Doctors, work — trying to procure work — all seem to have eaten up, and continue to gorge on, my free time, especially on my blogging time. Something had to give, and thus “Okie” has been abandoned the last couple of days. Same is holding for today, but I can’t ignore some of what is going on, so here goes.

Blogging buddy and Editorial Page Editor and Behind the Wheel columnist for The Washington Examiner Mark Tapscott sent me an email notification of this Quin Hillyer column in today’s edition, Is Christianity still legal in America? Seems that the Southern Illinois University School of Law tried to shut down their campus chapter of the Christian Legal Society because of complaints on discrimination by gays and lesbians, which found the CLS prohibition on homosexual sexual acts, as well as any non-married sexual activity by its member, a grounds for refusal to let them be a part of the voting membership. But, they could still be a member, attend meetings, etc. So far the CSU has persevered, but who knows what will happen in the upper courts — their opposition is the ACLU and CAIR — now there’s a real fun duo for ya.

CLS may still ultimately lose the case, but for now it regained recognition and use of SIU facilities.

Writing for the court, Judge Sykes — reportedly on a White House list of potential future Supreme Court nominees — observed:

“CLS is a faith-based organization. One of its beliefs is that sexual conduct outside of traditional marriage is immoral. It would be difficult for CLS to sincerely and effectively convey a message of disapproval of certain types of conduct if, at the same time, it must accept members who engage in that conduct. CLS’ beliefs about sexual morality are among its defining values; forcing it to accept as members those who engage in or approve of homosexual conduct would cause the group as it currently identifies itself to cease to exist. We have no difficulty concluding that SIU’s application of its nondiscrimination policies in this way burdens CLS’ ability to express its ideas.”

Mark has another interesting question on his blog this AM: Which Senator (s) Is Behind the Secret Hold on Coburn-Obama Spending Database Bill? Can the Blogosphere Force the Offender Out in the Open?

Federal Times reports today that “an unknown number of senators have blocked legislation to create a public, searchable Web site of all federal grants and contracts. Senate rules permit any senator to anonymously block consideration of a bill on the floor, effectively killing the measure.”

The measure is not necessarily dead because the offending senator or senators might withdraw their hold, or the Senate might even change its rules and require the identities of such holders to be made public.

In any case, the senator or senators who placed the anonymous hold on the measure are swimming against the tide of support for Coburn-Obama from more than 100 organizations that span the political spectrum.

Considering the effects of judges, Hugh Hewitt is thinking of sending Carter nominated Federal Judge Anna Digs a thank you note:

Judge Anna Diggs Taylor has ruled that it is unconstitutional for the NSA to conduct warrantless surveillance of al Qaeda abroad contacting or being contacted by their operatives residing in the U.S.
(…)
I might have to send her a thank you note myself, though not for her logic or her abuse of precedent.

Rather, the judge has triggered another great moment of clarity about the Ned Lamont Democrats (and the Jon Tester Democrats in Montana, the Debbie Stabenow Democrats in Michigan, the Maria Cantwell Democrats in Washington State, the Sherrod Brown Democrats in Ohio etc etc.) Judge Anna Diggs Taylor is a Jimmy Carter appointee, and so she’s even given us a twofer today: Illustrating the vast dangers of liberals running national security, and the lasting impact of liberal presidents on national security.

Yeah — what he said! Contemplate that, all you that hanker to vote for John Edwards, Al Gore or John (where’s my magic hat) Kerry — not that you would be reading this screed anyway. Dean Barnett wonders at the restraint of the NYT in its reporting of Judge Taylor’s decision, being that they (and our own local rag) broke the story against the pleadings of the Bush Administration and many others. Funny, the LA Times doesn’t mention the reason that this NSA program became public — although it sure was proud of its roll in the expose a few months ago!

And then, there’s the 9/11 conspiracy nuts. I’ve even got rational level-headed friends who have friends that believe this stuff, and have asked me for information to refute their ever-more-heated machinations. Well, here’s one.

Healthy skepticism, it seems, has curdled into paranoia. Wild conspiracy tales are peddled daily on the Internet, talk radio and in other media. Blurry photos, quotes taken out of context and sketchy eyewitness accounts have inspired a slew of elaborate theories: The Pentagon was struck by a missile; the World Trade Center was razed by demolition-style bombs; Flight 93 was shot down by a mysterious white jet. As outlandish as these claims may sound, they are increasingly accepted abroad and among extremists here in the United States.

To investigate 16 of the most prevalent claims made by conspiracy theorists, POPULAR MECHANICS assembled a team of nine researchers and reporters who, together with PM editors, consulted more than 70 professionals in fields that form the core content of this magazine, including aviation, engineering and the military.

In the end, we were able to debunk each of these assertions with hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense. We learned that a few theories are based on something as innocent as a reporting error on that chaotic day. Others are the byproducts of cynical imaginations that aim to inject suspicion and animosity into public debate. Only by confronting such poisonous claims with irrefutable facts can we understand what really happened on a day that is forever seared into world history.–THE EDITORS

Of course, those that thrive on conspiracy theories can never be persuaded by “hard evidence and a healthy dose of common sense”. Sigh . . . Read the entire PM article, great stuff to have at the ready the next time one of these nutters starts spouting off within earshot — not that it will do any good for them, but you might save the sanity of an innocent bystander! Then again, what will save the sanity of the Presbyterians? Sheesh!

If you haven’t been to the Anchoress lately, stop by and send her an encouraging word. Once again under the weather, this thoughtful-prolific lady should be in our thoughts and prayers.

Hopefully — I’ll be back to regular blogging very soon . . . (db)

Technorati Tags: NSA Surveillance Program, PCUSA, 9/11 Conspiracy, The Washington Examiner

This entry was posted on Friday, August 18th, 2006 at 9:34 am and is filed under Intellegence Efforts, Okie on the Lam, Religion & Media, Surveillance Issues. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.  |   Print This Post  |   Email This Post

Recently Posted:

• Obamessiah Wants To Heal You With Obamacare — Are You Feelin’ Any Better Yet?
• Stars & Stripes NOT Flying At Main U.S. Relief Site In Haiti!
• Obamacare — The Last Big Push — Better Stock Up On The KY . . . You’re A Gonna Need It!
• Is Obamacare A Suicide Pact? Dems Are Gonna Find Out The Hard Way!
• Obamacare Vote Coming This Week — Dems To America — Sit Down! Shut Up! Take It Already!
• Salt To Be Banned In New York Restaurants?
• “Stop Obamacare” Babies — Heh!
• The Census & Your Race — Are You An ‘American”?
• Obama Comin’ After Your Rod, Reel & Bass Boat? — Hmmm . . . Maybe!
• “Only Glenn Beck Understands Me . . . There’s A Communist Living In The White House!”