Love


Here’s a great timeline found at Mother Jones detailing the failures of the Clinton and Bush administrations’ policies:
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline

A few of the highlights you’ll find in there:
Condi Rice lying about aluminum tubes
The main Iraqi informant “Curveball” was widely suspected to be feeding the US crap
Five hours after 9/11 attacks Rumsfeld was seeking to begin military action against Saddam Hussein
Bush administration’s approval of torture (and subsequent torture of innocent civilians)
Fabricated tales of WMD by Condi Rice, Cheney, et al

All in all, the pattern of falsified intelligence and the marketing of an unwarranted war by the Bush administration is
nothing short of criminal.
Happy Holidays everyone!

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline

Iraq and Afghanistan war spending and homeland security have comprised more than 25% of the Government debt increase since 2001.
Why?
We are covering the cost of the wars with borrowing.
Remember those Bush Tax Cuts? Yup.
George W slashed taxes in 2001 and 2003. And when government revenue is choked off while undertaking two new wars funded by borrowing, debt will pile on fast.

And where is the money going? Well…
The Pentagon has not once produced a clean financial audit since government auditing began twenty years ago. And from what we do know through congressional investigations it is estimated that 25% of wartime contractors is wasted or misspent.

On September 18th of 2011, Linda J. Bilmes and Joseph E. Stiglitz wrote in the LA Times an essay titled “A Costly War Machine.” There they write,
“The invasion of Iraq and the resulting instability in the Persian Gulf were among the factors that pushed oil prices up from about $30 a barrel in 2003 to historic highs five years later…Higher oil prices threatened to depress U.S. economic activity, prompting the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates and loosen regulations. These policies were major contributors to the housing bubble and the financial collapse that followed.”

There are costs of war beyond any monetary evaluation. The human costs bore by our military service members and their families are great and as a nation and as individuals we must hold dear the honor and memory of each member of our Armed Forces that have given their lives.
Currently, an average of 18 veterans commit suicide every day and every month 1,000 veterans attempt suicide.
Since 2002 an estimated 200,000 service members have sustained traumatic brain injuries (TBIs).

Over 12 percent of veterans deployed after 2001 are currently unemployed.

Since 2001, at least 20% of the US’ soldiers experience the symptoms of PTSD.
These symptoms include insomnia, depression, and bouts of rage.
Although women are twice as likely as men to develop combat related PTSD, currently that are less likely to seek medical treatment for it.

The face of the US’ human toll in war is often that of the soldiers but the repercussions of service in the armed forces also dramatically affects the veterans’ families.
Research suggests that children of service members are at higher risk of behavioral disorders, violent aggression, and learning disabilities.
The spouses of military service members are as adversely affected by drug and alcohol abuse as the veterans themselves.
The marriages of service members are twice as likely as their civilian peers to end in divorce.
Domestic violence surfaces in the relationships of veterans and their partners four times as often as their civilian peers.

As a nation, we have the power to choose how we conduct ourselves in the world.
We have the power to vote for political leadership who are committed to ending the US’ pattern of violent incursions around the world.
We have the power to demand from our leaders and corporations that war profiteering be made illegal.
We have the power to demand of our government that the VA be well funded and effectively run to ensure the best possible treatment of all our service members.
We can motivate and lead within our communities of faith to serve the veteran population.
We can tell our elected officials that we desire our taxes to support better lives for those at home in the US and those abroad.

*I want to recognize that this post does not include the costs to the peoples of Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and elsewhere due to US military violence. The lives, cultures, and well being of all people are important and I sought to focus this post on the US perspective.
Challenges met by some in our Armed Forces–and source for some of this post’s information:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2011/11/veterans-challenges/

How the US’ militarism is damaging our nation’s economy and quality of life–and source for this post:
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/18/opinion/la-oe–bilmes-war-cost-20110918
By Linda J. Bilmes and Joseph E. Stiglitz
Veteran and Families
http://www.veteransandfamilies.org/home.html

Veterans For Peace
http://www.veteransforpeace.org/

National Domestic Violence Hotline:
1-800-799-SAFE (7233)

