Blue Heart of Dixie

2012-01-31T16:34:00.000-05:00

Funny, I don't remember getting this particular email in 2004 or 2008! The emphasis on certain words is mine.

Subject: "Did You Know?": Obama/Candidate Photographs and the Election

POLITICAL ACTIVITY AND THE FEDERAL WORK PLACE – GENERALLY
1. Q. Now that President Obama is a candidate for reelection, may federal employees display his picture in their offices?

Answer: NO. An employee covered by the Hatch Act may not engage in political activity while on duty, in a government room or building, while wearing an official uniform, or using a government vehicle. 5 U.S.C. § 7324. Political activity is defined as activity directed toward the success or failure of a political party, candidate for a partisan political office or partisan political group. 5 C.F.R. § 734.101.

Thus, the Hatch Act prohibits federal employees from, among other things, displaying pictures of candidates for partisan public office in the federal workplace. See 5 C.F.R. § 734.306, Example 16. Because President Obama is a candidate for reelection, the Hatch Act prohibits an employee from displaying his photograph in the federal workplace, unless one of the two exceptions discussed below applies.

The first exception applies to official photographs of the President. The Hatch Act does not prohibit the continued display of official photographs of the President in the federal workplace, to include both public and employee work spaces. Official photographs include the traditional portrait photo of the President displayed in all federal buildings, as well as photographs of the President conducting official business (e.g., President meeting with heads of state). However, these official photographs must be displayed in a traditional size and manner and should not be altered in anyway (e.g., the addition of halos or horns). Pictures that are distributed by the President’s campaign or a partisan organization, such as the Democratic National Committee or Organizing for America, are not official, even if they depict the President performing an official act. Similarly, pictures downloaded from the internet or clipped from magazines or newspapers, screens savers and life-size cutouts are not official photographs for purposes of this exception.

The second exception, which applies to all candidate photographs, concerns employee personal photographs. An employee would not be prohibited from having a photograph of any candidate in his or her office, if all of the following apply: the photograph was on display in advance of the election season; the employee is in the photograph with the candidate; and the photograph is a personal one (i.e., the employee has a personal relationship with the candidate and the photograph is taken at some kind of personal event or function, for example, a wedding, and not at a campaign event or some other type of partisan political event). An employee must not have a political purpose for displaying the photograph, namely, promoting or opposing a political party or a candidate for partisan political office.

Questions?: Please contact the CDC Ethics Program Activity Office

Ok, Maybe I DO Get Overenthusiastic

2012-01-02T23:05:00.001-05:00

I wrote this essay in October and think it is worth sharing.

I would recommend that anytime you stop seeing someone in a romantic sense that you sit down with that person and have a chat about it. The things you can learn are quite useful, and it goes a long way to soothing hurt feelings. Some of you are aware that in the past couple of months, I have felt terribly wronged, misled, and otherwise lied to by someone. Names are not important (and please do NOT call out any names in comments). Suffice it to say that this person finally agreed to sit down with me one-on-one and talk. I think the talk went very well, and had I had talks like that with previous exes (although this person didn't last long enough to be an actual "ex"), I could have saved myself a lot of self-torment and heartache.

In this conversation, I was able to provide my perspective of what went on between us and to explain where my thought processes led me, even when the conclusions were in error. About a month ago, I had become pretty drunk and for the first time in my life, I was an ANGRY drunk. Never before had this happened, and I hope it never happens again. I don't remember what I said to him, but I do remember the overwhelming sense of rage. It's the kind of rage I've only felt a couple of times in my life, and never drunk. It's never been pretty. I'm fairly slow to anger, but when I do lose my temper, it can be volcanic, and I can say some of the most vicious things imaginable. That's why I try to always recognize when I'm getting angry and to deal with it immediately rather than let it fester or grow. It's a strategy that has worked pretty well for me. Apparently, Angry Drunk Jason unloaded on this guy for about an hour (via text no less). Then I switched to depressed, morose, self-pitying drunk Jason. Luckily, this guy deleted the whole ugly scene, as did I, before I passed out.

Anyway, what led up to that unloading of venom does not in any way excuse it. I made that clear when I started asking him to sit down and talk with me after that incident. I wasn't sure he'd actually do it, even after he said yes. After all, he'd stood me up before, but to his credit, he did show up. I spent a lot of time talking, explaining things about my background, and why I thought the things that I did. It wasn't a monologue, thankfully, and he provided feedback along the way.

What I learned is that I tried too hard, and made him feel like I was pushing him toward a certain "boyfriend status" ahead of the timeline he was comfortable with, so he just shut down and backed off, basically avoiding me like the plague. Why not just tell me I was being too intense to relax or back off? Good question. He says he didn't know what to say, so he said nothing. It's a bit of a cop out, but one that rings true to me. He knows that this course of action simply made things worse, and lead me to believe that he'd been telling me a pack of lies which infuriated me. Nothing will send me into orbit more quickly than giving my trust to someone and having them betray it.

I have trust issues with men. There's no way to get around that fact. I've had therapy to work on it, but it's a very slow process. My first experiences with having my brain soaked in "love chemicals" which produce the unique sensation of falling in love with someone with it's euphoria, the sense of fireworks exploding in the sky, etc etc did not go well. In fact, they have NEVER gone well. After a particularly heinous period in my early-to-mid-20s, I simply vowed that I would never allow anyone to hurt me like that again, to rob me of my sense of self-worth and feeling that I was loveable and worthy of being loved. The result was that I built a particularly strong and effective wall around my heart so that a person could get pretty darn close to me, but not close enough to do real damage. Flash forward a decade or so, and this strategy certainly kept me from having my heart broken again, but it left me completely alone with no prospects of that changing.

Over the last several years, I've learned that if I don't want to die alone (a thought which has haunted and frightened me since I came out of the closet in 1994), I have to be willing to take risks emotionally. I have to be willing to open my heart to being broken again if I expect someone else to do the same. The crappy thing about that idea is there are no guarantees that it'll work out. You expose your heart to pain, and you're likely to get hurt, even if you find love. The people we love can be the ones who hurt us the most sometimes. So I could either grow old and die alone, but heart not being risked again, or I could learn to tear down that wall I'd built and take a risk that could REALLY pay off or it could end up in heartache again. But if I didn't take "enter the game" there was no way I could win. Besides, *I* get sick of hearing myself complain about never having a man; I can only imagine what my friends think!

Anyway, why this guy ended up being the person to unleash the love hormones in my brain, I don't know. He's not the type I usually go for, and had he not expressed interest first, I probably would have never paid him a bit of attention. But he did express interest first, and I was intrigued and then really liked what I saw. Next thing I know, by the end of the first date, my brain was pumping out dopamine, norepinephrine, serotonin, oxytocin, and vasopressin (the "love chemicals" of the brain) in apparently large quantities. Spending the night together soon after only put production of these chemicals into overdrive. What can I say? I don't share my bed often, but when I do, it's very much a bonding experience for me. It's why I don't do overnights casually in the sexual context. Sharing a bed on group trips does not have the same effect ;-)

It had been over a decade since I'd experienced anything close to these emotions, and I have to admit it frightened me. Even though I'd been "in training" via therapy for such an event, when it arrived, the terror started to rise in me. Because I have never had a good experience when I have felt these emotions, my rational mind equates them with impending doom and heartbreak. I had to fight very hard against that fear when I spent time with him. I knew I had to force myself to remain emotionally open and completely honest, even though that felt like surrendering all the power. It was terrifying, but I managed to do it. What I found was that I became somewhat obsessed in making sure that I wasn't putting forth all this effort in vain; that I wasn't being "played" or used. I was so afraid that if this guy turned out to be a douchebag, that it would undo all the effort I'd put in to being willing to take a risk.

So I definitely became over-enthiastic. I couldn't help myself. The ironic thing is that he wasn't the only person I was spending time with, getting to know. But he was definitely in the lead just based on brain chemicals alone. I did seek too much reassurance, tried way too hard. It would have helped me come back to earth had he just pointed that out and been honest about how much it was driving him nuts. When I started to get information that indicated he was playing me, that's when he chose to start avoiding me, which led me to conclude that my information must be correct since actions speak louder than words.

There are other details that don't really matter, except for one. He admitted, and apologized, for lying to me about stupid things. The chief one being the night he simply stood me up when I was supposed to cook him dinner and then gave me some crap excuse about his phone dying being the reason he couldn't contact me until over 24 hours later. Had I had an ounce less of those damn brain chemicals flowing in my head, I would have never spoken to him again after that. It stands out as the single rudest thing that has EVER been done to me. He also lied about text messages not being delivered, all of which I knew. Not only did the lying anger me, the notion that he thought I was stupid enough to buy his pathetic excuses insulted me to boot. I was pleasantly surprised that he owned up to it, and that he apologized. I told him that empathy for other people is not a sign of weakness or a bad trait. The truth is always better than a lie, especially when your lie is so transparent.

Another thing about this guy is his charisma. I've seen him work that charisma on other people, and it's pretty amazing to see him switch it on and off so quickly. His level of charisma rivals the best politicians I've met in my life, and I've shaken hands with Bill Clinton! This guy can, and does, turn his charisma on and off at will. When he's turned it on in your direction, he's very hard to resist or with whom to remain angry. Some of what he told me was probably self-serving, especially his misunderstood bit. What he told me about his experience of my behavior, though, was very useful. I *do* get over-enthusiastic when there seems to be a mutual attraction. I blame it on the fact that I'm basically starved of romantic love, so when the opportunity looks like it will arise for me to experience it, I'm like a starving man at a buffet. I'm sure it scares people off, like it did this guy.

I'm not sure how to control that response. Do I warn future prospects that this is how I get, and to please tell me when I'm coming on too strong since that is not my intent? I'm not getting any younger. I need to find good answers, and a good man who will love me quirks and all. I'm still scared that such a man does not exist, and that if he does, it's certainly not in the metro Atlanta area. I don't know how to beat that fear down either.

Where's a mail order husband when you need one?

I'd like to leave you with this quote that explains perfectly why I have tried to tear down my inner wall and why I am so determined not to rebuild it:

"Life will break you. Nobody can protect you from that, and living alone won't either, for solitude will also break you with its yearning. You have to love. You have to feel. It is the reason you are here on earth. You are here to risk your heart. You are here to be swallowed up. And when it happens that you are broken, or betrayed, or left, or hurt, or death brushes near, let yourself sit by an apple tree and listen to the apples falling all around you in heaps, wasting their sweetness. Tell yourself you tasted as many as you could." Louise Erdrich, The Painted Drum, p247

Fighting resegregation in Georgia

2011-11-25T11:10:00.000-05:00

Today, I wrote the US Department of Justice to urge it to reject the proposed Georgia legislative maps for violating the spirit and intent of the Voting Rights Act. If you wish to write the Justice Department with your concerns about these maps aiming to create a super-majority white conservative control of the legislature, here's how you do it:

Write a letter to the Department of Justice. Where to send your letter:

Mr. Chris Herren

Chief, Voting Section
Civil Rights Division
Room 7254 - NWB
Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20530

If you want to send your letter through an overnight express service such as Airborne, DHL, Federal Express or UPS, then your letter should be addressed to:

Mr. Chris Herren

Chief, Voting Section
Civil Rights Division
Room 7254 - NWB
Department of Justice
1800 G St., N.W.
Washington, DC 20006

You may also email your letter to vot1973c@usdoj.gov and please enter “Georgia Redistricting” in the subject field.

If you would rather not send a letter or email, you may also call the Department of Justice at 1-800-253-3931 and ask to speak to the Georgia Redistricting team. You can also Fax 202-616-9514 and on your cover page, please reference “Georgia Redistricting”

My letter:

Hello -

My name is Jason Cecil, and I am a Georgia resident who lives at 1503 Oakridge Court, Decatur, GA 30033. I wish to comment on the proposed redistricting maps that Georgia Republicans have adopted.

