Or…They Can Donate the $83K to NCTE so The Quisling Can Clone Herself to Pay Herself Double to be Doubly-’Effective’

November 19, 2010

Small wonder that the Party of Economic Treason was so eager to defeat Alan Grayson:


Only if HRC Gets to Define “Ally”

November 19, 2010

From the Dallas Voice:

Later today the Dallas ISD’s board of trustees will vote on a bullying policy that, if approved, would make the district the first in the state to specifically outlaw bullying based on actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity/expression.

Obviously one of the keys here is gender identity/expression, which covers not only students who are transgender, but also students who are perceived by classmates as not meeting gender stereotypes. Clearly, this is a major factor behind bullying — students who are made fun of, for example, for being “sissies” or “tomboys.”

So why, then, would a state representative who is considered an LGBT ally file an anti-bullying bill that includes sexual orientation but NOT gender identity/expression?

Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin, last week filed HB 224, this session’s version of the comprehensive anti-bullying legislation that Strama authored in 2009. But for some reason, and we still aren’t exactly sure why, Strama has left out gender identity/expression this time. The 2009 version of Strama’s bill, HB 1323, which almost made it to the House floor, included both sexual orientation and gender identity/expression. However, this year’s version includes only sexual orientation.

We contacted Strama’s office on Wednesday, but we still haven’t heard back. Earlier today we spoke with Chuck Smith, deputy director of Equality Texas, who assured us he’s well aware of the omission. Smith said “gender identity/expression” was in every version of Strama’s bill  that Equality Texas reviewed, but suddenly disappeared from the version that was filed.

Because it all depends on what the definition of “ally” is.

You know…

Just like it all depends on what the definition of “progress” is.

When people of the HRC mindset – you know, people who have been ‘educated’ as to what sort of legislation is acceptable – get to define such things, racists like Alphonse D’Amato suddenly become ‘allies’ and a backlash to gay marriage that might erase existing trans right suddenly become ‘progress.’

Rep. Mark Strama, who’s considered an LGBT ally, may not realize how big a mistake he’s making by omitting gender identity/expression from his bullying bill.

Now, I haven’t lobbied in Austin in a while, but my eyes and my nose still work.

And I detect a rat in that big granite thing on Congress Avenue (well, another rat; Rick Perry’s hair and brain have been scampering around there for a decade already.)

HRC proper may not be there, but the acceptability that it has countenanced for the last several decades is.

Trans-positive things may well get included in bills by accident on occasion, but when they are absented it is on purpose – and the absenting is always drenched in gay greed.

Send appropriate thank yous to Elizabeth Birch, Winnie Stachelberg, Hilary Rosen, Barney Frank and all of their apologists.


Which Means…The Word “Marriage” Should Not be Uttered in Albany

November 19, 2010

But, of course, we know that where Marriage Derangement Syndrome settles in, it doesn’t go away – and when it metasticizes it kills trans rights.

From Gay City News (http://www.gaycitynews.com/articles/2010/11/18/gay_city_news/perspectives/doc4cdb09f0265bd108740650.txt):

Marriage equality advocacy groups showed something of a tin ear as they celebrated their success at converting State Senate seats from the “no” column to the “yes” list this year.

To be sure, five districts represented by senators who voted no last December — including three in Queens — have now elected representatives committed to supporting our right to marry. That is to the credit of the Empire State Pride Agenda, Marriage Equality New York, the Human Rights Campaign, and Fight Back NY.

It is also true that those pro-equality senators who lost their reelection bids were undone by factors wholly separate from their advocacy for gay marriage. The problem is that the number of such losses is at least one, perhaps as many as four, and in all likelihood three. Which means that the number of public Senate supporters of marriage equality will have risen by only two, to 26, in a 62-member chamber. The path to success on gay marriage in New York remains fraught, especially since, under the likely scenario, Republicans would retake the Senate. Only in the past month has the Senate GOP leader, Dean Skelos, signaled a willingness to consider allowing a second vote on the issue.

