"If you're gay, lesbian, or bisexual, would you sacrifice for your trans neighbors and siblings? If you're trans, would you sacrifice for your gay, lesbian, or bisexual neighbors and siblings? It's something worth knowing about yourself and those around you." --Autumn Sandeen, 4/19/2010, the night before GetEQUAL's DADT repeal protest at the White House
Public Calendar
Press/media, organizations, and individuals send your time-based event info to: calendar@phblend.net
The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend: "a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."
He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior."
(CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)
Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).
"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:
A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist." (Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)
"A nutty lesbian blogger." (MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)
Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush
who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
Oh. My. God. Sum of Change took its cameras to Glenn Beck's rally on Saturday and interviewed some of the political geniuses. This first clip is a couple from Ohio, and the ignorance is astonishing. The conversation about privatizing Social Security alone is hilarious. The man doesn't know WTF he's talking about.
Dave From Florida wants to get back to values. Particularly deal with the people who "don't want to work for a living." My favorite line - apparently comparing the unemployed and/or those on welfare to animals: "They believe that they should be fed and clothed like they were in a zoo for their whole life...probably about 40% of the population obviously, that are on government programs other than the disabled or people that cannot work.
Two years in prison for a Memphis, Tennessee Police Department (MPD) Officer beating an African-American transgender woman. Not exactly a strong message against treating black (or any other ethnic minority), transgender, prostitution.
Bridges McRae, a former officer with the Memphis Police Department (MPD), pleaded guilty today in federal court to a felony civil rights charge related to the use of excessive force, the Justice Department announced today. During the plea hearing, McRae admitted that Duanna Johnson had been in his custody when he used an unreasonable amount of force against her when he struck her while booking her into the Shelby County Jail. McRae acknowledged that his conduct violated federal law and that he violated Johnson's civil rights. He further admitted that his attack caused bodily injury to Johnson in the form of cuts, bruises, and pain.
McRae faces a maximum of 10 years in prison for the civil rights offense. The parties agree that McRae will be incarcerated for 24 months per the plea agreement. McRae also agreed to plead guilty to one count of tax evasion, pending approval by the Department of Justice's Tax Division. "Law enforcement officers are entrusted with a great amount of power so that they can effectively carry out their duty to protect public safety.
This officer abused that power when he violated the civil rights of an individual in his custody," said Thomas E Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division. "Officers who violate the public trust in this way will be brought to justice." "Ensuring that public officials do not victimize the public by abusing their power is a top priority of this office," said Edward L Stanton III, United States Attorney for the Western District of Tennessee. "No one is above the law, especially those who have sworn an oath to uphold the law," said Amy Hess, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI's Memphis Field Office. "It is a sad day when our citizens are preyed upon by its protectors, however, the FBI is proud to have worked alongside our law enforcement partners to ensure justice was served." "We will continue to hold all officers of the Memphis Police Department accountable for their actions," said Director Larry Godwin of the MPD.
Former MPD officer McRae was tried for the beating previously. However, as the Memphis Flyer's Bridges McRae Pleads Guilty reminds us:
McRae was tried in April, but a mistrial was declared when the jury of five men and seven women were unable to reach a verdict.
WMC-TV's video stated that the jury deadlock was 11-to-1 in favor of conviction.
One can only imagine what kind of sentence Duanna Johnson would have received if she had been convicted of assaulting an officer of the law. Of course, Duanna couldn't accomplish that now, even if she were so motivated to ever assault an officer of the law -- she was murdered, execution style, a few months after she was beaten by police. That murder still remains unsolved.
The message here to me seems to be don't be black (or any other ethnic minority), transgender, and arrested for prostitution because you are subject to police brutality. Even on some chance that you're an ethnic minority, transgender, and arrested for prostitution...Well, if an officer of the law is criminally punished for violating your civil rights for a jailhouse beating, then it won't seem like the punishment is enough. That is, assuming you're still alive when the officer is criminally punished.
In regards to Glenn Beck's rally today, one twitter post stands out in my mind (and I am printing it exactly as it is spelled):
To everyone calling the #glennbeck #828 event a gathering of KKK raciest: are you calling Alveda King, niece of MLK, a raciest as well?
The twitter post proves the point of a post I wrote yesterday. Alveda King is at Beck's rally as a token, a bastardization of King's legacy manipulated to blunt appropriate questions of the racial motives of Beck and many of the people attending today's rally.
And a recent expose by Daniel Denvir of Salon magazine exposes Alveda King's history of not only desecrating the King name for her own purposes but also a few more revelations:
She is the head of an organization, King for Life, which has a defunct website and allegedly one staff member.
Her press literature calls her a "doctor," but her degree is merely honorary from St. Anselm College, a Catholic school in Manchester, N.H. What's worse, Alveda can't remember can't recall why she was awarded this degree:
She sued Paramount Pictures, charging that Eddie Murphy stole her idea to make his movie Coming To America. Needless to say, she lost the case.
