Monday, October 30, 2006

And the Beat Goes On...

Not only have my posts gotten me called a liberal heterophobe, but now it is being implied that I believe that Gay people must prove we are people before we get rights. My comments on his blog attempt to explain my posting.

Clearly you didn't read my entire post on my blog. While did say that we should withdraw our focus on winning the right to marry in the courts, my argument was for our community to focus on real progress in Gay rights.

Specifically, I live in California where Gay people are legislatively equal to straight people (with the exception of the word marriage, alone). But there are too many places in our nation where that is not the case. In many states we can not adopt children, we have no form of domestic partnerships, and have no legal protections against hate crimes. These are real issues that need real progress.

The focus on forcing the courts to grant same-sex marriage is very much hurting our push for other, more important, equal rights. We should focus on true equality first!

In reality, what I was trying to explain with my most recent post is that while Gay people want the right to marry and deserve it, it should be placed lower on our list of priorities. The Queer community is being denied a great number of rights across this country because of our sexual orientation. Those rights are of immediate necessity to many Gays and Lesbians and should be fought for now. Marriage is of less immediate necessity but is known to infuriate many of those who oppose Gay people on even the slightest level. Instead of attempting to prevent our right to marry, they go further and attempt to withhold other rights from us.

As such, I firmly believe we should not back down from our fight to secure equal rights for all Gay men, women, and children. The word "marriage" should be a part of these rights because it is part of our equality to straight people. However, we should be smart about our struggle and fight for those things most necessary to us first.

Wednesday, October 25, 2006

A Case AGAINST Gay Marriage

No, I haven't become a straight, Christianist, homophobic operative of the religious right. Trust me, I am as Queer as I have ever been. And yes, I do think that we Gay people are totally equal to straight people and should have every equal right, including marriage. However, given the state of our nation and the Gay rights movement today, a good case can be made as to why we shouldn't be fighting for the right to marry.

Today, New Jersey made a ruling that is being touted as a precursor to Gay marriage. It is not. What the court said today is that the State of New Jersey must provide all the rights that married couples enjoy to same-sex couples. They did not, however, say that Gay people can get married. Their ruling will likely provide a system identical to California's. We are seperate and almost equal.

But if we learned anything from the civil rights movement, seperate is inherently unequal. We should be allowed to marry. But the title of this post is "A Case AGAINST Gay Marriage." We shouldn't be fighting for the right to marry.

In states where Gay marriage is likely to be legalized, we don't need it. In California, we have all the benefits of marriage that the state can give us, except for the word marriage. Soon, New Jersey will give those same rights to Gay people. Several other states have granted protections for the Queer community and a few have even protected Gay families.

Unfortunately, in many other states, Gay people have few (or no) protections. In some states, not only can't Gay people adopt children, they can lose custody of children that they adopted in other states. Until quite recently, it was illegal for Gay men to have sex in some places. As a community, Gays should be focusing on promoting the basic necessary rights for our families to survive in this world.

Gay marriage scares little old ladies in the South. It scares a lot of other people, too. The people that Andrew Sullivan calls "Christianists" get motivated by their homophobia and act on it. They vote. There is a reason why several states have gone so far as to repeal Gay rights in some places and enact constitutional bans on any form of domestic partnership or civil union between same-sex couples. Every time our community goes out there demanding the right to marry, more and more single-issue voters try to elect the Mountjoys of the world- namely homophobic " Biblical constructionists" that provide no benefit to society.

This isn't to say that we should give up the fight. Gay people should be recognized as completely equal to straight people. Instead of so loudly proclaiming that we want to marry, we should be focusing on protection for Gay people and families in places where there is none. We should be working to provide support for young people terrified to come out of the closet. We should be working to improve the public image of the Gay community.

We know that not all Gays are sexually promiscuous demons ready to molest innocent children and turn them Gay, too. AIDS is neither the Gay Cancer or a punishment from God for our evil ways. Further, we are not hated by God or doomed to spend an eternity in hell because we want to sleep with a person of the same gender. We also know that we do not simply choose to be Gay. But we haven't done a very good job of portraying all of that to those who fear us.

What we should be doing is attempt to live our lives as best we can. If we want to marry, we should find partners and live as married couples with whatever form of civil union we can get from our states and santify them with an appropriate ceremony. We should live in homes next to theirs, mow our lawns next to them, raise our children next to theirs, and invite them to our bbqs.

Then they might finally see us as people.

Monday, October 23, 2006


While I understand that many political crackheads have already submitted their ballots for the November election (I submitted mine almost a week ago), the elections are coming up. But you probably already knew that, unless, of course, you have been living under a rock for the past few months.