 So remind me again why gay marriage is even being discussed in New York?  There aren’t the votes for it.

Hmmm…isn’t that always the criterion of death when trans-inclusion in the federal ENDA is rationalized out of existence by people who never did anything to wotk for trans-inclusion in the first instance?

And speaking of ENDA – well, not really, but rather ENDA with a ‘G’:

Should the three undecided races result in either a continued narrow Democratic majority or a 31-31 tie, our Senate allies, led by Tom Duane, the out gay Chelsea Democrat who is the lead sponsor on both marriage equality and the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act, must press for assurances that whatever governing structure the chamber establishes allows both bills to receive floor consideration when we are confident we can prevail.

GENDA is likely at or very close to the number of votes needed for passage; its tabling by the Judiciary Committee in June was unconscionable. If Duane is to effectively lobby for more support on marriage, he must be able to assure his colleagues that their courage in stepping forward publicly will be reciprocated by a floor vote on the question.

If the Senate, as seems more likely at this moment, is led by Republicans, the onus will fall on Skelos to ensure fair treatment. When the GOP last led the Senate in 2008, leadership refused to countenance floor debate on either marriage or GENDA. At a Log Cabin Republican event on October 12, Skelos said he would take the question of holding another marriage equality debate to his conference for discussion. Though that statement has widely been misreported as a “promise” of another vote on gay marriage, Skelos made clear to Gay City News’ Duncan Osborne that he was only pledging to bring the matter up with his fellow Republicans. Clearly, advocates, especially Log Cabin, will have to work determinedly to ensure that Skelos translates a friendly cocktail party message into meaningful responsiveness to the goals of an important part of the New York State family.

Should the GOP, whose 30 members voted unanimously against marriage equality last December, take control, it will place a premium on the political capital our new governor, Andrew Cuomo, is willing to put into our battles. At the Pride Agenda Fall Dinner in Manhattan, the governor-elect said, “I don’t want to be the governor who just proposed marriage equality. I don’t want to be the governor who just lobbies for marriage equality. I don’t want to be the governor who just fights for marriage equality. I want to be the governor who signs the law that makes marriage equality a reality.”

Making something a reality in Albany is often not an easy or even pretty task. But amidst all the deal-making, often out of the public eye, the things that get done are usually what one of the major bargainers makes a priority.

And we all know who will never actually have getting rid of the special right of non-trans New York gays and lesbians to discriminate against trans people as a priority.


Thinking People Know What Threatens Children…And it Ain’t Gay Marriage

November 18, 2010

Who writes these guys’ material…Bruce Vilanch?

Bruce Vilanch on acid?

From the Catholic Weekly (http://www.catholicweekly.com.au/article.php?classID=1&subclassID=2&articleID=7538&class=Latest%20News&subclass=CW%20National):

Allowing two men or two women to ‘marry’ would involve a fundamental change in our understanding of marriage, from a life-giving and sexually complementary union to a personal, romantic relationship with no true communion or connection to procreation, says Bishop Julian Porteous, auxiliary Bishop of Sydney.

But creating a self-perpetuating, pedophilia-based secret society that is all but immune from the law doesn’t constitute a fundamental change in what civilized human beings expect from people who claim to be emissaries of morality?

“It will entrench, in a public way, the separation of sexuality from its life-giving aspect and separate the notion of marriage from including the generation of children,” he said.

Yes, we all know how much you unmarried sexual terrorists care about children…

and what you care about doing to with them.


Kate Bornstein, You’re Fired

November 18, 2010

Kate has, over the years, had some good things to say, some not-so-good things to say and some downright wacky things to say.  I’m okay with most of each – after all, contrary to the well-telegraphed beliefs of America’s creeping christianist plutocracy, there actually is such a thing as freedom of speech.

However, just as her freedom of speech includes being provocative on trans issues and just as my freedom of speech includes the right to point out that people such as Michael Bailey and Alice Dreger are fraudmeisters and  just as my freedom of speech includes the right to point out that neither HRC nor NCTE actually speak for any trans people other than the token few that have been consecrated via paycheck by those ‘organizations’, I have the right both to opine that Kate Bornstein has forfeited the right to speak for anyone other than herself and to suggest that, if she actually does care about the future of the trans community, she act accordingly.   From EDGE, word that Kate is on the verge of becoming the David Irving of our ongoing incremental holocaust by spouting to the ever-so-eager-to-balance-out-any-position media – even LGBT media – that trans people:

are not of one mind on TDOR.

Well-known activist Kate Bornstein told the Windy City Times earlier this week she views TDOR as “problematic because it’s so concerned with death and despair”. Bornstein and others argue advocates should use Nov. 20 as an opportunity to celebrate trans lives and the community’s resilience.

Someone who makes money off of suicide – which, lets get real, is what peddling an anti-suicide book actually is (after all, if there was no such thing suicide, she’d have had to earn those bucks doing something else) - is telling everyone else (including those who haven’t been privileged with book deals) that, if we fend off suicidal thoughts only to get murdered by some closet case who can’t deal with his own sexual thoughts, we should be forgotten by those who are left behind ahd who are so into survival mode - nibbling the corporate pabulum and chasing the putple-n-yellow carrot – that we don’t see the next closet case who can’t deal with his own sexual thoughts creeping up behind us.

Kate Bornstein, you’re fired.


Judges and Torquemada-Wannabees

November 18, 2010

I’m sure that by now most folks have heard about Vicky Kolakowski’s election to a judgeship in Alameda County California:

 

LGBT groups such as Equality California and the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund had made electing Kolakowski a top priority in last week’s elections. For the transgender community, whose interactions with the justice system oftentimes are negative experiences, it is a particularly significant win.

“Vicky’s win is just incredibly historic for us as an LGBT community. She is the first out transgender trial judge in the United States,” said Transgender Law Center Executive Director Masen Davis. “The fact she won shows we are at a place where people can judge someone by what they bring to the table as entire people as professionals.”

Meanwhile…

Today Mayor Parker announced her associate municipal judge appointments, and one is longtime transgender activist Phyllis Frye. Frye becomes the first transgender judge in Texas and only the third in the country.

You can find the video of the Houston City Council ceremony here (BTW, for those not familiar with her, in the image snap above, Phyllis is not the woman directly in front; she’s the one wearing the red jacket.)

Of course, the illegitimately-tax-free, Taliban-in-waiting crowd has to use their illegitimate tax-free elite status to worm their way into the discussion (via Fox ‘news’ – naturally – stenographers for everything and everyone attempting to usher in christianism-saturated neo-plutocracy) of who is allowed to “handle mostly traffic tickets and violations of city ordinances on a part time basis”:

Hundreds of area pastors say Houston Mayor Annise Parker is pursuing a personal and radical agenda at City Hall.They’re not happy with one of the mayor’s appointments.

The Houston Area Pastoral Council, which represents about 300 churches, has a big problem with the appointment. Executive Director Dave Welch says for years Frye has been undermining Texas marriage laws. He says the appointment confirms Mayor Parker, who is openly gay, is making her lifestyle a central part of her policy agenda.

“This is not just a benign act. This is someone (Frye) who is very well known as an aggressive activist on sexual diversity issues and very much against the mainstream of most of the people….As we all know municipal court judges are the first step in the elevation of different judgeships. They typically go on to civil district court judges or family court judges and beyond, so this is not a benign appointment. It’s a statement. It really is. We’ll be calling on the churches to stand up and be involved,” said Welch.

Memo from Real America to Dave and other christianist tax-cheat welfaremongers:  Stop “undermining” America’s financial stability and start paying the taxes on your hate-propagation businesses.  THEN, you can participate in government.  No special rights for christianists!