I have to start out with this statement: Alveda King is a boil on the civil rights movement. What a joke; a CNN reporter just called her appearance "significant." That this is the spin when this niece of Dr. King has a long history of anti-gay bigotry that does not mirror the beliefs of most of Dr. King's immediate family is absurd. Given Alveda thinks genes trumps an acquired belief system regarding social justice, you'd think she'd be considered a whack job, but no.
Anyway, as Beck's "Restoring Honor" rally in Washington, DC proceeds on the mall, Media Matters has a primer on the stain reality that this event places on Dr. King's memory. Over to the right, I highly recommend following The Rude Pundit's @rudepundit) blow-by-blow coverage of the event.
King forcefully advocated for drastic action by the federal government to combat poverty; supported "social justice"; called for an "economic bill of rights" that would "guarantee a job to all people who want to work"; and stated that we must address whether we need to "restructure the whole of American society" -- all ideas that Beck has vilified.
Beck accuses progressives of trying to rewrite history and implores his followers to read original sources, but a review of King's own words clearly shows that Beck's insistence that he and his followers are the custodians of King's dream and legacy is nothing more than a lie.
By Kate Kendell, Executive Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights
Twenty-five years ago, I was 25 years old and just starting law school at the University of Utah. I was parenting my daughter Emily, who was 4 years old, with her mom and my former partner, Lori. While it was uncommon for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender friends in our circle to be planning for parenthood, it did not occur to Lori or me that we were at the forefront of what would be termed the "gayby boom."
Lori was a single parent raising the then 1-year-old Emily when we met. We were just living our lives, unaware of a sea-change that was just beginning when it came to issues of LGBT parenting laws and our community. While we were living that life, Academy Award-winning filmmaker Deborah "Chas" Chasnoff and her then life and work partner, Kim Klausner, were in the midst of writing, producing, and directing their groundbreaking film-the first of its kind-documenting this burgeoning movement.
Their film, Choosing Children, told the story about a choice that a growing number of lesbians and gay men were making, a choice that seemed both counter-intuitive, yet entirely revolutionary: becoming parents after coming out. Beginning in the early 1980's, lesbians, often in biological partnership with gay men, began choosing to have children as lesbian-identified parents, testing society's perceptions of family, challenging family laws that had yet to incorporate LGBT people, and becoming pioneers in our movement for equality.
What the fight for the right to be both LGBT and a parent has really been about is the right to live a fulfilled and authentic life according to what gives each of us joy and satisfaction. Back in 1985, for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, and transgender folks, becoming a parent often meant rejection from your loved ones-not just from your family of origin but also from your chosen family in the LGBT community. It also meant maintaining a pretense of heterosexuality to avoid absolute legal vulnerability because almost every state prohibited openly LGBT people from adopting and few, if any, states provided any parental protections. It was a time of very little community or institutional support for you as a parent, and especially for your child as the son or daughter of a queer parent.
The legal advances we have made for our families are nothing short of breathtaking, and couldn't have been achieved without this early generation of LGBT people who charted a previously unseen path in order to become parents and raise children. Choosing Children poignantly captures their impact on our history, and their contributions to today's LGBT family rights victories, including the recent Proposition 8 decision by Judge Vaughn Walker in California. As Judge Walker wrote:
"The sexual orientation of an individual does not determine whether that individual can be a good parent. Children raised by gay or lesbian parents are as likely as children raised by heterosexual parents to be healthy, successful and well-adjusted."
The truth is we would not be here in this precise moment in history without the LGBT people who came before us following their simple dreams of loving and raising children. Now, 25 short years after Choosing Children premiered, the groundbreaking idea that LGBT folks can be parents seems, well, not so groundbreaking. In fact, it is now so commonplace that doing so is viewed by some in our community as assimilationist and pedestrian. Gotta love the march of progress.
Emily will be 30 next year. She is smart, lovely, creative, open-hearted, and generous. I can hardly believe I have a daughter who is nearly 30 years old. But then, I also can hardly believe the progress we have made in the short time my oldest has been alive.
I recently watched Choosing Children again, and was inspired for many reasons, but most of all it made me really stop and appreciate how far we have come, how precious are the protections and gains we have made since then-and how much we have to lose.
On September 14, we'll celebrate the film's 25th anniversary with a special community viewing and reception that is intended to raise needed funds to preserve this vital piece of our history by saving it in a viewable format that future generations will be able to enjoy. Filmmakers Chas and Kim, the families featured in the film, our own founder Donna Hitchens-who provided legal expertise and commentary-did not intend to be pioneers, but they were, and we are all much better off because of them.
Choosing Children 25th Anniversary Screening and Reception What: Choosing Children 25th anniversary celebration to raise funds to permanently preserve this historical film on DVD
When: 6:30 p.m. on September 14, 2010 (Program begins at 7 p.m.)
Where: Herbst Theater, 401 Van Ness, San Francisco, CA
Cost: $25 (regular admission); $10 (student admission)
With Michelle Obama's charge to combat childhood obesity, all eyes are on commercially prepared foods that are possible contributors to our roly-poly youth. Manufacturers of high-fat, high-sugar foods are now hot to boost their nutritional profiles to justify their existence in the cupboards of today's family.
So it was no surprise when I started seeing commercials touting colorful, sugar-laden breakfast cereals traditionally aimed at kids -- Trix, Cocoa Puffs, and of course, Lucky Charms -- to say they are "Whole Grain Guaranteed," suggesting they are a significant source of fiber and wholesome goodness.
I turned to Kate and said WTF? I don't eat cereals regularly; occasionally I will get a craving for Lucky Charms, so I'll get a small box and get it out of my system. I can only eat a small bowl at a time, since it is so sweet. I don't know how kids can ingest this and not bounce off of the walls once they are in the classroom. This sh*te is dessert, not part of a balanced breakfast.
Now there's nothing wrong with having the magically delicious cereal if you realize what you are eating. This is not Kashi, Fiber One, Grape Nuts or Shredded Wheat. If you want fiber, you'll eat that. If you have the jones for trash food, you reach for the box with the Leprechaun on it.
Now General Mills marketers must be on crack if they think that they can convince moms that Cocoa Puffs is akin to chocolate-flavored Metamucil for kids. Look at that nutritional label for Lucky Charms, lol (it's a ONE cup serving size, by the way). FOURTEEN grams of sugar? That's rocket fuel for a child. So what that they spray some vitamins on it, that doesn't mitigate the nutritional disaster in a box.
That's why it should be considered a dessert, not a breakfast food. In the context of the impact on your diet of substituting that for say, a hot fudge sundae, then yes, a bowl of Lucky Charms with some skim milk is health food.
Q of the Day:
What foods do you see bogusly marketed as good for you?
With the Pentagon's family survey now in the field, Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN), a national, legal services and policy organization dedicated to ending "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT), will release a letter each day this week from family members and spouses of former service members impacted by DADT. As the Pentagon reaches out to 150,000 straight couples on how their lives are impacted, these letters will share the perspective of those forced to serve under this law alongside their loved ones. SLDN is urging supporters of repeal to call, write, and schedule in-district meetings with both their senators as the defense budget, which contains the repeal amendment, moves to the floor just weeks from now.www.sldn.org/action.
Hon. Jeh C. Johnson
General Counsel, U.S. Department of Defense
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
General Carter F. Ham
Commanding General, U.S. Army Europe
Co-Chair, Comprehensive Review Working Group
Dear General Ham and Mr. Johnson:
My name is Angela Trumbauer. I am an Air Force enlisted veteran. I was born and raised in a family of 8 children by my father, a retired Air Force officer (deceased 1979), and my widowed mother, a former Air Force officer, who just turned 78 years young this month. I am married to a retired Air Force Senior Master Sergeant. My stepson is an active-duty Air Force Technical Sergeant. My brother is Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, a highly decorated 19-year Air Force officer. I hail from the "military family" in every sense.
Over Victor's military career, our family had limited opportunities to see and spend time with him. He came home to Ohio for visits once or twice a year, usually over the Thanksgiving or Christmas holidays. I took my kids to visit him at his assigned Air Force Bases a few times over the years. We prepared and sent him care packages when he was deployed to Iraq. Vic sent me care packages when I was stationed in Greece years ago, while he was still a high school student. Reflecting back, I never gave much thought to his short 2-3 day trips home or the seemingly strained nature of the visits. All that changed in May, 2009, however, when my brother was forced to reach out and seek our family's support in the most difficult battle of his life - fighting against his discharge under "Don't Ask Don't Tell."
The revelations that have come to light and emotions evoked throughout the past year have brought a great sense of loss and heartache to our family, not unlike that experienced in grief and death. It saddened me deeply to realize that my single, younger brother could never enjoy a close personal relationship, free from fear of persecution or harassment, throughout his near 20 years serving. His family back home was free to enjoy wonderful family relationships with their spouses and children, but Vic was never to experience that same freedom and privilege while in uniform. I often wonder how alone or lonely he must have felt all those years, especially when he couldn't even share his personal struggles with his very own family.
I recently took the opportunity to ask my brother who he would like us to notify in the event of an emergency or upon his death, after I realized he had no one else to confide in. Most soldiers and airmen have a support system in place, where their spouses or immediate family members are aware of their dying wishes and will share urgent news or handle the appropriate notifications with those closest to their loved one. In my brother's case, I just figured the military would let us know if something happened to him and that no one else aside from his family members needed to be notified, since he was single and has no children.
Under "Don't Ask Don't Tell," the Fehrenbach family has been robbed of truly knowing and loving our brother for who he is for nearly two decades. He chose to serve in silence to protect his own family - the only family he can legally call his own - from potential exposure to investigation under DADT. We can never get those years back. Nor can we accept the damage to and destruction of our family's long-standing military history that will result from Lt. Col. Fehrenbach's discharge under this discriminatory and unjust law. Our family legacy goes back generations, in which our father, mother, grandfathers, spouses, children, uncles and cousins have all answered the call to serve.