As a resident of DeKalb County, these maps endeavor to disenfranchise myself and my neighbors by placing us in oddly shaped districts that slice through multiple communities of interest and dismanteling multiracial coalitions that have bound our communities together in the last couple of decades. My proposed state House district looks like a candy cane that coils around my neighborhood and then shoots over to Stone Mountain before ending in south DeKalb. My area of DeKalb has little in the way of common community interest with the rest of this proposed district other than being located in DeKalb County.

The state House and state Senate maps show a clear disregard for communities of interest, and have the intention of eliminating ALL White Democrats from the state legislature. The Georgia Republican party is endeavoring to segregrate the parties to ensure that the GOP is seen as the "white" party and the Democratic party is "black only". These maps produce majority white districts to elect Republicans and majority black districts to elect Democrats. As a white Georgia Democrat, I feel my vote is being targeted because of my race. The proposed maps ensure that I am not able to participate in multiracial coalitions to elect representatives of my choice. Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prohibits racial discrimination of any kind. The proposed maps appear to be systematic in their targeting of White Democrats which isolates African Americans and all other voters by limiting their ability to build coalitions.

What's even more offensive is that the Georgia Republican party has claimed the Voting Rights Act "made" them do it. There is no legal standing for Republican comments that they are allowed to have up to 73 percent Black Voting Age Population in a district. It is a manufactured number. The Voting Rights Act does not require a specific threshold, and the outcome cannot reduce the electoral power of minorities,including their ability to coalition with other groups. The artificial creation of Black districts at the expense of integrated districts violates the intent of the Voting Rights Act. These district maps manipulate the Voting Rights Act, maximize GOP voting performance at the expense of multi-racial coalitions. The proposed maps maps DISCRIMINATE against the ability of Georgians to build multi-racial coalitions which have been a proud feature of state and local politics for the last 46 years.

Other factors that lead me to oppose these maps:

GOP-led reapportionment hearings were not held in places and times in which most Georgians could attend. The panels did not fully reflect the diversity of Georgia.
Discrimination based on past political expression has been frowned upon by members of the US Supreme Court.
The growing Hispanic and Latino population in Georgia is being isolated by eliminating the sole Latino Democratic Representative in the legislature. The message to this population is: Get on board with white conservatives if you want a voice in state government.
The maps target two of three LGBT members of the legislature by putting them in districts with fellow African American incumbents. These two legislators are the ONLY African American LGBT state legislators in the United States

I ask that the Department of Justice reject these maps for violating the spirit and intent of the Voting Rights Act.

Respectfully,

Jason A. Cecil

Decatur, GA

What I Learned Tonight

2011-08-23T23:19:00.000-04:00

In my last post, I mentioned my current challenge of sticking with something for the sake of physical fitness. Well, through the misery, the dry heaves, the asthma attack, the new bouts of hyperventilation, and learning to run... I have stuck with it. Rugby is kicking my ass, but in a good way. I found an iPhone app called "From couch to 5k" that I've started working with that alternates periods of running with walking. I find that running is doable in digestible chunks. I find that at practice, I can now jog halfway around the pitch without feeling I need to slow down.

Oddly, the thing I enjoy the most about the conditioning part of rugby practice is the stretching. It hurts, but in a good way. When I first started at the end of July, I could barely grab my ankle, but now I can get a couple of fingers on the toe of my sneakers. I've learned a lot about stretching which is useful to me, and I'm grateful to Gary for showing me what he knows. Even at the gym, the stretches we do, especially for the legs, are very useful.

I've received a lot of support from the team that I didn't anticipate. I still find it embarrassing to be cheered on as I straggle behind everyone else to finish a drill. I'd much rather have someone there with me, urging me on to the finish...then bring the cheer when I do :-) That's just my sense of embarrassment at needing to be prodded, but it's good for me. I do need to be prodded, encouraged to push just a little farther without going overboard. It's an odd balance, but several guys on the team seem to have a gift for it, at least where it comes to me.

The one asthma attack I had was due to the fact I had forgotten to take my inhaler prior to practice. Not a smart move. When I take the inhaler prior to practice, I'm fine. I've found in the last week or so that I have a different problem; in trying to take slow, deep breaths, I lose control of my breathing and start to hyperventilate. It still scares me when it happens, but I've learned I can beat it by intensely focusing on an object and really putting my mind to seizing control of my breathing once more.

Tonight was an especially interesting practice for me. We started out with the usual stuff: a job around the pitch, squats, stretches, high knee jog back and forth. But then we started with this exercise that Gary promised was going to prove once and for all that we definitely have thigh and butt muscles. He warned us we'd feel it tomorrow and curse his name. I'll admit, I kinda wished at that moment that I could just go home.

I didn't, though. The drill went like this: we start at the end of the field (blanking on the name of the line right now), do 20 squats, then we do deep lunges to the 25 yard line, pulling up the opposite arm of the leg that is at a 90 degree angle from the squat. At the 25 yard line, we sprint to the 50 yard line. Gary strongly suggested that we really high knee the sprint in order to pump blood into thighs that will be screaming by that time. At the 50 yard line, we do another 20 squats. Then the lunges again to the 75 yard line. Then high knee sprint to the 100 yard line. Turn around, rinse, and repeat all the way back down the pitch to where we started.

I kid about the rinse part, but what was no joke was how my legs felt. I've been practicing squats on my own at the gym, so the first 20 were OK. The lunges started to hurt halfway to the 25 yard line. But I did it. Most of the other guys were in a bit of a race, so I was WAY behind. Coach Zach came up beside me to show me proper form and to do the lunges with me so I'd get it. He stayed with me all the way down the pitch and back again, encouraging me to take it one piece at a time. The 2nd half of the pitch, I thought my thighs were going to give out. It's a weird sensation to feel the strength in your legs just give out like that, but I stuck with it, and they did not give out. They hated me, screamed bloody murder at me, but they kept working. I was not able to run, but I did high step it through the sprint portions. And in that last bit where I was lunging to the finish line, Coach Zach said, "In front of all these guys, you're going to finish this. You can do it." That's when I got a round of encouragement for me to finish that I found embarrassing, but I plugged ahead and I did finish. I didn't finish pretty, but I finished.

Honesty time. Before that experience with Coach Zach, he really frightened me. He reminded me of my 7th grade basketball coach who was gruff, liked to yell a lot, and thought nothing of ridiculing you. I have lived in a bit of fear that Coach Zach would turn his ire on me. Whenever he talked about the need to build stamina because without it, you are useless to the team, I figured he was talking about me directly. When he came up to me while I was lunging, I expected to be yelled at for doing it wrong. Instead, he simply showed me how and had me mimic him, and then stuck by me to make sure I kept up my form. He didn't yell at me or ridicule me for being slow. Him sticking with me made me not want to give up. Getting that kind of personal attention told me that he had some faith me, and I wanted to honor that faith and not let him down. If he guessed that's how to motivate me, he guessed correctly.

We moved on to defensive drills and tackling. This is where I learned something tonight that I had not known before: I LIKE TO HIT! And by hit, I mean tackle. It turns out that I have some raw ability to do it too, which is even better. In the last practice, we were told to imagine we were tackling behind the player, which fits into how I was once taught to punch. You don't punch for the face; you punch for BEHIND the person's head. That way you fool your brain into hitting with full force. If you aim for what you are hitting, your brain will subconsciously pull back in anticipation.

I was paired with some of the more aggressive members of the team, which did worry me. Coach Zach said we had to not approach a tackle with fear because that would end in injury. So I only focused on the legs and I went to tackle, and I held on for dear life once I grabbed hold until the guy came down. It was fun! I liked to hit and take people down.

I wasn't as good at being the person tackled. I did what I could to avoid the tackler, which Coach Zach says I need to stop doing. "Forwards go forward, not sideways." The point, I believe, is to plow through a guy trying to tackle you like he's nothing. That I need to work on. I think the notion of making myself a kind of big bowling ball when I have the ball and am being approached will be helpful in this endeavor. Coach Zach even said that I could be pretty good once I learn to plow straight ahead. Gotta admit, that was the highlight of my night.

We then started more real-game type of drills. I found this disorienting and I ended up making a lot of mistakes. I tackled a couple of guys way too high and ended up putting a kink in my neck. But that's why they tell us to go low, and put our shoulders into the belly of the guy we're tackling. It makes perfect sense. I need to get comfortable with the chaos of a real game situation though. Otherwise, I'm going to be worse than useless on the pitch in those situations playing defense. The game of rugby moves FAST, and I gotta learn to move with it. I'm not as worried about that because my brain can process something and with practice, I'll be fine. I just need to find whatever it is that will make it click with me when we're doing the whole post-A-B-C stuff.

I already know that I'm going to be in MAJOR pain tomorrow. I feel it a little already, but the feeling I had when I was able to successfully tackle tonight is something I want to capture again. It makes the pain I"m going to feel tomorrow worthwhile. It's amazing to know that there's something physical that I could be good at! That is one reason why I'm writing this tonight instead of tomorrow: the pain is going to make me curse rugby at least a little bit. But that's why God invented naproxen and cold compresses.

The challenge continues...

My Current Challenge

2011-07-30T23:06:00.000-04:00

To say that I am not a fitness enthusiast would be quite the understatement. Other than cardiovascular and aesthetic benefits, I have never found myself obsessed with the gym, even with the endorphins released after working out. Thus, I have never been, nor will I ever be, a gym bunny.

This fact has made it entirely too easy for me to simply find excuses to skip the gym. It's too late. I'm too tired. I'm cranky. I don't feel good. I'm hungry. It's too early to be awake. I have other activities that take my time. I can't fit it in. Blah, blah, blah. The end result is that I'm grotesquely out of shape, my resting heart rate has gone up, and my waist size has expanded as my metabolism seems to be inexorably sliding to a complete stop. This has had health consequences from the development of a "fatty liver" which makes my enzymes screwy to an absolute warning that if I don't act, and SOON, I will become the latest citizen of Diabetes-Land.

I want to avoid diabetes at all costs. Diet isn't going to cut it. Even eating healthier, the slowing of my metabolism makes that route only so advantageous. Also, I enjoy a good meal. Always have, and probably always will. This means that I have to increase the number of calories I burn through physical activity. The gym is one aspect, but my history with consistent gym going is spotty. My lack of gym addiction makes it all to easy to push that down on the priority list. Even when I have friends to meet at the gym. It can be as simple as resentment of never going to the gym closest to my house. It invariably falls apart.

I'm equally not good at solitary sports which depend upon personal drive to have the discipline to succeed. I simply do not care enough about athletic achievements to make that workable for me. I've never been good at sports. I was never well coordinated. I was awkward. The one year I played basketball in 7th grade after being the first guy in my class to hit puberty was a disaster. I invariably screwed up in practice, got ridiculed by the coach, felt inferior and embarrassed, and the one time I did get on the court, I was fouled and couldn't even make free throws.

I need an organized activity where it's OK to not be talented. Where I won't have others pile onto my own sense of athletic inferiority. The one October I tried playing fall softball, I had the definite impression that I was annoying the more talented players. I could smell the judgment, although I will say they never vocalized it. I may have found a sport, and a team, that can fit my needs. It will not be easy, because I really am out of shape, but this is a mission, a challenge, that I cannot fail.

In July, I went to a Rugby 101 "clinic" held by the Atlanta Bucks rugby club. I suppose since rugby hasn't penetrated the United States school sports that it's expected people will come this not knowing a thing about rugby. That is certainly true of me. I thought of rugby because I've been told on more than one occasion that I have a build made for rugby. So I went.