Uhhh….No

November 13, 2010

In the Houston Chronk, Ken Gurley implores:

My response?  Tell them to buck up and reconsider their CHOICE of having thrown in with a multi-level criminal conspiracy that, over the course of 2,000 years, has persecuted at least ten times that many people (and I’ll play nice and not mention the people that christians have just flat-out murdered for daring not to be christian or making the mistake of not seeing see eye-to-eye with whatever capo might have been forced on their village at any given point in time.)

Witness the recent slaying of Christians in Baghdad.

Wow…

If Bill Hicks were still alive, I think he’d revamp his ‘Officer Coon Has Big Balls’ routine to cover an American clown who has stones of sufficient mass to say anything about the number of ‘christians’ in harms way in Baghdad after his nation’s minions - many of whom with uncut Franklin Graham-ism pulsing through their veins and the needle marks to prove it – did their dispatchin’ best throughout Iraq for the true almighty: the dollar.

This Sunday is the International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church.  Say a prayer for those Christians who stand against great opposition to proclaim their faith and to worship their God.  They are your brothers and sisters.

In a word: No.

There is no such thing as a persecuted church.  If one religion is acting violently against another it is only preventing (even if unintentionally) the acted-upon church from doing exactly what is being done to it, just against some even-more-defenseless third party.

There is no such thing as a persecuted church – only people who are persecuted by churches (and mosques, et. al.) and those doing  their bidding.

They ARE the persecutors – ALL of  them.

Deal with them accordingly.


Eric Cantor: Closeted Homosexual, Open and Notorious Traitor

November 13, 2010

As Crooks and Liars surmises:

If our political system made more sense, this would be an astounding scandal that would dominate the discourse.

Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday during a meeting in New York that the new GOP majority in the House will “serve as a check” on the Obama administration, a statement unusual for its blunt disagreement with U.S. policy delivered directly to a foreign leader.

“Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington,” read a statement from Cantor’s office on the one-on-one meeting. “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other.”

This just isn’t normal. Laura Rozen called the meeting itself “unusual, if not unheard of.” But it’s what Cantor said that’s astounding.

We’re talking about a powerful member of Congress engaged in foreign policy, vowing to a foreign government to oppose the administration’s policies regarding that government.

As Adam Serwer noted yesterday, “Based on Cantor’s own standard, he’s just committed a felony.”

Can we expect our Attorney General to do something more than sitting around and whitewashing the Bush Administration into a fake history of legality?  Its about time that Republicans catch the back end of the fake patriotism-piety that they pollute American discourse with.  Of course, we know that they won’t.  Apparently, even without Rahm Escamuel, President Obama thinks that people like Cantor and The Boner are capable of doing something other than turning Congress into America’s Fifth Column.


Scalia: Intent Only Matters Regarding What I Want it to Matter About

November 13, 2010

From Raw Story:

One of the most conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court and one of the most liberal ones sparred Friday over capital punishment, the direct election of senators and various other constitutional questions during a rare public debate that highlighted their philosophical differences.Antonin Scalia, 74, the longest-serving current justice, appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, and Stephen Breyer, 72, appointed by Democrat Bill Clinton, shared the stage in front of a crowd of thousands during a West Texas event organized by Texas Tech University Law School.

Regarding the death penalty, Tony the Duck Hunter opined:

“There’s not an ounceworth of room for debate as to whether it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment because, at the time the Eighth Amendment was adopted — the cruel and unusual punishments clause — it was the only punishment for a felony.”

Well, that’s actually bullshit.  There was this little thing called ‘transportation.’  That’s mostly associated with Australia of course, but it got started with forcible transportaion to England’s American colonies….

you know, back when the entities that would come up with the U.S. Constitution were still, um…, English colonies?

But wait, there’s more.

Scalia said he has no interest in what legislators intended when making a particular law. Breyer countered, saying judges need to go back and find out the purpose legislators had when crafting a bill.

“I don’t at all look to what I think the legislature thought,” Scalia said. “I frankly don’t care what the legislature thought.”

Breyer responded quickly, saying, “That’s the problem,” which brought thunderous laughter from the crowd.

“You’ve got to go back to the purpose of the legislation, find out what’s there,” Breyer said. “That’s the democratic way, cause you can then hold that legislature responsible, rather than us, who you can’t control.”

So…

He keeps an eighteenth century dictionary on his desk to somehow ascertain the meaning of words that appear in the Constitution (though, apparently, not to ascertain intent?), yet he doesn’t give a shit about the intent behind laws made since then – laws which often establish meaning via addressing matters previously addressed by law.

Translation: He of the plutocracy bloc of the court gets to make up whatever meaning he wants to make up in order to do the bidding of Walton and Koch families.

Remind me again why this character is still allowed to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court?


Why Do ‘Christians’ Oppose God’s Will?

November 13, 2010

This is an old story, but I was just reminded of it.  So, I thought I’d remind everyone else who might have forgotten.

Its from Pat Robertson’s Fraud Operation (sometimes referred to as CBN) and, when I did a PDF dump of the item back in 2004 it began with this:

Abdul longed to be attractive, to be normal like the other children, but his family could not afford surgery to fix his cleft lip and palate

The pic image no longer appears and the intro line is gone, but the story appears to be otherwise the same.

This is Abdul. He is six years old. Do you know what Abdul wants? He wants to be handsome. That’s all. To look in a mirror and see a handsome face. But what chance would a poor Muslim boy from the Philippines have to fix this cleft lip and palate so he could one day be handsome? Probably little.

“Abdul was born with that deformity,” says Abdul’s mother, Pinambai. “They say it happened because of certain medicines I took when I was pregnant with him, but I didn’t take any medicine. I believe this is what Allah wanted.”

Abdul’s mother pities her son because her family can’t afford the surgery to have his lip and cleft palate repaired. On top of this, Abdul also has a speech impediment.

“Other kids would tease him, make fun of the way he talked,” she says. “He would get mad and hit them.”

The heartache of a little boy’s life: hiding from other children so they won’t make fun of him. And because of his family’s poverty, there seemed to be no chance for a better life for Abdul. Then Pinambai heard wonderful news.

“I met sister Mely, and she told me, ‘I will help you,’” Pinambai explains. “She said, ‘Operation Blessing will help you.’”

Those words, Operation Blessing, were Abdul’s mother’s first glimmer of hope! The community where they live is one of Operation Blessing’s many outreaches to the Muslim people in the Philippines. First, Abdul was put in a feeding program because he was malnourished. Next, he was scheduled for surgery.

“He was very happy. He shouted, ‘Yeah! Now I can be handsome!’ After that, he looked at himself in the mirror several times,” Abdul’s mother states.

In September Dr. Hector Santos performed the first stage of the operation, which repaired Abdul’s cleft palate.

The item ends with the following:

Says a grateful Pinambai, “I would like to thank Operation Blessing. Thank you very much to all those who helped my son.”

Join The 700 Club today! For only 65 cents a day, or a mere $20 a month, you can offer the love and hope of Jesus Christ worldwide.

So, of course, this was just another of Marion the Anti-Librarian’s money-grubbing operations.

And yet, that’s not why I’m revisiting this (well, at least not the primary reason.)

We all know what treasonous christianist theocrats such as Robertson think of transition-related healthcare: its ‘cosmetic’ and, therefore, is against ‘god’s plan.’  (Yes, I’m sure that many of you remember a rather interesting ‘Ask Pat’ segment on the 700 Club in 1999 in which Muthuh Marion and Ms. Terry the Sobriety Lady clearly endorse the legitimacy of SRS; but, apparently, that didn’t mesh well with Marion, Inc.’s overall fundraising schematic so in Virginia Beach that is now relegated to the the book of forbidden history.)

So why is ‘cosmetic’ surgery on this kid’s face so ‘godly’?

Their ‘god’ made that kid look like that. 

So who are they to defy ‘god’?

I asked in 2004 – and I’m askin’ now.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers