More Saturday Male Beauty

The Benefits of Gay Blogs for the LGBT Community

Admittedly, there are days when I feel like letting this blog die. It's a major time commitment and it's an effort to try to find interesting and at times different thought provoking things to write about. Search agents help, but it still takes time - as does finding male beauty photos which are still a lure for some readers (yep, Don, I'm thinking of you) who by the way do claim to read the articles as well. On the plus side, writing is good therapy for me and since I cannot afford to be on meds and seeing a therapist, blogging fills a void. Of course, the biggest plus is when I receive a wonderful message from some reader whom I unwittingly have touched. An article at Ezines Articles has identified other benefits of gay blogs - even if LGBT blogs are none too popular with the Obama crowd at the White House. In fact, the article makes the proposition that gay blogs help gays worldwide. Here are some highlights:
*
In the information age, blogs have become important and popular tools that are instrumental to distributing knowledge and news to wide and diverse populations. As such, blogs are necessary tools for any group wishing to keep its members abreast of new information and developments. While blogs are important to any group, because of the way the LGBT community is spread out around the country and the world, gay blogs are even more important in making sure that all are kept up to date on items that are relevant and vital to LGBTs.
*
One important benefit of gay blogs is that they promote greater awareness of issues that are important to the LGBT community. . . . Data about progress in one area could provide a way for others to push forward in another area.
*
Another benefit of gay blogs is that they provide a way for LGBTs to meet other people and to discuss trends that they see occurring within the community or greater societal happenings that could ultimately cause an impact on other LGBTs.
*
While news about progress and trends are helpful, blogs can have an even more tangible plus. As LGBTs are still often victims of discrimination and violence, blogs can have the very real impact of warning others about specific incidents and rallying people to fight institutions that continue to promote discrimination.
*
Every day, LGBTs win more battles for equality and host more events that celebrate its members and their contributions. As a result, blogs can help spread news of these victories, which can serve as inspirations to others, and promote knowledge of and attendance at these events, so that they can achieve the greatest degree of success.
*
A final important advantage to gay blogs is to raise funds and support for gay causes and LGBT friendly politicians. Every success for the LGBT community requires money and manpower to drive it further. Blogs are vital tools in rallying these resources and increased readership of gay blogs can help to form a more vibrant and engaged social force.
*
Gay blogs have a vast potential to drive change, promote awareness, and mold a greater sense of family for LGBTs everywhere. Perhaps the greatest benefit of all is that gay blogs remind LGBTs that they truly are a community.

*

I can personally state that blogging HAS made me feel more of a part of a larger community, both in terms of interactions with other bloggers and also in terms of knowing that others are enduring and battling along with me for the day when anti-gay bigotry and homophobia will be largely a thing of the past. Making a difference for the better is something I very much want to do.

Tea Party Candidate Opposes Masturbation

There are some who have tried to depict the Tea Party crowd as conservatives who are focused on economic issues and smaller government rather than in many ways just another incarnation of the Christian Right. Sharon Angle and others demonstrate that the Tea Party candidates are more of the same tired bedroom police that we've seen time and time again. Then there's Tea Party candidate Christine O'Donnell (pictured at left) who who seems to want masturbation outlawed - she equates the act, in fact, as "self-abuse." If Ms. O'Donnell doesn't want to engage in masturbation, then my message to her is "don't." However, if she wants to police people's bedrooms and crusade for abstinence only education and other Christian Right whack job issues, then she ought to join a convent as opposed to running for Congress. Jezebel.com has details on O'Donnell's insanity. Here are some highlights:
*
Sorry, what was that about the Tea Party being all about economic and not social issues? Not only has this year brought Sharron Angle. There's also Christine O'Donnell, whose definition of abstinence includes self-abuse.
*
O'Donnell is challenging a congressman in Delaware's Republican Senate primary, and until now no one took her seriously. (Possibly because she's a wackjob . . . ) But then establishment Republican Lisa Murkowski lost in Alaska to a previous unknown, backed by Tea Party money, and the groups vowed to make Delaware their next target.
*
Republicans party officials are scrambling, trashing her in the press and making websites like "The Real Christine." And reporters have just started digging. The Huffington Post reports that O'Donnell was on a Sex In The 90s special on MTV. (Remember those?) "The Bible says that lust in your heart is committing adultery. So you can't masturbate without lust," she said,
*
The good news, this is all dandy for Democrats, who have every reason to want O'Donnell to win the primary — polls show that Democrat Chris Coons can beat O'Donnell, but not Republican Mike Castle. And that would actually be wonderful.
*
Until the GOP ceases to be largely a religious based party (no matter what the remnants of the country club set claim), we are going to see more and more Sharon Angles and Christine O'Donnells. The wealthy may want lower taxes and neat tax loop holes, but do they seriously want lunatics running the country? They - including some of my neighbors - need to wake the Hell up to what has become of the Republican Party.

Saturday Male Beauty

2012 Presidential Campaign Ad Starts Airing — for Hillary

As I have noted before, in retrospect I believe I may have backed the wrong candidate in 2008. Unfortunately, I believed Obama's moving - but utterly insincere - speeches. A Chicago dentist named William DeJean apparently has the same feelings that I do and has paid $5,000 to air some recruit Hillary ads for 2012 in New Orleans. As I have noted before, I hope Obama is challenged for the 2012 nomination and defeated. He needs to learn that words and promises DO matter. As Hillary warned in 2008, he has proven too weak to get done what he promised. This from the Advocate:
*
"She has more experience working in and with the White House than most living presidents,” the ad says about Secretary of State Clinton. “She is one of the most admired women in our nation's history. Let's make sure the president we should have elected in 2008 will be on the ballot in 2012. Hillary 2012: Hillary Clinton for President. Start now. Where there's a Hill there's a way.”
*
Contacted by The Advocate about the ad, DeJean said, “I think my commercial is saying what most are thinking right now. I think there's a lot of buyer's remorse with Obama.”
*
The ad does not address gay rights, and DeJean said that progress on that front did not specifically motivate the ad. However, he said that he believes a Clinton administration would have accomplished more for equality than President Obama has achieved at this point.
*
“I think she would have done what she said she was going to do,” said DeJean. “I don't think he's necessarily followed through on his promises. I saw a sign at the Chicago gay pride parade that said, 'Change, my ass.'”
*
The ad may also run in Washington, New York, Los Angeles, and possibly Houston. Clinton has repeatedly denied any interest in making another run for the presidency.

