Tim B-L Tries Blogging

Merry Christmas, WWWebbies and happy holidays, bloggers. The WWW creator, Tim Berners-Lee, figured he'd finally join the rest of us and make his present in electrons.

Check his unassuming and chatty blog here.

The guy who put the glue in GUI for us browsers writes at the end of his second post:

By the way, this blog is at DIG, the Decentralised Information group at MIT's CSAIL. I intend it to be geeky semantic web stuff mostly. For example, it won't be for W3C questions which should really be addressed to working groups.

So thanks for all the support, no need for more general 'thank you' comments! Thank *you* all.

Sig Check Glitch

Pout. Fume. Moan.

We've been waiting to see whether anyone forged our names on the anti-same-sex marriage petition in Boston. Knowthyneighbor has been on top of this for months.

The database is so popular — excellent — that we cannot run our queries – stinky. It barfed on the cable repeatedly, even just after 5 a.m. today.

So, many of us are checking. It may be frustrating, but we do have a week and change to note our fraud. Check back with the site if you can't get it working.

You have until January 6th (but don't wait that long). It's important to register every fraudulent signature to show both problems with this petition set and the inadequate controls on ballot initiative petitions in general.

Do it for all of us.

Maine Chits Filed

Protecting Maine's anti-discrimination-against-gays law cost the two sides about $1.5 million, according to the papers they filed with the state. Unless you sell advertising slots in media, that seems money down the sewer, money that could have served a good purpose.

On the other hand, it is small beer in ballot questions, even by Maine standards. The folk hassling over tax caps combined for twice that a year ago. Also, the very interested parties driving the Southern Maine casino question spent over $10 million in 2003.

On the plus side, there will be the conversational value over the long winter and quite a few self-writing sermons at fundy churches.

The Maine Won'’t Discriminate side collected and spent about three times that of the Dark Side, lead by the ironically named Christian Civil League of Maine'’s Coalition for Marriage and the Maine Grassroots Coalition. MWD put in about $1.1 million and the others about $412,000.

Now the losers get to claim it was just money talking (with no mention of why people in and out of state would rather donate to equal rights rather than freedom to discriminate). They can do a Red Sox fan thing –– if only the Yankees hadn'’t outspent them...there'’s next year.

The CCL is off to Augusta, peering at teen lingerie models in store windows, offended this time at heterosexual activity. There'’ll be lots of cold days to say what if about the last campaign.

Back in the Bay State, we can'’t get too upset now about the cost of the pending anti-same-sex-marriage amendment fights. These may well drag over two years and cost many millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of otherwise productive labor hours. That is a hate tax that returns again and again for more.

Like Maine, at the end we'll be able to calculate how much was wasted to fight efforts to discriminate in the name of morality. It'’s not going to speak well of the ballot initiative process or of those misusing it here and now.

Further Fitchburger

A source for Rep. Emile Goguen tentative announcement about not running for re-election is in his local paper.

He told the Fitchburg Sentinel & Enterprise that he'll say for sure in February.

Over at Beyond 495, word is "Susan Koeck, who ran unsuccessfully against Goguen in 2004 is looking to run for this 3rd Worcester seat again in 2006 whether Goguen retires or not." She told the newspaper that she'd step aside if she thought there was a better candidate.

Two locals considering running if Goguen quits are Fitchburg Mayor Dan H. Mylott and City Councilor Stephen DiNatale. The latter got the most votes in the last Council race. Goguen called him "...a knowledgeable individual, very intelligent, a good councilor..an electable guy."

DiNatale's Website makes him look like a typical constitutent-services guy. That's certainly part of being a state rep, but says little about his political philosophy otherwise.

Mylott ran unopposed last time, which may say more about no one wanting the job in a declining city than anything. His site does have positions, although they are small-city specific. Crime: against; parks: keep 'em nice; business growth: sure. Cracker barrel wisdom:

A sense of character is missing from Fitchburg and we seem to be losing it more and more. Dan stands as the people's candidate for Mayor with a mission of building a city of character by leading it with strong character.

Left and Right Coast Nasties

The plug nasties on both coasts are continuing relentlessly to make sure same-sex couples don't get the benefits that straight ones do. In California, one anti-SSM group sued to make sure a Massachusetts marriage doesn't earn benefits in San Jose. In New York State, four conservatives are trying to make sure New Rochelle strips domestic partners of health benefits.

These Spite and Fright Circuses of lawsuits and anti-gay groups love to claim that homosexuals have a dreadful agenda to destroy the nation. Yet what happens typically as we see here is that they are schadenfreude practitioners, intent on making others suffer or have less than they do. They deserve a special ring in hell.

Out West, the Proposition 22 Legal Defense & Education Fund got a Santa Clara County Superior Court judge to back them. The suit was over a city council vote that expanded benefits comparable to heterosexual married couples to city workers who married legally elsewhere, regardless of sexual orientation.

Judge Mary Jo Levinger wrote in part, "`to recognize all marriages of city employees certified by other jurisdictions is contrary to California law and is therefore pre-empted. Furthermore, only marriages between a man and a woman may be recognized by the City of San Jose." One of the nasties, ex-councilman Larry Pegram, said his group wanted to make sure the city didn't recognize same-sex marriage in any way.

Similarly, the chairman of the New Rochelle Conservative Party, Joseph Rossini, and three other ill-willed souls reveled in the catch-22 situation. One, Peggy Godfrey, said that continuing health benefits to domestic partners was "politically pandering" to gays. "Homosexuals don't have marriage rights," she added. Illogically, Rossini said that "I don't think taxpayers should be paying for people to be living together outside of marriage."

Joe, they are working within the system as best they can. Cut 'em some slack.

Mayor Tim Idoni said the practice was "fair and equitable to all employees of New Rochelle." They have been offered since mid-May. Two employees have requested the benefits, at a cost of about $14,000 to the city.

This should make for good arguments. The policy offers the benefits to any registered domestic partner, not just homosexual ones. The convoluted anti side seems to be stuck with its circular argument.

Golden Dome Goodness

We are unworthy of Mariposa at Beyond 495. Way up and out there, she posted her Christmas present to us in electrons. The evil elf of Fitchburg, the curious Rep. Emile Goguen may not run for re-election.

The infamous Fitchburger would join his anti-gay and anti-same-sex-marriage buddy Rep. Phil Travis in retiring. There's no guarantee that the backwaters won't dredge for like-minded replacements, but we can hope that reason prevails.

With all his free time, perhaps he can backtrack over his legislative career...and find where he left his brain and his compassion.

Initiatives Up and at 'em

Seven proposed ballot initiatives got approval to proceed toward 2006 and 2009 votes from the Secretary of the Commonwealth's office. The anti-same-sex marriage one has company with such diverse measures as banning greyhound racing.

See a clickable page about the current measures here.

The next step for the anti-SSM one is to go before the next session of the legislature. If it receives 50 votes (a quarter of the General Court), it must do so again in the following year to get on the 2008 ballot.

The text of the proposed amendment is:

This proposed constitutional amendment would require the state and local and county governments to license and recognize only those marriages that are between a man and a woman. It would prohibit future same-sex marriages, but would allow continued recognition of those entered into before the adoption of the proposed amendment.

Activist Judge, Not!

No matter what your politics, you gotta love U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III's attitude. He ruled today against intelligent design being taught in a Pennsylvania school district.

While very patient for many weeks listening to both scientific and emotional testimony, he got to act out in his decision. It is 139 pages long. You can get excerpts on the wires, news sites and papers.

Be sure you check out his conclusions, beginning on page 136. It includes the not too subtle:

Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board'’s decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources.

I like this guy.

Irish Hate and Humor

It hurts to admit it, but even the fundies are more fun in the U.K. The first same-sex union had verbally hateful protestors, but lots of yucks too.

The event occurred in Belfast, because Northern Ireland has the shortest waiting period. The Times Online was there with the very amusing coverage.

For a taste, consider:

Seventy guests packed one of the campest buildings in these islands (the City Hall is nicknamed “the Wedding Cake” for its Rococo flourishes of Victoriana) as Shannon Sickels and Grainne Close exchanged rings and vows...

But Northern Ireland’s fundamentalist streak ensured that the “Save Ulster from Sodomy” brigade — mostly members of the Rev Ian Paisley’s Free Presbyterian Church — were outside singing hymns and hurling abuse such as “sodomy is a sin”, “you’re going to Hell” and “filth, filth, filth”.

