In regards to the post last Friday about 20/20’s plan to air a segment debunking the Matthew Shepard killing as being a hate crime … let ABC News and 20/20 know what you think. Their general contact info page can be found here or you can e-mail 20/20 at 2020@abc.com. I sent me letter in this morning. Please join me in letting them know just how shameful and hurtful this type of reporting is.

In a press release promoting the program 20/20 says that it will present “surprising revelations, including Laramie’s underground world of methamphetamine use that may have contributed to the crime and whether or not Shepard knew his killers.”

The ABC promotion says that their first interviews since they were convicted, McKinney and Henderson now claim Shepard’s sexuality had nothing to do with the crime.

“The murder of Matthew Shepard was and is a heinous and vicious crime,” ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider told the Post.

“Exploring and re-examining the facts around that murder in a very thoughtful and in-depth way is the very essence of responsible journalism. This new information in no way diminishes the importance of the national conversation that took place after Matthew Shepard’s murder.”

How utterly disgusting it is of ABC News to do this.
[via The Man]

I feel so sick right now … Bush has won. My friends (dumb enough to vote for that asshole) had better not gloat. They will get told off.

Back when I was in High School, my World History teacher told us that the United States would eventually fall like the Roman empire did. I knew she was correct. I just was hoping that it wouldn’t happen in my lifetime.

Well, here we are. Let’s all meet in four years and see how good our beloved country is doing.

Damn. I need a drink.

I am still trying to figure out what Laura Bush has done over the past four years that makes her qualified to speak on … well, anything. And don’t even get me started on tonight’s theme at the RNC. “People of Compassion” my hairy ass.

I will believe it when I see it. Damn Republicans.

The ad shows a swimmer and the flags of Iraq and Afghanistan.
“In 1972, there were 40 democracies in the world. Today, 120,” an announcer says. “Freedom is spreading throughout the world like a sunrise. At this Olympics there will be two more free nations. And two fewer terrorist regimes.”

Humph. Shouldn’t it read more like “At this Olympics there will be two more nations … nations that are now in turmoil because of the Bush Adminstration’s imperial policies.”

“This is a dangerous time,” Bush said. “I wish it wasn’t this way. I wish I wasn’t the war president. Who in the heck wants to be a war president? I don’t. But this is what came our way.”
[Editor’s Note: Didn’t want to be the war president? You could’ve fooled me.]

All I can say is that Dr. Phibes and Company had better get out and vote tomorrow.

Seems like the record is broken. Haven’t we heard this one before?

GUEST COLUMN IN THE ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION

Wage War on Gay Threat to Marriage
By SHAUNTI FELDHAHN
Published on: 07/06/04

The importance of next week’s Senate vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment the proposal that we amend the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as one man and one woman is difficult to overstate.

It may not seem like such a big thing just one vote in one chamber about one important initiative among many but the key pivot points of history often don’t loom particularly large at the time. Sun Tzu observed that wars are actually quietly won or lost in the temples of leadership before the battle is joined.

And although you can’t see the battle to protect marriage as you can a military war, its cultural ramifications may be just as radical. In his new book, “Marriage Under Fire,” James Dobson notes that, “This struggle is not being fought with guns and bombs, but with ideas, with creative uses of the law . . . It is a battle for the very soul of the nation.”

Many of us feel discomfort at confronting this issue. I sure don’t like writing about it. Shouldn’t we live and let live? But as Dobson points out, history demonstrates that initial appeasement just worsens the eventual ramifications.

When the countries of pre-World War II Europe noticed Adolf Hitler’s emerging aggression, they said, “It’s not my business.” But, as we now know, it was their business. How much sorrow might have been prevented had they recognized that burying their head in the sand wouldn’t help?

Today, we are facing a Pandora-like threat that once allowed to escape can never be put back in the box. With activist judges rewriting the will of the people, it’s only a matter of time before gay marriages are declared legal nationwide. And then what are we going to do to restore the will of the people void marriages that have been solidified during those years? Rip apart families who have built their lives around their legal union? It is one thing to fight out the cultural decision now and prevent gay marriages. It is quite another to rescind that right once granted.

If we are going to confront this cultural decision, we need to do it now. That’s why, on July 12, the Senate leadership will bypass the usual lengthy committee process and ask for a vote on whether to begin the process of amending the Constitution. A Senate source recently told me that no one in leadership really wants to tackle this issue: It’s too politically costly, too divisive. But because of judicial excess, “We can’t not act,” he said. “Our hand is being forced.”

It is important to note that the danger to marriage comes not from gay individuals (as opposed to gay activists), who just want what they see as a civil right. Rather, it comes from not protecting a definition of marriage that has served as the foundation of society for millennia. In areas of Norway allowing de facto gay marriage, the regular institution has inevitably lost its meaning, so most children live in an unmarried home. And since the average gay marriage among men in Scandinavia lasts 1.5 years, most of their children will experience a broken home many times over.

As I have noted before, nearly all social problems from poverty to crime to drug use are caused by family breakdown. As much as we want to be compassionate, and live and let live, we simply cannot afford appeasement. Redefining marriage would not just legalize alternative marriages, but would negatively impact the traditional ones that are the backbone of our society.

— Shaunti Feldhahn of Norcross is the author of several books. Her column appears Wednesdays.

I can’t even begin to tell you just how laughable and (at the same time) terrifying this column is.
[via Chromewaves.org]

Wow!!! This country can’t fail with a zombie in office. He’ll pair up well with the Antichrist.
[via The Rezidence]

[via my friend Michael]

The undeserved deification of Reagan is almost done. Finally. After one week of watching the progress of his corpse around the country. After one week of hearing nothing but glowing praise for the man who did his share (and then some) of very bad things while President. Now maybe the news can start focusing on more important issues …