"Being a gay man and, up until this week, a Republican, those comments truly summed up for me the attitude of the GOP towards the millions of gay men and women who work, raise families, pay taxes, and contribute to our society. We are hated, we are marginalized, and are basically unwanted by a party that has forsaken the principles of Abraham Lincoln and become dominated by a right-wing that falls far short of representing main-stream America."
- New Hampshire State Representative Corey Corbin on joining the Democratic Party
Yesterday I fell down and went boom. I don't know if i will get around to updating today (I have about half the article done) but sitting at the computer is not exactly comfortable. Lucky for me, I have pain meds so I figure within the hour I will be in la la land.
Check back later this afternoon. Or tonight. Or tomorrow. Or sometime in the near future.
How the Bush Administration manipulates Science to it's own end.
I have gotten several emails from people who read the blog asking why I have never talked about George W. Bush and the fact that he seems so hostile to science.
One reason and one reason only...it makes me so very tired.
Bush has been the worse thing for science since the medieval Catholic Church. And that's saying something. He is the worse nightmare of anyone that professes to be skeptic. He does not know enough about science to see how politicizing science will ultimately damage science. And that's damn sad.
In just about every area of science, the Bush administration has been in the forefront of doctoring, distorting, and hiding any scientific fact that does not jive with Mr. Bush's far right philosophy. Don't worry about global warming, everything's fine. Don't worry about lead poisoning, everything's fine. Don't worry about pollution, mad cow, arsenic in the water, particulate matter in the air....etc...etc...etc. Everything is just goddamn fine!
I want to take a good close look at some of the areas that the Bush administration has been particularly careless, to the detriment of just about everyone. So let's start with
Global Warming
...my Administration’s climate change policy will be science-based, encourage research breakthroughs that lead to technological innovation, and take advantage of the power of markets. It will encourage global participation and will pursue actions that will help ensure continued economic growth and prosperity for our citizens and for citizens throughout the world. - George W. Bush
In fact, there is hardly anything scientific in Mr. Bush's global warming policies. By stacking committees and manipulating the science, the White House has downplayed what is becoming the most critical environmental emergency of this century. In one of it's first moves they fired Dr. Robert Watson, chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 1996. An internationally respected scientist and recipient of numerous awards and honors, Dr. Watson had been the Director of the Science Division at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and chief scientist at the World Bank. Under his leadership, the IPCC had produced "Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, Summary for Policymakers" predicting an increase of 2.5 to 10.5 degrees Fahrenheit in average global temperatures by 2100 (you can read the report here and allow me to say that at this point it appears sadly out of date.) and concluding that "there is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities." These conclusions were affirmed by the National Academy of Sciences in their report "Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions" (warning .pdf file).
Well one of the entities that was unhappy with Dr. Watson's conclusions was ExxonMobil. They sent a memo (warning .pdf file) to John Howard of the Council on Environmental Quality at the White House criticizing Dr. Watson. What they wanted to know is "Can Watson be replaced now at the request of the U.S.?" See ExxonMobil opposes the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to global warming in addition they are the deep pockets that back a lot of the global warming "skeptics". So it should come as no surprise that they didn't like Dr. Watson.
Naturally the State Department decided to opposed Dr. Watson’s reelection to head the panel. The Department gave no scientific rationale for this decision. In April 2002, lacking the support of the United States Government Dr. Watson lost his position as chair.
Nor is suppressing information that unusual for Bush. In the Washington Post Jeremy Symons wrote about the suppression of information from the EPA:
...in late February 2001, a debate ensued within the administration. White House aides drafted a six-page memorandum to John Bridgeland, who was then the president's deputy assistant for domestic policy. It listed the potential impacts on the coal industry, but devoted only six sentences to the science of global warming. Two weeks later, the president sent a letter to Congress announcing that he would no longer support new controls on global warming pollution from power plants. His letter left no room for compromise.
[...]
Since U.S. power plants alone account for 10 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, the Bush administration next had to address the issue on the international stage. A State Department options paper in March 2001 outlined potential next steps for dealing with our allies on the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that the president opposed. According to the paper, the United States could "repudiate the Kyoto negotiating process" altogether. Or, the administration could advance its own proposal in order to "give us time to develop a credible alternative approach to Kyoto, rather than simply blowing up the current negotiations." But the paper warned that leaving the door open to an alternative agreement "may not fully satisfy domestic groups that wish to drive the final stake in the heart of the Protocol." The United States subsequently walked away without offering an alternative.
[...]
Concerned about public opinion, presidential counselor Karen Hughes called a White House communications strategy meeting on the environment in April 2001, declaring that green issues "are killing us," according to a Time magazine report. Having ruled out any significant policy change, however, the administration's only choice was damage control.
One example was its effort to raise doubts about the international scientific consensus that carbon dioxide pollution is causing global warming. In May 2001, the White House asked the National Research Council, part of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, for a second opinion. But the effort backfired. The council's report confirmed the scientific consensus that greenhouse gas emissions are major contributors to global warming,
Then a June 2002 report by the EPA and the State Department concluded that "continuing growth in greenhouse gas emissions is likely to lead to annual average warming over the United States that could be as much as several degrees Celsius (roughly 3 to 9 degrees Fahrenheit) during the 21st century." The report also detailed deleterious effects on public health and the environment in each region of the country, warning, for example, that "drought is likely to be more frequent and intense" in the Great Plains.
Pressed to respond, Bush dismissed the report as a product of "the bureaucracy," denigrating years of work by scientists throughout the federal government.
Afterward, the administration took a much bolder approach to dodge such embarrassment by trying to minimize awareness of the threat of global warming. In September 2002, it stripped a global warming section from an annual EPA report on trends in air pollution. An annual update had been included for years.
Most recently, internal EPA documents obtained by the National Wildlife Federation show that White House officials tried to force the EPA to alter the scientific content of a report in order to play down the risks of global warming. The EPA has billed the report, released in June, as "the first-ever national picture of environmental quality and human health in the United States." An internal EPA decision paper noted that White House officials were insisting on "major edits" to the climate change section and were telling the EPA that "no further changes may be made" beyond the White House edits. In the internal paper, EPA staff warned that the report "no longer accurately represents scientific consensus on climate change." The EPA ultimately pulled the global warming section from the report to avoid publishing information that is not scientifically credible.
Don't worry...be happy.
Now I am not about to discuss the evidence that the globe is warming up. First because those that claim it's not hardly know enough to tie their own shoe laces, much less be able to dispute the huge amount of evidence that we are indeed involved in climate change and second, because like evolution, it is perverse to deny that global warming is happening. Third, I have yet to get a global warming skeptic to actually read any of the evidence that is out there! And guess what? The Pentagon (not known as a liberal institution) agrees with me:
Climate change over the next 20 years could result in a global catastrophe costing millions of lives in wars and natural disasters..
A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a 'Siberian' climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.
The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.
'Disruption and conflict will be endemic features of life,' concludes the Pentagon analysis. 'Once again, warfare would define human life.'
The findings will prove humiliating to the Bush administration, which has repeatedly denied that climate change even exists. Experts said that they will also make unsettling reading for a President who has insisted national defence is a priority.
Changing the world's weather is not something you can turn on and off. It is not something you can screw with for a few years and then say "Ok I am convinced, let's do something about it". It has taken mankind quite a few years to create the problem we face now. This is important, even if we were to stop all of carbon dioxide emissions in the world, it might very well be too late:
The threat that has riveted their attention is this: Global warming, rather than causing gradual, centuries - spanning change, may be pushing the climate to a tipping point. Growing evidence suggests the ocean - atmosphere system that controls the world's climate can lurch from one state to another in less than a decade - like a canoe that's gradually tilted until suddenly it flips over. Scientists don't know how close the system is to a critical threshold. But abrupt climate change may well occur in the not - too - distant future. If it does, the need to rapidly adapt may overwhelm many societies - thereby upsetting the geopolitical balance of power.
Though triggered by warming, such change would probably cause cooling in the Northern Hemisphere, leading to longer, harsher winters in much of the U.S. and Europe. Worse, it would cause massive droughts, turning farmland to dust bowls and forests to ashes. Picture last fall's California wildfires as a regular thing. Or imagine similar disasters destabilizing nuclear powers such as Pakistan or Russia - it's easy to see why the Pentagon has become interested in abrupt climate change.
Climate researchers began getting seriously concerned about it a decade ago, after studying temperature indicators embedded in ancient layers of Arctic ice. The data show that a number of dramatic shifts in average temperature took place in the past with shocking speed - in some cases, just a few years.
Sorry for the lack of updates this week but in truth I have been sick. So there won't be a whole lot today, but hopefully what is here is interesting...
You might remember Jason Mattera - Chairman of the Roger Williams University College Republicans, R.I. State Chairman of the College Republicans, NFRA-RI member and, last but not least, genius that came up (or stole) the idea for the White Only Scholarship? Well how do you think the state GOP feels about Mr. Mattera? In an article entitled "College offer ripped by GOP":
A whites-only scholarship being offered by the College Republicans at Roger Williams University is "disturbing," says the state's Republican chairwoman.
"It does not move us forward in a reasonable debate over the issues," Patricia Morgan said yesterday.
She emphasized that the student group is not sponsored or supported by the state Republican Party.
Morgan responded after learning that the College Republicans are offering a scholarship -- which now stands at $250 -- that is only open to applicants who are white. The group created the scholarship as a statement against affirmative action. It is not endorsed by the university administration.
Though she did acknowledge that the debate over affirmative action is valid, she said the student group's tactics have "racist overtones."
"We have zero tolerance for racists in the Republican Party," she said. "I'm really appalled by the way they brought this up."
True when I read Ms. Morgan's "We have zero tolerance for racist in the Republican Party" I did laugh out loud...
Well it looks as if Hal Moroz was snookered yet again. Posting to the group "The New Knighthood" Hal wanted to share a stirring story of Marine bravery with the group:
A friend of mine forwarded the following email to me. It concerns a gathering of U.S. Marines, who were celebrating the birthday of their extra-ordinary branch of our Armed Forces.
Apparently the ACLU wanted to "Go tell it to the Marines." They did, and the Marines responded!
Hal
One Nation Under God: ACLU Upset At Marines
Picture of U.S. Marines gathered with their heads bowed in prayer
If you look closely at the picture above, you will note that all the Marines pictured are bowing their heads. That's because they're praying.
The incident took place at a recent ceremony honoring the birthday of the corps, and it has the ACLU up in arms. "These are federal employees," says Lucius Traveler, a spokesman for the ACLU, "on federal property and on federal time. For them to pray is clearly an establishment of religion, and we must nip this in the bud immediately."
When asked about the ACLU's charges, Colonel Jack Fessender, speaking for the Commandant of the Corps said (cleaned up a bit), "Screw the ACLU."
This note bears a striking resemblance in tone to an earlier chain letter that accused the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of opposing crosses in military cemeteries. That one was originated as a joke to demonstrate an extreme that the ACLU might go to. This one is, similarly, only a joke - one that many have missed, because they fear the organization may soon go this far.
The ACLU's stance on religious observations on government property and involving government workers is highly criticized and frequently misunderstood. What rankles most is the ACLU's insistance that the First Amendment guarantee of free religion includes the choice to follow no religion, thus any tolerance or support by the government of any one religion is seen as a violation. The ACLU represents individuals. It would only get involved in the situation described above if, say, one of the soldiers objected to being ordered to pray in a manner that was contrary to his or her personal beliefs.
While I have been unable to find the source of the above photo, I have been able to confirm that the supposed reaction of the ACLU and the response from a Marine spokesman are total fabrications.
The current U.S. Marines Commandant of the Corps (CMC) is General Michael M. Hagee. I can find no mention of this incident or this statement on his web site, nor can I find any reference to a spokesperson for the CMC by the name "Colonel Jack Fessender." Further, the ACLU has issued a statement in response to this chain letter in which they state "we have no knowledge of this event nor have we ever had a spokesperson by the name of Lucius Traveler." Break this chain.
Now I now that both Pat and Hal read this blog....so come on guys. Are you going to issue a correction? Or are you content to allow all 111 members of your list to believe a lie?
Since I have not been feeling well this week I did not keep up with the reading of various blogs. So the "Best of the Rest" blog roundup was not done. Once again people, if you write a blog, and you have an article that you would like to see spread around the bloggerverse, please drop me email. I will be more than happy to visit your blog and take a look around
On the same note, if you have me on your blogroll and I don't have you on my blogroll, again drop me a line.
Where Hal Moroz proves once again the truth is simply not in him.
Well they are at it again.
One thing I will never understand is the concept of "lying" for the Lord. I was first introduced to this wonderful phenomenon back when I was posting to sci.skeptic. We had a cross-poster from talk.origins that went by the name of Jim McCoy. Needless to say he was a creationist nut. The posters of talk.origins had a special handle for ol' Jim. They called him nameless. I tended to call him McLiar or JMoron. Never have I met a guy that was so basically dishonest in his work for the Lord. What really pissed me off was his claim that Glen Kuban, I man I had the pleasure to meet a few years prior to this debate, destroyed a human footprint at Dinosaur Valley State Park in Glen Rose Texas. Click here for a tiny sample of the crap I used to get from this clown.
Well once again I am confronted with this problem. Judge Hal Moroz group, "The New Knighthood" have a very hard time dealing with reality. It seems that Patrick Townes has once again been trolling this board. He found my last article about their inability to tell the truth (here) and found my reference to Austin Cline's article (here and you can read his article here). Well Pat knows better than to go after me, so instead he goes after Austin. In an email entitled There They Go Again ... (warming, may need to be member of group to read msg):
No, I'm not talking about the Democratic National Committee or the angry Democrats running for their party's nomination, but I am talking about the athiets(sic)!
They're after you again, Hal! A church-friend found you being vilified AGAIN on the internet by the atheists, who I suspect are angry Democrats who lack the courage to identify themselves properly. Here is their latest attack, they are obvious avid viewers of this site. I wonder why??? :)
Got that? Austin vilified Judge Moroz by pointing out that the guy is not accurate, not knowledgeable about the subjects he pretends to be knowledgeable about, and not honest.
