Newsweek's Cleaning Service

I hate to think what goes on behind closed doors at American news weeklies nowdays - old suits discussing obscenity is what is disgusting.

& this:

New Pope Intervened against Kerry in US 2004 Election Campaign
Agence France-Presse

Tuesday 19 April 2005

Washington - German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the Vatican theologian who was elected Pope Benedict XVI, intervened in the 2004 US election campaign ordering bishops to deny communion to abortion rights supporters including presidential candidate John Kerry.

In a June 2004 letter to US bishops enunciating principles of worthiness for communion recipients, Ratzinger specified that strong and open supporters of abortion should be denied the Catholic sacrament, for being guilty of a "grave sin."

He specifically mentioned "the case of a Catholic politician consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws," a reference widely understood to mean Democratic candidate Kerry, a Catholic who has defended abortion rights.

The letter said a priest confronted with such a person seeking communion "must refuse to distribute it."

A footnote to the letter also condemned any Catholic who votes specifically for a candidate because the candidate holds a pro-abortion position. Such a voter "would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for holy communion," the letter read.

The letter, which was revealed in the Italian magazine L'Espresso last year, was reportedly only sent to US Catholic bishops, who discussed it in their convocation in Denver, Colorado, in mid-June.

Sharply divided on the issue, the bishops decided to leave the decision on granting or denying communion to the individual priest. Kerry later received communion several times from sympathetic priests.

Nevertheless, in the November election, a majority of Catholic voters, who traditionally supported Democratic Party candidates, shifted their votes to Republican and eventual winner George W. Bush.

My vote: Bu$hco Propaganda in action. It is more disgusting than Limbaugh's comments.

Time, Newsweek, US News & World Report recently have done all too many issues on religious topics & do not contain much "news". I now consider them optional, along with tv. Too bad they are still considered potential "news sources" by alot of Americans.

So Newsweek has it's online edition tied to MSGOP. Does that mean that MSGOP is participating the whitewashing of Limbaugh's obscenities?

Just came from the gym & so saw the magazine with Anne Coulter on the cover (Mrs. Right) up close - what a horse face & legs look anorexic - scary.

Was reading "The Economist" and found it more informative than the aforementioned "news" rags, though it's rather conservative & British too. More world news, more in-depth.

Finally, a news reporter that is not trying to hide the facts.

I couldn't get the link to the following article to correctly link to the article, so I am posting the entire article. You check out his web site. He has some good blogs that he has links to. http://commonwonders.com/

For release 4/21/05

DEMOCRACY'S ABU GHRAIB

By Robert C. Koehler

Tribune Media Services

"That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary. There wasn't even any rioting in the streets. People stayed home at night, watching television, looking for some direction. There wasn't even an enemy you could put your finger on." - Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale

What if it could happen here?

This is the disquieting question I hesitate to ask because, once asked, it pretty much changes everything. The answer roars in behind it, as obvious as a Florida hurricane, an Ohio twister, ripping up the complacent heart. What if it could? What if it did? I think of my daughter, quickly, guiltily, and the country she'd inherit. I can no longer stay on the sidelines. No breath comes easily afterward.

It's what I would call the spirit of Nashville, where a national conference was held in early April on the issue of vote fraud and election reform - a conference of expert testimony on dirty tricks, uncounted ballots, needlessly long lines, weird numbers and evidence of electronic vote tampering, adding up to a crime against democracy.

As angry as I've ever been with the direction of any given administration's foreign or domestic policy, I never doubted the bedrock premise that the country itself was sound and free, and that political activity - speaking up, attempting to sway public opinion - always had the chance of reversing that policy. I never doubted, even after moving to Chicago in the mid-'70s, with the old Daley Machine ("vote early and vote often") still huffing and wheezing, that elections mattered and could alter the balance of power. I never felt disenfranchised. Now that certainty is gone, replaced by dread.

I do know that I'm not alone. The column I wrote about the conference last week hit a nerve, generating more e-mail and more hits to my formerly obscure Web site, commonwonders.com, than anything else I've ever written, by several powers of 10. It was not "sore loser" stuff. John Kerry, indeed, was hardly a candidate to inspire that kind of loyalty. I heard from readers who saw irregularities firsthand last Nov. 2 that churned their stomachs:

"I live near Toledo, Ohio and worked 12 hours on Election Day driving people to the polls, mostly in the inner city," one woman wrote. "I saw up close what was happening - the long lines, the aggressive Republican challengers, the broken machines. I personally live in an upscale, predominantly Republican suburb of Toledo and people sailed through the lines at my voting place. The difference in voting conditions vs. in poorer areas couldn't have been more glaring."

There was a malice afoot that day directed at our electoral process that cannot be explained away as mere flaws in a basically sound system, as Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell attempted to do, shrugging off his critics with the glib observation that "There's no such thing as an error-free election."

No, no, we can't let copouts and smug catchphrases stand as answers to the serious questions the nation must ask. What happened on Nov. 2 were not "errors," honest or otherwise, to be tolerated as harmlessly inevitable. Nor were they random. Nor did they occur "on both sides."

There were, on that day, a "dizzying list of electoral problems that might make some wonder how any ballots were counted in November." So the Washington Post reported the other day, as part of the coverage of the opening session of the Commission on Federal Election Reform hearings.