Going to learn a sport in the midday heat of July during the hottest summer I have lived through in Atlanta wasn't the hottest choice. I overheated. I had had coffee about an hour before the clinic, so I chucked that one too. I had bags of ice applied to my head to bring down my body temperature. It worked, and no one gave me any judgement. The guys were super nice, and were quite adamant about not overdoing it. In the part of the clinic I did participate in, I actually had some dexterity at catching the rugby ball, which shocked me. I thought that perhaps I could do this.

But there's a level of athleticism required in rugby that will make this probably the largest physical challenge of my life. There's a lot of running, and endurance. I knew there was puking in my future. But I also knew that there was no way to make it through that without just doing it. My cardiovascular system needs to be strengthened for endurance and so that it doesn't so quickly escalate to maximum heart rate, and the attendant vomiting.

I went to the first Bucks conditioning practice last Thursday evening. On the plus side, it was held from 7:30 to 9pm, at the end of the day. It was still 90F outside but the sun wasn't nearly as intense. We started out running a lap around the field at Coan Middle School. I, of course, brought up the rear. Two laps was enough to send my pulse into the stratosphere and to bring on the nausea.

I had prepared better for this practice than the Rugby 101. I filled an old OJ 2 gallon jug with water and chilled it mostly so I could dump it on my head and try to regulate my body temp that way. I also ate nothing after lunch earlier that day, so my stomach was largely empty. But it wasn't enough to keep away the damn nausea.

I hate being nauseated more than anything. I can take things hurting. I can even take vomiting, even though it's very difficult for me to actually vomit. Nausea drives me nuts. It's enough to basically cripple you, but nothing that anyone can really recognize except you.

I had to stop and start a lot. It was really embarrassing, even though I'd warned the guy leading it that I was coming to him from a zero fitness level. The guys were quite encouraging. I didn't get the impression that I was making people roll their eyes at how lame my physical reactions were. Gary was really good about telling me not to overdo it, and to encourage me to do what I could. This was the first time doing a lot of these exercises, so I had the awkwardness of that combined with an overwhelming nausea that would start up again soon after I got going.

Even with the leg throws, my issue was getting my legs up to where they could be grabbed. Joe was kind enough to realize it would be better to hold my feet up, let my legs fall, and have me bring them back up. The last lap around the field at the end, I ended up walking it. But for me, walking it after I had vomited bile and felt like utter crap, was a victory. I really wanted to just say "screw it" but I couldn't. I knew I had to finish this workout for myself. Killie (that spelling may be off for the nickname) came back around the jogged with me, asking if I thought I could do a slow jog. I told him it was a victory for me to be even walking it, and he noted that my walking was keeping up with his light jog so it was all good.

The conditioning left me drained. I was basically a zombie afterward when I went out to eat. I'm sure my dinner companions found me less than charming. I also wondered if some of the guys thought that would be last they'd see of me. The next conditioning is scheduled for Tuesday night, and I will be there. I hope it will be better physically than it was Thursday. Gary gave me some pointers about what I could do at the gym to get my body used to sustained effort on a treadmill. There is a bit of fear about what happens when actual practices start. Gary made mention to all of us how the coaches would put us through hell. The conditioning kicked my ass... I can't imagine what the coaches have planned.

My mom did not greet the news of me vomiting well. Maybe I shouldn't have shared it on facebook, but oh well. I need to share because I need the encourage to fight through, to improve, and stick with it despite the physical misery I will experience early on. My mom both emailed and called me to express her concern. She has visions that I will end up one of those people who just drop dead in a practice because I will push or be pushed too hard.

I'm not concerned about the being pushed too hard with the Bucks. So far, they've really respected limits, and I have no reason to believe that won't continue. This is definitely something I need to do for me. It's going to be hard. I'm not whining; I'm simply facing the facts. I have to prepare myself mentally to face up to the regular embarrassment of not being able to do what other guys can do on the team. I usually haven't participated in things in which I am not naturally talented. From childhood through adulthood, I followed things that ran along with my passions from drama, to school honor societies, to politics. I have established myself as a credible contender for the activities I've participated in.

My parents never pushed me to play sports, and I certainly wasn't inclined to pursue activities where I had zero natural talent. But the stakes are too high for me now. It's important for me to pursue this despite the difficulties. Despite being pretty sure that I will see next to no playing time, and I certainly won't be a benefit on the pitch. Knowing this, I still need to pursue this rugby thing, push my physical fitness into healthier levels that will keep me away from diabetes and hopefully improve other aspects of my general health.

I need to face down something that has a lot of natural negatives for me and my ego, and to not give up. Maybe I will find a natural talent in some aspect of rugby. Maybe the game will click for me in a way that will allow me to make a REAL contribution. I have to do this for me. I feel that if I fail at this, the consequences for me personally will be bad. What's worse, I'm afraid I'd lose respect for myself. I'm a tough bastard in many ways, and I've faced down a lot of personal crap over my lifetime so far. But now I need to prove to myself that I'm more than just emotionally tough. I need to prove my mettle to myself.

But I may go through a personal hell to do it. And I'll need the help and encouragement of friends, especially new friends I'm making on the Bucks team.

Federal Furlough Notices Released

2011-04-08T09:03:00.000-04:00

In case you've never seen one, here is what went out to each individual staff member at CDC starting last night and through this morning. My notice was received at 7:06am. Thanks Teabaggers!

I. - Important Furlough Related Notice

As Secretary Sebelius communicated in her message to all employees, civilian and uniformed dated April 5, 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services may be in a furlough status when the current Continuing Resolution expires this week. In the absence of either a fiscal year 2011 appropriation, or a continuing resolution for HHS, no further financial obligations may be incurred as of midnight on Friday, April 8, 2011 except for those related to the orderly suspension of the agency's operations or performance of funded or excepted activities, as defined by the Office of Management and Budget.

You have not been identified as excepted from the furlough based on one of the following criteria defined by OMB: (1) Employees involved in obligations 'authorized by law' or (2) Employees involved in the safety of human life or the protection of property. This means that if the Department is in a furlough status, you will be furloughed from your position, and will be in a nonpay, nonduty status. (Commissioned Corps officers will remain on active duty, but in a non-work, non-pay status)

Please begin identifying the required actions you will need to complete in order to effect an orderly shutdown of your office operations should the official shutdown occur.

All employees will receive their regularly scheduled pay on Friday, April 15, 2011 for the pay period ending Saturday, April 9, 2011.

Because this furlough does not have a planned end date, Departmental leadership will make a reasonable effort to inform all employees when the furlough is over and when they are expected to return to work. Please also continue to monitor the news for the latest information regarding the furlough. When you hear that a continuing resolution or a fiscal year 2011 appropriation for HHS has been approved, you will be expected to return to work on your next regular duty day.

For additional furlough guidance, please refer to the Question and Answer document and the Office of Personnel Management's website at www.opm.gov/furlough/furlough.asp and www.opm.gov/furlough2011.

Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H.

Director, CDC, and

Administrator, ATSDR

A 10-year-old note

2011-02-13T22:43:00.000-05:00

The build-up to the 10th anniversary of my dad's suicide has been fairly quiet emotionally. I didn't even think about it much until the past week, although it has haunted me over the weekend. Yet, I didn't feel like rehashing the event in detail, as I have in the past. If you are interested, you can read about it here.

My thoughts have been most focused on the notes my dad left. He left 10 of them. Randy Cecil was nothing if not a planner. He knew exactly what he was doing and planned everything, even burning a disk of music he wanted played at his funeral. Out of the 9 personalized notes, the envelope with my name on it read, "Jason, Mom, Dad, and Judy". I didn't get my own note, which has bugged me. As his only son, I thought I deserved a note of my own. Perhaps he couldn't face the prospect. He adored my grandparents, so perhaps it was just easier to lump me into a note for them and his sister, my Aunt Judy.

Anyway, by the bedside table, Dad left the following note (italics indicate something written in my dad's handwriting):

February 13, 2001 5AM

To Whom It May Concern:

I took my own life without the knowledge or assistance of anyone. I used prescription drugs that I saved over time without my doctor's knowledge. Please notify Pam Cecil at 381-3332 (work) or 266-1591 (home) and Michelle Harr at 243-4882 (work), 312-4409 (mobile) or 223-4403 (home). Do not notify my parents or son as I prefer Pam or Michelle to do that.

Please give my will to Michelle Harr as she is my executor.

Randal H. Cecil
Randal H. Cecil

My physician is Dr. James Borders.
My therapist is Jacky Thomas.

I was struck at how, even at the moment of his impending suicide, Dad wanted to be sure that no one got into trouble because of his actions. He explicitly clears his medical doctor and therapist of any professional blame. And that was the right thing for him to do. I worked with Jacky to try to save him, and he fooled her in the end just as he fooled me.

Of course, the police had to open and read all of the suicide notes, even though mine was marked: "ONLY FOR Jason, Mom, Dad & Judy Personal"

This note read:

February 13, 2001

Dear Jason, Mom, Dad, and Judy,

I'm so sorry to cause you this pain, but I could not erase my pain any other way. I love you all very much. Please do not blame yourselves as you did all you could do. Please also know that I tried very, very hard for a long time to get well and could not. The pain hurts just as much, if not more, now than it did at first. Please do not blame anyone else either. Please forgive me.

It is my strong desire to be cremated and my ashes scattered here in Lexington at Raven Run Sanctuary. I do not want my body displayed! Just have my picture instead (the one I gave to Jason and Judy at Christmas). I would like a memorial service here in Lexington so that my friends can attend. I prefer not to have a minister or priest speak, just my friends and family. I created a CD of John Denver and Judy Collins music that I would like played at the memorial please.

As for my guitar and recordings, Judy, please let Jason have first pick. Also, I want my John Denver vinyl records and videos to be sent to Linda Symons in Australia.

Jason, please know that I am very proud of you and love you more than I can ever say. Please be strong, take care of your mother, and live a good life.

I've got to go.

Love,
Randal (Dad)
Randal

Dad had a really bad habit of signing cards and such to me with his name followed by "(Dad)" as if I needed the hint. LOL

The note itself is kind of impersonal, but I think it was difficult for him to write. He didn't get all of his wishes in the 2nd paragraph. I felt that since he had committed suicide, there were somethings we were going to compromise for the sake of his survivors, and if he didn't like that....tough. I did have him cremated, and became a HUGE fan of cremation in the process. When I die, I hope to be cremated myself. But, I only scattered half of his ashes at Raven Run Sanctuary with my mom. The other half I had placed into a cremation burial box, and buried it in the family plot in Dickson. My grandparents, especially, needed a place to visit my dad's remains. Someplace they knew a part of him lay. And since they will be buried next to him, they will always be close together.

The other compromise I enacted was having his body on display for family only before the visitation for friends and others. I know I wanted alone time with him, open casket, and I knew my family did too. I made sure we all had a few minutes alone with him to say whatever goodbyes we needed to say. It gave me a sense of peace, and I'm sure it helped everyone else too. For the general visitation, though, his casket was closed with a picture on top. His death was not gruesome at all. After he took his anti-anxiety meds on top of the screwdrivers he'd been drinking all night as he wrote the suicide notes (computer time stamps told the tale), he put on an allergy mask and then tied two trash bags around his neck, securing them with rubber bands. He suffocated within 30 minutes. I guess he just didn't want to be gawked at.

It's no secret that my lack of having someone unrelated to me who loves me enough to want to spend his life with me, and I with him, drives my depression cycles and sometimes leads to outright despair. But one thing about being a suicide survivor is that you know what it means to be left behind. It also takes suicide away as a potential choice, no matter how badly I might feel someday. I've lived through the devastation that haunts us to this day. There's a hole in the hearts of many people in my dad's life that will never be filled because of the way he left us. I don't think he anticipated that, or that we'd still care 10 yrs later.

But it is 10 years later, and I still do mourn for him. I think about him. I still miss him. But I do pray he's at peace.

