Health Care: Helping Friends and Congregants + More

Someone sent this to me today, and I want to forward it. As everyone surely knows, many are without any kind of health care coverage (me, for instance), and those that have cobra may not be able to afford it long. We HAVE to do something in this country about health care.

I hope it is helpful to you or to a friend, someone from your parish or someone else wise uninsured that needs help.

I cannot personally speak to the veracity of each contact, but sure worth a try if one has nowhere else to go!

*****

On the political front, the GOP is all over the map.

Most of the congressional types are hollering and hooting the stimulus bill saying that what we need are tax cuts. You don't even want to hear the words I am spitting right now.

Fact is, we tried tax cuts for the last eight years and look where (the hell!) we are!

The point of opposing the stimulus package for the GOP is taking THE opposite position of anything and everything dem. For God's sake, most (except three) didn't even vote for the Lily Ledbetter equal pay act.

It's true, we mere wimmin don't deserve fair pay. We need to be silent, walk behind our men (if we have or want one), and just nod approvingly when we are discriminated against. Nevermind that most single families are headed by women. Nevermind the kids. Why we wimmin cannot just go along (with discrimination) to get along is beyond me. You all certainly know I would. We shouldn't even HAVE a poverty line. People just need to work even when there isn't any and be thankful that they are underpaid.

On the other hand, the GOP governors are lining up with their tin cups (huge tin cups, at that) for stimulus money. That woman (from the north) is right in line with the others. Her supporters are pissed (along with being pissed at any governor that might be considered a future GOP presidential candidate). Wah Wah.

The bottom line is this: Congressional members are holding out so one of them can run in 2012 (if we still have a country) saying they didn't vote for it. Strange almost every single one voted for the TARP bill that has NO oversight. Governors, knowing their states are at or near bankrupcy, ARE lining up. They have to if they WANT to try to run in 2012.

This is what happens to a failed party. This is what happens when we war ourselves into such severe debt under a failed party. Cuts? Well, here's an idea: Cut the damn defense budget and get the hell out of the middle east and do it NOW.

I have to tell you, the red bloggers are hemoraging about now. They, too, are more concerned about politics than people. Don't go look. I do that so you don't have to, thus am not linking.

You'll just have to take my word on this one.

*****

Then, of course, a new bill was introduced by Edward Markey (d-Massachusetts) (and here is Alaska rep. Begich's thinking on this, and here from a Native American perspective) to Congress by to protect Alaska's ANWR. Please remember that the R in ANWR stands for Refuge. Thank God for Massachusetts rep Edward Markey.

My opposition to oil/gas research/drilling in ANWR has been present as long as it has been talked about and that opposition, in the face of global warming, has gotten stronger.

We must not put our monetary resources into carbon-based fuels. Rather, we must look at ways to increase CO2 sinks, and support efficient and effective green technologies. And right now, in the midst, we MUST conserve. So turn out those lights (and hopefully ALL of them are energy efficient light bulbs!). When you heat the oven, cook a LOT at once. Better winterize and summarize your homes and dress warmer in the winter house. Drive less. And for those in the west... PLEASE use water carefully.

Of course she supports it. Why? Well, because the people of Alaska LIVE off of oil. Alaskans pay no state tax. Her continual denial of the size of the project (she keeps using the 2,000 acre figure... which is patently wrong) says a great deal about what is primarily wrong with the project.

If you have to lie about it, it isn't good. Period.

Please support Markey's bill and ask your federal reps to do likewise by co-sponsoring the bill.

You can contact your legislators here. Takes one minute. Tell your reps to support Markey's bill to protect ANWR. That's all you have to say.

note: I don't normally link to sites I disagree with, but I think they are worth reading to understand their side of the issue so you can defend the other side.

*****

For some overall politcal snark, go here. Short and, um, sweet (not). I certainly enjoyed it and chuckled a bit in the way only elitist liberal snobs can. Well, that's what we're told, anyway.

*****

Finally, for you media types, this is pretty interesting on how Kennedy, Blago and She botched it with the press. I don't agree with it all, but it is surely writing to read.

Have a great Sunday evening.

So. Baptist R. Albert Mohler Calls +Robinson, Others, Atheists and Idolotors

UPDATE: You can see some video and hear +Gene Robinson giving his convocation prayer here at Pam's House Blend.

UPDATE 2: Bruce Wilson has an excellent article on Huff Post here. Warren, as we well know, has more problems than Obama's team knew or, apparently, bothered to research. Talk about political hypocrisy!

