Will someone please get up and ask -- or post an ad in small-city papers (my favorite tactic for getting our voice actually heard by other than ourselves) how we would have felt if Ayman Al-Zawahiri were to have made comments about our election -- or to have backed protestors against the Bush side in 2000?

It's redundant, yes, but while Iranians like Americans in general, they fear our government. Some of this is the same sort of 'endtimes nonsense' that is as common in Islam as it is in Christian Fundementalism, but there are 50 years of reasons why they feel justifdied. Mossadeqh, supporting the Shah, supporting Saddam, and the saber rattling from the Republicans in the last election.

In fact, comparing McCain's "Bomb Iran" to some of al-Qaeda's threats against the US is not out of line if you can see it from an Iranian perspective.

I'm visiting my parents in Wichita, Kansas this weekend. They just came home from church and said that Dr. George Tiller, a member of their congregation, was shot in the head and killed. Dr. Tiller performs abortions here in Wichita, and has for many years. He was shot in both arms in 1993 during the so-called "Summer of Mercy" protests but has continued his practice in spite of being kicked out of his former church. He then joined Reformation, my parents' church, who refused to kick him out despite protestors showing up every Sunday and screaming at them through bullhorns. The protestors got ahold of the church roll and have sent ugly postcards and letters to members of the congregation, including my parents.
Dr. Tiller was an usher today, and was going to get a cup of coffee in the lobby when a man came out of the sanctuary and shot him. At least one other usher witnessed it, but was afraid to tackle the man because he was afraid he might get shot as well. The man made it out of the church and into his car. He drove off, but another usher got his license plate number.

Later in the thread she reported the following:

I don't recall exactly what year the Tillers (George, Jeanne, and their three daughters and son) were evicted from Holy Cross church (also Lutheran, but Missouri Synod) and joined Reformation (ELCA)....I'm thinking maybe 2001, but that's just a guess. I do remember the people at Reformation having meetings about it, and specifically deciding that they were determined to make the Tillers welcome in their congregation despite the protests. One year we showed up for Christmas Eve service and the protestors were outside in the snow, standing in front of their van which was covered with photos purporting to be of aborted fetuses, and shouting through bullhorns at the people filing into church that we were "stepping on the blood of Jesus." One older lady walking in front of me turned her head at this and shouted back at them to either join us for worship in the warm sanctuary or go home and have some soup, as they'd catch their deaths out there in the cold.

My mother's position is that she doesn't think Dr. Tiller is a sinner, but if he is a sinner then church is precisely where he needs to be. Or at least, needed to be.

Everyone seems to be talking today about how bad this is for Wichita, and what a tragedy it is specifically that it happened in a church. Someone asked me if the people at Reformation would blame Dr. Tiller for being the occasion of violence within their church, even though he was not the cause. I replied that I thought not, and since then have received word that they are holding a vigil tonight in Dr. Tiller's honor, which confirms to me that they are only proud to have known him and to have been his church family.

I had always assumed that the early 90's were the worst of it, and things would just peter down, and peter down, and the protestors would lose interest, and for the most part that has happened.....but it only takes one nut to cause something like this. Most likely it was because Dr. Tiller has been in the news lately after being accused of violating "a state law that only allows late-term abortions if two independent physicians agree the procedure is necessary to save a woman's life or prevent 'substantial and irreversible' harm to 'a major bodily function.'"-- and aquitted.

and

I returned just a while ago from the vigil held for George Tiller in Old Town (a section of downtown Wichita). At least 400 people showed up, young and old, male and female, all different races and probably sexual orientations. It was a very peaceful crowd, giving the 50 or so police officers gathered very little to do. Apparently Fred Phelps and Co. were there before I showed up (it's not a long drive from Topeka), but they were shooed off. Since they were protesting on a public street, I'm not sure exactly how that happened and will have to find out.

My parents attended the vigil at Reformation Church, and to their surprise the Tiller family attended-- Jeanne and the four children, as well as the grandchildren. The bishop came down from Kansas City and gave a sermon, and they prayed and sang hymns. The Tiller family left first on their own and were given a police escort home, and then everyone else filed out.

The usher I mentioned before who witnessed the shooting was one of the ones Roeder threatened with his gun before going to his car, and there was another usher he threatened at the same time (I probably should not mention their names). He will probably be charged with two counts of aggravated assault for that in addition to first degree murder.

The boy was being bullied and taunted every day. He was being called 'gay' (or, probably, 'fag'). The parents reported it. The school did nothing -- and, btw, he was also black. If he'd been called 'nigger' -- unlikely in a predominantly minority school -- does anyone doubt that an assembly would have been called stopping it and telling the students in no uncertain terms this was intolerable?

But somehow, in a post as inaccurate as your spelling of HarlEm, you overlooked one minor thing -- the corpse of an 11 year old boy, and the noose he made to produce it.

No, if they are legitimately served with a warrant, they have to obey, and should.

On the other hand, the judge who issued the warrant is very much to be criticized, and might be subject to prosecution or impeachment if he were shown to be acting on behalf of the pastor.

Oh, and a hat tip to Ed Brayton and his invaluable DISPATCHES FROM THE CULTURE WARS for posting on this. (If more of you read Ed's blog, I'd be able to take it easier.)

As for your story, felt sorry for you. (As a non-driver, can't really appreciate what it must have been like for you, but glad it wasn't me.) But it could have been that the cop was busy on something more important, or maybe he's just an ass. (All of us probably have both 'cool cops' and 'rotten cops' stories -- one reason I regretted the number of people (on another blog, mostly) who expanded the Phoenix blogger story to a condemnation of all cops.)

What we should be working for, federally, are two goals, repealing DOMA -- very likely and soon -- and the more complicated one of extending the 'full faith and credence' provision in the Constitution explicitly to the area of marriage.

(I am aware that this would have been controversial at one time, with a wild, crazy-quilt of laws in various states. There's the classic case of the writer, Craig Rice, whose marital history was so complex that in several states she was considered to have been divorced more times than she was married. But laws have become much more uniform over time, and -- while hoping someone corrects me if I'm wrong -- I believe that the only thing that would be controversial about such a law would be the question of same-sex marriage.)

Those are the first steps needed, and I think Obama is right to leave the question to the states with those provisos. Why bring it into the national arena where it can only be a distraction.

So, along with most liberal commentators, and most libertarians from Ridley Balko to Ed Brayton -- and to marvelously unclassifiable ones like Andrew Sullivan -- we now have the premier funder of the anti-Clinton movement joining with the beloved (to Conservatives) founder of the NATIONAL REVIEW, the best-known conservative economist, Milton Friedman, and the sainted Barry Goldwater on the right.

Is there anyone out there defending the current system? I'd really like to challenge someone like that, and not someone like Mark. (I could live with Mark's plan -- though I doubt if it would last for more than a few months -- and Mark has, in some posts, admitted he is resigned to legalization. He just doesn't expect it to happen for years.)

"But it is a luxury to be able not to mind. I do not work in state government. I do not have an abusive ex-husband from whom I am hiding. My reasons for remaining anonymous are, as I said, pretty trivial. I have no idea whether the same can be said for AKMuckraker's. Nor, more importantly, does Mike Doogan. Did he stop to wonder whether she might have an abusive ex-husband, or a stalker? Or whether she has gotten threats because of her blog? (I have, and I'm Little Miss Reasonable.)
(Emphasis mine)

The fact is that bloggers have gotten death threats for opposing Palin, that she has a history of attacking opponents, and that some of her supporters seem to be close to the edge -- on which side I wopn't say -- of violence.

Or there are personal reasons. (Now none of these apply -- as far as I know -- to AKM -- but, again, Mike Doogan didn't know if they did or not.

She could have an abusive ex-husband. She could have been taking advantage of Alaska's reputation for 'giving people a chance to start over' after youthful indiscretions. She could be supported by in-laws who don't approve of her political opinions, or wouldn't, if they knew them. She could have been a state employee, or have relatives who were, or who had business contacts with the state. She could have had a business she didn't want to put at risk. She could live next door to a meth-head Palin supporter who is a relative of a police official who protects him.

Or she could just want to be left alone and not be asked about every political question when she was wearing her 'mundane hat.'

Whatever, there is enough evidence that he violated state statutes -- and not just a vague 'right to anonymity' which might not fly in an Alaskaqn Court -- that AKM should hope he starts writing better and more successful books to pay the judgment she should be able to win.

But he was an elected State Representative and outed her in a letter to his constituents -- and that makes it an entirely different matter.