You know there’s a problem when comic books have a more balanced view of war and terrorism than CNN :

In 2002, Marvel responded to the horrors of 9/11 with Captain America: The New Deal, a series featuring a terrorist named Al-Tariq who?s determined to punish the U.S. for its reckless misdeeds. After taking hostages in a small town with a defense plant, the militant addresses Captain America through loudspeakers, demanding: ?Tell our children then, American ? Who sowed death in their field ? and left it for the innocent to harvest? Who took their hands, their feet?? A horrified hostage mother turns with fury on her own husband and shrills: ?This is how you feed our baby? With bombs? You make bombs??

Of course, the quote above comes from an article slamming Marvel Comics for “blaming America first” by doing things as daring as viewing the terrorists as actual human beings with motives (rather than the faceless “evildoers” of rhetorical fame), drawing parallels between the events of 9/11 and the Allies bombing of Dresden during WW2, and having a storyline that evokes the Tuskegee experiments. Perhaps the author of this article would be more pleased with “Captain America: Let’s Roll”, which would follow the jingoistic adventures of the Captain through the Middle East where he would “invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity”.

The ongoing debate over evolution is indicative of a much bigger battle between the scientific community and the Bush administration :

Some other signs: if you were contemplating an abortion and were worried about the rumour that it might increase your risk of breast cancer, you might visit the website of the government-funded National Cancer Institute to read their factsheet, which noted that most scientists doubt a link. Or, at least, you might have done so until June last year, when the page, criticised by some Republicans in Congress, simply vanished. (A replacement page was posted last month.) Or maybe you were an Aids activist, elated by the president’s unexpected (and genuinely revolutionary) announcement in the State of the Union address of $15bn (pounds 9.7bn) in funding for fighting the epidemic worldwide – and then surprised to find that only around 10% was destined for the Global Aids Fund, while the rest would be funnelled through US agencies, where it is more likely to be accessible to American abstinence-only groups campaigning against condoms.

Welcome to the new battlegrounds of American science. No conspiracy, nor even one political agenda, links the incidents above. But US scientists say they are indicative of a new climate that has emerged under the Bush administration: one driven partly by close relationships with big business, but just as much by a fiercely moral approach to the business of science. The approach is not exclusively religious, nor exclusively rightwing, but is spreading worry as never before through the nation’s laboratories and lecture halls.

When Matthew Yglesias described the South African constitution as a “progressive wet dream” I knew I had to check it out. One of the things I find most fascinating is this section :

Freedom of expression

16. (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which includes ?

a. freedom of the press and other media;
b. freedom to receive or impart information or ideas;
c. freedom of artistic creativity; and
d. academic freedom and freedom of scientific research.

(2) The right in subsection (1) does not extend to ?

a. propaganda for war;
b. incitement of imminent violence; or
c. advocacy of hatred that is based on race, ethnicity, gender or religion, and that constitutes incitement to cause harm.

Speaking of “fighting back”, Matt Taibbi has a great idea for war protesters :

Don?t write petitions or make appeals, don?t sing songs, don?t wait for someone up there to change their “minds.” Just fight it. And make it hurt.

Wall Street supports this war. How do you think it would react if all 30 percent of the country that opposes the war decided one day to dump all of its stock? A self-defeating gesture, to be sure, but we didn?t get to drink the British tea, either. CNN and FOX are making a killing waving a flag for the Pentagon. Why not start boycotting their advertisers one at a time until they pull their spots? Does Dell really want that “Dude, you?re getting a Dell” kid to be turned into a symbol of the war machine on college campuses?

Hell, forget about boycotting just Dell. Boycott everything. If even this minority of the population could go a month without over-consuming, it would give corporate America an aneurysm.Just one month of no new cars, no new hoop shoes, no Atlantic records, no Kellogg?s Fruit Harvest, no nothing but the bare minimum.

As great as the “stock dump” idea is, I’m sure it would (a) be too complicated to ever pull off, (b) just be used the next day by people who want to cash in after the inevitable artificial market crash, and (c) probably be illegal. it’s a shame too, because that would really get the attention of corporate America.

As much as I love The Beatles, there are very few things that annoy me more than rich people who bitch about paying taxes. The rich constantly like to remind people that they pay a majority of the taxes (while changing the subject before anyone can remind them that they also have a majority of the money). Are they really that overburdened? Are the rich paying almost all the taxes while the poor pay little or none? As Kevin Drum pointed out on his blog :

If my arithmetic is reliable, the combination of payroll taxes and federal income tax that we paid amounted to 33% of our income. (Add in state income tax and it comes to 39%.)

