Moon over National Cathedral

I was talking to my friend Matt on the phone and suddenly realized how cool the moon was tonight. After I took the shot, I noticed the lights at the bottom right corner. That's a movie that Jack Nicholson, Reese Witherspoon and Paul Rudd are filming in my neighborhood. I have not seen any of them, but a neighbor tells me that his friend ran into Reese and Jake Gyllenhaal walking by Dupont Circle. The male friend, now beside himself, said something to the effect of "I'm gay, so I'd take either one of you!" Jake reportedly spit out his coffee. Read the rest of this post...

Take a guess who ripped off consumers/patients for billions?

You better sit down for this because it's shocking. I could hardly believe it myself because I always thought they were such fine, upstanding members of society. I believed them when they blamed all of the problems of high costs on those nasty lawyers and expensive lawsuits. I feel so lost right now after reading this news.

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released today by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

The report is part of multi-pronged assault today on the trustworthiness of private insurers by Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.). It comes at a time when the insurance industry is battling efforts to offer consumers a public alternative to private health plans.

At a hearing this afternoon, Rockefeller's panel is slated to air allegations by a former industry insider that insurers have put profits before people's health.

The report released this morning alleges that insurers have systematically underpaid for so-called out-of-network care. The issue has been brought to light in past litigation and investigations, including a probe by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.

Say it ain't so! My whole world is upside down! Darn you Andrew Cuomo. Darn you! Next thing you know they're going to tell me that family values politicians don't practice what they preach. Read the rest of this post...

The new enemies list

It should be interesting to see which gay leaders the Obama White House blacklists for next Monday's big gay bash to, ironically, commemorate the kind of gays who, if they were around today, would likely be on that blacklist. (I've already heard of three big gay groups reportedly being snubbed). Of course, the White House is refusing to say who they've invited, and who is now on the civil rights blacklist. It's almost as if somebody spooked the leader of the free world.

PS For those who have asked, no, Joe and I weren't invited. Read the rest of this post...

Banks reverting to risky strategies to pay high salaries again

Ya don't say? It's positive to see the Brits focusing now on the risky business of hedge funds and also pointing out the same old problems that fed the collapse of the financial sector. More importantly though, what will they do about it and is the US going to sit on the side or will they take action? Wall Street lobbyists own Congress so getting them to take serious action won't come easy. More from the UK chairman of the Financial Services Authority Adair Turner's interview with CNBC today:

Some banks are already reverting to the risky practices seen before the crisis, according to Turner.

The race to lure top employees with inflated pay packets is returning and could reach such a level that it encourages investors “taking large, proprietary trading positions,” Turner said.

Even though it is not the FSA’s role to regulate remuneration, “there is a danger that there is a process of returning to irrational exuberance, paying very fancy amounts of money for people,” he said.

Read the rest of this post...

Maybe Obama (or Rahm) isn't backing off the public option. We have to lobby this one ourselves.

Earlier today, John did a post titled, Dem Senators: White House Open To Dropping Public Option." Kinda speaks for itself and wouldn't be a surprise after yesterday's press conference where Obama repeatedly refused to take any kind of uncompromising position on the public option. Some Senators and Representatives filter that through their little brains and hear "no public option." Amazing how people on the Hill, who campaigned to fix health care, balk at really fixing health care. It's like all thos campaign promises were just blather.

Anyway, this afternoon, via Greg Sargent, we hear from Senator Kent Conrad that maybe it wasn't so clear cut:

A key Democratic Senator who met with Rahm Emanuel last night is denying an explosive report saying Emanuel privately signaled the White House’s willingness to take the public option off the table to get health care reform done.

A spokesperson for Senator Kent Conrad tells me that Emanuel was making a far more general comment and was “in no way” talking about doing away with the public option.

This story has been raging since Bloomberg reported Conrad and fellow Senator Max Baucus’s claim that Emanuel had told Senators that Obama could nix the public option. Bloomberg quoted Conrad saying Emanuel and Obama are “open to alternatives” to a public plan.

