A Closer Look

So Help Me God

Can anyone help explain to me why the words "so help me God" appear at the end of the oath taken by those becoming naturalized citizens in the U.S.?

So What Are You?

Have Money Will Write

Peter Ferrara of the Institute for Policy Innovation has acknowledged taking payments years ago from a half-dozen lobbyists, including Abramoff. Two of his papers, the Washington Times and Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader, have now dropped him. But Ferrara is unapologetic, saying: "There is nothing unethical about taking money from someone and writing an article." By Howard Kurtz "Washington Post" Dec. 6, 2005

Nurses Ranked # 1 In Ethics and Honesty

Despite the many woes affecting the nursing profession today, nurses can rest assured of one thing: they are held in high regard by the public. According to a recent Gallup poll, nurses ranked number one in ethics and honesty, with 82% of respondents categorizing nurses as having high or very high ethics. Gallup conducts the poll annually, this year interviewing more than 1,000 randomly selected adults between November 17 and 20, 2005.

The surveyors asked respondents to rate the honesty and ethical standards of practitioners of 21 professions on a five-point scale, from very high to very low. Telemarketers and car salesmen ranked at the bottom of this year's list.

The top six ratings are as follows:
1. Nurses, receiving 82% high/very high ethical and honesty ratings
2. Pharmacists, receiving 67% high/very high ethical and honesty ratings
3. Medical doctors, receiving 65% high/very high ethical and honesty ratings
4. High school teachers, receiving 64% high/very high ethical and honesty ratings
5. Policemen, receiving 61% high/very high ethical and honesty ratings
6. Clergy, receiving 54% high/very high ethical and honesty ratings

Nurses have only been included in the Gallup survey since 1999, but have ranked at the top six times in the past seven years, averaging 80% high honesty and ethics ratings. The only year nurses did not rank first was 2001, when firefighters received the highest ratings following the September 11 terrorist attacks.

They Are Not True Stories, But They Are StoriesThat Are True

The story of the oil of the Maccabees and the stories of Jesus' birth are great stories. To adapt a sentence from Norman McLean's "A River Runs Through It", they are not true stories, but they are stories that are true.

John S. Kloppenborg
"Slate" Magazine
December 21, 2005

Does Ann Kiss Her Mother With This Mouth?

A quote from the ever entertaining Ann Coulter:

"Which brings me to this week's scandal about No Such Agency spying on "Americans." I have difficulty ginning up much interest in this story inasmuch as I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East and sending liberals to Guantanamo...Among the things that war entails are: killing people (sometimes innocent), destroying buildings (sometimes innocent) and spying on people (sometimes innocent)".

A Christmas Carol For Bill O'Reilly

Sung to the tune of "Jingle Bells"

Oh the holiday season's here
But O'Reilly has no cheer
It seems all he can see
Are threats to Christianity
If you don't tow the line
And say Merry Christmas each time
He'll think you are shameless
Wicked, evil and ruthless

Oh Christmas is here
Let's make it clear
There's no room for other holidays
Leave Hanukah out
And there's no doubt
That Kwanzaa’s just a phase

The solstice is vile
And Ramadan's just a pile....
Well you know what he'd say
So listen to Bill
Before he gets more shrill
And DAMMIT
Say Merry Christmas to all today.

That Was Then, This Is Now

In 2002, Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) said in a Washington Times op-ed article that intelligent design "is a legitimate scientific theory that should be taught in science classes."

THAT WAS THEN, THIS IS NOW.

Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) today withdrew his support and affiliation with the Christian-rights law center for their handling of the Dover, PA Intelligent Design debacle.

I think the good Senator is running scared. For the third ranking Republican Senator to be trailing in the polls by double digits is fearful not only for Santorum but for the entire RNC. It appears the Senator can be accused of flip-flopping. I wonder if he will declare himself Pro-Choice next week.

Not The Virgin Again?

Holiness for the ideal woman was achieved first, by de-sexing Mary, that is she was a virgin mother, perpetual virgin and post-partum virgin, and then by dehumanizing her, that is by asserting that she had neither a normal birth nor a normal death. Only as a de-sexed and dehumanized woman was she then considered to be worthy to enter into heaven. The question this raises for me is what is the definition of a woman, alive in this religious tradition, that suggests that before a woman is worthy to enter into God's presence, she must first have her sexuality removed and then have her humanity removed. The other question that cannot be ignored is what does it do to women to be told that the ideal woman is a virgin mother? Since that is not a possibility for any other woman, does that definition not make the 'guilt of inadequacy' the daily bread of women in Christian history?

