Showing posts with label marriage equality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marriage equality. Show all posts

Monday, May 14, 2012

Real Stakes

So Willard lost a donor, very publicly, over his embrace of "one man/one woman" marriage as the only one he'll accept:

"I feel that I no longer wish to support your presidential campaign and ask you that you please return the maximum contribution that I gave to you last year," Bill White wrote in a letter to Romney, according to a report by CNN. "You have chosen to be on the wrong side of history and I do not support your run for president any longer."

White, a registered independent who runs a New York-based consulting firm, had given $2,500 to the Romney campaign.

White made his decision following Obama's announcement last week that he supports same-sex marriage. While he clarified to CNN that he does not agree with the president on fiscal issues, White said that Romney's speech during Liberty University's commencement on Saturday led him to believe that Romney would press for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage -- a position that White simply cannot support.

"I feel like [Romney has] declared war on my marriage," White said. "And I could just sit back and not say anything. Or I could do something about it. And I've chosen to do something about it."

Meanwhile, in the African-American community, a leading heterosexual comes out in favor of Obama's stance:

“I’ve always thought it as something that was still holding the country back,” Jay-Z said, referencing the fact that same-sex marriage is not recognized nationwide. “What people do in their own homes is their business and you can choose to love whoever you love. That’s their business. It's no different than discriminating against blacks. It’s discrimination plain and simple.”

Though he was in Philadelphia to appear alongside Mayor Michael Nutter and announce a two-day music festival in early September, Jay-Z sat down with CNN's Poppy Harlow to chat about broader issues. When he was asked if he felt Obama's decision to come out in favor of the right of same-sex couples to marry would cost him votes (particularly with the African-American community), he shrugged. "It's really not about votes," he said. "It's about people."

Hopefully Jay-Z's influence will be felt far and wide on this issue.

Meanwhile, the Obama campaign - NOT a surrogate PAC - released this ad straight out of Karl Rove's handbook, attacking his opponent's supposed strength:



Ju-jitsu, Mr. Rove. And nice branding for Mr. Romney.

Wednesday, May 09, 2012

Courage

President Obama did the right thing today. After a long period of saying his position on marriage equality was "evolving," he evolved. Unlike a typical politician, he let us know where he stands, which in legislative terms is against the Federal government interfering with states that legalize the right of two gay citizens to enter into the bonds of marriage. And there are plenty of jokes available about the challenges that come with those bonds.

Here's the statement that just changed the world:


Here's Andrew Sullivan, the blogger who first convinced me to take Barack Hussein Obama seriously as a Presidential candidate a little over four years ago:

Today Obama did more than make a logical step. He let go of fear. He is clearly prepared to let the political chips fall as they may. That's why we elected him. That's the change we believed in. The contrast with a candidate who wants to abolish all rights for gay couples by amending the federal constitution, and who has donated to organizations that seek to "cure" gays, who bowed to pressure from bigots who demanded the head of a spokesman on foreign policy solely because he was gay: how much starker can it get?

My view politically is that this will help Obama. He will be looking to the future generations as his opponent panders to the past. The clearer the choice this year the likelier his victory. And after the darkness of last night, this feels like a widening dawn.

Can anyone imagine Mitt Romney taking this kind of political risk and changing history for the better? The notion is so absurd as to be beyond laughable. It's enfeebling. Has there ever been a more morally feeble candidate than Willard? Worthless as a leader, and a danger to the free world should he ever get that position.

You want to join the groundswell of tolerant Americans letting the forces of darkness, bigotry and anti-human rights know that you support our President?


Tuesday, February 07, 2012

This is Huge. This is a Big Deal.

This country's most populous state, my adopted home, is free at last. And I don't think I can top Taryn Southern's description of how I think most Californians feel:


By the way, I have no idea who Taryn is, but she came up in a YouTube video search and has a nice, slightly confessional YouTube Channel. But that's how the Internet works.

You can't ban marriage between two people because of gender. True love cannot be property of the state (unless you're married to Newt Gingrich). Not in the Internet Age, and you can't defund Planned Parenthood or try to censor usage.

Like it says in our song, Let Freedom Ring.

Onto the Supremes?

Thursday, January 05, 2012

Live Free or Die Follies

Fun continues in New Hampshire is Willard Mitt Romney is confronted by Occupy questions at his rally:
“It seems that the U.S. is a great place to be a corporation,’’ the man said, “but increasingly a desperate place to live and work.’’

“Where do you think corporations’ profits go?’’ Romney asked.

