WASHINGTON, D.C. - Rep. Marilyn Musgrave, author of the Federal Marriage Amendment, plans to introduce companion legislation in Congress called the Federal Right-Handed Amendment in the near future.

"For too long, honest Americans have let left-handed people run roughshod over the majority, the right-thinking, right-handed Americans," said Musgrave, a Colorado Republican. "For instance, many of our public schools have been forced to waste precious funds on special left-handed desks. And left-handed people are always trying to trick us in baseball by batting from the wrong side of the plate."

Furthermore, the Bible itself contains more than 100 favorable references to the right hand and more than 20 unfavorable references to the left hand, Musgrave added. "Everyone knows that the left side is evil and the side of the Devil, while the right side is blessed by God and Jesus Christ," she said. "It's time we put an end to coddling these wicked left-handers."

The amendment would ban federal benefits such as Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare to Americans who "write, eat, bat, or do any major activity" with their left hand. People who are seen in public violating the law could also face arrest and up to a $10,000 fine and six months in prison.
[...]
According to a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, 58 percent of Americans opposed a Constitutional amendment making it illegal to be left-handed. Some 30 percent supported the measure, while 10 percent were undecided and 2 percent "just don't care."

But a recent Fox News/Washington Times poll found that 110 percent of Americans supported the amendment and minus-10 percent opposed it. The "just don't care" option was not allowed in that poll, leading some experts to question its scientific validity.

But, the general point behind the poorly-worded description is, I believe, that such an amendment would potentially have the impact of not simply enshrining marriage rights discrimination into the constitution, but also opening the door to more widespread discrimination. The amendment as written forbids not just marriage, but the "legal incidences thereof." While many have rightly commented on the fact that this would also destroy any kind of Civil Union legislation, I fear it would be much more sweeping than that. At a first pass, it could easily be interpreted as wiping out any kind of domestic partnership benefits. It could open the door to striking down housing anti-discrimination statutes if one were to interpret "cohabitation" as one of the legal incidences of marriage. It could overturn adoption rights legislation. etc... etc...

"Students really care what's going on in the school," said senior Aaron Lebowitz, who organized the protest. "(The school board) has been on their own track and haven't really listened to us."

Students were joined by one teacher and a handful of community members in their protest.

"The verbalization to the public has been from the school board but not the students and teachers," high school teacher Nathan Mentzer said.

Nearly 40 Darby High School students got permission from their parents to check out of school early and walked out expressing discontent of school board actions.

Trustees last month adopted a policy that calls for teachers to question evolution. The policy was brought to the board based on the idea to teach intelligent design theory - a biological origins theory that assumes there is a designer of the biological world but stops short of saying who or what that designer is.

Critics claim the theory is a guise to introduce creation science in the classroom.

"Over the past few weeks, students have discussed the issue at length and formed opinions about intelligent design," Lebowitz said.

One sign read, "Creationism in a cheap tuxedo." And others called on people to go to church for creationism.

Lebowitz walked down the row of students asking individuals why they were there. Students strongly voiced concern about creationism being in science class and encouraged people to vote in the upcoming school board election.

Currently, students touch on evolution in life science class in seventh grade and then again in 10th-grade biology.

"But evolution is not shoved down our throats," he said. "I was pretty disturbed by the ignorance of our community about what we're really being taught."

Lebowitz carried a sign that read, "Strike against preaching pseudo science," and said he would have taken the risk of disciplinary action if his parents didn't let him check out of school.

DENVER - A billboard unveiled on Ash Wednesday, the same day that a controversial movie depicting the last hours of Jesus Christ premiered, is sparking criticism from people of all faiths.

The large-size outdoor marquee, which sits on the property of the Lovingway United Pentecostal Church at Colorado and Mississippi, says, "Jews Killed The Lord Jesus" and the word "Settled!"

The Anti-Defamation League asked for the marquee to be changed because it is anti-Semitic, but the church only amended the billboard slightly by removing the word "settled" and attributing the line to biblical Scriptures.

PRINCETON, NJ -- In a hypothetical presidential contest, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry leads President George W. Bush by 12 percentage points among likely voters, 55% to 43%, while North Carolina Sen. John Edwards leads Bush by 10 points, 54% to 44%.