Despite all the suffering that Don't Ask Don't Tell has caused my brother and our family, we have reaped a benefit far greater than words can measure. Since I've come to know and understand my brother's true identity, and because he no longer has to hide any part of himself from me, our relationship has become much closer and deeper, where we laugh and share more than ever before. Vic can now be completely open and honest with me - an element that was clearly missing in our lives and relationship in the past. I can't express the immense pleasure I've experienced in getting to know my baby brother --- "Uncle Baldy" as some of our 17 nieces and nephews call him.
In light of the infinite family gains that the repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" will yield, I sincerely believe that allowing open service is necessary, right, and just in every sense. Each and every service member deserves the FULL love and support of their family and friends, without fear of persecution, discrimination and harassment. A strong sense of support and love is essential for our troops at all times. It only stands to reason that overall military performance is enhanced and the resolve to accomplish the mission is strengthened by complete and unhindered family bonds.
Sincerely,
Angela Trumbauer
CC: U.S. Sen. Carl M. Levin
Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee
U.S. Sen. John S. McCain
Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services Committee
U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman
Member, Senate Armed Services Committee
Back in the seventies, California passed legislation regarding identification cards that was truly progressive; I personally benefitted from the activism of Californian transsexual women that did work long before I was out of the closet. Transsexual Californians have relatively simple and accomplishable procedures for changing one's gender marker on California state identification cards (which include drivers licenses), and sometimes I find it too easy to take for granted.
Harrisburg: After several months of positive and thoughtful discussion, Equality Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) today announced that they have successfully reached agreement on a change in gender marker policy. "Gender Markers" refer to those ways in which individuals present themselves mostly on official documentation. For example, on a driver's license your "gender marker" would refer to your name and photograph.
"I want to applaud the Department of Transportation for the careful and intelligent way they have handled this discussion," remarked Equality Pennsylvania Executive Director, Ted Martin. "From the very beginning, they recognized what the American Psychological Association, over 25 other states and the U. S. Department of State has been realizing all along; that this just makes sense and is the right thing to do. This simple and cost-free change in policy will make lives better and that's really the most important point in all this."
Under previous policy, transgender individuals looking to be represented on their driver's license as their presenting gender were forced to prove that sexual reassignment surgery had occurred. With the newly adopted policy, transgender citizens of Pennsylvania will be permitted to change the designated gender on their driver's license when they are living full-time in their new gender and it can be verified by a licensed medical or psychological caregiver.
One step forward in Pennsylvania...
...and a step backward is occurring in Michigan's race for Secretary of State. Now two Republican primary candidates for the office have made rolling back transsexual/transgender gender marker policies to one similar to Pennsylvania's recently changed policy. In other words, as we're watching many Republicans on the national stage making a wedge issue of Muslims, at least two Republicans in Michigan have made a wedge issue of transsexual and transgender people. Apparently, we don't have enough minorities in the United States to express despite towards.
I already wrote about Republican Candidate Paul Scott, who in his letter announcing he was running for Secretary of State, he only had four campaign issue talking points -- and trans discrimination was point number three:
There are also policies that I will work to change:
• I will stand strong against illegal immigration by verifying a valid social security number before issuing anyone a driver's license, an issue Representative Dave Agema has been pushing for 3 years.
• I will actively push to encrypt the traceable RFID chip in the enhanced driver's license.
• I will make it a priority to ensure transgender individuals will not be allowed to change the sex on their driver's license in any circumstance.
• I will work tirelessly to repeal the over $100 million dollar tax increase on drivers in the form of driver responsibility fees.
After traveling around the State the past few months, I have not heard any of the other candidates for Secretary of State addressing the serious issues mentioned above.
Not to be outdone, Republican Candidate for Michigan Secretary of State, Ruth Johnson, has announced that she too is embracing changing policy for transsexual Michiganites. From the Michigan Messenger's Johnson Takes Hard Right Turn On LGBT Issues In GOP Primary:
Republican candidate for Secretary of State Ruth Johnson has issued a statement denying support for lesbian, gays, bisexuals and transgender people and disavowing her 2002 endorsement by the statewide gay rights group Triangle PAC.
In a move meant to match the political stance of opponent Rep. Paul Scott of Genesee County, Johnson also issued a statement saying, "No I do not support allowing people to change their gender on their license as a result of surgery or lifestyle."
Scott entered the race in February with a great deal of attention on his announcement that he would not allow transgender residents to change their gender markers on their state ID cards.
Julie Nemecek made a comment in the Michigan Messenger article that sums up why this reversal of policy, apparently endorsed by Scott and Johnson, isn't sound policy:
To not allow a transgender person to change their gender marker on a driver's license is to ignore the advice of the AMA [American Medical Association], APA [American Psychological Association], WPATH [World Professional Association for Transgender Health], and other healthcare organizations that understand this medical condition. The U.S. State Department allows changes on a passport even without surgery.