“It goes to the 1 percent of Americans who own the 90 percent of stocks,’’ the man responded and continued to press him.
...and college students boo anti-gay marriage bigot Rick Santorum from his stage:

A midday event in front of a gathering of college students here turned into a testy exchange in which Mr. Santorum compared allowing gay couples to marry to polygamy, apparently equating the two as equally undesirable.

“If you’re not happy unless you’re married to five other people, is that O.K.?” he asked.

Meanwhile, Mitt's tax plan gets checked and turns out to raise taxes on lower middle class Americans while giving huge windfalls to the rich:
The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center crunched the numbers — part of a series of analyses the group has done of the GOP candidates’ tax proposals — and found that the plan constitutes a major tax cut for wealthy Americans. But compared to today’s rates, Romney proposes effective tax increases for people making less than $40,000.

Above that level, Romney’s plan cuts taxes at greater rates for wealthier people. The average millionaire would thus pay $145,568 less in taxes in 2015 than they do today. Taken altogether, that makes the plan a budget buster, meaning greater deficits or deep cuts to federal programs.

A new website called Romney the Liar is up, sure to be a fun one-stop fact check for journalists who care to start checking up on Wild Willard's wild claim.

Meanwhile, as the follies roll into N.H., the President is on the job helping young people get summer jobs themselves. Compare the President's record to Romney's role in job creation at Bain Capital, using Romney's own methodology of only counting companies that created jobs under Bain's management and not those he closed or outsourced:

No contest.

Now or next November.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

No Big Deal

A welcome first (for such documentation and dissemination), certainly far from a last:


Welcome to America, sisters.

Wednesday, August 04, 2010

Proud to Be a Californian

There's marriage equality in Iowa, so we're not exactly the first, and there's a stay, and it's going to all somehow end up in Chief Justice John Roberts' lap, but the vile Prop 8 forbidding same sex marriage was voided in court.

Judge Vaughan R. Walker, originally a Republican appointee, presided over a lopsided trial, per reports at the time, and his opinion is just this side of lacerating, particularly with regards to the defense's key "expert" -- whom His Honorable reclassified as a pundit:
Walker, in his decision, writes that "Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gays and lesbians for denial of a marriage license." He evaluates as credible witnesses the panel of experts who testified against Proposition 8, and finds fault with the credentials of several witnesses who testified against same-sex marriage, including David Blankenhorn, President of the Institute for American Values:

Blankenhorn's testimony constitutes inadmissible opinion testimony that should be given essentially no weight," Walker writes. "Blankenhorn gave absolutely no explanation why
manifestations of the deinstitutionalization of marriage would be exacerbated (and not, for example, ameliorated) by the presence of marriage for same-sex couples. His opinion lacks reliability, as there is simply too great an analytical gap between the data and the opinion Blankenhorn proffered.
Marc Ambinder has this brilliant list of all the facts Walker is basing his opinion on -- 13 of them, including my personal fave:
11. "Marrying a person of the opposite sex is an unrealistic option for gay and lesbian individuals."
The battle's not over, and I'm sure there are hateful, bigoted pockets of individuals ready to do violence over the ultimate nationalization of this decision, but this is now about facts found in a court of law by a very smart and fair judge who has made the ruling very difficult to win an appeal against. Every single one of these facts would have to be struck down. By, like, Clarence Thomas.

And the original victims of violence who suffered or showed extraordinary courage to pave the way for this emerging civil freedom have actually won this day by providing, over several decades now, that gay marriage is not any of these threats, these fears that have developed over centuries.

Bravo, CA. It makes the fires, earthquakes and life-shortening mortgages worth it.

Friday, March 05, 2010

More/Same

It's March. Time for yet another in the collectible series of Republican politicians getting busted for engaging in something they demagogue against - which most of the time means homosexuality:

So we decided to look back: just how anti-gay is Ashburn's record?

Said Equality California director Geoff Kors in an interview with TPMmuckraker: "He has voted against every LGBT rights bill that's been introduced in California since he's been in the office."

At that 2005 anti-gay marriage rally, Ashburn said that "Our friends and neighbors in our community are restating the obvious -- that the institute of marriage is fundamental to our society. Marriage between one man and one woman is fundamental to civilization."

And the truth about California State Senator Roy Ashburn (R):

A California Republican family values legislator who was arrested early Wednesday morning for drunk driving had recently left a gay club,sources tell a local news channel.

State senator Roy Ashburn was pulled over by the California Highway Patrol on Wednesday at 2am in Sacramento, after police saw the car he was driving swerving erratically. An unidentified male passenger was in the car with Ashburn.

The sources told CBS13 that Ashburn, a father of four, had that night been at Faces, which touts itself as "Sacramento's premier GLBTI Nightclub since 1985."

