Radom thoughts and significant ramblings
The Democratic Convention is almost over. Meanwhile John McCain will soon name his vice presidential candidate and the Republicans are going to start their convention.
I feel as if I am watching the coming attractions in a movie theatre.
Folks, its about to get ugly.
Last night, I googled the latest lie about Obama (the one about William Ayers and the Weathermen) and it got me thinking.
Why is it so hard for some Republicans to campaign on the issues? Why can't they just say "we feel so and so won't do a better job than our candidate."
But no. In a huge show of self involvement that would land many of us on a psychiatrist's couch, Republicans and their cohorts (especially the anti-gay industry) make every election a pitched battle between good and evil with them wearing the wings and the halo:
We can elect Michael Dukakis because he is a card carrying member of the ACLU who opposes children saying the Pledge of Allegiance.
We can't elect Bill Clinton because he is a draft dodger who protested against his country on foreign soil.
We can't elect Al Gore because he is a congenital liar who says he created the Internet.
We can't elect John Kerry because he didn't deserve the medals he got in Vietnam.
It's a broken record that no one seems to have the sense to throw away. And that's because its somewhat effective.
Dirty political tactics are like pornography. Americans claim to be disgusted by it, but at the same time, it draws their interest.
And this time, there is a serious overload of rumors, conjecture and intentional whispering campaigns. Forget how nasty it was with Bill Clinton. Republicans, conservatives, and the rest of the so-called moral folks have gone into hyperdrive about Obama, accusing him of every of bad behavior except for shooting J.R. Ewing and "squeezing the Charmin."
By themselves, the claims are bizarre. But if you grouped them together, they take the semblance of one of those ridiculous Left Behind books combined with an episode of Twin Peaks:
Obama has deep ties with Jerome Wright, a "nutty" preacher.
Obama is a rock star.
Obama’s birth certificate is fake .
Obama has deep ties with “terrorist” William Ayers.
Obama had sex and did drugs in a limo with a white guy.
Obama is the anti-Christ.
Obama is secretly Muslim.
Obama’s mother was Communist.
Obama received “training” in a Muslim school while a youngster.
Obama did drugs while in the Senate.
Obama is for infantcide.
Obama is uppity.
Obama is like Paris Hilton.
Obama is unpatriotic because he does not put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance.
Obama is unpatriotic because he does not wear an American flag pin on his lapel or tie.
Obama was sworn into office on the Koran.
Years from now, people will look back at this election and scratch their heads. They are going to ask the question that I have been asking for a number of months:
What's wrong with these people.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Gay adoption, Hilary and other Wednesday musings
I got a message from a member of Arkansas Family First, the group working against the ballot measure I talked about yesterday:
This is Laura from Arkansas Families First.
Please visit our website, http://arkansasfamiliesfirst.org/, to join us in the fight to defeat this amendment!
I echo that sentiment for a number of reasons. Not only is the proposed law a piece of symbolic claptrap that will actually hurt children, but if it passes, we can count on seeing similar ballot initiatives in other states.
On other issues, give it up to Hilary. She turned it out last night.
Last night, I flipped between PBS and Fox News while the pundits and reporters on both channels were analyzing the speech.
What was funny about the entire thing was the pundits on Fox News attempting to find things wrong with Hilary's speech.
She only did it her herself. She didn't help Obama. I could hear her saying asshole under her breath everytime she said Obama's name. That wasn't Hilary on the podium because the Democrats kidnapped her. It was a Stepford Wife like that movie.
Then this morning, I happened to catch Joe Scarborough and his panel (with only one black man onboard) try and deconstruct Hilary's speech.
The ironic thing about that was Pat Buchanan's participation on the panel. Buchanan has said some ugly things regarding Obama and black people in general; something to the tune of black people were lucky to come to America as slaves because they were exposed to Christianity, blah, blah, blah.
And it made me realize that Pat Buchanan is a living, breathing symbol of the hypocrisy of racism on America's underbelly.
I mean if he was a black man and had said half the things about white people than he (as a white man) has said about black people, he wouldn't be considered as a venerable newsperson.
He would be a part of those code words Fox News uses when they want to scare white people about the motives of black people.
You know the code words - Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan.
Finally, some of you may have noticed that the countdown clock that usually sits on the right of this blog is gone. I removed it yesterday.
The countdown clock was showing how many days had passed since anti-gay doyenne Peter LaBarbera had seen my book (Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters) and not responded to the charges lodged in it.
It was not (as a certain individual put it) a plea by me to get LaBarbera to review my book. It was put there to demonstrate LaBarbera's hypocrisy.
He can go from one subcultural event to another and demonize the lgbt community from the depravity he sees there but will not address the fact that he and folks on his side have engaged in unfair and unscrupulous tatics to lie on the lgbt community.
Well as seen in my blog two Saturdays ago, Peter finally addressed those charges.
Granted, it took me pulling it out of him via a series of emails, but he did address my charges.
We're not perfect, he said.
Well duuuuh.
I got a message from a member of Arkansas Family First, the group working against the ballot measure I talked about yesterday:
This is Laura from Arkansas Families First.
Please visit our website, http://arkansasfamiliesfirst.org/, to join us in the fight to defeat this amendment!
I echo that sentiment for a number of reasons. Not only is the proposed law a piece of symbolic claptrap that will actually hurt children, but if it passes, we can count on seeing similar ballot initiatives in other states.
On other issues, give it up to Hilary. She turned it out last night.
Last night, I flipped between PBS and Fox News while the pundits and reporters on both channels were analyzing the speech.
What was funny about the entire thing was the pundits on Fox News attempting to find things wrong with Hilary's speech.
She only did it her herself. She didn't help Obama. I could hear her saying asshole under her breath everytime she said Obama's name. That wasn't Hilary on the podium because the Democrats kidnapped her. It was a Stepford Wife like that movie.
Then this morning, I happened to catch Joe Scarborough and his panel (with only one black man onboard) try and deconstruct Hilary's speech.
The ironic thing about that was Pat Buchanan's participation on the panel. Buchanan has said some ugly things regarding Obama and black people in general; something to the tune of black people were lucky to come to America as slaves because they were exposed to Christianity, blah, blah, blah.
And it made me realize that Pat Buchanan is a living, breathing symbol of the hypocrisy of racism on America's underbelly.
I mean if he was a black man and had said half the things about white people than he (as a white man) has said about black people, he wouldn't be considered as a venerable newsperson.
He would be a part of those code words Fox News uses when they want to scare white people about the motives of black people.
You know the code words - Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan.
Finally, some of you may have noticed that the countdown clock that usually sits on the right of this blog is gone. I removed it yesterday.
The countdown clock was showing how many days had passed since anti-gay doyenne Peter LaBarbera had seen my book (Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters) and not responded to the charges lodged in it.
It was not (as a certain individual put it) a plea by me to get LaBarbera to review my book. It was put there to demonstrate LaBarbera's hypocrisy.
He can go from one subcultural event to another and demonize the lgbt community from the depravity he sees there but will not address the fact that he and folks on his side have engaged in unfair and unscrupulous tatics to lie on the lgbt community.
Well as seen in my blog two Saturdays ago, Peter finally addressed those charges.
Granted, it took me pulling it out of him via a series of emails, but he did address my charges.
We're not perfect, he said.
Well duuuuh.
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Arkansas makes a possible boo boo
Wasn't Michelle Obama awesome last night? Personally I think she nailed her speech. And her two little girls were just adorable.
How can anyone vote against that family?
But seriously, in all of the hoopla about a presidential election, we sometimes forget state votes that could have a negative impact on our lives.
It happened in 1992 when Bill Clinton was elected. During that same time, Colorado passed a mindbogglingly bad law that prevented the state from passing any laws prohibiting anti-gay discrimination.
It was overturned by the US Supreme Court in 1996. If this law had not been overturned, the effects on our fight for rights and self-determination would have been disastrous. Laws like it would have popped up virtually all over the country.
And I don't think I have to rehash the anti-gay marriage laws that passed in 2004. To this day, some people still say that they were the key to the re-election of Bush.
So now in 2008 comes the following, courtesy of Arkansas:
A proposal aimed at effectively banning gays and lesbians from becoming foster or adoptive parents was cleared Monday to appear on this fall's ballot in Arkansas.
The measure would prohibit unmarried couples living together from fostering or adopting children, and Arkansas doesn't allow gays to marry or recognize gay marriages conducted elsewhere.
Secretary of State Charlie Daniels certified the proposed initiated act for the Nov. 4 ballot after verifying that the Arkansas Family Council Action Committee had submitted 85,389 valid signatures of registered voters. Supporters needed to turn in at least 61,974 valid signatures.
"Arkansas needs to affirm the importance of married mothers and fathers," Family Council President Jerry Cox said. "We need to publicly affirm the gold standard of rearing children whenever we can. The state standard should be as close to that gold standard of married mom and dad homes as possible."
This proposed law is pernicious on so many levels. It illustrates how the anti-gay industry is willing to distort while at the same time trumpet how they stand for morals.
The part about unmarried couples is a dodge because the Arkansas court recently said that a ban on gay adoption is unlawful. So the Arkansas Family Council Action Committee can't come out and say to keep lgbts from adopting is the purpose of the law, but everyone knows that is the case.
Apparently ducking and dodging is now a Christian value.
Of course lgbt couples can get around this law if it is passed by using surrogates or sperm donations.
And it is here where we see just who the law will hurt.
For all of the bluster about it, this proposed law does not guarantee that foster children will end up in two-parent heterosexual households. It neither encourages nor mandates that two-parent heterosexual households take foster children in.
Jerry Cox and those like him all over the country are constantly saying that "children have a right to a mother and father." Well this is all well and good but this law does not guarantee them that right.
In fact, it does just the opposite.
It eliminate choices based on outdated concepts of family. It is also based on an inaccurate assumption that unmarried couples (be they heterosexual or lgbt) are stealing foster children away from two-parent heterosexual households.
Based on the number of children in foster care nationwide, that's not happening.
This law is about symbolism, not actualities.
And it's a shame because a child can't get love from a symbol.
But the real shame is that in their attempts to get at the lgbt community, the anti-gay industry in Arkansas aimed wrong and kicked foster children squarely in the mouth.
Wasn't Michelle Obama awesome last night? Personally I think she nailed her speech. And her two little girls were just adorable.
How can anyone vote against that family?
But seriously, in all of the hoopla about a presidential election, we sometimes forget state votes that could have a negative impact on our lives.
It happened in 1992 when Bill Clinton was elected. During that same time, Colorado passed a mindbogglingly bad law that prevented the state from passing any laws prohibiting anti-gay discrimination.
It was overturned by the US Supreme Court in 1996. If this law had not been overturned, the effects on our fight for rights and self-determination would have been disastrous. Laws like it would have popped up virtually all over the country.
And I don't think I have to rehash the anti-gay marriage laws that passed in 2004. To this day, some people still say that they were the key to the re-election of Bush.
So now in 2008 comes the following, courtesy of Arkansas:
A proposal aimed at effectively banning gays and lesbians from becoming foster or adoptive parents was cleared Monday to appear on this fall's ballot in Arkansas.
The measure would prohibit unmarried couples living together from fostering or adopting children, and Arkansas doesn't allow gays to marry or recognize gay marriages conducted elsewhere.
Secretary of State Charlie Daniels certified the proposed initiated act for the Nov. 4 ballot after verifying that the Arkansas Family Council Action Committee had submitted 85,389 valid signatures of registered voters. Supporters needed to turn in at least 61,974 valid signatures.
"Arkansas needs to affirm the importance of married mothers and fathers," Family Council President Jerry Cox said. "We need to publicly affirm the gold standard of rearing children whenever we can. The state standard should be as close to that gold standard of married mom and dad homes as possible."
This proposed law is pernicious on so many levels. It illustrates how the anti-gay industry is willing to distort while at the same time trumpet how they stand for morals.
The part about unmarried couples is a dodge because the Arkansas court recently said that a ban on gay adoption is unlawful. So the Arkansas Family Council Action Committee can't come out and say to keep lgbts from adopting is the purpose of the law, but everyone knows that is the case.
Apparently ducking and dodging is now a Christian value.
Of course lgbt couples can get around this law if it is passed by using surrogates or sperm donations.
And it is here where we see just who the law will hurt.
For all of the bluster about it, this proposed law does not guarantee that foster children will end up in two-parent heterosexual households. It neither encourages nor mandates that two-parent heterosexual households take foster children in.
Jerry Cox and those like him all over the country are constantly saying that "children have a right to a mother and father." Well this is all well and good but this law does not guarantee them that right.
In fact, it does just the opposite.
It eliminate choices based on outdated concepts of family. It is also based on an inaccurate assumption that unmarried couples (be they heterosexual or lgbt) are stealing foster children away from two-parent heterosexual households.
Based on the number of children in foster care nationwide, that's not happening.
This law is about symbolism, not actualities.
And it's a shame because a child can't get love from a symbol.
But the real shame is that in their attempts to get at the lgbt community, the anti-gay industry in Arkansas aimed wrong and kicked foster children squarely in the mouth.
Monday, August 25, 2008
All eyes on Denver
This week will be a drag regarding news about the anti-gay industry.
You all know why. This is the week of the Democratic National Convention so all eyes are on Denver as the media will pontificate, guesstimate, and, in the case of Fox News and others like them, try to throw a monkeywrench in on the proceedings.
And the majority of the heavy hitting progressive bloggers are there also.
Oh well, there is always 2012 for me.
Seriously though, my guess is that the anti-gay industry will have their forces all keyed to making Obama look like a sepia Damien Thorne.
One good thing about him getting the nomination is how it threw everything into chaos. I think the anti-gay industry, et. al. were expecting Clinton to get the nomination and they were counting on her to galvanize supporters who are not necessarily sold on McCain.
How the pedulum turns.
Other than watching the convention, I think that I am going to take time out this week to work on several projects, including my other blog.
This is not to say that I am taking a break. We all know how the anti-gay industry is.
No rest for the wicked.
This week will be a drag regarding news about the anti-gay industry.
You all know why. This is the week of the Democratic National Convention so all eyes are on Denver as the media will pontificate, guesstimate, and, in the case of Fox News and others like them, try to throw a monkeywrench in on the proceedings.
And the majority of the heavy hitting progressive bloggers are there also.
Oh well, there is always 2012 for me.
Seriously though, my guess is that the anti-gay industry will have their forces all keyed to making Obama look like a sepia Damien Thorne.
One good thing about him getting the nomination is how it threw everything into chaos. I think the anti-gay industry, et. al. were expecting Clinton to get the nomination and they were counting on her to galvanize supporters who are not necessarily sold on McCain.
How the pedulum turns.
Other than watching the convention, I think that I am going to take time out this week to work on several projects, including my other blog.
This is not to say that I am taking a break. We all know how the anti-gay industry is.
No rest for the wicked.
Friday, August 22, 2008
Hallmark joins the 'overthrow of America'
In my best faux European accent - Our operatives tells me that we were able to elicit Hallmark Greeting Cards in our plans to overturn Christian values in America. With them selling cards congratulating gay couples on their marriages, nothing can stop us now.
Okay that was corny but I only did it to give a gist of the mindset of the anti-gay industry. Apparently they are all up in arms with Hallmark's decision to start selling gay marriage greeting cards.
In fact, the American Family Association will be launching a boycott:
Today, the right-wing American Family Association (AFA) announced a protest of Hallmark for its decision to start selling gay marriage greeting cards. AFA wants Hallmark to “stop promoting a lifestyle that is not only unhealthy, but is also illegal in 48 states.” From the protest site:
We’ve all given or received Hallmark Cards – remember their slogan – “when you care enough to send the very best.” But promoting same-sex marriage for profit is not the very best for families or our nation.
Hallmark is a private company obviously driven by greed. Let them know you do not appreciate Hallmark promoting a lifestyle which is illegal in 48 states. American Greeting Cards, Hallmark’s competitor, does not offer same-sex marriage cards.
Enough of the semantics already! Hallmark is selling these greeting cards because of the old reliable concept of supply and demand.
God bless capitalism. If you don't agree with the concept of gay marriage greeting cards, then don't buy any.
But don't waste your time telling that to the AFA. The group continues to push the lie that anything recognizing the fact that lgbts are normal people and should be catered to and treated as such is really part of a nefarious plan to destroy Christianity.
Somehow I just know Janet Folger is going to connect Hallmark with putting Christians in jail. Or Peter will connect the company with Folsom Street Fair.
What kills me about the AFA is their intentional deception regarding the legality of gay marriage - Hallmark is a private company obviously driven by greed. Let them know you do not appreciate Hallmark promoting a lifestyle which is illegal in 48 states.
That passage is not accidental nor is it a product of an overeager publicity writer. It's an intentional distortion.
Same-sex marriage is not illegal per se. True, it is not legally recognized but it is not against the law. The illegality of an act entails penalities such as arrests and jail terms.
I personally think that the AFA has stock in Hallmark, especially when one considers how successful their boycott against McDonalds is going.
I'm expecting Hallmark's sales to go through the roof.
In my best faux European accent - Our operatives tells me that we were able to elicit Hallmark Greeting Cards in our plans to overturn Christian values in America. With them selling cards congratulating gay couples on their marriages, nothing can stop us now.
Okay that was corny but I only did it to give a gist of the mindset of the anti-gay industry. Apparently they are all up in arms with Hallmark's decision to start selling gay marriage greeting cards.
In fact, the American Family Association will be launching a boycott:
Today, the right-wing American Family Association (AFA) announced a protest of Hallmark for its decision to start selling gay marriage greeting cards. AFA wants Hallmark to “stop promoting a lifestyle that is not only unhealthy, but is also illegal in 48 states.” From the protest site:
We’ve all given or received Hallmark Cards – remember their slogan – “when you care enough to send the very best.” But promoting same-sex marriage for profit is not the very best for families or our nation.
Hallmark is a private company obviously driven by greed. Let them know you do not appreciate Hallmark promoting a lifestyle which is illegal in 48 states. American Greeting Cards, Hallmark’s competitor, does not offer same-sex marriage cards.
Enough of the semantics already! Hallmark is selling these greeting cards because of the old reliable concept of supply and demand.
God bless capitalism. If you don't agree with the concept of gay marriage greeting cards, then don't buy any.
But don't waste your time telling that to the AFA. The group continues to push the lie that anything recognizing the fact that lgbts are normal people and should be catered to and treated as such is really part of a nefarious plan to destroy Christianity.
Somehow I just know Janet Folger is going to connect Hallmark with putting Christians in jail. Or Peter will connect the company with Folsom Street Fair.
What kills me about the AFA is their intentional deception regarding the legality of gay marriage - Hallmark is a private company obviously driven by greed. Let them know you do not appreciate Hallmark promoting a lifestyle which is illegal in 48 states.
That passage is not accidental nor is it a product of an overeager publicity writer. It's an intentional distortion.
Same-sex marriage is not illegal per se. True, it is not legally recognized but it is not against the law. The illegality of an act entails penalities such as arrests and jail terms.
I personally think that the AFA has stock in Hallmark, especially when one considers how successful their boycott against McDonalds is going.
I'm expecting Hallmark's sales to go through the roof.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Is the Family Research Council distorting another study?
From the Family Research Council's 25 Pro-Family Goals For The Nation:
In addition to deliberately creating and affirming motherless or fatherless families, other harms would result from same-sex “marriage.” Homosexuals are less likely to enter long-term partnerships, less likely to be sexually faithful, and less likely to remain committed for a lifetime. Commitment, sexual fidelity, and lifelong marriage would all decline if the behavior of homosexuals is incorporated into society’s concept of marriage. Demands for legalization of polygamy would grow. Religious liberty and freedom of speech would also suffer, since opposition to same-sex “marriage” would be treated as the equivalent of racial bigotry."
I have just emailed the Family Research Council asking where did they receive this information regarding gay marriage. I have an idea as to what study they got this information from. And if it's what I think, then the Family Research Council will have a lot of explaining to do.
My guess is that they used a study completed in the Netherlands by one Dr. Maria Xiridou. If this is the case, they took the study out of context big time.
You see, the 2003 published study's objective was “to access the relative contribution of steady and casual partnerships to the incidence of HIV infection among homosexual men in Amsterdam and to determine the effect of increasing sexually risky behaviours among both types of partnerships in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART).”
The study only looked at casual relationships amongst gay men and was completed before same-sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands.
There are other facts about Dr. Xiridou's study that speaks to how it cannot be used to gauge monogamy amongst lgbts in general. But I won't bring that up until I get an answer from the Family Research Council
If I don't get an answer back via email, then I will be calling their 1-800 number.
I will keep you all posted.
From the Family Research Council's 25 Pro-Family Goals For The Nation:
In addition to deliberately creating and affirming motherless or fatherless families, other harms would result from same-sex “marriage.” Homosexuals are less likely to enter long-term partnerships, less likely to be sexually faithful, and less likely to remain committed for a lifetime. Commitment, sexual fidelity, and lifelong marriage would all decline if the behavior of homosexuals is incorporated into society’s concept of marriage. Demands for legalization of polygamy would grow. Religious liberty and freedom of speech would also suffer, since opposition to same-sex “marriage” would be treated as the equivalent of racial bigotry."
I have just emailed the Family Research Council asking where did they receive this information regarding gay marriage. I have an idea as to what study they got this information from. And if it's what I think, then the Family Research Council will have a lot of explaining to do.
My guess is that they used a study completed in the Netherlands by one Dr. Maria Xiridou. If this is the case, they took the study out of context big time.
You see, the 2003 published study's objective was “to access the relative contribution of steady and casual partnerships to the incidence of HIV infection among homosexual men in Amsterdam and to determine the effect of increasing sexually risky behaviours among both types of partnerships in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART).”
The study only looked at casual relationships amongst gay men and was completed before same-sex marriage was legalized in the Netherlands.
There are other facts about Dr. Xiridou's study that speaks to how it cannot be used to gauge monogamy amongst lgbts in general. But I won't bring that up until I get an answer from the Family Research Council
If I don't get an answer back via email, then I will be calling their 1-800 number.
I will keep you all posted.
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Jerome Corsi and his fancy toilet paper
I am sure many of you know about the Jerome Corsi book that tries to skewer Barack Obama.
Corsi, who wrote a book about Sen. John Kerry four years ago during time in which Kerry was running against Bush for president, claims that this book will show the real Obama.
Please.
This book is a piece of crap and everyone knows it. It recycles some of the worst lies about Obama and creates a few more. Corsi is so scandalous that he even talks about Obama's mother.
But it is the number one book on the New York Times best seller list thanks to a skilled campaign of bullshit emanating from the right.
Corsi gets featured on Fox News unopposed in his lies on several occasions, conservative columnists (such as those on Town Hall and One News Now) give Corsi attention, conservative groups buy Corsi's book in bulk . . .
and lo and behold, we have to divert time away from real issues to talk about a smear job.
Whatever happened to true journalists like Edward R. Murrow, who would have devoted a significant bit of time to call out this bullshit, just like he did to Senator Joseph McCarthy.
With the crop of "journalists" we have now, McCarthy would probably be canonized.
LGBT For Obama - an excellent site.
I am sure many of you know about the Jerome Corsi book that tries to skewer Barack Obama.
Corsi, who wrote a book about Sen. John Kerry four years ago during time in which Kerry was running against Bush for president, claims that this book will show the real Obama.
Please.
This book is a piece of crap and everyone knows it. It recycles some of the worst lies about Obama and creates a few more. Corsi is so scandalous that he even talks about Obama's mother.
But it is the number one book on the New York Times best seller list thanks to a skilled campaign of bullshit emanating from the right.
Corsi gets featured on Fox News unopposed in his lies on several occasions, conservative columnists (such as those on Town Hall and One News Now) give Corsi attention, conservative groups buy Corsi's book in bulk . . .
and lo and behold, we have to divert time away from real issues to talk about a smear job.
Whatever happened to true journalists like Edward R. Murrow, who would have devoted a significant bit of time to call out this bullshit, just like he did to Senator Joseph McCarthy.
With the crop of "journalists" we have now, McCarthy would probably be canonized.
LGBT For Obama - an excellent site.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)