Monday, April 16, 2007

We Have "Credibility" Issues

On March 31, I posted a piece called Monica Goodling and 149 Others. It was about the fact that Monica, the attorney aide of Alberto Gonzalez implicated in the ever growing "Attorney Gate" Scandal was a graduate of Pat Robertsons Regents University. She is one of 150 graduates who went straight from the school into Justice Department positions and is the official who saiid that she would have to take the Fifth Amendment to prevent having to incriminate herself. I listed some of the credentials and "acomplishments" of some of the other members of the university teaching staff who have had positions in the Justice Department.
It is becoming clearer that the Bush Administration worked in league with Pat Robertson to place these graduates in positions to further his "Religious Revolutionary" seizure of power in our government and further his aims. These aims are the Administrations aims, to wage culture war from the inside.
Today it was revealed that George Bush may be at the center of the political plot to fire David Inglesias and the lost email scandal may be at the center of plot to protect him!
Today, I recieved this very interesting post from a blogger called jstraight. I checked out his claims and they are absolute fact!
He wrote:

Regent University has scrubbed from its web site any mention of its 150 graduates that work for the Bush administration.

Google cache has a screen capture from April 6 2007 of a Regent University’s “facts” web page where they proudly boast “150 graduates serving in the Bush Administration”

Their current “facts” page has that info removed:

Hmmm. Isn’t Regent University proud of those graduates anymore?

Or perhaps the number of graduates they listed as working for GWB was a bit overblown?

I have read elsewhere that there were 150 graduates working in the Justice Department. I would think that they are trying to erase the links to their "Cultural War, Religious Revolution" rhetoric before it becomes a catch phrase as the scandal becomes even bigger and engulfs them as it swallows more victims falling on their swords for the President.
Even Dick Cheney admitted "We have a credibility problem" today on Face The Nation!


Barb said...

A christian school can't brag about their grads in civil service but Yale and Harvard can?

I assume they scrubbed the list because of how you are using that knowledge right now --smelling a rat because Christians are hired by gov't. The fraternities and sororoties and ivy leaguers can favor their students in hiring, but not the Christians. we've all heard it's not WHAT you know but WHOM you know that gets you hired --but that can't apply to Christian people --only to everyone else.

we are all supposed to be secularist, humanist, atheistic, agnostic --or just NOMINALLY religious --but protect us from any true believers -any orthodox believers in God who, like William Wilburforce believed that his religious based values against slavery should prevail in a nominally Christian nation like Gt. Britain--and thankfully, his religion-based view that all men are equal in God's sight --that all men should be treated by The Golden Rule --prevailed and slavery ends. See the movie, Amazing Grace, out now.

microdot said...

Haw haw...thank you for your miserable attempt at justifying the organized destruction from within of our republic.
I guess I should be thankful you only wrote a few paragraphs.

Village Green said...

That wonderful "christian" law school is ranked at the bottom. I shudder at the thought of all those End Days driven people infiltrating the govt.

As for the movie Amazing Grace, I have heard that it has some excellent performances in it.

microdot said...

Amazing Grace isn't out here in France yet, but the reviews I have read of it mention that evangelicals aren't the only ones with a claim to be true christians.
Barb, I don;t mean to rude to a guest on my site, I've never deleted a comment and I never will.
(unless it's spam)
Welcome to my miserable liberal schmiberal life....

Barb said...

I don't know who is ranking the law schools, but Regent has had first place winning teams at least two years in a row in some national moot court competition. So they must know what they're doing.

amazing grace is very well done--it helps to know something going in --that Albert Finney plays John Newton, the composer of "Amazing Grace," who grieved the rest of his life for his role as a ship captain on a slave ship, who felt so guilty for the many deaths as well as the slavery --I gathered from the film that Wilberforce was raised in Newton's church where Newton was a minister? something ...we see him cleaning the floors, so I wasn't sure if that was self-imposed penance or what --I thought the film said he was a minister. NOw, I know I could research this --and my point is that a little research going in would be good for following the movie -- it does inspire further study though i have not done it.

