http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/08/5793248-after-rep-giffords-shot-in-arizona-palins-take-back-the-20-goes-down
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Palin Keeps it Classy...
http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/08/5793248-after-rep-giffords-shot-in-arizona-palins-take-back-the-20-goes-down
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Playing semantics... 1st Amendment Edition...
Ugh. The mid-term elections have become something of a freakshow as Conservative candidates (mostly those with Tea Party support...) have appeared on the scene to embarrass themselves with a spectacular lack of knowledge of the actual law, only what they believe the law to say.
Case in point, Christine O'Donnell, who has been out on the political scene since the 1990's working as a talking head for a number of morally conservative organizations (S.A.L.T., being her own creation) as well as other fundy Christian groups and causes. Her most recent run for Congress in her home state of Delaware has her in the spotlight (again) showing her spectacular lack of political knowledge, a la Sarah Palin.
In this video, she and her Democratic opponent are debating. She is asking him to cite the location of "the separation of church and state" in the US Constitution:
She thinks that she's being clever with her question, but the laughter you are hearing in the background is that of the law students in the audience, laughing at Ms. O'Donnell's blinding ignorance of the 1st Amendment.
The answer? It's in the First Amendment. In fact, it's the first part of the first amendment.
Here is the actual wording of the First Amendment to the Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The bolded section of the text is the "separation of church and state" that everyone talks about. Simply that the government will not engage in matters involving religion, nor will it prevent people from practicing their religion as they choose. Simple enough, yes?
Alas, no. Part of the Conservative rhetoric is that since the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear VERBATIM in the Constitution, then it doesn't apply.
Huh?
Amusingly, to those of us who are thinkers, these are the same Conservative Moralists who are the quickest to cite Bible phrases as explanations as to why homosexuality is bad. But, if you look in the bible, there's no mention of the words gay, homosexuality, or even the entertainingly comic-y "fanny bandit." But, they sure love to say that "that's what those phrases mean."
Sorry Conservative Moralists. You can't have it both ways. Stop trying to make the US into your own personal Jesus-land.
Rachel Maddow breaks it down for us:
Case in point, Christine O'Donnell, who has been out on the political scene since the 1990's working as a talking head for a number of morally conservative organizations (S.A.L.T., being her own creation) as well as other fundy Christian groups and causes. Her most recent run for Congress in her home state of Delaware has her in the spotlight (again) showing her spectacular lack of political knowledge, a la Sarah Palin.
In this video, she and her Democratic opponent are debating. She is asking him to cite the location of "the separation of church and state" in the US Constitution:
She thinks that she's being clever with her question, but the laughter you are hearing in the background is that of the law students in the audience, laughing at Ms. O'Donnell's blinding ignorance of the 1st Amendment.
Here is the actual wording of the First Amendment to the Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
The bolded section of the text is the "separation of church and state" that everyone talks about. Simply that the government will not engage in matters involving religion, nor will it prevent people from practicing their religion as they choose. Simple enough, yes?
Alas, no. Part of the Conservative rhetoric is that since the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear VERBATIM in the Constitution, then it doesn't apply.
Huh?
Amusingly, to those of us who are thinkers, these are the same Conservative Moralists who are the quickest to cite Bible phrases as explanations as to why homosexuality is bad. But, if you look in the bible, there's no mention of the words gay, homosexuality, or even the entertainingly comic-y "fanny bandit." But, they sure love to say that "that's what those phrases mean."
Sorry Conservative Moralists. You can't have it both ways. Stop trying to make the US into your own personal Jesus-land.
Rachel Maddow breaks it down for us:
Monday, October 18, 2010
The Rightwing Rhetoric...
It's been pretty clear to the thinking left that the right has abdicated any arguments that contain things like logic or reason... and they've taken to straight-up activist language, loaded with emotion and invectives that frighten people who are prone to moralistic outrages.
This clip is about 16 minutes, so it's a lot to watch, but the last half (give or take) is the most important, and lucid breakdown of what we stand to lose in the upcoming election.
Intelligent people, please take note:
This clip is about 16 minutes, so it's a lot to watch, but the last half (give or take) is the most important, and lucid breakdown of what we stand to lose in the upcoming election.
Intelligent people, please take note:
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Republicans Hate The Troops. Simple as that.
The fact that the Republicans decided that the entire bill should die because it would repeal DADT is simply appalling. Republicans have proven that they are more interested in the culture war than in supporting the troops.
Republicans hate the troops. There, I said it.
I'm going to go play my Rage Against The Machine album over and over now.
Republicans hate the troops. There, I said it.