Here in the Land of Fruits and Nuts, we have a super-sized ballot full of ballot initiatives and statewide candidates for office. To help you make sense of the madness, allow me to give you some brief advice on your ballot.

GOVERNOR- Arnold Schwarzenegger
My endorsement absolutely goes to the Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger. He has a brilliant record on Gay rights and the economy and has proven his moderate credentials. Phil Angelides is a hack that would overtax the state and drive business away without providing any substantial improvements on Schwarzenegger's social policies.

Lt. GOVERNOR- Tom McClintock
What does a Governor Lite do anyway? Since this is a post primarily concerned with waiting for the real governor to leave the state, die, or otherwise vacate his office, it is hard to come up with a good reason to have a Lt. Gov.

A harder question to answer is who is Garamendi? McClintock is a proven conservative. While I definitely disapprove of his views on Gay rights, he is a fiscal watchdog that would do a fine job...if that had anything to do with the office of Lt. Gov. I will endorse him anyway because I really don't like the idea of a no-name Democrat keeping the seat of the Governor-in-Waiting warm.

ATTORNEY GENERAL- Chuck Poochigian
I have already posted on the reasons I am not supporting Oakland Mayor Jerry Brown for Attorney General. Despite the impact the office can have on Gay issues in California, Brown won't be tough on crime. Poochigian would be. It's that simple.

I heavily considered giving my endorsement to Bruce McPherson, but he doesn't excite me. After former SOS, Kevin Shelley screwed up and was forced into resignation from office in a cloud of shame, McPherson stepped up to the plate to be appointed SOS. Well, sort of.

I think somebody forgot to tell him he was named Secretary.

His term was marked, well, by nothing. Granted that Secretary of State is not the most exciting office in Sacramento, but he seems to have kept things going as business as usual without any remarkable innovation.

Bowen, on the other hand, is a rebel rouser that seems to want to go totally back to paper ballots. While it is good to have a healthy fear of electronic voting machines, her fear of technology borders on paranoid.

CONTROLLER- Tony Strickland
Who would be a better person to elect as the official fiscal watchdog of the state than the man who successfully sued Gray Davis? Strickland was the youngest person to ever serve in the Assembly, was a powerful force in YAF, and would be a strong leader to preside over the Board of Equalization. And his opponent? Some Democratic unknown.

I won't even pretend to have a rationale for why I am endorsing Poizner. Really, I just have a great disdain for Cruz Bustamante and his greedy ways. Cruz has spent the greater part of his adult life "earning" a paycheck in elected office. In his most recent gig, he didn't even have to do anything to keep making six-figures except wait around for a Governor to leave office...and he managed to do a poor job at that! Even more recently, Bustamante got caught taking large amounts of money from insurance companies in the form of campaign contributions. While this normally wouldn't be a big problem, he is running for a job that's sole purpose is to oversee regulations on those same companies. If that doesn't reek of impropriety, I don't know what does.

US SENATE- Dianne Feinstein
DiFi is one of my favorite politicians alive today! Sure I hate her history on gun rights and dislike her position on abortion, but she has managed to carve herself a niche as a pragmatic problemsolver. She has been a great representative of California in the US Senate to date, and I expect her to have several more good years in office. This Republican proudly supports DiFi for office.

Sunday, October 22, 2006

Berkeley College Republicans in the Wall Street Journal

On Friday, when I did my usual look through The Wall Street Journal, I saw a familiar face. Between the sketches of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Nancy Pelosi, and various other political heavyweights was the poorly drawn image of fellow Golden Bear, Josiah Prendergast, President of the Berkeley College Republicans.

Chris Page at the Cal Patriot Blog already blogged about BCR's Wall Street Journal article. Unfortunately his coverage of the article lacks any real news. We already know BCR is a big group on campus and that the conservative mindset is a novelty in the People's Republic of Berkeley. However, he asserts that Republicans are needed in Berkeley more than anywhere and that is why they are a big group. In reality, the number of Republicans on campus is more a function of the increasingly moderate to conservative makeup of the student population. But the size of the club is mostly correlated to the activities of the organization.

The Berkeley College Republicans have fun. Students like to be involved in groups that are fun. It should come as no surprise, then, when BCR posts such large numbers. Really, who doesn't like a group that has lively political debates, fantastic guest speakers, huge events attracting worldwide media coverage, ice-skating trips, parties, bar nights, and other activities when people want to organize them? They really try to have something for everyone.

Another key to the success of BCR is that they avoid really divisive topics. The members of BCR, contrary to popular belief, don't sit around and talk about how wonderful it is that we are in Iraq right now or how awful abortion is. When those sorts of topics are brought up in meetings, it is usually in a debate format with two people passionately debating the issues with formal rules followed by the questions and comments of other members.

