Sheila Sorenson, Senate State Affairs Chairwoman from Idaho, refused to hold a hearing to ban gay marriages in Idaho even though the amendment passed the House 53-17 earlier in February. Can you believe she's a Republican? Sorenson's reasons? She felt the move was divisive, a political ploy, and unnecessary, especially since the president is calling for a federal ban on gay marriage. She also did not want to call any negative publicity to the state of Idaho. She's definitely no Marilyn Musgrave. The difference between the two women? Sorenson isn't worried about re-election. She's doing what she thinks is best. Read the story
The Results Are in and the Winner Is . . . or Maybe Not, By Adam Cohen
There is a disturbing amount of evidence that electronic voting, in its current form, is vulnerable to electoral mischief.
This story is very curious and talks about updates being added to the voting program at the last minute in one particular election. Give the story a read
The Presidential Prayer Team is currently urging us to: "Pray for the President as he seeks wisdom on how to legally codify the definition of marriage. Pray that it will be according to Biblical principles. With any forces insisting on variant definitions of marriage, pray that God's Word and His standards will be honored by our government."
Any good religious person believes prayer should be balanced by action.
So here, in support of the Prayer Team's admirable goals, is a proposed Constitutional Amendment codifying marriage entirely on Biblical principles:
A. Marriage in the United States shall consist of a union between one man and one or more women. (Gen 29:17-28; II Sam 3:2-5.)
B. Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)
C. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)
D. Marriage between a believer and a nonbeliever shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)
E. Since marriage is for life, neither this Constitution nor the constitution of any State, nor any state or federal law, shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)
F. If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law. (Gen. 38:6-10; Deut25:5-10)
G. Divorced people may not remarry without being considered adulterers. (Math. 5:31-32) (Mark 10:4)
H. Adulterers shall be stoned to death. (Lev. 20:10)
I thought this was great. I found it by clicking on the random blog links located to the left in the sidebar (you can click them, people. I don't get paid a dime if you do).
Now wouldn't this be the way? Triple-divorcee Senator Dave Zien is one of the the five committee members who cosponsored the WI amendment that is designed to keep homosexuals from ever being allowed to marry, in order to protect the sanctity of marriage.
Now, either Senator Dave Zien forgot he's been divorced 3 times, or Senator Dave Zien is participating in what I would view (in his case) as mean-spirited homophobic behavior. Or, there's a third option: Senator Dave Zien wants to protect the sanctity of everybody else's heterosexual marriage -- except his three.
The differences between John Kerry and John Edwards, the two prime contenders in the Democratic presidential race, are more stylistic and biographical than substantive, as both men have similar Senate voting records and views on key issues.
From reading this Reuters story on the two, I'm wondering if analysts aren't guessing that Kerry is a definite winner for the Demoratic ticket and Edwards would be Kerry's choice for VP.
Everywhere you turn, people are poking fun of the lack of differences between the two. Scrappleface.com, with his outrageously funny satire, has made it an almost daily occurrence to remind us that the two are almost one in the same.
[Bush] declined to say whether he was more inclined now to back a constitutional ban. However, he spoke privately with conservative Catholics about the issue, and activists who favor such a ban said the president would soon announce his support. Guardian Unlimited, February 19, 2004
That was an item I remembered I'd read as I was reading this story this morning:
On the eve of the release of a nationwide study of sex abuse in the Roman Catholic Church, the Boston archdiocese said yesterday that 162 of its priests -- 7 percent of all who have served since 1950 -- have been accused of molesting minors, and that it has spent $120 million to settle related lawsuits. Washington Post, February 27, 2004
Hmmm . . .
I had the same reaction when I read that Bush had pardoned his bank fraud buddy. I had the same reaction when I learned that the CIA never told Bush that the United States was in imminent danger. I had the same reaction when I learned that there never was any Unranium deal between Nigeria and Iraq.
Seems the Catholic church has their own . . . issues to deal with.
After President Bush pledged his full support for writing LGBT people out of the U.S. Constitution, we wrote to you and said we need a different response.
Now is the time.
A Wisconsin Senate committee will take up the anti-gay state constitutional amendment in a public hearing on Monday morning at 9am.
We are asking each of you to come to the Capitol [in Madison, WI] on Monday at 9am--but not to attend the hearing.
Instead, we are asking you and your family and friends to boycott the hearing and join us for a 9am press conference and protest. We will meet in the Capitol rotunda (the central area inside).
Writing a whole group of people out of the law is not a legitimate matter for public debate. Collectively, we have spent thousands of hours over the past few months trying to persuade legislators to oppose these vicious attacks on LGBT families. Enough is enough.
We refuse to demean ourselves by continuing to justify our love--and our very existence--to out-of-touch, right-wing legislators like Senator Dave Zien, Cathy Stepp, and Scott Fitzgerald who sit on the committee holding the hearing.
Please join us at the Capitol rotunda on Monday at 9am to protest the anti-gay state constitutional amendment and President George W. Bush’s support for a federal constitutional amendment. Please bring signs as well to show your support for equality.
Finally, we are asking that you help us by bringing as many non-LGBT people as you can. It is time for us to invite our allies to be equal partners in voicing pposition to the nationwide agenda against basic civil rights.
That should be a book written by John Kerry: How to Kiss 2 Asses at Once for Dummies (disclaimer, the "for Dummies Series is property and trademark of Wiley Publishing, Inc.). Kerry is working both sides of the room--appealing to the more conservative Democrat with his announcement that he will back a MA state ban on gay marriages, yet attempting to soothe the upset homosexual (who will [b]not[/b] vote for Bush) by stating that he will only back a ban on gay marriages if it "ensured that same-sex couples have access to all legal rights that married couples receive."
There's that back-and-forth stuff again. Listen, Mr. Kerry. Only marriage provides certain rights and protections under the law. That means same-sex couples [b]will not [/b]be provided access to all legal rights that married couples receive. That means, you are either (a) supporting a full ban on gay marriage, or (b), you are advocating same-sex marriage. Which is it? You're talking out the side of your mouth again.
That kinda politics leaves so many homosexuals hanging. We're told that there are other things that are more important than the right to marry. But this isn't just about the right to marry. Bush knows it. Kerry knows it. And a whole lot of other people know it.
Politicians are playing games with people's civil rights and they have no qualms about gambling with those rights -- all in the name of winning an election. Let's imagine that Kerry does win a term as President. Hell, let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he'll get 2 terms. Let's also say that he and Bush are successful at writing discrimination into the Constitution, but only one of them wins the election. History dictates that those bastards will be old news and homosexuals will still be living with the consequences of their actions long after their terms are up. I don't see how that's fair. (Oh, I hear someone saying "like isn't fair.")
I wonder how far Kerry's neck has to stretch back to get in that awkward limbo position. . .
Ok, I'll admit I rarely watch/listen to the Howard Stern show because TV bores me and I'd rather be online reading. From what I do know of his show, I can say he's the King of Shock. He doesn't pick one group to zone in on either. I'm curious about Howard's latest troubles. Apparently, Clear Channel Communications has adopted a new standard of decency and has suspended Howard Stern's show. Hmm... interesting. Maybe this has something to do with the big deal the world made about Janet Jackson's boobie fiasco while people like Howard Stern are allowed to go on everyday and do whatever the hell they want. I don't know. Anyway, I'm wondering just what the incident was since the story I read didn't go into specifics. I'm particularly interested since the act was supposed to have offended "women and African Americans" -- both classes of which his sidekick belongs to and often partakes in helping him "offend."
I'm never offended by Howard Stern. I'm actually amused that so many women will let Howard treat them like trash just to be on his show. How come he can tell a woman "Show me your tits" and they just do it? Alright, I might be a tad bit jealous, too. Ha!
Senate Majority Leader Mary Panzer is said to be a fair-minded leader. We want to give her a chance to live up to that reputation.
As Majority Leader, Senator Panzer has the power to set the agenda for the Senate -- and the power to prevent the anti-gay state constitutional amendment from reaching a floor vote.
According to a February 25th report in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Panzer said the Senate has not agreed to bring it to a vote. In an earlier article, she said, "I don't know if it's the right time or not."
Please tell her now is not the right time -- and that there's never a right time to write discrimination into the Wisconsin Constitution.
Or call her office directly at: (800) 662-1227 or (608) 266-7513.
If you call, here are some suggestions on what to say:
* Urge Senator Panzer to put a stop to the state constitutional amendment on marriage rights, S.J.R. 63.
* Tell her this amendment should not be a legislative priority -- indeed a recent poll showed that 75% of Wisconsin citizens think the Legislature should focus on other issues.
* An amendment like this will foster intolerance in communities all over our state.
“This is a classic case of the president trying to distract from his failures. Whether the issue is Iraq, the economy and jobs or health care, the president and the Republicans are in disarray and in desperate need of a distraction. The American people deserve better.”
--House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) (when speaking about Bush promoting the ban on gay marriages)
I'd have to agree with this. Nothing more than a distraction.
Many Democrats, on the other hand, supported the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 when Bill Clinton was President. The Defense of Marriage Act states that no State shall be required to give effect to a law of any other State with respect to a same-sex "marriage." So, every state in the US is required to honor a heterosexual marriage that takes place outside this country, but no state is required to honor a homosexual marriage that takes place in MA. Screw the Democrats and their election-time rhetoric.
Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (dinner.rtf.scr). Warning: Please read the "VirusWarning.txt" attachment(s) for more information.
you are a bad writer
Received from: pblythe@tapeservpro.com
Good, I'm pissing somebody off for a change. He sent me a virus as a gift. That was so sweet.
Today President Bush gave his full backing to a federal anti-gay constitutional amendment. It would not only deny marriage to same-sex couples, now or in the future, but could prevent any state legislature or electorate anywhere in the country -- and perhaps even private companies -- from ever recognizing and protecting our relationships.
Today the [WI] state Assembly Judiciary Committee also approved an anti-gay state constitutional amendment by a 6-1 vote. Voting for it: Reps. Sheryl Albers, Glenn Grothman, Mark Gundrum, Samantha Kerkman, Terri McCormick, and Tony Staskunas. Rep. Dave Cullen, who voted against us on last fall's "defense of marriage" act, didn't show up. The lone vote against the amendment was Rep. Tom Hebl (D-Sun Prairie).
Today we are not going to ask you to contact these legislators, to contribute money, or to volunteer. Soon we will be asking you for all of those things and more, but today is a different kind of attack -- we need a different response.
Today we ask you to think about what it means that lawmakers -- and now even the President of the United States -- are attacking the most basic right guaranteed to every citizen of this state and of this country: equal treatment under the law. LGBT people are already treated as second-class citizens throughout this country, but writing that discrimination into the constitution would strip us even of the hope for change.
Today we are asking you to think about what you will do when things have gone too far. How hard are you willing to work for a shot at equality? How much can you afford to give? How many days could you take off to join actions that show we will not stand for a referendum on whether or not LGBT people are equal citizens of this country?
Please think about this today, because tomorrow we will begin asking you to take action.
Besides that, who then determines what a valid marriage is? If gay marriage were legal then why wouldn’t polygamy be? Why not incest? What are the rules and who makes them? Can’t use Christian values, separation of church and state you know!!
Marilyn Musgrave, Republican Congresswoman from Colorado, introduced the bill that would ultimately ban gay marriages in this country and define marriage as those between a man and a woman only.
According to recent reports, support for that bill is beginning to unravel in the Senate. I wonder where that will leave Congresswoman Musgrave when it's time for re-election -- especially considering there's a rather [b]LARGE[/b] gay & lesbian population in Colorado. I don't think the gay & lesbian population in Colorado will take too kindly to Congresswoman Musgrave being the one to sponsor such a bill. At least she's doing what she feels is right and not worrying about re-election. If I were in Colorado, I'd boot her ass right out of there. Nobody messes with my equal rights -- not even a woman.
I'm still trying to figure out what significant change Mary Cheney's public opinion about gay marriage will make on your opinion of gay marriage. What significant change will it make on the minds of the many Americans who are currently opposed to gay marriage? Will Bush suddenly decide that amending the Constitution will be a bad idea if Mary Cheney makes a public statement about gay marriages? Will Americans everywhere suddenly support gay marriages if the Vice President's openly lesbian daughter suddenly speaks out and says, "I am against a constitutional ban on gay marriage"? Will the many MA residents who are opposed to gay marriages suddenly give up their efforts to ban gay marriages if Mary Cheney will just speak up?
The gay activists who are wasting precious resources harassing Mary Cheney for exercising her freedom to remain silent on this issue are getting on my last damn nerve. Let it rest for Christ's sake. Mary Cheney has made her choice. Her choice is to support the Bush Administration. She does not have to support the Gay Rights movement just because she's a lesbian. I don't have to support everything Jesse Jackson says just because I'm Black and he's Black. If Mary Cheney chooses to place her political affiliations before her sexual orientation, that's her choice. It's obvious that the choice she made has been more advantageous for her than the other choice these activists want her to make.
What I see here are a group of gay activists who look like pathetic lost souls who need Mary Cheney to validate their existence. I don't need Mary Cheney, and I can guess there are a lot more of us who could care less if Mary Cheney chooses to work her ass off for the Bush Administration. Let her. It pays well and it has great benefits. We've all worked for employers we don't agree with for great pay and great benefits. I was in the military (well, nevermind -- bad pay, great benefits, bad example).
What if Mary Cheney made her public opinion and it wasn't the opinion the gay activists wanted to hear? What if Mary Cheney said she felt that other issues were more important than gay marriage to the nation at this time, then what? All gay-hell would break loose!
Let me clear my inbox first before the lot of you start clogging my mailbag with hate mail, or else your lovely words of wisdom will bounce.
I hear the Democrats advising us to avoid all contact with Nader because it will inevitably result in four more years of Bush. The Democrats are telling us to vote for them because the Democratic party is the party of change -- the true party of Progressive politics. I hear the Democratic party telling us to vote for them because they are the party with the country's best interest at heart. I hear it. But I don't see it. As a matter of fact, I haven't seen it for a long time. My family hasn't seen it for a long time either.
I was born and raised in Georgia. My Mama never cared much for politicians -- Democrats or Republicans, Black or White. My Grandma thought all politicians were bought and paid for. In my town, the Sheriff shared in the profits of illegal "bootlegging" (homes turned into bars because we lived in a dry county). If you didn't share your profits, your bootlegging home was always busted, while the other bootlegging homes were allowed to operate untouched. I grew up with a very sour taste in my mouth about politics, and a politician couldn't set foot on my Mama's doorstep during the election season. You don't have to have an education to realize that politicians are liars. You don't even have to be able to read to understand that politicians, well, politicians "talk out the side of their mouth." Intuition can tell you that much.
Well, I don't like relying on intuition alone, and I was fascinated with my Mama's hatred of politicians, so I took up Political Science in college as an undergrad. I learned she was right all along (and she didn't have to pay as much money as I did to figure that out!).
The Democratic party has changed so much over the years. The Democrats who want us to vote for them are of the mindset "what's in it for me?" or "where's my special interest money?" They're no longer working to secure equal rights for everyone in this country (including gays & lesbians), but instead, they're caving to the pressures of the [b]voting[/b] majority. You can bet your ass if the polls suddenly showed that it was likely that gays & lesbians would be a significant part of the voting majority, the Democrats would be performing a new song and dance. That's why my Mama hated politicians; they "talk out the side of their mouth."
Yes, there are pressing issues at stake. Bush has made it clear that he will amend the US Constitution and ban gay marriages, if it's at all possible for him to do so. Well, I don't trust that Kerry wouldn't promise to do the same thing. I expect to hear almost any promise from Kerry in order to win this election (all in the name of getting rid of Bush).
My Mama dislikes Jesse Jackson something fierce. Mention his name and her eyes just roll to the ceiling. Al Sharpton gets the same response. She views these two candidates as mere opportunists -- money hungry "brothas" she calls them -- dumb enough to start playing the "White man's game." The only reason she says that is because they really have no platform and they step to you preaching "let's stick together because we're Black, now hand me some money." My Mama's not giving you anything just because you're Black.
