The Climate of Hate - Handiwork of the Right

We still don't know what motivated Jared Loughner to go on his killing rampage, but hearing and reading the constant message from the hate-filled and lunatic elements of the GOP party base and "lock and load" statements from the "Loon of the North," Sarah Palin, can only have help foster an atmosphere where violence - and gun violence in particular - would appear all the more acceptable to someone mentally unbalanced. As noted many times, the hate and vitriol that is the norm on numerous far right websites and Fox News does have consequences and none of them good. Paul Krugman has an excellent column in the New York Times that looks at the situation and the responsibility of those who have shamelessly fanned the flames of hatred for ratings or political game. These people do bear responsibility no matter who much the duck and weave to deny their piece in the larger picture. The added irony, of course, is that so many of these merchants of hatred wrap themselves in the flag of Christian religiocity. Here are column highlights:
*
I’ve had a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach ever since the final stages of the 2008 campaign. I remembered the upsurge in political hatred after Bill Clinton’s election in 1992 — an upsurge that culminated in the Oklahoma City bombing. And you could see, just by watching the crowds at McCain-Palin rallies, that it was ready to happen again. The Department of Homeland Security reached the same conclusion: in April 2009 an internal report warned that right-wing extremism was on the rise, with a growing potential for violence.
*
Conservatives denounced that report. But there has, in fact, been a rising tide of threats and vandalism aimed at elected officials, including both Judge John Roll, who was killed Saturday, and Representative Gabrielle Giffords. One of these days, someone was bound to take it to the next level. And now someone has.
*
It’s true that the shooter in Arizona appears to have been mentally troubled. But that doesn’t mean that his act can or should be treated as an isolated event, having nothing to do with the national climate.
*
Last spring Politico.com reported on a surge in threats against members of Congress, which were already up by 300 percent. A number of the people making those threats had a history of mental illness — but something about the current state of America has been causing far more disturbed people than before to act out their illness by threatening, or actually engaging in, political violence.
*
The point is that there’s room in a democracy for people who ridicule and denounce those who disagree with them; there isn’t any place for eliminationist rhetoric, for suggestions that those on the other side of a debate must be removed from that debate by whatever means necessary. And it’s the saturation of our political discourse — and especially our airwaves — with eliminationist rhetoric that lies behind the rising tide of violence.
*
Where’s that toxic rhetoric coming from? Let’s not make a false pretense of balance: it’s coming, overwhelmingly, from the right. It’s hard to imagine a Democratic member of Congress urging constituents to be “armed and dangerous” without being ostracized; but Representative Michele Bachmann, who did just that, is a rising star in the G.O.P.
*
[E]ven if hate is what many want to hear, that doesn’t excuse those who pander to that desire. They should be shunned by all decent people. Unfortunately, that hasn’t been happening: the purveyors of hate have been treated with respect, even deference, by the G.O.P. establishment.
*
So will the Arizona massacre make our discourse less toxic? It’s really up to G.O.P. leaders. Will they accept the reality of what’s happening to America, and take a stand against eliminationist rhetoric? Or will they try to dismiss the massacre as the mere act of a deranged individual, and go on as before? If Arizona promotes some real soul-searching, it could prove a turning point. If it doesn’t, Saturday’s atrocity will be just the beginning.
*
Sadly, I don't hold out too much hope that the GOP will act responsibly. That party's cynical use of crazies is what has helped get us to this point.

Enough Agonizing, Mr. President

There has been much coverage of Barack Obama's confession that he's "evolving" on the issue of same sex marriage - which in my view is yet another example of Obama trying to have his cake and eat it too by seeking to placate the LGBT portion of the Democratic Party base yet at the same time stroke the fundies like his BFF Rick Warren. As discussed in a recent post, if one is really true to the Bible, then polygamy, not marriage between one man and one woman, is the true form of "Biblical marriage." Thus, Obama needs to get over the attempts at fence sitting and admit that CIVIL marriage and religious marriage are two utterly separate things and get on board the civil marriage for same sex couples bandwagon. The torturous prevarication is truly growing tiresome. The editorial board of the Los Angeles Times agrees and has taken Mr. Obama to task. Here are some highlights:

*

We can't peer into President Obama's soul, but his statement last week that he is "struggling" with whether to endorse same-sex marriage is open to an unedifying interpretation. Given the president's support of gay rights in other contexts, his opposition to marriage equality raises the question of whether the struggle Obama referred to is between politics and principle. If so, we hope principle will prevail.