Moore says he displays the Ten Commandments in judicial buildings because they are the foundation for America's legal system.

"It is required that this nation acknowledge God's law as its foundation, because both the Constitution and Bill of Rights enshrine those principles," he says.

Four activist judges in Massachusetts may have just marked the beginning of the end for America.

How? By destroying the building block of society, and replacing it with nothing more than straw.

To redefine marriage – the very core of what we know as family – is to wreak havoc on every other institution that holds our country together. From the legal system, to interstate commerce, to health care, to your neighborhood, everything would eventually fall apart. Why? Because the nuclear family – starting with the marriage of one man and one woman – is the very foundation of the entire human race and every single civil society since the beginning of time.

[Another] subpoena ask[ed] Drake University for all records relating to the November 15 conference, as well as information about leaders of the Drake University chapter of the National Lawyers Guild and the location of Guild offices and any annual reports since 2002 [including membership rolls]. In addition, it asks for "all records of Drake University campus security reflecting any observations made of the November 15, 2003 meeting, including any records of persons in charge or control of the meeting, and any records of attendees of the meeting."

"I don't like the smell of it," said Sen. Tom Harkin, adding that he did not know details of the investigation. "It reminds me too much of Vietnam when war protesters were rounded up, when grand juries were convened to investigate people who were protesting the war."
[…]
Rep. Leonard Boswell, a Des Moines Democrat and member of the House Intelligence Committee, said he understands the need for secrecy when dealing with matters of national security.

"However, I am increasingly concerned about Attorney General John Ashcroft's disregard for explaining the actions of the Justice Department to the public,"

Federal officials Monday said a grand jury inquiry involving four peace activists and Drake University is not part of an anti-terrorism investigation.

U.S. Attorney Stephen Patrick O'Meara said late Monday that the investigation focuses on unlawful entry onto military property at Camp Dodge on Nov. 16, and whether plans were laid for that at a conference the day before at Drake.

Suggestions that the investigation is related to the Patriot Act "are not accurate," O'Meara said. ,"

A review of historical trial-heat data from past elections shows it is rare for an incumbent president to be trailing at this stage in a campaign. At the same time, in the eight elections analyzed here, there have been campaigns in which the incumbent led in February but was defeated for re-election in November. As such, it is hard to draw any inferences as to what Bush's current standing means for his re-election prospects.

…There are comparable data from as far back as 1948 for elections in which an incumbent president was pitted against his eventual challenger in January or February of the election year…. Gallup's historical polling shows it is rare for an incumbent to be trailing any named opponent at this early stage in the election year. The only other time an incumbent trailed his eventual challenger (or, for that matter, any other possible opponent tested) at this stage in the campaign was in 1976, when Democrat Jimmy Carter held a slight edge over incumbent Gerald Ford, 48% to 46%.

The president seemed tired, unsure and often bumbling. His answers were repetitive, and when he tried to clarify them he tended to make them worse. He did not seem prepared. He seemed in some way disconnected from the event.

I never expect Mr. Bush, in interviews, to be Tony Blair: eloquent, in the moment, marshaling facts and arguments with seeming ease and reeling them out with conviction and passion. Mr. Bush is less facile with language, as we all know, less able to march out his facts to fight for him.

I don't think Mr. Bush's supporters expect that of him, or are disappointed when he doesn't give it to them….

Mr. Bush's supporters expect him to do well in speeches, and to inspire them in speeches….They put the bar high for Mr. Bush in speeches, and he clears the bar. But his supporters don't really expect to be inspired by his interviews.

The Big Russ interview will not be a big political story in terms of Bush supporters suddenly turning away from their man. But it will be a big political story in terms of the punditocracy and of news producers, who in general don't like Mr. Bush anyway. Pundits will characterize this interview, and press their characterization on history. They will compare it to Teddy Kennedy floundering around with Roger Mudd in 1980 in the interview that helped do in his presidential campaign. News producers will pick Mr. Bush's sleepiest moments to repeat, and will feed their anchors questions for tomorrow morning: "Why did Bush do badly, do you think?"

But I am thinking there are two kinds of minds in politics. There are those who absorb and repeat their arguments and evidence--their talking points--with vigor, engagement and certainty. And there are those who cannot remember their talking points.