Our Political Discourse

2011-01-10T21:06:00.000-05:00

When I first heard the news that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) had been shot, I immediately figured it would turn out to be a teabagger exercising his/her "2nd Amendment Remedies". After all Giffords was one of those swing districts whose re-election was one of the last ones called. Her re-election campaign was ugly and full of fury on both sides. Sarah Palin had her as one of the "targets" to take out in 2010 since she had voted for Health Reform. I wasn't the only one who immediately jumped to that conclusion. Millions of other people did too, and like me, they tweeted about it.

I was scolded for jumping to conclusions and not being helpful. The nature of twitter is its immediacy. It's very much like a rolling national, sometimes international, conversation. There's a reason that so many people, mostly unconnected to one another personally, immediately thought about the Tea Party Movement with its talk of 2nd Amendment "remedies", watering the tree of liberty with the blood of martyrs, and threats of a 2nd American Revolution, and specifically Sarah Palin with her tradement "Don't Retreat - RELOAD!" crap.

That the right immediately went on the defensive indicates to me some evidence of a guilty conscience. They immediately starting saying things like:

"How DARE you suggest that our rhetoric might play a role!"
"Dude was crazy, we had NOTHING to do with it! How DARE you!"
"Liberals said worse about Bush!" (who, unless I missed something, never had someone take a SHOT at him)
"Democrats use targets too!"
"Violent rhetoric is just part of politics, and always has been!"
"You're just crass and political trying to take advantage of a tragedy. How DARE you!"

In all that hand-wringing and deflecting, never once did Palin, Beck, or her defenders say, "Wow, that is NOT what we meant by that rhetoric. Everyone knows that. Dude was crazy, but Jesus, if things we said helped in any encourage him, that's not what we're about. Using gun sights and talking about "reloading" and "2nd Amendment Rememdies" in the heat of a campaign was taking it too far. We wouldn't do it again, and we'll call out anyone who tries in the future."

But no, instead there is complete denial and attempts to change the conversation. There's no acknowledgement that just because we CAN say something that we should. There's no willingness to even discuss that perhaps political leaders shouldn't engage in the ultra violent rhetoric of the base. All the examples of Bush bashing, and the calls for Bush's death came from no-name fringe people, most of whom were anti-war. You didn't have Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Nancy Pelosi, or any Democratic leader of note going on the nightly news to spew out the same crap, or suggest that liberals needed to take up arms to seize back the country. We were always focused like a laser on the next election, convincing people to show up to the polls. Harry Reid did insult Bush, calling him a liar on the Senate floor which was as bad as it got. We did feel that the Bushies were dangerous to the freedoms we loved under our Constitution, but we protested peacefully, sued (often successfully) in court, and got our voters to the polls in 2006 and 2008.

But conservatives have, since the Clinton presidency, presented liberals and Democrats as beyond the pale, trying to create a socialist dictatorship with FEMA concentration camps and death panels that will swoop in and kill healthy grandmas everywhere! Oh, and while we're at it, we're going to disarm the populace, and take a black marker to scratch out the 2nd amendment. Since Obama was elected, we've endured the unending charges of birthers that Obama is a Kenyan Muslim looking to exact vengeance on America for European colonialism in Africa?!? And we have just gone through a 2 year election cycle where House members feared for their lives, to the cheers to the GOP establishment. We saw my Representative, John Lewis, get spat upon while walking to cast his vote for health reform. And Giffords herself had her office windows broken after she voted Yes on health reform. We saw Sharon Angle saying that people might have to use "2nd Amendment Remedies" as if we were on the verge of a tyranny not seen since the election of Hilter in 1933.

Politics is rough, and campaigns have become mini-wars. No longer do we think people are merely wrong in their policy preferences, but somehow EVIL and out to DESTROY the Constitution! I've been as guilty as any teabagger in that fallacy. I've assumed that people on the right are driven by pure greed and a disdain against people different than they are. I think that not only are they misguided but dangerously so.

A lot of this feeling is driven by real sense of potential danger I feel as an openly gay man living in the South. I am accutely aware that the VAST majority of my fellow citizens in Georgia do not think I have many rights worth respecting. I don't have children, but I have many dear friends who do. I know there are people who would gladly use the police power of the state to remove those children from their homes because their parents happen to be gay. I know the Constitution of Georgia states that no relationship that I might enter into with another man will be recognized in any way, shape, or form. If I had a husband and someone tried to contest a will that left him as beneficiary, I have no confidence that my wishes would be followed unless the case was tried in DeKalb or Fulton Counties. For me, who is in charge makes a difference. It's the difference between attempts at writing discrimination into the US Constitution with a "marriage amendment" versus the repeal of DADT.

I have learned that not all Republicans are enemies, but I find it much easier to intellectually engage with fiscal conservatives and have a debate about how much and what kind of governement is necessary than I do to engage with social conservatives who I believe would do not consider me an equal human being in any way, shape, or form. I fear social conservatives, and until they learn to accept that gays are part of society and must be treated equally, I always will.

What frustrates me more than anything about Sarah Palin, her rhetoric, and the white washing of her record, and ludicrous denials of any responsibility whatsoever for dealing in over-the-top rhetoric...and all the conservatives who are screaming that Democrats are just as bad for even bringing up the rhetoric issue is the lack of personal responsibility. Keith Olbermann had the decency to personally apologize for overheated rhetoric he has used. Would it be too much to ask someone to acknowledge that he/she has engaged in overly violent rhetoric, and to agree that perhaps we need to tone it down? For too many on the right, the unfortunate answer seems to be YES, that IS asking too much.

The assassin in Tucson was undeniably off his rocker. I think he knew right from wrong, which is thankfully the definition of legal insanity. I hope that he will be put to death for what he has done. But honestly, people, it was only a matter of time before some crackpot decided to take matters into his/her hands. Our divisions are too great and too deep to promise that only polite conversation be used in debate and campaigns. But responsible political leaders need to have a filter for what is appropriate! Just because we CAN say something does not mean we SHOULD. Isn't that a lesson we were supposed to learn in Kindergarten?

Some suggest that making this argument is an attempt to chill political speech. That we should not only continue to engage in overheated, violent rhetoric, but revel in it. And when a tragedy happens like the attempted assassination of a member of Congressman, we should merely dab away the tears at the tragedy, lament the loss the loss of life, and then carry on. No reflection needed! After all, Freedom of Speech apparently means Freedom from Criticism. If we somehow suggest that we need to cool it with the war, revolution, and violence metaphors, then we are, by definition, enemies of freedom. I don't think asking for responsible maturity in our political discourse, especially from our acknowledged leaders, is anti-Freedom of Speech.

I hope we don't give in to pressure from the right to drop the discussion about the tone of our politics. No one should suggest making a law to regulate speech, but there's nothing in violation of the Constitution from applying shame and peer pressure to urge people to use a little judgement when exercising the precious right to free speech. It may be the only way to continue to preserve our system.

Crackin' on Crackers

2010-12-13T17:17:00.000-05:00

It would appear that my earlier use of the term "cracker 'Democrats'" in a story link on facebook featuring the new Georgia House Democratic Leader Stacy Abrams has ruffled a few feathers. I have always understood the word "cracker" to be uneducated, poor white trash. It has never been synomyous with "rural" as I've known plenty of crackers who live in a city. Being uneducated poor white trash doesn't have a geographical limitation to me. It's more about your attitude toward life.

Anyway, my comment was meant to relay that if any more ignorant white elected Democrats (trash in my book) wanted to leave a party led by a smart, capable, African American woman like Stacy Abrams, they should just go now. Somehow, that's been translated by some to say, "F*ck you, rural Democrats! We don't want your kind no how." Which is certainly not true, and anyone who either knows me or has worked with me on political stuff over the years would know. There is a no more beseiged individual right now in the political landscape than a rural, white Democrat, especially if that Democrat is male.

With the collapse of Democrats in Georgia, I do wonder if we can get the rural areas back again under the Democratic banner. Since the Republicans have pretty much successfully characterized us all as only made up of "cityfolk, liberal whites, homos, and colored people", I don't have a lot of hope that despite having their economic best interest at heart, that we'll get them back. The Pennsylvania and Virginia examples could be telling. Statewide elections in PA are won by taking the cities by large margins, and winning the suburbs. Rural PA is as red as blood, but Democrats can win the state with an urban/suburban coalition. That's how Obama won Virginia in 2008. And in Georgia, the key to the surburbs is women. I really think that rural GA has simply stopped listening to us for the most part. That doesn't mean we shouldn't keep talking to them, but acting like rebuilding the old urban/rural coalition for Democrats is realitistic is a sure way to keep on losing for decades to come.

Our party switchers have all been rural Democrats, plus the Representative from ATHENS. A lot of these guys looked many of us in the face before the election, denouncing the very IDEA that they'd ever be anything but Democrats. That was, until Roy Barnes got beat, Democrats lost EVERY statewide office we held, and the national GOP gained 60+ seats in the US House. November 2 was a VERY bad night in Georgia, no two ways about it. And some of the switchers have specifically said that the Democratic party is too urban, too gay, too black, and too liberal for them now. What I suspect is tha they pooping their pants imagining what kind of districts will be drawn for them if they DON'T flip to the GOP.

So yes, as I watched Democratic Leader Stacy Abrams discuss the party switchers over the last month or so, my thought was, "How could ANYONE not be proud to be part of a group led by such an intelligent, well spoken woman?" I do know that some folks are upset that the rural boys aren't in charge anymore, and there are some folks who still wear the Democratic label who nonetheless think that an intelligent, capable, African American woman who takes on the mantle of leadership is somehow the very definition of "uppity". That's definitely not the democratic party they knew, and they aren't really comfortable being a minority in their own caucus.

On the emotional level, I get why they would want to leave. I remember when I first went to Africa, and I'd be the only white guy that I'd see for days at a time. It was jarring, but the confidence I had instilled in me from being a white guy in America allowed me to quickly get over it. I realized it didn't have anything to do with me, and I could just carry on. The Democrats who have bolted could have carried on to, knowing they'd be the first to be screwed in redistricting. But carrying on would have required a moral fiber and strength of character that none of the bolters possessed. To me, that makes them trash, and since they happened to all be white (at least the bolters in the legislature), white trash. And I wonder how much having a black female leader from Atlanta played in their thought process.

So I commented that any crackers pretending to be Democrats who still wished to leave should just go. That was NOT a general invitation for all white rural Democrats to leave. The fact that I personally know Democrats from every state in the South, many of them in quite rural areas, not to mention states like Idaho, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, and Utah makes me very proud of my party. We do have lots to offer for the thinking person. We don't have an interest in taking away anyone's guns, even if I do think there is an argument to be made that urban gun control is a very different beast than rural gun control. I worry about the economic decay in our rural areas, the inequity of school funding, and a host of other issues that make a real difference in rural American life. It grieves me that so many just look at me as someone who wants to take away their freedom, confiscate their guns, force them to either have or watch gay sex, and God only knows what else! I sure as hell don't want to lose the people we have left in rural areas!

After I was informed by a friend that unnamed people were angry that I'd called all white rural Democrats "crackers" (I did not...they read that into 'cracker', not me), I decided to look up the formal definition of the noun "cracker".

In the Urban Dictionary, there were three definitions:

Originally the white slave driver because he would "crack" the whip, hence the noun cracker.
Noun. Slang word used to refer to those of European ancestry. The word is thought to have either derived from the sound of a whip being cracked by slave owners, or because crackers are generally white in color.
opposite of "N-word", an insult to whites... except white people aren't dumb enough to walk around calling each other that word because it's intended to be demeaning.

