You can't argue with this logic...
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
7 Feb 2011
9 Jan 2011
We Need to Put Down the Guns, We Need to Stop the Violent Rhetoric
As usual, Keith Olbermann expresses it more lucidly than I ever could...
Labels:
gun control,
politics
28 Jun 2009
Democrats are the new Republicans
Though I'm a huge Bill Maher fan, I don't always completely agree with him. In fact, over the past few years, I've posted just three of his closing monologues from his HBO show Real Time with Bill Maher.
This latest clip, from the 19 June show, is absolutely right on the money as he accuses Democrats of not really being Democrats anymore. They've moved so far to the right as to now be a sort of centrist-right party, while Republicans have also moved so far to the right as to be, for want of a better word, lunatics.
At 3:16 in the video, Maher outlines exactly what a Democrat SHOULD believe in, in the traditional sense of the word Democrat. As he correctly states, these aren't radical ideas and a large portion of Americans already agree with them, while even more would agree if they were presented/argued properly.
But enough. For the third time, I completely agree with everything he says in this clip and think it's a shame that he's seen primarily as a comedian, rather than a serious political commentator (though this may be starting to change). Watch the video.
This latest clip, from the 19 June show, is absolutely right on the money as he accuses Democrats of not really being Democrats anymore. They've moved so far to the right as to now be a sort of centrist-right party, while Republicans have also moved so far to the right as to be, for want of a better word, lunatics.
At 3:16 in the video, Maher outlines exactly what a Democrat SHOULD believe in, in the traditional sense of the word Democrat. As he correctly states, these aren't radical ideas and a large portion of Americans already agree with them, while even more would agree if they were presented/argued properly.
But enough. For the third time, I completely agree with everything he says in this clip and think it's a shame that he's seen primarily as a comedian, rather than a serious political commentator (though this may be starting to change). Watch the video.
Labels:
Barack Obama,
bill maher,
politics
3 May 2009
Texas and "Evolution"...in the same article!!
From an article by Christopher Hitchens in this week's Newsweek (again, the red highlighted parts are mine)...
[L]ast week [the] Texas...Board of Education, in a muddled decision, rejected a state science curriculum that required teachers to discuss the "strengths and weaknesses" of the theory of evolution. Instead, the board allowed "all sides" of scientific theories to be taught...
...It's not just that the overwhelming majority of scientists are now convinced that evolution is inscribed in the fossil record and in the lineaments of molecular biology. It is more that evolutionists will say in advance which evidence, if found, would refute them and force them to reconsider. ("Rabbit fossils in the pre-Cambrian layer" was, I seem to remember, the response of Prof. J.B.S. Haldane.) Try asking an "intelligent design" advocate to stipulate upfront what would constitute refutation of his world view and you will easily see the difference between the scientific method and the pseudoscientific one.
But that is just my opinion. And I certainly do not want it said that my side denies a hearing to the opposing one. In the spirit of compromise, then, I propose the following. First, let the school debating societies restage the wonderful set-piece real-life dramas of Oxford and Dayton, Tenn. Let time also be set aside, in our increasingly multiethnic and multicultural school system, for children to be taught the huge variety of creation stories, from the Hindu to the Muslim to the Australian Aboriginal. This is always interesting (and it can't be, can it, that the Texas board holdouts think that only Genesis ought to be so honored?). Second, we can surely demand that the principle of "strengths and weaknesses" will be applied evenly. If any church in Texas receives a tax exemption, or if any religious institution is the beneficiary of any subvention from the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, we must be assured that it will devote a portion of its time to laying bare the "strengths and weaknesses" of the religious world view, and also to teaching the works of Voltaire, David Hume, Benedict de Spinoza, Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson. This is America. Let a hundred flowers bloom, and a thousand schools of thought contend. We may one day have cause to be grateful to the Texas Board of Education for lighting a candle that cannot be put out.
[L]ast week [the] Texas...Board of Education, in a muddled decision, rejected a state science curriculum that required teachers to discuss the "strengths and weaknesses" of the theory of evolution. Instead, the board allowed "all sides" of scientific theories to be taught...
...It's not just that the overwhelming majority of scientists are now convinced that evolution is inscribed in the fossil record and in the lineaments of molecular biology. It is more that evolutionists will say in advance which evidence, if found, would refute them and force them to reconsider. ("Rabbit fossils in the pre-Cambrian layer" was, I seem to remember, the response of Prof. J.B.S. Haldane.) Try asking an "intelligent design" advocate to stipulate upfront what would constitute refutation of his world view and you will easily see the difference between the scientific method and the pseudoscientific one.
But that is just my opinion. And I certainly do not want it said that my side denies a hearing to the opposing one. In the spirit of compromise, then, I propose the following. First, let the school debating societies restage the wonderful set-piece real-life dramas of Oxford and Dayton, Tenn. Let time also be set aside, in our increasingly multiethnic and multicultural school system, for children to be taught the huge variety of creation stories, from the Hindu to the Muslim to the Australian Aboriginal. This is always interesting (and it can't be, can it, that the Texas board holdouts think that only Genesis ought to be so honored?). Second, we can surely demand that the principle of "strengths and weaknesses" will be applied evenly. If any church in Texas receives a tax exemption, or if any religious institution is the beneficiary of any subvention from the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships, we must be assured that it will devote a portion of its time to laying bare the "strengths and weaknesses" of the religious world view, and also to teaching the works of Voltaire, David Hume, Benedict de Spinoza, Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson. This is America. Let a hundred flowers bloom, and a thousand schools of thought contend. We may one day have cause to be grateful to the Texas Board of Education for lighting a candle that cannot be put out.
