NY Times Contradicts Itself, Spreads Propaganda

Here's a winner. It seems that in yesterday's elections the Dover School board in Pennsylvania had eight of its members loose their reelection bids and where replaced by those who campaigned against their introduction of Intelligent Design into the classroom. The Times had a strange take on the case:

All eight members up for re-election to the Pennsylvania school board that had been sued for introducing the teaching of intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in biology class were swept out of office yesterday by a slate of challengers who campaigned against the intelligent design policy.

...

The school board voted in October 2004 to require ninth grade biology students to hear a brief statement at the start of the semester saying that there were "gaps" in the theory of evolution, that intelligent design was an alternative and that students could learn more about it by reading a textbook "Of Pandas and People," available in the high school library.

So which is it? Did the school board mandate the teaching of ID, or just a 15 second introduction to it?

We know that the latter is true, but the Times would have you believe otherwise.

Also, I suppose that this goes to show that when a school district is told by a circuit court that they can teach whatever they want in any way that they want and that the parent's have no say, all you need to do is vote out the school board. Of course, if the Dover case comes back in January and the school board's paragraph on ID is rejected by the courts it doesn't really matter too much who is on the school board, does it?