More Thursday Male Beauty

FRC: Pray For The Criminalization Of Homosexuality

I've talked before about the bizarre upside down morality of the Christian Right which has taken a religion that per the Gospels themselves should focus on love of neighbor and forgiveness of others and turned it instead into and unrelenting message of hatred. Hatred of gays, hatred of blacks, hatred of Hispanics, hatred of immigrants - indeed, hatred of just about everyone but for the cadre of haters themselves. Among those leading the charge with the banner of hatred is Family Research Council ("FRC") which time and time again proves the Southern Poverty Law Center 100% on target when it added to FRC to its list of registered hate groups. FRC latest missive of hate is a call for its Kool-Aid drinking followers to basically pray for the criminalization of homosexuality. Never mind the destroyed lives - and murders - such laws produce. Right Wing Watch has details on this foul "call to prayer." Here are details:
*
In the Family Research Council’s latest prayer target list, the organization asks people to pray for countries, Malawi in particular, that have laws criminalizing sodomy. The FRC believes that they are facing unfair pressure from the U.S. to decriminalize homosexuality, and accuses the Obama administration of “pushing homosexuality, using taxpayer dollars.” According to the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Malawi is one of more than 70 countries that outlaw “same-sex relations between consenting adults” and earlier this year “Malawi enacted a law criminalizing homosexuality among women. Homosexuality is already illegal for men in that county. If convicted, a defendant could receive up to five years’ imprisonment.” Last year, a gay couple in Malawi was sentenced to fourteen years in jail.
*
The FRC’s support of policies like Malawi’s should come as no surprise, as the group backs the criminalization of homosexuality and has previously criticized the State Department for calling on countries to decriminalize homosexuality. Now, the FRC wants people to pray that God “give targeted nations courage to withstand U.S. coercion” and “forgive us for this evil”: May God restrain the Obama administration from promoting the LGBT agenda at home and abroad. May He give targeted nations courage to withstand U.S. coercion! Forgive us for this evil (Ps 94:16; Is 3:9-15; Jer 7:3-11; Lk 17:2; Rom 1:32; Jas 3:13-18; Jude 7).
*
And people wonder why Christianity is dying in educated portions of the world! FRC makes the case for putting as much distance as possible between one's self and Christianity. Meanwhile, where are the "good Christians"? Once again yielding the field to the hate merchants with little more than a whimper. The Christianists at FRC are guilty of sins of commission. The "good Christians" by their silence are guilty of sins of omission.

National Catholic Reporter Slams Catholic Bishops and Hierarchy

As a former Catholic, I pretty much gave up on any hope that the Roman Catholic Church would ever reform itself, cease its anti-gay jihad and, most importantly, sack those in the Church hierarchy who bore responsibility for enabling and/or protection predator priest who sexually abused children and youths. For the most part my pessimism and decision to "vote with my feet" has been proven totally justified. Nonetheless, it is nice on occasion to see some who have remained in the Church to verbally bitch slap the bishops and hierarchy as is so justly deserved. Not, of course, that such candor will have much chance of changing the Church's feudal governance structure. In its main editorial, the National Catholic Reporter laid into the New York bishops for their nastiness on the New York marriage equality vote as well as the utter collapse of the Church's moral authority in the wake of the handling of the sex abuse scandal. Here are some editorial highlights:
*
The vote approving same-sex marriage in New York is the latest and most glaring confirmation of some gloomy news for the Catholic church in the United States, and it’s not that gays have achieved the right to marry. Rather, affirmed in the recent vote is the disturbing reality that the Catholic hierarchy has lost most of its credibility with the wider culture on matters of sexuality and personal morality, just as it has lost its authority within the Catholic community on the same issues.
*
[T]here are reasons we think the bishops’ hyperbolic reaction to laws such as that enacted in New York are not only wrong-headed but counterproductive. First, even if bishops retained the stature they once had in the wider culture, it is evident in polls and politicians’ votes that neither most of the Catholic world nor the wider culture buys the church’s teaching that homosexuals are disordered and are thus relegated to sexless lives in order to remain in the Christian community.
*
To parents of a gay child, the idea that a group of men can claim to know the mind of God so perfectly that they can proclaim with unyielding certainty that God deems a significant portion of creation “disordered” is absurd. The label is not only demeaning but to contemporary Christians has no resonance with the heart of the Gospel.
*
Second, even if the bishops had a persuasive case to make and the legislative tools at their disposal, their public conduct in recent years -- wholesale excommunications, railing at politicians, denial of honorary degrees and speaking platforms at Catholic institutions, using the Eucharist as a political bludgeon, refusing to entertain any questions or dissenting opinions, and engaging in open warfare with the community’s thinkers as well as those, especially women, who have loyally served the church -- has resulted in a kind of episcopal caricature, the common scolds of the religion world, the caustic party of “no.”
*
The larger problem for the hierarchy, of course,is not persuading the secular culture of its point of view on sacramental marriage, but persuading its own adherents, and particularly young Catholics who now tend to drift off in scores before adulthood, that staying attached to the church is a compelling good, that the church is in fact relevant and will draw them closer to Christ and thus the freedom and fullness of a life of faith.
*
The bishops have little credibility in the wider culture and diminished authority within the church because in the case of sexual violence against young people by members of their clerical culture, they responded in ways that any reasonable and healthy segment of society would have considered disdainful.
*
In reaction to the marriage vote, Dolan stretched to call up the specter of what remains of the Red menace. On his blog he wrote that in China and North Korea “government presumes daily to ‘redefine’ rights, relationships, values and natural law.” In those countries, he says, government dictates the size of families, who can live and die, and what defines marriage. “Please, not here!” he begs. The comparison, of course, is absurd on its face, a kind of hysteria that demands that someone listen when so few are.
*
The vote in New York sends a strong message to Catholic leadership. The danger is not in the vote itself. The danger they face is far deeper -- a crisis of leadership and authority for which they have only themselves to blame.

