YADL **

Dr. James Dobson was on CNN to react to the events surrounding Terri Schiavo's death - the far right lost this battle to stomp on our family rights, but it sounds like they're moving on to an all out attack on the judiciary. And Dobson, like many on the right, won't let any inconvenient facts get in the way of his quest to have this nation turned into a Theocratic Oligarchy.

Dobson on the courts: "They're totally out of control."

They won't even let us execute teenagers! Dobsie: "With regard to executing minors. Seventy percent of the people disagree with that. ** " Yet a CNN poll (the same CNN that gives Dobson so much air time) found that "69 percent of Americans oppose executing juveniles." Funny how those numbers got completely reversed - I hate it when that happens. Of course, Wolf Blitzer completely ignored that little mistake.

What to do? SpongeDob: "They could take away the franchise, if you will, for, say, the 9th Circuit out in California." Yeah, those evil liberal judges in California, that review cases for the largest portion of the United States, let's just remove their jurisdiction. That'll show them some respect for the Constitutional principles of seperation of powers and judicial review.

And who's fault was this horrible situation? "I am angry at Judge Greer and the federal courts that did not accept ** the demand or the order ** that came down from the Congress that this case be reviewed."

Jeez, can we just get this guy to concentrate on SpongeBob again? And maybe telling the truth.

** - yet another Dobson lie.

The New York Times> Op-Ed: What's Going On?

The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: What's Going On?: "Yesterday The Washington Post reported on the growing number of pharmacists who, on religious grounds, refuse to fill prescriptions for birth control or morning-after pills. These pharmacists talk of personal belief; but the effect is to undermine laws that make these drugs available. And let me make a prediction: soon, wherever the religious right is strong, many pharmacists will be pressured into denying women legal drugs.

And it won't stop there. There is a nationwide trend toward 'conscience' or 'refusal' legislation. Laws in Illinois and Mississippi already allow doctors and other health providers to deny virtually any procedure to any patient. Again, think of how such laws expose doctors to pressure and intimidation."

Paul Krugman has an excellent op-ed on the theocratic tendencies of the present Republican majority. This section (not news to me) led me to comment however. It amazes me that states are actively supporting the ability of pharmacists and other medical professionals to deny treatment not for medical but for their own personal, moral reasons. I guess it can seem radical, but my feeling is that any doctor or pharmacist who allows their own personal sense of morality to impair their medical decision making should have their license to practice revoked for the egregious violation of medical ethics they have committed.

Some on the other side might say, well, the person can just go to a pharmacy that will fill that prescription. This is a problematic defense. Small towns may not have multiple medical options thus to find someone who would provide the care that is needed, the individual would have to go an unacceptable distance. Secondly, as the article points out, there is the threat of intimidation against those who do not give into the religious bias, slowly narrowing the selection of ethical doctors.

It is horrifying to me. I feel I can do only very little to stop this theo-fascist tide in the United States. I want to see millions of people across the country taking up protest against this action, but the Democratic leadership is lacking and the people are too indifferent it seems. Apathy is the best friend of extremism.

Hypocrites on the Town Square

There has been an open question on the progressive side of the blogosphere since the last election: when will the social conservatives in the Republican party figure out they've been duped by the corporate-bound hierarchy of the party? The recent events surrounding the right to die for Terri Schiavo have exposed the hypocrisy of the national Republican leadership and the tenuous relationship between the two groups that have solidified the Republican party since Ronald Reagan was president. It looks like the jig is up.

The Hypocrites are Exposed

Tom Delay said with great emotion, and a tear in his eye, that removing Schiavo's feeding tube was "an act of medical terrorism". Yet he had to go through the same wrenching decisions involving his father and allowed him to pass peacefully when his physical body was ruined by an accident. (Notice how those who want Terri to end her normal life are now "terrorists" according to Tom.) Oh, and Terri was God's gift to Mr. Delay to show how the same people that are out to kill Terri are also out to get the majority leader.

Senator Bill Frist, in his rush to throw gasoline on the fire save Terri's life, made an unethical diagnosis of Mrs. Schiavo via videotape and proclaimed his expertise on the floor of the Senate. The hypocrisy? Dr. Frist wrote a book arguing for the same right to die for brain dead people, and proposed expanding the definition to anencephalic babies - is he a baby killer? Probably not, but if you think he should have his license removed, go here (scroll down a bit).

President George Bush, though, has been the most craven, and has the most history, in disregarding his principles and blatantly pandering to his base in this horrible family tragedy. He said "in extraordinary circumstances like this, it is wise to always err on the side of life" (Applause) at one of the Social Security misinformation discussions. The lack of body armor for our troops, cuts to Medicare, the murders of Iraqis while in Unisted States custody and lack of accountability, the execution rate while he was governor of Texas, and the mocking of a born-again Christian as he sent her to the electric chair all belie his statement. It's much easier to err on the side of life when all you have to do is pick up a pen.

These are the hypocrites on the town square, megaphones in hand, their lies resonating down the city streets.

The Fault Lines are Exposed

The fault lines in the Republican party are now exposed, and the fundamentalist religious faction can no longer deny that they are being played for votes. They will not accept this situation quietly or without a fight. But the limits of their attempts to force their God on society as a whole are now evident, as shown by poll after poll of Americans rejecting this intervention into family life. And the quick attempt by the President to back away from the bill, along with the feeble response by Jeb Bush of the calls to take custody of Terri, show that even the publicly pious politician will only take so much heat for their fire and brimstone toting constituents.

That an organization like Focus on the Family is more concerned with homosexuality and abortion than homelessness or joblessness means they will inevitably break from the more progressive churches, who have far more members, that are willing to address all of society's ills. The break between corporate and religious Republicans has now been forced into the open, and the light of day will have its usual illuminating affect on a forced truce, taken advantage of by the powers that be in the Republican party, broken apart by cynical politicians and the dogmatic beliefs of its most vocal minority.

As they also say in the blogosphere, pass the popcorn............

Amendment 23 Discussion

The Gadflyer: Fly Trap: "'Business Sees Gain In GOP Takeover'

In other news, our nation's crops benefit from rain and sun, and teenagers are interested in sex."

Thought this was a priceless headline/comment from The Gadflyer. Onto the question that I hope will foster some debate.

State Amendment 23 states that K-12 spending should increase inflation plus 1% every year. It is part of the budget discussion in the TABOR issue. I certainly am an advocate of increasing our education expenditure...but I'm not quite sure the benefit of this specific amendment. I could see an amendment saying at minimum it needs to stay the same plus inflation and growth being useful, but the 1% stipulation could get out of control down the road. I guess my question is, why are Democrats so adamant about not changing Amendment 23 when it has this perhaps questionable aspect to it? Sell me on it.