Our Collective Reflection in the Sparkle of a Tiara

Who would have thought that the schlack of the Miss USA pageant would serve as a mirror for Americans to look at themselves and the issues that affect our country? Yep, the sparkle of big white...teeth, the shimmer of flowing hair extensions and the radiance of spray-tanned flesh not only celebrate gay men's notion of femininity, they're also the heat index for our country's most pressing problems. Based on the outcome of last night's pageant, where Miss Michigan, a Lebanese immigrant, won the crown, it looks like the debate about what it means to be American is going to be a scorcher. While Americans are trying their darndest to not look at people of Middle Eastern descent with suspicion, boom! the new face of American beauty could easily get pulled over in Arizona for a review of her immigration documents or be detained for a thorough once-over by the TSA.

You may recall the row that ensued last year between celeb-blogger Perez Hilton and Miss California, Carrie Prejean (she of lofty Christian values, silicone boobs and just-leaked coochie photos), who expressed an opinion against same-sex marriage. Hailed by the right and mauled by everyone else, Carrie didn't need to win a crown, she just got on the fast-track to political pundit status.

And so it goes this year, the year of suspicious packages and legalized racial profiling. If there's an issue America doesn't want to talk about, or, hell, if there's an issue America isn't talking about enough, Donald Trump's solution is to throw a bikini and a tiara on it. Well done, DT!

Arizona Lays Down the Gauntlet for Latinos Everywhere

Arizona has become the first state in the union to legalize racial profiling with the signing of a law to "identify, prosecute and deport illegal immigrants." (NYT) Signing the bill into law last Friday, Governor Jan Brewer has set off the outrage of Latinos and other conscientious Americans, not least the president, who take issue with the idea that cops can now stop anyone they suspect is in this country illegally, and fine and detain them if they fail to present proper documentation. (HuffPo)

So, Latinos, are your papeles in order?

It's shocking, isn't it, to watch elected officials with the support of their constituents enact hateful legislation right in front of our very eyes. The amount of time and money that has been poured into marginalizing one group and amplifying hysteria around an issue that will not go away speaks to the shortsightedness and bigotry that still exist in our government. As a Latino myself, I can't even imagine what I would say if some cop pulled me over on my way to work and asked to see my proof of residency. That's progress for ya.

True, Arizona has a high undocumented population and the state is the busiest illegal entry point along the U.S./Mexico border. With over 400,000 undocumented residents, yes, it's understandable that Arizona would want to address the strain on its resources and its identity - after all, how do you govern over a people who you don't even know are there? You've got close to half a million people under your watch whom you are morally and legally bound to serve and protect, but they have no obligation to you. From that perspective I understand the frustration of the people of Arizona.

These issues, however, all point to the need for comprehensive immigration reform. We can't apply martial law to the border, we can't just round up people based on the color of their skin and we can't just force everyone to wear their badge of citizenship. That's not what America is about. This isn't the former Soviet Union, this isn't Stasi-era East Germany, this isn't any Latin American country (pick one) under military rule. We're a country of visionary leadership, of innovative solutions - why haven't we been able to come up with a process to bring undocumented residents into the legal system, tax them appropriately and bring them from the shadows into our society? They're already here, they're already working (most of them), so what other choice do we have that doesn't compromise the principles on which this country was founded?

Our own hate and mistrust will be our undoing. This legislation in Arizona is frightening and needs to be challenged. Who's for a march on AZ?

Sometimes Extreme Parallels Make Sense, Sometimes They Don't

You gotta love our country. When we're not busy electing an African American man to our highest office, we're celebrating the memory of the armed forces who battled to keep POTUS' great great grandparents in slavery. Well, the state of Virginia is. And that, as you can imagine, has worked everyone into a lather. CNN's Roland Martin, an African American man himself, called the celebration akin to to honoring Nazi soldiers, or Muslim extremists. Makes perfect sense to me. While soldiers on both sides of the Civil War had less than progressive views on the status of black Americans, it was the Confederate Army that was mostly invested in keeping slavery as a force of industry for South. While the Nazis ultimately sought to wipe out the world's Jewish population, both the Nazis and the Confederate Army find their reason for being in the victimization of a perceived lesser people.

While we're stewing over this latest breach on civility and common sense (to make matters worse, the Governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour, thinks our most recent national outrage over the issue of slavery and the Confederate Army "doesn't amount to diddly" - Source: WashPo), there's been another affront to our morality. This one involves the Catholic church and its history of turning a blind eye to pedophile priests. One of the church's most out-spoken critics is the brilliant Maureen Dowd at the New York Times, but in her latest opinion piece, "Worlds Without Women," she makes a parallel that I'm not too comfortable with. She equates the church with the same oppressive, patriarchal structure of Islam, going so far as to compare her experience as a Catholic with that of Saudi women who have very few rights in their own country.

