Column/Legend
1 - Prefix  - L-Life,  H-Homosexual Behavior/Perversion, R-Religion/Legal Persecution/ACLU, E-Education, M-Media Bias, O-Other
2-7 - Yr, Mo, Dy
8 - L -Letter to Editor, C-Commentary, O-Op-Ed, M-Metro

Hotlink Index of this weeks's family values related news:  [Life]   [Homosexual Behavior/Perversion]   [Religion/Religious Persecution]   [Education]   [Media]   [Other]

LIFE

HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR/PERVERSION
H050625        Spellings avoids PTA ties to pro-gay advocacy group
H050627        At PTA gathering, no tolerance for ex-gays
H050628        Pro-gay group seeks support at PTA convention

RELIGION/RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION
R050625       Thousands flock to see Billy Graham
R050626       Curtain to fall on Supreme session
R050626C     Forum: Religious debate?
R050627       CALIFORNIA   Court overturns sale of public TV station
R050627       Judicial activism
R050627C     As the vacancy nears
R050627E     When intolerance stalks faith
R050628       Court splits on Commandments
R050628       Desperate liberals
R050628       Tense moment
R050628C    Chief justice benchmarks
R050628E    Taking down the Ten Commandments
R050628L    The coming judicial battle
R050628Md High court ruling may affect Frederick
R050629       A 70 percent majority
R050629       Church leader backs gay 'marriage'
R050629       Congress to step into Ten Commandments fray
R050630C    'Mainstream' judges
R050630C    Supreme obfuscation
R050702E  Justice O'Connor retires
R050701      Justice O'Connor retires
R050701E    When the law gets big for its pants
R050701L    God's law and the courts
R050702      Bush revisits options
R050702      Democrats warn Bush to consult
R050702      Justice O'Connor had pivotal role in big rulings
R050702      The battle for the court begins
R050702      UCC likely to give nod to gay unions
R050702C   Foreign law fantasies
R050702C   Unholy spectacle
R050730E   Religion in the Air Force

EDUCATION
E050628Md   Board reaches pact on sex education

MEDIA
M050626C    Battle for balance
M050627C    Why press gets 'bad press'
M050628E    Bias, what bias?
M050629      Times nabs 6 AP editorial awards
M050630E    Liberal sprinklings of bias
M050701      Dorgan's complaint

OTHER
O050626       Court OKs religious abstinence content
O050626E    Liberal vs. conservative in Virginia
O050627      Senator-doctor wants to keep both roles
O050629       PBS and Playboy
O050630      Condoms' efficacy questioned

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

H050710   Senate in Oregon OKs gay unions

By Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 10, 2005

The Oregon Senate has passed a bill to create civil unions for homosexual couples, although the measure is not expected to pass the state House.
    The bill, which would give homosexual couples many of the benefits of marriage, passed the Democrat-led Senate on Friday by a 19-10 vote.
    The issue now goes to the Republican-led House. Members of that chamber have said civil unions violate the state's new constitutional marriage amendment. They have proposed an alternative "reciprocal benefits" system, which would allow any two adults who can't legally marry to sign up for certain rights and benefits.
    Voters outlawed same-sex "marriage" in November, and homosexual rights groups have been working ever since to make Oregon the third state, behind Vermont and Connecticut, to enact civil unions for same-sex couples.
    Advocates of same-sex "marriage" are also active in California.
    On Tuesday, a California Senate committee is scheduled to consider a bill to make marriage language gender-neutral and allow same-sex couples to "marry."
    In June, the Senate rejected the same bill by four votes.
    However, Assemblyman Mark Leno, the lead sponsor, has revived the bill using the "gut and amend" tactic. In this process, Mr. Leno took AB 849 -- a bill about fishing research that passed the Assembly -- and "gutted" it by substituting the gender-neutral "marriage" language.
    Same-sex "marriage" supporters, such as Equality California, are hoping the Senate committee and eventually the full Senate will pass the revised same-sex "marriage" bill.
    But traditional-values groups such as the Campaign for Children and Families are ramping up opposition.
    "Mark Leno, be careful what you wish for," said Randy Thomasson, president of the campaign. He said Mr. Leno's nonstop efforts to legalize same-sex "marriage" in California will galvanize a petition drive to put the question of same-sex "marriage" to voters next year. The petition drive is set to begin later this month.
    Several weeks ago, Mr. Thomasson and his conservative allies were dealt a setback by the California Supreme Court.
    In January, California's sweeping new domestic partnership law, AB 205, went into effect, giving registered homosexual couples most of the rights of married couples.
    Conservative groups challenged the law, saying it violated Proposition 22, a voter-passed law that says only marriages between a man and a woman are valid in California. AB 205 is "gay marriage by another name," the plaintiffs argued.
    Homosexual rights groups and their allies responded that Proposition 22 does not forbid domestic partnerships and that domestic partnerships are not, in fact, marriages.
    California courts upheld the domestic partnership law and on June 29, the state's high court unanimously declined to take the case, leaving AB 205 in effect.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

S050708   Hot and shrill
    "President Bush has yet to pick his Supreme Court nominee but he's already won Round 1 of the fight — because Democrats have come on way too strong and sound as if they're spoiling for a fight no matter who's the nominee," the New York Post's Deborah Orin writes.
    "That's good for Bush because in this fight, the side that comes off as too extreme will lose in the court of public opinion. Most Americans believe the high court should be above politics," Miss Orin said.
    " 'I like very much the place we're at as Republicans because Democrats overreacted. They attacked immediately — they were too hot and too shrill,' said a senior Republican strategist.
    "Another veteran Republican put it this way: 'The Democrats are telegraphing so blatantly that they're going to tar and feather whoever the nominee is that they're losing credibility.'
    "Typical was Sen. Ted Kennedy: 'If the president abuses his power and nominates someone who threatens to roll back the rights and freedoms of the American people, then the American people will insist that we oppose that nominee, and we intend to do so.'
    "The numbers show the Democrats were leading with their chins because a CNN poll found an extraordinary 86 percent of Americans expect Democrats to use 'inappropriate political reasons' to oppose Bush's nominee."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

S050708E   Something nice for a good buddy

July 8, 2005

George W. Bush is loyal to his buddies. The gooder the good ol' boy, the better. It's one of the president's most endearing traits.
    He stood up for Alberto Gonzales on his way to the G-8 summit in Scotland, scolding the "extremists" on the right who are suspicious of the attorney general's credentials as a conservative nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court.
    "I don't like it when a friend gets criticized," the president told reporters at a stop in Denmark. "I'm loyal to my friends. And all of a sudden this fellow, who is a good public servant and a really fine person, is under fire. And so, do I like it? No. I don't like it at all."
    This may or may not mean the president intends to nominate Mr. Gonzales to the Supreme Court. George W. is known to be partial to his friends, and a lot of conservatives are afraid that's what his Valentine for Alberto is about.
    Sen. Harry Reid, the leader of the Democratic minority in the Senate who ordinarily thinks the president is "a loser" and looks for opportunities to say so, swiftly endorsed Mr. Gonzales, figuring that he's the best the Democratic left is likely to get. Other Democrats, who would ordinarily throw up at the very mention of the man who wrote the Guantanamo torture memos, are falling into line.
    Mr. Gonzales himself has been campaigning for something with the enthusiasm of a Democratic alderman on the south side of Chicago. He has gone courting at the Heritage Foundation, Paul Weyrich's Free Congress Foundation, Grover Norquist's tax-cut breakfast, Laura Ingraham's radio talk show, and even to Baghdad to sup with the troops. He wants the conservatives to know how much he loves them, at least for now. Naturally all this campaigning doesn't have anything to do with panting for a seat on the Supreme Court, because that wouldn't be seemly. Whoever heard of an unseemly Washington lawyer?
    But the buzz is confusing. George W. said not long ago that he wants to find Supreme Court nominees like Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, but some of his most faithful friends say that he's talking like that was then, and this is now. The faithful conservatives are always suspicious that the Republican biggies, who prize moderation except in the heat of an election campaign, is about to dump them. And it's true that "respectable" Republicans, so called, invariably sniff the air when the conservatives enter the room, as if they expect to be overwhelmed by bad breath or body odor. Most of the talk about Mr. Gonzales' qualifications is that (a) he's the president's good buddy, (b) he's an identifiable Hispanic, the current object of White House affection all sublime, and (c) maybe most important, Harry Reid and the Democrats think he might be "moderate" enough to suit them. They think he has the potential to "grow" up to be David Souter. They're terrified the president will choose a fully grown nominee, and they're willing to take somebody they despise to avoid getting someone they really hate.
    But what is a "moderate" judge? Mr. Justice Scalia, the man the president described as his model justice, offered his opinion earlier this year in a speech to the Woodrow Wilson Center. "What is a moderate interpretation of the text?" he asked. "Halfway between what it really means and what you'd like it to mean? There is no such thing as a moderate interpretation of the text. Would you ask a lawyer, 'Draw me a moderate contract'?
    "The only way the word has any meaning is if you are looking for someone to write a law, to write a constitution, rather than to interpret one. I think the very terminology suggests that's where we have arrived: at the point of selecting people to write a constitution, rather than people to give us the fair meaning of one that has been democratically adopted ...
    "When we are in that mode, you realize, we have rendered the Constitution useless, because the Constitution will mean what the majority wants it to mean."
    Majorities change, of course, but the Democrats don't want to hear that, and echo the president's description of fair criticism of Mr. Gonzales as "attacks." But none of the criticism smacks of the personal. The "attacks" have actually been "civil" and "dignified." The president's loyalty to his friend is nevertheless exemplary, and doing something nice for a friend is, well, nice. But it's hardly necessary to nominate a pal to the Supreme Court to demonstrate loyalty and affection. He could just send flowers and a box of candy.
 
