Alabama hates dildoes. And the 11th Circuit agrees. Says Law.com (link from Sully):

Americans do not have a fundamental right to sexual privacy, a 2-1 decision of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said on Wednesday.

The split panel upheld an Alabama law — nearly identical to one in Georgia — that made the sale of sex toys a crime punishable by up to a year in prison.

This would be funny if it weren’t so ridiculous. Please, somebody, show me the government that is SO successful at defending our borders, educating our children, healing the sick and feeding the hungry that it has time to legislate and deliberate about what products consenting adults should be allowed to put in various orifices! Hint: it bloody well is NOT Alabama, where a decent number of people still lack indoor plumbing.

If there was any true conservatism left in the “conservative” movement, they would take one look at this issue and go, “Oooh, don’t go there!” But 25 years into the “Reagan revolution,” there is apparently nowhere too private, too personal, or too petty for the government to try to insert its prying fingers. And yes, that’s exactly the metaphor I wanted–it’s almost as if the conservatives are after a government monopoly on the right to drive that dildo home. A vote for Bush is a vote to bend over for the Gross Old Proctologists! My fellow Americans, I say to you now, there is not enough lube in this great country of ours to make that prospect even remotely enjoyable.

So I guess I missed this amusing story about USA Today’s decision not to run a particularly stupid piece by Ann Coulter on the Democratic Convention. Human Events Online published the squashed piece, along with the editorial comments from USA Today, which tend to be along the lines of “I don’t get it,” and “Is that last sentence supposed to be sarcastic? If so, you sure lost me.” The comments definitely make the piece more readable. In addition to the usual Ann Coulter tirade of unreasoned conservatism, the article is really just weird and sort of gives one the impression that Coulter isn’t actually at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston, but maybe traveling in time back to the 1968 one. For example, following up on her assertion that all of the “pretty girls” at the convention are actually conservative infiltrators, she asserts:

As for the pretty girls, I can only guess that it’s because liberal boys never try to make a move on you without the UN Security Council’s approval. Plus, it’s no fun riding around in those dinky little hybrid cars. My pretty-girl allies stick out like a sore thumb amongst the corn-fed, no make-up, natural fiber, no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, hirsute, somewhat fragrant hippie chick pie wagons they call “women” at the Democratic National Convention.

I’m not actually sure what to make of this paragraph. Is this to say that all of the democratic women are midwestern granola types? Isn’t that what corn-fed implies–from the cornbelt? So then what happened to all the East Coast liberal elitists her ilk is always accusing the left of using to fill it ranks? And “hippie chick pie wagon”? I’m not sure I can even begin to parse that one. Pie wagon? So we’ve got a whole bunch of tye-dye wearing, unwashed, midwesterners who showed up driving antique Fords? Because I’m not seeing much of that in the images from the current party in Boston.

In response to USA Today’s decision not to run the piece, Coulter said, Apparently USA Today doesn’t like my ‘tone,’ humor, sarcasm, etc. etc., which raises the intriguing question of why they hired me to write for them in the first place. Perhaps they thought they were getting Catherine Coulter.”

Or perhaps they thought they were getting a columnist who could write a somewhat controversial, snappy, and amusing opinion piece. I would argue that they were somewhat misguided in believing Ann could deliver on that promise, but I’m sure they were not expecting a piece that sounds like it was generated by one of those automated applications that piece together strings of keywords and phrases to assemble an opinion piece: it uses plenty of the right words, but still doesn’t make any sense.

If it weren’t such good news for Kerry, this news would cause my head to explode. Falwell will pray, pray, pray! the Republican National Convention into session in New York next month.

While the media had a field day with Al Sharpton hitting W a little harder than the script read, do you think they will recap some of Falwell’s greatest hits? Who can forget Christofacist ramblings like these?

