Already the dishonesty and the revisionism and the hatred and the stupidity are flying in the to-do over the 9th Circuit’s PoA decision yesterday. In response to one particular piece, spoken by Missouri Senator Kit Bond ®, I sent this e-mail to his office today:
I mean, is this really the level of dishonesty that discourse on this topic has to be conducted at? Can anyone sit there and argue with a straight face that the 1954 insertion of “under God” into the Pledge (which was written by a clergyman, for heaven’s sake, who could have included it had he wanted) did not have a religious purpose behind at, and was therefore violative of the Establishment clause?
C’mon, PLD, of course Kit Bond and every other elected official has to act outraged. What do you think his chances for re-election would be if he had said, “The ruling by the federal appeals court is an excellent step in maintaining the wall of separation between church and state, and I applaud their strong endorsement of the Establishment clause of the Constitution.”?
He could kiss his cushy elected post goodbye because he’d be trounced at the next election.
pldennison, that’s a good e-mail. Unfortunately, it’s highly likely nobody read it. In fact, they likely stopped as soon as you said, “I am not a member of your state.” Never, ever state that upfront. In fact, don’t even bother mentioning it. That ensures your letter gets read.
Well, that assinine quote has made it to the “Hot Topics” section of the Senators web page, so I took the liberty of calling his office. I spoke with an aide who had clearly received other phone calls about this issue. He said that Senator Bond had spoken “in the heat of the moment” and they where aware of the factual errors in his statement, but they didn’t seem to keen on correcting it. I offered to send the Senator a copy of the constitution to peruse at his leisure, but they didn’t seem too keen on that either.
No, because athiests are the most unjustly screwed people in society.
But yeah, as gobear said, for any politician to come out and support the 9th Court’s ruling would be hari-kari for his or her career. Which doesn’t make their pandering any less annoying.
Neurotik
Actually, I’ve known of cases where a Governor responded to letters coming from a citizen and resident of the UK. (It was a response to an anti- death penalty letter.)
PLD: I would, however, recommend that you print the letter out, attach a stamp, and mail it to
Senator Bond
US Senate
Washington, DC 20510
You can also cc your own Senators, should you feel inclined.
I think Governor Ventura of Minnesota would qualify as an avowed atheist. Wasn’t there some ruckus about him describing religion as being for the weak-minded?
In any event, after reading through several news stories reporting the cavalcade of stupidity as each Senator tries to outdo the last in supporting the phrase “under God”, I went and joined the ACLU today. Anyone know if they send out membership cards? I’d prefer to be able to describe myself as a “card-carrying” ACLU member. And next time I’m at their office (the state office is one of my company’s clients) maybe I’ll buy one of their tshirts.
With the price of stamps, may I suggest faxing it instead?
Most computer modems (err, well, at least before they went all software, no idea about now days) can send faxs as well, so it may very well just be the cost of a long distance phone call.
flowbark, governors and senators might be different. My only experience was in a representatives office, same with most of my friends. In all of our offices (about ten different) it was usual policy to simply take any letters that were not from our district and immediately pass them along to whoever their representative was. Considered professional courtesy among congressfolk. Foreign mail, unless “sponsored” by a constituent was usually just tossed.
pldennison May I add another senator to your list? Yesterday, Senator Lieberman said the following:
Then there was this…
Hmm…let me think, oh wait I don’t have to think at all. I can think of two more assinine rulings right off the the top of my head. How about Scott v. Stanford for starters? You remember that one don’t you, the one that established slaves as property in the land of the free? Or how about that Plessy v. Ferguson? You know the one that made treating blacks as second class citizens hunky dory? Precisely the same thing you’re trying to do with your constitutional amendment you knumbfuck!
