Elaine Donnelly is baaa-ack

As a gay veteran, I'm a big supporter of Vote Vets progressive agenda and follow them on Twitter. According to Richard Allen Smith and his article over at HuffPo, uber bigot Elaine Donnelly is back with a dubious poll with results that, surprise, say what she wants the poll to say about American's attitudes regarding DADT. Be sure and check out the entertaining video of her getting pwned in front of the House Armed Services Committee by Congressman Patrick Murphy (D-PA). It's here.

Here are Smith's rebuttal to couple of points Ms. Donnelly makes. I'm of the opinion it is just another example of conservatives, like Ms. Donnelly, having no problem with their rationalization of lying and spreading propaganda:

Now, this poll seems shady on its face for several reasons:

- CMR claims the poll found that respondents prefer the status quo by a margin of 48-45%. According to CMR's own press release, this means absolutely nothing, as that is within the +/-3.1% margin of error.

- This poll is an overwhelming outlier compared with every other poll that has been taken on the subject. In February, a Quinnipiac University poll found that 57% of respondents support repeal. That same month, a CBS/New York Times poll found that 59% of respondents favored repeal. In March, a Vet Voice Foundation found that 73% of Iraq and Afghanistan combat Veterans found open gay service acceptable. Similarly, in May, a CNN poll found that 78% of respondents supported repeal.

- The poll was conducted using a "likely voters" model, which excludes a large portion of the population. Additionally, in an off cycle election year of a President's first term, the opposite party can always expect gains. Therefore, a likely voters model in such an environment would more heavily favor Republican respondents.

Yep, it never ceases to amaze me how easy it seems for conservatives to justify spreading propaganda and lies to accomplish their nefarious agendas. I believe it is horribly naive for the rest of the media to take anything pushed from the right without verification and a healthy dose of salt. Read More...

AFER statement on today's ruling: 'we are confident that we will continue to prevail'

There were lots of post-decision reactions today. But, I think this one is important. It's the full press release from the Americans Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), the group that brought the Prop. 8 lawsuit:

The Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, who last week rendered a sweeping decision striking down California's Proposition 8 as an unconstitutional violation of the rights of gay and lesbian citizens to due process and equal protection of the law under the Fourteenth Amendment, today denied the proponents' motion to stay that decision pending a full resolution of the merits on appeal, instead granting only a short stay until August 18, 2010 "solely in order to permit the court of appeals to consider the issue in an orderly manner." This means that unless the Court's decision is stayed by a higher court, Californians who were denied equality by Proposition 8 will soon, and once again, enjoy their fundamental right to marry. Today's order can be found here: http://www.equalrightsfoundation.org/legal-filings/ruling-on-motion-for-stay-pending-appeal/

“The overwhelming evidence at trial established beyond any doubt that Proposition 8 denies gay men and lesbians the fundamental right to marry and treats them unequally, without any rational basis for doing so, and that it causes them irreparable and immediate harm,” said Theodore B. Olson, who together with David Boies led the legal team in this lawsuit. “The Court's decision today recognizes that there is no reason to delay allowing gay men and lesbians to enjoy the same rights that virtually all other citizens already enjoy."

“The unconstitutionality of Proposition 8 is comprehensively and unequivocally demonstrated by the Court’s 136-page ruling, and so we are confident that we will continue to prevail,” said Chad Griffin, the Board President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights. “Our nation was founded on the principle that every American is equal in the eyes of the law. This case is about affirming that principle.”

The American Foundation for Equal Rights and plaintiffs Kris Perry, Sandy Stier, Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo challenged Proposition 8 in federal court for violating the U.S. Constitution. After a three-week trial (including the testimony of 17 plaintiffs’ witnesses, among them the foremost experts on the relevant issues, and thousands of pages of documents and a wealth of other evidence) the Court ruled last Wednesday, August 4, that Proposition 8 violated the rights to equal protection under the law and due process that the U.S. Constitution guarantees to every American.

