King County Elections has issued a couple of FAQs answering questions that have been raised about its handling of the Nov. 2 election and the subsequent recounts. The first regards Military and Overseas Ballots:
King County Elections began mailing oversea and military ballots for the General Election on Oct.1, 2004. These were from an absentee category referred to as “submarine” or “special absentee ballots” for voters who may not be able to receive a regular absentee ballot within the timeframe necessary to participate in the election. The bulk of the military and overseas ballots were mailed on Oct.6 with some mailings in between these two dates and subsequent mailings as further requests were received.
246 ballots went out on Oct. 1, the bulk were mailed by Oct. 6, and an additional 3055 went out on Oct. 10. KC issued 15,289 military and overseas ballots in all, and of these, 12,694 were received back… exactly matching King County’s overall 83% turnout rate.
In addition to regular absentee ballots available to military personnel, King County also provided ballots via fax or email to those who contacted the office that they had not received their regular ballot by election day. Several hundred of these were issued. In addition…
The Federal Voting Assistance Program, a program of the United States Department of Defense monitors services for military and overseas voters. Under federal law, a federal write-in ballot is also available from armed services voting assistance officers to allow service members the opportunity to cast a ballot for federal office. These ballots are accepted and counted even if the service member is not listed as a registered voter in the jurisdiction where they indicate their residence.
1,342 Federal Write-in ballots received, and 1,081 validated and counted.
As to the oft raised question of military and overseas ballots that were received too late to be counted, King County reports a grand total of… sixteen.
The Washington State GOP is now running a deceptive and dishonest radio ad, featuring a wounded marine who did not receive his ballot on time. While this is regrettable, and both parties should work together to assure that military ballots are mailed out even sooner, it is despicable to attempt to turn this into a partisan issue, when all the facts indicate that King County conscientiously issued military ballots in a timely manner, and in full accordance with federal law.
Dino Rossi’s PR henchmen continue to cynically impugn Christine Gregoire’s patriotism, but as part of a legal contest of this election, military ballots are clearly a non-issue.
Coming soon, much ado over voter lists…
I sense just a little more deflation of the right-wing, whirling dervish bubble. Watch Shark and Cynical spin even more wildly.
Let’s see how you spin the fraud brought in by Gregoire volunteers who mined for provisional votes in the first count. Dead guys? Double-voters? Felons? Hmmmmmm…….
Interesting inside view on the King County recount. Seem’s the R’s have little to complain about. http://www.seattleweekly.com/f.....ecount.php
Right about now, I have zilch trust in anything out of King County Elections.
Why?
Reason one: They can’t keep seperate provisional ballots from other ballots.
Look, I know you’re desperate. But look at your source. I do, too.
Neither the Ds or the Rs have a leg to stand on…they say anything they want and use any facts they want to get their guy/gal sworn in. Wish both sides would admit this rather than claim the sole right to the moral ground.
I’ll keep wishing…
john–You don’t need to “spin” when you have the proof. When are you silly folks gonna wise-up? The R’s have to put up or shut up by January 20th. That’s 2 more weeks. Why would the R’s show everything they have right now? It’s not my intent to convince the Dem “spinmeisters” and “spinmistresses” of anything. It’s funny how y’all have spent so much time trying to spin the law and be blog lawyers. I’m grateful you have wasted all your time on this while so many of us have patiently gone thru lists, public records and building a solid case. You have lots of faith that judges will focus on spinner BS like from jim p and jcricket rather than looking at ballot signatures of felons, dead folks, duplicate signatures, forged signatures, clear examples of 1 person signing multiple ballots etc. etc AND a few more surprises to come.
Why aren’t you pinheads going thru those Berendt affadavits yourselves trying to prove that these illegal ones don’t exist, hmmmmmm? Because you are lazy and believe your own BS…plus you are afraid that what BIAW has found is true.
So spin away my little Lefty’s!! So many people besides BIAW continue to work at this.
Goldy–care to make a friendly wager about what BIAW claims to have? I’ll bet it’s true…and then some!! How much dude?
Mr. C- they don’t have – what you don’t have. Proof and credibility.
Tell Dino it is getting soggy with all the Bulllll shitttttt.
The Daily Vance Conspiracy Defrocking
Here’s the “tragic story” the Vance team are screaming about.
Tyler Farmer, a Marine, opened up his absentee ballot in Iraq right around the time President Bush was declared the victor in his re-election bid.
Farmer — a 23-year-old who has a computer animation degree from a school in Everett — was bummed because he figured it was too late to mail in his ballot. He chucked it, because he thought rules are rules, not to be broken.
A military member disenfranchised by the liberal mean King County right?
As with nearly every conspiracy theory, even a cursory look at the facts deflates it. Plus, the vote came from Pro-Rossi County Snohomish.
Tyler Farmer’s ballot was mailed Oct. 8 from Snohomish County. It would have been counted had the soldier immediately sent it back and it was received before the Nov. 17 certification date, county Auditor Bob Terwilliger said.
Also, if Farmer had e-mailed or faxed a note to the county Nov. 2, he could have voted by e-mail or fax, providing that he was able to mail his signature as verification by the certification date.
He said most military units have a voter information officer to assist soldiers.
Thus, Farmers ballot was not counted because he destroyed it.
He could have sent it in by mail and it would have reached Washington in time (11/17/2004). He could have made a fax or email. He could have at least spoken to the “voter information officer.” He did non of these things and apparently has still not learned in the last two months the special federal voting measures enacted for military members.
Yet, this is the centerpiece of Vance’s call for a new election this week. How weak.
Comment by Erik— 1/5/05 @ 7:33 pm
Again, our point is that a) the body of rules was changed and b) that body of rules including one that absentee ballots need to be delivered ahead of the election or on election day.
Erik, be forewarned: I’m not in a tolerant mood tonight.
Be sure to read the Seattle Weekly article referenced above. It drips with “D’s are righteous, and R’s are bigots.” I suspect that the hand recount had its share of mistakes and problems, regardless of what this reporter says. I am quite impressed by her perfect record, and quick counting abilities that she proclaims.
As far as the military vote, does the military vote in numbers equal to the general public? I would have guessed that normally they would vote in great numbers, but 83% ain’t bad. It is concerning that there were over 1,000 in the military potentially denied the ability to vote in state races. Goldy glosses over the fact that the federal write-in ballots recorded exactly zero votes for governor. That tally alone could have offset CG’s margin of victory.
Goldy also forgets there are 38 other County’s in this State that can be brought in to contest this election. Let’s look at the Military Ballot situation in Yakima County. Dem Auditor who tried to “circle the wagons” for Logan. What is the status of Military Ballots in that heavy “R” County, for example? How about the other 38 County’s Goldy? Are you so myopic that you think this contested election is only about KingCo??? Are you havin’ a bad day dude?
Cheer up…you could be Paul Berendt!!!
Goldy–
Answer me this one question since you ignored my prior long list–
If evidence of wrongdoing continues to mount, how will Gregoire do in a re-vote when she assured us this was a “model” election?
Give it a shot. I answer your questions Goldy…except if you ask why I’m such an a$$hole.
DO NOT FORGET THEY HAVE THE ARCH REPUBLICAN IN SAMMISH WHO VOTED HIS DEAD WIFE’S ABSENTEE—-FRAUD, CRIME—— ALL THE GOOD STUFF, IN THE ROSSI NEIGHBORHOOD, BET MONEY CLOSE FRIENDS SINCE THE COUPLE WERE PROMINENT R’S —-ONE OF THE COUPLE A PCO
Josef – You’re wrong about the “body of the rules changing” regarding absentee ballots. I’ve pointed out the relevant RCW several times that states that absentee ballots need to be mailed out by the proper date (which they were), but even that failure to do so doesn’t, in itself, qualify as a reason to even contest an election (let alone overturn it). There’s also nothing in the RCW about contesting an election that allows as reason/evidence that ballots weren’t received on time, unless they weren’t sent out on time (which they were).