Larry Sabato Predicts a Republican House Majority

My undergraduate classmate and politico guru Larry Sabato is predicting that the Democrats will lose control of the House of Representatives in the upcoming elections. I have been saying for well over a year that the Democrats have alienated their base and done nothing to prove that they can govern and get things done other than on a half-assed basis (e.g., piss poor health care reform). As a result, I candidly cannot find much sympathy in my heart for the Democrats since, in my view, they have brought defeat upon themselves by breaking promises to those who put them in office and lacking the spine to attack demagogues within the GOP who have not been properly challenged even though they propose no solutions to the nation's problems. It's basically, the same old bullshit from the GOP, but unfortunately, the Democrats have set themselves up to be depicted either as do nothings or big spenders - even thought the budget deficits track back to the GOP. Leadership DOES matter and it's sadly lacking both in the White House and among the leaders of the Congressional Democrats.

*

All this said, the boyfriend and I will do our part and support our local members of Congress who have supported the LGBT community. In fact, on the afternoon of September 26th, we will be hosting an event for Congressman Glenn Nye at our home. More on that will be forth coming as the details are finalized. I will likewise be doing a piece once I have a one on one conversation with Nye. Here are highlights from the Washington Post on Larry Sabato's predictions:
*
In a report issued this morning, University of Virginia political handicapper Larry Sabato estimated that Republicans will pick up 47 seats in the House on Nov. 2, more than enough to restore the party to majority status at the start of the 112th Congress.
*
"Conditions have deteriorated badly for Democrats over the summer," writes Sabato. "The economy appears rotten, with little chance of a substantial comeback by November 2nd. Unemployment is very high, income growth sluggish, and public confidence quite low." He adds: "To most voters--fair or not--it seems that President Obama has over-promised and under-delivered."
*
And, on Wednesday, Charlie Cook, a former Fix boss and editor of the Cook Political Report, wrote that "Democrats find themselves heading into a midterm election that looks as grisly as any the party has faced in decades." Cook added that there are 32 Democratic incumbents who currently trail their Republican challengers in either public or private polling -- far more than the 11 GOP incumbents who were losing at this time in 2006. (Democrats re-took control of the House that year.)
*
[G]loom and doom predictions for Democrats, therefore, can have real world implications as donors are less likely to pony up crucial dollars, targeted Members go into panic mode and party strategists become more willing to throw their side overboard in conversations with reporters.
*
For Democrats trying to hold the House majority then, these increasingly pessimistic prognostication add another layer of complexity to the challenge.

Historians' Changing View of Lincoln's Sexuality

In 2005, the late C.W. Tripp posited that Abraham Lincoln was secretly a homosexual in his book, “The Intimate World of Abraham Lincoln.” Not surprisingly, many historians and those on the far right were aghast - as if somehow being same sex attracted makes one incapable of being a great leader and a wartime president. Never mind the many figures from history that were what we would nowadays call gay: Alexander the Great, Roman Emperor Hadrian, Michelangelo, Leonardo Di Vinci to name just a few. Some might question why 145 years after Lincoln's death the issue even matters. In my view, it IS an very important question given the far right's never ceasing efforts to depict LGBT individuals as sick, perverted, mentally ill, alcoholics, drug addicts and many other derogatory things. That a major figure like Lincoln was one of us - albeit perhaps more or less in the closet - turns the agenda of our enemies upside down. It also will cause no small amount of angst amongst far right Republicans if their party's principal founder on the national level loved another man and slept with him for years. Indeed, if Joshua Speed (pictured at right, above) was in fact the "love of his life" for Lincoln, many anti-gay stereotypes are destroyed or at least seriously undermined.