    Wesley Pruden is editor in chief of The Times.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

L050708       Web of opponents
    "NARAL Pro-Choice America, which has taken a leading role in the fight against several of President Bush's judicial nominees, has purchased the web addresses stopgonzales.com, stopgonzales.org, and stopgonzales.net in anticipation that the president might nominate Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to the Supreme Court," Byron York writes at National Review Online (www.nationalreview.com).
    "Gonzales, seen as a moderate, has sometimes been mentioned as a candidate who might not spur vigorous opposition from pro-Democratic groups. The existence of the stopgonzales sites indicates that such a vigorous opposition is at least being planned," Mr. York said.
    "Asked whether the purchase of the stopgonzales names meant NARAL would oppose Gonzales' nomination, NARAL spokesman David Seldin told National Review Online, 'I wouldn't read too much into that. We haven't made any decision on that. We had pretty serious concerns about his nomination for attorney general, but, in general, we are hoping not to have to oppose a nomination by the president. We are hoping for peace and arming for war.'

    "NARAL has also purchased the Web addresses stopowen.com, which refers to Judge Priscilla Owen, stopmcconnell.com, which refers to Judge Michael McConnell, and stopgarza.com, which refers to Judge Emilio Garza. All are considered possible candidates for the court. ...
    "Other anti-Bush groups have also purchased web addresses from which to attack other potential candidates. For example, People for the American Way has purchased stopluttig.com, for Judge Michael Luttig, stopwilkinson.com, for Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson, stopalito.com, for Judge Samuel Alito, stopbrown.com, for Judge Janice Rogers Brown, and stopjones.com, for Judge Edith Jones."
    A spokeswoman for People for the American Way said her group has yet to decide whether to oppose any potential nominee, Mr. York said.
    "Finally, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, another group that has played a substantial role in opposing Bush nominees, has purchased stopestrada.com, for Miguel Estrada, President Bush's filibustered nominee to a place on D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and stoproberts.com, for Judge John Roberts."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

L050708       Patriot lobby
    The American Civil Liberties Union has hired a new top lobbyist in Washington.
    Caroline Fredrickson, a former special assistant to President Clinton, a former legal aide to Tom Daschle in the Senate, and currently general counsel and legal director of NARAL Pro-Choice America, becomes director of the ACLU's wwWashington Legislative Office on July 18.
    Foremost on her plate: the USA Patriot Act, privacy rights and "marriage" of same-sex couples.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

L050708    Romney's choice
    Massachusetts lawmakers have approved a measure that would allow pharmacists to dispense the "morning-after pill" without a prescription and require hospitals to offer it to rape victims, setting the stage for Gov. Mitt Romney's first major decision on an issue that many conservatives link to abortion, the Boston Globe reports.
    The House approved the bill Wednesday by a 135-17 vote, following the Senate's unanimous vote for a similar bill last month. Lawmakers will have to settle several differences between the two versions before it heads to Mr. Romney's desk, Globe reporter Scott S. Greenberger writes.
    Because both chambers approved it by veto-proof margins, the measure will become law no matter what Mr. Romney does. With the Republican governor considering a run for president, however, his decision on the emergency-contraception legislation is being watched closely by activists on both sides.
    A spokeswoman suggested that Mr. Romney's decision will revolve around the question of whether the emergency-contraception bill changes the current laws on abortion.
    "When the governor receives the emergency-contraception legislation, he will review it carefully and measure whether or not it changes the status quo," spokeswoman Julie Teer said.
    A nationally prominent group of social conservatives urged him to veto it.
    "It's a family issue. People will be watching to see what he does on this," said Connie Mackey, vice president for government affairs of the Washington-based Family Research Council. "This gives the right to young girls to go in and get a very dangerous drug. It's insane. It's worthy of a governor's veto."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

O050709   AIDS funds linked to prostitution fight

July 9, 2005

ASSOCIATED PRESS
    U.S. groups fighting AIDS overseas are being given an ultimatum by the government: Pledge your opposition to sex trafficking and prostitution or do without federal funds.
    The new rule has created confusion among health groups that wonder how it will affect them, and has drawn criticism from others who say it infringes on free speech rights and could do more harm than good.
    It will affect about $2.2 billion in AIDS grants and contracts this year, according to Kent Hill, acting assistant administrator for global health at the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which recently issued a policy directive outlining the regulation.
    Mr. Hill said the pledge is a tool the United States can use to make sure none of its money goes to support a practice he called degrading and debilitating.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

O050709       Inaccurate Sex Offender Registry
LANSING, Mich. -- The state's sex offender registries contain inaccurate and incomplete information that may give the public a false sense of security, according to a state audit released Friday.
    Auditors said the Michigan State Police did not have procedures to verify the accuracy of data including sex offenders' names and addresses.
    They also found that information on Michigan's two registries -- one for the public, the other a complete listing for law enforcement -- did not always match.
    The report by the state's auditor general covered records from October 2001 to August 2004.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

R050708   Majority in poll see God as direct Creator of man

By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 8, 2005

Most Americans believe it all starts in heaven: 64 percent of us agree that "human beings were created directly by God," according to a Harris poll released yesterday.
    The belief was pronounced along partisan divides: 73 percent of Republican respondents and 75 percent of conservatives believe God is the ultimate Creator. The figure stood at 58 percent among Democrats and 48 percent among liberals.
    The poll found that while college graduates, adults ages 18 to 54, Democrats, liberals and those living in the Northeast and West support "evolution in larger numbers ... among these groups, majorities believe in creationism."
    Among college graduates, for example, the poll found that almost half believe in creationism, while 31 percent supported evolutionary theory.
    Debates over the divide make for piquant politics in the public arena.
    In recent years, school districts in Kansas, Pennsylvania, Alabama and other states have wrangled over science and religion in the classroom, the debate further compounded by the rise of a third theory -- "intelligent design," which maintains that humans are so complex that a powerful, sentient force is logically behind their creation.
    Harris found that 10 percent of Americans believed in that particular idea.
    Yet the nation still supports free choice in the classroom. A majority -- 55 percent -- felt that creationism, evolutionary and intelligent design all had a place in public schools. Just less than a quarter said creationism alone should be taught, while 12 percent favored evolution only and 4 percent intelligent design only.
    Meanwhile, 54 percent of us do not think that humans developed from an earlier species, a figure which stood at 46 percent in 1994, according to Harris. Another 48 percent felt that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was not proven by fossil evidence, while 47 percent said humans and apes do not share common ancestry.
    Simian heritage was a more popular theory among Democrats, however. According to the poll, 61 percent of Democrats think man and ape evolved from the same family tree, an idea shared by 30 percent of the Republicans.
    The poll found that 49 percent felt that plants and animals had evolved from some other species, however.
    Such things fuel spirited discourse.

    Yesterday, for example, the Tulsa Park and Recreation Board in Oklahoma dropped plans to include a privately funded creationism exhibit at the Tulsa Zoo despite protests from Mayor Bill LaFortune.
    The board, which had previously approved the exhibit, had received a 2,000-signature petition from a group called "Friends of Religion and Science" protesting the idea.
    A vexed Mr. LaFortune, however, pointed out that while Hindu and American Indian beliefs were represented at the zoo, the "traditional Biblical creation story" had been excluded. In the name of fairness, the mayor recommended those exhibits be removed.
    The Harris poll of 1,000 adults was conducted June 17-21, with a sampling error of three percentage points.
    Other polls have shown similar results. A CBS News poll of 885 adults released in November found that 55 percent believe God created humans in their present form while 13 percent felt that God did not guide the process. Two-thirds felt that creationism and evolution should both be taught in public schools.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

S050708   Hot and shrill
    "President Bush has yet to pick his Supreme Court nominee but he's already won Round 1 of the fight — because Democrats have come on way too strong and sound as if they're spoiling for a fight no matter who's the nominee," the New York Post's Deborah Orin writes.
    "That's good for Bush because in this fight, the side that comes off as too extreme will lose in the court of public opinion. Most Americans believe the high court should be above politics," Miss Orin said.
    " 'I like very much the place we're at as Republicans because Democrats overreacted. They attacked immediately — they were too hot and too shrill,' said a senior Republican strategist.
    "Another veteran Republican put it this way: 'The Democrats are telegraphing so blatantly that they're going to tar and feather whoever the nominee is that they're losing credibility.'
    "Typical was Sen. Ted Kennedy: 'If the president abuses his power and nominates someone who threatens to roll back the rights and freedoms of the American people, then the American people will insist that we oppose that nominee, and we intend to do so.'
    "The numbers show the Democrats were leading with their chins because a CNN poll found an extraordinary 86 percent of Americans expect Democrats to use 'inappropriate political reasons' to oppose Bush's nominee."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