It's a good love story too --and shows how romantic a movie can be without sex.

Barb said...

3rd time to post this --comment keeps disappearing. I'll copy it this time. I can't even do that --your format forbids it?

If you can be nice, I'll retract my blog snob comment to you and LD --though you guys do dance around, snorting and backslapping, over my perfectly coherent, rational, common sensical, on topic, cogent posts.

About the reviewer of the movie saying not all Christians are evangelicals --we would agree to a point. I assume Wilberforce was Anglican. John Wesley would be viewed as evangelical --and he is 18th C. abolition advocate I believe --father of methodism --These two plus Newton would all be viewed as heroes of the faith by today's evangelicals. Because, like evangelicals, they believed in a higher law to which a nation's laws should conform. England didn't have the separation of church and state argument. They defended slavery by ignoring the Golden Rule and other equality teachings of the book --by noting that the Bible didn't explicitly condemn slavery --but it did implicitly condemn it --and it never explicitly DEFENDED slavery either. However, Biblical references to slavery were not brought up in the movie that I recall --the war with France? was Parliament's defense for delaying abolition --they couldn't afford to break their economy in wartime and they were afraid abolition might do that.

there is a lot of dialogue and I'm sure I didn't catch it all

engineer of knowledge said...

The History of the Religious Right Movement

In the late 1970’s during the Carter Administration, Oral Roberts did not want to see blacks and whites dating holding hand on his college campus. To prevent this from happening, he made it a law that blacks could not apply to attend his school in Oklahoma. The Carter Administration noting the blatant segregation law baring blacks the right to apply to any school they desired simply based on skin color, took the viewpoint that if he continued to discriminate against black people that they would revoke the religious tax deferment. Jimmy Carter is a religious man that growing up in the south, instantly recognized the injustice toward the black community. There were many so called Christian Preachers who were heads of the Klan during the 1960’s civil rights period and were spouting passages, in their opinion, the proved that blacks and whites should not even eat at the same lunch counters much less be romantically involved with each other.

The other high profile Christian ministers like Pat Robertson and Jerry Farwell saw the enforcement of desegregation laws on Oral Roberts College started a movement touting that the government was attacking Christians. So they started political movements with names like, “Moral Majority,” etc. Of course the first causality of this movement was “Truth.” I am sure many remember the con-man, Oral Roberts, even had a campaign of, “If the people did not send in a million dollars to his fund that God would call him home.” So he sat in some penthouse tower with a video camera feeding to his television broadcast that would go fuzzy on queue and all of the other actors would get excited saying, “What happened?!?” “Is he still there?!?” Pat and Jerry would tout misleading facts and even lies to prove their points and people believed them because they were good Christian men. Bottom line, they are business men with multi-million empires preying on the fear that the government was going to force their godless ways on the people of the United States and force their grandchildren to marry a black person. This was the start of religions push to take back the government from the Carter Administration and the blacks going to evangelical religious colleges with the fear of losing the tax deferments”. I do not believe that this was the teachings of Jesus.

I will close with these quotes:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” Look up the Bombing in Birmingham, AL. A good Christian Minister was the instigator in this incident.

Arthur Schopenhauer,
“All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violent opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”

steve said...

I don't think the point was, that the Administration is hiring christians to key positions. The point is, is that they are attempting to undermine the wall between church and state and therefore abrogate ALL American's rights to freedom to believe whatever religion they want- Whether it be Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Budism, Taoism, Zeus, or The God of Thunder-Mighty Thor... and of course his father Odin. Anyway, they are trying to turn the United States into some kind of Fundie Christian Theocracy.. So when BushCo and friends do away with our first ammendment right to worship as we see fit. Will they force our women folk to dress only in ankle length skirts and burn all pant suits? Will we be euthanizing all mixed marriage couples and their offspring? If a woman seeks a divorce from an abusive husband, will we be stoning her to death?