So tell me how the “body of the rules” has been changed. I am not an expert, but I have read the RCWs on this and I don’t see anything about absentee voters receiving ballots late due to the fault of the postal system as an allowable reason to contest an election. And the rules were followed as to when the ballots should be mailed out, and alternative voting methods were made available to service members.
Let me clear – I’m not in favor of disenfranchsing anyone. But the RCW was written knowing that the county wasn’t going to overturn elections due to faults in the postal system. The military is a special case, which is why they’re given more time to mail the ballot back and several other methods in case the ballot doesn’t look like it will arrive on time. The law was followed, the rules were not changed, and you can’t use the military ballot issue as evidence for a contest.
http://www.leg.wa.gov/RCW/inde.....on=section
Thanks, Goldy.
I hope the local newspapers (and even better, the TV stations) pick up on this. It’s long past time for the general populace to be made aware of what a total sham the various GOP claims have been.
Cynical – The reason Goldy won’t go through your laundry list is that it’s not evidence of wrongdoing. It doesn’t rise above the level of accusation, speculation and innuendo because your sources have proven less than credible.
If you’re the source – you have a track record of presenting evidence that you made up (only to later pretend you never said it). Goldy also belived (at one point) that you post here under two accounts, your denials to the contrary. So that’s another (potential) strike for your credibility.
If unSound Politics is the source – Stefan has a track record of misrepresenting facts and going off half-cocked before gathering all the evidence. Jim Miller starts with the premise “Democrats cheat more than Republicans” as “proof” of his theories. So Goldy’s not going to “take their word for it” when they claim something as “irrefutable proof”.
Even if the Republican party is the source – They have so far failed to provide evidence to back up accusations of ballot insecurity when in front of the Supreme Court. They presented affidavits of already counted ballots as proof of unfair recount standards. They’re trying to misrepresent the delay of military ballots (which is neither the fault of the election officials, nor grounds for a contest) as proof of some kind of conspiracy.
So yes, it’s possible there has been wrongdoing in this election, on both sides. But so far, all the Republican accusations have amounted to nothing but false rumors. Goldy’s not here to jump at your command.
I’m sure that he is, however, communicating with people he trusts in the media and actual first-hand sources (senators, election officials, people at the recount). So far, he’s got a far better track record than anyone you’ve been involved with (including yourself) of getting the full picture and presenting accurate, fact-based information.
Am I correct that the “federal” military ballots do not have the state contests on them but only the Presidential race? That would seem to be the problem with many not receiving their absentee military ballot – they couldn’t even vote in the governor’s race.
No matter what is said the libs continually say nothing has been proven. No matter what you are presented you will continue to say it’s not proof. Are you saying that none of the issues brought up to date raise legitmate questions? You are confortable with results based upon these problems? You are not trying to prove them wrong your are just denying they exist. Prove to me that the feloms that are said to have voted in Pierce County did not vote or that they were not felons. Proof to me that provisional ballots did not get put into machines before being vetted. To me these issues have been proven, statements have been made by County poll workers confirming the provisional facts and Dean Logans even stated the provisonal issue happend but tried to down play it as insignificant.
Chris – If the Republicans actually have proof, they’ll do well in an election contest. Let the Republicans follow the rules and present their evidence to the courts, like the law says. So far they’ve failed to present evidence to the courts when needed to support their accusations.
If you believe everything the Republicans say is true then you should be very confident about their ability to contest the election. No reason to have a re-vote and give Gregoire a “second chance” to win again.
Before anyone jumps in, I know the window for contesting an election doesn’t start until after the ratification. I was commenting on the fact that during the previous case before the Supreme Court the Republicans failed to provide evidence to support their accusations of ballot insecurity in KC, when they had lots of observers and plenty of time to gather evidence. All they provided were more accusations.
Cynical – there was one word missing from your missive:
military.
Put up or shut up. No problem. I can wait. You guys haven’t impressed me yet.
That article in the Weekly was hilarious.
The GOP lounge, the desperate trouble-making tactics. Hilarious!
The atmosphere in that lounge was so obnoxious even some Republicans stayed out. My sides are splitting!
How many R’s that haunt this board would have stayed out of that lounge? I count ZERO.
No reason to have a re-vote and give Gregoire a “second chance” to win again.
Comment by jcricket— 1/5/05 @ 8:38 pm
And if Gregoire and the dems deny a re-vote it gives Tim Eyman momentum for his second chance. Which we will all, dems and repubs, regret. Thanks, Chris!
Yeah John, I bet you go all pale and pasty if somebody prays in the same time zone you’re in too, don’t you?
How did you guys get a dead guy’s signature on a provisional ballot? You know–the ones you guys ‘mined’ in Seattle several weeks back after Judge Lum said you could?
No matter what is said the libs continually say nothing has been proven. No matter what you are presented you will continue to say it’s not proof.
Chris,
I think the bottom line is that most of the errors raised happen in nearly every county in every election in every state for the last 200 years.
For instance, all 50 states likely had some felons who voted, some people who voted twice and there are unreconciled voter lists. Furthermore, some absentee ballots are almost certainly rejected in each state even though the voter actually signed.
In Washington, Rossi leaning Walla Walla almost certainly has a slew of felons who voted as there is a prison there. Rossi leaning Pierce County has had a few voting felons as well.
None of the above, even if proven true, are a basis to overturn an election. However, the acts could get the voting felons in trouble.
gregoire wouldn’t win a revote. The dems know it that’s why they won’t go for it. If they thought they would win they’d be all over it to “help the state heal” Just more bullshit from papa paul berendt.
If Rossi expects to win a revote he had better hope that Ruth Bennett is included. Everyone agrees that she took votes away from Christine Gregoire. I doubt many republicans voted for a lesbian who opposes the War in Iraq, supports legalizing drugs, and is pro-choice.
Zip – Where did you pull that one from?
Was there praying in the lounge? If there was I don’t care. I highly doubt that G*d would have advised the faithful to emphasize the over-votes.
Comment by Erik— 1/5/05 @ 8:54 pm
Just because “it happens all the time” does not mean you accept it without a fight. If it happens in all counties in the country , in all elections and noone wants to do anything about that is their problem. Wrong is wrong and if a legal remedy is available you take it. You all would want Gregoire to do the same and I would expect her to. You would all be saying the problems invalidate Dino’s 129 vote lead if roles were reversed. I am only looking for some honesty from the libs here.
I am only looking for some honesty from the libs here. -Comment by Chris— 1/5/05 @ 9:21 pmt.
By they way, how is it that Gregoire only won by 129 votes after the 3rd count? This is Washington State isn’t it? I have said it before you libs should be embarrassed it took a potentially (I say that for those of you still in denial – cricket) screwed up 3rd hand count with a million problems to get you canidate “elected”. Look in the mirror and ask yourselves why you are losing control. This should have been a cake walk, after all she was only going up against a Real Estate agent. (People always fail to mention him as a Senator – Funny isn’t it?)
You would all be saying the problems invalidate Dino’s 129 vote lead if roles were reversed. I am only looking for some honesty from the libs here.
Thats a good question. I really don’t believe I would ask for the legislature to not certify the election as their role is only really ministerial.
The legislature has no ability to determine the credibility of the allegations of fraud, hear live testimony or conduct any kind evidentiary hearing.
However, I will admit that if Gregoire lost by 129, I would encourage her looking into whether there was a sufficent basis to overturn the election and would not hestitate to bring the matter before the court.
With that said, I still don’t believe there is enough discovered for the State Supreme Court applying state law to overturn the election.
Because the voter rolls change constantly as well a felon lists, people die and others turn 18, they are always being updated and contain some measure of error.
Comment by John— 1/5/05 @ 9:19 pm
Near the end of the weakly article she gets all concerned for our future as a nation because some guy said he prayed in the lounge. I thought it put a wierd spin on the article.
This should have been a cake walk, after all she was only going up against a Real Estate agent.
Alot of people would agree with that statement since Murray won by 11 percent (I think) and Kerry won Washington by 7 percent. This is still generally a “blue” state. Of course, it might have something to do with the $10,000,000 of attack ads against her and Rossi’s natural charisma.
