Obama Hanging In In North Carolina

Ken AshfordElection 2008, Local Interest1 Comment

Candidate July 23-27 June 26-29 Pollster
McCain 47 45 46
Obama 44 41 44
Barr 3 5

2.5

So Obama is still behind by a few points, but within the margin of error (832 LVs, July 23-27, MOE +/- 3.4%)

From Public Policy Polling’s analysis:

Obama leads 53-38 among respondents most concerned with the economy, and 58-32 with those whose top issue is the war.

"The bigger an issue the economy is for voters the better Barack Obama is going to do," said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. "If North Carolina voters choose on immigration or moral and family values, John McCain is going to win a big victory here. But if voters increasingly put the economy foremost when deciding who to vote for, Democrats are going to have the best shot they’ve had in quite a long time."

Obama leads 82-8 among black voters, but trails 57-34 with whites.

For what it’s worth, the PPP poll presumes a 20% turnout of NC African-Americans, which is, to my thinking, probably low.  26% turned out in the 2004 elections, and I suspect that number will be higher this year, given that there is a black candidate.

Let Us Not Bicker About Who Killed Who

Ken AshfordCrime, Right Wing Punditry/IdiocyLeave a Comment

Wow.  This paragraph is astounding:

In other words, the Adkisson case provides a case study in the secular demonology of the left. We’re seeing the politics of hatred in action. It’s marked by demands for vengeance and modes of discourse seeking to protect the perceived purity of the liberal sensibility. It is irreligious and opportunistic. It is the repudiation of decency. It is the absence of divine soul. With it, we see the Bush adminstration, John McCain, Bill O’Reilly, and Fox News attacked as the manifestation of the Fourth Reich.

He’s talking about the killing in Tennessee the other day, where Jim David Adkisson walked into a Unitarian Church and opened fire, killing two.  Adkisson wanted to commit suicide-by-cop, and chose that church for one reason and one reason only: because it was "liberal" (it welcomed, for example, gays).  Adkisson’s home was later searched and found to have the standard conservative fare — books by O’Reilly, and Michael Savage and so on.  Adkisson hated liberals.

And liberals on the Internet, myself included, have pointed out this fact.

Liberalhuntingpermit_thumbnailBut somehow by making this point, it is the liberals engaging in the politics of hatred, not the man who shot at liberals because they were liberals.  That’s what the above paragraph is trying to say.

No, sir.  The "politics of hatred in action" happened on Sunday in a little church in Tennessee.  Not on the Internets.  Adkisson’s actions were the by-product of an entire market — in books, radio, and television — to demonize liberals.  It’s a market replete with eliminationist rhetoric, like the time Ann Coulter quipped (as a "joke", of course) that "we need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens’ creme brulee"

Or when Limbaugh said (as a "joke", of course):

"I tell people don’t kill all the liberals. Leave enough so we can have two on every campus — living fossils — so we will never forget what these people stood for."

Try as they might to plead that nobody point out the obvious, conservative pundits simply can’t escape the fact that Adkisson, while clearly mentally ill, was a creature of the rightwing hate machine industry.  And it’s not a stretch to lay indirect blame at the feet of those incidiary conservatives who talk (you know, as a joke) about killing, maiming, incarcerating, deporting liberals.  When you start hearing this stuff enough, it’s not surprising when some people stop thinking you’re "joking" (because, after all, it isn’t funny to begin with), and starting thinking it’s serious.

Little Tremble in California

Ken AshfordBreaking News, DisastersLeave a Comment

The Nevada Seismological Lab Helicorder webcam (in my righthand column) caught it:

Shutter20080729

UPDATE:  Happened six minutes ago as I write this. 

Data from USGS says it was a 5.8.  Epicenter is 3 km ( 2 mi) SW of Chino Hills, CA, which is an LA suburb.  Happened at 2:42:15 pm. EST, which is 11:42:15 am Pacific Time.

News reports just coming in….

UPDATE:  USGS says epicenter was 47 km (29 miles) ESE (103°) from Los Angeles Civic Center, CA.  It appears to have been 12.3 km (7.6 miles) deep, which is, as earthquales go, pretty shallow.  Could mean some structural damage.

