OK. Melanie Scarborough may have a point.

As the only state other than New Jersey that will elect a governor this year, Virginia is being watched by the nation’s politicians and pundits as a testing ground for Democrats’ latest strategy: courting Republican voters by embracing religion while assuring Democrats that such convictions don’t matter. This is a peculiar position, as the gubernatorial candidacy of Lt. Gov. Tim Kaine (D) demonstrates.

For instance, Kaine says that his Catholic faith leads him to oppose both abortion and the death penalty but that he would not, as governor, try to thwart either practice. Why not?

Kaine’s opposition to the death penalty dates from his days as a law student. What sort of person spends his adult life campaigning against the death penalty, but — if given the power to commute death sentences — would decline to use it?

Either Kaine’s beliefs are not strongly held, or he is being disingenuous.

She goes on to criticize Gov. Mark Warner for saying he wouldn’t raise taxes during the 2001 campaign, but then she returns to Kaine.

Will the real Tim Kaine please stand up?

The gubernatorial candidate seems to want to appease both camps on social issues as well. When running for lieutenant governor, his campaign literature heralded him as pro-choice. Now Kaine says he is antiabortion — but would not interfere with abortion rights.

During the 2001 campaign Kaine supported “civil benefits” for gay couples; now he says he doesn’t favor civil unions or gay marriage. Does that distinction have a difference?

A professional acquaintance I hardly know shared some of her political views this morning. She’s definitely a Democrat, but Kaine’s waffling sent her into apoplexy. I suspect she’s not alone.

What emerged from several dozen conversations was a deep pessimism about the coming campaign. Most said they have little faith that any of the politicians running for the state’s top job will deal seriously with the issues they care about. They said they crave candor, straight talk and honesty but are not expecting to get it.

“I’m sick and tired of the mudslinging,” said Ginger Branton, director of Tazewell’s Chamber of Commerce. “I want to hear what’s important to me, not made-up stuff on other people.”

Many of the those interviewed expressed skepticism about proposals by both major-party candidates to rein in homeowner taxes. “If there’s a proposal to decrease taxes, the question is: ‘And then what?’ ” said Norris, a board member of the Kingstowne homeowner association near Springfield. ” ‘I’m going to decrease taxes here, but I’m going to raise them over here.’ “

These opinions “emerged” from one of The Washington Post’s talking tours, where they talk to a few folks around the state and try to divine a mood of the electorate but wind up tripping over themselves.

Bill Kelehar has heard the radio ads for weeks now. Democrat Timothy M. Kaine and Republican Jerry W. Kilgore — each proclaiming throughout southern Virginia to be religious men, guided by the Christian faith. He’s tired of it already.

A plant manager at a South Boston flag manufacturer, Kelehar is a religious man, a born-again Baptist. But he grimaces over the radio spots.

“All they are after is the Southern Baptist, religious, God-fearing vote,” he said. “They don’t think we have enough sense down here to know anything about roads or taxes and about any of that stuff.”

But wait!

And [Crystal Brown of Suffolk] said the candidates for governor would be wise to talk more about their commitment to religion and faith.

“You can be governor and you can do whatever, but a lot of times you have to step back and say, a lot of things are not possible without your Lord and savior,” Brown said. “You have got to have some kind of strength. You have got to have it from somewhere. You are not just going to get it from your title.”

If this round-up piece is at all accurate, I think the best you can say about the two gubernatorial candidates is that they’re running scared — scared of being called anti-faith, a hillbilly, a tax and spender, a liberal, and, it seems, a leader. Scarborough, of course, confines her criticisms to Kaine.

He served honorably both as city council member and lieutenant governor. But those roles drew on his talent for collegiality; a governor has to lead. And before deciding whether they trust him to do that, Virginians need to know exactly where Kaine stands:

Is he a tax-cutting, antiabortion, gun-rights conservative or is that campaign posturing?

Kilgore is no more a leader.

The referendum and transportation regional authorities are ideas born by man afraid of his own shadow.Hilary Goodman lives near Springfield’s Mixing Bowl interchange, which Virginia is rebuilding at a cost of $700 million. He drives to work at the U.S. Department of Justice in the District. And he is quick to point out that, despite the increases in real estate taxes he has endured recently, his top issue is traffic.

“Tell the gentlemen down in Richmond who are running for governor, don’t come and talk to us about capping assessments,” Goodman said. “Come and tell us what you are going to do about transportation.”