Well, gosh. Think of that. This is not page 17 news, though that's where the Post buried it, in its unfathomable news judgment. But at least the story is seeping out. This requires national outrage, an unstinting demand that the details of fraud and disenfranchisement be outed, the perpetrators punished and, most important of all, future elections secured from a repeat. It's democracy's Abu Ghraib.

I fear that a force is loose in the land that will stop at nothing to impose its agenda on the nation. We already have a permanent state of war and the USA Patriot Act. Now the Senate Republicans are attempting to implement the "nuclear option" and eliminate the filibuster - what William Rivers Pitt calls "the last lingering firebreak" separating church from state - so that 12 far right nominees to the federal judiciary (a mere 5 percent of the Bush administration's total) can be confirmed over Democratic objection.

". . . right now they believe they have the power to get anything they want," writes Pitt, referring to the "theocracy" wing of the GOP. In the context of a disabled electoral process, this is truly chilling. Could it happen here?

With God on your side, who needs democracy?

- - -

Robert Koehler, an award-winning, Chicago-based journalist, is an editor at Tribune Media Services and nationally syndicated writer. You can respond to this column at bkoehler@tribune.com or visit his Web site at commonwonders.com.

© 2005 Tribune Media Services, Inc.

Cancelled Time subscription
by kos

My wife made the call this morning. That felt good. Really, if you still have a subscription to Time, it's time to call itquits. As Alterman writes, after some good Coulter bashing:

While I'm alienating my friends, here, I suppose it is as bad a time as anyto point out that Time's political balance of columnists is badly skewed tothe right in direct contrast to Newsweek's. While the latter has the almost always excellent and genuinely liberal Jon Alter, together with theundeniably bleeding-heart Anna Quindlen to balance George Will and Robert
Samuelson and Fareed Zakaria, who is perhaps America's most thoughtful conservative pundit, now that David Brooks has decided to become something else entirely. (Other possible nominee: Chris Caldwell.) Time, meanwhile, has no one at all to balance right-wingers Charles
Krauthammer and Andrew Sullivan save Joe Klein; a "liberal" of the Nick Kristof/"Even-the-liberal-New-Republic..." variety. This is no accident.
Time used to publish Barbara Ehrenreich and it fired my friend Margaret Carlson, who is only just a little bit liberal, but apparently too much. It's not as if there are not plenty of people available. Just off the top of my head, E.J. Dionne or Josh Marshall could give Jon a run for his money on a regular basis and my sometimes nemesis Katha Pollitt could be Time's Anna Quindlen. And hey, wouldn't getting the currently under-employed Bill Moyers to do a regular column be a coup for any publication? (Speaking of which, whatever happened to Mike Kinsley's Time column?)

I'm not saying boycott Time because of the Coulter cover. Every publication will run something offensive to someone at any given time.
I'm saying boycott Time because it has systematically shut out liberal voices from its pages. And there's no reason our money should make its way into their pockets.

& here is a great blog that shows graphically how we are not winning the war in Iraq

http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2005/04/looking-at-iraq.html

Hell Freezes Over

Washington Times actually ran this!

Bipartisan?

We wrote earlier about a newly impaneled bipartisan presidential election reform commission made up of the likes of former President Jimmy Carter, former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, both Democrats, and former White House Chief of Staff James A. Baker III, a Republican.

Now, an election-reform advocacy group wants Mr. Baker, who served under former Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush, removed as the commission's co-chairman before the panel gets busy on whatever reform it can accomplish.
Representing about 100 affiliated election-reform organizations, the Velvet Revolution considers Mr. Baker "a partisan political operative and Bush family loyalist" who "will irreconcilably sully the credibility of such a commission and render its findings completely suspect, wholly useless and, regrettably, without merit."

"Mr. Baker is, in fact, the architect behind the invidious scheme implemented to ensure that the votes of all Americans would not be counted in the unfortunate and undemocratic 2000 presidential election fiasco," says the group, referring to when the soon-to-be-inaugurated George W. Bush dispatched Mr. Baker to voter-challenged Florida.

Outrageous...

Today during floor discussion on the state employees retirement plan, Iowa state senator Mark Zieman called Iowa state employees "bottom-feeders," who are "looking for a handout."

Feel free to email Zieman
mark.zieman@legis.state.ia.us

The slimeball in question
http://www3.legis.state.ia.us/ga/member.do?id=116

A transcript:

Senator Mark Zieman (Postville): “This has been quite an interesting discussion. It’s quite interesting. I went down and met with the BAC Board on Monday. The Benefits Advisory Committee. Maybe let’s go over and see who sits on this board. We have the Iowa State Education Association. We have the Iowa Association of Community College Trustees, the School Administrators of Iowa, the Iowa Association of School Boards, Retired School Personnel Association, Sheriffs and Deputies, Sheriffs Association, Iowa Association of Counties, State Police Officers, State of Iowa, Chiefs of Police Association, Iowa League of Cities, the IPERS Improvement Association, AFSMCE, and, guess what, one public member representing the taxpayer. Every fall, when I start going to meetings, I get to meetings and here they are, the bottom feeders, out there with their hand out. They’ve got their hand out.”

Remember "It's the economy, stupid..."? Well, it's time to bring that saying back, and this time, we need our legislators on both sides to listen...

Economic Worries Aren't Resonating on Hill
By Jonathan Weisman and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, April 21, 2005; Page A01

Inflation and interest rates are rising, stock values have plunged, a tank of gas induces sticker shock, and for nearly a year, wages have failed to keep up with the cost of living.

