Virginia Gov. Mark Warner has a following at a web site call Draft Mark Warner. I’ll post the link on this page, not that I endorse him for president. The web site states, “The moderate wing of the Democratic Party must fight for a ‘New Generation of Leadership.’ This is crucial to winning future elections. This past election was our call to action to bring the Democratic Party back to the center.”

If the Democratic Party was to go back toward the center it would be moving left, in my opinion. Still, I’ll give the man his due. It’s just way to early for me to back anyone in particular.

You think it’s OK to teach religion in public schools even if the kids are allowed to opt-out? Read this lady’s memories.

The Washington Post is certain to boil the red blood of Bush supporters with what appears to be a concerted effort to highlight the disingenuousness of the Bush budget plan. A series of articles and postings in the last two days go for the jugular.

Yesterday’s Outlook section had a commentary that suggested that the Bush administration is “Enronizing” the budget, although its first comparison is to the Boeing deal where the Air Force wanted to lease planes from the aircraft maker rather than buy them, despite the higher costs. Why? To reduce cost in the annual budget.

The president and Congress continue resorting to ever more smoke and mirrors to veil the truth about the costs and burdens that will be placed on American taxpayers. Moreover, they’re using precisely the sorts of gimmicks and tricks that we wouldn’t tolerate in the private sector.

The Boeing deal was eerily reminiscent of corporate deals using the same kinds of long-term leases for exactly the same reasons. I still carry images in my mind of that imposing Enron headquarters building in Houston that we saw on the nightly news as the Enron scandal unfolded about four years ago. Guess what? Enron acquired that building by creating a special entity solely for the purpose of purchasing the building and then leasing it back to the company. Its reasons were the same as the Air Force’s in the Boeing deal — to avoid recording the full cost of the building up front, effectively keeping the purchase “off the books.”

You’d think the embarrassment of the Boeing deal, and the lessons of Enron et al., might have compelled the administration to cease and desist from the use of such accounting tricks. But in this new budget, they’re everywhere.

Then today, an A1 story carried the headline “After Bush Leaves Office, His Budget’s Costs Balloon.”

Congress and the White House have become adept at passing legislation with hidden long-term price tags, but those huge costs began coming into view in Bush’s latest spending plan. Even if Bush succeeds in slashing the deficit in half in four years, as he has pledged, his major policy prescriptions would leave his successor with massive financial commitments that begin rising dramatically the year he relinquishes the White House, according to an analysis of new budget figures.

Bush’s extensive tax cuts, the new Medicare prescription drug benefit and, if it passes, his plan to redesign Social Security all balloon in cost several years from now. His plan to partially privatize Social Security, for instance, would cost a total of $79.5 billion in the last two budgets that Bush will propose as president and an additional $675 billion in the five years that follow. New Medicare figures likewise show the cost almost twice as high as originally estimated, largely because it mushrooms long after the Bush presidency.

Finally, Terry Neal in his Talking Points online column writes

The one-year budget deficit will be so large in the next fiscal year that if the government stopped funding everything except defense, homeland security and entitlement programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, the nation would still be $75 billion in the red.

Put another way, if the government decided this year to eliminate every education, school lunch, public health, housing assistance, space exploration, medical research, environmental protection, highways, national parks and veterans program, it would still run a deficit in 2005.

That’s because domestic discretionary programs that aren’t associated with defense or homeland security make up only about 20 percent of the federal budget. President Bush proposes spending about $352 billion for those domestic programs this year. The estimated budget deficit is $427 billion. The difference: $75 billion.

For all of the White House crowing about holding down spending, it is clear the government is not going to be able to cut its way out of this deficit — not without making drastic cuts that would completely redefine the role of the federal government.

Oh my, how Scott McClellan must be boiling!

A couple of stories review the moral agenda that is rapidly being approved by at least the House of Delegates. Some of those who are supporting these measures would give any progressive pause.

Democratic Whip Brian Moran (Alexandria) and Kris Amundson (D-Fairfax) voted for the internationally ridiculed “droopy drawers” bill, while conservatives Dave Albo (R-Fairfax), Vince Callahan (R-Fairfax)and Brad Marrs (D-Richmond) had the good sense to vote against it.