Those who cannot remember their talking points can still succeed as leaders if they give good speeches. Speeches are more important in politics than talking points, as a rule, and are better remembered.

Mr. Reagan had a ready wit and lovely humor, but he didn't as a rule give good interviews when he was president. He couldn't remember his talking points. He was a non-talking-point guy.

Democrats have minds that do it through talking points, and Republicans have minds that do speeches…. And the reason--perhaps--is that Democratic candidates tend to love the game of politics, and Republican candidates often don't. Democrats, because they admire government and seek to be part of it, are inclined to think the truth of life is in policy. How could they not then be engaged by policy talk, and its talking points?

Republicans think politics is something you have to do and that policy is something you have to have to move things forward in line with a philosophy. They like philosophy. But they are bored by policy and hate having to memorize talking points.

Speeches are the vehicle for philosophy. Interviews are the vehicle of policy. Mr. Kerry does talking points and can't give an interesting speech. Mr. Bush can't do talking points and gives speeches full of thought and assertion.

Ousted Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore is focused on trying to get his job back but will not rule out a third-party run for the presidency that could threaten President Bush's re-election chances.

[L]ast Saturday Moore was a featured speaker at the Christian Coalition's "Family and Freedom" rally in Atlanta. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported he was "treated like a rock star, signing autographs and getting thunderous standing ovations."

One week prior to that event, Moore spoke at a dinner in Lancaster, Pa., sponsored by the Constitution Party, which has the third-largest number of registered voters in the U.S. The party's presidential candidate, Howard Phillips, was on 41 state ballots in 2000, Fund noted.

Richard Winger, an authority on independent candidates, told Fund he believes Moore could rally enough support to sustain a presidential candidacy.

"If he can get on talk shows and stir up conservative voters he could easily get significantly more than the usual third-party vote totals," said Winger, editor of Ballot Access News.

Winger points out the Constitution Party has 320,000 registered voters nationwide and guaranteed ballot access in large states such as California and Pennsylvania.

A one-time aide to Richard Nixon who resigned in protest of that president's "liberal" policies, Phillips pulled together a coalition of extremist third parties before the 1992 elections, forming the U.S. Taxpayers Party (the name was changed to Constitution Party in 1999).

At first, the goal was to use the party as a vehicle for Pat Buchanan, should the conservative commentator decide to bolt the GOP in a run for the White House. Buchanan reportedly toyed with the idea, most seriously in 2000, but the nabob of American nativism ultimately chose to seize control of the Reform Party, which could offer him millions in matching campaign funds generated by Ross Perot's showing in 1996.

Unable to lure a marquee candidate, Phillips has ended up carrying his party's banner in each of the last three elections. Every time around, the party has won ballot access in an increasing number of states — up to a solid 41 in 2000. Even so, Phillips has never collected more than 0.2% of the presidential vote.

As 2004 approaches, the 62-year-old Phillips, who gets around with the aid of a cane, seems determined to sit out the campaign.
[…]
"I think it's likely we'll have a greater opportunity in 2004 than ever before," he declares.

Why such confidence? Simple: for the first time in the party's history, as Phillips reminds his true believers, there will be "no Ross Perot, no Pat Buchanan, no Alan Keyes, no Gary Bauer" to siphon away the votes of fundamentalist right-wingers.

The time just might be nigh, Phillips says, for the most extreme organized political party in America to "wield our terrible swift sword."

U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert pledged for the first time yesterday that he would push a tobacco buyout plan to the House floor -- but only if Republican Alice Forgy Kerr is elected to Congress.

Tobacco growers attending the $50-a-head Kerr-sponsored event in Lexington applauded Hastert's remarks. A Kentucky Farm Bureau representative was more reserved, saying the group was encouraged but would fight for a buyout regardless of who wins the Feb. 17 special election for Gov. Ernie Fletcher's vacant 6th District seat.
[…]
Jason Sauer, spokesman for Chandler's campaign, said he could not comment on Hastert's specific words.

"But if it's a political condition being put on something as important to farmers across Kentucky and the country, then that's unfortunate," he said. "That's playing politics with the farmers of America. And that seems beneath the office of the Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives."