Mortgage Debt Is Snowballing

Several commentators have argued that the Democrats need to do more to tie the home mortgage debacle sweeping the country to the GOP and its policies of decreasing regulation, apparently believing that the fox would properly police the hen house. I believe they are correct and someone needs to get the blame for this disaster which is dragging down the entire economy and pushing more and more businesses to the brink financially. As this New York Times story indicates, the problem of loan defaults and plummeting home values is getting worse - much worse. It is becoming a downward spiral that keeps going as values fall and more homeowners find themselves owing more on their mortgages than their homes are now worth. Also note, that it is the Republicans who are opposing legislation to try to help the very bad situation. It their view, it is fine to bail out the fat cats on Wall Street, but to Hell with regular Americans (Senators DeMint and Bunning from the South probably think the borrowers in distress are members of minorities, so why help them. Only white evangelicals count). Here are some highlights:

*

When Congress started fashioning a sweeping rescue package for struggling homeowners earlier this year, 2.6 million loans were in trouble. But the problem has grown considerably in just six months and is continuing to worsen. More than three million borrowers are in distress, and analysts are forecasting a couple of million more will fall behind on their payments in the coming year as home prices fall further and the economy weakens.

*

Those stark numbers not only illustrate the challenges for the lawmakers trying to provide some relief to their constituents but also hint at what the next administration will be facing after the election. While the proposed program would help some homeowners, analysts say it would touch only a small fraction of those in trouble — the Congressional Budget Office estimates it would be used by 400,000 borrowers — and would do little to bolster the housing market.

*
“It’s not enough, even in the best of circumstances,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody’s Economy.com. The number of people who will be helped “is going to be overwhelmed by the three million that are headed toward default.” The bill would let lenders and borrowers refinance troubled mortgages into more affordable 30-year fixed-rate loans that are backed by the government. Democratic leaders say Congress could send something to the president next month. The White House, which initially threatened to veto the measure, has indicated that it is open to supporting the bill if certain provisions are removed.

*

Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts and a central force behind the legislation, said on Friday that recent reports about falling home prices have rallied support for the plan. But he acknowledged that the plan may not do enough to help homeowners or the housing market. Mr. Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said that even after a bill like this, “you may need more.”

*

But not everyone supports government interventions. Some Republicans, like Senators Jim DeMint of South Carolina and Jim Bunning of Kentucky, say the proposal would use government subsidies to bail out reckless lenders and borrowers. They suggest that the housing market will correct itself more quickly if Congress does not intervene.

*

[O]thers forecast that two million to three million mortgages will default — beyond the three million in trouble now — and economists at Lehman Brothers say home prices nationally may drop 15 percent by the end of 2009. That may force policy makers to consider further interventions.

More Saturday Male Beauty

Chimperator's Mindless Crusade in Iraq Continues to Make Us Less Safe

Just think what things might have been like if the USA had stayed focused on Afghanistan and weeding out the Taliban and Al-Qaeda rather than the Chimperator launching his hubris driven, hair brained crusade in Iraq. Besides the trillions of dollars that might have been saved and the thousands and thousands of lives - both American and Iraqi - that would not have been lost, the world and the USA might have actually been more safe and secure. But instead, the Chimperator thought he heard voices telling him what to do - would that the cretin had been removed from office and committed to a mental hospital somewhere. Now, as this story from the Globe and Mail suggests, things are continuing to go to Hell on a wider and wider scale with Pakistan (which has nuclear weapons) now in growing jeopardy. Here are some highlights:

*

PESHAWAR, PAKISTAN — Security around Peshawar, the provincial capital in northwest Pakistan, has been dramatically stepped up amid fears that the city could fall to heavily armed Islamic militants who have now massed around its outskirts. From three sides, Peshawar, which borders Pakistan's wild tribal belt, is menaced by Taliban groups and other warlords.

*
If Peshawar is taken over by extremists, the rest of the North West Frontier Province is also threatened, raising the possibility that religious fundamentalists may gain control of a state on Afghanistan's border. The drama in Peshawar reinforces existing doubts about the new Pakistani government's policy of pulling back the army and seeking peace deals with militants.

*

“[Central] government has not got to grips with the problem,” said one provincial government official who decline to be identified. “Things have moved fast and unpredictably. Last month we drew up a plan for the defence of Peshawar. We have a vast area to defend and our forces are thinly spread. They [the militants] have mobility and guerrilla tactics.”

*

Residents of Peshawar, a colourful city of three million, have become alarmed at developments in and around the city. Militants have started openly entering Peshawar to threaten businesses they disapprove of, such as music shops. Last week, a band loyal to warlord Mangal Bagh arrived in several pickup trucks in Peshawar and abducted a group of Christians. They were released after 12 hours.

Presbyterians Drop Gay Clergy Ban

This vote by the Presbyterians shows that gays are slowly winning the war, if you will, and I suspect more denominations will follow suit . The ELCA hopefully being one of them when it votes next year on a new statement on human sexuality, especially now that some of its sister churches in Europe are recognizing gay unions. It truly disgusts me that supposedly Christian people who ignore all kinds of other passages in the Bible continue to cling to a few passages to condemn and discriminate against gays, even as medical research shows more and more that one's sexual orientation is not some simple choice we make. Are these folks really so insecure in their own sexuality/identity that they must have others to look down upon? Thankfully, the younger generation is increasingly ignoring the bigotry of their elders and, in time, religious denominations will need to change or wither away. I know my own children and their freinds strongly disagree with anti-gay churches and will not attend them. Here are some highlights from 365gay.com:

*

The denomination's General Assembly, meeting in San Jose, Calif., voted 54 percent to 46 percent Friday to drop the requirement that would-be ministers, deacons and elders live in "fidelity within the covenant of marriage between and a man and a woman, or chastity in singleness." The proposed change to the church constitution requires approval from a majority the nation's 173 presbyteries, or regional church bodies - a yearlong process that has proven to be a barrier to similar efforts in the past.

*
Of equal importance to advocates on both side of the debate, the assembly also voted to allow gay and lesbian candidates for ordination to conscientiously object to the existing standard. Local presbyteries and church councils that approve ordinations would consider such requests on a case-by-case basis. That vote was an "an authoritative interpretation" of the church constitution rather than a change to it, so it goes into effect immediately. The interpretation supersedes a ruling from the church's high court, issued in February, that said there were no exceptions to the so-called "fidelity and chastity" requirement.

*

Jon Walton, co-moderator of the San Francisco-based Covenant Network of Presbyterians, which advocates a broader role for gays and lesbians, hailed the ordination votes Friday, calling it "a day we've been waiting almost 30 years to see happen." He also expressed hope church members can move forward together.

Saturday Male Beauty

Dobson v. Obama - Update

Earlier in the week I posted about blowhard James Dobson's verbal attacks on Barack Obama's Christianity and his hissy fit over the fact that Obama does not view the disingenuous, un-Christian Daddy D as the final authority on what religious beliefs are permissible. If Obama is guilty of selectively picking Bible passages, then he's a rank beginner compared to Dobson who uses the Bible to (1) line his own pockets with money and (2) denigrate and foster discrimination against others. No one, including Dobson gets to dictate to others what they must believe. We stilll have a constitutional right to freedom of religion, although Dobson clearly wants that right reserved only for those who follow him like mindless sheep. Thankfully, others see Dobson for the hypocrite that he is, including a fellow evangelical, Peter Wehner, who takes Dobson to task in a column in today's Washington Post. It doesn't get much more fun that watching one evangelical bash another evangelical. Here are highlights from Wehner's column:

*

As an evangelical and conservative who has deep concerns about Obama's policies and political philosophy, I nonetheless welcome such a statement by a leading Democrat. . . . Obama was doing what people like Dobson have long urged: making the public square more hospitable for people of faith and calling for a halt to their demonization. Obama made his case in ways I found to be respectful and authentic.

*

Dobson took particular umbrage, for at least one obvious reason, with this passage from Obama's speech: "And even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's, or Al Sharpton's? Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy?

*

Dobson was critical of Obama's biblical references here and suggested that he had set up a series of straw men to support his "confused theology." But as I understand him, Obama was pointing out why the words of Scripture do not provide a ready policy blueprint for modern American society. Indeed, many of us have grappled with how to arrive at a theologically informed and fair-minded reading of the Bible that takes its moral principles seriously without simplistically applying to our time the cultural norms of previous eras.

*

[Obama] was arguing that in a pluralistic nation like ours, politics depends on people of faith being able to persuade others based on common and accessible ground and appeals to reason -- which sounds entirely reasonable. . . . appeals to the Bible or church teaching aren't sufficient in a pluralistic nation.

*

There are certainly reasons for evangelicals to have concerns about Obama -- based on his extreme views on abortion, judicial nominees, Iraq (his plans for a precipitous withdrawal would probably trigger mass death and perhaps even genocide) and other issues. But critics of Obama have an obligation to provide a fair and honest critique, and the attacks leveled by Dobson fall terribly short of that standard.

Surfing Saturday

For the first time in weeks there were rideable waves at the ocean front in Virginia Beach. I met a surf buddy of mine and my office manager - she is learning to surf - at the beach early this morning and spent several hours in the water. Overall, it was gorgeous although we are still having smoke drift into this area from the wild fires in northeast North Carolina and in the Great Dismal Swamp which have been burning for over three weeks now. It was not too bad at the beach where I was (Croatan/Pendleton), but to the north the smoke was much heavier and one could barely see the high rise hotels in the main resort strip. I suspect some of the tourists were none too happy.

*

I think the beach early in the morning is when it's the most beautiful. This morning, the crowds had not yet arrived and it was mostly just the surfers in the water, the brown pelicans were flying in single file formations over the waves, and pods of dolphin were swimming around among the surfers. It's always amusing to me that the old guys are among the first surfers out in the morning and usually get the best waves. The young eye candy comes straggling in later, most likely after partying the night before. There were definitely some real lookers in the water as well as on the beach.

*

All in all, it was a great outing, although I can definitely feel the results of all the paddling in my shoulders and neck. But, I suspect I will rally so that I can go to The Wave for my weekly dancing/aerobic exercise workout. The picture below gives a sense of what this morning was like when I first arrived at the beach. To actually be able to see live images of the beach where I usually surf, go here (it takes the cam a few seconds to load). Looking at the cam now, it looks like we got the best of the waves this morning.

McCain Steps Up Pandering to Christianists

It's almost sad to see John McCain shamelessly pandering to the most lunatic elements of the Christian Right, particularly after the way the wingnuts screwed him over in 2000 and ended up setting the stage for the Chimperator and all the negatives of his hubristic regime. Now, McCain apparently - like some cheap prostitute or disingenuous rent boy - will say and do anything required to kiss the bigoted asses of the leaders of the Christian Right such as extreme gay-hater, Phil Burress, in order to get them to direct the sheeple to go out and vote for McCain come November. McCain's disgraceful pandering only re-enforces my analysis as to why any LGBT citizen voting for McCain needs mental health therapy. Here are some highlights from the Los Angeles Times describing McCain's latest steps to embrace the gay-haters:

*

CINCINNATI -- Sen. John McCain, who has struggled to win the trust of evangelical voters, met privately Thursday in Ohio with several influential social conservatives who have been critical of him -- and impressed them, while telling them only some of what they wanted to hear. . . . And, according to participants, he indicated that he would take seriously their requests that he choose an anti-abortion running mate and would talk more openly about his opposition to gay marriage -- a pledge he carried out later in the day by endorsing a ballot measure in California to ban gay marriage.

*

Many conservatives have been upset that McCain opposed a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, a position he said he took because he believes states should decide the issue. At the meeting, McCain sought to reassure conservatives by emphasizing his work on behalf of an anti-gay-marriage measure in his home state. He referred to that in his endorsement of the California initiative, lauding efforts to "recognize marriage as a unique institution between a man and a woman, just as we did in my home state of Arizona. I do not believe judges should be making these decisions."

*

McCain is scheduled to fly Sunday to Asheville, N.C., to meet privately with the Rev. Franklin Graham, son of Billy Graham. The younger Graham met this month with McCain's rival, presumptive Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama, who has launched his own effort to court skeptical evangelical leaders. McCain told the activists Thursday that he also hoped to meet with James C. Dobson, founder of the influential group Focus on the Family, who has said he would not vote for McCain. "The senator spoke fondly of him, but believes there's probably room for some bridge-building," said Mike Gonidakis, head of Ohio Right to Life.

