Dem Bones

Gone Fishing: Shutting Down "Dem Bones"

2009-07-25T21:00:00.002-04:00

Friends,

I must regretfully, but hopefully temporarily, discontinue Dem Bones. This past week, I was offered a wonderful job opportunity, and because of the nature of the position, the time and energy necessitated therein, I will no longer be able to actively blog here. And just when I was hitting my stride, gaining national exposure!

The purpose of this blog was to report, in a fair-minded fashion, local and national politics, cultural and demographic trends, and pressing theological issues. I tried to create, foster, and facilitate an atmosphere where differing, oftentimes opposing, viewpoints can discuss important contemporay issues. I feel that I - that we! - have been successful in that endeavour.

I have truly enjoyed this experience, finding and gaining confidence in my voice. While my writing here has also provided a sense of escape from the stressors of my newly previous job, nowhere have I been most rewarded than by this community. I have been immensely proud of all of you - a diverse group, both theologically and politically, of sisters and brothers with one common goal: to transcend our polarized culture and to engage, genuinely, in fruitful dialogue with each other. We didn't have to agree - in fact, we seldom did! - but we did try to get to the heart of the issues, to emerge past the vitriolic grenade-lobbing all to commonly employed by both sides of the ideological divide. And we did it respectfully. Thank you for letting me get to know you, to grow through deeper understanding.

In leaving, I would ask that we all carry this ethic forward. We have much more in common than we have in difference. Recognize that people of differing worldviews are good, well-intended people, loving of God and nation, hopeful of humanity, and desirious of a prosperous, safe community. Especially for our children and the ensuing generations, we all want to leave the world in better shape than we recieved it. Our differences, important and valid to be sure, are minor in comparison to these over-arching commonalities. While it is all too easy, cognitively speaking, to revert back to our polarized and politicized stations, when relating with others please be mindful of this truth. Do not let our disagreements divide and embitter us, but shape and mature us, together in common purpose.

Thank you for reading this blog, for your time and for your attention. Until we meet again, grace and peace be with you.

Drew

Reclaiming the Blairs Event

2009-07-23T23:34:00.004-04:00

I normally don't blog on Letters to the Editor, but I wanted to make a quick exception. Today the Danville Register & Bee ran three Letters to the Editor by people closely involved in the organization of the visit by Secretaries Chu and Vilsack in the region. While the tea party incident has dominated the news coverage, reclaiming the importance and specialness of the event is necessary.

Buddy Mayhew, the farmer and host of the town hall meeting, wrote on how the event highlighted the potential of the Southside. Money quote:

But most of all, I want to thank Rep. Tom Perriello for bringing the focus on energy and agriculture to Southside Virginia. Although I have been a longtime Republican, I can still recognize when a Democrat is working hard on our behalf. I encourage everyone to step back and take a good long look at the job our new congressman is doing.

It was an honor and a privilege to host this event on my farm, and to meet and hear three of the leaders of our country in person. It made me proud all over again to be an American.

Todd Haymore is the commissioner of the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. In his letter he states that he is proud of the Southside area, its past and its future:

Pittsylvania County always has been considered a top agriculture county in the state. For generations, this has been a traditional agricultural area, and no doubt that strong base will live well into the future. But recently the area has embraced cutting-edge agricultural enterprises that I believe will serve it well in the new ag economy.
[...]
Again, I’m proud to be a product of the community — a community with a “can-do” attitude — that understands that overcoming challenges and adversity represents new opportunities for success and prosperity. Just as important, I’m very pleased that the nation is paying attention to what is happening in Pittsylvania County and the greater Danville region.

Finally, Ken Moss offered a tour to the Secretaries at his business, Piedmont Bioproducts. Like Mayhew and Haymore, Moss believes the visit highlighted this area's potential:

The tour was completed and summarized with the fact that our region has all of the necessary components needed to see this new green industry develop and prosper, from natural resources to people to technical expertise and research support. Secretary Chu later commented that what he saw in Gretna represented the future and it is something real.

This event was as tremendous positive reflection on our region, and we all should be proud of that fact and do our part to continue to convey this message to our political leaders inside and outside of the immediate areas.

While the incident with the tea partiers has captured the news cycle, we must remember that it was an honor to host the Secretaries of Energy and Agriculture in the Southside.

Another Goode Speech

2009-07-23T23:22:00.002-04:00

Here is a Goode speech he gave in Franklin County at the beginning of the month. He mainly hits on government spending, cap and trade, and, of course, illegal immigration. Check it.

Sigh

2009-07-23T11:09:00.005-04:00

Given the storm of blog posts, though diminishing in pace and volume, I can't - and shouldn't have to - respond to all the claims being made regarding the recent tea party incidents. One post, however, especially since it is an in-district blog, offered me a quick and easy opportunity to respond.

Jerry Fuhrman, the editor-in-chief of the blog From on High, offers his thoughts on media reports, this blog, and push back against the Charlottesville tea party claims. Money quote:

It wasn't 5th District Congressman Tom Perriello's office that called the police and had tea party protesters removed from in front of Perriello's office. It was ... someone else ... who didn't like the idea that tea party protesters were in front of Perriello's office.

Why anyone ... else ... would be concerned about protesters being in front of Perriello's office remains a mystery.

See the exhaustive - and too-shrill-by-half - excuse-making here. And here.

Get it? With a slew of mischevous ellipses, Fuhrman heartedly implies Perriello, his staff, and/or those blogging the facts are lying. Despite the mudslinging, which I can handle, this is the important part:

This can be easily resolved, by the way. Calls to the police on emergency communications lines (9-1-1) are a matter of public record. Charlottesville police should reveal the name of that individual who called and lodged the complaint. (emphasis mine)

Mr. Fuhrman, not a bad idea! As I noted in my two previous posts, the Daily Progress did just this. Again:

(UPDATE: U.S. Rep. Tom Perriello’s office did not contact police about protesters gathered outside his Charlottesville headquarters, according to emergency communi-cation center records.) [emphasis mine]

Now, I don't know who called the police, but this exonerates Perriello's staff. I am told, for what it's worth, that it was a neighboring business. But, no matter who it was, the matter here is that Perriello and his staff, supported by factual evidence, were not involved.

Please stop with the insinuations. Take a deep breath. Given your general distaste for our congressman, save your energy for a legitimate reason to be upset with Perriello.

Breaking Through the Allegations: Perriello, Tea Party Protesters, and the Police (Day 2)

2009-07-22T20:37:00.011-04:00

Another day of developments. Let's get to them.

Yesterday I mentioned that a tea party meme was emerging within the district, and today it solidified: Rep. Perriello is censoring and intimidating citizens, those who respectfully disagree with him (1, 2, 3, 4). Here is a nice right-wing political cartoon stating such.

With regard to the Charlottesville event, where cops were unfortunately called, matters seem to have calmed; the facts have emerged, and the truth has settled. Again, as the Daily Progress reported, according to "emergency communication centers," the Perriello office did not call the police. Helping to clear the air, Instapundit, a highly trafficked conservative blog, linked my to blog:

REP. TOM PERRIELLO DIDN’T CALL THE COPS ON TEA PARTY PROTESTERS. According to this report, it was the neighbors.

Well, then he back-tracked somewhat, but I do appreciate the intellectual honesty of Instapundit.

Although the facts are coming to light in the tea party incident on Buddy Mayhew's farm, you wouldn't know it from the heated rhetoric. Nigel Coleman, the Danville Tea Party Chair, who is at the center of this incident, gave a for-the-most-part thoughtful comment today on this blog. Money quote:

I have tried not to just wildly sling allegations at Rep. Perriello. His office told me that they did not know we were there. I take them at their word. However being tailed by the police and haing [sic] Bobby visited by officers seems to step over a line. Someone alerted security to our presence, they explained this to Bobby Conner when they were at his house. There were other groups there and I hope no one is trying to just single out Perriello.

Coleman, to get to the bottom of his concerns, then sent a letter to Attorney General Mims asking the AG to investigate whether or not Rep. Perriello or his staff had involved the police in the event on the farm, an incident that Coleman believes led to intimidation and harrasment:

If such coordination between the police and Rep. Perriello's office did in fact take place, we believe it is compelling to learn under whose direction and instigation. If you find that it was instigated by Rep. Perriello and/or a member of his staff, we believe the line has been crossed and legal action is required.

Soon after this letter was sent to the AG, however, the Danville Tea Party sent out this press release, with Coleman listed as the contact person - a press release full of "wildly slung allegations." It begins:

Rep. Tom Perriello, D-Va., may be using the state police and local law enforcement to harass and intimidate citizens who have publicly expressed opposition to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s trillion-dollar health care reform legislation, a local TEA Party leader charged Tuesday in a letter urging state Attorney General Bill Mims to conduct a formal investigation.

This press release is unfortunate, implicating Perriello in some anti-tea party conspiracy. Let me repeat: Perriello and his staff were not involved. In fact, Perriello learned about the incident the next morning.

Clearing up any remaining confusion to the incident the Danville Register & Bee contacted the police and event attenders. As the newspaper reports, and I stated yesterday, Buddy Mayhew had discussions with the police beforehand concerning any protests on his property:

Organizers held the event on private property, which allowed the property owner to decide whether law enforcement could remove people.

Buddy Mayhew, who owns the farm where the community forum was held, said he hadn’t heard about the incident until afterward.

Mayhew talked to sheriff’s deputies before the community forum began Saturday about whether they should ask anyone to leave his property. He said that if protesters were there and behaving, then they could stay.

“But if something occurs that is of a disruptive nature, that has no place to be there, you have my permis-sion to ask them to leave,” Mayhew said he told the deputies. (emphasis mine)

And, the police reported how they responded during the event:

Sgt. M.C. Davis of the Virginia State Police said that the security detail with the secretaries of energy and agriculture brought the local authorities’ attention to a group of people, which included Bobbie Conner and Nigel Coleman, during the community forum. Coleman is the chairman of the Danville Tea Party Committee, and Conner is its vice chairman.

“Obviously, you look into these things when people act differently than the rest of the crowd,” Davis said.

Conner and Coleman were standing beside a block of seats, about six rows back. The group talked audibly to each other during the forum and looked upset at times with the secretaries’ answers and some questions. They left just before the question-and-answer session ended.

Sheriff’s deputies approached them after seeing the group pull protest signs out of their car, said Capt. Donald Motley of the Pittsylvania County Sheriff’s Office.

“When they were approached by law enforcement, the event itself was over,” Motley said. “They told them that if they were going to put those up, they would have to leave.” (emphasis mine)

So, the Secretaries' security details initiated contact with the local police to keep an eye on the tea party protesters, because of their loud and agitated behavior. Only when they decided to display signs and protest were they asked to leave. Like Coleman claimed, however without the malicious intent, the police followed up on Monday:

The state police followed up on the incident Monday when a trooper visited Conner’s house.

“They were questioned about their actions during the meeting,” Davis said. “We were trying to inquire that they were asking a question and didn’t know how to go about it.”

The trooper got the information he needed, and the investigation ended.

“As far as I know, it was over with,” Davis said. “They were satisfied with the answer they received.” (emphasis mine)

Again, I am sure that the presence of the police is a distressing affair - especially when their presence is seemingly unexpected and unwarranted - but when confronted by the police, one should be careful not subscribe malicious intent onto one's ideological opponent. It is an illogical, though somewhat understandable, mental shortcut. One, however, should be hesitant to make these judgments public - that elected officials, cabinet secretaries, security details, police departments, event hosts, and event attenders are all mashed into some nefarious and oppressive plot. Question the incident, yes, but don't malign folks seemingly to further your ideological agenda. Perriello and his staff were not involved, and Perriello and his staff should not have been the targets of such hasty conclusions.

And to the lesser matter of a staged Q&A. Saith the Register & Bee:

The Monday police visit to Conner’s home and the request for the Tea Party members to leave on Saturday have led to other allegations from the committee that the event was staged. Organizers and those who asked questions deny that claim.

The newspaper then interviews several people who asked questions and could not find any truth to the claim of a staged event.

So after two incidents with tea party protesters and the police, two newspapers fact-checked the claims, calling those involved, and found that Rep. Perriello was not involved. While I do not expect the meme to discontinue over night, we should all relax now that the facts have emerged.

Carry on.

Breaking Through the Allegations: Perriello, Tea Party Protesters, and the Police

2009-07-21T20:53:00.013-04:00

Over this past weekend it appears that a tea party narrative has been forming: Rep. Perriello will do everything in his power - even utilize the full extent of the law - to hide from tea party protesters. Of course, this is patently absurd. Here's what happened.

Last week tea partiers protested outside Perriello's Charlottesville office, and during the demonstration, the police were called. Tea partiers felt that Perriello's office called the police, angry at the protest outside. Today, the Republican blogosphere is going crazy about this (1, 2, 3). But after some fact-checking, the Daily Progress discovered that Perriello's office did not call the police. A neighboring business, apparently, did so. Saith the Daily Progress:

(UPDATE: U.S. Rep. Tom Perriello’s office did not contact police about protesters gathered outside his Charlottesville headquarters, according to emergency communi-cation center records.) [emphasis mine]

Lowell has a scanned copy of the clip if you want to see it.

On Friday, at the opposite end of the district, Danville, tea partiers also demonstrated on Perriello's office. On Saturday, they again showed up when Secretaries Chu and Vilsack visited the area to talk about rural economies, agriculture, and green energy. At the event, several tea partiers were apparently asked to leave the premises. Star News out of Danville/Reidsville even had a special show last night discussing these allegations, nevermind interviewing clearly sympathetic to the tea partiers. Since I was at the event, I can offer my eye-witness perspective, and I called Perriello's Press Secretary, Jessica Barba, for an on-the-record accounting of the events. Importantly, this event was hosted by the USDA and the Obama Administration, so Perriello had no control over the event, as it wasn't organized by his office.

Tea Partiers have been stating that the questions were staged at the event, seen in Perriello's calling specific people by name, and that Perriello purposefully and deliberately overlooked their questions, afraid to answer the tough questions. On Star News, the tea party organizer, Nigel Coleman, made these assertions - assertions corroborated by Del. Danny Marshall, though, Marshall fairly would not subscribe intent to Perriello. Here's what I saw: there were between 200-250 people at the event, and, since I was in the back during the Q&A, I can say that dozens upon dozens of people raised their hands to ask Perriello and the Secretaries questions - too many for each potential questioner to ask his/her question. To me, the Q&A did not look staged, and because of the slew of raised hands, no one was purposefully overlooked during the questions. Barba said that no one was given a question beforehand and that no one was purposefully neglected in the choice of questioners. She highlighted that, to the contrary, Perriello has held townhalls throughout the district, and that Perriello has much experience - even enjoys - taking the tough questions.

Tea partiers have implied either that Perriello asked the police to remove dissenters from the property or that the police department - or some other agent - was overzealous in the defense of Perriello, even intimidating protesters days later. As Star News put it, citizens were silenced. I did not see anyone asked to leave the property, and, obviously, I cannot speak for the police department. Barba said that Perriello had no knowledge that protesters were asked to leave the premises; he was even surprised to learn about the incident the next morning. With this in mind, according to Barba, Perriello and his staffers were not involved, in any way, with the actions of the police. On Star News, the event host, Buddy Mayhew, stated that he had told the police department, days beforehand, that, as it was his private property, he did not want any demonstrations - of any kind - on his property; he did not want to distract from the purpose and specialness of the event.

As an office policy, Barba said, no staff person is allowed to call the police unless there are threats of physical violence. The voicing of our disagreement are First Amendment principles, and the Congressman welcomes differences of opinion. By all accounts, the protests were/were to be non-violent, and as the facts show, Perriello and his staff did not involve the police in either circumstance.

Psychologically speaking, the presence of police is distressing and anxiety-provoking to be sure. To subscribe ulterior motives, however, contrary to the facts on the ground, to Rep. Perriello or his staff is intellectually lazy at best, partisan-hackery at worst. I do not know the intentions underlying these assertions, but I would ask that people take a deep breath and let the facts emerge. Don't jump to hasty, unfounded conclusions, and do not demonize the Congressman, because of disagreement, for these unfortunate incidences.

Of note, Rep. Perriello has met with Tea Partiers before in Charlottesville. According to Barba, to her knowledge and to the knowledge of Perriello's scheduler, there has been no request for tea partiers in Danville to meet with Perriello - Barba and the scheduler will double check to be sure. She also said that Perriello would be happy to meet with the tea partiers in Danville in the future.

Wall Street Journal Late to the Party

2009-07-20T22:39:00.004-04:00

The Wall Street Journal has this article on the overall reaction to Perriello's ACES vote. As it is several weeks late, the article doesn't offer anything new.

In fact, I would argue readers of this blog have a more complete picture.

Demographic Trends and the Diminishing Importance of the Culture Wars? (updated)

2009-07-20T20:38:00.005-04:00

The Center for American Progress released a rather convincing study proposing that the culture wars, because of trending demographics, will, in the coming years, no longer hold any political salience. Those demographic shifts:

First, Millennials—the generation with birth years 1978 to 2000—support gay marriage, take race and gender equality as givens, are tolerant of religious and family diversity, have an open and positive attitude toward immigration, and generally display little interest in fighting over the divisive social issues of the past.
[...]
Second, the culturally conservative white working class has been declining rapidly as a proportion of the electorate for years.
[...]
Other demographic trends that will undermine the culture warriors include the growth of culturally progressive groups such as single women, and college-educated women and professionals, as well as increasing religious diversity. Unaffiliated or secular voters are hugely progressive on cultural issues and it is they—not white evangelical Protestants—who are the fastest-growing “religious” group in the United States.

These demographic trends are having their greatest effects in America’s metropolitan areas, especially the largest ones, and it is here that the culture wars are dying down the fastest.

To which the study concludes:

The culture wars as we have known them are likely coming to an end. Demographic change is undercutting both the level and salience of conservative cultural views, thereby reducing the effectiveness of such politics. That will not prevent conservative activists around particular culture wars issues from continuing to press their case. Indeed, reaction to their current desperate plight may lead them to intensify their efforts in some states, especially where demographic change has been slow or where local right-wing culture war institutions retain strength. But there will be diminishing incentives for politicians to take up these causes for the very simple reason that they are losers.

That last sentence is important. In theory, with these demographic trends and their likely resulting electoral mandates in mind, law makers will be less inclined, vis-a-vis the decreased political incentive, to use the culture war issues as part of their platforms, thereby diminishing both the political strength of these issues and the politicization of culture.