*

Both Change.org and Gay City News have stories on this still debated topic and the growing number of top flight historians who are beginning to admit that Lincoln was likely gay. Living out and proud changes many minds in our favor on a daily basis. And while younger generations are rapidly changing their attitudes about and levels of acceptance of LGBT citizens, by bringing out the real stories of gay figures from the past, may further accelerate the the ultimate defeat of anti-bigots. Plus, it's down right fun to imagine the conniption fits among the Bible beaters. Here are highlights, first from Gay City News:
*
[T]he LGBT press has been ignoring an infinitely more significant development under way with vastly more important implications for the Republican Party: the increasing acceptance by historians that the loving heart of Abraham Lincoln, the Great Emancipator and the first GOP president, found its natural amorous passions overwhelmingly directed toward those of his own sex.
*
This shifting consensus about Lincoln’s sexual orientation is certainly the most stunning and effective rebuke to the Republican Party’s scapegoating of same-sex love for electoral purposes, which came to fever pitch during the 2004 race that [Ken] Mehlman spearheaded for George W. Bush.
*
“We are getting closer to the day that a majority of younger, less homophobic historians will at long last accept the evidence of Lincoln’s same-sex component,” John Stauffer, chair of Harvard University’s Department of American Civilization, told Gay City News, adding, “ We’re already seeing the beginnings of a trend that will amount to a major paradigm shift.”
*
Stauffer is one of the nation’s leading experts on the Civil War era, and in his latest — and best-selling — book, “Giants: The Parallel Lives of Frederick Douglas and Abraham Lincoln,” he supports the thesis that Joshua Speed was, as he put it, “Lincoln’s soulmate and the love of his life.”
*
And in the latest issue of the scholarly journal Reviews of American History, Stauffer hammers home this point, writing, “In light of what we know about romantic friendship at the time, coupled with the facts surrounding Speed’s and Lincoln’s friendship, there is no reason to suppose they weren’t physically intimate at some point during their four years of sleeping together in the same small bed, long after Lincoln could afford a bed of his own. To ignore this, as most scholars do, is to pretend that same-sex carnal relationships were abnormal. It thus presumes a dislike or fear about such relationships, reflecting a presentist and homophobic perspective.”
*
A majority of Lincoln scholars dumped on Tripp’s book when it was published five years ago, but the “paradigm shift” on Lincoln of which Stauffer speaks is not only being led by younger historians like himself (Stauffer received his Ph.D. from Yale University in 1999, began teaching at Harvard that year, and was tenured in 2004).
*
In a lengthy article entitled “Abraham Lincoln and the Tripp Thesis” in a recent issue of one of the oldest scholarly journals devoted to the iconic president, the Lincoln Herald, a senior Lincoln historian and author of numerous Lincoln books, the octogenarian William Hanchett, professor of history emeritus at the University of California/ San Diego, “challenges historians to either refute the Tripp thesis or to rewrite Lincoln’s biography. Hanchett believes that Tripp is correct at least in the broad outline of his work and finds it frustrating that most historians, rather than confronting this pioneering study, choose to ignore it,” as the Lincoln Herald’s editors put it in introducing Hanchett’s revealing, carefully footnoted essay on Lincoln’s same-sex affinities.
*
Hanchett in particular breaks new ground when he deconstructs what we know of the much-ignored secret Memo books kept by Lincoln’s law partner William Herndon as he spent a quarter century intensively researching his massive “Lincoln: The True Story of a Great Life,” published in 1889. The UC/ San Diego scholar details how he believes that the otherwise thorough Tripp missed the evidence there that backs up Hanchett’s view that “Lincoln’s secret” was homosexuality.
*
One of the few traditional Lincolnists to describe — however obliquely — the lifelong Lincoln-Speed relationship as homosexual was the Illinois poet Carl Sandburg, in his masterful, six-volume Lincoln biography. In the 1926 tome titled “The Prairie Years,” Sandburg wrote that both Lincoln and Speed had “a streak of lavender, and spots soft as May violets.”
*
“I do not feel my own sorrows more keenly than I do yours,” Lincoln wrote Speed in one letter. And elsewhere: “You know my desire to befriend you is everlasting.” In a detailed retelling of the Lincoln-Speed love story — including the “lust at first sight” encounter between the two young men, when Lincoln readily accepted Speed’s eager invitation to share his narrow bed — Tripp notes that Speed was the only human being to whom the president ever signed his letters with the unusually tender (for Lincoln) “yours forever” — a salutation Lincoln never even used with his wife.
*
Speed himself acknowledged, “No two men were ever so intimate.” And Tripp credibly describes Lincoln’s near nervous breakdown following Speed’s decision to end their four-year affair by returning to his native Kentucky.
*
“Why [have] scholars [been] so willfully blind to the host of historical evidence that Lincoln had a strong homosexual component?,” Harvard’s Stauffer wrote to this reporter in an email, explaining, “The answer stems from the intense homophobia throughout 20th century America, which has profoundly shaped Lincoln scholarship. Every scholar needs to read previous scholarship on Lincoln; and even comparatively open-minded scholars, after reading the mass of Lincoln scholarship, can easily be persuaded into perpetuating the blindness about Lincoln’s relationship with Speed.”
*
Stauffer, however, underscored in his email, “These explanations don’t account for the fact that most scholars today can agree that other well-known and beloved figures, such as Walt Whitman and Herman Melville, had strong homosexual tendencies but deny that Lincoln did, despite similar evidence. The reason for this paradox, and perhaps the central reason why scholars have been willfully blind to the evidence on Lincoln, is because most view him as the ‘redeemer president’— essentially ‘America’s Christ’ — and don’t want America’s Christ having strong homosexual tendencies.”
*
Change.org follows a similar analysis and also adds these salient points that underscore why having the truth about Lincoln ultimately told is important:
*
Abraham Lincoln is one of the most revered figures in American history. Students around the country are required to memorize his Gettysburg Address. His debates are seen as some of the penultimate political rhetoric in U.S. electoral history. His mug is on the penny, the five-dollar bill, and on Mt. Rushmore. Scores of Republicans proudly boast that they're "the party of Lincoln." And his Emancipation Proclamation makes up one of the foundational documents in the U.S. civil rights narrative.
*
Stauffer's comments in the piece are pretty interesting, if not for the fact that they suggest that within historian circles, folks who dismiss claims about Lincoln's homosexuality might be doing so because of internalized, or not so internalized, homophobia.
*
Today, we're making a big deal out of people like GOP strategist Ken Mehlman coming out of the closet, or conservative straight allies like Ted Olson, Margaret Hoover, Steve Schmidt, and Christine Todd Whitman, who willingly point their name down to support marriage equality. But what if it turns out that one of America's foremost historical figures, and someone dubbed one of the greatest Presidents our country has ever seen, "had a streak of lavender?"

More Friday Male Beauty

Focus on the Family Supports Bullying and Gay Teen Suicide

UPDATED: I concede that my emotions were high when I wrote this post. Having lost friends to suicide because they could not deal with the rampant homophobia around them, Justin's needless suicide as the result of religious bigotry truly set me off.

*

Focus on the Family ("FOTF") has shown its truly ugly face yet again in a controversy that has arisen out of the Anoka-Hennepin School Division where three gay teens have committed suicide. In the face of efforts to implement a no-bullying policy that would protect GLBT students against vicious bullying, FOTF has come out in opposition of the policy - once again disingenuously claiming that it would restrict the religious freedom of religious based bigots who frankly believe that the only good gay is a dead gay. The controversy highlights just how sick and perverse FOTF and its adherence are in reality despite their efforts to wrap themselves in religion and play the victim card. It truly sickens me and every time I read a story such as this I slip one step further towards disavowing Christianity in its entirety because it is nothing less than evil as practiced by people and organizations like FOTF.