So, I walk a fine line between everything I learned watching the women in my family deal with the political system and everything I learned in college. The two educations aren't that different. I just have to figure out what to do with the information.
So, another candidate who's actually targeting the gay voter. Kucinich supports gay marriage also.
Reported by GayWired, Nader said he would support same-sex marriages because he views it as a civil rights issue. John Kerry and Bush both oppose same-sex marriages. Kerry opposes amending the constitution to ban gay marriages; Bush suggested that the constitution be amended to ban gay marriages.
With gay marriage being an important issue this election year, you can bet that a large amount of the lesbian & gay population will make their way to the polls this year. But, who will we vote for will be the question.
I found this President Match Up quiz that's designed to help you determine which candidate best fits your own belief system. What would you do if you learned that Nader's platform best fit your needs? Or worse, what would you do if you learned that Bush's platform was closely aligned with your ideals? Would you vote for them, or would you go ahead and vote the way you've been planning to vote ignoring the outcome of the quiz? Ok, so no the quiz isn't designed to be a deciding factor, but I thought it was a good starting point. It's definitely one way to compare the candidates and see just which one may come close to what you desire in a Presidential candidate. If it's Nader, would you vote for him -- even if it means voting for him may give Bush 4 more years in office?
I'm repeating myself here (again), but I'm fascinated with the hoopla over Nader running again. What Democrats should have learned in the last election (and prepared for in this coming election) was the fact that the 3% of the voting population the Democratic party lost to Nader was a significant chunk of voters they could have worked to regain for the 2004 election -- instead of throwin daggers at Nader for throwing his hat in the ring again. It's still a free country and the man can run for President if he so chooses.
The Democrats who are opposed to Nader throwing his hat in the ring are a bunch of sore losers looking for a scapegoat. The problem isn't Nader. The problem is the problematic Democratic party. Give us something to vote for Democrats and we'll gladly vote for you. Give us the same old bullshit, and we'll be looking elsewhere. Enter Nader, stage left.
No, I won't be voting for Nader, because his platform doesn't suit my needs. I certainly hope that anyone who agrees with Nader's platform does vote for him. There's no place in the Constitution that says we have to have a two party race (unless Bush decides to make it so). So, what's with all the fuss? Oh yeah, I forgot. If Nader runs, Bush will automatically win. At least that's the fear. We don't really know that for sure, now do we? Perhaps (let's chew on this for a moment), just perhaps, if the Democrats were more secure with what they had to work with, Nader's presence would be a non-issue.
In reference to your recent article, 'Low-Down Democrats, No Better than Bush' Friday 02.20.04 [12:03 pm], I just wanted to say thank you for at least being unbiased.
I don't normally push my own political leanings on anyone, but I hope the hypocrisy in both major parties will incline you to look at the Libertarian Party.
I'm a staunch economic conservative / social liberal. I believe if you'll look at their stand on important issues, you'll find that the majority of people who are wary of the Big Two agree with the Little One.
By the way, Bush didn't steal the election of 2000. Nader did. :-)
--William C. Hamby
For anyone who's interested in learning more about the Libertarian Party, visit their website. I did actually request information about the Libertarian Party a week ago. I haven't received my kit in the mail yet. Sometimes I feel like choosing a political affiliation is almost as complicated as deciding where you stand on the sexuality spectrum. No, I haven't taken the Straight-Acting quiz. I won't either.
I've been reading about Ed Schultz today. Supposedly he's the polar opposite of Rush Limbaugh, although at one point he used to be extremely conservative and often poked fun of homeless people.
A group of Texas A&M students have developed a few scholarships designed to protest Affirmative Action. These scholarships are in the amount of $5,000, $3,500, and $1,500. The Texas A&M students are hoping to avoid the backlash the College Republicans at Roger Williams University in Bristol, CN received when they created the Whites Only scholarship for $250. The Texas A&M students received funding from anonymous alumni donors and worded the scholarships differently. The Texas A&M scholarships are not designed for Whites Only, but are open to any students who feel that race is used too often in Texas A&M's admission policies.
The scholarship is designed to protest any initiative that's designed to specifically target minority groups in the college's admission policy. Read the story.
I find it a cowardly move that the alumni who are funding this effort have decided to remain anonymous. If you're going to support a cause, why hide? Are these alumni local business people? Are these alumni your local politicians? Are these alumni the professors teaching at the university? There must be a reason these alumni have decided to remain anonymous. There must be a reason they decided that their opinion of Affirmative Action will not be a favorable one.
Lambda Legal [on Thursday, February 19, 2004] advised newly married same-sex couples and government officials issuing marriage licenses in San Francisco that antigay groups' public statements threatening criminal action against them are groundless and should be ignored.
While reading the Chicago Tribue, I ran across a piece on four gay couples and their thoughts on marriage -- what marriage could be for them and other homosexual couples.
Lee Schrank, 67, and Bill Franco, 69, of Schaumburg
Rickey Sain, 46, and Jim Boushay, 56, of Oak Park
Lucy Shumpert, 46, and Hurdie Styles, 62, of Chicago
Mona Noriega, 48, and Evette Cardona, 41, of Chicago
Don't miss the Gay Rights Meetup in Chicago on Tuesday, March 9, 2004 at 8:00pm. Gay & Lesbian activists and those who are interested in promoting equal rights for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people will be meeting to discuss gay community activism and other issues that will broaden awareness of gay rights issues. Visit The Gay Rights Meetup page for more information.
Vietnam-Era Veterans - Record Your Experiences and Perspectives on the Conflict
The Vietnam Archive at Texas Tech University is the largest repository of Vietnam War-related material in the United States, outside of the US National Archives. With over a million pages of documents and photos online, and several thousand new pages added each week, the Vietnam Archive has become the premier American research institution on the War. Anyone can access their materials through their website: vietnam.ttu.edu.
You can help expand the historical record of the Vietnam conflict. The Vietnam Archive's Oral History Project is looking for vets, including gay, lesbian, bisexual, and other veterans, to participate in oral history interviews that will be deposited at the Archive and made available on the Web to students, researchers, and the public. The process is simple. You will be asked to fill out questionnaires that give a roadmap to your Vietnam-related experience, and then schedule a telephone interview at your convenience. The Archive is respectful of all participants, and welcomes all points of view on the conflict and its aftermath.
The Archive is also actively seeking donations of original photographs, film, letters, and any material from the Vietnam era. For original photos, the Archive is able to digitize the images and provide the donor with a copy on CD.
If you would like to help make sure that the Vietnam Archive represents YOUR experience, or for more information, please contact : Dr. Laura Calkins, Oral Historian, Vietnam Archive, Texas Tech University, Lubbock TX. Tel: 806-742-9010 or Email: laura.calkins@ttu.edu.
Many Gay Activists view Gavin Newsom's actions in San Francisco as a step backwards for the progress Gays & Lesbians have supposedly made in MA. Those activists believe that Gavin has offended too many common people by being so in-your-face with his actions and issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples without CA law specifically stating that same-sex marriages are legal. They feel a more appropriate course of action would have been to wait for the courts to rule that same-sex marriages are indeed legal and then proceed.
Wait.
Wait for the Conservative, Religious right to challenge the MA law. Wait for the Conservative, Religious right to make every attempt to amend the constitution to make it illegal for any gay & lesbian couple in any state -- including MA -- to obtain a marriage license. Even if the Religious Right doesn't succeed with amending the Consitution and it's decided that each individual state gets to decide on the issue of gay marriage, we're supposed to wait for our home state to grant us the right to marry -- not civil unions, marriage. Some of us live in states where it will be a cold day in hell before gays & lesbians will see the right to marry if it's left up to the states -- Texas and Florida come to mind. How long should we wait?
I don't really care if common people have been offended by the gay marriages out in San Francisco. I'm shocked that Gay Activists care. Those gay marriages haven't hurt the common people in the least. What have those marriages done to those people? Since when are Gay Activists in the business of pleasing common people? Gays & Lesbians supposedly make up about 10 - 20% of the US population; that doesn't make us a part of the "common people." So who the hell do these Gay Activists work for?
We've been waiting long enough. Wouldn't it be the way that as soon as it's perceived that Gavin's actions may have caused a bit of negativity in MA, he gets shunned by Gay Activists? You can bet your ass that if suddenly the press were to report that Gavin's actions caused a massive show of support for gay marriage, those same Gay Activists would call him a hero. We're so damn fickle and our loyalties change from day-to-day. I still support what Gavin is doing in San Francisco -- screw the offended common people.
I was reading an article in RainbowNetwork about Mayor Daley of Chicago, IL. He said gays & lesbians in IL shouldn't get caught up in the gay marriage debate because there are two other issues that are more important right now. Can you believe that? Two other issues that are more important to the gay community right now.
"First we have to defeat the attempt to amend the [state] constitution,"
"And we need to pass [civil rights legislation] to protect gays and lesbians against discrimination in housing and in the workplace."
I live in WI, barely across the IL/WI state line. Working in either state is a viable option, but the one thing I always did when I chose to work for someone else was work in WI because of the protections afforded to me as a homosexual employee. I never had any protections in IL as a homosexual employee, unless the specific company I worked for provided me with those protections. Borders was the only company I ever worked for in the state of IL. Borders included sexual orientation as a part of its anti-discrimination policy. I grew very tired of looking for companies that included sexual orientation as a part of its anti-discrimination policy. I wouldn't work for an organization that didn't have clear language expressing that.
Are we getting caught up in the marriage debate? I'm not too sure we are. I think we've waited long enough for someone else to speak up and say, "Hey, wait a minute. What about the gay people? Don't they have rights too?" Mayor Daley is right though. There are two more important issues to be concerned about. But, all the issues are important. It's just unfortunate for everyone involved that gay people are sick of waiting for what's rightfully ours-- equal rights.
Gay and Lesbian Weddings – Growing Market in the Nation’s Capital and Around the Country
On April 4, 2004, Washington DC will experience its first Gay Life and Wedding Expo. This groundbreaking event comes amidst a Massachusetts’ ruling striking down that state’s ban on gay marriage, San Francisco issuing gay marriage licenses in an act of civil disobedience and the President of the Untied States threatening constitutional action to quell such trends. Regardless of the controversy, gay and lesbian weddings are growing throughout the US and DC’s gay and lesbian community is heralding their coming expo while businesses of all kinds are participating in a show of strong support.
The magnificent 13,000 square foot Galleria at Lafayette Centre (1155 21st Street NW in DC’s west end) is hosting the expo while Parker Communications of Virginia produces the affair. National and local area vendors have paid a premium to participate in the fully booked event which includes a full day of entertainment, an impressive list of exhibitors and some very valuable giveaways. The main highlights of the show are a His&His / Hers&Hers Wedding Fashion Showcase and the chance to win a seven day vacation for two to Copenhagen, Denmark. While the event has exhibitors of all types and sizes, its major sponsors like Icelandair, the Washington Terrace and I. Gorman Jeweler have supported the effort in a much larger way. It turns out that many businesses are viewing the gay and lesbian community as one of the nation’s most affluent affinity markets.
Although some statistics are disputed, it is common knowledge that same-sex couples generally tend to have more discretionary income than heterosexual couples. This is due to another set of data which show that gay men and lesbians are generally higher educated and hold higher management positions when compared to their heterosexual counterparts. Multiply this by two partners while realizing there are typically no kids (although this too is changing), and you have a true power-couple. Aside from statistics, it’s the local “anecdotes” that really speak when industry professionals explain the fabulous hi-end gay weddings they’ve performed. But to really know there’s something to this market, you only need to look at the larger national companies such as Subaru, GE, Anheuser Busch, NBC and many more who not only target the gay dollar, but are pioneers in offering domestic partner benefits for their gay employees.
For those who may believe there’s no real market in local areas, consider the following: according to the 2000 census, there are approximately 300,000 gays and lesbians and 20,000 same-sex couple households in the DC Metro commuting area alone. To many businesses, this means an entirely new market to target with incredible opportunities for growth; this of course only for those positioning themselves in ways like exhibiting at gay and lesbian expos.
When asked what inspired this event, co-producer William Harrison responded “Just like engaged heterosexual couples, this too is a special time in these couple’s lives and they should feel comfortable seeking out professionals without fear of unkind responses. These folks are choosing to express their love in front of family and friends and if during their search a vendor with hateful values unleashes some verbal tirade, it can be really devastating!”
Mr. Harrison cited a recent example that he and his life and business partner experienced (his partner remains anonymous as he serves in our nation’s Armed Forces). Together, they publish a local area traditional bridal publication and when word of the expo reached their print advertisers, many bought space in the show. One, however, contacted them with a very different response. According to Harrison, the advertiser doesn’t “believe in that gay lifestyle” and said she would no longer advertise in their bridal magazine. Mr. Harrison’s point was then very well taken, for had a gay couple called this particular vendor, they would have no doubt been met with unkind remarks. “I wish I could say I was used to this” Harrison’s partner said, “but no matter how old you get, how strong you become, or what station in life and community you hold, this kind of hate always hurts.” Harrison concluded by saying that the advertiser’s behavior reinforced the need and underscored the reasons for producing the expo.
It seems many expo producers and wedding industry professionals all around the country have the same sentiment. While Washington DC’s Gay Life & Wedding Expo impressively holds the market in its region, it was not the first and is not the only in the nation. Los Angeles’ first Gay & Lesbian Wedding Expo was such a success last year, the second takes place this February. Last year also saw Las Vegas’ debut of their Gay Wedding Expo with a second coming soon. New York City has a two-day Gay Life Expo which brings in nearly 20,000 attendees and a separate gay wedding expo as well. And finally, there are signs of several more in production from Boston, New Orleans and Miami, to Minneapolis.
With all this talk of gay marriages, Nader, Kerry, Bush and his little white lies (no pun intended), San Francisco and their civil disobedience, Janet Jackson and her boobie flash, the college students and their anti-Affirmative-Action-W hite-Boys-only scholarship, it's no wonder the Neo-Nazis were starting to feel lonely in their neck of the woods.
About 35 demonstrators carried signs saying, "Hitler was right" and waved flags bearing Nazi, Confederate and Ku Klux Klan insignia.
Their leader, Jeff Schoep from Minnesota, who calls himself "commander" of the NSM, in a speech at the old state Capitol attacked blacks, immigrants and gays, often lumping them all into one group.
Great Op Ed piece on marriage written by Cheryl Jacques. Cheryl does a great job explaining what the court in MA said when they stated that civil unions would not be enough, that only marriage would provide equality under the law for gay & lesbian couples:
Simply put, civil unions do not provide any of the more than 1,000 protections or securities afforded under federal law through a marriage license. They are recognized today in only one state - Vermont - and provide only the state benefits of marriage. If two men in a civil union travel across state lines, they carry with them none of the rights or protections that they have in Vermont.
Read the rest of Talking About Marriage. From there, maybe that will help provide a better understanding of why any proposal [b]other than marriage [/b] would be a slap in the face to gays & lesbians everywhere. Offering us anything [b]other than marriage [/b] would make us 2nd class citizens who aren't entitled to the same rights as married heterosexual couples. Then, think about the presidential candidates who propose something [b]other than marriage[/b].
When asked whether her mainstream audience was ready for an album featuring two songs regarding her sexuality, Etheridge said “For goodness sakes, all I get asked about is being queer. I was playing in a super market parking lot for a radio station. Yes, I know, welcome to my life. It was for a food drive. I was playing while people were grocery shopping and this Latino couple went by, they looked up, and the women said ‘I know her, that’s that lesbian singer.’ That’s just it; they know I am queer, they might not know my music, but they know that I am queer. I just make my music and who knows in the end what my greatest contribution will be.”
Check out the interview.