While the long-term prognosis of the culture wars looks bleak indeed, the current political atmosphere has also relegated these issues to the margins. The current economic and healthcare crisis, not to mention the continued importance of Iraq and Afghanistan, are the national priorities - the attention grabbing, higher-order concerns. But, don't be lulled into a sense of complacency. In the near future, however, if conditions improve, we could easily see their re-emergence, and long-term, don't count out the possibility of a re-fashioned movement or the emergence of new, unforseen issues.

Update: 538.com interviews Ruy Teixeira, the author of the CAP study, on this issue.

(h/t Mother Jones via Tripp)

Roanoke Times Political Cartoon on Perriello

2009-07-20T13:59:00.003-04:00

The Roanoke Times has a great political cartoon on Rep. Perriello's ACES vote and the ensuing reaction from the tea partiers. Good catch by Paul Wiley, and check out his new blog.

Roanoke Times Profiles Rees

2009-07-19T13:46:00.003-04:00

The Roanoke Times did a short profile piece on Bradley Rees, Republican congressional candidate, a couple days ago. Of note, Bradley Rees didn't seem happy with the article, and as best as I can tell, it's because a third of the article centers around Virgil Goode and the possibility he will re-run for his old seat. Money quote:

"While the members of this campaign hold Virgil Goode in very high regard and have the utmost respect for his service, this election is too critical for some 'Rocky II' rematch fantasy that will leave a younger, slightly more invigorating candidate like Tom Perriello in a better position to win," said Michael Ernette, campaign manager for Rees.

Cabinet Secretaries Visit Southside

2009-07-19T13:02:00.004-04:00

Yesterday, two of Pres. Obama's Cabinet Secretaries, Secretaries Chu (Energy) and Vilsack (Agriculture) visited Pittslyvania County as part of the White House's Rural Tour. About 250 people showed up to Buddy Mayhew's farm to listen to the Secretaries, along with Rep. Perriello. The purpose of the event:

The tour is an attempt by the Obama administration to tell local citizens how it’s revitalizing and rebuilding rural America. Another goal is to give those citizens a way to tell his administration their concerns.

The three officials stressed the importance, among other things, of "government support to rural communities," the positive long term affects of ACES, and the leadership this district could provide for the development of the next generation of energy. Money quote:

"I’ve been bragging about you an awful lot up in Washington,” he said. “Telling everyone that we are at the cutting edge of Southside Virginia.”

Perriello said he has learned a lot about the opportunities that are available. He said the community will survive the tough times and lead “the commonwealth and lead the country in areas that we’re frankly better at than anybody else.”

I was at the event yesterday and noticed that people from all over the state traveled to talk with the Secretaries to voice their concerns, and I also was pleased with the focus of the event, as during these difficult times, Southside rural and agricultural communities have suffered. To me, underlying the existence of the event is a continued interest by President Obama on Southside Virginia, a promise he made during his campaign stops within the area.

Interestingly, after protesting at Rep. Perriello's office on Friday, several TEA Party protesters attempted to protest during the event but were kicked off the private property by security.

(Photo by Jim White)

From Science Class to History Class: An Emerging Culture Wars Frontline?

2009-07-16T20:08:00.003-04:00

The Wall Street Journal has an article suggesting that there might be a new frontline for the culture wars in public school. Historically, the main debate has centered around evolution and the science classroom, but according to the WSJ, emerging debates could spill over into the social studies classroom. Key excerpt:

The Texas Board of Education, which recently approved new science standards that made room for creationist critiques of evolution, is revising the state's social studies curriculum. In early recommendations from outside experts appointed by the board, a divide has opened over how central religious theology should be to the teaching of history.

Three [of six] reviewers, appointed by social conservatives, have recommended revamping the K-12 curriculum to emphasize the roles of the Bible, the Christian faith and the civic virtue of religion in the study of American history. Two of them want to remove or de-emphasize references to several historical figures who have become liberal icons, such as César Chávez and Thurgood Marshall.

"We're in an all-out moral and spiritual civil war for the soul of America, and the record of American history is right at the heart of it," said Rev. Peter Marshall, a Christian minister and one of the reviewers appointed by the conservative camp.

Three other reviewers, all selected by politically moderate or liberal members of the board, recommended less-sweeping changes to the existing curriculum. But one suggested including more diverse role models, especially Latinos, in teaching materials. "We have tended to exclude or marginalize the role of Hispanic and Native American participants in the state's history," said Jesús F. de la Teja, chairman of the history department at Texas State University. (emphasis mine)

Keep in mind that the Texas Board of Education is not a meager influence on the academics of the rest of the country, as Texas is a third of the textbook market. Since textbook companies don't want to have many differences in copies, what happens in Texas to some extent affects the rest of the nation:

The standards that the school board eventually settles on won't dictate day-to-day lesson plans; that is up to individual teachers. But they will offer clear guidelines for educators -- and also for publishers.
Nearly every state has its own curriculum standards, and there are scores of social studies texts to choose from at most grade levels, so what happens in Texas won't necessarily affect other states. But the Texas market is huge, so most big publishers aggressively seek approval from the board, in some cases adopting the majority's editing suggestions nearly verbatim. (emphasis mine)

Given the debate over displaying the Ten Commandments on governmental property, this, to me, is a derivative argument. The argument is similar: the Bible and the faith of the Founding Fathers has had a lasting affect on the greatness of this nation, and the lack of recognition to these historical "truths" is naive. Naturally, strict adherents to the separation of church and state, me included, will argue against the intrusion of theology into public classrooms.

Southside House of Delegates Fundraising Numbers (updated)

2009-07-15T21:47:00.012-04:00

Here are the fundraising numbers for Southside House of Delegates races, with continued interest in the 58th district race (Bell vs Neff). Since our last report, several candidates have dropped out (1, 2). For more information on the Governors, Lt. Govs and AG fundraising numbers check out Lowell's post.

Candidate (Bold - incumbent)	Amount Raised	Expenses	Cash on Hand
District 9
Charles Poindexter (R)	$995	$1,335	$13,471
District 10
Ward Armstrong (D)	$32,743	$15,436	$76,837
District 14
Danny Marshall (R)	$16,412	$14,327	$29,047
Seward Anderson (D)	$23,309	$18,249	$25,517
District 16
Don Merricks (R)	$15,425	$296	$32,197
District 58
Rob Bell (R)	$74,490	$12,812	$582,210
Cynthia Neff (D)	$29,919	$20,838	$83,985
District 60 (open seat)
David Guill (D)	$132	$0	$2,472
James Edmunds (R)	$19,110	no data	$32,645

For the second quarter in a row, Seward Anderson outraised Del. Marshall, though overall, their war chests are relatively equal. Cynthia Neff's haul, while still solid, is surprising compared to her gold rush last quarter, but Del. Bell, with an impressive quarter, still has an ungodly warchest. David Guill turned in another disappointing (non-existent?) quarter, while James Edmunds numbers, for some reason, are still not yet available on-line - though I have seen plenty of his signs in that district.

Update: I found some of James Edmunds' numbers in VPAP's downloadable lists. Don't know why VPAP has his numbers on their list but not on his own page. Importantly, the list just had his funds raised and cash on hand, not his quarter expenses.

Goode's Anemic 2Q Haul (updated)

2009-07-15T20:41:00.006-04:00

Former Rep. Virgil Goode has been saying for weeks now that he is close to making an official announcement about running for his old seat against Rep. Perriello. Today, we may have more clarity to Goode's position.

Last quarter, April through June, Goode raised an anemic $154.

Although we won't be 100% sure until Goode reveals his future himself, this seems pretty conclusive. Goode does not look to be running.

Update: The Lynchburg News & Advance interviewed Larry Sabato, apparently the only political science professor in the state, about Goode's fundraising. Saith Sabato:

The lack of campaign contributions is a sign that Goode might be leaning toward not running, said Larry J. Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.

“That to me is a signal that he’s not running,” Sabato said. “Let me add, Virgil’s full of surprises.”

Duh. Of note, according to the article, Rep. Perriello also had a solid quarter raising $215k.

Center of Attention: Perriello on ACES

2009-07-14T22:13:00.006-04:00

Since Rep. Perriello's vote on ACES, there has been a deluge of television ads within our district both supporting (1, 2, 3, 4) and denouncing (the NRCC) his vote - not to mention the editorials, both for (1, 2, 3) and against (1, 2). And forget counting the blog posts and the Letters to the Editor.

With this in mind, the New York Times has an article on the attention Rep. Perriello has drawn over his ACES vote. Money quote:

The freshman Democrat from southern Virginia, who has little name recognition outside his district and little influence over the legislation, declared a couple of weeks before the vote that he would support the bill. And so much of the media attention and lobbying efforts were on the powerful committee chairmen and a number Midwestern Democrats that seemingly held the fate of the bill in their hands.

Much has changed in two weeks.

Since Democrats squeezed out a 219-212 vote on the legislation, no single member of Congress has been the subject of as much scrutiny -- and political sparring -- as Perriello.

The reaction to Perriello's vote, naturally, has broken down partisan lines. While the Republicans have been using the vote to bruise Perriello for his next election, Perriello thinks this strategy might backfire:

"These are the kinds of bills that we came to Washington to pass," Perriello said. "What I think you're seeing is a new generation of politicians that are more interested in solving the issue than scoring the political points."

Adding that even if voters punish some Democrats in 2010, the long-term impact of the legislation will result in more voters turning away from the Republican Party. "It may not backfire [on the Republicans] next year but it will backfire over time," he said. "I think it's a short term political risk for the Democrats, but its a long-term risk for Republicans because of the national security and economic impacts."

Of course, it's too early to tell how this vote will affect Perriello's future, to which Larry Sabato opines:

At the moment, the energy issue is being used primarily to rile up each party's political base, Sabato said. "Democrats think the bill is terrific, and Republicans think it is awful," he said. "The battle is partly to motivate base voters for a relatively low turnout midterm election."

Like it or not, that is probably a fair assessment.

The Right-Wing New Athiests

2009-07-14T20:59:00.004-04:00

Robert Wright has a great post dismantling the surprisingly hawkish foreign policy of the New Atheists. Wright begins:

It must strike progressive atheists as a stroke of bad luck that Christopher Hitchens, leading atheist spokesperson, happens to have hawkish views on foreign policy. After all, with atheists an overwhelmingly left-wing group, what were the chances that the loudest infidel in the western world would happen to be on the right?

Actually, the chances were pretty good. When it comes to foreign policy, a right-wing bias afflicts not just Hitchens's world view, but the whole ideology of "new atheism," especially as seen in the work of Hitchens allies Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins.

Wright then objects to how the New Atheists posit that religious is poisonous and how this understanding, negligent of the facts on the ground, necessitates a militant approach to the Middle East. To which Wright brilliantly concludes:

If some Jihadists are motivated partly by fear that the west threatens their religious culture, is the optimal counter-terrorism strategy to have know-it-all westerners tell them their God doesn't exist?
The history of the Abrahamic faiths suggests not. Making Jews, Christians, and Muslims feel threatened by other cultures has often brought out the worst in their religions, whereas doing the the opposite -- putting them in "non-zero-sum" situations, where win-win outcomes are possible -- has brought out the best.

Hitchens, Dawkins, and Harris should of course write what they want, even if it's likely to increase the amount of religious radicalism in the world. But if they're going to style themselves as soldiers in the war on terror, that will just go to show that the "God delusion" isn't the only kind of delusion.

Agreeing with Wright's conclusions, Matthew Yglesias offers this thought:

I think another way of thinking about it is that Dawkins has basically tried to reformulate atheism in the evangelizing and illiberal mode of illiberal evangelizing religion. Thus, much as right-wing Christians and right-wing Muslims can simultaneously loathe each other and have structurally similar views, so, too, can “new atheists” join the party. Elsewhere you have a liberal ethic adhered to by people who identify with different spiritual traditions and also by what I think are “normal” atheists, just people who don’t identify with a religious tradition, rather than people who want to construct a self-conscious atheist identity and go to battle over it.

I am actually shocked that the New Atheists employ such a hawkish worldview, as a non-purposive cosmology - especially without an afterlife - should, in my mind at least, engender a peaceful relational ethic. Not being an atheist, though, I cannot speak for the New Atheists, but Bob, an agnostic, judiciously corrects their error.

Christian Coalition 2.0

2009-07-14T20:17:00.002-04:00

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports that Ralph Reed is starting a new brand of the Christian Coalition. Money quote:

“This is not going to be your daddy’s Christian Coalition,” Reed said in an interview to describe his new venture, the Faith and Freedom Coalition. “It has to be younger, hipper, less strident, more inclusive and it has to harness the 21st century that will enable us to win in the future.”
[...]
And while there are myriad other faith- or family- or freedom-touting organizations, such as Focus on the Family or the original Christian Coalition, Reed does not believe there is one that has captured the national mode of religious conservatives quite like Coalition did in the 1990s.

The article continues:

“The bottom line is we [Republicans] need everything,” said [public relations executive Mark] DeMoss, who until recently had office space in the same building as Reed’s firm. “Better technology, better organization skills, better messaging, better candidates, better leadership. Ralph is addressing a good part of it, and I believe he’ll probably do good things with it.”

This would be Ralph Reed's first return to the political arena since his failed Lt. Gov campaign in Georgia, a campaign in which his close ties to the disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff was revealed. Whether or not his former "sins" come back to haunt him, according to the article, critics on both sides of the ideological divide agree that Reed is a formidable organizer.

Given the current temperature within the political atmosphere (i.e., the reaction against the Religious Right and the politicization of religion), I wonder if there is available room for another conservative evangelical/political organization. And if there is, how will this new organization gather the attention of the electorate in ways that similar organizations currently are not? My gut feeling, and correct me if I am wrong, is that Americans, outside of the conservative evangelical base, will barely notice.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

2009-07-13T23:35:00.002-04:00

When cheetos attack:

Authorities said a couple got into a fight using Cheetos. The Bedford County [Tennessee] Sheriff's Department said a 40-year-old man and 44-year-old woman became involved in a 'verbal altercation.' Somehow, the orange puffy snacks were used in the assault.
Deputies said they were charged with domestic assault. No one was hurt.

... [B]oth posted bond of $2,500.

The Presidency and the Papacy

2009-07-13T21:49:00.004-04:00

Last winter, I wrote:

[Compared to the President Bush, the US-Vatican] relationship is likely to change under the Obama Administration as, needless to say, President-elect Obama and Benedict XVI will have several differences of opinion. Watch for US Catholic leaders to apply pressure on Obama over his stances on abortion and stem-cell research, among others. At the same time, the Vatican will want a positive relationship with Obama to help promote international peace and the safety of Christians throughout the world. In this good cop/bad cop approach to the Administration, the Pope, naturally, will be "above the fray."

Needless to say, this theory has proven correct, as American Bishops have protested several of Obama's policies, seen especially in their anger over Obama's invitation to speak at Notre Dame's commencement ceremony. The Vatican, however, has not taken an antagonistic approach towards Obama.

Because of President Obama's recent meeting with the Pope, the relationship between the presidency and the papacy is again under scrutiny. To give more credence to this theory, The New Republic last week stated:

The conservative minority among the bishops as well as political activists on the Catholic right have insisted on judging the president only on the basis of his support for legal abortion and stem cell research.

But the Vatican clearly views Obama through a broader prism. Archbishop Pietro Sambi, the papal nuncio in Washington, has privately warned American bishops that harsh attacks on Obama threaten to make the church look partisan.
[...]
No one pretends that the Vatican is at peace with Obama's views on the life issues, and Benedict mentioned the church's resistance to abortion at three different points in this week's economic encyclical, "Charity in Truth."

But the pope and many of his advisers also see Obama as a potential ally on such questions as development in the Third World, their shared approach to a quest for peace in the Middle East, and the opening of a dialogue with Islam.

Last week, the New York Times also highlighted the difference in relationship between American Bishops and the Vatican. Money quote:

Both the pope and the president recognize that despite their differences, they have an opportunity to join forces on international issues that are mutual priorities: Israel and the Palestinians, climate change, nuclear nonproliferation, increased aid to poor nations and immigration reform.
[...]
“You’ll never get Rome to admit it,” Father Christensen said, but the Vatican has a different approach than the American bishops to working with governments. “Some of the critics of the president think you have to be at war, and the pope is saying, there’s a different way to proceed here and it’s very essential to the church’s approach, in that what you want is consensus.”

Even after six months in office, it is clear that the Pope views Pres. Obama as an ally in world affairs, despite Obama's relatively contentious relationship with Catholic leaders stateside. Expect this complex dynamic to remain constant over Obama's presidential tenure.

Vatican Hearts Harry Potter Movie

2009-07-13T21:19:00.003-04:00

The Vatican's newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, gave positive ratings for the new Harry Potter movie, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. In the past, the Vatican has expressed disappointed in J.K. Rowlings' books for her lack of an explicit transcendent power. In terms of the movie, however, the Vatican lauds the new Harry Potter for a couple reasons. Most importantly:

L'Osservatore said the latest installment nevertheless makes clear that good should overcome evil "and that sometimes this requires costs and sacrifice."

"In addition, the spastic search for immortality epitomized by Voldemort is stigmatized," the review said.

The Vatican also lauds the "correct balance" in the movie's treatment of adolescent love.

America more conservative? Not really

2009-07-13T20:11:00.004-04:00

Last week there was much talk, especially among the Fox radio personalities, about a Gallup poll claiming that a majority of Americans consider themselves conservatives. The truth of the matter is not so cut and dry. While Americans, by a 2-1 margin, are claiming a more conservative ideology, at least in theory, when exploring stances on policy issues, Americans have remained the same:

While the new Gallup Poll finds the public reporting a heightened sense of conservatism in its political outlook, Americans' specific policy positions have not changed much since 2004. To the extent they have, about as many of these positions have become more liberal as more conservative.

Not to mention that there has not been an ideological shift among independents and progressives. According to David Frum, over at New Majority, a Republican blog, it's not that America is turning conservative, it's that conservatives have become even more conservative:

We are not, in other words, viewing a big national shift from the left to the right. Rather we are viewing a shift among those who already described themselves as conservatives toward an acceptance of more extreme forms of conservatism.
[...]
What the Gallup poll seems to have discerned is not a change of substance, but a change in style. Over barely six months of the Obama presidency, the right has worked itself into a furious state of mind, not so much over any one issue in particular, but over the very existence of the Obama administration. Then we confuse our own mood of extremism with a more general swing to conservatism by moderates and liberals. That’s a big misjudgment – and a misjudgment that may lead to some very serious strategic mistakes in the months ahead.

