause] Thank you. Thank you very much.

There are some who would say that I sound bitter, that now is the time for healing, to bring the nation together. Let me tell you a little story. Last night, I watched the returns come in with some friends here in Los Angeles. As the night progressed, people began to talk half-seriously about secession, a red state / blue state split. The reasoning was this: We in blue states produce the vast majority of the wealth in this country and pay the most taxes, and you in the red states receive the majority of the money from those taxes while complaining about 'em. We in the blue states are the only ones who've been attacked by foreign terrorists, yet you in the red states are gung ho to fight a war in our name. We in the blue states produce the entertainment that you consume so greedily each day, while you in the red states show open disdain for us and our values. Blue state civilians are the actual victims and targets of the war on terror, while red state civilians are the ones standing behind us and yelling "Oh, yeah!? Bring it on!"

More than 40% of you Bush voters still believe that Saddam Hussein had something to do with 9/11. I'm impressed by that, truly I am. Your sons and daughters who might die in this war know it's not true, the people in the urban centers where al Qaeda wants to attack know it's not true, but those of you who are at practically no risk believe this easy lie because you can. As part of my concession speech, let me say that I really envy that luxury. I concede that.

Healing? We, the people at risk from terrorists, the people who subsidize you, the people who speak in glowing and respectful terms about the heartland of America while that heartland insults and excoriates us... we wanted some healing. We spoke loud and clear. And you refused to give it to us, largely because of your high moral values. You knew better: America doesn't need its allies, doesn't need to share the burden, doesn't need to unite the world, doesn't need to provide for its future. Hell no. Not when it's got a human shield of pointy-headed, atheistic, unconfrontational breadwinners who are willing to pay the bills and play nice in the vain hope of winning a vote that we can never have. Because we're "morally inferior," I suppose, we are supposed to respect your values while you insult ours. And the big joke here is that for 20 years, we've done just that.

It's not a "ha-ha" funny joke, I realize, but it's a joke all the same.

Being an independent candidate gives me one luxury - as well as conceding the election today, I am also announcing my candidacy for President in 2008. [Wild applause, screams, chants of "Fel-ber! Fel-ber!] Thank you.

And I make this pledge to you today: THIS time, next time, there will be no pandering. This time I will run with all the open and joking contempt for my opponents that our President demonstrated towards the cradle of liberty, the Ivy League intellectuals, the "media elite," and the "white-wine sippers." This time I will not pretend that the simple folk of America know just as much as the people who devote their lives to serving and studying the nation and the world. They don't.

So that's why I'm asking for your vote in 2008, America. I'm talking to you, you ignorant, slack-jawed yokels, you bible-thumping, inbred drones, you redneck, racist, chest-thumping, perennially duped grade-school grads. Vote for me, because I know better, and I truly believe that I can help your smug, sorry asses. Vote Felber in '08! Thank you, and may God, if he does in fact exist, bless each and every one of you.

[Tumultuous cheers, applause, and foot-stomping. PULL BACK to reveal the rest of the stage, the row of cameras, hundreds of unoccupied chairs, and the empty field beyond.]

posted by scott pilutik at November 4, 2004 07:30 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

unity - don't hold your breath

The word Unity is no stranger to post election feel-goodism, but there's good reason to believe that this year's chiming is as hollow as its ever been. If 'Unity' has a lawyer, it should file a defamation suit.

from NY Times:

Dr. Dobson and several other Christian conservatives said they believed the expanded Republican majority in the Senate and the defeat of the Senate Democratic leader, Tom Daschle, put them in striking distance of both amending the constitution to ban same-sex marriage and approving the appointment of enough conservative Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade and other abortion rights cases.

CNN has a poll indicating, amongst other delusions, that most people are 'hopeful'.

I guess it's a more honest word than unity. After all, I have hope too - that this administration becomes mired and scandal and thus neutralized. But until the press starts doing its job and holding this administration accountable, I don't have much of it.

posted by scott pilutik at November 4, 2004 08:34 AM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

November 03, 2004

redistricting

(found in daily kos' comments)

posted by scott pilutik at November 3, 2004 07:50 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink

the civil crusades

Andrew Sullivan writes:

What we're seeing, I think, is a huge fundamentalist Christian revival in this country, a religious movement that is now explicitly political as well. It is unsurprising, of course, given the uncertainty of today's world, the devastating attacks on our country, and the emergence of so many more liberal cultures in urban America. And it is completely legitimate in this country for such views to be represented in public policy, however much I disagree with them. But the intensity of the passion, and the inherently totalist nature of religiously motivated politics means deep social conflict if we are not careful.

We're being careful to this point?

posted by scott pilutik at November 3, 2004 07:36 PM

digg  |  del.icio.us  |  reddit
permalink