3335119117

Looks like many smaller aftershocks, too….

MSNBC reporting only minor structural damage

The Sun Will Come Out Tomorrow

Ken AshfordCrime, GodstuffLeave a Comment

A nice blog report about the services at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church.  As you may know, the gunman interrupted a church performance of "Annie" which (obviously) never reached the final curtain.

Today, the kids sang "Tomorrow".  That’s very Unitarian.

Things I Didn’t Know: Internet Edition

Ken AshfordScience & Technology1 Comment

I knew that the Internet is an outgrowth of ARPANET ("ARPA" = Advanced Research Projects Agency, which was a division under the Department of Justice Defense [of course — what was I thinking when I typed "Justice"?]), which was created in the late 1960’s/early 1970’s as a way for the military to get info and data (quietly) from those in the academic world.

What I didn’t know is that there exists a 1963 memo about forming the ARPANET.  You can read it here.  I particularly like the memo is addressed to "Members and Affiliates of the Intergalactic Computer Network".

I also didn’t know that the first ARPA consisted of four nodes ("users" in present day parlance).  Here’s original documentation:

Arpanetwork4nodes

The nodes were at UCLA, Stanford Research Institute, UC Santa Barbara, and University of Utah.

The first login to a remote computer is shown by this, uh, log (yes, the word "login" comes from the fact that connecting to host computers were logged in a written log):

Firstarpanetimplog

A description of the historical event:

The programmers in Westwood (UCLA – Ed.) were to type "log" into their computer, with the SRI computer in Palo Alto filling out the rest of the command, adding "in."

"We set up a telephone connection between us and the guys at SRI," Kleinrock recalled. "We typed the L, and we asked on the phone, ‘Do you see the L?’ ‘Yes, we see the L,’ came the response. We typed the O, and we asked, ‘Do you see the O?’ ‘Yes, we see the O.’ Then we typed the G, and the system crashed!" They immediately rebooted and this time, ARPANET sprung to life. (Source)

I learned all this from an interesting post at Neatorama.

oh, by the way, the first video posted on YouTube was uploaded at 8:27 pm on Saturday April 23rd, 2005. It was of one of the YouTube founders at the San Diego Zoo:

That kid’s a multibillionaire now.

Rules In The Obama Household

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

From People:

* No whining, arguing or annoying teasing
* Make the bed. "Doesn’t have to look good—just throw the sheet over it," says Mom.
* Keep playroom toy closet clean
* Set your own alarm clock.
* Be considerate of how other people might feel. Put yourself in the place of other people.
* Never think that you’re better than anybody else. Or worse than anybody else.
* If you guys can’t decide nicely what program to watch, then you don’t get to watch anything.
* Lights out at 8:30 (but have a grandmother on standby who likes to bend this rule when Mom and Dad aren’t home)

I find this very ironic, because they are very similar to the rules in my household:

* No whining, arguing or annoying teasing.  Okay, a little teasing is okay.
* Make the bed. "Doesn’t have to look good—just throw the sheet over it," says Me.
* Keep playroom toy closet clean (everything else can be messy)
* Set your own alarm clock.
* Be considerate of how other people might feel. Put yourself in the place of other people.
* Never think that you’re better than anybody else. Or worse than anybody else.
* If you guys can’t decide nicely what program to watch, use TIVO.
* Lights out at 11:30

Election 2008: It’s Over

Ken AshfordElection 2008Leave a Comment

What?!?

It’s over?!?  How can that be?  Election Day is 100 days away.

But that’s what many are already saying.  Check out this electoral map from Pollster.com:

Electmap

[The actual map at Pollster.com is better — it’s interactive, so you can see the underlying polls on which this map is based]

Now, with 270 electoral votes needed, Obama is already there (barring, of course, a huge gaffe of epic proportions). 

To win, McCain would have to maintain all his "lean McCain" states, win ALL the tossup states (in yellow above), and snag a major "lean Obama" state (like Ohio).  That’s a very tall order.