She writes "I, too, belonged to an inbred and wealthy men’s club cloistered behind walls and disdaining modernity. I, too, remained part of an autocratic society that repressed women and ignored their progress in the secular world."

Now, I'm not even gonna try to spar with Maureen Dowd, but for all of the trespasses of the church, I think it's a huge, unfair leap to compare the experience of a Catholic woman who is free to show off her hair, her body and pursue a career without fear of being stoned to death, with that of women who, under the most strict interpretation of their faith, have little to no human value. Dowd's argument that the church's staunch position on family and the clergy has created generations of criminals is fair, but to say that the church is as repressive and outdated as fundamentalist Islam is slander. After all, we have yet to see rogue Christians flying airplanes into office buildings.

Let's just be careful, then, with the parallels we draw to interpret current events - and events in our own lives for that matter. No one likes a drama queen.

Yep, I'm Gonna Write About Ricky Martin

...how could i not? I've been obsessed with him since he landed smack on the windshield of a video vixen's convertible on the Champs Elysees while singing "Maria." (Sorry, my Menudo memories aren't that clear). Back then, when I was all of 16 and a gangly bundle of angst, Ricky Martin represented everything I wanted to be: handsome, sophisticated, and light years away from the stoop I used to hang out on in Brooklyn.

Of course, the fact that I was a budding homosexual made the fascination with him all the more intense, so much so that I literally went into hysterics when I caught the flu in my senior year of high school and was forced to skip an autograph signing for the "Vuelve" album at the Virgin Megastore. That my parents both felt compelled to console me and buy the album for me while I sobbed and watched a two-hour special about Ricky on Univision seems to have escaped their memory when I revealed my truth to them a few years later. That, and the brilliant, spontaneous performance of "Maria" that I presented my grandparents with at their 50th wedding anniversary in Colombia.

Through the years I never bristled at the rumors about Ricky's sexuality. Even in my wildest dreams I remained sufficiently pragmatic to know that if Ricky really did go my way he probably wouldn't go my way, and that was OK. If anything I daydreamed of being a part of his fabulous circle of fabulous Latinos. And while his popularity seemed to wane among American audiences, I, along with millions of Latinos, remained a die-hard fan (I can honestly tell you that his Unplugged album, released in 2006, is genius.) Gay or not, Ricky does no wrong in my eyes.

So when my mom called me last week to ask me if I had checked "el Twitter" to read about Ricky's big news (yep, he's gay), I was like, "sorry mami, I'm trying to hold on to the new job I landed, I'll have to check el Twitter later."

But the more I think about it, the happier I am for my role model and his two kids. Coming out, privately or publicly, is a journey that can only be dictated by the person himself...there's no such thing as taking too long to do it. G'ahead Ricky!

It's the Republicans Who Should be Scared of the Tea Party

It seems no one in Washington, whether they're a Democrat or Republican, is spared from the public's wrath in the wake of healthcare reform. Wait until the first Tuesday in November, both parties have been warned, the nation's capital is in for another shake-up. The Democrats argue that Republicans are on the wrong side of history and that voters, energized and thankful for healthcare and other social reforms, will vote the donkey party back into another majority of both houses of Congress. Republicans counter that Americans are fed up with big government and the liberal excesses of Obama-nation.

Spicy rhetoric aside, Americans are faced with three choices for government:

1 - A liberal, socially-conscientious system that focuses on inclusion and improvement
2 - A conservative, self-righteous system that aims to keep everyone in their place
3 - The Tea Party, you know, the one whose spiritual leader is Sarah Palin

We all know which way America is leaning.

While the Democrats definitely have their work cut out for them and have to shift their focus back to issues of national security and those two wars we're fighting overseas, it's the Republicans who ought to be scared. Not scared of the Democrats, mind you - they've already lost that battle. No, the Republicans should be afraid of the Tea Party. That rogue group could either drag the GOP into the far right fringes of political and religious extremism or force them to return to their core values of fiscal prudence. Either way, the GOP is pants-down in this situation. At the moment, they're a caricature of a party forced into a serious reckoning with the lowest common denominator of political debate.

Meanwhile, that "hopey changey" thing is working out for the Dems just fine.

On Healthcare: It's Good to be Polarizing

Yes he did! President Obama's efforts to introduce a health care reform bill finally paid off last night. A narrow 219-212 vote will now send a healthcare reform bill to the President's desk, after a year of contentious debate that many still think may be the undoing of the Democratic party. As for President Obama, it's certainly curtains for his bipartisan approach to leadership. With a resounding "no" from the GOP, the President and the Democrats must lead the charge for healthcare reform, and it would seem every other major national issue, alone. Is this leadership or tyranny?