Then I went to Dictionary.com, where I found the following:

a thin, crisp biscuit.
a firecracker.
Also called cracker bonbon. a small paper roll used as a party favor, that usually contains candy, trinkets, etc., and that pops when pulled sharply at one or both ends.
( initial capital letter ) Sometimes Disparaging and Offensive . a native or inhabitant of Georgia (used as a nickname).
Slang: Disparaging and Offensive . a poor white person living in some rural parts of the southeastern U.S.
a tuft or knot of cotton, horsehair, hemp, etc., at the tip of a whip's lash; cracker; popper.
braggart; boaster.
a person or thing that cracks.
a chemical reactor used for cracking. Compare catalytic cracking, fractionator.
a break without complete separation of parts; fissure.
a slight opening, as between boards in a floor or wall, or between a door and its doorpost.
a sudden, sharp noise, as of something breaking.
the snap of or as of a whip.
a resounding blow: He received a terrific crack on the head when the branch fell.
Informal . a witty or cutting remark; wisecrack.
a break or change in the flow or tone of the voice.
Informal . opportunity; chance; try: Give him first crack at the new job.
a flaw or defect.
Also called rock. Slang . pellet-size pieces of highly purified cocaine, prepared with other ingredients for smoking, and known to be especially potent and addicting.
Masonry . check¹( def. 41 ) .
a mental defect or deficiency.
a shot, as with a rifle: At the first crack, the deer fell.
a moment; instant: He was on his feet again in a crack.
Slang . a burglary, esp. an instance of housebreaking.
Chiefly British . a person or thing that excels in some respect.
Slang: Vulgar . the vulva.
Chiefly Scot. conversation; chat.
British Dialect . boasting; braggadocio.
Archaic . a burglar.

So it appears that I was correct in thinking of a cracker as an ignorant (#21 Dictionary.com) white person. Being a southerner by birth, I did not associate it just with the South. Ignorant is ignorant, regardless of where it is found. And white trash can live in a holler or in a run-down urban tenement. Now before others think I'm calling names to people who might live in a holler or a run-down urban tenement, the key for me in someone being white trash, or a cracker, is ignorance. Willful ignorance that is not open to even hearing a different way of thinking.

Take home point: I was not calling all white rural Democrats crackers, nor was I wishing they'd leave the party. The ignorant, self-centered crackers who have bolted to the GOP in recent weeks were my target. I value, and desperately hope to keep what rural white Democrats we have left. I apologize for any impression I gave to the contrary regarding my rural brothers and sisters.

That said, the folks who thought it was necessary to go to people around me to express your displeasure, you are cowards. Anyone who's seen my wall on Facebook can see that I'm not opposed to people calling me out or arguing with me out in the open. The passive aggressive folks who like to whisper to everyone EXCEPT the person they are upset with, who also hint that perhaps a formal complaint should be filed -- well, you are the poster child for why the Young Democrats of America has been forced to rebuild from the ground up. I respect people a lot more who are willing to say to ME, "What the HELL, man?" whenever I've said or done something to offend. That's when we can talk it out and sort everything out. But I know for some folks, creating behind-the-scenes drama is like breathing.

Why I Oppose Pledging "Allegiance" to the Georgia Flag

2010-11-16T14:41:00.000-05:00

“I pledge allegiance to the Georgia flag and to the principles for which it stands: Wisdom, Justice, and Moderation.”

Certainly seems innocuous enough, right? Who could possibly disagree to the principle of Wisdom, Justice, and Moderation? Not to mention fidelty to the state which you serve? Well, there's plenty wrong with it when you look into the history of such a pledge.

In 2009, Sens. Pearson, Rogers, Williams, Wiles, Mullis, and Seabaugh introduced SR 632 - A RESOLUTION affirming states' rights based on Jeffersonian principles; and for other purposes (http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/2009_10/search/sr632.htm). Sens. Williams and Rogers are the key leaders controlling the Senate at this point, and this pledge is part of their radical "states rights" agenda.

This resolution restated controversial propositions of the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions written by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Among other things, this established Jefferson's belief that states had some kind of extra constitutional veto over federal legislation or action a state believed usurped its authoirty under the shared sovereignty doctrine of the Constitution. What the resolution fails to mention is that 10 states specifically condemned KY and VA for passing those resolutions and the ideas contained within them. South Carolina explicitly relied upon these resolutions in 1832 when it tried to nullify the Tariffs of 1828 and 1832. President Jackson had to make preparations to invade South Carolina by force before a political compromise cooled the situation and South Carolina backed off.

The Constitution makes the laws of the United States the supreme laws of the land. Anything a state does contradictory to federal law is null and void. States have no nullification rights, and it's attitudes like those of the GA GOP Senate caucus that led to the Civil War, which honestly answered the question forever. We are AMERICANS first, citizens of the United States of America. We are citizens of our state and locality second. How can you pledge loyalty to the United States of America while at the same time pledging the same loyalty to the state of Georgia without diminishing BOTH pledges? I argue that you cannot.

Further, under our constitutional system, it is not up to the state legislature to interpret the US Constitution. We have courts for that, and the Supreme Court is more than willing to throw out federal laws that overreach federal authority. Implied threats of violence inherent in nullification and secesstion should not be tolerated. This is this spirit of nullification and threat of succession which is driving this "state pledge" idea. Even State Rep. Bobby Franklin (R) said that the pledge to GA was needed, “given the usurpations of Washington.” I understand that Franklin doesn't like the outcome of the elections of 2008 or any of the laws LEGALLY passed by the Congress now ending. But there are legal ways to attack such laws, and nullification/secession is NOT included.

What this pledge does is try to drive a wedge between Georgians and the United States Government. It says, "Sure, I pledge allegiance to the United States...only so long as it doesn't piss Georgia off." We are ONE nation, under God, INDIVISIBLE...as the national pledge says. Taking a pledge to Georgia does seem harmless, but the ideas driving it are dangerous and sinister. As a result, I would hope that my state Senator, Jason Carter, wouldn't participate. However, much to my disappointment, it appears that he will.

Obama and "The Gays"

2010-10-28T10:36:00.000-04:00

I understand, and certainly share, the frustration that Obama hasn't used his majorities in Congress to make good on the promises he made in the 2008 campaign. The frustration over his Administration's legal maneuvers in DADT and DOMA are also understandable. As someone who's earned a law degree, I appreciate his strategy of defending laws he clearly does not agree with as a way to make sure the stake is permanently through the heart of those laws.

The President's interview with The Advocate was enlightening for me on a couple of fronts. When talking about disillusionment and disappointment in the LGBT community, Obama said:

I guess my attitude is that we have been as vocal, as supportive of the LGBT community as any President in history. I’ve appointed more openly gay people to more positions in this government than any President in history. We have moved forward on a whole range of issues that were directly under my control, including, for example, hospital visitation.

On “don’t ask, don’t tell,” I have been as systematic and methodical in trying to move that agenda forward as I could be given my legal constraints, given that Congress had explicitly passed a law designed to tie my hands on the issue.

And so, I’ll be honest with you, I don’t think that the disillusionment is justified.

Now, I say that as somebody who appreciates that the LGBT community very legitimately feels these issues in very personal terms. So it’s not my place to counsel patience. One of my favorite pieces of literature is “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” and Dr. King had to battle people counseling patience and time. And he rightly said that time is neutral. And things don’t automatically get better unless people push to try to get things better.

So I don’t begrudge the LGBT community pushing, but the flip side of it is that this notion somehow that this administration has been a source of disappointment to the LGBT community, as opposed to a stalwart ally of the LGBT community, I think is wrong.

I guess the President is saying to us, "Look, I'm doing the best that I can. I know you want me to do more, faster, but I want to get this done right. I'm your FRIEND. Look at what I have done so far! Saying that I'm not that good of a friend is wrong, and kind of hurts my feelings." OK, I read the feelings part into the President's response, but I think it's true.

What has President Obama's Administration actually accomplished for the LGBT community since taking office in January 2009? Here's a list:

Signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, expanding federal hate crime law to include crimes motivated by gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity.
Supported legislation to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”—which has passed the House and the Senate Armed Services Committee—including sending the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman to testify before the Senate in favor of repeal.
Lifted the discriminatory ban on entry to the United States based on HIV status.
Ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to guarantee medical decision making and visitation rights to LGBT couples.
Expanded the Family Medical Leave Act to ensure that LGBT parents and partners can take leave from work to care for their child, parent, or spouse just as any family member could.
Committed to ensuring the Housing and Urban Development Department’s core housing programs are open to all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, and clarified the department’s definition of “family” to include LGBT people.
Removed a common barrier to safe housing experienced by those in the LGBT community by including gender identity and expression in the Fair Housing Act.
Led a successful international effort to gain recognition of LGBT organizations at the United Nations.
Reversed an inexcusable U.S. position by signing the United Nations Declaration on Gay Rights, which condemns violence based on sexual orientation and gender identity worldwide.
Signed the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act.
Changed State Department policy so that transgender Americans can more easily obtain passports that reflect their true gender.
Banned job discrimination based on gender identity throughout the federal government.
Endorsed the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009 to provide full partnership benefits to federal employees.
Eliminated the discriminatory Census Bureau policy that kept LGBT relationships from being counted, encouraging couples who consider themselves married to file that way and urging transgender Americans to identify their true gender.
Hired and appointed a record number of qualified LGBT Americans, including several transgender appointees— the first president ever to do so.
Awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Billie Jean King and the late Harvey Milk.
Sent an administration official to the Senate to testify in favor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, the first time any official of any administration has done so.
Hosted the first LBGT Pride Month Celebration in White House history, and after eight years of silence under the Bush administration resumed the tradition of issuing Presidential Pride proclamations.

A lot of people will say, "Yes, that's lovely, but it's only moving issues around the edges! We want DADT and DOMA repealed! We want ENDA passed! And we wanted it yesterday!" I think the 2008 campaign did create unrealistic expectations of what Obama would be able to accomplish upon entering office. Our Presidency is not a monarchy. The President, for the most part, cannot simply decree things, even with huge majorities in the House and Senate. What he has been able to decree, he has done so, in a methodical manner. It's real change, even if not everyone feels it. Obama is laying groundwork that will pay off for us as we continue to fight DADT and DOMA in Congress and the courts.

The sad fact remains that if the Teabaggers totally take over Congress, legislative movement on our rights will come to a halt. A GOP Congress will not even vote on ENDA or DADT. And you can forget about DOMA. We'll probably see a renewed push to amend the Constitution to ban same sex marriage again. Such a move will fail, but don't be surprised when they try. I think the House is lost to us, but the Senate is not. If we can keep the Senate, we can still get judges appointed who are open minded about LGBT rights, and we can stop the worst of the House-passed bills. And hopefully Obama will wield his veto pen to protect us.

So remember to vote if you haven't already. You really have no room to bitch if you don't participate.

My 2010 Georgia Election Guide

2010-10-24T01:15:00.001-04:00

I'm starting to get more questions about who should be supported on the Georgia ballot in this election. It's no secret I'm a hard core Democrat, so my suggestions are not surprising. But I will note cases where other candidates are generally NOT freaks. I'm also the Treasurer of the Atlanta Stonewall Democrats, and we have a process for giving judges a smell test, so for Fulton and DeKalb County judicial races, I will share those recommendations. I also got a really good summary from my State Reprepresentative, Mary Margaret Oliver, who passed along a summary prepared by Rep. Stephanie Stuckey Benfield. I'll share that and my recommendation for your vote.

GOVERNOR: Roy Barnes

If the Republicans are allowed to control redistricting in 2011, they will redistrict Democrats almost out of existance for the next decade. It will be a disaster, and only Roy Barnes with a veto pen can stop it. Also, Nathan Deal is a crook. The man is bankrupt and may not survive a term without being indicted for corruption. Not to mention he's the type of man who tried to make rape trial laws so lax that a woman would have to prove she "didn't ask for it" in a rape trial. If Georiga elects Deal governor, we will continue to decline as a state, and we'll be no better than Mississippi and Alabama in making fools of ourselves by the people we elect.