*

Viars said she was "holding out" to see who McCain picks for his ticket before she decides whether to volunteer for the campaign, as she did for Bush.Others said McCain can't win evangelicals merely by meeting with them privately; he has to embrace them publicly. "We told him that if he didn't come out and share his pro-family stances on these issues, then he can kiss Ohio goodbye," Burress said. "We can't deliver his message for him."

Larry Craig and David Vitter Sponsor Bill To "Protect" Marriage

The Republicans have reached new levels of hypocrisy with the re-introduction of a proposed "Federal Marriage Amendment." The re-introduction of this legislation shows to what lengths the current GOP will go in order to pander to Christianists. As the Huffington Post notes, some of the sponsors are the same old gay-hating fruit cakes, but the surprising thing is that two less than paragons of marital virtue are also sponsors: Larry Craig and David Vitter. These two jerks go beyond being shameless and certainly are not exactly the poster boys for upstanding examples of the supposed sanctity of the ‘union of a man and a woman.” But then again, the GOP has increasing come to stad for nothing except hypocrisy. Here are highlights from HuffPo:

*

Just this week, a group of Republican senators re-introduced the Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution, which, as we know, would ban gay marriage. This isn't especially surprising. Republicans are looking at the political landscape, and they're feeling awfully discouraged. The polls look bad, the base looks depressed, and fundraising looks iffy. Rallying the far-right troops with an anti-gay amendment to the Constitution -- even though it has no chance at even getting so much as a hearing -- might be helpful to the conservative movement.

*

Most of the names are predictable -- Brownback and Inhofe, for example -- but there are two others whose names stand out: Sens. David Vitter (R-La.) and Larry Craig (R-Idaho). Yes, two of the principal sponsors of a constitutional amendment to "protect" marriage include one far-right Republican who hired prostitutes and another far-right Republican who was arrested for soliciting gay sex an airport men's room.

Is Dobson's Obama Hit Backfiring?

Time magazine has a new story entitled "Is Dobson's Obama Hit Backfiring?" and from the contents, it looks like the egotistical, homophobic, false Christian Dobson may have shot himself in the foot when he attacked Barack Obama earlier in the week. Moreover, the story suggests that people - including evangelicals - may, in fact, be waking up to the fact that Daddy Dobson does NOT represent as many Christians as he once did. While his insufferable ego is inflated as ever, Time did a story in January, 2008, that indicated that Dobson's Focus on the Family has been losing membership and had declining revenues for each of the last five years. One can only hope that more and more of the public will come to recognize Dobson and those like him for the mean spirited, hate-filled individuals that they are and that they are not a true Christian in light of their non-stop message of hate, intolerance and denigration of others. Here are some highlights from the new Time story:

*

After years of attacking Democrats with relative impunity for their supposed moral failings, Evangelical leader James Dobson surely didn't expect to suffer much of a backlash when he trained his sights on Barack Obama. . . . Earlier this week, Dobson used his popular Christian radio program to denounce a 2006 speech the Illinois senator gave about the place of religion in public life.

*

But less than 24 hours after Dobson's radio broadcast, www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com was up and running on the Web. The site displays both Dobson's charges against Obama and Obama's own quotes from the 2006 speech. It also features a statement condemning Dobson that reads in part: "James Dobson doesn't speak for me when he uses religion as a wedge to divide; he doesn't speak for me when he speaks as the final arbiter on the meaning of the Bible."

*

It's hard out there for a Christian Right leader. Last December came and went with barely a peep about a grinchy liberal "War on Christmas." The Republican nominee, John McCain, has refused to make the pilgrimage to Colorado Springs, telling the Focus on the Family leader to come to him instead. But the biggest problem is that Democrats —and Barack Obama in particular — are determined to make a play for a bloc of voters over whom Dobson and his colleagues have traditionally maintained exclusive control. And those voters seem willing to listen.

*

Just a few weeks earlier, the conservative columnist and former Moral Majority vice president Cal Thomas wrote an essay calling Obama a "false prophet." Placing Obama's "Christianity" in quotes, Thomas charged that the candidate's statements about religion — including his belief that non-Christians can get to heaven — prove that he does not understand what it means to be a Christian.
*
But if the grassroots reaction is any indication, the attacks on Obama have been largely self-defeating. After Thomas' column ran, dozens of regional papers that carry it were flooded with letters to the editor — and they were hardly in liberal bastions. In places like Augusta, Georgia, and Lubbock, Texas, people wrote in to criticize Thomas' attack on Obama. "To suggest that anyone is not a Christian because they do not adhere to Cal Thomas' narrow interpretation of what a Christian should believe," wrote one Texan, "is extremely intolerant, ignorant, and downright insulting."