If the Democrats have put their necks out on the line in favor of the lofty ideal of granting access to healthcare to more Americans (32 million more of them), so too have the Republicans with all of their fear mongering (death panels! socialism! niggers and faggots!) and their staunch commitment to being the party of "no." This time around the Republicans have lost and all they're left with is a tea party, bitter words, and the hope of divine retribution come November.

The Democrats, and our President, have certainly taken a beating over the last few months. Many, including yours truly, wondered if healthcare was worth undoing all of the progress the party had made over the last two years. Would healthcare, we wondered, send Obama down the path of Jimmy Carter, rendering him a visionary thinker but ineffective leader? It even seemed as if the media, the same people who some say were complicit in placing Obama in power, were reveling in his plummeting approval ratings and the increasingly loud din of the tea party movement.

But here we are, with a momentous victory that casts a ray of hope yet again on the future of the American spirit. Our country has started a new chapter in our narrative, one that is relentlessly optimistic and very much in line with the vision that our country was founded on. A huge gamble was made and we're all the better for the outcome.

Yes, GCL is Still Alive

Dear Readers,

No, I haven't abandoned the blog. Though I should, right? I mean, the Dems just can't get anything right and that Obama, God bless him, he's beyond any sort of help that my little piece of cyber space can offer. With that in mind, I've taken an unofficial break from blogging - James and I took a little vacation and then I went and got myself a new job. Actually, James got a new job too, so we've been all sorts of fun these days second guessing ourselves and fretting over this new chapter in our lives. Anyway, please bear with me for another few days and GCL will be back, stronger than ever. Promise.

(Not) Talking Mom (and myself) off the Ledge

Just weeks after a massive earthquake struck Haiti, the headlines herald doom and gloom yet again for another nation in the Americas. This time around, an 8.8 magnitude earthquake has struck Chile, triggering aftershocks and tsunami warnings throughout the Pacific. It's only natural, of course, for anyone to be scared and upset by these events, but when you believe that natural phenomena are a sign of the Apocalypse - the end of the world - well, then, how do you remain calm?

Picture it: Saturday morning - after hearing the news of the Chile disaster - I found myself playing hopscotch across the mine field that is my mother's faith and her interpretation of the Bible and world events. "This is it, oh my God, the end is upon us," she'll moan, and after listening to her sob and pray out loud I hear a hasty "I'll call you later" and then a dial tone. By this point, after narrating in Spanish to me what CNN is saying (as I'm watching it in my home), my mother needs a more immediate, visible reaction from an audience, so she hangs up on me to work my father and my brother into a lather. Which means that in two minutes I'll get another phone call, deriding them for not playing along - err, caring about what's going in the world - and then I reassure my mom that I am very much a Christian, and yes, I do believe this is a sign of things to come.

It's a conversation that never gets old for either of us, given our penchant for the dramatic and mutual love of wine. For us, natural disaster + white zinfandel = we're all going to hell in a handbasket, starting with my "stupid" father and my "useless" brother.

I should know better. I shouldn't poke at crazy and make it dance, but I can't help it. For all I've read in school and learned in the world, I shouldn't be so preoccupied with the end of the world, but I am. Call me provincial, accuse me of being scared of eclipses and snowflakes, I don't care. Believing that these horrible events aren't random, but in fact part of a bigger plan, helps me cope with the uncertainty of life in these modern times. Besides, what else would I talk about with mami?

2008 Redux: Sarah Palin

Why settle for being a half-wit VP nominee when you can become a movement? Sarah Palin, former Governor of Alaska turned FOX News talking head, is now the spiritual leader of the Tea Party Movement and homegirl is fired up and ready to go.

At the movement's first ever national convention this past weekend, Sarah came out swinging at President Obama, "how's that hopey-changey thing workin' for you?" (NYT) she asked, followed by "we need a commander in chief, not a professor of law."

Such spunk for someone who was barely a Governor and who is barely literate. If you think I'm being a liberal bully, I strongly encourage you to read "Game Change," which chronicles (yes, in a dishy kinda way) the ups and downs of the 2008 Presidential race with a startling portrait of Palin's incompetence and insolence.

As much as one would like to poke fun at Palin and her merry band of nasty Americans who see conspiracy and death panels lurking where other, more even-keeled citizens see an opportunity for our country to live to its full potential as a haven for freedom and responsible government, the threat she poses is very real. She's got an eye on 2012 and let me tell you, we could very well re-live a Reagan-Carter upset if the Dems don't wop this bitch upside the head.