So I forget: as a liberal, am I supposed to think this is too high or too low? And why do I suspect that I’m actually paying a higher percentage of taxes than the millionaires are?

Oh yeah, it’s because I am.

Ever since World War 2, tax rates for average Americans have gone steadily upward while the tax rates for the top 1% of Americans have gone sharply down. For more than 50 years the tax burden has been been shifted from the extremely rich to the extremely poor. If you look at the figures on this page, you’ll see that the median tax rate in 1955 was 9.1%, but the tax rate for millionaires was an astonishing 85.5%. Thirty years later, those figures were 24.4% and 24.9% respectively.

Conservatives like to shoot down complaints such as these as class warfare and they’re right. The rich have been waging class warfare against the middle and lower classes for 50 years and they’re winning the war. How else can you explain the median tax rate going up by almost 300% while the tax rate for the rich shrinking by 70%? I have yet to hear about a millionaire who is taxed so heavily that they have to eat ramen noodles every day, yet that sort of thing is happening to the poor every day. In this “war”, it’s time for average Americans to fight back.

On Tuesday, the Texas state senate overwhelmingly approved a bill that a) makes it mandatory to recite the pledge of allegiance in schools and b) forces kids to spend a minute every day in “silent prayer, meditation or reflection”. How did they get away with it? :

Students could be excused from the pledge recitals upon written notice from a parent or guardian, but they wouldn’t be able to opt out of a minute of silence. During the one-minute period, each student may, as the student chooses, reflect, pray, meditate, or engage in any other silent activity that is not likely to interfere with or distract another student,” the bill states.

So, in order to legally force children to pray and pledge allegiance, they built in a loopholes to allow people to get out of the pledge with a note from their parents (and thereby stifle any potential legal challenges from Jehova’s Witnesses) and used the vague terminology of a “moment of silence” when they’re really just want to make every child to pray to Jesus every morning. Nevermind the fact that this is all sneaky and underhanded, the real question is why is all this necessary? Aren’t schools supposed to be teaching children and not forcing their obediance to an invisible man who likes making frogs fall out of the sky and a spoon-fed retard (no offense meant towards actual retarded people) who can’t even pray without smirking? (see the Newsweek cover below)

And while we’re on the subject of people forcing their beliefs on others, what’s with religious right’s obsession with the ten commandments? People keep insisting on posting it in courthouses, schools, and jails. Hell, there’s even one group that was paying children ten bucks to bribe them to memorize the ten commandments.

Now, I’m no bible scholar (few athiests are), but wasn’t the whole point of the new testament that Jesus was coming to Earth to tell people to forget about all the crazy Hebrew laws in the old testament and for people to just love each other? As far as I can tell, the ten commandments only appear in the old testament. If that’s the case, then shouldn’t the ten commandments be held in the same regard as animal sacrifices, the monetary values of various people, or god disliking midgets and people with crushed testicles?

Since many religious people falsely believe that all moral codes are based on the ten commandments (which were in fact adapted from ancient Babylonian law), I can understand why they’re so intent on posting them everywhere. These people see any attempt to block the posting of the ten commandments as a rejection of their values (ie. thou shalt not kill, bear false witness, etc.), while those of us on the other side object to the overtly religious overtone of the first 3 or 4 commandments, depending on which version they’re trying to post.

Of course, people like me aren’t the only ones who aren’t too fond of the “god commandments”. Jesus was known to skip these commandments as well :

“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, obey the commandments.” “Which ones?” the man inquired. Jesus replied, ” ‘Do not murder, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.”

Not only did Jesus leave out all the “no graven images” crap, but he even went a step further and added one more commandment (which he later repeats as being his only commandment). These are the commandments that most of the Christians I’ve known follow (ie. the ones who keep their religion to themselves), so why aren’t they good enough for the right-wingers who want them posted everywhere?

This is the most unbelievably racist thing I’ve heard in a long time :

[Rep. Barbara] Cubin [R-Wyo], who supports the bill, was complaining about a failed senate amendment that would have banned gun sales to drug addicts or people undergoing drug treatment. “So does that mean that if you go into a black community, you can’t sell any guns to any black person?” she asked.