One step backward in Michigan to go with our one step forward in Pennsylvania.
On the state level, we have one state take a step forward regarding gender markers on atate identification cards, and in another state we one step backward in the use of trans people as a wedge issue...specifically regarding gender markers on state identification cards.
It's certainly an interesting time to live as a transgender and/or transsexual person in the United States.
Today I came across a piece that really shows the problem the left and left-center have governing versus campaigning.
The slice of the LGBT blogosphere that has been critical of this President has been chastised early and often by Obama defenders for expressing our disappointment, frustration -- and yes, anger -- at the inaction, slow-go and even no-go behavior regarding LGBT issues. We are all well aware that Barack Obama held our prized issues -- DADT, ENDA, DOMA, etc. -- in high regard and stressed their priority to him when he was on the campaign trail. We also know what has happened in the last two years.
On the day he took office, I switched from campaign cheering mode to fulfilling Obama's request that we "hold him accountable." I take those words and that duty seriously. It's my job as a citizen. Since 2008, I've used the written word to tug at the administration from the left.
I truly respect and admire Obama. I've worked in past campaigns with a number of his staffers. I know they are good and decent people trying to improve their country and working tirelessly under extreme stress. There's no denying that they've racked up an impressive list of accomplishments and they deserve credit for it. But that doesn't mean I should set aside the things I've fought for my entire adult life. It doesn't mean I should stay silent if I think the White House could do a better job promoting a progressive vision. And it doesn't mean I should stand aside if I think mistakes are being made. Sure, I'm just one individual with an opinion, but why the fierce urgency of defending Obama whenever I express it?
Obama told us to hold him accountable (do you think he regrets saying that aloud now?), but we're all apparently struggling with what that means. Obviously, there are plenty of flat-out angry and profane critics, more nuanced ones, and those who fall somewhere in between.
Who is to judge what to take seriously -- or dismiss -- in terms of criticism of this President?
A good number of self-appointed arbiters of what is appropriate criticism and what is productive or not productive populate the comments and show up on Facebook/Twitter to "set the record straight" all the time. But these people are no more qualified to hold an opinion than anyone else. It's just that -- an opinion. Take it or leave it. Certainly the White House does, even if they have thin skin over there.
The real issue is influence, real and perceived. The fact is there are so many blogs/columns out there -- by professional politicos, armchair activists and citizen journalists -- and no real way to know who's reading and being affected by the arguments presented.
That generates fear and paranoia. We've seen a lot of that now, haven't we? Perhaps this is generated by the notion that there are now people of some undetermined influence who really aren't qualified to be influential, either because they:
1) Don't have Beltway experience in a professional capacity with a campaign, org or think tank;
2) Lack sufficient gravitas (not a published author/academic, member of the MSM, etc.);
3) Just aren't part of the DC "A-list" -- a known quantity that is well-connected; or
4) Don't have deep pockets, which gets you into almost any door in DC, regardless of your gravitas rating.
I haven't seen a discussion about this anywhere, have you? I wonder why. I'm sure those conversations go on in meetings all the time, but I like sunshine on topics like this because is a great disinfectant and the Beltway is quite polluted when it comes to shooting straight and basic common sense.
The debate was civil and revealing about the media and its handling of the professional self-outing of Ken Mehlman. John King disclosed that he is friends with Mehlman. Clearly he had some inside knowledge about whether Mehlman just recently came to the conclusion he's gay. Yet as a reporter he failed to engage that topic at all.
KING: I want to read you something, I had a phone conversation with Ken today and I should disclose to our viewers I have known him for a very long time. I consider him to be a friend and a good man. This is what Ken told me earlier today. "When you don't accept a part of your life it makes things unbelievably difficult on all kinds of levels. This is an example of that. Knowing how much I tried to push the envelope in other areas in attracting new constituents to our party, I look back and wish there was something I had done in this area. It was something about my life I was having a hard time accepting then, and I can't change that. What I can do is try to be helpful in the future. I understand people who are going to be angry. I have to look forward and do what I think is right." Go ahead.
SIGNORILE: Well, you know, if somebody is willing to come out and help, I think it's great and we should accept their help and use all of the connections he has, that is terrific. But we cannot sweep under the rug what happened. I spent the day on the radio listening to people tell me about how their lives were destroyed in these campaigns in Arizona, people being forced to move, their neighbors turned against them. In Wisconsin, people's homes defaced, their children attacked. These campaigns were brutal. They used homophobia, they used hate and they used religious bigotry. That needs to be addressed. He needs to be held accountable and history needs to record it. It cannot be swept under the rug.
COOPER: This is being addressed. It is being addressed. Of course it's being addressed. We are talking about it right now. We have moved forward and Ken has actually said himself that he wants to work toward reconciliation. We all recognize, actually Michael just said it, to say as we say in the military, when you add a force, you have a force multiplier. Ken can be a tremendous force multiplier for equality and for advancing civil rights, and I'm very glad that he is now on our team to move it forward. It is very good news. We're very grateful that he's finally reached that point. . But let's move forward. Onward and upward, folks.
Yesterday a study was released by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) that estimates that at least 88,500 adults held in U.S. prisons and jails were sexually abused at their current facility in the past year.
What is astonishing is that the Obama DOJ has been studying and reviewing proposals to reduce sexual violence in detention by establishing national standards for staff sexual misconduct for 14 months. Nothing has been finalized and each day more inmates are being raped, harassed and abused while Attorney General Eric Holder doesn't act, defying a congressional deadline set national standards to reduce this criminal activity. Look at what is going on (via Just Detention International):
According to the BJS, 4.4 percent of prison inmates and 3.1 percent of jail inmates reported having experienced one or more incidents of sexual victimization by other inmates and/or staff at their current facility in the preceding 12 months. While some suffered a single assault, others were raped repeatedly: on average, victims were abused three to five times over the course of the year. The survey did not include minors held in these facilities, but in a similar BJS report released in January 2010, more than 12 percent of youth in juvenile detention reported sexual abuse, or one in eight.
JDI has testimony of just a few of the egregious cases of abuse.
Inmates with a history of sexual abuse, and those who identify as gay or transgender are exceptionally vulnerable, and JDI hears from such inmates on a daily basis. In another letter received by JDI last week, James, an openly gay prisoner in Michigan who has been raped more than 20 times by numerous inmates over the course of several years, asked, "Do you know what it's like to see their faces each day? Seeing the look they give me? Knowing that they smile and laugh..."
In both men's and women's facilities, staff perpetrators tend to be of the opposite sex from the victim. "Allowing staff unlimited access to inmates of the opposite sex -- including when they are in states of undress -- encourages sexual abuse. Yet, such cross-gender supervision remains standard practice in most U.S. prisons and jails," said Lovisa Stannow, Executive Director of Just Detention International.
Another inmate who wrote to JDI last week, Nathan in Wyoming, described an officer fondling his genitalia while passing out medication. A nurse who observed the groping did nothing, simply stating, "I know I didn't see what I just saw." After reporting the incident, Nathan was transferred to another prison. He has not received information about the outcome of the investigation.
..."Sexual abuse in detention is a stain on our society," said Stannow. "Every day that the Attorney General doesn't finalize the national standards is another day of anguish among prisoner rape survivors, of preventable safety breaches in prisons and jails, and of significant spending of taxpayers' money on medical treatment, investigations, and litigation that could have been avoided."
And what about the standards recommended by the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA)?
These standards include limitations on cross-gender supervision. They also call for staff training and inmate education, the provision of medical and mental health treatment to sexual abuse victims, and regular independent, external audits to hold agencies accountable for failures to keep inmates safe from abuse. By law, Attorney General Eric Holder had until June 23, 2010 to ratify binding standards, but he missed this deadline and no new date has been set. Once the Attorney General issues final standards, they will be immediately binding on federal facilities. States and localities will have one year to get into compliance or risk losing five percent of their corrections-related federal funding.
And the clock is ticking as the abuse continues...
I've been fond of quoting Bayard Rustin on the job of the gay community. Here's the quote I've often referenced:
"[T]he job of the gay community is not to deal with extremists who would castigate us or put us on an island and drop an H-bomb on us. The fact of the matter is that there is a small percentage of people in America who understand the true nature of the homosexual community. There is another small percentage who will never understand us. Our job is not to get those people who dislike us to love us. Nor was our aim in the civil rights movement to get prejudiced white people to love us. Our aim was to try to create the kind of America, legislatively, morally, and psychologically, such that even though some whites continued to hate us, they could not openly manifest that hate. That's our job today: to control the extent to which people can publicly manifest antigay sentiment."
~Bayard Rustin; From Montgomery to Stonewall (1986)
But that paragraph I often quote as a bit before the "[T]" of "[T]he job of the gay community..." -- the whole paragraph is as follows (emphasis added):
There are four burdens, which gays, along with every other despised group, whether it's blacks follow slavery and reconstruction, or Jews fearful of Germany, must address. The first is recognize one must overcome fear. The second is overcoming self-hate. The third is overcoming self-denial. The fourth is more political. It is to recognize that the job of the gay community is not to deal with extremists who would castigate us or put us on an island and drop an H-bomb on us. The fact of the matter is that there is a small percentage of people in America who understand the true nature of the homosexual community. There is another small percentage who will never understand us. Our job is not to get those people who dislike us to love us. Nor was our aim in the civil rights movement to get prejudiced white people to love us. Our aim was to try to create the kind of America, legislatively, morally, and psychologically, such that even though some whites continued to hate us, they could not openly manifest that hate. That's our job today: to control the extent to which people can publicly manifest antigay sentiment.
I'm not so sure. Ken Mehlman seems one of many closeted, and/or recently uncloseted, gay community members to indicate that fear and self-hate -- those characteristics of internalized homophobia -- is alive and well within the gay subcommunity of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community. And, that those in the leadership of our LGBT civil rights organizations still apparently satisfied to be in the back rooms discussing LGBT issues and sipping cocktails with our nation's politicians, and not dissatisfied enough to privately and publicly demand action on LGBTQ legislation regarding freedom, equality, and justice from our nation's politicians...well, that too seems to indicate that internalized homophobia is alive and well within the gay subcommunity of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community.
It seems to me too that those who identify as transgender, transsexual, or as both transgender and transsexual, haven't overcome the first three burdens as yet, and are likely significantly further behind the curve that the rest of the LGBTQ community. The trans subcommunity of the LGBTQ community seems to have an awful lot of internalized transphobia within its members. As a group, we seem more than a bit bitter and angry too.
So, what are your thoughts on the four burdens? Do you believe LGBTQ community has significantly overcome the first three burdens?
Many black leaders oppose the comparisons between the African-American civil rights movement and the gay rights movement. But few are as vehemently opposed to the comparison as Martin Luther King Jr's niece, Alveda King.
However, as her recent behavior demonstrates, it could be that Alveda King doesn't like the so-called appropriation of the black civil rights movement because it hones in on her action.
Witness her comments in defense of her joining Glenn Beck's 8-28 rally which will be held 47 years to the date of the 1963 March on Washington which featured Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's "I Have A Dream" speech:
"It is absolutely ludicrous that abortion supporters would accuse a blood relative of Dr. King of hijacking the King legacy. Uncle Martin and my father, Rev. A. D. King were blood brothers. How can I hijack something that belongs to me? I am an heir to the King Family legacy."
Alveda King's statements in this press release (which is titled Pro-Abortion Blacks Attack Heir to King Legacy) isn't the first time she claimed that "blood" entitles her to be an "heir to the King legacy."
Last month, during an anti-gay marriage rally, she said pretty much the same thing during a verbal attack on her late aunt, Coretta Scott King. Her exact words then were:
She (Coretta) was married to him (Martin Luther King, Jr.). I've got his DNA. She doesn't.
Alveda King's constant yammering that the "King blood flows through her veins" reminds me of Saturday Night Live comedian Tracy Morgan's hilarious send-up of Star Jones on The View in which he would constantly pepper the conversations in various skits with assurances that his character was a lawyer in an effort to lampoon questions of Jones's relevancy.
Porterville, California. I don't want to paint all of its residents with a broad brush, so I'll share some demographic information here:
Porterville is a city in the San Joaquin Valley, in Tulare County, California, United States. The population was 39,615 at the 2000 census. City limit signs currently have the population at 51,467. The city's population grew dramatically as the city annexed many properties and unincorporated areas in and around Porterville. Porterville is considered part of the Census Bureau's designation of the Visalia-Porterville metropolitan statistical area.
...The racial makeup of the city was 49.75% White, 1.28% African American, 1.73% Native American, 4.63% Asian, 0.15% Pacific Islander, 32.71% from other races, and 4.75% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 54.45% of the population.
And look at this:
In the state legislature Porterville is located in the 18th Senate District, represented by Republican Roy Ashburn, and in the 34th Assembly District, represented by Republican Connie Conway. Federally, Porterville is located in California's 21st congressional district, which has a Cook PVI of R +13[3] and is represented by Republican Devin Nunes.
Yes, that Roy Ashburn. The Republican who was caught with an "unidentified man" in the car after leaving faces, Faces, the gay bar Ashburn frequented, and arrested for DUI? He had a 100% anti-gay voting record before this dragged him out of the closet. He later, as these storylines usually play out, figured out that voting anti-gay because his constituents are homophobes was not the right thing to do:
"I would not have been speaking on a measure dealing with sexual orientation ever prior to the events that have transpired in my life over the last three months," Ashburn told his colleagues. "However, I am no longer willing or able to remain silent on issues that affect sexual orientation and the rights of individuals. And so I am doing something that is quite different and foreign to me, and it's highly emotional."
The tragic and destructive spread of homosexuality across the country is a major evil of our time. The John Birch society reported that thousands of boys per year are stolen from their parents to feed homosexual pornography.
I recommend that American citizens study anti-homosexual books available at Christian book stores. And to read anti-homosexual books which are out of print.
W. Cleon Skousen in 1958, wrote a warning about the communist conspiracy. The book was called, "The Naked Communist." The book warned that the communists would set out to turn America into a moral cesspool, including corrupting America with rampart homosexuality, flooding America with pornography and sexual anarchy, and thereby seeking to destroy the family institution.
Not every homosexual is a communist, but every communist supports the militant homosexual war against mankind. Why? Because it attacks the family. Homosexuality, as well as every kind of heterosexual immorality, is a destroyer of freedom.
