Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Interesting story on economics
Most people when asked will say that liberals are to blame for the most government spending. Here is a story that refutes that with facts. It seems that the more "anti- government" you are the more government services you use. At least in California thats is the case.
State's most conservative county uses much cash
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Modoc has the highest Republican registration of any county in California, it unfailingly elects anti-tax Republicans to office, and the vote here against last month's ballot measure that would have raised a variety of taxes was one of the most lopsided in the state. And yet, per capita, Modoc County gets more state taxpayer dollars than all but one of California's 58 counties.
The prevailing attitude among the right-wing ranchers and modern hippies who define Modoc County is of fierce self-reliance - but more people here than just about anywhere else depend on welfare checks of some kind to get by.
So with state Republicans blocking new taxes and insisting on deep cuts in taxpayer-funded services, does that make this most solid of GOP bases politically conflicted? Or, worse, just plain ignorant?
No way, say the cattlemen and the hippies. Most folks up here will tell you that no matter who is in office or what the big-city politicians do, the dearest wish of anyone living in Modoc is to be left alone - except for a little help for core needs like hospitals and schools.
And if you cut off our funding even for that, they say, we won't like it - but we'll get by. We're independent.
It's a frontier thing.
Split but not split
Ken McGarva and Tina Hodge will both tell you with equal ardor that government should stay out of their faces. But you wouldn't know they could agree by looking at them.
McGarva is a cowboy. The real kind, one who ropes and brands his cattle in the dot-in-the-road town of Likely. At 70, he loathes liberal politics.
Hodge is a back-to-the-land hippie. The real kind, one who raised her kids in a tepee on a remote mountaintop near tiny Eagleville and now lives off the grid in a hobbit-style house on that same mountaintop. At 57, she loathes conservative politics.
However, both McGarva and Hodge maintain that state legislators shouldn't even think of cutting health and education funding to rural counties like Modoc, where 9,184 residents knock around a territory the size of Connecticut.
Instead, they say, swing the budget ax on bloated-big-government-style frills - for instance, state-paid cars for legislators and misguided environmental regulations, though they don't always agree on which ones are misguided.
'We'll just get by'
The fact that health and education spending make up about 70 percent of California's general fund, leaving little else to cut, only emphasizes the importance of that funding, they say.
And if the Capitol does indeed slash Modoc County's money for road maintenance, health services and welfare job training - which will happen, if Sacramento's Republicans get their way - McGarva and Hodge have the same plan.
"Well, we'll just get by the way we did in the Great Depression - on our own," McGarva said, swatting mosquitoes on his porch after another hard day of herding dogies on his 1,000-head ranch. "We'll grow a vegetable garden, we'll use milk cows." If the roads are closed, he said, they always have horses.
"We have pretty much all we need here on the mountain, and if we had to we could grow more of our own food," said Hodge, standing in her front yard, which is 6,100 feet above sea level and a jarring, 4-mile rumble up a dirt road. If the roads are closed, she said, she can always pack into town using her herd of llamas.
The politicians 200 miles south in Sacramento say they admire that frontier spirit, and both sides say they know what is best for Modoc County. But that's about where they stop sounding alike.
Politicians can't agree
Democrats say the solution to the state's $24.3 billion deficit involves more revenue sources. Republicans say it requires only expenditure chopping. Both sides have dug in their heels.
Assemblywoman Noreen Evans, D-Santa Rosa, chairwoman of a legislative budget conference committee, ordered up a report last winter ranking which of the state's counties send the most tax money per capita to the Capitol, and which ones consume the most in health and other services. It showed that conservative counties - like Modoc, with 49.9 percent Republican registration, the state's highest - generally consumed the most, and liberal counties sent in the most.
Marin County was No. 1 in contributions, at $4,793 per person, and San Francisco was No. 3 at $3,578. Modoc was No. 2 in consumption at $2,216 per person, and conservative Tulare was No. 1, with $2,223.
"I don't think voters in the conservative counties understand the connection between the service they are receiving and the votes their representatives are making," Evans said. "Maybe the layers of government are so convoluted that many people don't realize how it works."
In Modoc, the way it works is that if the cuts being proposed go through, near-catastrophe will reign, said County Administrative Officer Mark Charlton.
He said the entire road maintenance service would be closed except for snowplowing on a few main roads, the welfare-to-work CalWORKS program would be cut in half, many mental health patients would no longer be monitored and would relapse and wind up behind bars, and there would be fewer police patrols.
"You'll be able to translate these cuts into more accidents on the road, more people in jail, more people getting sick," Charlton said.
Assemblyman Jim Nielsen, R-Gerber (Tehama County), vice chairman of the Assembly budget committee, represents Modoc County. He said cutting social services is not what he has in mind when he talks about deficit reduction - it's chopping other things, such as regulatory oversight committees and government employees.
He said health and road services cost more per capita in rural places like Modoc because they're remote and expensive to reach. So don't blame the sticks for consuming more funding per person, he said.
"There's no way you're going to have a booming county up there, so every penny we send counts," Nielsen said. "The funding there wouldn't buy (much) in San Francisco, but it goes a long way in Modoc."
Barbara March, 62, who moved up from Carmel Valley six years ago to publish the Modoc Independent News with husband Ray, 74, said the only people who move so far into the trees are by definition stubborn, frontier types. So it makes sense they would share some values. If you're looking for multiplexes and Starbucks, you don't come.
A self-selecting population
"Hippies and buckaroos and everything in between - they all have a tolerance and generosity of spirit up here," March said. "But you can't tell them what to do."
In the cities, talk of chopping government services brings defiant cries of protest. In Modoc, cowboy McGarva, whose family has ranched here since 1918, said his solution to the budget crunch is to shoo government as far away as possible. Fund good education and rural health services, he said - but don't raise taxes.
"Get rid of all this environment crap first, saving the three-legged frog and whatnot, and protecting the mountain lion so much it ruins the hunting up here," he said. "Cut down on useless things like all those departments they have. Then they'll make some progress."
Back-to-the-lander Hodge and her husband, Bill, 63, moved to their mountaintop in 1981 to raise two daughters, as well as llamas for wool and breeding. In 1995, she started Eagle Peak Herbals, which ships herbal remedies and potions all over the world. In their way, the Hodges are every bit the self-starting business people that the ranchers are.
"I think we should raise money when it's needed ... but no, government does not work as well as it should, and there are quite a few things we don't need," Hodge said. "We don't need the corporate subsidies we give, and we don't need more dams on the rivers up here."
Her suggestions don't exactly match McGarva's. But then, they and their families said, in a place like Modoc, they don't have to be a perfect fit.
"Around here there are a lot of people with great hearts, and if you work hard, you can do fine," said Bill Hodge. "We all have a real sense of community."
"We're the kind of people this country was founded on, still strong enough to stand up for our ideals," said McGarva's daughter, Rhonda, 44, who can drive cattle with the best of them. "When you're talking about self-reliance, you're talking about us.
"No matter what they do in Sacramento."
| Median household income | Living below poverty line | Median value of owner-occupied homes | Residents over 25 with bachelor's degrees | White population | Republican registration | Democratic registration | |
| Modoc County | $33,713 | 19.6% | $69,100 | 12.4% | 79.2% | 49.9% | 28.9% |
| California | $59,928 | 12.4% | $211,500 | 26.6% | 42.7% | 31% | 44.6% |
Chronicle staff writer Matthew Yi contributed to this report. E-mail Kevin Fagan at kfagan@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page A - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Monday, June 29, 2009
Climate change
Today Paul Krugman wrote an op-ed addressing this issue. it's a good piece. I don't always agree with him but on this one he is dead on.
When did money become more important than our planet and our lives?
Betraying the Planet
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: June 28, 2009
So the House passed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill. In political terms, it was a remarkable achievement.
But 212 representatives voted no. A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases.
And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.
To fully appreciate the irresponsibility and immorality of climate-change denial, you need to know about the grim turn taken by the latest climate research.
The fact is that the planet is changing faster than even pessimists expected: ice caps are shrinking, arid zones spreading, at a terrifying rate. And according to a number of recent studies, catastrophe — a rise in temperature so large as to be almost unthinkable — can no longer be considered a mere possibility. It is, instead, the most likely outcome if we continue along our present course.
Thus researchers at M.I.T., who were previously predicting a temperature rise of a little more than 4 degrees by the end of this century, are now predicting a rise of more than 9 degrees. Why? Global greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster than expected; some mitigating factors, like absorption of carbon dioxide by the oceans, are turning out to be weaker than hoped; and there’s growing evidence that climate change is self-reinforcing — that, for example, rising temperatures will cause some arctic tundra to defrost, releasing even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Temperature increases on the scale predicted by the M.I.T. researchers and others would create huge disruptions in our lives and our economy. As a recent authoritative U.S. government report points out, by the end of this century New Hampshire may well have the climate of North Carolina today, Illinois may have the climate of East Texas, and across the country extreme, deadly heat waves — the kind that traditionally occur only once in a generation — may become annual or biannual events.
In other words, we’re facing a clear and present danger to our way of life, perhaps even to civilization itself. How can anyone justify failing to act?
Well, sometimes even the most authoritative analyses get things wrong. And if dissenting opinion-makers and politicians based their dissent on hard work and hard thinking — if they had carefully studied the issue, consulted with experts and concluded that the overwhelming scientific consensus was misguided — they could at least claim to be acting responsibly.
But if you watched the debate on Friday, you didn’t see people who’ve thought hard about a crucial issue, and are trying to do the right thing. What you saw, instead, were people who show no sign of being interested in the truth. They don’t like the political and policy implications of climate change, so they’ve decided not to believe in it — and they’ll grab any argument, no matter how disreputable, that feeds their denial.
Indeed, if there was a defining moment in Friday’s debate, it was the declaration by Representative Paul Broun of Georgia that climate change is nothing but a “hoax” that has been “perpetrated out of the scientific community.” I’d call this a crazy conspiracy theory, but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists. After all, to believe that global warming is a hoax you have to believe in a vast cabal consisting of thousands of scientists — a cabal so powerful that it has managed to create false records on everything from global temperatures to Arctic sea ice.
Yet Mr. Broun’s declaration was met with applause.
Given this contempt for hard science, I’m almost reluctant to mention the deniers’ dishonesty on matters economic. But in addition to rejecting climate science, the opponents of the climate bill made a point of misrepresenting the results of studies of the bill’s economic impact, which all suggest that the cost will be relatively low.
Still, is it fair to call climate denial a form of treason? Isn’t it politics as usual?
Yes, it is — and that’s why it’s unforgivable.
Do you remember the days when Bush administration officials claimed that terrorism posed an “existential threat” to America, a threat in whose face normal rules no longer applied? That was hyperbole — but the existential threat from climate change is all too real.
Yet the deniers are choosing, willfully, to ignore that threat, placing future generations of Americans in grave danger, simply because it’s in their political interest to pretend that there’s nothing to worry about. If that’s not betrayal, I don’t know what is.
When did money become more important than our planet and our lives?
Betraying the Planet
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: June 28, 2009
So the House passed the Waxman-Markey climate-change bill. In political terms, it was a remarkable achievement.
But 212 representatives voted no. A handful of these no votes came from representatives who considered the bill too weak, but most rejected the bill because they rejected the whole notion that we have to do something about greenhouse gases.
And as I watched the deniers make their arguments, I couldn’t help thinking that I was watching a form of treason — treason against the planet.
To fully appreciate the irresponsibility and immorality of climate-change denial, you need to know about the grim turn taken by the latest climate research.
The fact is that the planet is changing faster than even pessimists expected: ice caps are shrinking, arid zones spreading, at a terrifying rate. And according to a number of recent studies, catastrophe — a rise in temperature so large as to be almost unthinkable — can no longer be considered a mere possibility. It is, instead, the most likely outcome if we continue along our present course.
Thus researchers at M.I.T., who were previously predicting a temperature rise of a little more than 4 degrees by the end of this century, are now predicting a rise of more than 9 degrees. Why? Global greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster than expected; some mitigating factors, like absorption of carbon dioxide by the oceans, are turning out to be weaker than hoped; and there’s growing evidence that climate change is self-reinforcing — that, for example, rising temperatures will cause some arctic tundra to defrost, releasing even more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Temperature increases on the scale predicted by the M.I.T. researchers and others would create huge disruptions in our lives and our economy. As a recent authoritative U.S. government report points out, by the end of this century New Hampshire may well have the climate of North Carolina today, Illinois may have the climate of East Texas, and across the country extreme, deadly heat waves — the kind that traditionally occur only once in a generation — may become annual or biannual events.
In other words, we’re facing a clear and present danger to our way of life, perhaps even to civilization itself. How can anyone justify failing to act?
Well, sometimes even the most authoritative analyses get things wrong. And if dissenting opinion-makers and politicians based their dissent on hard work and hard thinking — if they had carefully studied the issue, consulted with experts and concluded that the overwhelming scientific consensus was misguided — they could at least claim to be acting responsibly.
But if you watched the debate on Friday, you didn’t see people who’ve thought hard about a crucial issue, and are trying to do the right thing. What you saw, instead, were people who show no sign of being interested in the truth. They don’t like the political and policy implications of climate change, so they’ve decided not to believe in it — and they’ll grab any argument, no matter how disreputable, that feeds their denial.
Indeed, if there was a defining moment in Friday’s debate, it was the declaration by Representative Paul Broun of Georgia that climate change is nothing but a “hoax” that has been “perpetrated out of the scientific community.” I’d call this a crazy conspiracy theory, but doing so would actually be unfair to crazy conspiracy theorists. After all, to believe that global warming is a hoax you have to believe in a vast cabal consisting of thousands of scientists — a cabal so powerful that it has managed to create false records on everything from global temperatures to Arctic sea ice.
Yet Mr. Broun’s declaration was met with applause.
Given this contempt for hard science, I’m almost reluctant to mention the deniers’ dishonesty on matters economic. But in addition to rejecting climate science, the opponents of the climate bill made a point of misrepresenting the results of studies of the bill’s economic impact, which all suggest that the cost will be relatively low.
Still, is it fair to call climate denial a form of treason? Isn’t it politics as usual?
Yes, it is — and that’s why it’s unforgivable.
Do you remember the days when Bush administration officials claimed that terrorism posed an “existential threat” to America, a threat in whose face normal rules no longer applied? That was hyperbole — but the existential threat from climate change is all too real.
Yet the deniers are choosing, willfully, to ignore that threat, placing future generations of Americans in grave danger, simply because it’s in their political interest to pretend that there’s nothing to worry about. If that’s not betrayal, I don’t know what is.
Still more gay bashing?
on and on it goes. one story after another. When does it stop?
Candidate to confront deputies over raid 
Francine Busby">
Candidate to confront deputies over raid
Host, guest arrested at Busby fundraiser
2:00 a.m. June 29, 2009
Francine Busby"> Francine Busby
Update: Internal probe
The San Diego County Sheriff's Department announced Monday that it has launched an internal affairs investigation into a deputy's use of pepper spray at a fundraising party for Francine Busby on Friday night in Cardiff.
Undersheriff Bill Gore said in a statement that he has spoken with several community leaders about the incident, including Busby.
"The only proper way to ascertain exactly what happened is to initiate an Internal Affairs investigation," Gore said. "We cannot take action based on media accounts and will conduct a thorough inquiry, to include interviews of witnesses at the fundraising event."
ENCINITAS — Francine Busby says she will demand an explanation from the Sheriff's Department about deputies breaking up a fundraising party held for her in Cardiff and arresting the host.
The party was Friday night in the 1300 block of Rubenstein Avenue, the home of Shari Barman, a Busby supporter.
It ended with Barman, 60, being arrested and jailed on suspicion of battery on a peace officer, and resisting, delaying and obstructing a peace officer.
Pam Morgan, 62, a Rancho Santa Fe resident and one of the guests, also was arrested and taken to the Encinitas Sheriff's Station, where she was cited for resisting, delaying and obstructing a peace officer.
Other partygoers were doused with pepper spray, and seven deputies, a sergeant and a helicopter were dispatched to the neighborhood of expensive homes.
Busby, Barman, guests at the party and a Sheriff's Department spokesman provided varying accounts of what happened.
Busby, 58, a Democrat seeking the 50th Congressional District seat in 2010, said she will meet with Sheriff Department officials today to find out who made what she called a “phony” noise complaint.
The Sheriff's Department received the complaint at 9:33 p.m. from a man who said someone was talking on a loudspeaker and a crowd was cheering, keeping him awake.
From about 8 to 8:30 p.m., Busby said, she used an amplified microphone to talk to guests, whom she described as middle-aged supporters.
During Busby's speech, Barman said in a statement yesterday, a man on the property behind her house shouted “disparaging remarks” about Busby and gay people. Barman lives in the house with her partner, Jane Stratton, 55.
After her talk, Busby said, people chatted.
“It was a quiet home reception, disrupted by a vulgar person shouting obscenities from behind the bushes,” Busby said.
Neighbors on three sides of the house said yesterday there wasn't much noise from the party. One man said he slept through it.
“We didn't hear anything until the sheriff came, with eight patrol cars and a helicopter,” said Natasha Cortina, 43, who said she and her two children were home with the windows open.
Hugh Elliott, 53, who lives closest to the house, said he heard a deputy's radio, then arguing, coughing, crying and finally everyone spilling outside as the smell of pepper spray drifted over his back fence.
Deputy Marshall Abbott, who has worked for the department for about two years, was sent in response to the noise complaint, said Sgt. Thomas Yancey of the Encinitas station, which serves Cardiff. A member of the department's psychiatric emergency response team, who was riding with Abbott that day, went with him. Abbott could not be reached for comment.
While trying to deal with the complaint, guests at the party surrounded Abbott and he felt threatened, Yancey said.
“We don't like people standing behind us – we have Tasers, guns, clubs,” he said.
Busby said no more than 30 people were still at the party. Yancey said deputies' reports indicate there could have been as many as 50.
When Abbott arrived, Yancey said, he told Barman about the complaint, and she uttered an expletive about a neighbor. Abbott asked Barman for her birth date so he could issue a noise warning, but Barman refused to give it, he said.
Barman tried to walk away, Yancey said, and Abbott grabbed her. The guests took Barman away, and Abbott used pepper spray on them. In the chaos, someone kicked the emergency response team member, a woman who is 5-foot-2, Yancey said.
“He was pepper-spraying the faces of anyone who tried to talk to him,” Busby said. “People were stunned. It was something that none of us has experienced.”
In her statement, Barman said she asked the deputy why he needed her birth date, because he knew her name and where she lived.
“He told me I was under arrest, grabbed my right arm, twisted it behind me and threw me on the ground,” she said.
When Stratton asked the deputy to be careful because Barman had shoulder surgery recently, the deputy “knocked her to the ground,” Barman said.
After the pepper spray was used, the crowded backed off, and Abbott saw Barman in the kitchen and grabbed her, Yancey said. A man held on to Barman's foot to prevent her from being taken out of the room, and she fell to the floor. Abbott took out his Taser, the man backed off, and Barman was arrested, he said.
At some point Abbott called for backup and six deputies and a sergeant responded, Yancey said. Deputy Derek Sanders arrested Morgan, he said. There were no reported injuries.
Reports from deputies at the scene do not mention alcohol, Yancey said, which indicates people at the party were not suspected of being drunk.
“The place got out of hand,” he said. “If Francine Busby was there, why not take a leadership role, step up, and nip this thing in the bud?”
Busby said she couldn't intervene because the deputy was using pepper spray on people indiscriminately.
Barman was booked into jail at 2 a.m. Saturday and released on her own recognizance at 11 a.m., a jail official said. She is scheduled to appear in Vista Superior Court on Aug. 11 on the two misdemeanor counts.
Morgan could not be reached for comment.
Busby had sought the 50th Congressional District seat in 2006, but was defeated by Brian Bilbray, 53 percent to 44 percent. The seat was vacated by former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, who is in federal prison after pleading guilty in a corruption scandal.
The hate comes spewing out
In this story a PA Senator has graciously "allowed" gays to exist. Mighty White of him!
I suspect this is just the beginning of a long, hot, hate -filled summer.
Steel City Stonewall Democrats Denounce PA Senator Eichelberger’s Comments
Tagged with: hate speech John Eichelberger LGBT Civil Rights Pennsylvania Stonewall Democrats
YVJFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, June 25, 2009
CONTACT: Dana Elmendorf, President
president@steel-city.org
Steel-City Stonewall Democrats denounce statement made by Senator John Eichelberger
The Steel City Stonewall Democrats wishes to express our profound disappointment in the statement made by Senator John Eichelberger on Friday, June 19, 2009 during his debate on WHYY with Senator Daylin Leach.
In that debate Senator Eichelberger made the statement (in reference to a question by Senator Leach about whether Pennsylvania policy regarding same-sex marriage should be about punishing the gay community) that Gay people were not being punished and that “we are allowing them to exist and do what every American can do…”
This statement is very hurtful because no minority group needs permission to exist. LGBT community members are important participants in the fabric and culture of Pennsylvania. It is difficult enough to listen to hurtful language about our civil rights but discussions about our right to exist are beyond the pale of civil political discourse and unacceptable from any elected leader.
We call upon leaders of both parties to repudiate this statement and request that Senator Eichelberger apologize to the LGBT men, women and children of Pennsylvania.
Steel-city Stonewall Democrats is a voice of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Democrats in Southwestern Pennsylvania. We endorse and recommend candidates for public office, sponsor events and try to foster progressive change throughout the community.
I suspect this is just the beginning of a long, hot, hate -filled summer.
Steel City Stonewall Democrats Denounce PA Senator Eichelberger’s Comments
Tagged with: hate speech John Eichelberger LGBT Civil Rights Pennsylvania Stonewall Democrats
YVJFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Thursday, June 25, 2009
CONTACT: Dana Elmendorf, President
president@steel-city.org
Steel-City Stonewall Democrats denounce statement made by Senator John Eichelberger
The Steel City Stonewall Democrats wishes to express our profound disappointment in the statement made by Senator John Eichelberger on Friday, June 19, 2009 during his debate on WHYY with Senator Daylin Leach.
In that debate Senator Eichelberger made the statement (in reference to a question by Senator Leach about whether Pennsylvania policy regarding same-sex marriage should be about punishing the gay community) that Gay people were not being punished and that “we are allowing them to exist and do what every American can do…”
This statement is very hurtful because no minority group needs permission to exist. LGBT community members are important participants in the fabric and culture of Pennsylvania. It is difficult enough to listen to hurtful language about our civil rights but discussions about our right to exist are beyond the pale of civil political discourse and unacceptable from any elected leader.
We call upon leaders of both parties to repudiate this statement and request that Senator Eichelberger apologize to the LGBT men, women and children of Pennsylvania.
Steel-city Stonewall Democrats is a voice of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Democrats in Southwestern Pennsylvania. We endorse and recommend candidates for public office, sponsor events and try to foster progressive change throughout the community.
Presidents speech at Gay reception
so it appears the President is going to ignore the DOMA defense brief. His words sound nice. I just don't trust them, especially after what Clinton did. Essentially he is telling us to be patient AGAIN. Read for yourself.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000003156526
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docID=news-000003156526
CQ Transcript: President Obama Addresses Reception for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month
CQ Transcriptswire
SPEAKER: PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA
[*] B. OBAMA: Hello, everybody. Hello, hello, hello.
(APPLAUSE)
Hey. Good to see you. I’m waiting for FLOTUS here. FLOTUS always politics more than POTUS.
M. OBAMA: No, you -- you move too slow.
(LAUGHTER)
B. OBAMA: It is great to see everybody here today. And there are just -- I’ve got a lot of friends in the room, but there are some people I want to specially acknowledge.
First of all, somebody who helped ensure that we are in the White House, Steve Hildebrand. Please give Steve a big round of applause.
Hey, Steve. He’s around here somewhere.
The new chair of the Export-Import Bank, Fred Hochberg. Where is Fred?
(APPLAUSE)
There’s Fred. Good to see you, Fred.
Our director of the Institute of Education Sciences at DOE, John Easton. Where’s John?
(APPLAUSE)
A couple of special friends, Bishop Gene Robinson. Where’s Gene?
(APPLAUSE)
Hey, Gene.
Ambassador Michael Guest is here.
(APPLAUSE)
Ambassador Jim Hormel is here.
(APPLAUSE)
Oregon Secretary of State Kate Brown is here.
(APPLAUSE)
All of you are here.
(LAUGHTER)
Welcome to your White House.
(APPLAUSE)
(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE) OBAMA: Somebody’s asking for the Lincoln Bedroom here. What -- you knew he’s from Chicago, too.
(LAUGHTER)
It’s good to see so many friends and familiar faces. And I deeply appreciate the support I’ve received from so many of you. Michelle appreciates it, and I want you to know that you have our support, as well.
And...
(APPLAUSE)
You have my thanks for the work you do every day in pursuit of equality on behalf of the millions of people in this country who work hard and care about their communities and who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender.
(APPLAUSE)
Now, this struggle I don’t need to tell you is incredibly difficult, although I think it’s important to consider the extraordinary progress that we have made. There are unjust laws to overturn and unfair practices to stop. And though we’ve made progress, there are still fellow citizens -- perhaps neighbors or even family members and loved ones -- who still hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes, who fail to see your families like their families and who would deny you the rights that most Americans take for granted.
And I know this is painful. And I know it can be heartbreaking.
And yet all of you continue, leading by the force of the arguments you make, but also by the power of the example that you set in your own lives, as parents and friends, as PTA members and leaders in the community, and that’s important. And I’m glad that so many LGBT families could join us today for...
(APPLAUSE)
... for we know that progress depends not only on changing laws, but also changing hearts and that real, transformative change never begins in Washington.
(CELL PHONE RINGS)
Whose -- whose -- whose duck back there?
M. OBAMA: It’s a duck.
B. OBAMA: There’s a duck quacking in there somewhere.
(LAUGHTER)
(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE) B. OBAMA: Where do you guys get these ring tones, by the way? I’m just curious.
(LAUGHTER)
Indeed, that’s the story of the movement for fairness and equality, not just for those who are gay, but for all those in our history who’ve been denied the rights and responsibilities of citizenship, who’ve been told that the full blessings and opportunities of this country were closed to them.
It’s the story of progress sought by those who started off with little influence or power, by men and women who brought about change through quiet personal acts of compassion and courage and sometimes defiance wherever and whenever they could. That’s the story of a civil rights pioneer who’s here today, Frank Kameny, who was fired...
(APPLAUSE)
Frank was fired from his job as an astronomer for the federal government simply because he was gay. And in 1965, he led a protest outside the White House, which was at the time both an act of conscience, but also an act of extraordinary courage.
And so we are proud of you, Frank, and we are grateful to you for your leadership.
(APPLAUSE)
It’s the story of the Stonewall protests, which took place 40 years ago this week when a group of citizens with few options and fewer supporters decided they’d had enough and refused to accept a policy of wanton discrimination. And two men who were at those protests are here today. Imagine the journey that they’ve traveled.
It’s a story of an epidemic that decimated a community and the gay men and women who came to support one another and save one another, and who continue to fight this scourge, and who’ve demonstrated before the world that different kinds of families can show the same compassion and support in a time of need, that we all share the capacity to love.
So this story, this struggle continues today, for even as we face extraordinary challenges as a nation, we cannot and will not put aside issues of basic equality. We seek...
(APPLAUSE)
We seek an America in which no one feels the pain of discrimination based on who you are or who you love. I know that many in this room don’t believe that progress has come fast enough, and I understand that. It’s not for me to tell you to be patient anymore than it was for others to counsel patience to African-Americans who were petitioning for equal rights a half-century ago.
But I say this: We have made progress. And we will make more. And I want you to know that I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I’ve made, but by the promises that my administration keeps. And by the time that you see...
(APPLAUSE)
We’ve been in office six months now. I suspect that by the time this administration is over, I think you guys will have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration. I (inaudible)
(APPLAUSE)
Now, while there is much more work to do, we can point to important changes we’ve already put in place since coming into office. I signed a memorandum requiring all agencies to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families as current law allows. And these are benefits that will make a real difference for federal employees and foreign service officers who are so often treated as if their families don’t exist.
And I’d like to note that one of the key voices in helping us develop this policy is John Berry, our director of the Office of Personnel Management, who’s here today.
And I want to thank John (inaudible)
(APPLAUSE)
I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination...
(APPLAUSE)
... to help end discrimination against same-sex couples in this country. Now, I want to add, we have a duty to uphold existing law, but I believe we must do so in a way that does not exacerbate old divides.
And fulfilling this duty in upholding the law in no way lessens my commitment to reversing this law. I’ve made that clear.