Berkeley College Republicans can thank their own efforts for developing an organization that people want to be a part of. Good job, guys! Thanks for keeping a conservative beacon on our liberal campus!

UPDATE: Josiah Prendergast, President of BCR, has been asked to appear on Hannity & Colmes on FoxNews on Wednesday. The show will air at 6pm and 11pm, PST.

The CNBC show "Kudlow & Company" is airing a debate at 2 pm tomorrow between Josiah and a representative of the Cal Democrats regarding the November election, students inpolitics, and the future of America.

Get Those Rally Comm Kids a Cigar!

Apparently, the Big Game Week hijinks are starting a little earlier than usual this year. I couldn't be more pleased! Check out Wikipedia! Somebody (presumeably) a member of Rally Comm updated the Stanford entry with a few interesting facts.

Nobody cares more about Cal traditions, history, and spirit and the stanfurd rivalry than the good folks in the UC Rally Committee. Those kids put in long hard hours all year long to make sure all the traditions occur. Among their duties are card stunts (which Cal invented), the California Victory Cannon, the Big Game Bonfire Rally, keeping the Big C a fine shade of "King Alfred Yellow," and waving the cal flags at football games. All the while, they are running around in hideously ugly (and dirty) striped rugbys.

Let's go on a tangent for a moment, shall we? Seriously, those rugbys are ugly. And they stink. The smell is a sure testiment to the hard work that the Rally Comm kids do in that they are dirty and smell because Rally Commers are so frequently hard at work in them that they don't often get a chance to wash them properly. But there is no excuse for the ugliness. Somebody should tell them that striped rugbys went out of style in like 2002. I guess it is better than the cardigans and funny looking caps that Rally Comm members wore in ancient times. I don't have a picture of those uniforms, but check out a yearbook and take a look. The rugbys are actually an improvement. But I digress...

Go check out Wikipedia! It contains such interesting facts as stanfurd being a finishing school and it's recent losing streak to Cal.

UPDATE: It appears that the stanfurdites have gotten wise. The updates have been removed. If any of you know of any other pranks, hijinks, or other anti-stanfurd community service occurring on or around campus, please drop me a line! I won't even publish it if you don't want me to. I just hate stanfurd!


Thursday, October 19, 2006

Are You Gay? Vote GOP!

Ever since I came out of the closet (and especially since I started this blog), people have asked how I am able to reconcile being a Gay Republican. In this post, I hope to provide some explanation.

The answer is simple, but first I must explain that I am not a Gay Republican. I am a Republican and happen to be Gay. Alternatively, I am Gay and happen to be a Republican. My political beliefs do not determine my sexual orientation nor does my sexual orientation alone determine my political beliefs. In reality, many things influence my political beliefs, one of which happens to be my sexual orientation.

One major criticism of the Republican Right is that they tend to bow to Christian conservatives. It is very clear that the Religious Right doesn't tend to agree with what they term the "Homosexual Lifestyle" and often attempt to restrict the rights of Gay people. However, what the left forgets is that the American Christian movement is not a hateful group of people, on the whole. While not all of them adhere to the adage, "hate the sin not the sinner," most don't hate Gay people.

I don't hate them either! My best friend happens to be a (straight) right-wing religious Republican. I, myself, am a Christian and try to live accordingly. Like many other Christians, I don't believe that my religion should dictate my political beliefs. Similarly, I don't feel compelled to let my sexual orientation dictate my political beliefs. Sure, same-sex marriage is very important to me. Equal rights are even more important to me. But so are other social issues, the economy, gun rights, the environment, and national security. I don't pretend to agree with the GOP on every issue, but I certainly don't agree with the Democrats on many issues apart from Gay rights.

To vote Republican doesn't mean that I am self-hating. To the contrary, I am proud of being Gay! But that doesn't mean I have to vote the same way as other Gay people. For instance, the typical Gay party line requires that I be in favor of abortion (which I equate to murder). It also says that I need to care deeply about the rights of transgendered people, which I really don't. Trannys have a whole different set of concerns than a Gay man does. If I were to vote along Democratic party lines, I would be voting against gun rights, in favor of higher taxes, and more government spending. I really do care about these things and think the Republicans tend to have the right idea.

Republicans, in general, aren't opposed to Gay people. A few notable ones tend to oppose us every chance they get, but most are really fairly ambivalent about Gay issues. Some Republicans quietly vote against Gay rights bills because they have little to gain for voting in favor and can pick up a few votes by voting against. They believe (and rightly so) that the Queer community will NEVER vote for a Republican. What is forgotten is that Democrats feel that they can vote against Gay rights because the Queer community will ALWAYS vote for them.

If the GLBT community wants to see real change, they need to be willing to support Republicans when the Democrats won't support their cause.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

We Are (almost) Equal Now

Hiding under the hundreds of bills Governor Schwarzenegger signed at the last days before his deadline was a simple and almost unremarkable bill written by California State Senator Carole Migden (D-San Francisco).

Except nothing about that bill was simple or unremarkable to hundreds of thousands of people across the state.

Arnold Schwarzenegger's signature on SB 1827 should be cause for celebration among Gays and Lesbians all over California. Short of actually providing same-sex marriage, the State of California can provide no more rights to domestic partners than it now has. This bill will provide same-sex couples in a registered domestic partnership with the same tax rates they would recieve if married. After decades of fighting for equality, California has come closer to granting Gay people the right to marry than it ever has before.

This doesn't mean the fight is (or should be) over. According to the Office of the General Counsel of the U.S. General Accounting Office, there are still 1,049 benefits provided by the federal government that are only granted to married couples. None of these benefits are currently available to same-sex couples. Further, none of these benefits can be made available by the State of California. Certainly, we should expect the fight to continue inside the Beltway.

But this doesn't even mean that our fight is finished in California. While our government grants equal status between heterosexual married couples and gay domestic partners, the Gay community has not yet achieved equality.

I have had the benefit of spending my adult years in metropolitan areas with thriving Gay communities. Unfortunately, not all Gay and Lesbian people can live in big cities. Many live in areas where it is not acceptable or safe to live as an "out" Gay person. Despite anti-discrimination laws, many members of the GLBT community would find it difficult at best to secure a job, reasonable housing, and live a happy, free, and secure life if they allowed themselves to be labeled Queer.

Far worse, too many children are bullied each day because they are labeled Queer, either in reality or in perception. If any of us, Gay or Straight, look back on our days in middle school, we will remember just how intolerant kids can be. And how mean. But that isn't the worst of it. Adults can be just as intolerant toward Queer or effeminate children and cause an environment where a child is not free to live he or she was created by God.

While I was fortunate enough to have an amazingly accepting family that more than embraces my homosexuality (and helped teach me to do the same) I remember growing up in a town where it is not acceptable for a person to live out of the closet. Does that mean that there are no Gay people there? Absolutely Not! It just means that we need to keep up the fight for equality so that those closeted individuals might eventually be able to live freely.

I'm Too Sexy For My.....Jersey?

I mentioned a while back that Cal wore hideous new uniforms when they went Duck hunting a couple weeks ago. While the Bears look a little Crayola-esque, the look is starting to grow on me. Sure, I would have preferred our team dressing in something a little more traditional and classy, but these bright yellow jerseys are helping our boys to draw a little more attention.

If you still have doubts about the new look, I suggest you check out and watch this week's episode on new jerseys. She does a great look at whether a new look can motivate a team to do better. And, damn, that girl knows her sports!

Speaking of which, KateOnSports! Our favorite Mic Lady does a great show. Whether you are an Old Blue Cal Fan, like to watch sports in general, or (God forbid) a fan of the U$C Trojans or the stanfurd cardinal, you are gonna like Kate. If she were a guy, I would be all over her!

Monday, October 16, 2006

Caution: Intolerant, Liberal, Heterophobe Post Ahead

Despite the inevitable criticism that I am an intolerant, San Francisco, Left-wing, Liberal, Heterophobe, I want to draw some attention to a great column I saw in the San Francisco Chronicle today. Jon Carroll penned a fantastic article explaining that what Pete Wilson referred to as Bevan Dufty and Rebecca Goldfader's "experiment" is really no different than what every other parent experiences, and is better than most.

That is, every venture into parenting is an experiment. Sometimes, the experiment is successful and sometimes not. The goal is for parents to make more sucesses than failures...or to at least make enough successes that the child develops into a normal person. An experiment involving two parents that adore the child that they brought into the world together is much less risky than many of the minor parenting experiments that are tried each day by countless parents worldwide. Ranging from deciding what to feed a child to deciding whether the child is ready to operate a walker/tricycle/bicycle/automobile.

Unfortunately, most children seem to be born without instruction manuals that list precisely how to care for a child. Worse, most children are born to people in my age group. Frankly, I am barely able to care for myself enough to stay alive and healthy and I can't imagine being responsible for the life of a helpless infant. Then again, I have known many young people that have had children on "accident." While the parents certainly love their children, the family didn't exactly plan on bringing a child into the world.

How then is it more wrong for a man and a woman with more than sufficient life experiences and financial resources who want to bring a child into this world to have one than a couple of foolish young adults?