I saw Melissa at a concert in Milwaukee, WI a couple of years ago. It was the first time I'd ever been to a live concert and the first time I've ever seen a celebrity in person -- ever! After that, I was hooked. I saw Ellen Degeneres and Kate Clinton, too. Kate was great, a dynamic political comedian. You should hear her rip the Bush Administration apart. Anyway, Melissa put on a great show. I got to touch her. Mmmm, mmmm. If you ever get to see Melissa, do it. She's extremely talented. Her drummer was great, too. I forget his name, but he was bald and wore these awesome shades that wrapped around his head.
I find this hilarious. Democrats don't expect Nader to have much of an impact on the election this year. . . yet, they "plea[ded] with [him] to stay out of ths race . . . and Democrats from across the ideological spectrum have asked him to stay out of the race." One politician went on to say:
I don't think he'll have a sizable impact, but it's terrible if he goes ahead because it's about him, it's about his ego, it's about his vanity and not about a movement," New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said on "Fox News Sunday."
Don't make me laugh! MOST of you are in public office because of your ego and your bank account. If you were serving the public because of your urge to be part of a movement, you'd be doing what Gavin Newson is doing and not worrying about an upcoming re-election, but doing what you honestly felt was right for a change!
Republicans tried not to celebrate the news. "Regardless of what Ralph Nader does, President Bush is going to be re-elected in November," Republican Party chief Ed Gillespie said.
I see arrogance is running rampant in the White House.
Let's see . . . Perhaps, if the Democrats were less like Republicans, they wouldn't have anything to worry about. Yes? I certainly have a hard time differentiating between the two at times.
Nader has announced he will run for President again this year. Let's watch Kerry throw his darts at Bush, Edwards and Nader. Watch Edwards throw darts at Kerry, Bush, and Nader. Watch Bush make accusations against Kerry, Edwards, and Nader. What an interesting and entertaining event this is all turning out to be.
I didn't mention Kucinich because people are assuming he doesn't have a chance of winning the Democratic ticket, so neither Kerry nor Edwards view him as a threat. Nader is a threat to the candidate who wins the Democratic ticket because presumably he's the only reason Bush is in office. Many people are saying the same of Kucinich though, a progressive candidate -- a vote for Kucinich is a vote for Bush because he has no chance of winning.
I, for one, would enjoy watching Kerry squirm -- like the snake he is.
"The more they shoot their mouths off, doing things that offend ordinary people, the better for Bush," said Thornton, who shook his head as he talked about the San Francisco mayor.
--Loren Thornton, a GOP activist from the South Bay
There's the fear factor at work again. That was Thornton's comment on the San Francisco gay weddings. The oppressed group should be afraid to offend ordinary people. The oppressed group should be afraid to speak up. The oppressed group should be afraid to say or do anything that will anger ordinary people because it will provide ammunition for the Bush camp.
I've been curious about this. I was one of the many who didn't vote for Nader in 2000 because I was of the mindset that a vote for Nader was a vote for Bush. It wasn't that I didn't agree with his platform, I was motivated by fear. The same fear that's setting in with many voters already. A lot's changed for me in the past almost-4 years. I guess you could say life's thrown a lot of curve balls and emotionally I've developed to the point where fear isn't much of a motivator anymore.
Anyway, fear. . . it won't be looming over my head this election year. It shouldn't be an issue for anyone, really. I fell for it once. Not this year. I'll vote the way I want this year. Let the chips fall where they may. If Bush does win, it won't be because I voted for someone who the rest of the world thought didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning. It'll be because Bush stole another election. Ha! Wow. What an exciting event that was to watch. Where were you?
Beloit Police Officer, Roel Benavides came to my home today to question me about an incident with my exhusband. The officers came to the front door. When I opened the door, Officer Benavides asked me for my name. I asked the officer "Why, do you have a warrant?" Officer Benavides immediately grabbed me and said, "We're not playing this game. You're under arrest for disorderly conduct." He didn't originally plan to arrest me. I was only being arrested because I asked him if he had a warrant.
Office Benavides refused to allow me to get a coat. He refused to allow me to get a pair of shoes. When we were in the car, he wouldn't answer any questions about why I was being arrested.
Once we got to the police department it was explained to me that since I opened the door and we were standing in the foyer of the building, (and I refused to identify myself) I was being disorderly.
Now, that may be just fine, but let me draw your attention to a little bit of information on Officer Roel Benavides. It seems Roel Benavides thinks he can buy alcohol for minors! Officer Benavides is a frequent visitor to a local bar in Beloit, along with a group of other officers. Officer Benavides, along with another officer, purchased alcohol for an underage female intern one evening, knowing full-well the owners of the bar would not question them because they were police. Read the story here: Two officers are cited in intern case .
Ya know, the Beloit, WI police department really should stop assuming that everything they hear about me is true. I'm not nearly as crazy as they think I am.
What did he come to question me about? Domestic abuse. What did I do? I yelled at my exhusband. He was parked on the street and I was standing in my yard. He works for the Beloit Police department.
Christopher E. Stevens, while serving as a Navy recruiter in the Rockford, IL recruiting office, was accused of sexual misconduct with a 17 year old female applicant.
Mr. Stevens was then a 2nd class Electricians Mate with the Navy. PO2 Stevens was seen entering the Navy Recruiting office with a female applicant at approximately midnight by a Marine recruiting officer in an adjacent office. The following morning, the Marine officer reported PO2 Stevens to his superior office and an investigation was launched.
The investigation revealed that PO2 Stevens had an ongoing relationship with this 17 year old applicant. The 17 year old applicant stated during the course of this investigation that she felt PO2 Stevens would ensure that she would get in the Navy provided she performed certain sexual favors. PO2 Stevens was placed on restriction at the restriction barracks at the Great Lakes military base and reduced in rank to PO3.
PO3 Stevens still currently serves in the military as a reservist at the reserve CB unit in Madison, WI. The 17 year old applicant withdrew her application to join the Navy.
Dennis Kucinich is the one candidate for President whose vision, eloquence and commitments on the issues can lead us to rise to and surmount the worldwide crises precipitated by the Bush Administration.
First and foremost, Kucinich is inviting us to stop being aggressive nationalists and start being brothers and sisters with the entire human race. It's a euphemism to call Bush's war on Iraq "a war of choice"; it was a classic unprovoked war of aggression. Kucinich is the only member of Congress running for President who voted against the resolution authorizing Bush to attack Iraq. Kerry, Edwards, Gephardt and Lieberman all voted for it, while Kucinich led almost two-thirds of the Democrats in the House of Representatives to repudiate their own party leader on it.
"Certificates issued to same-sex couples [in San Francisco] do not meet state legal standards."
What a mess, what a mess you got on your hands there, Arnold. Talk it over with Maria and see if she can offer you some guidance. Or maybe that's what Maria already told you?
It looks like [b]San Francisco [/b]is now suing the state of CA. It's the city's belief that it is unconstitutional to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Damn, the situation out in CA is getting almost as interesting as watching the Democrats battle it out for the Democratic ticket. There just isn't as much mudslinging.
Now all we need is a major sex scandal (not this sorry attempt the press made with John Kerry, and not Janet Jackson's boobie either).
I can't believe the press even bothered, but I just had to make a comment or two (or three).
It looks like "Spotty," the presidential pooch, passed away today. Quite possibly the most loyal and honest person at the White House, Spotty will be missed by all. He's in a much better place, I'm sure.
I would file this in Humor, but I don't want to offend the Animal Rights people.
Bush on Saturday said his administration, along with lawmakers in Congress and the United Nations Security Council, "saw a threat. All of us knew Saddam Hussein's history."
mr. president, you have a history with alcoholism, does that mean we should be removing you from office and demanding you attend AA meetings?
Bush & Blasphemy was one of the best opinion pieces I've read in weeks.
The most offensive thing that Mr. Bush raised in his State of the Union address — and this is saying something — was his proposal for a Constitutional amendment to protect the “Sanctity of Marriage.” Why did this bother me so much? I turned to Brother Noah (Webster) for guidance.
Some prominent Democrats facing election this fall -- such as Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer -- are finding it difficult to straddle the question as Republicans seize the gay marriage issue as a new soft target for attack.
So that's the way it works, huh? Don't state your opinion until you know what opinion will make or break your political career. What a buncha . . . It's annoying to know that while 62% of the state accept gays & lesbians as a part of the culture, only 42% support equal rights for gays & lesbians. That's like saying "we know you're here and we tolerate you, just don't expect too much from us."
And a conservative group in CA stated:
. . . the weddings [in San Francisco] harm all Californians who voted in 2000 for Proposition 22, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
Oh yeah, I can just see all those straight married people who voted for Proposition 22 heading to divorce court right now because a buncha gay people just got married.
Andrea Ratkovic, a professional multi-sport athlete who has her eyes on the 2004 Olympic Cycling team, needs your support. She's out, she's proud, and she wants to represent!
3rd World Championship Qualifier Dannon, Palm Springs, CA.
1st Nationals (35-39) RR-Cherokee Park, KY
2nd Nationals Overall in Womens (35-39)
4th Nationals (35-39) Downtown Criterium-Louisville, KY
2nd Downtown Criterium Arlington Heights, Illinois
1st Noodles & Company Lake Front Road Race, Milwaukee, WI
2nd Bodyworks by Concours WhiteFish Bay Classic, Whitefish Bay, WI
1st Isle of Capri Criterium, Columbia, MO
4th Place Ralph's Half Ironman, San Diego California
[b]Andrea's Career Highlights[/b]
2002: US Pro Duathlon Champion, Carlsbad, CA
2001: US Pro Duathlon Champion, Carlsbad, CA
2000: Auto Trader.Com Professional Cycling; 1st Stage 2 Tour of Gila
1999: HP Women's Challenge Most aggressive rider; Masters 30-34 Road Champion; 2nd @ Masters Time Trial Overall Best Masters Award (Of all Masters Categories)
A report in the Chicago Sun-Times yesterday adds a few details to an old story covered in The Washington Post and elsewhere about how a group of Democrats conspired to damage Dean in Iowa and New Hampshire
The writer, Lynn Sweet, described it as "the first demonstration of how a political group can attack working under the new McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. Jones collected $663,000 from the 26 donors in the last quarter of 2003 and was able -- with some luck in timing -- to irrevocably wound Dean's $42 million campaign fueled by thousands and thousands of small contributors."
Ok, I've been asked several times who I endorse, since I haven't officially thrown my support behind any candidate. I've been acting more as a devil's advocate -- offering my two cents on Kerry and Bush. Bush and Kerry. Kerry/Bush. Whatever. Seems almost the same to me. I know this sounds very . . . childish and immature, but there's something about the way Kerry looks that bothers me. He just looks like someone up to no good. Like a problem child. Ever seen what a problem child looks like? If you have, you know what I mean. Regardless of the way he looks, and the negative energy I pick up from that, I only agree with about 35% of his platform. The fact that he's a Democrat and not a Bush, isn't enough to bring his approval rating up in my book.
I support Dennis Kucinich's platform -- not 100% -- but his platform is much, much closer to my own belief system. Does he have a chance of winning? At this point, I'd say no. But will I sell out my belief system to support someone who doesn't believe in protecting my equal rights just because I don't think Dennis has a chance of winning. No.
A lot can happen between now and November. I'm hoping Dennis can gain some momentum and surprise us all.
This is just my opinion and not the opinion of anyone who may write as a guest commentator, or anyone who is a member of the SistersTalk Discussion Board.
It's a wonderful world when your lesbian, left-liberal, anti-bush blog ad shows up here: Bush/Cheney Supporter.
I love those BlogSnob ads. Ya gotta ad those to your blog. When checking my stats, I like to see who's been checking out the site and where they come from. That site paid me a visit. She obviously couldn't resist because my ad reads: SistersTalk: Lesbian Poli-Tickin' Off the Right. Beautiful, isn't it?
The first thing I noticed was her Bush/Cheney banner at the top of her blog. I laughed. Actually, I howled. I'm sure that eventually her blog ad will find its way to the pages of my blog, but, hey I don't care. You can click on it and go see how pretty her blog is.
When I went off to start doing more research on the other John (Edwards), I was distracted by Dennis Kucinich. The Washington Post's Candidate Comparison was a great starting point. A little on Kucinich:
Voted against the Patriot Act. He's the only candidate among those currently in Congress who did.
Supports gay marriage equality for same-sex couples.
Opposes the death penalty -- supports life imprisonment without possibility of parole, instead. Also supports a stalled bill that will guarantee DNA testing for anyone on death row (a stalled bill, huh? I wonder if the bill to ban gay marriages would be stalled.)
Advocates Affirmative Action to help schools that are racially segregated.
Does not support mandatory minimum sentencing, advocated rehabilitation.
Co-sponsored a bill that was designed to reduce prescription drug costs for seniors.
Has had some back-and-forth voting on the abortion issue, but says he now supports a woman's right to choose after the House passed a ban on late-term abortions and did not take the woman's life or health into consideration.
So far, so good. I've yet to look at his record on other issues. [b]Some of what I read about John Edwards[/b]:
Voted for the Patriot Act (as did John Kerry)
Opposes civil unions for same-sex couples (John Kerry picked a middle ground for election purposes). Edwards favors expanding benefits to same-sex couples -- whatever that means.
Supports the use of Affirmative Action in colleges & universaties.
Opposed Bush's order that prohibits the use of US funds for international organziations that counsel women on abortion of perform the procedure. (boy that bush is one hypocrital bastard, ain't he? We can dump over $87 billion in US funds into a war in Iraq, but we can't use US funds to help women in under-developed countries learn more about the pros and cons of abortion)
Take a look at the Washington Post's Candidate Comparison and see where the candidates stand on issues important to you.
Without doing anymore research, I'd have to say I would throw my support behind Kucinich. I still need to know more, though.
That's the question asked by a new Web site that wants the vice president's openly lesbian daughter to speak out against a proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriages. Since going up last Friday, the site has received 3,000 letters from people pleading with Mary Cheney to publicly oppose the amendment.
I don't really give a damn what Mary Cheney [b] says [/b] she thinks about gay marriage. Her actions speak volumes. I had a rather entertaining and lengthy discussion with a group of gay men who sent out a satirical cartoon that displayed Mary Cheney as a victim of oppression and Dick Cheney as her oppressor. The picture was an eBay auction ad; Mary was the item for sale. Her father, the Vice President, was the seller. The picture portrayed Dick Cheney as a sell-out, and Mary Cheney as a helpless victim being sold at the highest price.
I, of course, always playing devil's advocate, screamed, "HOLD UP! I don't see Mary as a victim here. Personally, if Mary wants to work her ass off for the Bush Administration and help them get elected, she's no victim." That was not a popular comment because it broke the momentum the picture was creating. It also called one of our own to the carpet for the role she was playing in denying us our equal rights. When I suggested that, perhaps, Mary wasn't concerned about gay marriage rights, the gay boys reacted with disgust that I would dare suggest a thing. Of course all gay people are concerned about gay marriage rights -- even the Conservative, Republican, Vice-President's Lesbian-Daughter-Who's-Wo rking-to-Relect-the-Admin istration-That-Wants-to-D eny-Gays-Their-Rights.
I don't give a damn what Mary has to say. We can have such pathetic needs at times (we, meaning gay people). When we seek validation from the likes of Mary Cheney, I call that a pathetic need. We don't need Mary. We've accomplished a lot without Mary. If anything, Ellen Degeneres, Rosie O'Donnell, Melissa Etheridge, and all the other high profile out lesbians (who put their careers on the line to make a public statement) have done more for the Gay Rights Movement than Mary Cheney ever will.
The only thing Mary Cheney has accomplished for us is to show us that we're not all alike. Gay people are just as diverse as our straight counterparts. Some of us are concerned about Civil Liberties, some of us are not. If you work for the Bush Administration, you're not concerned about Civil Liberties. Mary Cheney is a wealthy Republican first and a lesbian after that.
