The Madness of King George

[Black Dog]

It seems like every day I read a story from out of the U.S. that leaves me shaking my head. I honestly beleive there is a growing divide between the U.S. and the rest of the world and so I thought it would be interesting to keep a repository of some of the wackiness coming from south of the border. Now some might accuse me of harbouring anti-American tendancies, but I prefer to let people draw their own conclusions about a country that is currently debating whether or not to add invisible sky pixies to high school science cirricula.

[Black Dog]

Gah!!!

[The Terrible Sweal]

William Harris, a professor of medicine who specialises in omega-3 fatty acids and co-founded the Intelligent Design Network, said that Darwinism clashed with the biblical teaching that life was created by God. “Part of our overall goal is to remove the bias against religion that is currently in schools,” he said.

[Black Dog]

Family values

Last night, anti-abortion extremist Neal Horsley was a guest on The Alan Colmes Show, a FOX News radio program. The topic was an interesting one - whether or not an internet service provider should allow Horsley to post the names of abortion doctors on his website. Horsley does that as a way of targeting them and one doctor has been killed. In the course of the interview, however, Colmes asked Horsley about his background, including a statement that he had admitted to engaging in homosexual and bestiality sex.

At first, Horsley laughed and said, "Just because it's printed in the media, people jump to believe it."

"Is it true?" Colmes asked.

"Hey, Alan, if you want to accuse me of having sex when I was a fool, I did everything that crossed my mind that looked like I..."

AC: "You had sex with animals?"

NH: "Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule."

[moderateamericain]

Family values

Last night, anti-abortion extremist Neal Horsley was a guest on The Alan Colmes Show, a FOX News radio program. The topic was an interesting one - whether or not an internet service provider should allow Horsley to post the names of abortion doctors on his website. Horsley does that as a way of targeting them and one doctor has been killed. In the course of the interview, however, Colmes asked Horsley about his background, including a statement that he had admitted to engaging in homosexual and bestiality sex.

At first, Horsley laughed and said, "Just because it's printed in the media, people jump to believe it."

"Is it true?" Colmes asked.

"Hey, Alan, if you want to accuse me of having sex when I was a fool, I did everything that crossed my mind that looked like I..."

AC: "You had sex with animals?"

NH: "Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

glad you can pick out the most severly demented portions of are society and potray them as the average american. congradulations you are the biggest intolerant i think ive ever seen. (seen as far as thoughts you type out on this website). You obviously have not spent much time in America as you would clearly see that what makes the newspapers is far cry from your average law abiding decent american. Your inability to distiguish between an extremist conservative and the rest of america is unbelievable.

[Black Dog]

glad you can pick out the most severly demented portions of are society and potray them as the average american. congradulations you are the biggest intolerant i think ive ever seen. (seen as far as thoughts you type out on this website). You obviously have not spent much time in America as you would clearly see that what makes the newspapers is far cry from your average law abiding decent american. Your inability to distiguish between an extremist conservative and the rest of america is unbelievable.

Hey jackass, where did I say that these folks were representative of the average American? Nowhere.

That said, there's no denying the rising tide of extremism in the U.S, as evidenced by some of these stories.

Let me put it another way: if these were all random and unconnected events, that would not tell us anything. But they're not. The lowering of the barriers between church and state (as evidenced by Terri Schiavo, "Justice Sunday", the serious consideration of intelligent design in schools) is part of a wider agenda to roll back the Enlightenmnet value sthe U.S. was founded upon. You can dismiss some of these folks as freaks, but to do so would be to underestimate the influence they have. Look: Neal the mule humper was a guest on Alan Colmes's show. Colmes is a guy who is considered pretty mainstream, yet he's having anti-abortion donkeyfuckers on his show. Have you asked yourself why the mainstream media is giving these freaks so much attention or why the Republican party is aparently willing to do whatever they an to placate them?

These people are indeed "severly demented ". they also represent a severly powerful element of contemporary Amerian society. ignore them at your own peril.

One last thing: where is middle America through all this? Where are the voices rising up and saying "Pat Robertson does not represent me"? Why aren't they rallying against the undercurrents of fascism that are buffeting the body politic? Are all y'all too cowed, too stupified by TV and junk food to see what's going on? Or is it that this administration and its allies have convinced y'all that anyone who doesn't toe the line (or keep their mouth shut) is a traitor or worse, a "liberal"?

