http://phonogram.us/viewpoint/family.htm

The above is a link to an article by Pastor Christopher Priest. It address gay rights and bigotry.

An open letter to former Governor Julian Carroll:November 18, 2005

Dear Mr. Carroll,
I appreciate the things that you have done in the past to help Powell County. I'm sure that we benefitted as much or more from your term in office as we have benefitted from every Democratic governor we've had. I also appreciate the fact that you seem committed to keep a firm eye on and a sharp word for the Republicans currently skirking around Frankfort, from your vista at the Fountain Plaza. Some of your remarks, however, cannot go by without notice. You offended about a third of the room within five minutes of beginning to speak to the the Powell County Democratic Action Group last night. Apparently you are very much a Dixiecrat at heart, and you assume that Powell County Democrats are right there with you. You forget that Powell County contains an awful lot of liberal voters, and this group contains a lot of them. “I’m against abortion. I’ve been against abortion all my life. My faith demands it of me.” “I’m not for same-sex marriages. Who’s gonna have the kids?” The irrelevance of that last bit is just astounding. I don't have a problem with Democrats like you who believe that way. I do have a major problem, however with elected officials who buck their own party to vote for what is Written instead of voting for what is right. The separation of church and state in this country is all that separates us from the maniacal Muslims in the Middle East who hate us so much. I also have a major problem with anyone addressing members of my party in a stump speech, claiming to be a Democrat, and then beginning by distancing himself with the main body of the party. If you have a problem with our party's platform, then we respect your right to address that issue, but not by assuming that we are all on your side, and not by catering to the Republicans in drag, and especially not by making excuses for taking away one group's civil rights. When we should be telling our less enlightened party members why protecting the civil rights of everyone in this country is so important, you're spouting out Republican rhetoric that helps to justify hatred. There are people out here who believe in a woman's right to choose. This is our party. There are those of us who think it is wrong to tell two people who are in love that they can't get married, and enjoy the special rights that married couple enjoy. This is our party. There are a few of who nearly walked out, but stayed to see if you began making sense. We were disappointed. More than a few of us think the Committee of 29 is just a way of making sure the Democratic Party remains a relic in this state, whose direction is determined by political bosses rather than by the will of the people, because this is our party. If you are so good at getting commitments from potential candidates not to run if not endorsed, why can't you get commitments to scale back spending, and not to run dirty. You could get it in writing so that the party itself can publish a censure should a candidate go back on this commitment. That would be a much better way, a much more democratic way, to keep from exhausting our coffers and smearing our candidates, instead of taking the decision away from working people. After all, THIS IS OUR PARTY! Are you sure that it's really yours?

Sincerely,
Brinton Epperson

"I don't believe it," seethed Ann Coulter.

How 'bout that liberal media.

Of course, if you've ever spent twenty minutes defending a leftist position you've undoubtedly heard the rhetoric. The media is liberally slanted. The New York Times hates America. Hollywood undermines patriotism. You get the point. But let me ask you this, if the media suffers from such rampant liberalism, then how did this story possibly fly under the radar?

I consider myself to be fairly news-savvy. I read four or five different newspapers a day, I keep up with the blogs, I watch CNN, C-Span, and just for laughs I occasionally tune into Fox News. So how is that everyone from Michael Moore to Buzzflash missed this story? Granted, it's only a month or so old, but why did I have to dig through the depths of The Nation's archives to find it?

Apparently Pat Tillman wasn't so much the party line soldier, but a Chomskyite questioning his place in the war.

Like Cindy Sheehan, another Gold Star mother, a far more prominent one, is now asking questions that the Bush Administration would rather leave unanswered.

As Mary Tillman said this past May, "They could have told us up front that they were suspicious that [his death] was a fratricide, but they didn't. They wanted to use him for their purposes.... They needed something that looked good, and it was appalling that they would use him like that."

But even more powerful than that statement is a comment from the same article that quotes Tillman himself as saying, "You know, this war is so f***ing illegal." The Nation reports that Tillman himself had arranged a meeting with legendary leftist Noam Chomsky upon his return to the states, a meeting that never occurred due to his unfortunate death in a friendly fire incident in Afghanistan.

If one story exists to refute the allegations of the "liberal media" it must surely be this one. After all, wouldn't the "liberal media" just adore a story like this?

Oh, and screw Ann Coulter.

"As far as I'm concerned it was a blindside attack," Roberts said. "That's not the way to run the intelligence committee. We really politicized it, and I think that's most unfair."

- Sen. Pat Roberts (R-KS) regarding the closed session to discuss pre-war Iraqi WMD evidence

"This is an affront to me personally," said Frist, a Tennessee Republican. "This is an affront to our leadership. It is an affront to the United States of America, and it is wrong."

Sen. Bill Frist (R-TN) regarding the same session


FACT: Senate Republicans called for closed sessions SIX times during the impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton... who was later acquitted.