Kilgore has proposed the creation of local regional authorities that could hold voter referendums to raise taxes for roads. Kaine has said he supports the idea. But Goodman calls that just another “cop-out” by politicians looking for easy votes.

“It’s like saying, ‘We’re passing it to you to take care of the problem because we’re not doing it for you,’ ” Goodman said.

Kaine will be in Virginia Beach tomorrow, and Fredericksburg and Manassas on Wednesday. See if you can pin him down on some of these issues.

I’m not sure where Kilgore will be; his web site doesn’t list upcoming events unless they cost you to attend. Maybe he’s following President Bush’s idea of limiting who can come hear him to those guaranteed not to rock the boat.

If this keeps up, Russ Potts just might have a shot at winning — by default.

One of the best [blogs] is Commonwealth Commonsense, which is found at commonwealthcommonsense.typepad.com.

A Democrat from Northern Virginia, Bob Grindling, runs that blog, which last week contained some intelligent commentary about Kilgore’s accent.

“The flap over how Jerry Kilgore talks and what he says is penetrating the mainstream media after flying around the blogosphere for several weeks,” Grindling noted.

Other recent posts include his thoughts and those of others about whether America is a “Christian nation,” about the Kilgore campaign’s strategy of branding Kaine with the liberal label and the ever-present dish on Chapman.

Since Bob Gibson of the Charlottesville Daily Progress got the URL right, I’m willing to forgive the misspelling of my name. After all, I’ve been called worse.

Define racism. One could certainly make the argument that the cable networks that continually focus on these missing white women, to the virtual exclusion of minority women, are practicing a form of racism. The racism in this case, however, while predicated on color, does not concern itself with the color of one’s skin. Rather, it is based on the color of money, ratings points and competition. Would an African-American woman who went missing days before her wedding receive the same (or any) coverage as that of Wilbanks? Not likely.

More on missing white girls here.

The final of today’s moral trifecta is the case of the Kansas board of education. Basically, proponents of intelligent design say an almighty force (not necessarily God, they say) explains how we got here and not evolution. They want ID to be taught in the schools along with evolution. I guess you could do that by saying “some folks say we got here by Christian magic” and then move on to evolution. I mean, what else do you say after saying God did it?

Of course, I always thought God designed evolution. Evolution itself is a miracle to me, so I can’t see why evolution is a threat to Christianity. But The Washington Post gives ID a hard uppercut.

NEARLY FIVE YEARS into the 21st century, the Kansas State Board of Education has begun an earnest discussion of whether schools in that state should teach science that was obsolete by the end of the 19th century. The board is holding hearings into proposed changes to its model science standards, changes intended to cast doubt on conventional evolutionary biology and inject into classrooms the notion of “intelligent design” — the idea that the complexity of life can be explained only by some conscious creator’s having designed it.

Intelligent design is not your parents’ creationism. It’s a slick set of talking points that are not based on biblical inerrancy but framed, rather, in the language of science: molecular biology, the structure of DNA and holes in the fossil record. Moreover, the ostensible justification for the changes is a seductive one. Proponents say they mean merely to ensure that schoolchildren are given a full sense of the scientific controversy over evolution so that they can make up their own minds. Who can object to that?

But there is no serious scientific controversy over whether Darwinian evolution takes place. Intelligent design is not science. Whatever its rhetoric, the public questioning of evolution is fundamentally religious, not scientific, in nature.

Groups protesting the Kansas curriculum, sex education and the separation of church and state form the nexus of American Taliban movement. Say that, of course, and someone will accuse you of being against people of Christian faith. No, people of strong faith are those who understand that faith is a private matter, and they practice it by setting an example. There are many good people of faith who are legitimately upset by our moral waywardness. But most of them are toiling away in the vineyards. The American Taliban, on the other hand, is using those people and their beliefs to sell an agenda that is reminiscent of the McCarthy era. They want to squash dissent and impose their moral relativism. (Life is sacred but capital punishment is cool, for example.)

Again, we find the battleground to be the classroom. I welcome that, if for no other reason than it will engage kids to get involved in the issues of the day. If curriculum changes the Taliban wants in sex-ed or science class is accompanied by a freewheeling discussion in the classroom, then maybe it’s worth it. Progressives shouldn’t be afraid of “former gays” or ID proponents. But I suspect that a discussion of the issues is not what the Taliban want. We need to force it.

