Crusading Against Same-Sex Marriage

Keep Your Church Out of Our Government and We'll Keep Our Government Out of Your Church!!!

And Yes, all of your "holier than thou" types...this document DOES EXIST!!! And Thomas JEfferson wrote it not Satan!

Statute of Religious Freedom
1777
Jefferson first drafted his “Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom” in 1777. Although it was not enacted into law until 1786, it firmly established the principles of religious freedom and the separation of church and state and provided the basis for the First Amendment’s clause on religion.

http://www.pbs.org/jefferson/archives/documents/ih195802.htm

We need to fight against this oppression. We need to organize ourselves to be every bit as forceful as they are.

We need to learn how to take off the "demon" label from gays and put it on corrupted officials instead.

That is what the dcp is about.

http://img8.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img8&image=bush-stole-it.png

This is absolutely incredible. I guess the separation of church and state has been completely blurred and we are no longer even beginning to by into it. This sort of ideology is very dangerous and can lead to incredible controls. This has happened before and we must stop it-we must be sure that we organized and stay focused. This is really scary. I hope many people get the word out.

Hello, everyone - hope your Thanksgiving was a good one, and you are not as bloated as I am. Here is a little snippet from Michael Moore's site:

Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell's office offered contradictory statements this week regarding the request for a statewide recount. First spokesman Carlo LoParo said, "there can't be a recount until the votes have been counted the first time," but strangely, the following day, he said, "the boards are conducting what for all intents and purposes is a recount right now." Sound confusing to you? Us too. Are they conducting a count, or a recount? Give Ohio Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell a call to find out exactly what is going on: 877-767-3453

Reach out and touch someone!

Indy,
That is a great link.

The neocons have forgotten our history of democracy and why we have the separation of church and state.

They have forgotten the religious abuses that happened in England and which were the fundamental reason for our forefathers putting that clause into our Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

They also have forgotten the history of (religious) persecution that led ot our forefathers limiting the power of government to "spy" on its people.

Each of our amendments was created to protect our freedoms, yet they try to narrow them down to fit into what they consider to be "moral and justified."

Whether we are gay or know people who are gay, these actions have much farther reaching ramifications. We need to build our base here and now because we are the true defenders of the democracy our forefathers dreamed. (And they are the nightmare!)

Sparrow,

I am not sure I agree--I don't think they have forgotten at all, I think they are using the best of what we have in our country--our ability to organize, free speech, and the right to assemble to impose their garbage. This needs to be countered and exposed--I hope many people bring this up in the December Meet-ups.

Reach out and touch someone!

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 26, 2004 08:55 PM

Did you say "touch" or smack upside the head?

Iraq officials seek delay for elections http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/I/IRAQ?SITE=TNKNN&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Hmmmmmm

I saw that Times article as well, and it turned my stomach. And yet Burress' story also gave me great insight into his twisted psyche, and that of people like him, when he described his "obsession" with pornography, and what he did to obtain it - and now what he does to try and prevent others from experiencing it. This is so typical of the kind of the right wing zealot that we are dealing with. They have a problem, and insist that their problem become our problem - rather than devoting the necessary time and focus to exploring, and exorcizing, their own inner demons.

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 26, 2004 08:55 PM

Kik:

Very likely they are recounting while they count: 1 kerry vote for record--3 kerry votes for trash 1 Bush vote for record--3 Bush votes to add.

Frankly--since there is NO transparency, they can call it whatever they want to call it; however, they better not be charging the tax payers for their deceptive actions.

And until both sides have transparency and representation, it's not worth the money they are spending on it.

Looks like some of the neocons are out to go after and "destroy" the ACLU..until they need their services, I'm sure..didn't the ACLU defend Limbaugh and his medical record privacy??

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=41564

Chicago man has launched a website to mobilize millions of Americans to consign the American Civil Liberties Union to the "ash heap of history."

The ACLU, says the website StopThe ACLU.org, is "relentlessly and fiercely assaulting America's foundations by feverishly working through activist court systems to impose same-sex marriage and remove all vestiges of the Ten Commandments wherever they may be posted."

His website exists for one purpose, he said, "to mobilize millions of God-fearing, patriotic Americans to stand up to the ACLU agenda and consigning it to the ash heap of history (or export it to Communist regions)."

This is what I was referring to this morning where I didn't have the link - someone had sent it my way. What struck me is that this dude knows nothing about moderation. He went overboard with his porno to the point where he ruined two marriages. Then when he becomes a religious nut he is so fanatical that he doesn't trust Republicans unless they share his exact level of intensity with his bizarre believes. This is one sick fellow!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6374820/

KIEV, Ukraine - Ukraine opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko, defiant and backed by tens of thousands of supporters, on Friday demanded a new presidential election be held to replace last weekend’s widely contested vote.

Hmmm...Ukraine wants legitimate elections. Their press wants legitimate elections.

So why does't our pResident "Thief in OFFICE 2x" demand the legitimate Democratic elections which we deserve! And why doesn't our media demand that we uphold Democracy and eliminate corruption and fraud?

Perhaps, Russia, and the Ukraine, and all the world will laugh at Bush when he tries to bully them.

He can run from his record--our 2 timing thieving President--but he can't hide.

I think that is an incredible insight, hpleft. It is a symptom of a number of personality disorders to project one's own issues on the culture as a whole, or onto one powerful person.

Mr. Burress, like some others we know, chose to overcome an addiction--NOT through insight or reconciliation of inner and outer urges, but by projecting that kind of split thinking onto others.

When I worked as a movement therapist, these patients were the most difficult to treat, because they were invariably quite charming at first, only to reveal a layer of judgement of others, passice agressive rage, and an unwillingness to own their own tantrums.

The only way to address such personality types is through supportive confrontation on the part of a range of people who are important to the person. In other words, intervention, followed by intensive therapy that involves a high degree of self-examination of beliefs.

Anyone else have similar experiences with these types?

There must be ways to pool our knowledge and take appropriate action.

These people are really bright. Stop the ACLU - yeah, right. We just sent $100 to the ACLU. The ACLU even defended the right for some rightwingers of a type I don't want to even mention to march in a parade in Idaho. (hint - they resemble an archaic Germanic cult) What are these people thinking?

They are the same type who are so small-minded & dense that they vote against their own interests - they vote for people to bust their own unions, to make it so they can't sue if they are unjustly harmed, so their children don't have healthcare access. They have low self esteem & identify with their bosses - they believe in the trickle down theory. They are going to have buyer's remorse - I am shocked they hadn't in time for the election, but I suppose the propaganda was too strong.

Speaking of separation of church and state..there was this blurb about military bases, etc.. sponsoring Boy Scout groups.
There is also a thread over at DU about it

http://tinyurl.com/4kn7x

WASHINGTON, Nov. 25 (UPI) -- U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has spoken out in support of military bases sponsoring Boy Scout troops, the Washington Times said Thursday.

At issue is a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union that claims the government sponsorship violates religious freedoms since the Boy Scouts require members to pledge allegiance to God.

In a partial settlement, the Justice Department, representing the Pentagon, agreed to warn military commanders not to officially sponsor Scout units.

In response to letters of complaint from at least three conservative Republicans, Rumsfeld voiced his support for the sponsorships.

DU thread:
http://tinyurl.com/6stz5

There was a fascinating comment at the end of the 2nd Religion and the Presidency Panel on C-SPAN today. One of the audience members had done some research that had been picked up by the NY Times, and become part of a recent story. The research indicated that people living in decadent, oh so "liberal" Massachusetts were among the least likely to get divorced, a trend that persisted throughout NE, and mid-Atlantic states through NJ. This greater likelihood of remaining married was linked to a superior quality of education.

Posted by: hpleft | November 26, 2004 09:17 PM

They project their fears and shame onto all of us. And they don't hesitate to use fear to motivate people to do what they want.

Many of these people are genuinely good people, but they have learned to let fear and prejudice rule their lives. I hope through the dnc we will be able to learn how to connect to those moderates in the "red states" and teach them about true values, not just expediant values.

Oh, YEAH...meanwhile neon blinking red TEXAS is near the top for divorce, teen pregnancies, and abortions. There were other red states that had ALOT higher percentages in every category than the blue states. I'm sure the stats will be blamed on us blue people trapped in the red states. I'll look for the link.
The other stat was how the blue states tend to have a lot more comprehensive sex ed classes in their school and not JUST abstinence . Can repubs connect the dots here?? Or will they
rearrange the dots to try and prove their case that "teach only abstinence" is the cure all?

Posted by: sparrow | November 26, 2004 09:39 PM

I personally think that it's time to adopt a mental health model in such discussions. We need to bring these kinds of splits, fears and disorders to light - and make them an issue. As a passionate advocate for modernity, I feel that we have been fighting with one hand tied behind our back for too long.

Here ya go..some numbers:

http://tinyurl.com/4dqlm

As of May 1, only 14 states required contraception to be covered in sex education, and 21 states required that abstinence be stressed, according to SIECUS, a nonprofit that promotes education about contraceptives.

The numbers put out by SIECUS indicate that of the 14 states that mandate contraception be covered, nine of the five have teen birth rates that fall below the national average. The national teen birth rate is 45 per 1,000 women ages 15-19. Maine, with one of the most comprehensive sex education programs in the nation, has a birth rate of 27 per 1,000, whereas it is 66 per 1,000 in Texas. Delaware, which mandates that both abstinence and contraceptives be covered if sex education has been taught, has a birth rate of 44 per 1,000.In Maryland, which mandates that sex education cover contraceptives, the birth rate is 38 per 1000 women.

In many ways, I think the problems we face have a lot to do with aggression - who is willing to be the most aggressive?

It always seems that a platform of intolerance attracts the most boldly aggressive people, whether they are trying to suppress the rights of people because of their color, or their sexual orientation, or their gender. When I look back on the history of intolerance in America, I see the lengths people have been willing to go in order to achieve these exclusionary agendas - lynchings, for example. And witch hunts. And gay murders. And there are other legal methods, like the efforts employed by Burress. These are all part of a pattern of bold, highly charged aggressiveness that characterizes movements of intolerance and undermines our society's adherence to egalitarian principles. Things seem to spiral downward until those who are tolerant get equally bold in their efforts to put forward more inclusive doctrines.

It also seems clear to me, from watching my deer, that the aggressors will be as intolerant as the others will allow. I just watched a small yearling take on the queen doe in our yard. I cringed, knowing the doe and fearing the outcome, and watched in amazement as that little one stood her ground and refused to back down. She's not aggressive, far from it, but she had finally had enough of the bullying. My own little Rosa Parks, right here in my yard.

Somewhere, sometime, in some way, we will all have to be Rosa Parkses together - we will all have to refuse to give up our seats, refuse to go to the back of the bus, and stand by our principles of equality and justice, in spite of the consequences. And we will all have to be willing to walk to work, day after day for weeks on end, even if our feet bleed.

Until we do that, until we stop fearing the consequences of our dissent, things will only get worse.

Great words Amy.

There is much we can do together--and with our friends and compatriots.

Rosa Parks was not alone--she knew she had the backing of a group.

No one here is alone either.

Wow - I just read the article in it's entirely, and it's clear this Burress man is one twisted fugg.

A porno addict, twice divorced, attacking what he hates most about himself and projecting it onto others. Sad and scary. Also, the gay marriage issue is beginning to make my blood boil more and more each day as I watch these hateful people bullying and attacking others, and attempting to invade others' personal lives, and take away their rights. It is beyond me how someone can concern themselves so deeply and vehemently with who someone else may or may not marry. There's no good reason for it, other than a deliberate attempt to undermine the happiness and well-being of others by people who clearly hate themselves. No one with a healthy self-image has to oppress someone else to feel good about their own worth.

These neo-cons are wallowing in self-loathing and trying to take everone else down with them.

Is it my imagination or is deep-rooted homophobia likely caused by feelings of shame and fear brought on by homosexual urges that the person does not want to face up to?

"Is it my imagination or is deep-rooted homophobia likely caused by feelings of shame and fear brought on by homosexual urges that the person does not want to face up to? "

Works for me, although I'd personally exchange the word "homosexual" for "bisexual". As a colleague pointed out a few years ago, all human behavior can be described by a bell curve EXCEPT sexuality. Methinks respondents are a little wary of telling the absolute truth on this one...

It's not simply a case of churches opposing gay rights.

Locally there is a liberal church which has made a point of being open to everyone, regardless of sexual preference. Several years ago they were affiliated with the Dutch Reform Church, which is very conservative. (I've never understood why Holland is so liberal, yet the local Dutch are so conservative). They were kicked out of the Dutch Reform Church over such stances.

More recently they've had some signs up noting their position. They also had some pre-election ads which could not officially endorce anyone, but it was obvious (with minimal reading between the lines) that they supported Kerry. The local papers are full with angry villiagers protesting this "evil" church. For example, one person wrote in shock, asking what she is to tell her young son that same sex marriage means! Shocking! (sarcasm).

From the Mission Statement on their web site (with a statment which is shocking to many of the natives):

Christ Community is an alternative to church as usual.

We live together in the awe of worship in the Presence of the Mystery of God Whose inclusive grace moves us to embrace all with unconditional love and gracious acceptance, irrespective of race, gender, economic status, age or sexual orientation,

http://www.christ-community.net/html/mission_statement.html

hpleft -

Yes, that makes sense. Your description is probably quite accurate. I suspect all prejudices are rooted in fear and insecurity.

I highly recommend "Religion and the Presidency: The Early Presidents" on C-SPAN if you get a chance to see one of the repeat showings. I see it is on Monday morning at 4:20! I learned some interesting things about Jefferson and his famous letter to the Danbury Baptists where the term "separation of church and state" is first used. He was most likely reinforcing the concept of federalism - the federal government will stay out of the way of the right of states to make laws about religion (re: first amendment - Congress shall make no laws regarding an establishment of religion - empahsizing Congress here - the federal governmnet). After some digging around on the internet after I saw the show on C-SPAN, it appears most scholarly researchers agree that Jefferson is not putting up that bricks and mortar wall between the federal government and religion that the Supreme Court has interepreted from his writings.

Jefferson himself regularly attended church services in the House of Representatives - yes, in the Capitol Building! Jefferson also approved several other federal buildings for use in Sunday morning church services. A scholar's comment on this was that perhaps because these services were voluntary, he allowed them to happen in federal buildings.

Jefferson won election to the presidency in a cliffhanger after his opponents attacked him relentlessly on religious issues. They painted him as ungodly based on his Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom and for positions taken by the Democratic Party. According to the presentation on C-SPAN, Jefferson demonstrated his personal "piety" or "religion" during his first term as way of counteracting the intensely personal attacks from the campaign and as a political move to assure the American people that he was not godless. His opponents had predicted a Jefferson presidency would cause an increase in the "teaching of "murder robbery, rape, adultery and incest." How Rovian.

Just some more "musings" - with a little different twist - on Jefferson and separation of church and state.