Yet in Washington, the political class has been consumed with the death of a brain-damaged woman in Florida, the ethics of the House majority leader, and the fate of the Senate filibuster.

The disconnect between pocketbook concerns of ordinary Americans and the preoccupations of their politicians has helped send President Bush's approval ratings on the economy down, while breeding discontent with Congress. The problem has yet to grow into a political wave that could sweep significant numbers of lawmakers from power next year, but both parties face risks if they fail to pivot their attention to economic issues.
--snip--
Few economists would say the nation is at risk of slipping back into recession, but most believe the United States is back in a "soft patch." Inflation jumped 0.6 percent in March, the Labor Department said yesterday, the biggest price surge in five months. The 115-point plunge that followed the inflation announcement brought the Dow Jones Industrial Average to its lowest level of the year, 842 points below the height it reached in late December, when Wall Street rallied after Bush's reelection. An average gallon of unleaded gasoline cost $2.22 yesterday, 27 cents higher than election week.

Perhaps most important, wages are not keeping up with prices. Adjusted for inflation, average weekly earnings fell by 0.3 percent from February to March, the Labor Department reported yesterday. Inflation-adjusted hourly wages last month were a half-percent lower than a year ago. Real weekly earnings have not risen in four years.
--snip--
"People feel vulnerable and besieged," said Lawrence Mishel, president of the labor-oriented Economic Policy Institute, "and they don't hear anybody talking about it."

Yet the only economic bills signed into law this year have tilted against the little guy: Legislation that restricts class-action lawsuits, and a major rewrite of the nation's bankruptcy laws, signed yesterday, that will make it harder for debt-ridden Americans to wipe out their obligations.
--snip--
Still, there is evidence that the public may be paying closer attention to economic issues, particularly rising gasoline prices, than politicians in Washington realize. The most recent NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll found that gasoline prices ranked second behind Schiavo as the most closely followed story during late March.
--snip--
"Many are rather upset at the Terri Schiavo issue," he said, even "moderately pro-life" voters. "I'm getting a lot of the, 'Why are you spending time on that when we don't have jobs?' type of thing."
--snip--
Democrats have been slow to seize on the economy, focusing on Social Security plan, attacking House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and a Senate showdown over filibustering judicial nominations. But they weighed in yesterday, charging that the Energy Department had estimated last year that the GOP energy bill would raise gas prices by an average of 3 cents a gallon.

Democratic strategist Geoffrey Garin said Democrats should be working harder to make the case that Republicans are ignoring pocketbook issues while they pursue changes in the judiciary or try to protect DeLay. "The developing story line is about an arrogant Republican majority that's lost touch with what's important," he said. "For Democrats to convey that point, they have to invest a lot of time and energy."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6118-2005Apr20.html

nyet nyet neyt

Rice Announces Presidential Run by Mistake

WASHINGTON (AP) - It was a long interview in Moscow, and maybe she was tired from her travels, but for just a moment Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice declared Wednesday that she would seek the U.S. presidency.

``One day you will run for president?'' Rice was asked on Ekko Moskvy Radio.

``President, da, da,'' Rice readily replied.

That, as nearly everyone knows, even if they are not fluent in Russian as Rice is believed to be, means yes.
 
``Nyet, nyet, nyet, nyet,'' Rice quickly added, taking herself out of the race as fast as she'd gotten into it.

The former academic, whose specialty was Soviet studies, is fluent in Russian - usually.

Moments before, in response to a series of friendly questions from listeners, Rice had begun her answers by saying ``Da.''

Her mood was clearly upbeat as she assured one listener, in Russian, that ``the United States and the American people respect the great culture of Russia, respect the great people of Russia, and we know that Russia has a very good future ahead of it.''

She told another listener, in English, ``The United States is not an enemy of Russia.''

And when a Russian girl asked how she could become like Condoleezza Rice, she replied in English, ``I don't want to talk about myself.''

She did, but only when the caller pressed. ``I enjoy very much what I do now. I have great friends and family,'' Rice said.

Rice also acknowledged in her reply, switching to Russian, that the Russian language ``is very difficult.... It is difficult to speak without mistakes.''

And she proved it a few minutes later by accidentally applying for the job of U.S. president.

My friend has a gift for getting LTEs published.

______

Thanks, Ms. Keene. I'll be using your letter as the lead in tomorrow's Times.

Diane Albert
Letters Editor

Subject: Of Popes and Kings and Locke

As a non- Catholic American, I watched the passing of John Paul II and the choosing of his successor with the same detachment with which most Americans viewed the funeral of Princess Dianna or the wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Bowles. Then I realized, with pride, what a great thing it is to be an American. There was a time, just two-hundred and fifty years ago, when any of these events would have had a direct and profound impact on all of our personal lives. It is easy to forget that just a few generations ago the "divine right of kings" was the prevalent basis of government and the only check on the king's power was a Pope or Archbishop. When the founders proclaimed "all men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights" it was not meant as an affirmation of a "creator" but rather that we ALL had the same rights as a king or pope.

There are those right now who are bent on bringing their version of "God" back into government. For the sake of our still short-lived experiment in democracy and personal conscience I pray they are unsuccessful.

Another good LTE

Bush's belief in free speech has its limits

Re: In Australia, they have seen the STV, and they say it works, Paul Wilcocks, April 9

I thank Paul Wilcocks for his excellent report on my experience with the single-transferable-vote system.

There was one error not of his making. While I did speak strongly to U.S. President George W. Bush in the Australian Parliament in 2003, I did not boo him. And while the Speaker of the House of Representatives did order me to leave, he erred, having no authority to do so. I stayed.

To a further break-in on his speech (my colleague, Greens Senator Kerry Nettle, expressed concerns about Australian farmers and copyright laws with the U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement), Bush called back, "I believe in free speech."

It was a good point and one on which we could all agree.

Since then, Bush has declined invitations to address the parliaments in Ottawa and London. Perhaps the risk of democratically elected members making a good point during a presidential speech is not one that White House advisers relish.

Senator Bob Brown

Hobart, Australia

And the war (whose "mission" was presumedly "accomplished" on May 1, 2003) goes on...

Helicopter Crash Kills 9 Contractors in Iraq
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A6493-2005Apr21.html

Fifty bodies found in Iraqi river
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4465769.stm

Massacre at Iraq football stadium
The bodies of 19 Iraqis have been found at a football stadium in Haditha, north of the capital Baghdad.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4465445.stm

Iraq blighted by poor services
Two years since the fall of Baghdad, there is deep frustration among Iraqis at the state of public services.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4414291.stm

And most importantly...
http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/

American Deaths
Since war began (3/19/03:
Total: 1561
In Combat: 1210

Since "Mission Accomplished" (5/1/03):
Total: 1424
In Combat: 1100

Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03):
Total: 1094
In Combat: 904

Since Handover (6/29/04):
Total: 695
In Combat: 578

Since Election (1/31/05):
Total: 129
In Combat: 104

American Wounded Official Total Wounded: 11, 664
Estimated: 15000 - 20000
Latest Fatality April 18th, 2005

Iraqi Civilian Count:
Min: 20,117
Max: 22,851

Now for today's daily puke:

Read this to get an idea of the neoconservative social issues "intellectual" group think. As hard as is it to take, I would recommend reading this to get a better understanding of what type of arguments we are having to deal with. Have a bucket nearby when your read this op-ed by David Brooks:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/21/opinion/21brooks.html?ex=1114747200&en=5a719996e3f8ae43&ei=5070

Roe's Birth, and Death
By DAVID BROOKS

Published: April 21, 2005

Justice Harry Blackmun did more inadvertent damage to our democracy than any other 20th-century American. When he and his Supreme Court colleagues issued the Roe v. Wade decision, they set off a cycle of political viciousness and counter-viciousness that has poisoned public life ever since, and now threatens to destroy the Senate as we know it.

I love it! Typical of Brooks, et al, isn't it? A Supreme Court decision intended to advance liberty and remove government control over the body is to blame for all the rancor. Let's ignore the people who claim to love the rule of law yet go ballistic when a judge does something based on law instead of Leviticus. (Just an example, y'all. I know Leviticus doesn't address abortion.)
There are too many fallacies to address, but I will take issue with Brooks calling legislatures of the 60s and 70s "moderate." I would have to say that legislatures, in the South anyway, are anything but moderate to this day. I mean, you still can't buy sex toys in Alabama, and Texas is gearing up to ban gay and bisexuals from being FOSTER parents! Yeah, good moderate legislatures. And that's not even addressing Jim Crow.
Does Brooks really think legislatures tend to be moderate?

Excellent point:
"Democratic strategist Geoffrey Garin said Democrats should be working harder to make the case that Republicans are ignoring pocketbook issues while they pursue changes in the judiciary or try to protect DeLay. "The developing story line is about an arrogant Republican majority that's lost touch with what's important," he said. "For Democrats to convey that point, they have to invest a lot of time and energy."

I have always thought that, especially for those here down in the south, that we have lost cultural conservatives but there is absolutely no reason why the Dem Party can't reconnect with economic conservatives and the working class which has always been the strngth of the DNC. Just this morning Greenspan was going on about how we need to balance the budget. That can't be done while Repubs are giving away billions to the pharmacutical industry and soon billions to the oil and gas industry along with trillions in unnecessary tax give aways.

DeLay should be the poster boy not just of corrupt politics but how that corruption has infiltrated our economy and budgetary process.
Just calling DeLay a crook won't cut it with voters here in his district. It has to be personalized i.e. DeLay's corrption has effected the economy, your company's bottom line and your job Mr. or Ms. voter, directly.

We are the Mature Party that knows how to balance a budget without devistating cuts in programs.

Spending out of Control; the deficit will hurt the economy if not dealt with and Pay Go a Democratic plan is necessary reported Greenspan this morning. He admitted that higher revenues, tax increases along with program cuts are necessary Greenspan just stated to Congress.
Lindsey Graham just admitted that making tax cuts permanent and his $1300 per person SS Plan with private accounts will explode the deficit to $650 Billion in the next few years. A few honest words now from the Senate. Interesting; the Dow rose immediately after Greenspan admitted that some revenue increases are necessary to keep the deficit under control.

Ira, how true.

I know middle school students who handle money better than these social conservatives.

PoppieProng -- welcome!

More self-serving bias that we're all sick of. Use the courts when you need them (remember 2000?) but slide the issue into Congress if it pleases them.

BTW my father's family is from Alabama, and if they're representative it's probably a good idea to keep sex toys out of their hands, for the simple reason that they'd probably think most of 'em are fancy bass fishing lures.

Hey Poppie! BoBo is insipid. I saw him at a booksigning giving a talk. What a load of tripe. He is even more insufferable and self-aggradizing in person than in print, if that's possible.

Welcome, Poppie --

Always nice to hear a new voice in the choir...

Santorum vulnerable, poll shows
Thursday, April 21, 2005

By Tom Barnes, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau

HARRISBURG -- With more than 18 months to go before Pennsylvanians elect a U.S. senator, it's way too soon to say that incumbent Republican Rick Santorum is in trouble.

But a new independent poll by Quinnipiac University of Connecticut is signaling some early problems for the two-term senator from Penn Hills, who's trailing his Democratic challenger, state Treasurer Robert P. Casey Jr. of Scranton, by a hefty 14 points.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05111/491793.stm

hello and welcome poppieprong!!!

Ira--this article is for you, my friend!!!

tutterfly: 'Please' do not underestimate Santorum's political skills and posturing b/w now and Nov '08. I have previously posted my complaint about John Kerry joining Santorum in co sponsoring a Pharmacutical bill that allows alternate pharmacists to dispense contraceptives when one opposes their being dispensed. Its a good common sense bill but Santorum's name should not be included on any mainstream legislation. Incidentally, that is the first and hopefully last time I will ever post a knock on my hero JK.

"Midterm and long term, if the bill becomes law, we'll see prices stabilized," Barton said at a news conference with Majority Leader Tom DeLay, also of Texas, who accused Democrats of being "obstructionists."

"There are those that do not want a solution, they just want the bill to fail," DeLay said."

Interesting DeLay/Barton: Oil prices have consistantly risen from $40-$58/barrel since your Anwr bill was attached to the Senate budget and passed the Senate weeks ago, to our consternation and due to the sell out of our fine Democratic Louisiana and Hawaiian Senators who will remain nameless. So once again DeLay is pushing more bs in hopes of getting $8 billion more in give a ways to the oil industry.

November '06, but I think you know tutterfly, where I am coming from.

JOHN KERRY ON C-SPAN 2 NOW!
21 April 2005

John Kerry to Address Republican Congressional Leadership's Failure to Focus

On Real Priorities of the American People

Republican "nuclear option obsession" highlights the ways Washington is broken

As Senator Frist and the Republican leadership presses forward with a so-called "nuclear option" to confirm the most extreme judicial appointments, Senator John Kerry will go to the Senate floor this afternoon to make it clear that the sheer fact Washington Republicans are so fixated on a handful of extreme judges just goes to show Americans that their government is no longer working for them.

WHAT: John Kerry pushes Republican Senate leadership to act on real problems facing Americans and abandon so-called "nuclear option" to get extreme judges confirmed
WHEN: TODAY - Thursday, April 21 - 2:30 p.m. Eastern (time approximate)
WHERE: Senate floor

Pamela: all that will accomplish will be to show the American public that they made a mistake in November. lol

This is from Jim Wallis at Sojourners..

Filibustering people of faith?
by Jim Wallis

During the 2004 election campaign, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson virtually said Christians could only vote for George W. Bush. Many of you, along with other Christians and people of faith, responded with letters to the editor, newspaper ads, and even bumper stickers reminding America that "God is not a Republican...or a Democrat." Then the Republican National Committee circulated lists of "duties" to local churches, which included turning over their congregational membership lists. The RNC also sent postcards to voters in some states with images of a Bible being banned and a man putting a wedding ring on another man - warning that this was what "liberal" politicians planned to do.

Now the Religious Right is saying that supporting the president's judicial nominations is a test of orthodoxy. This is a dramatic new and serious breach in the relationship between faith and politics.

James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Prison Fellowship's Chuck Colson, and Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler are hosting "Justice Sunday," a telecast this weekend from a mega-church in Louisville, Kentucky. Their message is that those who don't support President Bush's judicial nominees are hostile to "people of faith."

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist plans to join them by video to get political support for his effort to end the Senate practice known as the filibuster, which is designed to delay a vote on controversial issues in order to protect strong minorities from being overrun by majorities. The Republican leader's appearance at this event endorses the Religious Right's claim that the Democratic filibuster of a small number of very conservative judges is "a filibuster against people of faith."

Despite the fact that Democrats oppose these judges for their views on a variety of subjects, conservative leaders have singled out abortion and gay marriage as their chief concerns and only want judges who support their agenda. Despite the fact that many Democrats who oppose some of President Bush's nominees are themselves people of faith, Republicans and their religious supporters are questioning the faith and religious integrity of their opponents.

That is an escalation of the religious/political war. And the two together sound like assertions of a Republican theocracy. Behind these activities lies a fundamental assumption by Republican operatives and their conservative religious allies that they own religion in America. They demand that religious people vote only their way. They claim that "values voters" in America belong to them, and they disrespect the faith of those who disagree with their agenda. There are better words for this than just "politically divisive" or "morally irresponsible." For these are not merely political offenses, they are religious ones. And for offenses such as these, theological terms are better - terms such as idolatry and blasphemy.

We should bring our religious convictions about all moral issues to the public square - such as the uplifting of the poor, the protection of the environment, the ethics of war, or the tragic number of abortions in America - without attacking the sincerity of other people's faith, or demanding that we should win because we are religious. We must make moral arguments and mobilize effective movements for social change that can powerfully persuade our fellow citizens, religious or not, on what is best for the common good.

What I hear, from one end of this country to the other, is how tired we are of ideological religion and how hungry we are for prophetic faith. Join me in sending a message to Senator Frist that we are people of faith, and these Religious Right leaders do not speak for us.

+ Take action: Tell Bill Frist to stop playing the faith card!

http://go.sojo.net/campaign/frist/wi86sb72r5jdn7t

battlebob: why is this not a violation of 501 (c) (3) tax exmption by these churches and how can this be stopped without appearing hostile to these churches? The answer is you can't. Its like criticizing Bush's military policies and being called anti military.
"Then the Republican National Committee circulated lists of "duties" to local churches, which included turning over their congregational membership lists."
How do you subscribe to Sojourners, or is it available on the internet Bob?

April 21, 2005 - Remarks As Prepared for Delivery - Senate Floor

Mr. President, the Republican "nuclear option" has been discussed endlessly on editorial pages, talk radio, and in this chamber. This ongoing debate is about much more than Senate procedure. At its core it's a debate about where we're headed and what kind of nation we want to become. And beneath it are questions about Washington , which seems headed in a direction that clashes with the will of the American people.

The fact we even are talking about this issue is a stark reminder that Washington is not fighting for the broad interests of the American people. From the outside looking in, our Democracy appears broken - endangered by one party rule intent on amassing power, often at the expense of real work the American people elected us to do.

In recent weeks alone we have witnessed as disturbing a course of events as I have ever seen in this city. Republican leaders of Congress are crossing lines that should never be crossed:

The line that says a leader in the House of Representatives should never carelessly threaten or intimidate federal judges.

The line that says the leader of the Senate should never accuse those who disagree with his political tactics of waging a war against people of faith.

FULL STATEMENT - http://www.lightupthedarkness.org/blog/default.asp?view=plink&id=764

Posted by: Ira at April 21, 2005 03:22 PM

Is that a problem Ira?

Ira---

I don't put too much faith in a poll this far out. And I've swallowed my shareof pollzac, believe me. The article was just nice to look at, a moment of sunlight breaking through.

As far as the pharma bill, I must say I'm a bit behind on it. Shame on me, I know. Bit of an unheaval here at home, nothing major, but I am still getting caught up.

I sure hope our paths cross next year. Pa. is waiting for you with open arms!!

Pamela: all that will accomplish will be to show the American public that they made a mistake in November. lol

You are kidding, right?
My point is that its self evident.

for tutterfly:

The legislation is well thought out; the co-sponser (Santorum) is inexplicable.

"Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Senator Rick Santorum, Republican of Pennsylvania, have introduced the Workplace Religious Freedom Act, which would allow a pharmacist to refuse to dispense certain drugs as long as another pharmacist on duty would."

Welcome aboard Poppy. Enjoy the ride.

Posted by: Ira at April 21, 2005 02:19 PM

When I heard about the 8 billion give away to big oil on NPR yesterday. I almost drove off the road.
"values shmalues", that's what I say. When people are deciding if they can go to a family restaurant or fill up with gas, when the big prize is a tank of gas, when new shoes for the kids vs. a tank of gas becomes the big question, then and only then will people become outraged that they are getting screwed by Bu$hco. I think it will happen sooner rather than later.

I thought about posting my letter to Brooks (in reponse to this morning's column), but I'm afraid it is inappropriate for public consumption...

Needless to say, I hit the roof, and used some rather inflamatory rhetoric.

We are living in very scary times. I pray that cooler heads will prevail.

Italy's Berlusconi Resigns as Premier!!!

Vows to Reshape Cabinet in Bid to Renew Coalition
by Alessandra Rizzo

ROME -- Silvio Berlusconi, faced with mounting criticism over Italy's sluggish economy and its involvement in Iraq, resigned yesterday as premier but vowed to quickly form a stronger new Cabinet to restore confidence in his leadership.

Resigning and then immediately shuffling the Cabinet is an old strategy to use Italy's complicated political system and has been used by premiers to strengthen faltering coalitions.

Berlusconi, who had presided over Italy's longest-serving government since World War II, had so far resisted the move, sensing it would dent his image as a new-style politician. Yesterday, he suggested he would have preferred not to resign.

''One can't always get what one wants," he said, acknowledging the end of his ambition of heading Italy's first postwar government to serve an entire five-year term.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0421-01.htm

***
Ah yes, Silvio, but (according to Mick) you just might find that one can get what one needs...And Italy needs you to go away...

Posted by: Ira at April 21, 2005 02:19 PM

ugh, Barton. He was invited to speak where I teach and was completely insulting to the intelligence of the students. In response to a question he said they "probably shouldn't try to understand the complexities of funding the war in Iraq... just don't worry about it."

Check out Mark Fiore's latest animated cartoon...

http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/fiore/2005/04/reverse.html

Another example of what a dignified and honorable man John Kerry is...

'04 Ratzinger letter seen as Kerry rebuke

By Scott Shepard
Cox News Service

April 21, 2005

WASHINGTON -- German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, played an indirect role in the 2004 U.S. campaign when he directed Catholic bishops to deny Communion to abortion rights supporters such as Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry.

But Kerry, a lifelong Catholic and former altar boy, declined to criticize the new pontiff Wednesday.

"The election of a new pope is a great moment of hope, renewal and possibility for the Catholic Church," Kerry said in a statement.

Ratzinger, head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, wrote a letter last June to U.S. bishops stating that Catholics who support abortion rights are guilty of a "grave sin" and are unworthy of Communion.

Although he did not mention Kerry or any other person by name, it was widely viewed that he was referring to Kerry when he said the sacrament should be denied in "the case of a Catholic politician consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws."

Further, his letter said any Catholic who votes for such a candidate is likewise "unworthy."

However, "Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia," Ratzinger wrote. Disagreeing with the pope "on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war" would not make someone unworthy to receive Communion.

http://tinyurl.com/8xvyo

WATCH THE VIDEO!!

http://www.drivedemocracy.org/breakthesilence/

amazing..

What a coincidence... The Johnson Space Center is now a part of DeLay's district...Hmmm. Maybe DeLay will be taking junket golf trips to the Moon and Mars...

And clearly, going to the Moon (again) or to Mars is so much more important than investing in science programs that potentially save lives on Earth...

DeLay's Grab for NASA
by DAVID CORN
[from the May 9, 2005 issue of The Nation]

Who's in charge of the US space program? There's the administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, for one, and of course the President--and also Tom DeLay.

The scandal-scented Republican House majority leader has invaded NASA, grabbing its biggest outpost and taking a rather personal interest in the agency's budget. He has established himself as the go-to guy on Capitol Hill regarding NASA. And given the way Washington works, this means he can influence how the agency carves up its $16 billion pie and how it resolves critical policy debates--matters of keen interest to aerospace and military contractors, who often look to make contributions to friendly or feared legislators. Fans of NASA might cheer DeLay's involvement. "It's always to the benefit of the agency to have someone in the leadership interested in the agency's budget," says Wesley Huntress Jr., an associate administrator of NASA in the 1990s. "And Tom DeLay is very interested in NASA." But anyone concerned about good government and effective and appropriate budgeting decisions ought to fret about The Hammer's sway over NASA. "With NASA changing its spending priorities to support President Bush's vision for space exploration that will return humans to the moon and take them to Mars, there will be plenty of money going to start-up companies with no record of producing hardware, and there will be no way to measure results," says John Pike, director of globalsecurity.org. "DeLay, if he wants, will be in charge of a free-for-all, with money flowing everywhere--mainly flying in the direction he directs." NASA, then, is another potential source of money and power for DeLay--if he survives his ethics troubles.
--snip--
Until last year the JSC was miles outside DeLay's Congressional district. When he and other Texas Republicans orchestrated a controversial redrawing of district lines in 2003, they wiped out the district next to DeLay's, a Democratic stronghold that included the JSC. At the same time, an elbow-shaped piece of territory was added to the east side of DeLay's district. This patch stretched far enough to wrap around the Johnson Space Center.
--snip--
At the start of 2004, Bush proposed spending $16.2 billion on NASA in the 2005 budget, granting NASA the only proposed spending hike for a domestic agency not involved in defense or homeland security. The funding increase was linked to Bush's new moon-Mars initiative. But not every Republican was enthralled with Bush's proposal. The GOP-run House appropriations subcommittee on veterans and housing--which oversaw NASA's funding--trimmed NASA's budget by $1.1 billion, partly to make room for funding for veterans' healthcare. Bush then threatened to veto the $92 billion appropriations bill that included NASA's money. More important, DeLay hit the warpath.

"To me, that's unacceptable," DeLay said of the decrease in NASA funding. "And it would be very hard to get this bill to the floor if it's unacceptable to me." DeLay was right. He kept the subcommittee's bill bottled up. (During this spending battle, aerospace firms like Northrop Grumman and Boeing funded a reception honoring DeLay at the GOP convention.) The appropriations bill covering NASA eventually was incorporated into an omnibus spending measure. And in December DeLay threatened to block that legislation unless NASA received the full funding proposed by Bush. According to Democrats on the appropriations committee, to accommodate DeLay the committee had to apply a nearly 1 percent cut to other programs. This meant slashing $456 million in education, $225 million in veterans' healthcare and $61 million in scientific research. DeLay didn't mind. He held firm and got his way. This approach to budgeting was unprecedented.
--snip--
DeLay will again loom large as Congress considers the latest budget request for NASA. Bush called for a 2.4 percent increase, even as he proposed cutbacks in other programs, including those serving low-income Americans. At a February hearing, Representative Sherwood Boehlert, GOP chairman of the House Science Committee, said that "in a budget as excruciatingly tight as this one, NASA probably should not get as much as the President has proposed." Republican and Democratic House aides note a concern among legislators that while NASA's budget is going up, the Administration's spending on other science programs is heading south.
--snip--
"This is not just about DeLay bringing money to his district," Pike says. "It's national. If you want a contract with NASA, who are you going to go to? And we all know how you get DeLay's attention. DeLay must realize this. Over time, the amount of discretionary budget authority available to him could add up to billions."

Read the whole article. It's worth it.
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20050509&s=corn

We in Houston are in favor of full funding of NASA but I get your drift about his strong arming Grummin and Boeing for campaign contributions.