*****

James, over at The Three Legged Stool, presents, today, a very interesting piece on recent schizmo actions. But what I found the most fascinating, actually, is the apparent intervention in TEC affairs by Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr (Ph.D.).

In case you don't know who Mohler is, he is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. So first we have Warren, now Mohler, playing in the TEC schizmo sandbox.

And least you think Mohler, whose theological differences with Warren are more aesthetic than fundamental, you'd be right. They are both led by the dogma of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Among other things, Mohler maintains a blog and broadcasts a weekday one-hour radio show. He is also frequently called upon to dispense vitriol (and lies) on shows with James Dobson and others on the uber religious right and mainstream (MSM) media.

In contrast to the more large tent less dogmatic version of Christianity found in TEC, Mohler, like Warren, maintains an apparent list of "qualifications" to be Christian and penned this caustic statement (also found on his blog, linked above) on TEC's Bishop Gene Robinson and other TEC Bishops January 16th of this year:

We can be fairly sure that, for Bishop Robinson, "specifically" and "aggressively" mean more or less the same thing. A review of most recent inaugural prayers reveals virtually nothing that could be fairly described as "aggressive" and remarkably little that can be described as "specific." The last two inaugurations have included prayers with greater specificity, to be sure.

The bishop's comments reveal just about everything one needs to know about his theology. He pledges that "this will not be a Christian prayer" and he "won't be quoting Scripture or anything like that." No, nothing like that.

Recent controversies over praying in the name of Jesus Christ will not be a factor here. Instead, the bishop said he might address his prayer to "the God of our many understandings" - an expression calculated to be vague. Bishop Robinson says that he learned the language in a 12-step program he attended after developing an alcohol addiction.

"The crisis in the Church of England," wrote Clive James in The Dreaming Swimmer, "is that too many of its bishops, and some would say of its archbishops, don't quite realize that they are atheists, but have begun to suspect it."

Lets be clear about what Mohler is saying here: Mohler is clearly supporting the notion that Bishop Gene Robinson and other Bishops in the CoE are atheists.

I have no doubt I wouldn't fit into his tiny-minded box which defines Christian, either. Having been an atheist/agnostic for a good part of my life, I can only conclude that he more enjoys wielding the hatchet than seeking understanding since he overtly denies the meaning of the word atheist: one who believes that there is no deity.

One could easily suggest that Mohler is just conflating his opinion of others' religious views, or one can just flat out call it straight: Mohler is lying.

Interestingly, on January 15 and 16 of this year, while in Southern Carolina at the "Mere Anglicanism" conference where Mohler was asked to speak, Mohler broadcast two radio shows one on the life and opinions of Bishop of Rochester Michael Nazir-Ali (January 16th), and the second on "Mere Anglicanism" (whatever that is) (January 15th).

Nazir-Ali's discussion on Anglicanism, Bishop Gene Robinson and the current situation begins at about 26:30. Nazir-Ali says he doesn't know what "God of our many understandings" means. Nazir-Ali--led enthusiastically by Mohler--calls the use of the above term "intentional idolotry". So not only is Bishop Robinson an atheist, he is also an idolotor.

They discussion moves on to embryonic stem cell research/use, abortion and euthanasia which Mohler calls [euthanasia] "a liberal death wish". At 34:45 they move on to the issue of African evangelism, as they call it.

The previous radio show on "Mere Anglicanism" is described this way:

As the Episcopalian Church in the United States of America (ECUSA) has moved further into theological liberalism and away from biblical fidelity, many evangelical American Anglicans have ventured out in search of faithful church structures. In a special broadcast from the Mere Anglicanism Conference in Charleston (SC), Dr. Mohler welcomes Rev. Dr. William Dickson—rector of St. Andrews Episcopal Church in Forth Worth, TX--to the program to discuss the significance of these developments not only for Anglicans, but for evangelicals at large.

Mohler mentions CA Proposition 8, Rick Warren, Obama, Bishop Robinson and "homosexual activists". Mohler says, outright, that "Bishop Robinson is NOT a Christian Bishop." Mohler takes on Warren a bit, but not much, and takes on the term "nation's pastor", executive orders issuable by the U.S. President and backs again into embryonic stem cell use, and DADT (Don't Ask, Don't Tell as it pertains to gays in the military).

At about 12:25 Mohler begins to discuss Mere Anglicanism and the North American Anglican Province. Dickerson enters about 13:25. Dickerson goes back to (sigh) the 1960s and Pike saying that is where it started and that it did not start with the issue of "homosexuality". Gads, cannot they EVER get over Pike?