More Friday Male Beauty

A McCain Presidency = LGBT Citizen's Nightmare

Meanwhile, John McCain continues to demonstrate that he should be regarded as every LGBT citizen’s worse nightmare and illustrates why, in my opinion, the Log Cabin Republicans who support him need some serious mental health care. Lately, McCain’s offered so many reasons for gays not to support him that it is almost difficult to know where to start. These positions on multiple issues make it clear that all LGBT Americans should be working diligently to make sure he is NOT elected come November. First, McCain has come out in support of the effort to amend the California Constitution to ban gay marriage. Here are highlights from PR Newswire on McCain’s support of the anti-gay initiative in California:
*
SACRAMENTO, Calif., June 26 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- United States Senator John McCain today announced his support for the California Protection of Marriage initiative on the state's November ballot, leaders of the ProtectMarriage.com campaign announced. In an email received by the ProtectMarriage.com campaign, Senator McCain issued the following statement: "I support the efforts of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution between a man and a woman, just as we did in my home state of Arizona. I do not believe judges should be making these decisions."
*
If that is not reason enough to fear a McCain presidency, then there are his views on what type of individual’s he would nominate to the U. S. Supreme Court. In his statements, McCain has idicated that he would nominate individuals like Roberts, Alito and Scalia. As Judith E. Schaeffer at Huffington Post notes, with more justices like Robert, Alito, Scalia and Thomas, gays would still be criminalized under the sodomy statutes and Lawrence v. Texas would have been decided very differently. Here are highlights from her column:
*
Many people probably don't recall much, if anything, about June 26, 2003, but I recall a great deal. That's because it's the day on which the Supreme Court issued one of its most important rulings in the area of individual rights and human dignity. In Lawrence v. Texas, a sharply divided Court struck down a Texas state law that prohibited consensual, private sex between adults of the same gender, a law that essentially made criminals out of gay men and lesbians. Five justices held that the law was an improper intrusion on the right to liberty guaranteed to everyone by the Constitution, effectively invalidating all state laws that invade the home to prohibit so-called sodomy.
*
But as significant as the Lawrence ruling was, I am mindful that four justices did not join Justice Kennedy's majority opinion. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who was part of the majority in Bowers (truly a low point in her judicial career as well), declined to join the majority in overruling that decision. She agreed, however, that the Texas "sodomy" law was unconstitutional, but only because it treated same-sex and opposite-sex couples differently.
*
Three justices dissented outright from the ruling in Lawrence: then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. Scalia and Thomas are still on the bench today. The late Chief Justice Rehnquist has been replaced by the equally ultraconservative John Roberts, while Justice O'Connor has been replaced by the extreme right-wing Samuel Alito. Counting the numbers, then, it's very clear that the constitutional protection of the essential human dignity of gay men and lesbians is hanging by a slender thread on the Supreme Court. John McCain has praised Justice Scalia and has also promised to put more justices like Roberts and Alito on the Court, which should be a consideration for any voter who cares about gay rights and the future of the Supreme Court.
*
Lastly, and as icing on the cake, there is McCain’s position on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The April, 2007, letter that McBush sent to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (a copy of a portion is set out below) said the1993 law, "unambiguously maintains that open homosexuality within the military services presents an intolerable risk to morale, cohesion and discipline.” The bottom line is that McCain is out of step with the direction of the country and/or a willing tool of the Talibangelicals (a great term a commentor used on Pam's House Blend). Here's the letter:

Decorated Army Sergeant Discharged Under Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Homo-hater, Elaine Donnelly, president of the so-called Center for Military Readiness, who in reality has no actual military expertise or experience herself (she is a former political appointee hack), is probably having an orgasm over this news story concerning how Darren Manzella, the Army Sergeant who appeared on 60 Minutes with Lesley Stahl to tell his story of coming out of the closet to his colleagues and commanding officer, and who served openly in Kuwait without incident, has now been discharged under DADT. Ms. Donnelly would much rather see the military issue waivers to convicted felons and waive minimum educational requirements in order to meet enlistment requirements as opposed to allowing qualified, competent, patriotic gays to serve in the nation’s military. Living in the Hampton Roads area with its huge number of military personnel, many of whom are gay and lesbian, underscores the idiocy of DADT which serves no true purpose other than to pander to the bigotry and hate of frigid looking bitches like Ms. Donnelly and obsessed closet cases like Robert Knight. Here are highlights from Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN)’s press release on the matter:
*
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Decorated Army Sergeant Darren Manzella has been discharged under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law banning lesbian, gay and bisexual Americans from military service, effective June 10. The Iraq war veteran was the first openly gay active duty service member to speak with the media while serving inside a war zone. In December 2007, Manzella was profiled by the CBS news magazine 60 Minutes. He told correspondent Lesley Stahl that he served openly during much of his time in the Army, with the full support of his colleagues and command.
*
“The discharge of battle-tested, talented service members like Sergeant Manzella weakens our military in a time of war. National security requires that Congress lift the ban on gays in the military and allow commanders to judge troops on their qualifications, not their sexuality,” said Adam Ebbin, Communications Director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN).
*
Sergeant Manzella said, “My sexual orientation certainly didn’t make a difference when I treated injuries and saved lives in the streets of Baghdad. It shouldn’t be a factor in allowing me to continue to serve.” Manzella, 30, enlisted in the U.S. Army in 2002 and was twice deployed to the Middle East in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. While under fire on the streets of Baghdad, he provided medical care to his fellow soldiers, Iraqi National Guardsmen and civilians. He was awarded the Combat Medical Badge, and also received several other awards recognizing his courage and service.

Friday Male Beauty

The Recession Is Just Beginning

For some time now (probably since last August or earlier) I have been predicting that a bad current economic downturn was coming due to the collapse of the U.S. Housing market and that despite all the statements from the Pollyanna set, that it was going to be long and ugly. Now, Washington Post business columnist, Steve Pearlstein is saying the same thing. In my view, until housing begins to turn around - or at least stabilize - things are only going to get worse. Despite this, Congress has yet to really wake up to the magnitude of the problem. In addition to homeowners on the verge of losing their homes, the impact of the housing collapse is having an ever wider ripple effect. Ask anyone in a business related to real estate and they will tell you that things are dire indeed. here are some highlights from Pearlstein's column:

*

So much for that second-half rebound. Truth be told, that was always more of a wish than a serious forecast, happy talk from the Fed and Wall Street desperate to get things back to normal. It ain't gonna happen. Not this summer. Not this fall. Not even next winter. This thing's going down, fast and hard. Corporate bankruptcies, bond defaults, bank failures, hedge fund meltdowns and 6 percent unemployment. We're caught in one of those vicious, downward spirals that, once it gets going, is very hard to pull out of.

*

In explaining why that second-half rebound never occurred, the Fed and the Treasury and the Wall Street machers will say that nobody could have foreseen $140 a barrel oil. As excuses go, blaming it on an oil shock is a hardy perennial. That's what Jimmy Carter and Fed Chairman Arthur Burns did in the late '70s, and what George H.W. Bush and Alan Greenspan did in the early '90s. Don't believe it.

*

American Express and Discover warn that customers are falling further behind on their debts. UPS and Federal Express report a noticeable slowdown in shipments, while fuel costs are soaring. According to the Case-Shiller index, home prices in the top 20 markets fell 15 percent in April from the year before, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac report that mortgage delinquency rates doubled over the same period -- and that's for conventional home loans, not subprime.

*

You know things are bad when middle-class Americans have to give up their boats and Brunswick, the nation's biggest maker of powerboats, is forced to close 10 plants and lay off 2,700 workers. For much of the year, optimists took comfort in the continuing strength of the technology sector and exports to fast-growing countries around the world. But even those bright spots have dimmed.