[kimmy]

...

...

-k

edit: d'oh.

[moderateamericain]

Family values

Last night, anti-abortion extremist Neal Horsley was a guest on The Alan Colmes Show, a FOX News radio program. The topic was an interesting one - whether or not an internet service provider should allow Horsley to post the names of abortion doctors on his website. Horsley does that as a way of targeting them and one doctor has been killed. In the course of the interview, however, Colmes asked Horsley about his background, including a statement that he had admitted to engaging in homosexual and bestiality sex.

At first, Horsley laughed and said, "Just because it's printed in the media, people jump to believe it."

"Is it true?" Colmes asked.

"Hey, Alan, if you want to accuse me of having sex when I was a fool, I did everything that crossed my mind that looked like I..."

AC: "You had sex with animals?"

NH: "Absolutely. I was a fool. When you grow up on a farm in Georgia, your first girlfriend is a mule."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

glad you can pick out the most severly demented portions of are society and potray them as the average american. congradulations you are the biggest intolerant i think ive ever seen. (seen as far as thoughts you type out on this website). You obviously have not spent much time in America as you would clearly see that what makes the newspapers is far cry from your average law abiding decent american. Your inability to distiguish between an extremist conservative and the rest of america is unbelievable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

first of all i will once again be forced to overlook your personal insult, i hope the moderation on this board will do so as well, he obviously cannot control his/her emotions at the time of posting.

secondly, every single one of your post for the last week, have been how, who, or what is in your opinion the problem with america. you have made it into your agenda to post every wacko thing that comes out of america. what is one to infer? that you spend ur time looking for excuses to shame the united states? and as far as the people who are denouncing relgious institutions in school, they are at work.

[Black Dog]

first of all i will once again be forced to overlook your personal insult, i hope the moderation on this board will do so as well, he obviously cannot control his/her emotions at the time of posting.

Wah wah.

Very magnaminous of you. In return, I'll overlook your inability to support any of your points (say, what ever happened to your claim that the Democratic Party is becoming more socialist).

secondly, every single one of your post for the last week, have been how, who, or what is in your opinion the problem with america. you have made it into your agenda to post every wacko thing that comes out of america. what is one to infer? that you spend ur time looking for excuses to shame the united states?

I beg to differ.

and as far as the people who are denouncing relgious institutions in school, they are at work.

meaning what? That the moderate Americans out there are too busy to pay attention to the erosion of their society? Excellent! That wil make the fascists' and fanatics' job so much easier.

[moderateamericain]

first of all i will once again be forced to overlook your personal insult, i hope the moderation on this board will do so as well, he obviously cannot control his/her emotions at the time of posting.

Wah wah.

Very magnaminous of you. In return, I'll overlook your inability to support any of your points (say, what ever happened to your claim that the Democratic Party is becoming more socialist).

secondly, every single one of your post for the last week, have been how, who, or what is in your opinion the problem with america. you have made it into your agenda to post every wacko thing that comes out of america. what is one to infer? that you spend ur time looking for excuses to shame the united states?

I beg to differ.

and as far as the people who are denouncing relgious institutions in school, they are at work.

meaning what? That the moderate Americans out there are too busy to pay attention to the erosion of their society? Excellent! That wil make the fascists' and fanatics' job so much easier.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

most of what we talk about is hypothetical so therefore difficult to back up, on concrete evidence stuff such as the thread where we discussed how many people america had actually killed, i did back up what i was saying with data. how i interpet america is an Opinion just as you have yours. And the communist and socialist will have just as much opportunity to sieze this country as the facists. i have no illusions that america is going anywhere but down (economically) which is why ive applied with international corporations for new job oppurtonities. Also nice try to cover up what i said about your post, that post you made was done AFTER i posted the original message in this thread. And also nice job to duck out of your personal insult, when i get you to curse at me, it just shows me how right i am. i know apologizing to me is out of the question so i wont even ask.

[Black Dog]

Also nice try to cover up what i said about your post, that post you made was done AFTER i posted the original message in this thread.