The US Justice Department hardly knows the meaning of justice. While corporate scandals run rampant because politicians are taking bribes (call it what it is!), Ashcroft and the rest of the hoodlums at the Justice department are harassing anti-war demonstrators and issuing subpoenas to hospitals demanding that they hand over the medical records of women who haven't done anything wrong.
Freedom to Marry Week was a bigger success than we anticipated. Among other things, couples in six Wisconsin cities applied for marriage licenses to highlight discrimination, at least 150 people turned out at the Capitol to oppose the amendment, and our Marriage Equality Town Hall drew nearly 800 people.
Here in our office, the phones rang with calls from reporters like never before. To read some of the coverage, go here:
Freedom to Marry Week was just the start though. Working with allied groups, Action Wisconsin is taking advantage of the unprecedented interest in equality across the state.
This means several things:
1. We're going to send you more email alerts on critical developments. We'll try not to clog your inbox, but the pace has accelerated. We simply have to ask for more involvement.
2. We're making preparations for a greatly expanded volunteer effort. We'll soon be moving to larger office space to accommodate more volunteers in Madison, and are looking for people to coordinate efforts throughout the rest of the state as well. Write us at info@actionwisconsin.org for more information.
3. We're going to ask for more financial support. Over the next month or so, the outcome of our current fight against the constitutional amendment will determine the overall "price tag" for our efforts over the next year and a half. Either way, however, the amount that we (and our allies) will need to raise for different aspects of this work will be unprecedented because the challenges and opportunities before us are unprecedented. Please be assured, however, that we are constantly working to keep our expenses low, and we cooperate with other national and local organizations to avoid duplication of effort.
We'll be sending new action alerts in the very near future, and you can contribute online to support our work here:
Thanks for your interest in equality. We've got a long, hard and expensive effort in front of us, and there are bound to be disappointments along the way -- but I hope you're all as excited about what's ahead as we are!
Well, since we saw Dean go from shining star to a fizzle in no time, anything is possible between now and November. John Edwards shocked us all with his second place spot in the WI race. I'd be curious to know more about Edwards. I'm certainly not happy with what we have on the table right now.
So, I'm off to start my research on the other John.
Jeff Skilling, former CEO of Enron, posted a [b]$5million cashiers check [/b] as his bond and walked out the door after he was indicted for over 2 dozen counts of fraud and other high-ranking crimes.
From 1999 through late 2001, Skilling, Causey and their co-conspirators ''engaged in a wide-ranging scheme to deceive the investing public, the (Securities and Exchange Commission), credit rating agencies and others about the true performance of Enron's businesses'' by manipulating the company's finances and making false and misleading public statements about Enron's financial performance, the indictment said.
Source: Skilling Pleads Innocent to Fraud Charges By KRISTEN HAYS, AP
Will Skilling be the next Presidential pardon? Posting a $5million cashiers check as your bond. Must be nice.
Why in the hell are we going into somebody else's country and writing their Constitution?
"When we went into Iraq, our plan was to have a government, build a structure and write a constitution that would be a source of longterm stability," said an administration official. "Now that's out the window."
Yeah, and the Americans who backed Bush thinking it would be a swift ass-kickin' and house-cleaning were so wrong. So now what? The Bush Administration is considering NOT leaving Iraq by June 30 because they don't feel that whatever mess we leave to clean up will not be done properly.
Why do I keep hearing this strange voice in a foreign accent saying, "cocky Americans" over and over again in my head?
Time to get people registered to vote and tell them in no uncertain terms who to vote against. How?
Quite simple, just follow these easy steps.
1. Get a bunch of voter registration cards.
2. Any restaurant you go to between now and late October, ask you server if they are registered to vote. If not, register them on the spot. If so, ask them who they are voting for in November. Most will dissemble, and admit they haven't studied the issues, which is code for I don't vote even though I registered. Simply tell them to vote for anybody but Bush. You will see visible relief on their face at this suggestion. No homework.
3. Suggest that they meet with other minimum wage colleagues and encourage them register and/or vote.
4. For the commited diner, ask to attend the meeting.
There are millions of minimum wagers out there that really have no interest or knowledge of the political process and how political their lives SHOULD be based on nothing more than the slave wages they're paid. It's not their fault. Civics is not required to graduate in public high schools anymore as it might increase voter turnout among the less well healed citizens of the country.
Start this today at lunch. You will find almost without exception that the servers you engage on this issue are grateful and energized by their exchange with you. And you'll feel like you're doing something concrete to defeat the beast.
Yours in wishing the presidential impeachment process worked in this country, I am,
Sincerely, WTM
I don't agree with voting for anyone but Bush. I don't agree with voting [b]for[/b] Bush either! We should have had more choices from the beginning. It's unfortunate that not as many people are as involved in the political process. Just imagine what we could accomplish if everyone who belongs to an underrepresented group registered and voted. Everyone. Oh, they know (you know who "they" is) what could happen -- which is why they find all sorts of reasons to keep Blacks from voting in certain areas of the country.
"I have watched carefully what's happening in San Francisco, where licenses were being issued, even though the law states otherwise," Bush said. "I have consistently stated that I'll support law to protect marriage between a man and a woman. Obviously these events are influencing my decision."
mr. president, maybe you need to focus on the state of the economy instead of abusing the powers of your position so you can push your own warped (and I do mean warped) sense of values.
You just pardoned your buddy who committed bank fraud. You misrepresented the truth about Iraq so you could send this country to war. You accept extremely large campaign contributions from wealthy Arab-Americans who you allow to "sit in on meetings" about the state of affairs in Iraq. You joined the National Guard so you could be one of the many affluential draft dodgers in this country who were protected by their Daddy's name and money. You've been working diligently to remove as many civil liberties from US citizens as you can since the day you stepped foot in office.
None of this seems to "trouble" you or your kind, but you find gay marriages troubling? With all due disrespect, mr. president: you're the sorriest excuse of a leader this country has seen in a long time.
Black & White Civil Rights protestors sat at Whites Only counters in the south, even though the law said Blacks couldn't. Unjust laws deserve no respect. Leaders who defend unjust laws deserve no respect.
And yes, Jesse Jackson, I just made a comparison between the Civil Rights movement and the Gay Rights movement. Screw you, too.
Why it took the Japanese so long to get around to this is beyond me, but according to an The Gully, the Japanese have now joined the ranks of Absolut, Levi Strauss, IBM, Jaguar, and Del Monte (to name a few) in the courting of gay & lesbian consumers. We absolutely love seeing ads produced by major companies that show something other than smiling, happy, straight people. We appreciate knowing that companies will kiss our asses too to get our cash.
As you probably know, most blog visitors are repeaters, which means that static, unchanging ads become virtually invisible within just a few days.
Ours don't.
Keep fighting! PG Designs
I received notice from one of my advertisers that they had received the same email from PG Designs, only with SistersTalk where TPM is.
This is a very pathetic move, PG Designs. Your website looks like ass and I wouldn't use your advertising services if you were the last ad service online. Your low-down tactics remind me too much of those of the Repubilcan party and I wouldn't dare stoop to align myself with your website -- not even for free.
Speaking of websites: Sorry for the missing graphics here, folks. SistersTalk.com is down for maintenance so the graphics won't show up.
PG Designs, perhaps you should try developing your own unique idea instead of attempting to ride off the success of someone else. [b]You get an F[/b] for your use of SPAM, bad business acumen, and downright tackiness.
Ok, this is seriously off topic, but much too interesting to pass up.
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AP) -- French doctors were taken aback when they discovered the reason for a patient's sore, swollen belly: He had swallowed around 350 coins -- $650 worth -- along with assorted necklaces and needles.
Ouch. Apparently, this all accumulated over the years. He had a condition called "pica": a desire to eat things other than food.
I am still trying to wrap my brain around this Mel Gibson film about Jesus. I'm not too sure what all the fuss is about.
Supposedly, the movie is shot in Latin and Aramaic, so you'll be reading subtitles when you go see it. There will be much controvery in the way the director (Mel) portrayed the last 12 hours of Jesus's life, but hey, we like controversy.
Mel took great care in finding a location for the movie, and he even decided to shoot it in November because of the way the sunlight reflected off the buildings that time of year.
Might be worth seeing. Not sure yet. You've seen one rendition of a Jesus crucifixion, you've seen them all.
Go see it. Spend too much money on popcorn, snacks, and drinks, then write me to tell me all about how good/bad it was.
Ooops! Wrong numbers. Seems Bush's MBA from Harvard didn't help any with his screwed up prediction that the economy would produce 2.6 million jobs by the end of this year.
White House Backs Off Job-Growth Forecast
By TERENCE HUNT, AP
WASHINGTON (Feb. 18) - The White House backed away Wednesday from its own prediction that the economy will add 2.6 million new jobs before the end of this year, saying the forecast was the work of number-crunchers and that President Bush was not a statistician.
Perhaps he shouldn't have thrown that number out there without consulting a REAL number-cruncher first. He's gettin' people all excited for nothin'.
Speaking of the MBA degree from Harvard that David claims you can't buy no matter who ya are, I think I'll comment now. (pause)
David, get thee some real life experience. You can buy pretty much anything in this country.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush pardoned a former mayor of Plano, Texas, who pleaded guilty to bank fraud in 1996, the Justice Department announced Monday.
Didn't Bush just give a speech in which he criticized B.S.A Tahir for being the "chief financial officer and money launderer' of an illicit operation"? Now Bush pardons his buddy who played a role in moving bad loans from one back to another? I see. We're selective about who we decide to call a weasel, is that right Dubya? Now, my question is this: how much did he contribute to your campaign this election year?
Does anyone else find it absolutely beautiful that Rush Limbaugh is relying heavily on the American Civil Liberties Union to keep his ass outta prison?
Limbaugh's attorneys were joined by the American Civil Liberties Union in their arguments to the 4th District Court of Appeal in West Palm. Beach
Ok, so they're arguing that Limbaugh's medical records should be suppressed as evidence in his case.
The case: Limbaugh is being investigated for "doctor-shopping, a third-degree felony defined as when a patient dupes two or more doctors into prescribing overlapping medications"
Their argument: Limbaugh's records should be suppressed as evidence to prove that he doctor-shopped because it violates his civil rights to privacy.
Let's reflect on the issue of the Department of Justice and Ashcroft demaning medical records of women whose doctors don't agree with the abortion ban. The DOJ and Ashcroft are demanding records of women whose doctors are involved in legal challenges to the abortion ban. This didn't state that the women had actually had abortions; it states that the women are seeing doctors who are protesting the ban. If you're a doctor who protests the ban on abortions you become a target for the DOJ and your patients' records should now be open to scrutiny to ensure that you are not still performing certain types of abortions.
Ok, so now we know that the Department of Justice investigates anyone who sells Progressive Clothing and speaks out against the government, and women who are merely patients of doctors who protest the abortion ban.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'd be more worried about the DOJ than I would any terrorists.
Back to Limbaugh: No, his records should not be used to convict him. That violates his civil rights to privacy in regards to his medical history. I don't think he should serve time for his addiction either (there's the bleeding heart liberal in me -- the type Limbaugh routinely dogs on his show). I do find it hypocritical though that Limbaugh, who always advocated jail time for drug addicts is now saying he shouldn't have to serve time.
So, I guess Rush Limbaugh views drug addiction as a crime -- for everyone but him.
Thank u for the great post on the whites only scholarship. I understood what you meant when you tried explaining that Affirmative Action isn't just about race yet groups like this make it about race. Your right, a much more effective protest of Affirmative Action would have been to protest all characteristis of it. But Blacks are just easier to use as a scapegoat. How many straight male college students would design a scholarship for men only and tell those college girls to take a back seat? How many of them would design a scholarship for non-disabled Americans only? I think they're missing the point of Affirmative Action and basically just running off of limited knowlegde and limited experience with life. Can you believe that the guy who headed up this ridiculous effort was a [b]Hispanic [/b] male who had received a $5000 scholarship himself that's designed for minority students? I wonder how the people/committee who gave him that scholarship would feel knowing about that.
--Alana in MN
My comments: I think the student you speak of who headed up this effort has his eye on being someone's Mayor, Governor, or president someday. He probably figures the only way he can get there is to become "one of them." He wouldn't be the first. I can throw Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, and Justice O'Connor in the mix. Obviously the tactic works.
Salesman on Nuclear Circuit Casts Blurry Corporate Shadow By RAYMOND BONNER Investigators are trying to determine whether a businessman's companies in Malaysia are a cover for nuclear-black-market activities.
After reading the article, I came to the conclusion that the [b]someone[/b] has determined that B. S. A. Tahir is indeed smuggling nuclear parts to and fro:
President Bush, in a speech last week at the National Defense University, called him the "chief financial officer and money launderer" of an illicit operation headed by the Pakistani nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan. That operation has been accused of providing Iran, North Korea and Libya with technology for making atom bombs.
So, investigators are still trying to determine the merit of this allegation against B. S. A. Tahir, while president bush somehow has information that states the allegations are true--the same kind of information he had that said Iraq was developing and hiding biological weapons?
While reading the New York Times, I found an OpEd on gay marriage.
The Massachusetts and San Francisco events are a welcome indication that the nation is having a long-overdue discussion about the right of gay people to marry, and that the states are beginning to serve as laboratories for reform in this important area.
A reader named David responded to the posting about The Whites Only Scholarship with the subject line Reverse Racism. He went on to say:
Hey, great argument. "You white people deserve what you're getting due to what your ancestors did!"
Yeah, that'll stop the resentment between races dead in its tracks. Good to know where your prioities lie.
The problem with this assessment is obvious: the system that whites allegedly set up is no longer the status quo. There is no longer any obstacle that stops anyone, of any race, from succeeding in this country.
By the way, slavery was a worldwide problem. In fact, tribal leaders in Africa were the ones who sold their slaves to the Europeans.
This is very much like anti-Semitism, in that a whole group of people are being held accountable for a crime that their ancestors committed, and not all of them at that.
Martin Luther King Jr., whom you quoted, fought for a world in which a man was judged "by the content of their character", not the color of their skin. Yet you propose that we should do exactly the opposite.
Your position helps no one. Whites are going to rightfully claim racial discrimination, and black accomplishments now have the "affirmative action" qualifier that suggests that they aren't where they are on merit.
Stop holding open the wound of slavery for others' benefit. Let it heal already.
--David
David did not state whether he agreed with the Whites Only Schorship.
David did not address the issue of the [b]existence[/b] of the Whites Only Scholarship, nor did he question the motives behind the students developing a scholarship to protest Affirmative Action, but picking only one aspect of Affirmative Action to attack (race).
Yes, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. advocated judging people based on the content of their character, not the color of their skin. If that's what this country had been doing from day one, Bush wouldn't be president and you and I wouldn't be having this conversation. The point I was making in my post. The point David missed.
AP - A decade ago, President Clinton dispatched 20,000 troops to help restore democracy in Haiti during a political crisis there. A repeat performance is highly unlikely this year, officials say, even though Haiti is once again bordering on chaos.
Highly unlikely because we're not interested in anything they have and Bush isn't handing out anymore American charity in the form of troops -- not after this mess with Iraq.
There is frankly no enthusiasm right now for sending in military or police forces to put down the violence," Secretary of State Colin Powell said Tuesday.
Aaaah, there he is. Bush's Diversity-Token. Ok, so there's no enthusiam to send in the troops. Hmm. . . was there any enthusiasm to send troops to Iraq? Oh wait, he's not talking about OUR enthusiam, he's talking about THEIR enthusiam.
John Kerry squeezed past hard-charging John Edwards on Tuesday to win Wisconsin's primary, gateway to a 10-state, two-man showdown March 2. Howard Dean, his candidacy doomed, considered endorsing one of his rivals.
A Virgina man received a 3 year prison sentence for trying to pick up a male undercover police officer in a department store bathroom.
Circuit Judge Frederick B. Lowe Tuesday sentenced Singson to three years in prison for one count of solicitation to commit a felony. The judge suspended all but six months of the sentence and set an appeal bond of $5,000. The maximum sentence in Virginia for approaching someone for sex in public place is five years in prison.
Read more of VA Man Sentenced to Prison for Asking for Sex. The case has gained lots of attention because of the application of the sodomy law (recently declared unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court) and the fact that sodomy laws are typically applied only to gay males.
Well, when you have a buncha heterosexual men (who don't mind watching lesbian sex, but are disgusted by the thought of gay men) running the country, I think it's fair to assert that sodomy laws would be applied more harshly to gay men.
I really don't like this man. Never have. Probably never will.
Jesse Jackson took an opportunity to try a little divise measure when he spoke at the Holy Cross Church in Worcester, MA. He made sure he spent some time discussing his frustration with gay & lesbian Americans often contrasting the Gay Rights Movement with the Civil Rights movement. His words: "In my culture, marriage is a man-woman relationship." I wonder if Jesse Jackson is discussing the same culture that I have. As a Black American, I know that marriage is hardly something we do in our culture. I can say this because I grew up in a family of many. My grandmother had 13 children. She was unmarried. Of the 12 children, only one of them has been married to one person for over 10 years. The rest of them have spent the majority of their lives unmarried (with children). Many of the other Black families I know resembled my family. So, for Jesse Jackson (a Dr. Martin Luther, King wanna-be) to even go there with defining marriage for our culture--LOW.
Another speaker, Ms. Wilkerson, was a bit more compassionate in her speech (note: it's a female speaker):
"I know the pain of being less than equal, and I cannot and will not impose that status on anyone else," Wilkerson said, explaining why she would not support an amendment banning same-sex marriages. "I was but one generation removed from an existence in slavery. I could not in good conscience ever vote to send anyone to that place from which my family fled."
Recently elected [b]Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger[/b]. His stance on the issue:
Gov. Schwarzenegger has stated that the people of CA voted to ban gay marriages with the passing of Proposition 22 and that San Fran should immediately cease and desist performing gay marriages. He supports the ban on gay marriages.
Judge James Warren: the presiding judge over the Dog Maul case in which a straight couple stood by and watched their dog kill a lesbian. Judge Warren says he can't stop gay marriages because it hasn't been proven yet that the Mayor is doing anything wrong. How did he reach that conclusion? a punctuation error in the way Proposition 22 is written. There's a semicolon where the word "or" should be. Gotta love those attorneys!
Judge Ronald Quidachay: a judge viewed by lawyers as the judge who constantly has this look of "I'm not as dumb as you think I am." Quidachy states that conservative groups that are attempting to force judges to issue an emergency injunction "[haven't] given the city enough notice to obtain an emergency injunction. He also went on to say that the court is just not ready to deal with. I should mention that lawyers view Quidachy as ungraceful or patient with lawyers as other judges.
And the man himself: Mayor Gavin Newson. He's the man who "pledged to draw on the ideas and talent of all of the diverse communities in [San Francisco] to create [his] new administration." In addition, he was once regarded as the Mayor who had "no compassion for the gays, the poor, or working families." Many gay residents dreaded having him as Mayor and Schwarzenegger as Governor at the same time.
Action Wisconsin is compiling stories from same-sex couples around the state who have experienced marriage discrimination. The “Marriage Registry" includes stories like these:
• Mark Lemmert, an Appleton resident, was locked out of his home when his partner unexpectedly passed away. The partner’s children had the legal authority to take over possession of the home and kick Lemmert out because the law saw the two men as legal strangers.
• One Milwaukee woman tried to pick her daughter up from school when the girl had a serious allergic reaction to a bee sting. But because the woman is not the legally recognized parent of her daughter, she was forced to first track down her partner and obtain written permission to take her child to the hospital.
• Elk Mound resident Barb Steenerson was forced to use all of her vacation time to be with her partner, Margo Wilde, when Wilde’s dad died. Later, when Wilde underwent serious neurological surgery, Barb could not be with her because her vacation days were all used up. If they were legally married, Steenerson would have been able to use family leave time.
If you are a WI resident and have experienced marriage discrimination, please help compile the “Marriage Registry."
(CBS/AP) Two judges delayed taking any action to shut down San Francisco's same-sex wedding spree, rebuffing conservative groups enraged that the city's liberal politicians had already married almost 2,400 gay and lesbian couples.
Damn, I wish it were me pissing off those conservative groups. They're just having a good time out in California. So, if statistics are correct, 1200 of those couples will be divorced in 5 years.
Wait, do you go by those statistics, since gay & lesbian married couples were never included in the first place? It would be interesting to see if that statistic remains the same when (if) homosexuals are ever granted full rights as full citizens in this country.
[b]Summer Vaid Fellowship Applications Now Being Accepted[/b]
Vaid Fellowships to support and recognize the leadership of people of color and other emerging leaders in Social Science, Public Policy and Legal Research
APPLICATION DEADLINE: For Summer 2004, application deadline is March 12, 2004. Decisions will be made and communicated by April 16th.
WHAT IS THE NATIONAL GAY AND LESBIAN TASK FORCE POLICY INSTITUTE?
The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute is the largest think tank in the U.S. engaged in research, policy analysis and strategic action to advance equality and understanding of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people. At the Policy Institute we are expanding the knowledge base that our movement needs to conduct informed public education and advocacy campaigns to ensure that policy frameworks treat our community and our relationships fairly-including those frameworks not usually thought of as "gay" issues, like anti-poverty policy. We then translate this into tools that grassroots activists can use to conduct public education and public engagement campaigns.
The Policy Institute focuses in particular on issues of concern to LGBT people of color and low-income people of all races through Racial and Economic Justice Initiative; as well as family policy issues; aging and youth policy issues; voting behavior and political representation issues; public opinion; workplace benefit and discrimination issues; the impact of anti-gay ballot initiatives, and the anti-gay movement; and documenting basic demographics of the LGBT community.
The Task Force Policy Institute is a 501(c)(3) founded in 1995 and is located in New York City. It is a program of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which was founded in 1973 and works to eliminate prejudice, violence and injustice against LGBT people at the local, state and national level. As part of a broader social justice movement for freedom, justice and equality, the Task Force is creating a world that respects and celebrates the diversity of human expression and identity where all people may fully participate in society.
WHAT IS THE VAID FELLOWSHIP?
The Vaid Fellowship was created through generous grants from the Billie Jean King Foundation and the Anita May Rosenstein Foundation in honor of the Policy Institute's former director, long-time activist Urvashi Vaid.
Vaid Fellowships support and recognize the leadership of people of color and other emerging leaders in the progressive movement for LGBT equality.
Vaid Fellows are given a great deal of responsibility. The three Vaid Fellows selected for Summer 2004 will focus on legal and policy research and writing, and will be directly supervised by a staff of nationally recognized LGBT policy experts from social science and legal research fields.
STIPEND
Summer Vaid Fellows are paid a stipend of $400 per 40-hour week.
The summer 2004 term runs from June 7 - August 13. Vaid Fellows work in the Task Force New York City office and are responsible for their own housing and living expenses.
QUALIFICATIONS
Applicants must be enrolled in a degree program at least half-time as a law, graduate or undergraduate student, or have successfully completed a law, graduate or undergraduate degree within the 12 months preceding the application deadline. Statistical analysis skills are particularly needed.
Interested applicants should have:
- Demonstrated leadership in progressive and/or LGBT communities.
- Knowledge of and commitment to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender issues.
- Desire to work in a multi-cultural environment where commitment to diversity based on race, ethnic origin, gender, age, sexual orientation and physical ability is an important institutional value.
- Extensive skills in research, writing and critical thinking.
- Computer proficiency in word processing, database work, email and Internet research.
Applications must include:
1. Cover letter outlining the applicant's interest and background, if any, in public policy affecting LGBT people
2. Resume
3. Contact information for three references
4. A brief writing sample (maximum 5 pages)
Applications must be received by March 12, 2004.
Please mail application packages to:
Policy Institute Fellowship Program
NGLTF Policy Institute
214 W. 29th Street, 5th Floor
New York, NY 10001
[b]Do not fax or e-mail your information. No telephone calls please. [/b]
The Vaid fellowship is highly competitive. We will contact you if we desire an interview, and all applicants will eventually be contacted.
DOJ & Department of Homeland Security Spying on OutspokenClothing.com
As I was approving website additions to The SistersTalk Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, & Transgender Directory, I stumbled upon a very interesting link on OutSpoken Clothing's webpage. Apparently, the Department of Justice & Department of Homeland Security are spying on these people. They visited various search engines and typed in keywords such as: progressive clothing and pop culture to find websites that they considered suspect and a threat to the Nation's security. It appears they visited that site and checked it thoroughly between January 26, 2004 and January 29, 2004 using every search term they could think of to see if the site would come up in a search engine. View their web logs to see for yourself.
Now, if you visit OutspokenClothing, you'll see it's a website that offers clothing with political quotes and satirical graphics on it -- hardly a threat to the nation's security. So, are we all being watched by those bastards? I find that odd, considering Bush is accepting pay offs from wealthy Arab-Americans. THAT seems more like a threat to the nation's security than OutSpokenClothing.
Think of it this way: IF I WERE receiving large amounts of cash from wealthy Arab-Americans, setting them up with meetings with key administartive officials, and wining and dining with them, I would've been hauled off to some dark room and questioned by the FBI by now.
No, this is not a racist posting and definitely not a jab at Arab-Americans. But seeing as how the USA itself has established this idea that Arabs & Muslims are a threat to the USA (by establishing the Patriot Act), then why the hell can Bush accept payoffs from the wealthy ones? And why are his cronies spying on OutSpokenClothing.com? No wealthy Arab-Americans are paying them off!
Left-Liberal, Libertarian, Centrist: Accept the Challenge
Ok, so it's not a challenge. It was just a short quiz to determine where you are politically.
I'm constantly referred to by one of my dearest friends and allies (a Conservative, White Male in Canada who supports Bush with a vengence) as a [i]bleeding heart liberal. [/i] So, I wanted to figure out whether my heart really is bleeding. I typically just vote for the candidate I think is best, regardless of the candidate's political party.
Here's a brief description of the popular political philosophies, compliments of The Advocates. You get a description of the philosophies after you've taken a brief quiz:
[i]Political Philosophies[/i]
[b]Libertarian [/b] Libertarians are self-governors in both personal and economic matters. They believe government's only purpose is to protect people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility, and tolerate economic and social diversity.
[b]Left-Liberal [/b] Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for economic equality.
[b]Centrist [/b] Centrists favor selective government intervention and emphasize practical solutions to current problems. They tend to keep an open mind on new issues. Many centrists feel that government serves as a check on excessive liberty.
[b]Conservative [/b] Right-conservatives prefer self-government on economic issues, but want official standards in personal matters. They want the government to defend the community from threats to its moral fiber. [b] Authoritarian [/b] Authoritarians want government to advance society and individuals through expert central planning. They often doubt whether self-government is practical. Left-authoritarians are also called socialists, while fascists are right-authoritarians.
So, I learned that I am a Left-Liberal, not a bleeding heart liberal. I didn't even see that one of the list. I would say that on some days, I agree with the Libertarian view also. On ZERO days do I agree with the Conservative philosophy. Stay out of my personal life.
See, now looking at that picture wasn't so bad, now was it? Looks like the media is trying to be a little more inclusive in their coverage of the San Fran marriage party.
Any unattractive couples getting married? I keep seeing nothing but beautiful people. Ha! I won't start on that.
The list is an interesting read. Some of the articles available:
WASHINGTON / CAMPAIGN 2004 | February 17, 2004 Arabs in U.S. Raising Money to Back Bush By LESLIE WAYNE (NYT)
BUSINESS/FINANCIAL DESK | June 6, 2003, Friday Using Technology to Develop Arab-Jewish Ties By ETGAR LEFKOVITS (NYT) 925 words
EDITORIAL DESK | April 26, 2003, Saturday A Path to Arab Democracy By Marwan Muasher (NYT) Op-Ed 784 words
FOREIGN DESK | January 26, 2003, Sunday Israeli Arabs Lose Political Faith as Election Nears By FRANK BRUNI (NYT) 1256 words
NATIONAL DESK | December 17, 2002, Tuesday THREATS AND RESPONSES: THE TIGHTENING BORDER; Facing Registry Deadline, Men From Muslim Nations Swamp Immigration Office By JOHN M. BRODER with SUSAN SACHS (NYT) 1204 words
NATIONAL DESK | November 26, 2002, Tuesday THREATS AND RESPONSES; Hate Crimes Up Against Muslims (AP ) 212 words
EDITORIAL DESK | November 12, 2002, Tuesday Scrutiny at the Borders (NYT) 221 words
The article "A Path to Arab Democracy" . . . I wonder if those big checks from wealthy Arab-American donors has anything to do with the US deciding that Iraq needs to be a Democracy.
And there are still others who have a more practical reason for opening their checkbooks: access to a business-friendly White House. Already, their efforts have brought them visits with the president at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., as well as White House dinners and meetings with top administration officials.
So, Bush has wealthy Arab-Americans who are backing his campaign (note the word wealthy). Meetings with top administration officials, eh? So, you show some cash (a lot of cash) and you get a meeting with a top administration official -- allowing you the opportunity to wheel and deal and come up with all sorts of deals that are mutually beneficial to you both. I wonder if these open checkbooks and large checks had anything to do with Bush's decision to invade Iraq to begin with. So, what else do these wealthy Arabs who suport Bush get? I know damn well it goes beyond a visit to his ranch and meetings with top administration officials. What else do they get?
Big donations have brought high-level access for Dr. Malik Hasan. . . In the past few months he has met personally with Mr. Bush, once at a White House dinner and again at a fund-raiser in Washington. He visited with Mr. Bush at the president's ranch, and Dr. Hasan's wife, Seeme, has been brought into high-level meetings on Arab-American concerns.
Something about all this really bothers me. It doesn't make me comfortable knowing that Bush may have quite possibly lied about the existence of Iraq producing biological weapons combined with wealthy Arab-Amercians sitting in on high-level meetings and buying meetings with top administration officials.
Well, his timing was certainly off when he announced that he would support Kerry if Dean didn't win WI. It was a bit . . . tacky. I smelled a rat with that one.
LA CROSSE, Wis. (Feb. 16) - Howard Dean on Monday pushed his beleaguered Democratic presidential bid across Wisconsin amid the departure of his national chairman, a fresh sign of internal upheaval on the eve of a critical primary with 72 national convention delegates at stake.
Woo! This is almost as exciting as . . . well, I don't know. Two campaign aides gone in less than one month. What the hell was Grossman thinking when he stated (on the record) that he would support Kerry if Dean didn't win WI. He was Dean's head cheerleader. That's like having the captain of the cheerleading squad preparing cheers for the other team just in case her team loses. He was honest enough to state his intentions; however, dude, you're the campaign chairman. Don't say that!
Looks to me like these boys choose a team based on who they think can win, not who they think has the nation's best interest at heart.
I just watched a gun violence commercial in which they showed two separate scenes:
The first scene was that of a group of Mexicans shooting at a group of Blacks.
The second scene was that of a Black male walking into the home of an older White couple and shooting the man.
I didn't get to catch who produced the commercial, but I'm a bit ticked by what my biracial children just saw while they were watching their after-school cartoons.
The message they were just sent was: Blacks and Mexicans have a problem with gun violence.
My oldest is at a Middle school that locks the doors after school officially starts at 8am and requires that the students always have an ID on them. When you call the school, you are informed that calls are monitored for security purposes.
Does this tight security in our nation's schools have anything to do with gun use by Black and Mexicans? As I recall, schools decided to tighten security because there were too many students walking into schools and shootin' up the place! Now, let's try to recall who those kids were:
I could go on, but I won't. Stop feeding my kids this idea that they are members of a violent racial group. The reason the schools are locked today is due to the increased awareness (by some) that gun violence is everybody's issue -- not just ours.