Isn't that why the pilgrims escaped England because they didn't want to be Anglicans. Well I don't wont to be a fundementalist christian.

Barb, you want a state that imposes your moral and theocratic viewpoints on every body else. To achieve that kind of state, certain laws will have to be enacted, certain levers of power created to enforce moral conformity. What happens when the Fundie Christians lose power, say to an islamic administration. Now THOSE people have the levers of power at their disposal to enforce THEIR moral viewpoint on YOU. Today it's the 10 commandments on the courhouse steps, tomorrow it could be the 5 pillars of ISLAM.

The reason we have a secular government, is to protect YOU from religious coersion by the state, or other religions.

engineer of knowledge said...

Very well stated.

Barb said...

engineer of knowledge -

Are you sure you have your facts straight about ORU? It was Bob Jones U. that prohibited ALL hand-holding by dating couples on their campus --and prohibited any unchaperoned dating --and prohibited inter-racial dating because they believed God would want people to marry within their race to preserve those races. They DID have Afr. am. students. they DID lose their tax exempt status for awhile --they DID get rid of their stand on interracial dating, I BELIEVE --as there were many Biblical scholars even in their own ranks who didn't agree with the school that interr-acial dating was a sin--because it isn't Biblically prohibited.

microdot said...

After spending a half hour checking, I think Barb is correct, it was Bob Jones University instead of Oral Roberts, but Substitute Bob Jones for Oral Roberts and the facts of Engineers post about the interracial dating ban as well as out and out discrimination are exactly the same.
Bob Jones U refused to admit unmarried black men until 1972!
His statements about Oral Roberts as a religious con artist are right on, I remember watching his freak show back in the 50's and 60's!
Where did the particularly American Fundmentalist big business of Religion get its start?
There are doctrines and interpretations of the bible that occur no where else in the world.
A tradition of religious showmen who build corporate empires with their hands in every aspect of finance and exploitative business.
How about Pat Robertson and his investments in African Diamond Mines? Money was raised for his African Mission and spent on planes and equipment for the mining infra structure....One of the investors in the mining operation was the one time Liberian dictator.
How about Michigan Millionare Mark Prince and his private Blackwater Army corporation?
The attempt to create a fundamentalist religious organization with in the US Military?
These are all people who ideas of the limits of freedom and who should govern are radically different than what our constitution defines. This is a huge present threat that has to identified and fought with every legal weapon in our arsenal!

Barb said...

Steve and Engineer of knowledge --

Because I can't cut and paste into this blog or out of it, I wrote my response to your erroneous right wing history and misunderstanding of right wing goals on MY blog entry of April 17.07

I hope you'll follow the discussion there even if you choose to respond over here.

Views on the Religious Right should be based on facts and not liberal propaganda.

steve said...

Hilight the text by dragging across it, then hit Control + C to copy, then hit Control + V to paste. If you want to Cut the text out of something hit Control +X. I have a bad cold today and don't feel like commenting much, plus I'm pretty bummed about the school shooting.

engineer of knowledge said...

Oh Barbara, Barbara, Barbara,
Sorry I have not written back sooner on this topic but I have been out of town performing my duties as a consulting engineer.

Maybe I should introduce myself. I am a very active member of the Republican Party and work on many projects with my Republican Congressman Wayne Gilchrest. I also have had long conversations with Vice President Candidate Jack Kemp on current issues that are damaging the Republican Party and courses of action to correct these issues. I also contribute to my talents to the international consortium think tank “Aspen Institute” located at Wye Mills, MD. I have been called many things but never subservient to liberal propaganda. But this being said, I am also not subservient to neo-conservative propaganda that is being propagated within the Republican Party by some current leaders. I am not a “Yes” man. Tomas Jefferson stated that the secret of a properly working democracy is the art of truth.