Dels. Chap Petersen and Steve Shannon, both Fairfax Democrats, voted for both the constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, and the abortion anesthesia bill while Republican Jim Dillard of Fairfax voted against them.

The contradiction of “small government” Republicans pushing their morals on the rest of us is being noticed by more and more folks.

“Never have we had the kind of avalanche we’ve had this year. Never,” said Larry J. Sabato of the University of Virginia, who said he has received calls from journalists in Canada, Austria and Mexico. “It really has garnered an awful lot of attention for Virginia, and not the positive kind.”

The largely conservative General Assembly poses a political paradox.

“When it comes to, say, guns, Virginia completely respects guns. When it comes to other subjects, individual liberty is not on the table,” Sabato said. “There’s a philosophical contradiction here if anybody thinks about consistency or lack of it in this session.”

Of course, the issues are irresistible to politicians. And they get play because of the media.

“While it may take up 5 percent of our time, it’s very alluring to the people in the media, I believe, so therefore it probably gets more attention than it occupies here,” said state Sen. Stephen D. Newman, R-Lynchburg.

The right makes no bones about future agendas.

“The right-to-life people are making inroads,” declared Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Prince William, who sponsored several abortion-related bills this year. “After they establish one beachhead, they march further on.”

Some think the likes of Marshall are just plain mean.

“The forces of reaction are arrayed against us,” said the Rev. Robin Gorsline, pastor of the Metropolitan Community Church of Richmond, which serves the gay and lesbian community. “They’re scared. They’re really scared that we’re now being viewed as citizens of society. They’re scared, and it’s making them mean.”

Some of these bills are sure to be ruled unconstitutional, according to Aimee Perron Siebert, the ACLU’s legislative director.

Citing the school prayer measure as one example, she said the bill would change the state constitution to allow religious expression in public places – including prayer in schools – despite more than 50 years of Supreme Court rulings that establish the practice as a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s separation of church and state.

“The U.S. Constitution trumps Virginia’s constitution,” Siebert said.

Similarly, a conservative-backed bill that would prohibit gay and lesbian clubs in high schools also is firmly established by a Supreme Court ruling that allows Bible clubs to be held on school grounds, Siebert said. “If you allow one, you have to allow them all. It’s that simple. They know that. It’s not our imagination. We are in their cross hairs. Personal religious views are infiltrating every nook and cranny of the General Assembly.”

…A break on state taxes for corporations that give money to scholarship funds for private schools, which is aimed at getting more students from poor families into private schools. Cobb said it is a foot in the door for future efforts to expand the use of tax dollars to support private schools. Critics said it might violate a clause in the state constitution prohibiting public money being spent on private schools.

Other conservative efforts this session include a ban on state money being spent on stem cell research and an attempt to cut all state funds to Planned Parenthood, even if that money is not used for abortion counseling.

These bills, in one form or another, add up to an attempt by the right to use government to legislate morals. That’s the message that needs to be emphasized because it is a contradiction of the stated Republican desire for smaller government.

Read Margaret Edds column.

I have sometimes wondered how unthinkable actions against minorities take root in civilized societies. Now I think I know. It happens cumulatively. Drip, drip, drip. Nice people sit by and say nothing while the bar on the rhetoric and the discrimination inches higher and higher.

I‘ve written before about how the right uses language to soften the impact of policies that are destructive to the middle class or that obfuscate the discrimination their policies promote. The Virginian Pilot has commentedon this issue, with evidence that now the right thinks “love” is a dirty word.

Though it may be no surprise to our critics, we must say we were surprised to find that a few things we consider virtues were part of an effort to brainwash America.

If only we’d known.

According to some people with an expanding fixation on other people’s sexuality, words like “tolerance” and “diversity” are nothing more than nefarious code.

…”‘Love’ is one of the Trojan horses for the acceptance of homosexuality,” said Focus on the Family’s Melissa Fryrear, who describes herself as a “former” lesbian. She made her comment in an e-mail to the Baptist Press. “The problem, though, is their definition of ‘love’ is carefully camouflaged to mean more than Cupid ever meant it to mean. Their definition is meant to mean the acceptance and the celebration of homosexuality.”

