Melanie Nathan Posts – San Francisco,   2/09/ 2010 -   Baldwin, Frank, Polis, Nadler, Honda, Quigley Seek to End Discrimination for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Binational Families.

 Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Congressmen Barney Frank (D- MA), Jared Polis (D-CO), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Mike Honda (D-CA), and Mike Quigley (D-IL), joined by more than 50 Members of the LGBT Equality Caucus, the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus (CAPAC), and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus have sent a letter to President Obama and House and Senate leaders expressing their strong support for a comprehensive immigration reform bill that would end discrimination against LGBT binational families. 
 
“There is simply no place for discrimination in America,” said Congresswoman Baldwin.  “LGBT families are being torn apart by inequitable immigration laws that deny same sex married couples and domestic partners the same rights and obligations as their married heterosexual neighbors.  As we tackle comprehensive immigration reform, it’s imperative that we end discriminatory laws that hurt couples, their children and extended families, and their communities and employers,” Baldwin said.
 
“We are a nation of immigrants and, as a result, our diversity is our greatest strength,” said Congressman Polis.  “Unfortunately, our out-dated immigration system contains laws that discriminate against LGBT families and hinder our economy, our diversity, and our status as a beacon of hope and liberty to people across the world.  To be truly comprehensive and achieve real, long-lasting reform, we must provide all domestic partners and married couples the same rights and obligations in any immigration legislation,” Polis said.
 
“Comprehensive immigration reform will only be truly comprehensive if it includes LGBT families,” said Congressman Nadler.  “We must take the government out of the businesses of singling out LGBT families for discriminatory treatment and live up to our democratic ideal of equality under the law.  I join my colleagues in calling on Congress and the White House to include the Uniting American Families Act, which I have introduced in every Congress since 2000, in any immigration reform legislation and end discrimination against binational LGBT families,” Nadler said.
 
“As Vice Chair of the Equality Caucus, I am excited to support the Caucus’s call for comprehensive immigration reform,” said Congressman Honda.  “Last June, I included same-sex permanent partners in my Reuniting Families Act, H.R. 2709, because the reunification of all families must be the cornerstone of our immigration policy.  That the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, Black Caucus, and Progressive Caucus, stand beside the Asian Caucus, which I chair, in this call for reform reminds me of the diversity of communities affected by our broken immigration system.  The time to help our economy, reunite our families, all our families, and to live up to our values as a nation of immigrants is now,” Honda said.
 
“It saddens me to think that the struggle for immigration reform, a movement based on the fundamental principles of equality and the decent treatment of every human being, could push on without including LGBT families,” said Congressman Quigley.  “If we are to truly consider a proposal deemed ‘comprehensive,’ we must include everyone. The beauty of America is that somewhere in each of our lineages, someone made the choice to come here, to a country built on fairness and justice.  We must continue to honor that tradition not just for some, but for all,” Quigley said.
 
Under current law, LGBT Americans are unable to sponsor their spouses or partners for legal residency in the U.S. and, as a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either living separately, facing imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together.  This policy often separates children from a parent, causes businesses to lose valuable employees, and forces state, local and the federal government to lose hardworking taxpayers.
 
A California mother of two who has been with her American citizen partner for 23 years, Shirley Tan, was detained by immigration and faces future deportation.  Ms. Tan, who is also the primary caregiver for her partner’s elderly mother, faces the very real possibility of being torn away from her family unless immigration reform includes LGBT couples, too. 
 
In Wisconsin, a valued language teacher, Lucie Ferrari, was forced to leave the country causing her American partner (they are legally married in Canada) to give up her job as a neighborhood organizer and leave as well, so they could be together. 
 
In Minnesota, an American citizen is currently considering closing her small business – which generates more than one million dollars annually – so that she can leave the country in order to be with her Malaysian partner.
 
In Vermont, a physician who worked with wounded troops at a local Veterans Administration medical facility recently quit his job, and moved to a part-time position elsewhere, so he will be able to travel frequently to South America to be with his partner.
 
Each of these stories is heart-wrenching and damaging to many, many lives and, unfortunately, all too common.  Every day, loving, hard-working families are torn apart because of discriminatory immigration laws. 
 
The Members call on President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Chair of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security, Chuck Schumer, and Chair of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law, Zoe Lofgren, to include the Uniting American Families Act (H.R. 1024/S. 424) in any comprehensive immigration reform legislation.   

My Commentary – I cannot understand why this does not simply make the case for UAFA as a Stand alone.  How can such a powerful caucus not have the gumshen to get this through congress, on the basis of INEQUALITY and not on the basis of IMMIGRATION REFORM.
 I do not understand why we are entering the complexity (or should I say why we have been cornered into it) of comprehensive immigration reform.   Of course we should be included in CIR – but that ought to have been organic.

In the meantime these very congressional reps should have fought like crazy for us binationals and the egregious inequality we have suffered.   So now that they are finally making the argument in such a forceful fashion, having been pushed by the fact that Schumer is planning to exclude us, I say get UAFA passed NOW.  Please Mr. President make that a priority.  If you add us to CIR there will be an enormous amount of fall out, not that I am sugegsting you don’t if that is the onl;y option.  

You, this powerful Caucus ought to first attempt UAFA as a stand-alone in earnest.  Before CIR is even announced.  It can then be tacked on.  But please let us stop waiting for CIR-…..   The argument for us is simple -E Q  U A L I T Y first - immigration second. 

  
A copy of the letter follows.  Copy with all signatures is attached.
 
February 2, 2010
 
The Honorable Barack Obama
President of the United States of America
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20500
 
The Honorable Harry Reid
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate
522 Hart Senate Office Bldg
Washington, D.C. 20510
 
The Honorable Nancy Pelosi
Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives
H-232, U.S. Capitol
Washington, D.C. 20515
 
The Honorable Charles E. Schumer
Chairman, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees and Border Security
313 Hart Senate Building
Washington, D.C. 20510
 
The Honorable Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
 
 
Dear President Obama, Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Schumer, and Chairwoman Lofgren:
 
As members of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus, we are writing to express our strong support for a comprehensive immigration reform bill which would end discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) binational families.  We urge Congress to include the Uniting American Families Act (H.R. 1024/S. 424) in any comprehensive immigration reform legislation.
 
Currently, U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents may sponsor their spouses (and other immediate family members) for immigration purposes.  But, same-sex partners committed to spending their lives together are not recognized as “families” under U.S. immigration law and thus do not have this same right.  As a result, tens of thousands of binational families are either already living separately, face imminent separation, or have left the U.S. entirely in order to remain together.  This is unacceptable, and we believe comprehensive immigration reform legislation must include a strong family reunification component inclusive of LGBT families.
 
According to 2000 census data compiled by the Williams Institute, an estimated 36,000 LGBT binational families are impacted by the inability to sponsor their partners for residency, and nearly half of those (47 percent) are raising children.  Our existing, discriminatory immigration laws hurt not only those individuals, but their extended families, communities, and employers, as well.  Not only would an inclusive family reunification provision strengthen American families, it would bolster the competitiveness of businesses in the U.S. by allowing corporations to attract, employ, and retain the very best talent from across the globe.  Indeed, the U.S. lags behind 19 countries that already recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, and Germany. 
 
In truth, no immigration reform bill can be called “comprehensive” unless it includes all Americans, including those who are LGBT.  This is recognized in the Reuniting Families Act (H.R. 2709), which includes LGBT families in addressing the broader immigration problem of family unification.
 
We urge you to include LGBT binational families in comprehensive immigration reform legislation.  No one should be forced to choose between the person they love and the country they call home.  It is time that our immigration laws kept families together instead of tearing them apart.                                                               
 
 
Sincerely,
 
Congresswoman Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Congressmen Barney Frank (D- MA), Jared Polis (D-CO), Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Mike Honda (D-CA), and Mike Quigley (D-IL), et. al.

Melanie Nathan,
www.privatecourts.com /
 nathan@privatecourts.com

02/07/2010 by JR Russell

Uganda’s proposed Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009 has attracted all kinds of unwanted attention from the world.

President Obama briefly spoke out against it at the Family-sponsored National Prayer Breakfast, calling it “odious”.

Ugandan Pastor (and former break dancing champion!), Martin Ssempa, has responded to President Obama’s condemnation of the bill here.

Ssempa, who calls himself, “A passionate voice in the global fight against HIV/AIDS” responded to Obama’s comments in a statement, published by Kampala’s Family Policy and Human Rights Centre, available here.

He starts:

President Barack Obama makes two mistakes; first Ugandaʼs anti-homosexuality law only prescribes the capital punishment in cases where the victims are children or the handicapped.

So he’s saying that the death penalty will only apply for pedophiles, statutory rape, or having sex with a disabled person.

That sounds sensible. But it’s a lie.

The relevant section of the bill: (Anything quoted directly from the Bill will be in italics)

3. Aggravated homosexuality.
(1) A person commits the offense of aggravated homosexuality where the
(a) person against whom the offence is committed is below the age of 18 years;
(b) offender is a person living with HIV;
(c) offender is a parent or guardian of the person against whom the offence is committed;
(d) offender is a person in authority over the person against whom the offence is committed;
(e) victim of the offence is a person with disability;
(f) offender is a serial offender, or
(g) offender applies, administers or causes to be used by any man or woman any drug, matter or
thing with intent to stupefy overpower him or her so as to there by enable any person to have
unlawful carnal connection with any person of the same sex,
(2) A person who commits the offence of aggravated homosexuality shall be liable on conviction
to suffer death.
(3) Where a person is charged with the offence under this section, that person shall undergo a
medical examination to ascertain his or her HIV status.

Let’s go through this line by line.

3 (1) a. This appears to apply the death penalty to anyone who has homosexual sex with a person under 18, regardless of consent or the age of the “offender”. Thus the 18 year old lover of a 17 year old could be put to death. However, this does seem to be consistent with Uganda’s heterosexual age of consent law.

b. If the offender is HIV positive. This section puts no requirement on the law to prove that the “offender” had any knowledge of her of his status, and in fact provides in 3 (3) that an HIV test may be performed on anyone caught engaged in a an act of “aggravated homosexuality”. It also fails to specify whether the other partner must be HIV negative in order for a crime to have been commited. Barrier methods appear to be ignored in this case. It appears two HIV positive partners using barrier methods, neither of whom are aware of her or his HIV status could be put to death under this section.

c. and d. refer to having homosexual sex with your own children or people over whom you have authority or responsibility. This should clearly be offenses, regardless of the sexuality of the people involved. Death penalty offense? Debatable.

e. If the victim is a person with a disability. For the purposes of this bill, the word “victim” is defined as an unwilling participant (and therefore thankfully excludes convicting the sighted partner of a consenting blind person). Like c. and d., this exists to protect the vulnerable. Again, whether the death penalty should apply probably depends on your view of the death penalty.

f. This is the one they all wish we’d ignore. In this bill, a “serial offender” is defined as: a person who has previous convictions of the offence of homosexuality or related offences

Homosexuality is defined in the bill as well. “homosexuality” means same gender or same sex sexual acts. A person who is convicted of homosexuality (they use the plural so I’ll assume more than once) and re-offends can also be subject to the death penalty. A person who has had homosexual sex three times in her or his life could be put to death, if she or he were convicted for each instance.

Also — related offenses? What are those?

PART Ill — RELATED OFFENCES AND PENALTIES.
7. Aiding and abating homosexuality.
8. Conspiracy to engage in homosexuality.
9. Procuring homosexuality. by threats, etc.
10. Detention with intent to commit homosexuality.
11. Brothels.
12. Same sex marriage.
13. Promotion of homosexuality.
14. Failure to disclose the offence.

So the death penalty could well be applied to the allies of lesbians and gays, and those who would prefer their friends/family members/colleagues didn’t get put to death and therefore fail to report homosexual activity.

Secondly, homosexuals and lesbians are never targetted for who they are, rather what they do.
(from Martin Ssempa’s statement)

I hate to nitpick (no wait, I love to) but the very definition of “lesbian” in the bill is: a female who engages in sexual intimacy with another female. The very definition of lesbian in the bill is a woman defined by her sexual activity with another woman.

Another problem with this particular offense of Aggravated Homosexuality is that it confuses rape with consensual homosexual activity. Sections c., d. and g. (and to some extent a.) deal with sexual activity with someone who either denies consent, or is not lawfully able to consent, either through malicious intoxication, disability or age.

So, surprise, he’s lying, and it’s obvious from the text of the bill he endorses that the bill has nothing to do with HIV/AIDS prevention as he would have us all believe. One last quote from the bill will speak for itself. Spot the many mentions of HIV/AIDS prevention.

3.0. The objectives of the Bill
The objectives of the Bill are to:
(a) provide for marriage in Uganda as that contracted only between a man and a woman;
(b) prohibit and penalize homosexual behavior and related practices in Uganda as they constitute
a threat to the traditional family;
(e) prohibit ratification of any international treaties, conventions, protocols, agreements and
declarations which are contrary or inconsistent with the provisions of this Act;
(d) prohibit the licensing of organizations which promote homosexuality.

I welcome any and all comments and corrections.

Related articles:

• 10 Things to Oppose the Anti-Gay Legislation in Uganda (topix.net)
• House of Representatives Introduces Resolution Condemning Uganda’s “Kill The Gays” Bill (lezgetreal.com)
• UN’s human rights chief urges Uganda to scrap anti-gay legislation (guardian.co.uk)
• Rachel Maddow Rips Into Ugandan Anti-Gay Bill, American Backers [Behind The Bigotry] (jezebel.com)
• Uganda’s Kill-The-Straight-Friends-Of-Gays Bill (wakingupnow.com)

02/06//10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Colonel Oliver North attacked the decision to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. He decided that the decision by Secretary Robert Gates to not pursue third party reports turning in gay and lesbian service members, such as Colonel Victor Fahrenbach, was selective enforcement of the law despite the fact that the third part of the law requires that the military not pursue service member’s sexuality unless it came to light by their own admission. Colonel North continuously called the decision to repeal DADT wrong and said that President Barack Obama was treating the military like lab rats. He also attacked the decision based upon the nonsensical notion that this would add to the burden of American troops already fighting two wars. Many service members have reported that the distrust that comes from lying about one’s sexuality often does more harm to morale and camaraderie than a person being open about their sexuality.

Colonel North also, in an opinion piece, also went after the repeatedly debunked notion that homosexuality is linked to pedophilia, and even questioned where the repeal of DADT would lead. He posited that it would lead to the lifting of age of consent laws. Never mind that there is plenty of evidence that children below the current age of consent are unable to understand what sex involves, and are not able to consent to an act which is often flat out rape. The smearing of homosexuals by linking them to pedophiles is often linked to the fact that people are more often likely to talk about a boy being molested but a girl being raped. In psychological and criminal parlance, however, a child is molested if they are groped or touched, but raped if there is any form of penetration. Children cannot consent to the acts that are done to them, and molestation and rape often leads to severe mental trauma. What Colonel North is, basically, doing is comparing a forced sexual act to a consensual act of love.

It should not be surprising that Colonel North, who was forced from the Marines in disgrace, is busy defending a law which undermines the military simply because its repeal is being pushed by President Barack Obama. North, who is currently a contributor to FOX News, was deeply involved in the Iran-Contra Affair, and was charged and convicted for his part within that scandal. His conviction was later revoked due to the fact that Congress had given him limited immunity for his testimony and the witnesses may have been affected by that.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has force many soldiers out of the military at a time when recruiting is down, and causalities are high. More than two hundred gay and lesbian service members were kicked from the military in 2009, and that is in addition to the couple hundred soldiers who were killed in Afghanistan and Iraq and the numbers of soldiers who had to be discharged due to their wounds obtained in battle. By continuing to use the most vile of all the allegations regarding homosexuality to try and prevent the military from having enough soldiers to fight two wars, Colonel North showed his own bigotry. He also tried to cloak the idea within patriotic words by claiming that the American military is the best in the world. However, given that the majority of America’s NATO allies already have lifted their ban on gays and lesbians serving openly, one is left wondering which militaries are the best.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand is, however, hoping to circumvent the need for an immediate repeal by cutting off all specific funding directed towards dismissing soldiers under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. A move that would save the government millions of dollars and keep qualified and needed soldiers in the ranks.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Senator Gillibrand Issues Statement Backing Repeal Of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (lezgetreal.com)
• 17 years ago – Sexual Orientation and the Irish Defence Forces (mamanpoulet.com)

 Posted by Melanie Nathan, February 05, 2010:  Third Part of The Binational Series UAFA or 1,666 years of Binational Stories”

Here is a letter which was sent to President Obama, with the emotive reflections of a foreign born spouse.  Although each story has a unique fingerprint, this  isdifferent from the very many stories we hear, as this letter reflects the abhorent and unconscienable detention of the writer by the American authorities.

Dear President Obama,                       (January 3, 2010)

Preaching in the 60s, when the US was racked with racism and the horrors of the Vietnam War, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. inspired the American people to pursue justice, the truth and simply to do the right thing, because “The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy”. 

So, where do the American people stand at this point in time of challenge and controversy, although almost 50 years later? Does America, the “land of the free and home of the brave” hold up to George Washington’s expectation of “Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair”? As I look through my wife’s passport, I find comfort in words of wisdom by the 34^th President of the United States Dwight D. Eisenhower: “Whatever America hopes to bring to pass in the world must first come to pass in the heart of America.”

It was in 1963 when Dr. King delivered his speech “I Have a Dream” in Washington. Dr. Martin Luther King had a dream, a dream to end racial segregation and racial discrimination; in 2009 as a result this country elected its first African-American President Barack Hussein Obama. In 1967 the Supreme Court declared interracial marriage fully legal in all U.S. States. Since then many more subjects on human rights issues have been addressed and corrected by congress. Just a few months ago President Obama signed hate crimes bill into law as a step toward change to “help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray”, (CNN Politics article, Oct. 28, 2009). So, could one finally say that all men are not only created equal but surely treated equal as well? Can America stand up to the world and with integrity proclaim that “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” – an excerpt from the Declaration of Independence written on pages 10-11 of the American passport.

I look at my wife’s American passport with its beautiful design, I read those profound words, wise words by wise men and I wonder why those words don’t reflect our reality!                                                                                                                       

Is it because our life is out of the ordinary range of the usual set of circumstances?  Is it simply because our life differs from the typical portrayal of a married couple? We are committed to each other, we know each other for more than 11 years, we love each other, we live together, we built a life together, we are married and we actually would have a happy life if it wasn’t for the remaining failure of the U.S. Government to ensure the pursuit of happiness for all U.S. citizens; this nation still neglects the basic human rights of their homosexual fellow citizens treating them as “second-class”, just a minority…  

“All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.” – Thomas Jefferson  

 This nation must make significant changes to ensure equal rights for gays and lesbians. Although President Obama has urged Congress to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, the States of New York and New Jersey recently refused the recognition of same-sex marriages. The subject matter becomes even more profound when dealing with immigration issues, as my wife and I do. I am a 47-year-old highly educated woman from Europe. For over 11 years I stayed in the US “out of status”, constantly living on the edge of being terrified of discovery and deportation. One could say fear was my constant companion. It was no fairy tale life or even in any way close to living the American dream, but as Albert Einstein simply puts it, “In the middle of difficulty lays opportunity”.

Most bi-national heterosexual couples living in the U.S. have no problem staying together; the American citizen can sponsor their foreign spouse in obtaining a green card including work authorization. The foreign-born spouse can easily pursue and further her/his professional career. Bi-national homosexual couples are denied those rights. I depended on my wife/life partner for support since I had no work authorization. Often I felt deprived of the right to contribute to society as well as my own household, simply put: a waste of time, a waste of talent, and a waste of life! In all those 11 years, my wife and I were “prisoners” of a political system that seems antiquated, out-dated and rather forces people into committing fraud. Many commit marriage fraud as a means to an end in exchange for a green card, but I never considered this to be an option, because for me marriage is too sacred to be dishonest about.

On March 18, 2009 our life took a tragic turn. As feared for so many years, I was finally picked-up at a Greyhound bus station as a result of a raid by border patrol and taken into custody by ICE (Immigration Customs Enforcement). I was detained for 102 days in a facility for ‘illegal aliens.’  I don’t think that any one of us, meaning my American spouse, our American friends and family members knew detention centers for immigrants existed. I was treated as a criminal, although with no criminal record at all. I was even told by officers in this facility that we all were criminals and deserve to be treated as such.

During my time in detention, we exhausted our financial resources for lawyer fees, travel expenses from my home to my out of State place of detention, phone cards and commissary goods, etc. A detainee is allowed a budget of $40 on phone cards per week which equals 140 minutes in talk time with your loved ones, or in other words a 20 minutes phone conversation per day. There were eight phones for over 100 female detainees. Well, the phone conversation with your family is your lifeline, and the only way to communicate with the outside world other than writing a letter. After an intake process, the detainee is provided with one set of sheets, one towel, one sweatshirt, two t-shirts, two pants and one pair of shoes. Everything else must be purchased with commissary such as shampoo, soap, deodorant, toothbrush, toothpaste etc., etc.

Visitation is only on Sundays for four hours; no detainee is allowed more than two visitors at a time unless the warden grants request.

Medical service is almost non-existent. Once I was very sick, I had high fever, sore throat, and sinus infection, earache and yeast infection all at once. Before being able to be seen by a nurse, I had to file a request. I was told it would take up to 48 hours to get a response. When I finally received medical care I had to choose between the two symptoms for which only one could be treated and given medication; for the second I had to file a new request and wait another 48 hours. On several occasions I have witnessed neglect of medical care of detainees in need of medication, not to mention dental care, which was completely non-existent. One detainee was advised to use common glue to repair a broken crown; waiting time to see a dentist was up to three months. Officers failed to provide underwear, sanitary napkins as well as toilet paper. Often I couldn’t comprehend still being in the United States of America, especially when witnessing detainees in handcuffs and shackles, reversed racism and the abuse of power.

Deprived of one’s dignity when for example announced over loud speakers to line up for the “feedings” as the officers called our breakfast, lunch and dinner, detention certainly took its toll on me. As I became severely depressed, my Post-Traumatic-Stress-Disorder (PTSD), I suffered as a result from years of trauma in Europe worsened. With no psychological help in sight one can only try to survive holding on to faith. A typical night as a detainee consists of waking up to a flashlight shoved in our faces every two hours by an officer along with the clinking sound of their keys made sleep impossible. I could list a dozen or more such infractions I suffered while detained, but it has taken me seven months to gather the strength to write even these details. Suffice to say, detention of immigrants who have not committed a crime is completely dehumanizing; such standards simply display and validate the civil and human rights crisis in the U.S. The current immigration system “perpetuates inequalities contrary to a free and democratic society” (NYCLU).

On June 26, 2009 I was finally released with the assistance of my spouse’s congressman, and it is this extraordinary act of compassion and courage that makes me love this country even more, despite all odds and the pain of being detained. It is with this extraordinary act of compassion for his constituent that made our reunion possible, a living testimony for the principle of the Declaration of Independence (1776), the unalienable Right to the pursuit of Happiness. For some U.S. citizens their rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness means changing laws becomes a demand, to ensure homosexual bi-national couples receive the same fair treatment than their fellow heterosexual citizens, after all they are all your constituents. Comprehensive Immigration Reform must include UAFA – Uniting American Families Act!

“Despite the progress we’ve made, there are still laws to change and hearts to open,” President Obama said during his address at the dinner for the Human Rights Campaign in October of 2009. “This fight continues now, and I’m here with the simple message: I’m here with you in that fight.”

Are you, President Obama?

 “If there is no struggle there is no progress…. This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both.”       – Frederick Douglass

 Sincerely,

Although the writer was released from detention – her battle has only just began as she and her spouse struggle desperately to remain in the United States.  Her Spouse cannot leave the USA for many reasons of extreme hardship and this couple simply cannot be separated.  Financial issues persist for them as they try to pursue this case with attorneys. How can any American or politician read this case without shame?

Posted by Melanie Nathan,
www.privatecourts.com /
nathan@privatecourts.com
follow me on twitter @oblogdeeoblogda

Related articles by Zemanta

• GOP Claims It’s Upholding The Legacy Of MLK, A Fighter Against The ‘Injustice’ In Health Care Inequality (thinkprogress.org)
• Schumer Immigration Reform News – Wake Up Call for Dallas Creating Change Conference (lezgetreal.com)
• The Grassroot Struggle for LGBTQI Equality in Immigration – New UAFA Sponsor. (lezgetreal.com)

February 4, 2010-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Harry Knox of the Human Rights Campaign announced today the formation of the American Prayer Hour in response to the National Prayer Breakfast which has been held annually by the group known colloquially as The Family, though their real name is the Fellowship Foundation. The LGBT Community has been pushing strongly for condemnation of, and even retraction of, the Ugandan bill which would criminalize homosexuality to such an extent that the penalty for being both gay and having HIV/AIDS would be death, and life imprisonment for just being homosexual. People who know of homosexuality in friends and relatives would be forced to turn in those people or face up to three years in jail.

In a statement issued on the web, Knox stated:

For too long, the American people have been in the dark about a right-wing Christian organization called the Fellowship Foundation, but more commonly known in Washington as The Family. The Family finances and gives technical support and training to political and faith leaders around the globe with a goal of spreading homophobia and heterosexism worldwide. We have seen the fetid fruits of the Family’s labors in recent weeks as its friends in the Ugandan Parliament have sponsored legislation that would make homosexuality a crime punishable by death in some instances and by life imprisonment in virtually all others.

How extensive the Family’s involvement in the creation of Member of Parliament David Bahati’s bill is unclear and unknown. Several members of the Family inside the United States have called for the bill to be scrapped, and supposedly the bill had been taken back to be heavily amended. The bill came at a time when Uganda’s government was sealing deals with European oil companies to extract the nation’s oil. The creation of this particular oil field has or will result in the displacement of roughly thirty thousand individuals.

Given the controversy surrounding the Family as well as other issues regarding this institution, President Barack Obama’s attendance at this National Prayer Breakfast resulted in calls for him not to attend. He did make a lengthy statement to the people gathered there about not exploiting gays and lesbians for political gain, and even briefly attacked the Ugandan bill.

Regarding the Ugandan bill, Bishop Gene Robinson, the first openly gay Anglican Bishop, stated “I spent time in Uganda to help set up HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment programs many years ago. Ugandans are a generous and hospitable people. But because of an unholy alliance between conservative religious groups in this country and anti-gay forces overseas Ugandans are turning on their own Ugandan sons and daughters who happen to be gay. This proposed law is a threat to LGBT people in Uganda and everywhere. Around 35% of Ugandans are Anglican and 45% are Catholic. Although many faith leaders have stood by silently, today we speak out on behalf of the marginalized. Faith leaders of all traditions should speak out for the most vulnerable in Uganda before it’s too late.”

February 4, 2010-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Talking to MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell yesterday, Senator Orrin Hatch made it clear that he was open to repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. He stated that there were “outstanding patriotic gay people who serve in the military and who should be given credit for it” and that they should not be forced to lie about their service. While Senator Hatch is reluctant to state whether or not he is absolutely for repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell right away, he did indicate that he wanted to wait until the military’s review of the policy had been completed. Senator Hatch also rejected the assertion that many people opposing the repeal have made. In effect, Hatch stated that he does not believe that repealing DADT would ultimately result in gays and lesbians asking for greater privileges and rights than any other person serving in the military.

Senator Hatch serves on the Senate Finance Committee, as well as on the Intelligence Committee and the Judiciary Committee. The Utah Senator is Mormon, and in 1998, courted controversy when he stated that the Constitution was ambiguous regrading the issue of polygamy. He later retracted that statement.

The push to end DADT has been spearheaded of late by President Barack Obama with the full agreement of Admiral Mike Mullen and Secretary Robert Gates. Currently, the military is setting up to study the effects of repealing DADT, though the repeal may come before the study is ready. The MREA or Military Readiness Enhancement Act may be folded into the Defense Reauthorization Bill in the same manner that the Matthew Shepard Act was. By folding this bill into that bill, it would require the Republicans to come up with sixty votes to remove the amendment, a feat that would likely be impossible even if the Republicans make inroads into the Democratic majority in November.

Update:

Senator Hatch’s office released this statement today stating:

Sen. Orrin Hatch says the left-leaning media misconstrued his comments in a TV interview Wednesday that seemed to imply he would be open to repealing the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which requires gay service members to keep their sexual orientations secret.

“I certainly do not support repealing this policy,” he said in a statement trying to clarify his views and blasting activist groups for “misconstruing my position.”

His clarification contradicts his earlier statements on this issue.

Related articles by Zemanta

• DADT State Of The Union Move Pushes Senate Hearings On Repeal Into February (lezgetreal.com)
• Rep. Skelton Doesn’t Want To Disrupt Military By Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (lezgetreal.com)

02/04/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Today, President Barack Obama spoke before the annual National Prayer Breakfast held by the The Family. He spoke regarding the different faiths that each person has and how each religion speaks to the need for people to heal the crises of people’s lives such as in Haiti. He talked also about how society has become numb to the day to day tragedies that are experienced each day, and talked about the divisions between the people inside the United States currently. He warned about nostalgia, and spoke to the feeling that there is a feeling that Washington is broken, and that the lack of civility is often to blame.

Obama even took a swipe at those who would question his faith and his citizenship in attempts to undermine his position.

Obama made a strong statement about disagreeing on marriage-equality. He acknowledged that many people may disagree regarding marriage equality, but he stated that it is unconscionable to specifically target gays and lesbians either here, or in Uganda. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton specifically had mentioned Uganda’s measures targeting gays and lesbians in Uganda, and spoke specifically regarding the need to expand human rights throughout the world. Her statements were underlined with verses from the Bible regarding the need to treat all people humanely. It has been common practice for many Conservatives to target gays and lesbians in order to gain political points and political support. While that has been waning of late due to shifting attitudes towards homosexuality in society, it remains something of a force inside the United States. In Michigan, one Secretary of State candidate targeted transpeople in order to try and score political support by attacking their right to have their correct gender put on their driver’s licenses.

The swipe taken at Uganda came in front of the very people who have been orchestrating the “Kill the Gays” bill in Uganda. The men who have been pushing this particular bill forward are part of The Family. It was even rumored that some of those men would be at this prayer breakfast today. In large part, Uganda has been using gays and lesbians as a means to distract the internal debate away from the displacement of families and the spoiling of one of Uganda’s natural wonders in order to get at oil that had been discovered there. This push for oil has created a backlash, but by giving the people of Uganda a common internal enemy and trying to link it to the external forces of colonialism, the governing parties of Uganda hope to avoid having an all out uprising over the damage that oil exploration and extraction could have on Uganda’s already disproportionally structured economy.

International pressure has resulted in an attempt to push back against those pushing the “Kill the Gays” bill. Even if the bill is ultimately abandoned, the purposes behind it will have already been achieved by diverting attention away from the oil contracts.

02/03/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
There are political slogans that work. There are political slogans that fail. There are those political slogans that end up being the butt of jokes for ages to come. “Take Back Illinois” is bound for that final category. Republican Mark Kirk, who is running for President Obama’s old seat, has chosen this to be his slogan. It is a nice slogan. It is bound to help the Chicago and Illinois tourism industry as much as “Take Back Vermont” helped to boost the Vermont tourism industry. Given the economic outlook currently, that would be a very positive step. The problem is, as a slogan it is not really effective.

First of all, take back Illinois from whom? By choosing this slogan Mark Kirk has made it sound like he is trying to take back Illinois from some oppressive dictator. Perhaps he thinks that he is trying to take Illinois back from the orcish forces of Sauron instead of trying to run for elected office in the state of Illinois. Perhaps he is intending on storming the castle and rescuing the princess from the vile dragon and to take back the kingdom from the forces of evil rather than running to be one person among a hundred voting on legislation in the Senate.

A slogan like this might work if Kirk were running for governor. After all, he could argue that he is trying to take back Illinois from the forces of corruption found throughout the Illinois executive; however, is he planning on taking Illinois back from the United States or something?

Take Back Vermont was intended to try and build support to put an end to civil unions in the state. It had a clear objective, and a clear “enemy”, even if the majority of Vermonters thought that the slogan was silly. In the end, Take Back Vermont did more harm to their cause than help as people from outside the state bought souvenirs, and the people inside the state simply stopped buying from businesses which had that slogan up on their shops. In the end, many businesses in the state that supported Take Back Vermont folded because Vermont has enough of an LGBT Community coupled with a strong number of allies that those businesses simply ran out of customers.

Some slogans work. “Yes We Can” worked, at least until after the election. Seriously, however, Mark Kirk sounds like he’s trying to pick up Illinois and take it back home with him.

by CanuckJacq

In a letter (pdf) addressed to President Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) asks that the administration not support the National Prayer Breakfast, run by the religious group known as “The Family”. President Obama has been invited and is expected to attend and address the gathering, as he did last year. In fact, up until 1970, it was called the “Presidential Prayer Breakfast”.

In an interview with AlterNet in December 2009, Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family: The secret fundamentalism at the heart of American power, points out that invitations to the event are sent on congressional headed paper, despite the event clearly a Christian, non-ecumenical event and is clearly in violation of the First Ammendment.

CREW cites a laundry list of ethics scandals involving those affiliated with the group, especially those housed at the notorious C-Street location in Washington DC. Names include: Senator John Ensign, Senator Tom Coburn, Governor Mark Sanford, and Representative Todd Tiahrt. They go on to show how The Family fail to operate with any clear mission or transparency, and seem to recruit heavily from amongst legislators.

The Family is also linked to Uganda’s Anti-Homosexuality Bill that, if passed, will introduce the death penalty for the crime of “Aggravated Homosexuality” and for repeat homosexual offenders.

I’ll add my voice then, to those requesting that the “Fierce Advocate” of LGBT rights find himself unable to attend. Because he hasn’t done anything else for us recently, it’d be nice if he’d simply decide not to support those who would kill us.

A group called Full Equality Now DC (FENDC) had this to say:

”We call on all National Prayer Breakfast invitees to publicly denounce Uganda’s efforts to pass such a bill and work to restrain The Family’s homophobic agenda in the U.S. and abroad.”

Related articles by Zemanta

• Ethics Group Calls On Obama To Boycott National Prayer Breakfast (joemygod.blogspot.com)
• Who and What Is the Family on C Street? (unbiasedtruth.net)
• Is Uganda’s “Kill-the-Gays” Bill Author Coming to Washington or Not? (topix.net)
• Uganda MP David Bahati Disinvited From National Prayer Breakfast (joemygod.blogspot.com)

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The majority of Americans want an end to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and many Congressmen and Senators want it done away with as well. The President wants it repealed, but now someone close to the White House is saying that the repeal probably won’t happen this year. Comedian Jon Stewart compared repealing the law to eating rice pudding at a large dinner. Compared to the other things on the agenda, repealing DADT should be something simple and easy to do. Of course, some politicians like Senator John McCain, who lost to Obama in the 2008 election, and Representative Ike Skelton feel that repealing DADT right now would put a strain on America’s military during a time of war without ever addressing the consequences of having thousands of soldiers discharged from the military under that law.

This morning on Morning Rundown with Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie, the subject of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell came up. Guthrie asked “The proof will be in the pudding. Is this something they try to move forward with with all deliberate speed. Are they going to slow walk it? So, I think in the coming days and weeks we’ll know how serious they are about it.” To this Eugine Robinson, a frequent guest on MSNBC, stated “What I heard this morning from somebody at the White House was probably not this year. But, maybe we would be hearing from military brass at some point.”

The law was enacted largely to be able to allow the older generals time to adjust to the idea of gays and lesbians serving openly in the armed services. The law, which was signed by President Clinton, was also intended to be a compromise between those who felt that gays and lesbians should not be allowed to serve in the military at all and those who wanted them to serve openly. Under the pressures of war, the politicians have been under pressure to repeal the law so that the military does not lose soldiers that it needs during a time of war. Many Christian groups, to which the Republican Party has looked to for votes, are opposed to any and all laws or actions which grant gays and lesbians more freedoms and recognition. Thus, the Republican Party was severely opposed to the repeal of DADT. Current polls show that around two thirds of Americans believe that the law should be scrapped.

The source close to the White House contradicts President Barack Obama’s promise to work with Congress to repeal the law. Anger over Obama’s lack of movement regarding major LGBT issues such as DADT and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act has caused many LGBT Americans to question whether voting for the Democrats is worth it.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rep. Skelton Doesn’t Want To Disrupt Military By Repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (lezgetreal.com)

01/29/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Representative Ike Skelton believes that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should not be repealed because it would cause too much stress on the military in a time of war. What Skelton never quite answers in his objection to repealing the law is what effect how does loosing thousands of able bodied troops under this law help the military? While some conservative groups are opposed to ending the law, the majority of Americans are in favor of scrapping it. As many as three quarters of those who have been polled believe that it is time to end DADT, as the law is known.

“We’re in the middle of two wars. And I don’t want anything that is disturbing or upsetting to the troops,” the Missouri Democrat said to reporters in Kansas City. Skelton stated that he plans on having a subcommittee hold hearings regarding this issue, but it is not clear when. Senator Carl Levin, Skelton’s Senate counterpart, has already scheduled hearings regarding DADT for 2 February. Skelton is currently the chair of the House Armed Services Committee.

“We ask people to lie about their orientation, serve silently and compromise their honor and integrity on a daily basis. And it’s time for this to stop,” Beth Schissel stated regarding Skellton’s announcement. She was discharged from the military for being lesbian. She and a group of activists and politicians protested Skelton’s announcement.

Many LGBT Americans have been vocally disappointed that President Barack Obama was unwilling to push for a fast solution to discharges under DADT such as issuing an executive order stopping discharges until after the law was repealed; however, they did applaud his mentioning of DADT in his State of the Union speech.

Currently, Representative Skelton is siding with Senator John McCain. Many Democrats, including Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Representative Joe Sestak are oppose to the law and want Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repealed. Sestak is a former Admiral, and has testified before his own party regarding the deleterious effects of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The Military Readiness Enhancement Act is intended to repeal DADT.

Skelton is in middle of debate on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’

1/29/10-by Paula Brooks
Yesterday, when asked about his position on equal rights for same sex couples during a town hall meeting in Tampa, President Obama reiterated his support for legislation moving through the House and Senate that extends full domestic benefits to the unmarried partners of gay and lesbian federal employees.

Obama and Vice President Joe Biden were in Tampa Thursday to announce that Florida would receive $1.25 billion in economic stimulus money to help build a high-speed rail line from Tampa to Orlando and to reconnect to Florida voters who are being hard hit by the current economic downturn.

Responding to a University of Tampa students question about gay rights, Obama said he hopes Congress passes the legislation this year that will give full domestic benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees…

I think that we’ve got to — we actually have an opportunity of passing a law that’s been introduced in Congress right now, and my hope is this year we can get it done, just for federal employees and federal workers. A lot of companies, on their own, some of the best-run companies have adopted these same practices. I think it’s the right thing to do and it makes sense for us to take a leadership role in ensuring that people are treated the same.
Look, if you are — regardless of your personal opinions, the notion that somebody who’s working really hard for 30 years can’t take their death benefits and transfer them to the person that they love the most in the world and who has supported them all their lives, that just doesn’t seem fair. It doesn’t seem right. And I think it’s the right thing to do.

In June, Obama signed a memorandum extending some federal benefits to same-sex partners of federal workers, however that measure did not cover health care and retirement benefits.

At that time he also voiced his opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act, saying he thought, “It’s discriminatory, it interferes with States’ rights, and it’s time we overturned it,” and stated his full support for, The Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act, a bill by introduced Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) that would extend full partner benefits to gay and lesbian federal employees, giving them same access as employees with different-sex spouses.

However, the Obama Office of Personnel Management last year also ignored a directive by Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Chief Judge Alex Kozinski to give spousal benefits to a lesbian court employee and is presently being sued by the LGBT advocacy group Lamda Legal on behalf of that employee.

Versions of Baldwin’s bill have cleared House and Senate committees, but to date, neither has scheduled a vote on the measure.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Domestic Partnership and Benefits Act – Your Reps need to hear from you today.. (lezgetreal.com)
• Lambda Legal Sues OPM Over Benefits Denial (hrcbackstory.org)
• Bill Offering Federal Benefits to Same-Sex Partners Advances (towleroad.com)
• OPM Denies Employee Benefits, Citing DOMA (hrcbackstory.org)

1/28/10-by Paula Brooks

Gay West Point Grad Disappointed in Obama’s DADT “Mention”

Claiming to be a “fierce advocate” for gays and lesbians, when President Barack Obama was running for office, he called for the repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay members, known to all as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

This was a big campaign promise, and one that many of us in the LGBT community hoped would be completed within the president’s first 100 days.

However, soon after Obama was inaugurated, the language on the White House Web page changed so that instead of promising to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, he instead supported “changing it in a sensible manner.”

Since Barack Obama has been President he has addressed other issues, such as national security, Haiti, jobs as a commander in chief … and many of us in the community has hoped when we heard he would be addressing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in last nights State of the Union Speech… that would be exactly that again… The Commander In Chief…. Our Commander In Chief.

But last night, when it came to repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, President Obama buried his “big” DADT repeal announcement deep in his State of the Union Address, was conspicuously lacking in specifics and, yet again abrogated his leadership on DADT to a do nothing congress.

“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It’s the right thing to do,” said the president.

“When I first heard he was making it a priority to put this in the speech, my heart jumped,” Lt. Dan Choi, a West Point graduate and Arabic linguist, who was discharged from the military earlier this year for being gay, told News Weeks Eve Conant last night.

“I had thought—I’m going to keep my job, I will keep my job this year,” said Choi.

But after hearing Obama would “work with congress” and do it “this year”, Choi said, “I was so excited, but then he said he was going to ‘work with Congress.’” …. “I was hoping he might have come in with an executive order, already signed….”

But Choi went on to say… “With everything Congress is failing to do? I took on a lot of impatience when I heard that…. Obama could have talked about this issue in every single one of those paragraphs. He could have simply said, ‘No gay soldier is going to lose their job this year.’ ”

After last night speech, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow asked senior policy adviser to the president, Valerie Jarrett, when and how the president planned to follow through on his promise regarding Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell.

Jarrett told a skeptical Maddow she was “very heartened” by the applause in the chamber in reaction to the president’s statement of commitment, and the president would “begin the process right away”, that he was “very clearly” committed to the promise. However Jarrett, like Obama, did not elaborate on the plan to end the policy.

Choi’s statements after Obama’s speech echo’s the disappointment felt by many in the LGBT community that more decisive action on DADT was not taken by Obama last night… and as you can tell, from his comments, President Obama broke Lt Choi’s heart, as he did many other LGBT hearts as well.

All I can say… Valerie Jarrett had better be right about Obama being “very clearly” committed to ending DADT… because if Obama lacks leadership on DADT repel and congresses lacks direction and mirrors their ineptness shown during health care reform debate… it will not be a good idea for either the Obama Administration or the Dems in congress to go fishing with many LGBT’s should they not get this done.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Sotu & Dadt (slog.thestranger.com)
• Obama: Gays Have Right To Serve In Military (huffingtonpost.com)

Melanie Nathan, Lt. Dan Choi Shirley Tan

Dear Melanie –

I have a message for President Obama: Don’t wait, don’t delay.

Last night, the President repeated his campaign commitment to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” as part of his State of the Union address. While the President promised that DADT would come to an end “this year,” he did not provide specifics — and the White House still has not released a plan to kill it. That’s unacceptable.

I served in the Army for a decade under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” — an immoral policy that forces American soldiers to lie about their sexual orientation. Worse, it forces others to tolerate deception. As I learned at West Point, deception and lies poison a unit and cripple a fighting force.

That’s why I feel strongly that America can’t afford to allow this policy to continue one day longer.

The time for talk is over. The time for action is now. If you agree, please join the Courage Campaign and sign my message to President Obama. Tell him “Don’t wait. Don’t delay. End DADT now!” DEADLINE: MONDAY.

http://www.couragecampaign.org/DontDelay

Last March, I went on Rachel Maddow’s show and spoke three truthful words: “I am gay.” For that, instead of being able to do my duty keeping America safe, I face discharge from the Army for who I love. I face being fired from my job, not for what I do, but for who I am.

As an infantry officer, an Iraq combat veteran and a West Point graduate with a degree in Arabic, I refuse to lie to my commanders. I refuse to lie to my peers. I refuse to lie to my subordinates.

Last year, 424,343 letters were sent by Courage Campaign community members supporting my fight to stay in the military. We’ve moved the president but now we need to finish the job.

That’s why I’m asking for your help again to end DADT so other soldiers who want to serve their country don’t face the same fate. Please sign my message to President Obama. Tell him “Don’t wait. Don’t delay. End DADT now!” DEADLINE: MONDAY.

http://www.couragecampaign.org/DontDelay

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. National security means many things, but the thing that makes us secure in our nation and homes is love. As I was reminded again when I attended the historic Prop 8 trial, what makes me a better soldier, leader, Christian and human being is love.

And I’m not going to hide my love. Love is worth it.

Thank you for your support.

Daniel W. Choi
1LT, IN
New York Army National Guard
Posted by Melanie Nathan, nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama to Repeal DADT “This Year” : Change in 337 Days? (lezgetreal.com)
• Obama Will Address ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ (huffingtonpost.com)

 by Melanie Nathan, January 27, 2010.  The President’s State of  the Union Address was uplifting, sincere and an earnest attempt to deliver the imperative message - There is hope but the Republicans better get off their campaign trail and into Congress.   As I looked across the Republican side all I saw was a bunch of fuddy duddy old white men who all looked the same, totally baffled by their own purpose.  I thought, ‘yup the lockstep clan.’   It was the first time I have ever seen such an admonishment in a State of the Union. 

The brilliant well crafted speech heralded two concepts, firstly context of the first year of Presidency and secondly if you want to help the American people then you must choose out of politics and into governing.

The likes – Helping Haiti; tax incentives for middle class; deficit reduction; college loan reform with public service incentive; repeal of DADT; big banks taxed; help for small local banks to provide loans to small local businesses; lobbyists not biz as usual; hope for health care reform and a challenge for anyone with a better idea to step forward; immigration – a small mention; troops will come home- eventually; national security priorities; more clean energy; jobs – many more to come! 

The dislikes: Not enough detail re immigration; not enough mention of LGBT equality after all its not just DADT – how about a time line, what about the DOMA campaign promise?   What about the oppressed – the unequal?

The sad reality is that this President, who has potential to lead in a manner like no other, is faced with the most careless, unethical, disconnected uncompassionate, self serving  group of Republicans ever to serve in Congress; and it is no wonder – born and/or raised/ and or matured in the culture of the Cheney/Bush Administration – these are the remnants!

President Obama:  “…Now, I am not naïve.  I never thought the mere fact of my election would usher in peace, harmony, and some post-partisan era.  I knew that both parties have fed divisions that are deeply entrenched.   And on some issues, there are simply philosophical differences that will always cause us to part ways.  These disagreements, about the role of government in our lives, about our national priorities and our national security, have been taking place for over two hundred years.  They are the very essence of our democracy.

 But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day.  We cannot wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about their opponent – a belief that if you lose, I win.  Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can.  The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual Senators.  Washington may think that saying anything about the other side, no matter how false, is just part of the game.  But it is precisely such politics that has stopped either party from helping the American people.  Worse yet, it is sowing further division among our citizens and further distrust in our government.

 So no, I will not give up on changing the tone of our politics.  I know it’s an election year.  And after last week, it is clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual.  But we still need to govern.  To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills.  And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well.  Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it’s not leadership.  We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. So let’s show the American people that we can do it together.  This week, I’ll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans.  And I would like to begin monthly meetings with both the Democratic and Republican leadership.  I know you can’t wait.”

So DOMA -DADT – ENDA-UAFA-CIR-HEALTH CARE  … Did you see those geezers sitting in their chairs -?  Nothing this potentially extraordinary President will do will move them toward a decent vote.  Something needs to change.  I hope the voters in mid term elections realize that adding more “R’s” to the bunch will only make things worse.

“Melanie –

I just finished delivering my first State of the Union, and I wanted to send you a quick note.

We face big and difficult challenges. Change on the scale we seek does not come easily. But I will never accept second place for the United States of America.

That is why I called for a robust jobs bill without delay. It’s why I proposed a small businesses tax credit, new investments in infrastructure, and pushed for climate legislation to create a clean energy economy.

It’s why we’re taking on big banks, reforming Wall Street, revitalizing our education system, increasing transparency — and finishing the job on health insurance reform.

It’s why I need your help — because I am determined to fight to defend the middle class, and special interest lobbyists will go all out to fight us.

Help me show that the American people are ready to join this fight for the middle class — add your name to a letter to Congress today:

http://my.barackobama.com/SOTU

We have finished a difficult year. We have come through a difficult decade. But we don’t quit. I don’t quit.

Let’s seize this moment — to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to strengthen our union once more.

President Barack Obama”

So to the LGBTQI community all I can say is SIGH – the oppression will continue… until we do something about it…. in solidarity/…

By Melanie Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Excerpts From State Of The Union Address: ‘We Face A Deficit Of Trust’ (huffingtonpost.com)

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama did bring up in his State of the Union Address the issue of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, as promised. The worry that now faced Obama is whether or not he will be able to fulfill his promises. The speech itself was strongly worded and not quite the old Obama of the past. He took on the Republican Party, often making direct mention of the political and financial mess that they created while in power, but also hitting them hard on the fact that they were unwilling to bend in any bipartisan manner.

“But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day. We cannot wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about their opponent – a belief that if you lose, I win. Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can. The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual Senators.”

For the LGBT Community, the fact that there has been a tendency to sacrifice the interests and rights of LGBT Americans in order to gain votes from Republicans or to push those rights into other bills in order to get them through Congress has been frustrating. The lack of bipartisanship, especially on issues such as hate crimes legislation and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, has been something that many LGBT Americans have expressed their extreme vexation with.

President Obama pledged to work with Congress and the military to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It is unclear if there is anything else that may happen with regards to this issue to give both institutions some breathing room in order to hammer out the Military Readiness Enhancement Act. Many LGBT Americans and their allies have called upon Obama to put enforcement of this law into abeyance until it is repealed either by Congress or the courts.

Senator John McCain has already issued a written statement opposing the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

“In his State of the Union address, President Obama asked Congress to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I am immensely proud of, and thankful for, every American who wears the uniform of our country, especially at a time of war, and I believe it would be a mistake to repeal the policy.

“This successful policy has been in effect for over fifteen years, and it is well understood and predominantly supported by our military at all levels. We have the best trained, best equipped, and most professional force in the history of our country, and the men and women in uniform are performing heroically in two wars. At a time when our Armed Forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy.”

Of course, this is on his election site, and McCain may be playing to the Right in order to stave off a strong challenge to his candidacy from the Tea Party direction of the Republican Party. His opposition to the repeal of DADT clashes and may be directed towards blunting the position that his wife Cindy and daughter Meghan have taken up regarding marriage equality.

Right now, the LGBT Community is very unhappy with Obama, and feel that it is time for him to work on getting issues related to their rights addressed in a big way. While many are willing to understand that repealing the Defense of Marriage Act is difficult, there has been a lot of push back regarding his unwillingness to address DADT before now.

Addendum: “The time for broad statements is over. The time to get down to business is overdue. We wish we had heard him speak of concrete steps tonight,” Rea Carey of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force stated after the speech, and went further to state that Obama should be announcing a moratorium for dismissals under the policy.

Nathaniel Frank, a fellow at the Palm Center stated “President Obama has the opportunity to modify the gay ban’s application through executive action.”

01/27/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama did bring up in his State of the Union Address the issue of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, as promised. The worry that now faced Obama is whether or not he will be able to fulfill his promises. The speech itself was strongly worded and not quite the old Obama of the past. He took on the Republican Party, often making direct mention of the political and financial mess that they created while in power, but also hitting them hard on the fact that they were unwilling to bend in any bipartisan manner.

“But what frustrates the American people is a Washington where every day is Election Day. We cannot wage a perpetual campaign where the only goal is to see who can get the most embarrassing headlines about their opponent – a belief that if you lose, I win. Neither party should delay or obstruct every single bill just because they can. The confirmation of well-qualified public servants should not be held hostage to the pet projects or grudges of a few individual Senators.”

For the LGBT Community, the fact that there has been a tendency to sacrifice the interests and rights of LGBT Americans in order to gain votes from Republicans or to push those rights into other bills in order to get them through Congress has been frustrating. The lack of bipartisanship, especially on issues such as hate crimes legislation and the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, has been something that many LGBT Americans have expressed their extreme vexation with.

President Obama pledged to work with Congress and the military to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It is unclear if there is anything else that may happen with regards to this issue to give both institutions some breathing room in order to hammer out the Military Readiness Enhancement Act. Many LGBT Americans and their allies have called upon Obama to put enforcement of this law into abeyance until it is repealed either by Congress or the courts.

Senator John McCain has already issued a written statement opposing the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

“In his State of the Union address, President Obama asked Congress to repeal the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy. I am immensely proud of, and thankful for, every American who wears the uniform of our country, especially at a time of war, and I believe it would be a mistake to repeal the policy.

“This successful policy has been in effect for over fifteen years, and it is well understood and predominantly supported by our military at all levels. We have the best trained, best equipped, and most professional force in the history of our country, and the men and women in uniform are performing heroically in two wars. At a time when our Armed Forces are fighting and sacrificing on the battlefield, now is not the time to abandon the policy.”

Of course, this is on his election site, and McCain may be playing to the Right in order to stave off a strong challenge to his candidacy from the Tea Party direction of the Republican Party. His opposition to the repeal of DADT clashes and may be directed towards blunting the position that his wife Cindy and daughter Meghan have taken up regarding marriage equality.

Right now, the LGBT Community is very unhappy with Obama, and feel that it is time for him to work on getting issues related to their rights addressed in a big way. While many are willing to understand that repealing the Defense of Marriage Act is difficult, there has been a lot of push back regarding his unwillingness to address DADT before now.

01/26/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama seems to be signaling to Congress that it is time to get the lead out on repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It follows on the heels of a certain amount of background noise regarding a potential Howard Dean primary challenge to Obama in 2012, and the loss of the Massachusetts Senate seat to the Republicans. What President Obama will do specifically is yet to be determined. He may move to end dismissals under DADT with an executive order on the rationale that every soldier is needed right now to fight two wars. This move would given Congress time to repeal DADT through the Military Readiness Enhancement Act or MREA. Among the leads on that bill is Kirsten Gillibrand, the junior Senator from New York.

Senator Gillibrand has been pushing to have hearings on DADT for some time. Those hearings, as reported by CBS, have been put on hold until after the State of the Union speech at the request of the White House. Senator Carl Levin has stated as much. The Pentagon came to Levin to let him know that the President was going to be addressing this issue in the State of the Union, and asked him to hold off on the hearings until early February. Levin stated that he did not know exactly what the President was going to say.

While Obama’s and Congress’ reticence to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act has been largely understood by the LGBT Community in this country, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell has been a major thorn in Obama’s political side. Many LGBT activists feel that Obama’s reticence to repeal DADT has been indicative of a failure to support LGBT rights. Comedian Jon Stewart even compared revoking DADT to eating rice pudding. Stewart even made it clear that this was such a small issue that it was not going to take long to repeal. In a later segment, Stewart and company changed Obama’s slogan of “Yes We Can” to include “But That Doesn’t Necessarily Mean We Will.”

After a year’s worth of chaos within Congress, Obama may also be, with this State of the Union, be planning on pushing to the fore and leading. Many people have been vocal over Obama’s reluctance to lead the charge into the legislative process.

Addendum: Press Secretary Robert Gibbs confirmed that the subject of DADT will be brought into the State of the Union Speech.

01/25/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Could Governor Howard Dean be gearing up to run for political office again? There are whispers from around Vermont that Governor Dean is getting back in touch with many of the people who worked on his campaign for President in 2004. One unnamed source even confirmed being contacted by Dean’s people about future campaigning. With President Barack Obama being seen as ineffective and even weak, it is possible for someone to step up and challenge him in a primary. While it is possible for a sitting President to be taken down in a primary, it is something that rarely happens, and certainly has not happened in the Post Franklin Roosevelt era of Presidential politics.

Certainly President Obama’s seat in 2012 will be a challenge to hold on to given the current political climate, the possibility of Obama being a one term President depends largely on how the next three years go. Ronald Reagan was expected to be a one term President after his first year, but ultimately won reelection. President Obama is liked as a person, but many people on both sides of the political divide do not like his policies. To some on the Left, Obama has been unwilling to be a strong leader and get his policies through unadultered and unwatered down. Many on the Right have been frustrated by the national turn to the Left. Many people across the country are upset that Obama has been unable to effect real change to the system. In many ways, Obama’s problem has been a lack of leadership.

It is possible that Governor Dean is not gearing up to run for President, but rather for another post. Representative Peter Welsh is not a popular man over all, but no one has stepped forward to challenge him in either a primary or the general election. The Republican Party is stretched thin this year, and unlikely to have anyone serious challenge him, and the Democrats have already signaled that they support him. Unfortunately, Welch was elected on an anti-war platform that he failed to live up to, and other issues have meant that the two term Representative is not necessarily in good standing if someone were to challenge him directly.

It is unlikely that Dean would challenge either Senator Bernie Sanders or Senator Patrick Leahy. Both men are extremely popular within the state. Despite Leahy’s often gruff demeanor, he is a popular man because of what he gets done for the state. Of course, there is a possibility that Sanders could chose to retire from the Senate in 2012, and that Dean may chose to make a run at that time. Dean may simply be getting prepared for a potential run in the future.

This news comes on the heels of calls for Governor Dean to be given his old job as Chairman of the Democratic National Committee again. Many people feel that Dean made a far more effective DNC chair than the current occupant Governor Tim Kaine of Virginia.

Governor Dean has been a regular contributor and even a guest host on MSNBC.

Picture via Wikipedia

Related articles by Zemanta

• Is It Time For Governor Dean To Return To The DNC Chairmanship? (lezgetreal.com)

01/24/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama is planning to give the American people a clear message when he delivers his State of the Union speech. He is planning to say ‘I understand the message you are sending.’ The recent electoral defeat of Martha Coakley in Massachusetts comes as health care reform enters its final stretch, and many attribute her loss as much to Obama’s inability to control the debate as they to her inability to wage an effective campaign. The central theme of Obama’s upcoming speech is job creation. This has been one of the central issues of concern for people angry with his lack of leadership in nearly every aspect of policy in his first year. For all the tempest that the Tea Party’s corporate and special interest sponsors wanted to create, there is a real sense of anger in the country when it comes to the economy. President Obama has failed to live up to his promises on a wide range of issues from job creation, Wall Street and financial corruption, political immobility and partisanship, closing Gitmo, ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and addressing substantial LGBT issues. In many cases, people do not feel that Obama has gone far enough, or that the policies he let Congress craft did not go far enough. For instance, Massachusetts voters rejected the Senate and House health care bills because they are far worse than what Massachusetts already has.

As much as President Obama understands the need for economic reform, he left the economic sectors to largely do what they wanted for the last year. This has lead to a lot of job loss and a lot of people feeling angry not only at Obama and Washington, but at the corporate sector. The recent Supreme Court ruling opening the spigot of corporate money into the political arena could backfire badly. After all, imagine having a politician who is openly supported by Bank of America. The fact that former Representative Harold Ford currently holds a job at Bank of America may be enough to turn the electorate against him in a very distinct manner.

Despite the fact that President Obama pledged to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and that move is backed by the majority of the American people, Obama has been loathe to push that legislation through Congress in any meaningful manner. For a man who rose to office on the heels of a President many saw as being unable to walk and chew gum at the same time, Obama seems to be unable to do more than one policy task at a time. Comedian Jon Steward of the Daily Show remarked that ending DADT was small compared to health care reform, and something that he could do easily. Obama has also alienated the LGBT Community due to the Justice Department’s firm commitment to defending the Defense of Marriage Act, often in a very biased manner.

President Obama is starting to see the boiling frustration of the American public. His State of the Union speech will, in all likelihood, be a well crafted piece intended to bring the people back to supporting him. He will try to cast his oratory magic once again and try to woo the American people in order to get them to support him. He will talk about health care reform, immigration reform, Wall Street reform, and try to tie all of his policies into one economic package.

The problem for Obama is not so much that he can give great speeches. Obama is great at speeches. Reagan, Roosevelt, and Kennedy were gifted with oratory as well. Parts of their speeches resonate even today. After all, how many people know the phrase “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.” The problem for Obama moving forward is not his speaking ability or the ability of his people to craft a message, but that he needs to show real leadership. Obama can no longer be the person standing aloof hoping that Senate Majority Harry Reid and Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi follow his vision of America. He needs to get into the trenches. If he does not get down into the trenches, no amount of speeches will be able to bring about better hopes for the Democratic Party.

01/20/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The blame game has begun. Well, technically, the blame game over Massachusetts began before last night. Certainly the lack of a campaign from Martha Coakley hurt, but so did the national ground game which did little to push back against the “Tea Party” Protests, most of which were organized behind the scenes by people such as Dick Armey. There is a sense of desire to fix the blame rather than fixing the problem, but there is also the realty that those who want to assign blame often want to look at those who were already critical rather than looking for the person who brought about the disasters in the first place.

There is an old truism about being in the military, or for that matter, just about any confrontation. The soldiers do not respect the general who remains aloof from the fray. General Patton may have been a major jerk, but he was a true general. Admiral Lord Nelson did not command the battle at Trafalgar from outside the confrontation. Instead, the HMS Victory was right there in the fray, and when Nelson died in battle, Lord Collingwood did not move the HMS Sovereign out of the fray to command the finish of the battle, but rather was in the thick of the battle himself. General Grant was a drunken sot and a bad soldier, but he was in the thick of battle as well. Generals who sit in their tent sipping drinks do not win wars. Typically, they charge their troops into battles like the one celebrated as the Charge of the Light Brigade. For those who do not know, it was a famous charge of British troops against entrenched Turkish gun emplacements. Almost the whole brigade was slaughtered by the Turkish guns.

For the most part, the blame can be easily spread around, but some of the biggest problems lie with the general and the commanders in the field. Certainly, the complete botch job that Martha Coakley did as a campaigner hurt big time. She was arrogant; went on vacation in the middle of the campaign, and took for granted that she was going to win, but there were other problems which made matters worse. President Barack Obama is a great orator, a natural Senator, and a rather lousy leader. In some ways, he has a lot in common with his predecessor, George W. Bush. Bush was a lousy leader as well. Both men rushed through the political landscape without any real understanding of how to govern. Both men were loathe to wade into the actual governance in order to direct policy. This is the kind of situation which often leads to the commanders running amok. While this is not a problem for the Republican Party, which has always been a Party which functioned better in the absence of a strong central leader, this is a situation which will result in a Democrat being eaten alive.

While Republicans are often quite happy with the Party being the governing structure, Democrats often look to a strong leader to solidify the actual governance. In many ways, the two Parties are negative images. The Republicans have always operated best without a strong central leader, and a common vision. The Democrats have always operated best with a strong central leader to wade through and measure the various visions that the Democratic Party has. In many ways, this is why the best Democrats have always been men like Franklin Roosevelt, Bill Clinton and Lyndon Johnson. The best Republicans have always been people who have a vision, but others carry it out. This is why Dwight Eisenhower and Ronald Reagan are the better Republican Presidents of the last seven decades.

The problem for the Democratic Party is that they only respect trench politicians. If one isn’t in the trenches giving orders, then one isn’t going to get a lot of respect. Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama and Tim Kaine are not trench politicians. They are hands off politicians who have always been best at being rank and file. Democrats are like cats, and herding them is difficult. The strongest of the House Speakers and Senate Majority Leaders have always been ones who could herd cats. Lyndon Johnson, as Senate Majority Leader, was one of the best. He was a dirty fighter who had dirt on everyone. Heck, Johnson probably even knew about J. Edgar Hoover’s little black strapless.

In the fall out over Coakley’s disastrous Senate run, there is a lot of blame being assigned. One of those being blamed is Governor Howard Dean. Supposedly he undermined President Obama on policy. What he did was air concerns like so many Democrats have. What he has not done, though, is undermine Obama. Obama did that on his own. Of course he had some help. After all, Pelosi, Reid and Kaine were all manning the shovels through their own inability to work from the trenches.

In a sense, the blame game often feels more like a game of kill the messenger. The problems were there, but a lot of people want to blame those who were trying to warn everyone else.

1/16/10-by Paula Brooks
As Republican Scott Brown’s surge continues in the days leading up to the Massachusetts Senatorial Special Election, President Obama has finally weighed in on the race to succeed Sen. Edward M. Kennedy…

“Our Fierce Advocate” has put out an impassioned plea for Attorney General Martha Coakley and said his “very important” agenda depends on her getting elected… “They believe that by defeating Martha and by replacing Ted Kennedy with a Republican opponent, that they’ll be in a position to tie up the senate and prevent a vote on health insurance reform, financial reform and other issues so important for working families,” Obama says. “A lot of people don’t even realize there is an election Tuesday. So I need you to put on your walking shoes again.”

During last years Presidential campaign LGBT’s in large number indeed put on their walking shoes for Mr. Obama… because he promised us change… and most importantly he promised us HOPE.

We had Hope, because, when Candidate Obama was courting lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender voters, he said that he would support repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions.

But for right now however… Mary Ritchie, a Massachusetts State Police trooper and lesbian, who has been legally married to her partner in that state for five years… is having to sue President Obama to get access to federal benefits that other married couples automatically receive when they get married in Massachusetts, such as tax benefits, pensions and health insurance.

Ritchie’s says she and her spouse have paid nearly $15,000 more in taxes than they would have if they had been able to file joint returns…. And she would like it back… as would the other dozen plaintiffs joining her in this suit.

Yet Obama’s Department of Justice lawyers say that the federal government needs to be “neutral” with regard to its treatment of married same-sex couples in order to ensure that federal tax money collected from across the country not be used to assist same-sex couples duly married by their home states and are defending the law with court filings in this Massachusetts case that argue, DOMA is constitutional and contended that awarding federal marriage benefits to gays in Massachusetts would infringe on the rights of taxpayers in the 31 states that specifically prohibit same-sex marriages…. And President Obama says he is committed to “the long followed the practice of defending federal statutes as long as reasonable arguments can be made in support of their constitutionality, even if the Department disagrees with a particular statute…” Notwithstanding the fact prior administrations have declined to defend laws in court they did not agree with.

So Mary Ritchie and her family are still light their 15k.

That fifteen grand would have bought more then a few pairs of LGBT walking shoes in Massachusetts to help advance Fierce Advocate Obama’s other… more important… agendas…

Now I don’t live in Massachusetts, but if I did, I would be telling President Obama I would gladly put on my walking shoes again… if he would only show me the money as it were, and do something about getting Mary Ritchie’s $15,000 back to her a little more expedient fashion… like withdrawing his Justice Department defense to Mary’s case… and to stop betraying my hopes for equality at every opportunity he gets.

However until he does… I would be telling every LGBT I know… come Tuesday… they should send Mr. Obama a loud and clear message about his dicking around with our civil rights and STAY HOME IN MASS on Election Day…

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama Administration Denies Lesbian Spousal Benefits Despite Judge’s Finding (lezgetreal.com)
• State rep: Obama action on gay marriage “disappointing” (seattlepi.com)
• The Top Five Straight Allies in Congress for 2009 (queersunited.blogspot.com)
• Melanie Nathan Calls for Moratorium as US Citizen’s Brazilian same-sex husband denied asylum .. (lezgetreal.com)

01/15/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama is now facing a very real problem in Massachusetts. He rushed there to try and shore up the flagging likelihood that Martha Coakley would, in fact, succeed Senator Ted Kennedy in the seat that he one held. What had once been a sure thing, now looks like it could be a loss. The why is simple. The base is upset and dispirited. They elected President Barack Obama to usher in a new era of liberalism in this nation. Instead, they got a man who was more willing to cut deals than to push what he campaigned upon through the Senate. Sure, he has managed to get almost everything he wanted, but rather than pushing through with health care reform, and pushing it hard, President Obama ceded that fight to the faux grassroots astroturfers who are less about fixing what is wrong, and more about ensuring what is wrong remains broken.

For the LGBT Community, Obama’s lack of spine has been a big problem. Instead of pushing through his promises of getting LGBT issues addressed in Congress, such as revoking Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act, President Obama has been signaling that he is more than willing to wait for his second term in office before being willing to address those issues. For the millions of gays, lesbians and transpeople, the President’s lack of movement on key issues beyond the Matthew Shepard Act- an act that had to be attached to another piece of legislation in order to pass- has been frustrating in the extreme.

It is there that Massachusetts becomes a problem. Massachusetts is a state with some of the largest numbers of LGBT Americans in the country, and a large number of LGBT allies. The lack of movement on Obama’s part on these issues is discouraging, and many may be unwilling to vote for Coakley because Obama has been so timid when it comes to these battles. In many ways, it will not be the fact that the Democrats went too far with health care reform and financial reform and even the repeal of anti-LGBT laws that lost them this seat, and threatens to make 2010-2013 a legislative deadlock unlike anything this nation has seen in a long time, but rather the fact that the Democrats did not go far enough in pursuing an agenda of popular Progressivism.

Obama, Reid and Pelosi forgot to fight for the people who put them into power, and now they are at risk of being unable to do anything for years to come.

01/11/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Should Senator Harry Reid resign over comments he made regarding President Barak Obama’s dialect? Peter Beinart over at the Daily Beast made an interesting article on this. “Barack Obama because he’s ‘light-skinned’ and has ‘no Negro dialect.’ Reid’s use of the word ‘Negro’ was, to be sure, unpleasantly retro.” Of course there are dozens of other places where the reader can find arguments regarding Reid’s statements- for, against, and indifferent. what follows is not an analysis of anything to do with the accuracy, inaccuracy, reality or unreality of the comments made by Senator Reid, but rather about something completely different.

And now for that something completely different. Is there wisdom in the attack on Senator Reid? The Republicans have seized upon this comment to push the idea that there is some sort of double standard going on regarding Senator Reid’s comments and the reaction from the Democrats regarding it. They point to the ousting of Senator Trent Lott for comparison. There is some problems with this comparison. First of all, Trent Lott had a strong history of voting against rights for African-Americans, he voted against renewing the Voting Rights Act, and was opposed to the continuation of the Civil Rights Act. He also voted against having Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday as a national holiday. At a birthday party for Senator Strom Thurmond, Lott stated “When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over the years, either.” Lott stated something similar at a 1980 rally. Lott was also facing problems from within the Republican Party at the time. He was in conflict with the Bush over much of the President’s policies. In many ways, Lott could have survived the controversy if it were not for the behind the scenes pushing by his own party to remove him.

For the Republicans, removing Harry Reid is actually a rather dumb move. Reid is an unpopular, ineffective Senate Majority leader that even many Democrats do not like. Reid has been loathe to push a Progressive agenda in the Senate, and has caved on a number of issues such as the Public Option in order to get Senators Ben Nelson and Joseph Lieberman behind the bill instead of threatening to pull their power and influence in the Senate. He has been reluctant to punish the Republicans for stalling legislation, and only just now been willing to bypass the Republicans in negotiating legislation such as the health care reform bill. If anything, many Progressives have been more than willing to see Reid leave due to a feeling that he is incompetent when it comes to ruling the Senate, and it is a perception which is causing a great deal of weariness and fear among the Progressive wing of the Democratic Party. The lack of enthusiasm in that wing could be the only way for the Republicans to make a come back in 2010 as the GOP is currently so lacking in money that it may not be able to effectively run a campaign for local rat catcher.

Should Reid resign his leadership position, his likely successor would be Chuck Schumer of New York. Schumer is far from being as willing to be bi-partisan as Reid is, and that would certainly whip up the base. Schumer is also more likely to push a Progressive agenda than Reid.

While the GOP has jumped on this scandal that most people really aren’t all that upset about, they risk dethroning their best asset in the Senate.

01/04/10-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Amanda Simpson has been appointed by President Barack Obama to the Bureau of Industry and Security, which is part of the Department of Commerce. Ms Simpson is the first transperson to be nominated or appointed to a government post. Though some have stated that she is the first transperson to work for the Federal government, it is unlikely that is accurate as there are several transpeople who work throughout the various departments, including one who works or has worked for the FBI. “I’m truly honored to have received this appointment and am eager and excited about this opportunity that is before me. And at the same time, as one of the first transgender presidential appointees to the federal government, I hope that I will soon be one of hundreds, and that this appointment opens future opportunities for many others.”

Simpson worked at Raytheon where she transitioned on the job. She also was able to get the company to change their policies to include gender expression to the list of non-discrimination groups. Simpson is a former test pilot. After leaving Raytheon, she went on to unsuccessfully run for the Arizona Legislature. She was a super delegate for Hilary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primary. She currently serves on the National Center for Transgender Equality.

President Obama has had a strong record of appointing LGBT Americans to government posts since he took office in 2009; however, a strong feeling of frustration is felt by many within the Community due to his lack of advocacy and movement on issues such as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the Defense of Marriage Act.

Amanda Simpson appointed to Department of Commerce

12/30/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Representative Mark Kirk may end up hoisted on his own petard. It all depends upon the investigation into allegations that his is gay. According to sources within the Pentagon, NCIS has to investigate the allegations made by Rep. Kirk’s opponent in the Republican primary. Andy Martin made the accusations against Rep. Kirk in a recent attack ad. While the ad has been resoundly denounced by the Republicans, the ad’s charges have come to the attention of the military since Rep. Kirk is a member of the Naval Reserves.

Rep. Kirk is strongly opposed to the attempts to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, a law which he is now being accused of having broken. Should he be found guilty of homosexuality, he will be honorably discharged with notation if he does not resign first.

According to Martin’s ad “I helped expose many of Barack Obama’s lies in 2008. Today, I am fighting for the facts about Mark Kirk. Illinois Republican leader Jack Roeser says there is a ’solid rumor that Kirk is a homosexual.’ Roeser suggests that Kirk is part of a Republican Party homosexual club. Lake County Illinois Republican leader Ray True says Kirk has surrounded himself with homosexuals. Mark Kirk should tell Republican voters the truth.” Of course, Mr. True has shot back that he was never contacted by Martin about this, and that the statements were false.

Currently, there is an attempt being made by Democrats to repeal DADT, but the Military Readiness Enhancement Act is stalled due to opposition by the Conservative Democrats and Republicans. It may be folded into the Defense legislation in the coming year.

Rep. Kirk was dispatched to Kandahar, Afghanistan. According to him, it was “the first time a U.S. Representative-reservist has deployed to an imminent danger area since World War II.”

Because of the seriousness of the allegations, anyone with information is encouraged to contact DC NCIS’ General Crimes and Fraud Hotline 1-800-264-6485.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Illinois Senate GOP Primary Turns Nasty With Accusations Of Homosexuality (lezgetreal.com)

12/28/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Mark Kirk is gay. That is, at least, the message of Andy Martin, one of his opponents for the seat vacated by President Barack Obama after he took office this year. The Republican Primary is likely to be won by Mr. Kirk, but it is not a sure thing, of course, until the ballots are counted. Martin’s campaign began running an ad against Kirk accusing him of being gay. The hope is that he will be able to derail Kirk’s run for Senate with whispers of homosexuality.

The ad run by Andy Martin goes: “I helped expose many of Barack Obama’s lies in 2008. Today, I am fighting for the facts about Mark Kirk. Illinois Republican leader Jack Roeser says there is a ’solid rumor that Kirk is a homosexual.’ Roeser suggests that Kirk is part of a Republican Party homosexual club. Lake County Illinois Republican leader Ray True says Kirk has surrounded himself with homosexuals. Mark Kirk should tell Republican voters the truth.” Of course, one of those Obama ‘lies’ was his faith. Martin is largely responsible for the run of rumors that President Obama is secretly Muslim. In point of fact, Martin filed so many lawsuits in Federal Court that were deemed to be a waste of court time that he was barred from bringing more without prior approval.

Of course the allegations are easy to make. Representative Kirk is fifty, divorced, and without children. It is easy to make the allegation that he is gay just based upon those factors. Supposedly, according to Martin, Kirk surrounds himself with a variety of LGBT Americans. Of course, Martin makes the innocuous statement “The issue is not homosexuality, the question is hypocrisy; people are entitled to their privacy, they are not entitled to live public lives in the closet.” Of course, there are many gays and lesbians who would agree. The problem for any Republican politician is that it is incredibly difficult to get elected to public office while being openly gay or lesbian. In point of fact, most of the openly gay or lesbian politicians in the United States are Democrats. There is a wing of the Republican Party called GOProud which is the LGBT voice within the Party, but it often runs into problems from other parts of the GOP.

Recently, the campaign of Annise Parker in the Houston Mayoral race turned nasty with her opponent’s supporters attacking her sexuality. Of course, Mayor Parker is openly lesbian. In this case, Martin appears to hope that he is able to key in on the negative view of homosexuality among many Republicans in order to capture the nomination.

A statement released by the Illinois Republican Party refuted Martin’s assertions. According to the statement:

The Illinois Republican Party disavows the statements made today by Mr. Andrew Martin in his statewide radio advertisements. His statements today are consistent with his history of bizarre behavior and often times hate-filled speech which has no place in the Illinois Republican Party. Mr. Martin will no longer be recognized as a legitimate Republican Candidate by the Illinois Republican Party.

In addition, it has been brought to our attention that Mr. Martin’s sources are now denying any such statements or allegations. According to Raymond True, a leader of the Republican Party in Lake County:

“Mr. Martin did not contact me in any way before making his announcement. The comments attributed to me are completely false. I request through the media that Andy Martin cease and desist from making any additional statements that are incorrectly attributed to me.”

Rep. Kirk’s site does not include any information on his positions regarding LGBT Rights.

Update:

Democratic candidate for Senator Jacob Meister had this to say: “The use of sexual orientation in this race, whether overt or by innuendo, can no longer be tolerated. Mr. Martin’s statements are clear attempts to use sexual orientation as a political weapon and are criminal in their perpetuation of ignorance and prejudice.”

Regarding his Democratic opponent: “During the course of this campaign, my sexual orientation has been the source of underhanded remarks from my opponent, David Hoffman. … Despite the enormous economic, national-security and domestic-policy challenges on which I have tried to focus my campaign, some think it more important to question someone’s sexual orientation than to propose their own ideas on how to confront the many problems that desperately need our attention.”

Wrapping up about Kirk: “Under the current circumstances, and in accordance with the very laws that he has whole-heartedly advocated, under current law Mark Kirk is subject to being removed from military service.”

 By Melanie Nathan,   Dec 24th, 2009 :   Story # 2, In this my second post in the series: ”UAFA or 1,666 years of binational stories,”  my column presents in the form of my letter to President Obama, below.  It also reveals my own less told binational story, the one that prompted my advocacy and writing on the plight of binational couples.  

Dear Mr. President,

 My family of four,  including my two young daughters, aged 4 and 12 years, wish You, the First Lady and the First Daughters a very Happy Holiday and New Year. Not to forget Maya Lasso Absa to Bo, First Dog… best wishes.

With these wishes, I would be remiss to ignore this opportunity to alert you, with respect Mr. President, to the other families, less fortunate than mine, the same-sex families, who are unable to spend this Holiday Season together. 

 During January of 2002, I went into an online chat room for the first time ever and developed a friendship with a woman from Israel.  Coincidentally she was soon to arrive in the USA to study at a University in Texas.  I invited her to stop in California, en route, so we could meet and soon I realized that this was the person with whom I wanted to spend the rest of my life. 

 Our relationship flourished while Dor was studying in Texas and soon she transferred to a college near my home in Northern California; and so we moved in together and married as soon as it was legal for us to do so.  At the time, my daughter, HC, from my previous relationship was five years of age.  Dor and HC developed a close relationship and they could not have loved each other more.

We were able to change Dor’s student visa to a very limited R1 visa.  Notwithstanding the fact that California recognized our domestic partnership and subsequent marriage, I the US citizen could not sponsor Dor in the same way as a different gender couple could.  

Dorit taught Jewish religious studies, Hebrew and Bible at a local congregation and was qualified for the R1 Visa. We were luckier than many others in the same-sex binational community because we had found a way, albeit expensive and fraught with difficulties.  With Dor the last in her family of Holocaust survivors, and biological clock ticking, we decided to extend our family and to inseminate so that Dor would carry a baby for us.  The birth of Refael was one of the most exhilirating moments in our lives, with HC, the big sister ecstatic at the arrival of her new baby sister. 

Our lives continued; and we were a tight family, notwithstanding our constant fear that we would have to part ways if Dor’s Visa did not lead to her intended immigration within the time constraints of the R1 termination date.  The termination date came and we advocated crazily for the renewal by Congress of the R1.   With mere days and then hours to the sunset of the law, and Dor’s process hanging severely in the balance, Congress did extend the Visa, setting yet another sunset date for March 06, 2009.

Dor’s lawyer informed us that our chances of success were remote as the timing was still not in our favor, as well as other aspects of the statute and rules that were so onerous and arbitrary on the part of DHS.  We were given low odds and another huge legal bill and a decision to make – should we continue on this Visa path?  The choices were dim; in fact there were no feasible choices.  I could not face the Sophie’s choice that had been haunting me for so many years.

How could I leave my then 11 year old (due to shared custody agreement with me ex) and go with Dor and the baby to Israel?  How could I say goodbye to the love of my life-my spouse, and my then three year old Refael.  How could I split the sisters? I went to see my member of Congress and there was nothing that could be done for our situation.  As an American Citizen and with both children American citizens there was no law to prevent the high probability of Dor having to leave the USA.    I had also determined that I would never prevent Dor from taking our baby with her; the attachment and bond between them would be forcibly broken and my baby would suffer irreparable harm. There were no choices, only extreme denial.

 So we paid and prayed… and then before the final impending sunset date, DHS showed up at our Congregation, with three official investigators to check that Dorit’s basis for her Visa to Immigrate was legitimate; and of course it was.  They approved her application and we were able to submit the finalizing Petition.  

 With 7  days to the sunset of the R1 process, we received a letter stating that the R1 Visa Law was going to sunset and this time there would be no renewal by Congress. This would not give enough time to process the final piece of Dor’s approved application.  Again I spun into denial determined to fight and not willing to think of my ‘Sophie’s choice.’ There was no plan B.  

 It was then that I went to Senator Feinstein for help and with mere hours to the sunset of the law, Dor’s file was given a priority position and viewed just before the 11^thhour.  Dor  was approved and received her green card about two weeks later. This four year hell cost us a great deal, emotionally stressful and financially debilitating. 

I calculated how much more it had cost us compared to that of a straight couple who could simply Petition because of their recognized marriage. I took into account legal fees, non-resident student fees, work limitation losses and Visa fees and renewals: A whopping total of $71,600  for us (over a six year period) compared to $1,500 for a straight couple over a six month period.

It was the spread of our good news that led to my introduction to Shirley Tan and Jay Mercado and my advocacy for them and other binationals has helmed my 2009 year.   

Mr. President, with great respect, I am mentioning this during the holiday season because this time for many is fraught with sadness, fear and pain.  Exiled Americans, who are with their spouses, cannot come home to spend Xmas with extended families and if they do, they have to leave spouses  abroad.  Tens of thousands of same sex couples are unable to spend these holidays together because they are stuck in different countries.  These families cannot wait any longer. Our binational spouses and partners are being turned away at US airports, even as I write these words, at the arbitrary instance of an ICE officer.

 We cannot wait any longer and this President  Obama is what we can do:  

 1. Ask Congress to formulate a special interim Visa for Same-sex Spouses, Domestic Partners, Civil Union Partners, for entry into the USA, and for the ability to remain and work in the USA – possibly subject to renewal  and/or- with a path to immigration.  This can be done in a similar manner to the R1 Visa Process.  It should however be less complicated and could be set for termination when UAFA or similar legislation is passed, or until DOMA is repealed.

 2. The burden of proof could be similar to a marriage – where, inter alia, the following is required:
a. Proof of certification of marriage, Domestic Partnership, Civil Union contract – from any jurisdiction, anywhere in the world, proving a contractual nexus between the spouses;  and also an Affidavit of suport from American Spouse;
b. The same two year conditional residency as spouses have – where the parties attend an interview where they prove that they have been living together in relationship, to back up the contract in the exact same way as straight people have to do;
c. Anyone who has a ten year ban – who was in a Same sex relationship at the time – ought to have their case reviewed to negate the ban and criteria for this should be established;
d. Same sex couples ought to have a process to convert Visas to this Visa status, regardless of waivers they may have signed.

(I have written a more detailed drafty of legislation for such a VISA and its available to anyone interested.)  UPDATED;  SIGN PETITION
http://immigration.change.org/actions/view/special_visa_for_binational_lgbt_spouse-perma-partners 

 I believe if this was done in the form of a special visa category and did not alter the Immigration and Naturalization Act in any way, it could perhaps work its way through the system quickly and differently.  The way it is written will not conflict in any way with DOMA and its tacit  restrictions on the Immigration and Naturalization Act.

The legitimacy would rest on the fact that de facto relationships and families exist, a simple fact of life; and that because they are specifically ousted by law, with their civil right to live together impeded, they should be allowed a special visa status, until such time as the law changes to include them, so that they no longer need to be considered a special class for special rights.   I say the argument here is to embrace an agenda of special rights,  as an interim necessity, and to counter the argument against it by admitting it to be just what it would be which is special rights! 

For as long as DOMA exists LGBT relationships are automatically a special class, simply because one cannot deny the factual existence, the contractual commitment and the ethical obligations these families have assumed.

Now while none of us want special treatment and would much rather have equal treatment, I guarantee that 95% of binational couples who are currently in jeopardy or suffering hardship by virtue of their non- status, would agree to a moratorium or interim visa so that they can live their lives in peace, in their own country and with whom they wish, as a matter of immediacy.

 This would in no way derogate from the work that needs to be done to amend this injustice in the long term.  All it would do is stop subjecting LGBT couples to immediate human rights abuses engendered by the lack of equality with regard to visas and immigration.

Regardless of my plea for binationals and certainly not to negate the urgency, what we need Sir, for the long term, is your leadership to pursue what you promised and that is the passage of repeal legislation for DOMA.

 Perhaps pursuing Congressman Jerrold Nadler’s “Respect for Marriage Act” ought to be the priority of all LGBT movements, organizations and leaders, above and beyond DADT, ENDA, UAFA, etc.     It  is my contention that the pivotal legislation detrimentally impacting the LGBT community is the insidious one that seeks to deny our de facto relationships, which to my way of thinking denies us the right to be gay.  If we are denied the validity of our relationships, it is tantamount to an overt endorsment  that we ought not have our relationships – what could be worse?

If  we cannot sponsor our spouses to be with us in our country, causing banishment from the USA, then we are thwarting those lesbian and gay relationships; – Silence by this Administration and the continued persecution of gays and lesbians, profiled and deported at the airports by suspicious ICE officers,  is the same as overtly stating that exiling our gays and lesbians is acceptable.  The relationships are the essence of who we are and the absolute benchmark  for acceptability, beyond mere tolerance.

 This situation, Mr. President,  is hardly known by mainstream America and I imagine once revealed more openly, through columns such as mine, where I am publishing this letter, the average American may feel compassion or perhaps even some guilt. The fact that America can exile its own is simply unconscionable. As a community we are hurt and sickened by the perception that a Democratic majority and President cannot rescue us from the throat hold of the religious right and from States that vote away our rights.

 So at this holiday time,  when families are gathering together  in happiness and joy, please find a way to remember those Americans. their beloved and children who, because of DOMA,  cannot share these days- and all our community can do at this time is beg and pray for something extraordinary, perhaps a miracle.  Our exiles and exiles-to-be cannot wait for the impending Immigration Reform battle or for UAFA to garnish more co-sponsors.  Our binationals do not want to be the “Public Option” of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. 

 Our binationals cannot wait to hold the hand of a dying parent, nor be on foreign turf if they themselves are ailing, nor be subjected to losing homes, jobs, and businesses, nor the separation of siblings. Our binationals are running out of money to support the long distance relationships.

 By XMAS time next year, it is my Holiday prayer that our binationals will all reunite through whatever means it takes – but here and now Mr. President we need your leadership and for you to take reach beyond business as usual in D.C. to accomplish what for us was also a “YES WE CAN.”   

Thank you for reading this and in Solidarity I say,

Happy Holidays and a Miraculous New Year,

Most Sincerely,
Melanie Nathan,

 American Citizen,  
Married Lesbian 
Mom of two daughters
Unable to Sponsor Spouse
Feature Picture taken by Melanie - of  Dorit, HC and Refael, 2008.

PLEASE NOTE – This Letter will be re-faxed to President Obama and mailed together with all comments that readers make.  I encourage one to two paragraph stories of binationals. 

 UPDATE; OUT OF THIS – Piece a Petition is born - The overwhelming response on my personal e-mail to this post has given me faith in the fight.  So I have taken a vision of mine, which many may think silly and naive,  and once again in defiance of  protocol, in defiance of all that (those who know better say) is possible, in defiance of the experienced, and veering off the beaten track…… here is my hopeful interim remedial solution to the crime against binational Americans and their partners/spouses/children.  PLEASE PARTICIPATE AND SIGN THIS experiment in grassroot power……   Lets take back the fight!!   Lets wake every American conscience to the Binational Plight.  We need 36,000 signatures.     CLICK HERE -  http://www.change.org/actions/view/special_visa_for_binational_lgbt_spouse-perma-partners

Although I call myself a Navy ‘Wife,’ Jo and I are not married.  We can’t be.

Prior to the big move, we came to explore our new base.  Jo wanted to document the occasion and the next step in our lives with a gift. My first piece of Navy apparel: a sweatshirt emblazoned with “Navy Girlfriend.” That is all I am and all I can ever be until the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy is overturned.

Ironically, we bought the Girlfriend gift during the same weekend Barack Obama was in Washington, DC being inaugurated as the first Black president.  Jo and I hoped within a year’s time, perhaps we could legally upgrade to the next level of sweatshirt: wife.  But here we are, almost one full year later, living an active duty life, and I’m still wearing Girlfriend across my heart.