LT. GOVERNOR: Carol Porter

This is a good woman who believes we need to focus on issues like the economy and efficiency in state government rather than focus on social issues like abortion or gay adoption. She would make a vastly superior Lt. Gov to Casey Cagle who's main accomplishment has been to forget to lock his office door while fucking his mistress on his desk. He's also been very involved in aiding Nathan Deal in his corrupt deals with state government.

SECRETARY OF STATE: Georgianna Sinkfield

When it comes to the office that protects integrity of our elections, I believe that a GOP SOS means that we have a default position that the poor and non-white should have obstacles in place in order to vote. I'm bothered that Sinkfield doens't seem to be campaigning outside the black church circuit, but she's better than Kemp who made some kind of secret deal with Gov. Sonny Perdue to short circuit what was promising to be a lively GOP primary by appointing him to the office when Karen Handel resigned to run for governor.

ATTORNEY GENERAL: Ken Hodges

After a successful primary, Hodges inexplicably fired his whole staff and decided to have "friends" run his campaign. Sam Olens, the GOP nominee, is widely expected to win, and he's one of the reasonable Republicans. He led the Cobb Commission to repeal its anti-gay resolutions from the 1990s that basically said gay people are bad and weren't welcome in Cobb County. He also has worked with friends of mine in Cobb to pave the way for the Cobb Commission to adopt a non-discrimination in employment ordinance for LGBT workers. The Libertarian Don Smart is pretty good too. He won't win, but just imagine how much fun it would be to have an independent AG who dislikes both Dems and GOP :)

STATE SCHOOL SUPERINDENDENT: Joe Martin

This is the 2nd time around for Joe running for this office. He's got a deep background in education policy making, and God knows our schools need help, BADLY. The Libertarian candidate is interesting, and she's a school teacher. She doesn't give answers you'd expect from a Libertarian who is suspicious that state government should be involved in education at all, unless it's a voucher system. The GOP candidate is a right wing FREAK, and if he wins, we can expect Georgia to make headlines like Texas disclaiming science-based fact and instead teaching that the earth is 6000 years old.

COMMISSIONER OF INSURANCE: Mary Squires

Squires is by far the superior candidate in this race, and she worked hard to clear the field so she could fundraise. However, we have not seen the fruits of that labor, and her campaign for this VERY important office has been invisible to me...and I'm heavily involved in Democratic politics! But she is smart, and she is tough...and she understands that this office is the only protection consumers have.

COMMISSIONER OF AGRICULTURE: J.B. Powell

There was some SUPER shady stuff going down around this office and who would run for it. Ostensibly, former House Speaker Terry Coleman was being groomed the last 4 years to run for the office that has been held by Tommy Irvin since 1968. Coleman decided at the last minute to run for Labor Commissioner. Considering Coleman was PERSONALLY responsibile for the Amendment 1 vote being held in 2004, voting for him would have been virtually impossible for any self-respecting gay person in Georgia. Luckily, Coleman lost, which warmed my gay heart. Powell and the GOP nominee are both big into corporate farming, but the Libertarian Kevin Cherry is big into organic farming, and he's got some ideas that could be useful for rural GA.

COMMISSIONER OF LABOR: Darryl Hicks

This is largely an administrative post, but the idea that a party which is ACTIVELY hostile to the average worker should be in charge of the department that provides services to the average workers baffles me. And the libertarians would probably want to see the department abolished, so again, why elect someone like that? Darryl is a good guy, and would be a very good commissioner of labor.

PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION: Keith Moffett

The Commission has become a rubber stamp for whatever rate increase Georgia Power wants to impose. They are actively anti-consumer, so we need Keith's voice on the commission.

UNITED STATES SENATOR: Michael Thurmond

Unless there is a huge turnout with black voters, Thurmond doesn't stand a chance. The fact he hasn't raised any money or campaigned doesn't help either. But I cast this vote as a vote of support for President Obama.

For State Reps, State Senators, and Congress, vote Democrat. In my own district, if John Lewis is not reelected, the world truly is coming to an end.

JUDGES

SUPREME COURT: Matt Wilson

This is a man who believes in personal freedom, including freedom for LGBT Georgians. He is the only one who applied for the Stonewall endorsement, and his answers to our questions indicate he would be a friend on the Court. The incumbent was appointed as Sonny's stooge on the court. I would NOT trust Nahmias to be fair or friendly when it comes to issues of gay rights on the Court.

APPEALS COURT - JOHNSON SEAT: Chris McFadden

None of the other judges on the Court of Appeals is opposed, and this seat is open. McFadden literally wrote the book on appeal procedure in Georgia. He would make a fair and good judge.

DEKALB COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT: Michael Rothenberg

This seat cannot go wrong. I like the energy and bipartisanship with which Rothenberg has approached his campaign. In this race, my CHIEF concern is to have a judge who interprets "best interest of the child" to INCLUDE gay parents and 2nd parent adoption. Rothenberg will support gay families, as will Denise Warner and Courtney Johnson. Any of these three are good choices.

FULTON COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT: Grier, Dallaire, Robertson

There is a stealth GOP right winger running for this seat, so whatever you do, DO NOT VOTE FOR KELLY LEE for this office! She WILL NOT support gay families in Fulton County, whereas any of the three listed above will.

PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS AND BALLOT QUESTIONS

AMENDMENT 1: Allows contracts with non-compete clauses to be enforced in Georgia courts.
BALLOT QUESTION: Shall the Constitution of Georgia be amended so as to make Georgia more economically competitive by authorizing legislation to uphold reasonable competitive agreements?
VOTE NO

Summary: Currently, the Constitution prohibits the General Assembly from authorizing any contract or agreement that may or intends to have the effect of defeating or lessening competition. Non-compete clauses in contracts may limit where a former employee works, where he or she works and the type of work they can perform. Moreover, these restrictions can be for brief periods or for years.

If passed, the amended would give the General Assembly the power to grant to courts the ability to "blue-pencil" contracts with non-compete language. This means a judge could limit the duration, geographic area, and scope of prohibited activities provided in a contract or agreement with competition restrictions and thereby make such non-compete language reasonable.

Pro: For many companies, non-compete clauses are essential to guarantee that former employees with specialized knowledge are not able to simply leave the company and take that knowledge to the next highest bidder or to create their own companies using knowledge gained from trade secrets. Most states allow “blue penciling” by judges, which Georgia currently does not. This amendment is ANTI-WORKER including doctors,lawyers, etc. Companies will simply write overly broad contracts and dare the employee to go to the expense of suing in court.

Con: Judges will have the unilateral ability to change the terms of a contract, either in favor of or against a former employee. This could lead to irregular decisions, depending on where the judge and the employer are based. For example, a judge in DeKalb County could throw out a non-compete agreement where the employee cannot work in the metro-area and a judge in Fulton County could uphold an identical agreement.

AMENDMENT 2: Adds $10 tag fee on private passenger vehicles to fund statewide trauma care expansion.

BALLOT QUESTION: Shall the Constitution o f Georgia be amended so as to impose an annual $10.00 trauma charge on certain passenger motor vehicles in this state for the purpose of funding trauma care?

VOTE YES, although our lilly-livered legislature should have the balls to just raise taxes themselves to pay for things like this.

Summary: This creates a $10.00 tag fee that can only be spent to fund trauma care and cannot be diverted to the general fund for other purposes. All motor vehicles designed to carry ten or fewer persons, including pickup trucks, motorcycles, sport utility vehicles, and passenger vans will pay the fee. The trauma charge would be collected together with license tag and registration fees.

Pro: This provides a new and necessary funding source for Georgia’s trauma care system that will be protected from other uses.

Con: The new funds may encourage the legislature to reduce its other funding streams; and large passenger vehicles, like buses, are exempt from the fee.

AMENDMENT 3: Allows the State to execute multiyear contracts for long-term transportation projects.

BALLOT QUESTION: Shall the Constitution o f Georgia be amended so as to allow the Georgia Department of Transportation to enter into multiyear construction agreements without requiring appropriations in the current fiscal year for the total amount of payments that would be due under the entire agreement so as to reduce long-term construction costs paid by the state?

VOTE YES - Why shouldn't the state be able to get reduced prices for multi-year contracts, with basic language that says its dependent on appropriated funds being available, just like the feds do.

Summary: Currently, a state agency cannot enter into contracts with private vendors if the contract requires payments beyond the funds available for that fiscal year. This means that unless an agency has funds in hand for a 5-year project, like a road project, it can only contract year-to-year. This amendment would allow the General Assembly by statute to let the Department of Transportation enter into construction agreements without obligating present funds for the full amount of the obligation.

Pro: Many contractors and states prefer multi-year contracts because they allow for bonuses for early completion, increase competition among bidders and allow for better transportation planning.

Con: This will allow DOT to agree to a project it may not be able pay for in the long-term.

AMENDMENT 4: Allows the State to execute multiyear contracts for projects to improve energy efficiency and conservation.

BALLOT QUESTION: Shall the Constitution o f Georgia be amended so as to provide for guaranteed cost savings for the state by authorizing a state entity to enter into multiyear contracts which obligate state funds for energy efficiency or conservation improvement projects?

VOTE YES - This will allow green energy retro-fitting, and the state can always include clasues about subject to funding for these projects, just like the federal govt does.

Summary: Currently, the constitution prohibits a state agency from entering into contracts with private vendors that obligate funds the agency does not already have committed. This amendment will authorize “energy performance contracts.” These contracts basically let a state agency use debt to finance energy efficiency and water improvement projects at state buildings, and the vendors who build the projects guarantee payments back to the agency based on realized savings (lower energy costs, less water used), which is achieved by the cost savings resulting from the improvements.

Pro: State agencies can upgrade to more energy and water efficient buildings by using a debt instrument that is underwritten by the very vendors who promise the savings. If it works, the agency has lower costs. If it doesn’t, the agency has guaranteed payments to make up the loss.

Con: It creates a new debt instrument for state government.

AMENDMENT 5: Allows owners of industrial-zoned property to choose to remove the industrial designation from their property.

BALLOT QUESTION: Shall the Constitution o f Georgia be amended so as to allow the owners of real property located in industrial areas to remove the property from the industrial area?

VOTE YES - This affects only two parts of two South GA counties.

Summary: The proposal amends the provisions of the Constitution relating to industrial areas which exist in only two counties in the state: Chatham County and Jeff Davis County. Currently, the counties face restrictions on the ability of these areas to participate in the municipal services provided near their locations. This restriction is a hold-over from the 1983 constitutional revision.

Pro: Property owners who currently have the responsibility for certain services will be permitted to join a neighboring city and reduce its costs.

Con: Unknown.

STATEWIDE REFERENDUM: Provides for inventory of businesses to be exempt from state property tax.

BALLOT QUESTION: Shall the Act be approved which grants an exemption from state ad valorem taxation for inventory of a business?

VOTE NO - Another giveaway for business. In these times, that should NOT be allowed.
Summary: This Act provides that all tangible personal property constituting the inventory of a business shall be exempt from state ad valorem taxation. If approved by a majority of the voters, the Act becomes effective on January 1, 2011, and applies to all tax years beginning on or after that date. Pro: Georgia is one of only 14 states that currently imposes an inventory tax. The amount raised by such a tax is minimal for the state, and nominal for most cities and counties.

Con: Certain cities and counties do rely on the inventory tax, which means a wholesale repeal could lead to a rise in the millage rate in those areas, particularly those school districts

A Southern Funeral

2010-10-19T17:38:00.000-04:00

There is a rhythm to Southern Funerals that I wonder is unique to this region of the country. First, there is the phone call telling you that someone has "passed". We always say "passed", not "died" when making these calls, although I have deliberately chosen to make the more blunt assessment. The person has not "passed" (passed what? Gas? A kidney stone?) or "passed away" (again, from what?), but the person has DIED. I am sensitive to many folks needs to be more gentle about discussing death, but as long as I'm not harsh or crude about it, I see no reason why I shouldn't state what is the case: a person has died.