I am glad that both you and Microdot research what is stated in these blogs but I also have more information at my access than most people. In the late 70’s it was observed that Oral Roberts was latently discriminating against black people and the Carter Administration threaten to revoke the religious tax deferment like what had be set as an example with Bob Jones as proof that they can and would act upon this threat. It was this president with Bob Jones and the continued threat to enforce the same action with Oral Roberts that the others like Pat Robertson and Jerry Farwell decided to go proactive to protect themselves on what they saw as a threat. (The reason you did not find this on a web site was because the revoking of Oral Robert’s tax deferment did not occur. The key word here is the “Threat of Revoking”) Here is where I got my information on the subject. I college “guy friend” classmate of my daughter continued his education and became a lawyer specializing in Tax Law. He did his internship with the IRS in Washington, DC. and is now with the Comptroller’s Office for the state in Annapolis, MD. This very nice guy has been to my home for holiday dinners and even some family gathering crab feasts. I have many contacts, like a personal friend who is the lawyer that defended the CIA agent whom Ollie North reported to. You can imagine my surprise when I heard on conservative radio making the statement that the Iran Contra matter never happened. It was just a liberal made up story to get to Regan. I have in my personal collection a letter from this CIA agent to my lawyer friend for helping him legally. By the way, the CIA agent was the only one who was not indicted. A fact that my friend takes great pride in. Ronny even went on TV and apologized to the American people. But I now here people quoting that the Iran Contra thing never happened. Go figure?!?

microdot said...

Jeepers! What a tale, Mr. Engineer!
Keep 'em coming!

Barb said...

on yesterday's comments:

Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority --followed by Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition –were two back to back movements which encouraged Christians to use their strength in numbers at the ballot box and in lobbying -- regarding the liberals’ erosion of American morality via entertainment media, their legalization of abortion, (now the gay agenda which was not an issue at first), liberals’ push to legalize drugs and prostitution and tendency to glamorize both; their perceived leniency on criminals, liberals’ weak response to crime, liberals’ advocacy of porn and sex establishments as civil rights (Playboy clubs and the "playboy philosophy" were in vogue then and it wasn't just liberals embracing it, but they would defend licentiousness in a culture), liberals' taking over our schools with their Planned Parenthood style of sex ed, their value- neutral, values-clarification style of life skills ed., liberal opposition to prayer,and holy book gifts and religious songs at public school graduations (something previously unchallenged and acceptable), liberals' embrace of ACLU agenda re: religious values and prayer exercise, etc. in the public square. (We used to say a little prayer of gratitude for our first grade morning snack 55 years ago --in public school. Didn't hurt anyone to believe in a loving Supreme Being to whom we owed gratitude for our blessings. Just as it never hurt anyone to pray a blessing on the graduates.)

It wasn’t the Religious Right that wanted to PLACE the Ten Commandments and the Christmas crèches where they had never been—they had ALREADY BEEN THERE --since the country’s beginnings. the Ten C’s were on the Supreme Court walls –with Moses and the tablets in the art work –long before the start of the current “religious right.”

It was LIBERALS who wanted to REMOVE the Ten C’s from public squares including public prayers in any tax supported situation or place. I remember when the Maumee community building refused a church's mother-daughter banquet on the basis of separation of church and state --though other groups could use the building.

Zion, Illinois, was founded by a religious group of people –and they had a town insignia with religious symbols in it. The liberal ACLU has fought and too often succeeded to remove all such historical remnants of our religious history from public property.

So THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT IS NOT THE CHANGE AGENT –they are the status quo protectors of things that make for a nation that is life-revering, wholesome, family-friendly, and respectful of the Golden Rule and Ten C’s.