Dude, I have no idea what you're talking about. If you're referring to the fact that I proved your statement ("every single one of your post for the last week, have been how, who, or what is in your opinion the problem with america") to be dead wrong, well, that's your problem. Obviously you don't read teh Canadian politics threads.

[The Terrible Sweal]

glad you can pick out the most severly demented portions of are society and potray them as the average american.  congradulations you are the biggest intolerant i think ive ever seen.  (seen as far as thoughts you type out on this website).  You obviously have not spent much time in America as you would clearly see that what makes the newspapers is far cry from your average law abiding decent american.  Your inability to distiguish between an extremist conservative and the rest of america is unbelievable.

Perfectly believable, given the Faux News Cabal market-share.

[TokyoTakarazuka]

I honestly beleive there is a growing divide between the U.S. and the rest of the world and so I thought it would be interesting to keep a repository of some of the wackiness coming from south of the border. Now some might accuse me of harbouring anti-American tendancies, but I prefer to let people draw their own conclusions about a country that is currently debating whether or not to add invisible sky pixies to high school science cirricula.

As far as I know, there are currently only four regions in the USA that have partly or entirely curtailed the teaching of evolution statewide: Tennessee, Mississippi, Kansas (from 1999 to 2003), and (on state tests) Colorado. Therefore, it hardly represents a divide between the entire United States and the rest of the world. Moreover, this is of course not a recent phenomenon. The most ideologically significant legislative battle ever fought in the United States over the teaching of evolution in public schools was the Scopes Monkey Trail in 1925.

Although I’m not sure about the rest of the world, the divide between the United States and Canada on this issue, in terms of popular opinion, is not large. I read a Gallup poll online taken in the United States in 2001 that estimates that 45% of Americans are effectively young earth creationists, who believe in a literal interpretation of biblical creation. Similarly, I read a Public Opinion And Customer Research (COMPAS) poll in Report Newsmagazine that was conducted in the year 2000 in Canada. It estimates that 38% of Canadians believe in “a Biblical understanding of creation.” Therefore, it would seem that in the United States the creationism movement is stronger by a margin of 7%. This “growing divide” (although these two polls didn’t actually indicate whether it’s growing or not) may be significant but for now it’s still relatively small. It might be that Canadian creationists are less vocal than American ones, as I know of few instances where creationism has surfaced in Canadian politics recently, although you might recall former opposition leader Stockwell Day infamously coming out in favor of creationism in 2000. It’s possible this might not have anything in particular to do the creationism-evolution debate, but I read an article that states that beginning in 2002 in Ontario it is no longer mandatory to teach evolution to high school students in some science classes. Each school district can now decide whether or not they wish to teach evolution in general science classes, although it will still always be taught in classes specifically dealing with biology. Although I don’t live in Ontario, I was similarly never taught anything too significant about evolution until I chose to enroll in a biology class in Grade 11. It’s possible that Canadian schools are intentionally trying to dodge this controversy.

I nonetheless wouldn’t be overly worried for two reasons. Firstly, if you look at the growth of creationism’s political influence in the United States since the Scopes monkey trial, you’ll see it’s actually growing rather slowly. As I said, only four states have taken significant action against the teaching of evolution in public schools, two of which (Mississippi and Tennessee) have strong anti-evolution legislative traditions that date back to the 1920’s or further. Therefore, the creationist movement has, since the 1920’s, made truly significant political advances in only two states. Secondly, the creationism movement had completely failed to penetrate the scientific community. Every poll I’ve read from both the United States and Canada indicate that, although creationism may be popular among 38-45% of the population, evolution is still overwhelmingly the preferred theory of scientists.

Also, the title of this article falsely implies that President Bush is affiliated with the intelligent design or religious fundamentalist movement. As his statements in this article indicate, George Bush is on many fronts staunchly at odds with extremist Christianity.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=193746&page=1

As far as I know, the only prominent cabinet member Bush appointed who identifies himself as a religious fundamentalist was John Ashcroft, who recently resigned.

The lowering of the barriers between church and state (as evidenced by Terri Schiavo, "Justice Sunday", the serious consideration of intelligent design in schools)

I disagree that there has been a considerable breakdown recently in the separation between church and state in the United States. Americans are still very much on guard against religious favoritism in government, as recently demonstrated in 2003 when a Ten Commandments monument was removed from an Alabama courtroom by Supreme Court decree.