*

"As I've said, my feelings about this are constantly evolving. I struggle with this. I have friends, I have people who work for me, who are in powerful, strong, long-lasting gay or lesbian unions. And they are extraordinary people, and this is something that means a lot to them and they care deeply about.

*

The president could spare himself that struggle if he would analyze the issue logically. If he did, he would recognize that it's irrational, once same-sex couples are given the practical advantages of marriage, to deny them married status. Civil unions, while a vast improvement over the absence of any recognition of same-sex relationships, are almost by definition second-class arrangements.

*

The temptation is to think that Obama knows this, and that his reluctance to endorse marriage equality is more political than personal. When he ran for the presidency in 2008, it was the conventional wisdom that supporting gay marriage would be politically fatal. With shifts in public attitudes, that probably will not be the case in 2012. According to the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, 42% of adults now favor same-sex marriage, compared to 37% in 2009. The trend seems clear.

*

What should determine his position is logic and the fact that same-sex couples across America, not just those in his circle, yearn for recognition of their relationships. Enough agonizing, Mr. President. Support marriage equality.

John McCain: The Man Who Never Was

I have commented on John McCain - recent nemesis to LGBT Americans due to his opposition to DADT repeal - on a number of occasions and basically posed the question of WTF happened to the man. I and many others once respected the man and supported him in his 2000 bid for the GOP nomination for president. Ten years later, I could not stand the man and his pick of Sarah Palin, a cunning cretin, sealed the deal where even holding my nose I could not have voted for the man. Is the 2010 John McCain the result of senility, obscene political cynicism, or did we simply never know the real McCain? An article in the November issue of Vanity Fair suggests that the latter may be the correct answer with McCain showing his willingness to sell his soul to remain in office. Sometimes it is better to fade from the scene with dignity and honor. Sadly, that is not the route that McCain has followed. Here are some article highlights:
*
Desperate to keep his Senate seat, John McCain repudiated his record, his principles, and even his maverick reputation, entrenching himself as the anti-Obama. Which raises the issue of whether the leader so many Americans admired—and so many journalists covered—ever truly existed.
*
[I]t fell to Hayworth, a glib galoot who was twice informally ranked among the dumbest members of Congress during his 12 years in the House, to deliver the dead-on zinger that summed up where McCain has found himself in this strange and angry political season, struggling not to win the presidency but simply to hold on to the job which defines him, and which is all he has left. “It’s really sad to see John McCain, who should be revered as a statesman, basically reduced to a political shape-shifter,” Hayworth said.
*
McCain would go on to trounce Hayworth in the August primary, by 24 points, but not before turning himself into an off-putting, almost unrecognizable political creature. . . . . McCain not only sold his soul, he went through a small fortune, spending $20 million to blow Hayworth out of the water. And far from seeing Hayworth’s challenge as a depressing indignity, McCain seemed to enjoy the opportunity.
*
The prevailing question about John McCain this year is: What happened? What happened to that other John McCain, the refreshingly unpredictable figure who stood apart from his colleagues and seemed to promise something better than politics as usual? The question may miss the point. It’s quite possible that nothing at all has changed about John McCain, a ruthless and self-centered survivor who endured five and a half years in captivity in North Vietnam, and who once told Torie Clarke that his favorite animal was the rat, because it is cunning and eats well. It’s possible to see McCain’s entire career as the story of a man who has lived in the moment, who has never stood for any overriding philosophy in any consistent way, and who has been willing to do all that it takes to get whatever it is he wants. He himself said, in the thick of his battle with Hayworth, “I’ve always done whatever’s necessary to win.” Maybe the rest of us just misunderstood.
*
As his daughter Meghan recently wrote, he has always been more of a craps guy than a strategic poker player. He has never been a party leader, like his old friend Bob Dole, of Kansas, or a wise elder, like his colleague Dick Lugar, of Indiana, or a Republican moderate, like Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, of Maine. He flies solo, first, last, and always, and his paramount cause has always been his own. That is the bracing reality of John McCain. It is the tragedy, too.
*
[T]here is no doubt that being John McCain 2010 is a colossal comedown for a man who was described just three years ago by The Almanac of American Politics as “the closest thing our politics has to a national hero.”
*
His choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate was, of course, the apogee of his hotheaded, cold-blooded self-protectiveness. Denied his own first choice, his friend Joe Lieberman, the Independent-Democrat from Connecticut, he opted instead for the only candidate his advisers thought stood a chance of reinforcing his much-dimmed reputation as a maverick. But in doing so he chose a person so manifestly unqualified for the presidency as to make him look like little more than a hack.
*
McCain and his wife, Cindy, have been living essentially separate lives for years. She has spent most of her time in Arizona while he has spent the workweek in a Virginia condominium where, he once told me, he sometimes went months at a time without ever entering the living room, simply coming home to the kitchen and bedroom late at night and leaving again early the next morning.
*
The real McCain will be lost to history. He’s got years ahead of him, but he is lost to history. The narrative is the narrative, completely untrue and unfair, but he is the old guy who ran a derogatory campaign and can’t remember how many houses he had.” Yes, you can make that argument—that the grand sweep of history, in all its majesty and indifference, will leave behind a false version of John McCain. But you can also make another argument, and it’s the one John McCain himself has been making powerfully by his behavior and example. It is that history has revealed the real McCain at last.