Religous Intolerance in America - http://www.religioustolerance.org/relintol3.htm#na

The Williamsburg Charter. One effort to return to basic principles is the Williamsburg Charter. Drafted by members of America's leading faiths and revised over the course of two years in close consultation with political, academic, educational and religious leaders, the charter was signed in 1988 by former Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, two chief justices of the United States, and by nearly 200 leaders of national life. With their signatures, these individuals strongly reaffirmed the principles of religious liberty as essential for developing a common vision for the common good.

The Williamsburg Charter states in part:

"We affirm that a right for one is a right for another and a responsibility for all. A right for a Protestant is a right for an Eastern Orthodox is a right for a Catholic is a right for a Jew is a right for a Humanist is a right for a Mormon is a right for a Muslim is a right for a Buddhist — and for the followers of any other faith within the wide bounds of the republic.

"That rights are universal and responsibilities mutual is both the premise and the promise of democratic pluralism. The First Amendment in this sense, is the epitome of public justice and serves as the golden rule for civic life. Rights are best guarded and responsibilities best exercised when each person and group guards for all others those rights they wish guarded for themselves."

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/rel_liberty/history/overview.aspx

This entire page linked above is worth reading!

'I Believe in an America Where the Separation of Church and State is Absolute'
September 12, 1960, address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association

John F. Kennedy



While the so-called religious issue is necessarily and properly the chief topic here tonight, I want to emphasize from the outset that we have far more critical issues to face in the 1960 election; the spread of Communist influence, until it now festers 90 miles off the coast of Florida--the humiliating treatment of our President and Vice President by those who no longer respect our power--the hungry children I saw in West Virginia, the old people who cannot pay their doctor bills, the families forced to give up their farms--an America with too many slums, with too few schools, and too late to the moon and outer space.
These are the real issues which should decide this campaign. And they are not religious issues--for war and hunger and ignorance and despair know no religious barriers.

But because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected President, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured--perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again--not what kind of church I believe in, for that should be important only to me--but what kind of America I believe in.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute--where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote--where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference--and where no man is denied public office merely because his religion differs from the President who might appoint him or the people who might elect him.

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish--where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source--where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials--and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew--or a Quaker--or a Unitarian--or a Baptist. It was Virginia's harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson's statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim--but tomorrow it may be you--until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end--where all men and all churches are treated as equal--where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice--where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind--and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood.

That is the kind of America in which I believe. And it represents the kind of Presidency in which I believe--a great office that must neither be humbled by making it the instrument of any one religious group nor tarnished by arbitrarily withholding its occupancy from the members of any one religious group. I believe in a President whose religious views are his own private affair, neither imposed by him upon the nation or imposed by the nation upon him as a condition to holding that office.

I would not look with favor upon a President working to subvert the first amendment's guarantees of religious liberty. Nor would our system of checks and balances permit him to do so--and neither do I look with favor upon those who would work to subvert Article VI of the Constitution by requiring a religious test--even by indirection--for it. If they disagree with that safeguard they should be out openly working to repeal it.
I want a Chief Executive whose public acts are responsible to all groups and obligated to none--who can attend any ceremony, service or dinner his office may appropriately require of him--and whose fulfillment of his Presidential oath is not limited or conditioned by any religious oath, ritual or obligation.

This is the kind of America I believe in--and this is the kind I fought for in the South Pacific, and the kind my brother died for in Europe. No one suggested then that we may have a "divided loyalty," that we did "not believe in liberty," or that we belonged to a disloyal group that threatened the "freedoms for which our forefathers died."

And in fact this is the kind of America for which our forefathers died--when they fled here to escape religious test oaths that denied office to members of less favored churches--when they fought for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom--and when they fought at the shrine I visited today, the Alamo. For side by side with Bowie and Crockett died McCafferty and Bailey and Carey--but no one knows whether they were Catholic or not. For there was no religious test at the Alamo.

I ask you tonight to follow in that tradition--to judge me on the basis of my record of 14 years in Congress--on my declared stands against an Ambassador to the Vatican, against unconstitutional aid to parochial schools, and against any boycott of the public schools (which I have attended myself)--instead of judging me on the basis of these pamphlets and publications we all have seen that carefully select quotations out of context from the statements of Catholic church leaders, usually in other countries, frequently in other centuries, and always omitting, of course, the statement of the American Bishops in 1948 which strongly endorsed church-state separation, and which more nearly reflects the views of almost every American Catholic.

I do not consider these other quotations binding upon my public acts--why should you? But let me say, with respect to other countries, that I am wholly opposed to the state being used by any religious group, Catholic or Protestant, to compel, prohibit, or persecute the free exercise of any other religion. And I hope that you and I condemn with equal fervor those nations which deny their Presidency to Protestants and those which deny it to Catholics. And rather than cite the misdeeds of those who differ, I would cite the record of the Catholic Church in such nations as Ireland and France--and the independence of such statesmen as Adenauer and De Gaulle.

But let me stress again that these are my views--for contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters--and the church does not speak for me.
Whatever issue may come before me as President--on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject--I will make my decision in accordance with these views, in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.

But if the time should ever come--and I do not concede any conflict to be even remotely possible--when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same.

But I do not intend to apologize for these views to my critics of either Catholic or Protestant faith--nor do I intend to disavow either my views or my church in order to win this election.

If I should lose on the real issues, I shall return to my seat in the Senate, satisfied that I had tried my best and was fairly judged. But if this election is decided on the basis that 40 million Americans lost their chance of being President on the day they were baptized, then it is the whole nation that will be the loser, in the eyes of Catholics and non-Catholics around the world, in the eyes of history, and in the eyes of our own people.

But if, on the other hand, I should win the election, then I shall devote every effort of mind and spirit to fulfilling the oath of the Presidency--practically identical, I might add, to the oath I have taken for 14 years in the Congress. For without reservation, I can "solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution...so help me God.

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/40/story_4080_1.html

Many of these people are genuinely good people, but they have learned to let fear and prejudice rule their lives. I hope through the dnc we will be able to learn how to connect to those moderates in the "red states" and teach them about true values, not just expediant values.

Posted by: sparrow | November 26, 2004 09:39 PM

Hi, sparrow! Speaking a a red-stater, I don't think we need to so much "teach" the moderates as just hone our good message that we already have and make it sound like something reasonable people can understand, latch onto and incorporate into what they hope and dream for their future. I have TONS of friends and acquaintances who are Bush voters and they can be swayed over to our side by different messages (economic, social, etc.) but they all have to strongly and reasonably counter what the Republicans are offering and make a clear, sensible case for the hope, possibilities and promises that our way offers. We need some strong, straight-talking stuff going on with a huge dose of Clintonian hope.

I was flipping through my channels and as I was one of the journalist on CNN said something that caught my attention so I started listening. Then they started about the elections in Ukraine but what really ticked me off the showed a bunch of RW nuts standing outside a coffee shop in Texas holding signs, praising Chimp, and hollaring democracy for Ukraine. I wish these people would shove Chimp so far up there a$$ he would come out their throat and they would choke and die! I'm sitting hollaring back at the TV F**k UKRAINE WHAT ABOUT DEMOCRACY IN AMERICA! I'm telling you this crap is really getting to me and I have been in more arguments with some of these nuts in the past week or so you can't count and what is really bad I almost went to jail the day before Thanksgiving because this one B***H I ran across in a store seen me wearing a Kerry/Edwards shirt and smarted off and said I was a Dumba$$ for supporting a war criminal, faggot lover, and baby killer. Well I didn't think I just knocked the B***h on her A$$. Lucky for me there was a older lady there that heard what she said and told the manager but also she told a little white lie so to speak and told him the woman swung at me first. When she did the B***H I hit went off and started screaming calling the lady a liar anyway the manager called security and had the B***h escorted out of the store and she was barred from the store. That is probally the only thing that kept me from going to jail. When it was all over and the manager told us to enjoy our shopping and left the lady told me she was glad I hit that idoit and not to let it upset me because the idiot deserved it and it it wasn't for lying cheating a$$holes like her Kerry would be president. But I think the reality of all of this is I need to stay home because my anger is getting the best of me right now. And if I don't I'm going to end up in jail or asking directions to the closest mental ward.

Gays Try to Make Sense of `Values' Vote

By Dru Sefton
Religion News Service

The voters have spoken, and many of them said, "Moral values."

What they meant remains the debate among gays, no matter how clear it may be to opponents of same-sex marriage. A ban on those nuptials was approved Nov. 2 in 11 states -- everywhere it appeared on a ballot.
Did Republicans use gay marriage to frighten their evangelical base?

"Oh, they pounced on it, they just loved it," said Phyllis Lyon, who wed her partner of 51 years on Feb. 12 in a San Francisco ceremony later found to have violated California law. "It wouldn't have been an issue if they hadn't hyped it from the rooftops."

If the GOP did that, was it fair?

Of course, said Matt Daniels, author of the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. "All parties use all issues all the time to win elections," Daniels said.

Or might "moral values" mean something more than gay marriage?

"The reality is, this is about a larger set of cultural issues, most of which have nothing to do with same-sex marriage," said Christopher Barron, political director of the gay Log Cabin Republicans.

Reactions are as varied as the gay community -- which is, as Warren Arbogast said, "as diverse as the sea is wide."

Arbogast and his longtime partner, Steve Forssell, both 42, were deeply disappointed by the election. The two, born and still living in Washington, D.C., contacted a Canadian attorney and started the application process for permanent residency there.

"We don't want to get married, that's not it," Arbogast said. "But when 11 states have the opportunity to do the right thing, and all 11 in landslide fashion go against a civil rights measure, it calls into question, do we want to be here? And the answer is no."

That doesn't mean, he added, "that we hate the U.S. or are rescinding our citizenship or hate the president. What it means is, we feel like `coloreds' in the '60s: good for TV, fun at a party, but certainly not equal."

Matt, a 35-year-old gay man from Fort Wayne in the conservative "red state" of Indiana, agreed.

"When the civil rights of an entire class of people are put in the hands of a misinformed and ignorant electorate, justice is not served and it is not healthy for our country," said Matt, who asked that his last name not be used. "I've lived here all my life, I know how people react to these issues."

John B. Johnson says some gays' inability to speak freely may have figured in the election's outcome.

"There are people who wanted to speak out against the marriage amendment and couldn't for absolute fear," said Johnson, 35, who works in the office of government relations of the Episcopal Church in Washington, D.C. "In no democracy can a full hearing of an issue be debated when the people most affected by it are afraid to speak out."

But Daniels, president of the Washington-based Alliance for Marriage, says the election proved democracy works. Lawsuits pushing for gay marriage "displayed a contempt for values held by the vast majority of ordinary Americans," he said.

"The American people have this stubborn notion of governing themselves," Daniels said. "They reached for whatever democratic remedies were available to them."

Jonathan D. Katz, a professor of gay history at Yale University, said the politicization of gay issues is "not an unusual tactic."

"The right uses this whenever an external enemy disappears," said Katz, head of Yale's Larry Kramer Initiative for Lesbian and Gay Studies.

"We saw it in 1952, after the end of World War II," Katz said. Back then, Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis., led a purge of homosexuals in the government known as the "lavender scare."

"We saw it in 1989 at the end of the communist era," when Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., fought against federal funding of photographer Robert Mapplethorpe's artwork, Katz said. "And we saw it this time, after the lack of success prosecuting a war against al-Qaida."

Barron of the Log Cabin Republicans disagreed.

"This was much more about the cultural differences between middle America and what many people there view as the `liberal elite,"' he said. "I believe in the goodness of the American people, and I don't believe 59 million of them voted anti-gay."

Rebecca Maestri, president of the Virginia Log Cabin Republicans, was one of the gay "Austin 12" who were warmly received in April 2000 by then-candidate George W. Bush, Texas' governor, who later declared himself a "better person" for having had the meeting. In April 2001, President Bush selected one of the 12, Scott Evertz, to head the Office of National AIDS Policy -- the first gay nominated to an executive branch position by a GOP president.

Now, despite a very different political reality, Maestri remains optimistic.

"We have huge opportunities here," Maestri said. "I view it as a big function of education. We've got to realize it's not always about candidates and elections, but schools and churches. We've got to get out on the same battlefield where the opposition is coming from."

Back in San Francisco, Phyllis Lyon also is upbeat.

Lyon is 80. Her "spouse for life," Del Martin, is 83. The two have seen decades of changes in treatment of gays in their half-century together. "It's been said that this gay marriage is too much too soon," Lyon said. "Well, fiddle-diddle, it's been around a long time.

"Actually it was back in the '70s when gay marriage came up," Lyon said. "But we were more concerned with employment rights, fair housing, basic things like not being considered illegal and immoral and sick.

"We won on all those other things," she said.

"Now, more people need to know who we are, know that we're just like them. We aren't a special breed, we don't have horns and tails.

"We're just people."

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/156/story_15618_1.html

Exit Polls: Comparative Charts
How did the votes of Protestants, Catholics, and Jews in 2004 compare to 2000?

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/155/story_15571_1.html

David Barton & the 'Myth' of Church-State Separation
The Bush campaign has hired a controversial activist who calls the U.S. a 'Christian nation'

By Deborah Caldwell



The Republican National Committee is employing the services of a Texas-based activist who believes the United States is a “Christian nation” and the separation of church and state is “a myth.”

David Barton, the founder of an organization called Wallbuilders, was hired by the RNC as a political consultant and has been traveling the country for a year--speaking at about 300 RNC-sponsored lunches for local evangelical pastors. During the lunches, he presents a slide show of American monuments, discusses his view of America’s Christian heritage -- and tells pastors that they are allowed to endorse political candidates from the pulpit.
Barton, who is also the vice-chairman of the Texas GOP, told Beliefnet this week that the pastors' meetings have been kept “below the radar.... We work our tails off to stay out of the news.” But at this point, he says, with voter registration ended in most states and early voting already under way, staying quiet about the activity “doesn’t matter.”

Barton’s main contention is that the separation of church and state was never intended by the nation’s founders; he says it was created by the Supreme Court in the 20th Century. The back cover of his 1989 book, “The Myth of Separation,” proclaims: “This book proves that separation of church and state is a myth.” Barton is also on the board of advisers of the Providence Foundation, a Christian Reconstructionist group that advocates America as a Christian nation. (Click here for an explanation of Reconstructionism.)

In an appearance on D. James Kennedy’s radio show, "Truths That Transform," Barton says: "Was America ever a Christian nation? Well, according to the eyewitnesses--yes." And he adds: "I would say if 88% call themselves Christians, I would say, yeah, you probably have a fairly good basis to call it a Christian nation."

Read more - http://www.beliefnet.com/story/154/story_15469_1.html

Also see this link - http://www.bjcpa.org/Pages/Resources/Pubs/Critique%20of%20America's%20Godly%20Heritage.html

I always pray that the good core of our human character--which cherishes truth, peace, and freedom--will prevail. - The Dalai Lama

atta girl misty4kerry good for you hope you got her one good. Wish you had got her one for me too.

Kangaroo Brisbane Australia

The more I read about values and religion here, the more I wonder : where has freedom gone?