Moveon.org has a great new campaign aimed to stopping corporations from using offshore tax shelter. Please read all about it below and then use the links to your left (under “Complain”) to contact your representative :

We are always told that war demands sacrifice. But while American soldiers are risking their lives in Iraq, many of the country’s wealthiest corporations are shirking billions of dollars in taxes. As the costs of conflict soar, the President refuses to close a tax loophole that allows big businesses to avoid shouldering their share of the tax burden using off-shore corporate tax dodges — literally leaving the country in a time of need.

The President wants the debate in Congress this week to focus on the size of his tax cut for the wealthy. We’re launching a media and grassroots campaign to instead focus on the hypocrisy of these corporations. Our TV ad juxtaposes the sacrifice of our sons and daughters in Iraq with their greedy and immoral pursuit of self- interest. I’ve attached a press advisory below. But the campaign will be most successful if the media hit is coupled with lots of phone calls to Congress. Can you help?

Please make a call today to your members of Congress to ask that they outlaw corporate offshore tax dodges. Be sure the staff members know you’re a constituent, then urge them to demand a vote on the “Corporate Patriot Enforcement Act” (HR 737 / S 384). Ask for their position on corporations and wealthy citizens leaving the country to avoid taxes. Ask them to provide it in writing. Tell them how you feel about this happening while young Americans are being sent to Iraq, and while we?re all facing deficits and cutbacks at home.

One of the biggest obstacles to action on this issue is that House Republican Leaders Dennis Hastert (R-IL-14) and Tom Delay (R-TX-22) are refusing to allow a vote on it. Please call them too, at:

House Speaker Dennis Hastert:

202-225-0600 or 202-225-2976

House Republican Leader Tom Delay:

202-225-4000 or 202-225-5951

Urge them to immediately let the Corporate Patriot Enforcement Act (HR 737) come to a vote. Ask for their position in writing as well.

Corporate offshore tax dodges are symbolic of the corporate interests driving the Bush administration and GOP in their ridiculous economic policies. Every year, about $70 billion dollars in revenue are lost from American corporations that have moved their corporate headquarters or subsidiaries to places like Bermuda, and from wealthy individuals moving their assets overseas. To get a sense for the size of this theft — this is the size of ALL the state budget deficits that are creating such pain around the nation through cutbacks in school programs and other essential services.

It’s not surprising that many of the worst tax-dodge offenders are directly linked to the Bush administration and right-wing politicians, through corporate patronage of family members, personal connections, and lavish political contributions. Vice President Cheney’s company, Halliburton, is a leader in this kind of tax evasion, even as Cheney himself continues to receive deferred compensation from the company.

The Republican right’s support of corporate offshore tax dodges is inexcusable. Your calls can help bring the issue to light. Once it’s out in the open, there’s a good likelihood that Congress can close the loophole. There simply is no excuse.

Of course, offshore tax dodges are only the most egregious example of the economic mismanagement we face. For the first time since Herbert Hoover presided over the Great Depression, the Bush administration has refused to provide any real stimulus to the economy in truly tough economic times. Instead, they are calling primarily for tax cuts for the wealthy and for corporations. We now face disastrous budget deficits as far as the eye can see, without a credible short-term stimulus. It’s an amazing example of ideology gone mad.

“Stimulus” means getting funds to those in the greatest need and to those who will spend the money fastest. In a time of economic crisis, it’s the only good reason for short-term deficit spending. Typically, a good economic steward would:

EXTEND UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS so that those hardest hit by the recession could make ends meet. This funding would obviously go directly into consumer spending and “raise all boats.”

PROVIDE SUPPORT TO STATES AND EDUCATION so that recession-driven state deficits don’t lead to the collapse of public education around the country.

PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR LOCAL SERVICES so that deficits and new unfunded “homeland security” mandates don’t devastate local police, fire and hospital services.
These kinds of measures would translate directly into consumer spending, providing an effective stimulus to pull us out of a recessionary spiral. It is truly terrifying that our national government is not playing this traditional role, and is instead building deficits for generations to come.

Call today and let’s begin the process of taking our government back from corrupt special interests. There can be no defense for the right wing’s support of corporate tax evasion in this era of deep economic challenges and true personal sacrifice.

It looks like the eighth amendment only applies to corporations now. On Monday, the Supreme Court overturned a $145 million award in punitive damages against State Farm Insurance :

By a 6-3 vote, the high court ruled that a punitive damages award 145 times greater than the actual, or compensatory, damages was “excessive” and violated fundamental constitutional principles of due-process fairness.

“In sum, courts must ensure that the measure of punishment is both reasonable and proportionate to the amount of harm to the plaintiff,” Justice Anthony Kennedy said for the majority.

Okay, fair enough. That does seem to be a little high, but this is the same court that just upheld California’s draconian three strikes law :

On Wednesday the Supreme Court upheld the state’s 1994 three-strikes law, the toughest in the nation for repeat offenders, ruling 5-4 that terms of up to life in prison are not too harsh for repeat criminals.

The court also said a term of 50 years to life was not out of bounds for a thief who shoplifted videotapes from Kmart. The tapes, including “Batman Forever” and “Cinderella,” were worth $153.

In the golf club case, convicted burglary felon Gary Albert Ewing tried to make off with clubs stuffed down one pant leg at an El Segundo golf shop. He was convicted and sentenced to 25 years to life in prison, with no possibility of parole before 25 years.

So excessive punishments violate “fundamental constitutional principles” when they’re levied against companies like State Farm, but if some dumbass who’s been to prison a couple times decides to steal some videotapes then a life sentence is acceptable? (A more fitting punishment would be to make the guy actually sit through “Batman Forever”)

In the interest a fairness, maybe we should have a three-strikes law for corporations who are (in Justice O’Connor’s words) “recidivist felons”. That way if a corporation gets caught polluting the environment, abusing employees, lying about their financial outlook, endangering the safety of their customers, or evading taxes three times then their company will have to go out of business, liquidate their assets, and distribute them to their shareholders. Maybe that’s a little harsh, but it’s not as bad as destroying someone’s life for petty shoplifting.

Here’s a great idea for the future of Iraqi’s oil, brought to my attention by Josh Marshall’s blog :

In the 1970′s, during the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, the state realized that the new oil leases would produce an enormous windfall. Its citizens set up the Alaska Permanent Fund to manage this income, directing that the revenue be invested, the principal remain untouched and the gains be used for state infrastructure investments. A part of the proceeds was distributed as dividends to every Alaskan. By July 2002, the fund had grown to more than $23.5 billion. Dividend payments to Alaskan families averaged about $8,000 per year.

Iraq’s annual oil revenue comes to approximately $20 billion. A postwar government could invest $12 billion a year in infrastructure to rebuild the nation. The other $8 billion could anchor an Iraq Permanent Fund, to be invested in a diverse set of international equities. The resulting income would go directly to Iraq’s six million households. These payments would make a huge difference to families in a country whose per capita gross domestic product rests at about $2,500.

As great as this would be, it’ll be a cold day in hell before the Bush actually shares the oil he’s currently stealing.

The AFL-CIO just issued a report warning of recent changes to the Fair Labor Standards Act that were proposed by the Bush administration that could rob millions of workers of overtime pay :

The Bush administration claims its proposal to raise the income ceiling for workers to automatically qualify for overtime pay would extend protection to some lower-income workers currently excluded. But most of these workers already are covered by overtime protections because of the nature of their jobs. In contrast, the Bush administration’s proposed changes in workers? job definitions and duties that must be met to allow an employer to classify workers as ?exempt? and thus ineligible for overtime would affect many more hundreds of thousands of workers.

The changes not only make it easier for employers to reclassify their employees to make them exempt from overtime pay, but it imposes an income limit that eliminates certain middle-income workers as well. For a guy who loves the Iraqis so much he wants to “liberate” them, Bush sure does seem to hate regular Americans.

But Bush isn’t the only Republican who hates working folks :

In a fund-raising letter for the National Right to Work Foundation (NRWF), House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) called the American union movement ?a clear and present danger to the security of the United States at home and the safety of our armed forces overseas.? He accused unions?especially the Fire Fighters?of exploiting Sept. 11, 2001, in a ?shameful post-9/11 power grab?at the expense of our homeland security and troops overseas.?

So, what was this “power grab”? It was an already promised $150 million grant (part of a larger $5.1 billion homeland security bill) that Bush later vetoed. I can think of a much bigger exploitation of 9/11 :

Decades of budget cuts in education are finally yielding results, a fact confirmed by CNN’s poll of March 16, which shows that an astonishing 51 percent of the public believe that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was responsible for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

It looks like our prison population has gone up over 2 million for the first time ever. The U.S. also has the highest rate of incarceration on earth. What’s more shocking about all this is that it was less than 200,000 in 1970. Are there more criminals now or is our government just “tougher” on crime?

The Sentencing Project, a group that promotes alternatives to prison, said state and federal policies continue to drive up incarceration rates despite sharp drops in violent crime rates since 1994.

“The relentless increases in prison and jail populations can best be explained as the legacy of an entrenched infrastructure of punishment that has been embedded in the criminal justice system over the last 30 years,” said Malcolm Young, the group’s executive director.