Poor condition, yet still operating after all these years. Comes with several extras: A Vice President, a Press Secretary, an entire House full of Do-Boys and Do-Girls, plus many more extras. Has had 43 owners (the past two having really tarred the image of the Oval Office). Call 202-456-1111 to setup a test drive.
Ok, all kidding aside. I'm surprised by how much it costs to "win" the Presidency. Howard Dean has spent $31 million so far in his attempt to win that seat in the Oval Office. If he has spent $31 million, what is Kerry spending? What is Bush spending?
Ok, so now that my anger has subsided and I can laugh about the motive behind the Whites Only Scholarship (nevermind the funny ass requirements), let's play with this a little bit.
The American Association for Affirmative Action is the association of professionals managing affirmative action, equal opportunity, diversity and other human resource programs.
Founded in 1974, the American Association for Affirmative Action (AAAA) is dedicated to the advancement of affirmative action, equal opportunity and the elimination of discrimination on the basis of race, gender, ethnic background or any other criterion that deprives people of opportunities to live and work. The organization's dedication is realized in its many activities designed to help Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action (EEO/AA) professionals be more successful and productive in their careers.
The students at Roger Williams University seem to have focused their attention on Blacks -- making us their problem with Affirmative Action. I'm assuming that's the case, because they've designed a scholarship to protest Affirmative Action, yet they're only attacking one aspect of Affirmative Action: race. So, can the readers here agree that these particular students at Roger Williams University only have a problem with the race issue.
If they really wanted to protest Affirmative Action, their scholarship would be:
The Heterosexual, Christian, Perfectly-Abled, White Male Scholarship.
Requirements: Send them a signed affidavit from all your friends attesting to your heterosexuality; send in a letter from the pastor of your church; send in documentation from your doctor stating you do not have any disabilities; send in a recent picture and all records of who your ancestors were, to prove that you are pure 100% White, and a brief essay stating how proud you are to be in the majority.
I briefly considered calming down first before I commented on this news story, but decided against it because I want my first reaction to shine through.
BRISTOL, R.I. (Feb. 16) - A student group at Roger Williams University is offering a new scholarship for which only white students are eligible, a move they say is designed to protest affirmative action.
The application for the $250 award requires an essay on "why you are proud of your white heritage" and a recent picture to "confirm whiteness."
I don't feel Affirmative Action is the perfect solution to fixing the problems of this nation; however, it's a solution -- imperfect as it may be.
Let's address why we have a need for Affirmative Action.
Have you been unable to draw a link between the gross unequal distribution of wealth in the United States and the misuse/abuse/disrespect of African Americans, Women, and other minorities in this country? Have you been unable to recognize that Europeans/Whites have been the dominant group in this country since 1776 in every way imaginable: economically, politically, and socially.
You're angry? Honey, you don't even begin to understand what it feels like to be really angry. I'm angry that we even need Affirmative Action in the first place.
I'm angry that your ancestors placed a system in motion that would setup African Americans, Women, and other minorities to be the scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in this country.
I'm angry that you, and everyone like you, is screaming "reverse discrimination" because there are few privileges in this country you're not afforded. Give me a break. Your people have been doing it to others for centuries, but now that it's happening to you it's an issue. A travesty. Immoral. Wouldn't that be way?
Ask your parents where they were when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr was fighting for the rights of African Americans. Ask them to tell you where [b]their[/b] parents were when women were fighting for the right to vote. Where are you now in the fight for equal rights for Gays & Lesbians?
Hand out your "I'm Pissed Off at Affirmative Action" scholarship. I suppose any White student who's that desperate for college money that they would freely accept your money in protest probably deserves to move in the ranks with you.
Affirmative Action is not the answer, no. But hey, we're only trying to fix a mess that your people made to begin with.
I was very pleased to see high school student Jessica Davis posing the question " . . . if this Gay/Straight Alliance is such a big thing that so many schools have, [then] why don't we have one?" I said out loud, while standing in the middle of the coffeeshop, "Yeah, why don't you have one?"
I often tell my friends that I would never go back to high school -- ever. You couldn't pay me to go back to walking the halls of an institution full of teenagers influenced by the discriminatory prejudices of their parents and society.
It's very nice to know that many high schools around the nation are establishing campus clubs like the Gay/Straight Alliance; however, I wonder if these clubs are utilized as fully as they should (could) be. You can liken this to the domestic partner benefits offered at large companies with strong corporate cultures. Once an employee applies for those benefits, that employee has essentially outed him/herself. High schools have very strong influential cultures. How many teenagers will avoid the Gay/Straight alliance because joining will either say one of two things: you are gay, or you support your fellow gay classmates. Either of these two things can make you unpopular with the majority in the dominant culture -- not to mention what your parents might say!
I attended high school in GA, so I'm a WI implant. I used to get picked on all the time for having White friends. I wasn't fat or nerdy. I didn't dress funny. I was on the cheerleading squad. I got good grades. I wrote for the newspaper and I played in the band. The only thing my classmates could find to pick on me about was the fact that I had White friends and I "talked White." Can you imagine if they knew I was dyke?
I had a crush on my sophomore English teacher. Her name was Sherri. But, that's another story.
[b]- BOOK REVIEW -[/b]'The Working Poor': Can't Win for Losing
David K. Shipler reports on the 35 million people, most of them employed, who are not making it in America. This article includes an audio interview with the author.
So, before I hit "publish," I'll save this first. Blogging is troublesome this morning. I've tried to post this twice already. I should've had my coffee before I started tangling with my blog.
The capture of Mohammed Zimam Abdul Razaq leaves only 10 top figures still at large from the list of 55 issued after the Saddam Hussein regime fell. Abdul Razaq was No. 41, and the four of spades in the military's "deck of cards" of top fugitives.
Reminiscing for a minute: didn't Rumsfield call France a country of weasles for refusing to support the Bush administration's war on Iraq? In addition, didn't the UN have tons of apprehensions about going into Iraq and Bush (after pretending to care about your opinion, set up up a call-in opinion poll and ignored the results) went ahead with the decision anyway?
Interesting. Very interesting.
I'm still trying to figure out the connection between Saddam and Al-Qaida. If there was really a connection, Saddam's buddies ditched him and left him to be discovered by US forces -- dirty, unshaven, and crouched in a hole. What a way to thank an allie.
The Gay and Lesbian Medical Association today condemned the decision of the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit to uphold a Florida law that prohibits gay people from adopting. The decision was handed down January 29, 2004, in response to a lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of four gay men who would like to adopt in Florida but are prevented from doing so by a state law that bans lesbians and gay men from adopting.
Jeb Bush (hey, that name sounds familiar!) would rather let innocent children remain in foster care than allow homosexuals to adopt them. Placing children in the middle of your own ridiculous biases against homosexuals is one sick move. I know plenty heterosexual people who shouldn't be raising children and if I could take them and hand them over to a gay person, I would in a second.
The complacency I'm hearing is sickening and settling for Kerry because he's not Bush is just sad. If the USA was better prepared to deal with a female or minority as Commander-In-Chief, perhaps we'd have some real choices here. But because the USA is not, we keep getting these sorry ass European male choices who keep giving us the same sorry ass results. Progress, people. Find thee some progress.
The only positive I see in Kerry becoming the next President is that he's not Bush -- and even now, I'm beginning to wonder about that one. You wouldn't want a wishy-washy doctor operating on your arm; why do we want a wishy-washy "I Don't Decide On Issues Until You Show Some Cash" candidate running the country? Well, because it's always been that way. It just depends on whether you support the Democratic sell-out or the Republican sell-out. I don't support either.
Reform is in order. But, hey, we've heard that before now haven't we? Real reform would involve taking an honest look at what we've been doing forever and whether or not it's been working ([b]for everyone[/b], not the select few who keep benefiting from the system they set up). From there, we start getting serious about adding women (women who can think for themselves) and minorities to significant roles in the political structure of this country. Nevermind the Thomas and O'Connors of the world. They're bought and paid for.
Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry signed a letter two years ago strongly urging the Massachusetts Legislature to drop a constitutional amendment outlawing same-sex marriage. More recently, Kerry has said he opposes gay marriage and has hinted he might even support a limited ban.
I'm repeating myself here, I know. But I do believe I predicted a Kerry backstabbing. Actually, I would call this a "a royal screw." But like the lesbian romance novelist said: ya gotta lie to get what you want and no one who supports gay marriage will ever see that nice big office at the White House. She plans to vote for Kerry.
I say we can do without the likes of lesbians like her and politicans like Kerry.
I think this part of her article is very nicely constructed, and definitely placed in the article to conjure up images in all our minds of Divorce Court:
The groom, Sergey Kisel, 23, said he opposed extending marriage rights to same-sex couples.
"I love my wife. The Bible says only man and woman," he said.
His bride, 17-year-old Lena Likhtar, nodded and said, "I think it's wrong. "
Already trained to nod and agree there, little lady?
The Audre Lorde Project (ALP) is a Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Two Spirit & Transgender (LGBTST) People of Color center for focusing on the New York City area. Through mobilization, education and capacity-building, we work for community wellness and progressive social and economic justice. Committed to struggling across differences, we seek to responsibly reflect, represent and serve our various communities.
ALP seeks two individuals for the following positions: Program Associate Resource Center (Reports to: Director of Resource Center) & Development Coordinator (Reports to: Executive Director)
From our Mailbag February 14, 2004: 10:30PM Central Time:
The construction of “The Wall” that is supported by many senators, as they praise the Bush decision to ignore the World Court, will never garner THIS Jewish vote! Let’s be aware that this dividing wall is NOT built on the legitimate borders between Israel and Palestine but is being placed inside Palestinian occupied territories. To one side are lands with the illegal settlements, making the wall a de facto expansion of the state of Israel. Palestinian towns are cut in two by it, families are separated by it, farmers find their fruit trees inaccessible and economic life of the villages is destroyed! (For details please see the Gushshalom.org web site of the Israeli “Peace Block”)
Does anyone think that “The Wall” will prevent suicide bombings? What side of the wall do the bombers live on? The right side or the left side? I am tired of catch phrases designed to win public opinion but which are sheer bunk!
Violence begets violence and violence , unfortunately, will increase as a result of “The Wall.” We must have the courage to see clearly and to speak up.
As I begin my own trivial games with my blogging service ([b]again[/b]-- someone shoot me the name of an excellent blogging service, please), I'm watching the Bush/Kerry game begin. Kerry hasn't even been chosen as the official Democratic candidate for President yet, and the Bush camp has already started the relentless filet of Kerry's character. Not that I think he really has much character since he sat back and kept quiet on the war in Iraq issue when Bush's approval rating was high, and then slammed the man (word loosely used) when his approval rating started to slip. But in either case, whatever character he has left intact, the Bush camp wants to make you, and me, and every other American believe that Kerry is unprincipled (is that a word?). I don't need the Bush camp to sway my opinion of Kerry. I predicted the man would stab us homos in the back on the gay marriage issue and I was correct. How did I know? It was yet another issue he was keeping quiet on until he could decide which decision would be the best decision for his campaign results.
So, at this point: it looks like Americans will have to decide between the lessor of two evils in November. But isn't that always the way?
And yes, [i]unprincipled [/i]is a word. Bush had to look it up too, I bet.
About this special interest money they're saying Kerry regularly pockets. I'd be curious to see Kerry's list of special interest groups. Hell, I'd like to see everybody's list because you know everybody on Capital Hill has one. I remember watching a Dean interview on one of the networks (can't remember which one) in which he stated that most politicians accept money from special interest groups. What matters is who accepts the [b]most[/b] money from special interest groups (at least that's what I got from the interview). So, of course, I took his logic and ran with it.
Everybody gets a DUI; what matters most is who gets the most DUIs.
Everybody uses drugs; what matters most is who uses the most drugs.
Every man beats his wife; what matters most is what man beats his wife the most.
That deserves the honors of "[b]the dumbest stab at defending Bush Boy I've heard all day[/b]."
Honestly folks, Clinton is probably not the best person to use to defend the honors of Dubya. Should I list the reasons why? Ok, I'll list just one:
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."
A little bit of thought, not even a lot, would help ya figure out why Clinton is defending Bush's actions with Iraq. Perhaps when he received notice from that investigative bipartisan committee that he would be questioned about just what it was he knew pre-911.
Well, it's nice to see that the good 'ole boys can work together [b]when they need to[/b]. Now, if we can just get the homosexuals and the Religious Right to kiss and makeup. A common goal. The homosexuals and the Religious right need a common goal -- kinda like Clinton and Bush now have a common goal.
"If people want to go back to find a photograph from 30 years ago, that's fine by me," Kerry said. "You know, I disagree, like everyone else in America, with the choice [Fonda] made at that point in time. I thought it was terrible. We just move on, Don. We're 30 years beyond that."
So, critics are tying to link him to Fonda and what she did 30 years ago, and he's trying to turn all eyes back on Fonda with this comment. That's some smooth politic-ing.
The USA is Now a THEY, Not an US: Corrupt & Oppressed
I think it's time for someone to blow a whistle and call a time-out here. Or maybe, somebody's pissed off Black grandmother needs to break out a leather belt and start whoopin' on some ass or somethin'. You folks are clownin' somethin' fierce now.
Is this what the United States has come to because we can't seem to agree that one adult American should be allowed to choose what other adult American he/she wants to marry? It's really as simple as that. We can't agree that one adult American should have the right to decide what other adult American he/she wants to marry. So, we're willing to pay off politicians to vote the way we want them to so they can do dirty dealings with the US Constitution.
Will it end here? The next time we can't agree, will we follow some whim suggested by our Commander-In-Chief and just change the Constitution (paying off the politicians in the process) so we can get what we want?
We have officially become what we preach to our children in Middle school that we shouldn't be -- an oppressive nation like "them." You know who "they" are. I speak of the "theys" we point to in Social Studies class when we're teaching our kids that [b]WE[/b] are the home of the free and [b]THEY [/b]are the home of the oppressed and corrupt. When you're paying off your politicians to change the Constitution, you couldn't get any more corrupt and oppressed.
The media loves lesbians! Or do they? Perhaps the media is just responding to what it feels its audience can stomach right now.
I have purposely withheld my comments about the first homosexual marriage performed in the United States: lesbian activists Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin. I wanted to see how the media would cover the delightful display of disobedience goin' on out there in CA. So, I've been keeping an eye on the newspapers and watching TV. You boys and girls love lesbians, dontcha? There's the mention of gay men getting married, but no pictures. Why is that?
I'll tell you why, but let me first point out another one of your common biases that pisses me off. When US Navy ships return home to their home port, the media shows images of women waiting patiently on the pier for their men to return home. The media shows cute little kids holding signs that say, "We Missed You Daddy!" But where the hell are the images and signs that acknowledge that there are women on those ships? Your gross lack of respect for the work that women do for this country really gets on my damn nerves. But you jump all over that sorry ass Jessica Lynch story like she was the only soldier in that screwed up war in Iraq. That wasn't news; that was propaganda.
Now, back to why the media is lesbian-happy with this gay issue. Porn. Plain and simple. Heterosexual men can deal with lesbian porn, but they can't deal with gay male porn. To flash images of two married males all over the news would conjure up images of gay male porn in the minds of all those men who would rather think of lesbian porn. I say you're all sick bastards. Do you automatically think of sex when you see a heterosexual marriage announcement in the newspapers? Probably not. But mention gay men and the heterosexual men cringe and say, "that just makes me sick to think about it." Then, don't think about it.
By the way, a belated congrats go out to Phyllis and Del. You've been upsettin' the status quo longer than I've been alive. Keep it up, you're doing a great job.
Bush and his cronies passed the Partial Birth Abortion Act in 2003, which made it illegal for doctors to perform partial birth abortions. To exert the President and Religious Right's new authority over a woman's body (and apparently a doctor's decision-making process), the Justice Department has issued subpoenas demanding medical records of hundreds of women in several states who were reported to have had certain types of abortions.
