Yellow Dog

The Onion brings us a hilarious piece on how "Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity with New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory."

Proponents of Intelligent Falling assert that the different theories used by secular physicists to explain gravity are not internally consistent. Even critics of Intelligent Falling admit that Einstein's ideas about gravity are mathematically irreconcilable with quantum mechanics. This fact, Intelligent Falling proponents say, proves that gravity is a theory in crisis.

"Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

Critics of Intelligent Falling point out that gravity is a provable law based on empirical observations of natural phenomena. Evangelical physicists, however, insist that there is no conflict between Newton's mathematics and Holy Scripture.

"Closed-minded gravitists cannot find a way to make Einstein's general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world," said Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry. "They've been trying to do it for the better part of a century now, and despite all their empirical observation and carefully compiled data, they still don't know how."

The sad thing is that evangelicals might read this and miss the parody.

The other "Yellow Dog Blog" reminds us that Bush, while not able to find a few minutes during his 5-week vacation to meet with a grieving mother of a soldier killed in Iraq, was able to find time last spring to interrupt his vacation to interfere in the Terry Schiavo case. That was the case where the government tried to interfere in a private family matter by forcing doctors to restore Terry's feeding tube. Bush had no problem leaving Crawford to return to Washington to sign this bogus legislation of unprecedented government interference with private family matters.

For Bush, it's all about political expedience (in this case, appeasing the rabid religious right) and not _ever_ about doing the right thing.

Only the war they are speaking out against is Clinton committing troops to Bosnia. What hypocrites. Not to mention partisan hacks:

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

[Passed along from Spence, the Yellow-Dog Pal]

We're getting a sense of how low Bush's approval ratings can go (hovering around the low 40's) and even a sign that some Republicans are using their critical thinking skills and questioning Bush's (mis)handling of Iraq (only 38% of Americans now approve of the handling of the war), so it's no surprise that the Bush administration would start back-pedalling and lowering their expectations in Iraq:

"The Bush administration is significantly lowering expectations of what can be achieved in Iraq, recognizing that the United States will have to settle for far less progress than originally envisioned during the transition due to end in four months, according to U.S. officials in Washington and Baghdad.

The United States no longer expects to see a model new democracy, a self-supporting oil industry or a society in which the majority of people are free from serious security or economic challenges, U.S. officials say.

'What we expected to achieve was never realistic given the timetable or what unfolded on the ground,' said a senior official involved in policy since the 2003 invasion. 'We are in a process of absorbing the factors of the situation we're in and shedding the unreality that dominated at the beginning.'"

Someone might tell Bush about this plan to "shed the unreality," since he said on Thursday that he "has no plan" or timetable for withdrawal of troops.

In further news that "sheds the unreality" of Bush's expectations in Iraq, six more US troops were killed in Iraq today.

U.S. Lowers Sights On What Can Be Achieved in Iraq

First, the statistics:

A majority of Americans--54 percent in the latest Gallup Poll-- now say the U.S. made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq.

A minority--just 34 percent in a Newsweek survey earlier this month, and 38 percent in a similar Associated Press-Ipsos survey--approve of Bush's handling of Iraq.

Next, the testimonials (source: Chicago Tribune):

Calls for withdrawal are coming from some of Bush's staunchest supporters. Clyde Graham, a retired trucking industry salesman in Wexford, Pa., twice voted for Bush.

"At the time, I felt we should stay the course," Graham said of the 2004 election. "I'm questioning that now."

The war cost Bush the vote of Graham's wife, Margaret, also a Republican, who supported Bush's election in 2000 but not his re-election.

"New things are cropping up all the time to frighten us," she said. "They don't frighten me, they annoy me--sending all our boys over there in a useless war."

Ruth Carlson of Aliquippa, a Navy veteran, voted for Bush in 2000. So did her husband, an Air Force veteran. But neither voted for Bush in 2004.

"We usually vote Republican," Carlson said. "Come around this time, we couldn't vote for [Bush]. . . . If they came after my son, I'd have to get him out of the country. We don't want our child going over there and dying for nothing."

Across the country, it's the absence of the threat that Iraq was supposed to pose that most troubles Dale Blake, 42, a Los Angeles construction worker.

"When it all started, we were hearing about nuclear weapons, gas, biological weapons, all sorts of stuff," Blake says. "Of course I thought we should get rid of stuff like that. But now we know that was all bull, and so I now believe I was wrong. But maybe wrong because I was lied to from the start. How are we going to get out? That's what I want to know."

That's what we all want to know. The only person who doesn't seem to be asking the question and figuring out a plan for getting us out of Iraq is the Liar-in-Chief himself.


Chicago Tribune | Doubt on war grows in U.S.

John F. Kerry didn't win, but the message still applies.
You know all of those scary, black, cult-like bumper stickers that read "W the President?" Well one Air Force officer finally got tired of those in-your-face Bush/Cheney and "W" stickers that tout allegiance to the (failed) war president and decided to take action, with paint:

"Kinney had a "Bush for President" bumper sticker stuck on a tool-box located on his 1992 Ford truck. When he returned from a flight on June 19, he noticed the bumper sticker had been painted over and the words "F--- Bush" were painted on the side of the car."

I think yellow dogs should pool their resources and donate to the Lt. Colonel-turned-vandal's legal defense fund; after all, it will probably come down to a plea of insanity, since no one can argue that Bush's dangerous policies are driving us all a little insane).

9news.com | News |
I-Team: Air Force officer allegedly vandalized cars with pro-Bush bumper stickers