Happily for the couple on their big day a counter-demonstration soon formed, with humour as its main weapon. Two satirical interlopers infiltrated the anti-gay ranks wearing garish sports jackets and toothbrush moustaches but no trousers, carrying their own placards as an antidote to the religious tracts being paraded in Donegall Square.

These read “Bring back slavery” and “Earth is flat”. There was so much laughter that even the moral indignation of the Christian fundamentalists seemed on the verge of giggles. At times it seemed that the excitement generated by the first occasion on which a same-sex couple could legally commit themselves to one another would descend into a punch-up. That it did not perhaps speaks volumes about how much this once dourly Presbyterian city, where playground swings used to be chained up on Sundays, has changed.

Read it all.

Presidential Pushing

Even before the current Bush, Bill Clinton had several bouts of I'm-the-boss toying with rights. Same-sex marriage certainly is a key one. He came on heavy with federalism/states rights issues on that in 1996 with his Defense of Marriage Act (DoMA).

The two key concepts there are:

• States can define marriage any way they want.
• To the Feds, marriage is one man with one woman.

So, he sort of managed not quite to strip states of the rights to regulate marriage, while actively encouraging them to follow his ideal of straight only. As a result, states started passing laws and amendments limiting marriage, partnership and other rights homosexuals could have, including stripping some benefits and partnership rights they already had. Also, the Republican Congress tried twice (2004 and 2005) to pass an almost certainly unconstitutional Marriage Protection Act prohibiting the U.S. Supreme Court from hearing any challenges to DoMA.

In the end, many conservatives, both in D.C. and at home are willing to turn their backs on their centuries old tradition of states rights. They would cede the basic right of a state's legislature and courts to regulate marriage to an overarching set of federal laws.

Shall We All Be The Enemies?

Let's say it while we still can. The White House Republicans are anti-freedom. They are authoritarians. They are paternal in the extreme. They may well be watching you already.

The arbitrary and secret enemies lists are back and George the Lesser doesn't care who knows it and who doesn't like it. The NY Times and Washington Post have been spreading the ink and electrons about this for some time and are heavy into this week.

Today's excellent Post feature Pushing the Limits of Wartime Powers has the history and status of the civilian spying and Bush's arrogant and deceitful defense of it.

You've heard it before, from Dick Nixon when he had his own enemies list, and now from Bush. In case you didn't know who was watching you in what ways, the Post recaps:

Since October, news accounts have disclosed a burgeoning Pentagon campaign for "detecting, identifying and engaging" internal enemies that included a database with information on peace protesters. A debate has roiled over the FBI's use of national security letters to obtain secret access to the personal records of tens of thousands of Americans. And now come revelations of the National Security Agency's interception of telephone calls and e-mails from the United States -- without notice to the federal court that has held jurisdiction over domestic spying since 1978.

You have also heard the justification's before. As the Post continues, the Bushies shamelessly try to justify these unAmerican activities:

Defiant in the face of criticism, the Bush administration has portrayed each surveillance initiative as a defense of American freedom. Bush said yesterday that his NSA eavesdropping directives were "critical to saving American lives" and "consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution." After years of portraying an offensive waged largely overseas, Bush justified the internal surveillance with new emphasis on "the home front" and the need to hunt down "terrorists here at home."

So, there we have it again. People can't fly and won't be able to find out why or have the due process our Bill of Rights states. Any American, singly or in groups, can be subject to arbitrary surveillance without search warrant or having to show probably cause. Use the word terrorism and strip away rights and freedoms we have taken for granted.

It looks like the rampaging authoritarians in Washington and Virginia have finally gone too far. The House and Senate have many members trying to distance themselves from such anti-liberty tactics, and are demanding investigations and changes. Turning America into a police state in alleged efforts to keep it free is worse than simply illogical.

The Brokeback Why

Hollywood takes the national temperature constantly. The big studios don't want and think they can't afford to lead too far. So what does the release of and crowded theaters for Brokeback Mountain mean?

The lead op-ed in today's New York Times by Frank Rich has it right on. (Insert grousing here. I get Times Select as a newspaper subscriber, but such clear insight and good writing should be freely available from papers.) The link for Selectees is here.

As Rich puts it:

Without a single polemical speech, this laconic film dramatizes homosexuality as an inherent and immutable identity, rather than some aberrant and elective "agenda" concocted by conspiratorial "elites" in Chelsea, the Castro and South Beach, as anti-gay proselytizers would have it. Ennis and Jack long for a life together, not for what gay baiters pejoratively label a "lifestyle."

But in truth the audience doesn't have to be coerced to get it. This is where the country has been steadily moving of late. "Brokeback Mountain," a Hollywood product after all, is not leading a revolution but ratifying one, fleshing out - quite literally - what most Americans now believe. It's not for nothing that the proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage vanished as soon as the election was over. Polls show that a large American majority support equal rights for gay couples as long as the unions aren't labeled "marriage" - and given the current swift pace of change, that reservation, too, will probably fade in the next 5 to 10 years.

It's what we experience in Massachusetts and Vermont, what they are getting to Canada, and have transcended in the Netherlands. We suspect Texans will take longer to accept reality. Pity for them, but they are used to following the elephants in the parade.

Dems Need to Dish

Caution: Pro-Democratic, pro-democratic rant follows.

A week before Christmas and we know who's naughty (dirty, dishonest). It's George the Lesser and his gang of fellow travelers in the executive and legislative branches. Let's hear it now, through the next presidential election cycle.

At least from Ronald Reagan's time, Republicans in power have a sodden record of the un-nice, undemocratic and unAmerican. There should not be a day or hour that the Democrats miss listing the disgraces.

Conservatives have played on the optimism, on the emotions, and on the fantasies of the voters. What we have to show for it includes:

• A pit of national debt and economic stagnation
• Successive generations anticipating lower living standards than their parents and grandparents
• A bloated government infrastructure that spends on programs that do not benefit the needy
• Fewer freedoms than any time in memory, even when Tricky Dick Nixon plied his dirty deeds

The bitter irony is that because of the long-time emotional tricks of these rampaging elephants, far too many Americans for far too long have believed the lies and supported the conservatives. They have been promised the opposite of what they got.

George the Lesser aside — and we can only anticipate when he will be cast aside — Dems need to said it loud. Ronald Reagan's presidency was a disaster. His Regonomics is a deceit that Georgie has revisited with the same desperate and destructive results.

Say it from the Senate. Say it from the campaign.

• You cannot have guns and butter.
• Borrow-and-spend economics destroys our economy.
• Borrow-and-spend economics steal from the Boomers, Gen-X, Gen-Y and beyond.
• Pushing narrow religious standards into law is unAmerican, hell, against the pilgrims and pioneers who founded this nation.
• Cherry picking rights for certain citizens in undemocratic and unAmerican.
• Spying on citizens' books, mail, calls, and contact is unAmerican.
• Claiming that the increasingly unsafe nation you shape can only be kept safe by stripping rights is unAmerican.

Even Randist Alan Greenspan has finally admitted that our Republican-driven trade deficits, deficit spending and crushing national debt mean disaster — for both the United States and the world economies.

Republicans and their conservative minions have become the horde of anti-Americans.

We Boomers grew up recognizing that the WWI and WWII generations put themselves totally on the line to provide secure, free democracy. (They also paid their bills.) The legislative and executive efforts in Washington and many states since Reagan's time have tried their damnedest to reverse the accomplishments of those heroic millions.

The Democratic officials and candidates have to call it as it is.

It was a lot of years ago (1928) when Al Smith was the Democratic Presidential candidate. He said, "The American people never carry an umbrella. They prepare to walk in the eternal sunshine."

The conservatives have played on that for decades now. Deficit spending, unwinnable imperial wars, tax gifts to the wealthy (who do not use the money to stimulate the larger economy), and limiting the rights of women, gays and minorities are the legacies.

Speak it. All of those are dirty, failed, unAmerican policies.

One Harper Harping

Even the allegedly very smart Canadian Tory leader Steven Harper nods and stumbles. In the current campaign, some of our Northern neighbors thought he did the bright, if not the right, thing in putting the same-sex-marriage issue out to air.

