Open Letter to Arianna Huffington: "Queer Voices" Has Got to Go

Ms. Huffington:

In recent days, The Huffington Post has unceremoniously re-branded its LGBT news section, "Queer Voices." Its previous name, Gay Voices was deemed to be too exclusionary, as not everyone under the sexual minorities umbrella considers themselves to be gay.

Yes, ma'am, I'm talking to you.

The problem is, "Queer" as a word carries a lot of baggage, most of it quite negative. To many--and I'm one of them--it's plainly offensive, particularly if used by others to define me. If a person wants to identify as "queer?" Knock themselves out. Don't assign it to me. If a gay organization or publication wants to use the word or a "Q" or a variant (such as Queerty)? It doesn't bother me. It's from the community, for the community. There is no hint of malice. But when it's a section of what is essentially an online mainstream newspaper? No. No.

I understand the impulse to change the name, and it is doubtless true that you've probably received criticism from trans people, bisexual people and anyone else who doesn't identify primarily as "gay." I also understand that coming up with a short, succinct heading is quite difficult, because by its nature, a short name has a difficult job being inclusionary. Somebody is bound to be left out of a lot of the options out there.

My own gay section doesn't try to solve the riddle, since it's
just little old me here. I'm not LGBT, I'm just "G."

This is borne out by the history of the most common identifier of LGBT. We've gone from "Gay" to "Gay & Lesbian," to "Gay, Lesbian & Bisexual," to "GLBT," (which is pronounceable as glibbit, and includes trans-, whether transsexual or transvestite), to LGBT (ladies first, but unpronounceable). That pretty much stuck, but it started to gather barnacles of other letters and symbols, because it still didn't include everybody. And though that seems only natural, it also starts getting unwieldy, and begging your pardon, quite ridiculous.

The entire point of an abbreviation is that it be shorter, and succinct. LGBTTQQF*GPBDS? doesn't do that. And, invariably, it's still going to leave somebody out. So, I can appreciate HuffPo's dilemma. "Gay" doesn't cut it, what are the succinct alternatives?

- LGBT Voices, probably nixed for the reasons listed above
- Pride Voices, reasonable, inoffensive, probably in use somewhere else
- Lambda Voices, probably too obscure
- Rainbow Voices, probably too vague
- Alternative Lifestyles, nearly as bad as Queer Voices for a lot of reasons

So, again, I understand your dilemma. I happen to think you blew it, royally. You'd have done better by inventing a word, and sub-titling it with a description. You could've done something plain like, "Huffington Post Pride Page," or something more vague like, "Our World: Huffington Post's LGBTetc. Pride Page." Ultimately, it's not up to me. That's why you, Ms. Huffington make the big bucks. But changing "Gay" to "Queer" to be more inclusive and less divisive utterly misses the mark.

I wrote this as an open letter for the simple reason that this little dark corner of the internet was inspired by The Huffington Post, though my sights weren't nearly as lofty (thank goodness). Along with John Aravosis' AmericaBlog, I decided to start my own blog because of HuffPo some nine years ago. I've continued to read it daily, and have used it many times as a source for articles and links. I haven't loved everything, and am utterly lost as to why your entertainment writers are seemingly obsessed with the Kardashians to the point of absurdity. But I've always felt included in the Gay Voices section. Queer Voices doesn't feel remotely as welcoming.

Sincerely,

James L. Greenlee, Editor
Greenlee Gazette

The Gay Thing: LGBT Employment Rights Federally Mandated All Along?

Well, this is kind of nifty. And no big hoopla, or anything. I've used the 1964 Civil Rights Act as an example for quite a while when arguing against discrimination in public accommodations. You know, those oddly religiously sensitive bakers and florists who won't sell to gay folks getting married? Though sexual orientation wasn't part of that act nationally, it's illustrative. But who knew it applied to discrimination in employment already? This is such new news, I wonder if it might not also apply to public accommodations? If so, this is a rather nifty end-run around all of those RFRA thingies, isn't it? I'm hoping so.

Image from source, Buzzfeed

[Excerpt]

Sexual Orientation Discrimination Is Barred By Existing Law, Federal Commission Rules
 
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has ruled that existing civil rights law bars sexual orientation-based employment discrimination — a groundbreaking decision to advance legal protections for gay, lesbian, and bisexual workers. . .

Read more at: Buzzfeed

Proud to be an American: White House in Gay Pride Rainbow Light

Yessssss.