Ironically, I live in the 17th precinct in Paris where the statue of Liberty was built. To be more precise, it was in the rue de Chazelles, not that far from the Arch of Triumph.

I cannot help from making a striking parallel between what is going on in your country and the situation in France before the revolution. We then had two powers :

- A totalitarian king of divine right, whose power and decisions couldn't be challenged, and who raised the maximum taxes from the poorest. He was surrounded by courtisans closely connected to the court, who all got the good jobs and the money. Of course the press was not free.
Any difference with George II?

- The church and the clergy imposed a very strict religion upon an uneducated crowd, lived in opulence while they were starving.
But that was in the name of God.
Any difference with those wealthy Born Again churches?

Then came the thinkers, who challenged both powers, by stating that each man had the right to think by himself according to more humanistic values. They spread their message through libels and pamphets, that could be the internet and the blogs today. What started revolution was not only the spreading of new ideas, it was the rebellion of the manies against the concentration of money in the hands of too little.
Any difference with the big corporate groups today?

You are today's thinkers, whose values cannot be extinguished because they are the very soul of man.

I read through all the comments in this thread, and got more scared and furious by the minute. I am new here, and apart from fervently wanting Kerry to win, and donating the occasional small amount of money, new also to participating in this kind of discussions. But the election has left me with such an unbelievable taste of ashes in my mouth that I feel the need to actually do something. Just expressing my frustration is not much, I know, but I hope these few words may be a way to start. Please people, give me some advice, what can I do?

Good Op-Ed in the Baltimore Sun.

Validate the vote - by Ian H. Solomon (Associate Dean of Yale Law School)
November 26, 2004

MOST MAINSTREAM newspapers have already dismissed stories of voting fraud and voting rights violations in the November election as baseless or irrelevant. Sen. John Kerry's concession is supposed to demonstrate that there is no story here. Give up, go home, it's all over. But it's not over.

We would like to believe that voting irregularities were identified and corrected, that participants fulfilled their duties appropriately, that the machines performed reliably and that the total discrepancy between voter intention and recorded results was less than the margin of victory in relevant contests. But that conclusion must be reached on the basis of evidence, not blind faith.

Disturbingly, several Web sites have demonstrated the ease of hacking into the AccuVote TS machines made by Diebold Election Systems, the company that for $2.6 million recently settled a lawsuit by California over voting machine problems. Another major manufacturer of electronic voting machines, Election Systems & Software, has also been subject to criticism for machine breakdowns and vulnerability. There is no evidence of fraud, but neither manufacturer has assuaged widespread concerns about inappropriate partisanship and unreliability.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.el...

NO SURRENDER !!!

More political satire about religious hypocrisy, intolerance, and bigotry (to name only three) on the part of the Bush administration.... IMHO, Jefferson was correct!!! (Thanks for posting that, Indy.) Religion and politics must never, but never ever, be combined into one agenda. Never! (That means also canceling the executive order Bush originated and signed that funds faith-based charities... it's a slippery slope from there....)

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7371.htm

President Bush, I need some advice regarding God's Laws and how best to follow them

Dear President Bush:

11/26/04 "ICH" -- Congratulations on your election victory and for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. As you said, "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18.22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

However, I do need some advice from you regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how best to follow them.

1. Leviticus 25.44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans but not to Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21.7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness (Leviticus15.19-24). The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord. (Leviticus 1.9) The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35.2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus11.10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there degrees of abomination?

7. Leviticus.21.20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Leviticus19.27. How should they die?

9. I know from Leviticus 11.6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean. May I still play football if I wear gloves?

10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Leviticus 19.19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Leviticus 24.10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, as we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Leviticus 20.14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Yours truly,
An Inquiring Supporter

P.S. I look forward to your answers because there are a number of other issues that I'd like to get settled as soon as you've enlightened me on these ... Thanks again.

Can you say the word CORPORATE ?

Top-Giving Action Groups Favor GOP

Fri Nov 26, 8:58 AM ET

By SHARON THEIMER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The top-giving corporate political action committees didn't hedge their bets in the fall elections despite the narrow division between the GOP and Democrats in Congress. They favored Republican candidates 10-to-1.

Of 268 corporate PACs that donated $100,000 or more to presidential and congressional candidates from January 2003 through the middle of last month, 245 gave the majority of their contributions to GOP hopefuls, according to an analysis released Wednesday by the nonpartisan Political Money Line campaign finance tracking service.

more >

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041126/ap_on_el_pr/pac_giving&cid=694&ncid=2043

NO SURRENDER !!!

Great message from Harvey Fierstein, posted for those who may have missed it over Thanksgiving:

http://www.inthelifetv.org/1402_player.html

This one hits right at the heart of one of the aims of this web site: Media Reform.... (And another astute observation about religious hypocrisy.) American media (who were on a daily feeding frenzy over Clinton's infidelity, which should have been handled by him and his wife) has abandoned their First Amendment rights under the Bush administration, genuflecting before Bush and his minions as though they are lesser gods who can do no harm. NOW is when American media should be on a feeding frenzy over the injustices perpetrated against our own people, and the injustices perpetrated against innocent people in foreign countries..... Where, oh where, are the journalists with integrity who are willing to stand up against Bush and his administration?!?!? Where, oh where, are journalists in mainstream media who are willing to speak truth to power in mainstream media where everyone can hear about the cruelties perpetrated in our names, and see the evil Bush and his administration are doing to innocent children, women, and men?!?!? In this season of traditional thanksgiving, peace, and good will, do the good Christians of this nation really approve of what's being done in their names?!?!?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7370.htm

Stinky And The Vulcans

By Sheila Samples

11/26/04 "ICH" -- The kid and I were chatting happily last week about really really important things such as this country's top movie, Spongebob Squarepants, when, suddenly, she pointed at the TV screen behind me. Then, as her face contorted in anger, she said ominously -- "He's e-e-e-e-v-u-l..."

Startled by the look on her face, I turned to the TV, expecting to see the Red Skull with his boot on the neck of Captain America -- but it was only George Bush, smirking and chortling and kissing members of his cabinet on the lips. "No, honey," I said, "that's only the president. That's George Bush."

"Well, okay," she said, with a shudder. Then, squenching her eyes shut and pursing her lips, she muttered -- "But I'm gonna call him Stinky."

I don't know which is more appalling -- that millions of comatose adults flock to theaters to pay homage to Spongebob Squarepants while the world goes to hell around them, or that a single 8-year-old, familiar with the stark, good-versus-evil battles waged by Spiderman, Captain Marvel and the entire battalion of Ninja Rangers could take one look at George Bush and instantly recognize a villian.

I hope she never sees Paul Wolfowitz, Condi Rice, Richard Perle and the rest of the Vulcans when they take their second-term circus act on the road. Wow. What a gig. Think about it. Stinky and the Vulcans -- The Greatest Show on Earth --coming soon to a midway near you...

They never seem to tire; their contortions grow more grotesque as they parade before the world with bells and whistles, high-wire acts, sword-swallowing feats, freak shows...one act bumping into another, faster and faster...now you see it, now you don't...grinning barkers motioning from the racuous celebration whirling beneath the big tent...tanks and gun-ships, bombs and blood...

I am dumbfounded as people in this country clamor for tickets to the obscene, pornographic performance of this hideous group. I cannot understand why leaders of other nations stand by, enthralled -- with neither the courage nor the decency to yank the curtain before this murderous bunch shows up with their next act and brings the entire international house down.

Later, when the stench of bloated corpses can no longer be ignored, they'll say they didn't know. But they knew. We all knew. Dick Cheney, Vulcans' production manager and Paul Wolfowitz, dance director, published the show's program in 1992 with their "Defense Planning Guidance," wherein they called for "preemptive" military action against friend and foe alike, to establish and maintain the U.S. as the sole global superpower.

Fortunately, this act flopped. But the Vulcans didn't go away. They merely backed off and waited in the wings while refining their little program http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf for world domination and looking for a lead singer for their group.

In addition to an "event on the scale of Pearl Harbor" to jump-start their strategy, they needed a front man -- an arrogant Nazi "Overman" doppleganger so shallow and eaten up with hubris that he could easily be convinced of his God-like superiority, and would have no qualms about the genocide necessary to reduce the world population and to achieve their goal of a new world order in which no nation dared challenge U.S. dominance.

They needed an Orwellian fool, one willing to debase himself -- unable to discern reality from fantasy. But more important, they needed one who could successfully captivate a gullible populace by cloaking acts of inhuman brutishness in words like "freedom," "democracy," "liberation," "God," and "compassion."

That man was George W. Bush. And he hit the stage in a dead run -- a rapper, a moon-walker, a whirling dirvish of death. He's on a killing rampage, and any American with the perception of an 8-year-old knows he must be stopped. Sooner rather than later. That's why we have a Constitution, a Congress -- a watchdog media. It's time for the madness to stop -- before the terrorism and evil we are spreading in the name of freedom metastisizes further, and we are drawn onto massive global killing fields from which there is no escape.

Later, some will say, "We didn't know what they were doing to our children...we were just supporting our troops...If only the media had told us -- had shown us what was going on -- we would have done something to stop it."

But they will know in their hearts that the time to have stopped it was before it started -- the instant the first big lie was told. They will know that on Nov. 2, when they bought tickets for four more years of madness, more than 1,200 Americans had already been brutally slaughtered, more than 9,000 Americans injured or maimed for life, and more than 100,000 innocent Iraqi men, women and children destroyed. And all for lies. For greed. For power.

The media has been literally yelling about what we are doing in Iraq -- just not the U.S. media. We have no excuse for not knowing about the atrocities of Guantanamo Bay, the torture and murders of Abu Gharib, the mass killings of civilians in Fallujah and countless other Iraqi towns and cities. We cannot help but know that most people in this stricken country have no electricity, no water, no food, no medicine -- that our troops have been ordered to shoot on sight any male between the ages of 15 and 50 whether or not he is armed -- that hospitals and clinics were first on the list of targets and that aid groups and ambulances were stopped at checkpoints.

I cannot judge if Bush, or even the Vulcans, are evil. However, although they refuse to be held accountable, evil is being perpetrated in Bush's name, and under his watch. As Rana Kabbani wrote http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5069215-103677,00.html in Britain's Guardian newspaper last week, "...the graves of Falluja speak for themselves."

Kabbani reported that, "Iraqis watch as their homes and mosques are desecrated by soldiers who shoot injured men in the stomach in pre-emptive lunacy that mirrors that of their leader. (Emphasis added) They and a billion Muslims watched as Americans forbade families from burying their dead, and allowed stray dogs to gnaw the corpses of pregnant women and toddlers on the mean streets of what was once Falluja, during Id al-Fitr, Islam's Holy Feast. No one is taken in by the lies and arrogance and greed of this racist war."

It is a mystery to me why Americans would vote for four more years of war crimes against humanity. However, while watching a C-Span program on the subject shortly after the election, I was struck by the answer given by a sweet-sounding woman from Missouri -- "I had no choice but to vote for Bush," she said almost regretfully. "I was obliged to vote for him because he was endorsed by God..."

Has there ever been a more glaring example of the chasm that grows wider every day under this administration between "religion" and "Christianity"? Religious "believers" who cast their votes were instructed by their leaders to cast a "vote for God" or for a man who would "ban" the Bible, support not only gay marriage, but drive-through abortions and killing babies for stem cell research. Verily, this deeply religious woman, and millions like her, had no choice but to vote for Bush.

Perhaps that is why so many Christians are weeping...

So, as Stinky and the Vulcans head for that fantastical midway and begin rehearsing for their next number entitled, "To Iran -- and Beyond!" just remember even an 8-year-old knows instinctively that the coming attraction transcends comic-book horror. It's the real thing. And it's e-e-e-e-v-u-l...

Later, we cannot say we didn't know.

Sheila Samples is an Oklahoma freelance writer and a former civilian US Army Public Information Officer. She is a regular contributor for a variety of Internet sites. Contact her at rsamples@sirinet.net

2004 Sheila Samples

Everyone, what we must do is educate these people who want to tell themselves and their neighbors that it's okay to let religion get intwined with law.

As HPleft said, a study was done that linked better education to less abortion, teen pregnancy, and divorce. And that is what we must do. We need a mechanism to attract conservatives across the country to meetings where they can be educated about why the separation between church and state exists, and why it must always exist. We must tell them that in their own household, in their own communities, not by way of law, they can encourage whatever they want - but their views are not the views of others. And that is why they must not tell others what to do based on their religious views.

If we value freedom in this country, we do not value religion and politics. This year one of my french teachers, a native from Oklahoma, went back to her mother for Fall break. She reported seeing signs everywhere that said 'Vote God's Way'. When we bring this much religion into our political agendas, we risk the fall of the American way. As much as many of us loath France, do any of you know why they ban religious symbols in educational institutions? It is because before the democracy, the Church, the riteous and noble church that knew everything, sided with the oppresive Monarchy that was killing its subjects via starvation, torture, and the terrible guillotine. The same church that wants to legislate itself today, came down on the wrong side of the issue - why? Here's the best part, because the king had a direct connection to god. Sound like somebody we all know and hate?

Anyhow, please e-mail me at gabe@civil-values.org if you have any ideas for separation education. We've got a blog up at http://blog.civil-values.org/blog that needs some posts, and we may very well shift our focus to this vital education that is so badly needed.

-Gabe

That's right.. you lefties keep pushing the gay rights and gay marriage agenda. We'll keep on laughing all the way to the election booths. You guys just don't get it. President Bush said it perfectly in the second debate. On the question of if he believes being gay is a choice. His response was along the lines of - I don't know.. I honestly don't know, but I do know that we have a responsibility in this country to respect each other and treat each other with compassion.

This is exactly how most non-liberals feel. We don't care! We honestly don't care! Yet liberals such as yourselves feel compelled to call us homophobes and to speak unfairly, and even at times, very nasty toward us. You keep this up, and you will lose every election outside the city limits of San Francisco.

Gays DO have rights. The same rights as every other red-blooded American Citizen.

Looking forward to the mid-terms... Are you guys preparing a NEW agenda? I hope not! ;)

Dubya

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 11:36 AM

W, like you, i dont have much of an opinion on gay rights. I DO have an 'agenda' though, and it involves 2 issues...first and foremost of which is media reform. If people like you are not informed of the real, serious issues in this world today...how can we expect you to vote in your own interest, instead of against them.

Secondly, how can we expect to have a legitimate vote (even if the people ARE informed)when we allow such corruption and fraud in our electorial process that it rivals the Ukraine!?

Yes, we 'lefties' have and agenda, and it won't be derailed by 'hot button' issues that you 'misinformationist' like to spread. And THAT my friend is what you NeoFascist are up against;)

Gee, Dubya, I wonder if GWB ever did bother to ask his vice president's campaign manager whether or not it was a choice for her. What about you -- did you ever ask your gay acquaintenances if it was a choice or whether they felt that they have equal rights and protection under the law?

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 11:36 AM

Boy did you give the right answer, YOU DON'T CARE.

Well there are millions of us out there that do CARE.

Yes we have an agenda, and it is to educate you simple minded people that vote for someone who DOESN'T REALLY KNOW a thing about true DEMOCRACY.