Lately though, he is sputtering along with his campaign. His party is trying to claim that a majority of Canadians want a vote in the Commons to revisit the issue. Without evidence, he says SSM has damaged the nation. Oddly enough tough, poll after poll reveal that what the majority want is to get on with their lives, to leave homosexual couples to do the same, and for the government to deal with pressing issues instead.

That all sounds like Massachusetts.

In his efforts to unseat the Liberals, led by Paul Martin, in next month's election, Harper has had to soft-pedal his absurd promises of overturning SSM. Apparently the only legal way to do that is to overrule a portion of the nation's Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That would be akin to picking one of the U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights Amendments say stopping using it (think no freedom of religion, for example). Canadians are as fond of the Charter as we are of our Bill of Rights. Even hinting at playing with it has burned Harper.

Now he has been reduced to courting the right-wing voters by continuting to promise SSM action, while saying he'd never use the opt-out clause of the Charter. That's basically impossible and to many, he looks like an ass.

In an effort that makes him more moke-like, Harper also tried the inane tactic the anti-SSM folk here in Massachusetts have taken. He claims to be thoroughly opposed to same-sex marriage, but he'll make sure that any existing ones remain. Huh? That is as risible in Boston as in Montreal.

In theory, Harper could win without raping the Charter. He might also fly with his arms. To do the former, he would have to win votes in both houses of Parliament, including the Liberal-controlled Senate. Next the national Supreme Court would have to support the vote and reverse its previous position that SSM is legal. When Tory leaders fly unaided...

Now there are 37 days before the election. The minor parties are scampering about, nipping first at Martin, pointing to the financial scandals from the previous Liberal administration. Then they turn to attack Harper. We can be assured that behind the displays they are seeing what deals they can get if they align with either party. Liberals would need only one of these parties to have a scant majority.

Martin has his other problems, particularly the trade rift with the United States. He is vulnerable. If Harper is as smart as he claims to be, he'll leave the SSM issues alone and go after the biggies. So far though, he seems to think the anti-gay vote is crucial. Whether he has already alienated them by promising to leave the Charter alone remains to be seen. We're betting he has. Meanwhile Martin gets to play the card that, unlike Harper, he'll never try to divide the citizens.

For final giggles, Harper got caught a couple of times in recent debates. In Vancouver, he responded to how he could react if one of his two children were gay. He said, "It's the job of a parent to always lover our children. I love mychildren and will love them for all their life." Hmmm, hard-line it is not. Then he must have made his handlers shake when he called French the nation's second language.

Canadian politics is simply more fun.

Thinking Spooks

My disclaimer for a recent post on the USA PATRIOT Act goes back a few years. Well, more than a few years...I'm a blogger alter kaker.

Let us step back in time to the thrilling days of yesteryear. There are rednecks, FBI agents, and 25¢ cans of beer. Those who know my wispy, cotton-candy head now may find it hard to believe that I once had long, blond waves — and even back then an earring. Today, you could go into any bar in rural Massachusetts or Idaho and see a lot of blue-collar conservatives who look like that. It was not the norm in South Carolina in the Viet Nam era.

Foolishly choosing to pay my own college way and hiding from the military, I combined summer lifeguard savings with a state academic scholarship and swim-team meal ticket and dorm fees to do just that. That ended up meaning the first Land Grant college (1801) with the first separate college library (1803) and one of the first journalism schools in America, the party school, the University of South Carolina.

A big, blond hippie who wrote pinko college newspaper columns was, shall we say, obvious there and then. It was not exactly a boy named Sue, but I did learn to deal with unpleasant right-wingers in both verbal and physical confrontations. Crush 'em like worms, said I.

However, two experiences in an apartment near campus come to mind immediately when I think of those who take liberties with my liberty. It was the same location and invasions from the left and from the right.

One evening, I returned home. When I opened my door, I found I chum standing there with a revolver pointed at my small intestine. It was the relatively well known radical Brett Bursey. Not only was he prepared to defend himself paranoically from the cops with his pistol — after breaking into my apartment — he had also tied my sheets together to let himself out of the second-floor window if necessary to escape. Recognizing me, he decided not to shoot me, but he left out the front door, leaving me to unknot my sheets.

Some months later, I returned from a class and saw that the door was open. This time, it was two FBI agents whom I recognized. They were reading my correspondence (pre-email, remember). When I entered, they were as cool as Mission Impossible characters. They dropped the papers and without a word, pushed past me.

Perhaps not surprisingly, a decade later when I asked for my FBI records under the Freedom of Information Act, there was no record. Newspaper chums had verified that I was among the people the spooks followed and photographed at an anti-war coffee house as well as on campus and in demonstrations, but no record. One must wonder how many paper shredders the protectors of our national security must wear out in a decade.

As a minor player in these dramas, I have long ago lost patience with those who would protect America by harrying Americans.

Paying for PATRIOT

Think back to when a doctor didn't know what was going on with you or a family member. The doctor said to take some painful and expensive, and maybe unnecessary, test. If anyone pushed back or asked for a reason, the doctor would say, "Well, you can do what you want, but if you don't take this test, you're robbing us of the only good diagnostic tool we have."

There is the current Bush administration and usually its Republican Congress. They have worked very hard — and incompetently — to make us less safe and less secure. Along the way and until today unfettered, they have both openly and surreptitiously worked to strip us of our long-loved and assumed rights and freedoms.

By a disturbingly small margin, the U.S. Senate came down on the right side of Americanism today. It rejected closing the debate on the speciously named USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, hardy har). George the Lesser needed 60 votes to force a vote in the Senate. The vote was 52 to 47, with two Democrats going to the Dark Side and five Republicans being moral.

In contrast, the House renewed this assault on American liberty Wednesday 251 to 174. Then again, that body has the deserved reputation as the more puerile and emotional of the chambers.

All the papers and wires are carrying the story. The Washington Post recapped the effect of the law:

The Patriot Act, approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, made it easier for the FBI to conduct secret searches, monitor telephone calls and e-mails, and obtain bank records and other personal documents in connection with terrorism investigations. Critics said the proposed renewal would do too little to let targeted people challenge national security letters and special subpoenas that give the FBI substantial latitude in deciding what records -- including those from libraries -- should be surrendered.

The obvious and unanswerable question is what are these bozo Congressmen thinking or drinking? They can say that real freedom is letting any crackpot get a gun without a permit or waiting period. Yet, it is okay to spy on, lie to and even physically abuse Americans and visitors. That's not the way the WWII folk raised their Boomer kids. We don't buy it.

In a beautiful synchronization, the NY Times broke the story that our what-me-worry? and what-me-think? President authorized the ultra-secret National Security Administration to intercept and record or copy the calls and emails of possibly thousands of Americans without showing cause. [Search warrants? We don't have no warrants. We don't need no stinking warrants!]

That may sink into the skulls of even the most mindless of the Administration's supporters.

Let us be thankful that the Senate may have queered George the Lesser's authoritarian anti-democracy. May it be a trend and may the House get its house in order.

Dark Side Petition Hordes

Good on MassEquality. They are going to cull the 147,000 signatures to put an amendment to rescind same-sex marriage on the 2008 ballot.

They do not expect to find 81,000 fraudulent signatures, which would nullify the petition drive. However, according to an article in Bay Windows. "MassEquality expects to find numerous examples of fraud, and the organization hopes that will discredit the effort to pass the amendment."

Conga-rats: BW interviewed then political director, Marc Solomon. The board just promoted him as the new head of the organization, with the title Campaign Director. It couldn't happen to a more driven and efficient guy.

Citizens using KnowThyNeighbor.org and MassEquality only have until January 6th to protest fraud. And they can't even get to work until the Secretary of State releases the lists, maybe at the end of this week.

His take on the doomed effort is:

The overall goal is to highlight that the integrity of this process is being undermined and to show that our opponents will really stop at nothing to advance this very extreme and very mean-spirited amendment. And that includes paying out-of-state signature collectors who use deceptive and sometimes fraudulent means to gather signatures.

We here have our own overlapping concerns. With ballot initiatives increasingly used here, in California and the other half of the nation where they are legal for commercial (big pharma, for one) and narrow special-interests (as in this case), it's time to return the tool to its original purpose.

A good count on how dirty this effort is should spur the legislature to examine paid petition signature gatherers and other questionable aspects of the process. That should also open the larger issue of how we can tame or at least train this initiative beast.

Yes, citizens should have a final word on irresponsible legislation. But letting crackpots crack the pot we share works very poorly. California ended up robbing the poor and middle-class, telling students that their education was unimportant and underfunded, and on and on. Also, the sleazy and dishonest anti-gay efforts in Maine and here highlight the kinds of abuse we should prevent.

It's a call to Senate President Bobby Travaglini (oops, he's Robert now that he graduated from City Council). Let's get a joint legislative committee examining this process.

This time around, we saw that the anti-SSM forces lost in a General Court vote and immediately started an almost identical drive, in clear violation of the spirit of ballot initiatives. Likewise, indecisive AG Tom Reilly pretended that the new one does not violate the commonwealth constitutional prohibition against trying to overturn judicial decisions.

We state it now, even though the existing format for ballot initiatives would benefit left-wing special interests as well, the current methods are dirty, illogical and of no service to the citizens. Clean 'em up. Straighten 'em up.

Re Clarkson Recap

One of the great speakers at our BlogLeft Massachusetts gathering, Frederick Clarkson, did us a double favor. In a Daily Kos post, he not only recapped some of his remarks, but he expanded on what we can expect as the Goth and Huns sweep into our commonwealth to pound on same-sex marriage.

He makes it plain how the odious James Dobson fits into this drive. As Clarkson starts his piece:

Even as gay and lesbian civil rights have dramatically progressed in the past few decades, there is no question that the religious right has mounted an organized and often, hate-infused backlash movement. The particular wedge issue for the religious right these days, is marriage equality.

Marriage equality promises to be one of the central issues of our time. I live in Massachusetts, where an antimarriage equality amendment will probably be on the ballot in 2008.

It will change political life in my state forever.

Give him a read. It looks like stormy seas.

Reilly Tries Roots

Like an kid with ADHD, our Mitt Romney has turned away. We won't miss his ineffectual governorship, but hey, Capt. Brylcreem is a caricaturist's dream. Tom Reilly has the turtle look, Deval Patrick is baby-faced, and Kerry Healey does the bobble-head doll thing, but none of them is as smarmy as the Captain.

Romney's announcement that he would not run for re-election was non-news after he had all but said it for most of the year. Yet, it lets loose the dogs.

• Healey can campaign openly and try to pretend she has been doing worthwhile things in a worthless office.
• Reilly will be able to present himself as the only real chance to keep yet another Republican from keeping the commonwealth government inert.
• Patrick gets his one, big, long shot at proving that he's not just a slick kid from Chicago.

Even before the Captain's formal withdrawal, the two Democrats were elbowing each other. The best preview may be in this week's Bay State Banner. Reporter Yawu Miller followed each as he made his best pitch in Roxbury.

Note: This link will be good for the week only.

Interestingly enough, both can appeal to the folk in African-American neighborhoods and in the Snooton and Swellsley fiefdom's. Reilly plays the commonwealth's action guy, who understands how to make things happen. Patrick is a much better speaker and he has a real platform that he has not been afraid to present to praise or potshots. Neither Reilly's indecisiveness nor Patrick's relative Blackness seems to hamper him.

Reilly had his peanut gallery of 40 when he showed at the Merengue Restaurant. He played the deep roots in the city in general and Roxbury in particular, an obvious contrast to newcomer Patrick. He is also working the State House Black Caucus for support.

At Reilly's side were former Suffolk DA Ralph Martin (Republican but well respected in minority communities), a couple of former assistant AGs, and State Representatives Marie St. Fleur and Marinie Torres. It was a feel-good time, during which he stressed his ties to Roxbury leaders.

Patrick, on the other hand, pulled in three times as many folk at the Freedom House, including a bucket of Black activists and folk representing Councilor Chuck Turner and Rep. Byron Rushing. His intro was from a tag team of Rep. Gloria Fox and Sen. Dianne Wilkerson. The latter said, "He's the best man for the job. He's going to bring the diverse communities together."

Patrick turned his presentation into his usual Q&A. Reilly hesitates to put positions out, at least yet, choosing to talk about his AG service.

The article notes, "While Patrick'’s credentials as the head of former President Clinton'’s Civil Rights Division have gotten his foot in the door, Patrick has had to make up for what he lacks in local connections with an aggressive schedule of town meetings." That's exactly what he's been up to for months.

The recap of their pitches included:

Patrick'’s message resonated with the crowd at Freedom House as readily as did Reilly'’s at Merengue. While Patrick'’s address outlined his proposed policy initiatives, Reilly focused his on his record as attorney general –— supporting Lynn'’s voluntary desegregation program, in-state tuition rates for the children of undocumented immigrants, fighting for public charities to benefit from the sale of the Boston Red Sox and other public policy victories.

This may be the race we wanted for Boston mayor, real choices and real issues.

They Have Theirs

Perhaps the prime social directive of kindergarten is to share. As kiddies grow beyond their anal and oral phases, teachers tell and model the nicety and necessity of equitable distribution of assets, physical and temporal.

So how is it that and when do we lose this, or do some of us feel so entitled that we never get the message?

We see it in education, business, politics, taxation and every aspect of adult life.

The ivy curtain of exclusion and retention of advantages suits those in power. For many such families, their advantages gelled in the 17^th, 18^th, and 19^th Centuries, prior to income taxes, anti-trust legislation and such levelers. Yet, descendants of the earlier wealthy still dominate the legal profession and legislatures at state and national levels. Of course, they take care of their own, their families and their peers.

The absurdity leads to cultural fantasies. You can see this in the trivial, such as the Good Genes dating service, with its implication that it is your genetic makeup that makes you an Ivy League student or grad and you will only be happy and pass along your superiority through breeding with other such beings. You can see it in sadder instances of

The attitude is hardly different when expressed in gerrymandered electoral districts. Here the aim may not be to keep every cent for those already wealthy. Rather, incumbents want every advantage – fair or unfair – to help them keep their office and power.

The effect in Boston as well as in Texas is to segregate by race and class, minimizing the possibility that the other might get representation in proportion to their population. That’s sharing in action and should be the American way. Let us pause to laugh up our sleeves.

Now Tom DeLay’s extreme gerrymandering to deliver control of the state government to Republicans faces U.S. Supreme Court examination. Texas conservatives may or may not have to share and be fair. Regardless, the nation gets another chance to see how down and dirty the I’m-keeping-mine attitude is in action.

Here in Boston too, we look at districts long skewed to keep the power in a few neighborhoods. Black and Latino citizens should have much higher representation than they do. It would be specious to suggest that there are no good candidates or that they don’t run. The facts are that from City Council level up, Boston districts lump far too many non-White voters at every economic level into relatively homogeneous districts. They give them near total control in very, very few districts.

An equitable districting would spread out the Black and Latino voters and their influence at the polls. That would be sharing, power, democracy, and governmental resources.

The first go-round for commonwealth legislative offices after a redistricting effort produced almost no Latino candidates. Shamefully, Democratic Party officials said that proved that voters were happy with the likes of then House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran. Far more likely, it will take several election cycles to make people think they have a shot at the formerly closed spots.

A year ago, the Sudbury Town Crier wrapped up the situation and promise nicely:

It doesn't have to be like this. In some states, notably Iowa, a nonpartisan commission draws the district lines. It is prohibited from programming the voting habits of residents or the home addresses of candidates into its computer. Instead it concentrates on creating compact, coherent districts that keep communities intact and provide fair representation for minorities…

…There's no guarantee, of course, that the representatives in (Massachsuetts) districts will follow the suggestion of their constituents, and even less chance that the legislative leadership will listen to them. While few citizens may understand the power of redistricting, incumbent legislators understand it all too well, and people with power don't generally give it up without a fight….

Leftists and Technology

In light of the BlogLeft Massachusetts gang, I remembered a sermon I co-preached. It was on technology. I was for it and the minister was against it. That was 17 years ago, before the Web, but I fear many liberals are still in that technology v. people trap.

As many people have noted, U.S. conservatives, organized and individual, were way ahead of us lefties in using the Net and Web for political purposes. They still are.

Back in 1989, many liberal organizations and a lot of liberal ministers and church goers honestly spoke of how dehumanizing technology can be. To many, it was are you for people or for computers?

I chaired the board of the downtown church at the time. One of my projects was moving the staff from typewriters to computers. I had owned computers for a decade, was a frequent USENET reader and contributer, and loved BBSes. I found amazing information through Veronica and Gopher.

Note: If you are too young to know any of that, I don't want to hear about it. Go to Wikipedia or a book and get smart. It's how we got to the Web. Modems were there first and for a long time.

Anyway, I knew a lot of ministers, UUA bureaucrats and social-action folk who would rant about bad computers were. My complaining to the minister made him tell me to say it from the pulpit. He scheduled a sermon where we gave our views.

I preached several times there and suspect that the pulpit is the tallest in the city. The church can seat over 900. Being up there reminds me of when I'd dive off a five-meter tower. I was way up there and felt very alone.

I told the congregants that it was their choice whether a computer robbed them of interaction with other humans or added another dimension. I said it was how you found and spread information to people you might never know or meet.

The minister stressed that he was old school (30 years my senior) and was most comfortable with what we now call wetware. He needed to see and touch people, to watch their body language and hear their tone. He was afraid of computers.

Ironically, by the time he moved on from that church, he had his first computer. I ended up being his unpaid IT consultant. I had him writing and revising sermons and jumping to research in libraries all over the globe. Omnis flux, dude.

Now I wonder whether too many leftists see blogging and Net technologies as that minister used to — inferior to human interaction, instead of a supplement.

It's one thing to be a computer user. Virtually all Gen-X and Gen-Y Americans can rip through Microsoft Office apps, use email, instant message and find their sites on the Web. So how is it that the Republicans are the ones who use these and other technologies better than we do? One answer is that being a user/luser is a hell of a lot different from understanding how to get the most from a technology, how to make it do your bidding.

We have access to the same tools. Fortunately, catching up to Web-based technologies is a matter of days or weeks and not years.

Flogging for the Greater Good

I would like to crush the anti-SSM forces like worms. In their current rescind-gay mariage here ballot initiative, they as undemocratic, unAmerican and unlikable as one can be.

Beyond that, I agree with my chum who says that people need to be aware of what the anti folk and AG Tom Reilly have let us in for with the ballot initiative. It's going to be two year of a tremendous waste of people power, emotion, and money as they fight their losing battle. He's a traditional New Englander, frugal to the cent, who hates to see such resource abuse.

We already know that the majority of the state has moved on. They see that same-sex marriage is permissible in the commonwealth constitution all along. They also see yesterday, today and tomorrow that it's none of their business. There's their religion or not and if they don't approve of gay marriage, don't marry a homosexual.

Yet, the overwhelming sense of bloggers I spoke with at BlogLeft, including the one I chatted with from Worcester to JP, that this fight is a painful battle that we must endure for the greater good. While yokels in Texas and homophobes in Florida rush to amend their constitutions to prevent equal rights, Massachusetts has another nyah, nyah, we're better moment.

The idea of my fellow bloggers is that this is a thumb in George the Lesser's eye. When Massachusetts voters say, "Fuck off, George (and Jerry and Rush and Jeff Jacoby)," we can gloat. We shall have stood our ground, turned the haters' let-the-people-decide rubric on its head, and told the illiberal rubes to go away.

I'll mull it, but I remain to be convinced.

Monitoring Massachusetts Marriage

Out in the West, that is Western Massachusetts, that is really West of Boston, a.k.a. Worcester, at BlogLeft, one of the biggies speaking was Frederick Clarkson. He concluded his presentation with a major theme on same-sex marriage. He said that the current struggle with change the face of politics in Massachusetts forever.

"Massachusetts is ground zero," he said. He predicted that a tremendous amount of resources, financial and human, will pour into the commonwealth for this effort.

Bloggers will have a special responsibility, he added. This includes:

• Being aware of who's coming.
• Learn why they're coming.
• Keep track of what they do here.
• Help the media and political leaders understand what they are doing.

There are only two years to do this. Bloggers can make a huge difference.

More RNC Propaganda

Another variation on the theme that conservatives will twist and lie appears in today's Slate. In the case of The Grinch Who Doctored Photos, it's the Republican National Committee putting out the lies in an ad instead of through blogs.

Yet, the pattern repeats. Truth and reason are not important and not in play. It is a straight appeal to raw, negative emotions.

This example is of PhotoShopping a pic of a soldier in Iraq to make it look like he's being confronted with images of key Democrats as surrender monkeys. Not only are their quotes seriously out of context, but in the most egregious example, Barbara Boxer, is actually echoing recent comments by Donald Rumsfeld.

The analysis by John Dickerson nails the same theme as what's going on with bloggers. Stuff the truth. Assume your viewers are gut-only driven. Feed them dishonesty, so long as it gives them an emotional excuse to avoid thinking.

We simply have different audiences. I can't see that playing with lefties.

Arnold Blows It Big Time, Again

There can be little doubt of two truths now:

1. The WWII generation was misinformed when it over-stressed consistency as a virtue
2. CA Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will wait until the last moment to make the worst possible decision

Yesterday, the last possible time to grant executive clemency, he earned his name the Terminator by turning Stanley "Tookie" Williams down. His six-page order is here.

Many, with the clear exceptions of the prosecutors and victims' families, doubt Tookie's guilt in the murders of which he was convicted. Yet, few can doubt that he has been rehabilitated, is a different man than the one who organized the Crips gang, and is a strong anti-gang-violence voice.

There is no question that over two decades ago, he was a violent gang leader and an anti-social threat to the public. Yet the crimes for which he is condemned to murder by the state are very questionable.

Arnold isn't buying any of it. As his order to proceed with the execution (which occurred at 3:35 a.m. EST) concludes:

Is Williams' redemption complete and sincere, or is it just a hollow promise? Stanley Williams insists he is innocent, and that he will not and should not apologize or otherwise atone for the murders of the four victims in this case. Without an apology and atonement for these senseless and brutal killings there can be no redemption. In this case, the one thing that would be the clearest indication of complete remorse and full redemption is the one thing Williams will not do.

Clemency decisions are always difficult, and this one is no exception. After reviewing and weighing the showing Williams has made in support of his clemency request, there is nothing that compels me to nullify the jury's decision of guilt and sentence and the many court decisoins during the lat 24 years upholding the jury's decision with a grant of clemency.

This is the reasoning that brought you the Salem witch trials and Spanish Inquisition. Confess and beg for mercy, even if you are innocent, and we just might let you live...or not.

It's also along the line of Arnold's veto of the same-sex marriage bill his legislature passed. He hides here too behind the courts. He is a cowardly non-leader.

Whether it is an individual or a class of citizens, Schwarzenegger lacks compassion, lacks vision, and lacks a sense of the public weal.

He does not understand the meaning of clemency. He does not understand the power he could use for good. He must have been raised by wolverines.

Get Openness While It's There

At Saturday's BlogLeft Massachusetts gathering, I found myself refreshingly retrograding to another career in another century. Waaaaay back when, I edited a convenience-store business magazine. The collegial feeling among the bloggers even before we officially started was much the same as then.

Imagine a time when people wanted more convenience stores, when they were not every 100 yards, scrambling for the lottery and beer and Oreos money of the neighborhood. I swear, back then, the then Southland-owned 7-Eleven and Hanniford's L'il Peach managers and executives were jovial and frank and sharing with each other. There was plenty of money, lots of growth, good will and camaraderie out the ears.


A trip to the national convention was a jolly business fraternity in party mode. Everyone talked about what worked best and what would help the industry to grow.

There's no reason to suppose that blogging will become as petty, price-conscious and competitive as the gas, rolling paper and Bud Light business. A few of the guys at the gathering make decent money from advertising, but almost all of us are there because it is both fun and fulfilling.

It is a pseudo-business that has those good vibes. We talked about how we get more readers and what makes our work easier. May it ever be so.

Turn Left(y)

It took over a day to percolate into my thick skull, but an undercurrent from the BlogLeft Massachusetts symposium (at least of coffee) was how important LeftyBlogs is to us. In conversations and at breakout sessions, this service that provides links to current pinko postings came up, with major praise.

Note: Many of us members put the BlogWire on our front page (left on this one, of course). You can click on a current post or on the logo to go directly to the LB site.

At Satruday's gathering, at a breakout session, the moderator asked those at the table what must-view sites and blogs we visited daily. The most consistent one I heard was LeftyBlogs, followed with comments about how it was the best way to keep track, to check on other parts of the country, to drill down to a given state, and get a flavor of how your favorite issue is covered by others.