I submit that both of these ideas reflect the historic negativity that religion seems to harbor against women. One wonders just why it is that an all male institution has the right to define a woman in the name of a God called 'father.' The time has come to recognize prejudice for what it is and to invite women to define what a woman is without any pejorative undertones. The Church will not be whole until that happens. The Virgin Mary, as she is presently defined, will also not survive as an icon when that occurs.

--Bishop John Shelby Spong

The Patriot

"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot. (Mark Twain - 1935)

Last Word On Christmas

Nissenbaum of the University of Massachusetts said modern-day religious criticism of Christmas is historically familiar. "Christmas was really a carnival season," he said. "There's that warm remnant of the Christmas season as a time of drinking and letting go and just misbehaving. That survived but it has survived only on New Year's Eve."

By the early 19th century, Christmas was becoming domesticated and made respectable, he said.

But Nissenbaum is skeptical that churches will ever have the last word on Christmas.

"In every age there have been a significant number of Christians trying to observe the holiday as a pious event, but I don't think they ever controlled the holiday. Its seasonal aspect is too powerful."

"LA Times" 12/21/2005

The Virgin In The New Testament

Excerpt from Bishop Spong.

Last week we looked at the New Testament's portrait of the mother of Jesus and the Virgin Birth. It is scant, late developing material filled with mythological details. That quick analysis served to make us aware that most of the images we hold of the mother of Jesus are not biblical at all. They are the creations of Christian history and they incorporate many elements of the pagan goddess figures that thrived in Europe before Christianity became the dominant religion of that region. Whether Christianity conquered these pagan ideas or was conquered by them is a debate that is ongoing. What can be said without fear or contradiction is that the Bible as we know it does not support the myth of the Virgin as it was developed in Christian history.

Those Were The Days

Taken from DemocraticUnderground.com

Those were the days: House Republican statements on Clinton's impeachment
Posted by EarlG
Added to homepage Tue Dec 20th 2005, 12:09 PM ET

It's interesting how these statements read in light of recent events...



Rep. Marge Roukema (R-N.J.):
And we all share in the emotional trauma getting back to our subject of this constitutional crisis in which we are ensnared. But this cup cannot pass us by, we can't avoid it, we took an oath of office, Mr. Speaker, to uphold the Constitution under our democratic system of government, separation of powers, and checks and balances.
And we must fulfill that oath and send the articles of impeachment to the Senate for a trial. Now I say personally, and all of you who know me, and a lot of you do, I've been around a long time; I bear no personal animosity towards the president. But we in the House did not seek this constitutional confrontation.

Rep. J.C. Watts (R-Okla.):
How can we expect a Boy Scout to honor his oath if elected officials don't honor theirs? How can we expect a business executive to honor a promise when the chief executive abandons his or hers?