Thursday Male Beauty

The Depressing Lack of LGBT Employment Protections

Click map to enlarge.

As the map above from Think Progress reveals, it is still dangerous to be an LGBT employee in the vast majority of states (the map doesn't reflect recent victories for transgender protections in Hawaii, Nevada, and just yesterday, Connecticut). What makes the issue so disturbing is that a vast majority of voters believe that LGBT employees enjoy non-discrimination protections when in fact we do not. Bishop Robinson sees supporting LGBT equality as a matter of Christian principle and has stated the following:

*

The scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are filled with admonitions that we will be judged by the way we treat our most vulnerable members. For Christians and Jews, God is described as having a special concern for the poor, the marginalized, and the vulnerable. We are morally bound to take special care to protect those who are so marginalized. I believe that in our time, it is gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people who are the marginalized deserving of civil protections. Surely, in this great nation, we can at least do that much.

*
Unfortunately, until special deference and privileges cease to be given to the most hate-filled and intolerant form of Christianity practiced by the modern day Pharisees of the Christian Right, what Robinson calls for will not happen. Certainly not in a hater's paradise like Virginia.

The Three Fundamentalisms of the American Far Right

A column in Salon follows the evolution of the far right in America from the post WWII years through today analyzes how we've come to such batshit craziness and irrationality which has now taken over the Republican Party for the most part. The irony in the piece is that it looks at the evolution - using a concept that much of the far right refuses to believe in despite scientific evidence to support evolution. But then, that's part and parcel with the fundamentalism that has replaced facts and reason. Just look at the GOP Congressional leadership to see how little objective facts and reasoning have evaporated from the scene in the GOP. Much of the drift to irrational insanity not surprisingly flows from the fundamentalism and ignorance by choice of the Christianist faction within the GOP which in my view is like a metastasizing cancer. Here are some highlights:
*
In contradiction to the hostility to Darwinism shared by many of its constituents, the American right is evolving rapidly before our eyes. The project of creating an American version of Burkean conservatism has collapsed. What has replaced it is best described as triple fundamentalism -- a synthesis of Biblical fundamentalism, constitutional fundamentalism and market fundamentalism.
*
Following World War II, the American right was a miscellany of marginal, embittered subcultures -- anti-New Dealers, isolationists, paranoid anticommunists, anti-semites and white supremacists. Russell Kirk and others associated with William F. Buckley Jr.'s National Review sought to Americanize a version of high-toned British Burkean conservatism.
*
The term "fundamentalism" originated in the early twentieth century as a description of reactionary evangelical Protestants in the U.S. who rejected liberal Protestantism and modern evolutionary science and insisted on the inerrancy of the Bible. . . . . once white Southerners captured the Republican party and the conservative movement, the High Church right that found Kirk and Buckley among its college of cardinals gave way to the political equivalent of the Foot-Washin’ Baptists.
*
The increasingly-Southernized American Right has transferred the fundamentalist Protestant mentality from the sphere of religion to the spheres of law and the economy. Protestant fundamentalism is now joined by constitutional fundamentalism and market fundamentalism.
*
In all three cases, the pattern is the same. There is the eternal Truth that never varies -- the will of God, the principles of the Founding Fathers, the so-called laws of the free market. There are the scriptures which explain the eternal truths -- the King James Bible, in the case of religious fundamentalism, the Constitution or the Federalist Papers, in the case of constitutional fundamentalism, and Friedrich von Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom in the case of market fundamentalism . . .
*
History, to the fundamentalist mind, is a story of original perfection, followed by betrayal and restoration. The early Christian church was perfect; it was corrupted and betrayed by medieval Catholicism; and it was restored to its original purity by radical Protestant reformers. In the same way, the American constitution was not a flawed compromise among rival states and factions, to be improved by later amendment, but a document of superhuman wisdom, created in a kind of secular Pentecost at Philadelphia in the summer of 1787.
*
Modern American market fundamentalism, too, is recognizably modeled on the fundamentalist Protestant version of church history . . . . the market fundamentalists pretend that the U.S. was governed by the laws of the market until Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal replaced capitalism with socialism . . .
*
Back when conservatism was orthodox and traditional, rather than fundamentalist and counter-revolutionary, conservatives could engage in friendly debates with liberals, and minds on both sides could now and then be changed. But if your sect alone understands the True Religion and the True Constitution and the Laws of the Market, then there is no point in debate. All those who disagree with you are heretics, to be defeated, whether or not they are converted.
*
The era of triple fundamentalism on the American right is bound to come to an end. Sooner or later, dogmatism and reality will collide, and it is not reality that will crumple like tinfoil. The only question is how much damage will be done to the American polity before the revolution of the saints fizzles out.
*
As I've noted often before, the extreme fundamentalism that we are seeing suggests to me severe emotional and psychological issues on the part of adherents who are absolutely terrified of (i) having to exercise independent thought and analysis and (ii) having their house of cards religious beliefs exposed as lies. This mental illness if you will makes members of the far right perfect victims for demagogues both in the pulpit and in Congress.