Still not all that comforting.

Jane Hamsher thinks we need to take matters into our own hands -- and she's right. We not only need to make sure there is a public option, we need to find enough House members who will vote NO if there is no public option:

Yesterday we kicked off our citizen whip count effort to demand that a public option be part of any health care reform, and introduced our new Whip Count Tool.

Yes, indeed FireDogLake makes it very easy to participate using that "Public Option Whip Count Tool." Key points, via Jane:

Remember -- we're not just asking them to support a public plan that is 1) nationwide, 2) available from day one and 3) answerable to the voters and Congress. We're asking them to commit to vote against anything that does not have these three features.

That's where the power is -- 40 votes against anything else can keep a bad bill from passing.

We can't leave this one to the White House and members of Congerss. We need to lock people in. Read the rest of this post...

Reader comments on the gay issue

LilMikeNYC :

My best friend's boyfriend of 7 years was born in a foreign country? His boyfriend's visa is expiring in about a month, at which point my best friend gets to choose, do I leave my spouse, or do I leave my country? I will lose a best friend, or he will lose his spouse, because of DOMA. It's not just servicemembers whose lives are being destroyed every day. I would like Obama to look him in the eye and tell him to get a divorce or get out of the country. It's just sick.

kevinbgoode:

Well, since it is now obvious that President "Separate-but-Equal" Obama's "fierce advocacy" seems to be little more than a (perhaps) willingness to sign a bill dumping DADT into law, one wonders why he just didn't say it that way along the campaign trail.

What we DO know now is that this President has no conscience. He has the authority to put discharges on hold until Congress takes action but he doesn't care about the careers of 262 American citizens who have served this country. He also has no conscience about those who did come out in the Guard and Reserve who were deployed overseas into combat zones anyway, despite the Pentagon's bogus claim that the existence of an open gay servicemember is an assault on morale and unit cohesion. He doesn't care that these people served their country and risked their lives in combat zones, only to return home to a probable discharge after the end of the tour of duty.

Any gay organization who participates in some cocktail party with the White House is dishonoring our community and the heroes who have suffered by the deliberate inaction of this Administration. This President knows there is nothing to talk about in terms of addressing this heinous policy - the talk was supposed to be finished when he made his campaign promise to end the policy.

funme:

Would he care if it was African-American soldiers that were being discharged from the military?

scottinsf:

How about they do a terrorist attack risk benefit analysis and consider the fact that the Pentagon firing linguists is putting this country at risk of another attack. Meanwhile, convicted violent felons are being given waivers and allowed into the military with open arms.

Obama's priorities are so f'd up it scares me.

dula:

Barack Obama is a disgrace to the Civil Rights Movement. The First Black President is indifferent to and strategically against the Equal Rights of a minority. He wouldn't even be here if it weren't for the fair-mindedness and courage of LBJ...hard to believe that a White man from the South had more respect for Civil Rights than a Black man from the North.

rduke:

How sad. A black president that won't lift a finger to help a minority obtain their rights. What a disgrace. I guess Obama wants everyone to look back on him with shame and disgust. I would have never guessed that I could grow to dislike Obama so much that I can't even look at him.

I almost decided not to vote for him after his sellout on FISA but I voted for him anyway. Never again.

leliorisen:

Obama not only has refused to halt the discharges, but he has allowed his Justice Department to argue that DADT is the correct policy. Forget the fact that Turkey is the only other NATO member to discriminate in this fashion.

This is it for me, however. I am done with Obama. On my other blog, I have defended him from attack for the last time. I will maintain that blog on Progressive issues, but I wash my hands of this man. My sister was correct, he will throw us all under the bus.

I am not sure what it would take for me to believe in Obama again. I do not even know if it is possible.

Frank Probst:

What the hell is the rep from GMHC doing [going to the DNC gay fundraiser]? They should have been one of the first groups to jump ship!

usagi:

Yeah, I was commenting to my husband last night, I remember when we hit the point in the Iraq war where I realized the Bush administration wasn't evil geniuses with a cunning plan--they were just idiots who relied on being greeted as liberators didn't think through where their actions would logically end.