 

Miss Virginia Nikki Poteet is innocent until proven guilty.
But sheesh.
When many people are confirming that you went on a drunken tirade breaking furniture and using homophobic slurs, a serious investigation is needed.
I encourage everyone to call requesting Miss USA investigate these allegations seriously.
(212) 373-4986
pr@missuniverse.com

About Nikki Poteet:
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/11/01/358324/poteet-homophobic-slurs/
http://missvirginiausa.com/titleholders.php?id=2010110809525094586

The National Organization for Marriage, or NOM, is an outspoken and effective leader in the debate of marriage equality
and I would like to offer my response to their ‘Marriage Talking Points.’
My effort here is to create a dialogue with NOM and others who would deny equal marriage rights for all Americans and
to spark ideas that others who support equality might find useful for their discussions.
I am writing from the perspective of a straight, Christian ally who seeks equal standing under law for all people.

NOM writes:
Gays and Lesbians have a right to live as they choose,
they don’t have the right to redefine marriage for all of us.”
I respond:
All people are guaranteed “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” in America. Let’s start from there.
I would add that there is a loaded word in that statement: “choose.” Let us remember that we know that sexual attraction is not a choice. While lifelong commitment in marriage is a ‘choice’ we can listen to many people’s experiences (straight and gay) that they often cite being “drawn together” or “made for each other” or that “God drew us into relationship.” There are deep levels of loving relationship that are so overwhelming, it isn’t the type of choice like choosing what TV show to watch.
I would add that the second part of that statement pretty much overrides and nullifies the first part. Marriage is a giant part of a person’s life and happiness. Marriage is considered by many a ‘sacrament’ and is probably one of their most memorable and important days of their life. To say to someone: “You are free to do whatever you want in terms of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness….except the biggest part of your life, liberty and happiness.” makes the whole sentiment ring pretty hollow. I think we can all see eye to eye that love is real, love is amazing, and marriage can be a person’s and a couple’s most central relationship and facet of their being.
And importantly: equality advocates and social justice seekers don’t expect you to change your definition of marriage. You can have any definition that you currently have. If you believe that divorce is not permissible for you and your partner, you can keep believing that. If you think that sex before marriage is not permissible for you and your partner, you can believe that and act on it. There are many divergent beliefs about marriage and different ‘definitions.’ We can all get along. Some believe it is not permissible to use birth control. That’s cool.
The bottom line I’m getting to is that no one I know in the equality-camp expects to change any one else’s mind about what marriage should be. Sure, I will grant that we will speak about how love and trust and family and commitment are, that’s true. But if you believe being gay is wrong or a sin–that is between you and God. No amount of arguing will change that. And you can raise your children to believe whatever you see fit. We only want equality under law.

NOM writes:
“Marriage is between a husband and wife. The people of [this state] do not want marriage to be anything but that. We do not want government or judges changing that definition for us today or our children tomorrow.”
I respond:
Marriage has certainly changed throughout our nation’s short history hasn’t it? We don’t need to get into details like 1967′s Loving v. Virginia decision or anything else. We just need to accept the broad stroke idea: Our nation has grown over time to better and better protect all people under law. The government and judges and people’s voting have all swayed towards less discrimination, and more equality under law. The legal definitions of many facets of our lives have changed: when a person is an ‘adult’, who can vote, who is a citizen, who can marry, when a person is legally drunk, what can be sold on Sundays, etc.
Importantly, despite the legal changes over time, this doesn’t prevent many people from keeping their own values and morals.

NOM writes:
We need a marriage amendment to settle the gay marriage issue once and for all, so we don’t have it in our face every day for the next ten years.
I respond:
This statement is pretty heavy. It sounds like equality for all people is hard on you and “in your face every day.” Wow. If this issue is affecting you this much, imagine if you will the lives of those who want to get married and can’t. What will their next ten years be like? What about the next ten years of their children? I can guarantee you that their inability to marry their loved one is important to them and I dare say even more pressing to them than it is on your life. There are well over 1,200 marriage benefits that these families cannot access including: ability to make medical decisions for an ill or end of life partner, access to partner’s coverage under Social Security and Medicare, joint adoption, bereavement leave, ability to sponsor partner’s immigration, etc. These are basic issues of compassion. Imagine yourself in their shoes.