Comment by Erik— 1/5/05 @ 9:31 pm
The legislature does have the ability to watch out for the future repurcussions of this screwed up deal. But a hypothetical: what if they swear Gregoire in, both houses vote (narrowly) to schedule a special revote election, and then Gregoire vetoes the bill? That would make the most serious of us partisand laugh out loud.
Comment by jcricket— 1/5/05 @ 8:07 pm
What I’m about to say is out of the box and contrary to the Rossifarian POV, somewhat.
I think many of us, certainly Chris Vance, don’t really care for the law per se but about perception and about doing the right thing, all else be damned. When we see troops going w/o the most sacred right – we patriots react awfully quickly. By that standard, we also believe that allowing those ballots in King County to be counted and then not doing right by the troops and making an exemption for them too is unsettling at best.
Does this start a good reply worthy of you?
Comment by Erik— 1/5/05 @ 9:35 pm
It was the Bob Dole syndrome: her campaign and the press acted like it was her turn to be governor. She still has no agenda. And Rossi gained a lot of bi partisan credibility with the budget last session. And Gregoire was seen as “damaged goods” from the AG scew up as well as her ineffective job as Dept of Ecology head. And her big campaign deal was that she helped sue big tobacco. Not very relevant to governorship.
That’s why it’s so ludicrous for all the far out lefties to try to paint Rossi as such an extreme right wing nut case.
Comment by zip— 1/5/05 @ 9:42 pm
Thanks!
It was the Bob Dole syndrome: her campaign and the press acted like it was her turn to be governor.
I do think that is true to some extent. However, I liked her work leading the AGs against big Tobacco although it resulted in a huge money attack on her old AG office and against here. I think it took guts.
Sims would have certainly lost the election. I expect her to be a pretty darn moderate governor. Prosecutors are not known as far left liberals.
Cynical… you and your buddies seem to have me confused with somebody else. I’m just some guy with some strong opinions and an entertaining way of phrasing them. It’s curious that you spend so much time and effort trying to distract me from my performance art.
Careful though… I might start taking this politics thing seriously.
In answer to your question, I don’t have access to polling data, but I assume that the GOP wouldn’t be pushing for a revote if they didn’t have internal polling that showed they would win. Of course, they (and you) have spent the better part of two months trying to persuade the public that corrupt Democrats have been trying to steal the election, so that wouldn’t surprise me at this point. But what the public thinks now, and what the public would think after a short, intensive, and extremely nasty campaign, are two different things.
That’s why it’s so ludicrous for all the far out lefties to try to paint Rossi as such an extreme right wing nut case.
What did I hear about Dino’s views on teaching creationism in the public school? His 100 percent approval rating from the WCU?
Actually that’s the kid stuff – it’s his close ties to the BIAW that I worry about.
Erik- Gregoire was NEVER a prosecutor- and big money tobacco, through their attorneys- supported her bid for governor, because under the guise of attacking tobacco, she gave Big T everything it wanted- guaranteed profits for the forseeable future…
This should have been a cake walk, after all she was only going up against a Real Estate agent.
Chris you are truly sad. Ok, Gregoire wasn’t the most exciting candidate. I was a Talmadge supporter. But I’ll be damned before I vote for a close buddy of the BIAW who wants to see creationism and “Intelligent Design” taught to my kids.
I still haven’t heard from anyone here how you all got the signature from a dead guy with those Lum provisionals. PROVEN democrat vote fraud. THEY brought it in to King County. And we also heard that an election worker in (of course) King county was caught feeding the same Gregoire ballot thru a counting machine FIVE times. FIVE times! We also heard about democrat handcounters cheating and getting fired. Not all of them got fired, tho. One dem was observed seeing a Rossi vote land mistakenly in the Gregoireovich pile and say NOTHING about it! Thankfully, the observer busted HER! One observer during the 1st recount twice in 3 hours caught workers trying to change a Rossi vote into a Gregoireovich vote. King County election workers are cheats! It was observed more than once
Jim – your version of the tobacco settlement is to say the least, just your opinion.
The reason the states sued — guess what.—-no Gregoire sell out—- as good attorney understand before the jump into anything—- they knew (they were betting) that big tobaco was going to pay BIG bucks to settle—- that discussion was out there all over media years before the settlement.
So what is the rub? Sit back, no suit, no money, hold out for much more and get less. OR, take the money and run– many, many billions.
For the uninformed, by settling the T. Companies solved an open end liability problem. Since their business is long term addictive they knew they would have world wide hundres of million of buyers, no matter what. So they fixd their losses and raised prices to pay for it.
Wish taxpayers could get the same deal fro BIG liquor makers…and bad drug makers….and Enron beore they went banko.
Jim you do not like Gegoire, and, I am glad we got the many billions. Smart lady, good attorney. Cash flow instead of hot air and platitudes.
Yes. Must be cheats. Couldn’t possibly be human error — And I’m sure there were never any mistakes the other way. The only crooked people out there are in King County and they are Democrats.
Bottom line is this. Nothing that has been brought up, even the provisional ballots mistakenly entered into the machines, indicates fraud. And in fact, I would guess that the same kind of mistake happened around the state at roughly the same rate. Which would mean that it should balance out and would not be enough to overturn an election.
This whole thing is very sad. No matter who would be governor (and I believe it is and will be Gregoire)is going to have a very tough time because of all this crap. It sucks for all of us.
Comment by John— 1/5/05 @ 11:10 pm
I think you will find the majority agree with my assesment that Gregoire should have won in a cake walk and would find your support of Talmadge to be, as you say – Sad.
So you have issue with those that believe in a Creator (GOD) and find it difficult to support someone with those beliefs? Reality is the vast majority of people believe, rightfully so, in God and Creation as I do. But I don’t mind if the schools don’t teach creationism to the kids, I can do that for myself to my son. But I don’t want them promoting Evolution and passing that off as fact either. For those that don’t believe in God all I can say is, you better pray your right. In reality, wouldn’t you rather believe and be wrong then to not believe and be wrong. Which position carries the most risk??? Another way to look at is, at least for me, I would rather believe and be wrong then not believe and be right. Believing can add alot to your life. Try it you might like it.
Comment by Goldy— 1/5/05 @ 10:41 pm: -I’m just some guy with some strong opinions and an entertaining way of phrasing them.
Me too! (but I will neither confirm nor deny the ‘guy’ part…”depends on the meaning of is“??)
HYPERBOLE: n. A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in Christine Gregoire legitimately won the Washington governors race.
HYPOCRITE: n. A person given to hypocrisy
HYPOCRISY: n 1: An expression of agreement that is not supported by real conviction [syn: lip service] 2: Insincerity by virtue of pretending to have qualities or beliefs that you do not really have, as in “Let’s count every vote.”
LIP SERVICE: n. Verbal expression of agreement or allegiance, unsupported by real conviction or action; hypocritical respect, as in “Chris Gregoire’s call for unity to move our state forward…” and “…the most accurate election in state history”.
ILLEGITIMATE: adj. Contrary to or forbidden by law; “an illegitimate seizure of power”;
DISINGENUOUS: adj. 1. Not straightforward or candid; insincere or calculating: “an ambitious, disingenuous, philistine, and hypocritical operator, who… exemplified… the most disagreeable traits of his time” (Paul Berendt).
2. Pretending to be unaware or unsophisticated; faux-naïf. (Dean Logan)
SANCTIMONIOUS: adj. Feigning piety or righteousness
SMUG: : adj. Exhibiting or feeling great or offensive satisfaction with oneself or with one’s situation; self-righteously complacent: “the smug look of a toad breakfasting on fat marsh flies” (Christine Gregoire).
VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY: n. Any sound, syllable, letter, phrase, sentence, paragraph, blog, essay, book, dissertation and/or punctuation mark, sigh, cough, yawn, sneeze, snort and/or miscellaneous utterance emitted anywhere at any time by any being even remotely considered to be conservative (VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRATOR) by anyone calling themselves LIBERAL, (aka, THE ANGRY LEFT or THE LOONEY LEFT)
VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRATOR, aka, EVIL RIGHT WING NUT: n, Anyone who does not completely agree with every sound, syllable, letter, phrase, sentence, paragraph, blog, essay, book, dissertation and/or punctuation mark, sigh, cough, yawn, sneeze, snort and/or miscellaneous utterance emitted anywhere at any time by anyone calling themselves LIBERAL.
LIBERAL: n. A confused being that considers him/herself as always right and always taking the moral high ground while calling those that disagree with him/her (aka, VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRATORS) foul and/or insulting names using vile invectives inappropriate to even the most base of rap and hip hop artists. See also: HYPOCRITE
THE ANGRY LEFT: n. A subset of the species LIBERAL known to take themselves entirely too seriously and also known to be continually miserable and always angry, who never, ever has or ever will see the good side of anyone or anything that is not in 100% agreement with their views at all times; see also: jcricket and Bob from Boeing
THE LOONY LEFT: n. A subset of the species LIBERAL willing to put forth remarkably inane ideas that make absolutely no sense in ramblings that make even less sense and known to be spelling and grammatically challenged; see also: bby
And in fact, I would guess that the same kind of mistake happened around the state at roughly the same rate. Which would mean that it should balance out and would not be enough to overturn an election.
Comment by Cheryl the Proud Progressive— 1/5/05 @ 11:36 pm
You have no indication that, as confirmed happend in KC, any other counties experienced the same problem. And based upon what do you say it would be at the same rate if it did occur elsewhere? So it should all just balance out. Debate is over, finally I wish I could have got this debate ending analysis weeks ago, would have saved so much time for everyone. Give me a break your opinions are pure speculation. You assume, “guess” is the word you used, that this happened here so it also happened there and there and I think over there too. So let’s just call it a wash give Gregoire the win and go home. You’ll have to forgive me for laughing my ass off.
And I don’t mind your son growing up being ignorant of real science, as long as he’s being home schooled or your paying to send him to the religious school of your choice. But hell if I want you to dumb down my child so as not to offend your religious beliefs.
Opposing the teaching of evolution in public schools is indefensible. So by all means… go for it.
The whole point is there is no credibility to these results!!!!!!!!!!!
You can say well it happend in Rossi counties too. I bet it happened just as much in favor of Rssi maybe more. But it is all speculation and the only known fact after all is said and done is NOONE can say with certainty who won this election. I repeat: NOONE. this might of happend, that could have happend he said she said all amounts to DOUBT of ELECTION RESULTS. Maybe Gregoire won and maybe it was by 2,500 votes not 129 or maybe Rossi won by 3500 votes or maybe it was two. But none of us really know do we?
Opposing the teaching of evolution in public schools is indefensible. So by all means… go for it.
Comment by Goldy— 1/6/05 @ 12:00 am
Indefensible? Pretty strong position to Take there Goldy? One question though? How is not having evolution taught in the schoold “Dumbing down your Kids”. Do you not have the ability to relay this point of view to your children on your own? You a sharp individual, I have confidence in you, go ahead give it a try. You don’t want me pushing my religous beleifs on your kids but you think the schools teaching my kids your beliefs regarding the existence of life is O.k.? A bit hypocritcial Oh that’s right the whole “Real science” comment. I think science classes have plenty to teach without having to include Evolution. And whether or no it is “Real Science” is subjective and is not for you to decide my son, or anyone else but your own, should learn it.
To –WellItSeemsStillMyFixationASSESandASSES: Your are a nut wing, not a wingnut. Honey – if you think what you post is logical or witty, find a street corner and read it to an audience.
Will match my advanced degrees against yours. I fit the high end Democrat profile. Over educated and awash with money. Hard life in Red Oasis Seattle. Kerry raised millions here. So will Hillary.
Year of the Gregoire. I think she will make a great Gov. – problem solver. Talk back to the nut wings, but more centrist than left.
My keyboard does not work well and I have stifd fingers in the winter. My sex life is private, but sorry, don’t date R’s. Creeps.
Comment by bby— 1/6/05 @ 12:13 am: Will match my advanced degrees against yours. I fit the high end Democrat profile. Over educated …My keyboard does not work well and I have stifd fingers in the winter.
Right. ‘OVERLY educated’ grammatical problems aside.
Goldy just a few paragraphs but I’ll include the link so you can read on. Just proves that even a significant number of those in the scientific community, which you appear to trust with your life, even doubt Darwin.
100 Scientists, National Poll Challenge Darwinism
SEATTLE–In an ironic greeting to the seven-part public television series “Evolution” , 100 scientists have declared that they “are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.” The signers say, “Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
Discovery Institute, a Seattle-based public policy center, compiled the list of statement signers (attached). Among other things, the long list may help to answer the contention of designated spokespeople for the series “Evolution” that “virtually all reputable scientists in the world” support Darwin’s theory. Institute officials charge that officials of WGBH/Clear Blue Sky Productions have used that contention to keep any scientific criticism of Darwinism from being acknowledged or examined in the eight-hour series. “They want people to think that the only criticism of Darwin’s theory today is from religious fundamentalists,” said Discovery president Bruce Chapman. “They routinely try to stigmatize scientists who question Darwin as ‘creationists’.”
Chemist and five time Nobel nominee, Henry “Fritz” Schaefer of the University of Georgia, commented on the need to encourage debate on Darwin’s theory of evolution. “Some defenders of Darwinism,” says Schaefer, “embrace standards of evidence for evolution that as scientists they would never accept in other circumstances.” Schaefer was on the roster of signers of the statement, termed “A Scientific Dissent on Darwinism.”
http://www.creationevolution.net/
Right or Wrong I believe this makes my position at least “Defensible” not indefensible as you described.
Chris – your kids are evolving before your eyes. Larger body weights, early maturation, list of many differences in just 70 years. Evolution – it is real.
The flat globe people are to be pitied. Your son will learn the truth and scorn you some day. Keeping him in the Bible Box will do little good in his world. So much change coming in the next 60 years.
Sorry – the best gift for him in an excellent general education.
Have snippet style, concerns about bandwith…revisit adverbs just for you…Gregoire is actually closer to your politics than mine…No communists on ballot this year.
Chris, you cannot teach biology without teaching evolution, and our children cannot grow up to compete in a world where bio-tech will be a dominant industry, without teaching them biology.
Evolution is not a religion. It is science, and for most people of faith, the two co-exist quite well. And if your religious beliefs were truly based on faith, why do you feel so threatened by the teaching of science?
Oh… and the Discovery Institute? Gimme a break.
Comment by bby— 1/6/05 @ 12:13 am: …and awash with money.
My keyboard does not work well and I have stifd fingers in the winter.
Right. “…and awash with money.” But, you can’t afford $$ for a keyboard (a whopping 20 bux) or a rheumatologist.
Comment by Goldy— 1/6/05 @ 12:40 am: –
Evolution is not a religion. It is science, and for most people of faith, the two co-exist quite well.
Please don’t fall over Goldy, but this practicing Catholic agrees with you. Yes, they do exist quite well, the problem, as I see it, is that they aren’t both TAUGHT equally and to co-exist.
That may be true, ProudAss, but public schools are certainly not the place to teach faith. Chris suggests that I should teach my daughter evolution at home… but that would be a more appropriate place to teach religion.
There you have it, there is a DOD form for voting, it just needs to be expanded to cover more than just the Presidential election. AND it is plain to see that once again we have un-educated voters that are members of the military. Why didn’t Farmer know about the Federal Voting Form? Because it helps the incumbent to keep people ignorant of solutions to their voting problems!
Peter, if your accusation about the Sammish voter is true, and he/dead wife was a PCO, it is doubly fraudulent, as a PCO certainly KNOWS the rules.
