When terrorists were Irish Catholics...

Reading stories like this really pisses me off.

NEW YORK -- For several weeks, the Associated Press has reported extensively on the New York Police Department’s secret surveillance of Muslim neighborhoods, including a lengthy report Thursday about an initiative specifically targeting Moroccans where they eat, shop and pray.

New York’s top tabloids, however, aren't applauding the AP’s dogged reporting in the face of early denials from the police department. Instead, they've given support to the NYPD's just-revealed methods for monitoring Muslims.

“The Associated Press has added, unintentionally, to its flattering profile of the NYPD’s anti-terror squad with a report on how a first-rate intelligence unit does business,” the Daily News editorial board wrote Friday.

The editors argued that "to AP's intrepid, if not obsessed, reporters, these basic and benign measures are a scandal." However, the editors continued, “they just don't get it, and, with the exception of the most knee-jerk civil liberties activists, they are essentially alone in not getting that the NYPD is valuably scoping out the who, what and where of neighborhoods by observing little more than activities in public view.”

Let's consider what's going on here. The NYPD, in cahoots with the CIA, has begun investigating Muslims for the simple act of being Muslims. These aren't people who are suspected to be terrorists, these are people who show up to their houses of worship to pray. This is patently unconstitutional, f'ing insane, but because they're Muslims, not only is little being done about it, but all too many people in the country cheer this kind of crap with glee. Most others, including the mainstream media, just don't seem to care.

Let's set the record straight. When Irish Catholics were the best known terrorists in the West and there was legitimate fear in the streets of one of our nation's biggest and most important allies -- people that blew up and maimed god knows how many UK citizens, and killed at least one US citizen -- we obeyed our constitutional obligations, including due process, and didn't resort to something like allowing the NYPD to spy on US citizens who just so happened to be Irish Catholics, who went to mass at Irish Catholic churches in NYC. We even did this knowing that there were sympathizers and those who would directly aid the Irish Republican Army in the US, including someone who now sits in the US Congress. Why? Because we are a nation of laws!

Now that our country is most concerned about extremist terrorists who just so happen to be Muslims, everything's changed. Because they're Muslims -- because they're different from "us" in the view of most Americans -- apparently, it's somehow become okay to ignore constitutional rights obligations, to count them as something less than human.

Well, that sort of thinking disgusts me. Muslims in this country are entitled to ALL the same legal protections, including our constitutionally-guaranteed rights to due process. If we ignore these rights for Muslims, it won't be long before we ignore them for people who are friends with Muslims, and then it won't be long before we ignore them for everyone. As Benjamin Franklin is often attributed for saying, he who sacrifices liberty for security deserves neither.

The Radical Homosexual Agenda

Barney Frank at his best.

DADT Repeal with Kara Suffredini from MassEquality

Mike and I had Kara Suffredini, MassEquality's still-new (and very savvy) director, on our latest LeftAhead podcast to discuss Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal and the state of affairs of GLBT civil rights in New England and beyond. Lots of good, frank talk -- this show's not to be missed by anyone who cares about GLBT civil rights. Suffredini knows what she's talking about.

You can listen by clicking the link or using the Blog Talk Radio player to the right. Enjoy!

Yes, we should thank Brown, and scorn him

As a lot of people are quickly figuring out, Brown's come around to supporting the proposed Don't Ask Don't Dell repeal, which will (eventually) allow gay and lesbian members of the military to serve openly. This is a huge political victory for civil rights, and is a huge step forward to achieving the votes necessary to get'er done. Brown deserves credit for coming around on this issue.

He also deserves scorn. He's up there with Republicans blocking almost everything on a daily basis. His opposition to extending unemployment benefits killed those benefits for people who've been out of work for a lengthy period of time (and just before Christmas), saying it would hurt the deficit. Meanwhile, he's perfectly willing to pass tax cuts for the uber rich, and hold up other bills until it passes, like a toddler throwing a tantrum fit. The tax cuts for the rich are one of the two or three biggest reasons why this country's deficit exploded post-Bush, an extension of them would cost this country $700 billion over ten years, all of which would count against the deficit. An extension of this country's meager unemployment benefits is pennies on the dollar compared to the tax cuts for the rich, so it's pretty clear he doesn't actually care about them. He just cares about making sure the deficit money government spends is going to the ultra rich.