I’m also urging Congress to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act, which will guarantee the full range of benefits, including health care, to LGBT couples and their children.
(APPLAUSE)
My administration is also working hard to pass an Employment Non- Discrimination bill and hate crimes bill, and we’re making progress on both fronts.
Judy -- Judy and Dennis Shepard, as well as their son, Logan, are here today. I met with Judy in the Oval Office in May.
(APPLAUSE)
And I assured her and I assured all of you that we are going to pass an inclusive hate crimes bill into law, a bill named for their son, Matthew.
(APPLAUSE)
In addition, my administration’s committed to rescinding the discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status. And the Office...
(APPLAUSE)
The Office of Management and Budget just concluded a review of a proposal to repeal this entry ban, which is a first and very big step towards ending this policy.
And we all know that HIV-AIDS continues to be a public health threat in many communities, including right here in the District of Columbia. And that’s why, this past Saturday, on National HIV Testing Day, I was proud once again to encourage all Americans to know their status and get tested the way Michelle and I know our status and got tested.
And, finally, I want to say...
(APPLAUSE)
Finally, I want to say a word about “don’t ask/don’t tell.” Now, as I said before, I’ll say it again. I believe “don’t ask/don’t tell” doesn’t contribute to our national security. In fact, I believe...
(APPLAUSE)
I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security.
(APPLAUSE)
Now, my administration is already working with the Pentagon and members of the House and the Senate on how we’ll go about ending this policy, which will require an act of Congress.
Now, some day, I’m confident, we’ll look back at this transition and ask why it generated such angst, but as commander-in-chief, in a time of war, I do have a responsibility to see that this change is administered in a practical and a way that takes over the long term.
That’s why I’ve asked the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to develop a plan for how to thoroughly implement a repeal. I know that every day that passes without a resolution is a deep disappointment to those men and women who continue to be discharged under this policy, patriots who often possess critical language skills and years of training and who’ve served this country well.
But what I hope is that these cases underscore the urgency of reversing this policy, not just because it’s the right thing to do, but because it is essential for our national security. Now, even as we take these steps, we must recognize that real progress depends not only on the laws we change, but, as I said before, on the hearts we open. If we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that there are good and decent people in this country who don’t yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters, not yet.
That’s why I’ve spoken about these issues not just in front of you, but in front of unlikely audiences, in front of African-American church members, in front of other audiences that have traditionally resisted these changes. And that’s why I’ll continue to do so.
That’s how we’ll shift attitudes. That’s how we’ll honor the legacy of leaders like Frank and many others who have refused to accept anything less than full and equal citizenship.
Now, 40 years ago, in the heart of New York City, at a place called the Stonewall Inn, a group of citizens, including a few who are here today, as I said, defied an unjust policy and awakened a nascent movement.
It was the middle of the night. The police stormed the bar, which was known for being one of the few spots where it was safe to be gay in New York. And raids like this were entirely ordinary.
Because it was considered obscene and illegal to be gay, no establishments for gays and lesbians could get licenses to operate. The nature of these businesses, combined with the vulnerability of the gay community itself, meant places like Stonewall and the patrons inside were often the victims of corruption and blackmail.
Now, ordinarily the raid would come and the customers would disperse, but on this night something was different. There are many accounts of what happened, and much has been lost to history, but what we do know is this: People didn’t leave. They stood their ground.
And over the course of several nights, they declared that they had seen enough injustice in their time. This was an outpouring against not just what they experienced that night, but what they had experienced their whole lives.
And as with so many movements, it was also something more. It was at this defining moment that folks who had been marginalized rose up to challenge not just how the world saw them, but also how they saw themselves.
As we’ve seen so many times in history, once that spirit takes hold, there’s little that can stand in its way. And...
(APPLAUSE)
The riots at Stonewall gave way to protests, and protests gave way to a movement, and the movement gave way to a transformation that continues to this day. It continues when a partner fights for her right to sit at the hospital bedside of a woman she loves; it continues when a teenager is called a name for being different and says, “So what if I am?”; it continues in your work and in your activism, in your fight to freely live your lives to the fullest.
And one year after the protests, a few hundred gays and lesbians and their supporters gathered at the Stonewall Inn to lead an historic march for equality. But when they reached Central Park, the few hundred that began the march had swelled to 5,000. Something had changed, and it would never change back.
The truth is, when these folks protested at Stonewall 40 years ago, no one could have imagined that you or, for that matter, I would be standing here today.
(APPLAUSE)
So we are all witnesses to monumental changes in this country. That should give us hope, but we cannot rest. We must continue to do our part to make progress step by step, law by law, mind by changing mind.
And I want you to know that, in this task, I will not only be your friend; I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a president who fights with you and for you.
Thanks very much, everybody. God bless you.
(APPLAUSE)
We are -- thank you -- it’s a little stuffed in here. We’re going to -- we’re going to open up that door. We’re going to walk this way, and then we’re going to come around and we’ll see some of you over there, all right?
M. OBAMA: Out there.
B. OBAMA: But -- out there. But thank you very much, all, for being here.
(UNKNOWN): We love you!
B. OBAMA: Enjoy the White House. Thank you.
END
.ETX
Jun 29, 2009 17:17 ET .EOF
Source: CQ Transcriptions
© 2009, Congressional Quarterly Inc., All Rights Reserved
The more things change the more they stay the same
As usual in Texas the police just have to be different. I will never understand how a place with such a rich tradition of hospitality can be so damned backwards socially. Unfortunately it seems to be getting worse not better.
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/06/29/dnt.tx.gay.bar.controversy.kdaf
http://lezgetreal.com/?p=15319
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2009/06/29/dnt.tx.gay.bar.controversy.kdaf
http://lezgetreal.com/?p=15319
On Anniversary of Stonewall, Police Raid Texas Gay Bar
Published June 28, 2009 @ 08:07PM PT
Add this to the file of "You've got to be kidding me!" On the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall Riots, police in Fort Worth, Texas violently raided a gay bar known as the Rainbow Lounge, arresting nearly half a dozen people and showing that the more things change in this country, sometimes the more they stay the same. Count the Fort Worth Texas Police Department as the most clueless and insensitive police departments around.
Protests sprung up throughout the day in Fort Worth, as LGBT rights activists demanded to know why the police chose the anniversary of Stonewall to make a violent raid on a gay bar. Here's the scoop on the protests and the ridiculous antics of the Fort Worth police department, fresh from the Fort Worth Star Telegram. Hat tip to reader Marlin Bynum for the heads up on this:
A crowd of more than 100 protesters chanted "No more!" from the steps of the Tarrant County Courthouse Sunday evening as they demanded an investigation into a police raid earlier in the day at a gay night club.
One patron was seriously injured in the raid, several protesters said, as police used excessive force in making seven arrests. Police defended their actions.
Speaker after speaker demanded an inquiry into the late-night raid at the Rainbow Lounge on South Jennings Street.
"I was scared," patron Todd Camp said at the protest Sunday afternoon. "I have never seen anything like this in my life."...
Witnesses say that police arrived at the nightclub about 1 a.m. Sunday and arrested seven people and that one of those arrested suffered a fractured skull during the takedown and is at a Fort Worth hospital.
Police brushed this off as a normal bar check, to make sure patrons were not breaking the law and that no minors were in the crowd. But as Todd Camp (founder of Q Cinema, and also quoted in the excerpt above), this was no normal bar visit by police. Instead, police showed up with zip cuffs and paddy wagons, which sure as hell sounds like they were trying to re-create Stonewall some 40 years ago.
"I have friends who are cops and I know what to do when officers are working," Camp said. "No one was acting aggressive to officers."
Camp said that he has been attending bars for years in Fort Worth when TABC conducts raids.
"Usually, they're very orderly and respectful – they work with the bar staff and check IDs, it's quick and painful and then it's over and then they're out," Camp said. "This was not that. This was harassment, plain and simple."
General manager Randy Norman said the bar had just been open a week and they had complied with all ordinances.
"Officers just don't come in armed with zip ties and a paddy wagon for a routine check of a bar," Norman said.
A group has now sprung up on Facebook for folks to receive up-to-date information on this incident. Unbelievable. Police departments are supposed to protect people from violence; they're not supposed to be raiding gay clubs with zip ties and paddy wagons, and cracking people's skulls. Stay tuned and see if we get some sort of apology out of this sad story.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
always the violence
It seems that some people can't resist expressing their hate. Last night in San Francisco on top of the Twin Peaks an iconic Pink Triangle was set on fire. Fortunately no people were injured.
http://sfist.com/2009/06/28/pink_triangle_partially_burned_earl.php
Pink Triangle Partially Burned Early This Morning
http://sfist.com/2009/06/28/pink_triangle_partially_burned_earl.php
Pink Triangle Partially Burned Early This Morning
The iconic Pink Triangle on Twin Peaks was set on fire by possible vandals at around 5 a.m. this morning, damaging a 25-by-30 foot area. The fire was extinguished thirty minutes later. Arson investigators are still trying to determine the cause. Mark Leno told CBS5 (video) that this isn't the first time it's happened, and that it will be repaired in time for next year's pride weekend. As Leno explained, the Pink Triangle is highly visible and vulnerable. In CBS5's video report about the incident, a resident mentions that there are lots of rare plants on Twin Peaks that were likely damaged. On a side note, some of NBC Bay Area's commenters are ignoramuses.
In the NY Times
In todays NY Times I found one of the best articles I have seen written in a long time. By Frank Rich of all people! The Times is not know for it's liberal view point but Frank Rich has been a vocal proponent of Gay rights. The full article is too long to post here but I highly recommend reading it.