L050708   Record 5 million visit family planning clinics

By Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 8, 2005

A record 5 million people visited federally funded family planning clinics last year, a reproductive health research group reports.
    The figure was 1 percent higher than in 2003 and "the highest client level ever reported," said the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI), which presented its annual report to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
    The vast majority of clinic users traditionally are women. However, outreach efforts to men are paying off, as a third of the new clients were male.
    This is "certainly a good sign," as men should be involved in family planning, said Lawrence Finer, AGI associate director for domestic research.
    The report also tracks current and past contraceptive use of female clinic visitors.
    For 2004, it found that oral contraceptives continued to be the preferred choice, with 48 percent of women reporting use of pills. However, this is far lower than in 1995, when 62 percent of female clinic visitors said they used birth control pills.
    As oral contraceptive use fell, condoms and injectable birth control products, such as Lunelle and Depo-Provera, have become more popular, the report said. In 1995, 12 percent and 13 percent of women reported using injectables or condoms, respectively. In 2004, usage for each method grew to 18 percent.
    Another growing category is "other" forms of birth control, which increased to 8 percent in 2004 from not even registering a percentage in 1995.
    "Other" forms of birth control include the Ortho Evra hormonal "patch," Nuva Ring vaginal rings and sexual abstinence.
    Clinics are not asked for details about the "other" category, but the Illinois Department of Human Services supplied it, noting that 10,381 women used the patch, 1,444 used the ring and 1,305 used sexual abstinence.
    "There is a little bit of a substitution effect going on here," Mr. Finer said of the changes in contraceptive use.
    "If somebody had difficulty taking the pill every day, the patch and the ring require less user intervention," but are about the same in cost and efficacy, he said.
    Contraceptive methods with "0" percent usage in 2004 included hormonal implants, cervical caps, diaphragms and spermicidal products, AGI reported.
    Other highlights of the report, which was released this week to the HHS Office of Population Affairs:
    • In 2004, there were 4,568 federally funded family planning clinics with total revenues of $982 million. About 63 percent of funding came from the federal government, primarily from the Title X and Medicaid programs.
    • ?The clinics conducted 5.4 million tests for sexually transmitted diseases and 530,569 tests for HIV/AIDS.
    • About 4.8 million users were women and 244,381 were men.
    • Half of clinic users were in their 20s and another 29 percent were in their teens.
    • About 68 percent of users had incomes at or below the poverty level.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

E050708   NEA bolsters gays on policy, practices

By George Archibald
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 8, 2005

LOS ANGELES -- The National Education Association ended its four-day convention here with a big victory for members promoting homosexual advocacy, but debate by conservatives seeking resolutions condemning adult-minor sexual contact and supporting respect for "all living things" was cut off.
    "It was a very obvious attempt to stifle dissent on issues with which they disagree -- biblical issues or issues on the [political] right," said David Kaiser, a retired teacher from Ohio, who was blocked from discussing his proposal to strike language allowing the right to abortion from the union's family-planning policy.
    The 9,000 delegates at the 2.7-million-member union's yearly business meeting also blocked a proposal by Ohio delegate Keith Gudorf to put the NEA on record that its longtime policy of "compassion and respect for all living things" in an animal vivisection section also applied to humans in the family-planning section.
    Also blocked was a proposal by California delegate Diane Lenning, ousted chairwoman of the NEA Republican Educators Caucus, to amend the union's sexual-assault policy to state that "the association deplores the advocacy of adult/minor sexual contact."
    But convention delegates resoundingly referred the conservative delegates' proposed resolution amendments to its national resolutions committee, thus killing discussion and action at the meeting that ended Wednesday.
    The convention handed the large Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Caucus approval of its proposal for the union to "develop a comprehensive strategy to deal with the new and more sophisticated attacks on [school] curricula, policies, and practices that support GLBT students, families, and staff members in public schools."
    The "new business item" offered by the chairman of the homosexual caucus, Connecticut delegate Thomas Nicholas, was predicated on his assertion that "extremist groups are using increasingly sophisticated and aggressive tactics to attack school districts with affirming GLBT policies, curriculum, and practices."
    Mr. Nicholas told the convention that a third of GLBT students drop out of high school because of harassment and that four out of five daily face verbal or physical harassment at school.
    NEA President Reg Weaver stopped debate when booing interrupted Pennsylvania delegate Sissy Jochmann, who said she opposed the proposal because homosexual-affirming programs in schools fail to point out that "some people who have same-sex attraction have changed ... and instead have successfully actualized their heterosexual potential and are now ex-gay."
    Mrs. Jochmann said youths who experience same-sex attraction "have a right to hear the stories of former homosexuals and be exposed to the research that validates them in order to help them make informed personal decisions."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

S050707       Hired help [Note:  MDFVA endorses this approach]
    The Legal Affairs Council is calling on conservative groups to stay home and not spend their money if President Bush appoints "a moderate or judge of questionable commitment" to fill retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's seat on the Supreme Court.
    The right-wing group goes so far as to state that "conservatives are treated like the hired help by most Republican presidential candidates, on the theory that conservatives have nowhere else to go and would not want to see a Democrat like Al Gore elected instead of a Republican president.
    "And why? Mainly because conservatives fear a liberal 'President Al Gore' appointing the next Supreme Court justice. Now is the time when that difference matters," the council states. "Yet, inexplicably, conservatives are being expected to hold their nose and support President Bush's nominee for the Supreme Court, even if the nominee is not a good choice in their view, such as Alberto Gonzales or some politically correct moderate judge."
    White House spokesman Scott McClellan says Mr. Bush spent "a good couple of hours" on his flight to Denmark going over "comprehensive materials on potential nominees," who number a half-dozen or so.
    "He's going to hone in on a handful of potential nominees over the next few weeks," said Mr. McClellan, adding that the president plans to consult with key White House staff and Capitol Hill lawmakers before making a final decision by the beginning of the next court term in October.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

S050707E   Schumer's phone call
    Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat and architect of the filibuster strategy that blocked so many of President Bush's judicial nominees in the Republican's first term, was overheard plotting how to bring down a Supreme Court nominee, Matt Drudge reports at www.drudgereport.com.
    Mr. Schumer, speaking on a cell phone while aboard an Amtrak train from the District to New York, promised a fight no matter who Mr. Bush nominates.
    "It's not about an individual judge. ... It's about how it affects the overall makeup of the court," Mr. Schumer said.
    Mr. Schumer, who is a member of the Judiciary Committee as well as chairman of the campaign wing of Senate Democrats, was caught in a long conversation with an unknown political ally, Mr. Drudge said.
    "We are contemplating how we are going to go to war over this," the senator said.
    Mr. Schumer said it is always difficult to predict how a Supreme Court nominee will turn out.
    "Even William Rehnquist is more moderate than they expected. The only ones that resulted how they predicted were [Antonin] Scalia and [Ruth Bader] Ginsburg. So most of the time they've gotten their picks wrong, and that's what we want to do to them again."
    Mr. Schumer mocked the "Gang of 14" deal to end judicial filibusters except under "extraordinary circumstances" and said it wasn't relevant in the Supreme Court debate.
    "A Priscilla Owen- or Janice Rogers Brown-style appointment may not have been extraordinary to the appellate court but may be extraordinary to the Supreme Court," he said.
    Not long after, at the time the train hit New Jersey, Mr. Schumer called "Gang of 14" member Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican.
    The two talked in a very friendly manner about doing an event sometime this week together.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

S050707   Anxious Gonzales courts the right

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 7, 2005

Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales has been making the rounds of conservative groups in Washington lately, but key leaders remain opposed to putting him on the Supreme Court.
    "If Mr. Gonzales is nominated, I will neither support nor oppose him," said Paul Weyrich, chairman of the conservative Free Congress Foundation. "I can't support him because of my constituency, and I can't oppose him because I can't hurt this presidency. I think it would be an unfortunate choice."
    As speculation swirled in recent weeks about a vacancy on the Supreme Court -- and the potential that Mr. Gonzales might be nominated -- the attorney general has met with numerous conservative organizations that have expressed reservations about him.
    Although several conservatives said privately that Mr. Gonzales appeared to be lobbying for support, no one agreed to say that on the record and several people said flatly that Mr. Gonzales' visits with conservatives are unrelated to the Supreme Court opening.
    "Mr. Gonzales came at our invitation to discuss reauthorization of the Patriot Act," said Todd F. Gaziano of the Heritage Foundation. "He's the attorney general, and we were honored to have him."
    In addition to the Heritage Foundation, Mr. Gonzales appeared recently at a weekly lunch hosted by Mr. Weyrich, a weekly meeting hosted by Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform and other gatherings of conservatives. Mr. Gonzales also appeared on the conservative radio talk show hosted by Laura Ingraham and took a high-profile trip to visit troops in Iraq for the Fourth of July.
    Although Mr. Weyrich said he'd intended to invite Mr. Gonzales to one of his lunches, it was Mr. Gonzales' office that initiated the invitation to his weekly meeting. But, he said, Mr. Gonzales did not appear to be lobbying for anything.
    "He said he felt an enormous sense of gratitude to people in the conservative movement," Mr. Weyrich said. "He said he knows that they -- the president and himself -- would not be there without the conservative movement."
    President Bush again defended Mr. Gonzales to reporters in Copenhagen yesterday.
    "I don't like it when a friend gets criticized," he said. "I'm loyal to my friends. And all of a sudden this fellow, who is a good public servant and a really fine person, is under fire. And so, do I like it? No, I don't like it at all."
    The White House, meanwhile, named former Sen. Fred Thompson, Tennessee Republican, as the "sherpa" who will usher the yet-unnamed nominee through what promises to be a bitter confirmation fight.
    One person who Mr. Gonzales isn't getting any criticism from is Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, who said yesterday that he would support Mr. Gonzales for the Supreme Court.
 "Alberto Gonzales is qualified. He's attorney general of the United States and a former Texas judge," said Mr. Reid, who in February voted against Mr. Gonzales' nomination to be attorney general. "But having said that he's qualified, I don't know if he'd have an easy way through."
    Some conservatives, though, remain adamantly opposed for many reasons.
    The primary concern is a 2000 opinion that he wrote as a Texas Supreme Court justice about an abortion case. In particular, Mr. Gonzales helped overturn a lower court decision that had denied a teenage girl a waiver around the state's parental-notification law.
    "Thus, to construe the Parental Notification Act so narrowly as to eliminate bypasses, or to create hurdles that simply are not to be found in the words of the statute, would be an unconscionable act of judicial activism," said Mr. Gonzales, using language conservatives say was unnecessarily harsh. "As a judge, I hold the rights of parents to protect and guide the education, safety, health, and development of their children as one of the most important rights in our society. But I cannot rewrite the statute to make parental rights absolute, or virtually absolute, particularly when, as here, the Legislature has elected not to do so."
    Conservatives see the vacancy created by the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor as an historic opportunity to reshape the court into one that doesn't read into the Constitution unwritten rights, such as those guaranteeing abortion.
    A key question for any nominee, then, is whether he or she thinks that stare decisis -- legal precedent set by previous Supreme Court cases -- is more important than the strict interpretation of the Constitution.
    J.C. Willke, president of the Life Issues Institute, said he heard Mr. Gonzales speak to a gathering of conservative leaders last year and asked him whether stare decisis would prevail in reconsidering Roe v. Wade, the 1973 court case that established abortion rights.
    "This was a broad cross-section of conservatives," Mr. Willke said. "When he said 'yes,' there was a loud 'oooooooooh' intermingled with some very clear 'boos.' That was as clear as it gets."
 
