The latest victim of the Flotilla is...Helen Thomas

"I’m a liberal, I was born a liberal, and I will be a liberal till the day I die. "
Helen Thomas on her personal politics in 2004.

"Hearst should’ve retired her a couple of years ago, honestly, but she occupies some weird place between history and “the liberal bloggers love her for saying what every liberal blog commenters loves to type.”
--Wonkette.com

This week the seemingly indestructible Helen Thomas met her match. She survived an all-male press corps, she survived the McCarthy period, she survived several international trips with Nixon, a power grab by the Moonies, and a notoriously combative relationship with both Bush administrations. Anyone who shrugs off her de-facto forced retirement should marvel that she's still standing today after several shockingly frank interactions with the second Bush administration, like this one, in which she basically tells Ari Fleisher point blank that Dubya is an illegitimate President:

THOMAS: Would the President attack innocent Iraqi lives?

FLEISCHER: The President wants to make certain that he can defend our country, defend our interests, defend the region, and make certain that American lives are not lost.

THOMAS: And he thinks they are a threat to us?

FLEISCHER: There is no question that the President thinks that Iraq is a threat to the United States.

THOMAS: The Iraqi people?

FLEISCHER: The Iraqi people are represented by their government. If there was regime change, the Iraqi --

THOMAS: So they will be vulnerable?

FLEISCHER: Actually, the President has made it very clear that he has not dispute with the people of Iraq. That's why the American policy remains a policy of regime change. There is no question the people of Iraq --

THOMAS: That's a decision for them to make, isn't it? It's their country.

FLEISCHER: Helen, if you think that the people of Iraq are in a position to dictate who their dictator is, I don't think that has been what history has shown.

MS. THOMAS: I think many countries don't have -- people don't have the decision -- including us."

Then, on May 27th while attending a Jewish Heritage Festival at the White House, she reiterated her widely known feelings about Israel (no doubt with increased fervor following Israel's most recent aggression). Here's the exchange:


Suggesting ALL Jews in Israel go back to their country of origin goes far beyond even my Anti-Zionist sentiments, it's a provocative opinion too be sure. And "opinion writer" is the official position Thomas has occupied since she left UPI as a reporter back in 2000 following the Moonie invasion.

Opinion writers say many things, many of them objectionable, and only rarely it seems to they actually loose their jobs. Charles Krauthammer remarked last week that, "What exactly was the humanitarian crisis the flotilla was addressing? There is none. There's no one starving in Gaza." Other than a well-deserved roasting from the Daily Show he seems to have made that beautifully insane and offensive remark with little to no fall out. But then again, his position was well aligned with hard-line Zionism.

Thomas issued an apology on June 4th, the same day as the footage of her comments was put on youtube, stressing her comments, "do not reflect my heart-felt belief that peace will come to the Middle East only when all parties recognize the need for mutual respect and tolerance. May that day come soon."

It's true, her comments do not reflect a mindset of mutual respect and tolerance. But it seems incredibly clear that her opinion is more in line with a historical disagreement over territorial rights to land in the Middle East than to any distaste with the Jewish people. After all Thomas didn't say Jews should be kicked out of Israel and shipped back to the lands they immigrated from (as many commentators claim). Rather Thomas said Jews should leave because "They can go home." Not just to Poland and Germany but, "America and everywhere else." Her concern seems less anti-Semitic and more Pro-Palestinian as she concludes "Why push people out who have lived there for centuries? See?"

As her career is eulogized and appraised many have said it was about time, that Thomas' glory days are behind her. Anyone who would call Thomas a dottering fossil well served by this unfortunate "gaffe" into a much needed retirement should recall her comments a year ago when she decried the Obama Administration as being the most controlling Presidency when it came to handling the Press. In fact she said the Obama administration was worse than the Nixon administration in this regard. Many commentators rolled their eyes and emitted the same boilerplate cynisim they're espousing now: an old reporter, out of touch, etc. etc. Today the New York Times' revealed that "in 17 months in office, President Obama has already outdone every previous president in pursuing leak prosecutions. His administration has taken actions that might have provoked sharp political criticism for his predecessor, George W. Bush, who was often in public fights with the press."

In the end, it was not Obama or Bush that vanquished Helen Thomas, it was a knee-jerk reaction by Left and Right alike that conflated a heated anti-Zionist comment into an anti-Semitic incident. Or at least, that's as much as I can figure. It's too painful to imagine that a difference of geo-political opinion alone could oust one of the most respected journalists of several generations. Because if that's the case, the Press is in a lot more trouble than even Helen Thomas could ever have predicted


Also, check out this great post on Talking Points Memo about how many Israelis are all ready taking Helen Thomas' advice.

Log Cabin Obstructionist

Gay marriage could have been legal TODAY in New Hampshire if it wasn't, in part, for a gay Republican in the New Hampshire Congress.

A week ago Governor Lynch of NH made it very clear that he would sign a marriage equality bill as long as religious groups were exempted from performing same-sex marriages. In Lynch's own words:

This morning, I met with House and Senate leaders, and the sponsors of this legislation, and gave them language that will provide additional protections to religious institutions.

This new language will provide the strongest and clearest protections for religious institutions and associations, and for the individuals working with such institutions.
It will make clear that they cannot be forced to act in ways that violate their deeply held religious principles.

If the legislature passes this language, I will sign the same-sex marriage bill into law. If the legislature doesn’t pass these provisions, I will veto it.

Simple enough right?

Today the state Senate agreed and added the proposed language into the bill voting on party lines. The House however said "no." By two votes no less. Why did the Democrat-controlled House vote against the bill? Reuters has some answers:

State Representative Steve Vaillancourt, a gay Republican from Manchester, was a leading voice against the amendment securing religious liberties, saying that the House should not be "bullied" by the governor.

Vaillancourt said an earlier bill that did not provide protections to clerics or religious groups was the one that should have been passed, adding that the amended bill would allow discrimination to be written into state law.

Ok let's unpack this shall we?

1) It's not bullying for the Governor to ask for a change in a proposed bill that could otherwise cause him huge amounts of political grief. When he ran for office Lynch said he opposed gay marriage. Now he's finally doing what's right but asking for a little political coverage at the same time. Why begrudge him that?

2) The proposed gay marriage bill, even without the wording proposed by the Governor, would not compel religious institutions to perform same-sex unions, so really why fight this?

3) It's called separation of church and state! The Establishment Clause was designed not only to ensure secularity in public life, but to also ensure the government wouldn't encroach on religious liberty.

Hopefully the NH Senate and House will be able to hammer out a workable compromise in committee.

The incredible shrinking party...

A new Gallup poll shows that the only demographic that has not jumped ship from the Republican party to some degree are (drumroll please) regular churchgoers (and unsurprisingly self-described conservatives)! This helps explain why a) the GOP isn't trying to moderate its stable of culture war issues and b) why the GOP is so intent on running moderates on social issues, like Arlen Specter, out of the party. Of course a block vote of churchgoers isn't going to win elections by itself in the near future, and this disadvantage may only get worse as one recent study showed that self-identified atheists and agnostics are a growing demographic in all 50 states. From the NYtimes:

Polls show that the ranks of atheists are growing. The American Religious Identification Survey, a major study released last month, found that those who claimed “no religion” were the only demographic group that grew in all 50 states in the last 18 years.

Nationally, the “nones” in the population nearly doubled, to 15 percent in 2008 from 8 percent in 1990. In South Carolina, they more than tripled, to 10 percent from 3 percent. Not all the “nones” are necessarily committed atheists or agnostics, but they make up a pool of potential supporters.

What's worse, this slide of Republican support started under Dubya's reign, "Gallup pollsters said the GOP slide began long before President Obama's election last November; Gallup first detected a loss of Republican support in 2005 following Hurricane Katrina, the failed Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers and the ongoing war in Iraq."

It's the National Day of Prayer, do you know where the Religious Right is?

Answer: Unlike the last eight years, not in the White House.

The holiday which has roiled those of us who believe in a little thing called the Establishment Clause has been celebrated since it was signed into law by Truman at the outset of the Cold War in 1952.

It's one thing to have a non-denominational day of prayer, it's quite another to host an official gathering of far right Christian leaders every year at the White House as Bush did for all his eight years in office. The National Day of Prayer Task Force, the group whose members were the guests of honor during the Bush administration, is an arm of the bat-shit crazy Focus on the Family and is unnervingly militant in its stated goals:

The National Day of Prayer Task Force's mission is to communicate with every individual the need for personal repentance and prayer, mobilizing the Christian community to intercede for America and its leadership in the seven centers of power: Government, Military, Media, Business, Education, Church and Family.

Can't imagine why Obama might not want to be associated with that! The Obama administration has sought a middle ground, signing a proclamation noting the National Day of Prayer, arguing against a lawsuit that challenges the day's legality, but not holding an official White House function. Even the Presidential proclamation has been toned down from the Bush era. As the conservative Dan Gilgoff observes in the US News and World Report's God and Country blog:

Whereas Bush's last proclamation focused on the one being prayed to, Obama's focuses on the people doing the praying...Whereas Bush employed overtly Judeo-Christian language when invoking God in last year's proclamation, Obama's goes out of his way to emphasize religious pluralism, even acknowledging nonbelievers...

Needless to say, the Focus on the Family people are none to pleased about this (then again are these people ever happy?), but are keeping their rage in check. Yesterday they released a statement that was politely chiding in tone, "We are disappointed in the lack of participation by the Obama Administration. At this time in our country's history, we would hope our President would recognize more fully the importance of prayer."