This is a gross misuse of power. Murder is against the law also, but the Justice department doesn't harass doctors and question their decision-making process when doctors lose patients during a routine operation. This Bush-infested "justice" department is overstepping their bounds and, again, dipping their noses into the private records of hundreds of female patients. This Bush-infested "justice" department is wasting valuable tax-payer dollars by moving so swiftly to attack doctors and women, while we are still waiting for the Enron Executive thieves of White-collar America to receive the punishment they deserve.
Where are all the Bible bangers when we learn about corporate scandals that costs thousands of people the money they were saving to live off of in their retirement years? I don't recall seeing any of you on the side of the road with a cardboard sign proclaiming "Take Down Coporate Thieves!" Of course not, because you let your leaders dictate to you what your cause will be. You have no mind of your own. Your leaders don't want you to have a mind of your own. Heaven forbid you start to see the hypocrisy for yourself.
Where are the Bible bangers when a new study on child sexual assault is released and it always points to heterosexual men as the largest group of sexual deviants among us? I don't recall seeing any of you standing on the side of the road with a sign proclaiming "Tougher Laws on Child Sex Abusers!"
No, those types of causes are usually taken up by the groups of people who are motivated [b]less[/b] by the desire to make one group look bad and [b]more[/b] by the desire to really do something. If the child sex abuse study showed gay men as the largest group of sexual abusers, I'm sure I'd see some Bible bangers on the side of the road!
What bothers me the most about all this is the amount of women who are being led by these power-hungry, power-abusive men. Girls, it really is okay to develop an independent thought and run with it. Try it sometime.
So I'm cruising the headlines and I can't get away from all the marriage protests. I saw a picture of a woman holding a sign that said: 1 Man + 1 Women = Marriage. I think she forgot to throw in the extra marital affairs. I don't know what she's so worried about. It's not like the men she's interested in are going to be the same men that my gay boyfriends are interested in. There won't be a slimmer pool of men for her to choose from if gay marriages were suddenly sanctioned in the US. And certainly, I'm not interested in the same kind of women that men are interested in. There's plenty for everyone. She need not worry about the competition when it comes to her choices of marriage mates.
I'd like to throw something out at ya for a minute. Look at the majority of people who are protesting against gay marriage. They're White people.
My exhusband is White. When I joined his family, I witnessed first hand, for the first time in my life, the amazing hypocrisy of European people. Here, we have a family that's hiding their dirty little secrets about Grandpa and what he did to his own daughter, but they were appalled that their son would consider marrying a Black woman. Why? Well, I wasn't a bad person. They didn't know me well enough to come to that consensus. They just felt that the culture of my "people" wouldn't be conducive to my then-husband and I raising children together. Excuse me. You have a fuckin' pedophile in your family and you're telling me that my family's culture is bad? Turns out they're daughter-in-law was a dyke, but they still blame my "people" and my culture.
Why do so many White people feel like moral superiors, even though they have just as much junk running through their veins as the rest of us? It was a rhetorical question. Don't answer it. Because they're White. And because they're White they were raised with that moral superiority complex. It's why you have so many White families who hide their dirty secrets from the world; you can't have the world knowing your dirty secrets, or you won't look like a moral superior, now would you?
Of course there's the societal pressure to be superior to other races. People were always surprised to learn that I was the Stevens in the household receiving the college alumni magazine and not my then-husband; he doesn't have a college degree. There were lower expectations of me -- because I am the Black female. He always thought I was over-reacting to people's assumptions. He would have been pissed off if someone automatically assumed there was no way he could possibly have a college degree.
It's a vicious cycle of socialization that starts from the day we're born. You know where you'll stand on the social ladder almost from the day you can understand class structure -- even at its most basic level. Each social class has a certain level of morality assigned to it. Heterosexual White people have conveniently assigned themselves to the top of the social class. Those at the top feel they are the ones who can best decide what value system the rest of us should follow. Nevermind that they have their own fucked up sense of values.
Madison, WI (the city I fondly call lesbian-capital of the world) is now home of a bill that, if passed, will make same-sex marriages legal.
Wisconsin Lawmakers Propose Marriage:(Madison, Wisconsin) As the eyes of the nation were focused on Boston, two Wisconsin lawmakers have introduced a bill to make same-sex marriage legal in that state. Copyright 2004 365gay.com
Madison, WI is a very liberal city -- with queer friendly businesses all over the place. Wisconsin, the state as a whole, I'm not too sure. Janesville, WI is home of the largest KKK organization in the country. Remember the KKK group that broke talk show host Geraldo's nose on national television? That was the Janesville, WI KKK group -- about 30 minutes outside of Madison. In addition, the anti-gay groups run rampant here. Once every few months or so, I get a God Hates Fags pamphlet on the windshield of my car. I suppose Christians (and I do use that term loosely) feel they can trespass and solicit -- all in the name of the Lord.
This will be an interesting battle to watch -- and right from my backyard. I must find my "I love Girls" tshirt to wear around (a lot) for the occassion.
San Fran, CA: I must say, I'm a bit disappointed that a city in California wasn't the first to perform the first legal gay or lesbian marriage. I'm actually quite surprised that gay marriages are still illegal in CA. It's CA, for cryin' out loud. But, to redeem its liberal reputation, San Fran [is] issuing marriage licences to gay couples despite [a] court challenge. Couldn't let MA have all the glory, now could ya? Why didn't ya do this when VT became the first state to allow civil unions for gay & lesbian couples? Why didn't you do [b]something[/b]? Here are two east coast states, seemingly conservative in nature -- making huge strides for the lesbian & gay community, while the legislative body in CA sits back and waits to see what will happen first before it makes a move. And even then, the only powers-that-be who are doing anything are the officials in San Fran. I'm all for civil disobedience. Martin Luther King, Jr would be proud, too.
"I think he was believing what he wanted to believe," said one respondent, Ron Perholtz, an accountant from Jupiter, Fla. "I can't say he's dishonest. He heard what he wanted to hear. He's manipulatable by [Vice President] Cheney and others."
Sounds like Ron Perholtz is believing what he wants to believe. What motive would Cheney have to manipulate Bush into going to war against Iraq? Did they include this quote in the article to make Ron Perholtz look bad?
The [b]POLL[/b]. [b]THE [/b]poll. I find this poll one of the most interesting polls I've read about so far in the past 2 weeks. There's been so many of them, ya know.
Ms. Ann Coulter, was it you who called us all non-patriots? Why yes, I believe it was! Oh, let's look at her continuous babble:
Bush's National Guard service is the most thoroughly investigated event since the Kennedy assassination. But the Democrats will accept only two possible conclusions to their baseless accusations: (1) Bush was "AWOL," or (2) the matter needs further investigation.
From her website: Ann Coulter. Oh my, there's even a blonde doll on her site that looks a lot like a fuckin' Barbie doll. It's called the [i]Talking Ann Coulter[/i]. You mean, it's blonde, skinny, [b]and[/b] it's allowed to speak?! Ya gotta look, it's worth a few laughs. Ok, more than a few.
The only other woman I think is as useless as Ann Coulter is Justice O'Connor. Perhaps they take tea together, yes? Run in the same country club circles?
How come they get to have all the fun? At this point, I really don't care about mr. president's [b]part-part-time [/b] military service. If I were the President of the United States, I wouldn't even tell anybody I served in the National Guard. That's like saying you were an overgrown Boy Scout playing pretend military. You ought to be automatically disqualified from even being the President if you served in the National Guard.
By the way, you're not asking, but I'm telling. I did my time. All of it. But I'm a damn homo, so what a disgrace, eh?
The case of the dumb ass basketball player who had it all then blew his marriage, his reputation, and his career, to please the membrane below his waste. He's set to leave the Lakers. And do I care? Hell no. Let's say it [b]wasn't [/b]rape. I don't know one way or the other. What I do know is that the "sanctity of his marriage" is a joke.
Ok, so who cares if companies are purposely targeting us just because we're gay? It used to be that no one paid any attention to us because we were. Absolut and Levi Strauss have a long history of marketing to the lesbian & gay market -- and the companies have been quite successful at it, too. They recognize that we have money and it spends like everybody else's. They also recognize that we develop a certain sick loyalty to companies that brand themselves as "gay friendly."
For everyone else who pulls a Hallmark and develops a separate company that they then use to market to the gay community so they can keep their mainstream consumers happy -- I say SCREW YOU! Bring on the Absoluts and I love my Levi's.
Ok, this was to be expected. In 1999, the state was so desperate to save heterosexual marriages, VA became a part of the Marriage Movement. The movement was developed by the nonprofit group Marriage Savers -- a religious organization that was designed to create marriage plans to help save marriages across the country.
How about an even more desperate measure: poke the husband's eyes out and help the wife develop some self-esteem; the sanctity of marriage will be preserved forever. You'll have a blind husband and a self-confident wife.
In a sense, the examination of Senator John Kerry's record as a war protester is the mirror image of the Democrats' focus on President Bush's military record.
Aaaah, good 'ole fashion mud-slingin'. I love elections. We get to see the rich get down and dirty. I mean, we already know the politicians know how to do it, it's just extremely entertaining watching them screw someone else up the &^#%@ besides us.
Don't you feel dumb? I'm going through this very interesting Commemorative Magazine that I picked up at the gas station on my way to class tonight. There's a great picture of you in it, passionately defending Bush's statement that Iraq was developing (and hiding) weapons of mass destruction. You look fabulous, darlin'. But, umm... don't you feel like the dumb, token, piece of ethnicity Bush needed to make himself look good in the public eye? No? You should.
Now, about this magazine... A Commemorative Issue published in February? Give me a break! This is timed for Dean's campaigning in WI. The publishers are ABCD Publishers (who I can't seem to find anywhere online)
The front cover:
Please, don't try to turn this into a "Saddam was a butcher so Bush's lies were justified" issue. I'm not too sure I can even believe that anymore. Seems to me Baghdad has a new butcher. Wonder who that could be.
By the way, that photo is the cover page of, well, I don't know the name of the magazine. I think it's "We Got Him!" Copyright belongs to ABCD Publishing.
BOSTON, Feb. 11 — The Massachusetts legislature defeated two constitutional amendments on Wednesday that were designed to ban same-sex marriage by overriding a state court's decision that would have made Massachusetts the first state to establish gay marriage.
Don't worry, Religious Right Wingers. Take comfort in believing that your spot in Heaven is still open. You tried.
Under firm but respectful questioning, Bush wilted. He couldn't explain his constantly shifting rationale for war with Iraq or why he was permitted to quit National Guard service eight months before his hitch ended or why his deficit goes ever deeper in the red or the dismal job creation record on his watch.
Perhaps he didn't understand all those polysyllabic words without the help of his interpreter.
Last night, Senate leaders were still trying to win support for a compromise that would allow legislators to vote for a constitutional amendment that would reserve the term marriage for a man and a woman but ensure for homosexual couples the rights and benefits of marriage through civil unions.
Gay talk show host Al Rantel's unpopular opinion will be met with much criticism, I'm sure. He says:
[w]ho said gays want to get married in the first place? Lets look at the numbers. The highest number of same sex households in America is ironically in Massachusetts, however even then it is under 2 per cent of all households. If gays make up five to ten per cent of the population as is often claimed, one would expect this number to be five times larger.
Mr. Rantel goes on to say the LGBT community is a:
group that has offered no indication that most even desire to enter into the kind of commitments that marriage ideally entails, or that serves the real purpose of marriage.
I must agree with Mr. Rantel; however, it doesn't mean we shouldn't have the right. Many heterosexuals don't really want to get married either. They're motivated by societal influences, the desire to live off 2 incomes instead of 1, and a sick inability to be alone. Note: the 50% divorce rate. I say we should all be screwing up the sanctity of marriage. Either we all get to do it, or no one gets to do it.
Al Rantel's article was quoted from: NewsMax.com Copyright 2004
Under pressure from a gay rights group, New York State has reversed its two-year position that denied unemployment benefits to gays and lesbians who quit their jobs to follow their partners taking new jobs out of state, according to The New York Times on Wednesday.
BOSTON, Massachusetts (AFP) - Thousands of gay activists and their opponents rallied at the Massachusetts state legislature, where lawmakers debated a proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
mr. president poised to sign federal marriage amendment that would make gay & lesbian marriages illegal in the US
From The Washington Post, 2/11/04: "Republican officials said Bush's decision to proceed now was driven partly by his desire to start the general election campaign on a fresh issue, at a time when his credibility has been battered by questions about prewar warnings of unconventional weapons in Iraq, as well as doubts raised by Democrats about his National Guard service."
It just might work because so many Americans and the Press (as a whole) are so damn fickle.
How about working on an amendment to the Constitution that makes lying to start a war an impeachable offense?
Revisiting the case of the Country Club Lesbians who are suing for the right to pay a ritzy country club a $40,000 initiation fee and about $475 in monthly dues to be treated like privileged equals. There's another case of Country Club Lesbians who are suing for the right to pay $18,000 to use a country club and be treated as equals. In both cases, one partner wants the other partner to be able to use the facilities and be treated as a spouse -- even though the couple is unmarried. According to the complaints, the clubs (separate clubs, unrelated cases) have made allowances for heterosexual unmarried couples to use the facilities as a married couple.
Setting the whole issue of equality aside for just a moment, I ask again: why would you want to spend your money at a [b] private country club [/b] that treats you like a second class citizen? Perhaps I don't understand it because I'm not a Country Club lesbian. Perhaps I shouldn't be so harsh in my questioning because the important issue here is equality.
Suing The Augusta National Golf Club for gender discrimination in a national sporting event is one thing; suing a [b]private country club [/b] that you are willing to pay $40,000 of your expendable income on for the use of a luxury item is another.
Bush Can Be a Draft Dodger Because He's Not a Homo
Apparently a suicide bomb exploded in Baghdad, killing 47 Iraqis who were working with American forces.
The man who auctioned his ugly sweater on eBay, General Wesley Clark, bows out of the Presidential election. That's good. He couldn't remember whether he wanted to support the Iraqi war-effort or not. At least Kerry just keeps quiet until he can figure out what the safest consensus will be.
Bush Boy's military service record shows missing gaps. In additon, I find it funny that "The National Guard and reserves, rarely called up during the Vietnam War, came to be regarded as 'draft havens for relatively affluent young white men,' the Air National Guard says in a history on its Internet site." Let's see: Affluent: that's Bush. White: that's Bush. Hmm... Why, was he a [b]draft dodger[/b]!? That's ok, at least he's not a homo, right?
Though California is one of 38 states with specific laws barring marriage between people of the same sex, the state is widely considered by gay rights activists to have the nation's second most gay-friendly laws after Vermont. . . [and] Newly elected Mayor Gavin Newsom said Tuesday he wants the city to be able to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. His spokesman said the mayor wants to officiate at the nuptials of two brides or two grooms within a week.
And kudos go out to the married heterosexual Presbyterian minister who violated a direct order to stop marrying gay couples. Rev. Stephen Van Kuiken was removed from his duties as a pastor for violating an order from a court made up of a group of Presbyterian churches in Cincinnati, OH. Rev. Van Kuiken has been reinstated but will not be returning to his church. I wonder if Bush and Rev. Van Kuiken pray to the same God.
Someone identifying herself as lesbian romance novelist Peggy J. Herring told me today that I needed to "get a clue" because to support Howard Dean in his quest for the Presidency wasn't a smart thing to do because anyone who supports gay rights will never see their way to the Presidency.
Well, Ms. Romance Novelist, you stated that you support Mr. Kerry. A quick lesson in politics will show you that your choice in candidates has a long record of support for gay rights. Does this mean your candidate will never see the Oval office? Do you yourself need to find that same clue you sent me in search of?
By the way, I've read reviews of your novel. It sucks.