    James G. Lakely, traveling with the president in Europe, contributed to this report.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

L050707       Santorum's book
    Sen. Rick Santorum, Pennsylvania Republican, compares abortion to slavery in his new book, "It Takes a Family: Conservatism and the Common Good," which is being promoted as an alternative to the views of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, New York Democrat.
    The book describes his evolution from a young politician uncomfortable with abortion to a major player in the pro-life movement, the Associated Press reports.
    It tackles subjects ranging from home schooling to welfare reform and advocates family over what he describes as the big government village in Mrs. Clinton's 1996 book, "It Takes a Village."
    "The African proverb says, 'It takes a village to raise a child,'?" Mr. Santorum writes. "The American version is 'It takes a village to raise a child -- if the village wants that child.'?"
    Mr. Santorum makes the case that abortion puts the liberty rights of the mother before those of her child, just as the rights of slave owners were put before those of slaves.
    "This was tried once before in America," Mr. Santorum writes. "But unlike abortion today, in most states even the slaveholder did not have the unlimited right to kill his slave."
    Mr. Santorum questions why Mrs. Clinton and other liberals tout decreasing abortion numbers if abortion is OK.
    "When you look at the politics she would change, her 'politics of meaning' boil down to little more than feel-good rhetoric masking a radical left agenda," Mr. Santorum said.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

M050707       Court polls
    "In the days and weeks ahead, we are going to see public polls used by the media to gain leverage in the selection of a replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor," David Hill writes in the Hill newspaper.
    "Because media organizations cannot openly campaign for a particular nominee or type of nominee, they will hide behind biased or leading polls to advance their agendas," said Mr. Hill, director of Hill Research Consultants, a Texas-based firm that has polled for Republican candidates and causes since 1988.
    "Before we succumb to these prejudiced conclusions, we should look at a plethora of polls that were taken just before O'Connor's announcement. These pre-vacancy polls may provide more useful insight on the public's real views of the Supreme Court, its justices and their decisions.
    "One of these surveys, released June 20 by the legal Web site FindLaw, makes us wonder whether public opinion should play any role in replacing O'Connor. The national survey of 1,000 adults found that nearly two-thirds of Americans couldn't name a single current U.S. Supreme Court justice. ...
    "Media polls will also press for 'moderation' because they know they can't win the war for outright liberalism. A nationwide Gallup poll of 1,006 adults taken in mid-June, before O'Connor's decision, asked Americans whether they would like to see Bush appoint a new justice who would make the court more liberal or more conservative than it now is or whether they'd keep the court as it is now. A strong plurality of 41 percent chose a justice who'd make the court 'more conservative.' Only 30 percent wanted a more liberal court, and just 24 percent championed the status quo."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050707    PFAW's funders
    "The liberal advocacy group People for the American Way (PFAW), which has sought to kill a number of President Bush's judicial nominations in recent years, is preparing to play a leading role in opposing the president's nominee for a place on the Supreme Court. But what few people know is that PFAW will do its work financed, in part, by several of the country's leading public -- and ostensibly apolitical -- corporations," Byron York reports at National Review Online (www.nationalreview.com).
    "A copy of PFAW's 2003 annual report examined by National Review Online lists dozens of corporations as contributors. The companies include Sony Corporation of America, the New York Times, 20th Century Fox Television (a division of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.), Best Buy Corporation, A&E Television Network, Eastman Kodak, NBC, Home Box Office, Inc., the Hearst Corporation, Comcast Corporation, Blockbuster, Inc., J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Sotheby's, and Conde Nast."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

R050707   Jews condemn church resolution

July 7, 2005

ATLANTA (AP) -- Jewish leaders condemned resolutions passed by the United Church of Christ that call for Israel to dismantle its security fences around Palestinian territories and for companies to use "economic leverage" to promote peace in the Middle East.
    The measures, passed by the UCC's rule-making body at its annual meeting Tuesday, seek to hold Israel to a different moral standard, said Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean for the Simon Wiesenthal Center. He called them "functionally anti-Semitic."
    "The UCC has disqualified itself as a legitimate partner for a just and equitable peace in the Holy Land," Mr. Cooper said.
    Peter Makari, the church's executive director for the Middle East and Europe, defended the General Synod's votes, saying the church remains committed to religious dialogue and participation among Jews, Christians and Muslims.
    "These resolutions condemn all acts of violence on both sides and indicate a clear desire by the synod to end violence and promote peace," Mr. Makari said.
    The synod discarded a previous resolution endorsing divestment against companies involved with Israel in favor of a proposal to use the tools of "economic leverage" -- including divestment -- to promote peace, Mr. Makari said.
    Such efforts would begin with trying to persuade companies to stop profiting from conflicts in the Middle East. If that failed, church officials might sell stock in those companies.
    The second resolution calls for the Israeli government to tear down the security barriers around the Palestinian territories.
    "The wall has devastating effects on the lives and livelihoods of Palestinians," Mr. Makari said. "It prevents the opportunity for interaction for people who desperately want there to be peace."
    David Elcott, the American Jewish Committee's U.S. director of interreligious affairs, criticized the resolution.
    "We understand Christian concerns about a wall, but we believe that saving human lives is more significant than property," he said. "That wall has saved the lives of Jews, Christians and Muslims."
    The votes came a day after the UCC's General Synod voted overwhelmingly to approve a resolution endorsing same-sex "marriage." Some conservative congregations have threatened to leave the church over the vote, which is not binding on individual churches.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

E050707   GOP caucus coup at NEA protested

By George Archibald
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 7, 2005

LOS ANGELES -- Many members of the National Education Association say they will leave the union's Republican Educators Caucus after the caucus takeover by opponents of traditional Republican policies regarding school improvement and choice.
    On Tuesday, Shawna Adam, a California delegate to the NEA convention under way here and newly elected chairwoman of the Republican Educators Caucus, helped lead a union march against California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger as part of the California Teachers Association's campaign to defeat his fiscal and school reform efforts.
    Miss Adam, with help from NEA President Reg Weaver and chief lobbyist Randall Moody, also persuaded the 9,000 convention delegates Monday to commit $171,125 for a beefed-up advocacy campaign against education policies of the Bush administration, Republican governors and state legislatures with whom the union disagrees.
    Miss Adam told delegates, "NEA Republicans [should] take on the GOP agenda to change the anti-public education to pro-public education. NEA Republicans are the obvious choice to change their party from within, help infiltrate the Republican Party with an anti-voucher agenda."
    Judy Bruns, a Republican delegate from Ohio, said she found Miss Adam's speech supporting convention approval of the NEA funding initiative and anti-Schwarzenegger march "very offensive."
    "She was denouncing the conservative viewpoint," said Mrs. Bruns, who is planning to leave the caucus. Opponents of Mr. Schwarzenegger and Mr. Bush "seemed to be pumped up when Shawna got up to say, 'Even Republicans support this,'?" she added.
    Sissy Jochmann, a Pennsylvania delegate and chairwoman of the NEA Conservative Educators Caucus, said many disaffected Republicans are members of her caucus, which has signed up more than a dozen members this week since Miss Adam and others cemented their coup in the Republican caucus that began last July.
    "Now that the new leadership of the Republican Educators Caucus is in place, it is apparent that some of the delegates who attended that caucus, including student delegates, are not finding the Republican caucus representing their views," Mrs. Jochmann said.
    "So they can come to our caucus and find common ground with conservative educators."
    A former Republican caucus member said that more than three-quarters of the members -- 132 of 167 -- have quit the group since Miss Adam took over. The 35 who remained have been joined by 35 new members at the convention.
    In addition, four of the six caucus officers resigned before the convention, saying they were unable to work with Miss Adam.
    At the NEA convention last year, Miss Adam helped organize the coup to oust Diane Lenning as chairwoman of the Republican Educators Caucus.
    Miss Adam, who calls herself a "conservative Republican," confirmed that Mr. Moody, who heads the NEA's mainly pro-Democratic legislative and political lobbying operations, supported and advised her throughout her effort.
    She told Republican caucus members this week that she had a dinner meeting in December with Mr. Weaver, which set the stage for her election Tuesday. The former Republican caucus member said Miss Adam's floor statement in favor of the $171,125 grant was written for her by an NEA staff officer.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050706   Nominee will be named in 'weeks'

By James G. Lakely
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 6, 2005

COPENHAGEN -- President Bush will pick a nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court "in a few weeks," likely pushing his decision well into Congress' August recess when the political heat will be less intense.
    Mr. Bush spent a quarter of his eight-hour flight to Denmark going over information about a half-dozen candidates to take the seat of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who retired last week.
    White House spokesman Scott McClellan would not say who the president has on his shortlist, but he is consulting with high-level staffers and has reached out to members of the Senate, which will have to approve his nominee.
    "He's going to home in on a handful of potential nominees over the next few weeks," Mr. McClellan said. "He's committed to moving forward in a timely manner."
    Mr. McClellan said Mr. Bush was reviewing background information on the judicial decisions of his potential nominees, as well as information on their personal lives -- something the White House must know well to prepare for a Supreme Court fight that is likely to get personal if history is any guide.
    The administration wants to avoid the protracted and ugly fights that President Reagan experienced with conservative jurist Robert Bork, who was rejected by the Senate, and the struggle Mr. Bush's father endured to get Clarence Thomas on the high court.
    "The president will appoint someone that we can all be proud of, and he urges the Senate to work together and elevate the discourse and move forward on a dignified process," Mr. McClellan said
    Mr. McClellan said he would not speculate whether the research Mr. Bush is conducting will be useful if a second opening on the Supreme Court comes soon. Many have speculated that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, who is battling thyroid cancer, might announce his retirement soon.
    Mr. Bush arrived in Copenhagen last night for a 16-hour stay on the eve of the Group of Eight summit in Gleneagles, Scotland, to thank one of his most loyal supporters in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
    Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who has pledged to keep his troops in Iraq through February, will share breakfast and a public appearance with Mr. Bush this morning.
    The president arrives in Scotland today talking of unprecedented commitments of aid to Africa, a subject host Prime Minister Tony Blair has made a main topic of the summit.
    The other is global warming, a normally contentious issue that the White House says it is close to bridging.
    National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley said, "The debate is moving beyond" the Kyoto treaty, which the U.S. never came close to ratifying and has proven unenforceable in the European countries that did.
    "What we're trying to do at this G-8 is not to have either side walk away from their fundamental approach to the climate issue, but to try to define where the common ground is, and use this G-8 as an opportunity to bring unity on an issue that's been a source of division," he said.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

M050706   Media's effect on teen sex not known

By Cheryl Wetzstein
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 6, 2005

There is more sex in the mass media, and teens are logging more hours of exposure, but little is known about how teens react to such sexual imagery, according to an article in the new issue of the Journal of Pediatrics.
    This "gap" in knowledge has major public health implications, wrote study author S. Liliana Escobar-Chaves and her colleagues at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.
    It's well-known that the mass media influence teen attitudes and behaviors on issues such as violence, eating disorders, tobacco and alcohol use, she wrote.
    But despite the growth of sexual content in the media, very little is known about its effect on teens, she said, noting that out of 2,522 studies on youth and the media conducted from 1983 to 2004, 13 examined sexual issues.
    Moreover, Ms. Escobar-Chaves said, the few studies done on teens, sex and the media have focused on TV and movies. Virtually nothing is known about how teens are affected by sexually charged radio commentary, music, magazines, advertising, Internet sites, and video and computer games, she wrote.
    This dearth of knowledge is troubling because "adolescents accept, learn from and may emulate behaviors portrayed in media as normative, attractive and without risk," Dr. Michael Rich, director of the Center on Media and Child Health at Children's Hospital in Boston/Harvard Medical School, said in a commentary in the journal.
    Groups such as the American Academy of Pediatrics have lambasted the entertainment media for "irresponsible" and "unrealistic" portrayals of sexual activity, such as allowing unmarried characters to be promiscuous but never get pregnant or catch a sexual disease, he said.
    "Every parent and health care provider should be very troubled by these findings," said Dr. Gary L. Rose, president and chief executive of the Medical Institute for Sexual Health in Austin, Texas, which assisted with the federally funded study.
    "Our children are saturated in sexual imagery," Dr. Rose said, noting that 83 percent of the programming watched most frequently by teens contains sexual content. "Yet, we have never stopped to ask what effect all this sexual content in television, the Internet and music has on young people."
    More than 800,000 teenagers become pregnant each year, and almost 4 million cases of sexual infections are diagnosed in teens yearly.
    The Impact of the Media on Adolescent Sexual Attitudes and Behaviors study also found that:
    • The average teen spends a third of each day with various forms of mass media, mostly without parental oversight.
    • Forty-two percent of songs on 10 top-selling compact discs in 1999 contained sexual content, 41 percent of which was "very explicit" or "pretty explicit."
    • In 1999, 22 percent of teen-oriented radio segments contained sexual content, 20 percent of which was "pretty explicit" or "very explicit."
    • Children ages 9 to 17 use the Internet four days a week and spend almost two hours online at a time.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

E050706   NEA protests California budget

By George Archibald
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 6, 2005

LOS ANGELES -- Republican educators yesterday joined the president of the National Education Association and union colleagues from across the nation in a protest march on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's downtown office here.
    The march came a day after the liberal-leaning NEA also agreed to give more than $170,000 to its Republican caucus to advance the union's agenda within the Republican Party.
    Three hundred marchers, joined by NEA President Reg Weaver and Barbara E. Kerr, president of the California Teachers Association, demonstrated on a 1?-mile walk between the Los Angeles Convention Center and Mr. Schwarzenegger's local offices on Wilshire Boulevard.
    The protest was against budget cuts and a teacher-tenure ballot initiative endorsed by the governor.
    "Starting with you, Governor Schwarzenegger, you raid our pensions, you raid our budgets. We're here to tell you that dog ain't gonna hunt no more," Mr. Weaver said to cheering delegates in the convention hall before the march began.
    But Margita Thompson, the governor's press secretary, said NEA claims of education budget cuts are false. Mr. Schwarzenegger's current budget will allocate $3 billion more this year for public schools than in 2004, she said.
    In talks with state legislative leaders, the governor is proposing spending more than $10,000 per public-school student, she said, noting that this would be "the highest amount ever spent in California."
    Late Monday, before July Fourth fireworks at Dodger Stadium, the NEA's 9,000 delegates at their yearly business meeting here awarded $171,125 of union money to the NEA Republican Educators Caucus.
    The grant would pay for training, polling, focus groups and other assistance for "a strategic program to help NEA Republican members advance a pro-public education agenda within the Republican Party."
    "NEA Republicans need to take back their party from the extreme right," delegate Scott Ellingson of Wisconsin said as rationale for the political spending for Republican union members.
    "At every level, they need to get active to change the GOP's agenda from anti-public education to pro-public education. NEA educators are the obvious choice to change their party's agenda from within."
    Delegate Marcia Boone of Georgia said she did not favor the NEA's singling out Republicans for the $171,125 training and advocacy award.
    "It's got to be all of us working together. You shouldn't single out one group," Mrs. Boone said.
    Ron Edwards, Pacific region chairman for the Republican caucus and a supporter of Miss Adam, said he agreed with the NEA-supported advocacy funding.
    "It will bring improved communication and members who are willing to pull together for a common goal that will lead to better relations on both sides of the [political] aisle for public education and increase communication between the national Republican Party and the [NEA] Republican caucus," Mr. Edwards said.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

S050706   Bork's analysis
    "Democratic senators' filibusters of the president's previous judicial nominees demonstrate liberals determination to retain the [high] court as their political weapon," former Judge Robert H. Bork writes in the Wall Street Journal.
    "They claim that conservative critics of the court threaten the independence of the judiciary, as though independence is a warrant to abandon the Constitution for personal predilection. The court's critics are not angry without cause; they have been provoked. The court has converted itself from a legal institution to a political one, and has made so many basic and unsettling changes in American government, life and culture that a counterattack was inevitable, and long overdue," Mr. Bork said.
    "If the critics' rhetoric is sometimes overheated, it is less so than that of some Democratic senators and their interest-group allies. The leaders of the Democratic Party in the Senate are making it the party of moral anarchy, and they will fight to keep the court activist and liberal."
    The coming fight
    "We conservatives didn't pick this fight, but we must win it," Mark R. Levin writes at National Review Online (www.nationalreview.com), referring to the opening on the U.S. Supreme Court.
    "It began with the assault on Bob Bork, and too many sat passively while it happened. Meanwhile, President Clinton's activist nominees, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, both sailed through the confirmation process. They weren't smeared. Their video-rental records weren't combed through. Their trash cans weren't searched. Witnesses weren't called to testify with phony stories about pubic hair on Coke cans. But now is the time to put an end to this," said Mr. Levin, president of the Landmark Legal Foundation and author of "Men in Black."
    "Thanks to the Left and its insistence on judicial supremacy, the constitutional, economic, cultural, and political stakes are too high to ignore. No more stealth candidates like David Souter, or compromise candidates like Anthony Kennedy, or [politically correct] candidates like Sandra Day O'Connor in hopes of quieting the Left's opposition. And if the president nominates originalists to this and any other upcoming Court openings, as he assured the public repeatedly he would do, his nominees deserve our complete and active support. And they will have it."
    The coming smear
    "We don't know who President George W. Bush will nominate to succeed Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. But this is certain: Democrats will smear the nominee," syndicated columnist Dennis Prager writes.
    "It will not matter how personally honorable, how intellectually honest, how legally profound this nominee is. Indeed, the greater the individual, the greater the personal attacks will be," Mr. Prager said.
    "Why?
"There are three reasons.
    "First, Democrats believe that conservatives by definition are bad people. As Howard Dean, the head of the Democratic National Committee recently said, 'in contradistinction' to Republicans, Democrats care if children go to bed hungry at night. In most Democrats' minds, conservatives/Republicans do not care if children go to bed hungry, and they are racist, intolerant, regard women as inferior, are stingy and mean spirited, and prefer war to peace.
    "The reason they see conservatives this way is that most people on the Left are certain that they mean well; therefore, their opponents do not mean well. Moreover, liberals tend to assess policy positions on that basis -- are the motives good? -- rather than on the basis of what actually does good. ...
    "A second reason Democrats and others on the Left use smear as a political weapon is to avoid challenging ideas and intellectual argument. Liberals have been able to do so in all the areas they dominate -- academia, news media and unions. Instead, they have learned to rely on personal attacks, such as routinely labeling opponents 'racist,' 'sexist,' 'homophobic' and 'intolerant.'
    "Third, having been unable to persuade the American public to adopt most of its policies, the Left has increasingly relied on the courts to do what the political process will not do. As Democrat William A. Galston, former aide to President Bill Clinton, admitted this past weekend, 'Beginning in the 1950s, the Democratic Party convinced itself that, especially on social issues, the principal vehicle of advance would be the court.'?"
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