If you thought the Bush years created a fissure in the American conscience, Palin and the Tea Baggers are poised to tear our nation to shreds, leaving no one spared in their wake, with flags waving and guns a'blazin'. While they claim to be looking forward, the group has no identity lest it looks back - back to the ubris of 2008 when anything seemed possible as the White House was up for grabs, and even farther back to colonial times. The Dems own vision and forward-thinking, let's not give it up so easily to a photogenic, preening ne'er do well with a shrill voice and hum-dinger sound bites.

How the Right got Haiti all Wrong

One would think that images of mass destruction would render even the most cynical political commentators toward compassion, but then you'd be wrong. In the wake of last week's devastating earthquake in Haiti, right wing zealots are praising the Lord for casting his might on a people who "made a pact with the devil" (Pat Robertson, you cheeky monkey) and decrying the politicking of President Obama, who is offering aid as a way to gain points with America's blacks (back from the brink of death, that was Rush Limbaugh's take on the disaster).

While the images out of Haiti become increasingly disturbing and heart wrenching, the aftermath of the earthquake has been a sidebar piece for FOX News and their non-stop coverage of the Massachusetts senate race (which, sadly, was lost by Democrat Martha Coakley). Republicans can't be bothered with natural disasters or healthcare - thank God that Todd Brown is now taking Ted Kennedy's seat to drive a sword right through the barely beating heart of Obama-care, err, healthcare.

Once again the GOP, through its most vociferous personalities, have shown themselves to be the party of avarice, scorn and blind prejudice. While their pundits have been blasting the dems for reckless spending - the kind which the GOP will admit cost them their own house majority back in 06 - they forget that the elections that ultimately ushered Barack Obama into office also followed the GOP's disastrous and callous handling of Hurricane Katrina. The American people were truly outraged by the devastation they saw on our shores and the incompetence of our leaders to handle it. Not to mention that a war famously declared to be a "mission accomplished" by then President Bush in 2003 was really only getting started. But what's a little history when there are new crises to be ignored?

**Saturday, Jan 23: My bad, I mistakenly referred to Massachusett's new senator as Todd Brown, his name is Scott Brown and I should know better. I write these posts so damn early that sometimes a major detail like that slips through the cracks. Sorry!

A Fine Mess for Harry Reid

Republicans are calling for senate majority leader Harry Reid's head over remarks made about President Obama in an upcoming book about the historic election. Reid, the democrat senator from Nevada, told writers Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, authors of "Game Change" (out tomorrow) that “He (Reid) was wowed by Obama's oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama - a ‘light-skinned’ African American ‘with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.'"(Source: CNN)

Well at least Reid was pleased with the outcome of the election. And while it always stings people of color to be praised by white people whenever we don't sound, well, colored, Reid isn't speaking an un-truth. Had Obama sounded more BET than NPR, and looked more like Al Roker than Bryant Gumble, we'd be singing Hail to the Chief to either John McCain or Hillary Clinton. Americans may have been ready for change, but they weren't going to give the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to anyone just 'cuz they was black.

Call it racism or ignorance, Reid's comments don't just illustrate the way some white people view color, they also capture how some blacks and browns view color as well. From the paper bag tests of yore that determined membership into the Jack and Jill club, an exclusive social club for African Americans (you had to be lighter than a paper bag to get into the club, in addition to being educated and well-off)to the million and one things some people of color do to look lighter (whiter), lots of blacks and browns are not only obsessed with color, but with the dilution of color and all of its negative connotations. Don't believe me? Read Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye (true story: I had to read it every year between sophomore year of high school and my sophomore year of college).

But now the chairman of the RNC, a black man himself, wants Reid to resign. In spite of Reid's apologies, which the president has accepted, and in spite of the fact that, well, there are other things going on in the world that merit both parties' attention. That's just beltway chicanery. If a black republican is offended...you get the joke.

Reid's comments are unfortunate, but they're the unabashed truth in a dialogue that we're all having about color and class.

For Gays, Christians and Muslims are the Same Kind of Crazy

Happy New Year, dear readers. In case you've been too busy digging for clues about Carrie Bradshaw's whereabouts in the Sex and the City 2 trailer to turn on CNN or read a newspaper, let me bring you up to speed on the specter of current events: the world is coming to an end. Al Qaeda has reminded us that they are still at war with the civilized world and on the opposite end of the crazy spectrum, it has now been revealed that American evangelical Christians have set the stage for the lynching of gay men and women in Africa.

If you're gay, you have little choice but to dismiss religion altogether. Then you would become, like yours truly, a self-righteous blowhard who looks inward for divine affirmation. Between the radical muslims who'd kill you for any reason, and the crazy Christians who want to divest you of any legal standing in this world (lynching by bureaucracy, if you will), anyone with a brain can deduce that religion will be the undoing of civilization.