-zip, why do you keep using Timmy as a scare tactic. Timmy is a non-entity, people have discovered what tax cuts do to their services! And your comment, “It was the Bob Dole syndrome: her campaign and the press acted like it was her turn to be governor. She still has no agenda,” is way off base. Do you still have your Voter’s Pamphlet? Read Christine’s blurb and Dino’s blurb, sounds like they both have an agenda and state them in print.
-Chris what we need in school is elective science classes. Parents could pick which class they wanted their child to attend, and then the Religious Right could find a college that taught creationism only, so their children could finish their education. As to election irregularities in other counties is the state, my county counted a block of votes twice, this mistake gave my county to Rossi. Now, I wonder if the person in the auditor’s office, that feed the same votes through twice, had Republican leanings? Because of the machine recount the mistake was discovered and my county went for Gregoire.
No evolution? Read, “The Seven Daughters of Eve.”
That may be true, ProudAss, but public schools are certainly not the place to teach faith. Chris suggests that I should teach my daughter evolution at home… but that would be a more appropriate place to teach religion. -Comment by Goldy— 1/6/05 @ 1:37 am
I respectfully disagree Goldy, in that they both are (can and SHOULD be) taught as THEORY. Because that’s the impetus OF science – having a theory based on previously proven or disproven facts, then setting out ot prove or disprove it. Presenting the theory of intelligent design vs evolution is no more teaching faith than spending a month studying the remarkable life of REVEREND Martin Luther King. How do the students learn to discriminate facts WITHOUT all the facts/theories? Isn’t the POINT of school to teach a child to think critically? Furthermore, I don’t believe it does our children any good to be falsely given the impression that faith has no place within the the context of a good discussion. That being said, my kids are Catholic school educated and were taught within and according to the values by which we already live. It is interesting to note though, that at the Catholic HS they attended/attend about 40% of the students are NON-Catholic ( I don’t know how many have no religious affiliation) and that those same families KNOW they will be required to take 4 years of religion based on the Catholic faith and traditions. The same was true at the elementary level, although the percentage was quite a bit lower.
Goldy – You’re right – the reason creationism isn’t taught in science class is that it’s not science. Creationism isn’t a scientific theory. It doesn’t make predictions, it’s not a coherent (distinguishable) theory, t’s not falsifiable, etc. We don’t teach creationism in science for the same reason we don’t dissect frogs in English. Simple as that. That’s why the Supreme Court ruled that that creationism has no place in science class.
For those of you interested in the actual facts of the debate I suggest you check out this web site: http://www.talkorigins.org/ – Debunks every creationist “argument” ever made. Good for arming yourself with information. For a short FAQ – http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-qa.html
When the creationists lost that argument for good, they started trying to develop a scientific theory, which used to be called “scientific creationism” – when that failed (because once they’re on the playing field of science, they lose because of the overwhelming evidence against them) – they turned to “Intelligent Design”. Intelligent Design is weakly repacked creationism – basically “life is complicated, the odds against it happening are big, so there must be God involved”. http://www.talkdesign.org/
Oh, and here’s a nice debunking of the whole “100 scientists” BS:
As little as this has to do with the election – Creationists have been proven wrong about every “hole” they’ve proposed in evolution, yet persist in their claims. When they lose at the Supreme Court, they repackage their ideas and try again. Fundamentally, they don’t let the facts “stand in their way”.
And if your religious beliefs were truly based on faith, why do you feel so threatened by the teaching of science?
Oh… and the Discovery Institute? Gimme a break.
Comment by Goldy— 1/6/05 @ 12:40 am
That may be true, ProudAss, but public schools are certainly not the place to teach faith. Chris suggests that I should teach my daughter evolution at home… but that would be a more appropriate place to teach religion.
Goldy, I stated in my post that I would teach my son Creationism at home and that you could teach evolution in yours. I never inducated at all that teaching of religion in publuc schools was appropriate. As far as feeling threatened by the teaching of science, I am not. The issue for me comes in when the teach only one of the “theories” behind the existence of man. I can have my son hear about evoltuion in science class and explain to him at home about the truth, as i know it. But for those kids that only hear the evolution therory at scholl and nothing about creationism they are the one’s that as commented Comment by bby— 1/6/05 @ 12:24 am are not going to get “excellent Education”. why are your afraid to have creationism taught???????? Give you a break about the Dicovery Institute – What a group of scientists, which you are not, that cast a doubt over your precious Evolution Theory. They must be idiots becasue they don’t agree with you!
The flat globe people are to be pitied. Your son will learn the truth and scorn you some day. Keeping him in the Bible Box will do little good in his world. So much change coming in the next 60 years.
Sorry – the best gift for him in an excellent general education.
Comment by bby— 1/6/05 @ 12:24 am
Try coming up with a better argument thern this. Noone is talking about the earth being flat. Try to come back to reality. We are “debating” two positions that are supported, whether you or I agree with it by evidence of their existence. Comparing Creationism and support of it to the earth being flat speaks volumes to your understanding of the issue.
Regarding my son scorning me when he learns the truth, this I doubt. I am not afraid for me to have my son know about evolution. But again, I think home is the place to discuss these issues.
While waiting for my longer post to show up… Creationism is most definitely not science and it’s not even a theory.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resourc.....7_2000.asp
Comment by jcricket— 1/6/05 @ 8:42 am – And Goldy –
We can argue back and forth all day and none of us are going to have our minds changed. The reality is I beleive in creationism and you don’t. I beleive that the scientific community has cast doubts over the theory of evolution, you don’t. For every article you find supporting your case, I then can find one supporting mine. The fact is both of these positions are widely accepted by a large percentage of the population and you and I both beleive were right. The medical field is also filled with Doctors that believe in miracles, as they have seen their patience recover form illness, their recovery unexplained by science. They beleive in the existence and influence of God. So we can agree to disagree, or we can continue to not make any progress in changing eithers opinion. We will both know the truth in the end.
Chris – I want to make it clear that you’re creating a false equivalency. Just because you can quote the same number of articles as I can, doesn’t mean your evidence is equal. There’s a reason for standards of evidence (as everyone who has been to court knows). It’s fine for you to say “I believe we all appeared on earth 6000 years ago” but not for you to teach that in science class. If you object to the facts taught in science class, you have to use scientific objections to counter them.
The fact remains that the higher courts continually reject the teaching of creationism (in any guise) in science class.
You’re right that it doesn’t matter whether you or I agree, or even whether God exists or not. It’s fine for you and I to personally “agree to disagree” to avoid having a fruitless argument. But that civility is absolutely not a reason as a reason to teach faith-based theories about the origins of life in a science class.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resourc.....5_2001.asp
Comment by jcricket— 1/6/05 @ 9:20 am
Please read all my posts. I have said repeatedly that I would prefer it, creationism, not be taught it schools but evolution should not either. I disagree that Evolution is a undebatable fact. You don’t know for certain you are correct and to teach one and not the other is wrong, either way. Present both theories or none at all. It ia a theory not a fact. Evolution is not undisputed. Because there is enough evidence for you to beleive it to be true does not make it so. We have different standards of proof, as we will all agree based upon this election and the problems within it. I beleive Creationism can be taught with jst as much factual data as evolution, because I believe that, does it make is so? No. Does it mean it should be taught in schools? No. Would you think I was wrong? yes. Does that make you right?, No. Why do you fear kids learnign about creationism? Again, I am not saying it should be taught in schools. But if evoultion is taught because you agree with it, why should creationism not be taught to give a counter view, that is very mainstream? Teach both or teach neither. I prefer neither, to appease your sensitivety to Religion. I don’t mind my son learning about both.
Because that’s the impetus OF science – having a theory based on previously proven or disproven facts, then setting out ot prove or disprove it. Presenting the theory of intelligent design vs evolution is no more teaching faith than spending a month studying the remarkable life of REVEREND Martin Luther King. How do the students learn to discriminate facts WITHOUT all the facts/theories? Isn’t the POINT of school to teach a child to think critically? Furthermore, I don’t believe it does our children any good to be falsely given the impression that faith has no place within the the context of a good discussion.
You can’t learn anything unless you are willing to entertain opposing points of view.