NO SURRENDER !!!

The title of the thread included "Crusading Against .." - that makes a "live & let live" attitude fairly difficult to pull off re bigots.

Dear Dubya,
The gay agenda, as you say, as in the story at the top of this thread is something being described by supporters of GWB.

Live and let live would be a good mantra, were it carried out. It is not. Gay people do not have the rights of everyone else, and that is tragic in a democracy.

But please tell all your friends to come over here, because we really have an agenda here to address the kind of limited thinking that you profess.

We need the practice. It's been WEEKS.

Hey Dubya,

Are you gay? Have you ever asked a gay person whether it's a choice or not?

Facts that Prove why it's not a choice:
1. Throughout the world, there is the same ratio of straight to gay people - IN EVERY COMMUNITY
2. This same ratio exists in animals

I mean, it's pretty damned hard to argue with nature and say it's a choice. But if someone can do it, I'm sure Bush can.

-Gabe

Dubya:

I don't understand how you can speak of compassion and yet show absolutely no compassion.

The bible tells us to not judge others and to love our neighbor as ourselves. Yet you come over here bashing gays, in a very "un-christianlike" way.

Jesus asked us to not judge others, that the judgement will be come later, yet you come over here and judge us and gays both.

We over here are trying to follow the teaching of the bible. And nowhere in the bible does it endorse hate and discrimination.

We would have a much better world if we could learn to accept others and to accept responsibility for our own actions, instead of trying to coherse a hate filled and discriminatory approach on all

Likewise, we hear stand for TRUE DEMOCRACY! We don't like that the President and his representatives chose to stiffle democracy by yanking the chains on the press and our election process.

It is his party who stole votes, suppressed black voters, and provided machines that don't count ballots properly.

Shame on you and anyone who thinks fair elections occured here. We have LOST our democracy to people who pride themselves on HATE and DISCRIMINATION.

Dubya, you said, "Gays DO have rights. The same rights as every other red-blooded American Citizen."

Given that statement, I can only conclude you think gay people have the right to marry.

We'll need a fresh pot of coffee right about now. ;-)

Dubya:

You need a refresher course in the history of our democracy and of your party. Though republicans often had some good ideas, they have never been known to be an inclusive party.

They have never completely supported minorities, gays, and even women. You speak about everybody having rights in a democracy, but your party has intentionally taken away the rights of black people and gays.

We don't want to divide the nation any further, but it appears that you do! Why is that? Is the goal of keeping republican's in office more inportant then the idea of democracy which our forefathers (and mothers) fought for and which more importantly our military is currently fighting other wars in the name of!

So instead of coming in hear and sticking your tongue out at us, why don't you come in here and say, "Let's build a true democracy! Let's make the election process everything our nation stands for. Let's give equal rights to all."

After all, it was George Bush's attorneys who stood before the Supreme Court of the U.S. and who argued under the 14th ammendment of "Equal Protection to all" but now has suddenly decided equal protection for the few is better. So is equal protection for all just one of those quasi rules (lip service), "Only when it helps me" or is it "WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA..."

I chose to be inspired--that all of us can stand together UNIFIED for DEMOCRACY for all.

Waouh, you answered!

I think, I stayed about 20mn in front of that screen before pcdoc entered. I couldn't say a word, I'm a foreigner, on top I'm French.
Too good preys for Bushies!

Just like you I noticed the "I DON'T CARE".

What I don't understand about those caring, God worshiping people is their hatred. Something doesn't work here, and if you go further, nothing works at all. They are living on a hell of contradictions. Use it, over and over, against them....

Another word raises my interest : EDUCATE?
For having been working for years and years with foreigners, mostly Americans, I noticed that most of them had little scholar education. They only referred to clichés. This is exactly what is going on with the Dubyas & Co....

Educating is fair, but I think you have much more to play on the social and economical issues. That's where people are going to be hit in their everyday life... Unfortunately.

Yesterday, we had a conversation over dinner, about Hawthorne and his "Scarlett Letter". You're back to it, on top today the letter is "blue".

As Indy woud say "Vive la Révolution"

Posted by: Irina | November 27, 2004 09:24 AM

I have shared your frustration. And I believe that there is something that every Democrat can do, and it is this:

Keep on top of what's going on, and have a Democratic response to anyone when the topic comes up. Bush does X, Y, or Z. And then you say something like, "well, the Democrats would do this:" and then outline Democratic policy and ideology to them. One voter at a time, we can educate people as to what the Democratic party stands for and believes in. We should not just shrink back and cower until the next election cycle. We can point out the weakness and failures of Republican policies and point out constantly how they are hurting average Americans. I feel it is our duty to do this, if we love our country.

Eventually people will get sick and tired of the Republican agenda, poking their noses into personal lives and parading their "values". That, plus Bush's inevitable failures will turn the tide back to a Democrat in the White House. At state and local levels, Dems have been winning like crazy, especially in Western states. So there is definitely cause to be really hopeful for next time.
I think the main problem with this election was simply that they ran a more organized campaign. It wasn't that the people agree more with them or that our candidate and our policies were out of touch. We just needed to get the message out better--which was made really difficult by the right-favoring media and people's pre-conceived stereotypes about Democrats.

Some news on the Unofficial Kerry Blog:

ENVIRONMENTAL WATCH: The Dirty Big Secret About US Energy Production

Coal's global goal
November 27, 2004

THE DIRTY big secret about US energy production is that coal is about to play an even larger role. Already more than 50 percent of US electricity comes from plants burning coal, the fossil fuel that emits the greatest amount of the most common greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide. Coal's share in the power picture is projected to spike upward in coming years as utilities turn to coal as an alternative to increasingly scarce natural gas.

http://kerryblog.blogspot.com/2004/11/environmental-watch-dirty-big-secret.html

Kennedy Investigating More Effective Talk About Religious Issues From Democrats

Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, is investigating how Democrats can talk more effectively about religious issues in the run-up to the midterm elections, when the party of an incumbent president traditionally loses seats in Congress.

http://kerryblog.blogspot.com/2004/11/kennedy-investigating-more-effective.html

Posted by: Andrée - France | November 27, 2004 01:27 PM

Andree,

It's interesting that you bring up Hawthorne and The Scarlett Letter.

I grew up about 20 miles north of Salem, MA and I have felt for quite a while now that this religious right wing fervor has parallels to that terrible time in our history, let alone worse the Burning Times in Europe.

Perhaps one step in educating people about the dangers of overlooking separation of church and state is to remind them of the horrors of the Salem With Trials, the Burning Times and the Inquistion.

Pamela aka Kerrygoddess

Pamela,

Quoting Hawthorne, is little, if you get back to Southern States Litterature (that was my PhD-, it gets even more obvious since its four touchstones are:
- The civil war
- The sense of guilt
- THE IMPORTANCE OF RELIGION
- The position of woman in society

Just try to analyze those four topics in what Dubya's policies are today, and you'll find out he is perfectly in the line.
The Biblic Belt has been imposing its mores and thinking all over the administration in Washington.

Posted by: Andrée - France | November 27, 2004 02:03 PM

But it's completely ironic in that those who support this philosophy are often the same ones who have strayed more in their personal lives than the average person ever did!

And they use fear and demonizing to capitalize on their own personal goals and to 'appease" their own personal demons.

Sparrow,

You're right. These people are living and thinking upon a hell of contradictions... except that Rove (Machiavel) marketed the whole thing by turning it into over simplified but effective slogans!

Sorry,

I forgot...

I wanted to say slogans and values......

If they may be quoted "values", any sound mind doesn't buy the thing.

There is a rather skewed women's organization that promotes bringing "Biblical principles into all levels of public policy" - http://www.cwfa.org/about.asp

Their links page gives a further idea about what these women are about - http://www.cwfa.org/links.asp

Interestingly the death penalty is missing from their agenda.

What I find most curious is that the Christians decry that homosexuality is natural, though it has existed since the dawn of man.

Didn't vote, couldn't vote,,but sure care

As an outside observer, I have been struck that those that preach the MOST about the importance of God's influence on their values, DEMONSTRATE the least evidence of God's values in their treatment of anyone not identical to themselves.

The very practice of their religious beliefs have made them 'victim' to Bush's machine.

Bush &Co worship $$$$. In order to get elected so they could control the world by their greed, they had to devise a plan to get people to elect them. Running on a platform of greed just wouldn't attract many voters! Watch how Rove's plan has always been 'take what Kerry/Dems think as their positive and turn it against them' (ie Kerry's Vietnam record)

Well, the Christian community has fallen victim to Rove's plan. 'Take their desire to be "followers", pepper in just the right amount of religious-speak, by someone we mascarade as 'one of their kind', and the masses will not question, just follow. To question is viewed as being an unbeliever. Therefore: believers will believe even Bush.

Now, 'patriatism'. Greed for control of Middle East oil was the reason to go to war in Iraq. Won't get voted for if we say that so, let's send the troops in first and then send a smoke screen of excuses. Questioning the President during times of war, and speaking against a war in progress is not supporting the troops! The American history supports the belief that a sitting President is not defeated during times of war, and that Americans would rather be known to have bravely suffered the loss of their sons and daughters, than to ever question the validity of the war they were sent to fight.

So add it up. It was not "values" that caused putting Bush in the WH again, it was 'Belief'.

Value can be defined as an ideal accepted by some individual or group
Believing is a mental act, condition or habit of placing trust or confidence in a person or thing. Mental acceptance of or conviction in the truth or actuality of something.

Rove and Bush deliberatly manipulated those gullible red state voters, so desirous of and so practiced at being 'believers in Christ' to become 'believers of Bush' and take the action of voting "as if they valued" the beliefs they were being fed as 'truths'.

The Dems have a big job, but must start back right at the beginning. They will actually have to take what Rove and Bush prize and turn that on them....in order for their followers (the red state fundies) to see the truth. Not easy, but what is a stake is DEMOCRACY. The target is not those who voted for Bush as they who don't want to be educated, and can't hear it anyway.

The only route to reach those voters is by having the 'truth' as Bush promised be laid out. So I hope this process is swift, because it will be painful. You never get a person to change their mind/their beliefs by arguing with them. The belief gets changed fastest and best, when the person holding it WANTS something else..

OK Dems: find, frame and voice "that something else".

Thomas Paine spoke these words in 1776...they rang out as clear and true then as they do of our struggles today:

“These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed, if so celestial an article as Freedom should not be highly rated"

When the going gets tough...Americans get going!!!

Posted by: Andrée - France | November 27, 2004 02:03 PM

Andree,

The Fundamentalists actually draw their doctrines from the early Puritans of America:

Fundamentalists trace their roots back to the N.T., but fundamentalism really arises at the end of the 19th century. They see themselves as "keepers of both the Christian heritage of the first century and the American heritage of the Puritans and the Founding Fathers," though, the sense of religious mission associated with the Puritans disappeared even before the American Revolution. They will quote Puritans this and that as the foundation of America, but the Puritans founded some backwater English colonies, not the United States of America.

In fact Protestantism had been undergoing massive changes prior to the American Revolution and continues to change to this day. The majority in Americans in 1776 (if we exclude Indians and Catholics) were Protestant, forming a "Protestant empire." The first and second "Great Awakenings" seemed to insure the role of Evangelism in America. Those days are what fundamentalists long for. Yet even before the American Revolution, the European Enlightenment had made inroads into Protestantism.

Fundamentalists have a loathing of democracy. One bitter fundamentalist had this to say, "democracy is the cause of all world problems...humans are under the law of God, and thus they CANNOT do anything they want or speak anything they wish to speak...democracy ultimately started with satan...we can't rule ourselves. God must rule us...those who actually set up America, and drew up the laws were people who did not favor Christianity. Christians living during that time disagreed with those in power or rather the founding fathers. They saw them as ultra liberals, and of course, they were."

http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/

What I find most curious is that the Christians decry that homosexuality is natural, though it has existed since the dawn of man.

Pamela,

Homosexuality not only existed but was an achievement under the Greeks and the Romans, who are seen as major civilizations. They had the cult of ideas and bodies in perfect harmony.

Christianity introduced guilt and the notion of fearing God. But when you think of Jesus, he was a hell of a rebel. It's men and later the clergy who alterated his words.

There is a Greek quote by Diogene of Nanda (not the one in the barrel) that I like a lot and that says : "The biggest courage in life consists in looking for happiness"

thank you all--- for great sites to go to so that i may "educate" my "red" neighbors in a most delicate way so as not to offend.....
;-)

Interesting article about the role of religion...getting ready for Bush's visit to Canada....offers chance for you to 'sound off'...follow the links

http://www.canada.com/national/globalsunday/index.html

Okay this is funny as they both appear in the same Newspaper the Washington Post. I believe you will all recognize the Irony.

Ukraine Parliament Declares Vote Invalid

Resolution says vote failed to reflect voters' intentions; non-binding vote comes as talks continue. – Reuters
• World Is Watching Dispute, Bush Says

End Results
Surveying the Damage
Exit Polls Can't Always Predict Winners, So Don't Expect Them To
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64906-2004Nov20.html

Happy Belated Thanksgiving all. I hope you all had great holidays with your families and friends. :)

Posted by: Andrée - France | November 27, 2004 02:55 PM

Andree

Jesus was a hell of a rebel and man wrote the bible! The average Christian, especially the Fundamentalists don't buy that however.

I've been a student of A Course In Miracles for about 12 years now. It's basic premise that God does not see us sinners, is what I have always believed since I was very young.

Happiness is choice. You can choose to be happy or you can choose to miserable. When one chooses happiness, happiness exists in their life and miracles happen.

Seven Days of Hell

With fewer Western journalists covering the war-torn nation, the true grim picture of continued violence isn’t getting out. Our correspondent reports on the last week.

By Rob Nordland
Newsweek
Updated: 2:35 p.m. ET Nov. 27, 2004

Nov. 27 - To a casual observer, the past week seemed to have been seven days of comparatively good news for the war in Iraq. Abu Musab al Zarqawi's No. 2 was captured in Mosul, while in Fallujah the victorious Marines were uncovering torture chambers and hostage prisons, bomb labs and mosque-based armories. The prime minister's kidnapped relatives were released. Major powers and Iraq's neighbors got together in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh and agreed to forgive 80 percent of Iraq's foreign debt, while supporting elections, which the government announced would take place Jan. 30, 2005, after weeks of speculation they might be delayed, as many rebellious Sunnis had demanded. "We feel we've broken their back and their spirit," said Lt. Gen. John Sattler, commander of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. "After Fallujah," added the Iraqi national security adviser, Qassim Daoud, "we saw terrorist activities, bombings, mines, reduce dramatically in Baghdad and elsewhere, clearly confirming our analysis that Fallujah was a safe haven for terrorists."