I don’t know that either Falwell or Robertson ever defended racism (as accused here) –such as would have been practiced at a school that wouldn’t let Afr.-Americans attend or use the same facilities, etc. Bob Jones U. is not a typically evangelical institution –much more fundamentalist/conservative than most evangelical colleges. They had a religious belief that God wanted races to remain distinctive and marry within the race. What happened to them regarding their prohibition of interracial dating will happen to all churches and Christian institutions, including the boy scouts, if liberals control both the courts and legislatures and presidency. We will have to hire practicing homosexuals in religious institutions if liberals prevail, even though their lifestyle is contrary to Biblical faith and practice --whereas equality of races IS supported by the Bible; interracial marriage was never prohibited by the Bible. Homosex is a different issue than race; it's a lifestyle choice influenced by upbringing and sexual temptation just like adultery and pedophilia. IF liberals prevail on this issue, the church will not be able to preach what the bible clearly teaches about sexual morality pertaining to gays. And that would violate both church –state separation, free exercise of belief and the Bible.

microdot said...

Let's see, this began as a thread about a religious institution trying to influence the basic pillars of our government and legislate its agenda in our society and their percieved attempt to cover up the evidence of their involvement.
Barb began by attacking my motives for raising the question, fair enough.
But then changed the subject we are beginning to hear that old sweet refrain "The Homosexuals are comin!" Hide the babys, there's homosexual perverts lurkin around every corner waitin to snatch your young uns!
Who cares about the government?
Stop them homosexuals now because what ever they are doin, it's wrong and they better stop it now!

Thank you, Barb, the suspense was beginning to build up. I was beginning to wonder if you had I can sleep soundly tonight..Your one track mind is right back in the gutter dragging us all down with you!

Barb said...

It’s misinformed or dishonest to say the Religious Right wants to force everyone to be Christian or to even be moral. They are never about coercion of religious belief, as radical Muslims have been. Christians know that Christians are made by repentance and heart’s desire to follow Christ –voluntary faith. There is no conversion with coercion.

I was not raised to be a racist -we learned to sing "red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight." We had African missionaries (from Africa to Africa) speak to our VBS several years, one had become an MD, getting his first schooling through our mission schools in west africa. Both church colleges I knew the most about had African students and Afr. American, though not many--and there was no rule against interracial dating. These were evangelical, bible Believing schools.

So not all evangelical churches and schools had racist policies. More did not --because students of the Bible knew that racism was indefensible. The church challenged the culture in this area --and Christians also were part of our racist culture --so some were affected by it --especially in the south.

Yes, some managed to defend slavery by the Bible, but it wasn't easy. The Golden Rule pretty much rules it out and teachings about the universality of sin and salvation and god's love for His creation.

And finally, one more issue: the Religious Right was also against policies that caused the erosion of marriage among the poor through LBJ’s Great Society agenda which began to pay single women to keep fathers out of the home and make more fatherless babies --i.e. a welfare mom could get paid more per month for every kid –as long as Dad was not home. It became more profitable for a woman to make kids than to marry or get a low-paying job for which she was qualified. After welfare reform, the low income tax credits helped to motivate the poor and unskilled to work, also giving some kind of aid allowing fathers to be present in their homes. Liberal welfare policy had taken responsibility and value away from the minority dads –giving support for an already matriarchal society whose sons got into gangs and looked to prostitution and drugs to make their livings. Gov't had replaced the fathers.

Barb said...

Everything I posted explains the Religious Right's concern for government policy in various areas --the reason why a school like Regent U. would train attorneys and other graduates for government service --NOT to change the country and impose something new on it.

I have consistently contradicted your original point and that of others here that the Religious Right wants to CHANGE America to something it has never been --a theocracy headed by the church. NO --they want to see the BEST aspects (not ALL aspects, not the racist aspects) of our culture preserved because we know that culture influences youth --and the Church has its hands full trying to counterract a newly licentious culture (past 40 years or so) that is promoted by education, entertainment media, and liberals in gov't administration, legislature and courts.