Here is an excerpt:
By FRANK RICH
Published: June 27, 2009
LIKE all students caught up in the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s, I was riveted by the violent confrontations between the police and protestors in Selma, 1965, and Chicago, 1968. But I never heard about the several days of riots that rocked Greenwich Village after the police raided a gay bar called the Stonewall Inn in the wee hours of June 28, 1969 — 40 years ago today.
Then again, I didn’t know a single person, student or teacher, male or female, in my entire Ivy League university who was openly identified as gay. And though my friends and I were obsessed with every iteration of the era’s political tumult, we somehow missed the Stonewall story. Not hard to do, really. The Times — which would not even permit the use of the word gay until 1987 — covered the riots in tiny, bowdlerized articles, one of them but three paragraphs long, buried successively on pages 33, 22 and 19.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/opinion/28rich.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
Here is an excerpt:
40 Years Later, Still Second-Class Americans
By FRANK RICHPublished: June 27, 2009
LIKE all students caught up in the civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s, I was riveted by the violent confrontations between the police and protestors in Selma, 1965, and Chicago, 1968. But I never heard about the several days of riots that rocked Greenwich Village after the police raided a gay bar called the Stonewall Inn in the wee hours of June 28, 1969 — 40 years ago today.
Then again, I didn’t know a single person, student or teacher, male or female, in my entire Ivy League university who was openly identified as gay. And though my friends and I were obsessed with every iteration of the era’s political tumult, we somehow missed the Stonewall story. Not hard to do, really. The Times — which would not even permit the use of the word gay until 1987 — covered the riots in tiny, bowdlerized articles, one of them but three paragraphs long, buried successively on pages 33, 22 and 19.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/opinion/28rich.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
Saturday, June 27, 2009
On the one day
On the one day of the year that Gays and Lesbians feel comfortable to be who they are without fear of reprisal the right-wing hate group known as AFA chooses to air their hate filled trash on an NBC affliate.
No wonder why people like the AFA and others like tham are disliked and mistrusted by us? If left up to them we would have been placed in internment camps in the 80's via LaRouche's California AIDS initiative. In 1986, LaRouche launched the Proposition 64 initiative in California, which would have placed AIDS back on that state's List of Communicable Diseases subject to Public Health law. Opponents claimed that the measure could have instituted quarantines and sexual contact tracing. After its defeat it was reintroduced two years later and again defeated. LaRouche has given speeches and written articles in opposition to gay rights that his critics consider homophobic. (from wikipedia)
No wonder why people like the AFA and others like tham are disliked and mistrusted by us? If left up to them we would have been placed in internment camps in the 80's via LaRouche's California AIDS initiative. In 1986, LaRouche launched the Proposition 64 initiative in California, which would have placed AIDS back on that state's List of Communicable Diseases subject to Public Health law. Opponents claimed that the measure could have instituted quarantines and sexual contact tracing. After its defeat it was reintroduced two years later and again defeated. LaRouche has given speeches and written articles in opposition to gay rights that his critics consider homophobic. (from wikipedia)
'Silencing Christians' paid program draws protest calls, e-mails
Published: June 27, 2009
Related Links
TAMPA - A flood of telephone calls and e-mails cascaded into WFLA News Channel 8 on Saturday afternoon and night over the airing of "Silencing Christians," a religious paid program that some say contained open hate speech against gays and lesbians.
Before the hourlong program ended at 8 p.m., the station had logged hundreds of telephone calls and more than 1,000 e-mails, all protesting the broadcast.
Stratton Pollitzer, deputy director of Equality Florida, has seen the program and said the message was clearly hate speech.
"I think this program is a piece of homophobic propaganda and it has no place on a major network like NBC," he said just after 7 p.m., as the program was airing.
The show was hosted by author and commentator Janet Parshall who, at the outset, said the homosexual community has established a plan for widespread acceptance at the expense of Christian morals and values.
"And to run it the same day as Gay Pride festival in St. Petersburg just adds insult to injury," Pollitzer said. "While tens of thousands of people in Tampa Bay area are celebrating diversion, WFLA is broadcasting homophobia."
"It's a dangerous show," he said, and stations in other markets have refused to run it because of its controversial content.
Pollitzer said he spoke with station executives around 4 p.m. Saturday and was told the program would be screened and a decision would be made. At 7 p.m., the show aired.
"We hope that advertisers who value diversity will take a long look at the decision to air this program funded by a radical, right-wing fringe element," Pollitzer said. "It's just not the type of thing you'd expect to see when turn on NBC on Saturday evening."
During most of the afternoon and even after the show started, the phones rang nonstop at WFLA.
"We have 20,000 members in the Tampa Bay area," Pollitzer said. "We reached maybe 10,000 through the e-mail network. And, we only sent this to the greater Tampa Bay area, to folks within this media market. All the calls are from people who watch WFLA.
"By broadcasting this homophobia," he said, "WFLA is willing to make a profit off the dehumanization of the Tampa Bay gay and lesbian community."
The thrust of the show, according to a Silencing Christians Web site, is that Christians in America are losing freedoms at the hands of the "liberal minority" which is "undermining the morals and values of mainstream America."
The airing came a day before the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall riots, a landmark time in the gay rights movement. The anniversary commemorates the storming of a gay bar in New York by police. The anniversary was marked by the Gay Pride parade and festival Saturday in St. Petersburg.
Before and after the show, the disclaimer that the program was a paid program and that views expressed were not those of WFLA.
Mike Pumo, WFLA general manager and president, Saturday night said the program has aired on other stations around the country and at least one other Media General station. Media General owns WFLA, The Tampa Tribune and TBO.com, along with 17 other television stations, mostly in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic States.
Pumo declined to comment specifically about what went into the decision to air the program, but did admit the show did have a controversial viewpoint. The content did not, however, "raise a red flag" during the vetting procedure, he said.
pollution and the law
Many people don't realize that everytime a refinery lights up a flare it is because there was a problem at the refinery. Living near the refineries I frequently see those flares. At night they light up the sky. It is for an unpleasant reminder of how dangerous they are.
I may be one of the few people here in Texas that applaudes the Cap and Trade legislation currently making it's way through Congress. If the same (watered down) method worked for Acid Rain I am confident it will work on the crap these local refineries spew.
I may be one of the few people here in Texas that applaudes the Cap and Trade legislation currently making it's way through Congress. If the same (watered down) method worked for Acid Rain I am confident it will work on the crap these local refineries spew.
Texas issues $650,000 fine against BP
02:41 PM CDT on Saturday, June 27, 2009
TEXAS CITY — The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on Friday fined BP’s Texas City operations $650,000 for what the state said was improper disposal of waste product. The fine covers 10 environmental violations over six months in 2007, the state’s environmental agency said.
Details of the violations were not provided by the commission Friday afternoon.
However, the commission announced that part of the fine includes $325,000 that will be used to purchase park land in Texas City.
The Supplemental Environmental Project is in lieu of a cash fine. In BP’s case, the $325,000 will be added to the $5.5 million the company has already contributed to the city of Texas City for an expansive park project.
About half of BP’s fine money will be used to purchase additional park land behind Mall of the Mainland in Texas City as part of the city’s Central Park nature park project.
Friday’s fine comes less than a month after the Texas attorney general sued BP for “repeated violations of environmental laws” at its Texas City refinery. On June 4, Attorney General Greg Abbott outlined the enforcement action listing 15 enforcement orders and 46 environmental violations against BP Texas City by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
Because the commission did not include details of the incidents that related to the new fines, The Daily News could not confirm whether the action by the state’s environmental agency was among the environmental violations included in the attorney general’s lawsuit, which covers violations that date back to 2002, but also includes incidents in 2007.
About time
I wish this would happen more often and to people with better known names...
The thinly disguised hate, bigotry, vile and venom must stop. If it takes arrests so be it.
Having a difference of opinion is human but being ugly about it has become a right-wing tactic courtesy of Karl Rove. He perfected it in the last administration when disagreeing with the President was enough to cause you to be labeled a traitor. All done with the Patriot Act and DHS backing him up.
The thinly disguised hate, bigotry, vile and venom must stop. If it takes arrests so be it.
Having a difference of opinion is human but being ugly about it has become a right-wing tactic courtesy of Karl Rove. He perfected it in the last administration when disagreeing with the President was enough to cause you to be labeled a traitor. All done with the Patriot Act and DHS backing him up.
Radio Host Is Arrested in Threats on 3 Judges
WASHINGTON — An Internet radio host known for his incendiary views was arrested Wednesday in North Bergen, N.J., after federal officials charged that his angry postings about a gun case in Chicago amounted to death threats against three judges.
In a case that tests the limits of free speech, the Justice Department charged that the radio host, Hal Turner, had crossed the line into hate speech.
Mr. Turner, regarded by civil rights monitoring groups as a white supremacist, an anti-Semite and a “maestro of radio hate,” posted commentaries on his blog denouncing a ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in Chicago, that upheld two local bans on handguns.
“Let me be the first to say this plainly: These judges deserve to be killed,” Mr. Turner wrote in a blog entry on June 2. “Their blood will replenish the tree of liberty. A small price to pay to assure freedom for millions.”
He said the three judges, William J. Bauer, Frank H. Easterbrook and Richard A. Posner, should be made “an example” of in order to send a message to the rest of the federal judiciary: “Obey the Constitution or die.”
Mr. Turner also posted the judges’ photographs, phone numbers, work addresses and courtroom numbers.
There is no indication that Mr. Turner or anyone else acted on his warnings. Nonetheless, the Federal Bureau of Investigation said in an affidavit that it believed his comments constituted “a threat to assault or murder a United States judge.”
F.B.I. agents arrested Mr. Turner at his home, and he is due to make his first court appearance on Thursday. Three weeks ago, in a case still pending, state officials in Connecticut charged Mr. Turner with inciting violence against lawmakers involved in an unrelated decision involving the Roman Catholic Church.