It was pretty good spin, but that's all it was.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6594892/site/newsweek/site/newsweek/

Dubya - there's really no agenda here - it is some of the right-wingers who made sexuality a political issue, by trying to legally regulate it among consenting adults. It is those Conservatives who wish to legislate morality - who have the "agenda". I'd say most on the right do care - a lot about this. They care enough to go out of their way to pass legislation to ban certain people from marrying, despite the common Republican standpoint of wanting to keep big goverment out of people's backyards. Conservatives will be the first to raise holy hell when they feel the government is trying to "micro-manage" by putting safety locks on guns to prevent children from killing themselves when they get at those guns (like my coworker's daughter did two months ago) or a wanton criminal from obtaining an assault weapon and murdering a police officer, or pass legislation to feed the needy or provide healthcare to kids. They say "That's not the government's job." However, the VERY second two consenting adults they don't even know, of the same gender want to wed, they want the government all over that like white on rice, trying to stop it. In other words SOME OF - NOT ALL of the right wing "cares enough" to legislate "morality" but not matters of firearm safety, or healthcare and human rights issues. It makes no sense at all, especially when you take into consideration the fact that gay marriage is supposedly a "moral" issue, and we have a separation of church and state in the Constitution for a damn good reason. In addition, if you pass a "moral law" in accordance to Christian principles, it is not even a valid principle to a non-Christian who does not recognize the same moral code. Imagine a strict Protestant being forced to accept a governmental law based on the Bible of Zen Bhuddism. We are a country whose Constitution grants freedom of religion, so passing legislature based on religious principles is an imposition upon anyone who is practicing their constitutionally granted freedom to recognize a different religious principle, or no religious principle at all.

So, it's safe to say many of the Conservatives DO care - enough to defy the principles the constitution in order to prevent gays from marrying.

My question is, why DO so many care who others wed? It is with great suspicion that I look upon anyone who spends such an ample amount of time concentrating upon the perceived "sins" of others. It might behoove those individuals to instead spend a little time evaluating their own morality, and why they feel such a pressing need to condemn others in order to feel worthy in the eyes of their chosen god.

Activists plan protests during Bush's Ottawa visit.

They are intending to topple an 18-foot statue of Mr. Bush, made out of papier-mâché, at Parliament Hill. The statue is being made in Toronto by a group called “Artists Against War.”

"No to Bush" is expecting thousands of participants: 12 buses coming from Montreal, eight from Toronto and student groups coming in from universities across the country.
We are expecting participants from out of town,” (globeandmail.com.) “From Moose Jaw to Flin Flon, people will be participating. It will be a national day of action.”

"No to Bush" is planning on lighting 100,000 candles to represent the reported 100,000 casualties in Iraq.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20041126.wbush1126/BNStory/Front

It is so hard for me not to feel utter rage at the people who would choose "no gay marriage" over "no war, torture, and poverty". Their goal IS, is based on homophobia and UNequal rights, and ours are based on principles of security and freedom. So, thanks so much to the red states for selling us out for their non-Christian, non-compassionate values. The only thing "conservative" about Bush's agenda is the conservative amounts of food and sleep your average GTMO prisoner receives. Don't come crying to me when Homeland Security tries to put a glowstick in your chute, we warned you and we tried, we tried to show you how bad Bush is. You've been used, Christian conservatives, but we'll accept your apologies when the real day of reckoning (Bush's resignation in shame, just like Richard Nixon) comes to pass.

MORE OF WHAT WE ARE BATTLING!

The Hot Sound of Hate
A fast-growing CD outfit hawks white power at school

By Sarah Childress and Dirk Johnson
Newsweek

Nov. 29 issue - In a cramped upstairs den in South St. Paul, Minn., a CD blares with fury. "Hang the traitors of our race," the singer screams, "White supremacy! White supremacy! Whiiiite supremacy!" Byron Calvert, 33, leans back in his chair, smiling and snacking on veggies. Calvert is a mountainous man with a swastika tattoo, a prison record and a racist dream. He runs Panzerfaust Records, a five-year-old company that has quickly become one of the top "white power" record labels in the country. Hundreds of bands in America and Europe produce such hate music. If Calvert has his way, their fans will soon be multiplying. In September he launched Project Schoolyard, a plan to snag kids 13 to 19 by distributing 100,000 free CDs of such bands as Day of the Sword, H8 Machine and Final War. Calvert cares less about the melody than the message. "We hook 'em with the music," he says, and then kids learn—and buy—more online. As his Web site declares, "We don't just entertain racist kids, we create them!"

To Calvert, the mission is nothing less than survival of the white race, and it's helped the label succeed and likely surpass its influential rival, Resistance Records. Though Calvert's reluctant to give numbers, watchdog groups estimate that Panzerfaust pulls in about $1 million a year.

The white-power movement is looking for young people like Tom Lindstrom, a 22-year-old tile layer from West St. Paul. He first heard the furious music three years ago, and it made him glow. He realized there were angry kids like him—angry at blacks, Jews, homosexuals, immigrants. "There's a general plague of anti-whiteness going on in this country," he says. "When I heard the white-power rock, I thought, 'Right on!' " Calvert says America is full of p---ed-off white kids sick of having multiculturalism stuffed down their throats, and resentful of gangsta rappers who rip on white boys like them. "You can be black and racist and have an illustrious career. If you're white and racist, you might end up going to jail."

The CDs have started to find their way into schools in smaller towns around the country. In rural Madison, W.Va., a pair of twentysomething kids clad in black silently handed out CDs to middle- and high-school students as they stepped off their buses one morning. When school officials learned what had happened, they asked kids to hand in the discs. Lauren Snyder, 13, was insulted that racists had targeted her county, like a lot of kids she knows. Still, she says many kids still played the CD at home out of curiosity. The discs have alarmed organizations that monitor hate groups. Project Schoolyard is especially dangerous because it poses as mainstream music, says Daniel Alter, director of civil rights at the Anti-Defamation League. "The kids go right for the music, and the lyrics, at first, are almost secondary," he says. "It's a very insidious way of indoctrinating kids into a whole lifestyle." Watchdog groups agree they've never seen white supremacists make such a targeted recruiting effort. The group Citizens Against Hate is working feverishly to combat the music's spread by alerting school officials and law enforcement around the country through their program, Project Hands-Off.

Experts say most kids who heed the music's message feel alienated from mainstream culture, unsure about their future or place in society. White-power rock groups seize on their insecurities, and make them feel that they're worthy—indeed, superior—simply because their skin is white.

Wendy, 22, works long hours as a housecleaner. All her life, she's preferred to hang out with other white kids. "I'm not as radical as you think I am," she says softly, tucking a strand of platinum-blond hair behind her ear. "I'm white, I'm proud to be white and I don't think there's anything wrong with that." She goes to white-power rock shows. But she seems conflicted, talking about an Indian friend and a mixed-race friend. "They know deep in their hearts that I love them for who they are," she says. But if Smith gets drawn deeply enough into the white-power movement, Calvert and other racist promoters are betting she'll change her tune.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6542890/site/newsweek/

Posted by: Indy | November 27, 2004 02:49 PM

Amen!
yay Thomas Paine!

...it seems as if heaven has indeed placed an incredibly high price on our goal... but that's how we know that it is so important!

Two men in different parts of the country who have been dear friends - one for about 30 years, the other for almost 20 years - have told me they always knew they were gay from the time they were little children, even before they had words to describe it. There was no "choice" about it - it's a matter of biology. Chance education via reading about genetics and some educational TV indicates it's a matter of how much testosterone a fetus gets in utero, too much or not enough, or the amount that makes for a straight person. That also applies to a chance that some lesbians apparently get too much testosterone in utero.

In any case, there was a study done in England a couple of years ago which showed that the more 'feminized' homosexual males have that connection between the two halves of their brains that women are born with. Straight males have a complete division of the halves of their brains, no cord linking the two that women always have. Straight men can think or feel with each half of their brain, but the two halves do not function at the same time, as do women's brains and that of some homosexual males who seem to be on the same wavelength as most straight females. Straight men can use one side of their brain or the other, but not both sides at the same time. Women have seemed to be more "intuitive" than men, but it's really the natural gift of the two halves of their brains functioning at the same time and the two halves of their brains communicating back and forth, which is why women can read body language and hear words and know when someone is lying to them if the body language and the words don't match. Women, after all, have to be able to intuit what babies and toddlers want or need by observing body language alone before children reach the age of being able to communicate wants and needs. It's a gift with which women are born, and a gift too often denigrated by men (unless, of course, the women in a man's life take care of him like his mother used to when she seemed to know what he wanted before he even said anything....).

To say homosexual people have a "choice" about their sexual orientation is inaccurate. Homosexuality is not a "lifestyle choice." It's a matter of birth.

As someone stated above on the thread, there has always been a statistical minority of homosexual people throughout history from the dawn of time. It has always been that way, it will always be that way; it's a matter of the XX chromosome from the mother and the donated XX or XY chromosome of the father and whether or not there's too much or too little testosterone when the fetus is about three months gestation (if memory serves, the fetus becomes a boy at about three months gestation if the chromosomes determine it's a male - all fetuses start out as females). There are also people born with extra chromosomes that give them super feminine or super masculine traits.

Sadly, the more fanatic religious cults would be unlikely to ever educate themselves about the biology of homosexuality - they barely educate themselves about heterosexuality - and what they don't want to know about they ignore. Religion in its more fanatic forms tends to keep education on the periphery while blaming or attributing everything in life to a supreme being, while never exercising free will or the brain they were born with (or given by a supreme being). To the religiously fanatic, education is anathema.... Education brings knowledge, and knowledge brings a break with blind faith and the religious leaders who love the power of being able to tell people how to live.... The truth sets people free....

Sorry to use such divisive language, like "their" agenda and "our" agenda, but frankly at this point to believe in Bush, and to vote for him, you have to be way out there.

You have to think gay marriage is a bigger threat to our society than indefinite detentions, torture behind prison walls, and corporate control of the ballot box.

So if any of those 60 million Bush voters come to this site, and read my words, please know that you're welcome to respond, but I want to offer the olive branch and educate you, not minister to you, but just tell you the facts about what Bush has been doing and why the Administration tries so hard to keep it secret.

Read the Bill of Rights, and decide for yourself if it still applies in the year 2004 (and will continue to in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008...)

And to any Christian, convservative, Bush-believers out there... hope you weren't hoping your tax returns would be private. Republicans have access to those now.

Have a great holiday season! Let's not dampen the spirit shall we.

I listen to:

http://www.randirhodesarchives.com

Pamela - that is utterly sad and disturbing. It is also interesting to note that a large percentage of hate mail that is received by Democratic and Liberal websites by Bush supporting right-leaning opposition is peppered with phrases referring to liberals as "N***er-loving fa***ts." I trust most can figure out that the edited words are racial and homophobic epithets. Mind you, not all of the letters say that, but a large enough amount of them do to make it very scary indeed. Look through the "hate mail bag" on any of these sites. Almost all are fraught with horribly obscene language and threatening words. I know that not all conservatives are that hateful but clearly, a lot are.

Why does that have to be?

As the bumper sticker says:

"Lord, save me from your followers!!!"

Why does that have to be?

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 27, 2004 03:48 PM

Hate, is easy.

To love, is very difficult.

It is easy to be made to hate the enemy, to be given the reasons why Iraqis (not Saddam, who was captured a year ago) deserve to be bombed and shot at on a daily basis by our soldiers.

It is easy to be made to hate gays, if you don't live with a lot of gays in your city or neighborhood. It is easy to hate something you don't fully understand, or don't want to understand because you're already distrustful of them.

It's easy to hate someone for their skin color, or the prejudices that have been conditioned in you by media, propoganda, and ignorance.

It was easy for "good Germans" who were not targets of the Nazis to turn their backs on entire swaths of their population that had been deemed undesirable, because it is easier to hate than to love.

Love, is "hard work".

The next month should be about "peace on earth, joy to the world". The next four years should be, too.

I know that all my fellow patriots here in DCP will be fighting for peace, and loving and caring for the least among us. We will never stop fighting for justice, and tolerance. These values will not disappear gently into that bad night of one-party rule, pretending to have a "mandate" from "values voters".

Peace, Justice, Tolerance. That is all we strive for, and will continue to, every day.

Just expressing my frustration is not much, I know, but I hope these few words may be a way to start. Please people, give me some advice, what can I do?

Posted by: Irina | November 27, 2004 09:24 AM

Thank you for finding this website.

You're among friends.

What can you do?

Be a Democracy Cell.

This website will be about, ground action, and building a network of thinking, capable individuals who together speaks clearly and loudly about what is right and what is wrong.

We may not have 100% agreement all the time, but with patience and understanding we will make a difference, one community at a time.

Welcome, and please keep coming back often. Your voices here will always be heard.

"First they came for the Jews and
I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me."

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 27, 2004 03:48 PM

KiK,

Hate is a fear driven emotion. And we all know that BushCo panders to the fears of Americans.

These are trying times indeed. Some how we must find a way to reach out and dispell that fear that has been peddled in this country.

DiAnne posted that masterpiece about religion yesterday and early today.

If you're looking for some relief about religion, please watch...
You'll feel better.

=================================================

Great message from Harvey Fierstein, posted for those who may have missed it over Thanksgiving:

http://www.inthelifetv.org/1402_player.html

Andrew -

I am sure you are right about hate being easier than love for so many. Admittedly, I can be a pretty angry person, and have been known to fly off the handle when things irritate me. Granted, my rancor is never directed at anyone for race, creed, color, sexual orientation, or anything of that nature - I am just really impatient sometimes, and prone to, uh, "displays of temper." :-)

During this election, I made a startling discovery. Love is actually easier than hate. At least for me. Hate is exhausting, anger eats you up, raises your blood pressure, robs you of your sleep and sanity. I am sure I will succumb to many more bouts of political/and or road rage over the course of my life, but at least it has fianlly dawned on me how destructive these emotions are and that I need to curb them, and attempt to channel my energy in more positive ways. That's a step in the right direction.

I hope someday, someway, some of these neo-cons will experience the same catharsis.

Hey, don't give the red state fundies the credit...give the credit to Rove.
Don't give Bush any acknowledgement, only speak of Rove winning the WH. You know that Bush can't stand it when he isn't acknowledged or when he is compared to someone (ie his daddy)

Rove is a telemarketer. He needed voters,,,he didn't care who they were or where they came from. If it had been chocolate ice cream eaters that were needed to get Bush elected, Rove would have shipped choc ice cream all over the US.

Let the indulgence take its course. When they have had their fill of each other, they will be looking for something better.

Congratulate those voters at every turn for helping the telemarketer, and don't even mention Bush.

Get yourselves ready to stand on the big issues,,,ie appointments to the SC.

when they have had their fill and Bush has had his way with that block of voters, the civil war in the Repug party will be a delight to watch...be ready to move in and move in swiftly and proudly.

My bumper sticker reads:

"I Actually DID vote for John Kerry... Before I voted AGAINST him"

You guys need to listen up and pay attention to what America tells you. You act like the only people that would vote for Bush are the far extremists. Well here's news for you.. 61 Million of us "extremists" put him back in office despite the lies from people like Michael Moore, and Liberal Hollywood. I find it amazing that you can label people like myself as being hate filled neo-cons, when in all actuality, I am an average American. The more you label people, the more they will become that label. There is truth in some of your words however... Sometimes you do have to fight for peace.