Growth of home schooling and Christian schools --the strength of groups like Focus on the Family, Am. Family Ass'n, Family Research Council, --all are concerned about the difficulty of raising children to respect and believe the Bible when the other 6 days of the week the influences are determined to erode faith in America --because so many have departed from the faith of their grandparents and parents --often influenced by misinformation and deceitful propaganda against the truths of Biblical Christianity.

Yes, I'll grant you there are frauds and Christian leaders who get off track --as did King David in the Old Testament. But of course, they are not to be our examples --Jesus is our standard. His teachings our guide. The bible can be misused, but it is still one of the finest guides for life found anywhere.

If the Bible is true, then socially liberalizing america at the expense of church and Biblical influence, is dangerous.

microdot said...

"If the Bible is true, then socially liberalizing america at the expense of church and Biblical influence, is dangerous."

What the hell does this mean?

I'd say we are back at the original starting point of having religious beliefs forced on us by a self righteous power crazed group who needs, like all extremist movements to create the embattled fortresss bunker mentality that stifles reason.

Barb said...

I wrote: "If the Bible is true, then socially liberalizing america at the expense of church and Biblical influence, is dangerous."

There is "reason" to christianity --have you read Chuck Colson's "Born Again" --or C.S. Lewis's "mere Christianity" --or any of Lee strobel's books (I think that's his name.)

Since you asked, IT MEANS: IF THE BIBLE IS TRUE, then undermining faith in the Bible, God and Christ, and weakening the church's influence in our culture, ignoring and changing the traditional, Biblical standards of right and wrong --these are detrimental to eternal health--for it is by faith that we are saved.

Socially liberalizing america includes the following aspects of undermining faith, especially in our youth:

Restricting free exercise of faith in the public arena --and stifling and censoring religious expression,

undermining belief in the Bible through higher education (or lower) by teaching kids that the Bible is NOT true, or by teaching that all religions are equally true (as with the Calif. school children practicing Islamic dress, prayer times, the tenets of Islam as a multicultural lesson) plus yoga with salutations to the sun and Hindu meditation. It's OK to teach about religions--but not to imply through multicultural teaching that all faiths are equally true, equally good, etc., -- putting kids through the motions of these more recently imported religions, for THEN we are undermining Christianity, the faith of most of the tax payers which claims to be the only true faith.

This is unwise whether the Bible is true or not, because the Bible is the civilizer of the west --bedrock to our ideals of human rights, and equality. (let's remember that Hinduism, in contrast, has its caste system, sacred cows, reincarnation beliefs, wives burned on funeral pyres (in the past), transcending above the poor around you through meditation --and ignoring the poor because they need to endure their deserved karma, until the next life.

Christianity is really the best of the world religions --by any reasonable and honest analysis and comparison of both its tenets and its results upon individuals and nations--when applied properly --i.e. when Jesus' teachings are applied and not ignored.

ANd IF the bible is true--it is eternally dangerous and possibly temporally dangerous --to not love the God who loves us --to reject the pardon and the relationship He offers to individuals --who make up families, churches, communities, nations. It is dangerous to undermine the Christian faith of others --if the Bible is true.

The fact that some of us believe this way need not make the secularist or the liberal Christian who doesn't believe the Bible, angry --as long as he is secure in his unbelief, sure that he is right. Because no one can force you to believe --and no one wants to force you to go through the motions. E.G. Even if there were a graduation prayer, or team prayers, or prayer before an athletic banquet --you don't have to pray yourself. You can think about anything else during those moments.

I think the anger of people who do not believe the Bible enters in because of their fear that the Bible is true, after all. For complicated reasons stemming perhaps from one's upbringing, or one's guilts, many people feel that the Gospel means "bad news" when it really means "good news."

the bad news is that we have responsibility to make a choice and are accountable for that choice and that there are both good and bad consequences --depending on what choice we make (Heaven or Hell) --the good news is that Christ loved us and conquored the grave for all of us --so we need only to repent and believe and enter into a faith relationship with Christ and we'll live forever in a better place.

The Bible says we are immortal through Christ--and that's good news at a funeral.

It won't kill you to have this long post here --I was just trying to answer your question as best I could. You probably won't even read this far and need to upset yourself.

JStraight said...

Regent University corrects an inaccuracy?

As late as 6 April, 2007, Regent University's “facts” web page proudly boasted that they had:
“150 graduates serving in the Bush Administration.”

Between April 6 and April 13, the University removed that statement from their web site and, for at least several days, (April 13-16) there was no statement listed at all about any Regent U. graduates working for the Bush administration.

Sometime on April 16, a new statement appeared on their "facts" page:
"150 students have served in the Bush administration."

Apparently, not all of the 150 are still "serving" Bush, but does this statement also mean that some of the 150 "students" never actually graduated from the U?

Barb said...

jstraight --I suspect you are right about the change --that the original statement was technically inaccurate. those things aren't usually intentional--just sloppy. Someone noticed it and they responded.

jayefbee said...

Those who incorrectly assume the posture that the franework of our constitution was designed to exclude Biblical values are technically eligible for the Darwin Award in Reasoning Abilities. When the Declaration of Independence, our civil and criminal codes, and all the founding documents of our nation were drafted, whom do you think the authors were referring to when God was cited?

In the absence of Judeo-Christian values, where do you presume our standards of laws originated? Economics, Business, Medicine, Technology, and Personal Freedom has consistently been documented at the highest historica levels within nations where the leaders observed these principles.

Because someone is a Christian or attends a Christian University, the assumption is imposed by those who wish to live life without moral ramifications, that those persons should have no rights to exercise the same rights given to all under the constitution. Should an Atheist have more rights under the law than a believer? Some who have posted in this blog would say no but argue that by exercising involvment in governance, the believer is removing the rights of the Atheist. In fact, through gradualism and secular humanism, the rights and freedoms of the belivers have consistently been impaired by the voices of the secular socialists for more than 50 years.

The irony of the situation of this entire discussion is, the underlying assumption that the supposed "scandal" with the DOJ and the Attorney General's office is based upon the premise that all the firings and changes were wrong because of some super-secret right-wing conservative agenda. In reality, if you removed the labels of left and right, Democrat and Republican from the issue of the mass firings, lined up all those removed from the bench, and then polled the American Public with the question of thumbs up or thumbs down, I would suspect the lot would be removed with tar and feather. Where many have been influenced by the media and constant barrage of Bush-hating liberals, the same group are also fed-up with the ludicrous decisions coming from the judiciary and the burden upon our progress as a result of a growing consortium of wealthy trial lawyers. I am convinced that if every child were forced to not only graduate collge, but go on to secure a JD, all productivity and sense of reason within our country would reach a permanent standstill.

Forgive the idealism, but what IF the mass firings and decisions were good??? The public objections are based upon the premise they were bad because conservative attorneys appointed by the Bush administration were bad. I am not asserting they were all correct, BUT, don't build an entire conspiracy theory around a biased assumption. If that kind of logic were applied in medicine, everyone with a headache would be treated with the assumption that a brain tumor or aneurism were the cause.

FYI, your posted comments about Oral Roberts could not be more incorrect. You have absolutely mistaken your facts for Bob Jones. Again, the premise, Oral has a University and is in the minsitry, therefore let's lump him together with Bob Jones. With a native American heritage, nobody is more sensitive and caring for minorities than Oral Roberts. He has invested nearly 75 years of his life to helping and loving people. Those who would make unfounded accusations against the man should measure the contributions of their own lives. When you can say you have even helped 1/1000th of the people Oral has touched then you may have the right to judge.

Based upon what I have read in this blog three other things merit clearing up: Elvis IS really dead, Oswald acted alone, and there are NO alien bodies in Area 51...

"If you Asked Me..."