[Excerpt]

The White House Is Decked Out in Rainbow Colors to Celebrate Gay Marriage

The Obama administration blanketed the front wall of the White House in rainbow-colored lights Friday night in a show of support for the Supreme Court decision released earlier in the day that made same-sex marriage legal in all 50 states. . .

Read more at: National Journal

 

Abraham Lincoln Died 150 Years Ago Today

Image from source, Mother Jones

The fact that Abraham Lincoln's death by assassination happened 150 years ago today is a little stunning when you think about it. In the scheme of things, that really isn't that long ago. I'll be 50 next year, and it's hard for me to believe that just three of my life-spans separate the here and now from Civil War America.

It's also roughly the same amount of time that it took to go from basically no modern conveniences to the world of today. There were some important inventions in use at the time of course, from photography to locomotives to telegraphs, but if you plunked a Millennial kid into 1865, he'd pretty much find it to be a dystopian nightmare. Similarly, if you plucked Lincoln out of Ford's Theater, and into 2015, he'd be mortified by the modern Republican Party.

In many of the discussions about civil rights (spurred by either a gay rights issue or Ferguson and the other racially charged controversies with police), I've seen countless conservative Republicans go on about how it's the Republican Party that blazed the civil rights trail. They'll start with Lincoln, and go all the way up to the Civil Rights Era. They'll point to George Wallace and other Democrats as proof. They're not wrong. . .but they're not right either. They disregard the massive shift both parties went through over the issue, and the fact that the "Dixiecrats" jumped ship and effectively overtook the Republican Party.

Look at a map sometime of the red and blue states, particularly in the 2008 and 2012 elections. Look at a map of the progression of same-sex marriage states. They echo closely the map of Confederate States vs. United States of Lincoln's time. I don't think that's a coincidence.

[Excerpt]

Lincoln Died 150 Years Ago Today and If He Were Still Alive He Wouldn’t Have Been a Republican

On April 14, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln was shot by John Wilkes Booth while attending a play at Ford's Theater in Washington, DC. Lincoln died the following morning, just six days after General Robert E. Lee had surrendered and the Civil War, which lasted four years and killed an estimated 750,000 soldiers, officially ended. . .

Read more at: Mother Jones

Prison Break's Wentworth Miller Comes Out, Refuses Russian Invitation

Image from Glaad.org

As a pop culture follower and a gay person, I'm pretty clued in to which celebrities are really gay, but in a "glass closet." Sometimes a name will surprise me (I really didn't guess Neil Patrick Harris, Wanda Sykes or Stephanie Miller), but usually I've heard it by the time they come out. I'm not saying I'm special or anything, but it's remarkable how often rumors are correct. Anderson Cooper, Ricky Martin, Matt Bomer, George Michael, Melissa Etheridge, Ellen DeGeneres, Jim Parsons, Victor Garber, Jesse Tyler Ferguson, Sean Hayes, Clay Aiken and many more were all "known" to those in the know long before they came out. There are still several big names in the glass closet, and the emptier it gets, the more you wonder a) what they're waiting for and b) if there's even a chance that they're actually straight. You know who I mean, right?

Anyway, good on Wentworth Miller for coming out--though I "knew" he was in there--for coming out in a classy way, and with a politically relevant message. Kudos to you sir!

[Excerpt]

Wentworth Miller rejects Russian film festival invitation; 'As a gay man, I must decline'

Actor and screenwriter Wentworth Miller today rejected an invitation to attend the St. Petersburg International Film Festival, citing Russia's anti-LGBT laws. In a letter to the Festival's Director, the 'Prison Break' star stated that "as a gay man, I must decline." Miller goes on to say that he is "deeply troubled" by Russia's lawful brutality toward the LGBT community. "I cannot in good conscience participate in a celebratory occasion hosted by a country where people like myself are being systematically denied their basic right to live and love openly," Miller concludes. . .

Read more at: GLAAD.org

President Obama on The Tonight Show starring Jay Leno

I've never been much of a Jay Leno fan, having probably seen his version of The Tonight Show maybe a dozen times in the two-plus decades it's been on the air. But this was a pretty good interview, and I think the president came off very well too.

[Excerpt]

President Obama chats with Jay Leno -- and middle America


For the past few months, Jay Leno’s decided President Barack Obama makes for a good joke.
That’s a problem for the White House — one that the president came here Tuesday trying to fix. . .