*

Like the rain-swollen waters of the Mississippi River, this sudden surge of downbeat news has now overflowed the banks of economic policy and broken through the levees of consumer and investor confidence. At this point, there's not much to do but flee to safety, rescue those in trouble and let nature take its course. And don't let anyone fool you: It will be a while before things return to normal.

Final Thursday Male Beauty

A Genetic Theory of Homosexuality

Slate, msn's online magazine, has an article that looks at some new research that indicated homosexuality may have a genetic basis and, moreover, it may play a roll in enhancing the fertility of women who have gay relatives. No doubt, Porno Pete LaBarbera, Daddy Dobson, and Robert Knight, among others, will be having violent fits and splattering spittle all around them at this news. God, forbid, gays might have a role in God's plan. Oh, but I forgot - the Christianists don't believe in science or evolution. Here are highlights from the Slate story:

*

Gay couples can't have biological kids together. So if homosexuality is genetic, why hasn't it died out? A study published last week in PLoS One tackles the question. It starts with four curious patterns. First, male homosexuality occurs at a low but stable frequency in a wide range of societies. Second, the female relatives of gay men produce children at a higher rate than other women do. Third, among these female relatives, those related to the gay man's mother produce children at a higher rate than do those related to his father. Fourth, among the man's male relatives, homosexuality is more common in those related to his mother than in those related to his father.

*

The theory is called "sexually antagonistic selection." It holds that a gene can be reproductively harmful to one sex as long as it's helpful to the other. The gene for male homosexuality persists because it promotes—and is passed down through—high rates of procreation among gay men's mothers, sisters, and aunts. . . . it does explain the high similarity of sexual orientation between identical twins, as well as patterns of homosexuality in families. It's also plausible because sexually antagonistic selection has been found in other species. And many scientists who think environmental and prenatal factors influence homosexuality also believe that genes play a role.

*

I don't know to what extent this theory will end up explaining male homosexuality. But its emergence threatens to change our thinking about gay men in several important ways.

*

The full scientific article can be found here.

Gay Dating - Or Why Are So Many Gay Guys Pigs?

It is a few weeks shy of one (1) year since I had my final altercation with my former long term partner and our relationship ended. After that night, we never lived under the same roof again. During most of the past almost year I have not dated at all other than a few times a month or two ago and that venture did not pan out. I've met one new guy since who seems quite wonderful, yet there are circumstances that raise questions as to whether there's a possible future on that front. Thus, a few times now I have posted a personal ad - which is actual how I met the guy that still might be a possibility - partly out of boredom and partly out of a blind hope/wishful thinking that Prince Charming is out there somewhere just waiting to discover me.

*

Perhaps it's because I'm direct by nature or maybe it's the attorney in me. In any event, I am pretty specific in my ad about what I want in a guy - intelligence, stability, honesty, a desire for monogamous commitment - and what I do not want in a guy - smokers, overweight guys, guys with facial hair, guys who would not accept that my children are and always will be a part of my life. I make it clear what I'm looking for because I don't want to waste my time on hopeless endeavors nor do I want to waste someone else's time. Some of the responses I have received are unbelievable, but NOT in a good way. They range from nasty expressions of wanting nasty, kinky anonymous sex to personal attacks on me for being "arrogant" for not wanting just anyone to in one case even foul comments about my children. Am I missing something, or is it wrong to have some standards? Likewise, if I say I want someone height and weight proportionate, am I unreasonable for not being pleased with responses from guys who are borderline obese or worse?

*

I truly do not get it. One jerk - the one who made comments about my children - even claimed that people like me (I assume with standards of what they want and who won't sleep with just anybody) "give the gay world a bad name." Funny, I thought it was guys - probably like the respondent - who are promiscuous and have constant random anonymous sex, use drugs, and have no values were the ones that gave us gays a bad image. Silly me. How could I be so confused? The straight world is fucked up in many ways and has its share of promiscuous sluts, but far too many gay guys seem to make those straights look pretty even keeled in comparison. In any event, my a portion of my response to this jerk was as follows:

*

If refusing to settle for guys who are (a) slobs who are fat and out of shape, (b) do not care what they look like, (c) promiscuous and have sex with anything breathing, (d) have the IQ of a fruit fly, makes me arrogant, then I'm guilty as charged. . . . . It's guys like YOU that give the gay world a bad name. You're probably pissed that I wouldn't give you the time of day and, I suspect, I'd be right in doing so.

*

Okay, my response wasn't very nice, but I sure felt better for it. You can insult me all you want, but take foul shots at my children, then you'd better look out. Meanwhile, I have no intention of "settling." After what I have been through in the coming out process (which has cost me hundreds of thousands of dollars not to mention much heartache and turmoil) I feel I am entitled to pick and choose who I want to have a relationship with. That said, Prince Charming, hurry the Hell up and find me!!

More Thursday Male Beauty

New Find Supports Evolutionary Biology Theories

The Washington Post has a story on a new find of a "missing link" type of creature that adds one more plank in support of the theory of evolution argument - not that facts and data mean anything to the hard core Christianist who could be struck in the head with a 2x4 and still not get the message. For those with some open mindedness to facts and logic, the discovery may have some relevance since the new fossil discovery of this primitive four-legged creature in Earth's history should help evolutionary biologists to better understand the evolution of fish to advanced animals that walk on land. Here are a few highlights:

*

The 365 million-year-old fossil skull, shoulders and part of the pelvis of the water-dweller, Ventastega curonica, were found in Latvia, researchers report in a study published in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature. Even though Ventastega is likely an evolutionary dead-end, the finding sheds new details on the evolutionary transition from fish to tetrapods. Tetrapods are animals with four limbs and include such descendants as amphibians, birds and mammals.

*

"At the time there were a lot of creatures around of varying degrees of advancement," Ahlberg said. They all seem to have similar characteristics, so Ventastega's find is helpful for evolutionary biologists. Ventastega is the most primitive of these transition animals, but there are older ones that are oddly more advanced, said Neil Shubin, professor of biology and anatomy at the University of Chicago, who was not part of the discovery team but helped find Tiktaalik, the fish that was one step earlier in evolution.

*

One question that scientists are trying to figure out is why fish started to develop what would later become legs. Edward Daeschler, associate curator of vertebrate zoology at the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, theorizes that the water was so shallow that critters like Ventastega had an evolutionary advantage by walking instead of swimming.

Obamacons and a Karl Rove Slap Down

I am often asked how I could ever have been a Republican. Given the current face of the demented and hate-filled base of today's GOP, it is an understandable question. However, the Party was not always dominated by people like James Dobson, John Hagee, et al. Rather Virginia's senior U.S. Senator, John Warner, former Senator John Danforth and many like them used to be the norm as opposed to the exceptions they have become in a Party that basically sold its soul to Christianists and amoral jerks like Karl Rove (who is further discussed below) who will say and do anything to win. Responsible positions, fiscal responsibility, recognition of the separation of church and state, and moderate social views once were wide spread. Unfortunately, such has not been the case for easily a decade which is why I and many moderates abandoned the party that had abandoned us.

*

The trend has intensified under the noxious regime of the Chimperator and his shameful effort to undermine the U. S. Constitution. The Party's current domination by the fraudulent, hate-filled, divisive Christianists has made the decision to defect all the easier. Hence the rise of the Obamacons - conservatives who cannot stomach the Republican Party in its present form. Robert Novak - not one of my favorite people, but sometimes a good observer - has a column in today's Washington Post that looks at the Obamacons and what they may mean for the GOP. Here are some highlights:

*

What is an "Obamacon?" The phrase surfaced in January to describe British conservatives entranced by Barack Obama. On March 13 the American Spectator broadened the term to cover all "conservative supporters" of the Democratic presidential candidate. Their ranks, though growing, feature few famous people. But looming on the horizon are two big potential Obamacons: Colin Powell and Chuck Hagel.
*

The Obamacon syndrome is based on hostility to Bush and his administration and on revulsion over today's Republican Party. The danger for McCain is that desire for a therapeutic electoral bloodbath could get out of control.

*

The prototypal Obamacon may be Larry Hunter, recognized inside the Beltway as an ardent supply-sider. . . . Explaining his support for the uncompromisingly liberal Obama, Hunter blogged on June 6: "The Republican Party is a dead rotting carcass with a few decrepit old leaders stumbling around like zombies in a horror version of 'Weekend With Bernie,' handcuffed to a corpse."

*

Obamacons -- little and big -- are reason for concern by McCain. They also should cause soul-searching at the Bush White House about who made the Republican Party so difficult a place for Republicans to stay.

*

In terms of Karl Rove, a/k/a "Turd Blossom" per the nitwit Chimperator (I can see the turd part but find no blossom discernible), Maureen Dowd has a great piece in the New York Times that rightly labes Mr. Rove. As always, MoDo takes him apart with wit and style. Here are some highlights:

*

Karl Rove was impressed with Barack Obama when he first met him. But now he sees him as a “coolly arrogant” elitist. This was Rove’s take on Obama to Republicans at the Capitol Hill Club Monday, according to Christianne Klein of ABC News: “Even if you never met him, you know this guy. He’s the guy at the country club with the beautiful date, holding a martini and a cigarette that stands against the wall and makes snide comments about everyone who passes by.” Actually, that sounds more like W.

*

Rove is trying to spin his myths, as he used to do with such devastating effect, but it won’t work this time. The absurd spectacle of rich white conservatives trying to paint Obama as a watercress sandwich with the crust cut off seems ugly and fake.

*

Unlike W., Obama doesn’t have a chip on his shoulder and he doesn’t make a lot of snarky remarks. He tries to stay on a positive keel and see things from the other person’s point of view. He’s not Richie Rich, saved time and again by Daddy’s influence and Daddy’s friends, the one who got waved into Yale and Harvard and cushy business deals, who drank too much and snickered at the intellectuals and gave them snide nicknames.

*

Haven’t we had enough of this hypocritical comedy of people in the elite disowning their social status for political purposes? The Bushes had to move all the way to Texas from Greenwich to make their blue blood appear more red. Rove’s mythmaking about Obama won’t fly. If he means that Obama has brains, what’s wrong with that? If he means that Obama is successful, what’s wrong with that? If he means that Obama has education and intellectual sophistication, what’s wrong with that?

*
Many of Obama’s traits are the traits that people in the population aspire to. It looks as if Rove is on the verge of realizing his dream of creating a permanent position for the Republicans. Unfortunately for him, it’s in the minority.

Thursday Male Beauty

Deb, this one's for you!

Ted Haggard - The Gift That Keeps on Giving

Good old Ted Haggard, former pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs right in Daddy Dobson's backyard, keeps of making news which, hopefully, will continue to make some people look at the hypocrisy of so many of the demagogues of the Christian Right (which is neither Christian nor right). In my opinion, Haggard is not unique among the Christo-fascists who seem to have an undue obsession with sex and all things sexual. Cases in point: Robert Knight and Peter LaBarbera who are absolutely obsessed with homosexuality and gay sex. In my opinion, their obsession derives from their own suppressed desires to engage in precisely what they condemn due to their religious fanaticism. Here are some highlights from KRDO News 13 (in my opinion, Knight and LaBarbera will get all hot and bothered reading the e-mail quotes):

*

COLORADO SPRINGS - In an e-mail obtained by NEWSCHANNEL 13, former New Life Church Pastor Ted Haggard admits to sexual contact with a gay escort and using drugs. . . . Haggard sent the e-mail to close family friend Kurt Serpe back in October. In it, he writes: "I was referred to Mike Jones from the concierge at a Marriott hotel when I asked for a masseur." The e-mail then becomes more detailed and sexual in nature. "It was during the massage that it started to become sensual, and that led to him masturbating me," writes Haggard. He continues with "That was and is our only sexual contact." Haggard adds because it was immoral it was this experience that caused him to confess immorality.

*

Jones went public about his alleged three-year paid relationship with Haggard in November 2006. Haggard was forced to quit as leader of New Life Church and head of The National Association of Evangelicals. The e-mail also talks about drugs Haggard bought from Jones. "During the conversation with Mike during and after the time he masturbated me, he told me about some drugs that he could get for me that would enhance my masturbation experience."

*

"He craved sex, he was a sexaholic," says Serpe. He believes it had nothing to do with homosexuality, but more about masturbation and gratification. "This is something that he has been struggling with all of his life," says Serpe. He says Haggard told him the relationship lasted only three-months, not three years.

*

Jones stands behind his claim that the relationship involved numerous encounters during three-years and denies selling Haggard drugs. We tried several times to contact Haggard, but he never responded to our requests.

More Christianist Misconduct at Military Academies

The New York Times has another disturbing story concerning Christianist members of the U. S. military trying to impose their religious views on cadets at the nations military academies. Unfortunately, some of the offenders are senior officers who, in my view, should be removed from commands - and ideally forced out of the military - if their cannot separate their apparent desires to be preachers from being military officers. They do NOT get to do both. All too typically, the religious nutcases cannot fathom the concept that their private religious views need to remain just that - private. They do not get to trample over the religious freedom of others in uniform, including their right to subscribe to no religion if they so choose. They whine about people restricting their freedom of religion but do not give a rat's ass about anyone else's rights. In the final analysis, they are obnoxious, self-centered, self-fish people who have no place in uniform. Obviously, having the delusional Chimperator, a definite religious lunatic, as commander-in-chief has not helped the situation. Here are highlights from the NYT story:

*

Three years after a scandal at the Air Force Academy over the evangelizing of cadets by Christian staff and faculty members, students and staff at West Point and the Naval Academy are complaining that their schools, too, have pushed religion on cadets and midshipmen. . . . critics say the new complaints raise questions about the military’s commitment to policies against imposing religion on its members.

*

At the Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., nine midshipmen recently asked the American Civil Liberties Union to petition the school to abolish daily prayer at weekday lunch, where attendance is mandatory. The midshipmen and the A.C.L.U. assert that the practice is unconstitutional, based in large part on a 2004 appellate court ruling against a similar prayer at the Virginia Military Institute. The civil liberties group has threatened legal action if the policy is not changed. But the academy is not persuaded.

*

In interviews at West Point, seven cadets, two officers and a former chaplain said that religion, especially evangelical Christianity, was a constant at the academy. . . . But most of their complaints center on Maj. Gen. Robert L. Caslen, until recently the academy’s top military leader and, since early May, the commander of the 25th Infantry Division in Hawaii. The cadets and staff said General Caslen, as commandant of cadets at West Point, routinely brought up God in speeches at events cadets were required to attend.

*

"Nowhere does it say that you have to be a good Christian officer or Jewish officer or Muslim officer: You need to be an officer dedicated to the Constitution of the United States,” said Steven Warner, who graduated from West Point last month. “They tell us as an officer you have to put everything aside, all your personal stuff. But religion is the one thing they encourage you to wear on your sleeve.”

*

“There is this massive sense of two things: that you are not wanted and you are made to feel like last-class citizens,” said Mr. Weinstein, a former Air Force officer. He added that he had been contacted by 31 cadets and staff members from West Point, including those who raised concerns about General Caslen, and 56 people from the Naval Academy, including 39 midshipmen. Almost all are afraid to go public.

More Wednesday Male Beauty

Is Life In Suburbia Becoming Untenable?

Most of life in the USA outside of central metropolitan areas is based on the automobile and what has heretofore been relatively cheap transportation costs for commuters living in the suburbs and traveling into central cities for employment. As a result, cities like Virginia Beach, Virginia - the most populous city in Virginia - have in essence virtually no public mass transit whatsoever. Other than in limited pockets of the city, an automobile is required to do just about anything whether it be commuting to work, grocery shopping, etc. Moreover, many suburbanites have shifted to massive SUV's - not that they ever use them off road - for the perceived status and other non-utilitarian reasons. Suddenly, $4.00+ gasoline is making this underlying basis for life go to Hell in a hand basket and commuting costs are wreaking havoc on many.

*

Will gasoline and energy prices result in a rethinking of the suburban dream? The hand writing has been on the wall for some time - Americans have just refused to see the reality of a changing world and that artificially low US gas prices could not last forever. As a former suburbanite, I love living in an older central city and find little motivation to travel to restaurants or other venues outside of a 3-5 mile radius of home most of the time. My office is less than a 15 minute walk from home. It saves tons of money in terms of gas and wear and tear on my Jeep. This International Herald Tribune story looks at what is beginning to perhaps happen and it suggests that living patterns might not remain the same. Here are some highlights:

*

ELIZABETH, Colorado: Suddenly, the economics of American suburban life are under assault as skyrocketing energy prices inflate the costs of reaching, heating and cooling homes on the outer edges of metropolitan areas.

*

But life on the distant fringes of suburbia is beginning to feel untenable. Boyle and his wife must drive nearly an hour to their jobs in the high-tech corridor of southern Denver. With gasoline at more than $4 a gallon, Boyle recently paid $121 to fill his pickup truck with diesel. The price of propane to heat their spacious house has more than doubled in recent years. Though Boyle finds city life unappealing, it's now up for reconsideration.

*

As the realization takes hold that rising energy prices are less a momentary blip than a restructuring with lasting consequences, the high cost of fuel is threatening to slow the decades-old migration away from cities, while exacerbating the housing downturn by diminishing the appeal of larger homes set far from urban jobs. In Atlanta, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Minneapolis, homes beyond the urban core have been falling in value faster than those within, according to analysis by Moody's Economy.com.

*

More than three-fourths of prospective homebuyers are more inclined to live in an urban area because of fuel prices, according to a recent survey of 903 real estate agents with Coldwell Banker, a national brokerage. Some proclaim the unfolding demise of suburbia.

*

"It's like an ebbing of this suburban tide," said Joe Cortright, an economist at the consulting group Impresa in Portland, Oregon. "There's going to be this kind of reversal of desirability. Typically, Americans have felt the periphery was most desirable, and now there's going to be a reversion to the center." In a recent study, Cortright found that house prices in the urban centers of Chicago, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, Portland and Tampa have fared significantly better than those in the suburbs. So-called exurbs - communities sprouting on the distant edges of metropolitan areas - have suffered worst of all, Cortright found.

*

Long before the recent spike in the price of energy, environmentalists decried suburban sprawl as a waste of land, energy, and tax dollars: Governments from Virginia to California have in recent decades lavished resources on building roads and schools for new subdivisions in the outer rings of development while skimping on maintaining facilities closer in. Many governments now focus on reviving their downtowns.

Catholic Church Denounces Cuba's Move To Support LGBT Rights

Not surprisingly, the Vatican - which refuses to set its own house in order and fire bishops and cardinals who enabled or covered up the sexual abuse of minors - is now trying to interfer in civil legal affairs in Cuba. I love how granting legal rights which should belong to ALL citizens is the "promotion of homosexuality" in the minds of the sex obsessed Catholic hierarchy. Why anyone takes these dottering, disingenuous dinosaurs seriously is baffling. Just like the Christianist bigots such as James Dobson, the Catholic Church's real goal is to keep gays regarded as inferior and unworthy sinners in the minds of the public. How that equates to "respect for the homosexual person" is beyond any kind of logic. Here are highlights from 365gay.com:

*

(Havana) Cuba's Roman Catholic Church is protesting the communist government's growing support of gay rights, including a daylong event raising awareness against homophobia and a law allowing sex-change operations. "Respect for the homosexual person, yes," said an editorial Tuesday in Palabra Nueva, the monthly magazine of the Archdiocese of Havana. "Promotion of homosexuality, no." The editorial signed by magazine director Orlando Marquez referred to activities held May 17 by Cuba's Sex Education Center, which is directed by Mariela Castro, daughter of President Raul Castro.

*

Prejudice against gays remains deeply rooted in Cuban society, as in much of Latin America. But the government has steadily moved away from the intolerance of the 1960s and 1970s, when homosexuals hid their sexuality for fear of being fired from work or even imprisoned. Cuba's parliament also is studying proposals to give gay couples the same benefits as married couples.

Orange County Register Endorses Gay Marriage

Orange County, California, is not often assosiated with anything liberal and is the home of many California Republicans. Hence, the wonder of the Orange County Register coming out and supporting civil marriage for all. The newspaper's position is (1) in keeping with equality under the law, and (2) the quasi-libertarian mindset that once was a hallmrk of the GOP before it was taken over by the Christianist nutcase element. Equally of note is that the paper clearly understands that church and state are sepoarate under the U. S. Constitution - something that utterly escapes the feeble minds of the Christianists. Here are highlights from the paper's editorial:

*

Our preference would be for the government not to be involved in marriage, the most fundamental of institutions in a civil society. Why two people who want to be married should be required to get a license from the state is something of a mystery. Marriage existed long before the California or U.S. governments came into being and will continue long after they have been consigned to history. Whether a marriage is valid should be up to the people involved and the churches, synagogues, mosques or other religious institutions that choose to perform them or not.

*
As a practical matter, however, the government has so entwined itself into our daily lives that state recognition is important. Filing taxes as a married couple or as individuals makes a difference, as does the ability to own real estate, make end-of-life decisions or adopt children. Considering all this and the importance of equality before the law, the high court's decision was justified.

*

It is argued that allowing same-sex marriage will infringe on the religious freedom of people who have a religiously based objection to it. It is hard to see the validity. Church and state are correctly separate in this country, and the fact that the state recognizes a union as a marriage doesn't mean that a religious person or institution has to recognize it or approve of it. It's hard to imagine a minister, rabbi or imam who objects to same-sex marriages being forced to perform one, and we would be the first to object if anybody tried it.

Wednesday Male Beauty

Two GOP Legislators Buck Latent Racism on a Local Level - Updated

Since this post at 7:00AM this morning the Virginian Pilot has reported the following:

*

RICHMOND - The House Transportation Committee unanimously approved today a proposal to extend the light rail system now under construction in Norfolk to within blocks of the Oceanfront. The measure now goes before the full House of Delegates. The legislation was introduced by Del. Robert Tata and state Sen. Frank Wagner with little apparent discussion with local elected city leaders.

*

Barack Obama's position as the Democratic Part nominee has brought issues of racism to the fore in national politics, but it's an issue locally as well and shows itself in many ways. In the Norfolk area, it has long played a subtle factor in why the area has been so slow to build a light rail system. Ultimately, Norfolk has decided to forge ahead alone since Virginia Beach has in the past opposed any light rail system that ran from Norfolk out towards the Virginia Beach oceanfront. While many reasons have been floated - even though the commute into downtown Norfolk or the Norfolk Naval base from Virginia Beach is often a nightmare- the real reason has never been widely stated: the Virginia Beach hotel owners and other heavy hitters in Virginia Beach feared blacks from Norfolk riding the light rail to the oceanfront. Now, amazingly two Republican state legislators (both of whom I know personally) are pushing to force the extension of light rail service into Virginia Beach, I commend them on their common sense and courage to defy the racists in their city. Finally, someone who wants to see Virginia Beach run for the benefit of other citizens besides the hotel owner group. Here are highlights from the Virginian Pilot:

*

Two Republican legislators from Virginia Beach have introduced a bill that would extend the light rail system now under construction in Norfolk to within blocks of the Oceanfront. The legislation was put in by Del. Robert Tata and state Sen. Frank Wagner with little apparent discussion with local elected city leaders. “It’s time for this to happen, whether they favor it or not,” Tata said Tuesday.

*

Tata and Wagner are calling for a major expansion of a $232.1 million rail system already under construction that will run 7.4 miles from downtown Norfolk to Newtown Road. The Tide is expected to begin operating in early 2010. Tata said he envisions the rail running all the way to the Virginia Beach Convention Center. He said it would offer a hassle-free commute to those who live in Virginia Beach and work in downtown Norfolk. “You’d be foolish to drive in,” he said. “I-264 right now is sort of like a race track , it’s so dangerous. Why fight that kind of battle? You could train in and save on parking fees.”

*

Under the bill, HB6028, the extension would be built with public and private money . The legislation calls on the state to solicit a private partner. The company would theoretically recoup its investment and a profit by being given a contract to run the rail and charge riders a fare.

*

Michael Townes, HRT president, said he was surprised but encouraged by the bill. “We’re excited that Del. Tata understands that extending The Tide into Virginia Beach is important to Virginia Beach and the region of Hampton Roads,” he said. “Whether this bill passes or not, the indication is that our General Assembly members are understanding of light rail and are trying to find ways to be supportive.” Townes said he has no position yet on whether a public-private partnership is the best approach.