If you haven't visited, do it, bookmark it, and use it.

If you have a left tilting blog, you ought to let us see what you are up to by joining.

By the bye, when you visit, you can click on the state you want to see posts from (local or all from there). You can also go to the home page, where they show the current most popular clicks. You can choose the day or week of those.

Often, there's a reason -- hot topic, breaking news, good writing -- for the top clicks. By way of warning though, be aware that if you join, the readers may not agree that your latest brilliance is all that interesting. It's a good sanity check.

When RC = Real Crazies

The Boston Globe's Eileen McNamara can be pretty flaky on political issues. Yet, she knows and calls her loons when she hears them.

Today's piece, Zealots mask real struggles, nails the crackpots who identify themselves as speaking for Roman Catholics. They want to take funds from Catholic Charities because the organization is honoring Tommy Menino for his good deeds. That's the cash that would clothe and feed the poor, feed the hungry, and like Jesus said...

She testifies against Bill Cotter, C.J. Doyle and Carol McKinley. As she puts it:

They are a tiny band of antiabortion zealots, being exploited by the hierarchy in hopes of promoting a backlash against reformers outraged by the criminal conduct of predatory priests and the bishops who protected them.

These folks do not just miss the Latin Mass; they miss Cardinal Bernard Law.

She makes it real.

Building Budding Bloggers

As befitting activists, we ended the BlogLeft Massachusetts gathering-like-thing yesterday with questions about what to do next. Liberals, pinkos, progressives and plain old Democrats accomplish the most good when they have a to-do list in hand.

One intriguing goal was to host blogging workshops, mini-schools to spread the joys, distractions, and primarily the skills. That's one of high interest and sure to happen.


If you're thinking, why bother, come with me to the misty yesterday or well, yesterday. Jon Garfunkel of Civilities.net (he likes to portray himself as an ezine guy, not a blogger, but we know what he is) led the technologies and futures breakout session.

Perhaps the most intriguing rant was from the multi-phasic ubergeek cos. He contended that we have plenty of technologies at our disposal already. On the other hand, he knows that these can be applied much better to the tasks of informing and persuading.

The proper strategy, he said to much approval around the table, is for existing bloggers to teach as many non-bloggers the how and why of it. Sharing what we do, what works best, what's efficient, how to get info, and how to implement can flatten the ramp considerably for others.

This can be everything from how to set up, how to blog and what makes it easiest. It can mean the HTML and the Wikis and the other tools. The idea is to save others from our mistakes and get them analyzing and publishing.

After that, one or more somebodies will come up with the best ideas on how to use and expand those technologies.

Evil That Bloggers Do

We know it, but it was still a sad shock to see Conservative Blogs are More Effective in today's NY Times maggy. This brings up the questions about whether liberals could...or should...do the same things to get our points across.

Key points in the times mini-article (part of the annual ideas or things-that-make-you-go-hmmmm issue) include:

• Left-wingers tend to blog ideas.

• Right-wingers go straight for an emotional appeal, regardless of truth or reason.

• Right-wing radio and TV are eager to broadcast the conservative tripe, even if they know it is false.

So the questions remaining are can pinkos catch up to the Dark Side, which jumped on radio and on the Web while we were thinking deep and altruistic thoughts? Can we create a network of broadcast media eager to spread our messages? Perhaps most important, should we, any of us, consider the raw, manipulative tactics of the worst of the right-wing bloggers?

We can dismiss the last one quickly, or we can consider it. Both fortunately and unfortunately, lefties tend not to swallow and repeat emotional crap. That makes our messages more lasting, but harder to disseminate.

On the other hand, our traditional way can work. Take last summer and this fall's Maine battle to keep the anti-gay discrimination laws and wording. Twice before, hateful and dishonest arch-conservatives pulled every emotional trick they could to predict the most dire consequences if homosexuals were offered basic legal protections.

This time they lost to a honest, smart and reasoned campaign by left-wingers. They tried the same lies and distortions, but Maine Won't Discriminate and their buddies won with honor and honesty. It certainly didn't hurt that all the dreadful untruths that the Christian Civic League and their partners in spite were increasingly obviously false. Simply put, the voters knew gay men and women, and knew they were neither monsters nor citizens who should be denied the rights the rest of us take for granted.

So here we are looking at Republican lies that have already cost the lives of thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis. Right-wing bloggers still fling fallacies frequently. The Rush-type radio talkers push every innuendo, calumny and deceit as not only truth, but truth that proves liberals and real leftists are wrong.

What's a leftist blogger to do?

I honestly can't see the left-wing blog world turning to lies and gut-over-brain appeals. If the proven, impeachable lies that put us into war in Iraq will not convince those of small minds, our gnawing on that bone won't either. The right-wing blogger/broadcast support is neither our audience nor the forces that will eventually prevail.

Our future seems to be as we must in Massachusetts and as they did in Maine. Make it true, make it right, make it real, and we eventually prevail. It is the preponderance of the small.

As the Boomers did with the Viet Nam War, pound and pelt and prove. Eventually, the scales fall from the eyes of the voters. Thne even Tricky Dick or George the Lesser give it up.

It's a damned pity that the bullies who can't play fair or tell the truth start out with an advantage. They lose in the end though.

Sticky Bloggers

It was a mass, a gathering, a thingummy of fun and education and maybe importance. The first BlogLeft Massachusetts met today. If you read local pinko blogs, you'll become aware of it.


You can catch up on the formerly live blogging at Political Cortex. Then head to blogs you likely already read (or should) for their takes. We'll have material here in the next few days.

Among other bloggers who attended and will provide their views are:

• Beyond 495

• Blue Mass Group

• Blogging of the President (Stirling Newberry)

• Chimes at Midnight

• The Eisenthal Report

• Frederick Clarkson

• Left Center Left

• Left In Lowell

Be There or Be Here!

One small blog for pinkos. One giant something or other, yet to be determined.

Today is a something or other for us, the leftist bloggers of the Bay State. There shall be live blogging at Political Cortex from our first BlogLeft Massachusetts gathering.

It's a big deal to us. Let us heap praise on Lynne from Left in Lowell with help from Mariposa from Beyond 495 for creating and organizing this gathering of bloggers.
We are not worthy — that has never stopped us from posting or talking.

Live coverage of the sessions and various bloggers' views on blogging, bloggers and BlogLeft shall be at Political Cortex and perhaps mirrored in several of our blogs, but head to PC first. Chatter will probably be from around 11 a.m. to 4 p.m. or so.

By the bye, some politicianss and aspirants recognize the value of this gathering and will be there at breaks to wow us.

Do yourself and us a favor and cyber-drop. Then check the live poster's blogs in the next couple days for recaps and our usual éclat.

Why Fry?

News from Japan this week is that a group of 100 legislators are ready to give another try to banning murdering their citizens in the name of justice. They announced to the international conference on capital punishment that they would propose a new sentence there — life without parole.

So, you'd think that was non-news in low gun-owning, low crime-rate Nippon, eh?

Consider, if you will, that two First World countries alone continue to kill convicted criminals. The other is the dirty mirror image, high-crime, high-gun-owning USA.

We are in terrible company. Almost to a one, death-dealing countries are underdeveloped ones run by autocrats and which actively repress their citizens. Think Afghanistan, China, Congo, Malaysia, Nigeria, Iran, North Korea, Syria. You can see a list of who kills here.

We can't expect knowing that we are standing almost alone among industrialized nations to cut it. Americans in general and our top leaders in particular can take a peculiar pride in standing alone, allegedly for what's right. That's the American way, that's the pioneer spirit, and in this case, it's the dunce chair.

We do know that:

• Capital punishment does not deter crime.
• Many innocent people have died at the hands of government officials.
• The religions whose fundamentalists drip the blood of retribution from their lips all forbid killing.
• Murder by the state is still murder.

All of our peers, excepting Japan, have outlawed the death penalty, some over a century ago. They view it for what it is, illogical barbarism.

The head of the Japanese national lawmakers who will propose a ban there, Shizuka Kamei, notes, "If simply asked whether a person who commited an atrocious crime should be executed, it is natural to say yes. But there are cases in which criminals can be transformed into Buddha-like people who feel deep regret."

This is the stated intent of our criminal codes as well as our creeds.

So, a country that has hanged one criminal this year is ready to give into compassion and reason.

Blogger Outing, So to Speak

Full of Ourselves Friday will certainly be followed by Self-Concerned Saturday. I love it.

Tomorrow from almost downtown near almost beautiful Worcester, we're in a self-absorbed bloggers gathering, BlogLeft Massachusetts. There shall be laughter, caffeine ingestion, interaction with each other, and multiple foci on blogging.

Live coverage of the sessions and various bloggers' views on blogging, bloggers and BlogLeft as they unfold will appear at Political Cortex. We begin perking in late morning, continuing to 4-ish.

Be virtually there!

Rocky Mountain Activist

Two generations back, ketchup kings were archconservative bigots funding countless right-wing efforts. A new generation of late Baby Boomers has been coming down on the good side.

One of the latest to put millions where it can work is Denver's Tim Gill.

He founded Quark Inc. and put most of his millions into the Gill Foundation. It is a do-gooder group, with a concentration on GLBT projects. Not surprisingly, Gill is gay.

Then in August, he established the Gill Action Fund, described in the Denver Post as "national in scope and bankrolled entirely by the high-tech millionaire."

Note: Some of the best articles on his efforts are in the New York Times, but they require a subscription to Times Select to view them. If you have a sub, search for him by name.

Amusingly the best article on the subject "A Hands-On Generation Transforms the Landscape of Philosophy," is by everybody's favorite reporter, Judith Miller, from December 9, 1997. She notes that he began in reaction to the dreadful Colorado Amendment 2, which state voters passed to prohibit cities and towns from protecting homosexuals from discrimnation. Of that, the then head of the Foundation said, "Tim realized that he had to help educate people about gay and lesbian issues."

The Gill Action Fund "will oppose planned initiatives next fall to constitutionally bar gay marriage in Colorado, California and other states. The group also will seek to steer wealthy donors nationwide toward supporting candidates at the state and local level." Gill says that he wants to elect "our friends" and punish "the wicked," as he calls anti-gay politicians.

He gets considerable support from Jared Polis, another Colorado high-tech god, and Pat Stryker, billionaire heiress to a medical-supply giant.

Guys with big bucks trying to bring equality rather than hold down those unlike themselves has a history. But it is still odd enough that people are unsure how effective it will be. According to the Post article, Michael Brewer of the GLBT Community Center of Colorado said that Gill Action is a "step toward leveling the political playing field."

Poison Petitions Pending

Now it's Massachusetts Secretary of State Francis Galvin's turn to be overwhelmed by anti-same-sex marriage petitions. They are arriving from the cities and towns for his office to certify.

Pro-SSM forces expect certification. A comprehensive piece on the developments and options for the pro-SSM folk is here. The short of it is that even with many fraudulent signatures, there will surely be the nearly 66,000 required. GLAD will argue that the commonwealth constitution forbids this effort to overturn a judicial decision. To be argued...to be decided.

Still for giggles and as a reference for legislators who will surely have to revisit such ballot initiatives gone amok, check with KnowThyNeighbor.org to be sure your name is not on a petition that you did not sign.

Sulking, Spewing Soltani

You can hear it here and read it here. In New Hampshire, the commission to consider implications of same-sex marriage and civil unions was and shall remain an insult to the state's citizens and a farce showing the worst of American conservatives.

Note: The hearing link above opens an MP3 and the reading one brings up pages linking to PDF files.

The kindest view one could take is that this is an extreme cautionary tale of the abuse of a state legislature dominated by one party. We in Massachusetts should take it as a warning. We generally tolerate our worst bigots in the General Court as though they were odd animals in a zoo. Let's not appoint them to head public commissions.

The dumb and puerile rants of the commission's chair, Tony Soltani, are in the clip. With arrogance as large as his intellect is teeny and his egotism as overt as his compassion is non-existent, Tiny Tony screams his irrational feelings at a reporter in a public meeting. If you ever needed an example of the disdain which ultra conservative Republicans have for the public in its right to be informed and be heard, keep a copy of this clip handy. When a Karl Rove or other professional liar talks about only being reasonable, play the clip to remind yourself.

As related reminders:

• When someone says, "I have a quick question," be aware that the question is unlikely to be quick and it certainly will require an elaborate and long answer. The burden is on you.
• When someone says, "It's not the money. It's the principle," it is certain that is the money.
• When someone says, "I'm only being reasonable," it is certain that what follows is illogical, untrue and unreasonable, and that anyone who dares disagree will find heaps of scorn.

8ers Examined

Big up to MassResistanceWatch for pointing us to the hysterical analysis of the Amy and Brian show on blogs near you. They have been feigning or exhibiting paranoid indignation about MHAs (militant homosexual activists) plotting her undoing.

To glance is to snicker. To read is to laugh. Enjoy.

Supine Smoots

The disclaimer should be obvious. Neither the photos here nor the story has anything to do with Massachusetts marriage law, or solemnization or same-sex marriage.

However, you can't live in or visit the area at length without becoming aware of the 364.4 and an ear Smoots that mark the distance across the bridge from Boston to MIT (named not for this tool school down the river, but called The Harvard Bridge). A good natured MIT frat boy lay end over end that many times to measure the distance in October 1958. Subsequently repainted regularly, those marks let you count your passage across the Charles.

The Boston Herald recaps the etymology of Smoots in recognition of the pending retirement of the original Oliver Smoot. If you have a problem with congruity, sit before continuing.

Oliver Smoot will retire after a career in setting and regulating standards at the American National Standards Institute. As George W. Arnold, ANSI's board's chair said, "It'’s very appropriate that Ollie will always be remembered as a unit of measurement in Cambridge.. . . He'’s certainly set a standard for all of us."

There was no word on how much he has shrunk with age. We would have to wonder though, how many Smoots would the bridge be today?

The Unamerican Way

The hypocrisy of the anti-gay conservatives increases daily. It may reach levels in many states so that legislatures, attorneys general, courts and governors will have to act to protect citizens' rights.

For one detailed example, an AP analysis by David Crary describes what faces a Massachusetts married gay couple moving a short distance to Connecticut. Brian Rice and Jason Kelliher find that their new state won't recognize their marriage and that the wispy version of civil union it offers is at best a giant step backwards.

As a Lambda Legal attorney, David Buckel, put it, "There are lots of families in states where it's harder to be a strong family, where the state does everything it can to weaken you."

To wit, Rice and Kelliher can't file taxes jointly. They have to create a new, narrow will to be sure one can inherit or even care for the other. The many ordinary deeds and expectations of other marrieds are no longer theirs. Fortunately in Stamford, Rice's law firm at least offers domestic partner health benefits. That's not a given for most same-sex couples.

Meanwhile, the anti-gay, anti-SSM forces are heavily handedly about the business of doing what their Fright and Spite Circuses dishonestly said pro-SSM groups would do and have not. They are trying to use their DoMA or similar legislation to strip existing rights from same-sex couples playing by the local rules.

• In Michigan, conservatives are suing to bar local governments and public universities from offering health benefits. (How anti-capitalist, as well as anti-democracy, all in the name of kicking the gays.)
• In Nebraska, where law forbade any legal status for same-sex couples before a Federal judge struck it for unconstitutionality, the state wants to figure out how to re-pass it so that it goes into force.
• In Ohio, anti-gays want to force Miami University to stop offering health insurance for partners of employees.
• In New Jersey, Ocean County officials would not transfer death benefits to the lesbian partner of a cop dying of cancer.

How low can the Dark Side sink? I don't think decent people can even imagine. It is to the alert and freedom-minded to counter them as they try to drag everyone down.

Taking basic rights from any group that has them is not what the country should be about.

No Concord in NH

A lesson in Concord, New Hampshire, is that there will be no accord or concordance if an autocrat (and bigot) heads a public commission.

The very narrow-minded, extremely divisive chair of the commission to study marriages (Tony Soltani, left) got his way. The state will suffer for it.

The charge to the commission was to hold public hearings and consider in light of legal and cultural changes whether marriage and related laws might be due for re-examination and alteration. The clear undertone was whether New Hampshire's lawmakers should think about and talk about the New England neighbors' changes — civil unions in Vermont and Connecticut and same-sex marriage in Massachusetts.