More Wednesday Male Beauty

Ninth Circuit Finally Halts DADT Enforcement

Better late than never as the saying goes. Today, the U. S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the stay that it had imposed to block the world wide injunction that was issued by U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States which blocked enforcement of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Frankly, the stay should never have been issued in my opinion. The immediate result is that the U. S. military must immediately cease enforcement of DADT while the wait continues for the Department of Defense and the White House to deliver the certifications needed to finally repeal DADT. The order lifting the stay can be found here. No doubt the Christo-fascists will have yet another conniption fit and whine about judicial tyranny. Metro Weekly has coverage on this development. Here are highlights:
*
In an order issued by a unanimous three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, U.S. District Court Judge Virginia Phillips's judgment halting the worldwide enforcement of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as a result of her decision in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States has been put back in effect.
*
DADT cannot be enforced, per the order, unless the government gets a stay of the order from either the full Ninth Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court pending an appeal of today's decision.
*
The three-judge panel -- Judges Alex Kozinski, Kim Wardlaw and Richard Paez -- decided to lift the appellate court's earlier stay of Phillips's order pending the appeal of the LCR case because, the judges write, "The circumstances and balance of hardships have changed, and appellants/cross-appellees can no longer satisfy the demanding standard for issuance of a stay."
*
Among the circumstances cited by the court are the July 1 filing in Karen Golinski's federal case seeking health insurance benefits for her wife and the related earlier Feb. 23 letter from Attorney General Eric Holder declaring that he and President Barack Obama had decided that heightened scrutiny applies to classifications -- such as DADT.
*
The judges also note that "the process of repealing Section 654 [-- the DADT law --] is well underway, and the preponderance of the armed forces are expected to have been trained by mid-summer." Smith echoed this fact, writing to Metro Weekly, "[I]mplementation of the DADT repeal voted by the Congress and signed in to law by the President last December is proceeding smoothly, is well underway, and certification is just weeks away."
*
In addition to lifting the stay, the Ninth Circuit set arguments on the appeal of the merits of the LCR case itself -- as opposed to the stay of Phillips's order pending the appeal, which was what the judges altered today -- for the week of Aug. 29. White House and Justice Department spokespersons did not respond to requests for comment.

Michele and Marcus Bachmann - More and More Questions

The questions about Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann and the extremist anti-gay views she shares with her husband, Marcus Bachmann, continue to multiply. Marcus Bachmann markets himself as a psychologist who provides "Christian counseling" at his practice, Bachmann & Associates. The Washington Post did a lengthy piece on July 6, 2011, on both Bachmann's history of anti-gay extremism and their joined at the hip mentality of opposing any and all civil rights for LGBT Americans. Pam Spaulding chimed into the mix a post raising serious ethical issues that seem to surround Marcus Bachmann's "Christian Counseling" practice in Lake Elmo and Burnsville, Minnesota. Adding even more fuel to the fire is Think Progress' story of Michelle Bachmann's 2004 endorsement of Focus on the Families utterly bogus and, in the view of the American Psychological Association's ("APA") view, unethical ex-gay ministry, Love Wins Out. While both Bachmann's are dodging questions on whether Bachmann & Associates offers ex-gay "reparative therapy" a lot of questions exist as to (1) the nature of Marcus Bachmann's credentials and (2) how he operates his practice without being licensed. A perusal of the Minnesota Revised Statutes reveals that state licensing is required for (1) psychologists, (2) marriage and family therapists, and (3) professional counselors. Yet, by all reports Marcus Bachmann holds no license. The obvious questions are how and why? Is this the type of "expert" Michele Bachmann would utilize were she to be elected to high office?

*
But Bachmann's lack of a license to practice isn't the only irregularity surrounding Marcus Bachmann professional qualifications. He apparently prefers to be referred to as "Dr. Bachmann." Coincidentally, from my years of following "family values" organizations, affixing "Dr." in front a supposed "expert's" name is a favored tactic to add credibility. The Post story and others indicate that Bachmann received his PhD from Union Graduate Institute in Ohio. While it's an apparently legally created institution, it's doctoral program in Psychology is NOT accredited by the APA which means its degree holders cannot be licensed in a number of states. Moreover, it specializes in limited residence and distance learning programs. That's right, it is NOT a traditional university offering typical doctoral education program.
*
Given these unanswered questions about Marcus Bachmann's practice and his unlicensed status, these thoughts raised in Pam Spaulding's post are most relevant:
*
Someone should publicly ask him to provide a copy of the informed consent that he has patients seeking to undergo "ex-gay" therapy sign. Informed consent is a legal procedure to ensure that a patient or client knows all of the risks and costs involved in a treatment. The elements of informed consents include informing the client of the nature of the treatment, possible alternative treatments, and the potential risks and benefits of the treatment.
*
For ex-gay therapy, the informed consent should tell a patient that "ex-gay" therapy is not proven, is considered "experimental", is not supported by research, that no medical or mental health association endorses it, that it could have harmful side effects including depression and suicidal ideation, and that change to heterosexuality is not likely. A good informed consent should also list alternative treatments and options, including learning to live life as a celibate homosexual or seeking gay affirmative therapy.
*
A good informed consent would inform a potential client that she/he could spend years and tens of thousands of dollars seeking "change" but would most likely continue to experience homosexual attractions for the rest of his/her life.
*
As for specifics of Michele and Marcus Bachmann's virulent anti-gay track records, here are highlights from the Washington Post story:
*
Michele Bachmann has called gay marriage “probably the biggest issue that will impact our state and our nation in the last, at least, 30 years.” In 2005, she ran screaming from a bathroom at a constituent forum, claiming that a lesbian had attempted to keep her there against her will. (The woman said she was merely questioning Bachmann about her position on gay marriage.) As a state senator, she was seen crouching behind hedges to observe a gay rights rally. (She has explained that she was checking the turnout.) Dr. Bachmann’s views on homosexuality have likewise earned him the ire of gay activists and liberal critics.
*
The Bachmann campaign declined to specifically address whether the couple’s clinic, set back amid serene ponds in an office park gauzy with floating dandelion seeds, engages in the practice of reparative therapy.
*
Both Bachmanns have warned that a greater acceptance of homosexuality could have grave social consequences. . . . In Dr. Bachmann’s interview with Point of View talk radio in 2010, he said that parents and authority figures have a responsibility not to allow homosexual feelings “to move into action steps” and warned that the rate of homosexuality in public schools would increase if it became tolerated with “full, wide-open doors.” Both Bachmanns have been supportive of Janet Boynes, the author of “Called Out: A Former Lesbian’s Discovery of Freedom.”
*
Think Progress adds this to the already disturbing picture of this frightening couple:
*
In 2004, as ex-gay proponents “Love Won Out” prepared to hold their annual conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota for those “struggling with unwanted homosexuality,” Bachmann not only lent a quote for the group’s press release but also “opened the conference with a greeting and blessing.”
*
Yes, criticism of Bachmann and her husband may rally the delusional elements of the GOP base to rally to he cause. However, it is critical that moderates and independents realize just how crazy and extreme Bachmann and her husband are in the beliefs and policy towards civil rights for all citizens.

Wednesday Male Beauty

Has the GOP Ceased to Be Normal?

The caption of this post is the question that David Brooks - hardly a flaming liberal by any definition - ask in a op-ed in the New York Times. Brooks takes a good look at the extremism and utter disregard for facts and/or the consequences of the fanaticism that are the hallmarks of a political party that once prided itself on reason and deliberative decision making. Many old school Republicans would be horrified to see what they party has become under the puppet strings of religious extremists, Tea Party demagogues and a leadership that doesn't give a damn about the good of the country. Yes, there are still a few sane voices to be heard, but I truly do not know how they can bring the party back to the world of the rational world where objective facts matter. Here are highlights from Brooks' column:
*
If the Republican Party were a normal party, it would take advantage of this amazing moment. It is being offered the deal of the century: trillions of dollars in spending cuts in exchange for a few hundred billion dollars of revenue increases.
*
A normal Republican Party would seize the opportunity to put a long-term limit on the growth of government. It would seize the opportunity to put the country on a sound fiscal footing. It would seize the opportunity to do these things without putting any real crimp in economic growth.
*
This, as I say, is the mother of all no-brainers. But we can have no confidence that the Republicans will seize this opportunity. That’s because the Republican Party may no longer be a normal party. Over the past few years, it has been infected by a faction that is more of a psychological protest than a practical, governing alternative.

The members of this movement do not accept the logic of compromise, no matter how sweet the terms. If you ask them to raise taxes by an inch in order to cut government by a foot, they will say no. If you ask them to raise taxes by an inch to cut government by a yard, they will still say no. The members of this movement do not accept the legitimacy of scholars and intellectual authorities.
*
The members of this movement have no sense of moral decency. A nation makes a sacred pledge to pay the money back when it borrows money. But the members of this movement talk blandly of default and are willing to stain their nation’s honor. The members of this movement have no economic theory worthy of the name.
*
Over the past week, Democrats have stopped making concessions. They are coming to the conclusion that if the Republicans are fanatics then they better be fanatics, too. The struggles of the next few weeks are about what sort of party the G.O.P. is — a normal conservative party or an odd protest movement that has separated itself from normal governance, the normal rules of evidence and the ancient habits of our nation.
*
If the debt ceiling talks fail, independents voters will see that Democrats were willing to compromise but Republicans were not. If responsible Republicans don’t take control, independents will conclude that Republican fanaticism caused this default. They will conclude that Republicans are not fit to govern. And they will be right.

Will Obama's Failure to Demand a Reckoning On the Part of Wall Street Doom His Re-election?

Since his departure, I've missed Frank Rich's column's in the New York Time. Now, in New York Magazine Rich has another must read column that takes Barack Obama to task for his refusal/failure to demand consequences from those who drove the USA into the Great Recessions through their greed and wanton carelessness: Wall Street and the financial industry. These interests have been largely bailed out at taxpayer expense, have shared little or nothing with homeowners and average Americans, and are among those reaping higher and higher incomes while the rest of us face income declines or outright unemployment. I agree with Rich's analysis. Sadly, I do not believe that Obama has the backbone to do what is needed and to properly use the pulpit of the presidency to take on the disingenuous GOP. Here are some highlights:

*
What haunts the Obama administration is what still haunts the country: the stunning lack of accountability for the greed and misdeeds that brought America to its gravest financial crisis since the Great Depression. There has been no legal, moral, or financial reckoning for the most powerful wrongdoers. Nor have there been meaningful reforms that might prevent a repeat catastrophe. Time may heal most wounds, but not these. Chronic unemployment remains a constant, painful reminder of the havoc inflicted on the bust’s innocent victims. As the ghost of Hamlet’s father might have it, America will be stalked by its foul and unresolved crimes until they “are burnt and purged away.”
*
As the indefatigable Matt Taibbi has tabulated, law enforcement on Obama’s watch rounded up 393,000 illegal immigrants last year and zero bankers. The Justice Department’s bally­hooed Operation Broken Trust has broken still more trust by chasing mainly low-echelon, one-off Madoff wannabes.
*
Those in executive suites at the top of that chain have long since fled the scene with the proceeds, while bleeding shareholders, investors, homeowners, and ­cashiered employees were left with the bills. . . . . Rather than purge the crash’s crimes, Wall Street’s leaders are sticking to their alibi: Everyone was guilty of fomenting this “perfect storm,” and so no one is. Too-big-to-fail banks are bigger than ever, and ­Masters of the Universe swagger is back.
*
As good times roar back for corporate America, it’s bad enough that CEOs are collectively sitting on some $1.9 trillion in cash—much of it parked out of the IRS’s reach overseas—instead of hiring. . . . But what’s most galling is how many of these executives are sore winners, crying all the way to Palm Beach while raking in record profits and paying some of the lowest tax rates over the past 50 years.
*
Obama can win reelection without carrying 10021 or Greenwich in any case. The bigger political problem is that a far larger share of the American electorate views him as a tool of the very fat-cat elite that despises him. Given Obama’s humble background, his history as a mostly liberal Democrat, and his famous résumé as a community organizer, this would also seem a reach. But the president has no one to blame but himself for the caricature.
*
He stocked his administration with brilliant personnel linked to the bubble: liberals, and especially Ivy League liberals. Nearly three years on, they have taken a toll both on the White House’s image and its policies. Obama arrives at his reelection campaign not merely with a weak performance on Wall Street crime enforcement and reform but also with a scattershot record (at best) of focusing on the main concern of Main Street: joblessness.
*
His failure to push back against the financial sector, sparing it any responsibility for the economy it tanked, empowered it to roll over his agenda with its own. He has come across as favoring the financial elite over the stranded middle class even if, in his heart of hearts, he does not.
*
By failing to address that populist anger, Obama gave his enemies the opening to co-opt it and turn it against him. Which the tea party did, dishonestly but brilliantly, misrepresenting Obama’s health-care-reform crusade as yet another attempt by the elites to screw the taxpayer. (The Democrats haplessly reinforced the charge with marathon behind-the-scenes negotiations with insurance and pharmaceutical-­industry operatives.)
*
Obama is the chief executive. It’s his fault, no one else’s, that he seems diffident about the unemployed. Each time there’s a jolt in the jobless numbers, he and his surrogates compound that profile by farcically reshuffling the same clichés, from “stuck in a ditch” to “headwinds” (first used by Geithner in March 2009—retire it already!) to “bumps in the road.”
*
There’s not much Obama can do to alter the economy by 2012, given the debt-ceiling fight, the long campaign, and nihilistic Capitol Hill antagonists opposed to any government spending that might create jobs and, by extension, help Obama keep his own. But the central question before the nation couldn’t be clearer: Who pays? The taxpayers bailed out the elite; now it’s the elite’s turn to return the favor. Massive cuts to the safety net combined with scant sacrifice from those at the top is wrong ethically and politically. It is, in the truest sense, un-American. . . . You have to wonder why he [Obama] isn’t seizing the moment to articulate and fight for the big picture instead of playing a lose-lose game of rope-a-dope with the Republicans on their budgetary turf.
*
To differentiate himself from the discredited Establishment, he will have to mount the fight he has ducked for the past three years. The alternative is a failure of historic proportions. Those who gamed the economy to near devastation—so much so that the nation turned to an untried young leader in desperation and in hope—would once again inherit the Earth. Unless and until there’s a purging of the crimes that brought our president to his unlikely Inauguration Day, much more in America than the second term of his administration will be at stake.

More Tuesday Male Beauty

Brad Pitt'sLatest Statement on Marriage Equality

I will confess that I have been a fan of Brad Pitt ever since I first saw him on the big screen. His social consciousness and philanthropic endeavors certainly help seal the deal. The icing on the cake is his strong stance on marriage equality. Pitt has released the following statement to People magazine in the wake of the New York marriage equality vote on June 24th. Here is the statement:

*
"It is encouraging that New York has joined the movement to grant equal marriage rights to its citizens. But it is each American's Constitutional right to marry the person they love, no matter what state they inhabit. No state should decide who can marry and who cannot. Thanks to the tireless work of so many, someday soon this discrimination will end and every American will be able to enjoy their equal right to marriage."
*
Pitt has previously stated that he and Angelina Jolie will not get married until everyone had the same right.

Trial of Larry King Murderer to Begin

At long last the trial of Brandon McInerney, the 14 year old who brought a gun to school with premeditation and shot classmate Larry King in the back of the head, is about to begin. In a display of just how sleazy and unethical some criminal defense attorneys can be, McInerney's attorneys plan on possibly using a "gay panic defense." A defense that even though bogus requires a "in the heat of the moment" context. Never mind that McInerney planned ahead, brought a gun to school, positioned himself directly behind King during a morning computer class and fired twice into the back of Larry King's head. Frankly, in my opinion, if defense counsel try that shameless defense, disbarment would be to lenient a punishment. The Los Angeles Times looks at the upcoming trial and has these highlights:
*
When he was just 14, Brandon McInerney walked into an Oxnard classroom, took his seat, pulled a .22-caliber handgun out of his backpack and shot the student sitting in front of him. Then he tossed the weapon to the floor and walked out. The victim, Lawrence King, was an openly gay student who McInerney reportedly thought had a crush on him.
*
Prosecutor Maeve Fox says she will outline a straightforward case in opening arguments set to begin Tuesday in a Chatsworth courtroom. The Oxnard teenager carefully planned and carried out the Feb. 12, 2008, execution of his eighth-grade classmate, she said. He brought a gun to school, positioned himself directly behind King during a morning computer class and fired twice into the back of the 15-year-old's head.
*
McInerney is being tried in adult court under the provisions of Proposition 21, which allows prosecutors to bring murder charges against juveniles as young as 14 for certain serious crimes. McInerney's lawyers, Scott Wippert and Robyn Bramson, say their client doesn't deny the killing. But they argue it was voluntary manslaughter because the adolescent was provoked by King's repeated sexual advances.
*
A voluntary manslaughter conviction would prevent a life sentence, Wippert said, making McInerney eligible for release before he's 40. Even a finding of second-degree murder would virtually assure that he wouldn't be eligible for parole until he was in his 70s, his lawyers said.
*
The defense could face a challenge in portraying McInerney as a naive youth. At the time of the shooting, he looked young and sweet-faced. In court recently, the defendant was a tall, lanky young man dressed in crisp Oxford shirts and khaki pants.

Will Marcus Bachmann Be a Gift the Keeps on Giving?

While some Democrats have issued statements to the effect that commentators such as me should cease speculation about the possibility that Marcus Bachmann might be a closed gay - never mind that his lisp makes most drag queens sound uber-butch - it increasing looks as if Marcus "Gays are Barbarians" Bachmann may be a source of other ongoing embarrassment to his unhinged wife. You know, little things like running a clinic without a license, receiving lots of Medicaid money and sucking up federal agriculture subsidies like a bloated hog. Things that go a good way towards exposing Michele Bachmann as a hypocrite. Politico and Time magazine both have articles that look at the liability Marcus Bachmann may yet become for his wife a/k/a Crazy Eyes. First these highlights from Politico:
*
Now the question is how much influence he will have on her presidential prospects. Already, his clinic has come under fire for taking Medicaid payments, but there are more questions surrounding the Christian-centric therapy. Among them are Marcus Bachmann’s credentials: He is not registered with any of the three boards that certify mental health practitioners and professions in the state. The Minnesota Board of Psychology and the Board of Marriage and Family Therapy confirmed to POLITICO that Bachmann is not licensed with them. And a search of the Board of Behavioral Health and Therapy license database returns no result.
*
Trisha Stark, of the Minnesota Psychological Association, said that the title “clinical therapist” is not widely used in professional circles and that Bachmann is able to operate his clinic because of state rules regarding mental health practice. “Minnesota is one of the only states in which you can practice mental health without a license,” Stark said. The Bachmann and Associates office declined to comment on his professional credentials, and the campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
*
But it gets better as described in the Time article which includes these highlights:
*
There’s also been controversy over Bachmann’s use of government subsidies, which cuts against his wife’s Tea Party message. Marcus’ unlicensed clinical practice has received roughly $30,000 in state funds, according to public records, and NBC News reports that it has taken $137,000 in Medicaid payments since 2005. There’s also the issue of Marcus Bachmann’s family’s farm, which has benefited from some $260,000 in agriculture subsidies.
*
This kind of baggage might not have meant much in Bachmann’s bids for Minnesota State Senate or the 6th District House seat, but it is getting more attention now that she’s under presidential-level scrutiny. As a rare “First Gentleman” prospect, Marcus Bachmann is liable to be treated with more interest and intensity than many other candidates’ spouses.

NOM and Its Spokesmen Are Skating on Legal Thin Ice

Time and time again the Christianists - and in my view that includes the Catholic Church hierarchy - believe that they are above law. Indeed, the rule of law applies to everyone else, not them. In fact, they constantly claim special rights not given to anyone else even as they accuse others of doing what they are guilty of themselves. A perfect example of this arrogant mindset is the National Organization for Marriage ("NOM") which in state after state refuses to comply with election finance disclosure laws. NOM needs to either be shut down or forced to comply with the same disclosure laws as everyone else. And if NOM refuses to comply, then put its leadership behind bars or at a minimum fine the living Hell out of them (Yikes! Imagine how immensely fat Maggie Gallagher would look in horizontal stripes!). Fred Karger has a column at Alan Colmes' blog that lays out the case against NOM. Here are highlights:
*
Poor Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown; what a sad couple. The front group they run for the Mormon and Catholic Churches, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), is under an active investigation for money laundering in Maine. This investigation by the State Attorney General and the Maine Ethics Commission has been underway for nearly two years, because NOM likely believes that it is above the law.
*
Well, one or both of these alleged lawbreakers could end up in prison if there was “intent” when they decided not to report the source of the $1.9 million that they raised to take away Maine’s marriage equality law back in November 2009.
*
You see, they decided not to report the names of any of their donors as required under Maine’s election law. That must be because they promised their contributors that their names would be kept “secret” in dozens of emails that I turned over to that state’s Ethics Commission.
*
Maggie and Brian are now threatening to spend $2 million to defeat the four Republican State Senators in New York who absolutely did the right thing and voted for gay marriage just 10 days ago. Wonder if they plan on laundering that money, too? NOM has sued 23 states to invalidate their election laws so they can bully anyone who goes against them, and they do it with secret money.
*
Maggie and Brian, you lost in New York, Washington, DC, New Hampshire, Vermont, Connecticut and Massachusetts. The tide has turned against you and your secret backers. The public has turned on you, too. Polls show a majority of Americans support marriage equality and the support keeps growing. So before the ice breaks beneath you two, if you’re so concerned about marriage, why don’t you tackle the growing divorce rate, and leave happy gay and lesbian couples alone?

Tuesday Male Beauty

Will GOP Congressional Freshman Be Short Timers?

I've noted before that the Republican Party has created two Frankenstein monsters that plague the party and which may well be it eventual undoing: the Christianist faction and the so-called Tea Party. Neither of these factions deal in facts and an objective reality and sooner or later the short term advantages of embracing these poisonous groups will likely have a very real negative consequence. In the short term, as an article in the New Times notes, the current class of GOP freshman in the House of Representatives may be unseated - often by someone even more untethered from reality than the current crop of GOP loons. But for the danger the trend bodes for the country in the short term, there would almost be some perverse pleasure to be had in watching the self-demolition play out. Here are some article highlights:
*
WASHINGTON — Just when freshman House Republicans have finally learned their way to the Cannon Caucus Room, how to vote on a motion to proceed and which commissary serves the best tuna sandwiches, someone back home — worse, someone from their own party — wants to take it all away.
*
It is miles to go before the 2012 Congressional races begin in earnest, but already some of the 87 freshmen who helped the Republicans win back the House last year are bracing for a challenge from within the party. At least half a dozen potential primary challengers to freshmen are considering a run, and there is heated chatter about more.
*
In some ways, the freshmen are responsible for their own predicament. Many won their seats after successfully challenging establishment Republicans in primaries . . . . Now, to some of the impatient and ideological voters who sent them to Washington to change things, the new House members may be seen as the establishment, and they face the disconcerting prospect of immediately defending themselves in the political marketplace.
*
[G]roups aligned with the Tea Party movement, which helped push many new-to-politics candidates into House seats, are disenchanted with some of their new hires and are pondering if they can raise the money, and the firepower, to find someone to take them on. “I do think it is going to be more competitive,” said Jenny Beth Martin, a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots. “With the freshmen who claim to be Tea Party or claim to support the ideas of the Tea Party movement but haven’t kept their promise, I think it will be tough for them.”