While regressives cast aside church members who don’t agree with their voting habits (see post below), just across the river from Virginia, the American Taliban attacked a sex education program and succeeded in killing it — at least for this year.

As The Washington Post noted in an editorial, there is at least one valid objection.

School officials need to remove some of the inappropriate “teacher resource” material accompanying the curriculum, particularly documents that praise some religious denom inations and criticize others; it’s no wonder some parents were upset about that. Though students don’t see this material, it shouldn’t have been deemed acceptable as the basis for teachers to plan lessons, and it shouldn’t have taken a court case for [School Superintendent] Mr. Weast to learn of it.

I absolutely agree that mentioning certain denominations is exactly what we don’t want schools to engage in. If we don’t want regressives to bring religion into the schools, then why would progressive educators do the same?

Still, this is an issue that I hope progressive Montgomery parents rally around, though I happen to favor at least allowing an appropriate opportunity for “reformed gays” to present their case. I’m willing to be corrected on this, but maybe because I would love to hear their arguments, I think high school students should, too.

I have three teenagers of my own and dozens more who pass through our doors on a regular basis. They’re not all liberals — in fact, they sometimes seem too apolitical — but on the issue of sex, they strike me a more knowledgeable and sophisticated than I was at their age. Where they stand on homosexuality, however, is another issue.

While I wouldn’t be surprised to find them more tolerant of gays than their parents, a recent school event gave me pause. It was the annual Mr. Woodson contest where about a dozen guys compete for the title by producing skits and answering a question, modeled after Miss America. A few of the skits this year made reference to gays that were not necessarily malicious but were gratuitous. One featured a straight guy being turned off by a homosexual proposition that had nothing to do with the theme of the skit. Another featured an effeminate music video director.

At the same time, my son, who did a stand-up comedy routine, was told he couldn’t use a joke that referred to sperm because it was “inappropriate.” He was to make light of a trainer’s instructions to keep a cold pack on his pulled groin by saying that it was proven that sperm couldn’t survive at that temperature. But making fun of gays was apparently appropriate.

Homosexuality wasn’t the only objections raised by a couple of groups in Montgomery County. They apparently didn’t want instruction on how to use a condom or a curriculum that acknowledged abstinence as only one way to avoid diseases and pregnancy.

Schools may be the arena where progressives can rally the troops. Parents who might be turned off by the American Taliban’s agenda can simply ignore it. But just like the regressives, they want to protect their kids from zealots who seek to indoctrinate the little tykes.

Vote Kerry? Get kicked out of church.

That’s the latest from the American Taliban movement. The pastor of a Waynesville, N.C. church led the effort to expel nine members for voting for John Kerry. Forty others in the 400-member church “resigned in protest.”

“This is very disturbing,” said Pastor Robert Prince III, who leads the congregation at the nearby First Baptist Church. “I’ve been a pastor for more than 25 years, and I have never seen church members voted out for something like this.”

…”It’s just an outrage for something like this to happen in America,” said Heidi Jenkins, 52, as she held a garage sale at her home down the street from the church.

Prince said he noticed during the presidential campaign that more pastors made endorsements _ although not from the pulpit _ than in past years.

“It used to be that pastors would speak about the issues and not specific candidates,” he said. “I think that line is being crossed.”

This doesn’t just happen in rural North Carolina towns. It’s happening, perhaps not so blatantly, in Loudoun County, Va., where, according to one parishioner, the pastor for Our Lady of Good Hope openly encourages the congregation to vote for Va. Del. Dick Black. You might think that he’s just promoting one of his own. Well, in the last election when Black ran against Patty Morrissey, the pastor actually preached against her — and she too is a member of the church.

Unfortunately, members of the church are reluctant to protest as did the members of the Waynesville, N.C. church, afraid, according to one member, of being ostracized by the pastor.

After reading about Pastor Chandler, one can appreciate their apprehension.

The remaining members [after those voted out left a meeting] decided that if another church wrote for the letters of those who left, East Waynesville would reply saying they had left in bad standing. Members also discussed changing the church bylaws to state that all members had to sign a statement saying they supported the pastor’s political views, [church member Bill] Rash said.

Sounds like a blacklist to me. No reports whether the church voted to stone to death women — but not men — who commit adultery.

The pastor is now trying to backtrack. A church meeting will be held tomorrow, perhoaps to discuss the issue.

What role Christianity should play in American governments is the provocative question of the day. It’s a question NPR is addressing in a series, the first part of which aired this morning with the second part this afternoon on “All Things Considered.”

The report cites the claims of many, I think with much justification, that this movement is prompted by a “longing for a culturally simpler time.” Many of us who are not religious or conservative worry about the tenor of public debate and the coarseness of our culture, but what concerns me more is what appears to be an American Taliban movement to make religion the basis for our government. How is longing for Christianity to be the guiding light of our public institutions any different from what the Taliban want?

The report goes on to discuss why some feel religion deserves a greater role, though opponents call the intellectual basis for this to be based on a “secret history” of the U.S. The Declaration and Constitution make no mention of Christianity, and on the report’s web page you’ll find quotes from historical figures supporting or debunking the claim that religion, let alone Christianity, is central to our form of government. What’s fascinating is that the quotes on both sides of the issues are often from the same people.

As some in the report suggests, the real reason many are pushing for a greater role of Christianity in government is religion is fear that Protestants are “slipping into the minority.”

The fastest growing religion in America may be Islam. That scares the hell out of Christians. It also explains why the radical right is attempting to emulate the Taliban while many of its leaders most loudly condemn the religion.

The Christian Bible is the oft-cited source of many regressive’s beliefs. You can see it here in the comments section of some posts. The Bible was used to justify slavery by its leading proponents such as Congressman James Jackson of Georgia in the 1790s.

So nothing is really new, except maybe the “secret history” that we are now being coerced to learn.

That tried and true tactic of vapid conservatives everywhere is to call your opponent a liberal, as if that says it all. That says he or she has no values, cares little about working Americans and is a coward. Or I can only surmise. But Jerry Kilgore, under attack for avoiding debates with Kaine, prefers to stand to the side and call Kaine a liberal. Well, OK, the Neanderthals who couldn’t understand an argument if it hit them on the back of their red necks, might say, “That’s all I need to know.” But you’d think Kilgore would have something to point to as proof.

It seems all he has is Kaine’s support for tax increases last year and his work on two cases referred to him by that anti-American, commie-pinko, radical ACLU. Never mind that most Virginians supported the tax increase, meaning, I guess, that most Virginians are liberal. And how is it that a group that seeks “to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States,” and who also seeks to “conserve America’s original civic values – the Constitution and the Bill of Rights” is liberal? Do liberals “conserve America’s original civic values”?

Kaine need only remind voters of the popularity of the tax hikes and of what preserving our rights mean in a post-9-11 Patriot Act world. And he might tell them of what the cases were that earned him this epithet. Kaine’s spokesman Delacey Skinner did that, but not before taking the bait.

“They like to say that Tim Kaine is an ACLU lawyer. But the truth is that Tim was never a member of the ACLU and has never worked for the ACLU,” Skinner said.

“The closest contact that he has had with the ACLU was his work on two cases that were referred to him by the ACLU. One of those was a housing-discrimination case in which the people that he was representing had been discriminated against on the basis of their race. Regardless of your political beliefs, it is hard to criticize Tim for offering his services on a case of that nature,” Skinner said.

The apology for the ACLU — in the form of a distancing statement — adds credibility to the charge. Why not defend this organization that regressives don’t like until their rights are trampled?

Steve Chapman, who is challenging Harry Parrish for the Republican nomination for the Manassas seat in the House of Delegates, said he expects to be charged today for filing false residency information. He says he’s lived in three places over the past six months, one of which is not in the district. He took the Washington Post reporter to one of the residences.

At the Manassas condominium on Richmond Avenue, Chapman said, “Welcome to ‘Pimp My Ride,’ ” as he opened the door — referring to an MTV show where skilled mechanics transform dilapidated vehicles into luxury cars.

The cluttered, one-story condominium was filled with dirty furniture. The walls were not painted. The kitchen had no refrigerator and a broken stove. The bathroom, he said, was “under renovation.”

In a bedroom, two old mattresses were stacked on top of each other and had no sheets. “It’s luxurious,” Chapman said sarcastically. “I have an ergonomic pillow so I get a good night’s sleep.”

A good conscious is reportedly also a way to get a good night’s sleep. If this is his legitimate residence, I say he’s unqualified because he’s a slob.

I think it’s a fair question as to why he has had three residences over the past six months. Does he still have the Woodbridge home that’s not in the district but in which he has lived for the last eight years? If he does, then believing this clap trap is his legitimate home is hard to swallow.

UPDATE: Democracy for Va. has more.

Know the numbers. (Thanks to Talking Points Memo.)