In the case of my Grandma Sookie*, we knew she was on the decline and was going to die of congestive heart failure since she had been placed in hospice.

*Pardon this interruption, but I must explain the "Grandma Sookie" part. Most people are like, "Grandma WHAT?!?" My grandmother was given the nickname "Snooks" by my great-grandpa, Andrew Jackson Felts, because she had naturally curly hair just like a cartoon character in the late 1920s called "Snooks". The nickname stuck, but everyone ended up calling her Snookie. With today's "Snooki" being that over-tanned tramp from Jersey Shore, the irony is pretty thick. I'm not sure my grandma knew about the 2010 "Snooki" or that she'd appreciate the name being associated with the TV girl. Anyway, as a child, I could not say "Snookie" as I learned to talk. It always came out "Sookie", so she became "Grandma Sookie" to me, and will always be "Grandma Sookie" aka "Bad Grandma".*

So when Mom called me last Thursday, Oct 14 to tell me that the end was near, the doctors said she was in her final hours as her systems were shutting down, I was not surprised. She then called back 20 minutes later to tell me she had died. My only thought was to make sure that I was there for my mother through the coming ordeal of my grandma's funeral.

Mom beat me to Nashville, since she was coming from Lexington, KY and I was coming from Atlanta, GA. That first night, we went to eat Hibachi, and I bought my mom two strong Mai Tais to make sure she'd sleep soundly. The plan worked, and she was fast asleep within 30 minutes after we returned to the hotel.

When I had received word from my mom that Grandma Sookie had died, I immediately called my paternal grandparents, who are now my ONLY grandparents. I had to leave a message but I figured they may be out. But the fact they had not called back by the time we were in the hotel getting ready for bed, made me think that they might have gone off on a trip. Usually, my grandma will call me before they run off somewhere in case "something happens". This time, they didn't. I called the cell phone number I had, and my grandpa answered it. After asking if everything was OK, I told him that Grandma Sookie had died. They were in north GA looking at the leaves, and had thought of going down to Atlanta to see me, not knowing that I was now in Nashville. Their farm is 40 minutes west of Nashville in Bon Aqua, TN, so I told them we had gotten a hotel closer to Joelton because of the back-and-forth. They understood but said we're more than welcome to come back and spend the night at the farm on Saturday. I'd already "spent" the Marriott points, so I declined.

We slept in on Friday, getting up about 10:30am. My cousin, Mary Frances, who just goes by Frances, had been my grandmother's primary careperson the last year or so of her life. She had the power of attorney, which was fine because neither I nor my mom could have done the things that needed to be done prior to death. Frances told us that the funeral home had an appointment available for noon or 2pm. We picked noon, had some Waffle House for breakfast, and headed out to Joelton, TN... ground zero for my mother's side of the family.

We met at Anderson & Garrett funeral home, where EVERY member of my mother's family has had his/her funeral since my great-grandpa died in 1955 of a heart attack. It's located across the street from Joelton Middle School (which was Joelton High School back in the 1930s and 1940s when my grandmother's generation attended there) at the crossroads of two major roads. It looks kind of like Twelve Oaks from Gone With the Wind.

Turns out that Frances had done some prep work before we arrived. My grandmother had thankfully purchased two burial policies that would just cover the expenses of burying her. We picked out a simple white coffin and a no-frills vault. The funeral director threw in engraving her name, years of birth and death, and an icon of our choosing. My grandmother was all about music, so I picked out some musical notes for the icon. The engravings were done with laser, and turned out quite nice. I approved the jewelry that Frances had picked out, removing only one piece on the grounds of being tacky. The jewelry was, of course, fake.

Frances said she had a million things to do before the funeral on Saturday (the next day) include making phone calls. She was insistent that we have a full 4 hour visitation per my grandmother's wishes. My grandmother had made a folder that included sheet music to the old-time gospel songs she wanted sung. To this list, Frances wanted "Great is Thy Faithfulness" to be the final tune as it was personally meaningful to her. It was at this time, she said that the Lord had put something on her heart that she had to say at the funeral. My mother and I wondered what the hell it could be, but after all Frances had done for my grandmother (including putting up with a heaping helping of verbal abuse), we were inclined to let her do whatever she wanted. I did make it clear that Mom and I wouldn't be there for the whole visitation. 4 hours was just not doable for either of us, and honestly, we expected that no one would show up until later anyway. I announced our intention to arrive by 12:30pm, when the service would start at 1:30pm. An hour is what we had when my father committed suicide in 2001, and that was plenty. You have no idea how emotionally draining these "visitations" can be. I know I had forgotten until this weekend.

After we left the funeral home, we stopped by a florist down the road. The florist was dealing with another customer, so we had time to look around this old converted house sitting by itself, surrounded by plowed fields near the interstate. I had hoped we could see a catalogue of "sprays" which lay on top of the coffin and just pick one at a reasonable price. The florist was NOT helpful in this regard. She said you could do a nice spray from $100-800. I certainly didn't want to just say "gimme a $100 spray". After all, this was to represent both me and my mother at the funeral. There were certain expectations to be met. We couldn't just buy a bundle of weeds or brush and call it a day.   I told her we were looking to spend about $150-200 max. Of course, I meant $200 inclusive of tax, but the florist immediately jumped on spending $200 BEFORE tax. After she said with tax, I could get a nice spray of flowers for $218, I didn't feel like I could just say, "No, I meant $200 WITH tax!" She was talking about color palettes and different available flowers for that price. We ultimately went with "pastels", but I had no idea what it would look like. My catalogue idea was a non-starter. I should have just gone online to pick something out. My mother told me as we left that I really shouldn't have spent so much, but I told her that we had to keep up a certain standard, and I'd just deal with the cost. The spray turned out to be really nice, and even had some beautiful purple Calla lilies in it. Frances gushed over the spray, so I figure I did my job getting something respectable for the casket, especially since we weren't doing the Wheel.

What is the Wheel, you ask? It is a tradition that has largely died out, as Frances learned that very few florists even knew how to do one, and fewer still were willing to execute. My grandmother was the 8th of 12 children. When "Pap" (my great-grandpa) died in 1955, the family started a tradition where every time someone died in the immediately family, the brothers/sisters would buy a wheel for the funeral. At the center would be flowers representing the great-grandparents. Each child would be a "spoke" in the wheel, with 1 o'clock being represented by the 1st born, 2 o'clock, the 2nd born, etc. all the way to 12 o'clock representing my Uncle Jerry Felts, the youngest child. Each living child would pay for his/her "spoke" which would go all the way to the middle. Any dead child would be represented by a "broken spoke" that would go halfway. The deceased child would have a half-spoke and a dove on it. I guess the dove was in the middle when the parents died. Anyway, since 1955, this wheel has represented "The Family" at each funeral of a brother or sister. Aunt Janie, the 11th child, was responsible for the Wheel since the 1990s at least. Before she died, she made Frances promise her that if she were dead, and Frances living, that EVERY sibling would have a Wheel. This was the first death since Aunt Janie died in 2007. Frances did a great job. The half-spokes had to be dropped because only one child is still alive, Aunt Mary Ella. The wheel couldn't withstand so many broken spokes, so instead of flowers, the spokes were covered with "green leaves" and a single carnation (blue for boys, pink for girls) represented all the deceased siblings. The deceased family member's immediate family is not expected to pay for a spoke. The relatives of previously deceased siblings are expected to donate, however. When Aunt Janie died, her Wheel was elaborate and covered in white roses. It also cost $800. I think Frances was able to keep the cost of my grandmother's wheel around $300. If I told you that Aunt Janie was simply adored by EVERYONE in the family while my grandmother simply was not, the desire to "go cheap" is understandable. If it hadn't been for the promise to Aunt Janie, the Wheel probably would not have been there at all.

After arranging for the funeral spray, my mother took me to visit another cousin, who lives next door to Frances, named Billie Sue. Billie Sue is the oldest daughter of my great Aunt Sis, who was the spitting image of my mother. If you saw a picture of Aunt Sis, you'd swear that SHE was my grandmother because of the ressemblance between her and my mom. Billie Sue has a daughter who was born 5 years to the day after my mom. My mom was never able to get that close to her cousins because my grandmother kept her away from them. Anyway, she has been able to reconnect with the family in recent years, as she has pulled away from my grandmother's influence and realized just how isolated she had kept her from the rest of the family, who had VERY fond memories of her as a child.   We sat in Billie Sue's house with her husband (whose name escapes me) and chatted. It was mostly about family gossip, talking about the funeral, and what we knew of Grandma Sookie's last moments. (She simply stopped breathing. It was very peaceful according to Frances, who was there.)

Mom had mentioned wanting to see a movie later, so I used my iPhone to find out the closest theatre to Rivergate showing Secretariat, which we both wanted to see but had not seen yet. That gave me and excuse to shoo us out to get back to where we were staying by 4:30pm. We said our goodbyes, and I realized just how exhausted the afternoon of funeral planning and visiting had been. Luckily, the movie revived my spirits so that we could enjoy a nice dinner before returning to the hotel for an early evening.

Grandma Ann and Papa (my living grandparents) told us they'd come back to Bon Aqua on Friday, and wanted to see us for the funeral. We arranged for them to come have breakfast with us before the funeral. It was really nice to see them, and having them there provided both my mom and myself a great deal of comfort. They were a stablizing force, and it was good to have them there.

After stuffing ourselves at the Shoney's breakfast buffet, we went to the funeral home. We arrived much earlier than we intended (just before noon), but with my grandparents there, it was OK. There were more people there than I expected. We had several cousins and their children sitting around. We came in, and paid our respects at the coffin. My grandmother had a picture 8x10 of her last dog Princess by her along with a smaller photo that was taken of her, me, and my mother that she always carried in her wallet from when I was a child.

Southern funerals are always open coffin if you can help it. There's something about seeing the deceased in the coffin, embalmed, where you are certain they are dead. My grandpa likes to say he wants to be embalmed because he'll damn sure be dead! There's a fear of being buried alive that having an open coffin eases. I also find that people want to touch the body. The feeling of cool, plasticy skin reassures you that the person is truly dead. It gives a finality to the death and a certain amount of closure. When my father committed suicide, he did not want an open coffin, but I arranged for family to have alone time with the coffin open before visitation to say goodbye. I know it was important to me to have those moments with my dad, along with the rest of the family.

Frances was standing by the open casket by the Wheel of flowers. She apologized to us that the Wheel was kind of crooked (spokes were not in exactly proper position), and that she'd forgotten to call the church where my grandmother was to be buried, which meant the church ladies had not had time to fix food for us. She talked about how my grandmother would not be pleased, but we reassured her as best as we could. My grandmother had not been a member of New Hope Free Will Baptist church in DECADES, and the food was not a big deal. It wasn't likely we'd want to stick around post-graveside service anyway.

As the closest surviving kin, my mom was the "other" star of the show that is visitation. Most people left me alone, which was fine. I found it most pecular that older relatives would approach me by saying, "I bet you don't know who I am!" Several did that with my mom too, and my only thought was, "No, I don't know you. You know I don't know you. Why are we pointing this out?" After a semi-awkward silence, the relative would follow-up with "The last time I saw you, you were this big!", holding up a hand about waist high. At this point, I would semi-laugh, and they'd let me know how we were related. There were a handful of cousins that I knew, and I got to visit with my Aunt Cricket who is Uncle Jerry's widow, and seems to NEVER age. She was wearing a lovely pair of black slacks, a sweater, and a matching scarf. If I could have given a DFI (Democratic Fashion Institute (c)) award, I would have presented it to Aunt Cricket.