Now we already know that Pat is not the brightest bulb in the pack, but what really struck me as funny is the accusation that Austin must be an "angry Democrat who lacks the courage to identify themselves properly". Because, if you don't agree with Pat and Hal, you must be everything they hate and fear. There is absolutely no reason to assume that Austin is a Democrat, hell I have had a couple of email conversations with the guy, and have read his site pretty extensively and I have no idea what political party he belongs to. That Pat jumps to the assumption that Austin is a Democrat should not surprise, they had one poor libertarian posting there by the handle of DJ Entropy. whom they also accused of being a Democrat for the crime of not being Christian. Par for the course, disagree and you are not one of us and therefore can be lied to, treated with contempt and generally lied about.
Oh and one other thing. Austin (as far as I know) is not an avid reader of "The New Knighthood". I am. Austin is an avid reader of this site...
Well Hal had to jump in, and in regular Moroz fashion he totally misrepresents what is going on:
Thanks for the posts, my friends, but that article you speak of is false, misleading, and a sad picture of the person who actually authored it.
First of all, I never invited any atheist or individual they cite to "debate," as the author of that column states in his opening sentence. The author opens his column with a falsehood.
Secondly, the theme and membership of this group is outlined on our group's homepage. It speaks for itself. I would strongly suggest the atheist website you gentlemen mentioned does not have many readers, and it is obviously very biased to the left, the far, far left. They are no doubt tickled pink this morning ... they probably have more viewers today because of their attack than they have had in long time. They are, however, a sad lot that must join groups like ours to manufacture "debates" that were never "invited" as the author suggests.
Finally, I post here as a private citizen exercising my constitutional right to freedom of speech, not as any official or in any capacity as the author suggests by identifying me with a title.
Again, it bothers people like them when a conservative exercises Free Speech. It is perfectly fine for the liberals, angry democrats, rabid homosexuals, or fanatical muslims to say whatever they want ... in fact, they will strongly defend that right of free speech, but heaven forbid (strike that, they don't believe in heaven or God :) a conservative say something that they disagree with ... they will crucify you for that, literally!
My friends, in honor of this thread and our God-given rights and privileges as Americans, I strongly recommend we go to the movies and see "The Passion," and I include the one or two athiests that might be reading this post.
Ok first things first. I most certainly got an invite to join the group. As anyone that uses Yahoo groups know, people often troll other groups and mail invites to people who they think might be interested in joining their particular group. This is what happened to me. Now was the invite a sincere offer or was it a joke (my friends are not above such things)? I have no idea. Nor does it matter. As I said before I was getting ready to quit the group when I read Hal's totally inaccurate article on the Founding Fathers and Christianity. I had no intention of answering in that group, but I did make a blog article out of it because this is a subject that I find very interesting. There is a lot of "lying for the Lord" involved in trying to claim this country is founded on Christian law and values. Well this drove Pat right up the wall:
I went back to that Blog site I previously wrote about, and discovered I was wrong. The author of the article was "not attacking" Hal --- he was just pointing out how ignorant republicans are when it comes to American history --- and he isn't nameless (he goes by the pen name "Dominion"). I'm glad I got that off my chest. I feel better now.
By the way, Dominion, since you religiously :) read posts here (and comment on them on your web site), what political party are you associated with? I don't want to be wrong here, but I distinctly detected an anti-republican, anti-libertarian, anti-Christian bias in your columns. Am I wrong? (of course I am :)
Cheers! (I'll read your response in your column tomorrow ;)
Patrick
That was Pat's second screed about me to the group. Now I would have never gone to the group to reply except for two things. It was obvious that I was a member of the group at this point, since I was reading the email of the group, the only way I could have known what Pat was saying. The second thing was that Hal Moroz stepped up and admonished Pat:
Well, Patrick, this would be a pretty boring world if everyone held the same beliefs. I am not sure about the motivations of your "friend," but I respect his right to express his opinions ... as much as I respect your right to say what you believe.
Debate is a great thing! And I, personally, love a good debate. While your "friend" may not admit it, he probably enjoys his (or her) exchanges with you ... and who knows, we all may learn something in the process. It is my hope that he (or she) is learning something that may affect/modify his (or her) views by reading the posts here. I consider a day poorly spent if at its end I have not learned something new.
Now considering these two points I decided to answer in the group itself rather than replying on my blog. I did it out of a misplaced sense of fairness, I had said some pretty harsh things about the group, and I thought they should have a chance to confront me. Hal seemed to be a good guy, the type of guy that appreciated good debate. So although no one came out and said "Come on over Dom and we will debate" it is obvious that Pat issued me a challenge and Hal seemed to be agreeable to the debate. Alas it was all a lie (that you can read about herehereherehere and here).
Now when I started this I trusted Hal Moroz. I considered him honorable. Needless to say at this point I feel that Hal is nothing more than yet another fundamentalist Christian that, in addition to being intellectually dishonest in the extreme, is yet another Liar for the Lord. These people simply don't live in reality. Hal claims that Austin must be picking up lots of readers from his group, but his group consist of exactly one hundred and eleven people. Austin is the editor of the About.comAbout Atheism site, a huge site that has been around much longer than Hal's pathetic group. Note also that Hal also throws the "He must be left, far left, extreme left" crapoloa. He complains because he is identified as a Judge, but that is exactly what he is, regardless of whether or not he is posting as a private citizen. Of course, the best part is Judge Moroz recommending attending a movie, and putting money in the pocket of a director who believes that everyone on Moroz list is going to hell for the crime of failing to be Catholic. Rich is it not?
One last example of the basic dishonesty of Judge Hal Moroz. In a subject he is supposed to know (the law), he misrepresents a very famous court case in an attempt to show that the U.S. Supreme Court consider this a Christian Nation::
Lemon v. Kurtzman 403 U.S. 602 (1971):
Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. Three such tests may be gleaned from our cases. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances nor inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster "an excessive government entanglement with religion."
When I told a couple of lawyer friends of mine, they cracked up. The reason is because this passage is known to lawyers as "The Lemon Test" and far from confirming that this is a Christian Nation, it's real purpose is to insure that religion and government stay separate (you can read about this and two other court cases that Moroz tried to fit into the Christian shoebox here ). Now I cut Hal some slack with the totally bogus quotes he shoved in the mouths of the Founding Fathers, but here it is clear that Hal Moroz is nothing more than yet another fundy Christian for whom the truth is simply not within.
Come on Hal, give it up. You were handed your ass on a platter and you simply refuse to deal with it. Lying for the Lord is still lying!
Somehow I don't think the Lord is very proud of you.
Going out of their way to prove they are racist scum.
Good Monday. Well it looks as if, once again, College Republican's just can't stop making racist fools of themselves. Today's prize winner is none other than Jason Mattera, a 20 year old attending Roger Williams University. Before we get into particulars, let's take a closer look at Mr. Mattera:
Jason Mattera Chairman of the Roger Williams University College Republicans, and R.I. State Chairman of the College Republicans, and NFRA-RI member, was recently named the outstanding CR State Chair in the nation by the College Republican National Committee. Jason was also one of 20 young conservative leaders of tomorrow chosen to attend an April retreat at the Ronald Reagan Ranch near Santa Barbara, California. In addition, Jason interned this summer at the National Journalism Center in Washington D.C., which trains future conservative journalists.
Wow impressive eh? The best of the best in the Republican party. So then, why is Mr. Mattera being called on the racist carpet? Well in his republican wisdom he thought it would be a good idea to start a "White's Only" college scholarship:
A student group at Roger Williams University is offering a new scholarship for which only white students are eligible, in a move they say is designed to protest affirmative action.
The application for the $250 award requires an essay on "why you are proud of your white heritage" and a recent picture to "confirm whiteness."
"Evidence of bleaching will disqualify applicants," says the application, issued by the university's College Republicans.
Jason Mattera, 20, who is president of the College Republicans, said the group is parodying minority scholarships at Roger Williams and making a statement.
"We think that if you want to treat someone according to character and how well they achieve academically, then skin color shouldn't really be an option," he said. "Many people think that coming from a white background you're automatically privileged, you're automatically rich, and your parents pay full tuition. That's just not the case."
The group's move is one in a series of actions that have sparked debate, as well as anger.
Isn't that just great? Now this is not the first time this particular group of Republicans have been involved in bigoted controversy:
The university administration temporarily froze the College Republicans' money in the fall during a fight over a series of articles published in its monthly newsletter.
The articles in the September issue accused homosexuals of squelching free speech by pushing for hate-crimes legislation and alleged that a well-known gay-rights group indoctrinates students into homosexual sex.
University president Roy Nirschel called the issue "pornographic in nature, puerile" and "mean-spirited" and said the university would "not condone publications that create a hostile environment for our students."
In the end, no action was taken against the Republicans.
Sounds like a great, all-inclusive group eh? You gotta love that big tent!
Now there are a few punch lines to this story so bear with me.
The first is, of course, this is not a new idea. Why right here in the great State of Texas, we had our own racist idiot coming up with a scholarship for white people.
LUBBOCK, Texas - Texas Tech University student Matt Coday has a unique response to the affirmative action and reverse discrimination problems in colleges and universities. He created the United White Person’s College Fund, a scholarship program established for white students in the United States.
"For the longest time, members and supporters of groups like the United Negro College Fund have said their practices are not discriminatory," the senior political science major from Levelland, Texas, said. "If I were to have a white students association or host a Miss White Lubbock USA pageant people would say I was a racist."
He said he has two purposes in creating this fund. The first, he said, is to provide financial assistance for a group that has been severely discriminated against because of organizations that give scholarship money only to minorities.
The second is to serve as a direct antidote to those groups, to confront them with their own policies, Coday said.
"This is done a little bit tongue-in-cheek," he said. "On one hand, I'm just daring someone to take me to court."
There will be lawsuits, he said. But he is prepared.
"I'm really ready for it," he said. "I've threatened to do this for years, thought about all the rhetoric I'd need, and I think I've got it."
However, Coday may not be as successful as he would like, said Kevin Scott, assistant professor of political science. He said he doubts it will be found constitutional because of several 1960s Supreme Court precedents that made discrimination illegal if the private companies practicing it were engaged in interstate commerce.
"If it’s a private organization not in the stream of interstate commerce, there is nothing we can do to prevent them from discriminating," Scott said. "But if it’s related at all to public activity, then they run into problems. My guess would be if the objective is to provide scholarships to Texas Tech students, it is state action."
The United Negro College Fund is within legal guidelines because race-based preferential treatment is allowed to make up for past discrimination, Scott said. However, despite the reverse discrimination arguments Coday could make, the fund is questionable.
"One of the goals of the educational community is to promote diversity," he said, adding Texas Tech’s student population is not representative of the population of Texas.
Now this took place a year ago! So although Mr. Mattera is a jerk, he is a not-very-original jerk...
The IKA is a non-profits Whites' civil rights organization. It is dedicated to the unification, preservation and advancement of White Christian America.
The White Children's Scholarship Fund is a program that is open to needy White Christian families in the state of California, who's children attend school up to and including the 6th grade.
The California Klan will be locally administering the scholarship program and while donations are expected from all over the world, the money and school supplies will be distributed locally to needy White Christian families in the state of California. We plan on disbursing fifty-dollar awards along with school supplies. The school supplies range from pencils and pens to lunch boxes. Each applicant will be screened by a panel of three Klan members who will review the applications and select the scholarship winners based on need. All California White Christian families are eligible and may be nominated or apply for themselves.
Each disbursement will be hand delivered to the winning family.
So in addition to being a not-very-original jerk Mr. Mattera is stealing ideas from the Ku Klux Klan. As Mr. Burns would say "Excellent".
But wait, we have not discussed the funniest part of the whole racist plan. See. Mr. Mattera is himself not white:
Some have accused the College Republicans of being disingenuous in making a stand against minority scholarships, noting that Mattera himself is the recipient of a scholarship open only to a minority group.
Mattera, who is of Puerto Rican descent, readily acknowledges that he was awarded a $5,000 scholarship from the Hispanic College Fund.
He said he was given the money because of his academic achievement and plays down the role his ethnicity played in the funds being awarded.
Mattera also contends that his ethnic background only strengthens his position.
"No matter what my ethnicity is, I'm making a statement that scholarships should be given out based on merit and need," Mattera told The Providence Journal.
Rich is it not? A non-white college republican steals an idea from the Ku Klux Klan after gaining the benefit that he would deny all other non-whites. One wonders why Mr. Mattera does not really make a point and return the money. Ah but I forgot, hypocrisy is just another name for Republican...
Watch Scott McClellan do the Shuck and Jive. Then journey with me on a long ramble...
Well the Bush AWOL story is heating up big time. For once the press is acting like they have a spine. As evidence check out the grilling that Scott got yesterday over the release of "can't-even-read" documents. Pretty damn funny if you ask me. (warning you need real player). In fact, you can find a lot o' links on this subject by visiting Daily Kos.
The subject dovetails nicely with a conversation that I am having with Akim, who blogs Empty Days, in the comment section. He asked me why I bothered to debate in right wing email groups, considering how unlikely I was to convert anyone. An excellent, if old question, back when I was posting to sci.skeptic we were asked this question quite often, most probably because of the acrimony that most of us seemed to permanently suffer from. People constantly asked if we ever had a hope of converting someone to our views.
Bawahahahahahaha. If there is one thing I have learned, true believers will never convert. They will go through the most interesting contortions in order to continue to believe. If you don't believe me, check out sci,skeptic for a month, it is an eye opening experience.
No the reason most of us gave is that we had no hope of converting those we were debating, but we were trying to convert those that came to the newsgroup to get information. A large segment of any newsgroup consist of people that merely read the group. That never post at all. Those are the ones you try to reach.
Now there was a time where I engaged in debate everyday. And I did it for years. But after a while you get tired of the constant battles. You get tired of repeating yourself a hundred times a day. You get tired of your opponents totally ignoring your every point to bring up everything but the subject at hand. Lord knows I got tired of it. So I don't post to Usenet anymore. The reason that I subscribe to right wing email groups is the old "know your enemy" canard. I like to see what arguments they come up with so that I can counter them when the opportunity arises.
