Making the email rounds...

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

Subject: Request for Clarification on God's Law

Dear President Bush,

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from you and understand why you would propose and support a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage. As you said, "in the eyes of God marriage is based between a man a woman." I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination... End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them.

1.) Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

2.) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3.) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness - Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

4.) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

5.) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?

6.) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

7.) Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here?

8.) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

9.) I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

10.) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev. 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Damn those Indian astrologers.

I mean, I trusted them. Sheesh.

All I can say to you Bush voters is that it's all your fault. You couldn't see the issues clearly, you let him get away with lying and cheating, and you're letting him spill precious American blood for the control of oil prices. I will hold you all personally accountable.

And what's with this "moral values" crap? The name itself is an Orwellian term describing Puritanism, (but that fooled you, too, like "Clear Skies" and "Healthy Forests") and I'm sick of you who think that your moral values are superior to mine, or that my life should be in any way subjugated to your interpretation of xtian scripture.

Regardless of what comes of the recount in Ohio or of any well-deserved recount in Florida, you Bushies need to understand that the margin of victory was within the margin of error in our patchwork of election systems. Mr. Bush does not have a mandate, just like he did not have a mandate in 2000. Democrats need to stand firm: no retreat, baby, no surrender. Even if the filibuster is the only way to block legislation, Democrats should use it to block Bush's extremist agenda. Meanwhile, I'll be working with the DCCC and the DSCC to defeat the rightwing goosesteppers where ever we can get them in 2006.

No regrets. No apologies. No surrender.

Cautious Optimism.

The other day, Mom told me that Dubya would be reelected. She said it so matter-of-factly, with that unique Mom Credibility, that the back of my neck went prickly.

Fortunately, I found reason for optimism. First of all, there's the incumbent 50-percent rule. When the incumbent polls at lower than 50%, his percentage of support is like a ceiling, while the challenger's percentage of support is like a floor, and likely to go up. Bush is running less than 50% nationwide and in all the swing states. So, if the candidates are fluctuating around 47-48%, who gets the remaining 5% or so? Usually the challenger does. In other words, if you're not with Bush by now, you're against him.

I think that Kerry's support is underestimated. There's the cell phone voter, who doesn't get to participate in political polls but who might just go for Kerry; lots and lots of newly registered voters who aren't represented in the political polls (last I heard, Democrats had a strong lead in new voter registration) and the youth vote, which strongly favors Kerry.

But if we can believe the polls, more reason for optimism comes from Donkey Rising's interpretation of the final Gallup poll before election day. And the electoral vote predictor sees Kerry beating Bush in the Electoral College, 298 to 231.

Lastly, other experts have weighed in to call the election for Kerry. I know that some people are hanging their hats on the Redskins loss to the Packers, but I think that one is cancelled out by the Weekly Reader.

As I said, I'm cautiously optimistic. Mom, I promise not to gloat in your presence.