By all appearances, it seems as if the same forces that paid for and sponsored the endless investigations of the Clintons (and their friends) investigated the Washington Press Corp first. Considering where they live and how easy it is to presume that power and prestige can bring you invulnerability and invisibility (that no one would dare do such a thing to you), I suspect these investigators found enough outrageously embarrassing information that it was easy as pie thereafter to manipulate the press by threatening to expose anyone who didn't follow the specific commands delivered by anonymous couriers. (Nice little job you've got there. It'd be too bad if someone revealed the truth about what you do in secret 'cause then everyone would think you don't deserve such a position of responsibility.)

Thus, the Washington Press Corp attempted to tear the Clintons apart, kissed the Bush regime's backside as deeply and as often as needed, are having a love affair with Mr. McCain (whose endless gaffes and mis-speaks are reverently ignored) which will continue if he's elected. Meanwhile, they will continue to seek to tear down Senator Obama with trivia, guilt by association, and by repeating every paranoid little email smear that's circulating without actually refuting them, an approach which will only be amplified if he's elected.

If we see a President Obama, the press corp which has been as docile as goldfish in the press room through the outrageously dishonest and criminal behavior of BuschCo will be commanded to (and will comply with those commands) turn themselves into a school of Piranha.

The only exception is Helen Thomas. Evidently they couldn't find anything on her. Perhaps someone should hire her to wheedle the truth out of the rest of the denizens of the Washington Press corp. Or, lacking that, perhaps a president Obama, with the new powers congress is about to grant the president could discover how the reporter's commands are being communicated, what the source of those commands is, and expose the whole slimy, stinking mess that is our currently completely pwned Washington Press Corp.

What kind of cheese would go best with all this wine - ing. Geeze!

Let's look at a bit of history here... In the late 1800's, scientists, using the crude tools provided by the physical observations of Sir Isaac Newton, decided that the "supernatural" miracles of the Bible were all physically impossible. At the time, it looked as if science might sweep away Christianity as nothing but irrelevant myth and ancient superstition.

As a reaction to that crude science, a group of theologians based at Princeton Seminary proposed the idea of "Biblical Inerrancy" - that the Bible was written directly by God using the human authors as mere instruments through which God put God's thoughts and commands on paper. Together with proclaiming God the absolute author of every word of the Bible, they then added the idea that the Bible, having God as its author, was truer than science. This was a giant leap away from Judeo/Christian tradition. Never before in the five thousand year history of the Bible were it's words regarded this way.

In doing as they did, what they really swept away was five thousand years of tradition in which God's people discussed and argued over what the Scriptures meant and thus kept their faith relevant to their own days and times. This proclamation of absolute truth involved, of course, a tremendous over reaching, but they were trying to save Christianity from being swept into the dustbin of history.

Then times changed. Science became more sophisticated. Physicists working at the forefront of Quantum Mechanics and Subatomic Particle Physics observe things every day that look miraculous from the perspective of Newtonian Physics. Only the most desperately old fashioned scientists would now say that miracles are impossible (and yes, there are a few who do). Among the theologians who ignored Biblical Inerrancy and decided to wait to see where science went, the fear from which Biblical Inerrancy was born has long since vanished.

The old traditions of studying and searching the Scriptures for meaning and thus keeping faith relevant to the lives we live is the stronger tradition and lives on. From this perspective, science and faith complement each other since they search for answers to different questions using different methods.

People such as Schlafley et al, who cling to the idea of the Bible as absolute truth are only doing so because it enables them to proclaim that their own ideas are based on the Bible and therefore, beyond question, and that locks them into the world view of the late 1800's (evidently they're more comfortable back there).

No doubt the Princeton professors who tried to save the faith are spinning in their graves each time a person or web site like "Conservapedia" uses their ideas to make faith seem dangerously outdated and irrelevant in our own day and time. Meanwhile, as reality rears its ugly head more and more, the folks like Schlafley gradually and ever more rapidly render themselves irrelevant and threaten to do the same with the entire Christian faith (at least in the eyes of those who begin with their conservative perspective but have to deal with having life strip off their blinders).

Because of course the wonderful people who read the American Family Association web site will now all be totally convinced that Tyson Gay is, indeed, homosexual and that the rewording of the article to reflect the man's actual name was the result of pressure from nefarious groups like the ACLU to avoid sullying the good name of the American Olympic Committee (Greg Louganis, notwithstanding). Of course even with a lawsuit, Tyson will now, in the conservative blogosphere and with those having the paranoid conservative mindset, be not only "Gay," but also homosexual (of course with a last name like that, they knew it all along).