Oh Well, Just this once.....
Apr. 8th, 2009
08:07 pm - NOM Iowand
The NOM people have a link where you can write to the Iowa senators. I'm not sure I'll send from their website, since you have to give your address, but I did draft a letter, since it's so fun that you can edit theirs--here's my twisting of it below--you can edit it yourself here:
http://www.nationformarriage.org/c.omL2
I am writing to urge you to not support HJR 6, the constitutional amendment on marriage. Specifically, I am urging you to vote no on the amendment to bring HJR 6 to a floor vote before the end of this year's legislative session.
The recent decision from the Iowa Supreme Court makes one thing crystal clear: We need to leave marriage in the hands of 7 judges. It's time that the people of Iowa had a chance to have a say in the matter of defining our most basic social structure, which is why these internet people have sent this all over the country so non-Iowans like me can have our say..
There is no doubt about the views of Iowans on the matter. In a recent Hawkeye Poll, fewer than 30% of Iowa voters supported same-sex marriage, which was probably worded to be completely biased against it.
In 30 out of 30 states where voters have had a chance to vote on marriage, they have spoken loudly and clearly: Marriage is the union of a husband and wife, which we all agree on, but not only that. And most states the voters were confused, or completely lied to, like in California. On answering machines even--what won't these people stoop to?
Marriage should be left in the in the hands of a few judges, since obviously the nutsos in charge of this site don't bother to actually figure out the what the judicial branch of this country does, and certainly supports it when it's in their favor, but call judges "Activists" when it's not. Please support a constitutional amendment to protect marriage for all people--regardless of their orientation--your conscience, as well as the law, should dictate it.
Oct. 21st, 2008
04:04 pm - Undecided
Oct. 8th, 2008
Jul. 8th, 2008
09:30 am - McCain=Bush
Librarian given a ticket on city property for holding a sign at a McCain event. Given by the police, at the request of someone in McCain's camp. Wow. 4 more years of this--that's just what we need.
Jun. 11th, 2008
10:39 am - Gay Marriage
Yay for the LA Times for running a light, funny editorial on gay marriage
Mar. 24th, 2008
01:48 pm - Obama
Okay. Wow. The whole transcript.
Wouldn't it be nice to have someone in office who can write his own speech?
Excerpt:
There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organized for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.
And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that’s when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.
She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.
She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.
Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother’s problems were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn’t. She sought out allies in her fight against injustice.
Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they’re supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who’s been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he’s there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, “I am here because of Ashley.”
“I’m here because of Ashley.” By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.
But it is where we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hundred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins.
Oct. 2nd, 2007
02:28 pm - 9/11 Policy
This is a good op-ed from Thomas Friedman:
We can’t afford to keep being this stupid! We have got to get our groove back. We need a president who will unite us around a common purpose, not a common enemy. Al Qaeda is about 9/11. We are about 9/12, we are about the Fourth of July — which is why I hope that anyone who runs on the 9/11 platform gets trounced.
Sep. 27th, 2007
11:09 am - Democracy
Someone emailed me this today. I don't know that it's true of us, but it is thought-provoking. Hopefully (and I do mean that in the true sense of having hope), our system of checks and balances will keep us afloat (if we don't let anyone dismantle it). :
How Long Do We Have?
About the time our original thirteen states adopted
their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a
Scottish history professor at the University of
Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the
Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier: "A
democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply
cannot exist as a permanent form of government."
"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time
that voters discover they can vote themselves generous
gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on,
the majority always vote for the candidates who
promise the most benefits from the public treasury,
with the result that every democracy will finally
collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always
followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the world's greatest
civilizations, from the beginning of history, has been
about 200 years. During those 200 years, those
nations have always progressed through the following
sequence:
1. from bondage to spiritual faith;
2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
3. from courage to liberty;
4. from liberty to abundance;
5. from abundance to complacency;
6. from complacency to apathy;
7. from apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage"
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/classic/thinking.gif){kind=small}
pensiveSep. 24th, 2007
01:21 pm - Columbia and Iran
I'm not a fan of Ahmadinejad by any means, but does inviting him to speak under the guise of free speech and then ambushing him in your introduction really invite any true discourse to happen? What was the point of that? Certainly there are some ideas that need to be challenged, but is insulting someone before they speak the way to go? One could use the trapped, wounded animal metaphor here, but one won't.
I don't agree with him, but c'mon folks, if you're interested in free speech, then let's have the speech before we have the verdict. He's obviously an incendiary figure on purpose, and I don't trust him as far as I can throw him, but I think it's a bad move on Lee Bolinger's part as an administrator. Is he planning on running for something and we didn't know? Appeasing his donors? If, in theory, an institution of higher learning is allowing people to learn how to think and discern, then he did just the opposite.
Like I said, I don't like wjhat Ahmadinejad says either (in fact, I think he's full of sh**), but stooping to the level of a stumping pol just put him on the defensive and made the whole thing an exercise in slaughter and self-congratulation. Sure we like to cheer for Bollinger telling the big bad leader what he thinks of him, but where exactly does that lead us?
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/classic/angry.gif){kind=small}
annoyedSep. 20th, 2007
02:23 pm - Xmas in San Diego
Watch the video of the mayor of San Diego. It will bring tears to your eyes. Yay.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/walsh/poli
He tells reporters that his daughter Lisa and members of his staff are gay, and explains: "In the end, I could not look any of them in the face and tell them that their relationships -- their very lives -- were any less meaningful than the marriage that I share with my wife, Rana," Sanders said.
![[mood icon]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/classic/smile.gif){kind=small}
jubilantAug. 10th, 2007
11:54 am - Turn that frown upside down
Fred Phelps, the virulent anti-gay pastor, is coming to West Hollywood to protest--I guess just the neighborhood in general. Anyhow, instead of engaging him, the Gay and Lesbian Center is turning it into a fundraiser, which is brilliant. For every hour, you can donate something and it will go to their Youth Services Programs. Here's the link:
https://www.kintera.org/AutoGen/Sim
and an update from John Duran:
A reality show is trying to "stir it up" in Weho. Apparently, this is
all being orchestrated by the producers of the show. The reality show
will be in Weho on Saturday asking the gay on the street: "What do you
think about Phelps coming to Weho? Are you aware he has said/done
this?". Then, they want to film the reaction at the protest.
What a bunch of crap. Who is more villanous? Phelps or those who
attempt to foment hate?
I don't want to play or be used. I still encourage people to give to
the Youth Programs at the Center. We should anyways! But I don't think
we should participate for somebody's television show and exchange our
dignity for profits.
Of course it's a reality show. Should've known.
Jun. 22nd, 2007
09:54 am - Reviews and...
My favorite lines in a review I've read in a while, for the new Parker Posey film, Broken English, written by Matt Zoller Seitz in NYT:
"a comedy about a woman who realizes that she’s unhappy because what she thought were high standards were actually items on a romantic and sexual shopping list absorbed from a bankrupt popular culture.
The right age? Check. Interesting job? Check. Looks like a catalog model? Check. What are you doing Friday?
As played by Ms. Posey, who tamps down the vivacious kookiness that has made her an independent-film darling, Nora is the sort of cute mope that might appear in a screenplay emblazoned with Kate Winslet’s coffee stains."
I think "shopping list from a bankrupt popular culture" is brilliant. And it's an interesting view of the movie, that sounds like it's probably right on--bait and switch--"Its contradictory message is something like: 'Listen up, 30-something single women; there is no Prince Charming. Oh, wait a minute ... Yes, there is!'" Sounds like my kind of movie
Speaking of cultural bankruptcy, I just heard this this morning on NPR:
"A new set of declassified CIA documents set for release next week detail CIA kidnappings, wiretapping without warrants, assassination attempts and surveillance of American journalists and activists up until 1974.
Tom Blanton, director of the National Security Archive at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., tells Renee Montagne that while some of the activities are widely known — such as assassination attempts against Fidel Casto and the CIA's infiltration of domestic anti-war groups — some are not.
The CIA's current director, Michael Hayden, said the documents 'provide a glimpse of a very different time and a very different agency.'"
Since Kissinger said something like "blood will flow" if the documents are released, do you think maybe this is the best time for this, considering everyone seems exhausted? In 1974 this might have caused a real stir. I wonder if everyone's faith in the government has fallen so far that the most this will warrant is a raised eyebrow, if that. Unfortunately, I think it will just mostly come as no surprise. I guess when any trust in the government is at its lowest and apathy at its highest, this is the best time for it. Sad
Jun. 12th, 2007
10:21 am - Do this now
Please take the 5 seconds it takes to send a letter through this easy link:
http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/camp
To try and stop the confirmation of Bush's choice for the new Surgeon General, who believes homosexuality can be cured. Idiot. And that's my compassionate response.
Mar. 14th, 2007
10:42 am - Larry Kramer
Remarks on the 20th anniversary of ACT UP. Some of the history is lazy, and he takes things out of context, and he's as rageful and incendiary as ever, etc., but also thought-provoking, as always.
Go to Queens, go to Jamaica, go to Iran, go to Wyoming, we still
aren't free. How many places in this country, in this world, can we walk
down a street holding a beloved's hand? I went to my nephew's wedding in
Jamaica twenty years ago. They are out for blood against gay men in
Jamaica now. They do it to you the minute you get off the plane. There are
men with iron crowbars waiting to maim you at the airport. Does our
government protest? Of course not. Who cares if a faggot dies. They are
actually beheading gays in Iran. This is progress? The European Parliament
which in the past had played a key role in advancing gay rights worldwide,
is about to be taken over by conservative delegates that will strengthen
their neo-fascist bloc, which will actually call for capital punishment
for homosexuals. You don't think that any of this can't happen here? I do.
Our country's top soldier said so this morning. We are immoral. The Mayor
of Moscow calls us dirt. Polish leaders call us scum. Ann Coulter calls us
sissies. General Pace calls us immoral. Who cares if a faggot dies.
( Read the Speech )
pissed offJan. 25th, 2007
10:05 am - Bush Stickers
These were just forwarded to me. Good for a laugh. Or cry--whatev.
1) (On an infant's shirt): Already smarter than Bush.
2) 1/20/09: End of an Error
3) That's OK, I Wasn't Using My Civil Liberties Anyway
4) Let's Fix Democracy in This Country First
5) If You Want a Nation Ruled By Religion, Move to
Iran
6) Bush. Like a Rock. Only Dumber.
7) You Can't Be Pro-War And Pro-Life At The Same Time
8) If You Can Read This, You're Not Our President
9) Of Course It Hurts: You're Getting Screwed by an
Elephant
10) Hey, Bush Supporters: Embarrassed Yet?
11) George Bush: Creating the Terrorists Our Kids Will
Have to Fight
12) Impeachment: It's Not Just for Blowjobs Anymore
14) America : One Nation, Under Surveillance
15) They Call Him "W" So He Can Spell It
16) Which God Do You Kill For?
17) Cheney/Satan '08
18) Jail to the Chief
19) Who Would Jesus Torture?
20) No, Seriously, Why Did We Invade
21) Bush: God's Way of Proving Intelligent Design is
Full Of Crap
22) Bad president! No Banana.
23) We Need a President Who's Fluent In At Least One
Language
24) We're Making Enemies Faster Than We Can Kill Them
26) Rich Man's War, Poor Man's Blood
27) Is It Vietnam Yet?
28) Bush Doesn't Care About White People, Either
29) Where Are We Going? And Why Are We In This
Handbasket?
30) You Elected Him. You Deserve Him.
32) Impeach Cheney First
34) When Bush Took Office, Gas Was $1.46
35) The Republican Party: Our Bridge to the 11th
Century
Dec. 20th, 2006
11:10 am - Middle East Rules
This is from Thomas Friedman in the NYTimes--it's great. I don't have Times select, or I would link to it, and I'm sure it's illegal to copy the whole thing, but it was sent to me and I'm pasting it here. Worth a read, and some fodder for debate, actually:
For a long time, I let my hopes for a decent outcome in Iraq triumph over
what I had learned reporting from Lebanon during its civil war. Those hopes
vanished last summer. So, I'd like to offer President Bush my updated rules
of Middle East reporting, which also apply to diplomacy, in hopes they'll
help him figure out what to do next in Iraq.
Rule 1: What people tell you in private in the Middle East is irrelevant.
All that matters is what they will defend in public in their own language.
Anything said to you in English, in private, doesn't count. In Washington,
officials lie in public and tell the truth off the record. In the Mideast,
officials say what they really believe in public and tell you what you want
to hear in private.
Rule 2: Any reporter or U.S. Army officer wanting to serve in Iraq should
have to take a test, consisting of one question: "Do you think the shortest
distance between two points is a straight line?" If you answer yes, you can't
go to Iraq. You can serve in Japan, Korea or Germany - not Iraq.
Rule 3: If you can't explain something to Middle Easterners with a
conspiracy theory, then don't try to explain it at all - they won't believe
it.
Rule 4: In the Middle East, never take a concession, except out of the mouth
of the person doing the conceding. If I had a dollar for every time someone
agreed to recognize Israel on behalf of Yasir Arafat, I could paper my
walls.
Rule 5: Never lead your story out of Lebanon, Gaza or Iraq with a
cease-fire; it will always be over before the next morning's paper.
Rule 6: In the Middle East, the extremists go all the way, and the moderates
tend to just go away.
Rule 7: The most oft-used expression by moderate Arab pols is: "We were just
about to stand up to the bad guys when you stupid Americans did that stupid
thing. Had you stupid Americans not done that stupid thing, we would have
stood up, but now it's too late. It's all your fault for being so stupid."
Rule 8: Civil wars in the Arab world are rarely about ideas - like
liberalism vs. communism. They are about which tribe gets to rule. So, yes,
Iraq is having a civil war as we once did. But there is no Abe Lincoln in
this war. It's the South vs. the South.
Rule 9: In Middle East tribal politics there is rarely a happy medium. When
one side is weak, it will tell you, "I'm weak, how can I compromise?" And
when it's strong, it will tell you, "I'm strong, why should I compromise?"
Rule 10: Mideast civil wars end in one of three ways: a) like the U.S. civil
war, with one side vanquishing the other; b) like the Cyprus civil war, with
a hard partition and a wall dividing the parties; or c) like the Lebanon
civil war, with a soft partition under an iron fist (Syria) that keeps
everyone in line. Saddam used to be the iron fist in Iraq. Now it is us. If
we don't want to play that role, Iraq's civil war will end with A or B.
Rule 11: The most underestimated emotion in Arab politics is humiliation.
The Israeli-Arab conflict, for instance, is not just about borders. Israel's
mere existence is a daily humiliation to Muslims, who can't understand how,
if they have the superior religion, Israel can be so powerful. Al Jazeera's
editor, Ahmed Sheikh, said it best when he recently told the Swiss weekly
Die Weltwoche: "It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small
country as Israel, with only about seven million inhabitants, can defeat the
Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The
Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West's problem is
that it does not understand this."
Rule 12: Thus, the Israelis will always win, and the Palestinians will
always make sure they never enjoy it. Everything else is just commentary.
Rule 13: Our first priority is democracy, but the Arabs' first priority is
"justice." The oft-warring Arab tribes are all wounded souls, who really
have been hurt by colonial powers, by Jewish settlements on Palestinian
land, by Arab kings and dictators, and, most of all, by each other in
endless tribal wars. For Iraq's long-abused Shiite majority, democracy is
first and foremost a vehicle to get justice. Ditto the Kurds. For the
minority Sunnis, democracy in Iraq is a vehicle of injustice. For us,
democracy is all about protecting minority rights. For them, democracy is
first about consolidating majority rights and getting justice.
Rule 14: The Lebanese historian Kamal Salibi had it right: "Great powers
should never get involved in the politics of small tribes."
Rule 15: Whether it is Arab-Israeli peace or democracy in Iraq, you can't
want it more than they do.
Nov. 9th, 2006
05:16 pm - A Nice Gesture
A friend of mine just composed a letter that he's sending to Senator Allen, and I think it's a nice gesture. If you're interested, copy and forward.
Senator Allen,
As an American who still has vivid memories of the 2000 debacle, I would just like to thank you for choosing to concede the election rather than put this country through the same, horrible legal wrangling that was the Florida re-count of 2000.
I realize that this was not an easy decision for you, so I applaud your making it so quickly after the election.
I also know that the results of the election were a huge disappointment to you and other incumbent Republicans who were unable to retain their seats because of issues out of their control and general voter dissatisfaction targeted at the current Administration and not, necessarily, at our individual Senators and Representatives.
Your gesture is a critical first step in moving our country away from unproductive partisan politics and toward cooperation across the aisle. Who knows what further infighting would have resulted had we not known the results of the mid-term elections until the end of the year.
Again, I cannot thank you enough for your very patriotic gesture. I only hope now that the Democrats and the current Administration will use the opportunity you have provided to work together to find a common solution to some of the big issues currently facing our country.
I wish you all the best in your future endeavors - both political and personal.
Yours most sincerely,
Oct. 13th, 2006
01:07 pm - The Russians are Coming
This article completely pissed me off this morning. It's about Russian Evangelical immigrants in Sacramento who are turning up in the hundreds and thousands at Anti-Gay protests. My favorite line is the Russian woman who says that gays infringe on her freedom to have a normal life. I love that line of argument. And by love I mean hate, and by argument I mean complete idiocy.
My big question is this--in light of this, and say, the murder of Theo Van Gogh by Muslim extremists in Amsterdam, how will the left react to groups that are coming into permissive nations saying that part of their right is to not be permissive? Even if that includes restrive laws, honor killings, etc.? And given that the left is protective of immigration, how will the immigrants' idea of restricting culture as freedom be defended? On the other side, how will conservatives, who generally are anti-immigration, look at this issue if they see that new arrivals would support them in their conservative social agenda (and by conservative social agenda I mean restrictive, fascist, anti-democratic rhetoric based on fear)?
I am certainly grappling with this myself, as we look at a fence going up between us and Mexico, and more and more migration/immigration happening the world over, especially into "first world" countries. How do we hold onto ideas of inclusiveness and freedom when being inclusive includes ideas we don't agree with? And includes some groups who will kill for their ideas (though that seems to be happening more in Europe)? And have we noticed the people who are willing to kill always seem to win? And how do we avoid becoming xenophobic, when at heart the ideals of this country are supposed to be about welcome? It's true that the history of immigration is rocky. I can't support a wall, but it's going up. And how much more will this fear affect us when the government is feeding off of it, and the economy continues to worsen as our sense of entitlement balloons? I am always amazed at anti-immigrationists who still use the statue of liberty as a symbol for the US and freedom. Wasn't it given to us by France? And doesn't it say "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free?" Although to be fair, they had to raise private funds to erect it. The disconnect between our reality and our rhetoric. Hmmmm....
Well, this has been your official downer for the day. I'm going to try and stop worrying. Even though I saw Reds yesterday (with ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
moroccomole and aairplane) and I just keep thinking of Jack Reed and Emma Goldman realizing the revolution didn't go the way they had hoped. We're human, and fear is a great motivator. I asked moroccomole why it seemed we are all so beyond cynical, to even post cynical after relecting on the idea swap of the characters in the movie--people enlivened, enlightened, on fire from ideas about new systems and possibilities. He said "They didn't live through this century." I suppose that's why I heard them talk and thought "How wonderful to sit up all night and talk about changing the world" and at the same time "How naive." We all know how it turned out.
There's a lot more about Russian Orthodoxy, after being banned in the USSR is making a fascinating comeback in a country which has supposed religious freedom. And using that religious "freedom" to try and condemn others. Who knew that the religious right and former communists would have so much in common? The ironies are beginning to grow thicker and thicker.
I hope I haven't offended anyone--please let me know what you think. I just find it all disturbing, and wonder where our ideas and political history are taking us. And, as always, what ideals are we willing to stand by, and what they actually mean when put to use. And I have to say it feels better to get this all out than sit and stew. Now I can read about fashion--tra la.
angry