Traditionally, the courts have given wide latitude to First Amendment rights, even in cases involving speech that is widely considered offensive, but public statements regarded as “true threats” have not been afforded legal protection. One key test case came in 2002, when a federal appeals court in California upheld a $109 million jury verdict against organizers of an anti-abortion Web site that distributed Wild West-style wanted posters of abortion providers, with photos of dead doctors crossed out.Friday, June 26, 2009
American Icons
I guess I have finally reach that age where the famous people I grew up with are starting to die off.
In the last few weeks we have lost Michael Jackson, Farah Fawcett, Ed McMahon, and David Carradine. All of these very talented people influenced my life as I grew up.
I can still hear Ed introducing Johnny Carson so many years ago, See David Carradine as the wandering monk, See Farrah in her bathing suit and oh so perfect hair, See Michael as a boy my age singing on TV for the first time.
These are images I will never forget.
I hope each of them finds peace.
In the last few weeks we have lost Michael Jackson, Farah Fawcett, Ed McMahon, and David Carradine. All of these very talented people influenced my life as I grew up.
I can still hear Ed introducing Johnny Carson so many years ago, See David Carradine as the wandering monk, See Farrah in her bathing suit and oh so perfect hair, See Michael as a boy my age singing on TV for the first time.
These are images I will never forget.
I hope each of them finds peace.
Amazing
I never ceased to be amazed at what value people find in attempting to argue points that are subjective opinions.
If you say to me "I believe the sky is going to fall tomorrow." I typically will say "I think your crazy but you may be right."
My reaction is based on the fact that while in my belief it is very unlikely that your prediction is going to be correct I can't possibly prove you wrong.
Today I voiced the opinion that a commentator was a Fox news political hack based upon the times I have seen him express his opinion. He is very akin to chicken little in his shrill doomsday predictions. Worst of all is that he never bases these opinions on facts. He does not cite any studies or research. We are just supposed to take him at his word without the benefit of critical thinking or reasoned discourse.
And yet I am told to shut up for voicing my opinion. Amazing!
PS. don't hold your breath waiting for me to shut up... you don't look good in blue.
If you say to me "I believe the sky is going to fall tomorrow." I typically will say "I think your crazy but you may be right."
My reaction is based on the fact that while in my belief it is very unlikely that your prediction is going to be correct I can't possibly prove you wrong.
Today I voiced the opinion that a commentator was a Fox news political hack based upon the times I have seen him express his opinion. He is very akin to chicken little in his shrill doomsday predictions. Worst of all is that he never bases these opinions on facts. He does not cite any studies or research. We are just supposed to take him at his word without the benefit of critical thinking or reasoned discourse.
And yet I am told to shut up for voicing my opinion. Amazing!
PS. don't hold your breath waiting for me to shut up... you don't look good in blue.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Health Care and gays
In a surprising twist i found this interesting, and encouraging, article from the Dallas Voice.
http://www.dallasvoice.com/artman/publish/article_11484.php
Baldwin offers LGBT health equality bill
By Staff Reports
Jun 25, 2009 - 5:45:42 PM
Openly lesbian U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., on Tuesday, June 23 introduced the “Ending Health Disparities for LGBT Americans Act,” a comprehensive piece of legislation intended to improve “all areas of the health care system where LGBT Americans face inequality and discrimination,” according to a statement released Tuesday by the congresswoman’s office.
“Our current health care system fails LGBT Americans on many levels,” said Baldwin. “Although we have ample anecdotal evidence of these disparities, the federal government lacks even the most basic data on sexual orientation and gender identity and health. This bill invests in research and takes critical steps towards improving the health of LGBT Americans and their families.”
Other sponsors are House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Reps. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., Mike Honda, D- Calif., and Nydia Velazquez, D-N.Y.
Baldwin said she has been working on the bill for more than a year and that as Congress takes on the task of reforming the health care system as a whole, she and her colleagues are “working to ensure that we address the health care of all disenfranchised populations.”
In addition to investing in data collection and research, the bill establishes non-discrimination policies for all federal health programs, provides funding for cultural competence training for health care providers, extends Medicare benefits to same-sex domestic partners, creates a new office of LGBT Health within the Department of Health and Human Services and provides funding for community health centers that serve the LGBT community.
http://www.dallasvoice.com/artman/publish/article_11484.php
Baldwin offers LGBT health equality bill
By Staff Reports
Jun 25, 2009 - 5:45:42 PM
 |
| Rep. Tammy Baldwin |
“Our current health care system fails LGBT Americans on many levels,” said Baldwin. “Although we have ample anecdotal evidence of these disparities, the federal government lacks even the most basic data on sexual orientation and gender identity and health. This bill invests in research and takes critical steps towards improving the health of LGBT Americans and their families.”
Other sponsors are House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and Reps. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., Mike Honda, D- Calif., and Nydia Velazquez, D-N.Y.
Baldwin said she has been working on the bill for more than a year and that as Congress takes on the task of reforming the health care system as a whole, she and her colleagues are “working to ensure that we address the health care of all disenfranchised populations.”
In addition to investing in data collection and research, the bill establishes non-discrimination policies for all federal health programs, provides funding for cultural competence training for health care providers, extends Medicare benefits to same-sex domestic partners, creates a new office of LGBT Health within the Department of Health and Human Services and provides funding for community health centers that serve the LGBT community.
Monday, June 22, 2009
401(k)'s
This is the worst "recession" in my memory. Last week I walked into work on my 2nd anniversary there. I had 2 emails waiting. The first was a congratulatory letter for my anniversary, the 2nd was a letter letting us know that the company would no longer be contributing to our 401(k) accounts.
Now when I started working companies vied for you by offering benefits, we had these great medical packages, dental benefits, vision, retirement, disability, and all kinds of time off for vacation, personal AND sick days.
Over the years I have seen these benefits slowly be eroded. I currently get 1/2 of the time off I used to get. The benefits are fewer and more expensive on my part.
To have the companies contributions to my retirement account ended (ostensibly temporary)was a blow I never expected. Unfortunately I have found that when a company "temporarily" stops "giving" something to employees... they never get it back.
Today I found out I am not alone. According to a story on MSNBC today http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31488492/ns/business-personal_finance/ at least 25% of employers have stopped this practice. Where does it stop?
Companies now seem to resent that they have to actually PAY people to work for them.
What happened to business morals and ethics?
Now when I started working companies vied for you by offering benefits, we had these great medical packages, dental benefits, vision, retirement, disability, and all kinds of time off for vacation, personal AND sick days.
Over the years I have seen these benefits slowly be eroded. I currently get 1/2 of the time off I used to get. The benefits are fewer and more expensive on my part.
To have the companies contributions to my retirement account ended (ostensibly temporary)was a blow I never expected. Unfortunately I have found that when a company "temporarily" stops "giving" something to employees... they never get it back.
Today I found out I am not alone. According to a story on MSNBC today http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31488492/ns/business-personal_finance/ at least 25% of employers have stopped this practice. Where does it stop?
Companies now seem to resent that they have to actually PAY people to work for them.
What happened to business morals and ethics?
Sunday, June 21, 2009
On a lighter note...
Here is a video you have to watch... hilarious!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/20/new-jibjab-obama-video-ob_n_218477.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/20/new-jibjab-obama-video-ob_n_218477.html
Iran
For the last couple of days I haven't posted anything because I have been watching and waiting to see what would happen in Iran. The situation there was bad but not it is getting worse.
For all things wrong with our country I thank god that I can at least sit here safe and secure in the knowledge that it is still better than what it could be.
Better than what is happening in Iran. For that we should all be grateful.
I don't see how that situation will do anything but get worse. I hope I'm wrong.
Here is a comment that was posted on you tube about the video I am linking.
Her name was Neda.
Say it. Remember it. Not just today, but everyday someone in this world is being oppressed and killed because it's easier for a monster in any position of power to force his will on the people than to admit he is wrong.
Some say we can do nothing for them here. I disagree. We can bear witness. We can post the link to this to our friends. We can remember when tyrants would demand we forget.
Her name was Neda.
Remember this COULD be us. We are the only ones that can make sure it's not.
WARNING VERY GRAPHIC!!!!
From BNO news on twitter -
Terrible, terrible footage from a woman shot death, allegedly in Tehran. Very graphic: http://bit.ly/XBzEb
For all things wrong with our country I thank god that I can at least sit here safe and secure in the knowledge that it is still better than what it could be.
Better than what is happening in Iran. For that we should all be grateful.
I don't see how that situation will do anything but get worse. I hope I'm wrong.
Here is a comment that was posted on you tube about the video I am linking.
Her name was Neda.
Say it. Remember it. Not just today, but everyday someone in this world is being oppressed and killed because it's easier for a monster in any position of power to force his will on the people than to admit he is wrong.
Some say we can do nothing for them here. I disagree. We can bear witness. We can post the link to this to our friends. We can remember when tyrants would demand we forget.
Her name was Neda.
Remember this COULD be us. We are the only ones that can make sure it's not.
WARNING VERY GRAPHIC!!!!
From BNO news on twitter -
Terrible, terrible footage from a woman shot death, allegedly in Tehran. Very graphic: http://bit.ly/XBzEb
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Crap Update
Here is the text of todays signing. Notice he does not promised to rid of us DOMA or DADT.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Wrongs-that-We-Intend-to-Right-Today/
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Wrongs-that-We-Intend-to-Right-Today/
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17TH, 2009 AT 7:26 PM
“Wrongs that We Intend to Right Today”
Posted by Jesse Lee
This evening the President signed a memorandum expanding federal benefits for the same-sex partners of Foreign Service and executive branch government employees. In his remarks before signing the memorandum, he said that this was a first step: "We've got more work to do to ensure that government treats all its citizens equally; to fight injustice and intolerance in all its forms; and to bring about that more perfect union. I'm committed to these efforts, and I pledge to work tirelessly on behalf of these issues in the months and years to come."