This, to me, unfortunately highlights that, although conservatism remains a salient moniker, on the whole, conservative stances might be sliding out of the mainstream. And to Frum's point, could use of this poll data unwittingly further the current Republican death spiral (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)?

Perriello's Book Review, JFK and Obama

2009-07-13T19:57:00.003-04:00

Yesterday, Rep. Perriello reviewed the book The Making of a Catholic President, by Shaun Casey, for the Washington Post. In the review, Perriello relates some of his campaign experiences, especially those revolving around the excitement of electing the first African-American President, with Casey's portrayal of the nation's interest in electing the first Catholic President. Money quote:

The brilliance of the Obama and Kennedy campaigns may have been each candidate's ability to ask voters to put their faith in what they might not be ready for; to make them wonder if Americans could transcend bigotry; and then to convince them that, in order to face the daunting future, they must.

The Best Anti-Perriello, Anti-ACES Editorial Ever (updated)

2009-07-09T00:01:00.005-04:00

Thank you, John Barnhart (Bedford Bulletin), for this awesome editorial. Any column that uses an anectdotal conversation and Facebook statuses to support its over-arching claim is priceless. Money quotes:

Thank you Tom Perriello — for stabbing the working people of the 5th District in the back.

On June 29, 41 House Democrats had the courage to stand up to Supreme Leader Nancy Pelosi. They voted against her cap-and-trade energy bill. Congressman Perriello was not one of them. He voted for this nightmare, which narrowly passed the House of Representatives by seven votes.
[...]
Don Perriello de la Mancha, seems to think all these unemployed workers will find jobs, just as good as the ones they lost, building windmills. However, the “green” jobs that Congresman Perriello envisions may never develop, or they may not develop in Virginia’s 5th Congressional District. Then, there is the issue of retraining displaced workers. Workforce development programs have to train workers for jobs that actually exist, or they are worse than worthless.

So, thank you Tom Perriello for supporting the ideology of your party’s well-heeled elite instead of the economic interests of the 5th District’s working people.

Good times. Good times.

Now, I good for a legitimate discussion on this issue, but this editorial precludes any serious dialogue.

Update: Mark Brooks responds to Barnhart's editorial.

Palin, Polls, and the Common Good

2009-07-08T22:27:00.006-04:00

Gallup today released a poll surveying people's voting attitudes towards Sarah Palin after her surprise resignation last week. 43% of the electorate are somewhat likely or very likely to vote for Palin if she were to run for President. 72% of Republicans would vote for her, while only 44% of Independents and 17% of Democrats would vote for her. According to Gallup, voter's opinions have not yet changed regarding Sarah Palin since her announcement. The opinions might not have (yet) changed, but the numbers are not, on the whole, presidential level numbers. Outside of the GOP base, the numbers are abysmal.

Other recent evidence reinforces my point. Also in light of Palin's resignation, ReligionDispatches offered a great post-election analysis, picked up by Nate Silver, on how Sarah Palin affected John McCain and the GOP ticket. Money quote:

A look at other national data reveals that on balance, John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin hurt him more than it helped across most segments of the American electorate. The data also reveals a lesson that is often forgotten among political operatives: voters want more than a candidate who holds certain positions or values; the character, tone, and competency of candidates also matter. Voters can and do distinguish between someone who shares their values and someone who would serve the public well.

Interestingly, while many religious (other than white evangelicals) voters identified with Palin's values, they did not consider voting for her. The reason:

Part of the explanation certainly has to be her many now-famous stumbles, public gaffes, and lack of knowledge about key policies. But there is another important explanation. There is mounting evidence that the American electorate is turning away from so-called “values voter” wedge politics that Palin represented ....

In our post-election survey, an overwhelming majority (73%) of American voters agreed that “people of faith should advocate for policies that protect the interests of all and promote the common good” compared to only 22% who preferred pursuing “policies that protect their values and way of life.” By a nearly 2-to-1 margin, those favoring a common good politics said Palin’s addition made them less likely to support the GOP ticket (27% less likely vs. 15% more likely).

While I don't necessarily agree that we have moved past wedge politics, though I wish it so, the part about how religious voters are more concerned with the "common good" is provocative. To which the authors conclude:

But the numbers reveal her limitations as a national political figure, and her serious liabilities among virtually every religious and demographic group outside of the GOP base. Moreover, the numbers reveal that voters across the political spectrum are looking not only for candidates who share their values, but for candidates who can ably serve the common good. (emphasis mine)

On a related note, in light of these numbers, it isn't surprising to me that Republican gubernatorial nominee, Bob McDonnell, has a Palin problem: she is wildly popular among the conservative base while simultaneously unpopular with moderate and independent voters. To campaign with her or to not campaign with her?

Tom, Joe, and Mika

2009-07-08T21:06:00.003-04:00

Today, Rep. Perriello was on "Morning Joe," where he talked to Joe and Mika (not exactly progressive poster children) about his ACES vote, budget deficits, and healthcare reform. Watch this clip to the end to see how the hosts raved about Perriello afterward.

Positive Ratings For Sotomayor by Prominent Church-State Group (updated)

2009-07-08T20:15:00.005-04:00

Today, several prominent groups offered their reviews on the qualifications of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the nominee for the Supreme Court. First, the American Bar Association (ABA), in a unanimous opinion, rated Sotomayor as "well qualified," their highest possible rating.

While the ABA's rating is important indeed, personally, I am more concerned with another group's opinion. The Baptist Joint Committee (BJC), a prominent organization for the separation of church and state, also offered their review of Sotomayor. Basically, while there isn't an abundance of her opinions on the subject to sort through - there is not a complete picture - the BJC generally likes what they see:

While Sotomayor’s written record raises no red flags, it also fails to provide complete assurance to those who are most concerned about our fragile religious freedom rights. In the free exercise cases, she displays careful attention to protecting religious rights, including in prisons where courts generally give deference to government officials. Likewise, these cases demonstrate an emphasis on the importance of assessing the individual’s specific religious claim. This approach illustrates an expansive view of religious freedom that does not depend on the approval of the majority. Her religious display cases demonstrate the fact-sensitive nature of such disputes, but tell us little about where she would draw the line between permissible acknowledgements of religion and unconstitutional displays that send a message of endorsement of religion by the government. Beyond those cases, her record gives little indication of her views of the Supreme Court’s various Establishment Clause standards or how she is likely to decide such cases.

Sotomayor’s writings include few if any statements articulating how the First Amendment protects religious liberty, promotes the voluntary nature of religion, prevents governmental interference in religion and tends to reduce conflict among religions. Still, her record offers positive signs that she will be a thoughtful, fair-minded jurist in protecting religious freedom. (emphasis mine)

Two esteemed organizations, two positive reviews. Count me convinced.

Update: The Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission believes that Sotomayor will "redefine the law":

"After carefully examining her record as a lower court judge, we believe that Sotomayor should not be confirmed to serve on the nation’s highest court," Land said in the e-mail. "Sonia Sotomayor’s record reveals that she is perfectly willing to lift the blindfold of justice to achieve her desired result. She is a judge with a terribly flawed view of the judicial system at best or a judge who simply doesn’t care what the law says at worst. She has constantly shown her lack of deference to the Constitution. She is the type of justice who instead of applying the law neutrally will redefine the law to conform to her policy preferences."

So, two organizations for religious liberty, two opposing view points.

Follow-up: Perriello Unveils Energy Plan

2009-07-07T23:06:00.004-04:00

Yesterday, I mentioned that Rep. Perriello held a press conference unveiling his new energy plan for the district. Today, his office released more details on the subject. Money quote:

"Southern and Central Virginia stand poised to lead the nation towards energy independence, and this new commitment is the kind of game-changer our area has needed to regain our competitive edge. Our local entrepreneurs are already the best in the nation at energy efficiency modular homes, bio-fuels, bio-refineries, and nuclear energy. If we have the courage to move from merely surviving to thriving as a region, this can be a homerun for our farmers, advanced manufacturers, and construction industries," said Perriello.

Perriello's "clean energy blueprint" outlines how and why this district can lead the nation in the new energy economy. The plan also offers a vision of a clean energy economy in the Fifth District, as well as offering the benefits of this approach to energy independence. Perriello plans to distribute the document to local elected leaders, administration officials, and entrepreneurs and businesspeople to lobby for bringing investments and jobs to the district. Importantly, the ideas in the plan were the result of the "New Energy Summit" earlier in the year.

The plan, entitled "New Energy for the Fifth District: A Blueprint for putting Southside and Central Virginia at the Forefront of the Clean Energy Economy," can be downloaded here. Please download it and read it! Good stuff.

The Church, 25 Years From Now

2009-07-07T22:15:00.004-04:00

Collide Magazine offers their thoughts on what the Church will look like in the next 25 years. By following certain media and technological trends, they posit their thoughts on the size of church communities, church networks and sermons, music, and the multimedia experience. Sometimes verging on the absurd, with androids and holographic projections, I think their insights offer an overly accommodationist approach to technology, in my opinion, loosing the meaning and purpose of the worship experience while simultaneously exacerbating our idolatrous supplication to technology. For example:

The Church in 2034 ministers to people who have mostly embraced the ubiquity of technology in their lives. As a result, the Church in 2034, for the most part, has done what it can to facilitate the kind of weekend multimedia experience that people expect. If electronic media is the language of culture, most churches in 2034 have few, if any, reservations about speaking that language in every aspect of church life.

Their conclusion (below) that the church will become a community focused group is aspirational and hopeful, but unless for a cataclysmic shift in mission, I don't think that current trends are leading in that direction, especially given the flight of the younger generations:

Christians in 2034 are beginning to associate the term “church” with a group of people more than a building or a weekend experience.
[...]
Christians of all shapes and sizes embody a renewed emphasis on deep connection with one another. The majority of the faithful appear to realize that resources, multimedia, and production are wonderful tools for weekend services but poor substitutes for authentic, missional community. In the Church of the future, this kind of community is increasingly facilitated and shaped by new technology ...

Overall, while this is an exercise in pure speculation, there is some value to it:

As we live in the here and now, I think we owe it to ourselves and the generations of Christians that will come after us to imagine the future. We must think carefully and critically, even if we can’t see the future clearly, and we must do our best to consider the long-term implications of the way we do church today for the sake of the church tomorrow.

I encourage you to read the article, but don't invest too much stock into their ideas.

Virgil Being Virgil (updated)

2009-07-07T21:19:00.005-04:00

Last month, Virgil Goode headlined the Constitution Party's national meeting, and thankfully, someone scored a video of his speech. Here, Goode, in classic fashion, talks about how he is scared and concerned with illegal immigration. Check it.

Update: It was brought to my attention that I had just posted Part 2 of a three part series. So, here I add the other two parts. Just as delicious.

Danville Register & Bee Chides TEA Party Movement

2009-07-07T20:40:00.003-04:00

The Danville Register & Bee, generally understood, is a moderate, right-of-center daily. Today, the newspaper published a great editorial chiding the arguments employed at Danville's TEA Party rally, a rally attended by 400 people this holiday weekend. Conceding that the government is spending money at an uncontrollable rate, the editorial staff, after sorting through other inane arguments, points out the ideological dissonance inherent within the movement. Money quote:

The best arguments made — that federal government spending must be brought in line with revenues and that existing programs have to work as well as possible before the public can be confident of adding new ones — sometimes got lost in the white-hot rhetoric.

Even the TEA Party’s timing — coming to life after the Democrats won power in the last election — says a lot about the ideological dead weight this group is carrying around.

Where was this group when previous conservative governments were running up ever-growing budget deficits? Why was it OK to borrow money to rebuild Baghdad but not Danville? (emphasis mine)

I love that question. Anyways, according to the editorial board, with all of the focused anger against the government, some of the tea party-goers did admit to the positive benefits of the government (i.e., healthcare and social security). To which they conclude:

That’s why reforming the existing system makes a lot more sense than all the tough talk that could lead America down a road few have the stomach to travel.

Not only do we not have the stomach to travel down this road, but America has moved past the debate of the size of the government. Now we are onto debating the role of the government. But I digress.

Quote of the Day

2009-07-07T20:06:00.003-04:00

John Calvin, who's 500th anniversary of his birthday is this upcoming Friday:

"It is the common habit of mankind that the more closely men are bound together by the ties of kinship, of acquaintanceship, or of neighborhood, the more responsibilities for one another they share. This does not offend God; for his providence, as it were, leads us to it. But I say: we ought to embrace the whole human race without exception in a single feeling of love; here there is no distinction between barbarian and Greek, worthy and unworthy, friend and enemy, since all should be contemplated in God, not in themselves. When we turn aside from such contemplation, it is no wonder we become entangled in many errors. Therefore, if we rightly direct our love, we must first turn our eyes not to man, the sight of whom would more often engender hate than love, but to God, who bids us extend to all men the love we bear to him, that this may be an unchanging principle: Whatever the character of the man, we must yet love him because we love God."

Chilling how much this quote parallels Bob Wright's thoughts on non-zero sum interaction, cultural evolution, and a moral trajectory undergirding (human) history culminating in an ethic of universal love and toleration.

(h/t Andrew Sullivan)

Perriello Unveils Energy Plan

2009-07-06T22:40:00.002-04:00

This past weekend, Rep. Perriello unveiled his energy plan for the district, covered by both the Martinsville Bulletin and the Franklin News Post. Perriello's plan is premised on three principles: maximize efficiency, revolutionize energy sources, and decentralize energy production. With these principles in mind, the Southside is well positioned to be a national leader in the new energy economy:

• There is an abundance of farmland for the production of bioenergy, and post-industrial sites are available and ideal for developing clean energy technologies.
• Entrepreneurs and farmers in the region are ready to become leaders in the struggle to reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil.
• The region is home to world-class research centers and is positioned to leverage funds provided by the Virginia Tobacco Indemnification and Community Revitalization Commission.
• The recently approved American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the American Clean Energy and Security Act are providing federal funds for investments in clean energy.

Perriello money quote:

“We will not turn this economy around by hiding from our problems, but by having the courage to reinvent our competitive advantage,” he said.

Goode running for another office? Doubtful

2009-07-06T21:13:00.006-04:00

A local Martinsville radio host, Bill Wyatt, believes that former Rep. Goode is not finished with public service. To Wyatt, if Goode does not decide to run against Rep. Perriello - announcement forthcoming - then Goode might consider other office. Saith Wyatt:

So the question is; Will Goode call for a rematch against Periello, or will he run for another political office? If he were to, I wonder what it would be? Either way, I don’t think Virgil is done with politics yet. Whether he runs for the 5th or whether he goes for something else I think we will see Virgil Goode in an elected capacity somewhere again.

Nevermind the assumption of victory, that Goode will be elected again. I do not know whether Wyatt has insider information or if he is merely speculating on this issue. On this very subject, however, last winter Goode, during a post-election interview, contemplated and dismissed the possibility of running for higher office, especially the governorship:

He has no immediate aspirations to seek another political office.

Being governor would be “the best job you could have” in the state, Goode mused.

But he is not considering running for that post. He said he thinks his years in the General Assembly promoting the needs of Southside and other rural areas of Virginia put him at odds with lawmakers from Northern Virginia.

Now a lot could have happened since last December, but I just don't see it. If Goode doesn't challenge Rep. Perriello, I suspect his career as a public official is over, that he opted for political retirement. Until then, however, let's take Goode at his word.

Worship and Web 2.0

2009-07-05T21:26:00.004-04:00

I had a great discussion with several pastors last month about using social networking sites as a way to do community outreach. This conversation is endemic of the church's overall struggle with Web 2.0, a struggle highlighted in yesterday's New York Times article. Money quote:

Still, many clerics admit to an uneasiness about the merger of worship and electronic chatter.

In online debates and private discussions, leaders of all faiths have been weighing pros and cons and diagramming the boundaries of acceptable interactions: Should the congregation have a Facebook page, or should it be the imam’s or priest’s? Should there be limited access? Censoring? Is it appropriate for a clergy member to “friend” a minor?

Some recoil at the informality and unpredictability of the crowds marshaled by social media, and at their seeming immunity — even hostility — to the authority of established institutions. More deeply, some in the clergy see a basic tension between the anonymous world of online life and the meaning of religious community.

While the church debates over the proper utilization and the theological function of social media, one thing is certain: like it or not, it's here to stay.

The American Patriot's Bible

2009-07-05T16:44:00.008-04:00

Another day, another study bible. This time, the American Patriot's Bible. Amazon offers this product description:

THE ONE BIBLE THAT SHOWS HOW 'A LIGHT FROM ABOVE' SHAPED OUR NATION. Never has a version of the Bible targeted the spiritual needs of those who love our country more than The American Patriot's Bible. This extremely unique Bible shows how the history of the United States connects the people and events of the Bible to our lives in a modern world. The story of the United States is wonderfully woven into the teachings of the Bible and includes a beautiful full-color family record section, memorable images from our nation's history and hundreds of enlightening articles which complement the New King James Version Bible text.

The USA Today, picks up on its creation, detailing its background and reaction to its formation. Money quote:

Americans looking to combine love of God with love of country this July 4th can quote the new American Patriot's Bible, which says God has influenced America through godly Founding Fathers, presidents and soldiers.

"This Bible is designed for the decent, hardworking core of America, the ordinary man or woman who loves this nation and believes it springs from godly roots," says Richard G. Lee, a Southern Baptist pastor from Georgia who served as the Bible's general editor.

Lee believes that conservative values are under assault in our current political context, and as such this study bible is necessary:

In his introduction, Lee writes that "America stands without equal as a beacon of hope and freedom in a hurting world." The Patriot's Bible, he says, speaks to Americans who feel their conservative theology, politics and morals are under assault.
"We are at our lowest ebb at this particular time," he said in an interview. "Judeo-Christian principles are being beaten down. They're actually under attack. This has never happened before."

However, not all conservative evangelicals celebrate this "non-partisan" publication. Some are disgusted with the unabashed and intentional fusion of Christianity and patriotism:

"Get thee behind me, Satan," wrote "Crunchy Con" blogger Rod Dreher on Beliefnet. "To the extent that this Bible's publishers conflate serving Christ with patriotism … they are corrupt, and corrupters."