Pundit O'Reilly Now Skeptical About Bush Copyright 2004 Reuters Limited
WASHINGTON (Feb. 10) - Conservative television news anchor Bill O'Reilly said on Tuesday he was now skeptical about the Bush administration and apologized to viewers for supporting prewar claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
Why, O'Reilly, I do believe this makes you downright UnAmerican. How dare you speak any word that makes the Bush Administration look bad. You are so UnAmerican. You are not a true Patriot. You have insulted the troops. (How's my ignorant American imitation?)
ASHINGTON, Feb. 9 — Members of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks warned the White House on Monday that it could face a politically damaging subpoena this week if it refused to turn over information from the highly classified Oval Office intelligence reports given to President Bush before 9/11
Yes, please hand those reports over [b]before [/b] the election, mr. president. Since it was so important for the public to know that Clinton used a cigar in his dealings with Ms. Lewinski, I think it's just as important for the independent commission to know just what was said in those reports pre 9/11. Yes?
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Declaring that ``America's economy is strong and getting stronger,'' President Bush told Congress Monday in his annual economic report that last year's tax cut was doing the job in reviving business growth.
MEMPHIS -- As Massachusetts lawmakers convene tomorrow to consider amending the state constitution to ban gay marriage, Senator John F. Kerry is attempting a difficult balancing act: preserving his reputation as a national leader on gay rights while remaining silent on the amendment debate that has gripped the gay community.
Anything to win the election, baby. He was silent while Bush marched this country into war on a lie, too. I have my bets on a Kerry backstabbing.
Kelly Trueman, 23, reinvented herself as 16-year-old Jake and concocted a string of lies to befriend a group of youngsters in Ripley, Derbyshire before forming a relationship with a 12-year-old girl she met on the school playing fields.
And we like to pretend we don't do sick things like this. The lesbian community also likes to pretend we don't abuse our partners. We do. It ain't all what you'll see on Showtime's "L".
Don't be fooled though. The sex offenders list is still overpopulated by heterosexual males.
(Albany, New York) A New York state senator lashed out at Harvey Milk High School Monday, accusing the all-gay school and New York City officials of racial discrimination.
The attack, by Sen. Ruben Diaz Sr. came during in a state budget hearing. Diaz, accused the city of funnelling money from minority districts like his to fund the $3.2 million Milk High.
"What they are doing is gross discrimination, gross disrespect toward our children, toward our community, and a misuse of funds," Diaz said at the first state legislative hearing on education since the school opened.
Diaz called the school "a haven to gays" while minority students face violence in crumbling schools across town.
"It`s a good school, with the top technology in the world, good teachers, air conditioning, nice school," Diaz said. "In my district, there`s no ventilation in the gym. ... Are they going to leave No Child Left Behind, or just certain groups?"
[b]Counter Argument 1[/b]: "a Democrat from the south Bronx who has opposed the school since its inception " Enough said.
[b]Counter Argument 2[/b]: "Diaz called the school 'a haven to gays'"
[b]Counter Argument 3: [/b]: Does Diaz attack the other schools in the area that are non-gay schools that have top technology, good teachers, and air conditioning, or just does he reserve that for the gay school?
Perhaps, Mr. Diaz, if parents and society would teach their children to refrain from being hostile little jerks to gay & lesbian students, there wouldn't be a need for a "gay haven" such as Harvey Milk High to exist.
WASHINGTON (Feb. 8 ) - Defending his decision to invade Iraq, President Bush said that although stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons have not been found, Saddam Hussein had the capacity to produce such arms and could have developed a nuclear weapon over time.
By DEB RIECHMANN, AP
[b]Translation[/b]: Ok, so I lied. But it could've happened.
Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but "you got to be one dumb mothafucka" to vote for a man who has done nothin' but lie to the American people just so he can start a war. That war cost the US government over $90 billion and hundreds of human lives. [b]So what [/b] if the US now has Saddam in custody. The man wasn't building any biological weapons and he wasn't getting any Uranium from Nigeria. And don't give me this "he's a tyrant who killed his own people" argument. There are lots of leaders in this world doing the same thing. The difference: mr. president has no interest in that country's commodities. If he did, he'd be lying about them building weapons of mass destruction, too.
The American Family Association only likes polls when the results are in their favor. When their latest poll backfired on them, they pulled the poll and decided not to approach Congress with the results. No cheating! You guys and girls are sore losers!
The conservative Tupelo based American Family Association (AFA) said it will not take the results of its marriage poll to Capitol Hill after a majority of respondents favored same-sex marriage.
(Washington, D.C.) The Senate has begun work on a bill to amend the US Constitution to prevent same-sex marriages and playing a key role will be the former Texas Supreme Court justice who dismissed challenges to the state's sodomy law.
I've never seen the lot of ya move so damn fast to get something done before. In the meantime:
there are still Senior Citizens with inadequate health coverage
we still have schools in urban areas with teachers who lack even the most basic skills required to educate our children
there are still thousands and thousands of homeless people in the United States
200 top companies are outsourcing their call-center jobs to companies overseas because the US government makes it too damn expensive to do business at home
And you low-down, dirty dogs didn't waste a minute working on an amendment to the Constitution to deny an adult American the right to choose what other adult American he/she can marry.
And we, as Americans, call ourselves the most progressive and free nation in the world? Please, the US is still the same nation that stole Africans from their country and used them as free labor. The US is still the same nation that raped female slaves then denied the existence of the children born of those rapes. The US is still the same nation that stole the Native Americans land and then claimed they gave it to us. The people who run this country still carry the same values of their ancestors.
Don't be a menace to society while lying about weapons of mass destruction, lying about the US being in imminent danger, protecting the sanctity of marriage, and plotting the demise of the Constitution.
Ok, so I wandered over to a popular hideout for lesbians on the net and made a little post that would definitely get the gyrls ticked off and "bois" running to the rescue. Why? Because I'm just like that. Also, because they need to be more involved. You visit a lesbian website that claims to get over [b]1 million hits a day[/b] and you wonder why they're not putting that website to some good use, eh?
While checking out the threads, I noticed the many, many threads about dating, sex, fat chicks (no offense, ladies, I struggle with my weight myself), love letters, music, and Showtime's "L" -- of course. Yeah, there were some political threads, but the ratio to the other threads was very small.
Now, let's look at why the LGBT community can't get a damn thing done. Finding a decent LGBT website that gets that kinda traffic that's designed to mobilize the community and get them politically involved -- yeah, right! I point that out in this thread, and the gyrls and bois get livid. Appalled. "Offended," said one of the regulars. Like I care. How dare I state that lesbians aren't as politically involved as they should be? Hunny, I'm looking at a message board that has a thread on fat chicks that's 30 [b]pages[/b] long, and a thread on gay marriages that's only 60 posts long. Umm. . .
Come on, all you lesbian & gay readers, be honest with yourselves. You know, just as well as I do, that our community has some serious political mobility issues. Trying to get a bar dyke involved in politics is like trying to get George Bush to marry Saddam. And you know just as well as I do that many of us in the community are bar flies.
I've crossed the line. I've criticized my own -- again. I'll never make friends this way.
Tenet Says Analysts Didn't Claim Imminent Threat By KATHERINE PFLEGER, AP
WASHINGTON (Feb. 5) -- In his first public defense of prewar intelligence, CIA Director George Tenet said Thursday that U.S. analysts had never claimed Iraq was an imminent threat, the main argument used by President Bush for going to war.
And this is the man who defends the sanctity of heterosexual marriage? He shouldn't be defending the sanctity of anything. When you have to lie to the American people because you want to go into Iraq because you have interest in Iraq's commodities . . . shame on you. Shame on your administration. Shame on the fools who voted you in office. Shame on the fools who plan to vote for you again.
I don't care what you think you accomplished by bringing Saddam to "justice." The justice you speak of is flawed by the lies you told to get there in the first place. You have sacrificed the lives of American sailors and soldiers all in the interest of the Bush family's interest in Iraq's oil. You have sacrificed the lives of innocent civilians in Iraq all in the interest of the Bush family's interest in Iraq's oil. Your end does not justify the means, Bush Boy. You lied to get there.
And the second dumb ass quote I've read this week. George W. Bush :
''Marriage is a sacred institution between a man and a woman,'' he said in the statement. ''If activist judges insist on redefining marriage by court order, the only alternative will be the constitutional process. We must do what is legally necessary to defend the sanctity of marriage.''
The sanctity of marriage? Who helped you spell that word? Listen, mr. president:
Nobody's trying to steal the glory of your 50% divorce rate.
Nobody's trying to steal the glory of all your soccer moms with hidden black eyes.
Nobody's trying to steal the glory of the phoney ass christian happy home that consists of drunken dad, unhappy mom, and the kids who have to listen to mom and dad fight all the time.
We just want the right to be a part of the 50% divorce rate too, ok? I'm sure the marriage counselors out there could use the extra cash that will come from all the gay and lesbian couples who will need marital counseling. Give it a rest, Bush Boy.
And MA is the only state in the Union with the courage to do what's right:
Mass. High Court Rules for Gay Marriage
By JENNIFER PETER, Associated Press Writer
BOSTON - The Massachusetts high court ruled Wednesday that only full, equal marriage rights for gay couples - rather than civil unions - would be constitutional, erasing any doubts that the nation's first same-sex marriages could take place in the state beginning in mid-May.
The court issued the opinion in response to a request from the state Senate about whether Vermont-style civil unions, which convey the state benefits of marriage - but not the title - would meet constitutional muster.
I'd pay good money to watch the Conservative, Religious Reich plan their attack of the MA Supreme Court. Oh wait, Bush Boy has already done that!
In what I view as the worst tit-for-tat after-break-up drama in history, Justin Timberlake tops his ex's sorry attempt to thumb her nose at him and turn some heads when she used a typical Madonna-shocker style staged lesbian-kiss to gain attention for her new album at the MTV Awards in September 2003.
I use the word lesbo to describe that kiss because that's what it was "lesbo." Phoney. Fake. Staged. And the worst display of style I've ever seen in my life. Timberlake's performance at the Superbowl will keep folks talking for awhile, too -- not to mention Jackson's tackiness for joining Timberlake in his childish tit-for-tat (isn't she a bit old for such nonsense?).
So, what now? Will Spears run off and get re-married? Give it a rest honey.
"We're talking about a group that engages in high-risk behavior, that are stricken with serious, life-threatening diseases that are very expensive to treat," Gary Glenn, president of the Midland-based American Family Association of Michigan, told The Detroit News for a Monday story.
"You add them to the insurance pool, and it's going to have the inevitable consequence of driving up insurance costs for everyone they do business with."
[b]Counter Argument 1[/b]: Mr. Glen is assuming that HIV/AIDS is a gay disease. Come on, we know that's the "life-threatening" disease Mr. Glen speaks of.
[b]Counter Argument 2[/b]: Breast Cancer is a life-threatening disease. Based on Mr. Glen's argument, women over the age of 35 should be excluded from coverage because it's a "serious, life-threatening disease that [is] very expensive to treat" and will "driv[e] up insurance costs for everyone" Blue Cross does business with.
Your Profit Margin Will Now Reflect the Size of Your Penis
Mark Eisenzimmer, one of the owners of the club in Portland, OR, accosted Lori Buckwalter, a transgenered MTF gym member while she was leaving the women's locker room and told her he thought she was a male and she was not to use the women's locker room anymore. Mark Eisenzimmer and Frank Eisenzimmer, owners of the club, then canceled Ms. Buckwalter's gym membership -- even though she tried explaining to Mark that she was transgendered.
Mark Eisenzimmer admits asking Buckwalter to show legal proof of her gender; but he didn't wait for that proof before he revoked her membership.
This is about 2 macho men, owners of a gym, who were bothered by having a transgendered MTF member using their facilities. He accosted the woman and demanded legal proof of her identity. No one, not even Mark or Frank said anything about anyone complaining about her presence in the locker room.
Ms. Bukwalter, recipient of the Mayor's award for activism 3 years ago, is now suing the Eisenzimmer boys (oopsie!). I hope Ms. Buckwalter is successful in her suit and the Eisenzimmer boys see themselves looking at a profit margin that accurately reflects the size of their penises.
Home Depot Sued. Goal Incongruency in the Lesbian Community
MILWAUKEE (AP) _ The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has filed a lawsuit against The Home Depot Inc., claiming it fired an employee because of her sex and in retaliation to complaints she made about racial and sexual discrimination.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, claims Renee Stachura complained to management of a Waukesha store about discriminatory conduct against a black employee and about racial and sexual language. No action was taken, the EEOC said Friday.
A male employee she complained about then made a similar, but untrue, complaint about her, and she was fired, the EEOC said.
``When an employee is fired for an untrue reason, without any chance to be heard, the EEOC will scrutinize the decision for a discriminatory motive,'' said Chester V. Bailey, district director of the EEOC's Milwaukee District Office.
The lawsuit requests that Stachura be reinstated and given monetary relief.
Ok, all you lesbian diehard Home Depot fans out there. This isn't the first time Home Depot has been sued for racial and gender discrimination. When will you stop carrying that Home Depot card in your wallet in your back pocket?
But wait, here's a good example of goal incongruency. Many lesbians of a European background don't take the time to think about things like this. To them, Home Depot is supreme because it has been one of the few large companies that provides domestic partner benefits to same-sex couples. But what about your fellow Black lesbian sister? She may have domestic partner benefits at Home Depot, but will she be around long enough to enjoy them?
I see you rollin' your eyes, big bad butch Home Depot manager. Will you continue to allow Home Depot to profit off you as valuable human capital, while the company continues to allow racial discrimination to occur? Yes, you probably will. Your needs are met; you make a lot of money; and you get to play with tools all day.
Monday, February 02, 2004 Gender, ethnicity and household income aside, one of the key indicators of why Americans vote the way they do is where they live. We explore the geography of politics, from the Bible Belt to the Rust Belt and from the East Coast to the West Coast.
In the second hour of the show: The movement for racial equality has affected African Americans in very different ways -- some have prospered, some have not. Henry Louis Gates explores the dynamics of racial equality in his latest book, America Behind the Color Line.
Sounds like a good show. I'm not a regular NPR listener, but sometimes it would be playing as the background "music" at the coffee shop I frequent here in town. Now, I tune in online and listen when the urge hits me.
I've seen BellaOnline come up in many of my web searches lately, so I finally made time to check out the website. The entrance page to the site is very clean and easy to maneuver, but the discussion forums -- what a mess!
The Gay & Lesbian Discussion section: Sad. Just a copy of all the other forums on Bella -- seriously lacking any diversity and culture. And, BellaOnline does have an African American culture forum, but I think the host may be a bit . . . uninterested or uninformed about the subject matter. There are a total of 9 topics since July 2003. As for the Lesbian Discussion forum: I shake my head.
While it may seem a bit unfair to judge an entire website on a few of its section, I think it's perfectly fair to do so in this case. BellaOnline does claim to be the voice of women. What women though? If you're gonna represent -- represent!
So, now I know what BellaOnline is all about and my curiosity has been severed and dipped in ice water.
Bush, Blair Among Peace Prize Nominees By DOUG MELLGREN, AP
Blair and Bush were praised for their efforts in removing Saddam Hussein from power.
OSLO, Norway (Feb. 1) - President George Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the European Union were among known nominees for the 2004 Nobel Peace Prize as the nomination deadline expired Sunday.
I guess the end always justifies the reason and the means, eh? The two leaders most interested in Iraq's commodities are nominated for a peace prize for removing Saddam from power. If the folks who hand out the peace prize (notice my use of lowercase lettering) are ready to set a new standard for securing peace, Bush & Blair would be the best benchmark.
Giving them a peace prize would put them up there in the same ranks as Dr. Martin Luther King and Mother Teresa. Interesting.
. Nice photo. Now that wasn't so bad, was it? 
I have purposely withheld my comments about the first homosexual marriage performed in the United States: lesbian activists Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin. I wanted to see how the media would cover the delightful display of disobedience goin' on out there in CA. So, I've been keeping an eye on the newspapers and watching TV. You boys and girls love lesbians, dontcha? There's the mention of gay men getting married, but no pictures. Why is that?