The official statement released along with the memorandum itself told the sort of story that moved him to sign it, and also announced his support for the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009:
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE PRESIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM ON FEDERAL BENEFITS AND NON-DISCRIMINATION, AND SUPPORT OF THE LIEBERMAN-BALDWIN BENEFITS LEGISLATION
In 2007, Michael Guest, the first openly gay Ambassador confirmed by the United States Senate, resigned from the Foreign Service. He loved his career, but he had to leave it in the end -- because he believed that the country he served was failing to implement the principles of equality it espoused abroad. His partner was ineligible for training provided to Ambassadorial spouses; he bore the costs of his partner's transportation to his placements abroad; and his partner did not receive the overseas benefits and allowances given to spouses of Ambassadors.
It is too late to prevent Ambassador Guest from having to make the choice he made, but today I am proud to issue a Presidential Memorandum that will go a long way toward achieving equality for many of the hard-working, dedicated, and patriotic LGBT Americans serving in our Federal Government -- Americans like Ambassador Guest. In consultation with Secretary Clinton, who in her role as Secretary of State oversees our foreign service employees, and Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry, who oversees human resource management for our civil service employees, my Administration has identified a number of areas in which greater equality can be achieved under existing law by extending to the same-sex partners of Federal employees many of the same benefits already available to the spouses of heterosexual Federal employees. I am therefore requesting the Secretary of State and the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to extend the benefits they have identified to the same-sex partners of Federal employees where doing so can be achieved consistent with Federal law. I am also requesting the heads of all other executive departments and agencies to conduct a review of the benefits they administer to determine which may legally be extended to same-sex partners.
But this Presidential Memorandum is just a start. Unfortunately, my Administration is not authorized by existing Federal law to provide same-sex couples with the full range of benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. That's why I stand by my long-standing commitment to work with Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. It's discriminatory, it interferes with States' rights, and it's time we overturned it.
I am also proud to announce my support for an important piece of legislation introduced in both Houses of Congress last month -- the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009. This legislation will extend to the same-sex partners of Federal employees the same benefits already enjoyed by the opposite-sex spouses of Federal employees. The legislation has a number of co-sponsors in both Houses of Congress, but among those many sponsors, I want to recognize one in particular -- Representative Tammy Baldwin, who has been a real leader on this issue, and more broadly on the LGBT struggle for equality. Representative Baldwin, I look forward to working with you to achieve the important objectives set out in this bill as it moves through the legislative process. I also look forward to working with the bill's Senate champions, Senators Lieberman and Collins; I know that they will approach this process with the same spirit of cooperation in pursuit of our shared goals that they bring to all of their work in the Senate.
Extending equal benefits to the same-sex partners of Federal employees is the right thing to do. It is also sound economic policy. Many top employers in the private sector already offer benefits to the same-sex partners of their employees; those companies recognize that offering partner benefits helps them compete for and retain the brightest and most talented employees. The Federal Government is at a disadvantage on that score right now, and change is long overdue.
As Americans, we are all affected when our promises of equality go unfulfilled. Through measures like the Presidential Memorandum I am issuing today and the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009, we will advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded and continue to perfect our Union.
It is too late to prevent Ambassador Guest from having to make the choice he made, but today I am proud to issue a Presidential Memorandum that will go a long way toward achieving equality for many of the hard-working, dedicated, and patriotic LGBT Americans serving in our Federal Government -- Americans like Ambassador Guest. In consultation with Secretary Clinton, who in her role as Secretary of State oversees our foreign service employees, and Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry, who oversees human resource management for our civil service employees, my Administration has identified a number of areas in which greater equality can be achieved under existing law by extending to the same-sex partners of Federal employees many of the same benefits already available to the spouses of heterosexual Federal employees. I am therefore requesting the Secretary of State and the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to extend the benefits they have identified to the same-sex partners of Federal employees where doing so can be achieved consistent with Federal law. I am also requesting the heads of all other executive departments and agencies to conduct a review of the benefits they administer to determine which may legally be extended to same-sex partners.
But this Presidential Memorandum is just a start. Unfortunately, my Administration is not authorized by existing Federal law to provide same-sex couples with the full range of benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. That's why I stand by my long-standing commitment to work with Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. It's discriminatory, it interferes with States' rights, and it's time we overturned it.
I am also proud to announce my support for an important piece of legislation introduced in both Houses of Congress last month -- the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009. This legislation will extend to the same-sex partners of Federal employees the same benefits already enjoyed by the opposite-sex spouses of Federal employees. The legislation has a number of co-sponsors in both Houses of Congress, but among those many sponsors, I want to recognize one in particular -- Representative Tammy Baldwin, who has been a real leader on this issue, and more broadly on the LGBT struggle for equality. Representative Baldwin, I look forward to working with you to achieve the important objectives set out in this bill as it moves through the legislative process. I also look forward to working with the bill's Senate champions, Senators Lieberman and Collins; I know that they will approach this process with the same spirit of cooperation in pursuit of our shared goals that they bring to all of their work in the Senate.
Extending equal benefits to the same-sex partners of Federal employees is the right thing to do. It is also sound economic policy. Many top employers in the private sector already offer benefits to the same-sex partners of their employees; those companies recognize that offering partner benefits helps them compete for and retain the brightest and most talented employees. The Federal Government is at a disadvantage on that score right now, and change is long overdue.
As Americans, we are all affected when our promises of equality go unfulfilled. Through measures like the Presidential Memorandum I am issuing today and the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009, we will advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded and continue to perfect our Union.
Spys, spys everywhere!
Sounds pretty crazy and paranoid to say that we have been, are and will be spied on by our own government but the truth is it has been happening since shortly after 9/11 and the passage of the insane "Patriot Act".
In the latest episode the NY times published an article about it and the abuses...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/us/17nsa.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&hp
A few hours later the #1 person on the "Senate Intelligence Committee" - Sen. Diane Feinstein (whom I used to like as mayor) decries the story as untrue. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVPrsoBZ8pmnVLGYV1juIJ6yP0UgD98SGPVG1
I'm betting the Times is right this time.
In the latest episode the NY times published an article about it and the abuses...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/17/us/17nsa.html?pagewanted=2&_r=2&hp
A few hours later the #1 person on the "Senate Intelligence Committee" - Sen. Diane Feinstein (whom I used to like as mayor) decries the story as untrue. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iVPrsoBZ8pmnVLGYV1juIJ6yP0UgD98SGPVG1
I'm betting the Times is right this time.
What a load of crap
For some reason the President seems to think that throwing us a bone will stem the anger over the brief his administration recently filed defending DOMA (see previous post) This is a joke.
Here is the fact sheet released today. Keep in mind that DOMA spefically disallows extending health benefits and many others.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Fact-Sheet-Presidential-Memorandum-on-Federal-Benefits-and-Non-Discrimination/
Here is the fact sheet released today. Keep in mind that DOMA spefically disallows extending health benefits and many others.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Fact-Sheet-Presidential-Memorandum-on-Federal-Benefits-and-Non-Discrimination/
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
__________________________________________________________________
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 17, 2009
Fact Sheet: Presidential Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination
In an Oval Office event later today, President Barack Obama will sign a Presidential Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination. The Memorandum follows a review by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management ant the Secretary of State regarding what benefits may be extended to the same-sex partners of federal employees in the civil service and the foreign service within the confines of existing federal laws and statutes.
Over the past several months, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management and the Secretary of State have conducted internal reviews to determine whether the benefits they administer may be extended to the same-sex partners of federal employees within the confines of existing laws and statutes. Both identified a number of such benefits.
For civil service employees, domestic partners of federal employees can be added to the long-term care insurance program; supervisors can also be required to allow employees to use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and non-biological, non-adopted children. For foreign service employees, a number of benefits were identified, including the use of medical facilities at posts abroad, medical evacuation from posts abroad, and inclusion in family size for housing allocations.
The Presidential Memorandum to be signed today will request that the Director of OPM and the Secretary of State act to extend to same-sex partners of federal employees the benefits they have identified. The Memorandum will also request the heads of all other executive branch departments and agencies to conduct internal reviews to determine whether other benefits they administer might be similarly extended, and to report the results of those reviews to the Director of OPM.
The Memorandum will also direct OPM to issue guidance within 90 days to all executive departments and agencies regarding compliance with, and implementation of, the civil service laws, which make it unlawful to discriminate against federal employees or applicants for federal employment on the basis of factors not related to job performance.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Only bad choices
Health care in this country has gone to the dogs. When I started working part of what employers were proud of was the health care package they offered employees. In the last 20 years that has ceased to be the case.
Employees are given options that are horrible at best and then charged exorbitant amounts of money for them. Your care is dictated not by your doctor but by what your provider decides they will or will not pay. The rules they post on websites are subject to change on a whim - without notification to you as the "client". They make decisions based on semantics rather than sound medicine.
Diagnostic testing is NOT preventative??? Since when? Don't you have to test to determine if a hypothesis is correct? Instead they assume based on the time of day and attitude of the person making the decision. A person with no medical background.
I would be better off if I quit my job and got medical care from the state. Maybe more red tape but at least some bean counter doesn't have the last word in MY life or death medical decisions.
Health Care MUST be changed. And I don't mean new boss, same as the old boss. I mean real change. Take the power out of the hands of for-profit corporations and put it in the hands of the patient and their doctor. Health care has no business being a profit center.
Employees are given options that are horrible at best and then charged exorbitant amounts of money for them. Your care is dictated not by your doctor but by what your provider decides they will or will not pay. The rules they post on websites are subject to change on a whim - without notification to you as the "client". They make decisions based on semantics rather than sound medicine.
Diagnostic testing is NOT preventative??? Since when? Don't you have to test to determine if a hypothesis is correct? Instead they assume based on the time of day and attitude of the person making the decision. A person with no medical background.
I would be better off if I quit my job and got medical care from the state. Maybe more red tape but at least some bean counter doesn't have the last word in MY life or death medical decisions.
Health Care MUST be changed. And I don't mean new boss, same as the old boss. I mean real change. Take the power out of the hands of for-profit corporations and put it in the hands of the patient and their doctor. Health care has no business being a profit center.
Racism
This has been a big topic of discussion again since the election of our first black President. I honestly don't understand why people are so damned hide-bound and prejudice. But of course they ALL deny they are the prejudice ones.
Here are a couple of interesting articles that caught my eye.
Here are a couple of interesting articles that caught my eye.
A Black President Doesn’t Mean Racism is gone in America
By Peter Phillips Racial inequality remains in the US. People of color continue to experience high rates of poverty, significant unemployment, police profiling and repressive incarceration. School segregation is a continuing concern among race scholars as well.
According to a new Civil Rights report published at UCLA, “Reviving the Goal of an Integrated Society: A 21st Century Challenge,” by Gary Orfield, schools in the US are currently 44% non-white, and minorities are rapidly emerging as the majority of public school students. Latinos and Blacks are the two largest minority groups. However, Black and Latino students attend schools more segregated today than during the civil rights era. Schools are still separate and not equal more than fifty years after the US Supreme Court case: Brown VS Board of Education. Orfield’s study shows that most severe segregation in public schools is in the Western states, including California, not in the south as many people believe.
This new form of segregation is primarily based on how urban areas are geographically organized—as Cornel West so passionately describes— into vanilla suburbs and chocolate cities.
Schools remain highly unequal, both in terms of money, and qualified teachers and curriculum. Unequal education leads to a diminished access to colleges and future jobs. Non-white schools are segregated by poverty as well as race. These “chocolate” low-income public schools are where most of the nation’s drop-outs occur, leading to large numbers of virtually unemployable young people of color struggling to survive in a very troubled economy.
There is a white people’s side of segregation as well. Diminished opportunity for students of color invariable creates greater privileges for whites. White privilege is a concept that is overtly difficult for many whites to accept. Whites like to think of themselves as hard working and whatever they achieve is due to deserved personal efforts. In many cases this is in fact partly true, hard work in college often pays off in many ways. What is difficult for many whites to accept is that geographical/structural racism still serves as a significant barrier for many students of color. Whites often say racism is in the past, and we need not think about it today. Yet, inequality stares at us daily from the barrios, ghettos, and from behind prisons walls. Inequality continues in privileged universities as well.
An example of white privilege is how Sonoma State University in California (SSU) has recently achieved the status of having the whitest and likely the richest student population of any public university in the State of California. Research shows, that beginning in the early 1990s, the SSU administration specifically sought to market the campus as a public ivy institution—offering an ivy-league experience at a State College price. Part of this public ivy packaging was to advertise SSU as being in a destination wine country location with high physical and cultural amenities. These marketing efforts were principally designed to attract upper-income students to a Falcon Crest like campus.
To achieve the desired outcome of becoming a wine-country public ivy SSU administration implemented a special admissions screening process that used higher SAT-GPA indexes than the rest of the California State University (CSU) system. According to Lani Guinier and Gerald Torres in The Miner’s Canary, high SAT scores correlate directly to both race and income with little relationship to actual success in college.
SSU also conducted recruitment at predominately white upper-income public and private high schools throughout the West Coast and Hawaii. The result was that SSU freshmen students with family incomes over $150,000 increased by 59 percent since 1994 and freshmen students from families below $50,000 declined by 21 percent (2007 dollars). The campus remained over three-quarters white during this fifteen-year period, while the rest of the CSU campuses significantly increased ethnic diversity.
We are at a time in society when a majority of the population has elected a Black president of the United States. This presidency is a hugely symbolic achievement for race relations in the US. We must not, however, ignore the continuing disadvantages for people of color and the resulting advantages gained by whites in our society. Institutional policies and segregation contribute to continuing inequalities that require ongoing review and discussion. Efforts against racism must continue if we are to truly attain the civil rights goal of equal opportunity for all.
Peter Phillips is a Professor of Sociology at Sonoma State University. His recent research study Building a Public Ivy: Sonoma State University: 1994-2007, is on line at: http://www.projectcensored.org/articles/story/building-a-public-ivy/
A former chairman of the South Carolina Election Commission has apologized after his posting on Facebook suggested a gorilla that escaped form a Columbia zoo was an ancestor of first lady Michelle Obama. Minutes after the gorilla's escape was reported Friday, GOP activist Rusty DePass posted: "I'm sure it's just one of Michelle's ancestors -- probably harmless."
Seriously did he think no one would notice this comment? Lastly for today, here is another of those political geniuses bright moves...
http://blogs.nashvillescene.com/pitw/2009/06/republican_staffer_e-mails_oba.php
Republican Staffer E-Mails Obama 'Spook' Photo
Monday, Jun. 15 2009 @ 12:45PM
The picture you're looking at on the right was allegedly sent from Sherri Goforth, 
research analyst executive assistant for Sen. Diane Black, on May 28 via e-mail, under the headline "Historical Keepsake Photo." We've never seen President Obama in person, but we're pretty sure those pair of spooked white eyes against a black background don't quite do him justice. In fact, one could argue that forwarding an e-mail like this to 20 of your friends makes you look like an out-and-out bigot.
Thus far we've hit Sen. Black, the Republican's caucus chair, with an e-mail and calls to both her office and cell phone with no response. Meanwhile, you can check out the list of e-mail recipients below.
From: Sherri Goforth Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2009 8:33 AM To: Alice Bigham; Anna Richardson; Beth Chiles; Carolyn Newman; Catherine Haire; Christina Barber; Chuck Grimes; Darlene Schlicher; Deana Guenther; Debbie Martin; Debbie Rankin; Glenda Mayes; Jeremy Davis; John Michael Burch; Lance Frizzell; Lee Harrell; Linda Klingmann; Liz Alvey; Logan Grant; Loudene Gee; Matt King; Micki Coode; Pam George; Pat Farmer; Patti Saliba; Rick Nicholson; Sandra Smith; Sherri Goforth; Tina Still; Tonya Morelock; Valerie Yancey; Will Canterbury; Wilma Carney; Zach Bates Subject: FW: Historical Keepsake Photo
Enormous H/T (damn near a bow, in fact) to Trace at Newscoma.
Update: Christian Grantham talks with Goforth. She says Black gave her a letter of reprimand but will keep her on the job. Also, Goforth only admits to having sent the e-mail to the wrong list; not exactly an apology.
Update #2: Just spoke with Alice Bingham, secretary for Sen. Tim Burchett and one of the people on Goforth's "wrong list." She says she can't remember whether or not she opened it, but she guessed she probably just deleted it, saying that "a lot of crap" gets sent out via the inter-congressional interwebs.
DOMA defense blowback
It appears the war has started. Like me, millions of gays are tired of waiting for our turn to be treated as equals. We had real hope till recently as I mentioned yesterday.
Today the seriousness of this begins to show.
From Politico http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Gay_figures_pull_out_of_Biden_fundraiser.html?showall and Americablog http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/attendee-list-for-1000-head-dnc-gay.html
Please call Barney, Tammy and Jared and politely ask them WTF? It's been 5 days and none of them have said anything about this travesty, let alone why they're hosting the inopportune fundraiser - literally asking you to give Obama and the Democrats your good money after they've abandoned us - no - knifed us. It's clear to me that the White House asked them not to say anything, perhaps promising something in return. And before anyone just assumes that Obama privately promised them to move forward on gay rights, the president could have just as easily promised them a new highway in their state or to do a fundraiser for their re-election, provided they shut up. Their silence is looking very bad. Please call them and then report back to the comments with how the calls went.
Rep. Barney Frank:
2252 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
tel: (202) 225-5931
fax: (202) 225-0182
Rep. Tammy Baldwin
2446 Rayburn Building
Washington DC 20515
(202) 225-6942 Fax
(202) 225-2906
Email Form
Rep. Jared Polis
Washington, DC Office
501 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
p. 202.225.2161
f. 202.226.7840
Today the seriousness of this begins to show.
From Politico http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/Gay_figures_pull_out_of_Biden_fundraiser.html?showall and Americablog http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/attendee-list-for-1000-head-dnc-gay.html
Please call Barney, Tammy and Jared and politely ask them WTF? It's been 5 days and none of them have said anything about this travesty, let alone why they're hosting the inopportune fundraiser - literally asking you to give Obama and the Democrats your good money after they've abandoned us - no - knifed us. It's clear to me that the White House asked them not to say anything, perhaps promising something in return. And before anyone just assumes that Obama privately promised them to move forward on gay rights, the president could have just as easily promised them a new highway in their state or to do a fundraiser for their re-election, provided they shut up. Their silence is looking very bad. Please call them and then report back to the comments with how the calls went.
Rep. Barney Frank:
2252 Rayburn Building
Washington, DC 20515
tel: (202) 225-5931
fax: (202) 225-0182
Rep. Tammy Baldwin
2446 Rayburn Building
Washington DC 20515
(202) 225-6942 Fax
(202) 225-2906
Email Form
Rep. Jared Polis
Washington, DC Office
501 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
p. 202.225.2161
f. 202.226.7840
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)