28 Apr 2009
"Bill Maher: The GOP Is Acting Like a Guy Who Got Dumped"
This is so funny and so true. An article from the LA Times by Bill Maher. Enjoy.
If conservatives don't want to be seen as bitter people who cling to their guns and religion and anti-immigrant sentiments, they should stop being bitter and clinging to their guns, religion and anti-immigrant sentiments.
It's been a week now, and I still don't know what those "tea bag" protests were about. I saw signs protesting abortion, illegal immigrants, the bank bailout and that gay guy who's going to win "American Idol." But it wasn't tax day that made them crazy; it was election day. Because that's when Republicans became what they fear most: a minority.
The conservative base is absolutely apoplectic because, because ... well, nobody knows. They're mad as hell, and they're not going to take it anymore. Even though they're not quite sure what "it" is. But they know they're fed up with "it," and that "it" has got to stop.
Here are the big issues for normal people: the war, the economy, the environment, mending fences with our enemies and allies, and the rule of law.
And here's the list of Republican obsessions since President Obama took office: that his birth certificate is supposedly fake, he uses a teleprompter too much, he bowed to a Saudi guy, Europeans like him, he gives inappropriate gifts, his wife shamelessly flaunts her upper arms, and he shook hands with Hugo Chavez and slipped him the nuclear launch codes.
Do these sound like the concerns of a healthy, vibrant political party?
It's sad what's happened to the Republicans. They used to be the party of the big tent; now they're the party of the sideshow attraction, a socially awkward group of mostly white people who speak a language only they understand. Like Trekkies, but paranoid.
The GOP base is convinced that Obama is going to raise their taxes, which he just lowered. But, you say, "Bill, that's just the fringe of the Republican Party." No, it's not. The governor of Texas, Rick Perry, is not afraid to say publicly that thinking out loud about Texas seceding from the Union is appropriate considering that ... Obama wants to raise taxes 3% on 5% of the people? I'm not sure exactly what Perry's independent nation would look like, but I'm pretty sure it would be free of taxes and Planned Parenthood. And I would have to totally rethink my position on a border fence.
I know. It's not about what Obama's done. It's what he's planning. But you can't be sick and tired of something someone might do.
Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota recently said she fears that Obama will build "reeducation" camps to indoctrinate young people. But Obama hasn't made any moves toward taking anyone's guns, and with money as tight as it is, the last thing the president wants to do is run a camp where he has to shelter and feed a bunch of fat, angry white people.
Look, I get it, "real America." After an eight-year run of controlling the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court, this latest election has you feeling like a rejected husband. You've come home to find your things out on the front lawn -- or at least more things than you usually keep out on the front lawn. You're not ready to let go, but the country you love is moving on. And now you want to call it a whore and key its car.
That's what you are, the bitter divorced guy whose country has left him -- obsessing over it, haranguing it, blubbering one minute about how much you love it and vowing the next that if you cannot have it, nobody will.
But it's been almost 100 days, and your country is not coming back to you. She's found somebody new. And it's a black guy.
The healthy thing to do is to just get past it and learn to cherish the memories. You'll always have New Orleans and Abu Ghraib.
And if today's conservatives are insulted by this, because they feel they're better than the people who have the microphone in their party, then I say to them what I would say to moderate Muslims: Denounce your radicals. To paraphrase George W. Bush, either you're with them or you're embarrassed by them.
The thing that you people out of power have to remember is that the people in power are not secretly plotting against you. They don't need to. They already beat you in public.
If conservatives don't want to be seen as bitter people who cling to their guns and religion and anti-immigrant sentiments, they should stop being bitter and clinging to their guns, religion and anti-immigrant sentiments.
It's been a week now, and I still don't know what those "tea bag" protests were about. I saw signs protesting abortion, illegal immigrants, the bank bailout and that gay guy who's going to win "American Idol." But it wasn't tax day that made them crazy; it was election day. Because that's when Republicans became what they fear most: a minority.
The conservative base is absolutely apoplectic because, because ... well, nobody knows. They're mad as hell, and they're not going to take it anymore. Even though they're not quite sure what "it" is. But they know they're fed up with "it," and that "it" has got to stop.
Here are the big issues for normal people: the war, the economy, the environment, mending fences with our enemies and allies, and the rule of law.
And here's the list of Republican obsessions since President Obama took office: that his birth certificate is supposedly fake, he uses a teleprompter too much, he bowed to a Saudi guy, Europeans like him, he gives inappropriate gifts, his wife shamelessly flaunts her upper arms, and he shook hands with Hugo Chavez and slipped him the nuclear launch codes.
Do these sound like the concerns of a healthy, vibrant political party?
It's sad what's happened to the Republicans. They used to be the party of the big tent; now they're the party of the sideshow attraction, a socially awkward group of mostly white people who speak a language only they understand. Like Trekkies, but paranoid.
The GOP base is convinced that Obama is going to raise their taxes, which he just lowered. But, you say, "Bill, that's just the fringe of the Republican Party." No, it's not. The governor of Texas, Rick Perry, is not afraid to say publicly that thinking out loud about Texas seceding from the Union is appropriate considering that ... Obama wants to raise taxes 3% on 5% of the people? I'm not sure exactly what Perry's independent nation would look like, but I'm pretty sure it would be free of taxes and Planned Parenthood. And I would have to totally rethink my position on a border fence.
I know. It's not about what Obama's done. It's what he's planning. But you can't be sick and tired of something someone might do.
Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota recently said she fears that Obama will build "reeducation" camps to indoctrinate young people. But Obama hasn't made any moves toward taking anyone's guns, and with money as tight as it is, the last thing the president wants to do is run a camp where he has to shelter and feed a bunch of fat, angry white people.
Look, I get it, "real America." After an eight-year run of controlling the White House, Congress and the Supreme Court, this latest election has you feeling like a rejected husband. You've come home to find your things out on the front lawn -- or at least more things than you usually keep out on the front lawn. You're not ready to let go, but the country you love is moving on. And now you want to call it a whore and key its car.
That's what you are, the bitter divorced guy whose country has left him -- obsessing over it, haranguing it, blubbering one minute about how much you love it and vowing the next that if you cannot have it, nobody will.
But it's been almost 100 days, and your country is not coming back to you. She's found somebody new. And it's a black guy.
The healthy thing to do is to just get past it and learn to cherish the memories. You'll always have New Orleans and Abu Ghraib.
And if today's conservatives are insulted by this, because they feel they're better than the people who have the microphone in their party, then I say to them what I would say to moderate Muslims: Denounce your radicals. To paraphrase George W. Bush, either you're with them or you're embarrassed by them.
The thing that you people out of power have to remember is that the people in power are not secretly plotting against you. They don't need to. They already beat you in public.
8 Nov 2008
One step forward, two steps back
UPDATE: I've added a video clip to the bottom of this post. Please see MSNBC's Keith Olbermann weigh-in on the debate with last night's Special Comment. Olbermann's usual fire-breathing histrionics are absent here...in favor of a heartfelt, sober opinion piece. Good stuff...
On Tuesday, the country took a huge leap forward. An African-American was elected to the highest office in the country and instantly became the most powerful leader in the free world.
While I think this was a great moment in the history of the US (tempered somewhat, though, by the fact that the current administration has been such a disaster that anyone would've looked positively gold-plated in comparison), it wasn't long (less than 24 hrs, to be exact) until we were reminded how backward many Americans (the majority, as it turns out) still are.
A majority of voters in Florida, Arizona and, somewhat unbelievably California, voted Yes to Proposition 8, banning gay marriage in those states and rendering invalid those who had recently gotten married there.
What. The. Fuck.
In a country that goes on and on and nauseatingly on about its "love of freedoms", basic human rights are still denied to a recognised, large minority group. If this isn't irony at its best, I don't know what is. The pursuit of happiness is still being denied to certain people. The right to benefits - monetary, cultural, compensatory, etc., is still being denied to certain people. The right to equal tax rights is still being denied to certain people.
I could go on and on, but I came across two articles this week from prominent figures in the gay community: Melissa Etheridge and Harvey Fierstein. They say it better than I ever could. And before anyone starts banging on about that shit-stirring, war-starting work of fiction known as the bible, remember that state-sanctioned MARRIAGE is a CIVIL contract. It has nothing to do with religion. So the "argument" that gay marriage goes against god or religion or christianity or the bible is, frankly, at worst bullshit and at best, moot.
First, Fierstein's short article. The bold sections were highlighted by me:
Historic for Some, Same Old Shit for the Rest of Us
While we dance in the streets and pat ourselves on the back for being a nation great enough to reach beyond racial divides to elect our first African-American president let us not forget that we remain a nation still proudly practicing prejudice.
I have heard this day described as one of transcendence where Americans came together to prove that we are, above all, a nation of fairness. World witnesses wrote that we rose above ideology, politics and bigotry to achieve a great moment for America. Meanwhile, on this same Election Day, we great Americans passed laws as heinous as any Jim Crow legislation. We great Americans reached out and willfully put our name to language that denies an entire minority group their equal rights.
Of course I am referring to the states of Florida, Arizona and California passing legislation to specifically deny gay people from entering into the contract of marriage. Actually, that's not true. We can still get married, just not to each other. Yes my friends, Florida and California have now made it legal for gay men and lesbians to marry as long as we don't marry our partners. How much sense does that make?
Now, before you rise up on your high horse to holler, "We're not against Civil Unions, just Gay Marriage", let me once again explain that THE SUPREME COURT HAS STATED THAT SEPARATE BUT EQUAL IS NOT EQUAL. And even if it were, civil unions are simply not equal to marriage.
Let me give you a simple example that anyone can follow. John and Jim are registered as domestic partners and so, just like a married couple; Jim is covered by John's employee health care. That's really nice. BUT... since the IRS does not recognize civil unions or domestic partnership Jim has to pay income tax on the value of this coverage. So, unlike a married couple, John and Jim are penalized hundreds of dollars for not being married. That's not fair. That's not in the spirit of the civil union legislation. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of the inequality being offered.
Listen, my fellow Americans, I am only asking that we get sensible about this controversy. Gays are not asking for religious blessings. We are not asking for everyone to come to our weddings. We are not asking the government to force churches and synagogues to perform marriage rituals or even to allow us into their tax-exempt edifices. We are simply and forcefully demanding equal protection under the laws of this nation as tax paying, voting, property owning citizens. I want no more or less protection than granted any heterosexual to control and distribute my holdings.
State sanctioned marriage is a civil contract period. A contract is not a judgment of moral value. It is a legal agreement between two parties that testifies to a meeting of minds between those consenting entities. It is not a religious act or rite and so has nothing to do with Adam and Eve or Steve or even Harvey. I often say that if you want to really want to understand the contract of marriage just ask anyone who has been divorced. The marriage contract is one of property rights. Or maybe you can look in the bible to see what Adam had to say about divorce since Eve was his second wife.
So, while we rightfully celebrate the election of our first African American president, let us take a moment to mourn the passage of three new laws legalizing prejudice. Of course there will be those who claim that voters were only protecting the institution of marriage to whom I would suggest it is just as likely that Obama's supporters were only voting against W. Breaking the lock on my door doesn't make your home any more secure.
And now for Etheridge's article. Again, the bold parts were highlighted by me:
You Can Forget My Taxes
Okay. So Prop 8 passed. Alright, I get it. 51% of you think that I am a second class citizen. Alright then. So my wife, uh I mean, roommate? Girlfriend? Special lady friend? You are gonna have to help me here because I am not sure what to call her now. Anyways, she and I are not allowed the same right under the state constitution as any other citizen. Okay, so I am taking that to mean I do not have to pay my state taxes because I am not a full citizen. I mean that would just be wrong, to make someone pay taxes and not give them the same rights, sounds sort of like that taxation without representation thing from the history books.
Okay, cool I don't mean to get too personal here but there is a lot I can do with the extra half a million dollars that I will be keeping instead of handing it over to the state of California. Oh, and I am sure Ellen will be a little excited to keep her bazillion bucks that she pays in taxes too. Wow, come to think of it, there are quite a few of us fortunate gay folks that will be having some extra cash this year. What recession? We're gay! I am sure there will be a little box on the tax forms now single, married, divorced, gay, check here if you are gay, yeah, that's not so bad. Of course all of the waiters and hairdressers and UPS workers and gym teachers and such, they won't have to pay their taxes either.
Gay people are born everyday. You will never legislate that away.
Oh and too bad California, I know you were looking forward to the revenue from all of those extra marriages. I guess you will have to find some other way to get out of the budget trouble you are in.
…Really?
When did it become okay to legislate morality? I try to envision someone reading that legislation "eliminates the right" and then clicking yes. What goes through their mind? Was it the frightening commercial where the little girl comes home and says, "Hi mom, we learned about gays in class today" and then the mother gets that awful worried look and the scary music plays? Do they not know anyone who is gay? If they do, can they look them in the face and say "I believe you do not deserve the same rights as me"? Do they think that their children will never encounter a gay person? Do they think they will never have to explain the 20% of us who are gay and living and working side by side with all the citizens of California?
I got news for them, someday your child is going to come home and ask you what a gay person is. Gay people are born everyday. You will never legislate that away.
I know when I grew up gay was a bad word. Homo, lezzie, faggot, dyke. Ignorance and fear ruled the day. There were so many "thems" back then. The blacks, the poor ... you know, "them". Then there was the immigrants. "Them.” Now the them is me.
I tell myself to take a breath, okay take another one, one of the thems made it to the top. Obama has been elected president. This crazy fearful insanity will end soon. This great state and this great country of ours will finally come to the understanding that there is no "them". We are one. We are united. What you do to someone else you do to yourself. That "judge not, lest ye yourself be judged" are truthful words and not Christian rhetoric.
Today the gay citizenry of this state will pick themselves up and dust themselves off and do what we have been doing for years. We will get back into it. We love this state, we love this country and we are not going to leave it. Even though we could be married in Mass. or Conn, Canada, Holland, Spain and a handful of other countries, this is our home. This is where we work and play and raise our families. We will not rest until we have the full rights of any other citizen. It is that simple, no fearful vote will ever stop us, that is not the American way.
Come to think of it, I should get a federal tax break too...
On Tuesday, the country took a huge leap forward. An African-American was elected to the highest office in the country and instantly became the most powerful leader in the free world.
While I think this was a great moment in the history of the US (tempered somewhat, though, by the fact that the current administration has been such a disaster that anyone would've looked positively gold-plated in comparison), it wasn't long (less than 24 hrs, to be exact) until we were reminded how backward many Americans (the majority, as it turns out) still are.
A majority of voters in Florida, Arizona and, somewhat unbelievably California, voted Yes to Proposition 8, banning gay marriage in those states and rendering invalid those who had recently gotten married there.
What. The. Fuck.
In a country that goes on and on and nauseatingly on about its "love of freedoms", basic human rights are still denied to a recognised, large minority group. If this isn't irony at its best, I don't know what is. The pursuit of happiness is still being denied to certain people. The right to benefits - monetary, cultural, compensatory, etc., is still being denied to certain people. The right to equal tax rights is still being denied to certain people.
I could go on and on, but I came across two articles this week from prominent figures in the gay community: Melissa Etheridge and Harvey Fierstein. They say it better than I ever could. And before anyone starts banging on about that shit-stirring, war-starting work of fiction known as the bible, remember that state-sanctioned MARRIAGE is a CIVIL contract. It has nothing to do with religion. So the "argument" that gay marriage goes against god or religion or christianity or the bible is, frankly, at worst bullshit and at best, moot.
First, Fierstein's short article. The bold sections were highlighted by me:
Historic for Some, Same Old Shit for the Rest of Us
While we dance in the streets and pat ourselves on the back for being a nation great enough to reach beyond racial divides to elect our first African-American president let us not forget that we remain a nation still proudly practicing prejudice.
I have heard this day described as one of transcendence where Americans came together to prove that we are, above all, a nation of fairness. World witnesses wrote that we rose above ideology, politics and bigotry to achieve a great moment for America. Meanwhile, on this same Election Day, we great Americans passed laws as heinous as any Jim Crow legislation. We great Americans reached out and willfully put our name to language that denies an entire minority group their equal rights.
Of course I am referring to the states of Florida, Arizona and California passing legislation to specifically deny gay people from entering into the contract of marriage. Actually, that's not true. We can still get married, just not to each other. Yes my friends, Florida and California have now made it legal for gay men and lesbians to marry as long as we don't marry our partners. How much sense does that make?
Now, before you rise up on your high horse to holler, "We're not against Civil Unions, just Gay Marriage", let me once again explain that THE SUPREME COURT HAS STATED THAT SEPARATE BUT EQUAL IS NOT EQUAL. And even if it were, civil unions are simply not equal to marriage.
Let me give you a simple example that anyone can follow. John and Jim are registered as domestic partners and so, just like a married couple; Jim is covered by John's employee health care. That's really nice. BUT... since the IRS does not recognize civil unions or domestic partnership Jim has to pay income tax on the value of this coverage. So, unlike a married couple, John and Jim are penalized hundreds of dollars for not being married. That's not fair. That's not in the spirit of the civil union legislation. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of the inequality being offered.
Listen, my fellow Americans, I am only asking that we get sensible about this controversy. Gays are not asking for religious blessings. We are not asking for everyone to come to our weddings. We are not asking the government to force churches and synagogues to perform marriage rituals or even to allow us into their tax-exempt edifices. We are simply and forcefully demanding equal protection under the laws of this nation as tax paying, voting, property owning citizens. I want no more or less protection than granted any heterosexual to control and distribute my holdings.
State sanctioned marriage is a civil contract period. A contract is not a judgment of moral value. It is a legal agreement between two parties that testifies to a meeting of minds between those consenting entities. It is not a religious act or rite and so has nothing to do with Adam and Eve or Steve or even Harvey. I often say that if you want to really want to understand the contract of marriage just ask anyone who has been divorced. The marriage contract is one of property rights. Or maybe you can look in the bible to see what Adam had to say about divorce since Eve was his second wife.
So, while we rightfully celebrate the election of our first African American president, let us take a moment to mourn the passage of three new laws legalizing prejudice. Of course there will be those who claim that voters were only protecting the institution of marriage to whom I would suggest it is just as likely that Obama's supporters were only voting against W. Breaking the lock on my door doesn't make your home any more secure.
And now for Etheridge's article. Again, the bold parts were highlighted by me:
You Can Forget My Taxes
Okay. So Prop 8 passed. Alright, I get it. 51% of you think that I am a second class citizen. Alright then. So my wife, uh I mean, roommate? Girlfriend? Special lady friend? You are gonna have to help me here because I am not sure what to call her now. Anyways, she and I are not allowed the same right under the state constitution as any other citizen. Okay, so I am taking that to mean I do not have to pay my state taxes because I am not a full citizen. I mean that would just be wrong, to make someone pay taxes and not give them the same rights, sounds sort of like that taxation without representation thing from the history books.
Okay, cool I don't mean to get too personal here but there is a lot I can do with the extra half a million dollars that I will be keeping instead of handing it over to the state of California. Oh, and I am sure Ellen will be a little excited to keep her bazillion bucks that she pays in taxes too. Wow, come to think of it, there are quite a few of us fortunate gay folks that will be having some extra cash this year. What recession? We're gay! I am sure there will be a little box on the tax forms now single, married, divorced, gay, check here if you are gay, yeah, that's not so bad. Of course all of the waiters and hairdressers and UPS workers and gym teachers and such, they won't have to pay their taxes either.
Gay people are born everyday. You will never legislate that away.
Oh and too bad California, I know you were looking forward to the revenue from all of those extra marriages. I guess you will have to find some other way to get out of the budget trouble you are in.
…Really?
When did it become okay to legislate morality? I try to envision someone reading that legislation "eliminates the right" and then clicking yes. What goes through their mind? Was it the frightening commercial where the little girl comes home and says, "Hi mom, we learned about gays in class today" and then the mother gets that awful worried look and the scary music plays? Do they not know anyone who is gay? If they do, can they look them in the face and say "I believe you do not deserve the same rights as me"? Do they think that their children will never encounter a gay person? Do they think they will never have to explain the 20% of us who are gay and living and working side by side with all the citizens of California?
I got news for them, someday your child is going to come home and ask you what a gay person is. Gay people are born everyday. You will never legislate that away.
I know when I grew up gay was a bad word. Homo, lezzie, faggot, dyke. Ignorance and fear ruled the day. There were so many "thems" back then. The blacks, the poor ... you know, "them". Then there was the immigrants. "Them.” Now the them is me.
I tell myself to take a breath, okay take another one, one of the thems made it to the top. Obama has been elected president. This crazy fearful insanity will end soon. This great state and this great country of ours will finally come to the understanding that there is no "them". We are one. We are united. What you do to someone else you do to yourself. That "judge not, lest ye yourself be judged" are truthful words and not Christian rhetoric.
Today the gay citizenry of this state will pick themselves up and dust themselves off and do what we have been doing for years. We will get back into it. We love this state, we love this country and we are not going to leave it. Even though we could be married in Mass. or Conn, Canada, Holland, Spain and a handful of other countries, this is our home. This is where we work and play and raise our families. We will not rest until we have the full rights of any other citizen. It is that simple, no fearful vote will ever stop us, that is not the American way.
Come to think of it, I should get a federal tax break too...
Labels:
politics
7 Nov 2008
New World Order
It's amazing how many people I run into who actually believe stuff like this will happen now. I mean, I know I'm in Mississippi, but still...
Anyway, I think this is hilarious...
Anyway, I think this is hilarious...
Labels:
Barack Obama,
humor,
politics
24 Oct 2008
16 Oct 2008
A sneak preview of tonight's debate
Here's a sneak preview of tonight's debate, courtesy of TheAtlantic.com (original link here). On the bright side, at least John McCain can play the part of Mickey in any subsequent Rocky sequels...
Isn't it amazing how closely he resembles an old, awkward-moving, villanous, short, super-criminal? The Penguin, I mean...(har, har)
Isn't it amazing how closely he resembles an old, awkward-moving, villanous, short, super-criminal? The Penguin, I mean...(har, har)
21 Sept 2008
Some great signs at a "Women Against Palin" rally in Alaska
(I received the following in an e-mail from my wife, who received it from her aunt. I don't know who the original author is/was, but I love what she's written and I love some of the homemade signs at the rally...)
[The] Alaska Women Reject Palin rally was to be held outside on the lawn in front of the Loussac Library in midtown Anchorage. Home made signs were encouraged, and the idea was to make a statement that Sarah Palin does not speak for all Alaska women, or men. I had no idea what to expect.
The rally was organized by a small group of women, talking over coffee. It made me wonder what other things have started with small groups of women talking over coffee. It's probably an impressive list. These women hatched the plan, printed up flyers, posted them around town, and sent notices to local media outlets. One of those media outlets was KBYR radio, home of Eddie Burke, a long-time uber-conservative Anchorage talk show host. Turns out that Eddie Burke not only announced the rally, but called the people who planned to attend the rally "a bunch of socialist baby-killing maggots," and read the home phone numbers of the organizers aloud over the air, urging listeners to call and tell them what they thought. The women, of course, received some nasty, harassing and threatening messages.
I felt a bit apprehensive. I'd been disappointed before by the turnout at other rallies. Basically, in Anchorage, if you can get 25 people to show up at an event, it's a success. So, I thought to myself, if we can actually get 100 people there that aren't sent by Eddie Burke, we'll be doing good. A real statement will have been made. I confess, I still had a mental image of 15 demonstrators surrounded by hundreds of menacing "socialist baby-killing maggot" haters.
It's a good thing I wasn't tailgating when I saw the crowd in front of the library or I would have ended up in somebody's trunk. When I got there, about 20 minutes early, the line of sign wavers stretched the full length of the library grounds, along the edge of the road, 6 or 7 people deep! I could hardly find a place to park. I nabbed one of the last spots in the library lot, and as I got out of the car and started walking, people seemed to join in from every direction, carrying signs.
Never, have I seen anything like it in my 17 and a half years living in Anchorage. The organizers had someone walk the rally with a counter, and they clicked off well over 1400 people (not including the 90 counter-demonstrators). This was the biggest political rally ever, in the history of the state. I was absolutely stunned. The second most amazing thing is how many people honked and gave the thumbs up as they drove by. And even those that didn't honk looked wide-eyed and awe-struck at the huge crowd that was growing by the minute. This just doesn't happen here.
Then, the infamous Eddie Burke showed up. He tried to talk to the media, and was instantly surrounded by a group of 20 people who started shouting O-BA-MA so loud he couldn't be heard. Then passing cars started honking in a rhythmic pattern of 3, like the Obama chant, while the crowd cheered, hooted and waved their signs high.
So, if you've been doing the math… Yes. The Alaska Women Reject Palin rally was significantly bigger than Palin's rally that got all the national media coverage! So take heart, sit back, and enjoy the photo gallery. Feel free to spread the pictures around to anyone who needs to know that Sarah Palin most definitely does not speak for all Alaskans. The citizens of Alaska, who know her best, have things to say.
[The] Alaska Women Reject Palin rally was to be held outside on the lawn in front of the Loussac Library in midtown Anchorage. Home made signs were encouraged, and the idea was to make a statement that Sarah Palin does not speak for all Alaska women, or men. I had no idea what to expect.
The rally was organized by a small group of women, talking over coffee. It made me wonder what other things have started with small groups of women talking over coffee. It's probably an impressive list. These women hatched the plan, printed up flyers, posted them around town, and sent notices to local media outlets. One of those media outlets was KBYR radio, home of Eddie Burke, a long-time uber-conservative Anchorage talk show host. Turns out that Eddie Burke not only announced the rally, but called the people who planned to attend the rally "a bunch of socialist baby-killing maggots," and read the home phone numbers of the organizers aloud over the air, urging listeners to call and tell them what they thought. The women, of course, received some nasty, harassing and threatening messages.
I felt a bit apprehensive. I'd been disappointed before by the turnout at other rallies. Basically, in Anchorage, if you can get 25 people to show up at an event, it's a success. So, I thought to myself, if we can actually get 100 people there that aren't sent by Eddie Burke, we'll be doing good. A real statement will have been made. I confess, I still had a mental image of 15 demonstrators surrounded by hundreds of menacing "socialist baby-killing maggot" haters.
It's a good thing I wasn't tailgating when I saw the crowd in front of the library or I would have ended up in somebody's trunk. When I got there, about 20 minutes early, the line of sign wavers stretched the full length of the library grounds, along the edge of the road, 6 or 7 people deep! I could hardly find a place to park. I nabbed one of the last spots in the library lot, and as I got out of the car and started walking, people seemed to join in from every direction, carrying signs.
Never, have I seen anything like it in my 17 and a half years living in Anchorage. The organizers had someone walk the rally with a counter, and they clicked off well over 1400 people (not including the 90 counter-demonstrators). This was the biggest political rally ever, in the history of the state. I was absolutely stunned. The second most amazing thing is how many people honked and gave the thumbs up as they drove by. And even those that didn't honk looked wide-eyed and awe-struck at the huge crowd that was growing by the minute. This just doesn't happen here.
Then, the infamous Eddie Burke showed up. He tried to talk to the media, and was instantly surrounded by a group of 20 people who started shouting O-BA-MA so loud he couldn't be heard. Then passing cars started honking in a rhythmic pattern of 3, like the Obama chant, while the crowd cheered, hooted and waved their signs high.
So, if you've been doing the math… Yes. The Alaska Women Reject Palin rally was significantly bigger than Palin's rally that got all the national media coverage! So take heart, sit back, and enjoy the photo gallery. Feel free to spread the pictures around to anyone who needs to know that Sarah Palin most definitely does not speak for all Alaskans. The citizens of Alaska, who know her best, have things to say.
30 Aug 2008
Kucinich is STILL the man!
Here's Rep. Dennis Kucinich's (D-Ohio) speech from the Democratic National Convention. He was my first choice for President and his was the only campaign I've ever given money to. I'm with him on every issue.
It's a hell of a speech!
It's a hell of a speech!
Labels:
politics
3 Aug 2008
"The Military is More Liberal Than You Think"
Here's an interesting article I came across on The Huffington Post. I've always maintained that since I joined the AF in 2003, there are more liberals serving than you would think. Don't get me wrong, I think there are still more conservatives in the military, but I was always slightly surprised at just how many left-leaning people I ran into on active duty.
Now with this catastrophic war and even worse administration, there are even more liberals. Rod Lurie, the writer of the following article, hits this particular nail on the head:
(original article here)
Here is a direct quotation from a column written by Maureen Dowd in the New York Times on July 23: "Asked by a Democratic lawmaker a while back why there weren't more democrats in the military, General Petraeus smiled slyly and said 'there are more than you think.'"
Now go to Colonel Steven Boylan of the General's public affairs office in Baghdad who said of the quotation that it is "in error, as he never made nor never would make such a statement."
Well, I certainly believe that Petraeus did not want to make such a statement given that it is inappropriate that a military officer make any partisan comment at all. But it does bring up an interesting question : Is the military more liberal than the clichés would have you believe?
The answer is "yes" and the reason that Obama will win the active duty vote this November.
Most people with whom I talk, often quite educated, think the military is made up of knife-between-the-teeth grunts, uneducated robots without any kind of free will whatsoever -- people who goose step to Republican philosophy and particularly the Bush cowboy mentality.
It is true that in the recent past most members of the military have voted Republican. This is because the GOP is far more likely to flood the military with cash and thus make the lives of the service member bit easier. However, I believe any sort of polling will show, on an issue-by-issue basis, that the military is mostly made up of people with a liberal mindset. And that is what Petraeus was talking about.
Let's take a look at the most ardent post-military political leaders in our nation today. Who are they?
John McCain -- Vietnam vet, former prisoner of war -- is a Republican. Robert Dole is a World War II hero. George Bush, the elder, is a World War II hero.
But now look at the rest of congress. The former military that serve in the House and Senate are mostly Democrats
Here are the political leaders with military experience who have taken prominent positions on defense issues. They are:
Wesley Clark - Democrat.
Jimmy Carter - Democrat.
John Kerry - Democrat.
Bob Kerrey - Democrat (winner of medal of Honor)
Max Cleland - Democrat.
John Murtha - Democrat.
Jack Reed - Democrat.
Daniel Inouye - Democrat. (winner of Medal of Honor)
Jim Webb - Democrat.
Charles Rangel - Democrat.
Al Gore- Democrat
Why do so many members of the military who decide on continuing in public service join the Democratic Party? There are several answers to this, here are a few:
1) Forty percent of the military is made up of ethnic minorities. Most of those, as is also the case with most of the Caucasian members of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, come from the lower economic classes. These demographic groups have largely voted Democrat in the past and will continue to do so. When officers (the more likely to go into politics) live with their soldiers day in and day out, a certain empathy builds. It is unavoidable. Those officers begin to understand and respect the problems their soldiers and their families face or have faced on a day-to-day basis. Indeed, the primary reason that young men and women join the service is not their fetish for combat or killing but to satisfy the dire economic needs of their family.
2) The United States military is probably the most socialistic institution in the United States. Think about it. There is universal health care in the military (though we have seen how unconscionably horrific our medical attention has been to our soldiers in places like Walter Reed). Housing is available to all members of the military. Educationally, the children of the officers, even the Generals, go to a school with the children of the lowliest Private in the army.
The major institutions that produce our most elite officers come from a position of absolute meritoriousness as opposed to wealth or contacts. Right now Annapolis and West Point are two of the nation's most difficult colleges to get into. Those two schools, as well as the Air Force Academy and the Coast Guard Academy, are blatantly transparent in who and how they admit because they are federally funded. The students who are accepted have to come from the highest academic stock. Were a qualified high school student to be be rejected in favor of somebody because of that person's family's wealth or political connections, it would create a gigantic scandal, given that it is Congressmen who nominate (though do not appoint) cadets and midshipmen.
Just for myself to be transparent myself, I graduated from West Point in 1984.
3) Former soldiers will almost always gravitate to the anti-war party. This happens for obvious reasons. The men who have been in battle tend not to romanticize it and tend not to take it flippantly. The reasons for going to war need to be extraordinarily convincing before anybody who has taken a bullet, seen their friends take a bullet, or who has lodged a bullet in the enemy's brain will put their support behind a war. Recent history has shown that the Republicans are more likely to use the military as a tool of policy rather than as a tool of defense. That is unacceptable to anybody who has served.
4) Finally, and maybe most importantly, is the Iraq war itself. The Bush administration sent our soldiers in on a mission that was initiated either by a lie or by the greatest act of incompetence in the history of this nation's intelligence gathering. In battle, our soldiers were ill equipped and not properly supported. (The "surge" was needed because Bush didn't send in enough troops to begin with). Our wounded soldiers have returned him to find inadequate medical care. The "love" that the soldiers felt from Republicans in peacetime turned into neglect and apathy during war.
The latest poll from Military Times shows that less than half of the military identify themselves as Republicans. The poll goes on to show that much of this anti-Republicanism comes from the bungling of the Iraq war.
As of the start of the year, only 35% of military personnel approve of the president's handling of the war, and 75% said the military is "stretched too thin to be effective."
A few weeks ago I was in Las Vegas playing blackjack. Two soldiers who were a couple of days away from being re-deployed to Iraq sat at the table with me. After a few minutes of conversation I asked them whom they were voting for. They both said they were voting for Obama (these two guys were white). When I asked them why, they very simply and honestly told me they want to vote for the guy that will get them out of Iraq.
I think this year we will see, for the first time, the active duty military voting for the Democratic candidate.
Now with this catastrophic war and even worse administration, there are even more liberals. Rod Lurie, the writer of the following article, hits this particular nail on the head:
(original article here)
Here is a direct quotation from a column written by Maureen Dowd in the New York Times on July 23: "Asked by a Democratic lawmaker a while back why there weren't more democrats in the military, General Petraeus smiled slyly and said 'there are more than you think.'"
Now go to Colonel Steven Boylan of the General's public affairs office in Baghdad who said of the quotation that it is "in error, as he never made nor never would make such a statement."
Well, I certainly believe that Petraeus did not want to make such a statement given that it is inappropriate that a military officer make any partisan comment at all. But it does bring up an interesting question : Is the military more liberal than the clichés would have you believe?
The answer is "yes" and the reason that Obama will win the active duty vote this November.
Most people with whom I talk, often quite educated, think the military is made up of knife-between-the-teeth grunts, uneducated robots without any kind of free will whatsoever -- people who goose step to Republican philosophy and particularly the Bush cowboy mentality.
It is true that in the recent past most members of the military have voted Republican. This is because the GOP is far more likely to flood the military with cash and thus make the lives of the service member bit easier. However, I believe any sort of polling will show, on an issue-by-issue basis, that the military is mostly made up of people with a liberal mindset. And that is what Petraeus was talking about.
Let's take a look at the most ardent post-military political leaders in our nation today. Who are they?
John McCain -- Vietnam vet, former prisoner of war -- is a Republican. Robert Dole is a World War II hero. George Bush, the elder, is a World War II hero.
But now look at the rest of congress. The former military that serve in the House and Senate are mostly Democrats
Here are the political leaders with military experience who have taken prominent positions on defense issues. They are:
Wesley Clark - Democrat.
Jimmy Carter - Democrat.
John Kerry - Democrat.
Bob Kerrey - Democrat (winner of medal of Honor)
Max Cleland - Democrat.
John Murtha - Democrat.
Jack Reed - Democrat.
Daniel Inouye - Democrat. (winner of Medal of Honor)
Jim Webb - Democrat.
Charles Rangel - Democrat.
Al Gore- Democrat
Why do so many members of the military who decide on continuing in public service join the Democratic Party? There are several answers to this, here are a few:
1) Forty percent of the military is made up of ethnic minorities. Most of those, as is also the case with most of the Caucasian members of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, come from the lower economic classes. These demographic groups have largely voted Democrat in the past and will continue to do so. When officers (the more likely to go into politics) live with their soldiers day in and day out, a certain empathy builds. It is unavoidable. Those officers begin to understand and respect the problems their soldiers and their families face or have faced on a day-to-day basis. Indeed, the primary reason that young men and women join the service is not their fetish for combat or killing but to satisfy the dire economic needs of their family.
2) The United States military is probably the most socialistic institution in the United States. Think about it. There is universal health care in the military (though we have seen how unconscionably horrific our medical attention has been to our soldiers in places like Walter Reed). Housing is available to all members of the military. Educationally, the children of the officers, even the Generals, go to a school with the children of the lowliest Private in the army.
The major institutions that produce our most elite officers come from a position of absolute meritoriousness as opposed to wealth or contacts. Right now Annapolis and West Point are two of the nation's most difficult colleges to get into. Those two schools, as well as the Air Force Academy and the Coast Guard Academy, are blatantly transparent in who and how they admit because they are federally funded. The students who are accepted have to come from the highest academic stock. Were a qualified high school student to be be rejected in favor of somebody because of that person's family's wealth or political connections, it would create a gigantic scandal, given that it is Congressmen who nominate (though do not appoint) cadets and midshipmen.
Just for myself to be transparent myself, I graduated from West Point in 1984.
3) Former soldiers will almost always gravitate to the anti-war party. This happens for obvious reasons. The men who have been in battle tend not to romanticize it and tend not to take it flippantly. The reasons for going to war need to be extraordinarily convincing before anybody who has taken a bullet, seen their friends take a bullet, or who has lodged a bullet in the enemy's brain will put their support behind a war. Recent history has shown that the Republicans are more likely to use the military as a tool of policy rather than as a tool of defense. That is unacceptable to anybody who has served.
4) Finally, and maybe most importantly, is the Iraq war itself. The Bush administration sent our soldiers in on a mission that was initiated either by a lie or by the greatest act of incompetence in the history of this nation's intelligence gathering. In battle, our soldiers were ill equipped and not properly supported. (The "surge" was needed because Bush didn't send in enough troops to begin with). Our wounded soldiers have returned him to find inadequate medical care. The "love" that the soldiers felt from Republicans in peacetime turned into neglect and apathy during war.
The latest poll from Military Times shows that less than half of the military identify themselves as Republicans. The poll goes on to show that much of this anti-Republicanism comes from the bungling of the Iraq war.
As of the start of the year, only 35% of military personnel approve of the president's handling of the war, and 75% said the military is "stretched too thin to be effective."
A few weeks ago I was in Las Vegas playing blackjack. Two soldiers who were a couple of days away from being re-deployed to Iraq sat at the table with me. After a few minutes of conversation I asked them whom they were voting for. They both said they were voting for Obama (these two guys were white). When I asked them why, they very simply and honestly told me they want to vote for the guy that will get them out of Iraq.
I think this year we will see, for the first time, the active duty military voting for the Democratic candidate.
2 Oct 2007
Keith Olbermann - Truth Teller
It's about time someone in the mainstream media had the balls to say what they mean.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)