Thanks to George W. Bush, I am no longer proud to call myself an American, because his lack of judgement reflects on me and half the population of this country who didn't vote for him....

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7368.htm Iraqi Lullabye
This is a link to a two minute video.... If you can't stand to see war-injured children who are injured, bandaged, mutilated, disfigured and scarred, or sometimes have limbs amputated and bandaged, don't watch it. Otherwise, grab a box of tissues.... This is the "collateral damage" our troops are doing; the same US soldiers we're supposed to be so proud of, thanks to Bush ordering them to invade Iraq for the sake of the oil beneath the sands of that country that he and his minions want to control.... The troops in Iraq are NOT fighting to keep you or me free - they are there to capture and protect the oil fields of Iraq....

And yet.... Bush wants the US exempt from prosecution for war crimes (link below). He's covering his own ass.... and offering foreign aid to countries in exchange for their moral support for the US against the world court.... So, is this Bush's way of taking over the world? Bribe the leaders of the other countries with money so they will look the other way while he takes over one country at a time???

Let's see: the US is bankrupt, has gotten money from China, Germany, Japan (and I'm not sure who else), yet Bush is willing to have foreign aid given to countries from the US in exchange for them looking the other way while the US soldiers Bush sent in to Iraq commit war crimes against innocent children, women, and men, all for the sake of the oil he and his cronies want control over beheath the sands of Iraq.... That, in essence, makes Bush the #1 war criminal and none of the other war crimes would have happened if Bush (who was too cowardly to fulfill his guard duties during the Viet Nam era) had not ordered US soldiers to attack Iraq in the first place, because then the US soldiers would have been at home leading peaceful lives, with no reason to harm or kill anyone.... That's the good Christian hypocritical minister in him saying "Do as I say, not as I do." (Power corrupts; and absolute power corrupts absolutely.)

I'm afraid the one marble left in my head is just not falling into place over this, no matter how I tilt my head - the logic just escapes me.... Many, many years ago when I was young, people were told "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime." And, obviously, very few of the soldiers know about the Nuremberg decision that says they don't have to follow the orders of a leader if that order is illegal or immoral....

December 8 there is a congressional vote on this bill:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7375.htm
Congress Seeks to Curb International Court
Measure Would Threaten Overseas Aid Cuts to Push Immunity for U.S. Troops

Pamela -

Indeed, dipspelling the hate and fear mongering so rampant in this nation is going to be a large and difficult job. I'm willing to do whatever is necessary, but so much damage has been done. Can it be undone?

I have been reading Kitty Kelley's "The Family" about the Bush dyanasty. It's interesting, because back in the 1950s, when GWB's grandfather Prescott Bush was a Senator of Connecticut, there was a large portion of the Republican party that was far more moderate, and far more pro-civil rights, pro-environmental protection, and pro-fiscal-responsibility that what we see in the party today. Prescott Bush, though not perfect, was part of that group, and risked alienating a large portion of his Conservative Catholic constituency in CT by opposing the right-wing extremism of McCarthy, and voting against legislature which profited oil companies, including the ones owned by his son, George Herbert Walker Bush. Despite agressive and often threatening lobbying from fuel tycoons, and the pleas of his son, he voted against the bill, calling it "immoral and greed driven."

Sources close to the family say that Prescott Bush was the last generation of his family to practice politics based on civic duty, and to respect the separation of Church and State, in fact, he was on the board of Planned Parenthood!

What has happened to the Bush family is what seems to have happened to America. "So go the Bushes go the country."

As our politics have become more and more driven by greed, profit, and exlusion, our society has followed suit.

What to do, what to do?

Dubya:

I've seen bumper stickers that say, "I voted for Bush 2000--Now I voted for kerry"

Lots of those out there.

Ahhhhh...Dubya:

You like bumper stickers.

I saw this too, "My child is an honor student, my president's a moron"

Speaking truth to power, there!!!!

You seem confused, dubya. You may truly reflect "average" however. The average American may indeed be as confused as you are.

First of all, what is the source of your belief that 61 million people voted for Bush? You seem to have an inflated idea of the man's popularity.

Secondly, the lies were hardly from Moore or Hollywood. The lies came directly from the press releases and ads of the RNC--sourced and directed by Karl Rove.

What happens when you realize how many people were "had"? The biggest fraud perpetrated here was on--

YOU.

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 04:15 PM

Dubya:

I'm sure there are average americans who did vote for Bush. Maybe in fact you are one of them.

However, I have spoken to many Bush supporters who know absolutely nothing about his policies. They think Sadam attacked us on 9-11 and they didn't even bother seeing Farenheit 9-11, which passes the fact check test.

Furthermore, on factcheck.org, Bush and Cheney LIED 95% more often than Kerry/Edwards, yet they don't know that either.

I think you're here because you really regret your vote. But you came to the right place to get facts.

Dubya - we hear what some of America is saying, alright, however, we choose to think for ourselves.

Not too many are convinced that a large voting majority put Bush back in office. it's far more likely that one man, Wally o'Dell is responsible for that travesty.

http://www.northcountynews.com/view.asp?s=11-24-04/news5.htm

Also curious, is why, if you are happy and content that Bush won fair and square, that he is the best man for the job, and has the resounding support of the majority of Americans you feel the need to hang around on a Democratic blog, trying to spead negativity? What do you care what this "extreme minority liberal group of lefties" think? Aren't you satisfied with your "victory"? Isn't that enough to get you through?

Maybe it is the same reason you feel compelled to sport a bumper sticker mocking John Kerry. You are not content to have your opinion and allow others to do the same. You are making it a point to not only advertise on your vehicle that you support Bush, but to go one step beyond, and mock and attack his political opponent. And now, instead of frequenting Conservative sites and talking to people you share beliefs with, you have to come here and attack us. Why? Surely you cannot feel threatened by this "tiny extreme minority" - Why waste your time? Why bother?

You say that you feel you were called a "hate filled neo-con". I don't think anyone called YOU that specifically, but there was mention of that sort, and they do exist. Why, when someone used that phrase did you automatically associate yourself with it? Do you feel you resemble that remark?

For the record, I wouldn't say you are a hate filled neo-con, but I do think that you are deliberately making a concerted effort to harrangue a group of people you do not agree with by coming onto their blog to instigate. Why do you feel compelled to do that? Why is that important to you?

Think about it, and let us know, because we don't understand what you are hoping to accomplish.

Andree

Thanks for keeping the Fierstein vid going - it's a good one. I travelled around town today & saw a large red house with a sign that said "Say No To The Bush Agenda."

Kerry got more votes than Reagan did for his "landslide." The only reason Bush "won" was because of the cheating & also the recruitment of paranoid religious fundamentalists. They are tools of the military/industrial complex. Most have no idea what they voted for, other than that they are terrified of diversity.

Really - I say to conservatives such as the poor Dubya - If you don't want to do something, don't do it, but don't impose your moral beliefs on others. They have not learned that & espouse authoritarian beliefs that are unacceptable in a civilized world.

Hey Dubya:

I WOULD put this on a bumpersticker, but I think it's a little too long...

I stand with John Kerry on his decision on the 87 billion dollar bill. Unlike Bush, who twice threatened to veto this bill, Kerry's position on it was consistant. He support an amendment to it (the Kerry-Biden amendment) which stated that the money should come from the tax cuts on Americans making over 200,000 dollars a year. Bush has always said that this war is about sacrafices. But he seems to be forcing the SOLDIERS to sacrifice more than they already do, so that those of us who make over 200,000 dollars a year dont have to. I think that that is wrong. Soldiers have been forced to pay for their own meals in the hospital, and they are not being provided with the necessary body armor. John Kerry stood by his principles and said that that was wrong. He proposed an amendment so that the money for the war would not come from the deficit (forcing our CHILDREN to sacrifice, so that those making over 200,000 dollars a year dont have to), and so that the money would not come out of funds that SHOULD go to healthcare, and education here in the US. I stand with John Kerry and would be PROUD to see my tax money go to support our brave troops, so that we dont increase the horrible deficit, and so that we dont lose healthcare and education programs at home.

Sorry, that's a bit too long for a bumpersticker, so I guess the John Kerry sticker along with the Support our Troops sticker I have on my car will have to do.

Dubya - The United States armed Saddam. Our CIA was very happy to have Iran & Iraq fighting. It's the same way they used Bin Laden against the Russians at one time. There are photos to be seen of Saddam shaking hands with Rumsfeld during that period.

We went into the Gulf the lst time, in 1991, after Cheney's equipment slant-drilled into Iraq from Kuwait and stole oil. Our Ambassador, April Glaspie, then gave Saddam our permission to invade Iraq. We left prematurely and Saddam then killed Shiites & Kurds.

Before 9/11, Bush intended to go into Iraq. Employees such as Richard C Clarke witnessed this and detail it in depth. Bush then trumped up a false connection between 9/11 and Iraq to justify our going into Iraq, which was unrelated to 9/11.
The 9/11 terrorists were mostly Saudis. Bush is very close with the Saudi royals.

9/11 was an excuse to carry out the agenda from http://newamericancentury.org, which is world domination. It is all about oil. When Bush talks about "spreading freedom & democracy" he is actually talking about building empire. He thinks that by referring to the "Global War on Terror" he can attack any country but there are, in fact, terrorists in more than 60 countries.

Iraq has become a hotbed of terrorism because of the lack of security caused by Bush's inability to plan for an occupation. Rumsfeld actually said the war might take 5 days, 5 weeks, 5 months. We have been there 20 months. Abu Graib represents a total breakdown of military discipline & also the ineptness of Bush as Commander in Chief. It is more than "a few bad apples".

As for Bush profiting from oil, you are being awfully concrete. Bush himself means nothing. He is a puppet for the neocons & Rove in the same way that Allawi & Karzai are puppets of the neocons.
The United States with their present foreign policy are hanging on to an obsolete form of energy that will be gone before long, war or no war. Do you know about "peak oil?"

Bush is a deficit spender, which Republicans are typically not. He is going to bankrupt us - right now interest on our debt is the second largest item and once it's our largest item, we're officially bankrupt. We import more than we export, so we also have an outrageous trade deficit. I haven't even mentioned out annual deficit, which is the equivalent of maxed out credit cards & no more relatives to borrow from.

When you buy a house, 40% of the mortgage is paid to the Chinese & Saudis because we have to borrow from them to finance our debt. Loaning us money is no longer profitable. When Clinton was in office, the Euro was worth 85 cents to $1 US. Not he Euro is worth $1.33 to $1 US. If these countries pull out, there is no one to loan us money. We are in the middle of two wars.

Under Clinton we had a surplus as well as a balanced budget. Under Bush, we had dipping into the Social Security fund and our grandchildren are literally paying for our current wars which we did not need and which the world and many Americans did not support, despite the lies.

You Republicans have been brainwashed. Every Republican I know voted for Kerry. Some of you are going to be having buyer's regret bigtime.

As for the US being a sovereign nation, so is Iraq. Iraq also has the right to determine its own affairs. Bush is actually not too clear on what sovereignty means, as he demonstrated when he tried to discuss native Americans in the US.

Hi DiAnne,

Happy to see you back.

For Dubya and friends, besides the domestic agenda issues, I would recommend the reading of "The Incoherent Empire" by Michael Mann.

There always was a rise and a fall of an empire, and America has neither the money nor the troops to fullfill the dreams of the neocons. Upper thread someone pointed out the bad state of ecomomy supported by foreign states, but those are getting less and less willing to put money into the abyssal hole... and to support a government that raises hatred and hostility around the world.

Watch Bush try to explain "sovereignty" & also note the correct spelling of the word.

http://www.campchaos.com/show.php?iID=868

dubya may have left the building but his nasty odor remains--the true hate-filled smarmy attitudes came out there at the end.

Our very first troll..and he slowly revealed his true nature. It was almost as if he could not help but share his true feelings about JK and us.

The comment you will NOT see had to do with Abu Ghraib and how pleasurable he thought we would find it to be treated as the Iraqi prisoners were. He even suggested we would be willing to pay for such treatment.

This is what the "average" Bush voter reveals.

The book that was given to me by the British intern, Kit, is called:

Colossus: The Price of America's Empire, by Niall Ferguson

Is American an Empire? Few Americans would say so. It certainly is an empire, Niall argues .. but Americans have preferred talking about spreading the blessings of liberty to using the "e" word. .. That attitude is perhaps the most fateful aspect of America's empire. To be an empire without admitting it is to be an empire with .. chronic attention deficit disorder.

On the rare occasions when Amerian occupations have been sustained, as in Germany & Japan after WW2, the rsults have been spectacular. But more often American meddles in haste, on the cheap and through proxies. This is why, despite all its vast resources and firepower, the United States is a relatively unsuccessful empire.

N. F.

Well, we had our first troll like old times! ...and it seems that none of us have forgoten just how to deal with them! ;-)

Thank you for finding this website.

You're among friends.

What can you do?

Be a Democracy Cell.

This website will be about, ground action, and building a network of thinking, capable individuals who together speaks clearly and loudly about what is right and what is wrong.

We may not have 100% agreement all the time, but with patience and understanding we will make a difference, one community at a time.

Welcome, and please keep coming back often. Your voices here will always be heard.

Posted by: Andrew Podolsky | November 27, 2004 04:00 PM

Thanks for the welcome.

It feels good to read the posts here, get informed, share thoughts, etc., but aside for the occasional W that strays in just for fun and is probably much amused by the reaction s/he gets, even the thoughtful and reasonable ones, aren't we preaching to the converted?

By the way, I remember listening a while back while driving home to a NPR story about a group of deeply religious people and how they meet to pray for the enlightment of our politicians. While quite far from my way of thinking, I found their words quite moving, they were "good people", naive maybe, but honest and not bigoted. Most of them, if I remember correctly, were saying that they would prefer Bush to win, but they wil not think their prayers were in vain if that will not happen, and if Kerry will prove to be a good and spiritual leader. Is this an example of the kind of people that we should reach out to? I think that the audio link for the story is http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4060577 I am not sure it is correct, there is a problem with the real audio on my machine which I do not have the time nor the patience to figure out right now.

* The United States Of Europe: The New Superpower, by T. R. Reid

* The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream by Jeremy Rifkin

* What's the Matter with Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of Americaby Thomas Frank

* Confucius Lives Next Door : What Living in the East Teaches Us About Living in the West by T.R. REID

* The Bush Survival Bible: 250 Ways to Make it Through the Next Four Years Without Misunderestimating the Dangers Ahead, and Other Subliminable Stategeriesby GENE STONE

* The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America by John Micklethwait

* Free World : America, Europe, and the Surprising Future of the West by Timothy Garton Ash

Remain a xenophobe and faux patriot at your own risk as doing so will not make American military overextension sustainable nor can it change the emerging demographics of Asia, South Asia and Southeast Asia with young & vibrant labor forces.

"We need to start making some friends on this planet." John Kerry.

We still do.