Read more: Politico

The Gay Thing: Living With Success and Setbacks

Back when I started this blog (almost 6 years ago now), I did a series of Behind the Blogger posts to introduce myself to whatever scant readership was around in those early days. I titled those segments in a similar way, The Politics Thing, The Religion Thing, The Writing Thing, The Debt Thing and ultimately The Gay Thing. I started the blog as an outlet for my frustrations during the second George W. Bush administration, not as a gay rights blog, neither primarily or even secondarily.

As the blog has evolved, and as news has more often been about The Gay Thing, there have been days--hell, sometimes whole weeks--where it seemed like this was full-on gay rights news blog. For some reason, I feel compelled to apologize for that, and explain it away with humor. This isn't due to some sort of lingering shame or self-loathing, it's just not the mission I set out for the blog. But maybe it should be.

My turn was 1996. A lifetime ago!

Or rather, maybe I should just allow the subject to be more front-and-center. Oh, I doubt things will change too much around here. In fact the extent of the changes are thus: the banner above has been created, and will be used for most stories with this subject. And I'm not apologizing or explaining the reason for the posts anymore. They are just part of the blog. I started making banners for different subjects a few years ago, and continue to add them when I recognize that I'm continuing on a theme. It's time The Gay Thing was it's own thing here at Greenlee Gazette.

Being gay in America has always had its challenges. I became an adult in a very scary era for gay people, the birth of the AIDS crisis. It kept me fairly monk-like in my behavior through much of the 1980s, which I can credit for a very lonely early 20s, and with potentially saving my life. I also never experienced the mass death of a circle of friends, because I was not in or of the community. I was unplugged, and am in some ways removed from my own generation.

But I was always clued in to any scrap of news, so it's not like I didn't know what was going on. And by the time I came out to the world at large at age 30, America was an easier place to be gay than at any earlier time. Sure, we were still used as a wedge issue, a scare tactic. Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) had only been law--by Bill Clinton of all people--for a couple of years. But friends and family were immediately (or almost immediately) accepting and supportive. It was practically painless.

Married for almost 5 years now, legally, though not in NV.
One reason that it is frustrating to have the topic of gay
marriage treated as a hypothetical. We've been getting
married for almost a decade now.

There was a dark time not long after that, for gay people across the country. There were rumblings of activity in Hawaii, where it appeared that gay marriage might become legal. In a panic--or in a shrewd fundraising/electoral move--the right wing went into heavy demonizing mode. In states across the country, they started passing preemptive laws and constitutional amendments that barred gay marriage. Often times, the laws were redundant, where marriage was already defined as "one man, one woman." Didn't matter, it was time to make a stand. The biggest move--again, by Bill Clinton--was the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The most head-scratching was the constitutional amendment in Nevada, home of the quickie marriage and quickie divorce.

All through this, the right maintained that it wasn't an anti-gay movement, no, no. They were merely "protecting marriage."  This focus-tested phrase came straight from groups with likewise focus-tested names, usually including the word "Family." But their motives have always been transparent. It doesn't take much effort to find a "traditional marriage" crusader's core motives, if you simply engage them in conversation. It's largely a fundamental inability for them to separate holy matrimony from civil marriage. And an inability to truly get them to acknowledge a separation of church and state.

A lot rests in SCOTUS's hands. Not scary at all. . .

But the tide has turned! The wave of anti-gay marriage measures seemed to not only recede, but race in the opposite direction. In April, we were up to 9 states plus the District of Columbia with full marriage equality. In this month alone, we've gained 3 more, with the possible inclusion of Illinois by month's end, plus very likely regaining California in June.

June is when the Supreme Court announces their rulings on DOMA and Proposition 8 (the referendum that rescinded same-sex marriage rights in California). Most SCOTUS followers believe we will get modest gains for marriage equality at the very least, with the possibility for a broader ruling. And this happens on my 5th wedding anniversary, which is very cool!

But any celebration is tempered by reality. In recent days, there have been reminders that gay people are not fully equal, or sometimes even safe in our own country. There's a teenaged girl whose girlfriend's parents conspired with police to arrest as soon as she turned 18, because the girl was dating their 15-year-old daughter, the motivation being that they didn't want their daughter to be gay. A Texas lesbian with a child by a previous marriage was ordered that she cannot reside with her partner and retain custody. There was a man shot in the head in New York City, killed just for being gay. There has been a rash of assaults in that city, all motivated by anti-gay animus.

A veritable anti-gay crime wave has hit NYC
Read about it here.

Gays are routinely viciously maligned on Twitter, Facebook, message boards, blogs, letters to the editor, and any other forum when a gay related issue is being discussed. "Good Christian" business owners are fighting for the right to refuse the sale of goods and services to gay people, because they "disagree with the lifestyle." Organizations like the "Family" ones mentioned above and the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) exist solely or primarily to actively fight gay civil rights. The Boy Scouts--who, to their credit just decided to allow gay scouts to be members--won't allow gay leaders. Arguments on that subject (and many others) falsely equate homosexuality with pedophilia. And finally, gays were used as a weapon again by the GOP, who held the immigration reform bill hostage, so long as it allowed gay married bi-national couples to be covered under it.

In short (I know, too late), there are still many mountains to climb for full civil equality.  And while I haven't been silent by any stretch, I have been reserved, timid even, though less so lately. I'm going to stop shying away. This is my blog after all, and it isn't as if I have an enormous and dedicated following anyway. So, expect to see the subject covered without apology from now on. Thank you.

Pennsylvania State Rep. Brian Sims Awesome for Several Reasons

An appropriate shot of Brian Sims
from his Facebook page.

For some time, a politician in Pennsylvania named Brian Sims has been on the liberal radar, mine included. Part of the reason is kind of shallow: he's a former football player who is big, beefy and very attractive. But after you discover that part, you find out he's also very smart, well spoken, and a strong liberal with integrity. That's pretty awesome. Then, if you didn't already know, he turns out to be openly gay, and was electable in a state where that hadn't happened before.

So, Sims wins a seat in the Pennsylvania legislature, and everyone who was paying attention probably still has him in their Twitter feed and is still following him on Facebook, and you start to see that he's a pretty awesome dude like, all the time. He really seems like the real deal, saying and doing all the right things, and looking great doing it. And now, he's really gone and done it: he's warmed the hearts of both the pro-choice constituency and those of us opposed to the intrusion of church into state.

I'm going to keep following him.

[Excerpt]

Brian Sims, Pennsylvania Democrat, On Abortion: We Did Not 'Swear To Uphold The Bible'

. . ."This legislation is about advancing an ideology of oppression and suppression, even if such a plan means ignoring the oath of office that each of us swore," Sims told his colleagues during a floor debate in the House of Representatives. "As a reminder, Mr. Speaker, I do believe this has been forgotten entirely by many of my colleagues today: Each of us put our hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. We did not place our hands on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible. . ."

Read more at: Huffington Post

Tuesday Was a Big Gay Day!

The gay rights victories have been piling up of late. This is--I'm sure--much to the consternation of groups like National Organization for Marriage and Pope Palpatine.  Screw 'em, we've been kicked around long enough!

[Excerpt]

Gay marriage clears first hurdle in Illinois Senate

Gay couples would be allowed to marry in Illinois under legislation that cleared a first hurdle Tuesday, setting up a key state Senate vote supporters say they want on or before Valentine's Day. . .

Read more at: Chicago Tribune

[Excerpt]

U.K. Takes Big Step to Legalize Gay Unions, as Some Tories Rebel 

British lawmakers voted in favor of allowing same-sex couples to marry, taking a major step Tuesday toward adding the U.K. to a growing list of jurisdictions around the globe legalizing the practice, while highlighting the divisions in the Conservative Party. . .

Read more at: Wall Street Journal

Stephanie Miller Show Combats Conflation of Homosexuality and Pedophilia

The issue of whether or not gays be allowed in the Boy Scouts of America as volunteers or members, has sparked much conflation by idiots of homosexuality and pedophilia. On some levels, it's understandable that the issue of pedophilia can inspire visceral knee-jerk reactions. But, it is long past time for this debunked conflation to be common knowledge as false.

Obviously, pedophiles would be drawn to occupations or activities where they will have the opportunity to indulge their criminal behaviors. And, also obviously, there are pedophiles who focus on kids of their own gender, opposite gender, or any gender, depending upon the offender. However, the perpetrator's sexual orientation may or may not line up with that. For instance, many, many pedophiles who prey on boys do so because of opportunity, it being much more likely that they can be in a position of power over boys than with girls. Also, many, many of those perpetrators consider themselves to be heterosexual, indeed often having wives and families. Jerry Sandusky--for example--considered himself heterosexual, and would not have been screened out by the "no gays allowed" policy of the BSA. [Story continues below]

Equally obviously, we do not attach a social stigma to heterosexual men, even though there are more heterosexual male offenders in rape and pedophilia cases then any other demographic. The conflation of gay men with pedophilia is only due to the inability of many to see the difference between healthy, consenting adult behavior, over criminal, harmful behaviors against children. It isn't right, it isn't true, and it isn't fair.

On Friday morning, a caller to Talking Liberally: The Stephanie Miller Show (on Current TV and radio), claiming to have "nothing against" gay people, knee-jerked his way through an incredibly misinformed rant. Fortunately, the talented (and quite funny, even with this kind of serious subject) crew of Stephanie Miller--including Steph herself, Chris LaVoie, Jim Ward and John Fugelsang--took the caller's arguments apart, and hopefully educated some people along the way. Thanks, guys.

Reasons to be Thankful This Year!

Preach it, Rachel!

 

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

What Happens in Vegas: Las Vegas Sign Goes Purple for Spirit Day

Spirit Day is something I wasn't familiar with until last year, but it is a day to stand up and show your support against bullying by wearing or displaying the color purple. It has a heavy focus on gay people who have been or are victims of bullies, but is not exclusively about "the gay." Regardless, there is a bit of bewilderment on my part, knowing that the sign company that owns and is putting up the purple on the Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas sign is--or at least was founded by--Mormons. Color me pleasantly surprised!

Image from The Gay & Lesbian Community Center of Southern Nevada

In Case You Missed It: Howard Stern Defends Ellen DeGeneres

I'm not much of a Howard fan (I love fart jokes, but c'mon). But when he does something right, he deserves credit. Kudos, Mr. Stern.

Hillary Clinton Calls for World to End Anti-gay Discrimination

Image from source, Los Angeles Times

Wow. This is really a first. An American call to other countries to end anti-gay discrimination?  That is very cool. And it was Hillary Clinton, part of the Barack Obama administration, who did it. I wonder if this will help squelch any lingering resentment from gays and lesbians over a) the Obama/Clinton fight in 2008, and b) the perceived slights toward the gay community from Obama? I think it might.

[Excerpt]


Hillary Clinton calls on world not to discriminate against gays

Reporting from Washington—

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called on world leaders for the first time Tuesday to stop discrimination against gays and lesbians, announcing that the United States would use diplomacy and $3 million in aid to help expand the rights of gay people around the world. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

What Happens in Vegas: A New Gay Republicans Group?

Image from source, Las Vegas City Life

This morning on my short drive to work, I listened to part of an interview between the leader of a new gay Republicans group and Alan Stock of KXNT. Stock and I tangled a few times, back when the station's online message board allowed such things. I can say from personal experience that a) Alan Stock is a staunch Republican and b) he is not a fan of gay people. When I got to work, I couldn't help but write a short email (sorry, boss) expressing my befuddlement with the new group, Right Pride. How could they claim that the Republican Party is open, accepting and tolerant?

If you've landed at this blog, you have undoubtedly also stuck a toe in the rest of the vast internets, and have seen for yourself that by-and-large, the Republican Party is none of those things. In fact, if you seek out members of "the base" of the party--say, at a site like FreeRepublic.com--you'll find outright hostility. And that is putting it very, very mildly. Ordinarily, I'm a champion of underdogs, and Right Pride would seem to fall into that category. But there are underdogs, and then there are hopeless causes.

Several years ago, when we were in the thick of the Bush era, I was friends with a gay couple who were steadfast Republicans. I enjoyed their company, but whenever conversations would stray into politics, things would get prickly. "Well, we don't vote on social issues," was the common excuse. Hmm. Okay. So you only vote your pocket book then (or purse, as the case may be. . .ha!). I'm not sure that is very noble, and it surely seems self defeating. Especially when this particular social issue affects our pocket books in a very real way.

So, I'm once again going on record to state that I simply don't understand gay Republicans. The Democratic Party may not be 100% behind us--and the Obama Administration has been greatly disappointing on a great many of "our" issues. But they're a damned sight better than the GOP. I don't feel the need to site specific cases to back myself up here, as they're all over this blog, and all over the web. Recently. But if you're interested, here's a little more about Right Pride.

[Excerpt]

Whose right is it anyway?
State's newest gay rights group could shake up the GOP

. . .Decades after groups like the Log Cabin Republicans began to shake up the right and yank it away from Christian conservatives who hijacked the party in the '80s, the ranks of gay Republicans continue to swell.

The latest group here in Nevada? Right Pride, the brainchild of Massachusetts native turned Las Vegan Mark Ciavola, an activist and college student who says he thinks his gay and lesbian brothers and sisters should, at last, have a permanent seat under the Grand Old Party's supposedly big tent. . .