Rep. Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.):
How did this great nation of the 1990s come to be? It all happened Mr. Speaker, because freedom works. . . . But freedom, Mr. Speaker, freedom depends upon something. The rule of law. And that's why this solemn occasion is so important. For today we are here to defend the rule of law. According to the evidence presented by our fine Judiciary Committee, the president of the United States has committed serious transgressions.
Among other things, he took an oath to God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And then he failed to do so. Not once, but several times. If we ignore this evidence, I believe we undermine the rule of law that is so important that all America is. Mr. Speaker, a nation of laws cannot be ruled by a person who breaks the law. Otherwise, it would be as if we had one set of rules for the leaders and another for the governed. We would have one standard for the powerful, the popular and the wealthy, and another for everyone else.
This would belie our ideal that we have equal justice under the law. That would weaken the rule of law and leave our children and grandchildren with a very poor legacy. I don't know what challenges they will face in their time, but I do know they need to face those challenges with the greatest constitutional security and the soundest rule of fair and equal law available in the history of the world. And I don't want us to risk their losing that....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI):
The framers of the Constitution devised an elaborate system of checks and balances to ensure our liberty by making sure that no person, institution or branch of government became so powerful that a tyranny could be established in the United States of America. Impeachment is one of the checks the framers gave the Congress to prevent the executive or judicial branches from becoming corrupt or tyrannical.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas):
When someone is elected president, they receive the greatest gift possible from the American people, their trust. To violate that trust is to raise questions about fitness for office. My constituents often remind me that if anyone else in a position of authority -- for example, a business executive, a military officer of a professional educator -- had acted as the evidence indicates the president did, their career would be over. The rules under which President Nixon would have been tried for impeachment had he not resigned contain this statement: "The office of the president is such that it calls for a higher level of conduct than the average citizen in the United States."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. Charles Canady (R-Fla.):
Many have asked why we are even here in these impeachment proceedings. They have asked why we can't just rebuke the president and move on. That's a reasonable question. And I certainly understand the emotions behind that question. I want to move on. Every member of this committee wants to move on. We all agree with that.
But the critical question is this: Do we move on under the Constitution, or do we move on by turning aside from the Constitution? Do we move on in faithfulness to our own oath to support and defend the Constitution, or do we go outside the Constitution because it seems more convenient and expedient?
Why are we here? We are here because we have a system of government based on the rule of law, a system of government in which no one -- no one -- is above the law. We are here because we have a constitution.
A constitution is often a most inconvenient thing. A constitution limits us when we would not be limited. It compels us to act when we would not act. But our Constitution, as all of us in this room acknowledge, is the heart and soul of the American experiment. It is the glory of the political world. And we are here today because the Constitution requires that we be here. We are here because the Constitution grants the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment. We are here because the impeachment power is the sole constitutional means granted to Congress to deal with the misconduct of the chief executive of the United States.
In many other countries, a matter such as this involving the head of government would have been quietly swept under the rug. There would, of course, be some advantages to that approach. We would all be spared embarrassment, indignity and discomfort. But there would be a high cost if we followed that course of action. Something would be lost. Respect for the law would be subverted, and the foundation of our Constitution would be eroded.
The impeachment power is designed to deal with exactly such threats to our system of government. Conduct which undermines the integrity of the president's office, conduct by the chief executive which sets a pernicious example of lawlessness and corruption is exactly the sort of conduct that should subject a president to the impeachment power.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. Bob Ingliss (R-S.C.):
I think is important to point out here is that we have a constitutional obligation, a constitutional obligation to act. And there are lots of folks who would counsel, Listen, let's just move along. It's sort of the Clinton so-what defense. So what? I committed perjury. So what? I broke the law. Let's just move along. I believe we've got a constitutional obligation to act.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.):
Mr. Chairman, this is a somber occasion. I am here because it is my constitutional duty, as it is the constitutional duty of every member of this committee, to follow the truth wherever it may lead. Our Founding Fathers established this nation on a fundamental yet at the time untested idea that a nation should be governed not by the whims of any man but by the rule of law. Implicit in that idea is the principle that no one is above the law, including the chief executive
Since it is the rule of law that guides us, we must ask ourselves what happens to our nation if the rule of law is ignored, cheapened or violated, especially at the highest level of government. Consider the words of former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who was particularly insightful on this point. "In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. If government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law. It invites every man to become a law unto himself."
Mr. Chairman, we must ask ourselves what our failure to uphold the rule of law will say to the nation, and most especially to our children, who must trust us to leave them a civilized nation where justice is respected.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.):
You know, there are people out all across America every day that help define the nation's character, and they exercise common-sense virtues, whether it's honesty, integrity, promise-keeping, loyalty, respect, accountability, they pursue excellence, they exercise self-discipline. There is honor in a hard day's work. There's duty to country. Those are things that we take very seriously.
So those are things that the founders also took seriously. Yet every time I reflect upon the wisdom of the founding fathers, I think their wisdom was truly amazing. They pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to escape the tyranny of a king. They understood the nature of the human heart struggles between good and evil.
So the founders created a system of checks and balances and accountability. If corruption invaded the political system, a means was available to address it. The founders felt impeachment was so important it was included in six different places in the Constitution. The founders set the standard for impeachment of the president and other civil officers as treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors.
The House of Representatives must use this standard in circumstances and facts of the president's conduct to determine if the occupant of the Oval Office is fit to continue holding the highest executive office of this great country.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-Ark.):
In the next few days I will cast some of the most important votes of my career. Some believe these votes could result in a backlash and have serious political repercussions. They may be right. But I will leave the analysis to others. My preeminent concern is that the Constitution be followed and that all Americans, regardless of their position in society, receive equal and unbiased treatment in our courts of law. The fate of no president, no political party, and no member of Congress merits a slow unraveling of the fabric of our constitutional structure. As John Adams said, we are a nation of laws, not of men.
Our nation has survived the failings of its leaders before, but it cannot survive exceptions to the rule of law in our system of equal justice for all. There will always be differences between the powerful and the powerless. But imagine a country where a Congress agrees the strong are treated differently than the weak, where mercy is the only refuge for the powerless, where the power of our positions govern all of our decisions. Such a country cannot long endure. God help us to do what is right, not just for today, but for the future of this nation and for those generations that must succeed us.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.):
I suggest impeachment is like beauty: apparently in the eye of the beholder. But I hold a different view. And it's not a vengeful one, it's not vindictive, and it's not craven. It's just a concern for the Constitution and a high respect for the rule of law. ... as a lawyer and a legislator for most of my very long life, I have a particular reverence for our legal system. It protects the innocent, it punishes the guilty, it defends the powerless, it guards freedom, it summons the noblest instincts of the human spirit.
The rule of law protects you and it protects me from the midnight fire on our roof or the 3 a.m. knock on our door. It challenges abuse of authority. It's a shame "Darkness at Noon" is forgotten, or "The Gulag Archipelago," but there is such a thing lurking out in the world called abuse of authority, and the rule of law is what protects you from it. And so it's a matter of considerable concern to me when our legal system is assaulted by our nation's chief law enforcement officer, the only person obliged to take care that the laws are faithfully executed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...

On edit: how could I miss Tom DeLay?
Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.):
I believe that this nation sits at a crossroads. One direction points to the higher road of the rule of law. Sometimes hard, sometimes unpleasant, this path relies on truth, justice and the rigorous application of the principle that no man is above the law.
Now, the other road is the path of least resistance. This is where we start making exceptions to our laws based on poll numbers and spin control. This is when we pitch the law completely overboard when the mood fits us, when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.
Shall we follow the rule of law and do our constitutional duty no matter unpleasant, or shall we follow the path of least resistance, close our eyes to the potential lawbreaking, forgive and forget, move on and tear an unfixable hole in our legal system? No man is above the law, and no man is below the law. That's the principle that we all hold very dear in this country.
http://www.bluegrassreport.org/bluegrass_politics/2005/...

TerriPAC

MIAMI (Reuters) - Terri Schiavo's widower launched a political action committee  aimed at defeating elected officials he accused of exploiting a tragedy for political gain by trying to block court orders that allowed his brain-damaged wife to die.

Michael Schiavo said in a news release that the group, TerriPAC, would raise money to campaign against members of Congress, mostly Republicans, who drafted and voted for legislation to intervene in the case.

Among Republicans it is targeting are Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee, Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas.

Interesting Statistic

Democrats, using House records, said the reform committee had issued 1,052 subpoenas to probe alleged misconduct by the Clinton administration and the Democratic Party between 1997 and 2002, at a cost of more than $35 million. By contrast, the committee under Republicans has issued three subpoenas to the Bush administration in the years since.

Chart From The Far Left

Uncomfortable Straight Men

Ledger has a theory about why the movie, Brokeback Mountain, makes some men uncomfortable. "I suspect it's a fear that they are going to enjoy it," he says. "They don't understand that you are not going to become sexually attracted to men by recognizing the beauty of a love story between two men."

Right Versus Left: Two Thoughts

The religious left longs for a world in which everyone is liberal, while the religious right longs for a world in which everyone is Christian.

Great angst is shown by the religious right over why a resolution at the Union for Reform Judaism convention calling for full voting rights for the citizens of the District of Columbia is considered differently from the Southern Baptists passing a resolution calling on the United States to keep marriage defined as between a man and a woman. The difference lies in the fact that the former resolution is about expanding liberty, while the latter is about denying liberty.

Tea Time

On December 16, 1773, a group of colonists, including Paul Revere, dressed as Indians and boarded 3 tea ships in Boston Harbor. They threw 340 chests of tea overboard. This event became known as The Boston Tea Party.

The US Senate threw its own tea party today by refusing to reauthorize major portions of the USA Patriot Act after critics complained they infringed too much on Americans' privacy and liberty, dealing a huge defeat to the Bush administration and Republican leaders. Thank the goddess for a weakened presidency.

My Hero, Semper Fi.

I've been blogging for about a month now without comment until yesterday when Semper Fi added his thoughts. Thanks so much. I'm finally reaching out.

Christian = Consumer

Oh I suppose it has been coming for some time now.  The evolution, (no pun intended), of the Christian into the Christian consumer.  The morphing of these two powerful American traits into a super-colossus-spiritual-retail phenomenon is not surprising.  It is difficult to tell where one begins and the other ends.  Christian bookstores, movies, clothing, jewelry, rock groups, dating services, and television shows.  Christian music trade associations, yellow pages, market advertising guides, retail shows, telemarketers, and even Christian spam.  Christians are now broken down into devotional buyers, mature Christians, Christian computer users, Christian “Baby Boomers”, wealthy Christians, (I wonder what they hear when they read about the camel and the eye of the needle?), Christian parents, pro-life buyers, Christian donors, Christian teens, Christian subscribers, Christian consumers by occupation and ethnicity, and Christian business owners.  The Popes and priests who sold indulgences and relics in the 16th Century were rank amateurs compared to what we see today.  

Bishop John Shelby Spong

For anyone interested in a truly inspiring voice in the otherwise insipid, boring, bland and mean-spirited Christian rantings and ravings please visit Bishop Spong’s website.

Anti-Christmas Brouhaha

All right I guess it’s time to weigh in on the anti-Christmas brouhaha.  I’ll make one point and then let it go.  It seems just another attempt to get people to send funds to the likes of Jerry Fallwell and Pat Robertson.   Just create a problem where none exists and get the sheep to cough up funds to defend this non-issue.  Oh well I suppose if people are so obtuse to believe this drivel then I guess they deserve to be bilked.

Is Laura Ingraham a Heather?

I watched Laura Ingraham being interviewed by Brian Lamb on C-SPAN.  I was struck by two things.  First I found Ms. Ingraham almost unintelligible during the interview as she continued to fall over herself in praise of people like Ronald Reagan, Clarence Thomas and George W. Bush.  She seemed like a giddy high school girl discussing her latest crush.  Second I become aware of a level of nastiness, malice, and cruelty in her treatment of Maya Angelou that I had not thought possible even from Ms. Ingraham.  I’m sure the “Heathers” would have been proud.

The Friends We Keep

The U.S. and China refused to agree to mandatory steps to curtail greenhouse gas emissions on the same day China kills 2o of their citizens for prostesting. Is anyone else disturbed by the company we are keeping these days?

IMAGINE

Pathetic

Most in U.S., Britain, France, S. Korea say torture justified in rare instances.

I Wonder

"The fascination of the world with ‘wealth’, its comings and goings, its showy successes and spectacular downfalls, its drug addiction and detox regimes, its sexual exploits and ruined relationships, ensures that fewer people advocate the rescue of the rich from excess than the relief of the poor from insufficiency". Jeremy Seabrook, "The Poor and the Unequal", Nov. 2002.

I wonder what Nick and Jessica, and Lindsay, and Tiger, and the Gastineau Girls, and Tom and Katie, and Madonna, and Eminem, and JLo, and Puff Daddy, and the Manning brothers, and Oprah, and Martha, and Charles and Camilla, and O'Rielly, etc. etc. etc. would think about the above quote?

Chance Meeting

Today I met by chance a most extraordinary man. His name is Yale Joel. Interesting how people come into and out of your life. Our conversation led me to wonder about him and so I did a Google and discovered his great talent in photography. I feel privileged to have crossed paths with such a remarkable individual.

We Know What You're Thinking

Worst Ever

Stolen from my friend Betty Bower. Visit her at, http://www.bettybowers.com/index.html

My Letter to the Chief

Chief of Police December 1, 2005
Roger A Schroeder
c/o Jefferson City Police Department
401 Monroe St
Jefferson City, Missouri 65101

Dear Chief:

I am writing to inquire about the recent covert operations in Binder Park to crack down on sexual misconduct. I have a concern surrounding any operation of this kind because of the history of misconduct of other police departments around the country when engaged in similar sting operations.

Numerous court cases have deemed these concentrated efforts to rid parks of this type of conduct as illegal. Decoys were often challenged in court as entrapment and an undercover officer trying to lure a gay man into a lewd act cannot be presumed to be offended by the conduct. Furthermore communities around the country have found that not only are these undertakings a waste of our resources but unfairly target gay men.

Your department states they plan on continuing covert operations in the future. My hope is you are cognizant of the inherent problems associated with this type of police work and are taking measures to ensure your actions are fair and legal. Please note the community will be watching your actions and will not hesitate to speak out if this turns into a “witch hunt”.

Sincerely:
John Cook