Now, I can't take credit for this original thought. As you know, I grew up as a Jehovah's Witness and one of the things we were taught to look for as a sign of the end of this world (not the physical world, mind you, but the mechanics of a system that propagates war, poverty, greed, and so on...) was the unraveling of religion's prominence in world affairs. Soon, we were taught, mankind would feel defrauded by religion, offended by the presence of religious figures at the seat of political discourse, disgusted by the role that spiritual leaders have played in massacres and hate movements. Mankind will turn on religion, and then, poof - the end of this world. And of course there are other philosophers, scholars and bloggers who have waxed on the scourge of organized religion as well. So perhaps we're getting there, to that point where we lose any tolerance for the nuissance that is organized religion.

Which then begs the question: what do we do about problematic religions? Do we shut down the mega churches of the Bible Belt? Do we shut down our country's mosques and deny visas to anyone who is muslim or from a muslim country?

Tempting as all of this may be, that's not what civilization is about. We're meant to get through this, to struggle through the challenges of terrorism and religious fanaticism to become a better, more enlightened people. Not that we haven't had thousands of years to get better at getting along, but it's nice to keep trying.

Obama Fail on Terrorism

It wouldn't be Christmas in the post-9-11 era without a terrorist attempt on an airliner. As if the sluggish economy and two wars overseas weren't enough of a downer, the very real threat of terrorism aimed at U.S. citizens in our skies and on our land still looms large. The worst decade ever, as Time magazine says, may be over, but what the hell do we have to look forward to in 2010? That, my friends, is for a later blog post. Today, however, we have to talk about President Obama's loose grip on national security. In short: when a passenger plane is nearly blown out of the sky, don't you think the president should have a word or two with the nation?

Well, our president is on a much-deserved vacation in Hawaii. I say that seriously, the man has a right to some sun and golf and quality time with his family. But the "blackberry" president, he who is supposedly always at the ready, he who can answer that 3am call, has a responsibility to address any significant attempt on our nation's safety and tell the American people what next steps are in place to keep us safe. It is not the job of a bumbling administration official, one Janet Napolitano, to get on CNN to say the system "works" when the system just allowed an avowed terrorist - one whose family reported him to the FBI just a few weeks ago - to get on a plane with enough TSA-approved equipment to blow up a plane.

Then again, this is the same president who told the nation to not jump to conclusions after the killing spree at Fort Hood last month. A man who has since been revealed to have been in contact with religious extremists in Yemen shoots up an army base and it's preposterous to assume any connection with Islamic jihad. Uh, right.

This is where liberals rightly get it on the chin from conservatives. In the liberal mindset, national security is put in dismissive quotation marks to represent the hysterics of the barely literate. And even when the doom and gloom scenarios of the illiterate come true, liberals are quick to shrug these off and say they're the product of, well, insert any social ill here that can be blamed on capitalism and that, my friends, results in terrorism.

As much as I hate to reference Dick Cheney, that man did say that Obama's approach to national security puts our safety in danger. Now, Obama is no more responsible for this attempted attack than George W. Bush was responsible for 9-11. The idea, however, that Obama is soft on terror and is more inclined to court the Muslim world rather than chastise them for the unrelenting violence of their faith, lingers. For reputation's sake, the president should have by now addressed the nation and put on a brave face for an ongoing conflict.

Obama fail, as they say in Twitter speak, when it comes to our safety.

One Step Closer to National Health Care

America is one step closer to providing health care to all its citizens following a 60-40 vote in the Senate early this morning. What conservatives fear most, and what liberals perhaps thought would never come to pass, might just become a reality. There's no telling now what other sorts of progressive, inclusive legislation the Obama administration can introduce if we pass the healthcare bill (ahem, DOMA, DODT).

In spite of Joe Lieberman and Ben Nelson's antics and the unanimous discontent of senate republicans, the $870 billion bill is moving forward toward a final vote this week, but not without some major adjustments.

Among the compromises the dems made to keep the bill alive: the government-run public healthcare option has been scrapped, the minimum age for Medicare will not go down to 55, and public funds will not be used to subsidize abortion.

As for costs, well, CNN says: "Individuals under both plans [House and Senate plans] would be required to purchase coverage, but the House bill includes more stringent penalties for most of those who fail to comply. The House bill would impose a fine of up to 2.5 percent of an individual's income. The Senate plan would require individuals to purchase health insurance coverage or face a fine of up to $750 or 2 percent of his or her income -- whichever is greater."

Both versions of the plan represent significant increases in income tax for the wealthy, and the demands on small business are quite hefty - "the Senate bill would require companies with more than 50 employees to pay a fee of up to $750 per worker if any of its employees relies on government subsidies to purchase coverage."(CNN) That's a lot of money, even for a company that can afford to have 50 people on their payroll. I guess none of the people who wrote this book have heard of "working under the table."