*

One mother, Tammy Aaberg, who lost her son Justin (pictured above) is speaking out and properly laying responsibility for her son's death at the feet of the school board which has failed to protect her son and other students from anti-gay bullying. It appears that the school board recently - and all too typically - knuckled under to to Christiaist that "homosexuality not be promoted." These bigots believe they have the right to trample over the rights of everyone else. Gay Agenda has background on the situation here, as well as commentary on FOTF and it's faux "experts" who are opposing needed changes. In my opinion, if anyone is guilty of a "culture of death" it's FOTF and similar anti-gay bigots. The Daily Planet News has coverage on Tammy Aaberg's statements on this tragedy. Here are highlights:
*
According to his mother, Justin Aaberg was "a very sweet boy who seemed to always have a smile on his face; he didn't have a mean bone in his body...He was always a shoulder [friends] could cry on and would help them with their problems. He was also an extremely good cello player who even composed a few of his own songs."
*
Tammy Aaberg's son, a student at Anoka High School, killed himself on July 9th, 2010. In testimony she gave to the Anoka-Hennepin School Board on Monday, Aaberg said her son was bullied because of his sexual orientation. She blamed the district for not intervening to stop the bullying, accusing district administrators of tying teachers' hands with a policy that kept teachers from being able to "reach out and help these hurting students."
*
"I'm only asking that you please make the school safe for GLBT students still alive and in this district today they are people just like us and deserve to be treated like the rest of us. Suicide should not feel like the only way to take away the pain and shame."
*
According to Peter Gokey, a former teacher in the Anoka-Hennepin School District and a leader of a group of LGBTA activists in the school district and who is familiar with Justin Aaberg's suicide, the young man also left messages saying he was driven to suicide by incessant anti-gay bullying.
*
When OutFront Minnesota, through staff attorney Phil Duran, offered to conduct district-wide LGBT sensitivity and anti-bullying training for all teachers and staff following last year's suicide involving former Anoka-Hennepin student Alex Merrit, Associate Superintendant Michelle Langenfeld declined, saying in a letter to Duran that the neutrality policy prevented "support for district-wide staff development around a GLTB initiative."
*
"I suspect in part it's because they know they've got this very conservative community and some loudmouths in that community who'll raise cain if they do something pro-LGBT," said OutFront's Duran.
*
Yet another young gay life needless lost, one of thousands around the country each year. Meanwhile Christianist bigots like James Dobson strut about feeling self-righteous and congratulating themselves on their piety. Meanwhile, truth be told, they are little better than murderers. Justin, may you rest in peace. And may those at FOTF burn in Hell as they so justly deserve.

More Theocratic Craziness From The Family Foundation

On its blog, The Family Foundation ("TFF"), the Virginia affiliate of Jame's Dobson's Focus on the Family, would like to have its Kool-Aid drinking readers believe that I follow the organization's activities because I and others who believe in the separation of church and state are either fearful of the organization or intimidated by it. Such is hardly the case. I follow TFF for the purpose of keeping tabs on the resident insanity that is the norm at TFF and to see just what types of lies and poison are being disseminated by the less than godly folk at TFF. I also like to see which politicians are prostituting themselves and genuflecting before Victoria Cobb, and kissing her ring so that others can be made aware of such groveling and pandering. Later this month TFF is hosting an event called Pastors For Family Values Pastor Summit 2010 in Richmond. Given TFF's agenda of striving to impose a far right Christianist theocracy on the rest of the citizens of Virginia and the USA, I wasn't surprised to see that two of the speakers are hard core Christian Dominionists - Bishop E. W. Jackson, Sr. and David Barton, Founder and President of WallBuilders. What was disturbing was to see a U.S. Congressman involving himself with a group that seeks to undermine the U. S. Constitution. Even worse is that the Congressman is Randy Forbes who was in law school with me. To give you a sense of the batshitery that will go on, here's highlights from TFF's website about the event:

*

As you are well aware, our religious liberties are under constant attack as expressions of faith continue to be removed from the public square and mocked by those in the media, academia and other cultural institutions. We are now to the point where college students are being told they have to renounce their Christian faith in order to graduate. Learn how we got to this place in our history, what is being done about it and what is your role in reshaping our culture to respect the biblical principles that our nation was founded upon.
*
This summit is free to pastors and lunch will be provided. You will leave equipped and motivated to stand for truth in a culture that has bought the lies of the world.

*

It is noteworthy how TFF is enticing pastors to attend by offering them freebies. TFF makes great use of such bought pastors to spread falsehoods across Virginia. From experience, the only lies that I see in the context of TFF are those being disseminated by TFF itself and other Uber-Christian organizations like it that seek to impose a Christian theocracy in this nation - and undermine the U.S. Constitution that Mr. Forbes has supposedly sworn to uphold.

Friday Male Beauty

Christians Are Undermining Christianity

I have noted a number of times that the best reason/argument for one NOT to a Christian is those who profess themselves to be "godly Christians." Rather than living according to the Gospel message of Christ, hate, bigotry, intolerance, hypocrisy, frequent racism and general unloving behavior too often seem to be the principal hallmarks of Christianity based on the conduct of its supposed adherence. As I noted recently, individuals are leaving Christianity (often to adopt a "no religion" label) at four times the rate that others are converting to it - and it's no wonder, in my view. Yes, a number of mainline denominations increasingly do not fall into this nasty model of Christianity, but sadly, their message is overwhelmed by that of the hateful Christians. Michael Gerson has a piece in the Washington Post that looks at this phenomenon. Here are some highlights:
*
A church in Florida is poised to commemorate an act of violence committed in the name of Islam, the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, with an act of stupidity committed in the name of Christianity, the public burning of the Koran.
*
[T]he Manhattan mosque controversy has exposed a broader, conservative Christian suspicion of mosques and Muslims. Protests against the construction of mosques in California, Tennessee and Wisconsin have often included Christian pastors. Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association, a conservative Christian group, recently wrote: "Permits should not be granted to build even one more mosque in the United States of America, let alone the monstrosity planned for Ground Zero.
*
The Christian fundamentalist view of Islam bears a striking resemblance to the New York Times' view of Christian fundamentalism -- a simplistic emphasis on the worst elements of a complex religious tradition.
*
Many Christian fundamentalists seem oblivious to the similarity of their own legal and cultural peril. In portions of America -- say San Francisco or Vermont -- conservative Christians are sometimes also viewed as suspicious, illiberal outsiders. Their opinions on gender roles, homosexuality and public morality are viewed as an attack on constitutional values -- much as fundamentalists view the threat from Islam.
*
Christian fundamentalists who undermine religious liberty in order to target Muslims are playing a game of intolerance roulette. That First Amendment might come in handy someday.
*
Freedom of religious worship and expression is essential to human dignity -- which makes blocking the construction of a mosque for religious reasons a violation of Christian belief. And laws preventing the building of churches in Mecca or Riyadh do not make this principle less important here.
*
Religious tribalism -- dividing the children of light from the children of darkness -- is a problem in many traditions. But a reaction in kind from conservative Christians would manage to undermine their interests and their convictions at the same time.