Not the first trip to the bar for Roy:
The openly gay mayor of West Sacramento says that he's spotted state Sen. Roy Ashburn (R), who has racked up a consistently anti-gay voting record over the years, at gay clubs a number of times...
...The owner of Faces, the club where Ashburn reportedly was hanging out before his arrest, told CBS 13 that he can't confirm whether Ashburn was there Tuesday night because the club was packed with 400 patrons for a Latin drag queen beauty pageant.
Ooh. Spicy, Roy!

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Great American

Hard not to tear up watching this 86 year-old WWII veteran's plainspoken plea for gay equality:



Transcript in this post.

Save for a few stubborn states, marriage equality is just a few electoral cycles away.

Friday, April 17, 2009

The Storm

Credit where credit is due: Karl Rove protege and McCain '08 Campaign Manager Steve Schmidt "comes out" in favor of gay marriage to the Log Cabin Republicans, likening it to Civil Rights.

Meanwhile, the "storm approaching" ad by anti-equality activists has spawned a few good parodies, but none better than the master himself:

The Colbert ReportMon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
The Colbert Coalition's Anti-Gay Marriage Ad
colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full EpisodesPolitical HumorNASA Name Contest


One wonders if the GOP can expand their tent as Schmidt would like, or remains prisoner of the religious voters, as he references as well:
"If you put public policy issues to a religious test, you risk becoming a religious party," Schmidt declared. "And in a free country, a political party cannot be viable in the long term if it is seen as a sectarian party."
Perhaps the GOP with have the toughest time surviving the oncoming "storm"...already in progress.

Thursday, April 09, 2009

New Catalog

Hate to do this since I seem to have a (small but) growing number of GOP friends, but I do think that the biggest lies need to be called out when they happen, especially the most dangerous ones, and there's a whole new catalog on display this week.

  • There's GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann's gun-crazies inspiring lie that Obama is going to create young adult "re-education camps." She also believes Obama is going to trade in the U.S. dollar for a global currency, but that was last week's lie.

  • There's GOP Chairman Michael Steele's anti-democracy lie that the voter registration group ACORN engages in voter fraud and will somehow take over the counting of the next U.S. Census.

  • There's a whole big homophobic commercial full of lies that pretends to be ordinary people speaking out against marriage equality, but turns out of be full of actors per the uncovered audition tape (now pulled from YouTube for "copyright infringement").
And, last but not least, there's a huge lie being circulated by the Republican talking heads that the latest Pew Research poll proves that Obama is the "most polarizing" President ever...when really it just means that hardcore, hard-right Republicans are a shrinking minority, small than they've ever been in modern times:



As always, I'll say that the GOP are not gone for good, and that the timing of their return depends on the success of the current President and, potentially, his Democratic successor in eight years. But if the public eventually turns back to the Republicans due to lies rather than truth, it'll be another dark day for America.

Like December 12, 2000.

Monday, April 06, 2009

Ball of Confusion

We're in crazy times. Recessions, depressions do that. Howling at the moon. Firing guns. Stealing airplanes. Devastation in Italy, 150 dead so far in the earthquake.

Bob Dylan likening Barack Obama to a fictional character.

Meanwhile, our President rushes to change the world fast enough, overdue. Working quickly for a nuclear-free world. He's doing perhaps the #1 job he was hired for, the biggest unassailable point that no other candidate could claim, a man with Muslim family making it clear to the world that America is not in a battle against Islam.

Going so far as to say that America is not solely a Christian nation:



Oh, and he's reforming the U.S. military budget while allowing Americans to finally see (with the relatives' permission) the cost of war:



And it's the week that brought marriage equality to Iowa, the state that first showed us it was alright to vote for Obama. Can the state of America really be so bad when a straight legislator makes an honest, compassionate, breakthrough speech like this:



Yes, the battle against barbarism is far from over, but at least decency is scoring some points right now.

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Meghan

I do believe the GOP will return to power, although there will be anywhere from 4 to 12 years in the wilderness depending (a) how the economic and national security situations fare, and (b) whether the more moderate wing can both coalesce around a set of principles as well as convince the more radical elements to let them lead.