And then there's the issue of undocumented residents - what to do with them when they're sick or injured? That there is no provision in the bill for this group still smacks of the short-sightedness that has kept universal healthcare at bay for decades.

While the dems can withstand a little in-fighting and some name-calling from the republicans, if this bill doesn't pass then the whole course of the Obama administration could be derailed. Not that the President has lost his lustre, but Americans are a little less fired up nearly a year into his administration. Some of that is to be expected, but with the war effort being the mess that it is and unemployment still hovering at 10 percent, we need to see our president be able to exert some form of control on a major issue.

It all comes down to Tuesday's vote...

Houston's Gay Mayor...See? They Like Us, They Really Like Us

Beyonce's hometown has elected an openly gay woman as mayor of their city. This past Saturday, Houston City Controller Anisse Parker was elected by a margin of 53%; it's a fascinating development for the reddest of the red states "that overwhelmingly voted to outlaw gay marriage four years ago and in a city where voters have rejected offering benefits to the same-sex partners of government employees." (USA Today)

So, yes, the gays are everywhere. And most Americans don't seem to mind our presence. Except when we start making demands for equal rights and ask for society to confer the same recognition to our relationships as they do to heterosexual couples. Is it simple homophobia? Are all Americans really so obtuse and closed-minded that they'd vote in a near single block to deny (or, in some cases, take away) their fellow citizens' rights?

Or are we the problem? We meaning the gays of course. If Americans have no qualms letting Ellen into their homes everyday and they're electing openly gay candidates to positions of power, what's keeping marriage and domestic partner benefits out of our grasp?

A few years ago I probably would have wagged a finger at some of y'all and had said something like, see? your nasty porcine ways have cost us our rights. But that wouldn't be fair. The older I get the more heterosexual people I've seen pissing all over the institution of marriage (I refuse to talk about Tiger Woods here but you know what I'm talkin' about). So why are gays not allowed into the club? We can mess things up too, if given the chance.

Simply put: we haven't adapted our message of same-ness to the liking of most Americans. There's something missing in the gay/straight dialgoue when it comes to our basic rights. Could things change if we approached the issue from a "may we, too, please?" perspective rather than the current "you have it, so should I" model which annoys many, many people. Granted, there is a significant number of Americans whose faith would make it impossible for them to support our rights. We have to accept that. However, the public can be swayed. I wouldn't have a job otherwise. So I think the problem lies within ourselves. The gay community hasn't really put up a credible case for the recognition of our rights and relationships.

Parker's election is a foreshadowing of the great things that are on the way for gay people in the U.S. There is something to be learned from this victory that can turn the national debate on marriage in our favor.

Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings Shouldn't Have to Talk about Fisting

For a few months now conservatives have been lobbying for the removal of president Obama's safe schools czar, Kevin Jennings. That a homosexual should hold the title of Assistant Deputy Secretary for Safe and Drug-Free Schools is too much for some conservatives to handle, and as such, a host of allegations have been drummed up to scare Americans into thinking that a lone gay is single-handedly "queering" our nation's youth. Such is their dismay over Jennings' sexuality, and the fact the he founded GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network, that conservatives are actually spouting the words fisting and dental dams over the airwaves. Yes everyone, hide your kids because the gays, and all of their corporate backers are on a mission to rape America's children.

Outlets like Queerty and the Huffington Post have been following this story since September, when allegations against Jennings were first voiced by the conservative right. The chief complaints against Jennings, and GLSEN, are as follows:

1. Jennings all but applauded a sexual relationship between a 15 year-old boy and an adult male back when he was a schoolteacher in Massachussetts over 20 years ago
(When Fox News jumped on the story they then had to retract and say that the student was in fact, 16 at the time of the incident, which is the age of consent in that state)

2. Jennings supports an avoid pedophile
(Jennings lauded the activism efforts of one Harry Hay who unfortunately is an avowed member of NAMBLA, the National Man Boy Love Association)

3. GLSEN is an exploitative organization trading in pederasty and the advocacy of fisting and incest
(The group does provide bar guides to LGBT youth, information on gay chat lines and offers education on safer sex practices - may I say, however, that minus the gay chat lines, these are all integral elements of the Gossip Girl story line? Those kids are NASTY underage drinkers.)

4. GLSEN is promoting a salty reading list that is full of explicit sex
(Right. When it comes to sexualizing America's children, the gays did it first)

At the moment, bloggers like Michelle Malkin are calling for a boycott on GLSEN's corporate sponsors and she's making the rounds on the Fox News Channel to scare America straight on the "truth" behind GLSEN. She is all too happy to be talking about fisting and dental dams, and for the past week she's been linking to sites that are calling the Jennings controversy "FistGate."

