Still in NYC, had a really interesting weekend. Went to see The Ritz, a revival of an old comedy set in a gay bathhouse in NYC. It was cute (I'm a tough sell on comedies), with lots of eye candy and some excellent acting. Starred Kevin Chamberlin (who was great) and Rosie Perez, and included an outstanding performance by Patrick Kerr (who previously played Noel, the geeky dark-haired officemate in love with Roz on "Frasier"). I got to meet Rosie Perez after the show, and then go to dinner with Chamblerlin and Kerr and some mutual friends. Just the nicest guys. Kerr in particular was just fascinating, I got to speak with him for a long while over dinner. It's so interesting to talk to people who don't do politics for a living.
It was funny — I was recognized by a few folks along the parade route (for the blog). I guess next year I should march with a Pam's House Blend banner, but it would look kind of silly with just me and a sign, unless I could rustle up a few Blenders to march.
Anyway, we had a few fundie protestors again. It was hilarious. For your amusement, I took some video of the protestors from Operation Save America. They were the truly unhinged amateur hour crowd.
Photos and a short clip of former Village People singer Randy Jones are over at my pad. Talk about a blast from the past…
***
ENDA
John's posted on it, but if you want to read my take on the ENDA dustup, there are posts over at my pad to check out.
On Friday I happened to be in DC at the Out and Equal Workplace Summit -- right when the ENDA issue blew up. I was slated to appear on a panel that was relevant to the developments -- Workplace Equality in the American Spotlight -- so it was definitely apt timing to talk about the issue of trans inclusion with attendees charged with inclusion and diversity in corporate America. My post on the conference is here.
For the past couple days, there has been a roving rally here in Washington to support the movement for democracy in Burma. Chris has been writing almost daily posts about the anti-government protests in that country. The protesters in DC, led by monks, have marched to the Burmese, Chinese and Indian embassies. The Washington Post profiled the Burmese exile community today.
I caught up with the protest today in front of the Indian embassy where they stopped en route to the White House. There was something very powerful about seeing a group of Burmese monks protesting next to a statue of Gandhi -- in front of the embassy of India, the world's largest democracy, which Ganhdi helped create. Gandhi's statue includes the inscription "My life is my message." The Burmese people could use some of India's moral authority and democratic ideals right about now.
Last week, it was Hillary Clinton. This week, it's Bill (although he's not doing all five of them). Gingrich, who was running for Prez, but now isn't, is also on a couple shows. Beside them, it's an eclectic mix on the shows today. When was the last time anyone say Kit Bond on a weekend show? Bob Geiger, who knows the Senate better than anyone, told me anytime he saw Bond's name in the Congressional record, it was going to be something absurd and/or bizarre.
Oversight has never seemed so far away. The most pathetic story by a corporate PR spinmeister churned out in a long time leaves me just shaking my head in amazement:
"Because the health and safety of our consumers is our top priority, we are taking these expansive measures," said Vice President of Operations Geoffrey Livermore in the statement.
Um, if "health and safety of our consumers" was so important the problem of E. Coli would not be so widespread both in this recall and the industry in general. The problem consistently comes back to rushed processing and businesses that are more attentive to cost savings then to the end result delivered to consumers.
Since coming back to Paris at the start of September I've been missing warm weather so checking out photos from Sinai are helping take the edge off of the rather cool temperatures. Abu Galum is a Bedouin fishing village along the Gulf of Aqaba that is thankfully not connected to the overdone and high-hassle town of Dahab so transport to Abu Galum is an hour plus camel ride along the sea. A very pleasant view and nice diving - they actually have fish, compared to Dahab! - though I never really adjusted to sitting on a camel and felt it for days, with the salt water not helping the process.
If only there were more like him who weren't afraid to speak out like this. On Zimbabwe:
"The stories we are hearing of the harassment of political opponents, detentions without trial, torture and the denial of medical attention are reminiscent of our experiences at the hands of apartheid police," said Tutu, who was a leader of the struggle against South Africa's whites-only rule.
Yesterday morning, Bruce Springsteen did a concert on the TODAY Show. It was, of course, fantastic. In the intro to his new song, Living in the Future, Bruce gave one of the best -- and most succinct political speeches I've heard in awhile. He said, "This is a song about things that shouldn't happen here happening here." And, he listed some of those things.
My good pal, Taylor Marsh, got the video. Worth a watch on a Saturday night:
And the delightful folks at the Gap don't even think that it's important enough to provide any details. Sure, what could really happen with Social Security numbers and contact details? Sheesh, some people need to learn how to relax and put blind faith in a company that is too stupid to protect personal data because they've already proven themselves to be so competent with safeguarding information but are happy to pass the buck to a subcontractor which they are responsible for regardless of the buck passing.
The big tease. Yesterday, Newt was leading the Republicans to believe he was going to run for president. The GOPers are desperate because the presidential field is so pathetic. Newt was their next big hope. But, Newt's campaign is already over:
Former U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Saturday decided against running for president in 2008, less than a day after the Republican indicated publicly that he would spend the next month exploring the viability of a White House bid.
Gingrich said the last-minute change of heart, which came as aides readied the newtnow.org website and prepared to file campaign papers, was the result of legal advice that running for president would require stepping down as chairman of his non-profit organization, American Solutions.
That group is the latest vehicle for Gingrich's musings about politics and policy, and opened its first-annual "ideas summit" Saturday at a Georgia college an hour west of Atlanta and with webcasts on the internet.
Yes, American Solutions is apparently bigger platform for Newt than running to be the American President.
BAGHDAD, Sept 28 -- Five eyewitnesses to a Sept. 16 shooting incident in Baghdad involving the private security firm Blackwater USA insisted that company guards fired without provocation, forcing civilians and Iraqi police to run for cover, and that the Iraqi officers did not return fire.
The eyewitnesses and a senior Iraqi police official close to an investigation of the incident contradicted initial accounts provided by the company and the State Department, which employs Blackwater to protect U.S. diplomats. At least 11 Iraqis died in the shootings, which have focused attention on the actions of largely unregulated security companies operating in Iraq.
Big news in the Washington Post. Really big news. They have a front page article about Jenna Bush because she is getting married -- and wrote a book. Wow. No other real news for the Post to cover. So, Jenna gets front page. I'm not even going to link because it's so not worth it.
I'm heading out for a long run. Only four weeks til the Marine Corps Marathon.
Reports continue to vary with some saying 9 dead and others, including British PM Gordon Brown, believe it is much, much higher. With a steady stream of blogs reporting on the violent government crackdown, the junta responded by shutting down the internet in addition to arresting hundreds (thousands?) of monks and containing monks to their monasteries. Other reports suggested divisions within the military - even two units fighting each other - though today current reports suggest calm and lack of protest.
The new battle at the moment is over corporate involvement in Myanmar such as US and French oil companies Chevron and Total who both continue to operate. Some are calling for them to stop all operations or to pull out completely, requests which have been rejected. I would certainly not consider myself to be supportive of the oil industry though I wonder if it is not better to have some inroads into such a country which can be used to exert influence. The very strong counter argument is that if you do have influence you have to actually use it. So far there are no overt signs of China or India using any of their influence and they are the two countries who have the most interaction with the reclusive government. As for Chevron and Total, when was the last time we saw an oil company stand up for human rights? Yea, I can't recall such an event either.
Partially rescued, at least. But hey, it's the 1980s all over again! Now how did a savings and loan collapse manage to somehow - mysteriously, really - not get mentioned until late in the day on a Friday? Do they have a loyal Bushie working there or something? It's not exactly a Northern Rock-like failure but it's not insignificant either. At issue with the failed NetBank is over-exposure to loan defaults. Customers have the standard $100,000 FDIC guarantee but it is not clear what happens with deposits that were above that amount though the bank has been purchased by Dutch giant ING.
While dozens of mortgage companies have closed due to soaring defaults of home loans made to borrowers with weak, or subprime, credit, those problems previously had occurred among non-bank lenders such as New Century Financial Corp. NetBank, in contrast, is federally regulated.
Loose mortgage standards in recent years — especially among lenders catering to subprime borrowers — have resulted in a spike in home loan defaults.
Bert Ely, a banking consultant based in Alexandria, Va., said NetBank was in "deep trouble" before the subprime mortgage market's woes accelerated this year. Regulators, he said, "should have closed it a long time ago."
"Regulators?" What regulators? The GOP has made sure such old-fashioned ideas such as oversight and regulation were made a thing of the past.
Earlier this week, Tom Allen stood up for free speech and America's soldiers when he voted against the ridiculous resolution condemning the MoveOn newspaper ad. Just got this email from him on Limbaugh's slam against the troops:
I support all the troops, regardless of their position on the war. The men and women of our armed forces and their families have sacrificed a lot, and done everything that was asked of them. It is time to bring them home.
Tom is a great Congressman, but we really need that kind of sensibility in the U.S. Senate. While Susan Collins continues to do the bidding of George Bush, Tom has had a consistent message: We need to end the war. He didn't support the war in 2002, he doesn't support it now.
So, everyone's getting hit up because the FEC fundraising quarter ends of Sunday. But, if you're thinking of making a contribution to Tom Allen so he can beat Susan Collins, you really should do it now. The early money matters -- and in Maine, every dollar will go a long way.
AMERICAblog has an ActBlue page for Tom. Send him some early money so Maine can send him to the Senate. This is money well spent.
Openly gay Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) released a statement about ENDA this afternoon. It's long, but read it:
Being in the legislative minority is easy – pulling together to block bad things does not require a lot of agonizing over tough decisions. Being in the majority is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, we have the ability to move forward in a positive way on important public policy goals. Detracting from that is the fact that it is never possible for us at any given time to get everything that we would like, and so we have to make difficult choices. But it is important to remember that the good part of this greatly outweighs the bad. Going from a situation in which all we can do is to prevent bad things from happening to one in which we have to decide exactly how much good is achievable and what strategic choices we must make to get there is a great advance.
The current manifestation of this is the difficult set of decisions we face regarding the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. We are on the verge of an historic victory that supporters of civil rights have been working on for more than thirty years: the passage for the first time in American history by either house of Congress of legislation declaring it illegal to discriminate against people in employment based on their sexual orientation. Detracting from the sense of celebration many of us feel about that is regret that under the current political situation, we do not have sufficient support in the House to include in that bill explicit protection for people who are transgender. The question facing us – the LGBT community and the tens of millions of others who are active supporters of our fight against prejudice – is whether we should pass up the chance to adopt a very good bill because it has one major gap. I believe that it would be a grave error to let this opportunity to pass a sexual orientation nondiscrimination bill go forward, not simply because it is one of the most important advances we’ll have made in securing civil rights for Americans in decades, but because moving forward on this bill now will also better serve the ultimate goal of including people who are transgender than simply accepting total defeat today.
When the bill banning sexual orientation discrimination was first introduced by Bella Abzug and Paul Tsongas more than thirty years ago, it was a remote hope. Over time because of a good deal of work, education of the general public, and particularly the decision by tens of millions of gay and lesbian people over that time to be honest about our sexual orientation, we have finally reached the point where we have a majority in the House ready to pass this bill. Those of us who are sponsoring it had hoped that we could also include in the prohibition discrimination based on gender identity. This is a fairly recent addition to the fight, and part of the problem we face is that while there have been literally decades of education of the public about the unfairness of sexual orientation discrimination and the inaccuracy of the myths that perpetuated it, our educational efforts regarding gender identity are much less far along, and given the prejudices that exist, face a steeper climb.
We introduced legislation opposing sexual orientation discrimination with explicit inclusion of gender identity for the first time this year. Earlier this session under the leadership of Speaker Pelosi, we were able to get through the House a hate crimes bill that provided protection against crimes of violence and property damage for lesbian, gay and bisexual people and people who are transgender. There was some initial resistance to the inclusion of transgender people but a very organized effort on the part of Congresswoman Baldwin, who took a major role in this, myself, and the Democratic leadership allowed us to overcome it, with the support of some of our Republican colleagues.
We then began the work on passing a transgender inclusive ENDA. I was optimistic at first that we could do this, although I knew it would be hard. One of the problems I have found over the years of discussing this is an unwillingness on the part of many, including leaders in the transgender community, to acknowledge a fact: namely that there is more resistance to protection for people who are transgender than for people who are gay, lesbian and bisexual. This is not a good fact, but ignoring bad facts is a bad way to get legislation passed. I have for some time been concerned that people in the transgender leadership were underestimating the difficulty we faced in a broadly inclusive bill being adopted.
Still this seemed to me an effort very worth trying, and, when I testified before the Education and Labor Committee on ENDA I spent much of my time explicitly addressing the need to include transgender people. In fact, I believe I spent more time on that than any other witness. Sadly, as the time approached for the vote to be taken in the Committee, we encountered a good deal of resistance. The great majority of Democrats remained committed to this, but with Republicans overwhelmingly likely to be opposed – even on hate crimes on the critical vote we were able to retain only nine Republican supporters out of two hundred Republican Members – it became clear that an amendment offered by Republicans either to omit the transgender provision altogether or severely restrict it in very obnoxious ways would pass.
Responding thoughtfully to this requires people to accept facts. Some have tried to deny this unpleasant reality. The Democratic leadership, which is in complete sympathy with a fully inclusive bill, did a special official Whip count – a poll of the Members. There had been earlier informal counts that had showed significant support for a bill that included transgender, although even these informal checks never showed that we had a majority. But Members will sometimes be inclined to give people the answers they think the people who are asking the questions want until the crunch comes. In the crunch – the official Whip count taken in contemplation of the bill – it became very clear that while we would retain a significant majority of Democrats, we would lose enough so that a bill that included transgender protection would lose if not amended, and that an anti-transgender amendment would pass.
The question then became how to proceed. There were several choices. One was to go forward with the bill understanding that an amendment would be offered to strike the transgender provision. There was a proposal to have the Democratic leadership do that in what is known as a manager’s amendment, in the hopes of avoiding a divisive roll call on the subject. But the Democratic leadership did not want to take the lead in killing a provision to which its Members are committed as a matter of principle, and in fact, given Congressional procedures, there is no way to prevent a roll call even on that. People have claimed that th