While I understand the sincere religious opposition to homosexuality and abortion, it is the fervor with which such opposition is pursued and the apparent lack of any compassion with which the arguments are made that give me pause and which make me suspect that for many of the most vocal opponents, religion is a smokescreen for hate.

It’s not just Democrats, progressives or churches who actively cater to homosexuals that need to speak up. We need mainstream churches to condemn the extremists and redefine tolerance and love, although it baffles me that we need to redefine it in the first place. In fact, tolerance is generally not tolerated tolerance in the right’s world view, which calls for strict morality.

In Strict Morality, the Strict Father is the Moral Authority, determining right from wrong, and protecting the family from a world that is chaotic and threatening. Evil is a major force in the world that must be fought using Moral Strength, which has the highest moral priority. Evil is both external and internal. Internal evil is fought with self-discipline and self-denial to achieve “self-control.” “Weakness,” and the tolerance of it, is immoral since it implies being unable to stand up to evil. Punishment is required to balance the moral books: If you do wrong, you must suffer a negative consequence.

Farmers might be thinking George W. Bush lied to them. Imagine that. They must all be wacko Dems.

Heat packers aren’t satisfied with bringing guns into rec centers and restaurants. They’ve sued to be allowed to bring them into the state Capitol, perhaps to silence their critics there. Read all about this group here and see who supports them. The site conveniently lets you see how delegates and senators voted on the bills this group supports or opposes.

Audrey Jess, a student at Stonebridge High School in Loudoun County, Va., who wrote the play “Offsides” addresses the Loudoun school board after her play depicting a boy struggling with his sexuality was condemed by people offended by the play.

While some students understand what free speech is all about, others, apparently, are mystified.

A number of stories recently have focused on gays in schools. What should be taught? And who should do the teaching? What role should students play (literally, in one case)? What are facts and what’s theology, or worse, bigotry?

The Washington Times steps back and looks at some of the larger issues, as the role of sex education in schools is debated by two of Washington’s suburban counties, Fairfax, Va. and Montgomery, Md. I usually read the Times with a jaundice eye, my radar on for biased reporting. I’m infrequently surprised. But today’s story raises at least one question I’d like answered. What’s so bad about inviting “ex-gays” to speak to students about sexuality? My guess is gay activists, who are apparently invited into classrooms, would argue that there is no such thing as an “ex-gay.” Acknowledging them may be perceived as buying into the contentious notion that sexual identity is a choice. But if someone, whether he or she by nature is a heterosexual, for a long time has had only homosexual relationships, might not the students benefit from hearing that perspective. I trust students enough to smell a heterosexual in “ex-gay” clothing. All it is is another perspective. Let students weigh it, question it, and embrace or discard it as irrelevant to their own sexual examination.

Even “data about the overall health of gay men,” which, if I’m thinking of what homophobes see as “data,” is bogus, why can’t the schools present the information as well as evidence that the data is indeed, untruthful propaganda?

Sometimes the best offense is to allow the opposition to throw its best punches. When they miss their mark, their agenda hits the mat.

That may have been the case in the fight over a student written play in Loudoun County. Many politicians couldn’t resist making an issue out of two male students faking a kiss and a line in the play directed to the audience: “Am I a little too much like you for your own comfort? Do you hate me because you see a little of me hiding in you?”

School Board member Joseph Guzman (Sugarland Run) offered the strongest denunciation of the play. He began by offering homage to the idea of “tolerance,” calling it a “worthy idea,” but he said the play showcased “sexual behavior that is designed to provoke.”

“There is absolutely no place for this in our schools,” he said. “I am disappointed that this was allowed to occur in our district … Imposing immorality seems to be encouraged.”

He added that this “kind of thing” caused many parents to pull their children from public school and place them in private or home school situations.

At-Large School Board member Tom Reed called homosexuality a “perversion,” but he conceded that other controversial works have been a part of the school curriculum for generations. He cited such works as the Greek play Oedipus Rex, which deals with incest and Shakespeare, whose plays cover a variety of controversial topics. Reed conceded that Person would not want certain books of the Bible to be portrayed on stage.

“Love the sinner, hate the sin,” Reed concluded. “I support diversity, but it does not mean encouraging, or even tolerating, perversity.”

Tolerance is a dirty word to many of the radical right. And if they are granted the right to determine what is perversity, then many heterosexuals are in trouble. Maybe the school will soon be teaching what causes hair to grow on the palms of your hands.

Again, though, it may be best if you let the radical right speak out, as Del. Dick Black (R-Sterling) [Disclosure] did in an email he sent out when he learned of — but did not see — the play.

“We started getting a flood of calls from people who were very distraught about what had taken place at the school play,” said Black. “The taxpayers pay for our schools and the taxpayers do not want homoerotic sex acts to take place on the stages of our school plays.”

In a press release, Black mocked the assertion in January’s SBHS newsletter promoting Postcards as a “show you won’t want to miss.”

“Needless to say, I was upset to find out that the show our children were not supposed to miss was one where two male students engaged in a homosexual kiss onstage and then addressed the audience saying, ‘You can’t tell me that there isn’t a little bit of me in every one of you,’” stated a press release from Black’s office.

“The idea that our public school system is being used to promote a homosexual lifestyle is disturbing,” Black said. “When Christ’s name is banned in schools, and bricks with crosses on them are removed from Potomac Falls High School until a lawsuit forces them to be put back, it makes me feel that a double standard is being placed against people of faith. We are continuously lectured on the idea that we need to keep God out of the classroom. Am I now to believe that the reason we need to keep God out is so that homosexual teachings can have free reign?” Black’s release added.

… “This was an attempt at shock value, and by addressing the audience in this manner, it crosses the line of discussion into advocacy. Parents were not only offended at the shock value of this kiss, but also for the fact that it was implied that everyone in the audience was secretly hiding homosexual feelings,” Staton wrote. “What also disturbs me is that this play was obviously approved by the faculty at Stone Bridge, which makes me question what other kinds of practices are being condoned in our public schools.”

The email promoted a response from the school board chairman, according to Loudoun Today.

The school board chairman saved his strongest criticism for Del. Dick Black (R-32), without mentioning him by name but reading from the e-mail Black sent that helped to fuel the controversy with its mass mailing to constituents telling them to voice their opposition of the play at Tuesday’s school board meeting. Andrews was blindsided further by an “action alert” about the play that originated from the church he attends regularly.

[Chairman John] Andrews said he came back from a four-day vacation to find 56 e mails and 20 voice mails on his phone at work because Black’s e-mail listed Andrews’ work number. Andrews also noted he is one of Black’s largest financial backers.

When one of your big money men are turning against you, you may have overstepped. Again, let them throw their best punches, perhaps, as in many a cartoon, a roundhouse that misses its target and lands on your own cheek.

A Fairfax County school board member, who last month criticized Fairfax schools because he wanted students to hear “the other side” was forced to issue an apology and suffer a rebuke from the School Board.

Dialogue is not going to change the minds of bigots and religious zealots that think only they have the right interpretations of the bible. Even groups, like student gay-straight alliances, which are formed to help each learn to tolerate one another, are under attack in the Virginia House (HB 2868; the language is vague enough that the bill passed unanimously, so maybe it’s no harm, no foul).

But there are many mainstream conservatives and moderate liberals who are uneasy about homosexuality. They will tolerate gays and expect them to be accorded basic freedoms and protection from discrimination. But what is promoting a lifestyle versus learning the facts?

Marriage is another issue for them. Can we truly be tolerant and protective if we deny gays the right to commit in public their life-long commitment to each other, which after all is what marriage is all about? It’s not an easy answer for some, be they Republicans or Democrats. More dialogue is fine. Somehow I don’t think the Dick Blacks of the world want that.

Conservatives have often appealed to moderate Democrats to speak out on issues. I challenge moderate conservatives to do the same on same-sex marriage.