With AFER's team. led by Olson and Boies, leading the way, I am confident we will continue to prevail, too. Read More...

Hero of the Month: Judge Walker

My wife and I were in Roy-Ashburn-land when we learned about the big decision last week. We had been backpacking in the Eastern Sierra and had come down from the mountains late in the afternoon to look for a room and a shower in Lone Pine, California, in a county where 60% of the voters had supported Prop 8. While my wife discussed room rates with a young motel clerk, I spotted a copy of the LA Times on the counter. The headline announced: “Ban on Gay Marriage Overturned."

We shrieked with joy. The clerk was unaware of the decision and struggled to comprehend our excitement. It occurred to me that he, like most straight people, probably didn’t think about LGBT issues much. I thought about how indifference leads to ignorance, a condition in which fear and homophobia can take hold and thrive when they remain unexamined. Being in Ashburn’s district led me to reflect on how he nurtured homophobia there by being dishonest about his own sexuality, speaking in favor of Prop 8 and voting against every gay rights bill he encountered.

Contrast Ashburn with Judge Vaughn Walker, who called for a full airing of the fears and assumptions on which the Prop 8 campaign was based. Walker could have decided the case as an abstract matter of law on a motion for summary judgment where no evidence is evaluated. Instead, he called for a full trial and gave proponents of Prop 8 every opportunity to call witnesses and present evidence. During the trial, homophobic fears and assumptions were thoroughly and methodically exposed as unfounded

Only now, after reading Walker’s 136-page opinion, do I appreciate the import of Walker’s approach, and I have become more hopeful about the ultimate outcome. Anti-gay arguments were shown to be so devoid of evidentiary support that it will be a challenge for higher courts to find any kind of factual basis to reverse Walker’s ruling. That doesn’t mean a higher court won’t find a purely legal basis on which to do so, but if it does, it will have to disregard the evidentiary record.

The trial is also important in the court of public opinion. Facts, logic and rational argument may not sway everyone, but they do sway some people, and no open-minded person who followed the trial can credibly argue that the proponents of Prop 8 presented the better case. Oh, desperate conservatives will continue to mouth bogus arguments that such matters should be decided by popular vote, or that pro-Prop 8 witnesses were intimidated from testifying, or that Judge Walker should have disqualified himself because he is gay. But based on the trial and the evidence presented, there isn’t much room to argue that the proponents of Prop 8 were more persuasive and Walker simply got it wrong.

UPDATE: As we know now, Judge Walker lifted the stay, but it remains in effect until August 18, 2010 at 5:00 PM PDT. That gives the Ninth Circuit time to step in, unfortunately. Let's see what they do. Judge Walker's order is here. Read More...

House GOP homophobe caucus introduces resolution condemning Prop. 8 decision

On Sunday, during the "Face the Nation," while Tony Perkins was getting annihilated by David Boies, the right-winger did manage to eek out that there would be a resolution introduced in the House condemning the Prop. 8 decision. And, there was.

Yes, even as public opinion continues to move in the direction of support for marriage equality, House GOPers were on their usual homophobic warpath.

Chris Johnson has the details on H.Res 1607:

The introduction of the non-binding measure is one of the most prominent moves against the ruling from Republicans, whose response has largely been muted, or in some cases supportive of the decision.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas) is sponsoring the resolution, H. Res. 1607. The measure is pending before the House Judiciary Committee.

The resolution offers findings faulting U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision for engaging in improper conduct during his consideration of the case. It says Walker “failed to conduct himself in an impartial manner” and “attempted to illegally broadcast the trial in disregard of the harassment such broadcast would invite on witnesses supporting Proposition 8.”

This thing won't go anywhere. But, it does expose the caucus of the true, unwavering homophobes in the U.S. House. Here's the full list of co-sponsors. It's really a conglomeration of some of the worst of the worst right-wingers in the House:

Aderholt [AL-4], Akin [MO-2], Bachmann [MN-6], Bachus [AL-6], Chaffetz [UT-3], Fleming [LA-4], Franks [AZ-2], Gingrey [GA-11], Hoekstra [MI-2], Jones [NC-3], Jordan [OH-4], King [IA-5], Lamborn [CO-5], Latta [OH-5], Marchant[TX-24], Pitts [PA-16], Sensenbrenner [WI-5]

If the Republicans take control of the House in November, Rep. Lamar Smith will be the chair of the Judiciary Committee. That's one very good reason why we need to help our friends and allies in the House win in November.

And, does anyone actually think (besides all the gay staffers working for the Homophobe caucus) that this crowd really likes and cares for "gay people"? That's what Rep. Smith said:

“Those who support traditional marriage recognize that gay people can be loyal friends, dedicated community leaders, and beloved sons and daughters,” he said.

“And those with religious objections to same-sex marriage distinguish between the conduct, which they consider inappropriate, and the person, whom they may cherish and appreciate.”

I don't want to be cherished and appreciated by people who think I'm not their equal. And, I sure don't want people like that running the U.S. House.

If marriages do actually start taking place in California after the stay finally is lifted on August 18th, these members will have whipped themselves into a homophobic frenzy by the time Congress returns in September. Read More...

UPDATED -- BREAKING: The stay is over - but, was extended until Aug. 18th

The stay has been lifted. Judge Walker has denied the motion to stay his Prop. 8 decision with this line: Joe.My.God confirms.


But, there's an important UPDATE:

Here's the Judge's decision. The stay was lifted with this line:

Accordingly, proponents’ motion for a stay is DENIED.

So, it's lifted, BUT,

"That judgment shall be STAYED until August 18, 2010 at 5PM PDT at which time defendants and all persons under their control or supervision shall cease to apply or enforce Proposition 8."

Unless the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals intervenes, marriages will begin on August 18, 2010 at 5:00 PM.
Final Stay Order Read More...

Still waiting...Live feed from San Francisco

Crowd reaction might be how we figure out what happened:

Live Videos by Ustream Read More...

Glenn Beck: Gay marriage is not a threat to America. O'Reilly: 'Gay marriage is gonna be a reality in this country in 10 years'

Glenn Beck is now to the left of Barack Obama on the number one gay rights issue in America.

Well that was a weird bit of television. I suspect both gentleman are going to be hearing from the religious right, and Beck from his Mormon leaders.



Media Matters has the transcript:

O'REILLY: I know, but they do have something to do, because gay marriage is going to be a reality in this country in 10 years.

O'REILLY: Do you believe -- do you believe that gay marriage is a threat to the country in any way?

BECK: A threat to the country?

O'REILLY: Yeah, it going to harm the country?

BECK: No, I don't. Will the gays come and get us?

O'REILLY: OK. Is it going to harm the country in any way?

BECK: I believe -- I believe what Thomas Jefferson said. If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket, what difference is it to me?

O'REILLY: OK, so you don't. That's interesting.

Read More...

Anticipation grows in CA: Couples in SF line up to marry

Lots of activity in California today. Judge Walker's decision on whether to lift the stay will come within the next 1.5 hours. People in California are ready.

Couples in San Francisco are lining up at City Hall to get married according to the Chronicle:

Lesbian and gay couples were lining up this morning at the San Francisco clerk's office, hours before a judge is expected to rule on whether same-sex marriages can resume while his landmark decision in the case is appealed.

And, there's been big political interest in the ruling. A short time ago, California's Attorney General (and Democratic candidate for Governor) Jerry Brown tweeted:

Hoping Judge Walker will allow same-sex couples in CA to marry while the Prop 8 case appeal is pending. We should find out before noon.

So, do we. And, of course, we'll post the decision as soon as we get it. Read More...

Signorile: If Dems want our money, they need to work for it. And they haven't yet.