Once again conservatives have shown that when it comes to gay rights they can't approach the topic without delving into the most crude elements of sexuality and promoting the idea of the homosexual as a predator with aims on innocent youth. It's trashy but effective - the sad thing is that the business of fear is quite lucrative and conservatives, and their minions at the Fox News Channel, are going to run with this story for as long as they can.

Surge on Afghanistan? It's 30,000:1.5 Billion

As the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan rage on, President Obama has declared that an end to our efforts in the latter conflict will come in 2011. By then, an additional 30,000 troops will have been deployed to Afghanistan to fight the Taliban, on top of the 55,000 soldiers who have already served in the region. You have to wonder if 85,000 or so soldiers can topple an army of one billion. That figurative army of one billion refers to recent statistics which found that one out of every four people, or 1.5 billion men, women and children, are Muslim.

Is it gauche and irresponsible, almost ten years into the war on terror, to think of the conflict as a war on fundamentalist Islam? Or on Islam altogether? Is it unpatriotic to think that this is a battle that we can't win because there are too many religious zealots out there who aim to lay waste to western civilization? Or the whole world for that matter seeing as jihadists are apt to kill anyone, even their own people (just look at today's car bomb attacks in Baghdad that have killed over 100 people).

At this point in the war, I do believe that the Muslim world's reaction to the events of the past decade has been tepid and, quite frankly, I've gone from not having an opinion either way on Islam to thinking that it is, in fact, a dangerous religion. If the corner mosque can be a hotbed for fanatical thought, as we have seen at Fort Hood in Texas or here in Brooklyn, then there is no place for this faith in the modern, civilized world. At least not in the west.

Our leaders never sold the war as a quick fix for the epidemic that is fanatical thought, but this war seems to have no end - and while our troop levels may be depleting - a terrorist seems to be born every minute. Some people would argue that aid, education and understanding are needed to win hearts and minds, but as we all know by now the world's biggest terrorist comes from one of the world's wealthiest families and the 9-11 jihadists had enough education to know how to fly planes into skyscrapers. And while the response to these attacks back in 2001 was rightfully careful to not condemn of all Islam, our overtures to this faith have gotten us nowhere. Our own president has traveled to the Muslim world, he's tried to strike a conciliatory tone in his speeches about the war and the role of the faith in this country, but to no avail.

It's no wonder, then, that even ever-neutral Switzerland has had to take a stand on the issue of Islam by banning the construction of minarets in the country. A lot of people are in a pique about this but I'm of the belief that we can no longer play host to a faith who seems fixated on the destruction of so-called infidels. I compare the minaret ban to the closing of bathhouses in the 1980s during the AIDS epidemic here in the U.S. - when increasing numbers of gay men were coming down with the disease, public health officials saw a connection between the activities at the baths and the spike in AIDS infections. I don't think that was homophobia, that was a response to a plague. I would offer that fanatical Islam is a plague we've been fighting for quite some time as well.

So, fine, we can send another 30,000 troops to Afghanistan and sure, we can say that we "almost" found Osama, but the real problem, that seed which germinates and turns into terrorism and turns into a financial and spiritual drain on the west, still exists. So what do we do about that?

On Fort Hood: Beware of Pundits

Diversity is going to kill America. Or so say conservative pundits in the weeks following the shootings at Fort Hood. I think weak liberal pundits are going to be the death of democracy if they don't stop pussyfooting around issues of national security - in the case of the Fort Hood shootings the mainstream media has given conservative pundits plenty of ammunition (sorry for the gross pun) to voice all sorts of scandalous, racist opinions. To my friends at MSNBC and CNN: call a spade a spade - we are at war with Islam. And the shootings at Fort Hood were an act of terrorism. Neither statement is racist nor a call to violence - it's the fact of our times. While you're not talking about this, the Fox News Channel is having a field day playing upon Americans' worst fears. And guess what? This time around, I'm more inclined to believe their coverage of this incident over yours.

A summary of the attack on Fort Hood: The shooter is an army psychiatrist, but also a Muslim who had been exchanging e-mails with a radical cleric in Yemen for the past year and had made some shocking statements about non-Muslims, specifically calling them "infidels [who] should be beheaded and have boiling oil poured down their throats."