NOM writes:
Do we want to teach the next generation that one-half of humanity—either mothers or fathers—are dispensable, unimportant? Children are confused enough right now with sexual messages. Let’s not confuse them further.
I respond:
I work with youth now and have for many years. I have encountered a number who currently have two mothers or two fathers. I also know adults who have grown up with gay parents. I can only speak from their feedback and how I have interacted with them but not once have I seen anyone say that some people are “dispensable or unimportant.” Everyone has the capacity to be an effective, positive parent if they want to be. My message and the messaging I’ve heard from other equality advocates is never that anyone “is dispensable or unimportant.” No! Anyone who loves children and is willing to commit to the hardships of parenting should be applauded for their love and encouraged and supported. I firmly believe that not only are loving parental roles important, but so are other adults in children’s lives. Everyone is important! We all have a role to play in protecting and respecting our young ones.
But who is really getting the treatment of being “dispensable and unimportant?” Maybe people who are being singled out to be incapable of adopting, incapable of being legally married? Maybe our children are more confused by inequality in society. It would appear from many surveys that our younger generations are more accepting of LGBTQ folks than ever before. What do they think of having two sets of rules to play by: in word we laud equality and liberty but in deed we discriminate? That’s confusing to me!

NOM writes:
Marriage as the union of husband and wife isn’t new; it’s not taking away anyone’s rights. It’s common sense.
I respond:
Marriage as it has been commonly practiced and understood in the US for the last couple of decades is exactly that: just a couple of decades old. So it is a bit new. That we have ‘no fault’ divorce, that women are not considered property, that married women have sexual rights to not be raped and assaulted by their husbands, that people of ‘different races’ can legally marry, etc. Yes, it is pretty new. And it isn’t universal. There are many different cultural perspectives and expectations about marriage. Is it okay to marry a first cousin? Is it okay to marry a teenager?
What I’m getting at is that the way marriage has been approached in mainstream America for the last couple of decades is not a ‘given,’ is not ‘ancient’, is not ‘universal.’
I would argue that to deny someone the benefits of marriage (remember, there’s over 1,200 legal benefits!) because of the sex they were born would be to deny them equal access. This is a form of sexual discrimination, and it is not equality under law. We can see the provisions given to us by judges and government that protect freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of privacy, protection from sexual discrimination. This is the ‘common sense’ to which we appeal.

Closing Comments:
I respect the right of religion and freedom of conscience. However you want to believe the ‘ideal’ family looks like and however you want to define marriage for yourself and for your children and with your religious community, you can do so. However, without evidence that society or individuals are harmed by having two mothers or two fathers, there is no legal basis to discriminate against a group of people or an individual.
This is an issue of religious freedom. Many LGBTQ couples believe that God has blessed them with their relationship and has blessed them and led them to be married. Their churches and their clergy bless them. It is not the government’s place to tell them that their God, their church, and their clergy are wrong.

This is an issue of sexual discrimination. Imagine: it is because of how you are born that you cannot marry the person you love. Would we tell that to anyone else based on how they were born?

This is an issue of keeping government small and out of our private lives.
Will we have government officials assigned to supervise the sex of marriage applicants?  Do we want big government to research the medical histories of marriage applicants?

What about intersexed individuals? Who decides their ‘sex’ and potential to marry? What about transgendered individuals?

I for one promise to not use the ‘bigot’ card when discussing this issue. I do not know the heart of those who would oppose marriage equality. My first inclination and intention is to love. I want to meet everybody as a person of inherent dignity and worth and as an equal to be respected. I want to empathize with you in values we share and to listen to you carefully. I believe that the march towards greater justice is paved by patience and righteousness, not arguing and vitriol.
Much love and more love!