Republicans Versus Democrats from an LGBT Perspective

With the Democrats led by the spineless Barack Obama having basically flipped the bird to the LGBT community (after happily and cynically accepting our votes and money), some Republicans argue that LGBT voters need to stop voting lock step for Democrats. It's an argument that to some might sound attractive if one merely focused on LGBT issues. However, once other issues are factored in, it becomes more difficult to fall for the GOP's come hither song and dance. Dan Savage looks at the GOP versus Democrat comparison and, quite frankly, it seems that LGBT Americans are largely screwed regardless of the party in power. It's a sobering analysis and points out the difficulty in energizing LGBT voters - at least on LGBT issues alone. The argument that "we're not as bad as the other guys" really is shown to be hollow. Here are some highlights from Savage's piece in The Stranger:
*
I can't see myself voting Republican. Because I'm not—despite what you may have read in Slog's comments threads—a single-issue voter. I care about my rights, of course, but I also give a shit about reproductive rights, climate change, the rights of immigrants, the free exercise of religion (look what this "Ground Zero mosque" bullshit forced me to type!), and I much prefer reality-based solutions to the reality-based problems our nation faces.
*
But honestly... I am a lot less enthused about voting for, and giving money to, Democrats these days. Still going to vote for 'em, just not enthused. Feeling pretty tepid. And I suspect that I'm not alone. Backing way the hell up for a moment...
*
Here's what happens to the gays and our issues when Republicans win the White House or control Congress: not a whole hell of a lot. There's no progress on our issues under Republicans—all forward momentum ceases—but things don't get appreciably worse. We have to endure small outrages and insults, put up with slights, and be vigilant about legislative malice, but we don't see a big rollback of previously secured rights.
*
When we open our wallets for Democrats—and vote for them—the hope is that electing a Democratic president and Congress will result in significant progress on our issues. That's not just our delusional hope; that was an explicit promise made to us by Democrats. Once the Democrats were in power, everyone from Obama on down promised us, we would see real and significant progress on our issues: an end to DADT and DOMA, action on ENDA, a president willing to use the bully pulpit to aggressively defend our rights. But if, as we've seen, working to elect a Democratic president and give Democrats control of Congress results in no progress on our issues—no action on DADT, ENDA, or DOMA—then why the fuck should we bother?
*
If we get no progress under Democrats (just empty promises meant to excite their base), but no regress under Republicans (just empty threats meant to excite their base), why should we waste our time—and our money—worrying about who's in charge. . . . But the uselessness of the Dems has resulted in gay checkbooks snapping shut and it's definitely contributing to the "enthusiasm gap" that threatens to hand control of Congress to Republicans.
*
So here's where we're at: everyone who cares about gay issues is mad at the Democrats. The homophobes are angry because the Democrats suggested that they might do something about gay rights; gays and lesbians are furious with the Democrats for failing to do something—failing to do anything—about gay rights. Since doing nothing pisses off the gay haters just as much as doing something, perhaps the Dems should've have done something and won the enthusiastic support of someone. Heckuvajob, gang.

Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell Seeks Funds for Failed Abstinence-Only Sex Education

Never mind that numerous studies have documented that abstinence only sex education programs do not work and, in fact, often lead to higher teen pregnancy rates. Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell could care less that such programs are a blatant waste of public funds. Nope, acting I suspect on the orders of Victoria Cobb and the faux Christians at The Family Foundation, Taliban Bob wants to pursue funding for more ineffective and religious based sex education programs. If the Christo-fascists are happy, who cares if the programs actually work or not. As for Victoria Cobb's comments, from years of experience, if Ms. Cobb's lips are moving, she's lying. One might as well rely on an Ouija board rather than any data cited or claimed by The Family Foundation. as The Virginian Pilot has coverage on McDonnell's wrong headed pursuit of such funding. Here are some highlights:
*
Abortion-rights groups Tuesday denounced Gov. Bob McDonnell's decision to seek a federal grant for abstinence-only sex education while shunning funds available for comprehensive pregnancy and disease-prevention instruction.
*
Virginia's Health Department recently applied for a $1.27 million federal grant for supplementary abstinence instruction funds.
*
"Given Virginia's economic situation, wasting $400,000 of taxpayer money for an ineffective program is not a good use of the commonwealth's limited resources" wrote Jessica Honke, the group's policy director.
*
"The simple fact is that young people deserve honest information, not political ideology, in their health classrooms." The Family Foundation of Virginia defended McDonnell's choice.
*
State Sen. Ralph Northam, a Norfolk Democrat and a physician, said abstinence should be the goal but said he is disappointed McDonnell chose to disregard the chance to acquire federal dollars with more flexibility of use.
*
While abstinence is the only guaranteed way to prevent pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, Northam said, "the reality is with teenagers their hormones come into play, and abstinence-only doesn't always work."
*
"We should at least teach our teenagers, I believe, all aspects of family planning and all the options that are available," Northam added. "There should be a comprehensive plan to sex education that strongly encourages abstinence-only, but it needs to be comprehensive."

More Thursday Male Beauty

Sandra Day O’Connor to Weigh in on Far Right Demonization of Justices in Iowa

As a number of bloggers have noted and as the Des Moines Register has reported, a far right Christianist PAC inappropriately named Common Sense PAC which has the announced goal of unseating the three justices of the Iowa Supreme Court who face a retention vote on Nov. 2: David Baker, Michael Streit and Chief Justice Marsha Ternus. Their sin? Joining in the unanimous ruling that struck down Iowa's ban on same sex marriage. As is the norm, the members of the PAC claim that they are opposed to an "out of control judiciary" - except, of course, when the ignorant theocrats agree with a court's ruling. Then, the complaints mysteriously vanish.
*
Now an unexpected force is moving on to the scene in Iowa - former U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor who was often viewed as that Court's swing vote. O'Connor very much opposes an elected judiciary - something the opponents of the Iowa justices support - and having lived in both Alabama and Texas where judges and justices are elected, I agree with her - and Timothy Kincaid. Appointed judges and justices have their flaws, but generally some level of minimum competence is preserved (I take exception in respect to two judges on the Norfolk Circuit Court when I state this opinion). With an elected judiciary, all bets are off and money and campaigning skills count as opposed to potential competence on the bench. I recall one Alabama judge who pretty much everyone came to deem to be literally insane after he was elected to the bench. Fortunately, he was ultimately removed from office, but not before doing a great deal of damage to litigants and discrediting the legal system in general. Box Turtle Bulletin has some details on O'Connor's involvement in Iowa. Here are some highlights:
*
For 25 years Sandra Day O’Connor’s opinion mattered more than just about anyone in the country. Appointed in 1981 to be the first woman to sit on the Supreme Court, O’Connor was positioned such that half the court was more conservative and half the court was less so. There were very few decisions in which O’Connor was on the losing side and a great many where her judicial thinking determined the course of the nation’s laws.
*
Upon retiring, O’Connor was asked what she predicted for the court in the 21st Century. The jurist replied that just as matters of race had dominated the court during the 20th Century, the upcoming years would focus on matters of sexual orientation.
*
Now, even though she has stepped down from the SCOTUS, O’Connor will be – at least tangentially – addressing same sex marriage.
*
Next week the Iowa State Bar Association will host a panel to discuss judicial appointment, and O’Connor will come to advocate for experience, temperament, and merit as qualifiers rather than populist appeal. Sandra Day O’Connor will take part in a panel discussion Sept. 8 advocating judge retention based on merits rather than political whim.
*
I agree with her that the people are best served by having one governmental branch that is not subject to the whim of the latest political trend or the most affluent contributor.

Frisco North Carolina Takes a Beating

Over the last 15 years or more I have surfed many times not far from the Frisco fishing pier on Hatteras Island and have seen the pier withstand waves breaking a a height almost equal to the pier. From the photo above it looks like waves generated by Hurricane Earl may well take down the pier - or a substantial piece of it. Hopefully, the town and people of Frisco make it through the storm. Hurricane Isabel in 2003 breached the island about a mike south of the pier and wiped out a wonderful bakery that had been a standard stop on our "boys surf trips" when my son was younger.

*

Meanwhile, it looks increasingly that Earl will be a non-event for the Hampton Roads area. Nonetheless, the boyfriend and I put in place our preparedness plans.

Catholic Church Bitch Slaped for 'Selfish and Hedonistic Wasteland' Statement

Yesterday, in advance of Pope Benedict XVI's state visit to the UK, Edmund Adamus, an adviser to the Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, said that Britain: had become "the geopolitical epicentre of the culture of death," had been "the most permissively anti-life and progressively anti-family and marriage, in essence one of the most anti-Catholic landscapes, culturally speaking, and represented a selfish, hedonistic wasteland objectifies women for sexual gratification". This from a spokesman for a religious institution that has knowingly covered up the worldwide rape of children and youth - not to mention other reprehensible actions. Now, an op-ed in the Independent has fired back and lays out the case as to why Britain is far more moral than the hypocrites and scolds within the Catholic Church hierarchy and Catholic apologists such as William Donohue and the Knights of Columbus. Here are some highlights:
*
I woke up as usual yesterday in the "geopolitical epicentre of the culture of death" – and very pleasant it was. . . . congratulating myself on being a citizen of a country that doesn't stone women to death, hang gay men from cranes or murder people who change their religion. I mean, how great is that? I love living in the "selfish, hedonistic wasteland" that is London – both quotes come from one Edmund Adamus, who is apparently a senior British Catholic and an adviser to the Archbishop of Westminster – and I just wish more nations would follow our example.
*
Frankly, I'm tired of hearing religious bigots running down this country. For all its faults – crap public transport, Nick Clegg popping up everywhere and a national obsession with Simon Cowell – Britain is still one of the most civilised places in the world to live. It's not Iran, where prisoners are subjected to rape and mock executions; it isn't Saudi Arabia either, despite Mr Adamus's downright peculiar belief that we're more anti-Catholic than the Chinese or the Saudis. (Might I suggest he tries walking along a street in Riyadh carrying a crucifix and a Bible?) The Catholic Church has picked up this habit of dissing secular culture from hardline Muslims, who dislike pretty much the same things: gay relationships, equal rights for women and the freedom to mock religion.
*
This latest row has brought into the open what many people suspected in the run-up to a controversial papal visit to Britain; some Vatican officials, it seems, are alarmed by the threat of demonstrations and increasingly regard the UK as a hostile country.
*
The confusion that's been exposed by this latest attack on life-loving secular culture is actually a very old one, namely the pernicious myth that morality resides in sexual behaviour. Sexuality has always been an obsession for Christian churches and the Vatican's teachings on the subject are so severe that millions of Catholics – including Cherie Blair, wife of the former Prime Minister, who wrote in her autobiography about her contraceptive methods – simply ignore them.
*
[T]here are more important issues on which the moral standing of a nation should be judged. Here's one of them: when an earthquake devastated Haiti earlier this year, British donations to disaster relief eventually reached £101m. Now that floods have devastated Pakistan, leaving millions of people homeless, the British public has contributed another £42m to the Disasters Emergency Committee. Does that really sound like the response of a nation which is supposedly the "geopolitical epicentre of the culture of death"?

Thursday Male Beauty

DADT's Continuing Damage to Troop Safety

While anti-gay lunatics like Elaine Donnelly whine and carry on that allowing gays to serve openly in the U.S. military will harm military readiness and damage troop safety and morale. Thus, they claim DADT protects our troops. The sad truth, of course, is that DADT does just the opposite of what the wingnuts allege and that repeatedly DADT has meant the loss of much needed specialists, especially Arabic speaking linguists. Servicemembers United has a new ad that brings this point home through an interview with an active duty Marine discussing the dire need for Arabic linguists and the losses he has experienced because his unit was in need of one. The video from the ad cane be found here. Additional ads can be found here.

*

DADT is - no matter how one tries to dress it up - nothing more than religious based discrimination written into the federal law. The federal DOMA is more of the same - in my opinion - unconstitutional infusion of religious belief into the nation's laws.

Priestly Celibacy and Afghanistan's "Dancing Boys"

Having been raised Roman Catholic I grew up well versed in the Church's obsession with all things sexual and the sometimes less than subtle message that women were temptresses looking to corrupt men and/or dirty. After all, Eve was and is depicted as responsible for mankind's fall in the Garden of Eden. Add in the celibacy requirement for priests who are banned from marrying women and the typical older parish priest's lack of access to women who were relegated to being house keepers at the rectory and and members of the altar guild who washed altar clothes, etc, and it makes for a psychologically bizarre reality. In the wake of the Church's worldwide sex abuse scandal where the majority of victims have been boys and youths, the Church hierarchy and Catholics with an Opus Dei mindset have sought to blame the sex abuse scandal on gays within the priesthood. Indeed, these folks have sought to blame the church wide problem on modernity, Vatican II's liberalization of the Church - anything that places the blame on something other than the Church's own insane rules and sexual hang ups toward women in particular.

