Taking some much needed personal time, and spending the long Memorial Day weekend here in London with Eric. Interestingly enough the BP Oil spill may actually be a bigger story here than it is in the States.
The Ipad came out here yesterday. lines around the Apple Store in Regent Street stretched around the block, I fought the impulse to scream "NEVER BUY THE FIRST VERSION OF ANYTHING APPLE MAKES!!!" Sex in the City 2 opened here on Thursday night, people camped out in Leicester Square days before hand to catch a glimpse of Sara JP and her cohorts as they arrived for the premiere. I fought the impulse to scream "IT'S A MOVIE ABOUT AGING HOOKERS!" On the political front here, a Gay Liberal Democrat who was named to head the Treasury here in the UK had to resign when it it was revealed he had been claiming reimbursement for rent paid on a flat that was in a building that was owned by his long term partner, to the tune of $57,000.00 - ouch.
So it's "not for personal gain" when you bilk the taxpayers for forty thousand pounds but give that money to your boyfriend.... Nice, wish Eric and I could figure out a scheme like that.
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, has slightly different take on what happened when Rand Paul appeared on her show earlier this week. She thinks rather than being inarticulate, Dr. Paul may have inadvertantly revealed what is in fact, the common thinking among the "Tea Party" / Libertarian wing of the GOP.
As has been reported all over the media today. Kentucky Republican Senate Candidate and "Tea Party" favorite Rand Paul (Son of Texas Congressman Ron Paul) had quite the media day yesterday. Looking back on it I would not be surprised if Paul was feeling a bit like the old Bugs Bunny quote, "bet you wish you'd stood in bed."
The first stop was National Public Radio, where he expressed his view that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans With Disabilities Act were examples of government "overreach" that would be better handled at a local level. Well that bit of audio went viral soon afterwards, and later that day Paul found himself on Rachel Maddow's show over on MSNBC where he was asked to clarify his position. Things did not go well...
The problem with the interview wasn't so much his position, I don't think that Rand Paul believes segregated lunch counters are ok, but the problem was his complete inability to articulate that.
Watching him was truly a train wreck in slow motion. And Maddow kept trying to throw him life-lines. She actually is something of a fan, Paul announced his candidacy on her show. Now instead of being able to clearly explain what he really MEANT, he is blaming Maddow for asking the questions. It's like Sarah Palin calling Katie Couric the "gotcha media" for asking "what do you read?"
There was a moment when he HAD the answer. When he touched briefly on the issue of Hate Speech laws. But then he lost it in a bizarre twister board answer that he was unable to untangle himself from.
Rather than simply saying - Segregated Lunch Counters are wrong and stupid, and his concerns were really about Government trying to regulate how people FEEL and not just how they ACT, instead Paul did this bizarre tango were he tried repeatedly to tie the Civil Rights Act's desegregation provisions to Gun rights. What he MEANT was a hypothetical examination about the implications of Government trying to legislate how people feel. What America HEARD was "If you let Blacks sit at lunch counters then you have to let Whites bring guns into the restaurant."
What made it worse was, he came across as a man who seemed unable to say clearly that segregation and discrimination by a private business is wrong. Instead he talked about being against "any discrimination by Government", and unfortunately left the impression (false though it may be) that he has a complete lack of understanding of WHY the Civil Rights Act was passed in the first place.
Then to finish off the day Paul appeared on "The O'Reilley Factor" over on FOX News, where he stated his support for the complete elimination of a Woman's right to choose, banning abortions in all cases, including rape, incest, and threats to the life of the Mother .
Politics is perception and right now Rand Paul has a HUGE perception problem . The Libertarian movement has made great strides to be taken as a viable alternative to the GOP's evangelical christo-facist tunnel vision. But Rand Paul's performances yesterday make him look like a Lyndon LaRouche looney.
The problem here is Paul didn't understand where he was. This was not a intellectual exercise, these interviews were campaign appearances. Ones that may have doomed his candidacy
Rachel Maddow takes us on a stroll down "GOP Amnesia Lane..." and leafs through Newt Gingrich's yearbook, to see how the class that brought us "The Contract With America" , has fared... Enjoy.
Yeah, apparently in between spouting Fox News talking points on most issues. Hasselback has a clear concise and very well reasoned take on the debate over Marriage Equality.... Who knew?
I have been wondering when Sullivan was going to opine on this particular saga. He had previously expressed his concern over the "outing" of Rekers male escort companion, but not on the broader implications of the the whole sad sordid situation. I also reacently read about Rekers' torture of "Kraig", the 4 year old boy who George Rekers would eventually drive to attempt suicide, and had been wondering what Sullivan's thoughts on that were...
I have not dwelled on the Rekers scandal, because the man is a human wreck. But the wreck is instructive. Sometimes I wonder how much of the most aggressively anti-gay campaigning is done by closeted and tortured gay men, who seek to extirpate from others something they could not banish from themselves. The list of the closeted gay-baiters is long. From Roy Cohn and J Edgar Hoover all the way to Larry Craig and George Rekers. I have no doubt that the primary anti-gay forces in the Vatican are gay themselves, and working out their tortured psyches by demonizing others more honest and principled than they are.
These are men terrified by their own inherent orientation, who equate it with emasculation, and end up, in some cases, raping children and in others, merely abusing them, to keep their own demons at bay. This is one exercize that Rekers imposed on a child who was acting effeminately:
In 1974, Rekers, a leading thinker in the so-called ex-gay movement, was presented with a 4-year-old "effeminate boy" named Kraig, whose parents had enrolled him in the program. Rekers put Kraig in a "play-observation room" with his mother, who was equipped with a listening device. When the boy played with girly toys, the doctors instructed her to avert her eyes from the child.
According to a 2001 account in Brain, Child Magazine, "On one such occasion, his distress was such that he began to scream, but his mother just looked away. His anxiety increased, and he did whatever he could to get her to respond to him... Kraig became so hysterical, and his mother so uncomfortable, that one of the clinicians had to enter and take Kraig, screaming, from the room."
Rekers's research team continued the experiment in the family's home. Kraig received red chips for feminine behavior and blue chips for masculine behavior. The blue chips could be cashed in for candy or television time. The red chips earned him a "swat" or spanking from his father. Researchers periodically entered the family's home to ensure proper implementation of the reward-punishment system. After two years, the boy supposedly manned up. Over the decades, Rekers, who ran countless similar experiments, held Kraig up as "the poster boy for behavioral treatment of boyhood effeminacy."
At age 18, shamed by his childhood diagnosis and treatment, Rekers's poster boy attempted suicide, according to Gender Shock, a book by journalist Phyllis Burke.
This kind of stuff kills people. And it's based on a lie. It's time we took a stand against tortured gay men abusing children to vent their own demons. In saying that, by the Wieseltier rule, I am dangerously propagating anti-gay tropes. But when the tropes are true in some cases, they are simply true.
----------------------------------------
I would take issue with Sullivan on one point; Rekers is not a "human wreck", he is a twisted sadistic self loathing , EVIL man. His escapades with Gay male escorts make it clear Rekers had no intermal moral debate over his sick double life. His personal war against LGBT Americans waged from the deep dark depths of his own personal closet was done for one reason. It made him feel good.
To call Rekers a "human wreck" is giving him too much credit. There is nothing human about him. George Rekers is just a wreck.
The NYCLU, in collaboration with the LGBT Community Center and the Office of Congressman Jerrold Nadler, looks at discrimination against LGBT families in our immigration system and the ongoing efforts to reform the system in Congress through the Uniting American Families Act and comprehensive immigration reform. Citizen/Non-Citizen highlights the heart wrenching story of Britta and Carla, a married same-sex binational couple living in New York City fighting to stay together in the United States. To find out more about the NYCLUs work in support of comprehensive immigration reform and to take action, visit our site.
senator@boxer.senate.gov
Mon, May 17, 2010 at 8:55 AM
To: dpfabie@****.com
Dear Mr. Fabie:
Thank you for meeting with me regarding the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA). I appreciated hearing from you, and I share your strong support for this bill.
I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of the UAFA, which Senator Patrick Leahy introduced in the Senate as S.424 on February 12, 2009. This bill would amend immigration law to extend the same benefits to permanent partners as are currently afforded legally married couples under the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Americans in same-sex relationships would thereby be able to sponsor their partners for legal residency in the United States.
As you know, only opposite-sex couples are currently afforded the ability to sponsor their partners for immigration visas. This discriminatory practice has torn apart many binational families and denied American citizens equal opportunity under the law. The UAFA would correct this by adding "or permanent partner" to sections of the Immigration and Naturalization Act that apply to legally married couples.
Again, thank you for sharing your perspective with me. Be assured that I am committed to a fair and just immigration policy, and that I will continue to fight for equal rights for all Americans.
I am not going to argue with anyone on "is global warming/climate change real", It's like trying to argue about gravity. If you don't think climate change is at least partially caused by Humans you are either an apologist for pollution or an idiot... Anyway...at least the debate is producing some cool ads...
How much do you want to bet that the GOP is thanking their lucky stars that THIS time the affair was with a woman... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Via MSNBC)
Saying he "sinned against God, my wife and my family by having a mutual relationship with a part-time member of my staff," Rep. Mark Souder, R-3rd IN, said Tuesday he will resign from Congress. Souder, who won re-nomination to run for a ninth term, said he won't be a candidate in the fall. "I believe it is the best decision for my family, the people of northeast Indiana and our country," he said in a statement. Souder is the latest politician whose political career crumbled under rumors and admissions of extramarital affairs. "In the poisonous environment of Washington, D.C., any personal failing is seized upon, often twisted, for political gain," he said. "I am resigning rather than to put my family through that painful, drawn-out process.
Clearly the best bit is the guy makes a video touting abstainence WITH his mistress... Wow.
"Thanks to Rekers’s clownish public exposure, we now know that his professional judgments are windows into his cracked psyche, not gay people’s. But there is nothing funny about the destruction his writings and public activities have sown. His fringe views have not remained on the fringe. His excursions into public policy have had real and damaging consequences on a large swath of Americans.
"The crusade he represents is, thankfully, on its last legs. American attitudes about homosexuality continue to change very fast. In the past month, as square a cultural venue as Archie comic books has announced the addition of a gay character, the country singer Chely Wright has come out as a lesbian, and Laura Bush has told Larry King that she endorses the 'same' rights for all committed couples and believes same-sex marriage “will come.” All of this news has been greeted by most Americans with shrugs, as it should be." - New York Times columnist Frank Rich, in a delicious evisceration of Dr. George Rekers.
Girl Was Punished for Having 2 Moms
Published: May 7, 2010
Jenna Bissell says she sat in her fifth-grade class for hours with a gash on her face, dried blood between her loosened permanent teeth, cut lips and a swollen nose. She had tripped on the playground.
But Bissell says her teacher never asked about her injuries or sent her to the nurse. Her parents were never called. And Bissell believes she was treated this way because her parents are lesbians.
"I think it started because my moms are gay," Bissell said Friday.
Bissell's parents are preparing to bring a civil rights suit against Rio Rancho Public Schools, where Bissell attended Martin Luther King Jr. Elementary School. The family has since moved her to another school, where they say she is earning A's and B's and making friends.
Officials at Rio Rancho Public Schools said they could not comment on specifics of the case, but said discriminating against a student because of the makeup of her family would violate district policy.
"We're very diligent about making sure we respect all students," said Tonna Burgos, executive director of Student Services for RRPS.
Shannon Peterson, one of Bissell's mothers, said she called the school after Bissell came home injured on Feb. 26. She said she talked to Bissell's teacher, asking why she hadn't been notified and why the girl went without treatment.
Peterson said she asked, "Is this because she has two moms?" and that the teacher replied with a raised voice that yes, this was the reason and that Peterson should take her children to another school.
District spokeswoman Kim Vesely said any teacher who discriminated against a student would be disciplined. Bissell's former teacher is still teaching and Vesely would not say whether she has been disciplined, citing personnel privacy. Vesely also said "there are differing versions of what occurred," but declined to give the district's version.
Peterson said there was a pattern of tension between Bissell and her teacher, including over an assignment in which students were asked to write a book about themselves. On one page, they were asked to write about something they did over the summer, and Bissell said she wrote about her parents' wedding in Iowa, where gay marriage is legal.
"She threw out the whole page about where my moms got married and how beautiful it was," Bissell said, referring to the teacher. "She said, 'This is gross, this is horrible, you need to write about something else.'"
Peterson said they kept Bissell in the class until the injury occurred, hoping the situation would improve. "We try to teach her that there's going to be people like this all through life, and you're going to have to live with it and try to stick it out," Peterson said.
Bissell's family initially sought money from the school district for the girl's medical expenses, but the claim was rejected by the district's liability insurance. They have now notified the district that they plan to sue for negligence and violation of Bissell's civil rights. The family's attorney, Chris Foster, said he is preparing a civil complaint that will be filed next week.
"We don't send our kids to school in New Mexico to get hurt and to learn hatred and intolerance," Foster said. He said his suit will aim to show a pattern of harassment.
Ok, I realize that what I am about to confess may be an actual crime, under the laws of the City of San Francisco but.... umm.... I really have never watched "Glee".
Clearly that has been a huge mistake on my part, and one that will soon be remedied.
The past few days have been interesting. My blogging about the scandal surrounding Evangelical Anti-Gay "researcher", and male escort patron George Rekers, has prompted some interesting emails asking me why I am so focused on this story. A number of more centrist bloggers have even posted their thoughts about how the "two sides" in this debate should try to seek common ground and forge a new dialogue between Evangelical Conservatives and the LGBT Community.
This this isn't about "getting along" or "loving the sinner and hating the sin". This is about Evangelical Conservatives who want to take their hatred of LGBT Americans, pretend it is actual science and then turn that hatred into civil law.
I am sorry Dr. Cheng, these people do not want to "get along", they want to harm, marginalize, discriminate against, and in some cases even round up and kill Gays and Lesbians. The clear connections between American Conservative Evangelicals and the proposed "Kill the Gays" law in Uganda serves only to emphasize the point.
Then we come to this week's bit of news. That a prominent Evangelical has been caught leading a double life. Where by day he was someone who made his name and reputation on the notion that being Gay or Lesbian is an illness, that can be religiously treated and cured. And by night, (and on vacations) hires Gay Male Escorts.
The reason this is "such a big deal" is this; George Reker is not just ANY disgraced Evangelical hypocrite. Reker is/was THE anti gay Evangelical.
He along with James "focus on the funding" Dobson co-founded the Family Research Council, and is a leading researcher for NARTH. (National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality ) NARTH routinely puts out "studies" that claim, among other things, that children adopted by same sex couples are more prone to suicide. That being Gay or Lesbian is a mental disorder. None of their studies stand up to even basic fact checking, and NARTH has had to admit that their studies are not based on actual science.
The good folks over at Truths Wins Out have done their homework on NARTH:
The National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) is a self described “non-profit, educational organization dedicated to affirming a complementary, male-female model of gender and sexuality”www.narth.com NARTH explains in their mission statement “clients have the right to claim a gay identity, or to diminish their homosexuality and to develop their heterosexual potential.”
They claim to attain this through years of reparative therapy, (also used interchangeably with the terms conversion therapy and sexual brokenness) a practice the American Psychiatric Association says can “lead to depression, anxiety and self destructive behavior, and may reinforce self hatred.”
That is why this is a really really really big deal. George Rekers has spent his career advocating for reparative or "conversion therapy". A discredited practice that has done untold damage to countless people who are conned into thinking they are "sick" an this abusive voodoo masquerading as science will "cure" them.
George Rekers and those like him are directly responsible for the DEATHS of untold numbers of LGBT Americans who out despair from their inability to "pray the Gay away", committed suicide.
In 2007 the American Psychological Association (APA) adopted an updated resolution saying there is no evidence to support the notion that sexual orientation can be changed, and that gay conversion therapy can cause depression and suicide attempts.
The APA went on to issue a 138-page report, as a strong rebuke of the claims of organizations like NARTH and Exodus International that sexual orientation can be changed by religious-based "reparative therapy".
Now we find out that one of the world's leading proponents of this stuff, George Rekers, is in fact, a closeted homosexual. A man who while secretly having sex with men, is guilty of inflicting emotional, psychological, spiritual and physical torture on who-knows how many Gay and Lesbian Americans.
Now Rekers is claiming HE is the victim, because his escapades with an 20-year old Gay male escort are out in the open. His former supporters at the Family Research Council have been quick to condemn people like me, asking where is our "compassion" for someone who is "struggling with sin." That's funny, I haven't seen any compassion for Gays and Lesbians coming out of the FRC when they spew the most vile and contemptible lies about LGBT Americans. Lies like; Gaining access to children has been a long-term goal of the homosexual movement." —"Homosexual Behavior and Pedophilia," FRC publication, July 1999.
This is why the fall of George Rekers IS a big deal. It exposes the bigotry of the Conservative Evangelical moment in the United States for exactly what it is. The self-hatred of bitter closet cases. Too scared to live their lives honestly, so they spend those lives trying to harm those people that have the courage they lack.
Hmm.. Apparently, as long as George Rekers was a anti-gay bigot, spouting completely discredited voodoo about "repartative therapy", then he was welcome at the University of South Carolina, But now that he is known to actually be Gay,,, well, can't have THAT now can we?
I was having dinner with a good friend of mine the other night and he asked me to explain why this fall's midterm elections where "such a big deal" Here's what I told him...
Imagine about nine and half years ago, you lent your car to this guy. Now you didn't know this guy all that well, but you knew his Parents, and you liked them, so you figured it would be ok if he used your car for a while.
Then for the next 8 years this guy and a bunch of his friends, drove your car into the ground. They ignored rules of safe driving, ignored all the warning lights including "CHECK ENGINE NOW"! They never changed the oil, They drove the car into places the car was never meant or designed to go. They wore the tire tread down to practically nothing, and in 2008 were about to literally drive the car off a cliff in some bizarre game of "chicken", and the only thing that prevented THAT was you taking the car back, and the keys away from these guys.
So for the last year and a half or so, you have been working with a new mechanic who has been diligently working on the car, slowly repairing the massive amount of damage. At every step this mechanic takes the time to explain exactly what the problem is and what it will cost to fix it.
At the same time he is also smoothing things over with all of your other neighbors who have been really annoyed with you for allowing your car to be recklessly driven all over town for eight years.
On top of that, you just found out the reason that in 2008 those guys were trying to drive the car off a cliff, was because some of their other friends had placed huge BETS on how much damage crashing the car would cause.
Now that same bunch of drunk joy riders, who nearly totaled your car two years ago, show up and say you should hire THEM to fix the car. And their idea of fixing it, is to rip out all the safety features on the car. Take out the seat belts, remove the airbags, the shocks, the brakes, the turn signals and the mirrors. Their reason being , all those safety features were infringing on the car's "Freedom" to run.
Then they get some of their loudest and craziest friends to show up outside the garage, and protest against the fact that the car is even being fixed at all.
So that in a nutshell IS the choice this November. Do you let the Mechanic who saved the car from the junk heap keep working on fixing it, or let the same bunch of drunk driving idiots double down on everything they did to wreck the car.
My friend looked thoughtfully out the window of the resturant and then said, "Why doesn't anyone in the Democratic Party explain it that clearly?"
That, is a really good question.... I wish I knew the answer.