You can read NOM’s “Marriage Talking Points” at this link:
http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/c.omL2KeN0LzH/b.4475595/k.566A/Marriage_Talking_Points.htm

 

Saint Valentine’s Day is a very special day. Many people all over the world celebrate Saint Valentine’s Day. Big people, little people, old people, young people, pirates and gold prospectors all love the merry day. But not too many people know about origins of the holiday and the one who began it all.

This is the story of Saint Valentine.

There once was a very little boy who lived in a very little town. They were perfect for each other. The boy’s name was Steve and the town’s name was Valentine. Sometimes, people called the boy “Steve, you know, that kid from Valentine”. Steve was very shy which made the other little children feel uncomfortable around him and call him names like “Stink, the Ugly Kid”, or “Stink-Bomb-Ugly-Face”. This only made Steve even more shy. His mother would compensate for his state of social ineptitude by smothering him in maternal love and pastries. Before long, Steve had terrible blood pressure and an unhealthy attachment to his mother. Steve then left home at the tender age of thirty five to make a life for himself. “Goodbye mother, goodbye sweet, sweet pastries.” He said as he said goodbye to his mother and her pastries.

Steve went to the very big city that was by the ocean. Steve had always wanted to be close to the ocean ever since he first ate one of his mother’s homemade salt water taffies while school children chanted “Are you some horrific sea venturing creature?” over and over again. Steve wanted to get over being shy. Steve also wanted to be near the ocean. As a perfect solution, Steve joined the Navy. He looked very keen in his white dapper uniform.

Many times people would say to Steve, “You think you’re pretty hot stuff don’t you?” and he would give a little wink and a snappy salute and another little wink. His bunk mate on the boat would always say to Steve before a weekend pass at port, “Go have a great time, Rudolf Valentino.” And Steve would say, “My name is Steve for the thousandth time. But, strangely enough, I am from Valentine.” And then he’d give a little wink and a snappy salute and another little wink. While in the Navy, Steve formed three strong friendships: a seagull he saw once by an island, the picture of his mother that he had tattooed on his chest himself, and his pillow which he wet with bitter tears every night.

Finally, Steve shot himself in the foot with a harpoon to get out of the Navy. Steve returned to the big city by the ocean. Though his love for all things nautical had grown cold, he still enjoyed the briny smell and the memory of the seagull he’d seen. One day at a quiet out of the way bistro, Steve fell madly in love with an incredible little number called a “Frappie”. Steve admired the coffee based drink for its zing and its zip and was wild over its sass and attitude. It was at another not so quaint and not so out of the way bistro that Steve fell in love once again. This time it was with a woman named Candy. Steve approached her and asked for money.
“Get a job, you horrific sea venturing creature.” She said.
Steve liked her zing and zip.
Steve asked her what her name was:
“Candy.” She said.
Steve asked if that was because she ate a lot of candy:
“Actually, I can’t. I’ve got life-threatening diabetes. But thanks for bringing it up, puke face.” She said.
Steve liked her sass.
Steve asked her if she would marry him and she pretended to dry heave. Steve liked her attitude.

Their love blossomed over the next weekend and with Candy’s persistence, they soon married in a bistro that was near the bistro they had met in, but was more like the bistro Steve had met Frappies in. Steve and Candy soon had a large loving family.

Of their children, one they found in a basket left on the front porch, one they found in the oven and looked like a bun, one they found floating in a basket in the river, one was dropped down the chimney by a stork, and one just appeared levitating in their backyard and had no belly button.

“Looky here, Steve” Candy said, “We’ve got a whole week of kids!” This was because at that time there was five days in a week.
Steve said, “Let’s hope our huge and really loving family always stays just like it is and no one ever adds any days to the week so we can always say we’ve got a ‘week of kids’. We will always be together, in perfect, flawless matrimonial bliss. I love you Candy, more than any words a poet may pen. You are my life, Candy. I will love you forever.”

A week later, Candy left Steve for an out of work circus clown with a terrible, hacking cough.
“Why Candy? Why? Why?” Wailed Steve.
“I need a man who laughs at my jokes.” She said.
“Was that a joke?” Steve said.
“Nope.” She said.