So where do we, the people, and Senator Brown stand? He's decidedly a mixed bag, but clearly more bad than good. We should be happy that we can swing him on a few important issues in the meantime, but it's clear he's not our Senator for the future. It'll be important to make sure the public understands just how dangerous Brown is on economic issues, and not buy into his 'moderation' because he'll swing with us on occasion when it comes to social issues. Otherwise, we may all end up in his poor house.

The anti-gay "Bradley effect."

Interesting blurb over at dkos today.

There is a sort of "Bradley Effect" for gay-rights ballot questions.

The Haas Jr. Foundation hired NYU political scientist Patrick J. Egan to study 167 polls in the 33 states that had a gay marriage ban from 1998-2009 – and compared it with the results on Election Day. And as we already knew – having painfully experienced this in state after state – the results after votes are counted are worse than what polls had said. Moreover, as Dr. Egan reported, poll results throughout the campaign were mostly static.

Did people lie? Yes and no. Egan’s analysis showed that polls accurately predicted the pro-equality vote – i.e., people who voted “no” on Prop 8 – but that they undercounted people who voted to ban gay marriage. So if a pre-election poll would show us winning a plurality of 48-45 (which campaigns find encouraging), it would mean that we lost 52-48.

Unlike a traditional Bradley Effect, in which voters say they'll vote for the black candidate, then vote against it, in this case, a chunk of haters simply were too embarrassed to say they were haters, and claimed they were undecided.

This means that any gay rights group trying to fight off a ballot question -- or fight for one to pass, as it may come in the future -- should just assume "undecided" means no. Don't go into election day without striving to win a majority of support in the polling data ahead of time, not just the plurality.

Brown's Firm "Embarrassed" Over DADT Poll

Apparently, they didn't want to let it get out that Brown's against 77% of Massachusetts on Civil Rights. Interesting stuff here, but let's all be glad that the poll Brown "never intended to see the light of day," was released.

One final point: Why on Earth is HRC associated with DCI? This news does nothing to dissuade critics who have long feared HRC's leadership is far too influenced/controlled by the Log Cabin wing of the GLBT population. Eww...

Even if HRC did right here, this does little to change my mind that the group just needs to go away. It does the GLBT community few favors, and mostly represents a giant sucking sound ($$).

Slap in the Face on Transgender Rights (Et Tu, Rep. Story?)

The State House News Service posted a hit piece today on behalf of some real A-holes in the State House who don't want to see an inclusive Democratic State Committee, picked up by the Boston Globe. Why do I call it a hit piece? Because not one viewpoint or quote was printed in support of the measure the article was about: creating two transgender and two bisexual seats to the Democratic State Committee.

With hundreds and hundreds of people on the state committee, many of them party elites who barely lift a finger when it matters most (don't want to get those fingernails dirty by lifting up a phone or knocking on a door), there are some real jerks on the state committee who don't want to see transgender or bisexual people serve in any minority seat -- of which there are over a hundred.

That these forces weren't present to make a big fuss about this at the sub-committee meeting where it was proposed and passed -- almost unanimously -- as a recommendation to the convention for passage shouldn't be shocking, nor that they declined to appear at the previous state committee meeting where this was up for debate. The forces of intolerance prefer to work behind the scenes, like sending out anonymous press releases to whomever will print it.

The most absurd statement was this one, from Senator Baddour.

“"The fact of the matter is, the leadership of the state Democratic Party has lost sight of what matters to working men and women, and as important as transgender rights are, bisexual rights are, what really matters today are jobs, the economy, and putting people back to work,"” Baddour said. "We shouldn’t be putting stories like this out there."”

Really, Senator? If you don't want this to be a story, why are you and your legislative allies in the House and Senate making it one? No one would be paying attention to this story if the people who are opposed to transgender rights weren't making this an issue. No one ever cares what goes on at State Conventions, very few papers even cover them anymore (and I should know, since I normally go to them with a Press Badge). This isn't about opponents not wanting to create a big issue that could cost votes in November, this is about opponents not wanting transgender people to have equal rights in society. Period.

***

What is particularly frustrating here is that Representative Ellen Story, who lost her spine at some point since Speaker DeLeo made her a part of leadership, has completely lost sight of who she is and what she supposedly believes in. Leadership is what's behind keeping the transgender rights bill in the House from passing -- it has enough co-sponsors in that body this year to actually make a majority all on its lonesome, but leadership doesn't want it passed, so has nixed it.

Certain members of legislative leadership don't want this state committee provision passed, because for whatever absurd reason, they see it as linked to the transgender rights bill buried in the House -- when it's really only about ensuring that the many hard working transgender activists in the Democratic Party are able to have a voice, however small it would be, in the DSC. Now they have their "progressive" puppet out there trying to squash any talk of transgender rights, sending a message to progressives in the party to shut up. Sorry, Ellen Story, you may have forgotten just who you've promised to fight for as an elected leader of this state, but a lot of us haven't.

"“I think this is a good issue. I'’m not sure this is the year for it,”" said Rep. Ellen Story, an Amherst Democrat and social progressive. “"We need to be focusing on jobs and the economy. I’'m not sure this is the year for this push.”"

What utter bullshit -- and what a crappy straw man argument. Who said anything about jobs? What exactly is the state committee supposed to do about jobs in its charter? This is not a state house issue, this is a state party issue -- the state party can do nothing about jobs short of supporting candidates who have ideas on how to create them. And if this year is about jobs, why is the House holding up a bill that would protect transgender people from being fired at their jobs simply for being transgender? Shouldn't the jobs of transgender people count in this economy, too?

Story should be ashamed for continuing to be the Speaker's lap dog, betraying all her principles to do her Master's bidding. It's sickening and repulsive. I really, really hope her constituents are paying attention -- and not blinded by her once-proud history, presently being parodied by herself. For readers from her district, there's still four days to collect signatures in that race...

Baker's Hypocrisy Continues

Lynne beat me to it, but I've been meaning to blog today about Charlie Baker's most brazen form of hypocrisy yet. From a MassEquality email:

At the Massachusetts Republican Convention on Saturday, April 17, gubernatorial candidate Charles D. Baker came out in opposition to H. 1728/S. 1687 “An Act Relative to Gender Identity and Expression,” (also known as the Transgender Civil Rights Bill), which would outlaw employment discrimination against transgender people. As CEO of Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, however, Baker presided over a company that has for many years had a non-discrimination policy that protects applicants and employees on the basis of their gender identity.

In addition to stating his opposition to the Transgender Civil Rights Bill to reporters at the convention, his campaign circulated a flyer to convention delegates stating that Baker opposed “the Bathroom Bill,” -- the misleading name opponents of the bill use -- and would veto it if elected.

The irony is rich, given that Harvard Pilgrim -- to its credit -- has one of the state's strongest anti-discrimination policies, including for transgender people.

“Furthermore, Baker’s use of the term ‘Bathroom Bill’ in the flyer he distributed to convention delegates was a shameful attempt to use this badly-needed legislation to pander for delegate votes,” said Edmondson. “As the head of a company that gave workers a level playing field, Charlie Baker knows full well that protecting transgender people from discrimination has nothing to do with bathrooms and everything to do with attracting a skilled and diverse workforce.”

“This is so disappointing. So many in our community had such high hopes for this candidate,” said Executive Director Scott Gortikov. “I fear this is the Romney-fication of Charlie Baker. It’s stunning to me that he would borrow from the playbook of the radical social conservatives and condone this language of marginalization.”

My questions for Charlie Baker:

1) Who do you think you're kidding? You can try to rabidly flip-flop, appeasing the wingnut base, but you're just not going to be taken seriously by anyone with at least half a brain.

2) More importantly, why did you see fit to institute a policy of protections for transgender people in your workforce, as CEO of Harvard Pilgrim, but you wouldn't be willing to sign those very same protections for the transgender community across the state? Are they somehow less worthy than the transgender people who work at Harvard-Pilgrim?

Homophobia's Gathering South of the Border

"Don't miss this valuable opportunity to learn about the cutting-edge family, life and marriage issues affecting Rhode Island and all New England," the invitation begins, as NOM, the Family Research Council and others invite New Englanders to come and gather around their homophobic circle to discuss all the new, hip, bigoted ideas to beat back the marriage equality clock in New England. Something tells me it'll revolve around pathetic attempts to find new, manipulative and bigoted ways of screaming, 'the children, the children,' as if glbt families didn't have kids of their own, who suffer daily because of the discrimination pitted against them, in large part due to the actions of these groups.

It's fitting that they're doing this in Rhode Island, with the region's most bigoted Governor having his last days in office. Ironicly, while the forces of homophobia cluster in Rhode Island to try to block or repeal marriage equality, Rhode Island could very well be the next New England state to embrace it, once their stalwart ally, Governor Carcieri, is (thankfully) gone.

Here's a list of all of their old, bigoted speakers who will be coming, including the infamous Kris Mineau.

* Cynthia Hill, Senior Director, State and Local Affairs, Family Research Council
* Kris Mineau, Executive Director, Massachusetts Family Institute
* Peter Wolfgang, Executive Director, Family Institute of Connecticut
* Kevin Smith, Executive Director, Cornerstone Action of New Hampshire
* Christopher Plante, Executive Director, National Organization for Marriage, Rhode Island
* Shannon McGinley, Board Chairman, Cornerstone Action of New Hampshire
* Connecticut Youth Wing, Students, Family Institute of Connecticut
* Austin R. Nimocks, Senior Legal Counsel, Alliance Defense Fund
* Dr. Pat Fagan, Family Research Council
* Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies, Family Research Council

Somehow, I think this is a meeting I can skip. We can spare them that $15 admission fee. Thankfully, there's professionals out there to put these last gasps of homophobia in perspective. Cue MassEquality's executive director, Scott D. Gortikov, who has it right in his statement about the event, in his Feb. 4th press release:

“If the extremists at the Family Research Council are trying to find an opening in New England to promote their bigoted agenda they are wasting their time. With four out of six New England states granting same-sex couples full equality in marriage, it is clear that the vast majority of New Englanders are fair-minded people who aren’t interested in taking rights away from their GLBT friends, family members, neighbors and co-workers.... If the Family Research Council and those attending its summit truly cared about promoting marriage and the family, they wouldn’t be getting together to dream up ways to undermine the ability of GLBT people to provide for and protect their families.”

Fascism in the World of Azeroth

If anyone feels something creeping up behind them, lurking in the shadows, it's not the bogeyman. It's fascism in our government. Whether it's the seemingly universal calls coming from the national press for machines that see people naked as they go through airports (a cellphone snapshot away from being online for everyone to see), or the newest money-making schemes for cell phone companies -- selling your data to any random cop who asks for it for about $40 a pop, without warrant -- it's clear that there really is someone out there to get you. Government. And this crazy-absurd fear of terrorism and criminals that people seemingly have, irrational though it may be, has a large chunk of society cheering it on.

The latest, most absurd case of this is some poor, young schmuck who got caught selling pot and fled to Canada, though the cops didn't know where he was. The police learned that he may have been playing World of Warcraft, a Massive Multiplayer Online Roleplaying game where the undead teams up with orcs and night elves team up with gnomes to go kill stuff, with comic-book-styled animation. So, the police send a little letter requesting information, asking if Blizzard had any relevant information which would lead to capture. Blizzard, the company that runs WoW, sent over a package in the mail a few months later -- which lead to the extradition of the kid.

If that weren't enough, the cops involved didn't just get the address from Blizzard, though they had a general location. They went to Google Maps to actually lock down the specific address. Fascism, FTW!

Some people may applaud such a thing, but there was no warrant involved. There was only what essentially amounted to a politely-worded request. To catch a pot dealer. Busy cops, right? If people don't think this is ripe for abuse, they're nuts. Companies shouldn't just go handing over information to the government whenever the government asks for it. They shouldn't turn handing over information to the government into a money-making scheme, as many cell phone companies have done. They should protect that data until cops can get a warrant, otherwise, who knows how sound the information really is that they're asking for? If companies aren't going to protect our civil rights, all they end up being is one, giant loophole in our constitution's due process demands. No matter how anyone looks at it, that's just not kosher.

Musings: Stupak, Star Trek and Hulu

• The thing about Stupak: If it's okay to discriminate against women for one medical choice, why shouldn't it be okay to discriminate against men for ED? Or come up with other stupid ideas like "no tax credits for fat people." There are thousands of ways we could legislate morality into health care. What ever happened to coming up with legislation that lets doctors and patients decide what treatments are necessary together?
• I hate the new Hulu trend where you have to wait up to a week for an episode to go up. I realize it's not profitable yet, but I don't think it will become so by trying to get fewer people to use it. Ads may not get them to the promised land yet, but will eventually -- and probably soon. When it comes to media, companies always take a hit when starting out. Even in the good times, it used to take any publication 5+ years to to turn a profit. Hulu will get there... if they don't drive away their users first. Hello, Amazon.com.
• One of my hobbies is gaming -- yes, I am a geek -- so I was very excited today that the devs of an upcoming game I'm really excited about, Star Trek Online, took one of my questions - and actually gave an answer I found satisfactory.
  