If you look at the facts, you’ll see that prisoners tend to be low-income, poorly educated Black or Hispanic males who are often in prisons for non violent drug offenses :

Approximately 2/3 of crack users are white or Hispanic, yet the vast majority of persons convicted of possession in federal courts in 1994 were African American, according to the USSC. Defendants convicted of crack possession in 1994 were 84.5% black, 10.3% white, and 5.2% Hispanic. Trafficking offenders were 4.1% white, 88.3% black, and 7.1% Hispanic. Powder cocaine offenders were more racially mixed. Defendants convicted of simple possession of cocaine powder were 58% white, 26.7% black, and 15% Hispanic. The powder trafficking offenders were 32% white, 27.4% black, and 39.3% Hispanic. The result of the combined difference in sentencing laws and racial disparity is that black men and women are serving longer prison sentences than white men and women.

Although it’s not the way they’d prefer it, I’m sure statistics like these are making all the neo-Confederate assholes in the Republican party proud.

At risk of this turning into a religion blog, I gotta mention this :

The Blount County Board of Education denied the adoption of three new biology textbooks because they teach evolution but do not cover creationism…

“With the overwhelming references to evolution, I don’t feel comfortable with (adopting these texts),” Treadway said.

Simerly said she is concerned with how evolution is approached in the selected biology texts, because creationism is not addressed.

“I do not believe that we evolved from anything other than human beings,” she said.

Creationism, while it may make for some interesting religious dogma, isn’t science and therefore has no place in any science classes. Hiding under the buzzwords “creation science” and “intelligent design” is an organized effort to replace a valid and universally accepted scientific theory with a repackaged version of the Judeo-Christian creation myth (minus the talking snake and the apple, for now). Since both Raelians and Scientologists believe that we are descended from aliens (the Elohim and the Thetans, respectively), shouldn’t their “theories” also be given equal time ins science classes so kids can make up their own minds? Of course not. As someone pointed out in the comments section of this site, not all “theories” are created equal :

It’s like a student claiming that Napoleon actually won at Waterloo. When faced with overwhelming evidence that he did not, the student then simply shrugs and says that it is a difference of opinion and that the Napoleon-loses advocates are not giving due consideration to the Napoleon-wins theory.

Like the Scientologist belief that a galactic ruler named Xenu ruled the Earth (then known as Teegeeack) 75 million years ago or the hypothetical student who believes Napoleon won, creationism doesn’t deserve to be taught in science classes because it doesn’t fit the same criteria as the rest of the curriculum. Creationism is a hypothesis at best. Anyone with the slightest understanding of the scientific method should know the differences between hypotheses and theories :

A scientific theory or law represents an hypothesis, or a group of related hypotheses, which has been confirmed through repeated experimental tests. Theories in physics are often formulated in terms of a few concepts and equations, which are identified with “laws of nature,” suggesting their universal applicability. Accepted scientific theories and laws become part of our understanding of the universe and the basis for exploring less well-understood areas of knowledge. Theories are not easily discarded; new discoveries are first assumed to fit into the existing theoretical framework. It is only when, after repeated experimental tests, the new phenomenon cannot be accommodated that scientists seriously question the theory and attempt to modify it. The validity that we attach to scientific theories as representing realities of the physical world is to be contrasted with the facile invalidation implied by the expression, “It’s only a theory.” For example, it is unlikely that a person will step off a tall building on the assumption that they will not fall, because “Gravity is only a theory.”

But there’s a greater danger in teaching creationism alongside evolution. If we allow an untestable hypothesis like creationism to be taught side-by-side with accepted scientific theories, aren’t we undermining the whole reason for having science classes in the first place? In his excellent book “Why People Believe Weird Things” Michael Shermer makes this response to the creationist argument that the educational process should be concerned with teaching all sides of an issue :

Exposure to the many facets of issues is indeed a part of the general educational process, and it might be appropriate to discuss creationism in courses on religion, history, or even philosophy but most certainly not in science; similarly, biology courses should not include lectures on American Indian creation myths. There is considerable harm in teaching creation-science as science because the consequent blurring of the line between religion and science means that students will not understand what the scientific paradigm is and how to apply it properly. Moreover, the assumptions behind creationism compromise a two-pronged attack on all the sciences, not just on evolutionary biology. One, if the universe and Earth are only about ten thousand years old, then the modern sciences of cosmology, astronomy, physics, chemistry, geology, paleontology, paleoanthropology, and early human history are all invalid. Two, as soon as the creation of even one species is attributed to supernatural intervention, natural laws and inferences about the workings of nature become void. In each case, all science becomes meaningless.

But I seriously doubt the “creation scientists” have ever given the issue that much thought. I’m sure they’re still trying to reject the evolutionist claim that “people come from monkeys” (note : Evolutionists have never claimed that humans are descended from apes. Even pre-Darwinian evolutionists mostly agreed that humans and apes shared a common ancestor). The fact is, if creationism was a valid scientific theory, then it would already be taught in science classes. Creationism wasn’t discarded because of the myth of the increasing secularization of our society (as Calpundit points out, church attendance has been going up steadily for over 200 years), it was thrown out because scientific evidence doesn’t support it.

Having lost the battle within the scientific community, they’ve taken the step of trying to change the minds of school board members, judges, and state legislators. In other words, they’ve failed in their attempts to convince scientists that their “theory” is valid, so they’ve instead convinced non-scientists (who often share their anti-evolution prejudices) that the educational establishment is somehow “supressing” the evidence that supports creationism and that schoolchildren are getting only one half of the story.

It’s just a matter of time before Creationism is held in the same regard as the Flat Earth Society :

“You can’t orbit a flat earth,” says [International Flat Earth Research Society president Charles K.] Johnson. “The Space Shuttle is a joke–and a very ludicrous joke.”

“The whole point of the Copernican theory is to get rid of Jesus by saying there is no up and no down,” declares Johnson. “The spinning ball thing just makes the whole Bible a big joke.”

“Wherever you find people with a great reservoir of common sense,” he says, “they don’t believe idiotic things such as the earth spinning around the sun. Reasonable, intelligent people have always recognized that the earth is flat.”

Sure, that sounds crazy, but is it any crazier than this?

A large subset of creation scientists could be called “Biblical creationists”, who take the first eleven chapters of the Bible to be real history, including the creation of all things in six 24-hour days, the existence of Adam and Eve as the first man and woman, the unnatural introduction of “death” into the perfect creation because of the disobedience of Adam and Eve, and the occurence of a world-wide flood (Noah’s flood) which destroyed most life and greatly affected the processes operating on the earth. Most creation scientists believe that the earth is “young” (on the order of ten thousand years).

This is the same reason I hate missionaries :

In this dry desert world near Najaf, where the Army V Corps combat support system sprawls across miles of scabrous dust, there’s an oasis of sorts: a 500-gallon pool of pristine, cool water.

It belongs to Army chaplain Josh Llano of Houston, who sees the water shortage, which has kept thousands of filthy soldiers from bathing for weeks, as an opportunity.

”It’s simple. They want water. I have it, as long as they agree to get baptized,” he said.

First of all, since he’s with the Army, there’s a good chance that this water was provided and/or transported by the U.S. government. For that reason alone, this is not only immoral, but illegal as well.

Secondly, why the bait-and-switch bullshit? What is it about evangelical Christianity that makes people think that it’s acceptable to take advantage of people in need? I understand that they think they’re doing “the right thing” by saving their souls (blah, blah, blah…), but how can somebody truly justify withholding aid from people until they accept God? Did I miss the part of the Bible where Jesus tells Lazarus’s family that he’ll only raise the dead if they denounce their religious beliefs? Or that part where refuses to feed the five thousand people with five loaves and two fish (or four thousand with seven loaves according to Matthew) until they kiss his ass?

One of the readers of Media Whores puts this into perspective :

Remember the Spanish Inquisition? Jews who accepted Christ would be spared death. So, if you are a desperately thirsty Jewish soldier, do you have to accept Christ to get a juice box from this “man of God”?

I don’t know what fries my toast more, that he’s holding water from our fighting men and women, or that he’s extorting them with that water, or that he thinks he’s doing God’s work by his actions. Can we get this guy pulled from the front lines? This is just unconscionable. Appalling. Barbaric. And he’s doing this to OUR men and women. In the name of God. Somehow, I don’t think God would be so pleased.

During the 2000 campaign, Bush was asked who his favorite political philosopher is. Without missing a beat, he replied “Christ, because he changed my heart”. It seems that he forgot a few things between then and when he started to reinvent himself as “God’s President”. One particular quote from his favorite philosopher bears repeating :

“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.”

Matthew 6:5

Speaking of receiving his reward in full, I have a theory that the real reason they’re in Iraq is to determine exactly how hard it is to get a camel through the eye of a needle.