O050706       ARIZONA   New sex shops banned in city zone
    PHOENIX -- City Council voted to ban new sexually oriented businesses from downtown.
    Operators of adult businesses argue that downtown is a perfect location for their shops because conventioneers are a major clientele base. Proponents of the ban say such shops clash with the image of a family-friendly destination.
    Only one sexually oriented business operates within the zoning area and can remain open.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

R050706       MAINE   Diocese validates sexual-abuse charges
    PORTLAND -- Maine's Roman Catholic diocese validated child sexual abuse accusations against nine of 21 dead priests, saying they likely would be removed from ministry under today's standards if they were living.
    The announcement came more than a month after the state attorney general released the 21 names in compliance with an order from the Maine Supreme Judicial Court.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

H050705   Scandal-hit mayor avoids public arena

July 5, 2005

SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) -- In the two months since a sex and abuse-of-office scandal broke, Spokane Mayor Jim West rarely has ventured out in public, leaving to others the ceremonial activities usually associated with his office.
    After the Spokesman-Review newspaper raised accusations of past pedophilia and offers of city jobs to young men he met in a homosexual chat room, Mr. West no longer was in demand for the ribbon-cuttings and speeches that normally are part of a mayor's job.
    The city's Web site contains a calendar of the mayor's public events. It was blank last week and for this week, and a new poll shows a majority of Spokane residents want Mr. West to resign, something he says he will not do.
    "It's put the community in a very awkward position, and that is unfortunate," said Mr. West's friend Tony Bonanzino, president of the Spokane Regional Chamber of Commerce. "We have so many functions the mayor should be involved with, and it's becoming very difficult."
    Mr. West, 54, has lowered his public profile since May 5, when the newspaper began publishing its series detailing chat-room and e-mail conversations the mayor had with someone he thought was an 18-year-old male high school student, whom he encouraged to apply for an internship in his office.
    The e-mail recipient was, in fact, an adult with computer expertise hired by the newspaper.
    Although Mr. West has not been charged with a crime, the FBI is in the initial phase of a public-corruption investigation. And a Superior Court judge ruled last month that a recall petition may proceed to the signature-gathering stage, though Mr. West's attorneys are appealing that ruling to the state Supreme Court.
    Mr. West, a conservative former state Senate majority leader who opposed pro-homosexual legislation, resigned from numerous civic boards and commissions after his public "outing."
    In tightly controlled press conferences, Mr. West has acknowledged having relations with adult males and apologized for "mistakes in judgment," but denied pedophilia or abusing his position as mayor.
    His once-warm relationship with the City Council has been strained since its seven members voted unanimously to ask Mr. West to resign, council President Dennis Hession said.
    "A number of people have asked someone to substitute for the mayor, as well as his decision not be engaged in the public arena as he had been," Mr. Hession said.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

L050705E   Leftward drift
    "On June 27, as the Supreme Court ended its term amid rampant speculation about 80-year-old Chief Justice William Rehnquist's future, his 75-year-old colleague Sandra Day O'Connor was continuing to inch away from her 'conservative' past," Stuart Taylor Jr. writes in National Journal.
    "In one of the two Janus-faced decisions on the Ten Commandments, the Reagan-appointed O'Connor positioned herself to the left of Clinton-appointed Justice Stephen Breyer. She voted (in dissent) to order removal of a Ten Commandments monument in Texas that he voted to save.
    "Breyer wrote that court-ordered removal 'would, I fear, lead the law to exhibit a hostility toward religion that has no place in our Establishment Clause traditions.'?"
    "It was unusual to see Breyer associating O'Connor (among others) with hostility toward religion. But it has become increasingly common over the past two decades to see the woman who was once routinely (if misleadingly) labeled a member of the court's conservative bloc siding with its four most liberal members. She has tipped many a 5-4 decision in their direction, including three big ones this year: the other Ten Commandments case; a decision expanding educational institutions' liability for sex discrimination; and one overturning a death sentence because of blunders by the defense lawyer.
    "O'Connor's leftward drift helps account for the supposedly conservative Rehnquist court's surprisingly liberal trend in recent years. So do the similar evolutions of Anthony Kennedy, another Reagan appointee, and John Paul Stevens, a once-moderate Ford appointee who is now the leader of the Court's liberal bloc. Not to mention the emergence of David Souter as a liberal soon after his appointment by the first President Bush."
    The columnist said that for complex reasons, "Republican-appointed justices without ideological anchors tend to become more liberal over time."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050705   Court nominee fight seen 'crowding out' other issues

By Amy Fagan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 5, 2005

With the Senate headed for a heated battle over a Supreme Court nominee, some legislative priorities, such as immigration legislation and Social Security reform, may not make it to the floor this year.
    "It has the potential of crowding out a lot of other things," said Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican.
    The Senate has yet to approve several must-pass spending bills, and once the inevitable Supreme Court fight begins in earnest, efforts to reform immigration, compensate asbestos victims and piece together Social Security legislation all could get pushed into next year, senators said.
    "I think this takes the oxygen out of the air for a lot of other things," said Sen. Sam Brownback, Kansas Republican.
    However, senators were quick to note that several key bills have passed their chamber recently, including the Central American Free Trade Agreement, a long-awaited energy bill and a measure funding the nation's highways.
    Sen. Mel Martinez, Florida Republican, said the Senate has been "double-timing" in recent months, in anticipation of the Supreme Court battle.
    "I think Frist has been assuming this could happen and has been moving accordingly," he said, referring to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican.
    But Mr. Martinez said the asbestos and spending bills could run into trouble as senators focus on the high court. Mr. Brownback said immigration reform may have to be pushed off until next year, and called Social Security reform highly doubtful. He said he already has "real doubts we could get through Social Security this Congress." A Social Security bill would require lengthy Senate floor debate, he said, so "it becomes much more questionable" whether the Senate will get to it in light of the Supreme Court focus.
    But Sen. Robert F. Bennett, Utah Republican, said the Senate already has been "enormously productive" this year and that Mr. Frist and other leaders are prepared to consider various bills and a Supreme Court nominee at the same time.
    "I don't think any of that is going to suffer," Senate Republican Conference Chairman Rick Santorum said of asbestos legislation and the final versions of energy, highway and CAFTA bills being worked on in conference with the House. The Pennsylvania Republican also seemed hopeful that House movement on Social Security reform could still trigger Senate action.
    Meanwhile, House Republican leaders fully expect that Senate Democrats will grind the chamber to a halt while focusing on a Supreme Court nominee.
    "I think we'll see real quickly how they're going to gum it up," said Rep. Jack Kingston, Georgia Republican and vice chairman of the House Republican Conference.
    Mr. Kingston is worried the Senate will not consider Social Security reform and other House priorities, such as eminent-domain legislation and the United Nations reform bill. He also is concerned that numerous House-passed federal spending bills will fall by the wayside in the Senate and be forced into one huge bill at the end of the year -- an "ugly" scenario House leaders want to avoid.
    While Mr. Kingston said he hopes Senate Democrats do not hold up a Supreme Court nominee and cause delays of other bills, he had a warning if they choose that path: "The case, come 2006 [elections], will once again be that the Democrats are the party of obstruction."
 vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

R050705   United Church of Christ endorses gay 'marriage'

July 5, 2005

ATLANTA (AP) -- The United Church of Christ's rule-making body voted overwhelmingly yesterday to approve a resolution endorsing same-sex "marriage," making it the largest Christian denomination to do so.
    The vote is not binding on individual churches, but could cause some congregations to leave the fold.
    About 80 percent of the representatives on the church's 884-member General Synod voted to approve the resolution yesterday, a day after a smaller committee recommended it.
    The Rev. John H. Thomas, president of the United Church of Christ, said the rule-making body "acted courageously to declare freedom," in reference to the vote.
    The resolution calls on member churches of the liberal denomination of 1.3 million to consider wedding policies "that do not discriminate against couples based on gender."
    It also asks churches to consider supporting legislation granting equal marriage rights to homosexual couples and to work against laws banning same-sex "marriage."
    A small group of conservative congregations had proposed an alternative resolution defining marriage as between a man and a woman, and suggested that supporting homosexual "marriage" could lead to the church's collapse.
    The Rev. Brett Becker, who represents a group of the UCC's more conservative churches, said it is possible his congregation at St. Paul United Church of Christ in Cibolo, Texas, will leave the church over the resolution.
    "I would like to see us stay in the denomination and network for positive change," Mr. Becker said. "However, many of my members have expressed very clearly that this decision would cause great consternation and that, if this happened, they would want to see us leave."
    UCC leaders said individual churches have not been polled about their views.
    Formed in 1957 and traditionally strong in New England, the United Church of Christ has a tradition of support for homosexuals. It is distinct from the more conservative Churches of Christ, which has about 2 million members in the United States.
    The UCC was criticized last year for its television advertising campaign featuring a homosexual couple being excluded from a church. Networks rejected the ads.
  In the early 1970s, the UCC became the first major Christian church to ordain an openly homosexual minister. The church declared itself to be "open and affirming" of homosexuals 20 years ago.
    "This is a significant moment," said the Rev. Rebecca Voelkel, of Cleveland, coordinator of a church coalition addressing homosexual issues.
    But Mr. Becker said yesterday's vote was not representative of most church members.
    "If we had put it to a vote of the people in the pews, it would have failed overwhelmingly," he said. "This is truly Independence Day for the UCC -- we have declared ourselves independent from the teachings of Jesus and the clear teachings of Scripture."
    UCC churches are autonomous, meaning the General Synod does not create policy for its more than 5,700 congregations.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