Who's Blocking Transgender Rights?

Next week is Transgendered Awareness Week. The Massachusetts Trans Political Coalition is hosting a whole bunch of different events, ranging from advocacy to education to fun. I'm hoping many people will attend. Given next week's events, it's a good time to take a look at where we're at in terms of Civil Rights in Massachusetts. We've gone a long way to improving civil rights for most minority groups in this state, but one group that's lagged far behind is the transgender community. Even in this day and age, it's still legal to fire someone or deny them housing for being transgender in many cities and towns across Massachusetts. This is something we must change.

The MTPC is a group of transgender people and their allies who have fought hard for years to change perception across Massachusetts. They've had a lot of political success, helping get anti-discrimination ordinances passed in many cities and towns in the Commonwealth, including Boston. They've been pushing a transgender-rights bill in Massachusetts for a long time now. It failed last year (buried in committee), when it looked for a while like it had a shot, and the group was told to go out and get more co-sponsors. That was after years of getting a great many co-sponsors for their bill in both chambers.

What did they do for this year, the year after they lost in a nail biter? They got a majority of legislators in each chambers to co-sponsor their bill. Well, where is it? Why hasn't the bill been passed yet? I get that legislators have to deal with a lot of uninformed, ignorant constituents (and bigots) who don't and will probably never get this issue. The Kris-Mineau types will always try to reduce the bill to doses of fear, backed up by no facts.

However, legislators should stand by their words. How many bills in Massachusetts ever get a majority of each chamber to co-sponsor them? How many of those bills get left in the dustbin? There is no reasonable excuse not to get this bill through, this year, before the MTPC has to start everything from scratch, yet again. These are volunteers, fighting for their rights -- who just want the most basic protections society can afford anyone. It's not asking for much, just a little courage. Does Beacon Hill have any of it?

Please call your state legislators and ask them to stand up for civil rights by getting leadership to put An Act Relative to Gender-Based Discrimination and Hate Crimes up for a vote. It's time for this bill to get a full vote, one that will almost certainly result in it being passed.

Legislative Bigotry

Thankfully, this video isn't from Massachusetts, but it still pains me to watch it (along with the news that marriage equality is again delayed in NY, though that's much better than defeated).



Here's a woman who speaks at length about how she can't get legally married in her state demonstratively hurts her everyday life, speaking openly and honestly about a very frank issue, and how is she answered? Her state legislator ignores everything she said, doesn't try to solve any of her problems, and just says he's only for marriage bigotry. It makes me so sad to be in a country where hatred and intolerance is so widespread. No one should have to deal with this crap.

The Hypocrisy of Republicans

No group in America has fought against the "government take-over" of health care harder than Republicans. Though what they have to say has absolutely no merit, they spread the lie that this effort to reform the health insurance industry is nothing less than government deciding each and every individual's health care choices. Yes, what do Republicans decide to do in the new house health care bill? Allow government to decide what choices women will and won't have when it comes to their own personal health. This is nothing but hypocrisy.

People must stand up to the Senate and demand that their version of the health care bill does not include a provision banning a women's right to have an abortion - then demanding that any bill that goes through conference committee is free from such provisions, too. The House bill will ban the funding of the right to choose to any health insurance plan that accepts people who take any public subsidies. I ask readers: What health insurance company in Massachusetts doesn't accept any individuals who are subsidized? Doubtfully even one. The end result is millions of people who receive no health care subsidies at all will end up unable to afford their right to choose. Without that crucial ability to decide, they are not free and equal citizens of this country.

HRC is Useless and SHOULD GO AWAY!

Seriously, it's time to end this money-siphoning, zero-progress, horrible organization. It's worse than useless; it's getting in the way.

A Sign of Progress

An important frontier in the battle for equality and broader understanding is sports, especially male sports. While most women in this country support glbt rights, most men lag far behind. There's numerous reasons for that, but many of them can probably be better understood through the context of sports.

Men are supposed to be tough and macho, an archetype athletes and stereotypical sports fans fit well in, while gay men are viewed by many straight men as 'sissies' and 'fags,' somehow undeserving of equal rights. Equally damaging has been the fact that many athletes (and men in general) are afraid to be welcoming toward their gay counterparts, for fear of being labeled as gay themselves -- especially in locker-room-type environments, where towel-slapping and metaphorical (and otherwise) pissing contests are the norm because, gosh darn it, gay people aren't in there! (Yeah, right!) The word "fag" is thrown around like "the" between teammates, pushing gay players deeper and deeper into the closet, causing many others to feel completely unwelcome.