New DNC Chair No Real Friend to Gay Rights

UPDATED: Ironically - or perhaps not - HRC is singing Tim Kaine's praises even though when contacted by my client for help, HRC did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, not wanting to "upset" Governor Kaine who I guess might not attend HRC parties if "upset." Kaine is cited by HRC for helping turn Virginia Blue even though in reality it is (1) Virginia's changing demographics, (2) the horrific track record of the Chimperator's regime, and (3) Obama's ground game that won the day. Once again, HRC is out of touch with reality. Yet another reason to NOT renew my HRC membership - at least not until it gets new leadership that doesn't focus on being a lap dog for elected officials.

*

The Virginian Pilot and many other news outlets are reporting that Virginia Governor, Timothy Kaine will be the next Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. I am less than enthused by Kaine's selection. Why one might ask? Because when examined closely, Kaine is weak on gay rights and may represent yet another case like Barack Obama throwing gays under the bus after cynically courting our votes and soliciting our money as evidenced by the selection of Christianist Rick Warren to give the inaugural invocation. At least with Warren, his appearance will be short lived and he will not be influencing Democratic Party policy. My prediction is that Kaine will do absolutely nothing to further LGBT equality as DNC chair. Zero. Nada.

*

On the surface, Kaine can claim to be "gay friendly" - at least when compared to say Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell who tows the line with Daddy Dobson's Virginia affiliate, The Family Foundation, and has to date not found a piece of anti-gay legislation he cannot willingly embrace. Kaine did sign Executive Order 1 (2006) purporting to protect gay state employees upon taking office, thereby extending the policy of incoming U.S. Senator Mark Warner who Kaine succeeded as governor. But in terms of making sure that the Executive Order is enforced in a competent and timely manner, Kaine has been 100% missing in action. Moreover, the alleged investigation by the governmental department supposedly charged with enforcing the Executive Order of a complaint filed by a client against the Virginia Museum of Natural History has by the agency's own prior statements already taken 440+ days longer than it should have. And still no determination is in sight. I've even speculated that Kaine wants to drag the matter out long enough so that he can be out of office when a decision is rendered and thus avoid a show down with Bob "Taliban Bob" McDonnell who has issued a non-binding opinion that the Order exceeded Kaine's authority as governor.

*

Save and except for the theoretical protections afforded LGBT state employees under Executive Order 1 (2006), LGBT Virginians have ZERO employment non-discrimination protections. That's right. Zero protection from being summarily fired due to their sexual orientation. Sadly, Kaine's execution of Executive Order 1(2006) appears in retrospect to have been window dressing he never planned to have enforced based on a recent mealy mouthed letter from Kaine's office. The Executive Order was apparently a mere crumb thrown for show to the LGBT Virginians who helped get him elected. It is beyond troubling to me that someone with such a weak commitment to LGBT rights and equality is now DNC chairman. Maybe we should stop giving our hard earned money to such cynical and disingenuous politicians.

*

NOTE: I have documentation on all of the above statements.