KiK, your talents are wasted here. You need your own newspaper column, magazine column, online widely read journal or something. You are one of the best writers for the left that I read and I read a lot everyday. Your opinions are based on facts, you take the time to become informed and you spell out the liberal position on issues in a concise and compelling fashion with your quick wit shining through. I just need to print out what you write and when I get frustrated with someone, hand your stuff over and say, "here, this is what I am trying to say!"

Good work, friend.

A little more on Anglophone Empires:

All told, there have been no more than seventy empires in history. American is the sixty eighth. Communist China will be the sixty ninth, the European Union will be the 70th. Like ancient Egypt, America erects towering edifices in its heartland, though these house the living rather than the dead. Like the Athenian Empire, it has proved itself adept at leading alliances against a rival power. Like the empire of Alexander, it has a staggering geographical range. Like the Chinese Empire that arose in the Ch'in era and reached its zenith under the Ming dynasty, is has united the lands and people of a vaast territory and forged them into a true nation-state. Like the Roman Empire, it has a system of citizenship that is remarkablly open: purple Hearts and U.S. citizenship were conferred simultaneously on a number of the soldiers serving in Iraq last year.

In its capacity for spreading its own language and culture - at once monotheistic and mathematical - the United States also shares features of the Abbasid caliphate erected by the heirs of Muhammad.

Niall Ferguson

Is it too late to be a "good" Empire?
Can we share power? If we can't, we are doomed.

dubya, you remind me of someone I know in Houston who trolls liberal websites in order to pick a fight just as you are doing here. He thinks of himself as a normal, average American. Well, the rest of us are normal, average Americans also, so what is your point? You have fallen into the "I have a mandate" alterworld that Bush has created. When you say "you guys need to listen up and pay attention", I say "no". We are the loyal opposition and that's what makes America a democracy. I would have LOVED if your side would have listened up and paid attention during the Clinton years, but you all chose to take to the airways and other media outlets and slam his policies and slander him, so we would be remiss if we ran into a corner and cowered. That just wouldn't be right in our democracy, now would it?

I do hear you when you say that liberals seem to be attacking all Bush voters as way far to the right and extremists. That rubs me the wrong way at times, also. I am in a very red state and I know that is not true. I have many good friends, co-workers, family members and business associates who voted for Bush. But here is the deal. All of those regular folks who voted for him - they - and you - are accountable for all of the mess this President has created in our country and in our world. If you don't want to be accountable for a complete and utter disaster - the kind of thing we are depicting in our posts - then I suggest you work on your representative, senators and president to work for positive change for the people of America and for the world. Your time might be well spent making sure your "normal, average" agenda is being implemented rather than the far right wing plans we see being implemented every day.

Good luck to you and godspeed, dubya. You are going to need it now and in the future. I predict the future with the real "dubya" is not going to be pretty. Please work to keep that from happening - to keep our civil liberities and freedoms intact - since you are a normal, average American.

Bush: "We will actively work to bring the hope of democracy, development, free markets and free trade to every corner of the world"

Winston Churchill: "to reclaim from barbarism fertile regions and large populations"

The British: "the white man's burden"

The French: "civilizing mission"

Like the British Empire, the US reserves the ight to use military force, including preemptively.

(Bush: "even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack"

IS THIS SUCH A GREAT WAY TO PROCEED?!!
CAN WE AFFORD IT??!!

The more you label people, the more they will become that label.

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 04:15 PM

I guess that is why some liberals have become more liberal... The Republicans like to throw that label around!

I think labels are rather boring - they are stereotypes. Issues are far more interesting.

Is that a joke?

Columbian marxists planned to kill bush last week...

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/americas/11/27/bush-plot/index.html

To Dubya

Tis the fortune of bankers and builders of arms
To worship the profit however it comes
Up in their towers, sheltered from harm
Far from the smoke and the sound of the drums

Tis the fortune of dreamers to see what they see
To live with the scorn till the miracle comes
To teach us the music and show us the key
And the chorus to silence the sound of the drums
--- J Collins

Long, but maybe interesting to some:

Dubya's comments, though horribly misguided really made me think.

He suggested that there is a "moral majority" out there and we'd be better off if we listened to it and followed suit. This sort of suggestion shed a little light for me on the differences between Liberals and Conservatives, and why, at least for now, Conservatives seem to be enjoying a successful majority status.

They are the untimate conformists.

Conservativism is all about rigid conformity, maintenance of the status quo, and, dare I say, a "herd mentality." It is far easier to assemble a large group of conformists whose very core values are all about resisting change, and whip them into a frenzy and herd them to the polls in large solid numbers to vote to protect their rigid, unyeilding platform. To suggest that "change" ie, electing a progressive candidate and ousting a conservative one, for instance, is a threat to life as they know and accept it, really adds fuel to their ideological fire.

Now, Democrats and Liberals are entirely different animals - we are a large, diverse group of free-thinkers and visionaries who are open to suggestion and impossible to corral. While this sort of diversity may make it more difficult to reign us all into one homogeonous blob, and herd us all to the polls to vote for the same candidate en masse, (and thus making it harder to secure a rigid majority) most of us would never for one second consider trading our status as free-thinkers for a position in the Conformist's Army just to fit in with "the crowd."

Refusal to yield may be seen as a weakness by the Conservative movement, because our numbers are harder to secure - but I suspect that most of us see our flexibility as a strength - one we treasure most.

A little story -

Back in the late fall/early winter of 2001, (if you recall, the Florida Election debacle was in full swing) I was taking a Psychology class at a community college in my rural conservative town. The class was taught by a Roman Orthodox priest, and I was most assuredly, was the only "Massachusetts Liberal" in the bunch.

One day, the Prof came in and said "Ok, everyone, humor me, get up out of your chair, take your left shoe off, wave it in the air, and jump up and down on one foot."

About half of the class immediately did as they were told.

Sensing hesitation, the rather tall imposing priest, clad in his cassock, stood up, raised his voice, and said "Come on everyone, I'm serious! You'll all be jumping up and down until class gets out, unless ALL of you do it. This is an assignment!"

The remaining half all followed suit, some reluctantly, with the exception on me, who remained seated and looked around me at this group of leaping idiots with a "WTF" look on my face.

The prof trned to me, and adressed me by name and said, "COME ON!! get up!"

I looked at him, and said "No way!" "I am not doing that." He started slamming his hand on my desk. "Come on, the whole class is waiting!!"

This prompted everyone to start urging me to follow along.

I said, quite loudly, "There is no way in hell I am doing that. I don't give a sh*t if you jump up and down until you are blue in the face. It looks stupid, and I'm not doing it."

I turned to the teacher, and said "What the hell are you doing?!?"

He told everyone to sit down and put their shoe back on.

He said "Did any of you find that rewarding?"

Silence. Shaking heads.

"Did any of you want to do that at all?"

*blink blink*

Then why did you do it?

"You told us to" was the standard response, or "I didn't want everyone else pised off at me."

The teacher explained "You know it really makes me worry that half of you did exactly what you were told, no questions asked, despite your misgivings. This is not a matter of yeilding authority to your Professor - I did not ask you to please be quiet in class or turn in your homework. I asked to to do something utterly ridiculous that you had very right to say no to. The other half of you caved after a little pressure was applied. You all refused to exercise your right to be a free thinker, and to stand up for yourself - you all went along with the herd -

except for HER."

And he pointed to me.

He looked at me and said "I pray you will become an activist. The world desperately needs people like you. Twenty-nine to one, the people in this room did what their teacher told them, without rasing objection, despite not wanting to do it. I'm just a community college professor. In the event that a truly powerful entity such as our government, for instance, were to ask us to go along with a questionable activity, I fear most of the American public would follow like sheep. Young lady, I hope you find your voice when you need to speak up against a group of tens of millions, instead of 29. Because I can guarantee it won't be long before that happens."

Kerry is King

You are right. QUESTION AUTHORITY. Most do not.

"We were just following orders."

There are values besides worrying about who your neighbor is sleeping with:

http://kerryblog.blogspot.com/2004/11/democrats-make-appeal-for-hungry-on.html

Posted by: muse | November 27, 2004 05:26 PM

*sniffle* *blush*

Speechless.

Thanks.

:-)

P.S. You kick ass too. Also, I found your wishlist on line! All books! You little smarty, you. Mine is all bath stuff and girly crap. A few books are on there... like "Politics for Dummies!!" :-) You should come visit me in CA again soon. I have a few winter visits to S.F. planned. We can tear up the town again. I could visit TX too, but would they have me?

You are right. QUESTION AUTHORITY. Most do not.

"We were just following orders."

Posted by: DiAnne | November 27, 2004 06:09 PM

"Tis the fortune of children to have such a choice
To grow up to be dreamers or builders of guns
Born to be angels, born to rejoice
Not to grow up to the sound of the drums"

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 27, 2004 06:05 PM

Kik--

awesome post! I would have to say that we here in the dcp would sit along side you and fight for what we know is right.

Now we have to motivate others to do the same.

Sparrow - I trust you all would stand up for what's right, and not hesitate to speak he truth to power - which is why I feel so at home here.

I do my best to motivate others. After that whole incident in the classroom, I found myself wondering later on what might have happened if I had tried to convince the person next to me to ramain seated, told them that I was refusung to participate, and if they didn't want to stand up, they shouldn't either. Would it have been easier for someone else to resist the herd if they felt they had even one ally?

I think, maybe so.

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 27, 2004 06:05 PM

Thanks, KiK!!!!!!!! :-) GOOD lesson for all of us........!!! :-)

Eh - pardon my typos. Fast, impatient typist, I am.

:-)

kik:

You have a great point there. Yes, you were a lone voice out there and you were filled with fear--what would your refusal cause--but my guess is that each person in that room admired your fortitude to stand firm, even those that begged you to rise and hop around shoeless with them

And in a way, our project here on the dcp is going to help you and other like you speak to others in the way you were too young to be able to do before.

But your lesson is a lesson to all of us: it's cool that we're here and strong in our beliefs, but we need to reach out to others and create our own cells.

And Muse is right! You have a special way with words and should consider creating a book or a forum to spread your wonderful language to all. Perhaps you will do that within your own "cell", but no matter what, don't leave us here! (And if you ever decide to get something going--you have my email and know how to contact me. I will be honored to help you.)

Your ours and we won't give you up. We'll just loan you out for a while. Okay?

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 27, 2004 06:05 PM

Hey KiK! I really enjoyed that post!

especially this part:

"most of us would never for one second consider trading our status as free-thinkers for a position in the Conformist's Army just to fit in with "the crowd.""

...amen!

and of course, I enjoyed your story. "Massachussetts Liberlas" know best! ;-)

...speaking of Massachusetts liberals, here's a quote from a great Massachusetts liberal that I think goes along with what you're saying:

"There were some who said we should be silent about our differences on issues during this convention, but the heritage of the Democratic Party has been a history of democracy. We fight hard because we care deeply about our principles and purposes. We did not flee this struggle. We welcome the contrast with the empty and expedient spectacle last month in Detroit where no nomination was contested, no question was debated, and no one dared to raise any doubt or dissent.Democrats can be proud that we chose a different course and a different platform." ~ Ted Kennedy, at the 1980 DNC

Sparrow --

Tee-hee...thanks for all your kind words. I won't leave my brothers and sisters on DCP. I have considered trying to start up some sort of column or forum, but never really knew if I had what it took, as far as the discipline and creativity needed for such a venture - or where to start. I also wondered if what I had to say would really mean, in the words of Chris Farley's motiational speaker character Matt Foley, "JACK SQUAT!!!" to anyone other than me.

Thanks, KiK, for the great story about standing on one foot and jumping up and down until blue in the face.

I think that if we don't focus entirely on what is happening with our nation during these next few years, we may be facing "if everyone jumped off a bridge, would you" mentality.

As for the suggestions that the talented people drawn to this blog (and drawn to the Official Kerry for President web log before it) use their efforts in really making a difference, I think that is the direction DCP will go in over the next few weeks.

Right now there are links to the side of the main page of common cause web sites. Soon we will likely see places on this website where people can organize and meet up by region, state, and city in the US. I would like to see a weekly or bi-weekly newsletter (available in pdf form to print out and distribute, hand to hand) and maybe even a daily pod cast "message of the day" (if you are new to the pod cast craze please check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcasting for an introduction).

Kerry lost the election, unfortunately, and while we're still sorting out all the allegations of FRAUD, we have to realize that while one man had difficulty getting elected to POTUS, the groups and values that had their trust in him have not been and can not be defeated. They are larger than one person, or one Administration. They are the anti war movement, the civil liberties movement, the truth and accountability in government movements. These issues are far too important to have been "defeated" in this past election.

So, WATCH THIS SPACE. Thank you all.

Posted by: KerryisKing | November 27, 2004 07:04 PM

Kik:

You've got what it takes Kik--and you don't have to go it alone. Email me or catch me on the irc.

Sparrow -
Tee-hee, do you mean, as the New Kids on the Block would say, I've got the "Right stuff?!?!"

They were Massachusetts liberals, too. :-)

lol--kik--

Yep--you've got the right stuff! You gonna create liberal music next?

Sparrow - I could create some, but others would have to sing it. The mere sound of my crooning has caused the bleeding rupture of many a tympanic membrane.

I'll craft some lyrics, someone else can write the accompanying music and sing. I'll play the wax-paper comb.

kik:

We've got a deal then.

I have some talented kids who can write the music and sing the song.

And one will help you with lyrics if you make sure they're nonpolitical but tree-huggin' good.

KiK,
I sent your post to my daughter in college, hope you don't mind.
You're in a class by yourself, and you have proof!
Thanks for sharing.

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 07:47 PM

Hey Dubya:

This is a private blog-and it is not sponsored by any government official.

However, the Bush blog had absolutely no freedom of speech.

So do us a favor and go send your thought to them--so they can see exactly how "moral" you are.

Bye...don't let the door hit you on the way out. You have overstayed your welcome.

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 07:47 PM

Dubya

Maybe you ALL need to listen up...

There are people going hungry in this country.

There are good students who want to go to college and their parents can't afford it (Did you moral folks know that the Pell Grants were just cut?).

There are small businesses filing bankruptcy.

There are plans to burn more coal in this country as an energy source and further pollute the air not just in this country but in the world.

There are people who work for less money now than they did just a few short years.

The country's poverty rate is growing.

Kid's in public schools ARE BEING LEFT BEHIND.

Hundreds of thousands of kids have no health insurance nor do their parents for that matter.

There is a war in Iraq perpetuated by oil, greed and vengence for daddy. It was NOT perpetuated by 9/11!

The dollar's has dropped in Europe. That WILL effect trade and so will the recent WTO sanctions against our country.

We have the largest deficit in history and it is getting larger daily!

The death penalty is NOT PRO-LIFE!

THESE ARE MORAL ISSUES! YES THEY ARE ALL MORAL ISSUES!

These moral issues will have long term effects on the future of our country and the world. They will have far reaching effects that mean far more to everyone in this country and than the world, than who is marrying who or who is having an abortion.

Why is it that the folks who have the most divorces seems to be among the moral majority?

What did you do today to help make the world a better place other than come here and preach to us about your so called moral majority?