Chris – ID and Creationism aren’t other “scientific theories” – they courts have used that as the reason they can’t be taught in science class. There are competing theories about small parts of the overall evolutionary theory. As soon as you find some scientific evidence to dispove evolution, we’ll consider that in science class. Just because you believe there’s a theory that a giant turtle is holding up the eart doesn’t mean I have to give it equal time.
Second, you’re misunderstanding what evolution is both a fact and a theory. Speciation has been observed, and the overall theory of evolution has been well refined and supported by 100+ years of facts.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faq.....-fact.html
Ass – Creationism is not an opposing scientific point of view, therefore it has no place being entertained in science class. Since you’re so fond of quotes and critical thinking, here’s a quote from Becoming a Critical Thinker by Robert T. Carroll
[from Chapter 1, “Critical Thinking,” in Becoming a Critical Thinker by Robert T. Carroll]
Oh I see.
Because intelligent design is subscribed to mostly by people of faith, it surely must be a “crackpot idea”.
cricket, your condescending dismissal and blatant hatred of anyone that doesn’t agree with you is absolutely breathtaking to behold.
BYou can’t learn anything unless you are willing to entertain opposing points of view.
Nice total strawman ASS. Plenty of people believe both in God and evolution. I have no quarrel with them. I also have no quarrel with people who are anti-science, but they should skip that class, rather than try to stick their faith into it.
Intelligent design is a crackpot idea when used as a scientific explanation because of severe, fundamental flaws in the the ID theory. ID is flawed science, not flawed faith. I agree with this statement from the Talk Design web site FAQ:
When ID proponents claims are examined from a scientific perspective, they fail to pass muster. ID proponents misrepresent evidence for evolution and ignore evidence contrary to their theory of a designer (rather than try and refute that evidence, like scientists do). Read the Talk Origins or Talk Design web site – they refute every claim that creationists and ID proponents make. ID proponents display a breathtaking inability to present plausible scientific evidence and when called on it, they just move onto another theory.
In case you’re wondering why, here’s more info about the ID movement.
So that’s why I have a problem with ID.
http://talkdesign.org/introfaq.html
Comment by jcricket— 1/6/05 @ 10:01 am
We are clearly never going to agree and nothing I say will convince you of my point of view. Equating my belief in CReationism or ID to a turtle holding up the world is ridiculous. Is there thousands of years of history supporting the Turtle? (I know you opinion is history does not prove Id or creationism but I veiw the evidence to say it does) Are there real world instances that provides evidence, wether you choose to believe it or not or the existence of thie turtle. My beleive is not unfounded as your turtle analogy clearly is, they are not comparable.
BTW ASS – You talking about hatred is really rich. In this very thread you wrote, at length, dismissing everyone who calls themselves a liberal or is on the left. You called them looney and hypocrites. And When you lose arguments you break into a rant about Democrats aborting their babies.
You have no credibility when it comes to trying to claim the moral high ground on the “open-mindedness” or “hatred” issues.
cricket – please just try a modcum of honesty for once and admit you have a “problem” with anyone or anything contrary to your own views. I believe that is call being “closed minded”. And quite frankly, when you are as closed minded as you continually present yourself to be we can all be assured NOTHING is getting in. You can not learn a thing when you refuse to entertain opposing points of view. How incredibly sad for you.
*modicum
And by the way…Congratulations! You have now moved from the ‘to be scorned’ list to the ‘to be pitied’ list. And yes. I’m well aware that you don’t care so save your energy.
Chris – You’re right that we’re not going to agree. You’re welcome to continue believing in creationism. But it’s simply not true that there’s thousands of years of evidence in favor of your theory. If you’re really interested, I suggest reading the Talk Origins web site (http://www.talkorigins.org).
Every single creationist/ID argument and piece of scientific-like “evidence” (and there’s a lot of it over the years) has been shown to be wrong, inaccurate and/or not scientific.
So, again, feel free to believe in creationism and teach it to your kids, but it has no place in science class. If you want to get into science class you have to offer scientific evidence. And when that evidence is proven wrong (like many other scientific theories in the past), your theory doesn’t get taught.
Just like when scientists (and everyone) used to believe the sun rotated around the earth, or that objects of different weight fell at different rates. Alternating hypotheses were developed, evidence was gathered, refutations were offered, more evidence was gathered, and the more accurate theory won out.
Creationists have been presenting “evidence” for 100+ years and the evidence supporting evolution has only grown stronger. If anything, that shows how good of a theory (and fact) evolution is.
Science teaches us that it’s possible Galileo, Copernicus and Newton were wrong. Einstein offered up a hypothesis and others have discovered evidence that invalidates some of Newtonian mechanics under special circumstances. But when the body of evidence is so large as to prove nearly ever piece of a theory, that theory can only be disproved by another theory that offers a better explanation for all the evidence.
That’s how science works – it’s not some playing field where all ideas are considered equal. Unlike faith – where there’s no real way to say who is more or less right.
Intelligent design is not a scientific theory… it is fundamentalist religious doctrine dressed up as science. It took decades for the scientific community to has through evolution… debate, test, debate some more… before it was accepted as fundamentally sound enough to be taught in our schools. If in 30 years, a large chunk of mainstream scientific thought says that intelligent design is sound, then let it be taught. But teaching science is not about giving equal time… it’s about teaching to the most current scientific standards. If I claimed the the world was born fully formed, pooped out of a monkey’s ass, I wouldn’t expect it to be taught along side evolution as a “competing theory.”
And evolution is only a “theory” the way Relativity is a theory. Find me some reputable phyiscists to argue against relativity. Or should we just argue that it shouldn’t be taught because it is only a “theory.”
Cricket, while I know your proudly wear the mantle of ‘horses ass’ I was unaware you were shooting for the ‘dumb ass’ title as well.
Let me point out the teeny little flaw in your diatribe. You are so certain of your position, so certain that nothing else is provable and therefore unworthy (in your opinion) to be taught, then why, pray tell, are you so afraid to have it compared and contrasted with other points of view? Oh I know! It’s because you don’t want to spread the chance that someone might BELIEVE a different point of view! Can’t have those hump back, foot dragging, mouth breathing people of FAITH multiplying and spreading that heresy now can we?
Well irony of ironies…the Catholic HS where my child is taking biology as a sophomore teaches EVOLUTION right alongside our religious beliefs. Here, you can look at the text they’re using:
http://phschool.com/atschool/b.....index.html
Pay close attention to Unit 5. Yessirreee, there it is…EVOLUTION in a textbook used in a faith based school!
I DARE you to call every Catholic HS in the Seattle Archdiocese and ask them about their curriculum.
Here, I’ll even help you out… go ahead given them a call:
Forest Ridge School of the Sacred Heart: 425 641-0700
Eastside Catholic High School: 425 644-7737
John F. Kennedy Memorial High School: 206 246-0500
Bishop Blanchet High School: 206 527-7711
O’Dea High School: 206 622-6596
Holy Names Academy: 206 323-4272
Bellarmine Preparatory: 253 752-7701
Archbishop Murphy High School: 425 379-6363
Golly, gosh gee whiz…you don’t suppose that “diversity” of teaching, subjecting of kids to different points of view and expecting them to think CRITICALLY is WHY almost all of the Archdiocese schools – elementary and high school – have waiting lists to get in, do you?
You don’t suppose that is why (Catholic) parents are willing to shell out over $22,000 for a K-8 elementary education and another $30,000 for 4 years of high school, (while paying taxes for public education, I might add) do you?
You don’t suppose that is why non-Catholics are willing to pay double tuition compared to Catholics in elementary school and almost 30% more than Catholics for high school, do you?
Open your mind a bit there cricket – let some fresh air in. You may just learn something.
You’re seriously attempting to use religious schools as evidence that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in secular schools? I fail to see how this “bombshell” changes anything. Faith-based schools are free to do what they want. They can teach any creation story (there are a lot of them) and/or evolution. Muslim schools in England have taught that Jews are a lower species than other humans – am I supposed to be impressed by that and offer that alongside other “science” in public schools? Just because religious schools mistakenly offer creationism in their science classes is no reason public schools should.
I’ll make it simple for you: Creationism is not a secular theory, and advances one particular religions theology over another. It is also most certainly not science. Due to both reasons the courts have properly, repeatedly ruled that creationism has no place in science class in public schools.
And Ass – I’m not afraid of anything. Over the past 15 years I’ve read hundreds of pages of evidence on creationism and seen how easily it’s all debunked by people who know what they are talking about.
For the same reason that some Muslims’ belief that Jews are a lower species has no place in public school, the fact that some people believe the Christian creation story is no reason to offer it in science class.
Public school isn’t about offering “equal time” to every theory out there. As Goldy has said, it’s about offering fact-based, secular, up-to-date curiccula.
Amazing! The proud progressive that built tha monument to “diversity” are the ones working so hard to quash diverity of thought. How incredibly perfect!
You’re right – we are free to teach our children whatever we like in faith based private schools. And we are actually teaching them theories that could be construed as odds with the faith. So whose children are more prepared? Have more diverse thought? Are more able to think critically?
BTW Ass – The proper place to debate competing scientific theories is in the scientific community. That’s how theories get debated, analyzed advanced (like Einstein’s theory of Relativity) and eventually accepted or rejected. Only after that are they taught.
Based on your logic, we should give all students in every class equal exposure to any theory that, say, a lot of people believe. A lot of people believe that Jews control the media. Let’s start teaching that in history class. Wouldn’t be fair to exclude it. A lot of people believe blacks are an inferior species. Let’s teach that in science class. Lots of EMS workers believe the full moon makes for more accidents, let’s teach that as fact (even though the facts show the opposite). And while we’re at it, let’s teach that the Holocaust never happened, aliens regularly abduct people, AIDS is a conspiracy, the government faked the moon landing and Elvis is alive. There’s no end to what “a lot of people believe” – people even spread urban legends as “facts” they’re “sure” happened.
We don’t teach those theories because they’ve either been rejected after studying the evidence, or the evidence hasn’t been uncovered. Just like every other subject (history, english, math) the debate is carried out in the community of experts, and then the best accepted theory is presented to students. We don’t present every new theory that comes along just because some people believe it at one point in time (or some kids would be taught cold fusion exists while the ones that came later would know that was shown false).
And please spare me the lecture about the quality of Catholic private schools. You don’t suppose that deeply religious parents would pay as much as required to get their kids a religious education, regardless of the other qualities of the school? Hmm, Orthodox Jews in Seattle are still sending their kids to Seattle Hebrew Academy despite the fact that it recently lost its academic accredition from the independent private school certification body.
Creationists and ID proponents know that they have lost (and continue to lose) the debate in the area where they engage the right people (e.g. scientists, peer reviewed journals) so they have instead turned (like you have) to winning a PR war based on the false concepts like “equal time” or forcing their ideas through school boards.
That’s just like your tactics in this election – Can’t convince the courts? Try to change the rules and force your way through somewhere else.
Don’t ever whine about how deprived publicly educated children are. Their education isn’t lacking because of class size or lack of money. It’s lacking because they are taught to sing 1 note while the world sings in symphanies. How sad for them, that they don’t even are allowed to know what they’re missing.
Progressive indeed.
Ass – I feel sorry for your kids. They’re being taught a load of bunk in their science classes and will be ill-prepared if they ever choose to go into a scientific career. I can just see them being laughed out of any college when they try to claim there is equal scientific support for creationism or serious questions about evolution.
Merely exposing kids to more than one theory doesn’t automatically make them better prepared. You actually have to show them how to adjudicate between the two. And in the case of creationism, using scientific evidence, you clearly see that Creationism doesn’t belong in science class. It doesn’t pass a single test of scientific theories. So whatever time you used up to teach them a discredited theory is time they could have spent learning something that’s actually useful.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/E.....evolution/
http://www.channelone.com/news.....eationism/
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....A3PE11.DTL
http://www.gallup.com/content/login.aspx?ci=3625
A load of bunk eh? Better go look at that link again – maybe actually READ it this time.
And while you may indeed (inappropriately) feel sorry for my children, all well educated, – HS, college and grad school – and well adjusted and hailing from a happy intact family, I pray to God that YOU have not procreated at all.
Oh sorry. That’s right… you don’t procreate. You naturally select, evolve and multiply.
Thank you for showing your true colors. (And you wonder why people are so suspicious of the religious right?)
I see. And that’s MORE inappropriate than this?
Ass – I feel sorry for your kids. They’re being taught a load of bunk in their science classes and will be ill-prepared if they ever choose to go into a scientific career. I can just see them being laughed out of any college when they try to claim there is equal scientific support for creationism or serious questions about evolution.
I guuess it’s all in the perspective.
Oh hells bells! I forgot the sanctimony and convenience of those well loved situational ethics! I do believe that would make a GREAT topic for 10th grade ‘Moral Decisons’ class… yep, I think I’ll suggest it.
Comment by by HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS— 1/6/05 @ 1:02 pm
Yes – a load of bunk. Just because some non-scientists on a school board claim that ID or creationism doesn’t promote one religion, or they believe there is debate over evolution doesn’t make it so
That’s why previous school board decisions to allow creationism in class have been overturned (referenced in some of the links you posted).
That’s why multiple higher courts have ruled against teaching creationism in class. The Supreme Court concluded that despite protestations to the contrary, teaching evolution in class did promote one religion over the other, and also wasn’t science.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resourc.....5_2001.asp
School-board decisions to include creationism, ID or “disclaimers” in textbooks are ill-advised and end up being short-lived victories as the boards are forced to relent either by the courts or scientific groups showing them how misguided the board was.
Yes ProudAss, your comment was less appropriate than Cricket’s. Fairly or not, Cricket was criticizing they way you education your children, whereas you are asking God that Cricket not be able to have any.
It’s just an example of what I have said elsewhere… there are certain members of the fundamentalist Christian right who believe people like me are less worthy in the eyes of God.
In my opinion, any God that would answer a prayer like yours is not deserving of prayer.
Cricket LOOK AGAIN at the textbook link – that is the index of the actual text book they are using – see there:
UNIT 5: Evolution
Chapter 15: Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Chapter 16: Evolution of Populations
Chapter 17: The History of Life
Chapter 18: Classification
Now tell me – how is that a “disclaimer”?
The problem YOU have is that you ASSume all teacher in faith based schools are themselves of that faith. You ASSume that all parents sending their children to faith based schools are themselves of that faith. Your closed little mind cannot conceive that it could possibly be otherwise. However, if you were even the tiniest bit ASStute(sp) you would have researched the schools I mention and learned a bit about their student populations. I will go out on a limb here and figure you haven’t even bothered to look at any of them but if you had you would have discovered that one Archdiocese HS has an international program with kids having traveled here to live on campus from countries that certainly would NOT be considered Christian let alone Catholic: China, Germany, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Romania, Russia, Taiwan, Thailand, Africa and Vietnam. You wrongly ASSume with your blatant anti-faith, pro-secular bigotry that any faith based school has nothing to offer except religious indoctrination. And as with most ASSumptions, you would, again, be wrong.
Goldy, as god and guru of your own site your are entiled to your situational ethics as you see fit. However, I see no hypocrisy in hoping that someone with such vile attitudes toward anything remotely contrary to what they believe NEVER be allowed to influence tender, malleable minds. And further, I also suspect you would never want that for your own precious daughter. I suspect you beleive, as I do that our children deserve openness, honesty and as much information to digest (at age appropriate times) as we can give them so that THEY can learn and understand without biases.
Cricket, I want to thank you. As I’ve been doing things here around the house, mulling over your comments and attitude, I’ve come to realize you are the poster child for school choice. You are a prime example of why parents are pulling their children from government schools in droves and the reason private schools have waiting lists and can command outlandish tuition. It seems the marketplace truly does work.
Like your ASSumptions that I am a woman? Or that I don’t work? Or that I (or a partner) have aborted our babies to the “alter of career”? Or that I’m secular and/or anti-faith. It’s staggering the amount of times you’ve made faulty assumptions about me alone. I never bothered to correct you because I like seeing you make a fool of yourself with your assumptions.
More importantly, you have grossly misrepresented my argument using what’s known as a strawman. I never came anywhere close to saying that “all religious schools have to offer is indoctrination”. What I clearly indicated was that any school that offers creationism in science class is doing those kids a disservice. You were the one who went on about how your kids Catholic HS offers creationism and evolutionary theory in the same science class, so it’s not an “assumption” that a catholic school would offer it. You provided the proof.
It is a fact that teaching kids that creationism and evolution are on equal scientific footing is providing them a poor foundation of scientific knowledge, no matter how far away the kids have come from. If you want to teach the kids that the theory of evolution was at one time controversial, and that some people still believe the earth is 6000 years old, do that in history class, or comparative religion. Teaching kids in science class that one non-scientific theory with overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary is on equal footing to a scientific theory with overwhelming, observed facts on its side is bad education.
Just because you or a school board don’t understand the evidence supporting evolution and/or the scientific evidence rejecting ID and/or creationism doesn’t mean that scienctists and/or science classes should be used to propogate that ignorance.
To quote a scientist I know: “Open-mindedness is the willingness to follow where the evidence leads and should include willingness to defer to impartial investigations rather than one’s own predilections [3]. It is not close-minded to reject ideas that are unsubstantiated and lack a scientifically plausible rationale. Nor is it close-minded to rely upon the vast body of accumulated scientific knowledge as a guide to giving advice or making practical decisions.”
Oops – quote is from “Adler JE. Open minds and the argument from ignorance. Skeptical Inquirer 22(1):41-44, 1998.”
Comment by by HowCanYouBeProudtobeAnASS— 1/6/05 @ 2:45 pm
Logical Fallacies
The point of an argument is to give reasons in support of some conclusion. An argument commits a fallacy when the reasons offered do not support the conclusion.
Category: Changing the Subject
The fallacies in this section change the subject by discussing the person making the argument instead of discussing reasons to believe or disbelieve the conclusion. While on some occasions it is useful to cite authorities, it is almost never appropriate to discuss the person instead of the argument.
Fallacy: Attacking the Person (argumentum ad hominem)
Definition:
The person presenting an argument is attacked instead of the argument itself. This takes many forms. For example,the person’s character, nationality or religion may be attacked. Alternatively, it may be pointed out that a person stands to gain from a favourable outcome. Or, finally, a person may be attacked by association, or by the company he keeps.
There are three major forms of Attacking the Person:
1. ad hominem (abusive): instead of attacking an assertion, the argument attacks the person who made the assertion.
2. ad hominem (circumstantial): instead of attacking an assertion the author points to the relationship between the person making the assertion and the person’s circumstances.
3. ad hominem (tu quoque): this form of attack on the person notes that a person does not practise what he preaches.
Proof:
Identify the attack and show that the character or circumstances of the person has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of the proposition being defended.
http://www.intrepidsoftware.co.....ubject.php
Ass – Your arguments continually fall prey to the most common logical fallacies. That doesn’t speak well for whatever education you received.
Comment by jcricket— 1/6/05 @ 3:01 pm -Like your ASSumptions that I am a woman? Or that I don’t work? Or that I (or a partner) have aborted our babies to the “alter of career”? Or that I’m secular and/or anti-faith. It’s staggering the amount of times you’ve made faulty assumptions about me alone.
Yep, you are (for the first time) absolutely right. I don’t know you. But what you fail to recognize is that I really don’t care to know you. Your value to me is merely the amusement factor you so aptly provide. Thanks!
Thanks for clarifying that you neither listen to people nor care to get your facts right. Since you’re hear for amusement purposes only, we can logically conclude that nothing you say is really deeply considered and/or meaningful. Sounds about right to me, but I just want to check with you before I make that ASSumption.
If it’s true, please add a disclaimer on all your posts so the serious people here can avoid you.
Thanks for clarifying that you neither listen to people nor care to get your facts right. Since you’re hear for amusement purposes only, we can logically conclude that nothing you say is really deeply considered and/or meaningful. Sounds about right to me, but I just want to check with you before I make that ASSumption.
If it’s true, please add a disclaimer on all your posts so the serious people here can avoid you.
“Warning! ProudAss doesn’t listen or care what you think. Her posts are deliberatey inflammatory and intended merely to provoke and incite. Look for useful information and thoughtful debate elsewhere.”
Comment by jcricket— 1/6/05 @ 3:27 pm
Getting a bit More) dizzy from your spinning?
Wasn’t there just a bit of something about false premises? How about leaping to conclusions? For someone that has a “degree in logic” (snicker) you sure seemed to have lost it in that post dearie:
A – YOU said I don’t listen to “people” – invented in your stunted imagination because you will not find one source of that attributable to me. Furthermore,I suspect the subtext in THAT bit of spin is a foot stomping pout that I don’t accept YOUR words as definitive and/or that I dare call your veracity into question.
B – YOU said I don’t “care to get my facts right” _ OH really? By whose judgement? Yours? Sorry I consider your judgement less than stellar.
C- YOU said I’m “hear” (snicker ms/mrs/maiden/mr/it ‘ever so more intellectual’ for the amusement – UM, … NO I said YOUR only value to me was the amusement factor you so aptly provide.
Perhaps you better rework that disclaimer for yourself:
Warning! I AM cricket!!! I know everything!!! Do NOT attempt to tell me anything!!! My mind is closed but it doesn’t matter because NO MATTER what you say I will close my eyes, put my fingers in my ears and mumble my mantra “i am my god, I am my god, I am my god…nyah, nyah, n’nyah, nyah I win”
Thanks for clarifying that you neither listen to people nor care to get your facts right. Since you’re hear for amusement purposes only, we can logically conclude that nothing you say is really deeply considered and/or meaningful. Sounds about right to me, but I just want to check with you before I make that ASSumption. -Comment by jcricket— 1/6/05 @ 3:27 pm
Getting a bit dizzy from your spinning?
Wasn’t there just a bit of something about false premises? How about leaping to conclusions? For someone that has a “degree in logic” (snicker) you sure seemed to have misplaced it in THAT post dearie:
A – YOU said I don’t listen to “people” (whaa! whaa!) – invented in your stunted imagination because you will not find one source of that attributable to me. Furthermore, I suspect the subtext in THAT bit of spin is a foot-stomping pout that I don’t accept YOUR words as definitive and/or that I dare call your veracity into question.
B – YOU said I don’t “care to get my facts right” – Oh really? By whose judgement? Yours? Sorry I consider your judgement less than stellar.
C- YOU said I’m “hear” (snicker, snicker ms/mrs/maiden/mr/it ‘ever so more intellectual’) for the amusement – UM, … NO I said YOUR only value to me was the amusement factor you so aptly provide.
Perhaps you better rework that disclaimer for yourself:
Warning! I AM cricket!!! I know everything! I do! I do! I DO! Do NOT attempt to tell me anything!!! My mind is closed but it doesn’t matter anyway because NO MATTER what you say I will close my eyes, put my fingers in my ears and mumble my mantra “I am my god, I am my god, I am my god…nyah, nyah, n’nyah, nyah I win”
BTW it’s mutation not evolution. And I think that describes all of us.
Take your time to check out some information dedicated to.
In your free time, check some helpful info dedicated to…
meaner rarity phonetics greenish:spirally Odin?
unaffected:rattlesnake?contends.meson brewer:benevolence,abstruse,solver
underlines ineffectively Quezon decoupling,Orientalizing peninsulas:armful?fertilizer,
disarmament acre journeyings domestically cottonmouth veterinarian counselors,vanities.feasting,
curiosities arranges receptacles gaslight!nuclide!indistinct benches
bitterly vacating:dips little emacs …
calibrates bourbon Muenster Bridgeport Monterey composite forged brokerage
mutiny,Larkin interned cobwebs,prank burglaries empowered .