E050705   NEA affiliate rejects freedom proposal

By George Archibald
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 5, 2005

LOS ANGELES -- The college affiliate of the National Education Association yesterday unanimously rejected a proposal to expand its policy on academic and professional freedom to protect "intellectual pluralism and the free exchange of ideas" in the nation's classrooms.
    Randy Jackson, a delegate to the NEA convention now under way, appeared before the National Council for Higher Education (NCHE) summer meeting to defend his proposal, which was attacked roundly as part of a conservative agenda.
    "There are no secret agendas here. Divergency [of views] in the classroom is being stifled. More and more, what we can say in the classroom is being restricted," said Mr. Jackson, a high school English teacher from Kennewick, Wash.
    Teachers have a responsibility "to instruct students how to think, not to indoctrinate," he said. "All this is trying to do is to open this up and to prevent restriction" of the academic freedom of students as well as teachers.
    But Tom Oxter, president of a Florida higher-education group that led the fight before the Florida Legislature against a similar campaign for a student academic bill of rights there, denounced the proposal as "really just the beginning of a witch hunt" by conservatives.
    Mr. Oxter said, "What we need to do is have a clear-cut victory here" against such proposals, which are being pushed throughout the country by David Horowitz, head of the Center for the Study of Popular Culture.
    Ron Weatherford, the NEA's liaison to the higher-education council, invited Mr. Jackson to defend his proposal at the NCHE meeting.
    However, Mr. Weatherford is marshaling opposition to proposals that the NEA commit itself to recommending that teachers act "to ensure the academic freedom of students."
    Mr. Jackson has introduced his proposal for floor consideration by all 9,000 delegates to the NEA's convention here. The vote tomorrow is expected to be overwhelmingly negative.
    The resolution states: "In order to guarantee that democratic principles are conveyed to the next generation, academic freedom in the classroom should be included in teachers' instructional guidelines. It is important that teachers welcome intellectual pluralism and the free exchange of ideas by providing an unprejudiced learning environment."
    The resolution also states: "The association does not condone the indoctrination of students through intimidation, unfair grading practices, withholding of information, or by any other means."
    A delegate from Massachusetts said she saw Mr. Jackson's proposal as "a wedge" that would open the door for "students telling us what we can teach."
    Another delegate said he preferred a resolution with an expletive directed at Mr. Horowitz.
    Lawrence Sand, an eighth-grade history teacher at Webster Middle School in the Los Angeles school district, said he helped write the proposal and could not understand the vehement opposition at the meeting.
    "I don't understand what everyone is so afraid of," he said. "This is to ensure that students are not indoctrinated or browbeaten."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050704   Tar and feather
    What if a TV anchorman were to announce: "The president nominated George Washington for the Supreme Court to fill the vacancy left by Sandra Day O'Connor. Democrats immediately attacked Washington for his environmental record of chopping down cherry trees."
    Don't laugh, says Progress for America, a national grass-roots organization dedicated to supporting a conservative issue agenda.
    "Some Democrats will attack any Supreme Court nominee," insists the group, calling past attacks of judicial nominees a "smear" and "dishonest."
    In preparation for pending attacks on President Bush's nominee to replace Justice O'Connor, who announced Friday that she is retiring, the group is distributing "Tar & Feather Inc.: A Liberal 10-Step Plan for Judicial Character Assassination."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

O050704   MoveOn.org backs 'mainstream' Democrats

By Donald Lambro
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 4, 2005

MoveOn.org, the leftist, anti-war Internet group that spent millions of dollars last year trying to elect liberals and posted a clip likening President Bush to a Nazi, is raising money for two Democratic Senate candidates who call themselves mainstream moderates.
     The group, which has been running TV ads against the war in Iraq, is soliciting money on its political action committee's (PAC) Web site for the 2006 campaigns of Sen. Bill Nelson, Florida Democrat, and Robert Casey Jr., Pennsylvania's state treasurer.
     Mr. Nelson is seeking re-election, and Mr. Casey is running as a pro-life Democrat against Republican Sen. Rick Santorum.
     The MoveOn PAC's fundraising solicitations, authorized by both men, praise Mr. Nelson as "a solid progressive earns strong ratings from environmental groups labor unions," and says that Pennsylvania MoveOn members "overwhelmingly" support Mr. Casey.
     "If there was any doubt that Casey Jr. is aligned with the ultra-liberal left, he put it to rest," said Dan Ronayne, spokesman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. "When you are dependent on the efforts of groups like MoveOn, it is difficult to then disassociate yourself from their agenda with any credibility."
     Mr. Nelson, who was elected in 2000 with 51 percent of the vote, is considered one of the most vulnerable Democrats in next year's congressional elections. A large field of Republicans, led by Rep. Katherine Harris, is vying for the nomination against Mr. Nelson in a conservative state that Mr. Bush easily carried last year.
     Mrs. Harris' campaign advisers think the MoveOn fund-raising efforts will raise questions in the minds of many voters about Mr. Nelson's claims to be a conservative Democrat. The senator earned a 76.7 percent liberal rating in the National Journal's vote index.
     "It's hard to be what you've never been," said Adam Goodman, a Harris campaign spokesman.
     Mr. Casey, who announced his candidacy earlier this year, has been running what Republicans are calling a "stealth" campaign in which he says little about his positions on the issues, makes few appearances and lets surrogates speak for him.
     But Republican Party strategists now think the association with MoveOn, which called for "moderation and restraint in responding to the recent terrorist attacks against the United States," could undermine that strategy.
     "Casey is saying one thing in Pennsylvania and another thing in Washington and selling his soul to one of the most extreme liberal groups in all of America that is out of touch with mainstream voters," said John Brabender, a campaign strategist for Mr. Santorum.
     "What's happening is that Bob Casey is saying he wants the liberals' money and I believe he is winking at them, saying that he is going to be with him in the end," Mr. Brabender said. "But he can't say that in Pennsylvania."
     Some Democratic strategists were defensive about the MoveOn fundraising for their candidates in interviews last week, saying that taking the group's money did not mean that they agree with MoveOn's political views.
     "A politician can accept support from individuals and organizations but not necessarily agree with the givers' agenda, and that's the case here," said Ron Sachs, a spokesman for Florida Democratic Party Chairman Karen Thurman.
     "I don't know if Nelson embraces MoveOn or if he agrees with them. It's one thing to receive their support, but it does not denote that Nelson shares their agenda," he said.
     Republicans have been waging an e-mail campaign that has bombarded both states with information about MoveOn's support for Mr. Nelson and Mr. Casey.
     "We've sent out letters, updates and reports consistently in the last several months," said NRSC spokesman Brian Nick.
     But Phil Singer, spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, dismisses the attacks as "a smoke screen to cover up the fact that they are pursuing an agenda to cut Social Security benefits and services for our veterans."
 
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

O050704   Review criticizes agency on AIDS

July 4, 2005

ASSOCIATED PRESS
    The government's AIDS research agency "is a troubled organization" and its managers have engaged in unnecessary feuding, sexually explicit language and other inappropriate conduct that hampers the global fight against the disease, an internal review found.
    The review for the office of the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) director, obtained by the Associated Press, substantiates many of the concerns that whistleblower Jonathan Fishbein raised about the agency's AIDS research division and its senior managers.
    The division suffers from "turf battles and rivalries between physicians and Ph.D. scientists" and the situation has been "rife for too long," the report concluded.
    Nonetheless, the NIH formally fired Mr. Fishbein on Friday, over the objections of several members of Congress.
    The top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee are protesting, saying the firing was an example of whistleblower punishment.
    "Retaliation against an employee for reporting misconduct or voicing concerns is unacceptable, illegal and violates the Whistleblower Protection Act," Sens. Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Republican, and Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, wrote the NIH late last week.
    "Moreover, it would have a chilling effect on other NIH employees who might make truthful but critical comments about the NIH," the senators said.
    Citing personnel privacy, NIH officials declined to address the senators' letter or Mr. Fishbein's termination, except to say that his last day was Friday. NIH officials previously said they were terminating Mr. Fishbein for poor performance.
    Mr. Fishbein, an accomplished private-sector safety specialist, was hired by the NIH in 2003 to improve the safety of its AIDS research.
    In a series of recent stories, the AP has reported:
    • One NIH AIDS study in Africa violated federal safety regulations.
    • Senior NIH managers engaged in sexually explicit pranks and sent expletive-laced e-mails to subordinates.
    • NIH-funded researchers have used foster children to test AIDS drugs since the late 1980s.
    An internal report, written Aug. 9 by a special adviser to NIH chief Elias A. Zerhouni but never made public, raised concerns that the NIH's efforts to fire Mr. Fishbein at the very least gave the "appearance of reprisal."
    The report says documentation never was given to Mr. Fishbein suggesting poor performance until after he complained about the safety in one sensitive AIDS study and filed a formal complaint accusing the division's deputy director of acting unprofessionally with subordinates.
    The report said that after formally complaining about conduct of the deputy director, Mr. Jonathan Kagan, Mr. Fishbein inexplicably was forced to begin reporting to Mr. Kagan, who then went ahead with efforts to fire Mr. Fishbein.
    The report said Mr. Kagan and the division's director, Mr. Edmund Tramont, acknowledged that Mr. Kagan "uses sexually explicit and colorful language, saying that no one ever complained until" Mr. Fishbein did.
    The report broadly condemns the NIH's Division of AIDS.
    "It is clear that DAIDS is a troubled organization," the report concluded, saying the Fishbein case "is clearly a sketch of a deeper issue."
    "To have the senior management ... behave in this manner, spend incredible amounts of time feuding, and writing numerous long e-mails while seemingly unaware of the need for appropriate behavior decorum and enforcement of good management practices and the rules of supervision and concerns about appearance of reprisal clearly indicate a serious problem," according to the report.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050704       Bush's opportunity
    "On Oct. 23, 1987 -- a day that lives in conservative infamy -- Robert Bork's nomination to the Supreme Court was rejected by a Democratic Senate. Now, 18 years later, George W. Bush has the chance to reverse this defeat, and to begin to fulfill what has always been one of the core themes of modern American conservatism: the relinking of constitutional law and constitutional jurisprudence to the Constitution," Weekly Standard editor William Kristol writes at www.weeklystandard.com.
    "The restoration of constitutional government has been the one area in which modern conservatism has had the least success. From Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush, conservative economic policies have been (more or less) pursued, and, when pursued, have been vindicated. From Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush, conservative foreign policies based on American strength and American principles have been -- when pursued -- remarkably successful. One might even say that, in both economics and foreign policy, the degree of conservative success has been far greater than anyone would have imagined in 1980," Mr. Kristol said.
    "But in the area of constitutionalism, conservative goals have been thwarted, and the key moment of failure, from which conservative constitutionalism has never recovered, was the Bork defeat in 1987. For the last 18 years, constitutional jurisprudence has continued to drift away from a sound constitutionalism based on the written Constitution and a proper deference to popular self-government in many areas of public life. Bork's defeat was both a cause and a symbol of this continued downward drift. Now, with one of the two swing votes on the Supreme Court stepping down, George W. Bush has a chance to begin to make constitutional history, as he is certainly attempting to do in foreign policy and, to a lesser degree, in economic policy.
    "There are two pieces of good news to keep in mind as President Bush ponders his choice. The first is that, by contrast with the situation in 1987, the Senate has a Republican majority. The second is that President Bush can choose from among many, many well-qualified conservative constitutionalists," he said
    "Although President Bush is understandably fond of and loyal to his attorney general,  Alberto Gonzales, it's simply a fact that Gonzales does not have the stature of several other possible candidates. I now believe that, though tempted, President Bush will leave his attorney general in his current office."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050704   Momentous battle
    "The warm-up act was going to be the resignation of William H. Rehnquist, the chief justice. All of the interest groups were going to mobilize for a fight that didn't matter in hopes of getting ready for the one that did.
    "Then, Friday morning, Sandra Day O'Connor resigned and changed everything," Pittsburgh Post-Gazette executive editor David M. Shribman writes.
    "There will be no preliminaries. The cultural wars are about to break out into the open. The summer of reflection and relaxation is about to become a season of recrimination," Mr. Shribman said.
    The columnist added: "The O'Connor resignation is no longer the fire next time. Forget the 2006 midterm congressional election. Forget the 2008 presidential election. This is the most important political fight of our time."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050704   Politics shadow Supreme hopefuls

By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 4, 2005

Senate Democrats said yesterday that they will demand to know the political views of any nominee President Bush names to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
    "I think the number one thing that I am interested in are the nominee's views," Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat and Senate Judiciary Committee member, said yesterday on ABC's "This Week."
    Such questions will ensure acrimonious confirmation hearings and conservatives have long argued that such questions -- political "litmus tests," they call them -- are improper and undermine the independence of the federal judiciary.
    Democrats also warned Mr. Bush to pick a "consensus" or a "moderate conservative" nominee -- a far cry from Mr. Bush's re-election campaign pledge to name a conservative to the high court similar to sitting Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
    Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts Democrat, defended his 1987 decision to attack then-federal Judge Robert H. Bork based on his political views, including the famous "Robert Bork's America" speech on the Senate floor. And he said he would do the same thing if Mr. Bush sends an similarly conservative nominee to replace Justice O'Connor.
    "When the president sent Robert Bork to the Senate Judiciary Committee for nomination ... it was very clear that he was selected primarily because of his judicial philosophy," Mr. Kennedy said on ABC. "They made it, really, an issue there, and it became the issue before the Judiciary Committee and the country."
    "Again, this is up to the president," he said. "If he wants to pick a judge, we want to be able to support him, but if he wants to have a fight about it, then that's going to be the case."
    The notion of picking apart a nominee to the federal bench based on his personal opinions about political matters is out of bounds, conservatives say.
    "It's asking them to basically run on a political platform," Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, responded to Mr. Schumer yesterday.
    Mr. Cornyn said it's fine to ask a nominee to opine on a settled case, but asking about the merits of such issues as abortion or affirmative action is akin to requiring nominees to "make promises to politicians about how they're going to vote should a case come before them."
    Mr. Schumer said "the courts have been the protectors of individual rights since the Republic was founded" and it would be wrong "to put someone on the bench when you know nothing about their views on civil rights, on women's rights, on environmental rights and on everything else."
    Another Judiciary Committee Democrat said his colleagues will filibuster a nominee they deem unacceptable.
   Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, a former panel chairman, said on CBS' "Face the Nation" that while he personally has "no intention of filibustering anybody," that the nomination of someone like Judge Janice Rogers Brown "would be a very, very, very difficult fight, and she probably would be filibustered."
    Judge Brown, a former California state Supreme Court justice who now sits on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, was recently confirmed after being filibustered for nearly two years.
    Her confirmation last month was part of a deal struck in May that ended several filibusters. In exchange for Democrats' dropping the filibusters, several Republicans agreed not to support the so-called "nuclear option" to ban such judicial filibusters.
    But Republicans who signed onto the deal have said that if Democrats abuse the judicial filibuster by using it in cases other than "extraordinary circumstances," then they will support the nuclear option.
    Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican and Judiciary Committee member, said on "Fox News Sunday" that merely nominating Judge Brown or any ideologically conservative nominee -- would not constitute the "extraordinary circumstances" under which the deal allows a filibuster.
    "To me, it would have to be a character problem, an ethics problem, some allegation about their qualifications of the person," said Mr. Graham, one of the signers of the deal. "Not an ideological bent, given what we've done in the past."
    Added Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell of Kentucky: "I think there is every expectation, every reason to believe that there will be no successful filibuster. You know, virtually any reasonable nominee."
    "All options are still on the table, obviously, but we don't think a filibuster can be sustained," he said on Fox.
    As far as consultation is concerned, Mr. Bush appears to be off on the right foot, according to Sen. Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.
    "I've advised the president," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I won't go into the details of the private conversation, but parts of things I've said publicly before: Get somebody who will unite the country, not divide the country."
    But on CNN yesterday, Judge Bork said that the president should not aim for political compromise.
    "If Bush does that, he will, I think, have neglected his duty," he said. "His duty is to find somebody who will make a fine judge, not someone who is a compromise candidate with Teddy Kennedy."
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

SC050704   Gonzales avoids topic of Supreme Court post

July 4, 2005

From combined dispatches
    Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales deflected questions about his interest in serving on the Supreme Court and said yesterday that criticism about his conservative credentials did not bother him.
    "Many of the people speaking probably don't have all the information about prospective nominees. What's important is what the president of the United States thinks about me," Mr. Gonzales told reporters while flying to the Middle East.
    "That's evident by the position he has asked me to fill," said Mr. Gonzales, who made a surprise one-day visit to Iraq to see U.S. troops, as well as to meet Justice Department and Iraqi officials helping build a war-crimes case against ousted dictator Saddam Hussein.
    Mr. Gonzales, 49, will help screen nominees even though he widely is thought to be under consideration by President Bush to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
    During the trip, Mr. Gonzales was asked by reporters whether he was flattered to be considered a potential nominee.
    "I just look at the job that I do as attorney general. I'm happy in that job," he said.
    If nominated and confirmed, the longtime Bush confidant would be the high court's first Hispanic justice.
    For more than two years, conservatives have been warning the White House not to nominate Mr. Gonzales to the Supreme Court because they are not sure where he stands on many issues.
    There is an often-repeated joke that circulates among conservatives who still feel burned that Justice David H. Souter -- nominated by Mr. Bush's father -- turned out so liberal.
    "What's Spanish for David Souter?" they ask. "Alberto Gonzales."
    But Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Republican and chairman of the Judiciary Committee, warned on ABC's "This Week" that "social conservatives ought [not] to prejudge," especially because neither Mr. Gonzales nor anybody else can be more than the object of speculation for now.
    "I think the conservatives are entitled to express themselves, but I think they ought to have some respect for the president," Mr. Specter said on NBC's "Meet the Press."
    "Attorney General Gonzales is a very well-qualified man, and I don't think he really deserves to be criticized. But people ought to stand back. There's time enough to criticize after the president has made a move," said Mr. Specter, who often has clashed with social conservatives on judicial nominations.
    • Washington Times reporter Charles Hurt contributed to this report.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

E050704   NEA conservatives seek family-planning change

By George Archibald
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
July 4, 2005

LOS ANGELES -- Conservative delegates at the National Education Association convention have asked the about 9,000 delegates to amend the union's policy on family planning to say school staff should "encourage compassion and respect for all living things," mimicking language found in the group's policy on classroom use of animals.
    The change to the NEA's 407-page policy manual overwhelmingly was rejected without discussion Saturday by the union's resolutions committee, but supporters said they would bring the issue before the full convention t