*

A look at Afghanistan and the wide spread societal phenomenon of "dancing boys" and "boy players" would seem to demonstrate that crazy religious taboos and harsh demeaning treatment of women can indeed set the stage for widespread homosexual conduct even among those who view themselves as heterosexual. A story in the San Francisco Chronicle documents this long standing societal practice in Afghanistan which in some ways mirrors the Church hierarchy's approach of turning a blind eye toward sexual abuse by priests. Here are some highlights:
*
Western forces fighting in southern Afghanistan had a problem. Too often, soldiers on patrol passed an older man walking hand-in-hand with a pretty young boy.
*
For centuries, Afghan men have taken boys, roughly 9 to 15 years old, as lovers. Some research suggests that half the Pashtun tribal members in Kandahar and other southern towns are bacha baz, the term for an older man with a boy lover. Literally it means "boy player." The men like to boast about it. "Having a boy has become a custom for us," Enayatullah, a 42-year-old in Baghlan province, told a Reuters reporter. "Whoever wants to show off should have a boy."
*
In Kandahar, population about 500,000, and other towns, dance parties are a popular, often weekly, pastime. Young boys dress up as girls, wearing makeup and bells on their feet, and dance for a dozen or more leering middle-aged men who throw money at them and then take them home. A recent State Department report called "dancing boys" a "widespread, culturally sanctioned form of male rape."
*
Sociologists and anthropologists say the problem results from perverse interpretation of Islamic law. Women are simply unapproachable. Afghan men cannot talk to an unrelated woman until after proposing marriage. Before then, they can't even look at a woman, except perhaps her feet. Otherwise she is covered, head to ankle. "How can you fall in love if you can't see her face," 29-year-old Mohammed Daud told reporters. "We can see the boys, so we can tell which are beautiful."
*
Even after marriage, many men keep their boys, suggesting a loveless life at home. A favored Afghan expression goes: "Women are for children, boys are for pleasure." Fundamentalist imams, exaggerating a biblical passage on menstruation, teach that women are "unclean" and therefore distasteful.
*
That helps explain why women are hidden away - and stoned to death if they are perceived to have misbehaved. Islamic law also forbids homosexuality. But the pedophiles explain that away. It's not homosexuality, they aver, because they aren't in love with their boys.
*
As one boy, in tow of a man he called "my lord," told the Reuters reporter: "Once I grow up, I will be an owner, and I will have my own boys."

More Wedneday Male Beauty

Olympic gold medalist Matthew Mitcham

Hurricane Earl - Tedious Waiting and Wondering

I'm the type that likes to know what's going to happen, prepare for it, and then get it over with. Unfortunately, Hurricane Earl is not cooperating and the waiting and wondering continues to drive me crazy. Living on a tidal creek and across the street from Hampton Roads harbor in a home that has flooded before, the boyfriend and I have taken the storm warnings seriously and have completed the outside precautions in case the storm hits harder than forecast: the good car is in a parking garage in downtown Hampton (on the second floor) and all of the patio and deck furniture and the boyfriend's many potted plants have been moved into the shed or the garage. *

Hopefully, by morning we will have a better read on possible storm surge levels and we can decide whether to put the newly built flood doors in place and move furnishings to to the second floor. Unlike during the 2009 "nor-Ida" storm, we now have a more or less water proof first floor so that any clean up should be far, far easier. I will keep everyone posted on events as they unfold.

Will Conservatives Co-Opt Gay Rights Issues? One Democrat Says Maybe

It's certainly no secret to readers that I am far past being just a little disgusted with Barack Obama's betrayal of LGBT Americans. He courted our votes and more particularly our money during his presidential campaign and has delivered nothing in return. The feckless Congressional Democrats by and large have been little better. One would almost think that a deliberate effort is being made to alienate LGBT voters. Some even say leaving an opportunity for moderate Republicans - rare breed that they are - to court LGBT voters. Do the Democrats and Obama in particular really want to allow themselves to be on the wrong side of history given the support for LBT equality among younger voters? Sam Stein has a post at Huffington Post that looks at what some are viewing as Barack Obama's error in allowing Republicans an opening to potentially Co-opt LGBT issues or, at least, use Obama's failures against embattled Democrats. Here are some highlights:
*
The notion that the gay rights community would abandon the Obama White House over its unwillingness to fully embrace their legislative priorities may seem absurd to the casual political observer. But the recent embrace of same-sex marriage by prominent conservatives, most notably former RNC Chair Ken Mehlman, has some Democratic operatives concerned.
*
On Monday, former McCain campaign manager Steve Schmidt argued that there was a "strong conservative case to be made in favor of gay marriage" and that more and more Republicans are dropping their opposition to the cause. Shortly thereafter, a prominent Democratic consultant got in touch with the Huffington Post to make the case that the Obama administration risks losing the gay rights community (or at least depressing their votes) with its tepid embrace of their priorities.
*
I think they have been put in a tough place by these conservatives and they should be," the consultant said. "There are a whole group of people who are to the left of them [the Obama administration] on gay rights. And they are Republicans. It should make them feel uncomfortable."
*
Though hardly a barometer for the Republican Party's collective psyche, John McCain's daughter, Meghan, made overtures along these lines on Tuesday night. "We get the bad rap as Republicans being against gay marriage," she told Fox News. "[Obama] isn't doing anything for the gay community."
*
She's right - Obama isn't doing anything for the majority of the LGBT community. Policy changes that impact a small number of LGBT federal employees are not the change that Obama promised. Nor do these tiny mincing steps do anything for those who still lack basic employment non-discrimination protections. With Margaret Hoover, Laura Bush, Meghan McCain and her mother, Ted Olson, and for God sakes even Dick Cheney more supportive on the issue of gay marriage than Obama, stranger things have happened than a possible future GOP move to the left of the Democrats on LGBT issues. Yes, it's true that the Christianists within the GOP will have a conniption fit if the GOP begins to jettison its anti-gay plank. On the other hand, time and demographics are on the side of proponents of LGBT equality. As crazy as many in the GOP are at present, anyone with an eye to the future ought to realize Obama has made the Democrats vulnerable on the issue.