Although the intelligent design movement no doubt represents a serious problem for the separation of church and state, as I mentioned this shouldn’t be portrayed as a recent phenomenon, and at present it isn’t at its peak strength. The result of the Tennessee Scopes Monkey Trial of 1925 was to completely and explicitly forbid the teaching of evolution in public schools statewide. This was no doubt the greatest political victory anti-evolution Christian fundamentalists in the United States ever achieved. Since 1925, they have never again succeeded in attaining a ruling of such importance for any significant length of time. Therefore, what can be said at least is that the US Christian fundamentalist movement is considerably weaker now that it was 80 years ago.

As for your other two examples, I disagree that they should be considered threats to secular government. The Terri Schiavo case was just as much a dispute about legal guardianship as it was about a religiously-defined “right to life”. In Canada there are laws that would’ve prevented a similar case from ever happening. Had Michael Schiavo been a Canadian, legal guardianship of his wife would long ago have reverted to her parents, who were opposed to taking her off life support, because Michael Schiavo had been living with another women, who he had had children with, for nearly eleven years. Although I myself doubt Terri Schiavo would have ever recovered from her condition, from a Canadian legal perspective Michael Schiavo should not have been the most appropriate candidate to make the decision. I think that it’s also a great stretch to call Justice Sunday an abridgement of the barrier between church and state. Justice Sunday was simply a fundamentalist Christian group exercising their constitutionally-protected rights to association and speech by protesting against a political tactic they object to. Although I disagree with the tactics and motives of the Justice Sunday ralliers, I agree with their basic proposal that the filibuster is a ridiculous tactic for senate procedures and probably should be eliminated. Although many Republicans keen on abolishing the filibuster naturally sympathized with the protest, the intent of the demonstrators to influence political and public opinion through strongly religious appeals was denounced by most mainstream churches. 430 American religious leaders even signed a formal letter condemning the protest.

[Guest eureka]

There are currently 19 American States that are considering legislation to introduce the teachings of Creationism. That I read in an American Magazine not long ago.

There is also a wide difference between a "Biblical understanding of Creation" and "young Earth" teaching. Young Earth has no Biblical support and is the deduction of some demented souls.

[PocketRocket]

glad you can pick out the most severly demented portions of are society and potray them as the average american. 

Your inability to distiguish between an extremist conservative and the rest of america is unbelievable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1))) I think it's pretty funny. I also think you should relax and take it in stride. Until BD starts saying that these examples of foolishness are typical of the average American, then I don't see it as a big deal.

I have seen some pretty stupid stuff about Canada posted here as well, and it is generally taken at, and addressed at, face value, not as an insult to all Canadians.

I got a good laugh out of it.

Keep 'em coming, BLACKDOG.

[Black Dog]

As far as I know, there are currently only four regions in the USA that have partly or entirely curtailed the teaching of evolution statewide: Tennessee, Mississippi, Kansas (from 1999 to 2003), and (on state tests) Colorado.

This is misleading, as you don't count those states (such as Georgia and Alabama) that take measures such as disclaimer stickers on biologu textbooks.

I read a Gallup poll online taken in the United States in 2001 that estimates that 45% of Americans are effectively young earth creationists, who believe in a literal interpretation of biblical creation. Similarly, I read a Public Opinion And Customer Research (COMPAS) poll in Report Newsmagazine that was conducted in the year 2000 in Canada. It estimates that 38% of Canadians believe in “a Biblical understanding of creation.” Therefore, it would seem that in the United States the creationism movement is stronger by a margin of 7%.

This article casts doubts on the COMPAS findings.