Experts are starting to way in that this is shaping up to be a blowout.  In an essay titled "The Myth of a Toss-up Election," Alan Abramowitz (Emory), Tom Mann (Brookings) and Larry Sabato (Virginia), jointly declared:

[V]irtually all of the evidence that we have reviewed – historical patterns, structural features of this election cycle, and national and state polls conducted over the last several months – points to a comfortable Obama/Democratic party victory in November. Trumpeting this race as a toss-up, almost certain to produce another nail-biter finish, distorts the evidence and does a disservice to readers and viewers who rely upon such punditry….

It is no exaggeration to say that the political environment this year is one of the worst for a party in the White House in the past sixty years. You have to go all the way back to 1952 to find an election involving the combination of an unpopular president, an unpopular war, and an economy teetering on the brink of recession….[I]f history is any guide, and absent a dramatic change in election fundamentals or an utter collapse of the Obama candidacy, John McCain is likely to suffer the same fate as Adlai Stevenson.

Other political science academics aren’t quite as willing to go that far out on a limb:

Vanderbilt’s John Geer, in turn, is by no means convinced that McCain will lose as badly as Adlai Stevenson in 1952.

"We all know it is a Democratic year. But that does not mean Obama will win. Yes, the odds are in his favor. But there are at least 3 reasons why the election may be close, with either McCain or Obama winning," Geer said.

First, according to Geer, "we live in a post 9-11 world and the public has to be comfortable with a candidate’s ability to deal with foreign policy. Many voters are not yet comfortable….Second, McCain is a good candidate….Third, the last two presidential elections have been very close. Yes, there have been Democratic gains in some quarters and turnout may be up. But turnout was up in 2004 from 2000 and Republicans had made gains right after 9-11 and yet the election remained close."

Robert Y. Shapiro (Columbia) also sees a close election, but he adds that the closeness means the quality of the two campaigns will become all the more crucial: "This is where I see Obama as the likely victor not only in the popular vote but in winning, perhaps by very close margins, in the past blue states he needs to hold on to, and in Ohio and states in the west and possibly a few surprises. This will happen if, as I expect, Obama outcampaigns McCain."

Along similar lines, Michael S. Lewis-Beck, of the University of Iowa, said he and a colleague, Charles Tien of Hunter College, City University of New York, have just written an essay forecasting "that Obama will win, but just by a hair. The reason the contest will be so close is because of what we call ‘ballot box racism.’ We estimate that about 11 or 12 percent of voters who would otherwise vote for Obama will not vote for him because he is black. Our forecasting model, if uncorrected for the race factor, predicts a landslide for Obama. But once the ‘racial cost’ is corrected for, we get a bare Obama majority (about 50.6% of the two-party popular vote)."

Helmut Norpoth of Stony Brook University has an even closer prediction based on his model: a virtual tie, 50.1 percent for Obama, 49.9 percent for McCain.

Interestingly, nobody is predicting a McCain win right now.  Even by a hair.

My personal feeling is that, while I’m happy about this news, it would be bad to get complacent about this.  After all, if people already think it’s a done deal, turnout will be low, and that could tip the scales in some close states.

The Beast Has A Credit Card

Ken AshfordEconomy & Jobs & DeficitLeave a Comment

Naar611_budget_20080728183631Thank you, David Stockman.

For those of you who don’t remember, Stockman was director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Reagan.  He was among the most enthusiastic converts to what came to be called the “starve the beast” theory of taxation.

The Republican theory is that big government — well, government in general  — is baaad.  There’s no empirical basis for this belief, except to say that government often stands in the way of big business by regulating big business.  It is government, after all, that wouldn’t allow businesses to engage in child labor, pollute our waters, and so on.  So there is a natural friction between government and business.  And Republicans, in the pocket of big business, naturally take anti-government stances.

The "starve the beast" theory of taxation, developed in the early Reagan administration is quite simple: if the government doesn’t get any money, it can’t do things which stand in the way of business.  Therefore, if you lower income taxes, government can’t afford to govern.  It was a cynical way to prevent Democrats from actually improving this country.

it was a nice theory, but it doesn’t work.  Because the government doesn’t need money to govern.  It just simply borrows the money, and runs up huge deficits.