Five days later, Steve’s children left him while they had told him they were going out to buy cigarettes. They left him a note on the kitchen table which read:

“Told you we were buying cigarettes. Partially true. We are, but we are never coming back. Please disregard every time we ever told you we loved you.

Yours truly, your children.
P.S. If you ever see Mom again, tell her we love her very, very much.”

For the next nine days, Steve’s whereabouts were unknown. Some said that he lived in a cave where he harbored a sick turtle with a low birth weight he called his “Precious.”

He later reappeared in Valentine only to find his mother had died the previous night in an attack of angina and four badgers and a bat. Steve felt very alone. Steve took to spending many lazy afternoons by Valentine’s river where in his eye one could almost see the reflection of the ocean. One day, a servant girl came to the river to wash her cruel master’s clothes. Her beauty was unparalleled and her hair the color of burning heather.
“Whatcha doin’?” Steve asked.
“Washing my cruel master’s clothes.” She said.
“Really?” Steve said, “That’d be cool.”
“Washing clothes in a river?” She asked.
“No, being a cruel master.” Steve said, watching her get a really tough stain out of a coon skin hat.
“Hey, that gives me an idea!” Steve said. “Whatcha say we get married?”
“Well…” She said, “you sure a different fellow aren’t you?”
Steve laughed and laughed. She stared at him silently.

Eight hours later the two were married in Valentine’s second oldest bistro which was not as nice as the other bistros, but served great scones. “They’re like big funny cookies.” Steve said.

Their marriage produced no children, nor did they have a home to call their own. Instead, they moved in with her cruel master who got along famously with Steve. As the two grew older, they only grew closer and could hardly be separated. When they played horseshoes, each would purposely miss each toss to save the other the terrible shame of losing. Also, each would lie if the other asked if they were getting fat. Apparently, in this matter she lied very well, for it was two months after their wedding night that Steve died of morbid obesity. It turned out that all the years of pastries and salt water taffy had weakened his metabolism and the scones were just too much for his belabored heart.

She was as faithful to him in death as she had been in life. She visited his grave everyday for the next three weeks of her life before finally being struck down in an attack of gout, a badger, a spider, a leprechaun, and a bat. In her last will and testament she requested that all of their meager belongings be given to Steve’s five children, should they ever be found.

All the townsfolk said of her in her passing, “That woman put up with him like a saint. The woman was a saint. A true saint!” Because of that, and coupled with the fact that no one knew her real name, she became known as Saint Valentine. Throughout the little town of Valentine all remembered her by celebrating the day Steve first met her by the river- January 21. However, through the years, two more days were added to the week, Tuesday and Friday, so the date is now correctly reckoned at February 14.

Children originally celebrated the holiday by leaving small wooden shoes by the fireplace, so that during the night “Saint Valentine” could throw the shoes into the fire to warm the house and the hearts of the young. Sadly, today the little town of Valentine is gone and the townsfolk have long passed away, but it is said that the story will forever be told as long as there is love.

Call Mitt today to thank him for standing in solidarity with LGBTQ communities, families, and individuals!
857-288-3500

Or, at least he did in 1994. And that’s still worth something isn’t it?

In 1994, he wrote in a letter to Log Cabin Republicans:
“…As a result of our discussions and other interactions with gay and lesbian voters across the state, I am more convinced than ever before that as we seek to establish full equality for gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent [Ted Kennedy].”

“I am not unaware of my opponents considerable record in the area of civil rights, or the commitment of Massachusetts voters to the principle of equality for all Americans. For some voters it might be enough for me to simply match my opponent’s record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern.”

“We have discussed a number of important issues such as the Federal Employment Non-​Discrimination act ENDA, which I have agreed to Cosponsor, and if possible, broaden to include housing and credit, and the bull to create a federal panel to find ways to reduce gay and lesbian youth suicide, which I also support…”

Call Mitt today to thank him for believing that the Constitution protected everyone in 1994.
857-288-3500

I wish we all could travel in a time machine and go back to 1994 and talk with the Mitt Romney of old that
understood that gender discrimination and religious discrimination are wrong. I bet he was a real cool guy who
understood common sense, law, civil rights, and human decency.

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.