Dickerson defines the term "Mere Anglicanism" as primacy of the scriptures and the Thirty Nine Articles.

Dickson explains what has "happened" to the TEC as beginning with Pike and others who abandoned the Episcopal faith. Dickson said that Bishop John Spong expressly denied the presence of God and Mohler goes back to Spong's heresy. It's the battle of the literalists.

Mohler then goes back to the 1549 Book of Common Prayer and saying that there are people that read these words (and the Bible) and don't believe them. Enter the dinos and exit modern theology. Mohler calls the overall problem a "comprehensive collapse of Christianity" while Dickson calls this an exciting time to be an Anglican. Exciting? Not the term I would use by any means.

*****

I undoubtedly needn't voice how I feel about this kind of interference both from Mohler and Warren, how I feel about the rather vicious name calling, and it should make the motivation for Warren's offer to St. James crystal clear though Warren, as ever, has backed into and out of that issue, as usual. Some call it tap dancing.

Things the MSM Won't Show You On The "R" Word

Mercy.



Go here for the source, a great piece on Daily Kos.

Palin Supporter Advocates Killing: Palin Over The Top

My worst fears are coming to fruition.

Now that the "R" word is being more discussed by the press (as though it wasn't extent this entire time), Palin is stirring it up on the "sly" through use of words designed to instill fear and hatred. Sadly, it seems to be working for some of her more brain-dead supporters.

"Kill him!" proposed one man in the audience.
--Washington Post, October 7, 2008

And did that man get plucked out of the crowd for a talking to by the FBI? Apparently not.

Did Palin correct him? Of course not.

Now imagine someone doing that at an Obama event. Double standard?

Her goal is to foment hate and fear. Apparently, this is what she is good at and used to. And one can only wonder if she learned it at church.

Palin's Wasilla Church, an Assemblies of God church where she attended until just a few years ago from the age of 12, knows a thing or two about advocating hate and fear.

They have had guest speakers who have broadsided Judaism. The church's pastor has laid claims to 911 as a war contending for your faith and has stated that Jesus was in war mode.

The same Pastor has assigned hell to those that didn't vote for Bush later saying it was questionable whether Kerry supporters could enter into heaven. I sure hope someone reports this louse to the IRS. If that isn't supporting a candidate from the podium I don't know what is. And if that isn't instilling hate and fear, I don't know what is.

The trash on the net aimed at Obama is no accident. Some people will believe anything, especially if it suits their hateful or racist purposes. This is precisely why Palin has gone nuclear (or nucular in her pronunciation) in attacking Obama.

I have said it time and time again that Palin is neither qualified to be vice president let alone president and she is an embarrassment to intelligent women, regardless of party. Palin's moral ground has not shifted. Rather, it is just beginning to come into the light and it ain't pretty.

Last spring, McCain said that mudslinging and dirty campaigning wasn't something the public wanted. Apparently he has changed his tune. Please read THIS to get a good feel for what those in campaign positions are now foisting on the public.

Here is McSame vowing to run a clean campaign, as well as his wife doing the same... amid their attack adds:



I can tell you right now that if anyone in the Obama campaign dared do such things they would be fried by the mainstream media. Why is Obama held to a higher standard?

It doesn't get more vicious.

Yes, it angers me to no end. It reminds me of the crowd asking to let a thief go free and for the crucifixion of Christ instead. It's an eerie parallel. Not that I am equating Obama with Christ, it's the crowd that concerns me. A charismatic leader can be a God-send, or stand for evil.

There is a long list of them, historically. We know their names.

Now we can add one more. Sarah Palin.

Here is a rather gruesome, if telling, You Tube video on some of Palin/McSame's supporters. It is jaw-dropping.

Spit it Out: The Election and the "R" Word

Having traveled a lot within the United States, and having worked in a number of states as well as having lived in several, I have never doubted that racism is alive and well. I also know it rests heavier in some states and regions than others.

I have heard it, seen it and felt it. I am fairly certain you have, too. Statistics on the current presidential election show it potentially effecting the next election.

What is racism?

Racism is racial prejudice that has been incorporated into the activities and procedures of major institutions, corporations, social systems (such as those related to housing, education, and health), and other arenas of major social activity (such as politics, the media, finance, and banking). Racism serves both to discriminate against ethnic minorities and to maintain advantages and benefits for White Americans.

--American Psycological Association

I started to write on this topic a month ago but found it so personally depressing, I stopped and left my draft to simmer. After some shocking comments I heard yesterday from an acquaintence, I cannot remain silent.

But nobody -- well, hardly anybody -- acknowledged their own prejudices. Both blacks and whites instead blamed "they," a vague and unaccountable surrogate for their own racial attitudes.

*****
Four of every 10 white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, calling them "lazy," or "violent" or blaming them for the ills of black America, according to the AP-Yahoo poll. Such surveys draw criticism from whites who say the numbers are exaggerated and from blacks who say the numbers are too low.
--Associated Press, 9-28-2008

And it's not just African Americans, it is Arab Americans, Mexican Americans, Latino Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans and what are generally referred to as European Americans. Each doles it out, each gets it back. And this doesn't even begin to cover classism or sexism.

How might this effect the election?

"What kind of choice do guys like me have? A black guy or a woman," Coccia says. "It's a lesser of two evils."
--Associated Press, 9-28-2008

An Associated Press-Yahoo poll conducted with Stanford University has some telling statistics. In the linked article, you can go to the PDF and look at the questions and various stats. The segment on racial beliefs begins on page 12.

But the bottom line is this: Race DOES make a difference in elections and in the case of Obama, perhaps a 6 point difference something the "Bradley Effect" seems to agree with, at least on paper. In a nutshell, the Bradley Effect is a theory about outcome when a white and non-white candidate are running against one another for the same position.

A May 14, 2008 article in the Huffington Post concludes that not only is West Virginia the most racially prejudiced state in the union, but that exit polling shows that 17% of voters had a racial element in their voting deliberations, noting this topped the previous Arkansas standing of 13.7%.

The Republican Party's rise to power in recent decades has largely depended upon the fact that impoverished whites blame blacks rather than corporations for their problems. Without these racist whites, Republicans such as Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush could never have won. The biggest hope for the future of the Democratic Party is the dying off of the old racists who helped bring the Republicans to power. But West Virginia skews very old, and poorly educated, which is the worst possible demographic for Obama.
--Huffington Post, May 14, 2008

I know racism is a factor because I personally hear it from folks who surprise me and don't. Interestingly, I hear more of it from men than women, and far more from my age group than 18-30 year olds (who hold my greatest hope in helping to conquer racism, sexism, classism, ageism and all the other isms and gender identity issues that drag us down as a nation).

I know I am not alone. And it comes through in other respects, as well.

Anyone that scours the net daily as I do, sees another alarming trend: Increasingly hostile racist comments, and more internet sites dedicated to the white nationalist movement and its variations.

"The truth is, we're finding an explosion in these kinds of hateful sentiments on the Net, and it's a growing problem," said Deborah Lauter, civil rights director for the Anti-Defamation League, which monitors hate group activity. "There are probably thousands of Web sites that do this now. I couldn't even tell you how many are out there because it's growing so fast."

Neo-Nazi and white power groups acknowledge that they have little ability to derail Obama's candidacy, so instead some have decided to take advantage of its potential. White-power leaders who once feared Obama's campaign have come to regard it as a recruiting tool. The groups now portray his candidacy as a vehicle to disenfranchise whites and polarize America.

--Washington Post, June 22, 2008

This Palm Beach, Florida online new site, PalmBeachPost.com, carried a July 26, 2008 article that is almost a must-read on the issue as a primer. The largest white nationalist group in the country is located in Palm Beach (yes, eh hem, that Palm Beach!), and several others, likewise, hearken from Florida.

Remaining silent about the elephant in the room does little to supress its behavior, something I have argued with myself about for a month. We cannot change it in others, each of us, but we can remain vigilant for it's appearance and each of us can let it be known that this kind of talk and thinking is neither appreciated or tolerated. It can be done kindly, but it must be done.

The bottom line is this: We must not stop working for Obama until the polls close on November 4. The race is close if the Bradley Effect and polling are right, and even if they are not it is extremely close at this point with 37 days left.

Please, as Brave Net Films says..."pssst... do something."

An Inconvenient Truth: Politics of the Palins

Discussion on the overthrowing of the US or advocating for state succession prior to 9/11 may not have landed in the ear buds of national security folks. At that time, they were far less interested in listening to our telephone calls, filming our associations, searching our e-mails and acting inside environmental and political organizations as agent provocateurs. But 9/11 changed all that.