Read more at: Las Vegas City Life

Kalamazoo, Michigan Upholds Gay Rights in Vote

As of this writing, there is still no result in Maine or in Washington on the gay rights issues on the ballots there. Having been battered 0-30 in various state votes, a win in Maine would be a pleasant surprise, but I'm not ready to get my hopes up. This is, as I've stated numerous times before, something that shouldn't even be up for a popular vote.

Still, there is some good news. In Kalamazoo, Michigan, a gay rights measure passed. How 'bout that?

[Excerpt]

Kalamazoo, MI Gay Rights Ordinance VICTORY!

Kalamazoo residents approve nondiscrimination ordinance

“Our campaign started with a very basic idea, and today voters confirmed that we are One Kalamazoo,” said Campaign Manager, Jon Hoadley.

With only absentee ballots outstanding, 65 percent of Kalamazoo voters have approved Ordinance 1856 by a vote of 6,463 to 3,527, adding protections for gay and transgender people to the city’s nondiscrimination ordinance. This margin is larger than the number of outstanding absentee ballots that are currently being counted. . .

Read more at: iQreport

President Obama Speaks to Gay Rights Group

I feel uneasy when it comes to criticizing President Obama on gay rights issues. On one hand, he's said more about gay rights, and made more promises to the LGBTQIetc. community than any other President ever has. On the other hand, there was a deplorable defense of DOMA (the ludicrously named Defense of Marriage Act) by Obama's Justice Department, and little actual action. Soldiers are still being regularly discharged, even if nobody should have asked, and they didn't want to tell.

One of my favorite blogs (and an inspiration for this one) is John Aravosis' AmericaBlog. It's one of the first blogs I read every day. Over there, their attitude is white hot against Obama's gay rights achievements, and a complete skepticism that he'll follow through on anything. I can see their point, to a degree. In the speech below, there is little that is different--and little progress made since--from his campaign speeches. Aravosis, his associates and most of the commenters are giving Obama both barrels, with a huge amount of hostility.



Guys, the President of the United States has loudly and clearly stated that he wants to see an end to DADT (Dont' Ask, Don't Tell) and DOMA, in addition to wanting progress in other areas on gay rights issues. I share your frustration, I still don't understand that DOMA defense, and I wish this moved a lot faster. I also think that logically speaking, ending DOMA and DADT should be done right the hell now, when there is no major election to worry about. But damn, why the hell would Obama push any harder when we're taking a peeing on his shoes? It just seems out of scale to me.

Gay Marriage... So what???

With the editor indisposed I thought I would descend from said canopy & peel a banana or two with you.
Backpedaling a bit I thought it would be nice to touch on the quieted subject of gay marriage...
Whilst this monkey cares not who or what wants to get married.... many other non-evolved monkeys do feel the need to protect their made up sanctified contract with god. (Of course these other monkeys often cheat on their wives/husbands, molest collies, eat children, have "gay" sex with priests, boys & collies & often vote red against themselves???... but that is another blog post.)
In the spirit of this I found something which puts it all in perfect perspective. Its Buddy Cole & he gets it. You go girl.

Rachel on the DOMA Issue and the Bone Thrown to Gay Activists

I've got to say, I was rather disappointed (DISAPPOINTED! -- unknown clip from The Randi Rhodes Show) to see that even though Rachel Maddow was inteviewing openly gay Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin, that the issue of the language of the Obama Administration DOJ DOMA argument was not argued to my satisfaction. Blast!

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

My Letter to the President on DOMA Brief

I wrote a letter to President Obama this evening, and thought I'd share it here.

Dear President Obama,

I have been a supporter of yours since early in 2008. I caucused for you, have advocated for you on my blog, have donated to your campaign, and voted for you in November. Since the election, I have continued in my support.

But as a gay American (one of those who got married in California in 2008), I'm disheartened and terribly disappointed with the treatment the gay and lesbian community has been given by your administration.

I know that we probably seem rather pushy and whiny. We seem that way to me sometimes too. But the strange behavior of your administration as it pertains to gay rights issues has steadily declined to the point where I don't think it would be whiny to lodge a protest.

The brief filed in defense of DOMA late last week was particularly egregious. I simply cannot understand how our "fierce advocate" could have allowed such insulting and damaging language to be released in an official document. And I can't reconcile it with your campaign promises.

I haven't given up on you yet. I often get the feeling that you are playing chess while everybody else just sees checkers. However, I will not be enthusiastic about support if this topic goes unaddressed. And I certainly will not be donating to any Democratic fundraisers if this kind of treatment continues. I'm sure you understand.

Respectfully,

James L. Greenlee

Editor, Greenlee Gazette

www.greenleegazette.blogspot.com