Evangelical author and pastor Greg Boyd's lengthy critique, posted on Christianity Today's website, calls Lee's Bible "idolatrous," saying, "There's not a single commentary in this Bible that even attempts to shed light on what the biblical text actually means."

Importantly, it is relatively commonplace to have a study bible conform to a certain, sometimes secular, ideological agenda. Take, for example, the Green Bible. But, I too have a major problem with retrofitting and redacting our sacred texts with imperial nationalism; as if to be true Christians or true Americans, you must believe a certain way, and failure to do so invalidates your religious and patriotic credentials. At best this is unhealthy - at worst, harmful - to our religious and political identities.

Talk amongst yourselves.

Danville Register & Bee Defends Rep. Perriello (updated)

2009-07-05T16:08:00.005-04:00

Two days ago, the Roanoke Times applauded Rep. Perriello for his "principled stand" on ACES, and today, the Danville Register & Bee defended Perriello for his vote. The Letters to the Editor against him have been relentless, and the editorial staff shares these writers concerns. But:

But anyone who thinks Perriello — a man who has worked in this community’s soup kitchens — would blindly support a bill that would add hundreds or even thousands of dollars to our energy bills just doesn’t know our congressman. No member of Congress would vote to do that.

This bill, continues the editorial staff, would create and foster a new green energy economy, already budding in parts of Southside. The NRCC, "smell[ing] political blood," won't mention these local projects; they are obfuscating the truth with "wildly fluctuating costs estimates" and the fear of a national energy tax. Concludes the Register & Bee:

It took a lot of political courage — and guts — for Perriello to support a bill that’s so widely misunderstood. Maybe voting to give money to NASA in 1962 cost some congressmen their jobs, too.

How smart was that?

Update: The Bedford Bulletin offers their opinion on the matter. While I can not claim to be an expert whatsoever on ACES, this opinion is utterly devoid of both basic background knowledge of the legislation and its positive effects for Southside. Wow. Just wow.

Happy Independence Day

2009-07-04T10:43:00.003-04:00

Declaration of Independence, signed July 4th, 1776:

When in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness—-That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security. Such has been the patient Sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the Necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The History of the Present King of Great-Britain is a History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

British Poll: Compatibility of God and Evolution?

2009-07-03T20:39:00.006-04:00

The British Council and a marketing research firm, Ipsos MORI, asked 10,000 individuals in ten different countries asking, among other things, whether or not one can believe in God and evolution simultaneously (data here). Press release money quote:

Dr Fern Elsdon-Baker, Head of the British Council Darwin Now programme, said: ‘The international Darwin survey has thrown up some very interesting results, especially as it includes data from countries not previously covered before. The most encouraging aspect of the survey shows that whilst there are diverse views on Darwin’s theory of evolution, there appears to a broad acceptance that science and faith do not have to be in conflict. Whilst the results show that there is some way to go in communicating the evidence of evolutionary theory to wider audiences, it is evident that there is clear space for dialogue on this sometimes complex area of debate.’ (emphasis mine)

According to the results, 53% of Americans believed that it is possible to believe in God while believing life has evolved over time. 27% think that these beliefs are irreconcilable, obviously those from either creationistic or scientific backgrounds. India overwhelmingly believes in the compatibility of these belief systems, while Egypt is almost evenly split. Importantly, in each of the countries polled, a majority of respondents stated that the belief in God can co-exist with the belief in evolution.

The blog Science and the Sacred argues:

While surveys are not always accurate representations of a larger population, the results of this study offer some interesting ideas about the international debate over religion, evolution, and origins.

On one of those interesting ideas, like Elsdon-Baker, I think that these results, overall, underscore the general (and international) acceptance that science and faith can co-exist, can offer each other fruitful guidance and dialogue.

Palin: Unorthodox Presidential Maneuver? Quitter? Scandal Ridden? Tired?

2009-07-03T19:26:00.012-04:00

By now, you have most likely heard the news that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has resigned her position (text here). She says that she can best help Alaskans outside of the political system. Pundits and commentators, however, are less certain, utterly baffled, and without clear answers, speculation is ensuing. Marc Aminder, Nate Silver, and Mark Halperin each offer their theories, but by reading and listening to the news, several theories seem to have emerged.

Some are suggesting that Palin resigned so that she could better position herself for a run at the presidency. Here, she would need to stay visible and need to start putting together a national campaign team in order to focus full-time on the 2012 presidental nomination. Even throughout the recent drama, her favorable ratings among Republican activist is still high. Here, she can ride her popularity, without the confines of the governorship, into a strong position for the Republican nomination. Importantly, Alaska is too far away to effectively campaign in Iowa, New Hampsire, and South Carolina, and this resignation allows her to campaign more efficiently, clearing away the field of flawed GOP contenders.

But, as someone who has been criticized as a political novice, unprepared for the prime time, she foolishly truncates her political development. You don't run for higher office while resigning, especially this early, your current office. In effect, she quit. Palin quit on Alaskans and as such, she dashed any aspirations of higher office. She's finished.

Or, has something happened in the last few days, prompting her to resign the office? Are we going to see an ensuing investigation in the near future? An indictment? Some other type of scandal? The recent article in Vanity Fair has caused a storm of Republican in-fighting. But, are these leaked stories prelude to something larger?

Or, Palin could just be tired of public office. Here, the constant barrage of negative media wore Palin and her family down. That level of scrutiny, certainly, is tough for one person to handle, not to mention her family.

We are all speculating, and as Waldo states, this is a futile exercise. The truth is, at this point in time, we don't know Palin's motivations. More information, surely, will be forthcoming.

What are your thoughts? Got any ideas?

Faith Groups respond to ACES (updated)

2009-07-02T21:17:00.004-04:00

On the note of ACES, I wanted to highlight how differing faith communities are responding to the legislation. Naturally, reaction to the bill divides down the conservative-progressive fault-line, centered around the belief or disbelief of the existence of human-made global warming. While important and theologically significant, the derivative claims of taxes and jobs only serve as supportive justification to the group's overall stance on the issue.

Citing skepticism of global warming and a regressive tax, conservative Christians are "sounding the alarm bells":

[T]he Cornwall Alliance – a conservative Christian coalition – has described its cap and trade provisions, which allow companies that pollute less than their limit to sell some of their permits to others struggling to meet such green requirements, ”as the largest tax hike in history.” Analysts have said such arguments may appeal to voters especially against the backdrop of the current recession.

Conservative Christians are distributing an online petition called We Get It! which reads in part: “Our stewardship of creation must be based on Biblical principles and factual evidence. We face important environmental challenges, but must be cautious of claims that our planet is in peril from speculative dangers like man-made global warming.”
[...]
Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission and a leading figure in the social conservative movement, devoted much of his nationally syndicated radio show on Saturday to the topic, calling cap and trade a “regressive tax to the max.” Tony Perkins, president of the conservative Family Research Council, said in his blog last week that it “would increase an already staggering national debt by 26 percent by 2035” — a figure taken directly from the Cornwall Alliance’s estimates.

Progressive faith groups, on the other hand, are lauding the legislation. For example, a couple of Jewish groups hail the bill's passage:

"This is a crucially important issue -- the most important issue for the whole planet," said [Jewish Council for Public Affairs] Washington director Hadar Susskind. "If we don't do this, none of the others matter."
Rabbi David Saperstein, the director of the Religious Action Center, said that while the measure does not go far enough, it "creates an important framework for drastically reducing global warming pollution, creating hundreds of thousands of good, green jobs and increasing access to clean energy."

After lobbying for and winning the insertion of a provision to allow retrofitting to faith-based and other nonprofits, one influential coalition of religious groups is also content.

Update: According to the Wall Street Journal, several other progressive religious coalitions are going up on the airwaves, television and radio, to raise awareness of climate change, underscored by a biblical perspective. In the article, Rep. Perriello is quoted:

"It's important for people to see that it's not just [Democrats] saying this is important, but people who are coming at it from a moral background," said Rep. Tom Perriello ....

Perriello, ACES, Response, Counter-Response (updated)

2009-07-02T20:36:00.005-04:00

As you well know, Rep. Perriello voted for the American Clean Energy and Security Act (ACES), and the NRCC responded by cutting a television ad hitting Perriello for his vote (ad here). The Danville Register & Bee caught up with Perriello and asked his thoughts on the ad:

"I think it’s hogwash and cowardice,” Perriello said of the new television ad. “We have had an oil dependence probably since the day I was born and I think this bill is going to be a big winner for central and Southside Virginia. For biofuel, for our farmers.”

Perriello supported converting tobacco farms into future biomass producers and turning farm and municipal waste into power. The bill aims to create millions of green jobs through alternative energy sources, but Republicans claim the legislation would actually cut jobs and depress real estate prices.

“It’s just false,” Perriello said. “We’re already losing the jobs. This is what (critics) don’t get. We are hemorrhaging jobs in the energy sector. The status quo that they support is a job-loss strategy. We have a job-winning strategy by making investments in the future of technology.”

Not only does Perriello find the ad false, but one important non-profit group supports his claims. Importantly, FactCheck.org, ya know, checked the facts and declared, "[T]he NRCC is wrong," especially regarding the household costs. In light of these claims, one Roanoke television station, WDBJ-TV, decided that it won't run the attack ad, citing factual inaccuracies.

Other feedback has been positive for Perriello. The Environmental Defense Fund themselves made an ad, thanking Perriello for his vote (ad here). And, this morning, in the Washington Post, E.J. Dionne wrote a positive editorial on why Perriello and other vulnerable Democratic representatives voted for the bill. Money quote:

Hours before the House passed its cap-and-trade bill last week, freshman Democrats Tom Perriello and Frank Kratovil were pondering the political fallout of the votes they were about to cast in favor of a plan Republicans were denouncing as "cap-and-tax."

"Maybe we should be called the conscience caucus," said the 34-year-old Perriello ...

Update: Today's Roanoke Times editorial applauds Perriello for his principled stand. The Politico is also running a story in which Tom is selling his vote to Southside business leaders and farmers.

Current Southside Unemployment Rates (updated)

2009-06-30T23:08:00.004-04:00

Another month, another set of abysmal numbers for the Southside. For the month of May, Martinsville leads the state with an unemployment rate of 21.9% up almost 2%, followed by Henry county at 15.2% up about 1%. Danville has an unemployment rate of 13%, the highest for a metropolitan area.

To put these numbers in perspective, Virginia hosts a 7.1% jobless rate, while the country as a whole is 9.4%.

For trend lines, here are January's numbers, February's numbers, and March's numbers for the Southside. Note: I did not catch any contemporary articles citing April's numbers.

Update: Kenton Ngo, with distressing visuals, argues how Martinsville suffers from the GOP's anti-stimulus posturing.

Quote of the Day (updated)

2009-06-30T21:46:00.003-04:00

Responding to how his vote on the American Clean Energy and Security Act will illicit NRCC attacks, Rep. Perriello said:

“If I have to choose between national security and reelection, for me that’s easy. It’s national security,” he told POLITICO. “I can deal with losing reelection. I can’t deal with being a coward.”

Amen. Thank you, Tom!

(h/t Lowell)

Update: Here is an article on the NRCC planned television attack ads.

Archaeological Finds of the Apostle Paul

2009-06-30T14:00:00.000-04:00

The Vatican just announced several amazing Pauline discoveries. First, archaeologists have uncovered the oldest known image of the Apostle Paul, over 1600 years, uncovered in Roman catacombs. This fresco is was discovered during restoration work on the Catacomb of Saint Thekla.

Second, tradition has long held that the remains of Paul lie beneath the main altar of the Basilica of St. Paul. Several years ago, archaeologists excavated parts of the floor of the basilica and found a large white marble sarcophagus. Recently, archaeologists opened a sarcophagus, believed to hold the remains of of Paul, and they found surviving bone fragments. After doing DNA tests, the Vatican has confirmed that the bones are actually those of the Paul, as the bones date back to the first century.

Whether or not you are skeptical with the claims of these discoveries, you still have to find them somewhat remarkable.

Podcast: Interview with Robert Wright

2009-06-30T08:10:00.003-04:00

Our interview with author Robert Wright is up over at Homebrewed Christianity (the audio player is at the bottom of the post). Tripp and Chad have a little fun in the introduction, and then our good times roll with Bob. I hope that you enjoy the interview.

It seems that I have picked up a Southern draw from my time here in Southside - very long, drawn out vowel sounds.

Obama's New Church (updated)

2009-06-29T18:30:00.005-04:00

Fun fact: Obama has chosen his church. Obama has chosen to worship at Camp David at the non-denominational Evergreen Chapel, generally open to military personnel and camp staff. The Chapel, dedicated by Bush I and attended by Bush II, provides a spectacle-free opportunity in which a president can worship. Money quote:

A number of factors drove the decision - financial, political, personal - but chief among them was the desire to worship without being on display. Obama was reportedly taken aback by the circus stirred up by his visit to 19th Street Baptist in January. Lines started forming three hours before the morning service, and many longtime members were literally left out in the cold as the church filled with outsiders eager to see the new President. Even at St. John's, which is so accustomed to presidential visitors that it is known as the "Church of the Presidents," worshippers couldn't help themselves from snapping photos of Obama on their camera phones as they walked down the aisle past him to take communion.
[...]
White House aides say that security measures required by the Secret Service have become stricter since 9/11 and would cause significant delays for parishioners - and at significant cost to taxpayers - on Sunday mornings. Given Obama's popularity within the African-American community, the President also worried that if he chose a local black congregation, church members would find themselves competing with sightseers for space in the pews.

Update: According to Press Secretary Gibbs, there is not much truth to the fact that Obama has chosen his church. He is still in process of deciding, but, it is true, that he does not like to disrupt worship services.

The Political Underpinnings of The Transformers

2009-06-29T16:43:00.002-04:00

Michael Yglesias points out that Hollywood director/producer Michael Bay uses Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen as subtle anti-Obama political commentary. Bay, according to Yglesias, hits hard on Obama's political appeasement of enemies, now the Decepticons, and how Obama's strategies have destroyed our international allies. Money quote:

After all, though the film doesn’t dwell on the point, one critical turn in the storyline comes when a heroic Major in the United States Army (or possibly Air Force) decides to disobey orders and mutiny against a civilian operative specifically sent by POTUS to take command of the operation. But what’s more, this is no rogue special forces officer, he’s clearly supported in his action by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who elects to turn a blind eye, and leave President Obama (who’s named specifically) in the dark as he cowers in fear in an underground bunker. Obama, you see, has ordered American forces to attempt to appease the Deceptecon threat by halting all collaboration with the Autobots, and agreeing to turn Sam Witwicky over to the forces of evil. By defying Obama and staging what amounts to a coup, the military saves the day.
What’s more, the film appears to indicate that Jordan and Egypt share a border right near the tip of the Gulf of Aqaba. For this to be the case, of course, Israel would have to be wiped off the map. The film doesn’t specify how this horrific turn of events took place, but I think we can take for granted that Obama’s cowardly of a settlement freeze is ultimately responsible.

I haven't seen the movie - I enjoyed the first - but everything I have read gives this sequel less than stellar reviews. Now, I am even less inclined to go.

Similarities in Religious Belief Between Straights and Gays

2009-06-29T00:31:00.006-04:00

A new poll found that, in general, gays and lesbians hold very similar religious beliefs with their straight counterparts. Although there are some significant differences in belief between the two populations, the Barna Group, a conservative evangelical polling firm, found that many religious assumptions about gays are, in fact, unsubstantiated. Saith George Barna:

“People who portray gay adults as godless, hedonistic, Christian bashers are not working with the facts,” declared the best-selling author of numerous books about faith and culture. “A substantial majority of gays cite their faith as a central facet of their life, consider themselves to be Christian, and claim to have some type of meaningful personal commitment to Jesus Christ active in their life today.
[...]
“Although there are clearly some substantial differences in the religious beliefs and practices of the straight and gay populations, there may be less of a spiritual gap between straights and gays than many Americans would assume.”

I'm not surprised at all with the results of this study, but I am shocked that there was even a need to commission the poll. Responding to these results, one ReligiousDespatches contributor, a lesbian, while offering strong criticism to the analysis, says, "Well, duh."

Cantor's 2010 VA Predictions

2009-06-29T00:14:00.001-04:00

Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-7th) predicted that Republicans would pick-up three House seats here in Virginia next congressional cycle, specifically those of Nye, Perriello, and Connolly. Of course, Cantor must speak as if from a position of strength, but the ease in which Republicans believe these districts will flip is naive at best, laughable at worst.

Within the Fifth District, as we well know, all eyes are on Virgil Goode:

Another possible rematch could be brewing in Perriello’s 5th district where Cantor said former Rep. Virgil Goode (R) — who was defeated in one of the biggest upsets of 2008 — is close to making a decision on whether he’ll try to win back his old seat.
Reached on Tuesday, Goode would only say that he hopes to make a decision “in the not too distant future,” but most Republican insiders expect he’ll eventually join the race.

And, the end of this fundraising quarter (June 30th) will provide better clarity on Goode's position to run against Rep. Perriello.

Will Recent Scandals Turn Off Conservative Voters?

2009-06-28T21:26:00.003-04:00

The Los Angeles Times speculates how recent scandals among leading Republican officials will disillusion conservative evangelicals with politics in general. Money quote:

A series of sex-related scandals over the last few years has undercut the party's assertions of moral authority and, worse, may serve to reinforce the doubts that many evangelical voters have traditionally harbored about the unholiness of the political realm.

Republicans have been successful reaching out to religious voters, not just with their focus on conservative social issues but "by promoting an image of greater virtue and more godliness." With the confessions of Sanford, Ensign, Larry Craig, and Mark Foley, among others, however, conservative evangelicals feel betrayed:

"Episode after episode like this makes it relatively difficult for Republicans to say with a straight face that they're a party that stands on moral issues that evangelicals care about," said Dale Kuehne, an associate political science professor at Saint Anselm College and a pastor in Nashua, N.H. "You look at Mark Sanford and Larry Craig and say, 'Is there anyone we can trust?' "

But, obviously, this does not mean that Democrats will see a windfall of disaffected voters:

A sudden and overwhelming shift of Christian conservatives from the GOP to the more secular-minded Democratic Party appears unlikely. As Laura Olson, an expert on religion and politics at South Carolina's Clemson University, put it: "The Republican Party is still going to be, at a minimum, the lesser of two evils."