DeFarge Congresspeople Chris Bell, Gene Green, Nick Lampson,and Sheila Jackson Lee have all been strong supporters of NASA. I posted earlier in the week a Tom Friedman editorial regarding the science and technology gap the US is having with Japan, China and S. Korea.Its not a choice of either fully funding NASA or Patty Murray's 1.8 billion V.A. Appropriations amendment.

Its a question of trillions of unnecessary tax cuts for the super rich. This is the Bush agenda to force us to fight with each other over which program we want to cut to pay for Bush's tax cuts.

If we are going to attack DeLay's ethics, which is legitimate, it should be on how his lack of ethcs effects the workers and constituent's in the 22nd Ditrict and their personal economy. And believe me cutting NASA's budget isn't going to help us one bit to defeat DeLay in '06 and is a terrible idea. Sorry but I know this community and have many personal friends that live in Clear Lake, so Defarge I think you are wrong here.

Battlebob:

Can you fill us in on the Minuteman/vigilanti
immigration program in Arizona.

Some guy called into Ed Schultz this afternoon and started ranting about it. Sounds to me like another out of control right wing program of immigrant bashing to me.Is there any legitimacy to this program battlebob?

Ira et al.

Here is the IRS site which tell you how it handles third party reporting of violation of tax exempt status: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-news/fs-02-10.pdf

Here's the IRS site which also explains the restriction placed on churches etc.
and what exactly will jeopardize their tax exempt status:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

Posted by: Ira at April 21, 2005 07:55 PM

I understand your point, and I certainly wouldn't want Houston -- or any city -- to lose more jobs than necessary. My point (and probably David Corn's as well) was that this is just another opportunity for DeLay to potentially/alledgedly milk the system to his personal benefit. Also, I would prefer to see a more balanced and proportional approach to the the budget. Space exploration is certainly important, but so are the many issues facing us here on Earth... And if we continue to make education cuts, who do we expect will become the next generation of scientists? Or will we have to outsource that as well? (Which, by coincidence, is a great lead-in for the next thread...totally by accident...honestly!)

defarge: the point is that we expect to have a h*** of a campaign here in Houston and Clear Lake to unseat DeLay. I have been speaking with some of the folks here directly involved in that campaign and I just don't think pushing NASA cuts is a winner here. Defeating DeLay is priority one and meeting the needs of Congressional District 22 are critical to that victory. Cutting NASA in Clear Lake would be like asking Blanche Lincoln to campaign aginst Walmart. Just not smart politics. Is DeLay milking NASA for personal gain, I have no doubt he is,like he is milking the Indian tribe. We in Houston are hard at work setting the stage for DeLay's defeat in '06 and we will be very sensitive about arguments that play into DeLay's hand.

Again we can bridge the science, healthcare, V.A. etc gap with sane tax policies not eating our young by cutting programs.

The Congresspeople I mentioned above incidentally, are ALL Houston Democrats who all strongly support full funding of NASA.

Spinaker my question was not what the IRS prohibits, my question was how we enforce those violations w/o Dobson et al calling us antichurch which we know will happen.

Posted by: Ira at April 21, 2005 08:30 PM

We are as one, Ira. I think I can speak for everyone here at the DCP that we are with you 150% to help defeat DeLay.

And this has nothing to do with his national party affliation; this has everything to do with ethics and corruption.

"Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia," Ratzinger wrote. Disagreeing with the pope "on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war" would not make someone unworthy to receive Communion."

Shuttling repeat child abusers from parish to parish in order save face, and encouraging a culture of death in Africa and Asia thorugh opposing condom use in the midst of a deadly epidemic, carry the greatest moral weight. These are sins of pride, of arrogance, of astonishing hubris.

Attempting to interfere in an American Presidental Election rises to an entirely other level, however - as a high crime against Democracy, and the freedom of man itself.

Thanks defarge for understanding our concerns down here.
Top defeat DeLay we must have a unified message consistant with the needs of the 22nd District.

Believe me DeLay will run a nasty desperate campaign next year and will look for any crack in the seem of our frame. We can not let that happen.

Well said Cyrano. Hypocrisy at it's worst, and a deplorable use of power. The new pope sure doesn't represent this Christian.

Haven't been here in a few months - life got in the way :-) but it's good to be back here with familiar voices!

On a different topic - maybe Santorum knows his numbers are down, so he's trying to appear moderate? I wouldn't trust that as far as I could spit.

Posted by: Carol at April 21, 2005 10:07 PM

Welcome back, Carol. We missed you.

Have a look around the site and the forum. There's lots of new stuff!

Thanks, madame!

The site looks amazing and I loved the newsletter as well! You all are doing great, meaningful work. I passed along the newsletter to my friends - hopefully some of them will take a look!

It's good to be back.

Good to have you back, Carol.

Oh, Carol! It's wonderful to see you back! What a nice way to end the week! We have missed you!

Ira,

I don't know that it can be done. I think that maybe the only way I can think of is to have a church be the complaining witness. I read through the entire IRS site regarding non-profits because I am the financial officer on the board of a non-profit and needed to reacquaint myself with the rules. So I did that before I posted the two things above.

I understand your question, I just don't know if there will be any way to fend off the evangelicals. Since they have called the Catholic Church, they meaning FotF board member Albert Moehler, a false church and the Pope a false leader etc., I don't think there will be much love lss between the religious groups and the fundamentalists headed by Dobson. Moehler stands by his LKL remarks, BTW, on all other religions being false except his.

As I said, if it were another Church doing the reporting, it might help.