I've hit the same point with the Obama administration. There is no 20 dimensional chess game, they're just clueless idiots about some things, and they're not willing to learn from their mistakes.

DaveVentura:

Didn't Obama learn anything from seeing what happened to the Bush administration? Once an administration is seen as dishonest (regardless of what the dishonesty is about), it is very damaging all the way around. Even if people don't care about DOMA/DADT, they do care that they are being lied to and that will impact all areas that don't have anything to do with DOMA/DADT. Obama faces a particular risk based on who he campaigned on - if he ends up looking like just another politician (not even one exceedingly dishonest), that itself will be damaging.

dcinsider:

Unfortunately, like with the Clinton Administration, we are just the first "special interest" group to be kicked to the curb. By the end of the first term, the curb will be crowded with others who have become disillusioned with Obama's "smart" political tactics. It's anyone's guess who will join us ultimately, but we will not be alone (make room for environmentalists next). It's little consolation of course, but the truth is he is just like every other politician and will disappoint the believers one by one, drip by drip eroding our hope until we end up with the Hobson's choice in 2012 of him or some awful creature the Republicans have dug up.

TrueBleuCA:

Don't promise us you are our "fierce advocate" and then screw us at every turn. We are higher educated, financially more stable and more humane than those knuckle dragging righties you so often try to court. Let's see you win re-election next time around if you screw your friends every chance you get.

mf_roe:

When the Air Force One photo op screw-up happened Obama made an admission of error and quickly canned the responsible party, at some political risk since the man who got the boot was Hispanic. Obama is making it clear that he sees no problems in his administration's handling of these issues. Cut off donations, protest, confront, look for a spokesperson willing to speak out at a high enough level to get this on the radar of all citizens. It is time to start criticizing Obama for the systematic betrayal of promises he made.

dimitri:

Dear DNC gay caucus leaders,

I hope you and your families are doing great. Unfortunately, my partner and myself, our family, have not been doing great lately. You see, my partner and I are one of the 37 000 binational same sex couples that are currently denied immigration rights in America. Though we have been together for 9 years and have a valid marriage license from the Canadian government we are still unable to lawfully reside in our home because, as you know, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) does not allow us to be recognized as first class citizens and does not allow us to have equal rights.

As you are probably aware, the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) is legislation, currently in Congress, that would provide equal immigration rights to gay and lesbian Americans. So my question to you, will my partner and I be able to celebrate our 10 year anniversary together in our home?

atariageguy:

I think, first and foremost, we deserve a direct apology - from the President himself, no lackies - acknowledging the wording of the DOMA brief went way too far, was wrong, and shall be removed.

Second, a question - to be answered by the President himself: Does he or does he not view gay men and women as equal to others both as humans and as Americans under the law?

Next question: will he, here and now (wherever), state a bold and direct commitment to ENDA and the repeal of DOMA for which he - the President - will actively fight, as opposed to the current method of weakly passing the buck to others who are even less interested in the rights of gays and lesbians.

Next, does he view the gay men and women serving in our armed forces as lesser people or, worse, a clear and present danger to or forces and national security. If he does not, will he, at this instant call a moratorium on the firings of gay and lesbian servicemen? This is an action that is solely his to take and was just requested by 77 members of Congress?

Finally, if he will not do some or all of these things, why should gays and lesbians not view the current President of the United States as openly hostile to us?

(Grrr.... my hands were shaking just writing that!)

Jophus:

I'd like to point out here that Obama and DNC leadership has time and time again went out of its way to compromise with the republican party. Keep that in mind when you read that they don't listen to progressives.

I'd also like to point out that we had 3 polls come out where over 70 percent of the public said they are in favor of the public option (yet it is still a debate). Over half of the public has been polled on favoring the repeal of DADT but democrats are against it.