All those views can develop when teens are in the locker room, all of them are inspired by what is viewed as "macho," and too many men view macho as the opposite of being gay -- even though, as JoeTS likes to point out at Blue Mass Group, some of the most macho guys ever in existence were gay.

It's important for there to be push back against homophobia in professional sports, because that push back can make a difference at all levels. It could help a professional player feel comfortable in coming out, it could help inspire a gay teenager to continue playing, and it could show that real men aren't irrationally afraid of gay players or people. Perhaps most importantly of all, it can set a positive example for fans -- the exposure to glbt issues alone for most male sports fans is important. All of those things are far more likely when professional athletes speak out in favor of gay rights.

On that front, here's some fantastic news coming out of the NFL. Two players, including a defensive captain of the New Orleans Saints, have come out strong in favor of full equality.

"Looking at the former restrictions on human rights in our country starting with slavery, women not being able to vote, blacks being counted as two thirds of a human, segregation, no gays in the military (to list a few) all have gone by the wayside. But now here in 2009 same sex marriages are prohibited. I think we will look back in 10, 20, 30 years and be amazed that gays and lesbians did not have the same rights as every one else. How did this ever happen in the land of the free and the home of the brave? Are we really free?"—Brendon Ayanbadejo, NFL linebacker for the Baltimore Ravens.

"I hope he's right in his prediction, and I hope even more that it doesn't take that long. People could look at this issue without blinders on...the blinders imposed by their church, their parents, their friends or, in our case, their coaches and locker rooms. I wish they would realize that it's not a religion issue. It's not a government issue. It's not even a gay/straight issue or a question of your manhood. It's a human issue. And until more people see that, we're stuck arguing with people who don't have an argument."—Scott Fujita, defensive captain for the New Orleans Saints.

On a personal note, high school sports was probably the biggest reason why I never came out in high school. I enjoyed playing on teams and was afraid it would not at all be a comfortable environment if I came out. Furthermore, I, more than most, had irrational and predefined notions of what it meant to be a successful athlete -- coming from the son of a former professional football player, going to the same high school where my father was a literal legend. The 25 year old version of me would have easily met those obstacles head on, the 16 year old version of me just wanted to fit in. I wonder, given this decade's changes and news like this, if things wouldn't have been different if I were 16 today instead of 25.

My Concern with the Transgender Bill

What about the XX and XY electric field bathroom generators? Does it mandate turning them off, so XX can cross the streams? And vice versa?

And if that should happen, will the Stay Puft Marshmellow Man appear and attack everyone in the bathroom? Or if the Gatekeepers cross the threshold of the Key Masters, will they turn into giant statues or hideous monsters? And vice versa? These all could certainly explain the dangers of this bill.

I think we better make sure the XX and XY electric field generators stay online and plugged in at a bathroom near you, otherwise we could have a sensational, nonsensical issue on our hands.

One thing I hate about DailyKos

The anti-gay apologists. They support gay people in name only. I have no need for those kinds of people. Here's the bottom line, folks. If you "support" gay people, that means you support them. You can't vote for people who will strip their rights, or support politicians that would do the same -- at least without vocally appealing to them to change, fast.

Obama made a huge, huge mistake today in condemning the gay community. This is the last straw for most of us. Anyone who supports what Obama did today is an apologist and not a friend to the gay community. There was no need for Obama's DoJ to rise to the Rushian levels of comparing our relationships to incest. I'm appalled today. I don't know if I ever could say I support this President again, at least until he completely repeals DADT, DOMA and passes ENDA -- and it's him pulling his weight, not just signing on the dotted line and claiming credit after the fact. For now, he's getting Team Homophobia tag treatment.

Appropriate Recourse

Obama's DoJ released an utterly bigoted and hateful opinion today. This is just the last straw for me. What is appropriate recourse for me? I can't exactly afford to go march in DC. I identify with the state democratic party, not the national party, so I'm not going to pull my registration. What should I do, utilizing this blog or volunteer time, in order to push equality at a national level?

A Voice of Equality

When Dan Choi talks, people should listen.



h/t towleroad