At this point I'm not entirely clear what those principles might be, but it may end up being defined by young GOP activists like Meghan McCain, daughter of Sen. John. She writes regularly for The Daily Beast, she's got a blog where she reveals she's got good musical taste -- listening to Yeah Yeah Yeahs, and she's Twittering regularly. At 24 she is a young voice, and while she may not be the intellectual center of the party, she's raising issues in a sensible, refreshingly unpretentious way. (Because as Jonah Goldberg and so many others have shown us, even young Republicans can write pretentiously.) And if you still don't believe me, she's the first really significant Republican voice that I know of to declare that she's against Ann Coulter:
To make matters worse, certain individuals continue to perpetuate negative stereotypes about Republicans. Especially Republican women. Who do I feel is the biggest culprit? Ann Coulter. I straight up don’t understand this woman or her popularity. I find her offensive, radical, insulting, and confusing all at the same time. But no matter how much you or I disagree with her, the cult that follows Coulter cannot be denied...

...Coulter could be the poster woman for the most extreme side of the Republican Party. And in some ways I could be the poster woman for the opposite. I consider myself a progressive Republican, but here is what I don’t get about Coulter: Is she for real or not? Are some of her statements just gimmicks to gain publicity for her books or does she actually believe the things she says? Does she really believe all Jewish people should be “perfected” and become Christians? And what was she thinking when she said Hillary Clinton was more conservative than my father during the last election?..

...I am not suggesting that extreme conservatism wasn’t once popular, nor am I suggesting I should in any way be any kind of voice for the party. I have been a Republican for less than a year. Still, even after losing the election, I find myself more drawn to GOP ideals and wanting to fight for the party’s resurgence. And if figureheads like Ann Coulter are turning me off, then they are definitely turning off other members of my generation as well. She does appeal to the most extreme members of the Republican Party—but they are dying off, becoming less and less relevant to the party structure as a whole...

...More so than my ideological differences with Ann Coulter, I don’t like her demeanor. I have never been a person who was attracted to hate or negativity. I don’t believe in scare tactics and would never condone or encourage anyone calling President Obama a Muslim. But controversy sells and Coulter is nothing if not controversial. Everything about her is extreme: her voice, her interview tactics, and especially the public statements she makes about liberals. Maybe her popularity stems from the fact that watching her is sometimes like watching a train wreck.

You goP, girl.

Even better, she was just on Rachel Maddow's show and they were great together.



Now I'm guessing that even if/when her friends list ascends to lead the GOP I'll still be voting Democratic, mostly, although who knows what happens to that party once Obama's had his (please, Lord) eight, but America could do a lot worse that a class of Republicans who don't make a living demonizing Liberals. She seems like a decent, together young individual without an axe to grind, so it'll be interesting to see how she'll grow in her political thinking and potential influence over the years. Is she already part and parcel of the military-industrial complex, or maybe a more benign mutation of it? Is her public stance in favor of gay marriage going to help make that right a reality?

There's a second segment as well, with its own charms, including more of the mutual respect between these two political women:



Y'know, that she turned out like this actually speaks well of her father.

Monday, December 01, 2008

Landmark

Gus Van Sant's Milk, from a screenplay by Dustin Lance Black, is a landmark film about a landmark politician, San Francisco City Supervisor Harvey Milk, the first openly gay politician to be elected to major office in the U.S. and a martyr to the cause. What's so striking about the movie, besides the top-level skill with which it's been made and the performances, is the successful melding of a mainstream movie sensibility with an unabashedly, unashamedly gay point of view. So while an elderly woman with whom I saw the movie was a little uncomfortable with the steamy romantic scenes between the male leads, she was nonetheless moved by the picture and found it "excellent." While that may not mean huge box office between the coasts, it does mean that Milk moves the cinematic tolerance bar a previously unimaginable difference -- much as the Presidential Election did less than a month ago.

(WARNING: Some spoilers below, although most of it in the public record.)

On the flip side, there's no doubt that the passage of the gay marriage-bashing Proposition 8 in California lends a greater urgency to the film, particularly as one major sequence covers the battle back then against Proposition 6, which was a rabid attempt to ban gay teachers in schools, as well as (hello, Joe McCarthy) any other teachers who stood up for their gay colleagues. As a piece of agitprop, thanks to that current event, the movie doesn't give the comforting feeling of "work done" that deadens the value of some political pictures. If anything, it deepens the sense that gay rights (i.e. marriage, adoption) are the last major battlefield for civil rights.

Some criticism has been leveled against Milk for being a bit too mainstream in its storytelling. Truth be told, there's a lot of situations here you've seen before -- the rousing "Norma Rae" moments, the long-suffering partner (here James Franco rather than, say, Jennifer Connolly), the dread-implicit destiny a la Gandhi and others. But the twist is a powerful one, giving voice to all those gay men who hid in closets or (per the opening newsreel footage) suffered humiliating arrest for socializing together in the drinking establishment of their choice. And there's a lot more craft in Van Sant's filmmaking here than such critics may be crediting the picture.

Gus Van Sant made a big splash in 1989 with his fantastic second feature, Drugstore Cowboy, an honest, funny, surprisingly entertaining depiction of a criminal gang of prescription medicine dealers. While he hit some commercial peaks with Good Will Hunting and Finding Forrester, his most recent movies have been lower-budgeted arthouse experiments: Paranoid Park, Last Days, Elephant, Gerry. With their hyper-extended takes, poetically realistic textures and lack of standard psychologizing, these have been almost determinedly non-commercial projects, even if Elephant, a chilling and unusual take on a Columbine-type massacre, did win the biggest prize at Cannes. In some ways, however, the rigor and discoveries in these endeavors lend special qualities to Milk. Even if the shots aren't held as long, they have great integrity, including some Elephant-ine tracking shots at the climax, echoing the same mortal dread if not as punishingly as in the earlier film.

There are two motifs that stood out for me, albeit neither hit so often as to be overly obvious. One is the reflections that foreshadow death, most prominently on a silver whistle lying on the ground (Harvey and a cop standing over a dead gay-bashing victim) and of Dan White, Harvey's fellow Supervisor, in the television screen as he watches Harvey on TV. The other is the shooting through windows, often the Castro Street camera store out of which Harvey and his political team operated, most memorably with an early scene of getting a nasty greeting from an anti-gay neighboring merchant. The two motifs come together in Harvey's office in his final moments, with a rather startling and poignant view from his window, Harvey's last.

Yet for all the deceptively straight-forward storytelling skill, it is the performances Van Sant has elicited from his actors that takes the movie into that loftier sphere, anchored by Sean Penn in arguably his best performance to date. Penn channels Harvey Milk in a way that pays off the promise of much, much earlier roles -- The Falcon & the Snowman, Carlito's Way, where he seemed like entirely different people than any Sean Penn we've perceived elsewhere, uniquely individual yet highly credible character creations. The rest of the cast is perfect as well, although standouts for me are Emile Hirsch (whom Penn directed so well in Into the Wild) as street hustler-turned-activist Cleve Jones, and Josh Brolin as the ill-fated Dan White, once again disappearing into the role and making him empathetic enough to actually earn some audience sympathy.

I got plenty of tears in my eyes during Milk and was glad to have them for a movie of real and, I believe, lasting value. There's nothing synthetic about the wrongs that Harvey Milk addressed in his life, and one can only hope that the remaining injustices get turned around within the next decade if not the next five years. As with previous civil liberalizations by the American public, a big-hearted, powerful mainstream (studio indie) movie like this is bound to make a difference.

The release timing could not have been better.

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Two Fires

Southern California is on fire again, horrible destruction in the gorgeous Montecito/adjacent area next to/in Santa Barbara, and more in the northern foothills of Los Angeles county, particularly Sylmar. Horrific news and photos here, liveblog with unnerving evacuation and other info here.

The other major fire (after lumping together all the SoCal blazes above) is the nationwide and somewhat worldwide protest for gay marriage rights today (Saturday). There's some great pix from Los Angeles today but it was even in unlikely places like Alaska and Missoula. Nice to see that the one good thing to come out of the Prop 8 passage is everyone coming out -- gay and straight alike -- who believes in this American civil right.

This is truly the front line issue for civil rights today, and I'm not sure that any to follow will be of the same magnitude. It's just acknowledging reality in law, and I'm sure that in one generation this issue with be just treated in mainstream America just like racial intermarriage -- sure, some bigots will still be haters, and maybe it won't be the most pervasive image or marriage in the media, but we'll have gotten past it for good.

Tell me if I'm misreading the moment, but the success of President-Elect Obama seems to have opened the door for peaceful, firm but respectful and well-reasoned protests on every possible scale. The Facebook-centric organization and casual fearlessness of showing up in public appears mirrored by today's massive civic protest. There are so many different cities, towns and even countries represented on so many different Andrew Sullivan posts today that I can't link to them, although you can dig back to check them out yourself maybe by starting here. Remarkable.

This is a disjunctive moment in history, most notably economically, and Obama somehow planned his collision course perfectly, poised to take advantage of the disjunctive opportunity for good rather than the post-9/11 hackery that led us into Iraq, with so many carpetbaggers to feed at the trough. These moments don't come along very often, are fraught with fragilities, and require both haste and tact.

Take advantage of it.

Sunday, November 02, 2008

Can You Hear It Coming?

The rumblings...when the first rocks have come loose, knocking into other, larger boulders, which in turn undermine the structure of the entire mountainside...

Even self-identified rednecks are out there working for Obama. Republicans are scrambling to save their Senate and Congressional seats that are looking to be swept away with all that earth looking like it's going to be rollin' down that mountain. Profoundly moving stories like this from a 55-year-old Caucasian banker are happening everywhere:

Instead of walking the tree-lined streets near our home, my wife and I were instructed to canvass a housing project. A middle-aged white couple with clipboards could not look more out of place in this predominantly black neighborhood.

We knocked on doors and voices from behind carefully locked doors shouted, "Who is it?"

"We're from the Obama campaign," we'd answer. And just like that doors opened and folks with wide smiles came out on the porch to talk.

Grandmothers kept one hand on their grandchildren and made sure they had all the information they needed for their son or daughter to vote for the first time.

Young people came to the door rubbing sleep from their eyes to find out where they could vote early, to make sure their vote got counted.

We knocked on every door we could find and checked off every name on our list. We did our job, but Obama may not have been the one who got the most out of the day's work.

You can guess who did.

From rumblings to, one hopes, humblings. With Joe the Extremist questioning Obama's patriotism and American values this weekend and a GOP group reprising Rev. Wright on an ad that ran during Sunday Night Football, with Elizabeth Dole trying to save her Senate seat by smearing her opponent as godless via dubbed lines, with Sarah Palin creating the creepiest cognitive dissonance in memory by running as both celebrity and hate-monger, one can only wish that an Obama landslide will put the politics of lies and smears to bed for at a generation, and maybe force the more introspective of GOP losers to make a humble reappraisal of their electoral actions.

When you watch a video like the one below, you see how much Obama has gifted all of us Americans with his inclusionary campaign. Phone bankers are reporting older, more rural folks using some old-fashioned racial epithets when declaring their support for Obama. One senses that while not necessarily approving such language, Obama would understand that they are from a different time, but a vote is a vote, and recognizing the need for change is all any voter needs right now:



This is it. As Obama said early in the Primaries, we are the ones we've been waiting for. With over 27,000,000 early and absentee ballots cast so far, this is an election already underway in a very, very big way. While I would never rule out an upset, I believe we're about to watch a mountain roll. And hopefully it will extend to other historic changes, like a decisive "NO" vote on California's noxious and discriminatory Proposition 8, designed to overturn legal gay marriage in this great state.

I'm sure I'm not alone in betting that the vote on Prop 8 will be tighter than that for President, but there is reason for hope, like the Republican Mayor of San Diego reversing himself on the issue in an emotional public statement, in which he mentions both his gay staff members and his gay daughter:



I emailed my support to jerrysanders@sandiego.gov. How nice to see statesmanship come in different colors.

C'mon, America.

Monday, June 16, 2008

Freedom

As of today, there's no going back in California:
In Los Angeles County, longtime partners Diane Olson and Robin Tyler were the first and only same-sex couple to obtain a license this evening. Together 15 years, Olson and Tyler were the original plaintiffs in the 2004 California lawsuit challenging the ban on gay marriage as unconstitutional. The couple were chosen to receive the county's first license "in recognition of their unique role in the court's decision," said acting Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan.

So after eight years of showing up at the Beverly Hills courthouse each Valentine's Day and being repeatedly denied a marriage license, they returned this afternoon as conquering heroines -- with friends, their high-profile lawyer Gloria Allred and a mass of media in tow...

...At the county clerk's window, as Olson's and Tyler's marriage license was prepared, the full measure of the moment hit. "We've never gotten this far before," Tyler said.

"Well, you have, today," the clerk said.

It makes me proud to be in a state that leads the nation on reducing carbon emissions, creating high-tech business and science opportunities, and is near the front on this latest breakthrough in civil rights.

Props to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom for pushing the issue several years ago when he ordered the city to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, leading to the historic California Supreme Court decision. The same longtime couple that he chose to get the first one then got it this time:
Lyon, 83, and Martin, 87, were the first couple married four years ago when Newsom told the county clerk's office to start offering marriage certificates to same-sex couples. Eventually more than 4,000 same-sex couples were married in San Francisco that year, but those unions were later nullified by the court. Today, the couple, and dozens of others, had their first chance to make their unions truly legal...

...
Several feet away sat a couple on vacation from Ireland who happened to stumble on the historic event. Christine Yearsley said she planned to stay at City Hall the rest of the afternoon to witness as much as she could.

"This gentleman just told me there are two elderly ladies who are getting married today after being together for 50 years," she said. "They're obviously committed! I think it's terrific. They're an example for heterosexuals, I think."


Amen, sisters.

Friday, May 23, 2008

Healthy

I was going to write about all the Hillary/Bill/operatives hostage-taking that's going on, but it's just too negative when something as healthy as this overdue airing of "respectful disagreements" just happened:



Cheers to John McCain for gracefully navigating his political position with humbleness and tact under such uncomfortable questioning. But praise to Ellen Degeneres for bringing up the issue itself in a way where she gently but firmly used her humanity, her own presence, to confront this conservative representative with the real logic of that faintly liberal but altogether unsatisfying position.

This discussion is not only healthy for our society, it is necessary for our survival and evolution.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

Big Days

Today was a huge day politically for the U.S. and, after the Edwards endorsement and the West Virginia primary the day before that...I just think we have a lot more coming.

But today was something special.

It started with Sen. John McCain laying out his vision, i.e. a sci-fi style prediction of what the end of his first term will look like, chock full of promises but without any explication of how he will accomplish any of it. Welcome to 2013:



This is clearly meant to be a big re-branding moment for McCain, and he deserves credit for those places where he underlines his philosophical/operational differences with Bush, but as Joe Klein says (his writing actually much improved ever since getting lambasted by the blogs and actually responding to the criticism), it's all a bit, uh, hilarious:

No doubt, John McCain's attempt to lay out the goals of his prospective presidency was a worthy and honorable effort--but there was something deeply hilarious about it as well. Take his paragraph about Iraq:

By January 2013, America has welcomed home most of the servicemen and women who have sacrificed terribly so that America might be secure in her freedom. The Iraq War has been won. Iraq is a functioning democracy, although still suffering from the lingering effects of decades of tyranny and centuries of sectarian tension. Violence still occurs, but it is spasmodic and much reduced. Civil war has been prevented; militias disbanded; the Iraqi Security Force is professional and competent; al Qaeda in Iraq has been defeated; and the Government of Iraq is capable of imposing its authority in every province of Iraq and defending the integrity of its borders. The United States maintains a military presence there, but a much smaller one, and it does not play a direct combat role.

And the tooth fairy will spread giggle-juice throughout the land, and the Mets will win the World Series and I will lose 20 pounds while continuing to consume vast quantities of Chinese and Italian food.

Poor Johnny. The ultimate result of his announcement on the evening headlines: stomped once again (shades of 2000) by that asshole who beat his ass back then. Bush goes to the Knesset and uses the somewhat solemn occasion of Israel's 60th Anniversary to attack Sen. Barack Obama with classic smeartalk:
President Bush used a speech to the Israeli Parliament on Thursday to liken those who would negotiate with “terrorists and radicals” to appeasers of the Nazis — a remark widely interpreted as a rebuke to Senator Barack Obama, who has advocated greater engagement with countries like Iran and Syria...

...The episode placed Mr. Bush squarely in one of the most divisive debates of the campaign to succeed him, as Republicans try to portray Mr. Obama as weak in the fight against terrorism. It also underscored what the White House has said will be an aggressive effort by Mr. Bush to use his presidential platform to influence the presidential election.

“Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,” Mr. Bush said, in a speech otherwise devoted to spotlighting Israel’s friendship with the United States.

Firestorm. Obama hit back, Pelosi, Kerry, Dean, Emanuel, even Sen. Hillary Clinton.

But the hero quote is from Sen. Joseph Biden:
“This is bullshit. This is malarkey. This is outrageous. Outrageous for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, sit in the Knesset … and make this kind of ridiculous statement.”
Biden has hit the same loosened up stage as Nelson Rockefeller in his later years when they couldn't hurt him anymore, like when Rocky flipped the finger back at a student who birded him during a campus speech. The fact that CNN et al had a censored word running through their crawls -- "bulls**t" -- in the context of criticizing Bush is just too sweet. It's not like we all haven't been saying it these past 8 years!

McCain, who seems like the most available guy on any campaign bus, bless him, heard about it from a reporter and agreed with Bush. Even though he's voiced having to deal with Hamas in the past. Even worse, he got it wrong on Ronald Reagan: Ronnie did negotiate with Iran.

It just minimized his whole vision thing and gave Obama the perfect opening to carry through the Fall -- now he can surely attack McCain by aligning him squarely with the current President and run against George (least popular ever) to beat John.