I shudder to think that I have gotten more information about this attack, and the link between the shooter and Al Qaeda, from the likes of Ann Coulter than, say, the New York Times. This time around Coulter has found a terrific platform to voice her idea that minorities (aka "victims") have their run of this country, and that it's possible to plan a terrorist attack here under the gaze of the law because the feds will be too scared of coming off as racist and insensitive. Here's her interview with Bill O'Reilly. If you can't watch, here are the three bits of information that are worth taking away:

1-The US media dropped the ball on reporting on the shooter's ties to Al Qaeda (:57)
2- The shooter had never been to sent to war (3:58)
3- The shooter wasn't treating soldiers coming back from war, he treated them before they went on their assignments (4:20)



But you know what else crazy said during her interview? When asked why government officials and the mainstream media have been slow to call the shooter a terrorist Coulter replied:

"We have a caste system in America with different levels of victimhood. You have the feminists, gays, blacks, Jews, but the number one victims, but only starting on 9-11 when they killed 3,000 Americans, became Muslims."

Crazy say what?

See, friends, when those of us on the right side of reason allow political correctness to get the better of us and we don't call things what they are, we lend credibility to the most far-right and un-American ideas. We are, in spite of what us urban elites think, a nation at war. Not just overseas, but here at home. If we can't question the place of Islam in our country, without fear of sounding racist or alarmist, then we stand to lose all of the gains made for minorities in this country. Step up your game, guys - now is not the time for Ps and Qs in journalism.

That Adam Lambert...

I'm a little slow on the uptake with the whole Adam Lambert-oral-sex-on-live-TV fiasco - forgive me, it IS a holiday week after all. But I do have an opinion on the matter if you care to read on.

Artists doing shocking things at awards shows is nothing new - this week's faux-fellatio and boy-on-boy tongue action harkens Kanye West's stage raiding and Madonna's sapphic cougar antics. So the American Idol runner-up shoved his crotch in a dancer's face - big woop - at least he sang live! Janet Jackson wore Uggs, a bad wig and 60 extra pounds of chunk to open up the show. And if you want to talk about bad wigs and bad attitudes, Whitney Houston needs to come off her high horse, talking about her strength. Honey, there are real people going through real problems - that you had the "strength" to go on Oprah and blame your husband for your crack addiction isn't strength. It's brilliant marketing.

While marquee names are looking and sounding tired, sorting through the darkness of grief or addiction to come up with NOTHING, a new crop of artists is clawing at stardom - and if they have to commit all sorts of crimes, from vandalism (LOVED Lady Gaga's turn at crazy with her performance of "Bad Romance") and public indecency, well, dammit, this is pop culture isn't it? You wanna be on top? Set the stage on fire. Literally. And have at it like the proud homosexual that you are.

I personally don't care for Adam Lambert's voice or look. His spectacle looked more like a coming out party for a high school closet-case who shocks the bejeezus out of his little redneck town by turning the school's production of, say, Oklahoma! into a musical rendition of Cruising. Not my cup of tea, but do you, girl.

Tear Down This Wall, But Build Another Here, Here and Here

I know everyone has moved on from the commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, but I've been meaning to make a point about this historic event for a few days now. So here goes: while the world is celebrating the end of the Cold War and the unification of one country that would ultimately become a world super power, our country remains rife with division. In fact, we're very close to building our own literal and figurative walls within our borders.

I feel this most when I think about immigration and gay rights in this country. Both debates have spun out of control to the point of hate speech - Lou Dobbs stepping down from CNN doesn't undo the thinking of too many Americans who openly refer to other human beings as "illegals" and who fear the take-over of this nation by an illiterate, incompetent, brown menace. After all, the Fox News Channel is alive and well. And so is the push for a fence along the U.S./Mexico border, as is the idea that "illegals" should not be covered under a new, universal healthcare plan. In other words, Republicans are happy to plunk down 10 billion dollars on a fence that people are already going to find a way around, as opposed to developing a smart guest worker program that provides a channel for immigrants to enter and leave this country legally and safely. That sort of thinking would benefit everyone, except the contractors building the fence.

But the Republican party is not aiming for visionary, problem-solving policy, so long as people are afraid that undocumented gay Mexicans are going to take over the schools and absolve heterosexual marriage, the GOP will be in business for years to come. That's why the party has decided to abscond the Latino vote altogether by voting in a near single block against President Obama's recent hate crimes law because it has a provision outlawing attacks based on perceived immigration status. In other words, the Republicans voted against the Matthew Sheppard Act because it also grants protection from violent crime against "illegals." (And y'all know I've been writing about hate crimes against Latinos for some time now - this is a real issue, people)

And then there's the issue of gay marriage - in 31 states Americans have voiced a resounding "no" to providing same sex couples the right to marry. The issue is as tired as it pressing - it seems stupid to think that some Americans can be so vehemently interested in controlling other citizens, but then, that's exactly what's happening - it's scary and it's un-American.

But that's where our country is at right now. While I have seriously considered building up my own wall and not engaging with people who don't share my beliefs, I realize that I would then be making these problems worse. So I'll remain open for dialogue, in spite of my lesser, more Latino and argumentative self, and I'll keep writing and advocating for change.