Through social manipulation, fear descended upon America like a huge poisonous cloud. Green lights, amber lights and Orwellian neighbor watching replaced the tenor of American trust and ease. Fear, fear, fear was pounded into us day after day both overtly and covertly and done so successfully, it clouded the vision and reason of some of our best and brightest. The media had a field day. Fear is easy to write about.

But fear didn't start with Bush and 9/11. The stage was set long before and evolved to near perfection. It's name: Karl Rove.

The paranoia of Richard Nixon is legendary. This paranoia led to extensive crimes of fear; actions culminating in the first resignation of a US president over "Watergate" and resulting in Congress passing the FISA laws; laws which George Bush ignored even before Congress gave him not one but two bigger and better ways to do it.

Interestingly, some of those in Nixon's administration--later landing in Ford's--landed in George H. W. Bush's administration and still later in the administration of his son, George W. Bush, particularly notable is Dick Cheney, our two-term Vice President. It seems to be an inter-generational case of GOP party paranoia, Cheney bearing the torch.

Nixon, through the Watergate investigation, was found to have a very long (eventually over 3,000 names of people and organizations) "list of enemies". The list reads like a who's who of people and groups including entertainers Carol Channing, Bill Cosby, and Barbara Streisand, , football player Joe Nameth, most of the leading US newspapers and many, many columnists, television station executives, corporation CEOs ironically including then Phillip Morris Corp., George Weissman, virtually every major union leader, and membership or issue oriented groups including Common Cause and the National Student Association. Of course, there were a lot of academics as well, including the famous Daniel Ellsberg, professor, MIT, and then director of the Federation of American Scientists, Jeremy Stone.

Perhaps some can laugh it off in the case of paranoid Nixon, but President Bush has his list too, one begun when he was running for Governor of Texas that has Rove's watermark on it. This article from 2005 discusses the list in blunt terms. The list is said to be far more extensive now and is said to contain private information on congress members which explains a great deal about why the Patriot Act got passed twice (generally without so much as an audible whimper by most members) through congress. It's called blackmail in common parlance.

Former South African President Nelson Mandela made it to the list and it literally took an act of Congress, passed in July of this year, to get him off it.

In other cases, it appears that, like Nixon, one criteria for making it on the list may be criticism of George Bush; certainly more of a personal problem than a security problem. Then there's the Princeton constitutional scholar who sharply criticized Bush and of course he landed on the list. I'm probably on the list, and you may be, too.

Rove, of course, also goes back to the Nixon days and Watergate. Star prosecution witness in Watergate, John Dean, certainly implicated Rove in Watergate saying, "Based on my review of the files, it appears the Watergate prosecutors were interested in Rove's activities in 1972, but because they had bigger fish to fry they did not aggressively investigate him." Shortly after Rove was mentioned, he was picked up by George H.W. Bush who was then Chairman of the Republican National Committee (later under Ford, Director of the CIA) and with Bush's support and that of other GOP power brokers, Rove moved forward through the GOP party structure. He had a talent. It may have started simple--from information gathering by going through trash cans (something he actually recommended in those days as a tactic against an opponent)--but in the end, Rove had manipulated our own government agencies, our own congressional representatives, probably our court system, and certainly put the people of America under intense scrutiny.

Rove has been the negotiator of all things problematic for the Bush administration. Often dubbed "Bush's Brain", Rove knows the players and the countryside better than most and is a master at the set up and fall. He is ruthless and cool as a cucumber. Rove's brand of politics and his methods of creating the crisis he wants is legendary. There is nothing Bush that doesn't have Rove's fingerprints on it.

Enter the Palins

While the Palin family might appear to look like the average American family, they are anything but. Sarah and Todd are joined at the hip in political decision making and he takes an active hand--one that is highly criticized by many--in Sarah's political employment as evidenced by the subpoena now issued to Todd with the nod of local GOP members over the telephone calls made by him in "Troopergate". But it is far more refined than this. Todd's involvement in the governing affairs of his elected wife as this excellent article from Startribune.com posits, is legendary in Alaska.

Todd Palin is Sarah's Karl Rove--with an interesting twist.

These local Alaskan men of the statehouse who voted to issue that subpoena against Todd Palin may have hell to pay. The republican voting for the issuance of the subpoena is from Wasilla.