Ultimately, Matthew Yglesias get it right about McCain's saying that talking to our enemies somehow automatically confers a prestige onto them that actually makes a difference:
This is such a common talking point on the right that you'd think that somewhere out there you could find some kind of causal explanation of how this works. Obama takes office. The Iranians, having heard his campaign rhetoric, send a message through the Swiss or something about the possibility of arranging a summit. Our guys talk to their guys, the meeting happens, and this gives Khatami enhanced prestige in the eyes of whom? And what does this enhanced prestige allow him to do? What, in other words, are we afraid of?
So many kneejerk neoconik idiots out there who don't know the difference between talks and appeasement, even Chris Matthews is taking them down:



But if that's not enough, this is also a day where the House Republicans fell to pieces over an Iraq War funding bill, and House Judiciary Committee Democrats are preparing to have Karl Rove arrested.

But even neither of those score the biggest story of the day.

No, what really changes things in a material way is a landmark civil rights ruling by the mostly Republican-appointed, voter-confirmed, Supreme Court of my proudly adopted home state, over 1/10 of the U.S. population, California:
The California Supreme Court, striking down two state laws that had limited marriages to unions between a man and a woman, ruled on Thursday that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry.

The 4-to-3 decision, drawing on a ruling 60 years ago that struck down a state ban on interracial marriage, would make California the second state, after Massachusetts, to allow same-sex marriages.
Right on right on. In 30 days, unless there's some sort of judicial stay, same sex couples will be able to get married like everyone else. There will be fireworks by those opposed, but the fact is that a majority of young people not only don't care, they're want to go to their gay friends' weddings.

It will likely increase tourism which is great because California has been hit with major budget shortfalls. Back when San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom legalized gay marriage, the jewelers, florists, clothing shops or wedding planners in San Francisco had a banner year.

There will likely be a bit proposition battle this fall over a proposed CA constitutional amendment once again instituting a ban, and the fight could be tight. I'm hoping my state does the right thing. Because now that gay Americans can come out of the closet and be embraced by their parents, it really means something to be able to get hitched in the eyes of society and the law. From an email sent to Andrew Sullivan:
My Beloved, Samantha, just asked me to update my Facebook page to confirm that I'm engaged to her. My mother just called for the third time this morning and choked out through her tears, "I promise this is the last time I'll call this morning, but I understand that the proper protocol is that the mother of the bride pays for the wedding." I've left a message for our minister to see if he is available in 30 days to officiate our wedding.
Read the whole email and see a photo of the engaged and their two daughters here.

And please, dear Lord, let this year be the first official year of the 21st Century.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

The GOP Can't Help It

So another Republican official gets busted for living a lie. Poor Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID). So he wanted to hook up with a stranger in a bathroom. If it were too consenting adults (and not a sting operation) then what's the bother?

Is it because he hypocritically works hard to curtail the rights of out-of-the-closet American homosexuals (per Perez Hilton no less)?
* Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)

* Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)

* Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)

* Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)

* Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)


Is it because he previously demonized the very behavior in which we was engaged?
"This sordid fact of homosexual life surfaced yesterday in an AP article yesterday that reports on the number of arrests police have made for indecent exposure and public sex acts in the restrooms at Atlanta’s airport, the busiest in the world. The increased restroom patrols, begun to apprehend luggage thieves, instead uncovered a rash of sex crimes. Airport restrooms have become so popular that men looking for anonymous sexual trysts with other men have advertised their airport availability on Craigslist. One such ad was from a man saying he was stuck at the airport for three hours and was looking for “discreet, quick action.”

Is it because he hypocritically censured President Bill Clinton for his sexual transgression?
Craig: It’s a, bad boy, Bill Clinton. You’re a naughty boy. The American people already know that Bill Clinton is a bad boy, a naughty boy.

Or is because he attempted to use his position as U.S. Senator to secure favorable treatment?
Craig "handed the plainclothes sergeant who arrested him a business card that identified him as a U.S. Senator and said, 'What do you think about that?'"

Wow, another scandal for the GOP. Between bribery in Alaska, criminal war without end and closeted ideologues, they are The National Enquirer of American politics. With those mags you just know, it can always get worse.

His constituents want him out, his come-on is being re-enacted by newspeople, he going to have to enter some sort of sexual re-orientation camp.

I'm with Kos, very funny, on this:

To me, it's pretty obvious that every conservative anti-gay extremist is gay. If you're not gay, you don't sit around obsessing over gay sex.

If you sit around obsessing about gay sex, then you're gay. It's that simple.

If they came out of the closet once and for all, they'd be much happier and so would we.

Perhaps that's why Craig did this sort of self-destructive and dangerous behavior -- he hoped to get caught, because then he would no longer need to keep up the charade. And now, after Craig rides off into the sunset, perhaps he'll find the peace and self-acceptance that every human being deserves. Too bad he had to be a member of the party which reviles that which he truly is.


Free yourself, Senator Craig. Free the people, free all the people, to be who they really are.

Even Larry Craig.