Many homosexuals are basically decent men and women who took a wrong turn. The gospel of Jesus Christ says satan is the prompter of all sexual immorality, including homosexual perversion therefore homosexuality is wickedness. Society should be protected from it.
Sam Usher
Porterville
We have a long way to go, even if the law tilts to our side one day. The homobigotry doesn't go away even if laws protect your rights. Racism surely hasn't disappeared.
And that's why Republicans like Roy Ashburn and Ken Mehlman need to not only come out of the closet, but use their votes, power and money to stop feeding the bigotry and ignorance of people like this unfortunate man. You cannot fight for equality by electing low-tax, small-government homophobes. You have to draw a moral line somewhere when it comes to party and principles.
P.S. - And that goes for Dems too. We've seen what electing Blue Dogs does for passing civil rights legislation.
I don't know whether to laugh at or feel sorry for the folks at the Family Research Council. Honcho Tony Perkins and his crew are so desperate to try to stop repeal of DADT that they have resorted to some sort of gay "Night of the Living Dead" scare tactic to stop the Senate from a vote on the repeal language in the def auth bill. As Joe Sudbay says:
Poll after poll shows strong support for the repeal of DADT. We've even got hard core right-winger Liz Cheney on our side. But, the gay-obsessed Family Research Council is undaunted. Those right-wingers are on the air with an ad attacking Harry Reid over DADT repeal. Actually, it attacks "HARRY REID and HOMOSEXUAL ACTIVISTS." The ad looks like something produced for local cable back in the disco era.
***
In other DADT news, check out Servicemembers United's memo about that ridiculous spouses survey. Here are just a couple of the points made in the document.
The survey is an insult to military families and military spouses.
Just as the assumption that the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" would be problematic for straight troops is an insult to the professionalism of straight troops, so to is the assumption that the law's repeal would be problematic for families an insult to military families and military spouses. The assumption that spouses and families might be ill-prepared to handle such a simple and long-overdue policy change insults their own professionalism, their generation's non-discriminatory values, their unique ability to handle diversity, and their battle-hardened ability to handle any changes that the military throws their way.
Question 24: "Assume Don't Ask, Don't Tell is repealed and you live in on-base housing. If a gay or lesbian Service member lived in your neighborhood with their partner, would you stay on-base or would you try to move out?
This is one of the more egregious examples of a question containing derogatory assumptions and insinuations about gay and lesbian Americans. First, the question does not belong in a survey on the potential impact of the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" to begin with because repeal does not create federal recognition of same-sex marriages - a requirement for qualification for on-base family housing. Troops with partners, girlfriends, or boyfriends, even if long-term, are not given on-base housing. This question is both misleading of the survey taker, in that it suggests that repeal would permit gay and lesbian couples to live in on-base housing, and wholly unnecessary in a survey on the impact of repeal, because this scenario would not be a result of repeal. In addition to the above, this question also extremely offensive in nature. The question is undoubtedly rooted in the outrageous and antiquated assumption that gays and lesbians are predatory and that having gays and lesbians in your neighborhood is something to be concerned about, especially for the sake of children. The ironic thing about this question is that the suggested alternative is to move offbase, where there really is a likelihood that a family might reside beside a gay or lesbian couple, unlike in an on-base community.about.
Not exactly a strong message against treating black (or any other ethnic minority), transgender, prostitution.
McRae acknowledged that his conduct violated federal law and that he violated Johnson's civil rights. He further admitted that his attack caused bodily injury to Johnson in the form of cuts, bruises, and pain.
With Michelle Obama's charge to combat childhood obesity, all eyes are on commercially prepared foods that are possible contributors to our roly-poly youth. Manufacturers of high-fat, high-sugar foods are now hot to boost their nutritional profiles to justify their existence in the cupboards of today's family.
So it was no surprise when I started seeing commercials touting colorful, sugar-laden breakfast cereals traditionally aimed at kids -- Trix, Cocoa Puffs, and of course, Lucky Charms -- to say they are "Whole Grain Guaranteed," suggesting they are a significant source of fiber and wholesome goodness.
Dear General Ham and Mr. Johnson:
Today I came across a piece that really shows the problem the left and left-center have governing versus campaigning.
On the day he took office, I switched from campaign cheering mode to fulfilling Obama's request that we "hold him accountable." I take those words and that duty seriously. It's my job as a citizen. Since 2008, I've used the written word to tug at the administration from the left.
Yesterday 
Another inmate who wrote to JDI last week, Nathan in Wyoming, described an officer fondling his genitalia while passing out medication. A nurse who observed the groping did nothing, simply stating, "I know I didn't see what I just saw." After reporting the incident, Nathan was transferred to another prison. He has not received information about the outcome of the investigation.
Yes, that Roy Ashburn
I don't know whether to laugh at or feel sorry for the folks at the Family Research Council. Honcho Tony Perkins and his crew are so desperate to try to stop repeal of DADT that they have resorted to some sort of gay "Night of the Living Dead" scare tactic to stop the Senate from a vote on the repeal language in the def auth bill. As 