Todd Palin and the Alaskan Independence Party

From 1995 to 2002, Todd Palin was a member of the often radical Alaskan Independence Party (AIP) which openly and loudly calls for Alaska's succession from the United States. Early reports that Sarah was also similarly aligned as a "member" of AIP appear to be untrue on their face. I use the word appear based on Registrar of Voters records (page down at the site) indicating that since she registered to vote in 1982, her GOP party affiliation has never changed. Clearly, however, she has attended party meetings giving a welcoming speech in 2006, and another (taped) in March of 2008:


On September 3, 2008, AIP released a statement on Sarah Palin, over the name of Lynette Clark, wife of AIP Vice Chairman Dex Clark, clarifying their error in her regard as a member of AIP. However, this video of the Dex Clark, in addressing the AIP party suggests otherwise beginning at mark 6:00 (note he refers to Palin as Governor, so this had to be recorded post November 4, 2006, and appears to have been recorded (based on AIP site's information) on Oct 3-4, 2007 in Chattanooga, TN, at the 2nd Secessionist Convention). The pertinent text reads:

"There's a joke -- she's a pretty good-lookin' gal -- there's a joke around, that we're the coldest state with the hottest governor. And there's a lot of talk about her moving up. She was an AIP member, before she got the job as the mayor of a small town. That was a nonpartisan job. But to get along to go along, she eventually joined the Republican Party, where she had all kinds of problems with their ethics ... And she's pretty well sympathetic, because of her former membership."

This 17 seond video exchange with the former chairman of AIP, Mark Chryson, indicates that Palin did attend the AIP party convention in 1994, and the Los Angeles Times reports, Palin and her husband attended the party's 1994 convention at a Best Western in Wasilla, Alaska, said former Chairman Mark Chryson, a computer repairman who is now the party's webmaster.



Lynette Clark met Palin for the first time in 2006 at the AIP convention where she was speaking and is quoted in a Dave Talbot article in Salon.com as saying of this first meeting, "As I was listening to her, I thought she sounds like what we've been saying for years. I thought to myself, 'My God, she sounds just like Joe Vogler."

The AIP to which Todd Palin belonged for those seven years (he is allegedly registered as an independent now) was begun by a former Kansan-become-Alaskan, Joe Vogler (1913-1993) who was well known for his fiery rhetoric and his sheer open hatred for America.

"I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions."
--Joe Vogler

"...[T]the fires of Hell are glaciers compared to my hate for the American Government, and I won't be buried under their damn flag."
--Joe Vogler, tape 18, March 29, 1991, University of Alaska

Vogler disappeared in 1993. His remains were found in a gravel pit--located from a tip--in 1994. A convicted theif, Manifried West, took responsibility for the murder alleging he was killed during an explosives sale gone bad. Shades of McVeigh? Dex Clark claims Vogler was asassinated.

In a September 6, 2008 article on Sarah palin in Newsweek entitled An Apostle of Alaska, it was reported:

To the extent Palin has a governing philosophy, it was shaped by her political mentor, former governor Wally Hickel. The 89-year-old Hickel is a member of the Alaska Independence Party, which espouses, among other things, greater autonomy or even separation from the United States.

Hickel served as Secretary of the Interior during the first Nixon administration. He was fired by Nixon after a letter was published critical of the president's position on the Vietnam War. It was Hickel that first appointed now-indicted Ted Stevens to the US Senate upon the death of his predesessor.

Hickel served his first Alaska governor term as a republican, his second as a member of the Alaskan Independence Party. He was campaign chairman of Palin's run for governor though now says he will not vote for her in the presidential election given her support of a Canadian Company to build the Prudahoe, Alaska natural gas line.

*****

While Sarah Palin was busy hocking pork from Washington first as a tiny town mayor where she hired lobbyists, later working for now-indicted US Senator (R-AK) Ted Stevens' 527, then through the governor's position to garner more money for her welfare state, Todd was part of an organization that by any standard would be called radical. Were it a liberal organization, it would clearly be on the "watch and listen" list of Rove and Bush and homeland security would be all over it. Even more interesting, they may be on the watch list but no one could ever find out as it is a secret list.

Interestingly, the McCain campaign first claimed that during Palin's vetting, she was examined by the FBI a rather odd statement. Later, this claim was refuted by the FBI as they do not get involved in political campaign vetting. So, it would appear that neither Todd or Sarah was examined through security processes. If they were, no one is talking.

What is so interesting is the relative quell on the issue from the media. Early statements that Palin was a member of the AIP by network news and some print, were retracted or corrected. It's been all quiet on the media front since that time which seems peculiar in any respect.

I think it is more than clear that had Michelle Obama belonged to the AIP, she would be portrayed in the worst of ways and the affiliation would be mentioned in near every article under the sun.