Do these people sound like democrats? They HAVE to have heard our voice over and over and over again. They still don't care.

postdamnit:

I was a pilot in the A/F in the early '60s and was thrown out for being gay. I was treated like a common criminal and accused of being a Soviet spy. Repeatedly threatened with Levenworth, etc..

The whole affair had serious consequences on my future life and work. Has anything changed since then? I don't think so. It is the same old crap of almost 50 years ago!

KarenMrsLloydRichards imagined the questions the DNC gay caucus would ask the White House next time they talk:

Only these permitted questions, for the "Fightin' LGBT Caucus" please!

Examples:

Are cocktail parties at the White House fun? What is the best nibbly they serve?

Tell us what music they play at the cocktail parties: string quartet or smooth jazz?

What will you praise the White House for doing in your next press release?

Who is your favorite White House staffer? Is Rahm as charismatic as we are told? Has he made any jokes about ballet dancing?

Is it true that the President can turn the world on with his smile? Has he smiled at you personally?

Do you think the Oval Office rug, the yellow one, should be changed?

What is the White House art like?

Do you like Robert Gibbs' gentle banter as much as the Press Corps does?

Are you offering to help out in the White House garden, to harvest all the arugula and mache?

Mateo1970:

It still burns me up that not a single person from the Administration has personally apologized to the glbt community for calling us baby rapers and comparing our relationships to incest and bestiality. Hello? If it were any other minority community, the President would have made a special address apologizing. Why is it that only gays are supposed to just forget about being called the most derogatory epithets possible?

Someone better ask Obama to his face (preferably the soldiers themselves), wtf he is going to do to remedy ending the military careers of so many gay soldiers. This is not something to be taken lightly. People's lifelong dream careers (with awards!) were suddenly terminated because Obama says they are damaging unit cohesion. THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE!!

Read the rest of this post...

An environmental bill is so, so stupid

Those Republicans who say "no" to everything are correct. Who really needs a clean environment and how could it possibly impact average Americans? I doubt it could ever have a health impact which would then drive up health care costs with expensive treatments. Business needs to make their profits after all. While the GOP can sound like complete idiots and clueless, sometimes they're really onto something. Kinda like that whole economic thing-a-ma-jig.

People living in nearly 600 neighborhoods across the country are breathing concentrations of toxic air pollutants that put them at a much greater risk of contracting cancer, according to new data from the Environmental Protection Agency.

The levels of 80 cancer-causing substances released by automobiles, factories and other sources in these areas exceed a 100 in 1 million cancer risk. That means that if 1 million people breathed air with similar concentrations over their lifetime, about 100 additional people would be expected to develop cancer because of their exposure to the pollution.

The average cancer risk across the country is 36 in one million, according to the National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment, which will be released by the EPA on Wednesday.

Oops. Read the rest of this post...

Two weeks ago, Mark Sanford emphatically did not want the GOP to change on same-sex marriage

ANOTHER UPDATE: Via Pam Spaulding, Sanford's picture has already been removed from the Values Voters Summit website. That didn't take long.
_________________________

UPDATE: Markos:

Iowa, Maine, Vermont, Connecticut, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts -- I blame you for Sanford's marital problems.

Ha. Don't forget, Sanford's right wing allies are trying to "save" marriage by repealing Maine's new law. It's probably too late to save Sanford's.
__________________________
Mark Sanford is, of course, a right-wing defender of "traditional" marriage. Just two weeks ago, he made it clear that the GOP should not change its views on same-sex marriage. He was on MSNBC's Morning Joe to talk about unifying the GOP.

Joe Scarborough, led with the marriage issue, asking, "Do you think the Republican party should become more libertarian on the issue of gay marriage?" In other words, should the GOP stay out of the issue. Sanford responded, "No, I don't."

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

This is classic. Scarborough, Mike Murphy and Peggy Noonan trip all over themselves to tell Sanford how great he is. Noonan called him a "respected, popular Republican Governor." Read the rest of this post...

Ultra-conservative Gov. Sanford admits affair with "dear, dear friend" in Argentina

There was way more to the missing Governor story, so my obsession was warranted.