Wednesday Male Beauty

Mexico City Opens Office to Woo LGBT Honeymooners

A while back I noted how Mexico City, Mexico planned to woo same sex honeymooners following the legalization of gay marriage in the Mexican capital. Now, the city has formally opened the new gay tourism office. CNN has coverage of this step in a country which despite severe crime problems and poverty is out stripping the United States in terms of marriage equality. I find it nothing short of humiliating that the USA is increasingly shown to be a fraud when it comes to equality and freedom of religion for all of its citizens. Here in Virginia and under federal laws such as DOMA and DADT the religious dogma of Christianists has been made the defacto state and national religion. Here are highlights from CNN:
*
Mexico City, Mexico (CNN) -- As more governments approve same-sex marriage laws, officials here are hoping to attract a growing part of the tourism market: gay honeymoons.
*
The first couple to wed under Argentina's recent law allowing same-sex marriages nationwide arrives in Mexico this week on an all-expenses-paid trip -- part of a new push by the government in Mexico City, Mexico to woo gay travelers. "We hope that many same-sex couples who get married around the world spend their honeymoons here," says Alejandro Rojas, the city's tourism secretary.
*
In July, the city opened an office aimed at catering to gay tourists that officials describe as the first of its kind in Latin America. "We are a very tolerant, liberal, avant-garde city," Rojas says. Officials inaugurated the new office by cutting a rainbow-colored ribbon. Rojas said the office's goal is to make Mexico City the No. 1 gay-friendly destination in Latin America.
*
For years, it was rare to see gay rights issues gaining traction in Mexico and other Latin American countries. Not anymore, according to Javier Corrales, a professor of political science at Amherst College in Massachusetts. "Latin America currently has some of the most gay-friendly cities in the developing world," says Corrales, who ranks cities' gay-friendliness in a new book he co-edited, "The Politics of Sexuality in Latin America."
*
In addition to training local hotels and restaurants on how to be sensitive to gay clientele, officials say they hope to create maps of the city highlighting attractions for gay tourists and possibly host an international gay tourism conference. Hotels, restaurants and businesses in Mexico City have responded positively to the program so far, Rojas said.
*
Gay tourists represent 15 percent of the world's tourism market, and they spend more money than heterosexual tourists when they travel, he says. Recognizing the commercial value of gay tourism is a positive step, Navarro says, but it also shows that more social change is needed. "I hope that there comes a day in the future when they don't have to have an office for gay tourists, just like there isn't an office for Asian tourists," Navarro says.
*
Meanwhile, southeastern Virginia continues to keep its head stuck in the sand and kisses the ass of folks like Pat Robertson and his fellow theocrats. Ditto for the religious extremists who currently occupy the Virginia governor's mansion and office of attorney general.

Brian Brown - Still Sucking on the Anti-Gay Teet

Click to enlarge image.

Having followed the professional Christian set for well over a decade, one thing becomes readily discernible - many of its talking heads bounce from one homophobic organization to another, never holding a real job. Instead, they move from state based anti-gay groups to more national level organizations and the lies that they disseminate never change no matter what legitimate medical and mental health experts say about sexual orientation. Some of these professional gay haters are Peter LaBarbera, Robert Knight, Tony Perkins - and NOM's Brian Brown. Jeremy Hooper has a piece at Good As You that documents that Brown has been sucking on the anti-gay money teet for over five years. In fact, five years ago Brown was heading up the Family Institute of Connecticut and peddling Truth Won Out's bogus reparative therapy program - a therapy condemned by the APA. Here are some highlights from Jeremy's comments:
*
Nowadays, National Organization For Marriage president Brian Brown is way too politically savvy to encourage gays into scientifically discredited "ex-gay" change. But that wasn't always the case. Back when Brian was heading up the Family Institute of Connecticut and the national interest was much more lacking, a less public version of Brian was all about helping parents "prevent your child from embracing this destructive way of life"
*
What do we hear from NOM all the time? False victimization. Charges that Brian and crew will be unfairly labeled "bigots." An attempt to flip the script to make the anti-LGBT crowd seem like the sympathetic figures. But here we have it, almost five years ago to the date: Brian ignoring a preponderance of credible science to say that gays can and should pray away the gay.
*
Brown, like his compatriots of the far right Christianist set, is a con artist and charlatan. Sadly, the main stream media continues to lack the balls - and integrity - to expose these people for frauds and demagogues.

Younger Voters Apathetic - Voted for Change and Got Nothing

I bookmarked this article a day ago, but the topic is still relevant: younger voters who surged out to vote for Barack Obama and promises of systemic change are apathetic and inclined to stay home this coming November. Words do have meaning and broken campaign promises can have dramatic consequences - something the Democrats may discover in spades two months from now. Yes, the GOP has been the "Party of No" and has tried to obstruct any and all change. But the bottom line is that Obama and the Congressional Democrats have been spineless wimps who have time and time again failed to use their majorities to enact the legislation and programs promised. The result is that if Democrats are decimated in November, they need look no further than in the mirror to see the cause of their misfortunes. Standing at the head of the line for blame will be Obama who has refused again and again to be a LEADER. Now the country is poised to suffer from that failure of leadership and refusal of Congressional Democrats to deliver on promises. Here are highlights from the Seattle Times:
*
Getting young voters back to the polls this year is critical for Democrats' hopes of hanging on to majorities in Congress. But with the economy struggling, U.S. troops still in Afghanistan and Iraq, domestic issues stalled amid partisan wrangling, and no presidential race at the top of the ballot, that won't be easy.
*
The 2008 election also marked the first time since 1992 that a majority of voting-age Americans under 30 turned out, according to the nonpartisan Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE).
*
Getting those young voters back to the polls this year is critical for Democrats' hopes of hanging on to majorities in Congress, particularly in the Senate. . things haven't really improved much," said David Ruiz, 22, a Capitol Hill resident and University of Washington student.
*
According to a CNN poll in July, only 27 percent of Democrats were extremely or very enthusiastic about voting this year, compared with 42 percent of Republicans.
*
"We felt it was our opportunity as young people to change the face of American politics. I don't sense that young voters feel they have that same connection or influence this year." Anderstone, of Tacoma, who worked on the successful primary-election campaign of Democrat Laurie Jinkins in the 27th Legislative District, said the bitterness he's heard on the campaign trail isn't directed at the president in particular, but at politics in general.
*
Disenchantment with Obama is helping recruit young Republican voters, said Lisa Shin, 30, executive director of the King County Republican Party. "Kids are graduating from college and there are no jobs out there for them. So it has started to affect them personally."
*
The Obama agenda? You mean there is one? One would never know from his failed leadership and double speak be one LGBT, Hispanic, some other minority. It's all talk and little or no delivery.