This is the second perceived snub this week for the Religious Right. On Tuesday the Family Research Council released a statement excoriating the Jeb Bush, Ginchrich, and Romney lead National Council for a New America (the latest re-branding effort of the Republican party) as not religious enough:

The group's priorities, which were unveiled at a pizza parlor press conference, include the economy, health care, education, energy, and national security. Notice anything conspicuously absent? Former Gov. Jeb Bush explained the values void by saying it was time for the GOP to give up its "nostalgia" for Reagan-era ideas and look forward to new "relevant" ideas.

I wonder if the FRC knows that their beloved Sarah Palin is also part of this Pizza-eating heathen cabal.

In any event I know what the Religious Right will be praying for on this National Day of Prayer, relevance.

Nowhere to run to baby, nowhere to hide....

It is just getting harder and harder for members of Bush's "Torture Team" to hide from the tough questions:

Days after telling students at Stanford University that waterboarding was legal "by definition if it was authorized by the president," former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice was pressed again on the subject yesterday by a fourth-grader at a Washington [Jewish Primary Day] School...Misha Lerner, a student from Bethesda, asked: What did Rice think about the things President Obama's administration was saying about the methods the Bush administration had used to get information from detainees?

Even more impressive, apparently the question was TONED DOWN!

Misha's mother, Inna Lerner, said the question her son had initially come up with was even tougher: "If you would work for Obama's administration, would you push for torture?...They wanted him to soften it and take out the word 'torture.' But the essence of it was the same."

The Boston Globe should hire this Misha Lerner, I'd get a subscription if I knew he was on staff!

More evidence Giuliani is a jerk (as if more were needed)...

THIS WEEKEND, FORMER NYC MAYOR AND NOTED DRAG ENTHUSIAST RUDI GIULIANI (below with the Trump) SKIPPED THE WEDDING OF THE GAY COUPLE WHO LET HIM STAY IN THEIR APARTMENT FOR MONTHS AFTER HIS WIFE KICKED HIM OUT OF GRACY MANSION FOR HAVING AN AFFAIR!

From the NY POST :

The couple [Koeppel and Hsiao] famously let the ex-mayor crash at their luxury $2.37 million three-bedroom Manhattan apartment while he was going through a nasty divorce with Donna Hanover in 2001. Later, Giuliani married the "other woman," Judith Nathan. " Rudy and Judith were both invited with a beautiful written invitation by mail," said Koeppel. "His secretary called Thursday and said he was not able to come to the wedding and wished us all the best."

Seriously? Gulliani declined through HIS SECRETARY?

You know what? It gets WORSE...

According to Queerty the wedding wasn't some grand fete where one could easily ignore the absence of an important friend of the family, THE NUPTIALS WERE A 10 GUEST AFFAIR.

A follow-up in the POST reveals that Koeppel and Hsiao anticipated Giuliani acting like a douche:

"We're still friends,"...Koeppel said, "I danced at his wedding with [his wife] Judith [Nathan], and it would have been nice if he'd danced at mine." Hsiao said the ex-mayor's snub "did not spoil the day -- we actually didn't expect him to come." Koeppel said, "I understand why he's doing what he's doing. If he decides to run for governor . . . he's a Republican, and he's taking a Republican stand" on same-sex marriage.

WHAT A JERK!

Thoughts on The First 100 Days...

The first 100 days of any presidency is a comparatively arbitrary measurement of progress. You can try and compare one administration's first 100 days against another, and there is certainly criteria for basic success, but Presidential history is not a good constant against which to measure itself. Would Obama's first 100 days have been more successful if Mr. Specter had switched parties three months ago? Maybe. Would Obama have the political capital he has now if the economy wasn't in the shitter? Maybe. It's not what Obama has accomplished so much as the way Obama has tried to accomplish things that give us insight into what the next four years hold.

Three things can be said about Obama and his first 100 days.

1) He's not embarrassing the country at home or abroad. Even though the G20 isn't going along with his plans for worldwide stimulus, it's clear they like him and perhaps even respect him.

2) There's a firm belief that our President isn't prone to doing colossally stupid things. In other words, unlike his predecessor, we don't have to worry about our President getting a signal from God to bomb random countries. Or say, completely ignore a drowning city.

3) Obama is trying to build a broad coalition. While the GOP is quite literally shrinking to the point of temporary irrelevance, Obama has made a number of good faith efforts to reach out to his "loyal opposition." This may infuriate those on the left, like myself, who want the president to make few concessions and plow ahead with a progressive agenda, but in the end the Democratic party will be strengthened the more people it represents. The real trick will be making sure the Democratic party effectively serves all its constituencies.

A good public image, not making reckless choices, and trying to be bi-partisan, these have lead to historically high public opinion ratings. One could see these three accomplishments as baseline for a competent presidency. And one could make the argument that Obama is suffering from the "bigotry of lowered expectations." But this has nothing to do with Obama, and everything to do with Bush. The first 100 days has shown us we can breathe easier again (not easy, easier), and after eight years of holding my breath that's change I can believe in.

Now if only he would nationalize the banks....

Arlen Specter, no longer bi-partisan, now a flamming Dem!

The Washington Post is breaking the story. Arlen Specter the moderate Republican whom the Republicans love to hate (and try and unseat) is SWITCHING PARTY AFFILIATION, from now on he'll be a Democrat, with Al Franken expected to eventually get seated over Coleman in the still legally unresolved Minnesota Senate race the Democrats will have a FILIBUSTER PROOF 60-SEAT MAJORITY. Well a fillibuster proof majority on SOME issues, in a statement released today Specter made clear he wasn't giving Dems a carte blanche on their entire legislative agenda:

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Specter announced he will run to keep his Senate seat in 2010 by taking part in the Democratic primaries.

Why the change? Specter, faces a Liebermanesque dilemma for 2010, with a candidate more palatable to the base of his affiliated party planning on challenging the long-seated incumbent. The main challenger right now, Pat Tommey, lost by just one point in the 2004 GOP primary against Specter, and the lastest polling data shows Specter trailing Tom mey by 21 points. If Tommey wins Specter would have to run as an Independant or Democrat anyway. This way Specter has a fighting chance at keeping his seat.

Of course underlying this pragmatic decision is the ideological tumult that is threatening to hobble the GOP for years to come. Last week I described two moderate republicans as part of the "centrist fringe" of their party. Specter's statement on his decision to change parties shows my hyperbole may not be as exagerrated as I though:

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary...Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans...When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing...I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

Speaking of Lieberman, I bet the Dems are glad now that they didn't strip him of his committee appointments as recompense for his McCain support. It wouldn't be a stretch of the imagination to see a powerless Lieberman abandoning the party that abandoned him to join the GOP in the name of a "loyal opposition."


Specter (first on the left) with Schumer (D-NY) and Leahy (D-VT), his new party colleagues.

Obama backtracking on promises for greater civil liberties?

Hours ago the AP announced some unsettling news: the Obama administration will be asking the Supreme Court to overturn a 1986 ruling that forbids police to question suspects in custody unless an attorney is present.

As the AP noted:

The administration's position assumes a level playing field, with equally savvy police and criminal suspects, lawyers on the other side of the case said. But the protection offered by the court in Stevens' 1986 opinion is especially important for vulnerable defendants, including the mentally and developmentally disabled, addicts, juveniles and the poor, the lawyers said.

This seems at EXTREME ODDS with several proposed reforms posted on the White House's webpage which acknowledges, "America is facing an incarceration and post-incarceration crisis in urban communities." Two solutions to this crisis are suggested on the Administration's Civil Right's Agenda webpage:

Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: President Obama and Vice President Biden will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.

Eliminate Sentencing Disparities: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.

It seems more than a little disingenuous to call for an end to sentence disparities and then remove one of the greatest protections against coercion and false evidence currently in our legal arsenal. It's also extremely disconcerting to see the Obama administration putting more effort into post-incarceration interventions than into steps designed to avoid unnecessary incarceration in the first place. Does the prison industrial complex have the administration over a barrel or something?

Beyond the practical problems this reversal could present to Obama's stated goals of reduced incarceration rates, this move just seems patently unconstitutional, violating the right against self-incrimination and the right to legal representation .

Here's hoping the Supreme Court refuses to hear the case, or that the Administration decides to reconsider its position.

Weekly Queer Index: 4/12/09-4/18/09

If the two weeks before last were seismic events for us gays, than last week was marked less by a continued shaking than by minor aftershocks.

THE OBAMAS INVITING CHILDREN OF SAME-SEX COUPLES TO THE TRADITIONAL WHITE HOUSE EASTER EGG ROLL IS: GOOD FOR THE GAYS


The White House Easter Egg Roll is one of those supremely hokey and highly ritualized public performances that the White House has to pull out the stops for every year. As if electing someone President isn't enough, we demand to see footage of our Commander In Chief interacting with children in a competent way (the armchair shrink in me says it has something to do with us projecting onto our President a paternal role that casts the voters as the de facto children).


Anywho, traditionally tickets to the event are given out on a first-come-first-serve basis but this year special efforts were made to give blocks of tickets to GLBT organizations including: Human Rights Campaign, Family Equality Council and the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. This is actually a big step beause it means the White House is going out of its way to be inclusive towards the GLBT community (inclusive though not down right progressive).

Compare this year's event to the Roll in 2006, when 100 gay families obtained a block of tickets (by camping out all night in front of the White House) to show Bush that gays and lesbians exist in real life and don't have horns and the sign of the beast tattooed onto their foreheads. At the time the Weekly Standard lamented that gays planned to, "crash the event with a 'family visibility action' to spotlight their non-traditional families. " Bear in mind this was only three years ago.

This distinction between the acts of past and current administration is important in measuring the pace of progress. As Alisa Surkis, a gay mother who took part in the 2006 "crashing" and also attended this year's Roll wrote in the HuffPo:

I've heard people complain that the invitation extended to the gay and lesbian families by the Obama administration is just a symbolic gesture, but symbols are powerful. This one sends the message that at the very highest levels, our families are acknowledged and appreciated as part of the diversity of families that make this country great...Sure, I wish that the administration was spearheading the repeal of DOMA and DADT. I wish that President Obama was speaking out in favor of marriage equality. But I think it's a bit of a chicken and egg issue. Does society change in response to the signals sent by legislative changes, or do changes in people's attitudes push forward legislation? I think it's a little bit of chicken and a little bit of egg, and this Monday is a day to celebrate the egg (roll).

Amen sister.


AMAZON.COM CAUSING A CYBERSTORM AFTER "ACCIDENTALLY" DELETING THE RANKING OF GLBT BOOKS ON THEIR SITE IS: A MIXED BAG FOR THE GAYS.


This story isn't just notable for the potentially intentional actions of Amazon, but also for the massive shit storm of cyber outrage that the so-called "glitch" incited. To sum up the events: last weekend gay author Mark Probst posted a blog entry about the mysterious disappearance of sales-rankings for gay-themed books on Amazon.com. Amazon was still selling the books in question, but because they weren't ranked they didn't show up prominently in search results. More damning was an email from Amazon to Probst explaining that the de-ranking was part of Amazon's policy of excluding "'adult' material from appearing in some searches and best seller lists."

As the outrage spread on twitter and the blogosphere it became clear that Amazon’s stated rationale didn’t hold water. The de-ranking covered a HUGE range of GLBT books from self-help: Outing Yourself: How to Come Out as Lesbian or Gay to Your Family, Friends, and Coworkers and Hello Cruel World: 101 Alternatives to Suicide for Teens, Freaks and Other Outlaws to classics like Giovanni's Room, Heather Has Two Mommies, and Brokeback Mountain. Entertainment Weekly also noted that heterosexual erotica such as, "a raunchy memoir by porn star Ron Jeremy and Playboy: The Complete Centerfolds, which includes pictures of more than 600 naked women, are still being ranked."

By last Monday Amazon had re-established rankings for the excluded books and upgraded its excuse for the debacle from a "glitch" to a "ham-fisted cataloging error ." The exact nature of what caused the rankings to be stripped is still being debated, but the most salient feature of this whole episode is the fact that within days, perhaps even hours after the glitch occurred, us queers and our allies were mobilized and putting Amazon on the defensive. This is exactly the kind of rapid response that the queer community needs if it’s going to successfully fight for its civil rights in a number of future uphill battles. This may only have been a test, but we passed with flying colors.

MCCAIN'S DAUGHTER, AND CAMPAIGN STRATEGIST COMING OUT TO SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE IS: A MIXED BAG FOR THE GAYS.

Gays last week got a purely symbolic boost from what can only be described as the "centrist fringe" of the Republican party as both Steve Schmidt, McCain's former campaign strategist, and Meghan McCain, his daughter (and "blogger") both came out in support of gay marriage. Sure, it's always good to have more people on our side, but within the GOP these are the last people anyone is going to listen to. The McCain campaign isn't thought of very highly (think how the left feels about Kerry and his campaign), and when it comes to campaign strategy, Mr. Schidt's domain, the consensus has been negative across the aisle. Weeks before the presidential race was even decided in November, the NYTimes magazine ran a scathing article entitled "The Making (and Remaking and Remaking) of the Candidate"showing just how inept the McCain campaign (and especially Steve Schmidt) was at selling a long serving senator, decorated war-hero, and the loving father of several children (including one adopted from Mother Teresa's orphanage no less) as a winning presidential candidate. The failure (and anger) towards McCain, Schmidt, and Co. in the eyes of the right is even greater when one considers that from their perspective McCain's opponent was a largely unknown, bi-racial, first-term senator whom a tenth of the electorate stupidly believe is a Muslim.

Schmidt, who has a gay sister, gave his endorsement for gay marriage at a Log Cabin Republican Convention last Friday. Even his verbal support for gay marriage came in the form of a backhanded compliment:

I know mine is a minority view among Republicans, and I don’t honestly expect our party will reverse in the very near term its opposition to same sex marriage. Nor do I yet see support for it from a strong majority of the general public. And, I do believe that such a highly charged political question such as this should be settled by the freely expressed will of the people, and not by the courts.

Apparently one can be for gay marriage and feed the right talking points at the same time. Glad to see Mr. Schmidt has overcome his messaging problems.

As for Meghan McCain, she's fast morphing into a savvy blogger more than any sort of political figure. Sensing a vacancy of young GOP contrarians, Ms. McCain has lambasted Ann Coulter as well as Karl Rove, and in a blog post on the Daily Beast last week confusingly declared herself a "pro-life, pro-gay-marriage Republican." Might I suggest the slogan: Government, out of our bedroom, into our exam rooms? She also gave a speech at the Log Cabin Republican's Convention that was curiously almost completely devoid of any mention of sexual orientation.

The biggest problem for queers with these endorsements is that the Republicans could siphon even more gay votes away from the Democrats. Last election more queers voted for McCain than voted for Bush in 2004, we were the only demographic to move more to the right. The Democrats talk a good game but outside of invites to the White House Easter Egg Roll, actual action on a federal level by the Dems for gay rights has been consistantly nill. If the GOP splits the gay vote it will be because they'll be able to talk the talk like the Dems, but neither party will be walking the walk, and that will benefit no one. Still nice to see the sane among the GOP are raising their voices.

WASHINGTON STATE'S LEGISLATURE EXPANDING RIGHTS COVERED UNDER CIVIL UNIONS IS: A MIXED BAG FOR THE GAYS
Last week the Washington State Legislature approved a bill that would extend the benefits from an earlier civil unions law passed two years ago, to include all the rights currently enjoyed by heterosexual married couples in the state. All rights and benefits save marriage itself. Governor Chris Gregoire has promised to sign the bill into law. The bill was hotly debated but passed with a two-thirds majority. Despite being home to Seattle, the second gayest city in the country, Washington state has a Defense of Marriage Act that was passed in 1998. The state Supreme Court refused to overturn the DOMA three years ago citing the legislature's right to, "further the State's legitimate interests in procreation and the well-being of children." Pardon me while I gag.

On the one hand, civil unions seem like a great compromise, except that if you recall last week's WQI, Nate Silver made the astonishing prediction that support for anti-gay marriage amendments would become a minority opinion in all states by 2024. Washington State was among the states that Silver predicts already has an anti-gay marriage minority. So it's disheartening to see progress in the state manifest itself through what is essentially the final piece of a a civil rights installment plan that grants same-sex couples "everything but marriage." Will passing a civil unions law today kick the fight for full marriage down the road? Only time will tell.

NY GOV PATERSON PLANNING TO INTRODUCE A BILL TO THE LEGISLATURE TO APPROVE GAY MARRIAGE IS: GOOD FOR THE GAYS.

New York, which has no civil unions or domestic partnership laws, could become the fifth state in the union to allow gay marriage.

Two years ago, then Gov Elliot Spitzer promised to introduce a bill to allow gay marriage in the state. Then Spitzer decided to spend more time with his family (ahem). His successor, Paterson, had a grand introduction onto the queer stage months after taking office by marching in the NYC gay pride parade, the first Governor in the state to do so.

The legislation is far from a sure thing though. According to Gothamist:

The State Assembly has previously passed a gay marriage bill in 2007, but it stalled in the Republican-controlled Senate. Though the Senate is now controlled by Democrats, the majority is fractured and Senate Majority leader Smith's spokesperson said last week, "Currently, there are not sufficient votes in the Senate to pass the marriage equality bill.

NEVADA'S GOV PROMISING TO VETO A DOMESTIC PARTNERSHIP LAW IS: BAD FOR THE GAYS AND ABSOLUTELY INSANE.
So, suppose you're the Governor of a state that invented the drive-thru wedding, the quickie divorce (once referred to as a "Reno Divorce"), has legalized prostitution, and who's primary tourist attraction is advertised as a haven for bad behavior. Now suppose your legislature sends you a bill that would set-up domestic partnerships in your state, a law you don't want to sign for some stupid reason. You can't argue that signing the bill would detract from the institution of marriage because eroding the sanctity of marriage is big business for your state. You can't argue that the bill would encourage deviant behavior because that too turns a profit in your state. But you have to give SOME reason for vetoing the bill so you merely say, "I just don't believe in it."

Way to go Governor! Las Vegas is feeling the financial crunch and you're turning down domestic partnerships when you should be pushing for gay marriages to prop up your economy. Don't let the door hit you on your way out of office.

This Week's Totals
GOOD: 2
MIXED: 3
BAD (and insane): 1

LEAVE FAIREY ALONE!

Sad news coming out of Boston as the forces of art and the forces of Boston's jack-ass PD/conservative Sox-obsessed culture do battle; their focal point? Shepard Fairey. Fairey, the artist behind the Andre the Giant Obey images, the Obey clothing line, and the Obama Hope poster is enjoying his first retrospective at Boston's Institute for Contemporary Art. I saw it, it rocked, check it out.


Fairey is also very hot.


Fairey was arrested feet from the Institute of Contemproary Art on years-old vandalism charges as he made his way to his exhibit's opening night party in February. He was taken away and booked. This caused major annoyance among the ICA attendees who were waiting for Fairey to DJ an opening night party, tickets to which cost mucho dinero. At first Fairey's arrest seemed to have some silver linings: Fairey got his high-art cred and street cred affirmed on the same day! And as the Boston Phoenix suggested back in February, the orginal arrest might have been nothing more than political gamesmanship; payback for the mayor's recent strong-arm tactics with the police union during budget cuts, coupled with the Mayor posing for a photo-op with Boston's most infamous tagger.

Unfortunately things took a darker turn yesterday as 7 criminal complaints were dropped and the remaining 10 were upgraded from misdemeanors to felonies. This means that Fairey is now potentially facing a maximum penalty of 30 YEARS IN PRISON! Had the charges remained misdemeanors at most he would have paid $1000 in fines plus restitution.

In addition to the Boston charges, Fairey faces 12 seperate criminal complaints in Roxbury

Are we sensing a certain degree of double-standards here? Is Fairey getting the felony counts because he's so well known? What message does this send to Boston area artists?

I stand by my orginal solution: Obama should pardon Fairey. That Hope poster wasn't just iconic in its aesthetics, it perfectly packaged the candidate as patriotic, bold, new, and (yes) hip. Obama owes Fairey. And this is rapidly turning into a ridiculous cluster-fuck that's an embarrassment for Boston. And seriously, do we really need to add to our clogged prison systems' woes by sentencing a street artist to prison for 30 years?????

Reasons why Barack Obama is a better Jew than I...

It's the second day of passover, do you know where your Matzos is?

Certainly not me. I've always described myself as Jew-ish: I may not pray to Yaweh, but I do worship Mel Brooks.

Passover in particular has always been a stretch for me to celebrate as a holiday. Of course I'm glad the Jews got out of bondage several millennia ago, but as a secular humanist and armchair critic it's hard for me to connect with a story that involves so many miracles and deux ex machina moments.

However Obama knows it's passover, and he's trying to make the high holy days hip again.
This is only one reason why Obama is a better Jew than I.

One of the things that makes tonight different than all other nights, is the fact that the president will hold a "first Seder." But Don't be expecting some goyim blunder by Obama to end up in the news tomorrow, this is not Obama's first Seder. Apparently last year in Pennsylvania during the primaries, Obama campaign staffers were unable to get home for Passover and held an impromptu Seder using room service from the Harrisburg Sheraton (who knew the H-burg Sheraton had manischewitz in their wine cellar?). Obama took part in the Sheraton Seder which ended with the traditional refrain of the meal, "Next Year In Jerusalem," punctuated by an impromptu "Next Year in the White House." Things have come full circle.

Leading this historic occasion will be a 24 year old campaign baggage handler named Eric Lesser. No pressure, kid. According to the AP the "The White House says the Seder meal will be traditional, including matzo, bitter herbs, a roasted egg and greens in the family dining room in the executive mansion." I noticed gefilte fish and horseradish are not on the menu.

This the first time a sitting President has attended a Seder in the White House. Seders were held in the White House during the Clinton administration but Bill never attended. And as for Bush, well, does everyone remember the White House Hanukkah card from last year:












Obama has attended Seders on two consecutive Passovers. I have not attended one in at least seven this is one of the reasons Barack Obama is a better Jew than I.

Of course Obama celebrating Passover isn't the only reason Barack Obama is a better Jew than I am.

Barack Obama is a better Jew than I because Obama's visited Israel, (and I haven't). Until I find a gay kibbutz I don't anticipate this state of affairs changing in the near future.

Barack Obama is a better Jew than I because he's related to a Rabbi (I'm not).
What's that, you say? Obama's related to a Rabbi? Indeed he is (by marriage). The New York Times Magazine last week profiled Capers Funnye, "the chief rabbi of the Beth Shalom B’nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation in Chicago, one of the largest black synagogues in America. " Funnye (pictured below) and Michelle Obama are first cousins once removed, "his mother, Verdelle, was the sister of Fraser Robinson Jr. — Michelle Obama’s grandfather."

Now you may be wondering--as I was-- where the hell was this Rabbi Funnye when all those "Obama's an anti-semite" talking points were circulating during the campaign. Well behold the answer :

At the start of the 2008 presidential primary season, Funnye contributed a few hundred dollars to the Obama campaign but didn’t publicly endorse Obama, and he avoided mentioning the family connection. “I was afraid it might do him harm in the Orthodox community,” he told me. “I believe they were the ones putting out stories about Barack being a secret Muslim and so on. They could have made me out to be a friend of Farrakhan’s or a cult leader or who knows what.

Quote of the Day

"What underlines so many of Obama's decisions is an attachment to the institutions that hold up American society, a desire to make them function better rather than to remake them altogether."

--George Packer in this week's New Yorker

Anyone who has wondered why Obama is bailing out the big banks rather than nationalizing them, or why Obama is creating a government run health care option rather than pursuing free universal health care, has noticed the President's seemingly unshakable faith in large institutions. The big question is what are the consequences to such a philosophy when major institutions of American society need to be remade rather than reorganized? It's one thing for Obama to temper and compromise audacious plans to meet pragmatic needs, it's another thing altogether for Obama to aim for pragmatic success in the short-term in order to avoid messy but much needed major renovations down the road.

GAY MARRIAGE SCORES A DOUBLE

VERMONT OVERRIDES GOV'S VETO, APPROVES GAY MARRIAGE

First civil unions
Now gay marriage.
Next comes Gov Douglas in a baby carriage.

It passed by one vote.

Vermont is now the first state in the country to pass gay marriage legislation, all other states that allow (or allowed) gay marriage do so as a result of court rulings.

This is only the 7th legislative override of a gubernatorial veto in all of Vermont's history and the first in 20 years!

AND as if that wasn't enough of a lavender laurel for one day:
THE WASHINGTON DC COUNCIL VOTED TODAY TO RECOGNIZE SAME-SEX MARRIAGES APPROVED IN OTHER STATES.

So what happens in Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Iowa doesn't necessarily stay there.

Now if you'll excuse me, time for a little reveling:

Is Barack Obama a show tune queen?

During the campaign I was impressed by Obama's top 10 song list that he gave to Blender; included were "Give Me Shelter" "Sinnerman" and "Think". McCain by contrast listed TWO Abba songs in his top 10. So it's extremely interesting to me that Obama gifted her royal highness with the treasure of so many other queens, an ipod full of show tunes!

This news raises several very important questions: Did Obama create this playlist himself? If so, how long has he been a fan of the great American musical songbook? If not, who was making these important decisions for him behind closed doors (hopefully not Geitner)? Does Obama include "Seasons of Love" because he genuinely finds "Rent" still relevant or is he merely including it as part of a representative sample of the genre? Finally I must ask the question that is on everyones' mind: Is Obama a closet homosexual the same way he's a closet Muslim, closet non-citizen, and closet socialist?

Songs on Queen Elizabeth's iPod include:
"Oklahoma!"
"If I Loved You," Jan Clayton, "Carousel"
"You'll Never Walk Alone," Jan Clayton, "Carousel"
"There's No Business Like Show Business," Ethel Merman, "Annie Get Your Gun"
"Once in Love with Amy (Where's Charley?)," Ray Bolger
"Some Enchanted Evening," "South Pacific"
"Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend," Carol Channing, "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes"
"Getting to Know You," Gertrude Lawrence, "The King and I"
"Shall We Dance?" Gertrude Lawrence, "The King and I"
"I Could Have Danced All Night," Julie Andrews, "My Fair Lady"
"I've Grown Accustomed to Her Face," Rex Harrison, "My Fair Lady"
"The Party's Over (Bells Are Ringing)," Judy Holliday
"Maria," "West Side Story"
"Tonight," "West Side Story"
"Seventy Six Trombones," "The Music Man"
"Everything's Coming up Roses," Ethel Merman, "Gypsy"
"The Sound of Music"
"Try to Remember," Jerry Orbach, "The Fantasticks"
"Camelot," Richard Burton
"If Ever I Would Leave You," Robert Goulet, "Camelot"
"Hello, Dolly!" Carol Channing
"If I Were a Rich Man," Zero Mostel, "Fiddler on the Roof"
"People," Barbra Streisand, "Funny Girl"
"On a Clear Day (You Can See Forever)," John Cullum
"The Impossible Dream," Richard Kiley, "Man of La Mancha"
"Mame," Charles Braswell
"Cabaret," Liza Minnelli
"Aquarius, Ronald Dyson, "Hair'
"Send in the Clowns," Judy Collins, "A Little Night Music"
"All That Jazz," Chita Rivera, "Chicago"
"One," "A Chorus Line"
"Tomorrow," Andrea McArdle, "Annie"
"Don't Cry for Me Argentina," Patti LuPone, "Evita"
"And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going," Jennifer Holliday, "Dreamgirls"
"Memory," Elaine Paige, "Cats"
"The Best of Times," George Hearn, "La Cage Aux Folles"
"I Dreamed a Dream," Aretha Franklin, "Les Mis Derables"
"The Music of the Night," Michael Crawford, "The Phantom of the Opera"
"As If We Never Said Goodbye," Elaine Paige, "Sunset Blvd."
"Seasons of Love," "Rent"

(List via NY Daily News)

UPDATE

Barack Obama is NOT a show tune queen. No actual homosexuals were used or harmed during the creation of the Queen's present. Apparently the Ipod's library is comprised of a double disk set known as "Ultimate Broadway."