Governor Mark Sanford just announced that he has been unfaithful to his wife. He developed a relationship with a "dear, dear friend in Argentina."

There was, of course, the perfunctory apology to his wife and kids. Unlike many of these previous press conferences (Spitzer, Vitter), Mrs. Sanford was not standing by him at this press conference.

Also, apologies were made to the people of South Carolina and people of faith.

(Now with video)


The GOP is running out of leaders. Sanford is also resigning as chair of the Republican Governors Association, too. Wonder if he'll be at the Values Voters Summit this year.

This press conference definitely had the "ick factor." Ick.

UPDATE: Via Media Matters, FOX News labeled the Sanford a Democrat.

And, I can't help it. Sanford said he was crying in Argentina. I'm going with Madonna's Miami Mix:
Read the rest of this post...

The latest on Che Sanford

Oh the IMs I'm getting, and the rumors are flying. Once people are trying to figure out if a married family values conservative has a secret novia or a secret novio, his presidential aspirations are pretty much over. Read the rest of this post...

CAP report tells Obama how to keep his promise on DADT

From the Center for American Progress:

[I]t is puzzling that there is not a stronger momentum within the administration to begin the process of repealing DADT, given the unacceptable moral and national security implica- tions of DADT, as well as President Obama’s stated campaign pledge. This inaction is due, in part, to the commonly held belief that there exists no road map for repealing and then implementing the new policy once DADT is overturned. However, this is not the case.

A clear and comprehensive road map for repealing DADT and implementing an alterna- tive, non-discriminatory policy already exists. This report provides a realistic outline for repealing DADT and opening our armed forces to the many qualified men and women who have been excluded under that law. These steps include:

1. Signing an Executive Order banning further military separations based on DADT and sending a legislative proposal on DADT repeal to Congress

2. Forming a presidential panel on how to implement the repeal

3. Repealing DADT in Congress and changing the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, or UCMS

4. Changing other necessary military guidelines to conform to the new policy

5. Following-up to ensure that the armed forces implement the policy changes

Obama refuses to do step 1. Well, he refuses to do all the steps, but particularly step 1. The Obama administration has never explained why it refuses to simply stop the discharges pending legislation. They keep saying that a partial fix now isn't enough. Well duh. But why does a future legislative fix somehow preclude the president from picking up his pen and stopping the two gay American soldiers from being discharged each day, saving their careers and their lives from ruin? As I reported yesterday, the Obama administration stopped the implementation of an immigration law, pending a congressional fix. So why not do it on DADT too?

But this administration doesn't think it needs to justify its actions, or inactions, to the gay community. The administration has yet to explain the fiasco that was the anti-gay DOMA brief that invoked incest and pedophilia. It's very much like the Bush administration - do something hideous, then charge right ahead as if you're the king of the world.

We voted for Obama. We gave our hard-earned money to Obama. We worked our asses off for his election. He owes our community an explanation. Read the rest of this post...

Krugman: Obama messes up on health care, big time

Paul Krugman, NYT:

My big fear about Obama has always been not that he doesn’t understand the issues, but that his urge to compromise — his vision of himself as a politician who transcends the old partisan divisions — will lead him to negotiate with himself, and give away far too much. He did that on the stimulus bill, where he offered an inadequate plan in order to win bipartisan support, then got nothing in return — and was forced to reduce the plan further so that Susan Collins could claim her pound of flesh.

And now he’s done it on a key component of health care reform. What was the point of signaling, right at this crucial moment, that he’s willing to give away the public plan? Let alone doing it at the very moment that he was making such a good case for it?

Read the rest of this post...

BREAKING: Howard Dean pulls out of DNC gay fundraiser

The former chair of the Democratic party now has a "scheduling conflict" for a fundraiser on behalf of the organization he used to run. Dean is one of the four top names on the invite - he's throwing the event, and now even he's not going.



It's interesting that the very heterosexual Howard Dean is willing to take a stronger stand for civil rights than our own gay elected representatives, Barney Frank, Tammy Baldwin, and Jared Polis. That Howard Dean is willing to take a stronger stand for the gay community than the following who are still attending, or have lent their name to the event:

Suze Orman
Elizabeth Birch
Virginia Governor / DNC Chair Tim Kaine
Chairman Barney Frank
Representatives Tammy Baldwin and Jared Polis
District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty
NBJC's Alexander Robinson (while NBJC has said that none of their board of directors will be attending, it's not clear what Robinson's current role is with the organization, nor whether he has yet decided whether to pull out or not)
GMHC's Marjorie Hill
Iraq Marine vet Brian Fricke (whom you may have seen on 60 Minutes)
Billy Bean
Former GLAAD head Joan Garry
Keith Boykin
Ray Buckley
Brian Johnson
Former SLDN head Dixon Osburn
Paul Smith
Krystal Ball Read the rest of this post...

Dem Senators: White House Open To Dropping Public Option

The public option is so gay.

Canaries in the coal mine, folks. Joe and I have spent so much time writing about Obama's betrayal of the gay community, not simply because it's an issue we care about. But because it's indicative of who Obama is. We are learning something about our president. And while it's not clear if Obama lied during the election about what a "fierce advocate" he'd be for gay rights, or whether he was being truthful but now has let "practical" advisers overrule his own agenda, the point is that we learned that President Obama is someone who is willing to go back on his word to a major constituency on several major promises - in fact, he's willing to undercut that constituency on those promises. That's a dangerous sign. To us, and to the GOP. After all, going back on his word is just another way of saying "caves under pressure."

First they caved on the gays, then they caved on health care, then they caved on immigration, then they caved on Iraq, then they caved on choice...

We are all in this together. Read the rest of this post...

SLDN invited Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach, facing discharge under DADT, to the White House gay cocktail party

Last night on Rachel Maddow's show, we learned that the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) invited Lt. Colonel Victor Fehrenbach to attend the exclusise gay A-list White House party on Monday night. Great. I hope the President will talk to Victor Fehrenbach. And, I hope other A-listers will invite more members of the military who have been discharged. Obama needs to see them face-to-face and it's pretty clear no one in this White House is going to invite the discharged servicemembers -- even though Obama regularly invoked these men and women during the campaign.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Read the rest of this post...

Missing Governor Sanford "wanted to do something exotic." He was in Argentina, not on the Appalachian Trail.

NOTE FROM JOHN: Plastic surgery is big in Argentina. If you were planning to run for president, and wanted to get a touch up, and didn't want anyone to find out, you'd likely consider going out of the country. That still doesn't explain why he ditched his kids and family on father's day. It does however explain the lying. One more thing - I lived and worked in Argentina for two months, in July and August. It's winter down there at this time of year - mid-winter in fact. When I was there, the temp seemed to always be in the 40s, give or take. I just checked the weather and today it's 43F with a high 51. Buenos Aires isn't that exotic when it's 43 degrees. So why go? Gay pride Argentina?

The missing Governor was found -- at the Atlanta airport after his secret jaunt to Buenos Aires. This bizarre story has an "exotic" twist:

Gov. Mark Sanford arrived in the Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport this morning, having wrapped up a seven-day visit to Buenos Aires, Argentina, he said. Sanford said he had not been hiking along the Appalachian Trail, as his staff said in a Tuesday statement to the media.

Sanford's whereabouts had been unknown since Thursday, and the mystery surrounding his absence fueled speculation about where he had been and who's in charge in his absence. His emergence Wednesday ended the mystery.

Sanford, in an exclusive interview with The State, said he decided at the last minute to go to the South American country to recharge after a difficult legislative session in which he battled with lawmakers over how to spend federal stimulus money.
picture

Gov. Mark Sanford stood in front of a mass of press and staff members after the S.C. Supreme Court ordered him to take $700 million in Federal stimulus money.

Sanford said he had considered hiking on the Appalachian Trail, an activity he said he has enjoyed since he was a high school student.

"But I said 'no' I wanted to do something exotic," Sanford said "... It's a great city.

So, the right-wing Republican, family values Governor of South Carolina ditched his wife and kids for a week in an "exotic" city. Okay. What "exotic" adventures did he have, one might ask. Read the rest of this post...

Best letter to Obama on gay issues comes from a straight group

Thank you, PFAW. But how embarrassing that the strongest letter to Obama on gay issues comes not from a gay civil rights group at all. Maybe it's time to change our name to PFAW-Americans:

June 23, 2009

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Obama:

I am writing to respectfully urge you to bring the energetic moral vision that you championed as a presidential candidate to the cause of equality for gay and lesbian Americans.

Among the reasons that millions of people were inspired by your candidacy was your eloquence on behalf of an America in which everyone is offered respect and equality under the law. At People For the American Way, we disagreed with your decision to stop short of supporting marriage equality, but we welcomed the clarity with which you articulated the constitutional principle of equality in so many other areas. That vision energized not only gays and lesbians, but many other fair-minded Americans who recognize discrimination as a national moral failing, who view equality under the law as a defining part of the American Way, and who believe the country is ready to discard discrimination based on bigotries that should be left in our past. That vision would be even more powerful coming from you as president, but since your election we have heard very little.

Any reasonable person is aware of the extraordinary challenges that faced the nation as you took office, including a dire financial crisis that has cost millions of Americans their jobs, homes, and access to health care. You have not shied from these most daunting of challenges. But it seems that you have shied from promoting the vision of equality that you articulated during your campaign.

Legislative change is needed, and we will continue to push Members of Congress and the Democratic leadership to move forward to end discrimination against LGBT Americans even as they grapple with other urgent national priorities. We are counting on you to call for and help win passage of legislation that you pledged to support.

As importantly, Mr. President, you are uniquely capable of communicating to the American public the moral and constitutional values at stake in ending discrimination against gay Americans. Beyond the clear harm to gay and lesbian Americans, the lack of your leadership on these issues damages both America's sense of fairness and the credibility of your administration.

Your recent action to extend some benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees, and your statement from the Oval Office committing yourself to work tirelessly toward equality, could have been the kind of moment that was celebrated as a milestone on the march toward equality. But instead it had the feel of, and was reported as, an incremental half-measure rushed onto the stage to placate a discontented political constituency.

While your comments in opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act at the recent signing ceremony were welcome, they would have carried more weight as part of a larger ongoing effort to educate the American public about the moral need for LGBT equality. Moreover, the impact of your words was blunted coming so soon after your administration's brief in support of DOMA using arguments that degraded gay and lesbian couples. You may have felt it was your duty to defend the law, but your argument that discrimination against same-sex couples doesn't count as discrimination and citation of case law on incest to claim that marriages of gay couples are unworthy of legal recognition was beyond the pale. Americans who support equality would not have been at all surprised if that brief had been filed by the Bush Administration. Coming from you, particularly without a broader public affirmation of your commitment to equality, it had the force of a hard slap in the face by someone we trusted.

Moreover, in the absence of a stronger statement about the importance of equality for all Americans, it has been equally difficult for your supporters to understand the continued discharges under Don't Ask Don't Tell of service members devoting their lives to our country. Congress should vote to repeal the destructive law that destroys military careers and robs the armed forces of highly trained soldiers, but until that happens, you should use your authority as commander-in-chief to suspend discharges of these personnel until that law is changed.

We have seen you change a nation's conversation with an extraordinarily compelling speech on the issue of race in America. We have seen you change the perceptions of the world with a historic speech on history, pluralism, respect, and democracy to the world's Muslims. We have seen you bring grace and conviction to the debate with your speech at Notre Dame about preserving a woman's right to choose.

On the question of LGBT equality, it's time to make that speech.

Mr. President, you have the opportunity to be on the right side of history. Every day, LGBT Americans face discrimination and are being denied their constitutional rights. There is no one in public life who could, and based on your stated principles and promises should, do more to move America forward toward becoming a country in which LGBT people are respected and treated as fully equal under our Constitution and laws.