And The Beat Goes On...

What is this? The year of the GOP congressional scandal?

If you are trying to keep track, let's see if we can recap the year to date (I am sure I will miss something):
  • First there was the Abramoff lobbying scandal starring Bob Ney.
  • Never to be outdone, Cunningham lived more like a Machiavellian Prince than a Duke.
  • DeLay may or may not have broken any campaign finance laws, but he sure did his best to make it look like he did.
  • I have already discussed Mark Foley and his follies on this blog.
Just as America was getting bored with exploring the Foley case, another Republican scandal to absorb the media! Joy of joys!

Now, it seems, Curt Weldon is under investigation for an alleged incident in which he may have used his congressional ties to secure cushy lobbying and consulting jobs for his daughter and a close friend. Though the alleged incident occured more than 2 years ago, investigators raided his daughter's home this weekend...just in time for some big media before this 10-term congressman faces a tough opponent in the November midterms. What luck!

Now it doesn't take any fancy degrees to tell you that public figures should avoid anything that even appears like impropriety. Ney, Cunningham, DeLay, Foley, and Weldon each have knowingly engaged in activities that regardless of actual illegalities are absolutely questionable. Because of this, the Dems, media, and general public have already found them to be guilty. And this sentiment has tainted the rest of our party.

Rightly so! Our party gained control of congress twelve years ago when we were able to successfully show that we had a clear plan to serve the nation. The Class of '94 was so popular because they had shown that Democrats couldn't be trusted and the Republicans had defined a plan to increase the quality of life while improving the budget and lowering taxes, simultaneously.

Lately, the grand elephants of the GOP have come to bear a striking resemblance to the asses of the Democratic Party. We have mastered pork barrel spending, overspending, and now the congressional scandal. What we have forgotten is how to maintain a healthy cynicism of big government and how to portray Democrat policies as too big brotherish.

I hate to say that we no longer deserve control of Congress. When I looked at the Drudge Report this morning and saw Nancy Pelosi's portrait with the caption "21 Days," I shivered with fear that this particular liberal could potentially be the next Speaker of the House.

Still, if the GOP were to narrowly maintain control of the House, it would only be nominally. Whichever party takes control would be unable to pass significant legislation without some help from the moderates of the other party but would bear liability for the wrongs that occur in the government over the next two years. Basically, all of the responsibility of congressional leadership without the benefits. It could benefit the Republican party to narrowly lose control of the House this year and let the Democrats take some blame for a while.

Saturday, October 14, 2006

I Am No Liberal!

In my life, I don't think I have ever been seriously called a liberal! In fact, I am unaware of many gun-toting, Reagan-loving, pro-life Republicans out there that are included among the leftists.

Somewhat hilariously, I have gotten a few hits from a conservative blog that has characterized the Land of the Fruits and Nuts as a part of the "Intolerant Left in San Francisco." His portrayal of my blog was because of my earlier post on talk show host Pete Wilson homophobic rants on his radio show blasting Bevan Dufty. If only the folks over at RightLinx knew how much I have supported and aided the Conservative Movement, they would see that my comments on Bevan Dufty certainly fit under the Big Tent of the Republican Party. Or not.

As any good GOP historian could tell you, our party has been in dire troubles before. There was a time when we went decades without controlling Congress and could scarcely pull enough votes for President to justify running a candidate. Great men, not the least of whom was William F. Buckley, Jr., met and developed an unlikely coalition to regain political dominance. This coalition included the Religious Right, Classic Liberals, Libertarians, and Moderates all under one Big Tent. This coalition gave rise to such great leaders as Ronald Reagan and continues to bolster the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger and John McCain.

Unfortunately the religious zealots on the far right end of our tent have forgotten the deals we made. Under the big tent, we fight for a moderately free-market economy as well as a few moderately socially conservative issues like abortion. However, the current Republican plan seems to call for lots of socially conservative issues without much concern about a functional budget. It should come as no surprise that the Grand Old Party is struggling to maintain control of Congress in this election cycle.

Instead of calling my end of the tent a bunch of intolerant leftists, perhaps the GOP should be reunified again. We were once the Party of Lincoln and could be again!

Friday, October 13, 2006

Where Can I Sign Up?

According to the folks at Accuracy in Media there is a Vast Gay Conspiracy going on within the GOP. They claim that the party leadership has given too much power and control to Gay operatives who have infiltrated the Republican ranks to push for a pro-Gay, left-wing, Democrat agenda.

When I came out of the closet as a Gay Republican, I must not have recieved my membership packet including my copy of the fabled "Gay Agenda" and our plans to rename the party the "Gay Old Party." If anybody knows where I can get a replacement copy, please let me know. I would love to use my status as a Gay Republican to get a nice, cushy political job.

The reality is that among all the strengths of my party (and there are many), a Gay-friendly agenda is not one. If it is true that the GOP has had a (slightly) softened stance on Gay rights in recent years it is not a result of a Queer infiltration of the party ranks. It is more likely the result of more accepting attitudes of society in general. That is, the general public is finally starting to realize that we aren't evil, we won't cause the armageddon or God's wrath, and we won't turn them or their children gay. If Gay Republicans tend to look a little like Democrats sometimes, maybe it is because the Democrats aren't always wrong. They do tend to watch out for the GLBT community more regularly than my party.

So really, folks, when and where is the next meeting for the Gay World Conquest? I want to be there for that!

Football Odds and Ends

  • Our boys have new hideous uniforms. Seriously. These are the ugliest uniforms I can remember the Golden Bears wearing.
  • What's the deal? We are finally a top 10 team and we can't get on TV? WTF?!
  • If you are in Berkeley on Saturday, the Athletic Department has announced that a live video feed will be played on the scoreboard at Memorial Stadium. They are encouraging people to bring their own food and drinks because the concession stands will not be open. Also, alcohol is not allowed. As much as I love the Bears, I don't want to watch a video screen in a half empty stadium without the benefit of booze.
  • If you need beer with your football or will otherwise be outside of Memorial Stadium, good ol' Joe Starkey will be announcing the game on KGO Radio.

Are You Ready For Some Football?

Ok, so our Golden Bears haven't won in Pullman since 1979. For those keeping track, that was when Carter was still President. Considering the current senior class was born in 1985, we can safely say that the recent series history is definitely not in our favor.

Still, California is on a roll! I have personally witnessed Cal shattering losing streaks including the 26-year streak to Washington that ended on October 5, 2002 at Seattle. When we beat the Huskies, they were a top 15 team with a 17 game winning streak at home and we were still coming off of the dark days of Cal Football known as the Holmoe Years.

Wazzu is far from a top 15 team. We could easily end the losing streak. Or not. They are so inconsistent that it is hard to tell.

Two weeks ago, WSU fought the Trojans and nearly won. They played a remarkable game. A week later, they stumbled repeatedly and barely pulled a victory against Oregon State, a week after the Bears slaughtered the Beavers.

Our offense is nearly unstoppable and if we can pull the same defense we did last week against Oregon then we could give even U$C a run for its $$. But with our loss to Tennessee still lingering, we have to remember that nothing is certain and, while we should win tomorrow, nothing is certain.

Wednesday, October 11, 2006


I am probably the only Gay man in California actively supporting Chuck Poochigian. Granted Poochigian doesn't have a stellar record on Gay rights (ok, his record on Gay rights sucks), he is still the best candidate available for Attorney General. Moreover, Jerry Brown is a kook that should be kept away from politics for good!

Granted that Poochigian seems to be running an abysmal campaign right now, he has a remarkable history when it comes to public safety and criminal justice. Before serving in both houses of the California Legislature, Pooch served in Governor Wilson's administration to appoint justices to the bench. Later, he worked to establish stronger criminal penalties for violent crimes and has tirelessly promoted sensible public safety reforms.

His opponent, Moonbeam, had a job where he appointed judges, too. His most famous appointee, Rose Bird, was the key justice responsible for overturning the death penalty. Despite the public outcry, Brown packed the California Supreme Court to ensure that the death penalty would be stopped. He is the reason notorious murderers like Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan are still alive today. After his term as governor, he called on Governor Wilson to allow the Freeway Killer (aka William Bonin) to live.

As I mentioned earlier, Poochigian tended to favor the Republican party line on Gay Rights legislation. He certainly doesn't earn many points in my book for his record on failing to support the GLBT community. Brown, however, deserves no respect in this regard either. While the Knight Amendment, Prop 22 defined marriage in California as a union between a man and woman, California law had already been amended to deny our community the right to marry. In 1977, Governor Jerry Brown signed California's first openly homophobic bill into law. Prior to Governor Moonbeam, California law defined marriage as a relationship between two "persons." Thanks, Jerry!

Another issue that is important to me is gun rights. Supporters of the Second Amendment have a friend in Chuck Poochigian. In a state where the right to bear arms is severely impeded already, Poochigian has attempted to preserve the rights of Californians to safely and legally possess firearms with sensible restrictions. Brown would have you believe that Pooch wants to arm every man woman and child with .50 caliber Browning Machine Guns. This couldn't be further from the truth. The vote Brown refers to in his attack ads is in regards to a ban on .50 caliber rifles. Already, .50 BMGs are banned in this state as are all assault weapons. Firearms larger than .50 caliber are made illegal by federal law. And, frankly, .50 caliber rifles are too big, heavy, and cumbersome for most people to use at all. Californians are in practically no danger from being shot with a .50 caliber rifle. In fact, we are all at a much greater risk of being shot and killed with a .22 caliber round fired from a handgun.

Brown opposes the Second Amendment. He doesn't believe that law abiding citizens should be allowed to purchase, own, and use firearms for our own protection. While I doubt he would support an outright ban on firearms in California, he has yet to meet an anti-gun bill he didn't like. But as we all know, laws restricting firearms only affect the people who follow the laws. Criminals, by definition, do not abide by the law. Murderers do not care whether the gun in their hands is legal or not. While Brown has attempted to restrict firearms in Oakland, along with other measures intended to fight crime, the murder rate has increased dramatically. The only people he is disarming are the good guys!

While I certainly have my issues with supporting Poochigian given that the Attorney General will likely be representing California in some important Gay Marriage cases in the next few years, Jerry Brown is the absolute worst person to elect. Frankly, I care more about public safety and criminal justice more than I do about same-sex marriage. That is why I am supporting Pooch for AG.

For Pete's Sake!

I had plans tonight to write a short recap of last weeks glorious victory against Oregon, a preview of this week's football game, a political opinion piece on .50 caliber rifles, and why we should all support Chuck Poochigian over Jerry Brown. Unfortunately, you will all have to wait for those posts.

Tonight, I was told to check out the KGO radio archive and listen to Pete Wilson's radio show. Unfortunately, KGO archives its shows only for 24 hours, so I am unable to provide a link. If the particular show I am interested in is podcasted elsewhere, I will give you a link later.

Today, Wilson (not to be confused with former Governor Pete Wilson), started his show with a discussion of Bevan Dufty and Rebecca Goldfader's new bundle of joy, Sidney. Unlike most local media that have congratulated the two coparents on the birth of their daughter, Wilson criticized the two in a bigoted tirade regarding their sexual orientation and marital status.

Best friends for more than 10 years, Dufty and Goldfader are both homosexual. The two plan to live side-by-side in a duplex that they plan to purchase. They intend to raise their daughter, Sidney, together in the duplex.

While it is now common in San Francisco for same-sex couples to raise children together, it is apparently taboo for two opposite-sex individuals that happen to be gay to raise a child together, or so says Wilson. The radio talk show host expressed his outrage that the two would have a child together by calling little Sidney "a potential travesty."

While it is true that the ideal situation for raising a child includes two married parents that both love and care for the child in a stable environment throughout the child's development, such situations are frequently unavailable. For example, gay couples are barred by law from marrying which can lead to partnerships that are less legally binding than a conventional marriage. Further, many children are born to single parent homes or may otherwise lose a parent prematurely. Such arrangements are so commonplace in our society that one hardly gives a second thought to a single parent caring for children. Certainly, these situations do not merit specific discussions on radio talk shows. Frankly, nobody cares when two straight people decide to have a child together and not marry each other.

However, when two gay people of the opposite sex decide to have a child together and not marry, it is apparently an outrageous affront to society. While Wilson unapologetically claims that Goldfader and Dufty's child is being treated as a toy instead of a new human being, he fails to recognize that this child of a popular San Francisco Supervisor and a Nurse Practioner will be extremely well cared for and loved by two parents that have remained close for more than a decade. If only more children could be so lucky!

I won't go so far as other bloggers and call for the resignation of Pete Wilson from KGO radio. He should, however, try to remember that the newborn he claimed could be a "serial killer" is a real human being with a real family who loves her. His comments and reactions were hurtful, not only to Dufty and Goldfader, but to many others in the San Francisco Queer Community.

Wednesday, October 04, 2006

DiFi v. Mountjoy

This November, California will barely notice as many Republicans cross party lines and vote for a Democrat likely to get more votes than Arnold could ever dream of. It is already a foregone conclusion that Dianne Feinstein will return for another term in the US Senate.

Opposite DiFi, the most popular politician in California, the GOP has endorsed former California State Legislator Dick Mountjoy. Despite the funny jokes we can make about his name, little good has ever come from this man. In fact, this man characterizes everything that I believe to be wrong with my party.

Mountjoy is most notable for writing Prop 187 to deny all government services to illegal immigrants. Fortunately, that proposition was overturned by the courts before it prevented innocent children from being denied an education or service at public hospitals.

Further, Mounjoy is Dubya's ideological twin. He is against Gay rights, maintains that we are doing a wonderful job in Iraq, and claims to be a veteran. However, President Bush has a less dubious military record than Mountjoy's.

However, the worst product of Mountjoy is his own son, termed-out Assemblyman Dennis Mounjoy. Assemblyman Mountjoy, who bears a strong resemblance in appearance and mannerisms to the late Chris Farley, made headlines earlier this summer when he offended several of his colleagues by calling all Gay people sexual deviants and related his views that we deserve fewer rights in this society.

On the other hand, DiFi has been a remarkable voice of reason in the Senate. Far more moderate than her colleague, Babs Boxer, Feinstein has been a critic of the war in Iraq insofar as we must develop an exit strategy and eventually leave. Further, she is a notably strong supporter of Gay rights and of equal marriage. But she is no liberal!

Feinstein is well known for working both sides of the aisle to get the good work of the Senate accomplished. She has no fear in antagonizing her Democratic base by pushing for a more moderate agenda and criticizing the harsh and quick politics typically played by the Democrats (a la Kennedy and Boxer). Also, you would be hard-pressed to find somebody who would really call her a fiscal liberal.

In short, my Grand Old Party is crazy for even trying this year against DiFi. Worse, my party's leaders should be committed to a mental health hospital for trying to run Mountjoy against the most popular politician in the state. At least the GOP donors aren't wasting much money on him--his campaign so far consists of an answering machine at his Monrovia home.

I will leave you with this funny story that I read in the paper today about an event Feinstein spoke at recently. She asked the crowd of Democrat supporters if anybody had ever heard of Dick Mountjoy and not a single person raised their hand. She responded, "Good. And I want to keep it that way." She didn't mention him again in her talk.

Monday, October 02, 2006

Duck Season

While hunters across the United States are waiting for duck season to begin on November 18, Berkeley will declare Ducks fair game on Saturday at Memorial Stadium.

Now don't get too excited, guys. The Bay Area liberals haven't suddenly become lovers of the Second Amendment on us. Besides, these Ducks may prove to be more difficult to down.

Oregon will be visiting Memorial Stadium this weekend in what is expected to be one of the biggest match-ups of the year. As of yet, Oregon (#11) is undefeated (4-0 and 2-0). With a similar record, we are 4-1 overall and 2-0 in conference play. I won't mention where our embarassing loss came from.

Moreover, some of you younger Cal fans may not remember the dark seasons before the Tedford Years. For your benefit, I will remind you that after Holmoe was banished from the sacred walls of Memorial Stadium by the ghosts of such great heroes as Pappy Waldorf and Andy Smith, we were left without a coach. Soon afterward, we managed to find a new hero: a former Fresno State Bulldog with an amazing record that was then employed by the Oregon Ducks.

For good reason, they know what we are going to do before we do. They have a killer offense, but one of the weakest defenses in the Pac-10. Unfortunately, they know how Tedford's mind works. Still we have some of the best runningbacks in the conference. Also to our benefit, Oregon's punter is terrible and gave up a TD to ASU last week.

This should be a great game! Don't miss it...Even if the Mic Men suck!

The NEW Political Drinking Game

Once again, my party has screwed up (Thanks, Foley). And again, they tried to cover it up. You would think they would have learned by now! If you read on a bit, I have devised a new drinking game to go along with the resignations on the horizon at the behest of an old and dear Democrat friend (well, nobody's perfect).

What most concerns me is that too many people are focusing on the fact that Foley is Gay. In fact, the general feeling among many politicos is that he was targetted because of his sexuality. This, in no way, excuses the fact that the did wrong. His wrongdoing, however, is not found in his homosexuality.

Foley attempted to seduce underage boys that were Capitol Pages. Not only were his actions disgusting, unethical, and immoral, but his attempt to hide his resignation from Congress under the guise of his alcoholism is insulting. Further, he singlehandedly set back the Gay-Rights movement in this country by purpetuating the stereotype that all of us Gay men are pedophilic, sexual deviants attempting to seduce and prey on little boys.

The Republican leadership should never have attempted to hide Foley's guilt. Upon learning about the emails sent by Foley to the pages, an investigation should have been opened to determine the extent to which the Congressman may have acted wrongly. Perhaps in that scenario, the IM conversations would have surfaced earlier and our party would be less damaged by this scandal.

Given that Foley has now resigned (blaming alcoholism) and many are calling for Hastert's resignation, just how many resignations should we expect between now and the end of the year?

If you are keeping track, it is 2 shots for any member of Congress that is forced into resignation between now and the November election and 1 shot for every member resigning from November 7 through New Year's Eve. A bonus shot if the member is up for reelection this year!

UPDATE: That same dear old friend of mine pointed me to a hilarious little video calling for the resignation of ol' Denny Hastert.