“Metro columnist” Wendi C. Thomas has returned to Memphis, where she has settled back into her old, comfortable job at the Commercial Appeal after an aborted move to Baltimore. For the most part, this is a welcome arrangement, though it certainly speaks volumes about the city’s self-respect; apparently we don’t mind when people consider working here as settling for second-best.

But Thomas does her job well, if indeed her job is to stir controversy and get people talking. Maybe that’s what sells papers, I don’t know. She’s also somewhat of an equal-opportunity critic, sparing neither Democrats nor Republicans, taking on hip-hop culture and the country club set alike, hitting on all the hot button issues of race, sex, religion, money, etc.

Today she finds another target on the “religious right,” though she has to employ some creative manuevers to get all her punches in. The column ["Y, can't 2 lesbians join as a family?"] is about a local YMCA’s decision not to offer a “family membership” to a lesbian couple with a child.

She quotes YMCA attorney Jim Stock as saying, “[w]e’re standing for what the organization believes the family should be. The term Christian is in its name, so the Christian principles are applicable.”

I braced myself for the next line that usually follows this Religious Right rhetoric, but thankfully, Stock did not go into the “Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” bit, so I didn’t have to point out that Jesus never said a word about homosexuality.

Her subject didn’t say what she wanted him to, so she said it for him, then offered a rebuttal. It’s nice of Thomas to perform this service for us, but she happens to be fantastically wrong.

Everything I’m about to write is basically listed here, but it’s worth pointing out that:

1. Not everything Jesus said is recorded in Scripture. According to the gospel of John, “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.”

2. Jesus probably never said anything about child molestation, insider trading and all kinds of other pleasantries, but I don’t exactly think that gets us off the hook. If we demand such a strict system of rules from the mouth of Jesus, we become pharisees. Jesus didn’t come to confirm and add to our list of sins, but rather to save us from them, so I wouldn’t expect him to have made it a point to name each one.

3. Jesus and the Father are one, so anything God said about homosexuality is true of Jesus as well. How does Thomas get around the fact that homosexuality was condemned by God, by the laws given to Moses, and by the disciples of Jesus… and yet assume he had no problem with it?

4. The biggest point of all is this: by the definition Thomas gives, Jesus must be a member of the “Religious Right.” After all, listen to his Adam and Eve “rhetoric” when he was asked about marriage, as is recorded in Mark 10:

But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.’

Jesus hearkens back to the Creation to explain the fundamental purpose of gender and marriage, and to the story of Adam and Eve, thus giving him the added “Religious Right” cred of believing in creationism, another modern taboo.

The good news is, Jesus came to save rather than condemn.

The bad news for Thomas, though, is that those who teach and those who lead people astray will be judged more strictly in the end. In that category I would include columnists (and bloggers)… though, I admit, Jesus probably never actually said that.

To a certain extent, I agree with the President’s immigration policy speech tonight. I agree that we’re a nation of immigrants and that we must welcome those who come here to work and improve their lives, that we are a nation of laws which must be enforced, and that the border must be secured. I also think it’s time that we reconsider our guest worker visa programs and encourage our large immigrant population to come out of the shadows and choose a legal path.

At the same time, I think it’s quite clear that the President has failed to take real steps to protect the border and that he is still taking half measures which seem to be more about appeasing both camps than about fixing the problems.

The most important word in the President’s speech tonight: reduce.

Mexico is our neighbor, and our friend. We will continue to work cooperatively to improve security on both sides of the border … to confront common problems like drug trafficking and crime … and to reduce illegal immigration.

If the Bush administration was really serious about illegal immigration, serious about enforcing the law and about protecting our borders, the word would not have been “reduce,” but “stop.”

But even if we assume that was a poor choice of words, we still have the problem that Ed Morrissey points out: “most people will wonder why this practice didn’t end on September 12, 2001.”

President Bush likes to say that he understands the situation, having been the governor of a border state. So after five and a half years as President, why hasn’t he fixed the problem? I don’t think he can blame this one on Congress, or the Democrats, though I’m sure they haven’t exactly been the best advocates for reform.

Why has maverick Rep. Tom Tancredo been the government’s only real voice on this issue?

Ok, boys, now listen up, see?

We know that “HRX” is a HON-da.

We know it has cruise control.

We know it has a Z-noid body that’s virtually IN-de-STRUCT-able.

What we don’t know is… what is THIS green lightbulb thingy?!!

I’m going to need you to go ahead and come in on SUNDAY, um kay?

I’ll need you to break into the Honda factory, or Sears, whichever is easiest, wearing long white lab coats and tossing your hair back like some model from a shampoo advertisement.

Oh, and then tell me what that green lightbulb does. That would be great.

It’s called [unintelligible].

It goes from mulching, to packing, to, ah, discharge.

With no, um, attachments.

Sigh.

This. Changes. EVERYTHING.

Except, of course, for my silly accent and that weird gap in my teeth accentuated by my dirty mustache.

Did you say discharge?