But in politics, subtraction can be just as important as addition. If large numbers of evangelicals were to stay home on election day, or channel their activism into outlets other than politics, the GOP could suffer grave consequences; over the last generation, devout churchgoer voters have become an increasingly vital part of the shrinking Republican base.

One Republican congressman offers his thoughts on how the party can regain the trust of voters:

"We really do need to cut loose this stinkpot of self-righteousness," said Bob Inglis, a GOP congressman from South Carolina who once served alongside Sanford on Capitol Hill. "I see a real opportunity for a more accurate presentation of the Gospel in presenting fact rather than the fiction . . . that we're paragons of virtue."

However you want to theologically intimate human sinfulness, the recognition of our flawed and broken natures necessitates Inglis' call for humility. We inevitably fall, and as such, the trumpeting of moral superiority becomes a double-edged sword - the negative effects, in light of scandals, being an increased intensity of public anger, charges of hypocrisy, and legitimate threats of voter abandonment.

I wonder, however, contrary to the LA Times, how much Republicans have to worry about the latter effect. The one factor providing potential cover? The political realtime between now and the next election cycle. An eternity. In the end, I think, voters will care much more about the economy, jobs, threats of religious extremism, and other unforseen circumstances. And, while a politician's funny-business is newsworthy, this is how it should be.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

2009-06-27T00:32:00.002-04:00

No Ociffer, you're looking for the other naked ex-mayor:

A former mayor found sitting naked and holding a beer at a Rabun County campsite told police he wasn’t the same naked man seen walking around earlier.

Mark Musselwhite, 43, said he was hot and had been in the creek, according to a Georgia Department of Natural Resources incident report. He apparently didn’t think he was doing anything wrong.
[...]
[DNR Ranger Brandon] Walls and a deputy sheriff went to the campsite Saturday evening after a complaint of a man walking naked in Earls Ford Road, according to the report. Musselwhite appeared to be intoxicated, and several alcoholic beverages were at the campsite, Walls said.
[...]
“I said the complainant had specifically said his campsite, and the fact that he was still nude made me think it was him,” Walls wrote.

Musselwhite denied that he was the nude man identified in the complaint.

(h/t TalkingPointsMemo)

Southern Baptist Church in Decline, Affects Republican Party

2009-06-26T23:01:00.005-04:00

Rueters has an interesting article on the decline of the Southern Baptist Church. Currently, the SBC comprises over 16 million members and is the second largest denomination behind the Catholic Church, if Catholicism can be considered a denomination. But the SBC leadership is alarmed by current trend lines:

[The SBC's] research arm LifeWay Research released the following projections this week at the convention’s annual meeting in Kentucky: it said its numbers would fall nearly 50 percent by 2050 “unless the aging and predominantly white denomination reverses a 50-year trend and does more to strengthen evangelism, reach immigrants, and develop a broader ethnic base.”

“Using U.S. Census projected population figures, SBC membership could fall from a peak of 6 percent of the American population in the late 1980s to 2 percent in 2050,” said LifeWay director Ed Stetzer. (emphasis mine)

The author, Ed Stoddard, believes that this denominational decline would seriously affect the growth and stability of the Republican party:

If the SBC is in decline, one also has to wonder what the long-term political implications could be for the Republican Party. Conservative white evangelical Protestants have become its most reliable base. In recent election cycles it has relied on this base to deliver the vote in part by galvanizing opposition to abortion rights and gay marriage.

And the conservative SBC, one could argue, is the core of that base.
[...]
But Republican strategists will probably not take comfort by the fact that the SBC’s demographics in many ways mirror that of the party itself. Old, white, and Southern (one could add male and rural), with expansion dependent upon attracting immigrants and other ethnic groups, notably Hispanics. It is perhaps no coincidence that the core of the Republican base looks a lot like the party itself. (emphasis mine)

Both the flipside to and the result of these trends is that younger generations are becoming, religiously speaking, increasingly unaffiliated and, politically speaking, increasingly Democratic.

Rep. Perriello, ACES, and the Anatomy of a Smear

2009-06-26T19:21:00.007-04:00

The American Clean Energy And Security Act (ACES) just passed the house, 219-212. Rep. Perriello voted for the bill. In a statement released by Perriello, he emphasized the positive effects of the bill with special recognition of the Southside. Saith Perriello:

Today we declare America’s energy independence and provide a blueprint for building the energy jobs and technology of the future right here at home. America can still out-innovate any other country on earth, and we cannot give in to those who doubt America’s ability to lead once more. Perhaps once in a generation we have the opportunity to revolutionize our economy in a way that creates for future generations the kind of jobs and opportunities that we inherited through the sacrifices of our parents. Today we reverse not only the hemorrhaging of energy sector jobs, but also the flood of our citizens’ dollars to those who would threaten our security.
[...]
Southside Virginia will be one of the winners under this bill, accelerating its ascendance to being the future energy capital of Virginia. In a carbon-constrained economy, we will see a resurgence of nuclear power. We can convert former tobacco farms into future biomass producers. And we can see farm and municipal waste turned into power. This bill, particularly the elements those of us from rural districts negotiated, will spur investments in biomass fuels that can flourish on former tobacco farms. We can convert manure on our cattle and poultry farms into power and finally get some profits back to our hard-working farmers. We will not turn this economy around by hiding from our problems, but by having the courage to reinvent our competitive advantage.

Today is a vote for America over petro-dictators. It is a vote for innovation over the erosion of our jobs. It is vote for demanding American leadership rather than settling for a slow slide behind India, China and other competitors. A vote against this bill is a vote to weaken this country, put our people at risk, and sit on the sidelines while we hemorrhage jobs. A vote for this bill is a vote for America’s security, her innovative spirit, good jobs for our citizens, and the future of our country.

Perriello's statement also included quotes from a local green energy businessman, the President of the National Farmers Union, and an Iraq war veteran who works for Veterans Green Jobs. Because of the proximity to my house and the location here in Southside, I want to highlight one other quote. Dean Price, owner of Red Birch Energy, a closed-loop biodiesel gas station a couple miles from my house, said:

“This legislation will allow more American entrepreneurs and farmers like me to grow and sell our own energy. These kind of jobs can’t be outsourced and will be a huge part of a new economy and business model in Southern Virginia. I applaud Congressman Perriello for his brave stance and leadership to make our nation energy independent.”

On a similar note, Lowell and Lloyd Snook dissect today's development of a right-wing smear against Perriello, specifically regarding Perriello's vote on ACES. I can't really offer more than them, except to say that, while I was listening to Rush Limbaugh today, I actually heard Limbaugh regurgitate this claim.

Bradley Rees Officially Announces Candidacy Against Rep. Perriello (updated)

2009-06-25T21:41:00.011-04:00

I attended Bradley Rees' announcement for the Republican nomination to challenge Rep. Perriello. I, unfortunately, could listen in for the first 15 minutes, as my co-worker had a time-sensitive emergency. So, fairly, I can only offer my initial impressions and my thoughts on his lengthy speech, as I was handed a hard copy.

For his announcement, Rees chose a small park in Danville, a block or two away from the closed Dan River Mills industrial complex. Walking up, you couldn't help but notice that Rees, presumably unchanged from work, was wearing blue jeans, a t-shirt, and a button-up shirt ... to the official announcement of his candidacy. These images, naturally, symbolized Rees' desire to be seen as a working man, one of us, fighting against the "pretension of politics" and the (governmental) ills affecting our families. Rees and his campaign manager, Michael Ernette, who has commented on this blog before, were very cordial and easy to get a long with, guys with whom you would want to grab a brew.

In an unorthodox start to his speech, Rees declared his relative distaste for the current political landscape. His message, in my opinion, was seemingly (or better?) fit for an Independent candidacy, especially given his previous thoughts on a third party candidacy and his reluctance to claim the Republican party as his own. Rees begins:

I can't stand politics, or most politicians. There are a few statesmen left, but not nearly enough to stem the erosion of core principles that has been taking place for nearly a century. Americans are tired of the same old choices. And you shouldn't have to hold your nose when you pull that lever in the voting booth.

Rees never aspired to office and has not held office, though his employment history "is replete with accolades from former employers, supervisors, et cetera." It wasn't until last year's campaign cycle, that Rees was agitated enough to consider public office:

In televised ads last October, Congressman Perriello, in typical political-posturing fashion, blatantly lied about the FairTax, an issue I've dedicated the last 5+ years of my life to. That and my years of research on the subject of the FairTax were my initial reason for running.

At this point Rees highlighted the major platforms of his campaign, the FairTax and reversing the onslaught of governmental intrusion, and he circuitously navigated between these two issues. To his latter platform, Rees stated:

Our political system has created a bureaucracy so large, pervasive, and downright insidious, that the average working family feels helpless to stop the wrecking ball that is swing toward them. our entire political structure has been reinforced over the last several decades, not to serve the people who foot the bill, but to reign over us in perpetuitiy.

On the FairTax, Rees existentially argued:

Why do I enthusiastically endorse the FairTax? Because a human being's life span is finite. You only have so many minutes, hours, and days on Earth. When you go to work, whatever time you spend there is a portion of your life that you can never reclaim. You are trading those hours of your life for a monetary compensation, with which you can purchase whatever you choose to enhance and/or sustain your life, and that of your family.

When your government forcefully confiscates any portion of that money, before you can even use it for sustatining the life of yourself and your family, your government is, essentially laying claim to a portion of your life. The framers of the Constitution knew this, which was exactly why they expressly prohibited direct taxation of a person's income. The 16th Amendment changed that. It's time to get rid of that amendment. And, yes, you guessed it: the FairTax will do that too.

Rees reiterated his anger at the current political atmosphere, aimed at both parties, and how his previous political organizing, complemented with new technology, can overcome this disenfranchisement:

Through the social edia revolution, massive numbers of ordinary people are being mobilized ot take on the corruption of the political machines run by both major parties, and their crony counterparts in Congress.

Through paralleling his rhetoric with his intended image, Rees concluded:

The paradigm must shift, but it will take some loud voices raised in opposition and some heavy lifting. Luckily, I'm bringing a bullhorn and a forklift with me.

Update: Catherine Amos, of the Danville Register and Bee, reports the event. Notice the interesting quotes from Ernette and Tucker Watkins.

Quick Perriello Points

2009-06-24T22:27:00.003-04:00

It's hard to keep up with my congressman these days. Come home from work and my inbox is flooded with news of new legislation he writes and supports. This is from the last two days.

On veteran's issues, Perriello first voted for two important bills and introduced legislation. He voted to improve how VA's get funded, thus allowing for better transparency and planning purposes, and he voted to expand and improve VA healthcare benefits for the women who have bravely served our country. Perriello also introduced legislation to extend healthcare benefits from the VA to family members who act as caregivers to disabled veterans.

Today, Perriello announced his support for the Trade Act, which will review existing trade negotiations and will reform our country's approach to such negotiations, specifically with four higher standards. You can watch his press conference here.

Tomorrow, Thursday, Bradley Rees will officially announce his candidacy for the Republican nomination for Congress in Danville. I actually have a meeting there earlier, so time permitting, I'm going to try to check it out.

Tweeting Religious Principles

2009-06-24T21:16:00.004-04:00

Stephen Prothero, religion professor at Boston University, twitters the basic premises of each religion, as well as athiesm - 140 character theological bombshells. Prothero, author of the new book Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know, argues that while America is a deeply religious nation, our literacy of the basic tenets of the major religious faiths, even Christianity, is grossly inadequate. Saith Prothero:

“Part of what I’m trying to do is to get people to understand that religion matters, that it’s a huge political and social force. We’re seeing that play out now in Iran,” he says. “You can open the newspaper and see how important religion is.”
While the tweets are a lighthearted effort to share basic information, they also contribute to Prothero’s ongoing effort to break down barriers between academia and “the so-called real world."

Prothero's twitterfeed is here, but I here are some of his tweets on the major religions.

Xianity140: Adam&Eve hungry so we=sinners. JC died&rose so we=saved. Is God3in1/Bible true/Kingdom coming/Pope Catholic? Believe/Love! Ahh!

Judaism140: 1 God, 1 chosen people. Do the Law (all 613), tell the story (Egypt to Zion, exile to return), repair the world. 2010 in 97500!

Islam 140: Allah told Gabriel told the prophet Muhammad (PBUH): Just 1 God, pray to Him 5x day, give alms, fast, hajj to Mecca. Submit! Ahh!

Atheism140: Warning: religion=hazardous 2 ur health. There is no uknowwho but Freud & Marx is his prophet. Faith=D’oh. Be good w/o god(sic)!

He also tweets on, among others, Buddhism, Hinduism, Daoism, Confucianism, and the religion of Red Sox fans.

What do you think of those 140 character religious assessments? Two gold stars to whomever can do better, with either these or new religions.

Seward Anderson and Virginia Veterans

2009-06-22T23:20:00.004-04:00

Last week, Seward Anderson, Democratic nominee for the 14th district House of Delegates seat, held a press conference to announce several proposals to help Virginia veterans. His proposals:

If elected, Anderson said he’d work to provide tax relief for veterans, prevent foreclosures on any active service member’s home, ensure returning veterans have quick and easy access to their benefits and deregulate veteran’s organizations, which would allow them to use revenue for improvements on their posts and other necessities.

Saith Anderson:

“I believe it’s our solemn duty to repay them for what they’ve given to this nation,” Anderson said.
[...]
“We should do everything we can to thank our vets and meet their needs,” he said.

You can watch video of the press conference here. Importantly, Anderson served six years in the Virginia National Guard, his father served in WWII, and his son is currently in the Air Force. Del. Danny Marshall responded to Anderson's proposals by highlighting his pro-veteran credentials.

Obama Fears the Culture Wars?

2009-06-22T21:10:00.003-04:00

ReligionDispatches has a provocative article alleging that the Obama administration is adverse to tackling the divisive issues of the culture wars because of the potential political fallout; Obama, the logic goes, could lose support among the cherished Independents, and he wants to use his political capital on other legislative priorities. According to the author, Daniel Shultz:

It seems fairly clear to me at least that Obama's Faith-Based Advisory Board, among his other religion-minded partners, has been tasked with neutralizing the president's right wing in order to protect his political capital when it comes to legacy issues like health care.

Shultz concludes:

Now is not the time to hedge bets. The Obama administration ought to be pressing its advantages and racking up some victories, not hemming and hawing and worrying about who it might lose when the inevitable fight comes.

I can't articulate how I feel about this, if true - a swirl and confliction of emotion. Thoughts?

Del. Poindexter Unopposed. Again?

2009-06-22T21:01:00.002-04:00

First, Del. Poindexter (R-Franklin County) was unopposed. Then he drew an Independent challenger, Sherman Witcher. Last week, however, the Franklin News-Post reported that the State Board of Elections has not (yet?) certified Witcher as a candidate, and as such Poindexter may be unopposed ... again. Of course, Witcher could start a write-in campaign. Stay tuned.

Baptists in the Current Religious Landscape

2009-06-22T01:41:00.005-04:00

The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life just released this graph highlighting the percentage of Baptists in America, a number to me that, at first, seemed surprisingly high. But after interviewing 35K people, it's hard to quibble with the results.

Notice that, though still a big percentage of Baptists, Southern Baptists aren't the majority denomination. As a Baptist, I say this to remind everyone that Baptists come in all shapes, sizes, and theological persuasion, progressive to conservatism, every point in between.

(h/t RNS Blog)

Follow-up: Fear! Perriello Hides Terrorists Under Your Bed

2009-06-21T18:30:00.003-04:00

We are in the midst of quite a stir. Here's the background: three days ago, Thursday, JR Hoeft at Bearing Drift wrote a piece hitting Rep. Perriello for an no vote on an amendment prohibiting funds to close Guantanamo Bay. That night, Aznew responded calling Hoeft's post "patently absurd," and in like manner, I wrote trying to shooting down the emerging Republican memes to the story (1, 2, 3). On Friday, Lowell wrote two posts, the first echoing Aznew's sentiments, the second defending Perriello from a Christian and a national security perspective. AnonymousIsAWoman, in a great post, argued against the fear-mongering, and, the following day, Hoeft pushed back on her blog, to which Aznew again painstakenly replied. Republican blogger Shaun Kenney, in an otherwise good post, picked up AIAW's blog and offered a sleight-of-hand-don't-pay-attention-to-the-real-issue comeback, prooftexting me to partially build his argument against AIAW. Today, Lowell applauds AIAW's post and Aznew's recent post. Although I could have missed some posts, that's just within the Virginia blogosphere! At the state and national levels, the RPV, the NRCC, and the DCCC, somewhat comically, exchanged blows over Perriello and this issue. Phew! Got that?

Although the debate over the closing of Guantanamo is necessary and important, to be sure, I want to refocus the conversation back to the actual amendment vote, hopefully exposing the disingenuous nature of the Republican faux outrage - or is it gotcha-induced giddiness? - against Perriello. Again to recap: Last Thursday, Perriello, joined by 212 mostly Democratic colleagues, voted against Rep. Jerry Lewis' (R-CA) H.Amdt 220 added to HR 2847. Here's the amendment:

An amendment numbered 118 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit the use of funds to implement Executive Order 13492, issued January 22, 2009, titled "Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention Facilities".

Basically, Republicans did not want to release funds to shut down Guantanamo Bay, to fund the President's executive order to close the base. The amendment was voted down, 212-213, mainly along party lines, and Republican's jumped on Perriello for being arm-twisted by Pelosi, for casting the deciding vote to bring detainees to Virginia.

Just two days prior, however, the house voted for a war supplemental bill (HR 2346), and it passed, 226-202, also along party lines; Democrats generally supported the supplemental, Republicans generally didn't. There, within the bill, are several important provisions disallowing the release of detainees on US soil. Click this text link, scroll down (about a fifth or a sixth of the way) to Title III: General Provisions, This Act and let's take a look:

(Sec. 30004) Prohibits funds from this or any prior Act from being used to release an individual who is detained, as of April 30, 2009, at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, into the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, or the District of Columbia. Prohibits any such release for the purpose of detaining or prosecuting any such individual until two months after Congress receives from the President a comprehensive plan regarding the proposed disposition. Requires the plan to include: (1) the risk to national security posed by the transfer; (2) costs associated with not transferring an individual; (3) the legal rationale and associated court demands for transfer; (4) a certification by the President that any national security risk associated with a transfer has been mitigated; and (5) a certification by the President that the President has certified to the governor and state legislature of a state to which the President intends to transfer an individual that such individual does not pose a security threat to the United States.
Prohibits any funds from being used to transfer or release such an individual to the country of such individual's nationality or last residence, or to any country other than the United States, unless the President submits to Congress, at least 30 days prior to such release or transfer: (1) the name of the individual and the country involved; (2) an assessment of the risk to U.S. national security posed by the transfer or release; and (3) the terms of any agreement with another country for the acceptance of such individual, including any financial assistance related to the agreement. (emphasis mine)

Okay, there is a lot there, and though it's relatively self-explanatory, it's still pretty dense. First, no funds can be used to release Guantanamo detainees onto US soil. Period. If the President, however, wants to prosecute or detain a prisoner on US soil, the President must first submit a plan for approval by Congress, especially assuring, among other things, against threats or risks of security. This supplemental goes further: no funds can be used to release detainees in any other country unless the President runs it by Congress.

Again, the language within the war supplemental bill, voted for by Perriello and Democrats, prohibits the release of detainees into the US. On the other hand, the gotcha-game amendment proposed by Republicans would have only prevented the closure of Guantanamo. The war supplemental bill passed and, of course, the prohibitions therein, although Republicans voted against the bill and its prohibitions.

In a fever of political gamesmanship, however, Republicans - knowing that two days prior Perriello voted to close these possibilities - have tried to create trumped-up charges against Perriello. And, in light of the supplemental, Republicans are now equally accountable to the same charges levied against Perriello. If I wanted to be similarly dishonest, I could say that Republicans, in voting against the war supplemental, voted against prohibitions - thereby either allowing or in favor of - releasing detainees onto US soil.

Just Another Day

2009-06-19T05:57:00.003-04:00

Since my entrance into this world, today marks another successful orbit around the sun. Reward me with well-wishes, food, and gifts.

Fear! Perriello Hides Terrorists Under Your Bed (updated)

2009-06-18T22:18:00.010-04:00

So, today Rep. Perriello voted against an amendment (H.Amdt 220 to HR 2847) that would have prohibited the use of funds to close down Guantanamo. Here is the actual amendment, introduced by Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-CA):

An amendment numbered 118 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit the use of funds to implement Executive Order 13492, issued January 22, 2009, titled "Review and Disposition of Individuals Detained at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and Closure of Detention Facilities".

The amendment failed, 213-212, mainly across party lines. So, the Republicans, along with 30 Democrats, were basically voting to keep Guantanamo Bay open, and Perriello and others voted to fund its closure. President Obama campaigned on the base's closure, an election he won, you might recall. Guantanamo Bay is a stain on our international reputation, the mere existence of which fuels terrorist recruitment. Closing this base sends a strong and clear signal to the Muslim world and strengthens our relationships overseas, both providing national security implications.

Two Republican blogs picked up this vote and several memes transpired. Tom voted with his BFF, Nancy Pelosi, to bring terrorists to Virginia, and Tom cast the deciding vote on this amendment. Here's Bearing Drift, emphasis mine:

Rep. Tom Perriello (D-VA05) has just cast the deciding vote to bring Guantanamo Bay detainees to Virginia. According to a Capitol Hill source:
Rep. Perriello just voted with Speaker Pelosi on an amendment to allow for funds to close Guantanamo Bay facility and move those detainees to Virginia. Perriello voted against an amendment, offered by Rep. Lewis of California, that would have prohibited the closure - the amendment failed 212-213 with Mr. Perriello casting the deciding vote.

Next up, Virginia Virtucon with a little more commentary, emphasis mine:

Soon-to-be-one-term-former U.S. Reps. Tom Perriello and Gerry “The Big Doofus” Connolly just cast the deciding votes on an amendment offered by Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.), H.AMDT.220 to H.R.2847, that would have prohibited funds to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and prevent those detainees from being move to places like, oh… VIRGINIA!!! The Lewis amendment failed 212-213 and Perriello and Connolly voted with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the people of the Commonwealth. ... How someone like Perriello who describes himself as a “National Security Analyst” could cast such a boneheaded vote is beyond me. ...

Now that's message discipline, almost like they read the same talking points.

You read the amendment. It doesn't necessarily mention bringing detainees to the United States, let alone Virginia. We are in negotiations with other nations to take some of these detainees (1, 2, 3), but likely, many will end up within our borders. In super-max facilities. You know the facilities that hold terrorists like Timothy McVeigh (before his execution), Terry Nichols, Ted Kaczynski, and Richard Reid. They never escaped, and we haven't heard from them since. For a party that relishes in its tough-on-crime credentials, this Republican fear-mongering belittles both our prison facilities and our prison guards, as if they are sleeping imbeciles guarding a lego fort.

With a cast of 213 Congresspeople, all 213, it could be said, cast the deciding vote. To lay the ultimate and final vote on Perriello is disinginuous and plays opportunistic political gotcha games to try to damage the reputation of a seemingly vulnerable incumbent. Doubly so, when Republicans tie Perriello to "super-liberal" Pelosi, the dream foil of the party. Nevermind that 211 other Democrats voted similarly.

This vote, to be sure, will rile up Republicans, and this vote could become a campaign issue next year. Defiantly, I welcome that opportunity. Tom is right. Last year, if we only learned one thing, we learned that when potential voters are treated like adults, given more than emotional and fear-inciting sound-bites, voters respond positively. I'll conclude with Aznew's thoughts on the matter:

This dynamic can win the GOP a local House of Delegates, or even congressional, election in Virginia, but the GOP's days of dreaming about sustainable political leadership or change are in the past.

Over the long run, however, I am confident that Republican reliance on arguments like this have been and will continue to erode the credibility of the GOP because they are insulting to voters.

Update: RPV Chair Pat Mullins sent out an email, copied in full at The Virginian Federalist, providing the same talking points listed above. Beautiful.

Update 2: Crystal Clear Conservative hits all the major talking points and has to mention twice the Pelosi and the "cast the deciding vote" memes. I'm done tracking them, you get the point.

Perriello's Online Healthcare Forum, "Your Health, Your Voice"

2009-06-18T22:01:00.002-04:00

Today, Rep. Perriello introduced his "Your Health, Your Voice" online healthcare forum, a place where constituents can come and provide input, relay stories, and dialogue with constituents over healthcare reform. You can find the actual forum here. Saith Perriello:

“I’m excited to use technology to make it easier for people around the Fifth District to inform my work on healthcare reform,” said Perriello. “Through my town hall meetings in the District, I have learned a great deal from patients and medical experts about the strengths and shortfalls in our current system. I’m hoping this forum gives people a place to be heard and to share ideas about how reduce costs, protect patient choice, and ensure quality, affordable care for all Americans.”

Finally, here is an introductory video by Perriello introducing "Your Health, Your Voice."

Quote of the Day

2009-06-17T20:28:00.004-04:00

The Las Vegas Sun on Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) admittance of an extra-marital affair:

The Republican Party didn’t make a deal with the devil.
It made a deal with God, or at least people who said they were God’s representatives — a certain class of very political and ideological preachers.

The deal, engineered by Republican operatives such as Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, went like this: Be against gays and abortion and for prayer in the schools, and in return, those preachers would proclaim the GOP the party of God and deliver millions of suburban and rural voters — enough to win elections for three decades.

But the deal carried a risk: Any behavior by Republican officeholders or public figures that seemed at odds with a certain kind of Old Testament morality — a tryst in an airport bathroom, a painkiller addiction, a sexual harassment lawsuit — and voters might feel betrayed and manipulated.

And the deal would collapse.

I don't think calls of hypocrisy in these situations are entirely constructive, as they only increase the polarized nature of our political and religious landscape. Under the public microscope, politicians of all stripes and parties have shown their flaws and personal failures. Democrats, to be sure, have had our share of the less than perfect role models (John Edwards, Bill Clinton).

As the quote highlights, the marriage relationship between the Religious Right and Republicans is a double-edge sword - especially as issues of sex, sexuality, and family values are central tenets to the party plank. When those trumpeting moral and political righteousness, however, fail to live up to those standards, people - not just the other party - are doubly angry. So while both sides have their share of disgraced politicians, the failure of conservative politicians - those who espouse and vocalize these central tenets - incites a special kind of indignation from the public.

And, as a result, the public lashes back. The Mark Foley scandal singlehandedly cost Republicans seats, if not the majority, in the House during the 2006 election cycle.

(h/t Taegan Goddard)

Sabato on Possible Perriello-Goode Rematch

2009-06-17T20:16:00.003-04:00

UVA Professor Larry Sabato weighs in on the possibility of a Perriello-Goode rematch next year. Money quote:

"And rematches are fun. They attract a lot of attention nationally. They attract a lot of money nationally, because naturally both sides assume they have a reasonable chance of winnings. They both have someone who served in congress," said Sabato.

This all assumes that Goode will run and get the nomination, to which Sabato opines:

Larry Sabato says if Goode wants to run, he would assume Republicans would give him the nomination.
[...]
If Virgil Goode decides not to run, Sabato says Republicans have the challenge of finding a candidate who is strong enough to defeat an incumbent.
[...]
"So the Republicans are divided. You know some of them want Virgil to run. Some of them want a new nominee, but of course, if they go with a new nominee, they have to actually find somebody who has the money and the name ID to win an election," said Sabato.

On the other hand, according to Sabato, Perriello has been campaigning for re-election since day one. I'm not entirely sure about that, but I will concede he is working a double-shift.

Quick Perriello Points

2009-06-16T18:50:00.004-04:00

Rep. Perriello has decided to open a fourth district office in Martinsville today, the first congressional office located in the city during "modern times." Current Vice-Mayor Kimble Reynolds will be his Martinsville/Southside area representative. Given the large economic problems in the Martinsville community this a good choice, and Reynolds' knowledge of the community is a huge asset. Jim White likes the moves also.

Perriello will be the featured guest speaker this year during the Independence Day celebration at Monticello, naturally on July 4th. Pres. Bush was given that honor last year.

The National Catholic Reporter has a great article on Tom highlighting his previous Catholic activism. (h/t @robertpjones)

Republican Candidate and possible challenger to Perriello, Bradley Rees, has a new campaign website and he now offers a Friends of Rees twitter account. Make sure you bookmark the site and follow him, respectively.

Robert Wright and Andrew Sullivan

2009-06-15T20:03:00.002-04:00

This is the final opportunity for you to listen to Robert Wright before Tripp and I interview him on Wednesday. Do you have an aching question to ask him, to win a copy of his new book, The Evolution of God?

Here Andrew Sullivan interviews Robert Wright about his new book - a short, five minute clip.

The Current Ideological Landscape in America

2009-06-15T19:10:00.003-04:00

A new Gallup poll released today surveys the current ideological landscape in America. According to the poll, 40% of Americans consider themselves conservative, 35% moderate, and 21% liberal. This percentage of self-identified conservatives has increased since last year, while those liberals decreased marginally. When asked about political parties, reinforcing the Democratic Big Tent meme, Gallup noted:

There is an important distinction in the respective ideological compositions of the Republican and Democratic Parties. While a solid majority of Republicans are on the same page -- 73% call themselves conservative -- Democrats are more of a mixture. The major division among Democrats is between self-defined moderates (40%) and liberals (38%). However, an additional 22% of Democrats consider themselves conservative, much higher than the 3% of Republicans identifying as liberal.

Their data shows that 36% self-identify as Democrats, 28% Republicans, and 27% Independents (who lean 51% Democratic, 39% Republican, and 9% purely independent).

In a gender breakdown, women are more likely to be liberal and moderate, less likely to be conservative compared to men. And, among the age groups, older generations skew heavily conservative, but in the youngest age group (18-29), Americans are split evenly between conservatism and liberalism.

Finally, according to the Gallup, America is slightly more polarized today then during the 1990's with increases in both the conservative and liberal bases and shrinking among moderates at large.

Anybody find any of this surprising?

Perriello, Possible Challengers, and Television Appearances (updated)

2009-06-15T14:49:00.011-04:00

This past weekend, while I was away, the Daily Progress had an article on potential challengers for Rep. Perriello. On the list, people we have talked about here (1, 2, 3, 4): Virgil Goode, Del. Rob Bell, State Sen. Robert Hurt, Cordel Faulk, and Bradley Rees, the only candidate actually in the race at this time. I am struck by the amount of deference Bell and Hurt are paying to Goode, who is still deciding on a run (1, 2). While I have heard of at least one other rumored candidate, this article provides the most comprehensive list of possible Perriello challengers to date.

On a somewhat related note, Perriello was on MSNBC today, and one of the anchors called Tom the "Republicans worst nightmare." He is also a "rising star" in the party, and he "speaks truth to power." Here's the clip:

Waldo, Lowell, and Jim White offer their thoughts.

Update: According to Swing State Project, the NRCC considers Perriello, along with fellow Virginia freshman Glenn Nye, one of their top-tier pick-up opportunities. While I have no illusions that Tom will skate to a re-election, I think there is an element of wishful thinking involved here.

Gone Fishing

2009-06-12T18:08:00.001-04:00

So, I'm out of town again this weekend. Be back Sunday. Behave yourselves.

And come up with awesome questions for Robert Wright so I can give you a free book. Many have already done so. Have you?

Republicans Hope 2009 Sets Up Strong 2010 in VA

2009-06-11T19:06:00.006-04:00

Here is an article by The Hill on how this year's gubernatorial race could help set up next year's congressional races. As such, Republicans are hoping this year's election will be seen as a referendum of Obama (sigh), thus electing Bob McDonnell and laying the groundwork to unseat the Democratic freshmen congressmen (Nye, Perriello, Connolly). Money quote:

Republicans, in particular, would like revenge against Perriello, who upset six-term Rep. Virgil Goode in one of the closest elections of 2008.

The GOP also think they have a good shot at unseating Nye, and some say he could overtake Perriello as the party’s No. 1 target in the state. Nye knocked off two-term Rep. Thelma Drake last year by five points in a district that barely went to Obama.

If Republicans sense a trend breaking their way, they’ll add Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly to their target list. But they admit it could be a long shot.

They highlight that the Fifth District was cut for strict Republican incumbency, a matter that I would nuance. Yes, in 2001, the district had a strong Republican majority, but with the influx of population in the strong urban areas, like Charlottesville/Albemarle and the Roanoke suburbs, this district, while still perhaps Republican-leaning, no longer steadfastly votes for a single party, if they ever did (the truth, naturally, is more complex). Neglecting this demographic trend, the article states:

Perriello’s district, warned James Madison University political scientist Bob Roberts, was gerrymandered so it would always be held by a Republican. “There is no reason they wouldn’t take back this district,” he said.

But Perriello outperformed Obama in the district, is part of the DCCC's Frontline program, and "has launched aggressive outreach and fundraising programs," seen in his last quarter's haul. In terms of Republican candidate recruitment, this part is very interesting on several levels:

If Goode passes on the race, and some Republicans believe he will, the GOP is excited about either Virginia Del. Rob Bell or Virginia state Sen. Robert Hurt. Bell has met with the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). And Hurt said he would only consider the race if Goode opts to stay out of it.

Most, that I've talked to at least, think Goode is going to run, but also, this nugget officially gives voice to long-standing rumors of other potential candidates, namely Bell and Hurt. In a similar vein, recruitment efforts against Nye are also underway by national Republicans, but seriously challenging Connolly, they admit, is a pipe-dream, given that district's Democratic strength.

If Republicans think Rep. Perriello is easy pickins, they are in for a rude awakening. As for now, let's take it one election at a time, but naturally, strong campaigning, activism, and turnout for Deeds/Wagner/Shannon will only help strengthen our chances of retaining these congressional seats next cycle.

Ward Armstrong: Very Excited about and Confident in Dem Ticket

2009-06-11T18:36:00.004-04:00

The Martinsville Bulletin interviewed House Minority Leader Ward Armstrong (D-Martinsville) on his thought on Tuesday night's primary results. Armstrong, who endorsed Moran during the primary, had "nothing but praise" for Deeds and LG candidate Jody Wagner, whom he did endorse. He praised Mike Signer as a rising star in the Democratic Party and hoped that Signer and Moran would stay in active in Virginia politics. On the entire Democratic ticket, Deeds-Wagner-Shannon, Armstrong said that he is excited about the line-up and confident that all three will win their respective races.

Southside Newspapers Report Primary Results (updated)

2009-06-10T23:24:00.006-04:00

Here are some quick links to Southside newspapers, at least the ones I follow:

The Martinsville Bulletin wrote two articles on yesterday's results - an article on Deeds' overall win and an article on Deeds and Signer's local victories - while the Franklin News-Post collapsed Deeds' victories, statewide and local, into one article. The Danville Register & Bee focused on Deeds' local numbers. The Appommattox News reports on Deeds and Wagner's overall victories, and tangentially speaking, it is surprising, in a good way, to see this:

Appomattox News endorsed Deeds on 1 June, and we stand behind him in the race for governor. We hope that Deeds continues to stand for rural Virginia, for the environment and for Virginia’s children and their safety.

Update: The News and Record out of South Boston on Deeds' victories.

Robert Wright: A Divine Code for Peaceful Interaction Between Abrahamic Traditions

2009-06-10T22:11:00.006-04:00

To help with our Robert Wright Interview Contest, I want to offer another great article written recently by Robert Wright. Also, if you are interested, Tripp discovers an conversation, in which Wright is apart, on God, evolution, and divine action.

Robert Wright, noting biblical and Qu'ranic precedent for peaceful non-zero-sum interaction between the religions, offers his thoughts on how the Abrahamic traditions, specifically, Jews and Muslims, can co-exist peacefully. Looking at the Hebrew Bible and the Qu'ran, Wright highlights passages where the relational approach of one religion to another was belligerent, but he also finds passages highlighting peaceful harmony between religions - an underlying Divine code:

If you juxtapose the Abrahamic Scriptures with what scholars have learned about the circumstances surrounding their creation, a pattern appears. Certain kinds of situations inspired tolerance, and other kinds inspired the opposite. You might even say this pattern is a kind of code, a code that is hidden in the Scriptures and that, once revealed, unlocks the secret of God's changing moods.
And maybe this code could unlock more than that. Maybe knowing what circumstances made the authors of Scripture open-minded can help make modern-day believers open-minded. Maybe the hidden code in the Bible and the Koran, the code that links Scriptural content to context, could even help mend the most dangerous of intra-Abrahamic fault lines, the one between Muslims and Jews.

Wright then provides a socio-historic reading of these sacred texts, pointing out general trends in ancient Judiasm and Islam from polytheism to monotheism, from zero-sumness to non-zero-summness, from belligerence to toleration - sometimes with fluctations between and betwixt:

In neither case had the growth been smoothly progressive, and in both cases, there would be backsliding. Still, in both cases, God spent enough time in benevolent mode to leave the Scriptures littered with odes to tolerance and understanding, verses that modern believers can focus on, should they choose.

These non-zero-sum keys can help with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, according to Wright:

The key, it suggests, is to arrange things so that relations between Muslims and Jews are conspicuously non-zero-sum.
Sometimes this may mean engineering the non-zero-sumness — for example, strengthening commerce between Israel and the Palestinian territories. Other times it will mean highlighting a non-zero-sum dynamic that already exists — emphasizing, for example, that continued strife between Israelis and Palestinians will be lose-lose (as would escalated tensions between the "Muslim world" and the "West" more broadly). Enduring peace would be win-win.

But as we know, this peace cannot be assumed, to which, Wright concludes:

It can take time for people, having seen that they are playing a non-zero-sum game, to adjust their attitudes accordingly. And this adaptation may never happen if barriers of mistrust persist.
But at least we can quit talking as if this adaptation were impossible — as if intolerance and violence were inevitable offshoots of monotheism. At least we can quit asking whether Islam — or Judaism or any other religion — is a religion of peace. The answer is no. And yes. It says so in the Bible, and in the Koran.

Thoughts? Any questions you would like to ask Wright to win his new book?

What 2009 Means for 2010, 2012

2009-06-10T20:37:00.003-04:00

Even before last nights results flooded in, national prognosticators were speculating on what this year's gubernatorial race (as with New Jersey's) would mean in the grand scheme of things. To head off any over-analyzation, several news outlets warned not too read too much into the tea leaves. The pre-set meme to be utilized, voiced here by the Washington Post:

But White House and Democratic Party leaders know that a loss in either state this fall will be interpreted as a setback for Obama. Republican victories in either state will boost a beleaguered party that is searching desperately for signs of renewal.
Virginia and New Jersey will be important for another reason. A lingering question from the 2008 election is whether the enthusiasm surrounding Obama's candidacy was singularly focused or transferable to other Democrats when he is not on the ballot. His candidacy was fueled by the passions he engendered among his followers and by the strongly anti-Bush sentiment in the country. To what extent did the results in 2008 signal affirmative endorsement of the Democratic Party?

But as the Post article opens:

Off-year elections rarely predict the future -- except when they do. That's why Democratic and Republican leaders will be closely watching the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and especially Virginia between now and November.

Echoing that voice, Salon's Mike Madden believes that off-year elections provide only little help, if any, to make larger claims for or against the Obama Administration:

Local elections can provide small glimpses of what each party is doing right – or wrong – but looking for a deep national significance in the result is just the latest example of the Washington political establishment's thinking that everything that goes on around the country has to do with something happening inside the Beltway.

In a similar manner, NPR admits the political obsession to make transcendent claims from the results of these elections:

But we, the political cognoscenti, have this ingrained and annoying habit of over-interpreting elections. That's especially true of off-year elections, like this year's gubernatorial races in Virginia and New Jersey, or special elections ...

Sometimes, off-year elections or special elections do signal larger trends, but generally we should not over-analyze the results:

So sometimes we do learn something in these isolated elections. But for the most part, attempts at reading tea leaves and extrapolating results into a BIG MESSAGE are often just silly.

Mental note.

Perriello's VET-WORK Bill Clears Committee

2009-06-10T20:00:00.003-04:00

Today, Rep. Perriello's Veterans Worker Retraining Act of 2009 cleared the House Veterans Affairs Committee, and the bill will now come before the entire house for a vote. This bill would increase on-the-job training benefits for veterans. Saith Perriello:

“The bipartisan vote by the full committee is a huge boost for my bill to support vocational training for our returning veterans,” said Perriello. “The 570,000 unemployed vets in our country could benefit from this program, and I think the full support we generated on the committee offers a great chance to build support from the entire Congress.”

My earlier thoughts on the bill when Rep. Perriello introduced the bill:

Notably, Tom is fulfilling his campaign promises here (i.e., his economic revival plan), however, with a positive twist. As I understand it, this bill will provide assistance to those veterans who, in terms of vocation, do not view a college degree as an option or a necessity. Not everyone needs to go to college, and people completing vocational training, obviously, provide positive and valuable contributions to our society. America needs welders, nurses, and mechanics. With that principle in mind, this bill provides a parallel option to the GI Bill. Good stuff.

Of note, the legislation has been endorsed by several prominent veterans groups.

As a freshman, Perriello already has written one law and passed several important amendments (1, 2), with more legislation in the works (1, 2, 3, 4) - not to mention his proactive help and constant presence within district. That's a double shift.

Poll: A Third of Republicans View GOP Unfavorably

2009-06-09T18:36:00.002-04:00

This was just passed onto me. According to a USA Today/Gallup Poll, one in three self-identified Republicans view their party unfavorably, compared to 4% of Democrats who view the Democratic party unfavorably. More:

Asked by Gallup "what comes to mind when you think of the Republican Party," 25% of those surveyed said "unfavorable" and another 1 in 4 offered negative assessments including "no direction," "close-minded" and "poor economic conditions." Sixteen percent said conservative and 7% "favorable."
For the Democratic Party, the most dominant impression was "liberal," mentioned by 15%. One in 3 used positive phrases such as "for the people" and "socially conscious." The most prevalent negative judgments saw the Democrats as "big spending" (8%) and "self-centered" (4%).

This poll "underscore[s] the perilous state" of the Republican Party:

Over the past three years, Republicans have lost control of the White House, the House of Representatives and the Senate, and they're now struggling to forge a unified response to the popular new Democratic president.

Adventures in Republican Typos (updated)

2009-06-09T16:47:00.004-04:00

The Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) has an on-line pledge for people to vote Republican in this year's upcoming election. They, however, misspelled one word, unfortunately playing into memes of the party's racial insensitivity, fair or unfair. The offending quote, unbolded:

If the Democrats win control of the Virginia General Assembly it will be absolutely disastrous for you and other taxpayers!

With the State Senate already under their control a Democratic win would mean that tax-and-spend legislators would be able to ram through a costly, high tax, big government, left-wing agenda that would racially [sic] change Virginia's future.

I'm pretty sure they meant "radically change," but that's unfortunate.

Update: The RSLC has updated their typo, sometime this morning (6/10/09).

Obama, Jesus, and Atheists

2009-06-09T15:42:00.004-04:00

Politico has two great articles today about the Obama administration and religion. First, Obama invokes the name Jesus Christ more than his predecessor, Pres. Bush. Money quote:

More than four months into the Obama presidency, a picture is emerging of a chief executive who is comfortable with public displays of his religion — although he has also paid tribute to other faiths and those he called “nonbelievers” during his inaugural address.

Obama’s invocation of the Christian Messiah is more overt than Americans heard in the public rhetoric of Bush in his time in the White House — even though Bush’s victories were powered in part by evangelical voters.

Conservative evangelicals (i.e., Tony Perkins), somewhat happy with the language, call the language a "thin veneer" to anti-Christian policies, while those favoring a strong separation of church and state are nervous with the rhetoric. But, according to Politico, there are political reasons for the frequency of Obama and Bush' invocation of Jesus:

But there are different political imperatives driving the two presidents. Obama has every incentive to broadcast his Christianity, while Bush, for other reasons, chose to narrowcast his religious references to a targeted audience.

For Obama, Christian rhetoric offers an opportunity to connect with a broader base of supporters in a nation in which 83 percent of Americans believe in God. What’s more, regularly invoking Jesus helps Obama minimize the number of American who believe he is a Muslim — a linkage that can be politically damaging.
[...]
For Bush, invoking Jesus publicly was fraught with political risk. He was so closely politically identified with the Christian right that overt talk of Christ from the White House risked alienating mainstream and secular voters.

At the same time, Politico has another article highlighting current atheist reaction to Obama. While upset with the use of religious rhetoric by Bush, atheists are currently willing to give Obama a pass despite his frequent use of similar language. Their thinking:

Nathan Bupp, director of communications for the Center for Inquiry, says that many nonbelievers view Obama’s invocations of faith as nothing more than a “symbolic gesture” used to aid his quest for social justice.
[...]
“They realize [Obama] is not doing what he’s doing for Pat Robertson-type reasons.”

Although there is some unease, atheist groups are generally pleased with some of Obama's policies and are pleased that they have been invited to the White House to offer their thoughts on a wide range of issues. Concluding atheist quote:

“The one important thing to recognize,” says Harris, “is [Obama] is so much better than the last guy in the Oval Office, and everyone is feeling so much relief for the change he has brought, that they are inclined not to gripe too much about all the delusional stuff he may be paying lip service to or holding over from the previous administration.”

Webb and Warner Help Save D-Day Memorial

2009-06-09T15:15:00.003-04:00

Sens. Webb and Warner introduced legislation into the Senate to save the D-Day Memorial in Bedford, a move to bring legislation before both Houses as Rep. Perriello introduced legislation last week. The D-Day Memorial is at risk of closure, due to decreased donations, and these Congressmen are moving to turn the memorial into an national park. Saith Warner:

In a statement released Monday, Warner said Bedford’s story of sacrifice on D-Day “is representative of many small towns across the nation.”

“Park Service stewardship of the Memorial will ensure that this sacrifice continues to occupy a permanent and prominent place in the story of America,” he said.

Primary Day

2009-06-09T06:00:00.002-04:00

Hey, Virginia Democrats! It's Primary Day, polls open at 6AM and close at 7PM. If you don't know where you vote, you can look it up here.

If you are interested in sharing, who are you voting for and why?

Interviewing Robert Wright: Help Needed and Contest

2009-06-08T18:40:00.005-04:00

Tripp and I have been lucky to land a podcast interview with the brilliant Robert Wright, author of the new book The Evolution of God. I have have been a long-time fan after reading his books The Moral Animal and Nonzero, and although I am still not very far in The Evolution of God, I have been impressed so far.

Tripp and Chad at Homebrewed Christianity have a weekly podcast where they interview theologians and scholars about their theological systems and world views (archive here). They have had some big names on their podcast, and a listenership that literally spans the globe. I am thankful to Tripp, Chad, and Robert Wright for this opportunity.

We are going to be interviewing Robert Wright next Wednesday. Importantly, we are soliciting questions from you to ask him. Mr. Wright and his publicist have been gracious enough to give us several copies of his new book, so those who offer the best question will not only get their question asked in our podcast interview, but will receive a new copy of The Evolution of God. Importantly, you can ask your question here, you can email me your question (email on the top-right of blog) or you can call into the Homebrewed Christianity caller hotline and ask it there (210.787.1057). Please remember to leave your name and contact information so that we can contact you if/when you win.

If it helps, we have discussed Robert Wright several times on this blog before. We discussed an article on religion and globalization, pointed out a great quote of Andrew Sullivan in Sullivan's review of The Evolution of God, and we highlighted a NYT's Q&A with Wright. Please read through these previous posts for more sources and information.

Do you have any questions that you would like to ask Robert Wright?

Deeds' Commanding Statewide Lead (updated)

2009-06-07T23:02:00.005-04:00

PPP released their final poll tonight, showing a commanding lead by Creigh Deeds over Terry McAuliffe and Brian Moran:

Candidate	Statewide
Creigh Deeds	40%
Terry McAuliffe	26%
Brian Moran	24%
Undecided	10%

This newfound commanding presence isn't localized to any one region. In fact, Deeds now owns leads in every area code but the 757 area code (McAuliffe):

Candidate	276	434	540	703	757	804
Creigh Deeds	43%	49%	56%	38%	30%	34%
Terry McAuliffe	34%	27%	23%	20%	33%	27%
Brian Moran	12%	14%	14%	35%	20%	25%
Undecided	11%	10%	7%	6%	17%	14%

The PPP blog offers their thoughts on why previous undecideds "broke almost exclusively" for Deeds.

Update: The final Survey USA poll bears similar results: Deeds 42%, McAuliffe 30%, Moran 21%.

State-wide Candidates Court Southside Voters Before Primary Day (updated)

2009-06-07T17:58:00.006-04:00

While the Washington Post argues that state-wide candidates (especially the gubernatorial candidates) are focusing on vote-rich Northern Virginia, the reality is somewhat more nuanced. State-wide candidates are making plays at potential voters NOVA, through traditional direct voter strategies like advertisements, direct mailings, robocalls, and get out the vote. And, with NOVA comprising between 30-40% of the Democratic electorate, no one can fault this strategy.

Several state-wide candidates, however, have spent valuable time and energy courting Southside voters only hours before polls open Tuesday. Yesterday, Lt. Gov. candidate Mike Signer visited Red Birch Energy, outside of Martinsville, and talked green energy jobs. Today, gubernatorial candidate Brian Moran visited Martinsville, and tomorrow Creigh Deeds will hold a rally in Uptown Martinsville. Each of these stops was/will be part of a greater Southside swing.

In the golden moments before E-Day, these candidates are showing us that, while NOVA votes are important, our votes matter also.

Update: Here are the Martinsville Bulletin's article on Moran's visit, and a Washington Post article on Deeds' Southside swing.

Bradley Rees Lauds Rep. Perriello

2009-06-07T17:07:00.003-04:00

Bradley Rees, keeping to his promise to praise Rep. Perriello when they are in agreement, thanks Perriello for his hard work to keep the D-Day Memorial open (HR 2689). Money quote:

Our brave men and women who voluntarily take up arms in defense of our great nation deserve our utmost gratitude, respect, and, most importantly, physical and mental health care. I applaud Congressman Perriello’s take-charge approach to these issues.

I appreciate that.

Religious Disengagement In Historical Context

2009-06-06T23:14:00.009-04:00

Although a month old, today I came across an op-ed column by Michael Gerson who previews an upcoming book, American Grace: How Religion Is Reshaping Our Civic and Political Lives, by authors Robert Putnam (we discussed his other thoughts here) and David Campbell. To begin, according to Putnam and Campbell, religious adherents are very constructive and productive citizens:

Putnam asserts, "religious Americans are nicer, happier and better citizens." They are more generous with their time and money, not only in giving to religious causes but to secular ones. They join more voluntary associations, attend more public meetings, even let people cut in line in front of them more readily. Religious Americans are three to four times more socially engaged than the unaffiliated. Ned Flanders is a better neighbor.

Against the expectations of many religious believers, this dynamic has little to do with the content of belief. Theology is not the predictor of civic behavior; being part of a community is. People become social joiners and contributors when they have friends who pierce their isolation and invite their participation. And religious friends, says Putnam, are "more powerful, supercharged friends."

Yet, this level of religious engagement is on the decline. According to Putnam, this religious disengagement is the result of "one shock and two aftershocks," the historical antecedants to the current trends. The shock, the 60's and its rebellious culture:

The shock came in the 1960s. As conservatives have asserted, the philosophy of sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll is an alternative to religious affiliation (though some of the rocking religious would dispute the musical part). Baby boomers were far less religious than their parents were at the same age -- the probable result, says Putnam, of a "very rapid change in morals and customs.

The first aftershock, the advent of the Religious Right:

This retreating tide of committment [sic] affected nearly every denomination equally, except that it was less severe among evangelicals. While not dramatically increasing their percentage of the American population, evangelicals did increase their percentage among the religious in America. According to Putnam, religious "entrepreneurs" such as Jerry Falwell organized and channeled the conservative religious reaction against the 1960s into the religious right -- the first aftershock.

The second aftershock, blowback against the politicization of religion from the Religious Right:

But this reaction provoked a reaction -- the second aftershock. The politicization of religion by the religious right, argues Putnam, caused many young people in the 1990s to turn against religion itself, adopting the attitude: "If this is religion, I'm not interested."

The result of these "shocks and aftershocks" is religious polarization. This polarization, however, hasn't affected the overall religious level of America; more are very religious and many not religious at all. And as we all know too well, this polarization correlates with partisan politics. Democrats must maintain their base of "nones" and unaffiliateds, while making plays into the religious base - a strategy successfully completed by Pres. Obama - and Republicans must maintain their base of constant church-goers, while making plays at those less inclined to religious engagement, currently a puzzling problem. Finally, Gerson provides Putnam's thoughts on the "nones" and how their religious views could change and re-adapt the religious landscape, a concluding message of hope:

"They are not in church, but they might be if a church weren't like the religious right. . . . There are almost certain to be religious entrepreneurs to fill that niche with a moderate evangelical religion, without political overtones."
In the diverse, fluid market of American religion there may be a demand, in other words, for grace, hope and reconciliation -- for a message of compassion and healing that appeals to people of every political background. It would be revolutionary -- but it would not be new.

Incidentally, I was talking to my friend, Tripp, tonight about the barriers to mainline faith in our First World, and while I agree with Putnam's historical conclusions, I think there are other contributing factors involved, of which two quickly come to mind. First, I think the mainstream media is complicit in the polarization of religion and politics. As I've said before:

I am most bothered by how the if-it-bleeds-it-leads conflict-generating media elevates certain (more extreme) views into the public discussion creating the general misperception that those views are both normative and majority; their skewing or mis-weighting of the plurality of theological voices leads, cognitively, to a fallacious availability heuristic. In this light, lost is the respect for the vast diversity of religious and theological thought, dismissed by the oversimplified - and perhaps dumbed-down - fault lines of conservatism versus liberalism. And when the press is only willing to cover a very narrow set of hot-button issues (i.e., abortion, homosexuality, environmentalism, school prayer), this supposed ideological binary perpetuates and exacerbates the divisiveness already inherent within those discussions. Healthy theological diversity is out, and unhealthy theological disagreeableness is in.

Second, technological interconnectivity and globalization. Our world is shrinking, via economics and technology, and in this manner, the internet provides instant exposure to a diverse set of thoughts and ideas on any and all subjects. At the end of our finger tips, we have access to virtually everything. The incorporation and assimilation of differing theological concepts, in my mind, creates an atmosphere where one questions - amplified by the results of scientific inquiry - not only his/her faith but the truth claims of all faiths.

Open Thread

2009-06-06T21:52:00.001-04:00

Keep the good thoughts rollin'.

Evangelical Leaders Optimistic About Global Christianity, Pessimistic About American Christianity

2009-06-05T22:05:00.002-04:00

The National Association of Evangelicals conducted a poll to gauge evangelical perception of the current state of Christianity. According to the poll, evangelical leaders are very happy with the growth of Christianity worldwide, but have a grim view of Christianity in America. Money quote:

In the latest Evangelical Leaders Survey, released Tuesday, respondents said they overwhelmingly (94 percent) believe the number of Christians worldwide will increase in the next ten years. A mere four percent of respondents said the number of Christians will stay the same, while two percent said they are unsure.
[...]
When it came to the United States, most of the U.S. evangelical respondents said they believe the number of Christians will stay the same at best, but will more likely decline. However, they expressed hope for a national spiritual awakening spurred by the current economic difficulties and political uncertainties.
NAE's president further noted that while respondents are optimistic about the number of Christians in the next ten years, they held more reserved expectations on the influence of the religion. Anderson said many of the leaders believe that even though there will be more Christians, the group will have less influence because of secularization, Islam and persecution.

Not sure about the prosecution part (at least stateside), but while I think there is some unsettling trends with religion in America, I have repeatedly said that Christianity is resilient.

Anathema: One Pastor (Unchristianly) Prays for the Death of the President (updated)

2009-06-05T20:05:00.005-04:00

Wiley Drake, a former officer of the Southern Baptist Convention and current pastor of First Southern Baptist Church of Buena Park, California, mentioned on the Alan Combs radio show that he prays the 'imprecatory prayer,' hoping that Pres. Obama will die - utterly gut-wrenching to even type, but still important to discuss. I will not give voice to his exact words, you can click the link if you are curious. Importantly, this is a VERY abnormal view; this should not be generalized beyond the thoughts and the ideas of a very small, deranged few. Even at the height of my disagreement with Pres. Bush, I, and everybody I knew of like mind, NEVER wished him harm, just a change of heart.

Thankfully, pastors have rebuked and denounced this. First, Dwight McKissic, pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church in Arlington Texas, has called for Southern Baptist Leaders to repudiate Drake, and in like manner, a spokesperson for the SBC has disavowed Drake's comments. Chad, wanting to be talked down, is ashamed of being a Baptist today.

I just don't get it. I don't understand. It's like I am reading a completely different Bible than Drake, with completely different understandings of the life and the ministry of Jesus. The whole 'love your enemies' thing jumps to mind.

Update: A Faithful Reader passes on this article in which Drake is thankful for the murder of Dr. Tiller.

Obama's Cairo Speech and the 'Virgil Goode Position'

2009-06-05T12:46:00.003-04:00

One UN blog draws a connection between Obama's speech in Cairo and an infamous letter sent to constituents by our former congressman Virgil Goode. The title, "The 'Virgil Goode Position' eschewed in Obama's speech" says it all. Money quote:

Just imagine if Goode had his way and Ellison was prevented from taking his oath of office on the Koran. How would Obama have explained that to his audience in Egypt and to Muslims around the world? Deeper still, how would this kind of bigotry have affected American strategic interests in the Middle East and beyond?

On Bradley Rees' Selective Reading of the Constitution (Guest Post)

2009-06-04T23:37:00.004-04:00

(Roland the HTG, a guest contributor here before, offers his thoughts on a new post by Bradley Rees)

Republican candidate/blogger/Fair Tax aficionado Bradley Rees posted recently on his belief that 5^th District Congressman Tom Perriello is “breaking his oath," assumedly, though not explicitly stated, Perriello's oath to uphold the Constitution. Basically, according to Rees, Perriello broke his oath to his constituents, and they, mad as hell, should call Perriello. Included in his post is an email from Bill Hay, head honcho of the Charlottesville [tea partiers], which in turn quoted H.R. 450, legislation that would require “a concise and definite statement of the constitutional authority relied upon for the enactment of each portion” of every Act of Congress from now 'til Doomsday. Hay’s email then lists the enumerated powers of Congress that appear in Article I.

With a few glaring exceptions. While Hay/Rees list out the provisions for federal courts and post offices, they shockingly choose to forget the first and last clauses of Article I, Section 8:

“The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States;…

…[and] to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.”

Selective constitutional memory is a dangerous thing. Rees brags on his blog of not being a lawyer; in fact it’s one of the four planks of his campaign platform. While his point about lawyers being overrepresented in the Congress, compared to their proportion of the general population, is well taken, it seems to me an absurd proposition that the makers of laws should not have some training in legal thought, legal practice, and most importantly legal writing. It’s easy to vilify the lawyers, but it isn’t intellectually honest to write them off completely.

The fact that the framers included the Necessary and Proper clause, giving the Congress the power to do what had to be done in order to “provide for the general welfare,” shows in the Constitution itself their understanding that a static document would not support a republic that was expanding its horizons, in geography, technology, and demography. But outside the Constitution, far more evidence exists of their belief in a living document. Take, for instance, my main man Thomas Jefferson (Wahoowa, Drew if you delete this part I will hurt you) [Go Hokies!]:

“A generation may bind itself as long as its majority continues in life; when that has disappeared, another majority is in place, holds all the rights and powers their predecessors once held and may change their laws and institutions to suit themselves. Nothing then is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.” (1824 letter to Jon Cartwright)

Ol’ TeeJ and his compadres never meant for the Constitution to last much further than their own generation. They wrote in the specific problems of the day that most urgently needed to be handled by the new Congress, but put in the escape hatch for when those needs had been taken care of.

(Brief aside—There are a lot of so-called strict constructionists who seem very willing to chuck out the Constitution when it gets in the way of their immigration policies. The issue of “anchor babies,” children born in the United States but to illegal alien parents, is not an issue that can be fixed with an Act of Congress. First sentence of the 14^th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” You want to erase their citizenship, amend the Constitution. Good luck.)

I’m interested to see how Rees’s campaign develops. So far he’s been a single-issue candidate, just railing against federal spending and bureaucracy. I’m curious as to how his constitutional interpretational theory (quote what helps you, leave out what doesn’t) fares when tackling other issues, like job creation, infrastructure, and healthcare. He faces an uphill battle trying to claw into a race as the Republican nomination for Congress. If the only message he’s got for people to latch onto is the kind of bunk he’s backed so far, that hill becomes a mountain.

Quote of the Day

2009-06-04T23:25:00.004-04:00

The conclusion of Pres. Obama's speech in Cairo today:

All of us share this world for but a brief moment in time. The question is whether we spend that time focused on what pushes us apart, or whether we commit ourselves to an effort -- a sustained effort -- to find common ground, to focus on the future we seek for our children, and to respect the dignity of all human beings.
It's easier to start wars than to end them. It's easier to blame others than to look inward. It's easier to see what is different about someone than to find the things we share. But we should choose the right path, not just the easy path. There's one rule that lies at the heart of every religion -- that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. (Applause.) This truth transcends nations and peoples -- a belief that isn't new; that isn't black or white or brown; that isn't Christian or Muslim or Jew. It's a belief that pulsed in the cradle of civilization, and that still beats in the hearts of billions around the world. It's a faith in other people, and it's what brought me here today.

We have the power to make the world we seek, but only if we have the courage to make a new beginning, keeping in mind what has been written.

The Holy Koran tells us: "O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another."

The Talmud tells us: "The whole of the Torah is for the purpose of promoting peace."

The Holy Bible tells us: "Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God." (Applause.)

The people of the world can live together in peace. We know that is God's vision. Now that must be our work here on Earth.

Another brilliant speech, laying a hopeful foundation for peaceful interaction between our nation and the Muslim world.

What did you think of the speech?

Perriello Quick Hits

2009-06-04T22:07:00.002-04:00

Congressman Perriello introduced legislation yesterday to save the D-Day Memorial in Bedford, making it a national park, legislation supported by Sens. Webb and Warner and Rep. Goodlatte. You can view his floor speech on the subject here. Roanoke Times' take here, Bedford Bulletin's take here, Lynchburg News & Advance's take here. Saith Perriello:

“The National D-Day Memorial is a reminder of the bravery and heroism of our American armed forces, and we must not let it fail,” said Perriello. “The men we lost were local heroes, but the freedom and security bought with their sacrifice is a national treasure. So, too, is our D-Day Memorial.”

Perriello is traveling the district encouraging first-time homeowners to take advantage of a $8k tax break.

Perriello's VET-WORK bill, a bill that would increase on-the-job training benefits to veterans, has gained the support of several prominent Veterans groups, and has moved through subcommittee, ready to come to the Veteran's Affairs Committee for a full vote.

Remember Redistricting, 5th CD Doing Our Part

2009-06-04T19:36:00.007-04:00

While everybody's attention these days is on the Gubernatorial Primary this Tuesday, FiveThirtyEight offers another reason that Democrats must get out there and volunteer for the local races. One word: redistricting. Which ever party controls the House of Delegates after this year's election will be in the driver's seat for control of redistricting.

But as the article points out, Democrats, for various reasons, have been woefully inadequate at recruiting or offering challengers even in districts where Obama did very well (generally NOVA seats). It will still be tough for us, even if all races where challenged, to pick up the six House of Delegates seats needed for a House majority, but if we can't find - according to Lowell, strong, well-funded - challengers for all the potentially competitive seats, we do ourselves serious disservice, hamstringing our efforts to regain a majority in the House, and, again, potentially relinquishing control of redistricting to the Republicans.

538 offers a list of 40 potentially competitive seats, and though guilty of our own unopposed races, only 3 of these potentially competitive races (districts 14, 58, 60) reside here in the 5th Congressional District. With this in mind, it looks like two of these races are, at this stage, very competitive [Anderson vs. Marshall (14th) and Neff vs. Bell (58th)]. These races will still be tough, as always unseating an incumbent is a tall order, but I am currently pleased with these pick-up opportunities. Truthfully, I am not really sure how the 60th (Guill vs. Edmundson) is shaping up, but I would love to see it competitive also.

While the gubernatorial primary is currently sucking all of the oxygen out of the room, we would do well to remember that control of redistricting is also at stake this November ... as if there wasn't enough at stake already.

Constitution Party Woos Christians/Values Voters

2009-06-03T22:02:00.004-04:00

The Constitution Party is seeking to attract both Christian and values voters to their party, obviously making a play at the Republican base:

The fastest-growing third party in America, (ballot-access.org) the Constitution Party (www.constitutionparty.com), will discuss a nationwide effort to encourage Christians to vote "like their faith depended on it." The CP will host a number of notable values-oriented speakers at its Spring National Committee meeting .... The party will gather to discuss its unprecedented growth which coincides with widespread voter dissatisfaction with the Republican and Democratic parties. The Constitution Party, the only political party in America which is 100% pro-life is challenging all Believers to put an end to the "lesser of two evils" approach to voting.
"Christians must vote their values and leave the results to God," noted Constitution Party National Committee Chairman Jim Clymer adding, "Our country was founded on Biblical principles, that's why it was so blessed. Without returning to God's law, we cannot expect America to change for the better." (emphasis mine)

Just what we need, another "party" offering their version of the revelation of God in order to win political elections.

Tangentially speaking, Virgil Goode will be one of those "notable values-oriented speakers" at the spring meeting:

Former U.S. Congressman Virgil Goode (R, VA), a one-time Democrat, whose stands against abortion, illegal immigration and gun control won him high praise from conservatives. Goode has been a vocal supporter of the Constitution Party.

A vocal supporter of the Constitution Party who is strongly (read: unanimously) rumored to want to re-challenge, under the Republican banner, current Congressman Perriello.

Palmer drops out of HoD 16 Race, Merricks Now Unopposed

2009-06-03T21:44:00.002-04:00

The Danville Register & Bee confirms rumors I have heard, specifically that Shawn Palmer, political novice, is dropping out of the race against Del. Don Merricks (R-16). Saith Palmer:

"At this time,” Palmer said, “it’s just not in the best interest for me to start an initiative that will take time — time that I do have, but mentally I don’t have the full time and devotion that it takes to give to the voters and campaign staff."
[...]
“The fact that I came into this campaign so late in the game — I don’t have the equipment that I need to mount a serious campaign. With those odds at my back, I’ve decided to suspend my campaign indefinitely.”

As such, Merricks is now unopposed. Palmer, who still eyes a political future, will seek a Board of Supervisor's position in Pittslyvania County in 2011.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot

2009-06-02T22:46:00.004-04:00

A church service, celebrating July 4th, where church members (and the attending public) are asked to bring and showcase their firearms, where gun store owners invited, and where there will be a lesson in 2nd Amendment rights and a hand gun raffle. A church service. Money quote:

In Celebration of July 4 and our rights as Americans, New Bethel Church will be hosting an OPEN CELEBRATION CHURCH service for all who support 1st and 2nd Amendment rights. It will be held on Saturday June 27th, the weekend before July 4th. It will begin at 5PM and picnic food will be served. We are asking responsible handgun owners to attend this service openly wearing their sidearm. This will be a Cold Range Carry meaning handguns must be unloaded and in a secure holster.
Area gun store/firing range owners will be invited to attend and tell about their services. There will be patriotic music and short presentation concerning responsible gun ownership and 2nd Amendment rights.
There will also be a raffle to win a handgun. All that is asked is that you bring a sidearm, a friend who has a sidearm and a canned good for local food bank. (emphasis mine)

In the last paragraph notice how church members are asked to bring canned food for a local charity only after they are asked to bring their guns and bring friends with guns.

Un-freakin'-believable, and - to put it nicely - especially clueless in light of the Dr. Tiller's assassination, no matter your level of agreement (or lack thereof) of his profession.

And Jesus wept.

(h/t Blake Huggins)

Southside Q2 House of Delegates Fundraising Numbers

2009-06-01T21:39:00.010-04:00

Here are Q2 (April 1 - May 27th) fundraising numbers for candidates for the House of Delegates, mostly from the Southside, but with a shout out to the hot race up in Albemarle (Bell vs. Neff). Also, there is a strong race going on in Danville (Marshall vs. Anderson). Of course, all information compiled for this table is courtesy of the Virginia Public Access Project. Importantly, for some reason, some candidates did not (yet?) have data available on-line. If you are looking for Gov, LG, or AG fundraising numbers, check out Lowell's post.

Candidate (Bold - incumbent)	Amount Raised	Expenses	Cash on Hand
District 9
Charles Poindexter	$4,242	$11,164	$13,811
Sherman Witcher	no data	no data	no data
District 10
Ward Armstrong	$53,122	$41,997	$59,530
District 14
Danny Marshall	$25,415	$8,802	$26,963
Seward Anderson	$44,218	$3,607	$20,457
District 16
Don Merricks	$2,302	$5,390	$17,068
Shawn Palmer	no data	no data	no data
District 58
Rob Bell	$55,805	$16,908	$520,532
Cynthia Neff	$89,966	$15,061	$74,904
District 60 (open seat)
David Guill	$3,592	$1,352	$2,340
James Edmunds	no data	no data	no data

If I am missing candidates, or there are races you would like me to track, please let me know in the comment section.

The Human Mind of God

2009-06-01T20:00:00.004-04:00

Here is a great article, exploring the cognitive psychology of Christian theology, on why God has a human mind, written by Valerie Tarico. Importantly, to me, Tarico is not making theological claims, but she explores how and why our mind constructs, interprets and relates to the Divine, especially the Christian God.

To begin, our over-active minds see patterns everywhere, not necessarily because these patterns exist, but because our minds are designed in a fashion to organize information quickly and efficiently in an environment with a super-abundance of stimuli. Intriguingly, for example, our over-active facial recognition modules (our ability to recognize and discern faces, old and new) allow us to see faces in the clouds, in nature, in ink-blots, or similarly, how some Christians see Jesus in food and other human-made objects. As such, when faced with unknowns and ambiguities, our minds utilize "inborn information modules" in order to find patterns sometimes where they don't exist - patterns inherent in our mind, not necessarily in random nature - because our minds default to over-interpreting information rather than under-interpreting information (an evolved safety technique?).

Further, according to Tarico, we have developed a "theory of the mind:" we have a mind, therefore others have a mind, and derivatively, we think, therefore others think. This allows us to navigate society and our complex webs of relationships - we can think about what they are thinking - and as such, we over-assume conscious intent in situations; we are adverse to assigning randomness to events, we have to assign credit/blame. This subscription of a "mind" can be generalized beyond humanity, as we can subscribe mind and thought to inanimate objects and even to a deeper, metaphysical Divine Power; these transcendent powers have "human minds" and employ thoughts, perceptions, preferences, sometimes emotions like humanity.

Also, theologically speaking, if our mind is predisposed to utilize certain cognitive schema - mental organizing principles - we preclude other schemas:

Nowhere in the world is there a supernatural being who exists only on alternate Tuesdays, or who sees everything but forgets it all in ten minutes, or who rewards us for ignoring and disobeying him. Nowhere is there a god who knows the future, but only the next hour, or a god who starves people to death whenever he is pleased with them, or who is exactly like an ordinary person in every way. Some ideas are simply not interesting to us. They may be counter-intuitive in ways that make them forgettable instead of "sticky." Maybe they don't make good stories or maybe we don't have good places to file them in our index of memories.

Similarly, when it comes to religious belief, those most salient theological principles incorporate an interesting deviation from an expected pattern. We start with something familiar and tweak it, leaving other basic assumptions the same:

If the supernatural thing we are discussing is a conscious being, it also needs to have a basically human mind.

This piques our interest, makes it more memorable, and to makes it easier to pass along to others. Think God Among Us born of a virgin, completely human yet 100% divine.

Tarico concludes (and teases us for her next installment):

Christian beliefs are highly successful at getting retained and transmitted. They fit our information processing structures and yet are counterintuitive in intriguing ways. They capitalize on our tendency to attribute events to human-like causal agents who have minds much like our own. They allow us to take machinery that is designed for processing social information and apply it to the problems of understanding inanimate objects and natural phenomena. They leverage our tendency to see patterns in ambiguous or random events. Consequently they are intuitive and broadly applicable and are easily remembered.
But if our brains allow for a wide range of religious concepts, how come so many people believe exactly the same thing? And what makes them so sure that those ideas are not only interesting--they are true? As we shall see in future articles Christian beliefs don't just fit our mental categories. They also leverage powerful emotions and social relationships so as to become the core reality for those who believe.

I'm looking forward to her next article! You?