Ok so then what's up with going to "The New Knighthood" newsgroup and getting involved in a debate? Well obviously I am not opposed to all debate. After all, I have a comment section right here on my blog. I put it there for people who disagree with me. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate all the support that I get (Akim and QrazyQat are very valued contributors), but I put it there because I wanted people that did not agree with me to have a chance to present their case.
What in the hell does this have to do with AWOL Bush and the news conference? Hang on I am getting there.
Now I got involved with the Moroz debate because I knew what he had posted was wrong and given what he said about enjoying a good debate and my right to disagree, I thought for sure that this debate would be interesting to say the least. As we can see, I was totally wrong. That is what I get for taking a right wing religious nut at his word.
I will also get involved if I think the debate is interesting...such as the one I got involved in yesterday. This took place in the email group Agenda 2000 · Political Debate on The Issues of the Day which I am not sure is a right wing group but it is there for debate right? Yesterday a fellow named Thom decided to post this little ditty (warning, you may have to subscribe to the group to read the posts)
Bush Claims Of Released Military Records Are False
Bush campaign chairman Marc Racicot said "To suggest...that the military should 'answer questions' about President Bush's honorable discharge is an outrage."
I agree. The United States Air Force does not exist to do opposition research for the Democratic National Committee. The democrats are trying to politicize the Department of Defense by making it a tool of their party. If the democrats can't run on the issues and can only engage in personal character smears, that is not the concern of The United States Air Force. Nor should it be.
Well come on who could resist an opening like that.
On "Meet the Press" this past Sunday, George W. Bush said he had no problem releasing his service record, just as every presidential candidate that has served in the military has already done.
*******
Russert: When allegations were made about John McCain or Wesley Clark on their military records, they opened up their entire files. Would you agree to do that?
President Bush: Yeah. Listen, these files - I mean, people have been looking for these files for a long period of time, trust me, and starting in the 1994 campaign for governor. And I can assure you in the year 2000 people were looking for those files as well. Probably you were. And - absolutely. I mean, I...
Russert: But you would allow pay stubs, tax records, anything to show that you were serving during that period?
President Bush: Yeah. If we still have them, but I - you know, the records are kept in Colorado, as I understand, and they scoured the records.
And I'm just telling you, I did my duty, and it's politics, you know, to kind of ascribe all kinds of motives to me. But I have been through it before. I'm used to it. What I don't like is when people say serving in the Guard is - is - may not be a true service.
Russert: But you authorize the release of everything to settle this?
President Bush: Yes, absolutely.
We did so in 2000, by the way.
*****
So instead of claiming that the USAF has no responsibility to release these records (which is simply a moronic statement. Of course they don't, in fact they have a legal responsibility not to release the records. Bush has to authorize the release, which is the bone of contention here) why don't we hold the President to his promise? He said he would release everything to settle the matter. What is he afraid of?
What are you afraid of?
Now that I blog the major reason to get involved in these types of debates is to demonstrate the type of debate you can expect. Watch carefully as Thom decides to ignore the main point of my post:
How is this relevent (sic) to the Presidency?
Is it that only a combat veteran is qualified to lead America in war time?
Americans don't have to speculate about what kind of leadership the President would offer in war time. They've seen it twice.
Is it that the troops can't respect a President unless he's a combat veteran?
If that is the case, you Dems should have no objection to counting ALL the military absentee ballots this time. Seriously, if you're so sure that your candidate will be so beloved by the military, why are you going to move heaven and earth to try to stop their votes from being counted?
Look familiar? You can read the whole thread here. Notice that Thom did not play with me for very long...
I guess though that the number one reason I get involved in these types of debates is that it is a real ego boost. It is not a boost I need all the time, but every once in a while, it is nice to know that I have not lost that sharp edge that I developed in all those years posting to Usenet.
One final thought. Akim brings up a couple of points:
Otoh, you really shouldn't resent the word "convert" here. After all deep convictions are a form of belief too, and when you find people who oppose that, it's normal to want to persuade them that they're wrong. No? :-0
So I suppose when you argued your point there, those guys must have thought: poof, here he goes with his crusade on us.
What I am trying to say is that the "know your enemy" strategy only goes so far. Do you really get to understand what drives all these people into this sort of beliefs - or you just collect unilaterally-winning arguments they don't care to answer?
The amazing fact is that your arguments are indeed convincing - to me, for example. But not to "those other guys".
So the art of converting/persuading someone to your own beliefs is not a thing to disdain. In a certain sense - it's vital. And it requires not seeing your enemy as an enemy for as long as you're willing to "get to know" him.
First I am a skeptic in all things, including my political belief system. I am a liberal but if someone could provide me a really good argument that liberalism is wrong or misguided, I would change my mind in a second. That is what we skeptics do, ask for evidence and when provided such evidence, incorporate it in our world view. Nor do I have a problem changing my mind. When I decided to be a skeptic I decided to give up comfortable fantasy (such as religion) for cold, hard, and often cruel reality. See I want to live in the real world, I don't want to suffer self delusion like I experienced so much of in sci.skeptic. Yet in all the years of my political involvement (since 1979) I have yet to hear an argument that proves liberalism wrong, on the other hand all I have to do is look around and I can see the tragedy of the right wing way of life all around me. Especially here in Texas, where right wing Republicans have reduced the state to a status most third world nations would be ashamed of. When you live in the second largest state in the Union yet you have the worse record for insuring children for god's sake, then something is wrong. Really wrong.
Second, no sorry, they are my enemies. Back in the 80's I knew lots of Reagan Republicans. At the time we could have rational debate about what was wrong in the country. See we all agreed that there were things wrong, poverty, the homeless...etc. We only differed in the methods in which we sought to cure these problems.
That is no longer true. As I have said before, I am told that liberals have to improve the tone of political debate in this country. How? Read Thom's response once again, there is not a shred of awareness that Bush has done a thing wrong. In fact, he disputes it, and will continue to dispute it till the day he dies. Convert? Hell I can barely hold an intelligent conversation with them...
So Bush-Cheney '04 Campaign Manager Ken Mehlman fields those softball questions.
Ok so I attended the chat event last night, and boys and girls, it was funny as all get out.
The title of the chat was "A Tough Election Ahead" but you would not have thought from those hard, hard questions that Ken Mehlman faced. A few examples:
Elizabeth Lord from Joplin MO wrote: What are President Bush's issues for his campaign? What are his key points that he is going after?
Ed Brucker from St. Louis MO wrote: With doctors leaving the practice of medicine at an alarming rate, due to the high malpractice premiums, when is the President going to start tying the issue of tort reform to health care? After all, it doesn't matter what the drugs cost, if you don't have a doctor to prescribe them.
Preston Walrath from Coto de Caza CA wrote: Have you always been a Republican?
Delores Jean Overpeck from Avon IN wrote: What is the single most important thing that we could do to influnce(sic) undecided voters?
Judi Lundh from Laconia NH wrote: How do I, as a middle school teacher, fight against the backlash of administrators and majority of teachers, because I am a Republican and defender of NCLB?? In my school, it is very obvious and disturbing!
Rhonda Girgis from Cleveland OH wrote: Isn't it a mistake on the part of the democrats to base this election on what they percieve(sic) as distain or hatred for our President by the democratic voters?
Dean McGregor from Wilsonville OR wrote: How does President Bush's immigration and amnesty plan make our borders more secure and discourage future illegal immigration?
Oy Vey! What a collection of softball questions. I mean, I could have answered those. In fact there were only two questions asked that was worth answering. Of course being worth answering and gettng an answer of some worth are two totally different things. Here they are and the full answer that Ken gave:
Jimmie Evans from Monroe City MO wrote: What is President Bush doing about creating new jobs that pay a good wage?
Ken Mehlman answered: First, the President has cut taxes and will make those tax cuts permanent. When families can keep more of their own money, they spend it on goods and services, which helps the economy and spurs new job growth. Second, the President is working to improve the education and training of our workers. He proposed $500 million for a series of measures called Jobs for the 21st century, including more community college training. Third, he is making health care more affordable so that businesses can have more to employ workers. We're pleased that a recession is now a recovery but we're still working hard for more good jobs and good wages.
Scott Smith from Reed City MI wrote: Will the president beging to address the problems with Social Security in his second term, and if so, what plans does the president have for meaningful reform to Social Security?
Ken Mehlman answered: The President is committed to making sure that Social Security is protected for today's seniors and also for younger Americans. With the coming retirement of baby boomers, there will be more retirees and fewer workers. To make sure Social Security is protected when this occurs, the President appointed a commission to examine options. The commission recommended the following: no changes for today's seniors and those nearing retirement. Allow younger workers the choice of investing a small portion of their payroll tax in safe investments the same way federal employees can make investments. This will preserve Social Security when baby boomers retire without a cut in benefits and raising of retirement age. The President will work for these reforms.
Man let's hope they come up with some better answers and soon.
But the most strange part of the chat came about halfway through. It seems that Dan Adams from Claremore OK. had a really tough question. So tough that apparently Ken could not answer it. Here are two screen captures. One shows Dan's question sans answer the other shows Dan's question disappearing...
Now you see it
Now you don't
So why is the war on terror so important? I guess we will never know.
Well I got some great news the yesterday. It seems that after a rather long hiatus "The Compassionate Conservatives" (my favorite rock group) has once again blessed us with a new song praising our fear-filled leader!
Frat Boy is sure to be a major hit. Below are the lyrics so you can sing along!
F R A T B O Y
George Bush, the one they chose Born with a silver spoon up his nose Slid by on the family name [He's got] no soul and a feeble brain
George Bush could do no wrong AWOL during Vietnam He had better ways to spend his time Like getting drunk and doing lines
George Bush, the corporate whore He's gonna wage perpetual war Flight suit with a padded schlong King George says "Bring 'em on!"
Got this in the old email box. Now if this don't get your engine running I don't know what will.
Dear Dominion
The 2004 presidential campaign is heating up. Do you want the hottest inside information straight from President Bush's campaign headquarters?
If so, join Bush-Cheney '04 Campaign Manager Ken Mehlman in the chat center this Monday, February 9, as he answers your questions about the 2004 presidential election!
Dominion, as a Bush Volunteer you have received this exclusive early invite to participate. The President's campaign manager, Ken Mehlman, wants to hear from you. Don't miss this opportunity to ask important questions and hear the very latest news direct from President Bush's campaign. Just visit the chat center at http://www.GeorgeWBush.com/Chat to submit your questions today!
Well ya know me. I love questions. Here are a couple I came up with.
During the interview with Tim Russert on Meet The Press the President promised to release all of his millatary service records. How long do you think it will take for him to do so?
Do you think that your refusal to testify in front of the 9/11 commission, and the upcoming commission on the intelligence failures that lead to the war in Iraq will have a negative effect on your campaign? What about the fact that the people who lost loved ones during 9/11 seem not to trust you. Is this not a big problem?
If you have any questions feel free to head over to http://www.GeorgeWBush.com/Chat/ and ask. Or dropped them in my comment sections and I will be more than happy to do so.
The Most Ironic Thing George W Bush said on Meet The Press:
The thing about the Vietnam War that troubles me as I look back was it was a political war. We had politicians making military decisions, and it is lessons that any president must learn, and that is to the set the goal and the objective and allow the military to come up with the plans to achieve that objective. And those are essential lessons to be learned from the Vietnam War.
Has it been two weeks already? Man time sure flies when your government is running amok.
First up is our good friends at NewsMax. If you don't know NewsMax then I suggest you spend the day reading ConWebWatch. In any case they are running a poll on who would you vote for, John Kerry or our current President, SuperStupid. No need to ask how I voted...
Les at Stupid Evil Bastard tells the tale of an Apple hoax. The funny part is not that some guy decided to gut an Apple and make it into a PC. No the funny part is how Apple users reacted to the idea.
The People's Republic of Seabrook goes over the...ahem..."fallout" from the appearance of Janet Jackson's tit. Or as I like to call it, much ado about nothing.
This weekend we suffered a great loss. Max, our special need bunny died.
Max was a brown Holland lop. A lop is a bunny who's ears do not point straight up. I called Max our special needs bun because he had no front teeth, so we had to take extra care in his feeding. We had to chop up his veggies into bite size chunks. We had to feed him carrot strips instead of carrot sticks. Well you get the idea,
As Max grew older, he was plagued with illness. He developed a strange twist to his hips that caused his body to curl under. His back legs became useless, but fortunately there was no pain, and Max continued to eat and drink normally.
Then on Saturday, after a trip to the vet to make sure he was in no pain, Max settled down to sleep and late in the night he left us. Needless to say we are all very sad.
We were told by the vet that Max was the most determined bunny he had ever met. We could tell he was a brave, adventurous rabbit, with a nose in everything. He will be missed greatly.
Last year when I wrote about buying a rabbit as an Easter Day present for the kids, Calpundit's Kevin Drum identified me as a person that really loved his bunnies. Well of course I am, as a magician, I am part of the mystical link between rabbit and magician. It has always been the perfect partnership.
But it is just not rabbits. See we are animal rescuers. Rabbits mostly but we have one rescued cat, and one big mother of a rescued dog. One of the things I hate is a human that does not posses the balls to take care of their pet's properly. It takes so damn little to make an animal happy, good and proper food. Attention and love. Clean water. A place to get out of the wet and cold. Hell if you are going to own a pet, this is the least you can do for it. Yet sadly all to many pet owners won't even provide the most simply of comforts.
Max was a rescue bun. His previous owners decided to give him up when a new baby was on the way (which makes no sense to me, we have a new baby and 8 rabbits. They seem to co-exist in perfect comfort). We were horrified to see that Max's living quarters was nothing more than a wire cage (a cage with a wire floor will destroy a rabbit's feet). He was eating ordinary grass with no veggies. He was rarely let out of his cage. He came to us as a foster bunny, one that we would hold on to only until someone adopted him. Well on the theory that there was no one out there that was going to take better care of Max than we, we kept him. We never regretted the decision, Max was a fun, loving and intelligent companion.
We will miss you Max. Have fun with your Bunny friends dancing on the Rainbow Bridge!
Austin Cline, your host at About.com's Atheism page caught my article on "The New Knighthood" and how proud they were to lose a debate by acting like chicken shits. He had a few choice words himself. Go check it out.
Welcome to the newest member of the "I'm a Jerk" Club
I just can't tell you how pleased I am that our next member, Charity Santa Cruz, comes from my home state of Texas. San Antonio to be exact. Let me be the first to extend welcome.
As usual it starts with an Action Alert:
This CONSERVATIVE ALERT prepared for Dominion:
ISSUE: Remember the high school Conservative Students Club in California we told you about, whose courageous young president was under attack by the school's liberal faculty and administration, as well as student body members? We recently received information from Adam McManus, host of "Take A Stand" on KSLR radio in south Texas, about another similar case: Charity Santa Cruz, an 18-year-old senior at South San Antonio High School, claims that her economics and government teacher Tim Duda continually harasses her for her conservative beliefs and her Christian faith. He even objects to her reading the Bible -- on her own time!
Plus, despite repeated complaints to Principal Tommy Garcia, Tim Duda uses obscenity in this PUBLIC classroom like the f-word, the sh-word and "uses the Lord's name in vain." In addition, he belittles the Christian faith and conservative values of students like Charity.
Charity Santa Cruz was recently joined in the KSLR studio by her church's singles pastor, Roland Gloria. Pastor Gloria has known Charity since she was 13 and testifies to her character and credibility.
Hiram Sasser of the Liberty Legal Institute says that if these charges by Charity are accurate, not only is the teacher Tim Duda at South San Antonio High School out of line, but so is the Principal Tommy Garcia for not taking more effective action.
This principal has only received a couple of hundred e-mails supporting this brave young lady. Isn't it time he heard from the REST of America?
ACTION ITEM: Charity has said that while Tim Duda at first received a verbal warning, the behavior continued unabated. Thankfully, Duda has now been suspended for 3 days -- WITH PAY -- during the investigation.
Gee, that'll show him.
The principal Tommy Garcia has, according to Charity, attempted to pressure her to talk about her concerns with him (Mr. Garcia), without her attorney on the telephone. Charity has refused on the advice of her attorney.
Conservatives across America need to stand up against harassment of students like Charity. Go to our site below to send a message to Tommy Garcia, the Principal at South San Antonio High School, and politely request that he instruct teacher Tim Duda that profanity has no place in the classroom, nor does religious or political discrimination:
NOTE: Charity has received quite a bit of verbal grief at school from students and stern looks from teachers. She has said to friends, "If looks could kill..." All of this has brought her to tears. Other than her church and her legal counsel, she doesn't have a whole lot of support. Please feel free to e-mail Charity and encourage her as she feels very alone in this fight right now: (email removed...for now). And be sure to forward this e-mail to everyone you know who wants to take a stand with this brave young schoolgirl. Thank you!
Of course, this is not quite the full story. Funny how it never is with these guys.
One of the first things missing is the fact that thus far, we have gotten only one side of the story, that of student Charity Santa Cruz. Apparently the place that Charity chose to vent was a Christian radio station in San Antonio KSLR and a right wing religious host named Adam McManus. You might have noticed this strange passage from the above:
Charity Santa Cruz was recently joined in the KSLR studio by her church's singles pastor, Roland Gloria. Pastor Gloria has known Charity since she was 13 and testifies to her character and credibility.
Why would someone need to testify as to her character? Well there is a reason for it, see Adam McManus has yet to attempt to get Tim Duda's side of the story:
Duda and school officials weren't invited to appear on the show.
"My experience in the past is that school districts are not reliable to talk to," McManus said. "Now that the heat is on, they are defensive about it."
Incredible ain't it? And therein lies the problem. Right wing kid makes a stink because he/she is being treated like every other kid in school. Kid figures if they make a stink about it, the right wing press will pick it up and they will become a hero instead of a heel.
Duda, a 23-year-veteran government and economics teacher, denies the allegations, specifically that he used a particular expletive in class.
"That is a blatant lie, and I categorically deny that," Duda said, noting he uses humor and might have used other obscenities..
In fact, Tim says something in the above article that makes a lot of sense:
"I give students my perspective and encourage them to have their own opinions," he said. "I'm good about getting both sides of the argument. ... There are people who don't want to listen to other people's views."
So what we have here is a student that for whatever reason does not like a very popular teacher. She makes claims that are disputed by the teacher and other students in class:
Meanwhile, many South San students say they want Duda back in school. He's a popular teacher who encouraged students to push for a much-needed bookstore on the South Side.
"We want our teacher back," said Naomi Roel, 17.
To show support, students collected signatures and turned them in to the principal. They also were planning a walkout of the classroom during their fifth-period class Thursday, but decided against the action.
Student reaction to their classmate Santa Cruz wasn't very positive.
"She told me that I'm going to hell because I'm Catholic," said Jennifer Treviño, 17.
This makes her less than popular with the rest of her classmates, so she contacts a right wing yahoo who does not even pretend to check both sides of the story. He starts talking about it on his radio show, a right wing organization picks it up and runs with it, the next thing you know:
...they filled Principal Tommy Garcia's Internet mailbox with about 8,000 e-mails denouncing the teacher's behavior.
Many of them were from out of state
and now a teacher's reputation is in tatters.
Now you might be asking yourself, why would I choose to believe the teacher instead of the student. Well one very telling fact:
Ed Suarez, a spokesperson with the school district, said the district has taken the allegations very seriously.
"The district requested all the allegations from the student's attorneys, but they refused to give us specifics," Suarez said.
Let us hope that when this is all over, Tim Duda pays special "legal" attention to Mr. McManus. I mean, it is the least he deserves!
See I got some email on Monday telling me that I had gotten a link to the Morris Meyer for Congress Campaign Page. Well of course that means I had to go over there and look around. Which I did. As I was looking around I found a blog page with (you guessed it) blogs! Now don't ask me how because I am still unsure, but I managed to create a blog on Mr. Meyer's site. Well I wrote the campaign and told them what happened (while telling them I was going to reciprocate the link). I got a very nice email back from Clay McReynolds the Director of Technology for Morris Meyer:
Thanks, I'll look for the link tomorrow. Feel free to use the blog on our site. Our plans for the use of the blogging utility are still somewhat up in the air, but the idea was originally proposed to allow supporters of Morris Meyer for Congress to be able to run their own blog to support the candidacy. Thanks for coming and looking around and diving right in. One caveat, though - we are in the middle of changing servers and we weren't planning to move the existing blog entries since they are almost non-existent at this point in time. If your blog disappears in the next couple of days, don't take it personally. It simply means that we moved to the new server and didn't move the existing blog entries. If that happens, it doesn't mean you've been thrown out - just recreate it and go. This will be a one-time change. If we change servers again, we will be moving the blog entries, too. If you have any questions or issues, let me know. Thanks again.
So it looks as if I will be writing for yet another blog. I am not quite sure what to do with the new real estate, but I will be thinking about it the rest of the week. Go give it a look, there is not much going on there yet, but that will change. Feel free to leave suggestions.
How are some of our...ahem...more obnoxious school Republicans doing?
I thought today would be a good day to check out a couple of our studious Republicans and see how they are doing after the controversial events that brought them to my attention.
Lets start with the oldest and work our way down. Things have not been going well for the Penn State Republican club since their ill fated Halloween Party (Story here and here, pictures here and remember, only those photos deemed offensive are shown. Page down.). It seems that they have had to set up a negativity committee:
Penn State College Republicans has formed a committee to fight the negative response members say they have received from many Penn State administrators and students after several members attended a controversial Halloween party.
College Republicans chair Brian Battaglia said the organization is carrying a "business as usual" attitude through this semester.
Battaglia said the past incidents have taken so much of the College Republicans' time, the group recently formed a standing committee to counter the demands made by Black Caucus and to come up with better ways to deal with the situation.
"People don't come to the club to talk about this issue, but the committee allows them the opportunity, while the club still functions," he said.
The committee has already met, and the issue has been discussed, but no action has been taken yet, Battaglia said. He confirmed the group has made contact with legal council for possible use in the future, if the university were to try to reprimand the group for exercising what members said are their First Amendment rights.
It seems that Brian's apology was simply not enough to stem the tide of critical responses the club was getting. Nor is that the end of Brian's problems:
Two executive members of the Penn State College Republicans announced their resignations and decisions to leave the organization late last week.
Group President Brian Battaglia and former Secretary Tiffany Iriana announced Thursday night that they no longer wanted to remain group leaders or members, citing "internal strife."
Following last semester's controversy surrounding a Halloween party held at Battaglia's apartment, many heads of student groups and university administrators criticized the organization and its leaders.
"I have led the club through controversy and criticism as best as I knew how, but now the club faces challenges through which I am not equipped to guide it," he wrote in an official letter of resignation.
In the resignation, which was distributed via the College Republicans' e-mail list, Battaglia said he could no longer lead the group because of internal strife, which he said had consumed much of his college career.
"There is no way for the club to win a civil war. I am resigning because I have already been witness to too much bloodshed. It must stop now, further conflict is certain to be disastrous," he wrote.
Tim Bueler is fairing slightly better than poor Brian, at least at his school (you can read about him here and here.) He seems totally oblivious to the fact that what he said was upsetting, though at this point he has had no less than Bill O'Reilly tell him so:
On Thursday, he appeared on "The O'Reilly Factor," on the Fox News Channel.
The show features conservative talk show host O'Reilly, who told Bueler: "I'm going to try to give you some advice here because some of the rhetoric that you're using is, indeed, inflammatory and is going to get you in trouble, and clouds the issue that you want to talk about. Do you understand that?"
"Yes, I do," Bueler replied.
It would be nice to believe this but even if true the damage has already been done.:
People look down on us for the color of our skin," said MEChA member Rosa Jiménez.
"Some people," cautioned Vera.
"Some people," she corrected.
Emotions are still raw over the newsletter (where Tim said such charming things as calling undocumented immigrants "unsophisticated, poor and uneducated, who do not in any way hold strong family values." and ""liberals welcome every Muhammad, Jamul and Jose who wishes to leave his third world state and come to America -- mostly illegally -- to rip off our health-care system, balkanize our language and destroy our political system," -Ed.). Some students have memorized whole paragraphs and still keep copies tucked away in their binders. Sixteen-year-old Jiménez broke down in tears talking about it.
"How many people are like this? How many people can I trust? Do they hate me? Am I supposed to hate them?" she wondered. "Is every person with white skin going to be an obstacle for me? You don't know who considers you your enemy anymore."
Bueler, a junior who idolizes such conservative pundits as Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly, said students should not take it personally.
Still all is not sunny in Tim's world. Turns out his hero, Mike Savage, takes exception to Tim's use of Mike's golden words:
Apparently, Michael Savage was watching this interview (with Bill O'Rielly - Ed.) while doing his radio show. But instead of lauding the young man for sharing his views and challenging liberal authority, Savage proceeded to go ballistic on the air, accusing the kid of stealing his lines and threatening to sue both Bueler and his parents for ripping him off his "intellectual property."
Proving once and for all that irony is not dead, merely acting like a child on talk radio.
Tomorrow I will introduce you to the newest member of the All Republican Student Jerks. It appears to be ever expanding it's membership.
Only "The New Knighthood" could think losing a debate is changing America for the better.
One of my New Year's resolution was keeping an eye on Hal Moroz and "The New Knighthood". You might remember that, although they won't let me post to the group (and who could blame them, considering the totally embarrassing way they attempted to debate me) I am still a member. I get email from the group, though every once in a while I have to go back to my account and change the email setting. See, I want to get individual emails, but for some reason it keeps switching to no email at all. I wonder why...
In any case, this letter came down the pike over the weekend. I recognized the URL as leading to the "About Atheism" site and the article about my debate with "The New Knighthood" The article pretty much made fun of Hal and the totally pathetic debate methods he and his group employed against me.
Well apparently Hal discovered the article over the weekend. So he penned this little missive to stroke his own ego and rally the troops:
In a small but meaningful way, this group is changing America for the better. This can be seen in a variety of ways.
A friend forwarded the following attack on me and this group by a national atheist site (it is amazing how they hate the fact America was founded by Christian men of honor, and how they selectively misrepresent the fact that this is expressly a group for Conservatives and Republicans working toward a common objective, that is, to change America for the better):
And as is their agenda ... I have apparently been hung in effigy on their other sites as well. It's great to be appreciated :)
This site is obviously read by those who do not share the objective of this group. Sharing a vision of God and country, ethics and family values is disturbing to them, or they would not be seeking to discredit this site.
The shear weight of the truth and wisdom by those who post their insight, ideas and bits of news here is a powerful force for change!
What more can be done? I ask each of you who share our vision of a better America --- a vision espoused by our Founding Fathers, and, among a great many other patriots like Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush --- to invite at least one other friend or associate to join our ranks, and rally around the banner of The New Knighthood!
God bless
Get it? Getting his ass kicked in a debate is "in a small and meaningful way changing America for the better". Damn, one wonders just what changes they would have wrought if they had actually won the debate instead of running away like the chicken-hearted Republicans they know they are.
Good try Hal, but the fact is that one lone unbeliever was able to make your entire group shake in it's collective boots. You tried your best to make Thomas Jefferson into a Christian. You totally failed. Several of your members made complete fools of themselves. Then you decided to show off your superior knowledge of the law by misrepresenting three court cases. Such a sterling record for a group that is "changing America for the better". Just what is your definition of better Hal? Teaching people to lie, cheat, and steal to make their point?
As I said before, real knights would be ashamed of Hal's little vanity group. They certainly don't behave like real knights. Still I can't help but think that Hal's advice is good. But instead of just inviting one friend, I will simply encourage all my friends to join. Just click here. If you need further instructions feel free to write.
Certainly the group needs a more...ahem...honest membership.
