GLBT News for the Week Ended August 16, 2012
BY ANN ROSTOW
Let’s Get Sirius
Do any of you by chance recall Michael Leisner, the man who set fire to the front lawn of General Mills headquarters in order to protest same-sex marriage the other day? Of course you do! He was trying to light a box of Cheerios, but he lost control of the flames and a line of fire took hold across the plaza. At any rate, the 65-year-old Leisner died of a heart attack in his car while waiting for his kids to finish a game of tennis. It’s not quite enough for a Lifetime made-for-TV movie, but it’s fine fodder for a GLBT news column in the middle of August.
One of his friends on Facebook compared him to John the Baptist and Elijah, or some other worthy Biblical squire. And I gather he spent quite a bit of time and effort manifesting his disapproval of gays and lesbians in a variety of ways. We won’t speak ill of the dead, but one does wonder what people like this think about in their final moments.
Speaking of August, or the Cannicula as I like to call it, my beloved cousin worried about the news slowdown that coincides with the Dog days and sent me some links. Among other things, she couldn’t help notice the disturbing social dilemma posed to the Sunday New York Times Style guy last week by some parents.
Seems their son had fallen in love with a man they disliked. At some point, the bad boyfriend hooked up with their daughter, who now wants to bring him by the summer house and cavort around as if nothing had ever happened. The son wants them to ban the man from the clan. What to do?
I think the expert suggested that the parents keep the two sides apart, but I say, tell the sleazy boyfriend and the oblivious daughter to find another place to hang out, period. Actually, I might suggest that all the kids find their own loci of activity for the summer. If they’re old enough to be drama queens on this level, they’re old enough to rent their own beach house. Why are they all still running with the old folks to begin with?
--
Chain Chain Chain
We have a lesbian general now. Ten hut! Congratulations Sister, Sir. Taiwan may have recognized a same-sex marriage, or be on the verge of doing so, and Madonna deliberately raised the subject of gay rights during a Russian tour in violation of a gag order by the city of St. Petersburg. Take that Ruskies. Let’s not forget who won the Cold War.
But other than that, the news is sluggish. Nor is the torpor limited to events in the GLBT community. Have you listened to the political talking heads lately?
Joe Biden used the phrase “they’re going to put you in chains!” in front of mixed race audience. Although the Veep was talking about the dangers of easing banking regulations, he was promptly accused of making a reference to slavery. Not only that, but some on the right suggested Biden be dropped from the ticket as punishment for the supposed allusion.
Okay, that’s absurd. But one or two pundits went on to ask: “Is this possible?” Talk about manufactured controversy. This is the Potato Buds of campaign news. For those who are drawing a blank, Potato Buds were little flakes in a box that turned into a white mush when you added water. They were not to be confused with actual potatoes, or any edible side dish.
--
Ryan’s Hope
So speaking of Veeps, what do you think of Mr. Ryan? Personally, I think he is in the process of descending from a pedestal and walking among us like the regular old Washington insider that he is. For so long, he’s struck an iconic pose, more a symbol than a real person, representing a “bold” and “courageous” public figure with the “guts” to offer specific budget plans with nary a care for the political consequences.
How bold and courageous! Now that the political consequences are front and center, he is becoming as mealy mouthed and halting as the rest of his colleagues on the right, hedging his bets and choosing his words with care.
The latest GOP talking point, that Obama cut $700 billion from Medicare, seems like an odd attack. The people who support health care recognize that the money was stripped from insurance subsidies and went to Obamacare. And the people who hate entitlements, on the other hand, should in theory approve of a big cut. Wouldn’t it sound worse to say that Obama added $700 billion to Medicare?
I don’t get it. Frankly, I don’t know why I continue to torture myself by watching cable news. But I suppose it’s like anything else. Why eat a bag of chips only to feel sick? Why fix an elaborate brandy drink at bedtime, only to wake up with a pounding headache—every time? It seems like a good idea at the moment.
By the way, do you think Ryan’s complete lack of foreign policy expertise will hurt the ticket? What about his rigid views on social issues? I think he is on the edge of opposing contraception. Did you see the shot of a grinning Ryan with a deer carcass? Did you read that he “noodles” catfish? And how about that work out obsession? Does it strike you as a tad self-absorbed?
Meanwhile, Mitt looks overshadowed and testy these days, accusing Obama of running a campaign based on “anger and hate.” Say what? All and all, I’m feeling cautiously optimistic about our chances.
--
Deadline Be Damned
So, I’m writing this column on Thursday rather than Wednesday because yesterday was Mel’s last day of vacation as a public school teacher and we chose to play 54 holes of golf in the last two days with the temperature in the low hundreds. I discovered, to my pleasure and distress, that I qualify for the 55-and-over senior discount on the most expensive public course in my area, a discount that cuts the green fee by a significant amount.
This is my first senior discount by the way, but I can’t complain about getting older considering the nonstop wild and fun antics that have packed every year of my life since I was old enough to climb out my bedroom window and run around the streets of Washington DC in the middle of the night. I think I was about ten. I’ve earned that discount.
At any rate, I’m in a position to comment on another campaign theme, to wit, the idea that people over 55 won’t be affected by Paul Ryan’s Medicare voucher system.
First of all, that seems not necessarily accurate, considering that other reports say we’ll pay $6,000 a year more for health care under his system. But regardless, since when do people vote based on their specific personal status? Am I supposed to be indifferent to scholarship subsidies because I’ve already gone to college? Am I supposed to blow off global warming and energy policy because I’ll be dead by the time something really bad develops? Are we supposed to ignore the national safety net because we’re not broke? Be oblivious to the unemployed because we’ve got jobs? You get the picture.
--
Aloha Ha
I do have a little GLBT legal news, as always. A conservative sounding federal judge in Hawaii echoed the old themes of antigay judicial reasoning that we haven’t heard in years, ruling that the state’s ban on same-sex marriage did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. In the course of the opinion, the judge (whose name I don’t feel like looking up) said the Supreme Court’s 40-year-old one-sentence comment in Baker v Nelson is controlling marriage law, and also stood by the Ninth Circuit’s semi-ancient antigay opinion in High Tech Gays.
Judge Whatever (Alan Kay if you must know) determined that sexual orientation discrimination should not be held to a high legal standard, and threw in the contorted idea that the fundamental right to marry does not apply to gay couples, because there is no “fundamental right to marry a person of the same sex.”
Meanwhile, Lambda’s case against the state of Nevada will go to oral arguments in late November. Our legal eagles say the Sin City State may not offer the equal rights of domestic partnership while denying the status of marriage. Sound familiar? It’s Prop 8 all over again with one distinction; Nevada never stripped couples of an existing right to marry. Still, the case is very similar, and since the Ninth Circuit has ruled in our favor (sort of) we have precedent on our side. Thaty precedent may also serve us well in the appeal of Judge Kay's antideluvian ruling.
--
Don’t Tase My Brand, Bro
Woah Nelly! I just heard about the gun-toting gay activist who barged into the DC headquarters of the Family Research Council and shot a security guard (non-fatally Thank God).
Thanks for nothing, Mr. Maniac. For years, our community has fought the baseless charge that we react to political opposition with hatred and violence. We’ve been able to take the high road, because the charge is not true. We react with protests, with boycotts, with political action, with op-eds. While abortion foes kill doctors, ex-gay groups damage lives, street bullies attack gay men, and Fred Phelps pickets funerals with vitriolic signs, we’ve never had a crazy killer.
Now we’ve got one, and the far right will certainly use him as a tangible example of our community’s murderous fury. Floyd Corkins is his name, a 28-year-old who volunteered for the local gay organization and who clearly has one or two wires loose. Fortunately, he only shot the guard in the arm. But that damage he did to the hapless security man is nothing compared to the damage he may have done to our cause. We’ll see.
--
Party On
What else is new, you ask? Well, it looks like the Democratic Party Platform will include a flat call for marriage equality. No vague appeals to equality or “all families.” Marriage equality for same-sex couples, period. Did I need another reason to be a Democrat? No. But I’ll take it none the less.
By the way, the bizarre Log Cabin Republicans managed to hail Paul Ryan, a man who thinks of us as immoral perverts deserving zip, simply because he once voted for the Employment Nondiscrimination Act back in 2007.
I have no idea why Ryan backed ENDA five years ago. But I do know he has voted for the federal ban on same-sex marriage. He voted against the end of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. He has voted against every other gay rights proposal. He opposes, not just marriage rights, but civil unions, domestic partnerships and adoption by gay couples. And yet, he voted for ENDA that one time. Strange, but surely a thin reed to support the endorsement of a otherwise hostile candidate don’t you think?
Yet this is nothing new from our Log Cabin friends. They will back any Republican who doesn’t call for an AIDS quarantine or a return to sodomy laws. I feel a pang of solidarity every now and then when the Log Cabiners are banned from a GOP convention or dissed by their fellow elephants in some way. And I agree in principle that gay Republicans should unite to have a positive influence on their party. But these sad sacks don’t really do that, do they?
They used to argue that issues like national security took precedence over gay rights. Fine. And so what’s their excuse for this election?
--
arostow@aol.com
No comments:
Post a Comment