“I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say, ‘You helped this happen.’”
– Rev. Jerry Falwell, 9/12/01, quoted in “God Gave U.S. ‘What We Deserve,’ Falwell Says,” The Washington Post 9/14/2001

“The idea that religion and politics don’t mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.”
–Sermon, July 4, 1976

“I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!”
–America Can Be Saved, 1979

“The Bible is the inerrant … word of the living God. It is absolutely infallible,without error in all matters pertaining to faith and practice, as well as in areas such as geography, science, history, etc.”
– Finding Inner Peace and Strength, 1982

“AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals; it is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”
–CBC television debate debate between Falwell and gay minister Rev. Troy Perry, 7/6/83

Falwell isn’t just some kooky preacher. He founded the group “Moral Majority” that spawned the “Christian Right” politcal apparatus and has done more than any one person to twist the faith of my fathers into a hateful force bent on hijacking our democratic process with the ultimate goal of asserting theocracy. Before Pat Robertson, before Ralph Reed, there was Falwell, spouting a doctrine that sucks all the love out of Christ’s ministry and replaces it with fear and discord. He is simply a false prophet, and the Bible he finds infallible is pretty explicit about what happens to them in The End. Let me just say, if I’m wrong, and Falwell ends up in Heaven I’ll be happy to enjoy brimstone cocktails with Beelzebub every day at 5 for all eternity.

We had been hearing that the RNC wanted to keep the convention mainstream, but the far-right was pissed that prime slots were going to moderates like Rudy and Ahnold. And we know how thoroughly they have W by the, um, ear. If this is how the convention is starting it will likely turn into a repeat of 1992–where the Christian Coalition flexed its muscle and Pat Buchanan’s “religious war in America” invocation terrified reasonable Americans and helped elect Clinton.

The great Seattle-based “Lawyers, Guns and Money” blog is a joy. We need to meet these guys. The following comment, from the post Refighting the Civil War: the correct rhetorical response is one of the best few sentences I’ve ever read in a blog.

“States’ rights” is, of course, a constitutionally meaningless term. In the context of American constitutionalism, to talk about governments having rights is a giant non-sequitur. States have powers; rights belong to individuals. What “states’ rights” means is “rhetorical cover for policies that are completely indefensible on their merits,” and when one understands this it makes perfect sense to say that southern secession was about “states’ rights.”

But more importantly, it’s baffling that it’s apologists for apartheid police sta…er, “federalism” that bring this up. The obvious response to this line of reasoning is “sure, the Civil War was fought for states’ rights. And states’ rights lost. Better luck at the track, assholes!” The Civil War seems to be the only conflict in which history was largely written by the losers…

Hats off, gentlemen. We’ll footnote you next time we get the chance to use this amazing slapdown. (And imagine our joy that it’s an Ann Coulter slapdown!)

KIRO has all the restaurant inspection violation date here. If you page through, you’ll see restaurants like Toi and 5 Spot as well as Las Margaritas and Nibbana Thai–two eateries near my office that I eat at all the time. Or at least used to.

Hey, just one last reminder that tomorrow is the last day John Kerry can accept campaign contributions, so please do what you can to make one more before he accepts the nomination, and do what you can to remind everyone you know to donate one more time.

http://contribute.johnkerry.com

Former President Jimmy Carter (The Velvet Hammer – thank you Jon Stewart) at the opening night of the Democratic National Convention delivered five principles of national and global citizenship:

“In repudiating extremism we need to recommit ourselves to a few common- sense principles that should transcend partisan differences. First, we cannot enhance our own security if we place in jeopardy what is most precious to us, namely, the centrality of human rights in our daily lives and in global affairs. Second, we cannot maintain our historic self-confidence as a people if we generate public panic. Third, we cannot do our duty as citizens and patriots if we pursue an agenda that polarizes and divides our country. Next, we cannot be true to ourselves if we mistreat others. And finally, in the world at large we cannot lead if our leaders mislead.”

Thank you, Mr. President, for taking it to the Bush Administration.

If you would like to read the entire speech, it deserves reading. Unfortunately, network coverage was and is so limited that we only got the prelims and the Clintons. But thankfully, for political junkies like me, the cable news coverage is incredibly over the top complete. Oh, and by the way, I will be this engrossed, if not more so, when the Republicans hit NYC – I can’t wait to see the police picket lines!

Here’s some stationery I won’t be licking closed: paper made from elephant dung. “Sheets have a unique color and texture, depending on the diet, age and dental health of the elephant that has produced the dung…” Apparently, George W. has been presented with a box of said paper, perhaps to celebrate his party’s mascot. I hope that DeLay and Frist will present their future legislative texts on dung paper.

Well, the HRC responds and has an interesting quote from Margaret Cho at the end. Sounds like she’s pissed off, but not terminally.
Read the rest of this entry »

MAJeff, the official homo on the DailyKos blog, has a great post on the Big Gay Controversy of the moment–the outing of gay staffers who work for anti-gay lawmakers (as I commented on last week). If you think Virginia is for Haters is tough, check out BlogActive, run by Michael Rogers–who has now replaced Michaelangelo Signorile as political outer-in-chief. (Don’t miss the post about Rogers’ beating O’Reilly at his own game.)

Having had my own first-hand view of the twisting of healthy sexuality that invariably comes when power heads into the Capitol Hill closet, I am unconflicted on this issue. The people outed recently aren’t just closeted–one has even modeled in his underwear for a gay weekly–but leading double lives. And as the editor of the Washington Blade stated in an article in yesterday’s NYT, the media have no obligation to protect anyone’s double life. The idea that they do rests on a fundamental misunderstanding that MAJeff brilliantly lays bare: the idea that sexuality is a private matter. To quote MAJEff:

The larger point here is that heterosexuality is far from private. It’s publicly enacted every day. Every time a married woman refers to herself as “Mrs. So-and-So”, she’s coming out as a heterosexual. When straight folks talk about their spouses or boyfriends or girlfriends, they’re publicly enacting their heterosexuality. When the men on this site swoon over Stephanie Herseth, they’re making their heterosexuality public. I’m not complaining about that, I’m just putting forth some of the ways that heterosexuality–as a social construct and a personal “lifestyle”–is far from private.

In the same way, when the people who have been outed belong to gay groups, when they frequent gay restaurants and bars, when they bring partners in public, they’re making their homosexuality public.

What happens is that sexuality gets conflated with sexual acts alone. When I state on this site that I’m gay, I have told you absolutely nothing about what I do or don’t do in bed. That part, for me, is private. My overall sexuality, however, is not. I’m part of a public community. I take actions in public settings; I frequent gay establishments. These are public, and they are related to my sexuality.

What many people need to understand are the myriad ways that sexuality is publicly enacted–and enforced. Sexuality is more than what we do in bed. It shapes so many other areas in our lives. Often, we aren’t aware of the ways these things are done. But, just because we don’t see them doesn’t mean they don’t occur.

While words like “Gay Uncle Tom” are undoubtedly hurtful, the metaphor is on target. The Times seems to sympathize with the “chilling effect on how many people navigate their lives, professionally and socially.” I would hope so. The DC gay scene for too long has been happy to quite literally sleep with those who sleep with the enemy. That’s the crux of this–as Republicans come to get us where we live, so the gay community is hitting the henchmen of the haters where they live.

We are talking here about people who are complicit with a political movement that would deny them–and all gays–full citizenship. For most of these lawmakers, their position rests on a denial of our full humanity. There will always be people who want to kiss the boot as it stomps on their face, to paraphrase one of the comments on Kos’s site, so I don’t really need to know much about how these staffers defend their choices. What I do know is that any argument about “trying to change the Republican party from the inside” rings more hollow at this moment than ever it has. Just ask any Log Cabin Republican you know–after years of laboring under the “change from the inside” delusion, they are faced with a party that has made it clear it doesn’t want them. Or us.

I’ve read recently, on several VAhaters posts, that “the only good fag is a dead fag.” While perhaps most Republicans don’t go that far, it is clear is they believe “the only good fag is a silent fag.” This new round of outing is about denying collaborators of their silence–and thus their utility to the masters they serve. Just as I intended with the Virginia boycott, these outings are a clear signal that we as a community are fighting back with whatever means necessary. Given the stakes, I find the moral calculus behind this new round of outing unassailable.