And now we’ve got a record:

President Bush will leave his successor with a record-high budget deficit of $482 billion, according to an administration estimate released Monday.

White House officials blamed the slowing economy and a $150-billion bipartisan stimulus package for the worsening picture for the 2009 fiscal year, but Democrats cited the president’s tax cuts and fiscal management over his eight years in office.

The cynic would say — perhaps correctly — that this is intentional.  Assuming Obama gets to be president, he’s going to have to spend the next several years cleaning up this fiscal nightmare, and won’t be able to get certain things done (like national health insurance, etc.)

Nothing But ‘Net

Ken AshfordPopular CultureLeave a Comment

A terafic milestone, according to Google’s report,

[O]ur systems that process links on the web to find new content hit a milestone: 1 trillion (as in 1,000,000,000,000) unique URLs on the web at once!

How do we find all those pages? We start at a set of well-connected initial pages and follow each of their links to new pages. Then we follow the links on those new pages to even more pages and so on, until we have a huge list of links. In fact, we found even more than 1 trillion individual links, but not all of them lead to unique web pages. Many pages have multiple URLs with exactly the same content or URLs that are auto-generated copies of each other. Even after removing those exact duplicates, we saw a trillion unique URLs, and the number of individual web pages out there is growing by several billion pages per day.

So how many unique pages does the web really contain? We don’t know; we don’t have time to look at them all! 🙂 Strictly speaking, the number of pages out there is infinite — for example, web calendars may have a "next day" link, and we could follow that link forever, each time finding a "new" page. We’re not doing that, obviously, since there would be little benefit to you. But this example shows that the size of the web really depends on your definition of what’s a useful page, and there is no exact answer.

We don’t index every one of those trillion pages — many of them are similar to each other, or represent auto-generated content similar to the calendar example that isn’t very useful to searchers….

The Final Word On The DOJ

Ken AshfordAttorney FiringsLeave a Comment

Remember this scandal?  Verdict (of a sort) is in:

Former Justice Department counselor Monica M. Goodling and former chief of staff D. Kyle Sampson routinely broke the law by conducting political litmus tests on candidates for jobs as immigration judges and line prosecutors, according to an inspector general’s report released today.

Goodling passed over hundreds of qualified applicants and squashed the promotions of others after deeming candidates insufficiently loyal to the Republican party, said investigators, who interviewed 85 people and received information from 300 other job seekers at Justice. Sampson developed a system to screen immigration judge candidates based on improper political considerations and routinely took recommendations from the White House Office of Political Affairs and Presidential Personnel, the report said.

Goodling regularly asked candidates for career jobs: "What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?" the report said. One former Justice Department official told investigators she had complained that Goodling was asking interviewees for their views on abortion, according to the report.

Taking political or personal factors into account in employment decisions for career positions violates civil service laws and can run afoul of ethics rules. Investigators said today that both Goodling and Sampson had engaged in "misconduct."

The improper personnel moves deprived worthy candidates of promotions and damaged the credibility of the Justice Department, investigators wrote. An experienced counterterrorism prosecutor, for example, was kept from advancing in favor of a more junior lawyer who lacked a background in terrorism.

The procedures imposed on immigration judge candidates caused serious delays in appointing judges at a time when the courts suffered under a heavy workload, the report said.

Of all the Bush adminsitration scandals, and there have been many, this particular scandal will probably be a footnote.  But sadly, it should be remembered more fervently.  We get into very dangerous grounds will the law, and those oblligated to enforce, are politicized.

The final report from the DOJ (PDF format) contains goodies like this:

We interviewed Angela Williamson, who was the Department’s Deputy White House Liaison and reported to Goodling during most of Goodling’s tenure as White House Liaison. Williamson attended numerous interviews conducted by Goodling and told us that Goodling asked the same questions “all the time” and tried to ask the same questions of all candidates. […] After Goodling resigned, Williamson typed from memory the list of questions Goodling asked as a guide for future interviews. Among other questions, the list included the following:

  • Tell us about your political philosophy. There are different groups of conservatives, by way of example: Social Conservative, Fiscal Conservative, Law & Order Republican.
  • [W]hat is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?
  • Aside from the President, give us an example of someone currently or recently in public service who you admire.

We found that this last question often took the form of asking the candidate to identify his or her most admired President, Supreme Court Justice, or legislator. Some candidates were asked to identify a person for all three categories. Williamson told us that sometimes Goodling asked candidates: “Why are you a Republican?”

Several candidates interviewed by Goodling told us they believed that her question about identifying their favorite Supreme Court Justice, President, or legislator was an attempt to determine the candidates’ political beliefs. For example, one candidate reported that after he stated he admired Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Goodling “frowned” and commented, “but she’s pro-choice.”

Shootings at Unitarian Church In Tennessee

Ken AshfordCrime, Godstuff, Sex/Morality/Family Values1 Comment

You know, it’s both laughable and disturbing that pundits like Michelle Malkin can make their daily bread by referring to liberals as the "unhinged left", accompanyed by such adjectives as "deranged" and so on.

When was the last time a disgruntled liberal started shooting people he disagreed with politically or socially?  Ever???  It just seems to me that even at its most fringiest extreme, the left just doesn’t do eliminatiost rhetoric.  But you find a LOT of that on the right side of the spectrum.

And it’s not just talk.  Yesterday, as posted on The Moderate Voice, there was a shoot-up in a Knoxville church.  Two people were killed; several injured, somce remain in critical condition.

Terrible news this morning. Some man entered our church with a shotgun and started shooting

I was not there this morning as we had friends visiting from out of town. But we seriously considered attending with our friends. This is such a shock to the community here. Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church is such a welcoming community. Though it’s decidedly more liberal than East Tennessee as a whole, we have very good relations with the rest of the community. I don’t understand why anybody would do this. All we know right now is that the suspect was not connected to the church in any way. I have no idea if the man had some sort of political or cultural agenda (TVUUC had just put up a sign welcoming gays to the congregation), or if it’s just some lunatic acting for no reason at all.

This morning we learned the answer to the reason why:

The shotgun-wielding suspect in Sunday’s mass shooting at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church was motivated by a hatred of “the liberal movement,” and he planned to shoot until police shot him, Knoxville Police Chief Sterling P. Owen IV said this morning.

Jim D. Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in which he stated his “hatred of the liberal movement,” Owen said. “Liberals in general, as well as gays.”

Atkinson entered the church during a performance of "Annie, Jr."

072807churchillustration_t600

While I can understand that there are bigots out there who dislike gays, I just can’t understand the mentality of someone who would shoot up a children’s musical, in a church, because of their hatred for gays.  Boggles the minds.

UPDATE:  Being closest to a UU member myself (to the extent I am affiliated with any religion), I was touched by rousing defense of the religions, as expressed by Sara at Ornicus:

We are an odd group, we Unitarians.

Conventional wisdom says that we’re soft in all the places our society values toughness. Our refusal to adhere to any dogma must mean that we’re soft in our convictions. Our reflexive open-mindedness is often derided as evidence that we’re soft in the head. Our persistent and gentle insistence on liberal values is evidence of hearts too soft to set boundaries. And all of this together leads to a public image of a mushy gathering of feckless intellectuals that somehow lacks cohesion, backbone, focus, or purpose.

You can only believe this if you don’t know either the history or the modern reality of Unitarian Universalism. The faith’s early founders, Michael Servitus and Francis David, were executed for the radical notion that belief in the Trinity — which excluded Muslims and Jews — should not be a requirement for participation in 16th century public life. Four hundred years later, in the same part of the world, other Unitarians died in concentration camps for having the courage of their humanist convictions. Viola Liuzzo, a 39-year-old mother from Michigan who was killed by the Klan in the days following the Selma march in 1965, was one of ours, too.