What has George W Bush done to make your life better, or make the future for your children better?

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 07:47 PM

Dubya,

Not everybody is evil. However, the majority DID not vote for Bush.

The bible says, "Thou shalt not steal"--you don't suppose they include STEALING elections in there too.

Frankly, the facts show that in FLorida--Volusa County some enterprising theifs threw away Kerry ballots and replaced them with Bush's. Now it's part of a wider fraud investigation.

In North Carolina, votes were thrown away because they didn't expect such a high turnout....hmmmm interesting, Why did Republicans who have held the majority in Congress for the last two years not take care of ensuring that every voter would get a paper receipt and be able to see that their vote counted.

In Indiana and Ohio, and Iowa, extra Bush votes were found--much greater than the population there.

Interesting, once again, that when there was an ERROR it registered for Bush. That's not a promising indication that fowl play did not occur.

Then of course--Extra votes in Ohio--people in democratic areas not getting to vote because the lines were HOURS long. Hmmmm...not many jobs out there thanks to our bungling Chief in Commander...mr. dubya himself... So we don't suppose people had a choice: vote or job... I bet you had a nice SHORT line--because in the republican areas they had 1 machine per 100 voters--which was QUITE opposite the major cities.

Let's not forget that Our dear Mr. Blackwell HAD all the registrations and KNEW exactly where all the newly registered voters where. Hmmmm....no don't worry, nothing wrong with discrimination and suppression and intimidation.

Hmm... a Warren city lockdown--compliments of the non-existant homeland security department which NEVER issued a warning.

And lets not forget all the thrown away ballots in Ohio--which when counted by hand will show a willful disregard for the 14th ammendment protection of equal opportunity for all.

NOPE--can't fool us. Bush did not win. NO he didn't have a majority--and my guess is that you know it too.

Tee-hee, Amy, I hope you corrected the typos!!

:-)

Dubya-
Again, I ask, why is it so important to you to come here and spread this form of negativity? You have now admitted to "finding your way around it" to get in here and continue your tirade. I am not sure if you think we are going to drop everything and convert, but it is not going to happen. Also, you mentioned that there is no possible way in your opinion that votes were hacked in large numbers. Are you so sure? Or are you not open minded enough to accept that possibility? The truth is, there are a LOT of voters coming forward to say that they faced many obstacles in voting on Nov. 2, including machines that popped up "Bush" when they tried to vote for Kerry, and various other Republican favoring "oddities." Did you read the article at all? It might be of interest to you that two mainstream news organizations have lent coverage to this matter, despite being under gag order to avoid the issue. It is not being ignored.

I think you will learn that we do listen to what the right-wing says. We listen VERY CAREFULLY. That doesn't mean we have to embrace it. You claim you did not ask us to follow suit, but only to "listen up." Then, you "found your way around the system" to enter this blog and reiterate that we need to "listen up". Are you SURE you aren't trying to be pushy?

What I have been trying to communicate various times on this thread today is that despite how many people think the way YOU do, we choose to think the way WE want to. We know we have to live on the same planet together with you, and we don't have a problem with that. I can live with my political opponents, hell - I can be friends with them.

Can you?

Dubya:

Head start was also eliminated. Hope you don't have a 3-5 year old and hope you don't know anyone who does either.

Head start is a program with a PROVEN success rate for keeping kids in school and helping them out of our prisons.

Republicans now want to view your taxes. hmmm...maybe they like to know how they can control your mind and your donations.

They also don't seem to understand that jobs, healthcare, and education keep us out of poverty. Poverty breeds crimes and more health problems and suicides too.

SPEAKOUT AGAINST VOTE FRAUD at KGO TV and Senator Boxer's Office in SF Monday 11/29

END THE MEDIA BLACKOUT OF THE ELECTION

JOIN US MONDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 11AM AT KGO-TV, 900 FRONT ST, SF.
and 12:00 at Senator Boxer's office, 1700 Montgomery St, SF.

Sponsored by UFPJ Bay Area, CODEPINK, and Fair and Accountable Elections

Dubs,
I don't agree with you on several points.

1) It is the extreme right that is the loudest noisemaker in this country. I feel confident making this assertion because I have been in the country only three years and for most of that time I thought the whole country was as intolerant as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter and others like them who shreik and fling the most vile insults at those who disagree with them. when I finally found some people who were more moderate and tolerant, the first thing I said to them was that they'd better start getting a lot louder, because I hadn't heard a peep from them. Of course, they're starting to catch up, but since you intolerant types have 15 years head start, I expect it will take a while.

2)Moderators have a right to delete posts from their own blogs; however, the ACLU, which protects the civil liberties of people from all persuasions, is under attack by your party - or rather, a group in your party who have hijacked it for their own purposes - and that is where we see who the real Nazis are. You will also find them at the polls in Ohio and Florida where they make consistent efforts, election after election, to suppress some voters because of their color. Thos are the fascists.

3)The silent majority you speak of is not what you describe - the silent majority in this country is moderate. Bush is anything but. According to several studies that I am sure you are familiar with, most people are okay with gay civil unions, okay with legal abortion as long as we offer alternatives - alternatives which, incidentally, your president has worked to curtail, which is why abortions went up so much under him - and are not okay with invading a country without provocation. Most people are in support of the Kyoto accord, for protecting the environment for our children and grandchildren, and for protecting endangered species. Most people are against refusing to comply with international law. Most are against running up record deficits and tax breaks to the super-rich and corporations during a time of war. Most people actually do support a pay as you go budgetary process.

Unfortunately, in this election, most of the people who voted for Bush were uninformed about his real policies and actions in most of these areas. Most didn't know that he pulled us out of Kyoto and the world court, and most thought he was popular in the world. Most thought invading Iraq was in response to Saddam's involvement in 9/11 - even the president has finally been forced to refute that bit of misinformation. Most thought Bush was in favor of protecting the environment, and had no idea that he dismissed the nonpartisan leadership in the Environmental Protection Agency when he took office and installed Republican lobbyists of the major polluters, who rolled back 30+ years of environmental protections in order to enhance corporate profits. Even Republicans knew they were toast if that one got out.

The list of these misperceptions is endless, and my time is running short. But you get the idea. Others here can fill you in on more of the misperceptions that so many Americans held when they went to the polls. In large part, I and others blame the weak-kneed media stars who have lost the inclination and the ability to dig up the truth, and instead enjoy the monetary and material rewards their positions as BushCo parrots provide them.

Watch for it, we will be changing all that.

So my final word to you my friend is this: You do not have the "majority" on your side if you support the real policies of this president. So don't come in here talking to us about the silent majority - we ARE the silent majority - the people who want fiscal responsibility, environmental protection, equality of civil rights and diplomacy first. WE ARE THE MAJORITY, and next time, our voices will be heard.

Sending a gift and greetings to you all...keeping hope alive

http://i.euniverse.com/funpages/cms_content/2529/4candles.swf

KiK - what typos?

Posted by: canadianview | November 27, 2004 08:25 PM

Thanks! that was cool =)

Amy - I think there may have been a lot of typos in my posts - I tend to type rapidly, looking everywhere but the screen. Often, I re-read and say "eeewww..that's bad."

Gosh, KiK, I didn't notice any typos. But then, I guess I read like you type!

I've been interested and have been thinking of what an impact the election results would have on such a strongly motivated group that was convinced winning was within your grasp.
How have you all coped since Nov 2?
Have the results changed any of your family, friend or co-worker relationships? Have you found yourself withdrawing and becoming more introspective as you have recovered in order to re-group? Have you changed your shopping or social activities?

The media did more then their part in trying to dig up the trash.

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 08:59 PM

YOU WANT TO TALK TRASH? And the media perpetuating of the trash?

The moral right wing jumped all over the SVFT and their lies. THAT'S TRASH DUBYA!

When the SVFT slandered John Kerry and his right to receive his medals they slandered EVERY VETERAN IN THIS COUNTRY, while young men and women are currently serving in an unjust war!

THAT'S TRASH!

And the U.S. was once a SUGAR DADDY to both Saddam and Bin Laden!

Why is it the Saudi's got to fly out of the U.S. when all planes were grounded after 9/11? Why did the U.S. let Bin Laden get away?

BushCo had an agenda called The New American Century - http://www.newamericancentury.org, you should feel very comfortable reading the well documented information there...

Dubya... you must be the same Dubya that liked to come on the Kerry Blog and drop your trash there.

Posted by: canadianview | November 27, 2004 08:59 PM

In many ways, I think most of us are more motivated than ever. What has happened is this: instead of spending a whole year gearing up and working hard for the upcoming election, we are now going to spend FOUR years gearing up and working hard for the upcoming election. And we are going to work hard at every election in between. Far from discouraging us, the election outcome has emboldened us, strengthened us, united us and given us focus. Most of us feel this way: We have only just begun to fight!

Stick around, you'll see what I mean. By 2008, the neocons won't know what hit them.

Okay, Dubya...you are actually saying that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 - but it was right to attack him because he financially supported terrorists? Hmmmm - that's a leap. What about Saudi Arabia? What about Bin Laden?

And your point that in a post 9/11 world the US needs to address developing threats? I guess that's why Dubya has done such a great job dealing with the developing nuclear threat in North Korea and Iran - and why the U.S. did so much to punish Kahn in Pakistan for helping proliferate nuclear weapons.

The fact is - Dubya is focused on one thing and one thing only, and uses 9/11 as justification. He wants US control of Iraq's oil - plain and simple.

And the media against Bush? That's a laugh. If you want to see media with integrity - look at the Ukraine. I never thought I'd see the day that I would look to the Ukraine for lessons on how a free press should operate and how a country should respond to voter fraud.

Posted by: Dubya | November 27, 2004 08:59 PM

You got it so wrong. The biggest in your words Sugar Daddy of them all is Osama Bin Laden, so where is he ?

Don't forget it was a Republican administration that gave Sadam his power,guess you don't remember them putting that Sugar Daddy in place to counter the Iranians. Lets see muster gas, anthrax, etc.

Please peddle your baloney somewhere else. Your anaylsis doesn't add up. Go back to Faux news, I'm sure you love their propaganda.

NO SURRENDER !!!

Amy,

I could not agree with you more. As I read the different blogs, I notice a restlessness about people and a willingness to get involved at many levels, especially the local level. Over at the DNC blog, they were discussing a need for a leader to unite us in our endeavors. I can see that we will be ready in 4 years to take them on, we are motivated and we will effect a change. I just hope we deal with voter fraud/suppression and the media--as two issues that need our attention.

canadianview: Here is something I sent out last week--it answers your question too:

Dear Loved Ones,

This is a short note to all of you to let you know we are doing fine, and beginning a new venture. We are aware of how hard everyone worked on this election and we want to let you know how moved we are by the support we received personally over the past year-plus.

While we know the country missed a tremendous opportunity, we also know that much of the country has little understanding of what has happened over the past few months. We want to build on the knowledge base that so many of you developed, along with millions of others, and provide a place for all of us to learn, share, and plan actions that will bring us back to the democratic principles we care about.

We have a skeletal site up now: www.democracycellproject.net

Over the next few weeks we will be adding information, links, and resources for you to access. We hope that you will participate with us in becoming ever more active, interactive, and proactive in creating communities of change agents.

Our gratitude this season goes to you-who continue to inspire, communicate, and support the ideals we share. Our love to each of you. Please visit us online and pass it along.

It is and always has been about raising the peoples' conscience...to think beyond their daily lives...to find happiness and fulfillment within compassion...one of the hardest lessons in the Universe.

One cannot force people to think, only present the truth for contemplation...and have patience...for when people do think...they grow...and though growth hurts...they thrive in becoming better people.

Such is the difficulty of what we are attempting to achieve...and though we cannot enlighten all Americans, we can reach out to those who embrace change for the betterment of society, our government and the world...this is our solemn promise...our bond with each other, to our Nation and to all of humanity...

To try to accomplish, not the impossible, but the improbable...though together, there is nothing we cannot accomplish.

Indy:

Right on!!!

Show up
Pay attention
Tell the truth
Let go of the result

:-) A mantra for the ages, at least one I subscribe to.

I think it's just a way of saying what was often said at the Kerry blog, we plant seeds... and then we plant some more, and then we plant some more. It's work, plain and simple, but it's work we can all do. :-)

... the garden will be expansive. And colorful.

Voting Machines Count Backwards in Okla.
by Bob Nichols Saturday, Nov 27 2004, 3:13am
bobnichols@cox.net
national / elections & legislation / news report

57 Rural Counties Affected - Vote Fraud Suspected

Rural Oklahoma Voting machines know how to count backwards.
(Oklahoma City) November 18, 2004 - Rural Oklahoma Voting machines know how to count backwards.

That looks like what the secretly programmed machines did for Sen. Kerry in President Bush's easily won Presidential Election victory in Oklahoma.

All 77 counties use the Optech Eagle voting machines and Tabulator's made by ES&S, Sen Hagel's republican company.

The respectable, conservative "Tulsa World" newspaper reported Nov 3rd that Kerry was winning in 57 of the states's rural counties., with 70% of the vote counted. Turns out that the famous November 3rd report was probably not supposed to be printed.

It represented the counting when the tabulating was about 70% "complete," as they used to say in the old Soviet Unon.

The "official" State of Oklahoma Election Board vote totals released later show Kerry not winning; but, losing in all the state's 77 counties, including the 57 rural counties. Yea, somebody really messed up, big time, and published a partially completed and, I guess you would haver to call it, "fixed" vote.

___________________snip_____________________

http://okimc.org/newswire.php?story_id=344

Hello all its me

I hope you all had a nice thansgiving and gave alot of thanks for all of the things that you have been blessed with this year

I missed you all but now I am back

Great to have this place up and running.

Vana, just wait until after Christmas before you ask me to give more money! :)

I guess I can't spell my own name! And I count backwards too!

Media Blackout on Election Fraud by Media News Group
Denver Post and 94+ Newspapers, Radio Stations, TV Stations
Corporate Profits vs Civil Rights, and the Vote
by Kali Autumn Lynn
The Denver Voice
Denver, Co: November 26, 2004

To those of us on the inside of this issue, it seems inconceivable that our local newspapers would offer a front page story on election fraud in Ukraine while ignoring stories of the same right here at home in the United States. Every day, since November 2nd, 2004, stories have emerged detailing such things as malfunctioning voting machines, fraudulent election records in Volusia, Florida, inconsistent numbers of voter registrations vs. vote totals in Ohio, credible university studies showing serious statistical impossibilities in election results, and much more. Yet, these daily revelations have been almost completely ignored by our media. These reports are coming not from persons with tin foil hats as is often claimed, but from PhD level citizens, election officials, and voting rights activists.

But to the rest of America, who get their information from corporate owned media sources, there is nothing missing from the daily news. That's because, if they don't report it, it didn't happen. For most of America, we trust our local papers to report honestly and fairly. But what many of us don't realize is that our local newspapers are not so local after all.

----------------------SNIP------------------
http://denvervoice.org/features/Nov_2004/who_is_the_denver_post.htm