I'm going to go play my Rage Against The Machine album over and over now.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Friday, September 3, 2010
Friday, August 27, 2010
ARTICLES OF FAITH
Since the Stonewall Riots in 1969, there has been an increasingly strong and visible gay 
community in the United States. Defining what the "gay community" actually is, however, is a subject of great debate. Since it isn't a group defined by something as tangible as skin color or geographical constraints, I would argue that it's something more akin to a religion. Now, before you argue that religion is a matter of choice (and of course it is…) and being gay is not (and of course, it isn't), hear me out. Religious affiliation is a bond that exists outside of the physical realm - a shared belief or values system that one grows up in, is one that can exist long before one searches out a physical location like a church or temple with like-minded people. Similarly, when gay people come to realize that they are, in fact, gay, there is a search that begins. When I figured out that I was gay, I was fortunate to be surrounded by friends who were all supportive and very pro-gay in both their politics and their personal beliefs. As I grew older, and started living on my own, I found neighborhoods that were gay meccas, businesses that were established with the intent of serving a gay clientele and cities sizable enough to maintain an annual Gay Pride festival.
As such, I've enjoyed the relative joy and protection of the gay communities where I have lived. In my life (since the late 1980's anyway), I've seen the emergence of celebrities who refused to be constrained by the
public's expectation of heterosexuality. Whether it was someone relatively predictable like Ellen DeGeneres in 1997 (who suffered a career setback as a result) or Rock Hudson, who only came out because he was nearing his final days - as a community we've risen up to embrace, and welcome them. It's the same reflex that we individually extend to our own dear friends and family as something of a pre-emptive strike against the potential negative backlash that may come as a result of coming out. After all, if you're living an unpleasant, oppressed life and there's a community willing to embrace you and offer you safe harbor, without judgment, it makes the decision that much easier. The gay community even offered this safe harbor to George Michael when he was found soliciting a hookup in a park bathroom in Beverly Hills. We may not have approved of his salacious actions (or maybe some did - whatever…) but, when it became public that he was gay, the public at large rejected him as a washed-up 80's pop star, but the gay community opened their arms and welcomed him in. Same with Ricky Martin. Same with Neil Patrick Harris.
However, this last week brought us the news that former Republican National Convention chair Ken Mehlman came out as gay. Rachel Maddow posted this video on her blog:
In it, Bill Maher (famous lefty wingnut, natch) names Mehlman as one of several closeted gay people who work fervently on anti-gay causes (see also Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, etc.)… what's most staggering about this video, however, is that it's from November 2006 - only days after the election that brought a Democratic majority to the House of Representatives - a day that was something of a massive blow to the Republicans at the time.
Now, who the f*ck Ken Mehlman, and why care?
- His entire professional life, he has been ardently conservative, and as such gained favor with the Republican Party.
- He was Field Director on George W. Bush's 2000 Campaign.
- After the 2000 election, Mehlman became director of the White House Office of Political Affairs (and was subsequently involved in a scandal involving election tampering)
- He was George W. Bush's 2004 Campaign Manager -- leading the Republican Party on numerous anti-gay initiatives, as well as using the then 18-month old war in Iraq as a tool for fear-mongering.
- From 2005 to 2007, he was the chair of the Republican National Committee, where he worked closely with Karl Rove on the Republican Party's (unsuccessful) ongoing electoral dominance plan.
Now that he has decided to come out, I can't help but wonder what his future holds for him. I'm hard pressed to believe that "it’s taken [him] 43 years to come to terms with this part of [his] life" when it seems that his sexual orientation was one of the worst kept secrets in DC.
Ken Mehlman should not expect the warm embrace of the gay community. If he hadn't spent the last decade of his career working against gay rights, thereby damaging his own personal future, there might be more love and support for Mr. Mehlman. For a while, he will have to say many, many mea culpas and Acts of Contrition to the community that he not only abandoned but actively worked against.
Most religious organizations recognize the offering of Absolution to the Penitent as an essential step on the road to ultimate salvation (whatever that may be). This may be where the gay community is much less like a religion, and more like regular humanity - ultimate "salvation" is more subjective and anything resembling absolution is a hard-won climb back up a rocky hill.
Mr. Mehlman will lose any favor he once had among the righteous Republicans - and he has a long way to go before he's truly embraced into the bosom of the gay community and progressives who support things as simple as gay marriage.
I'm inclined to believe that if he had simply embraced who he was earlier on in his life, he would have a much shorter list of mea culpas to make. In the meantime, however, I look forward to the next former-conservative to scrap their fervent anti-gay biases and come parading out of the closet.
Condoleezza? Is that you?
Now, one last bit for you. I Heart Barney Frank ALMOST as much as I Heart Rachel Maddow.
Enjoy!
community in the United States. Defining what the "gay community" actually is, however, is a subject of great debate. Since it isn't a group defined by something as tangible as skin color or geographical constraints, I would argue that it's something more akin to a religion. Now, before you argue that religion is a matter of choice (and of course it is…) and being gay is not (and of course, it isn't), hear me out. Religious affiliation is a bond that exists outside of the physical realm - a shared belief or values system that one grows up in, is one that can exist long before one searches out a physical location like a church or temple with like-minded people. Similarly, when gay people come to realize that they are, in fact, gay, there is a search that begins. When I figured out that I was gay, I was fortunate to be surrounded by friends who were all supportive and very pro-gay in both their politics and their personal beliefs. As I grew older, and started living on my own, I found neighborhoods that were gay meccas, businesses that were established with the intent of serving a gay clientele and cities sizable enough to maintain an annual Gay Pride festival.As such, I've enjoyed the relative joy and protection of the gay communities where I have lived. In my life (since the late 1980's anyway), I've seen the emergence of celebrities who refused to be constrained by the
public's expectation of heterosexuality. Whether it was someone relatively predictable like Ellen DeGeneres in 1997 (who suffered a career setback as a result) or Rock Hudson, who only came out because he was nearing his final days - as a community we've risen up to embrace, and welcome them. It's the same reflex that we individually extend to our own dear friends and family as something of a pre-emptive strike against the potential negative backlash that may come as a result of coming out. After all, if you're living an unpleasant, oppressed life and there's a community willing to embrace you and offer you safe harbor, without judgment, it makes the decision that much easier. The gay community even offered this safe harbor to George Michael when he was found soliciting a hookup in a park bathroom in Beverly Hills. We may not have approved of his salacious actions (or maybe some did - whatever…) but, when it became public that he was gay, the public at large rejected him as a washed-up 80's pop star, but the gay community opened their arms and welcomed him in. Same with Ricky Martin. Same with Neil Patrick Harris.However, this last week brought us the news that former Republican National Convention chair Ken Mehlman came out as gay. Rachel Maddow posted this video on her blog:
In it, Bill Maher (famous lefty wingnut, natch) names Mehlman as one of several closeted gay people who work fervently on anti-gay causes (see also Mark Foley, Ted Haggard, etc.)… what's most staggering about this video, however, is that it's from November 2006 - only days after the election that brought a Democratic majority to the House of Representatives - a day that was something of a massive blow to the Republicans at the time.
Now, who the f*ck Ken Mehlman, and why care?
- His entire professional life, he has been ardently conservative, and as such gained favor with the Republican Party.
- He was Field Director on George W. Bush's 2000 Campaign.
- After the 2000 election, Mehlman became director of the White House Office of Political Affairs (and was subsequently involved in a scandal involving election tampering)
- He was George W. Bush's 2004 Campaign Manager -- leading the Republican Party on numerous anti-gay initiatives, as well as using the then 18-month old war in Iraq as a tool for fear-mongering.
- From 2005 to 2007, he was the chair of the Republican National Committee, where he worked closely with Karl Rove on the Republican Party's (unsuccessful) ongoing electoral dominance plan.
Now that he has decided to come out, I can't help but wonder what his future holds for him. I'm hard pressed to believe that "it’s taken [him] 43 years to come to terms with this part of [his] life" when it seems that his sexual orientation was one of the worst kept secrets in DC.
Ken Mehlman should not expect the warm embrace of the gay community. If he hadn't spent the last decade of his career working against gay rights, thereby damaging his own personal future, there might be more love and support for Mr. Mehlman. For a while, he will have to say many, many mea culpas and Acts of Contrition to the community that he not only abandoned but actively worked against.
Most religious organizations recognize the offering of Absolution to the Penitent as an essential step on the road to ultimate salvation (whatever that may be). This may be where the gay community is much less like a religion, and more like regular humanity - ultimate "salvation" is more subjective and anything resembling absolution is a hard-won climb back up a rocky hill.
Mr. Mehlman will lose any favor he once had among the righteous Republicans - and he has a long way to go before he's truly embraced into the bosom of the gay community and progressives who support things as simple as gay marriage.
I'm inclined to believe that if he had simply embraced who he was earlier on in his life, he would have a much shorter list of mea culpas to make. In the meantime, however, I look forward to the next former-conservative to scrap their fervent anti-gay biases and come parading out of the closet.
Condoleezza? Is that you?
Now, one last bit for you. I Heart Barney Frank ALMOST as much as I Heart Rachel Maddow.
Enjoy!
Post-Katrina coverage
Rachel gives a shout out to one resilient radio station, that provided a lifeline to the residents of New Orleans post-Katrina. I'll be damned if I dont get teary just thinking about it too, Rachel.
Heart her always.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)