And then there are the thousands of us who lived to fight another day — surviving not because we were weak and indecisive, but because we were unshakable in our convictions and unwilling to back down out of sheer cussedness. That Unitarian-bred belief in the nobility of the human spirit was the spiritual foundation on which a plurality of America’s founders found sure footing as their convictions crystallized into revolution against tyranny. It fueled the passionate oratory of Daniel Webster, the wisdom of Ben Franklin, and the incisively clear writings of Tom Paine. It sent Paul Revere out into the cold of an April evening, and set Thomas Jefferson to the task of writing a Declaration. It recklessly bet the church’s entire existence — and the lives of its leaders, who willingly and knowingly committed a capital act of treason — in order to publish the Pentagon Papers.

Unitarianism and Universalism lit the spark of progressive change that drove Susan B. Anthony, Lucy Stone, and Julia Ward Howe to organize for women’s rights. It sent Jane Addams, Dorothea Dix, Albert Schweitzer, and Clara Barton forth to bring health and hope to the poor. It gave voice to poets from Whitman to Plath to cummings, novelists from Dickens to Melville to Vonnegut, and musicians from Bartok to Grieg to Seeger. It fueled the boundless imaginations of Bucky Fuller and Rod Serling and Frank Lloyd Wright. It kept Christopher Reeve alive and breathing and working for his causes. I still hear it crackling hot and fresh every time UU-bred Keith Olbermann goes on one of his trademark rants.

These are not fearful people. Nor do any of them seem to be bedeviled by a lack of conviction. "Mushy" or "feckless" are about the last words I’d use to describe any of them. ("Stupid" isn’t anywhere on the list, either.) When you sign up to become a UU, this is the legacy you take on, and from then on attempt to live up to. It’s not God’s job to make the world a better place. It’s yours. This has never been work for the faint of heart, mind, or spirit — and in this era of conservatism gone crazy, it still isn’t.

I’m thinking about all this tonight as I sift through the incoming news that seven people were shot when 58-year-old Jim Adkisson pulled a shotgun out of a guitar case and opened fire during a kids’ performance at the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist church this morning. Two have died; four are in critical condition as I write this.

One of the dead, Greg McKendry, apparently took a shotgun blast full in the chest while trying to shield other members from the line of fire. Three other members of the congregation almost immediately charged the gunman and took him down, breaking his arm in the process. Still other members acted sanely and calmly to quickly get the dozens of children out of the sanctuary, and summon the police.

Those are the Unitarians I know. Smart, tough, fearless, calm in a crisis, committed to right action. It could have been any UU church in America, and they’d have behaved pretty much the same way.

It could have been any UU church in America — and that’s the problem.

***

After 25 years of right-wing eliminationist rhetoric about liberal hunting licenses and scaring us out of our treason and keeping a few of us alive as museum exhibits, it’s natural that some of us would jump to the thought that maybe, at long last, somebody finally decided to grab a shotgun and go bag himself some libruls — and decided (not unreasonably) that down at the local UU church, they’d be as thick on the ground as quail on one of Dick Cheney’s private hunting trips.

Whatever the reasons turn out to be, there are at least two lessons I hope y’all take away from today’s events.

One is that you can bet that the members of this congregation will find a novel way to approach their healing — and in doing so, they’ll set example for the rest of us to watch carefully. If (when) mental illness becomes the issue, they will respond to this man and his family with compassion and justice, because that’s the UU way. And if hate turns out to be part of the story, too, then Knoxville, TN is about to have a dialog on hate crime that will leave nobody in town untouched or uninvolved. That’s the UU way, too.

The other is that this congregation’s cool, brave response shows, once again, that it’s past time to drop that old stereotype, and stop underestimating the courage and intelligence of the religious left in America. We’ve gotten incredibly short shrift over the past few decades — not only from the religious right, which thinks we’re the minions of Satan on earth; but also from fellow progressives, who think that "religious" is a synonym for crazy, dangerous, irrational, and definitely not an asset to the movement.

Secular progressives don’t seem to understand that while politics is all about how we’re going to make the world better, progressive religion tells us why it’s necessary to work for change, and what "better" will look like when we get there. Liberal faith traditions offer the essential metaphors and worldview that everything else derives from — the frames that give our dreams shape and meaning. It has an invaluable role to play in helping our movement set its values and priorities, understand where we are in the larger scheme, and gauge whether we’re succeeding or not.

The conservative movement knew from the get that it would not succeed unless it could offer people this kind of deeper narrative. Providing that was one of the most important things the religious right brought to their party. Progressivism will not defeat it until we can offer another narrative about what America can and should be — and our liberal churches have longer, harder, better experience than anyone at developing and communicating those stories, and building thriving — and on occasions like today, literally bulletproof — communities around them.

And then there’s that long, tough history to draw on. The UUs, along with the Congregationalists and Quakers, have been at the beating heart of American liberalism since before the country was founded. We’ve faced down the ignorant and the arrogant, the terrified and the unreasonable, the cops and the courts and the Congress so many times that it’s not even news any more. Civil disobedience is built into our bones (yes, *sigh,* Thoreau was one of ours, too), and we’ve come to regard it as one of our more important sacraments. These days, it’s not only in our defense of gay rights and our gathering fury about torture, but also in our leadership role in the New Sanctuary Movement defending immigrants from ICE raids.

If the right wing ever does turn its anti-liberal crusade into a shooting war, it’s easy to predict that the country’s UU churches will be among their first targets. What’s less predictable — unless you know the people, the theology, and the history, or took careful note of everything that happened in Tennessee today — is just how surprisingly fierce and fearless that response is likely to be.

Grief and pride taste strange together, but I am full of both for the people of the Tennessee Valley UUC tonight. After all, it could be any UU church in America. That’s the bad news. It’s the good news, too.

Also, local blogger James Protzman adds:

When I talked with my daughter today about this Tennessee shooting, the only word she could find between her tears was the word "ironic." She can’t understand how one of the most peaceful of all spiritual homes could be viciously assaulted by a person who believes liberals are the source of all the world’s problems. She also wondered aloud about all the other deaths that can be laid at the feet of right-wing political hate. Abraham Lincoln. Martin Luther King. John Kennedy. Robert Kennedy. Will it ever stop? she asked.

I hope so, but I fear not.

Maybe the man who committed this crime is indeed insane, which would at least make a modicum of sense. But I suspect he is not. I suspect he is a product of an angry and hate-filled conservative movement headed by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and John McCain, people who joke openly about murder, assassination, and genocide. And I suspect it will get worse before it gets better. Lunatics on the right are already expressing hope that President Obama will be shot within hours after being sworn in. Some are no doubt plotting to bring their hopes to fruition.

Those very same lunatics are also using this tragedy to make their case for fewer restrictions on guns. Preachers, they say, need to face the harsh realities of life in these United States and start packing heat behind their pulpits. Only then, in a perverse echo of mutually assured destruction, will peaceful congregations be safe from their kind.

I can’t help linking all of this madness back to the misguided ego trip taken by Christian churches more than a thousand years ago. Back before they put earthly possessions and power ahead of paradise and peace, evangelical leaders had the chance to be an unequivocal force for good in the world. Today, however, far too many are anything but. It’s deja vu all over again, Crusades on Parade, with so many Christian soldiers armed and ready to kill at the drop of a hint.

This isn’t just another crazy conservative off his meds. This is politics, pure and simple.

Vote For McCain — He’ll Help With Your Groceries

Ken AshfordElection 2006Leave a Comment

I can’t believe this is their nominee:

By the way, not only will he help you with groceries, but he’ll actually get the mandarin oranges FOR you, as you explain to him (with the patience one would emply for one’s senile grandfather) why bigger jars mean economy-size, and name brands tend to be more expensive than generic brands.

And if that’s not enough, McCain will cause a "clean-up on aisle nine" incident. 

Seriously, if I were the woman in this video, I would just turn to McCain and say, "Look, can you just GO AWAY?"

This is from a few days ago.  Sadly, McCain looks so out of place in a grocery story — like he’s never been in one before.  Not sure that helps the whole "regular guy" image.  But I’m past the point of trying to understand what McCain’s campaign team is thinking.