What Are They Hiding?
The little controversy in our county over a sex-ed curriculum was hardly worth fighting over, on its own. Some kids will take a couple of classes, it's not really the end of the world one way or the other. It really only mattered because it was part of a pattern that reaches all through the fabric of our country. Even the anti-gay venom is just part of a larger pattern. The religious right has moved into government, military, and business to saturate American life with an ideology of irrationality and ugliness -- and when I say "religious right" I don't mean "religious people" or even "religion," I mean people with a political agenda dressed in religious clothing.
In some places these groups have undermined the teaching of science, for instance by substituting religious dogma for the biology of evolution. In other places books are banned, history is revised, you never know what they're going to try -- look at the effort the local groups have put into keeping discrimination against transgender people legal. Who would have seen that coming? They tell us this is justified by their religion -- people with "deep religious beliefs" oppose fair treatment for transgender people. The new Crusades -- who could have imagined that America would be swept up in a Holy War against the Moors in the twenty-first century? Considering just the war against Islam by itself, the billions of dollars that have been spent in attacking Iraq and Afghanistan, the planned unprovoked assault on Iran, the magnitude of it is inconceivably huge.
You might remember earlier in the year, when somebody noticed that Regent University's web site boasted that they had placed 150 of their alumni in the Bush administration. Somehow students from a small, conservative, Christian college were being funneled into powerful positions in the government. As soon as the media noticed Regent's statement, they removed it from their web site, because secrecy is necessary for this to work.
Just how influential are these dangerous groups? Nobody really knows.
What legitimate reason could there be for keeping this a secret? According to the White House, someone like Dobson is a great guy, right? So why would they hide the fact that he hangs out with them? If he was so great, you'd think they'd want everybody to know they were buddies.
You've got to watch these sneaky guys.
In some places these groups have undermined the teaching of science, for instance by substituting religious dogma for the biology of evolution. In other places books are banned, history is revised, you never know what they're going to try -- look at the effort the local groups have put into keeping discrimination against transgender people legal. Who would have seen that coming? They tell us this is justified by their religion -- people with "deep religious beliefs" oppose fair treatment for transgender people. The new Crusades -- who could have imagined that America would be swept up in a Holy War against the Moors in the twenty-first century? Considering just the war against Islam by itself, the billions of dollars that have been spent in attacking Iraq and Afghanistan, the planned unprovoked assault on Iran, the magnitude of it is inconceivably huge.
You might remember earlier in the year, when somebody noticed that Regent University's web site boasted that they had placed 150 of their alumni in the Bush administration. Somehow students from a small, conservative, Christian college were being funneled into powerful positions in the government. As soon as the media noticed Regent's statement, they removed it from their web site, because secrecy is necessary for this to work.
Just how influential are these dangerous groups? Nobody really knows.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. judge ordered the Secret Service on Monday to disclose records of visits by nine prominent conservative Christian leaders to the White House and Vice President Dick Cheney's residence.
The ruling, in response to a legal watchdog group's suit, could shed light on the influence leaders like James Dobson of Focus on the Family have had on President George W. Bush's administration. It may also affect legal efforts to force the release of visiting records of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and other similar cases.
"We think that these conservative Christian leaders have had a very big impact," said Executive Director Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, which filed the case.
"The White House doesn't want to talk about how much influence these leaders have, and we want to talk about how much they do have," she said. White House told to detail Christian leader visits
What legitimate reason could there be for keeping this a secret? According to the White House, someone like Dobson is a great guy, right? So why would they hide the fact that he hangs out with them? If he was so great, you'd think they'd want everybody to know they were buddies.
You've got to watch these sneaky guys.
posted by JimK at 7:44 AM
22 Comments:
Sounds like Jim is acting like a paranoid conspiracy theorist now. Isn't this exactly the kind of attack leveled by anti-semitics? Jews have some kind of "secret, sneaky" influence?
The idea that pro-family groups are a major supportive constituency of the Bush administration has not been kept secret by the White House. They share common goals. They aren't TTF's goals.
So what?
Support the candidate who believes in your goals.
They'll lose because the Anerican people disagree with them.
And you won't have the "secret" plots of Karl Rove to blame this time.
secret santa (the freak) said,
"Isn't this exactly the kind of attack leveled by anti-semitics? Jews have some kind of "secret, sneaky" influence?"
As a JEWSIH GAY MAN I do not see see Jim's comments as anti-semitic.
Just thought I would throw that out there.
No one said they were.
Try moving beyond a TTF level of reading comprehension.
As to Jim's post, I constantly hear about Bush consulting members of pro-family groups about policy decisions. I had no idea I was in on a big secret.
For a fascist dictator, Bush seems particularly bad at keeping secrets.
He must not be ruthless enough.
Bush is a moron, to a large degree he's merely the pawn of the religious reich in the States.
So typical of Randi. Bush and all religious believers are a "Reich".
If they are so fascist, why is so much dissent tolerated? Simply asserting what you do negates your statement.
Like telling someone "Every statement I make is a lie."
Couldn't be true. Right?
ttter, I live in Canada, Bush can't do a damn thing about what I say.
Secret, I may be a paranoid conspiracy theorist now. The aliens' microwaves are interfering with the CIA's implanted radio transmitters because of the flouride in the water, and I am getting the messages scrambled until the Illumati explain it to me in my dreams. I don't think, though, that every conspiracy theory -- including true ones, like I belive in -- translates into anti-semitism.
The question is, why does somebody have to sue to find out whether powerful people are meeting with our elected leaders?
JimK
If they are so fascist, why is so much dissent tolerated? Simply asserting what you do negates your statement.
What planet are you from? No dissent -- absolutely none -- is tolerated at Bush events. You can't even wear a tee-shirt with a message of protest without being thrown out or arrested.
Teachers' T-Shirts Bring Bush Speech Ouster http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1015-06.htm
White House Role Exposed in Booting Activists from Bush Event http://www.progressive.org/mag_mc030707
A Compilation of Information on the White House Excluding Citizens from Taxpayer-Funded Events http://www.buzzflash.com/analysis/05/04/ana05010.html
White House Manual Details How to Deal With Protesters http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/21/AR2007082101662.html
What's TTT supposed to stand for, teach the truth? What a joke! The truth is fascists like Bush don't like dissent at all.
And the statement that has been negated is TTT's lie about the Bush Reich's view of dissent.
I know you guys must be secretly in favor of a pro-family agenda. That must be why you try so hard to make the gay agenda look so radical.
You'll probably be heartened, then, by the latest poll numbers.
Nationally, WSJ/MSNBC, with a three-point margin of error, puts it at Guiliani:20, Romney:20, Huckabee:17.
In the first state, Iowa, Huckabee has soared to first place by a large margin, according to the Washington Post/ABC poll in this morning's paper.
Best yet, the predictable attacks from the embarassed establishment on Huckabee are making him look moderate. Gerson calls him a "leftist" Christian. George Will says he is soft on taxes and letting the government assist the poor, calling his positions illogical. (Let's call up Paramount and suggest Will for the role of a Vulcan in the new Star Trek movie.) Robert Novak has helped out on the religious right stereotype by running a column today about how the leaders of Huckabee's nomination favor Thompson because Huckabee has not been on the conservative side in denomination politics. The Club of Growth, the Cato Institute, et al are coming out against him.
Meanwhile, despite having only a fraction of the funds of the other candidates, the Huckabee surge continues. According to the Post story earlier in the week, homeschoolers' e-mail lists are providing an organization of volunteers on the cheap. Pro-family issues are the one constant.
Romney is this week running ads attacking Huckabee for letting immigrants qualify for state scholarships. Huckabee just laughs and runs an ad wishing everyone a Merry Christmas. Let's stop attacking one another until after the holidays, he says. We're a better country than that.
Two days after New Year: the vote.
"The question is, why does somebody have to sue to find out whether powerful people are meeting with our elected leaders?"
I really don't know or care. The point is that Bush has made no secret of the fact that he consults these people regularly, whether in person or by phone. I really don't think he is obligated to release a log of every meeting he has to reporters.
If you don't like it, go ahead and dissent when President Huckabee nominates Bush for the next Supreme Court vacancy.
The state of the Democratic Party is so sad. Elected with a mandate for change, they have been outflanked by Republicans in Congress despite their majority. The two leading candidates for the Democratic nomination for President are a couple of inexperienced yokels. To add insult to injury, the most recent Democratic nominee for Vice President has endorsed a Republican for President. Where will this all end?
Hopefully, the creation of a respectable second party to keep our political discourse lively.
What ever happened to thye Whigs?
Secret Santa said "I know you guys must be secretly in favor of a pro-family agenda.".
No secret about it, we are in favour of a pro-family agenda, its people like you who are not - when you say "pro-family" you don't mean that you want to help families, you mean that you want to oppose gays. Gays are as much a part of families as anyone else.
Secret Santa said "The point is that Bush has made no secret of the fact that he consults these people regularly, whether in person or by phone.".
You lie, he has made a secret of it, he's tried to hide the records which would show just how frequently he conspires with these people.
"No secret about it, we are in favour of a pro-family agenda, its people like you who are not - when you say "pro-family" you don't mean that you want to help families, you mean that you want to oppose gays. Gays are as much a part of families as anyone else."
Well, obviously, gays had parents and, often, siblings. Sometimes they even have marriages.
But when you start to redefine "family" to mean any group of homo sapiens that gets together and likes each other alot and doesn't do "anything to hurt anyone else" , you've diluted the meaning of family.
Much like the terms "tolerance" or "hate" or any number of other English words, gay agendites are abusing concepts out of existence. In this case, that's anti-family, in addition to misanthropic.
"Secret Santa said "The point is that Bush has made no secret of the fact that he consults these people regularly, whether in person or by phone.".
You lie, he has made a secret of it, he's tried to hide the records which would show just how frequently he conspires with these people."
No, he hasn't. You should read more widely. And, really, why would he hide it? His association with these groups has always helped him politically.
"conspires." Another abused word. Meeting with constituents and discussing common concerns is a conspiracy?
Anti-family, misanthropic and, now, paranoid.
Your best qualities are coming out, Randi.
Democratic controlled Congress acknowledges importance of pro-family funding:
"The U.S. Senate unanimously passed a bill Tuesday to extend the Title V abstinence-education program for six months. It was scheduled to expire this month.
Title V distributes money for abstinence-only education to states that apply for it."
secret santa,
the defintion of family really does not belong to one person or group. families are created by design, by chance or by accident.
ALL families that provide love and support are families that should be recognized as such. I personally think any attempt to alter this ACTUALLY DILUTES the defintion of family because it creates a caste system in which someone is saying that irregardless of the fact that different families can provide love and support, only THEIR definition of families should be recognized.
"Secret S" is into secrets, just like all Bushleague fascists.
SS lied No, he hasn't. You should read more widely.
Bush, who thinks everybody in the world has to be accountable except anyone in his administration, is attempting to use the Secret Service like an accountability shield for everything from Abramoff's wheeling and dealing to the Christian Taliban leaders' influence by having the Service argue that revealing logs of visitors to the White House and Vice President's official residence would "reveal confidential policy deliberations." Judge Lamberth rejected those arguments as "misguided" because lists of names and appointments are not "deliberations."
Bush has a long history of hiding from scrutiny and avoiding accountability starting at least from his AWOL days in the National Guard to his DUI in Maine to his questionable stock sale and improper accounting that lost Harkin Energy Corporation millions.
[Democrats] have been outflanked by Republicans in Congress despite their majority.