Michelangelo Signorile in the Advocate:

For [openly gay DNC Treasurer Andy] Tobias, Democrats’ shaky midterm prospects have little to do with their own mediocre track record among those who voted them into power. Republicans are a much easier target for blame. Though the GOP has faced a far-right mutiny by Tea Party zealots and have the smallest minority in both houses in decades, Republicans, we’re led to believe, have somehow miraculously railroaded Obama’s “change” message, forcing him to pander to bigots like pastor Rick Warren. If that’s true, it’s only because Obama and the Democrats let it happen by alienating their own base and playing nice with people who didn’t vote for them—and likely never will.

Why should we be expected to mop up the mess Democrats have created even as we warned them over and over again while they caved in to Republicans? They pandered to conservatives on everything from energy policy and the health care public option to civil liberties and the war in Afghanistan, while spitting on the constituencies in their base who cared about those issues deeply.

And today, the desperate Dems’ message to LGBT voters continues to make little sense. Even while they claim that Obama can’t make progress on LGBT rights because of sinister Republicans, they also claim the Administration has done enormous things for us—more, to quote Tobias, than “any president in history,” as if we’ve really been waiting since George Washington to get the hate-crimes bill passed.

Tobias’s argument is that we must give money to our friends or else our enemies will completely seize control. But how can we continue to give money to friends who sell us out—taking our cash while sleeping with our enemies? How can we give money to the DNC, knowing it will dole the cash out to Democrats who run from our agenda or actively vote against it? If they want us to save them, they’re going to have to treat us a lot better, and right now that means supporting full civil rights. No more settling.

That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t support individual Democrats this year. There are plenty of Democrats who deserve your support because they’ve done some good things and are pushing hard for equality. By all means, give to their individual campaigns. But not a dime should go to the DNC. And if Obama isn’t willing to push the party hard—and come out for full equality, including marriage rights—then we’ll need to think about withholding money from him too in 2012.

Read More...

Maddow: "If DADT is going to end, the President could stop enforcement of that policy, pending that change. Why isn't he?"

Rachel Maddow closed her show last night with a rather strong broadside against Robert Gibbs and President Obama, over DADT, but more generally, over everything. Rachel says this White House refuses to spend political capital, refuses to show guts. She says the White House won't stop the DADT discharges now because "it would be hard." She concludes:

"If DADT is going to end, the President could stop enforcement of that policy, pending that change. Why isn't he?"

Why isn't he? Because either the policy isn't ending, or the President is afraid of something. Afraid of standing up to the Pentagon (remember, THEY work for HIM), afraid of spending political capital, afraid of making Republicans angry, afraid of doing anything that in any way might seem "controversial."

It's interesting that Rachel did this, since the White House made quite a big deal recently over her recent broadcast in which she praised Obama and his accomplishments. I'm guessing the White House won't be sharing this video with anyone. It's spot on.

Read More...

Judge Walker will rule on stay of Prop. 8 decision today

From The Advocate:

U.S. District Judge Vaughn R. Walker will issue a Thursday morning ruling on whether to stay a decision in the Proposition 8 federal case pending appeal, according to a late Wednesday e-mail from the court.

The ruling be issued between 9 a.m. and 12 p.m. Pacific Time.

Karen Ocamb reports that West Hollywood is ready to preform marriages, if the stay is lifted. And, she includes this additional background:

As Lambda Legal’s Jon Davidson noted, there is some confusion over the appeals process. There may only be a small window of opportunity for same sex couples to marry if Judge Walker lifts the stay on his affirmative ruling before the defendant-interveners appeal to the 9th Circuit to impose a stay and stop or prohibit marriages while Walker’s ruling is appealed – if the defendant-interveners have standing to make the appeal.

The issue of defendant-intervener arises because the named defendant, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and the state's Attorney General Jerry Brown, wouldn't defend the case and won't appeal the decision. In fact, they support allowing marriages to begin immediately and asked Judge Walker to lift his stay. Read More...