We ask for your leadership and voice. When you lead, we will back you with every bit of heart and determination we can muster.

Sincerely,

Michael B. Keegan
President
People For the American Way

Yes, HRC's letter to Obama was decent, but it was still second to this. Read the rest of this post...

Wednesday Morning Open Thread

Good morning.

My goodness, the traditional media types are very thin-skinned. Nico Pitney asked the President a question about Iran at the press conference yesterday. Nico has had the BEST coverage about the post-election crisis, bar none. But, the media types are pissy because someone at the White House gave Nico a heads up that he might get called on. Stuff like that happens all the time. But, it's only okay when it's the "real" media, apparently. This morning, on the TODAY Show, before they got to their very important "exclusive" coverage of Kate & Jon, Chuck Todd, Matt Lauer and Chris Matthews all discussed Nico's question. They found it "awkward." Hmmm. I find it awkward that Chuck Todd asks such stupid, inane questions. I found it awkward that NBC's Brian Williams got to spend a whole day with the President. I find it hysterical that NBC is so worried about the Huffington Post. Nico has been providing us up-to-date news from Iran -- a situation with enormous implications. NBC, meanwhile, is obsessively focused on Kate & Jon -- a situation of no import.

Okay, let's get it started... Read the rest of this post...

Citi to raise salaries

However the ground rules change, the bankers make their own changes so they win no matter what. Between Goldman Sachs being on target for record bonuses and now this, it again raises the issue of how deeply rigged the system has become in their favor. Despite their PR fluff about how tough it's been to work under the government changing positions, the reality here is they don't care. The world has been flipped upside down due to their failures yet none of it matters. They're going to make their bloated pay come hell or high water. Don't like it? Screw you. They don't care what you think and they couldn't be happier that they have such a meek presence in the White House who somehow thinks that "say on pay" without teeth means something in this day and age. The question of a non-binding vote is so hopelessly out of date.

It is certain that the Wall Street bankers who failed and were bailed are not missing a beat. Pay remains well above other industries. It's as if the global recession never happened. How does one lose in the finance industry?

After all those losses and bailouts, rank-and-file employees of Citigroup are getting some good news: their salaries are going up.

he troubled banking giant, which to many symbolizes the troubles in the nation’s financial industry, intends to raise workers’ base salaries by as much as 50 percent this year to offset smaller annual bonuses, according to people with direct knowledge of the plan.

The shift means that most Citigroup employees will make as much money as they did in 2008, although some might earn more and others less. The company also plans to award millions of new stock options to employees in an effort to retain workers and neutralize a precipitous drop in the value of their stock holdings.

Be aware that some might jump in at this point and say that 2008 was a bad year. It was still one of the richest years in the history of Wall Street. 2008 paid out about as well as 2004 which was impressive, to say the least, considering how poorly the banks all performed. If Washington tolerates these actions without a brutal response (I'm looking at you, tax code) than it's completely clear that Washington - Democrats and Republicans alike - are fully owned by Wall Street. What a disgrace to the system. Read the rest of this post...

Everyone required to give public testimony in UK Iraq war investigation

Yes, but can they ask the Vice President to sit by their side and field the tough questions? Just asking.

Gordon Brown and Tony Blair face being questioned in public over their roles in the run-up to the Iraq war after the chairman of the independent inquiry indicated that he is to summon the prime minister and his predecessor to give evidence.

In a setback for Brown, who had hoped the inquiry would be held in private, Sir John Chilcot has ruled that all witnesses will be expected to give evidence in public. This will apply across the board unless there are "compelling reasons" in a small number of cases for evidence to be heard in private. This would be if evidence could jeopardise national security or upset allies.

The decision by Chilcot opens up the prospect that Blair and Brown will be cross-examined on their roles in the Iraq war during the build-up to the general election that is expected to take place next year. Chilcot is not giving any indication on the timings of his hearings, which means that he could defer politically sensitive appearances by Brown and his predecessor until after the election.

Read the rest of this post...