Which is why GOP candidates are going to lose, big time, in the 2008 elections. Americans are sick of the lockstep that has cost America hard earned respect and turned the USA into the laughing stock of the developed world.
"the defintion of family really does not belong to one person or group"
Don't you see, Alvin, that a definition that belongs to everyone to use as they wish is no definiton at all. It's the destruction of definition.
"Bush, who thinks everybody in the world has to be accountable except anyone in his administration,"
I don't recall him asking anyone to give him a list of everyone they've talked to.
Ludicrous.
Equally as idiotic is the idea that he automatically endorses the views of anyone he meets with.
"is attempting to use the Secret Service like an accountability shield for everything from Abramoff's wheeling and dealing"
Surprised you guys would still bring up Abramoff now that the Democrats have their own fundraiser and lobbyist scandal.
"Bush has a long history of hiding from scrutiny and avoiding accountability"
He's not accountable for talking to people. A president is free to hear any advice he wants to. He's not accountable to anyone for listening.
"starting at least from his AWOL days in the National Guard to his DUI in Maine to his questionable stock sale and improper accounting that lost Harkin Energy Corporation millions."
Just wait until Hillary's nomination is secured.
"[Democrats] have been outflanked by Republicans in Congress despite their majority.
Which is why GOP candidates are going to lose, big time, in the 2008 elections. Americans are sick of the lockstep that has cost America hard earned respect and turned the USA into the laughing stock of the developed world"
What lockstep would that be? The slate of Republican candidates are a mix of every combination of ideas from Guiliani's pro-choice views to Huckabee's desire to assist the economically struggling to McCain's rejection of harsh interogation techniques. The Republican party is where diversity of thought went.
Well, at least we see where the CRC talking points are going now. First they decried that the definition of family is being destroyed, even though their idea of family was the ideal maybe for twenty years of the twentieth century.
Now they decry their understanding of the definition of sex is being undermined. Never mind that they have no idea what sex, or gender, or genes, or chromosomes, or signal transducers, or any of that stuff is. They kneel in pious embrace of their religious icon, Sigmund Freud, and declare their definition of male and female, and that's the end of it.
We all know what gender is, Dr. There is every reason, including evidence from scientific studies, to believe it is determined by one's chromosomal structure.
And as I've pointed out here repeatedly, you have consistently refused to listen. You are plainly and willfully ignorant.
"[Democrats] have been outflanked by Republicans in Congress despite their majority.
Which is why GOP candidates are going to lose, big time, in the 2008 elections. Americans are sick of the lockstep that has cost America hard earned respect and turned the USA into the laughing stock of the developed world"
What lockstep would that be? The slate of Republican candidates are a mix of every combination of ideas from Guiliani's pro-choice views to Huckabee's desire to assist the economically struggling to McCain's rejection of harsh interogation techniques
Try to stay focused honey. You were talking about Republicans in Congress. Two of the three GOP candidates you mentioned are not members of Congress and all three of them are running for President, not for the House or Senate, AKA Congress. In fact, McCain saw his poll numbers dip when he was very vocal about his support for the BushBlunder in Iraq, and this war hero who has first hand understanding that torture is wrong, languishes in third or forth place behind the New Yorker, the Morman, and another Baptist from Hope.
Republicans in Congress are the ones marching mostly in lockstep with feckless Bush and they are the "GOP candidates who are going to lose big time." Once the 2008 elections are over, we'll have a Democratic President with wider margins of Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress and then we can turn this ship around and get back on course to peace and properity and hopefully re-earn some respect for America that the Bushleagers sqandered.
"In fact, McCain saw his poll numbers dip when he was very vocal about his support for the BushBlunder in Iraq, and this war hero who has first hand understanding that torture is wrong, languishes in third or forth place behind the New Yorker, the Morman, and another Baptist from Hope."
Did you know that approval rating for Congress is lower now than when the Dems took over? Even scarier for the Dems is that all the major candidates for the Dem nomination are from Congress.
Ouch!
Post a Comment
<< Home