The state rep with the wide belly and constricted mind knew the answer going in. His commission would not recommend any consideration for the realities of this century. No quarter for queers, not from Tony.

Don't talk about it. Don't think about it. Forget about it!

His heavy handed majority report may not sway the state, either the public or the legislature. Hundreds testified, only to find their thoughts and feelings ignored in the majority report. Less ham-handed haters in the legislature are likely to be more sensitive to voters and not assume all are anti-gay and anti-SSM.

According to the Concord Monitor, the minority report that the commission was "nearly a complete failure (and) a disgrace" won't forget about it. "House Speaker Douglas Scamman said he hasn't read the report yet, but he hopes further discussion on the same-sex marriage will proceed differently. 'I'm glad that the commission is done,' he said. 'Hopefully the House and the Senate will receive it in a more orderly fashion than some of the meetings went.'"

That wouldn't be hard.

It will certainly be amusing if Soltani's bluster and bigotry ends up with yawns and turned backs. If the other lawmakers believe they are there to do the voter's business, that wil happen. Long-term, it may prove as minority commission member Rep. Steve Valliancourt said, Fifty years from now, when gay marriage has become a fait accompli and everyone realizes that it's something that should have happened a lot sooner, history will look back in shame at what this commission has decided to do."

Smart Kansas Talk

In refreshing proof that Kansas has smart people as well fundies, Supreme Court Chief Justice Kay McFarland wove a plain, strong web of reason about Massachusetts' judicial interpretation favoring same-sex marriage.

Taking on the let-the-people-decide-what-rights-to-share forces, she said, "Judges should not put their fingers up and see which way the wind is blowing. That's at the heart of judicial independence."

During a workshop for judges and newspaper sorts, she added, "Unfortunately, we're in a time where people who are in some very responsible positions and who shouldn't be in the category of extremists are stating extreme views." She cited both the Massachusetts SJC ruling and the Florida decision to remove Terry Schiavo's feeding tube.

Judges are supposed to uphold the rule of law and not bow to popular opinion, she noted. In addition, other judges in the workshop said that Americans didn't know enough about how courts work.

This was not entirely centered on our commonwealth law. However, we would note that the history of this nation has been until recently that what is not forbidden is permitted. The Baby Boomers heard growing up that this differentiated us from Soviet Russians, who lived where what was not specifically permitted was forbidden.

It appears that many special interest groups as well as politicians and our POTUS would like to force their politics and religion on everyone, heading toward just the type of restrictions that dictatorial states foster. How can our leaders demand that other nations aim toward freeing their citizens while our own leaders want to limit ours?

New Hampshire Very Much Minority Report

As foretold in the sneaked report, the anti-gay majority of the New Hampshire state commission to study marriage spit on homosexuals. As predictable, the minority report harshly criticized the results. Both sides have nothing but ill to speak of the other.

Animosity from the commission chair, Republican (need that be said) Rep. Tony Soltani extended to reporter Beverley Wang, whose article on the results appear here. She noted that he accused her of misquoting him but did not provide any specifics.

Her recap of the majority version includes:

(Recommendation) against gay marriage or civil unions and recommended amending the New Hampshire Constitution to limit marriage to unions between one man and one woman.

The majority said gay marriage is not a civil rights issue, that homosexuality is a choice because no "gay gene" exists, and that more study is needed before New Hampshire allows adoption for same sex couples. Gays and lesbians can adopt in New Hampshire, but only as single parents.

Of course, the minority had taken the charge to study marriage seriously and disagreed with the lack of any meaningful analysis or respect for citizen testimony. Its opposition report included, "We in the minority believe that the majority report evidences nearly a complete failure to address the commission's mandate." This version supported either same-sex marriage or civil unions.

It continued:

In part, the majority accomplished so little because the commission sought more to put gay people on trial than to consider the full scope of policy issues before it. Throughout its proceedings, the majority forced the commission to plod through antiquated and demonizing debates about whether gay men and lesbians are psychologically stable, transmit disease through acts of sexual intimacy, or are biologically aberrant.

Bizarrely enough, Soltani said that he was "disappointed by the minority report." He accused it of attacking individual majority members and said he "would be embarrassed to submit that."

Thus, avoiding personal responsibility seems increasingly a Republican hallmark.

Picking Petition Nits

Two aspects of the current Massachusetts anti-SSM ballot initiative petitions seem sure:

• Enough signatures will receive clerk certification to allow the process to proceed
• GLAD will try to derail the effort in court

We confess that from the beginning, we found this petition drive illegal. However, Massachusetts Attorney General Tom Reilly disagreed and had the power.

The current Bay Windows does a nice job laying out the issues on the commonwealth constitution's Article 48 or more formally XLVIII. It includes:

Excluded Matters. - No measure that relates to religion, religious practices or religious institutions; or to the appointment, qualification, tenure, removal, recall or compensation of judges; or to the reversal of a judicial decision; or to the powers, creation or abolition of courts; or the operation of which is restricted to a particular town, city or other political division or to particular districts or localities of the commonwealth; or that makes a specific appropriation of money from the treasury of the commonwealth, shall be proposed by an initiative petition; but if a law approved by the people is not repealed, the general court shall raise by taxation or otherwise and shall appropriate such money as may be necessary to carry such law into effect.

The key there is an initiative that relates "....to the reversal of a judicial decision..."

That seems straightforward enough. This initiative certainly wants to reverse the Supreme Judicial Court's SSM decision. However, Reilly interpreted it to only law going forward, not to existing decisions. (Hmmm, do you think his political ambitions to become governor have anything to do with his view?)

BW found a constitutional-law expert who predicts some word twisting, mind bending debate before the SJC on this. Northeastern University School of Law Associate Professor Margaret Burnham said, ""I think this turns entirely on a fairly complicated legislative history having to do with what the Massachusetts legislature intended in adopting Article 48 and how they intended the language barring initiatives [relating to] the reverse of a judicial decision to be applied."

She favors GLAD's view, as does the founder and general counsel of the National Voting Rights Institute, John Bonifaz. As he put it, "If people want to try to argue that this initiative is something different than reversing the Goodridge decision, I think that they'll have a tough time making that [argument] with a straight face."

However, you can be sure that if GLAD gets to the SJC on this, anti-SSM folk will try that argument. Then, if they lose, we can expect another assault from a different flank by the same forces.

Punishing Petition Plethora

As foretold by many, the anti-same-sex marriage folk have apparently won the first skirmish in a two-year fight. Over 100,000 signatures is far too many for the relatively poor and loosely organized pro-SSM folk to analyze in a few weeks.

Co-Chair Arline Isaacson of Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus admitted that they had neither the funds nor the time nor the volunteers to weed out the fraudulent signatures to see what the real count was. "The system is stacked in favor of those who would commit fraud or forgery because the burden of proof is so high."

Meanwhile, all petitions should get their local certifications from town and city clerks and get to the Secretary of State's office by yesterday. From there, KnowThyNeighbor.org will make lists available per area, so that you can check whether you are on there and if necessary protest. However, there's only a month for that (January 6th).

Regardless, it is extremely unlikely that such challenges will reduce the figure significantly. It makes sound political and moral sense to go through the process though. This has been a stinking, cheating petition process and a record of just how bad will help in future decisions about regulating petition drives.

So, like the annual groundhog ritual, it looks like the big, uglies have popped up. We have more bitter winter of division in the works.

Method in Harper's Madness?

Obnoxious, abrasive, exclusionary...and canny? Well in Ottawa, CNEWS writer Michelle MacAfee suggests Tory Leader Stephen Harper did his party a big favor in blustering about overturning same-sex marriage within minutes of the confidence vote.

As the article puts it, he took the right choice between "lance the boil quickly or let the tension drain slowly and painfully." It quotes University of Manitoba political scientist Paul Thomas:

My first thought was this is not a ground you want to fight the election on — that's really stupid. But then, as I thought about it more, I realized it was a calculated judgment. I don't think there's a huge downside, and it may provide protection against it surfacing later.

Other observers think the marriage issue, which he cannot deliver on, is a loser. It will distract from ethics, where he has the temporary advantage.

Meanwhile the NDP won't support opening the marriage issue. Polls show that voters have already moved beyond it. Harper has also alienated the Parti Québécois, which has an openly gay leader. The latter is particularly bad for the Tories, as that province has a lot of votes and is a key to January's election.