In a front page article published two days before the November 27th, 2000 Canadian federal election, the National Post reported that “[c]reationism . . . is supported by about as many Canadians as those who favour evolution” (National Post, November 25th, 2000, A1). Based on a poll of 512 Canadians undertaken for the paper by COMPAS Research Inc., the article stated that, although about a fifth of the sample (19%) was not prepared to advance an opinion on the subject, those that did offer a position split almost evenly  with only a slight edge (53% – 47%) to the evolutionist or  non-creationist position. It indicated as well that, among Alliance supporters and among Ontarians, “creationism” was  actually the prevailing position (53%-47% and 51%-49% respectively), while Liberal supporters who held a position were split down the middle (50% for, 50% against).1

These are surprising findings for a number of reasons. The most obvious of these (although not necessarily the most convincing) is that such findings run counter to the media’s conventional treatment of  “creationism” as a marginalized belief system espoused by a small minority of social and religious conservatives in this country.2  However, the findings are also at odds with scholarly research. Bibby (1982), for example, suggests that, at best, only about one in five Canadians subscribes to a “traditional” version of Christianity. And given that Bibby’s definition of “traditional” in this research does not require a literal belief in the Bible, it seems likely that “creationists” constitute a much smaller subset of his “traditional” group.2 Data collected within several months of the COMPAS study by the 2000 Canadian National Election Study team also suggest that fewer than 20% of adult Canadians subscribe to “crationist” views.  In that study, about 18% of the 1534 respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that “the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally word for word”.4  Finally, the COMPAS/National Post  findings seem odd because they are almost identical to those found in samples drawn from the  U.S. 5  –  a country with a much higher rate of church affiliation and church attendance, a country with a religious right that is much stronger in numerical and political terms, and a country in which “creationists” are currently waging a high-profile campaign to undermine the teaching of evolution in U.S. public schools.

A closer examination of the methodology which produced these curious Canadian findings provides a possible explanation for their anomalous character. The question posed by the COMPAS interviewers was the following:

“Turning to one final topic, religion, as you know some people believe in the theory of evolution to explain the origins of life while other people believe in a Biblical understanding of creation. Which viewpoint is closer to your own?” 

I nonetheless wouldn’t be overly worried for two reasons. Firstly, if you look at the growth of creationism’s political influence in the United States since the Scopes monkey trial, you’ll see it’s actually growing rather slowly. As I said, only four states have taken significant action against the teaching of evolution in public schools, two of which (Mississippi and Tennessee) have strong anti-evolution legislative traditions that date back to the 1920’s or further. Therefore, the creationist movement has, since the 1920’s, made truly significant political advances in only two states.

As this WaPo article on the Kansas situation notes, anti-evolutionists have changed their tack from fighting evolution one on one to trying to show horn Intelligent Design into cirricula.

Propelled by a polished strategy crafted by activists on America's political right, a battle is intensifying across the nation over how students are taught about the origins of life. Policymakers in 19 states are weighing proposals that question the science of evolution.

The proposals typically stop short of overturning evolution or introducing biblical accounts. Instead, they are calculated pleas to teach what advocates consider gaps in long-accepted Darwinian theory, with many relying on the idea of intelligent design, which posits the central role of a creator.

Secondly, the creationism movement had completely failed to penetrate the scientific community. Every poll I’ve read from both the United States and Canada indicate that, although creationism may be popular among 38-45% of the population, evolution is still overwhelmingly the preferred theory of scientists.

Evolution's preeminence within the scientific community is not in question. However, that's also not the issue. Creationist/ID advocates have made significant strides by bypassing the skeptical scientific community altogether and going straight to the public.

Although I disagree with the tactics and motives of the Justice Sunday ralliers, I agree with their basic proposal that the filibuster is a ridiculous tactic for senate procedures and probably should be eliminated.

Easpecially if you want to work to enshrine a permenant majority. Who needs checks and balances?

[Black Dog]

Keeping America hard

The federal government will spend nearly $2 billion in the next decade on male impotence drugs under its Medicare program, according to a new cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office that is fueling some lawmakers' efforts to end that spending.

[Black Dog]

You've Been Drafted: Uncle Sam Wants You for the War on Drugs

If you "witness" certain drug offenses taking place or "learn" that they took place you would have to report the offense to law enforcement within 24 hours and provide "full assistance" in the investigation, apprehension, and prosecution of the people involved. Failure to do so would be a crime punishable by a mandatory two year prison sentence.

Here are some examples of offenses you would have to report to the police within 24 hours:

You see someone you know pass a joint to a 20-year old college student.

Your cousin mentions that he bought Ecstasy for some of his college friends.

You find out that your brother, who has kids, recently bought a small amount of marijuana to share with his wife.

Your substance-abusing daughter recently begged her boyfriend to find her some drugs even though they're both in drug treatment.

In each of these cases you face jail time if you don't call the police within 24 hours. It doesn't matter if the offender is your friend or relative. It also doesn't matter if you need 48 hours to think about it. You have to report the person to the government within 24 hours or go to jail. You also have to assist the government in every way, including wearing a wire if needed. Refusing to cooperate would cost you at least two years in prison (possibly up to ten).

[Black Dog]

Utah Senator wants "divine design" taught in biology

"The divine design is a counter to the kids' belief that we all come from monkeys. Because we didn't," said Buttars, the retired director of a private school for troubled boys. "It shocks me that our schools are teaching evolution as fact."

Next on the hitlist: that bullshit about "gravity".

[Black Dog]

Marine recruiters go above and beyond

The sergeant was friendly but, at the same time, aggressively insistent. This time, when Axel said, "Not interested," the sarge turned surly, snapping, "You're making a big (bleeping) mistake!"

Next thing Axel knew, the same sergeant and another recruiter showed up at the LaConner Brewing Co., the restaurant where Axel works. And before Axel, an older cousin and other co-workers knew or understood what was happening, Axel was whisked away in a car.

"They said we were going somewhere but I didn't know we were going all the way to Seattle," Axel said.

Just a few tests. And so many free opportunities, the recruiters told him.

He could pursue his love of chemistry. He could serve anywhere he chose and leave any time he wanted on an "apathy discharge" if he didn't like it. And he wouldn't have to go to Iraq if he didn't want to.

At about 3:30 in the morning, Alex was awakened in the motel and fed a little something. Twelve hours later, without further sleep or food, he had taken a battery of tests and signed a lot of papers he hadn't gotten a chance to read. "Just formalities," he was told. "Sign here. And here. Nothing to worry about."

[Argus]

glad you can pick out the most severly demented portions of are society and potray them as the average american. congradulations you are the biggest intolerant i think ive ever seen. (seen as far as thoughts you type out on this website). You obviously have not spent much time in America as you would clearly see that what makes the newspapers is far cry from your average law abiding decent american. Your inability to distiguish between an extremist conservative and the rest of america is unbelievable.

Hey jackass, where did I say that these folks were representative of the average American? Nowhere.

Nevertheless, you clearly had no intention of portraying them as aberations. You set themout as an example of why America is "declining". So why not be honest and admit that you are using examples of aberrant behaviour in order to portay the Americans in as bad a light as possible.

I could, for example, post endless stories about Black crime and violence. No where would I say "All Blacks are violent criminals" but the implication would be fairly strong.

That said, there's no denying the rising tide of extremism in the U.S, as evidenced by some of these stories.

Rising from what point? From the point of Senator Joe McCarthy? Do you think we're as high as that? I don't.

These people are indeed "severly demented ". they also represent a severly powerful element of contemporary Amerian society. ignore them at your own peril.

No, they're simply very religious. And, oddly, you don't seem to find any reason to criticise the extremely religious people of India, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, etc.

[Black Dog]

Nevertheless, you clearly had no intention of portraying them as aberations. You set themout as an example of why America is "declining". So why not be honest and admit that you are using examples of aberrant behaviour in order to portay the Americans in as bad a light as possible.

America is declining in that the handful of nuts I'm talking about are the ones running the whole show, or at least influencing the direction the country is heading. That's the problem. They are not the majority, even if they try to misrepresent the last election to show they are. The only people I'm trying to portray in a bad light are the individuals in question and the political culture in which they operate.

Rising from what point? From the point of Senator Joe McCarthy? Do you think we're as high as that? I don't.

I'd say things took a turn around the time Reagan got in. In fact, I've heard a lot of talk about a "culture war" down in the states. But it wasn't the left that declared it.

No, they're simply very religious. And, oddly, you don't seem to find any reason to criticise the extremely religious people of India, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, etc.

Balls to that. I criticize repressive types from othe rpart sof the world all the time. I challenge you to find on instance where I've supported reactionary religious types of any affiliation.

What's more is that I'm not living next door to the creeps in India, Pakistan, Egypt, Iran, nor are they in a position to influence the political debate here. What I do see is ads from Focus on the Family in Canadian newspapers.

[TokyoTakarazuka]

Easpecially if you want to work to enshrine a permenant majority. Who needs checks and balances?

Canadians like ourselves probably aren’t one to talk about that considering that even without the filibuster American judicial nominations would still have more checks-and-balances than the Canadian system. Without the filibuster, Bush’s nominations still would require majority approval in the senate, which is composed of elected representatives. In Canada, there is no government organ, elected or otherwise, that Paul Martin is obligated to defer to when making judicial appointments. Whatever the reasons for the longevity of Liberal control over the federal government, however, I doubt it can be attributed to defects in our judicial appointment process. Similarly, there is no evidence that eliminating judicial filibusters in the United States would enforce a Republican administration.

I maintain that the filibuster is a ridiculous way to protest a judicial appointment. In the American Senate, filibusters can be of any length and aren’t even required to be relevant to the current debate: some of them consist of nothing but reading from the phonebook. When they know a filibuster will be staged, senators have in the past brought pillows to work. Other rituals are even more bizarre. During Strom Thurmond’s record-breaking 24-hour filibuster an aid waited nearby with a urine bucket in case of an emergency. Lengthy filibusters generally aren’t acceptable in the House of Representatives, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable that the Republicans would want them curtailed in the Senate as well. Frankly, I would be ashamed to know that my MPs were bringing phonebooks and urine pails to work just to stall a judicial appointment which had already gained the approval of both an elected house of delegates and an elected president.

This article casts doubts on the COMPAS findings.

Even if this particular poll is flawed, it is consistent with most other surveys on the subject. Brian Alters, founder of the Evolution Education Research Centre and a professor of science education at McGill University, stated in a recent Ottawa Citizen article that polls on Canadian support for creationism always indicate figures between 25% and 50%, and he asserted that the higher numbers in that range are generally more credible (he also notes that “de-emphasizing evolution” in Canadian schools is “a chilling effect” of the present intelligent design movement). Alters estimates American support for creationism at about 50%. However, the results of recent American polls are just as contentious as Canadian ones. In an American poll which specifically asked whether creationism and evolution are ideologically in conflict with one another, 70% of respondents answered that they are not.

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=1903

However, that's also not the issue. Creationist/ID advocates have made significant strides by bypassing the skeptical scientific community altogether and going straight to the public.

However, I believe creationists will inevitably fail in these efforts unless they can make a larger impact among scientists. Collectively, the scientific community comprises one of America’s largest and most influential lobbying groups, and once they’ve established a prevailing opinion it’s virtually impossible to bypass. For instance, when Kansas removed evolution from state curricula in 1999, this was treated as a direct challenge. Thus, the groups which spearheaded the opposition were the National Centre for Science Education, and the National Academy of Sciences; organizations which have consistently and often successfully sought to contain the growth of creationist thought in public schools. Two years later, this concerted effort resulted in the repeal of anti-evolution laws. Once again evolution is on trial in Kansas, and once again groups such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the regionally-based Kansas Citizens for Science are the forefront defenders. I have great confidence that, in the end, fundamentalists will have little more success now than they did two years ago, precisely because of the power and determination of the scientific community.

America is declining in that the handful of nuts I'm talking about are the ones running the whole show, or at least influencing the direction the country is heading.

If you were a religious fundamentalist you would have a lot more to worry about, because few would deny that the clout that the fundamentalist lobby holds over the United States government is positively dwarfed by the influence of the scientific community. I guarantee you that there’s not a religious organization in the world with the political influence of the National Academy of Sciences or the Federation of American Scientists, organizations which have regularly counselled every American administration since the 1860’s and 1940’s respectively. If Christian extremists were running the US government, Bush would have an advisor paid to consult him on religious matters; he doesn’t, although he does have an advisor paid to consult him on scientific matters. That would be John Marburger. Although a vocal opponent of the intelligent design movement, that’s exactly the kind of advice he’s being paid to give. If Christian extremists were running the US government, then there would be a government-funded department dedicated to propagating the Christian religion; there isn’t, although there is an agency “to promote the progress of science”. That would be the National Science Foundation, which, with an annual budget of 5.5 billion dollars, provides extensive funding for research on natural history and biological evolution. Through the NSF, the US government actively bolsters the teaching of science education. Creationists can’t do anything about it, because they’re not the ones in control.