How Do We Restore Civics/History Education?

I often bemoan the sad state of knowledge of history and the structure of the government in this country - a state of affairs that plays directly into the hands of demagogues of the Christian Right, the so-called Tea Party, and of course the Republican Party. A piece in the Daily Beast laments that less than half of the American public can name a single Supreme Court justice, yet more than 80 percent of Americans know Michael Jackson sang “Beat It” and “Billie Jean.” And that's but one example of the idiocy that is all too pervasive. How can one make even a remotely informed vote when they don't know how the system is supposed to work, who people are, and where places are in the world? Yet, that is what the USA is faced with. Former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is working with the U. S. Department of Education in the hope of addressing the problem. Here are some highlights of why O'Connor believes we need to retool our education system:
*
As families gather to celebrate Independence Day, it is time to rethink the notion that civics instruction is less than vital in the global economy of the 21st century. . . . . we believe it is a great mistake to push civics to the sideline in schools. From the dramatic uprisings for democracy in the Mideast to the tragic shootings in Tucson at a Congress on Your Corner event, Americans have been reminded once again that freedom matters—and that informed citizens are the lifeblood of democracy.
*
Unfortunately, a staggering number of Americans today know dismayingly little about the basic history and traditions of our democracy. . . . . Nationwide, more than a third of all high school seniors today lack even basic civics knowledge and skills. High school seniors that score below the basic level cannot, for example, describe the structure and functions of American government or identify an activity that is a part of civic life.
*
Not surprisingly, civic ignorance has current consequences. In February, a Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that nearly half of the public was either unsure if the health-care law was still the law of the land or mistakenly believed it had been repealed.
*
A number of organizations are leading the way to producing the next generation of civics instruction. iCivics, founded by Justice O’Connor, offers web-based education projects and an array of interactive games and activities that students can use in class or at home.
*
While civics education needs to be reinvigorated and updated, its mission remains largely unchanged. The founders, from George Washington to Thomas Jefferson, understood that informed citizens were a bulwark against tyranny and vital to a functioning democracy. When the founding fathers exited Independence Hall after drafting the Constitution, a woman asked Benjamin Franklin, “What have we got—a republic or a monarchy?” “A republic,” Franklin replied, “if you can keep it.”
*
When done well, civics education in fact equips students with the very skills they need to succeed in the 21st century—the ability to communicate effectively, to work collectively, to hone critical questions, and to appreciate diversity. . . . a world-class education requires a well-rounded curriculum. Civics learning is essential to ensuring that future generations will keep our republic and nourish the freedoms to help America move forward. In 2011, a strong foundation in civics is not a luxury but a necessity.

More Monday Male Beauty

Marcus Bachmann's Silver Daddy's "Profile"

Someone obviously has a great sense of humor and, after hearing Michele "Crazy Eyes" Bachmann's lisping husband ranting about gays being "barbarians," it doesn't seem all that improbable that good old Marcus in his heart is lusting for some hot man on man action. The photo above is via Joe.My. God. This is the link to Bachmann's faux profile which reads in part as follows:

*

Hi, I am a fun over-forty flamer who just wants to try IT ALL! I'm looking for some CRUDE BARBARIANS who will put me in my place, honey! Spank me, Spank me, and don't forget to thank me! I am just a "gal" who can't say no! Professionally I am a psychologist, which is funny because I am really into "mind games". My hobbies include doing Ethel Merman imitations, antiquing, and wearing my wife's clothes when she isn't around! If any of this interests you, please "ring my bell"! I'll have lots of time on my hands as my wife Michelle will be traveling a lot this year!

Parents of Gay Soldiers Become Crusaders for Same-Sex Marriage in Minnesota

I wrote about some time ago about Andrew Wilfahrt - the first known gay soldier killed in Afghanistan since Barack Obama signed legislation for the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Now, with the Christofascists seeking to pass an anti-gay marriage amendment to the Minnesota Constitution, Wilfahrt's parents (pictured at their first gay pride event) have become activists in the effort to defeat the hateful amendment and have gone very public about their feelings. CNN has a lengthy article on their activism and their belief that what they are doing is about defending the state Constitution and protecting the rights of all citizens. Jeff Wilfahrt skipped a recent White House tea with the first lady held for families of service members. He wanted to send a message to the Obama administration: My son gave his life for his country, yet didn't have full rights back home. Now, that's what a fierce advocate does - not just pretty words like all too often are all we see from the White House. I recommend reading the full story. Here are some highlights:
*
Cpl. Andrew Charles Wilfahrt, 31, is believed to be the first gay U.S. soldier to die in battle since President Obama signed the repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," the policy forcing gays in the military to hide that part of their lives or risk being kicked out. He was also among the smartest in the half-million force, scoring a perfect score on his aptitude test, a feat the Army says is rare.
*
Andrew was so well-liked his comrades named a combat outpost for the soldier with the infectious smile. COP Wilfahrt sits 6 kilometers from Kandahar. To his buddies, it is not named for a gay soldier, but for one who fought with valor. . . . Andrew never denied his sexuality. But like so many, he struggled with what it means to be gay in America.
*
[W]ith his death, his parents have taken up the cause of gay rights. Andrew fought for his nation in a foreign land. His parents' war is being waged in their home state of Minnesota. To them, it's about defending the Constitution -- protecting the rights of all citizens.
*
The Wilfahrts have the milquetoast looks of middle-age Midwesterners: gray hair, rimmed glasses, apple-pie ordinary. Yet make no mistake: These lifelong Minnesotans might be the most powerful force to join the same-sex marriage movement.
*
In a state that has produced GOP presidential hopefuls Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty -- who have made careers fighting gay marriage -- these parents of an American hero present a major challenge to the establishment. They'll take their battle to the Supreme Court, if that's what it takes. To the Wilfahrts, denying gays the right to marry is discrimination against a group to which their son belonged.
*
" ... I hope my son didn't die for human beings, for Americans, for Minnesotans who would deny him civil rights." On this day, in the grandstands of the pride parade, the Wilfahrts will celebrate their son's identity as both a gay man and a soldier. It's the type of event that would stun Bachmann and Pawlenty: More than 100,000 gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgenders and straights gathered in their home state, celebrating life and obeying the law.
*
Republican Rep. John Kriesel, who lost his legs while serving in Iraq, sent Andrew's photo around the floor during debate in the Minnesota House. A few years ago, he said, he would have defined marriage as solely between heterosexuals. But his military service changed that. "This amendment doesn't represent what I went to fight for," he told lawmakers.
*
"I cannot look at this family and look at this picture and say, 'You know what, Corporal, you were good enough to fight for your country and give your life, but you were not good enough to marry the person you love.' I can't do that."
*
None of his comrades cared about his sexuality. And, guys being guys, they cracked gay jokes around Andrew. His response: to laugh with them. He said it was funny that he talked more about his sexuality with his band of brothers than he ever had with gay friends.
*
Four months after their son's death, Jeff and Lori sit at the kitchen table, the place where Lori says "a lot has gone down." They both say the Army's been good to them. They don't feel anger, except as Jeff puts it, for "those f--kers at the Capitol" who voted against same-sex marriage.
*
Shortly after Andrew's death, Jeff wrote a letter to his son's comrades. "A gay child will take you to places in your heart you did not know existed," he said. "Regardless of orientation, I beseech all of you who are parenting now, or do so in the future, to give them all the love you can muster. At times it feels like you are bailing the ocean, but do not stop loving your children."
*
Jeff's greatest regret is not hugging his son when he first told him he was gay. "This is how it is for an old fool of a man. This moment is the burden I carry."
*
They want people to know their son wasn't a "gay soldier." He was a great soldier who happened to be gay. Above all, he was a citizen.
*
The irony is, of course, that from all I have read about him, Andrew Wilfahrt was a far better man and human being than those in the Minnesota legislature for the noxious anti-gay amendment. His parents have just reason to be proud of him and I applaud their efforts. Like their son, they are heroes. The true villians are the anti-gay bigots who need to denigrate and dehumanize others so that they can feel superior in their own shallow, miserable lives.

Catholic Church in New York and Rhode Island Continues Its Anti-Gay Jihad

The child rapist protectors in the bishoprics in New York and Rhode Island once again have underscored the lie that the Church treats LGBT Catholics with any semblance of respect or decency. Actions speak louder than words - especially disingenuous words. In Rhode Island, in the wake of the passage of civil unions for same sex couples in that state Thomas Tobin, Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Providence (at left), has barred gay Catholics from entering a civil union. Indeed, Tobin opposes ANY recognition of same sex relationships. The obvious question, of course, is what LGBT individual in their right mind would give a damn what the bitter hypocrites like Tobin have to say about any topic.
*
Things are not any better in New York State where homophobic Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio (below right) of the Diocese of Brooklyn has told officials at Catholic schools in his diocese to bar Andrew Cuomo and any legislators who helped pass New York’s new marriage law from speaking at their institutions. The truth is that Tobin and DiMarzio are putting nails in the lid of the coffin for the Catholic Church in terms of attracting younger generations to the Church. Yes, there will always be some who will drink the Kool-Aid, but more and more of these younger people see the Church for the unloving fossilized institution which it is. First these highlights from On Top Magazine concerning Rev. Tobin's bigotry:
*
Governor Lincoln Chafee on Saturday signed a civil unions bill into law, making Rhode Island the fifth after Illinois, New Jersey, Delaware and Hawaii to recognize gay and lesbian couples with civil unions. . . . . Even before Chafee signed the bill into law, Tobin released a statement criticizing it.
*
“I am deeply disappointed that Rhode Island will establish civil unions in our state,” he wrote at The Rhode Island Catholic. “The concept of civil unions is a social experiment that promotes an immoral lifestyle, is a mockery of the institution of marriage as designed by God, undermines the well-being of our family and poses a threat to religious liberty.” * Tobin, however, suggested he doesn't support any government recognition of gay couples, and barred gay Catholics from entering a civil union.
*
"[T]he Church reminds its members that homosexual activity is contrary to the natural law and the will of God and, therefore, is objectively sinful. Persons with same-sex attraction are required to live the Christian virtues of chastity and modesty, as all persons are.”
*
“Because civil unions promote an unacceptable lifestyle, undermine the faith of the Church on holy matrimony, and cause scandal and confusion, Catholics may not participate in civil unions. To do so is a very grave violation of the moral law and, thus, seriously sinful.
*
In my view, Tobin can go do something rude and crude to himself. Would that Tobin and his cohorts cared as much about ridding the Church of predator priests and those who protect them. It's members of the Church hierarchy like him that make me ever so grateful that I left the Catholic Church over a decade ago. As for the hate and batshitery in Brooklyn, Newsmax.com has this:
*
Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of the Brooklyn Diocese has told officials at Catholic schools to bar Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo and legislators who helped pass New York’s new law allowing same-sex marriages from speaking at their institutions. DiMarzio also wants the schools to reject any honors or awards that Cuomo, who is a Catholic himself, or the legislators might offer them.
*
“Republicans and Democrats alike succumbed to powerful political elites and have passed legislation that will undermine our families and, as a consequence, our society,” the bishop said in a statement. “With this vote, Governor Cuomo has opened a new front in the culture wars that are tearing at the fabric of our nation.”
*
If anyone is perpetrating the flames of the so-called culture wars it's bitter old men like DiMarzio who cling to a 13th century level of knowledge of science and sexuality and a book - the Bible - that has been shown to be riddled with historical errors and untruths.