I received an early Christmas gift that may, quite possibly, be more special than the standard diamond ring.  In honor of my blog’s one year anniversary and my role in her life, Jo presented me with my very own “Navy Wife” apparel.  Although I can’t walk down the aisle with Josephine to make it official, in the comfort of our home and the safety of the blogosphere, I am just as much of a wife as all of those women on base.  And maybe next year, the change will finally come. Thankfully, next year is right around the corner and hope is hanging in the closet.

12/23/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
“We are all floating in the same boat. We may certainly try to push one another over the side, but only a maniac…would make a hole in the bottom.”- Terry Pratchet, The Fifth Elephant

When Senator Tom Coburn seemed to wish for the death or major illness of a fellow Senator, the feeling is that he crossed the line. In many ways he did, but it was symptomatic of a failure of many things in the United States. The feeling within the Republican Party that is fueling this push to obstruct even the least little piece of reform comes from an absolute belief that Barack Obama will manage to remove them from power permanently. A recent caller to CSPAN asked GOP Senator John Barrasso “How hard did you pray because I see one of our members was missing this morning. Did it backfire on us? One of our members died? How hard did you pray senator? Did you pray hard enough?” While the Senator and the host of the show tried to go beyond the issue, the situation is still disturbing. It is hard to think that people are hitting the point where they are more than willing to ask that a frail, 92 year old man should have to come into the Capital in order to cast a vote in the Health Care Debate. Here is the video:

12/17/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
This is what happens when you cave in to one person who is having a snit. Another one comes along and demands that you cave in to him. In this case it is Democrat Ben Nelson of Nebraska who has decided to kill the bill. The time has come to ‘kill’ him and Lieberman. It is time to strip them of any and all power that they have within the Senate. The time has come to remove them from their committee assignments, and if needs be, the caucus as a whole. It is time to kill this bill. No ‘ifs’, no ‘ands’, no ‘buts’, no negotiation. And, if President Obama cannot learn to lead and Senator Reid cannot grow a spine, then it is time for them to leave or be removed. Senator Nelson has demanded that his amendment condemning women to die for lack of coverage for a legal procedure must be in the bill or he will filibuster. If that is his decision, then fine, remove him from everything. If he leaves to join the Republicans, great, replace him next election. Or replace him anyway.

One year and six months ago, or there abouts, I cast my ballot in the first primary in recent memory where Vermont was important. I cast my vote for Hilary Clinton. While I have held out hope that President Barack Obama would be better than he has turned out to be, I hate to say that he has lived up to my expectations. I voted for him in the general election because I saw in his opponent someone who was even less ready for the Presidency than Obama, and who chose a running mate who, in all honesty, seemed more of a caricature than a real person, especially in light of her transformation from the time she ran for governor to when she ran for Vice President. The why of my vote had mostly to do with History. Senators rarely make good Presidents, and one term Senators often make very weak Presidents. I knew in Obama we did indeed have a John Kennedy. The problem was that no one really goes beyond Kennedy’s assassination to look at the President. Kennedy has never impressed me as anything more than an decent orator. Johnson, at least, had guts. He had scars too and would show them off to anyone who wasn’t squeamish. Ok, that’s wrong, he would show them off to the squeamish as well.

I knew that Obama would not fight the way everyone thought he would. I knew that he would have trouble herding Democrats into doing anything. Obama was good at speeches, but not much else. It is because of that I have not been disappointed in his lack of movement. It is because I knew that Obama was not this great, grand Liberal leader that I have not been disappointed at the immobility of many LGBT issues, and many others. I knew that Obama was more interested in compromise than anything else. It has been painful to watch as Liberals come to the same place I was a long time ago.

Last night, Kieth Olbermann took what looked like and felt like a very difficult step. He called for the death of the health care reform bill and the creation of a new one. Until Senator Nelson made his demands, i was on the fence about this. Now, I am not. The bill must die and, as Governor Howard Dean said, be rewritten. It is time for the Democrats to fight back. It is time for it to be bluntly clear to people like Nelson and Lieberman that there are consequences for going against the majority of their party and the majority of the people. It is time for someone to make Joe Lieberman understand quite bluntly that his desire for revenge is not only unconscionable, but against everything that the Senate has ever stood for. This kind of petty politics is suppose to be confined to the House of Representatives not the Senate. Yet, it is in the Senate that we find more and more people who want to do nothing but hold their collective breaths until they turn blue in the face and then- and then Senator Reid will cave in and give them their treat. If the Republicans want to slow the bill to a crawl, then let them do so. Let there be no other business until this is done. If the government shuts down from their tantrum, then BLAME them. Make it clear that Senators Lieberman and Nelson are responsible for shutting down the government and starving our troops of the funds they need. If they shut down the government, make it clear that the Republicans with the help of Lieberman and Nelson are responsible for doing so. Blame them instead of capitulating. Perhaps then they will come to their senses and realize that compromise can be achieved on issues that they want.

But that is the problem, is it not. This is not about the Republicans WANTING anything policy wise. This is about them wanting power, pure and simple. They want to win the ideological battle that has been going on in this country since it was founded. They want power, and in order to get it they will do anything from lying, cheating and even shutting down the government. I have listened appalled at how the Conservatives spin History into something so out of shape and out of place that they it is unrecognizable. They talk about Our Founding Fathers as if they were some singular block that agreed upon a particular issue, and somehow, some way were of one mind and that mind was for small government without regulations to hold businesses accountable, and without the power to tax people. What they do not say is that we tried that form of government before the Constitution was written, and at that time, the states almost went to war with each other and the central government was so weak that it could not govern even enough to make this nation safe. What our Founding Fathers wanted was a balanced government, and they did not get there by decree or one side winning over the other. Instead, they created a government that was balanced by consensus and compromise. What we do not have here is any of that. The people who claim to speak for the Founding Fathers, or at least in their model of thought, do not any more than any Liberal in this country.

I am not a Liberal, and yet, no matter what I say or do in this blog, I will be branded as such. I am an academe, and that alone gets me attacked by people who have never understood that colleges are as diverse in their political thinking as any place out there. In fact, more so. Of all the colleges I have been to, only one was liberal, and that is not necessarily Liberal, but open minded in its approach to education. I have met professors who would not look me in the eye because I am a transwoman on some college campuses. Distrust Education, Distrust Government, and eventually what you have is anarchy. I often write on this blog in a Liberal manner because, no matter how much I may not be that label, it will be applied to me. That is what Olbermann said last night as well. No matter what he said or did, he would be labeled a liberal for daring to not follow lock step behind the Conservative mantra. When did Conservative become the same word as dictatorship?

You will forgive me if, by now, I am angry with how this has turned out. I had hoped that I was wrong about Obama, and I hate to admit that I was not. For me to be angry takes some doing, but I stand beside my Senator in condemning this mess. I stand beside Bernie Sanders, the Independent from Vermont. In four years, should he choose to stay in the Senate, I will vote for him. It was an honor to hear him speak. Like him, I am angry now too.

I am including the video from Olbermann’s special comment last night. Please, enjoy.

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

Clouds On The Horizon (follow up editorial)

12/2/09-by Paula Brooks
A bill that would allow gay and lesbian members of the armed forces to testify openly at Congressional hearings was introduced today in the US House of Representatives.

The bill, the “Honest and Open Testimony Act, sponsored by Congressman Alcee Hastings (D-FL) also has 27 other co-sponsors.

Currently the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy requires the discharge of any service members who acknowledge that they are gay, lesbian, or bisexual, even if they do it in a congressional hearing, but if this bill were to become law, it would allow gay troops to testify openly before congress without risk of discharge or other punishment.

A staffer with Rep. Hastings office told LGR this afternoon his bill will ensure that debate will not be stacked against those most affected by the current ban on gay and lesbian troops from talking about their sexual orientation.

Several recent proposals to reduce or suspend “don’t ask, don’t tell,” including a moratorium proposed by New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, as well as a proposal by Congressman Hastings to de-fund the implementation DADT, were blocked earlier this year by Congressional leadership and the Obama White House. But Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said his office is seeking “more humane” and flexible ways to apply “don’t ask, don’t tell” by relaxing its enforcement. Rep Hastings bill will be in line with Secretary t Gates efforts said Hastings office.

Hearing on “don’t ask, don’t tell”, promised by the end of this year, are now expected to occur in early 2010. This new bill would allow gay troops tell congress about their experiences under the policy in these as well as any other hearings on Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell. In July 2008 the Military Personnel Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee held hearings on “don’t ask, don’t tell,” however no openly gay troops were able to be included in the panel of witnesses testifying during those hearings.

Lawmakers need full information to effectively evaluate how to implement repeal and hopefully this bill will let them get that information.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Military’s New (Old) Position on DADT: Obama Still Very Busy, Will Get To You ‘At The Right Time’ (queerty.com)
• Marine Corp Boss Openly Opposing DADT Repeal (lezgetreal.com)
• Time to End ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ Official Writes (nytimes.com)

11/29/09-by Paula Brooks
A 44 year old, openly gay, Chicago attorney is hoping to fill the Illinois US Senate seat formerly held by President Barack Obama and hopeful Jacob Meister is quick to point out his sexual orientation is only one part of how he is different from his opponents.

Meister, a graduate of American University in Washington, D.C and the University of Wisconsin Law School, declared his intention to run for the Democratic Senate nomination in September of this year and hopes to eventually fill the job presently held by embattled U.S. Sen. Roland Burris.

Burris has been mired in controversy ever since Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich appointed Burris to the Senate job shortly after federal authorities indicted Blagojevich on corruption charges, including charges Blagojevich allegedly solicited for his personal benefit, the appointment of Obama’s replacement for that seat and allegedly tried to sell the seat to the highest bidder.

Last week Burris received a “public letter of qualified admonition,” from the U.S. Senate ethics committee for making misstatements to investigators in that case.

As of last week’s official petition filing deadline, Meister finds himself keeping company with three other Democratic candidates for the seat’s nomination, including David Hoffman, former Chicago Urban League president Cheryle Jackson and Illinois State Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias.

If Meister were to be elected, he would be the first openly gay member of the Senate, but Meister is considered a long shot. A recent poll found Meister has the lowest level of support among the four candidates current vying for the Illinois Democratic Senate Nomination.

Miester however is not deterred by his poll numbers and has said he is confident a television campaign launched this week, in the Illinois cities of Champaign, Springfield and Peoria, would resonate with voters as he begins to build support around the state and he want to shy away from making the corruption this Senate Seat and instead make his campaign about one of jobs and the economy.

“There’s other people who would like to say that it’s all about corruption,” Meister says in one ad,“Obviously, corruption is an important message, but that’s not the measuring stick we should be using. This is about the economy.”

In an interview with the Edge, Meister said of his chances…

“I think the word ’underdog’ is getting thrown around less and less as I get out there… With the economy and jobs, people are hurting out there and I don’t see any of the other candidates addressing these issues. [When I decided to enter the race], I looked at [it] and said we have to get someone in Washington to address these issues. We don’t need more career politicians.”

“I bring the real world experience that I have developed over twenty years [to this race].”… “I’m not a recycled government employee or bureaucrat or politico. I’m coming to it for the right reasons. I always say there’s a difference between politics and government and unfortunately politics really interferes with good government. I’m about good government.”

via Openly gay man seeks Illinois U.S. Senate seat :: EDGE Boston.

Of course in terms of LGBT issues, Meisters specifically supports the legalization of marriage for same-sex couples, the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the passage of a transgender-inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

Meisters has also said he is confident his identity as an openly gay man help his campaign.

“I think it’s actually a strength of my candidacy,” Meister said of his sexual orientation to the Edge. “I think it resonates with Illinois voters as they recognize that this is the civil rights issue of today. Illinois is a progressive state.”

Meister does have a substantial background in government, he was an intern with Milwaukee’s mayor and county executive when he was 18 and also served as a delegate to the Wisconsin Democratic convention.

He has also worked for former Wisconsin Congressman Jim Moody while Meister completed his bachelor’s degree in international relations and political science in DC.

 By Melanie Nathan The billboard, located at 4855 Miller Road, shows two cartoonish images of Obama wearing a Muslim turban and reads “PRESIDENT or JIHAD?” It also says “BIRTH CERTIFICATE – PROVE IT!” alluding to the conspiracy theory which claims Barack Obama was born in Kenya rather than Hawaii, which would disqualify him for the office of President.  The words “WAKE UP AMERICA! REMEMBER FT. HOOD!” appear on the bottom of the billboard. The sign belongs to a sleazy looking bloke (sorry my judgment)  used car dealer who describes his business as a “car dealership.”

“Since Fort Hood, I’ve had it,” owner Phil Wolf, displaying an educated command of the English language, told FOX 31 News Friday. “You can’t suggest things. You can’t profile. You gotta call a spade a spade.”    ”Everything I have read about Mr. Obama points right to the fact that he is a Muslim. And that is the agenda of what Muslim is all about. It’s about anti-American, it’s about anti-Christianity,” Wolf said.  (I call that treason talk, Mr. Wolfe not freedom of speech – !) 

The Anti-Defamation League condemned the sign, as did AM760 radio host David Sirota, who discussed the sign and interviewed Wolf on his program Friday morning. “It’s out of control,” Sirota said. “This conservative hatred of Barack Obama is out of contol, and this brings together all those strands of it: the racism, the anti-Muslim fervor. It’s one thing to criticize the president on health care, or Wall Street reform, or immigration. But this is outrageous. And I think it’s a fair question to ask why these questions about religion and ancestry are being directed so viciously at the first African-American President of the United States.” 

 “Are you a racist Wolf?” asked Ed Schultz on his ED SHOW, MSNBC TV?  “I am not,” answered Wolf.  I was unclear as to why Ed Schultz gave this apology of an American the time of day.  Did Ed think he would get a retraction from him? Or an explanation that made any sense?    Anyway I was much relieved to hear Mr. Schultz speaking to a woman named Pat on his radio show the next morning, and was proud of her resilience and her courage. 

 A  small group of dedicated progressive women, led by PAT have been protesting at the Wolf car lot since last Friday. They are organizing a big protest for Saturday Nov 28, starting at 10 am (“until we run out of volunteers to carry signs”).  This will probably go for at least 3-4 hours if the ladies’ past efforts are any guide. An internet  notice said “Would be great if a lot of men showed up, this time too.”

On the Ed morning show, she explained how a few women had pulled together and protested at the site of the billboard in question.  They braved the insults of a group of male bullies who went scurrying the moment men arrived to stand on the side of the women.  The minute the good men left the little cowardly bullies would reappear with their insults and threats. 

I thought Pat was amazing – a brave hero- standing before a group of adversaries for hours and enduring the insults.   She insists on continuing her protest and will be out there tomorrow with a big request for many more to join her side and that of the progressive women who show no fear.   

 The  ADL issued a statement calling the billboard an exploitation of the Ft. Hood shootings that is “divisive and offensive, and perpetuates hateful and harmful stereotypes about Muslims”, prominent conservatives have been silent thus far. “That could suggest that conservative leaders are afraid to confront the extreme fringe of their base,” Sirota said. “Or it suggests they actually condone this message. Either way, it’s disturbing.”

I ASK YOU – Help these wonderful progressive women protest the Racist Anti-Obama Billboard in Wheatridge Sat Nov 28 @ 10:00 AM (Visibility / Sign Waving)  -    They are getting some flack from the dealership. Having some men with them could help. The protesters and the sign are just 50 feet from I-70 Westbound so the protest has the potential to be seen by hundreds of thousands of Black Friday-Christmas Shoppers driving by on Saturday.  

Their message is – Dust off your old Anti-Iraq War signs, impeach, Stop Torture, whatever… and bring them Saturday. Show the public what Wolf is so proud of.  Help change the discussion back to the crimes of the Bush Administration, The protest is at Wolf interstate Leasing and Sales Location: 4855 Miller St Wheat Ridge, CO 80033  Map from the Wolf Website .   http://wolfwheatridge.com/index.asp?s=7772

To contact the organizer of the event directly email Saturday, November 28 from 10:00 AM – 1:00 PM patdunn4@comcast.net 

Hope this post gets a few over there to help/.  Have a Great Weekend and goodluck to you brave ones who speak for us all….

UPDATE Apparently Wolf had erected the Billboard in response to a challenge by a Denver  radio host Peter Boyles, who hosts the top-rated morning program on Denver’s KHOW-AM, Wolf who owns multi State car lots is planning on erecting more Billboards across the Country.

My thoughts: Where does one draw the line? While freedom of speech serves our essence as a nation, this language is deplorable both in intent and effect. We are a Country at War.  The proponents of this language are in essence committing a subversive and treasonous act when one considers all the circumstances. They accuse the President of the United States as being on the side of the enemy during a time of war? I would never have imagined seeing anything like this.  Its not mere lack of decorum or common decency – it is a sign that racial hate is so intensely pervasive that it has the power to cause Americans to turn into traitors.  Speaking of our President in the fashion has the significant stench of siding with the enemy.

 Blogged by Melanie Nathan nathan@privatecourts.com 

Yesterday the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a committee vote on the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act (DPBO), legislation that would provide equal benefits to the domestic partners of federal employees. The committee passed DPBO at 23-12, an important step in securing federal protections for the LGBT community. Kate Kendall of NCLR commented in a mailing today, “We must secure this victory and work to pass other crucial pieces of legislation pending in Congress.”

DPBO moves to the House floor for consideration, and it’s up to us to make sure that it passes and protects the thousands of devoted, hard-working LGBT government employees.  Equal work demands equal compensation. We must speak up and remind Congress about this basic principle of fairness, to ensure that the domestic partners of government employees are able to receive their partners’ benefits, including health insurance and access to pensions.

President Obama is ready to sign DPBO into law but we need to make sure that it passes in Congress. Call your representative today and ask them to vote for equality and fairness. Ask them to pass the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act.

Please take a minute and call your representative at (202) 224-3121. We must make sure that a House vote on DPBO will happen soon and that our representatives support DPBO. We need to stand together as a community and urge our representatives to fight for the rights of the domestic partners of federal employees.”

Notes from Melanie: -Thank you NCLR for keeping us informed and active.  

It is time now for LGBT groups and organizations to get married….(imagine!)  To work on the BIG ONE – Repeal of DOMA – it will solve many problems.  DOMA is a gift – because now it provides the opportunity for overt recognition- through its repeal, that might not otherwise have been there.  The recognition of our relationships, the cornerstone of who we are, may never otherwise have had this opportunity.

I know easier said than done, but imagine if we can pool our brains and set aside mutual resources as we pursue a “PINK-PRINT” ( as in blue print…) A comprehensive plan- to unify our movement. This can happen with a BIG conference of leaders and  defined and shared purpose… Full equality  is our civil right goal and must happen more urgently than fragmented piecemeal legislation will allow. Congressman Nadler has provided the tool, now lets all work it.    

Melanie Nathan.
www.visualcv.com/melnathan  nathan@privatecourts.com   www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com   www.privatecurts.com

11/19/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Accusations of supporting polygamy have forced President Barack Obama’s nominee for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to ask that her name be withdrawn from a statement that was, at least on the surface, written to support same-sex marriage. The statement itself appears to be poorly worded more than anything else. The statement from Beyond Marriage appears to be rather confusing in its terminology. This is a pitfall of many attempts to make language overly broad. Texas may have, for instance, banned all marriages within the state by simply putting in the wordage designed to prevent civil unions, but, instead, banned all institutions which are similar or identical to marriage. Marriage is identical to marriage, and this may be a big problem if someone decides to challenge them on it.

“Committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner” and “queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households” appear to be among the statements which have tripped up Chai Feldblum, who has been an ardent supporter of LGBT rights, including marriage rights. While it is easy to state that these might be seen as supporting polygamy, it appears that they are, more or less, confusingly written. Instead of fighting back on that particular subject, Ms Feldblum chose to issue this statement instead:

I am writing to ask that you remove my name as a signatory to the Beyond Same-Sex Marriage statement. I signed this document because it supports societal recognition of relationships between LGBT couples. But the statement was overly broad and there are parts of it with which I do not agree. Because the text of the statement does not reflect my views, I must ask you to remove my name.

It might be easier if Ms Feldblum were to fight back against the accusations rather than simply backtracking on the statement and opening up further opportunities by those opposed to everything that President Obama wants to accomplish to attack her. This time, they can attack her for backtracking on her statements and accuse her of flip-flopping on the issue of polygamy, and thus paint her not only as being a radical lefty, but a hypocrite as well.

YES -YOU – CAN Posted by melanie Nathan: Judge orders compensation for gay couple denied benefits (LA Times Report) by Carol J. Williams:-  
While recognizing  the status quo of federal government rejection of gay marriage under the Defense of Marriage Act,  federal judge of U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals,  Judge Stephen Reinhardt today ordered compensation for a Los Angeles couple denied spousal benefits by the federal government because they are gay men; and deemed the denial of health-care and other benefits to the spouse of federal public defender Brad Levenson to be a violation of the Constitution’s guarantee of due process and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, which is prohibited by California state law.

Levenson married his longtime partner, Tony Sears, on July 12, 2008, during the five-month period when same-sex marriagewas legal in California. A ballot measure. Reinhardt, who is the federal judge responsible for resolving employee disputes in the Federal Public Defenders office within the 9th Circuit, had earlier ordered the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to process Levenson’s application for spousal benefits for Sears. The federal government’s Office of Personnel Management stepped in to derail the enrollment, however, citing the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act that prohibits the recognition of same-sex marriage for the purpose of federal benefits or programs.

Levenson appealed, seeking either an independently contracted benefits package for his spouse or payment of the equivalent value of the coverage denied. Reinhardt ordered the latter, based on a “back pay” provision in the law covering federal defense lawyers’ employment.  “Considering that the federal government won’t give Tony the equal benefits package of other spouses, we are very pleased with this decision,” said Levenson. “Is it equal treatment? No. Is it a good remedy? Yes. And we are appreciative of the judge’s order.”

The men have been keeping track of the costs of separate insurance  and estimate the back pay and future compensation will amount to thousands of dollars each year.  The judge’s order is expected to resolve the injustice Reinhardt has cited in previous orders in Levenson’s case.  Several other challenges by those denied federal benefits, like filing joint tax returns, are making their way slowly through the federal courts.

The Obama administration has spoken out against what it sees as a discriminatory policy toward gay spouses of federal employees but Atty. Gen. Eric Holder has also said his office is obliged to defend the practice as long as the Defense of Marriage Act remains law. 

Comments Melanie Nathan:- When I wrote to President Obama about Holder’s pursuit I received the following (probably generic) email which was signed with the President’s name.

“Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.  I appreciate your perspective. Every American deserves equal protection under our laws, and neither Federal nor state law should discriminate against any American.  The issue of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) rights has all too often been used to divide our country.  We must treat all of our citizens with dignity and respect, and stand united in our protection of equality–a founding principle of our Nation and a moral imperative. 
      
I continue to oppose a Constitutional ban on same-sex marriage and support the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.  We must also extend the over 1,100 Federal marital rights and benefits to same-sex couples, because every American should be able to visit a loved one in the hospital, transfer property, and receive equal health insurance and other employment benefits.  
     
My Administration is committed to addressing a full spectrum of issues important to the LGBT community.  We can reduce
discrimination by strengthening hate crimes statutes; supporting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act; ensuring adoption rights for all couples and individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation; and opposing discrimination in public accommodations.  To combat HIV/AIDS, we need policies that support people living with this illness and increased funding for prevention, care, and research.  I also support repealing the current Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy in a sensible way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security.  Please join me online to learn more about my civil rights  agenda at:  www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_rights.     Together, we can create a more open and tolerant society that protects and values all people.  Thank you again for writing.  To be a part of our agenda for change, join us at www.WhiteHouse.gov 

Sincerely,

Barack Obama“

Mr. President – our families cannot wait any longer. Our binationals are being turned away at the airports, even as I write these words.  Just a few days ago a same-sex couple came home and  dispite having a  same-sex valid marriage and visa, the foreign partner was turned away at the airport and sent back to a country where he has no work, at the command of one ICE official given arbitrary power belying his age and qualifications.

If you cannot effect change immediatley, you must create a moratorium on all the unconscienable results of the inequitous laws that plague our lives; you MUST make what you yourself term civil rights your number one priority issue.  What could be more important than ALL Americans being treated the same way.   Is that not why we fight abroad.  What is the point of fighting on foreign soils and losing our soldiers while you continue to fail  your own at home when it comes to basic fairness and human rights. You must provide full civil rights to all your own citizens.

Do something now. Our LGBT leadership is disjointed and fragmented and we cannot expect our non-profits to take the helm in the face of this fragmentation.  Mr. president we voted for you to be our leader and now we expect YOU to be the ONE to lead us to equality. Please spare us your generic words and your purported civil rights agenda – you must come up with something to end all this – the Repeal of DOMA should be first on your list.  You must lead us to equality because you can;  ”YES YOU CAN”

Thank you Sir, for listening.

Article  Melanie Nathan. nathan@privatecourts.com; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com www.visualcv.com/melnathan ;
Picture by Refael Nathan-Israel, 4 years old – taken at kid level of fridge magnets

11/11/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Next year’s Defense Appropriation’s bill will include language which will repeal the law known as Don’t Ask, Don’t tell. The tactic is similar to that used to enact the Matthew Shepard Act into law. It entails placing the legislation as an amendment to a bill being considered. Should this work, the repeal would go into effect on 1 October 2010.

While President Barack Obama has been openly critical of DADT and asked for it to be repealed, he has not done a significant amount of lobbying for the repeal. According to Representative Barney Frank, the President does support ending the ban on gays and lesbians serving in the United State’s military.

Several countries allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, including several which have been working actively with the United States military in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

According to Representative Frank, “‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ was always going to be part of the military authorization.” It seems unlikely that this was the original plan since the Military Readiness Enhancement Act has been introduced; however, given the reluctance of some within Congress to touch LGBT related issues, this may have been the backup plan. Recently, several Democrats from ‘red’ districts have voiced reluctance to deal with DADT or the Defense of Marriage Act.

11/9/09-by Paula Brooks
President Barak Obama expressed confidence Sunday that the Senate will “take the baton” and approve sweeping health care reform legislation, after the House narrowly passed its version Saturday night.

In brief remarks from the Rose Garden yesterday, the president said the 220-215 House vote brings the country closer than it’s ever been to a health care overhaul and stated the “historic” passage of the House version of the Health Care Bill marked a “courageous vote” for many representatives, given the toxicity of the debate surrounding the bill, and predicted that lawmakers will view the eventual signing of the legislation as their “finest moment” in public service.

“Now it falls on the United States Senate to take the baton and bring this effort to the finish line on behalf of the American people. And I’m absolutely confident that they will,” said Obama.

Conveniently however, Obama made no reference to the Stupak-Pitts amendment in his remarks.

The Stupak-Pitts amendment will prohibit federal funds from being used for abortion services in any health exchange, public or private and prevents private insurance companies from receiving government subsidies if they cover abortions.

Many Health Care bill advocates, in an effort to bamboozle woman in to supporting this bill, are currently trying to sell a line of BULL CRAP saying that federal funding of abortion is already covered in current law and this amendment changes nothing.

But this is NOT the truth, as currently most private insurers cover reproductive health related services and that practice would cease if Stupak’s amendment remains in a finalized version of any legislation.

Those advocates are also saying that women could purchase a separate, single service rider to cover abortion related expenses. But no woman plans for an UNPLANNED pregnancy or one that has serious complications that would ultimately call for an abortion.

Under the mandates of the House version of the Health Care Bill all American citizens will be FORCED to participate, but women who are currently covered with reproductive health services under their current policies will now be FORCED to pay more for those services. This despite President Obama repeatedly saying, “If you like your health plan, you can keep it, the only thing that will change is that you’ll pay less.”

Right-wingers are hailing the passage of the Stupak measure “as a victory for the pro-life Americans across this country who have flooded Congress this week with the message that abortion does not belong in health care.”

The Human Rights Campaign is taking no notice of at all of the passage of Stupak on it web site and is saying the House Bill “a tremendous advance for the health needs of LGBT people,” conveniently ignoring the fact the “L” in LGBT are women who are being stripped of rights by this “tremendous advance.”

There are rumors on Capitol Hill that President Obama promised Henry Waxman Saturday that he will “personally” work to remove the Stupak language in conference…

From experience… I am sure Obama will “personally” work on Stupak the same way he has so far “personally” worked on the repeal of DOMA and DADT.

Over the weekend I have talked to many in the LBGT community trying to enlist their support in defeating Stupak… Unfortunately most have told me that while they don’t like Stupak and think it is wrong, they are willing to accept Stupak if it gets them a health care bill and a win for Obama ….

Many have told me I need to look at the bigger picture on this issue

Easy enough to say since many of those folks saying this will never have a need of or even the possibility to need any of the services being taken away from women by Stupak. And they need me to pay for THEIR health care.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Strict Abortion Ban Included In House Health Care Bill (huffingtonpost.com)

11/03/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Bob McDonnell is projected to win the governor’s race in Virginia. It was not unexpected since Craigh Deeds ran a weak campaign and was not liked in upstate Virginia. McDonnell was expected to win despite the surfacing of a variety of problematic views from his past including rather severe views on LGBT rights. The turnout was light, and had little to do with President Barack Obama. The turnout was largely in the direction of the Republican base, and the Democrats were not largely energized.

Deeds, who comes from the south of the state, ran a campaign that did not tack towards to the President, and did not capitalize upon the popularity of Obama.

The turnout was largely in the direction of older, more conservative voters. Young, minority, and liberal voters did not turn out in any kind of force.

10/30/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Today, President Barack Obama extended and strengthened the coverage of HIV/AIDS in the United States by signing into law the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act. In doing so, President Obama recognized that the disease is a priority. Obama opened his remarks noting that, while Americans often focus upon the epidemic in Africa, the United States is in serious condition on this issue.

He also went further and lamented that part of the problem was that the disease was originally seen as striking only one specific part of the population. “It has been nearly three decades since this virus first became known. But for years, we refused to recognize it for what it was. It was coined a “gay disease.” Those who had it were viewed with suspicion. There was a sense among some that people afflicted by AIDS somehow deserved their fate and that it was acceptable for our nation to look the other way,” he said.

What President Obama signed was the fourth reauthorization of the bill. The program set up under the bill helps to provide individuals with the medicines and treatments they need to fight this disease.

On Monday, President Obama will issue new rules regarding travel for people with HIV/AIDS. Stating at the signing, “If we want to be the global leader in combating HIV/AIDS, we need to act like it. And that’s why, on Monday my administration will publish a final rule that eliminates the travel ban effective just
after the New Year. “

HIV/AIDS strikes millions of people irregardless of their sexual orientation. Many gay men are more likely to be tested with regards to the disease, and are, thus, more often able to catch it while many straight men tend not to be tested. This is what likely accounts for the disparity in numbers with regards to which group has the most cases.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama On Ending The HIV Ban (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• PUNCH: Obama Lifts Ban for HIV-AIDS Travelers to the U.S. (blogs.abcnews.com)
• Obama Just Killed HIV Travel Ban (Updated) (queerty.com)
• Obama to lift HIV entry ban soon (news.bbc.co.uk)

Bishop E. W. Jackson Sr., who leads Exodus Faith Ministries in Chesapeake, Va., says that while he’s against anti-gay violence, he also opposes homosexuality and wants to be free to preach against it, as reported in the Virginian-Pilot. While reading this I am clear that the smiling Bishop and I clearly do not share the same Adonai. His comments were made in conjunction with President Obama’s signing of the Mathew Shepard Hate Crime Act into law, yesterday. Jackson stated that federal legislation defining attacks on gays and lesbians as “hate crimes” will stifle religious freedom.

I say – if stifling religious freedom saves lives, so be it!

Jackson told the newspaper he fears religious leaders could be prosecuted for inciting anti-gay violence, even though the legislation — expected to be signed Wednesday by President Barack Obama — contains language meant to preclude prosecution of religious leaders and others on the basis of speech or beliefs.

I say – let the chips fall where they may!

“We could find ourselves in a situation where we’re accused of inciting someone,” Jackson said. “I am categorically opposed to the hate crimes bill.”

I ask -Why did he not come out against Hate Crimes before sexual orientation was included?

Thank my Adonai for the solace I find in the voice of Rev. Steve Jolly of Freemason Street Baptist Church in Norfolk’s who disagrees, telling the Virginian-Pilot: “If I stand up in the pulpit and say the consumption of alcohol is evil and we should pour it all in the river, that’s a personal opinion. That’s very different from saying, ‘There’s a bar down the road; let’s break in and pour all the alcohol into the river.’”

But I must say – people like the BISHOP – scare me still! Has he considered that the Hate Crimes ACT protects lesbians like me from people like him? His intent is clear and I am pleased to recall my law school lesson where I learnt mens rea is mens rea!

Refs: http://blackchristiannews.com/news/2009/10/virginia-pastor-says-hate-crimes-bill-stifles-religion.html

Blogged by MELANIE NATHAN, of Private Courts, Inc. Consulting, mediation & private advocacy; motivated by injustice, I blog about family, law, mediation, politics, news and LGBT equality and anything that ‘tickles my fancy.’ Otherwise blogging as O-blog-dee-o-blog-da. Websites and blogs include: http://www.privatecourts.com; http://www.divorcemediators.us; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com. nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama Signs Historic Federal LGBT Hate Crimes Legislation (towleroad.com)
• Obama Signs Matthew Shepard/James Byrd Hate Crimes Bill into Law (bilerico.com)
• “No More Matthew Shepards,” Ctd (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• Judy Shepard’s Statement on Hate Crimes Legislation (mombian.com)

10/29/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Yesterday, President Barack Obama signed into law the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crime Prevention bill. The law was named for two men who were the victims of crimes due to their sexual orientation (Shepard) and race (Byrd). The law extended the hate crimes protections to sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, and disability. It also removed the provision from existing laws that these protections are intended specifically for people who are engaged in activities that are considered Federal in nature such as attending school or going to court.

In released statements following the signing, President Obama stated “This is the culmination of a struggle that has lasted more than a decade…But the cause endured and the struggle continued, waged by the family of Matthew Shepard, by the family of James Byrd, by folks who held vigils and led marches, by those who rallied and organized and refused to give up, by the late Senator Ted Kennedy who fought so hard for this legislation and all who toiled for years to reach this day.” The President ran down the statistics for the last decade. In that time, 12,000 known hate crimes have been perpetrated based upon the assaulted’s sexual orientation. Roughly 7,600 hate crimes of one form or another occur every year.

“At root, this isn’t just about our laws; this is about who we are as a people. This is about whether we value one another — whether we embrace our differences, rather than allowing them to become a source of animus…But we sense where such cruelty begins: the moment we fail to see in another our common humanity — the very moment when we fail to recognize in a person the same fears and hopes, the same passions and imperfections, the same dreams that we all share,” the President went on to say.

Said Judy Shepard, Matthew’s mother and the president of the Matthew Shepard Foundation Board of Directors. “The legislation went through so many versions and so many votes that we had to constantly keep our hopes in check to keep from getting discouraged,” she continued. “But with President Obama’s support and the continually growing bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate lining up behind the bill this year, it became clear that 2009 was the year it would finally happen.”

Shepard added, “We are incredibly grateful to Congress and the president for taking this step forward on behalf of hate crime victims and their families, especially given the continuing attacks on people simply for living their lives openly and honestly.”

At the signing was Representative Tammy Baldwin. Rep. Baldwin is openly lesbian, and one of the first openly gay or lesbian members of Congress to be elected. She and Jared Polis were both elected after coming out. Representative Barney Frank did not come out of the closet until after he had already won election. Baldwin is also the co-chair of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus. She said this about the death of Matthew Shepard on the day of the signing of the bill that, in part, bears his name, “I remember where I was and what was happening when the news of Matthew Shepard’s murder began to circulate. I remember how many people I encountered who felt scared and frightened themselves because such a heinous attack had been perpetrated against him because of his sexual orientation. It is high time that this Act become law. It has been an effort that I’ve worked on ever since I came to the Congress of the United States, and I think it will send a very powerful message.”

Below is a video from Rep. Baldwin regarding the passage of the Matthew Shepard Act.

10/29/09-by Paula Brooks
NPR is reporting that while most of us were sleeping, President Barack Obama went to look upon the real cost of the war in Afghanistan as he journeyed in the pre-dawn darkness to Dover (Del.) Air Force Base to honor the return of 18 fallen American heroes…. All were killed in Afghanistan this week.

AP is saying that, “The dramatic image of a president on the tarmac was a portrait not witnessed in years. Former President George W. Bush spent lots of time with grieving military families but never went to Dover to meet the remains coming off the cargo plane. Obama did so with the weight of knowing he may soon send more troops off to war.”

The solemn process of transferring remains of 15 soldiers and three Drug Enforcement Agency agents unfolded in four separate movements. Obama took part in all of them. as a chaplain offered prayers for the fallen, the crews that brought them home, the families who lost a loved one, and a nation embroiled in war.

President Obama Pays His Respects As Fallen Americans Return Home – The Two-Way – Breaking News, Analysis Blog : NPR.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Obama honors fallen soldiers at Dover (msnbc.msn.com)
• Obama Heads To Dover Air Force Base To Honor Fallen Soldiers (huffingtonpost.com)
• Obama honours Afghanistan killed (news.bbc.co.uk)

10/28/09-by Paula Brooks
10 years ago Wyoming college student Matthew Shepard was brutally attacked and murdered because he was gay, today, President Obama signed into law the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act, critical legislation that strengthens existing U.S. laws by extending federal hate crime protection in cases where the victim was targeted because of their sexual orientation, gender, disability, or gender identity.

In front of an East Room audience that included, Vice President Joseph Biden, Attorney General Eric Holder, Members of Congress, Department of Defense senior civilian and military officials, the Shepherd and Byrd families, Mrs. Vicki Kennedy, and members of the Kennedy family, Obama said before signing the bill, “After more than a decade of opposition we passed inclusive hate crimes legislation to help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray or who they are.”

The new law will also permit federal authorities to assist local governments in hate crime investigations and increase their capacity through training programs.

“This law honors our lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender brothers and sisters whose lives were cut short because of hate,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “Today’s signing of the first major piece of civil rights legislation to protect LGBT Americans represents a historic milestone in the inevitable march towards equality. Although this is a major step in fighting the scourge of hate violence, it is not the end of the road. As a community, we will continue to dedicate ourselves to changing not only laws but also hearts and minds. We know that hate crimes not only harm individuals, but they terrorize entire communities. After more than a decade of advocacy, local police and sheriffs’ departments now have the full resources of the Justice Department available to them.”

As a lesbian all I can say is… I am crying as I type this article, because I feel like I am finally on the way to being a citizen in my own country…

Related articles by Zemanta

• Mother finds solace in hate crimes bill (cnn.com)
• The Gay Hate Crimes Crisis Isn’t Over Yet (bilerico.com)

10/27/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
The White House announced today that President Obama would hold two White House signing ceremonies tomorrow for the FY 10 defense authorization bill.

After a signing ceremony for the $680 billion defense-spending bill in the White House Rose Garden, the President will host a second event on a new law attached to the defense bill, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

That act will make it a federal crime to assault a person because of his or her sexual orientation, disability or gender identity and is named for Matthew Shepard, a gay teenager from Wyoming who was tied to a fence and beaten to death and James Byrd. Jr., a black man from Texas who was tied to a pick-up track and dragged to death.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates and members of Congress will attend the actual defense bill signing ceremony, the later tomorrow evening the President will host a reception to commemorate the enactment of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

Obama is also scheduled to deliver brief remarks around 6:05 PM, and will be joined by Attorney General Eric Holder, civil rights community leaders and others.

10/13/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
President Barack Obama is not the Dictator in Chief no matter how much people would like him to be. He cannot wave a wand and repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell or the Defense of Marriage Act without Congress passing new laws. It is unfortunate, and a point often overlooked. That said, there certainly is a lot more that President Obama can do including lobbying Congress to get these laws pushed through faster while other pieces of legislation are worked on. Jon Stewart is certainly correct on that point. DADT and DOMA are small compared to winning a century’s long battle for healthcare equality.

After President Obama’s speech on Saturday, many people weighed in complaining about how he could do more. They forget that the Congress in the guises of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid can do more as well. There comes a point where the battle is not going to be won without taking risks, and unfortunately, Pelosi and Reid are not taking risks. The people who will be angered by a repeal of DADT and DOMA will not vote for the Democrats anyway. It is time to stop hiding and hoping that they support us and go for it. We have the advantage, we should use it. Make it clear that they do not have to vote for the bill, but only for cloture. Stop acting as if, somehow, someway, the Conservative…really the Reactionaries in this country are going to support the Democrats, and pass these laws.

What follows is a news roundup of the coverage of the President’s speech. Please enjoy.

10/12/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Apparently, I did not get the memo when I was a minute and a half old that, when I grew up to be a full participatory member of the LGBT Community, I must follow lock step behind the political beliefs of someone I had never met, and likely would never meet. Not even all gays, lesbians and transpeople are in agreement over whether or not we need to repeal certain laws even though most do agree on that. We do not agree on what should come first marriage rights or employment rights. We do not even seem to agree on whether or not to have nights where we all just gather in one place and socialize.

A recent opinion piece at the Daily Beast by Jacob Bernstein sought to show the world in a very horrified tone that the LGBT Community was, well, not unified. Anyone living within the LGBT Community could have told them that, as could our allies, and even many of our detractors. The fact that, by some estimates, as many as 150,000 gays, lesbians, transpeople and their allies marched in Washington, DC this weekend is a triumph in and of itself. While there was no unity in the support for President Barack Obama, there was a unity of purpose.

No Civil Rights movement is ever unified. I do not believe that Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X ever sat down and said “ok, we’re going to all march peacefully in the streets until we get what we want.” Instead, the two had different philosophies and different views on how to achieve a set of goals that overlapped, but were not even themselves unified. There was not even agreement over whether or not to push hard to change the establishment. Some people even pushed for a slow, gradual change to the system rather than a more liberal or radical push for equality.

Representative Barney Frank, for instance, comes from a generation which is, let us face it, not the most active when it comes to the fight for equality, but also he comes from within Congress and has a very different view of what we should be doing. There are people who agree with him, and there always will be. There are also a lot of people who disagree with him, and there always will be. Rep. Frank comes from a generation where being openly gay, lesbian or transsexual was, honestly, not something that was expected, and it was quite dangerous. Mr. Frank is not openly gay by his own choice. He was forced out of the closet due to a scandal back in the 1980’s. He is unlike Representatives Tammy Baldwin and Jared Polis who were elected after coming out. I know, it is hard to imagine that a person from a time when one stayed silent about ones sexuality or gender identity would be excited about the rally on Sunday.

To a certain extent, Representative Frank is right in that a rally like Sunday’s does little to lobby Congress, but there are things that it does that are more important than that. For all our disagreements, and all our lack of unity, what it shows is that we are not singular. We stand as a group. The LGBT Community is, quite honestly, not a community. There are precious few neighborhoods where you can walk in and see someone just like yourself mowing the lawn or walking down the street. We are not like the African-American Community, the Latino Community, the Asian Community with a ready made structure of community. We have always been, at best, a collection of small groups and individuals. We do not have a unified set of cultural icons, and we do not have a unified history in the same manner as other minorities. The idea of a hundred and fifty thousand gays, lesbians and transpeople with their allies standing together calling for equality will have some impact. It means that we are visible.

There are divisions in the LGBT Community. Gays, lesbians, and transpeople do not always get along as internal groups within the larger Community. Racial minorities within the LGBT Community often do not get the same kind of representation as whites do. We are an imperfect group, but we are a group seeking to gain respect and a right to live our lives as we see fit. We are not some stereotype.

The showmanship, the Madonna-esque nature of some of the performances, as Mr. Bernstein said, are not out of place in a massive rally like this. This is not the floor of the Congress, but rather a rally where, quite bluntly, people expect red meat (except for our vegan friends) speeches designed to lift the spirit and provide a unifying sense of who we are.

What is more, there is a reason that Mr. Bernstein overlooked as to why we, as a Community, are not fully behind Healthcare reform because of HIV/AIDS, and it has to do with the reality. It is hardly a unifying or even unique experience. The percentage of gay men with HIV/AIDS is higher than the numbers among lesbians, and the overall number of heterosexuals with HIV/AIDS outnumbers both. It is not our issue, it is everyone’s issue, and the sooner people, especially politicians, realize that the better. It concerns us, yes, and it should concern everyone, but it does not define us.

And, to Meghan McCain, no, we as a community have not given President Obama a free pass on his promises. By saying as much, Ms McCain, you put yourself into the same category as the other Obama naysayers such as Rush Limbaugh and the cast of FOX News. Some of us are here every day pushing President Obama and Congress to repeal discriminatory laws or to pass those that grant us greater protections. Some of us have greater patience than others, but very few of us are giving him or Pelosi and Reid a free pass on any of these issues. I certainly am not. While I am more patient than most and more understanding of the process than is typical, I am not going to sit here and not voice my belief that we need to get our rights. I am not going to say to our President, sir you can walk all over me if you want, so please, Ms McCain, do not think that we are. It is rather insulting to those of us who fight this every day that you who have been a great supporter of our rights would pull this kind of crap. Just because one group (who were not fully unified behind him either) applauded him and let him speak at their dinner does not qualify as rewarding him.

Ms McCain, do not expect that you will get a free pass either.

The LGBT Community is not a unified group, nor should it be. We should not all be expected to walk lock step behind every single person who ‘leads’ us. Even those of us who adore President Obama grow impatient with the delays, and we want action. We want to know that we are not forgotten, or ignored.

This is not the fight of that occupied much of the middle of the last century. This is about civil rights, not political rights, and it will take little to end the de facto (legalized) homophobia and transphobia of the government so that the du jour (informal) homophobia and transphobia can begin to be addressed.

picture of Meghan McCain via Wikipedia

From Melanie Nathan
To Joe Solmonese

October 11, 2009

Dear Joe,

This morning, as expected, I received your email, Joe Solmonese from HRC, and your promise “ In the days and weeks ahead we’ll move quickly to capitalize on this momentum?” What momentum may I ask? What did the President say that provides this so called momentum? Are you asking me to accept a campaign speech as momentum?

Last night was an amazing accomplishment having the President speak at your fundraiser dinner; his speech was supportive, motivating and awe inspiring and I was quite moved by the validation, especially after being so let down by President Clinton signing DOMA into law and the passage of Prop 8 here in California. After so many years of fighting, we get a resounding nod out of Washington. SADLY though, the validation for those 37 minutes was short lived as when the ‘rah rah’ was over the reality set in; words, words and more words- and what about marriage?

While writing my BLOG last night, I found myself being both critical and grateful at the same time entitled I AM HERE WITH YOU IN THAT FIGHT and yet I give as much as the law allows?) Tossing and turning between the emphatic stance and the inadequacy of the detail, it left me wondering… how does this all translate into action? Where will it go? Any quicker than thus far and what about the big cop-out, the part that the pundits, activists, bloggers, commentators seem to have missed this weekend or have chosen not to mention= the OVERT no to marriage equality cleverly embedded in the speech. The fob off that you call momentum?

We wanted to hear it all – he gave a tidbit and you call that momentum? Was I the only one who hears those words “as much as the law allows?” Joe the LAW DOES NOT ALLOW! and you call that momentum? Now we hear lets wait and see what happens when we look back in 2017? Joe, do you expect us to sit back and wait for your timetable and only get as much as the law allows -the big and constant zero?

Joe, the chutzpah! You brazenly center your˜DONATE NOW” button on the email you sent me – as you ask for mysupport for you to, in your words ˜capitalize on this momentum.” You are asking us to pay you to condone the most significant and yet painful aspect of the speech “where the President expressly pronounced us ˜separate but equal!

that this speech worked in direct contradiction to our champion Jerrold Nadler’s recent introduction of the respect for marriage Act?

Joe, what momentum? One where we agree to no marriage? Carpe Diem everyone – look what we got out of our dinner comfirmation – NO MARRIAGE ! Lets celebrate and give HRC more money yeah…. is that what you are sking us to do Joe?

I certainly hope not. Before you ask for our money can you tell us your plan and your thoughts and where you think this is going? Lets see if we agree. Lets see if the community at large agrees with your strategy. Can you please tell us what you think of this Domestic partners Act as a condition for our federal benefits.

Unless you go for the ALL and consult grass-root communities about strategy, and become more inclusive in your process, ” you will not get my money! I am spending my money to get to D.C. myself, to lobby for what I want for me, my family and my community and that is nothing short of full equality, one where my marriage is legal and respected, and which will grant me the exact benefits that all heterosexual married couples in US receive. I do not want to be a victim of “as much as the law allows.” I certainly will not endorse the underlying qualification that if we accept anything less than marriage equality, we are in fact endorsing no boundary between church and state. I simply refuse to do that!

I challenge all of you who are inclined to donate to the patronizing promoters of anything less than FULL equality, to take those hard earned dollars and some hours or days of your working time and to show up in D.C. at the offices of your own Representatives to tell them what you want. We must tell out stories ourselves and stop depending on these self appointed leaders who purport to speak for us all. We must go to DC now and ask for the unconditional REPEAL OF DOMA, during this 111^th congress through the Respect for Marriage Act, introduced by Jerrold Nadler last month. We finally have our vehicle and I have yet to hear HRC strategy on this one.

There were about 250,000 people at the March. Can you imagine the impact if another 250,000 of us showed up at the doors of our respective reps asking what they are doing about DOMA and RMA? My experience in D.C. has taught me that the organizations are viewed for the most part as ‘nudgers’ and with some disdain, while constituents are the most important people to the congressional representatives. They want your stories and they need your stories. So get creative and get out there ” yourselves, individually or in groups. Cause mayhem if need be! Its enough! Its enough!

FYI Joes email to me and probably you too
” Original Message “

From: Joe Solmonese, Human Rights Campaign

To: nathan@privatecourts.com

Sent: Sunday, October 11, 2009 7:13 AM

Subject: Obama speaks at HRC last night: watch the video

Dear Melanie,Just hours ago, President Obama took the podium at HRC’s National Dinner to talk directly to the LGBT community and our many friends and allies. Find out what Obama said ” and be sure to share the news with your friends Today, thousands of people are marching on Washington to demand LGBT equality.And last night, President Obama told LGBT Americans that his commitment to ending discrimination in the military, in the workplace and for loving couples and their families is œunwavering” He made it crystal clear that he is our strongest ally in this fight, that he understands and, in fact, encourages our activism and our voice even when were impatient with the pace of change.And we heard unequivocally about the repeal of Dont Ask, Dont Tell:I am working with the Pentagon, its leadership and members of the House and Senate to end this policy. I will end Don Ask, Dont Tell. That is my commitment to you.Finally, we heard something quite remarkable from the President: You will see a time in which we as a nation finally recognize relationships between two men and two women as just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman.It was an historic night when we felt the full embrace and commitment of the President of the United States. It’s simply unprecedented.In the days and weeks ahead we’ll move quickly to capitalize on this momentum. But right now, please watch what President Obama had to say, share this email with your friends, and know that your commitment means that were much closer to attaining real equality and protecting millions of Americans: http://www.hrcactioncenter.org/site/Ecard?ecard_id=1061 Thank you for being part of this historic fight with us. Warmly, Joe Solmonese President

Blogged by, MELANIE NATHAN, CEO of Private Courts, Inc. – Consulting, mediation & private advocacy ; motivated by injustice, I blog about family law/mediation, politics, news and LGBT equality and anything that ‘tickles my fancy.’ Otherwise blogging as O-blog-dee-o-blog-da. Websites and blogs include: http://www.privatecourts.com; http://www.divorcemediators.us; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com. CONTACT:- nathan@privatecourts.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• The Battered Wife Syndrome Of The Human Rights Campaign (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• Obama’s Gay Outreach: All Talk, No Action (time.com)

10/11/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire
Last night, President Barack Obama gave the keynote speech at the Human Rights Campaign dinner. For those who are interested, the video follows. “For nearly 30 years, you’ve advocated on behalf of those without a voice. That’s not easy. For despite the real gains that we’ve made, there’s still laws to change and there’s still hearts to open. There are still fellow citizens, perhaps neighbors, even loved ones — good and decent people — who hold fast to outworn arguments and old attitudes; who fail to see your families like their families; who would deny you the rights most Americans take for granted. And that’s painful and it’s heartbreaking.”

President Obama in his speech told the LGBT Community as a whole that it is not his place to tell us to be patient any more than it was the right of others to tell the African-American community to be patient half a century ago.

Not missing an opportunity to point out that the administration is working on those issues that touch upon our lives that are not directly related to the shared identity of being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual. He also pointed out that “And while progress may be taking longer than you’d like as a result of all that we face — and that’s the truth — do not doubt the direction we are heading and the destination we will reach.” Though, as pointed out by Jon Stewart recently, some of the LGBT issues seem trivial and easily handled when compared to the enormity of the other issues facing the country.

He singled out the loss felt by the Shepards, and announced quite clearly that he will sign the bill named for their son, Matthew. “Together, we will have moved closer to that day when no one has to be afraid to be gay in America. When no one has to fear walking down the street holding the hand of the person they love.”

Speaking of the Employee Non Discrimination Act, President Obama stated frankly that he wants that bill passed, and made mention of recent attacks on a gay member of his staff by saying, “and it’s for this reason that if any of my nominees are attacked not for what they believe but for who they are, I will not waver in my support, because I will not waver in my commitment to ending discrimination in all its forms.”
The President went on to state that he has called upon the Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (his words).

President Barack Obama made the same point that I once made to a professor when he made this point “But these issues also go to the heart of who we are as a people. Are we a nation that can transcend old attitudes and worn divides? Can we embrace our differences and look to the hopes and dreams that we share? Will we uphold the ideals on which this nation was founded: that all of us are equal, that all of us deserve the same opportunity to live our lives freely and pursue our chance at happiness? I believe we can; I believe we will.”

The fight for rights is about empathy, as President Obama mentioned, but he also called upon us to continue to pressure him and others to change the laws. Because they are laws, of course, President Obama and his staff can lobby for those changes, but he is, of course, limited to what a President can do regarding them. He closed with this: “day by day, law by law, changing mind by mind, that is the promise we are fulfilling.”

Below is the speech, please give it a listen. It is a long video.