In light of today’s deadline to sign up for the new Medicare prescription-drug plan, here’s a letter Rep. Marsha Blackburn released last December. She is asking for co-sponsors to a bill that illustrates another reason why Social Security needs reform:

Did You Know…

• When senior citizens turn 65, they cannot receive the Social Security benefits they have paid for their entire working lives if they choose to opt-out of Medicare?
• Medicare beneficiaries lose the ability to make tax-free contributions to their Health Savings Account (HSA) as soon as they join Medicare, which they are required to do if they want to receive their Social Security benefits?
• Medicare beneficiaries are not allowed to use funds accrued in their HSA to privately contract for health care outside of Medicare?

When senior citizens turn 65, they are automatically required to join Medicare Part A. If individuals choose to waive their Medicare Part A entitlement because they prefer private health insurance or for any other reason, they lose their Social Security benefits. Even though they have paid payroll taxes to fund those benefits during their entire working lives.

I’m not certain what became of the bill, but it seems to me that any step toward reform is a welcome change.

I long for the day when people realize that Social Security is a pyramid scheme, except in this case the top of the pyramid keeps growing and the bottom keeps shrinking. Time is running out.

If the Houston Astros are unable to bring The Rocket out of retirement again this year, perhaps he would consider serving as our nation’s next ambassador to the U.N. We could use somebody up there to knock some skulls. But…

…hmm, maybe that’s not such a good idea afterall.

Jeepers, and they were worried about John Bolton’s “diplomatic temperment“?!!

Now you can follow along with American Idol at home, using this unofficial Idol scorecard. Simply print this page, then mark out the contestants as they get sent home. The last one standing is your next AMERICAN IDOL!!! Have fun.

It remains Fishkite’s contention that filling the leadoff spot was not the Chicago Cubs’ top priority over the off-season. I’ve said the Cubs had “comparable leadoff talent and could have avoided signing another expensive, one-year contract” with Juan Pierre, while giving up cheap young pitching talent in Sergio Mitre (and others).

Still, I was surprised to see this headline at Cubs.com yesterday: Baker drops Pierre from leadoff slot.

Indeed, going into last night’s game vs. the Giants, Juan Pierre was DEAD LAST in on-base percentage (of lineup spots 1-8). After hitting two-for-four last night, Pierre managed to edge-out second-baseman Jerry Hairston. Here’s how the team looks now:

D Lee (1B) .448 OBP .318 AVG - on the DL
T Walker (1B,2B) .375 OBP .302 AVG
M Murton (LF) .369 OBP .280 AVG
M Barrett (C) .357 OBP .287 AVG
R Cedeno (SS) .331 OBP .308 AVG
J Jones (RF) .310 OBP .269 AVG
A Ramirez (3B) .302 OBP .216 AVG
J Pierre (CF) .282 OBP .239 AVG
J Hairston (2B) .273 OBP .231 AVG
N Perez (2B) .218 OBP .189 AVG

And since the Cubs are 10-2 in games in which OF Juan Pierre scores a run, and his batting average dropped 27 points during the Cubs’ 8-game losing streak, it would seem as if he’s been leading the team in more ways than one.

But let’s add insult to injury. Let’s take a look at our former, would-be leadoff centerfielder, known unaffectionately by Cubs fans as Korey Patterson (drop the “C” for a “K”).

Cubs manager Dusty Baker shuffled him up and down the lineup so frequently that Patterson’s homerun swings became bunts and his bunts became strikeouts. After many years of promise with the Cubs, he was sent down to the minors for a period, then traded to the Orioles.

This year, Patterson’s batting average has improved to .271 from .215 last year. He has a .301 OBP, with seven stolen bases and three homeruns in only 70 at-bats.

So as it turns out, so far this year the Cubs would have been better off keeping Patterson. That means we wouldn’t have lost cash and assets for a one-year contract with the underperforming, please-God-don’t-let-him-get-hurt-like-Nomar Juan Pierre.

And in place of AAA starters Rich Hill or Angel Guzman on the mound, we’d still have ole Sergio Mitre, who is currently second only to Dontrelle Willis on the Marlins’ strikeout leaderboard (28 SO in 36 IP) and second in ERA among Marlins starters with 20 or more innings pitched.

S Mitre 1-4, 4.89 ERA, 35 IP, 13 BB, 28 SO
A Guzman 0-2, 7.20 ERA, 15 IP, 11 BB, 16 SO
R Hill 0-2, 9.00 ERA, 10 IP, 10 IP, 5 BB, 5 SO

Would this be a dramatic improvement? No, not necessarily, but it also wouldn’t be a waste of resources in the face of injuries to D. Lee, M. Prior, K. Wood, A. Pagan, etc.

“This merger of religion and politics is exactly what our nation’s founding fathers hoped to avoid.”

- May 4, 2006

Five. That’s how many runs we’ve gotten in the same number of days (and games), leaving us with an impressive 1-4 record over that span.

They’re called runs.

Let’s get some.

UPDATE I: Make that five runs in six days.

UPDATE II: Make that six runs in seven days.

CNN Headline: U.S.: Outtakes show al-Zarqawi as poor gunman

An interesting choice of words, considering the fact that “gunman” is generally media code for “terrorist.”

So is Zarqawi a bad shot or simply a disadvantaged terrorist? The world may never know.

But if it’s the former, perhaps he wouldn’t mind going on a nice little educational hunting trip with the Vice President.

Hey Abu, d’ya like pepper?