So the next time you hear some media mechanics by Rove or other Rovian, just keep that in mind. But remember: They are probably framing you for a fall of their own creation.

Palin and McCain: Does it work? Part I

Preliminary Note: Permission is given to copy this piece, but ONLY in its entirety. Please link, also, if you like.

Since this is Sunday (well, was Sunday), I decided to begin with " creationism" and its sometimes partner " intelligent design" (ID); something of interest to every parent of school children, scientists, courts, constitutionalists and supporters of theocracy in the United States.

ID is not a science. Unlike scientific theory--and like creationism-- ID cannot be tested against accepted theory. It cannot be tested against anything since the basis for it is untestable. Please note that creationism and ID are NOT the same thing, though they do often point the same direction. Creationism is a "belief" perhps stretchable to a philosophy. ID is a philosophy that leads back to creationism.

Much on the net has been directed at McCain's choice of Sarah Palin, Alaska's "hockey mom"-turned Governor. No one really knows, at this point, exactly why the former runner up for Ms. Alaska was chosen by McCain, if, in fact, she was chosen by McCain.

There are a few really interesting things about Palin that make me personally believe she was NOT his choice, but perhaps the choice of Karl Rove--a man far more conservative than 72 year-old McCain who he is advising these days in order to get his sagging campaign back on track.

Here I will look at, and document to source, their positions on Creationism and Intelligent Design (ID).

Teaching Creationism/ID
John McCain
John McCain has been all over the map on this topic, hardly a first for a man who New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson addressed at the convention in saying:

"John McCain may pay hundreds for his shoes, but we're the ones that will pay for his flip-flops."

For instance, in February of 2007, ABC News reported on a Seattle luncheon co-sponsored by the right-wing associated Discovery Institute. The Institute--whose board members and funders include Howard Ahmanson whose wife sits on the TEC-Bashing Board of the Institute for Religion and Democracy (scroll down to read about IRD and Howard Ahmanson, specifically) along side other political and religious right wingers--is a major proponent for ID. ID has tremendous support by those who believe that America was created to be a Christian nation and/or others who support a theocratic government in the U.S.

____________________________________________________

"My goal is the total integration of biblical law into our lives."
--Howard Ahmanson to Orange County Register
___________________________________________

The wealthy Ahmansons, Howard Ahmanson being the eccentric and often rather bizarre supporter of dominionism and who is the wealthy heir of the Home Savings and Loan fortune, and his wife, Roberta, obviously support a theocratic American government, thus criticism from alleged "liberals" at McCains luncheon involvment with those that do support The Discovery Center and who make no secret of their penchance to a religion-based government. Politically speaking, support of creationism and ID are not just religious topics, but a pathway for many to American theocracy.

It appears to remain, however, that no one knows exactly where McCain stands. Please note that creationism and ID are not equivalent by definition, and one is not the other, though one can be used to support the other and it is clear that these are easily confused or can be combined. In reading below, please note that McCain has said (elsewhere) that decisions to include either ID or creationism should occur at the local level (school boards). Please note that I did not use quotes which could not be found but which were referred to in articles.

Daily Star: Should intelligent design be taught in schools? McCain: I think that there has to be all points of view presented. But they've got to be thoroughly presented. So to say that you can only teach one line of thinking I don't think is - or one belief on how people and the world was created - I think there's nothing wrong with teaching different schools of thought.

Daily Star: Does it belong in science? McCain: There's enough scientists that believe it does. I'm not a scientist. This is something that I think all points of view should be presented. (on ID)

--John McCain, Arizona Daily Star, 8/28/2005 Ed. Board Meeting (transcript in whole)

*********

Question: [What's your stance on teaching creationism in schools?]

McCain: I think that students should be exposed to every theory and every thought that we can...I don't like communism, but I think students should be exposed to communism.... There are people that believe this is the the way the earth was created. I'm not saying it should be forced on them, but I don't get this dispute....

Question: But in science class?

McCain: I'm not on the school board. I'd let them decide that. One of our fundamental beliefs is local control. --John McCain, July 6, 2006, CNN

*********

John McCain: “'I think Americans should be exposed to every point of view,' he said. 'I happen to believe in evolution. ... I respect those who think the world was created in seven days. Should it be taught as a science class? Probably not.'" (question is not quoted, but reported to be on creationism/evolution being taught in schools)
--John McCain, Aspen Times, July 2, 2006

*********
"On the issue of whether the teaching of evolution in public schools should also include "intelligent design" - the idea that life is too complex to have happened by accident - McCain said he agrees that "young people have a right to be told" about intelligent design. "It's a theory, just like evolution is a theory ... (even though) it may not be as plausible," given there's little scientific evidence to support it, he said. The "hand of God played a role," he said." (on ID)
--John McCain, Louisville Courier Journal, 2006 [unable to locate original article to substantiate. Mentioned here as second source.

*********

"Senator McCain believes evolution is supported by science, but that we shouldn’t be afraid to expose students to other theories." (creationism and ID)
--McCain Staff, The Hotline, May 9, 2007

*********

(This is a debate video, extremely short, where McCain says that he believes in evolution but sees the hand of God when he hikes the Grand Canyon)

--Republican Primary Debate, May 3, 2007 Ronald Reagan Presidential Library Simi Valley, CA

In McCain's book, Character Is Destiny, co-authored with Mark Salter a long time staffer, it is reported (but we have not verified) that he wrote:

"Darwin helped explain nature's laws," McCain and Salter wrote. "He did not speculate, in his published theories at least, on the origin of life. The only undeniable challenge the theory of evolution poses to Christian beliefs is its obvious contradiction of the idea that God created the world as it is in less than a week.

"But our faith is certainly not so weak that it can be shaken to learn that a biblical metaphor is not literal history," they added. "Nature does not threaten our faith. On the contrary, when we contemplate its beauty and mysteries we cannot quiet in our heart the insistent impulse of belief that for all its variations and inevitable change, before its creation, in a time before time, God let it be so, and, thus, its many splendors and purposes abide in His purpose."

So, here is my view:

Is McCain a creationist? No.

Does McCain believe in evolution? Yes.

Does McCain believe in God? Yes.

Does McCain believe ID should be taught in science classes? Probably not/Yes (note the yes is a little wiggly as he did not specifically SAY in science classes, nor did he deny it should be taught in science classes, but his answer, to me, clearly implies he does because of his use of the word "theory" in both cases. Since ID is NOT a science, I can only conclude he either really doesn't understand science (as he freely admits--which is troubling on its face), but that he cannot discern the difference between creationism, ID and evolution and whether each is a belief, philosophy, or a scientific theory. Most all articles on this, except found on science pages for the most part, don't seem to understand these differences, either, which is probably cause of much of this so-called confusion.

Does McCain believe creationism should be taught in school? Yes.

Does McCain believe ID has a place to be taught in schools? Yes.

Regligion? Is an Episcopalian attending a Baptist Church, identifies as a Southern Baptist.

Has McCain flip-flopped on teaching of ID in science classes? Yes.

Has McCain flip-flopped on teaching of creationism in science classes? Unclear.

*****

Teaching Creationism/ID
Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin's father was a science teacher and also a Christian. What seems marginally clear, in Palin's case, is that she does not separate the two concepts of ID and creationism. Like many, she lumps them together. Because until recently there WAS no history, really, on Palin because she remained an obscure Governor in a state with 670K people, there have not been many opportunities for Palin to get on the record on this matter.

Here is what I am able to find, however:

Q: The education section of the Republican Party of Alaska’s platform states “We support giving Creation Science equal representation with other theories of the origin of life. If evolution is taught, it should be presented as only a theory.” Do you support this position? Why?

A: I support this plank in the Republican Party’s platform. I believe society can have healthy debates on scientific theories, so equal representation of creation and evolution shouldn’t be an offense.

--Sarah Palin, published written answer, August 24, 2002, Daily News-Miner (ID and creationism* see note below under "Does Palin believe ID should be taught in science classes?")

*********

Is Palin a creationist? Unknown.

Does Palin believe in evolution? Unknown.

Does Palin believe in God? Yes.

Does Palin believe ID should be taught in science classes? Yes. In the first Palin quote, she says she agrees with Alaska GOP's party plank. ([see section III(e)]. In this document, ID is specifically called out: We support teaching various models and theories for the origins of life and our universe, including Creation Science or Intelligent Design. If evolution outside a species (macro-evolution) is taught, evidence disputing the theory should also be presented.

Does Palin believe creationism should be taught in school? Yes, appears so. She does not state science classes specifically, rather concedes it should be taught along with "other theories" which would include evolution which IS taught in science classes.

Does Palin believe ID has a place to be taught in schools? Yes.

Religion: Baptized as a Roman Catholic, she was rebaptized into the pentecostal Assembly of God church as the age of 12 currently attending Wasilla Bible Church and an independent Christian church.

As of this writing, Palin has not flip-flopped.