The man my grandmother adored, Kyle Lehning, was not able to come, but he did send flowers. In a twist that my grandmother would have appreciated, Kyle could not come to the funeral because he had a previously scheduled recording session with Randy Travis, who my grandmother had worked with as a bookkeeper when he was starting out.

Another thing about Southern funerals is not only noting who shows up, but noting who doesn't...and why. Most people were either out of town (like my cousin Gary) or had to be at work that Saturday. No one blamed anyone who needed to work for not being there. The people who where there largely showed up out of respect and love for my mother...or out of respect for the dead brother or sister they were directly descended from. Only two sets of people were there out of grief for my grandmother, and they were about to make themselves known.

The first lady who approached me had the EXACT same hairdo as my dead grandmother, except hers was blond, while my grandma always dyed her hair red, claiming it was her "natural color". For what it's worth, her natural hair color is the same as mine...dark brown with deep red undertones. Natural redheads, we are not. I don't remember this lady's name, but I do remember that my grandmother had rented from her that last time I had anything to do with her. This was post-divorce, but pre-suicide, so sometime between 1998 and 2001. My mom and I visited my grandmother with the intention of staying the night for Thanksgiving. Well, some kind of big blow-up happened, and mom and I left. That was the last time I really interacted with my grandmother much. I don't believe she came up to Lexington when my dad committed suicide in 2001. This lady even had to evict my grandmother for non-payment of rent... a common theme in my grandmother's life.

However, this lady and her husband managed to maintain some kind of friendship with my grandmother despite the eviction. Lord only knows what my grandmother told her, but she told me, "Your grandmother loved you and your mother so much. I don't think your mother really knew that, but she did. She really had you and your mother on a pedestal. I used to listen to her cry on the phone about the estrangement, but I really wanted you to know how proud she was of BOTH of you and how much really did love you both."

All I could do is nod my head sympathetically and repeat "Thank you" over and over with each declaration. That my grandmother thought I was the bee's knees is no secret. She always bragged about me and my academic achievements, which she thought was direct proof that I was her grandson. My smarts were from me and my dad, you see. That she held my mother in any kind of esteem was news to me. That a pedestal was involved was downright shocking. I held my tongue from spitting out, "SINCE WHEN?" or "She sure had a funny way of showing it." Again, there's a ritual to Southern funerals, and I was certainly not going to cause a scene unless provoked.

The other "group" there for my grandmother was a family led some lady who reeked of smoke, had a cane, and wore an ill fitting polyester black suit. I noticed she had cornered my mother at some point, so I made a beeline to step in and rescue her. My mom immediately grabbed my hand behind her back and SQUEEZED as tight as she could. I got the message, but I could not rescue her from the monologue that ensued.

The lady informed us that she had adopted my grandmother and had her over for birthdays and holidays. When my mom said she'd heard a lot about them, the older daughter piped up, "Oh, I hope it wasn't too bad!" which indicated to me that they were quite familiar with my grandmother's acid tongue. But they said she loved the children, and they enjoyed her company. There was a slight indication of "we had her over because you wouldn't have anything to do with her", but it wasn't overt enough to react. They talked about how much my grandmother liked to eat, especially when the meal was free. The somewhat toothless husband of the matriarch (also with a cane) said that he'd promised my grandmother to go dancing when she got better. I suppose that was supposed to be a heart warming story, but it left me cold. This family also mentioned how my grandmother had my mom on a "pedestal" of some kind. She also said how my grandmother had bragged about my mom's "degrees". She said, "Oh, no, that was my son. He's got two graduate degrees." The lady looked confused and asked if my mom did not have a teaching degree, because my grandmother had mentioned several times that my mom had a teaching degree. Umm, no, my mom worked in schools as a secretary, not a teacher.   Awkward silence ensued. Finally, I got my mother away after the story telling had died down.

At 1:30pm, the music my grandmother had selected was played. The one cousin who can sing was not able to perform due to lack of preparation, which Frances beat herself up for not providing. Mom and I just wanted to tell Frances to relax, but we provided assurances that everything was fine. And it WAS fine!

After my grandmother's selections were played, it was Frances' turn to speak. She picked up a notebook and read out her eulogy of my grandmother. WHAT a eulogy it was! Mom and I had no idea where she going with it, only that Frances said the Lord had put something on her heart to say. It was quite the soap opera moment, wondering what would be said about a woman who had been pretty nasty to just about everyone in the room.

Frances framed it around my grandmother's life story. Recouting how she was born in Davidson County just outside Nashville, where my great-grandparents lived until 1930 when they bought the family farm in Joelton, TN. She mentioned my grandmother's scholastic abilities, of which she was quite proud, and justifiably so, according to Frances. She mentioned my grandmother's marriage to my grandfather, and then she got to the meat of the story.

She started talking about my grandmother's difficult personality. The "sharp tongue" that she used on just about everyone. She was respectful, but honest. The crowd chuckled when Frances said, "Aunt Snookie wanted things how she wanted them, when she wanted them, and no other way. If you tried to do something different, she'd let you know." She talked about how my grandmother was often difficult to love because of her sharp tongue, and sprinkled in a couple of bible verses about forebearance. She said that even my grandmother couldn't drive anymore, she wanted you to cart her around on HER schedule according to HER wants at the moment....and she'd "let you know" if you didn't.    In other words, people helping her out of kindness were treated like servants or staff.

At this point, I was wondering how honest Frances would be, and I was wondering if the people here who only knew my grandmother and weren't family would interrupt to defend her. This was before Frances started talking about the state of my grandmother's soul.

Frances talked about the bittnerness in my grandmother's heart toward her family that was evident in everything she said or did. She talked about how worried she was about my grandmother's soul as she got sick. She had very frank discussions with my grandmother about whether or not she was right with Jesus and whether she was sure she would go to heaven when she died. She pushed my grandmother on the need to reconcile with my mother and make amends for all the things she'd said and done to her over the years...for the sake of her soul going to heaven rather than being confined to the fires of hell. She expressed the worry she had for my grandmother's salvation.

About three weeks before her death, my mother did visit my grandmother in the hospice. They did have a reconciliation of sorts, which was somewhat married by the poison pen letter that Frances found and gave to my mother. However, my mom had made her peace with my grandmother, and vice versa. Frances swore she was a changed woman after that, not expressing any of the bitterness or venom she had prior to my mother's final visit. She wove in quite a few Bible verses about how to treat one another, and on the theme of salvation in Jesus. I almost expect an invitation to the crowd to accept Jesus as personal savior, but the sermonizing was perfectly in tune with the eulogy. Frances gave a textbook example of how to properly eulogize someone who was very difficult to love in real life, being honest about their faults, but presenting a message of hope and salvation at the end. It was amazing in its honesty without being rude or disrespectful to the dead.

I think her eulogy was 5-6 pages handwritten, front and back. When it was done, the song "It's Well with My Soul" came on, and Frances collapsed in tears. The song went perfectly with her eulogy, and it all made sense. I believe that God did put something on her soul that she was compelled to say, and the message was perfect. I wish I had been able to get a transcript of her eulogy.

Mom and I were immediately following the coffin as it was ushered out of the funeral home and into the waiting hearse. As the immediate kin, we had the car right behind the hearse as we made our way to New Hope Free Will Baptist Church.

Another nice gesture that is made in Southern funerals, especially those held in the countryside, is the tradition of traffic pulling over the side of the road until the funeral procession has passed. In the city, you don't really see that, and it's not very practical. But in Joelton, TN, every car we passed was pulled over to the side of the road until we passed. It's a quiet marker of respect for the deceased and the family, and I loved seeing it. It really gives you a sense of being in a community where death means something.

We arrived at the church, and the weather was gorgeous. It was sunny, slightly windy, not a cloud in the sky. The church had expanded A LOT since the last time I was there for my grandfather's funeral in 1996. The funeral director showed me and my mom the top of the vault where the engraved name and dates of birth/death where located on smooth marble. The music notes looked better in person than they had in the book, and everyone was very pleased at how nice it was.

Mom and I took our seats in the front row, joined by the lady who had "adopted" my grandmother. The retired deacon of the church (who had buried my grandfather all those years ago) gave the graveside prayer. The only sad part was when he talked about "my favorite verse of scripture and yours too..." followed by silence. Silence that lasted nearly a minute as he forgot and tried to remember this verse of scripture that was his favorite: John 3:16.

But he did remember, and the vault was sealed and lowered into the ground. My mom tried to get away because she did NOT want to see the dirt being poured on the grave. It's a thing with her. She finds the dirt falling on the coffin to be suffocating, creepy, etc. But the old landlady grabbed her for a few words and she simply had to avert her eyes, despite telling the lady she couldn't stand to see the dirt cover the vault with the coffin.

This woman repeated the story my grandmother had told about my mom having some kind of teaching degree. She also said that my mother needed to dye her hair red in honor of my grandmother. Yeah, I had a WTF moment there myself. Then the "adopted" family came up and was sharing with my mother yet again too. Poor woman could not escape!

I figured the only thing to do was to find my grandfather's grave. Turned out he was about 15 feet away from my grandmother's resting place. Considering how much they DESPISED each other, the irony of their burial placement was pretty rich.   Finally, they friends of my grandmother let her go, and another random person came up, saying, "I bet you don't know who I am."

That person turned out to be a Milliken cousin! This lady was the daughter of my grandfather's older brother! I don't think I'd ever met any of the Milliken cousins, who are also buried all around the New Hope Free Will Baptist cemetery along with the Feltses. Anyway, after some visiting, mom was able to visit her dad's grave for a few minutes.

Frances had a few items of business to discuss with my mom about the estate (such as it is). Mostly about going through my grandmother's things, and how she'd been the victim of some kind of scam before she was hospitalized in July. It was very dramatic, but if my grandma's chotchkies were stolen, so be it. They were pretty much worthless anyway. Frances had my mom take the dove from the wheel that was now laying on the filled grave. Mom took a couple of flowers from our spray, which was also lying on the grave. A couple of cousins who lingered stayed to give their condolences one more time and exact promises that my mom would visit and not be a stranger.

Finally, we got in my grandparents' new SUV and came back to the hotel to collapse in a nap. I didn't do much all day but sit or stand around, but the funeral had exhausted us both. It struck me that the ritual was necessary in a Southern family like mine, even when the deceased was someone who had alienated us all. But then again, funerals are not for the dead...they are for the living.

Bad Grandma - A Primer (from Facebook Note of March 2, 2009)

2010-10-15T22:57:00.000-04:00

My bad grandma has struck again, so I feel the overwhelming need to explain who she is and why she's so "bad". This story is a string of horrors that goes back pretty much to the depression, but definitely in the 1950s. I hasten to add that as bad as my mother's mother is, my father's mother has more than made up for it in the Grandma department. She was everything that my bad grandma was not: kinda, generous, loving, tender-hearted. But this note isn't about her; it's about my bad grandma: Wilmoth Felts Milliken Swaringim.

She was born October 25, 1925 near Joelton, TN to Andrew Jackson Felts and his wife. I never knew either of them, but the family tells wonderful stories about their beloved "Pap" and the woman my mom called "Grandmother". My theory is that Andrew Jackson Felts made only one serious mistake in the raising of his children; he allowed my grandma to become the apple of his eye. Out of about 12 children, she was certainly his darling. I have been told stories about how she would often be the one to get new clothes or shoes during the depression even though she was not the oldest daughter, let alone the oldest child. She was praised heavily for her intellect, and she graduated top of her class in the middle of WWII while all the boys were off fighting. She has remained very proud of being a Valedictorian, even though the class had no boys and ended up with 10 graduating seniors. She ended up being married off to a friend of her older brothers, Tony Milliken.

I'm not sure when everything went sour, but it can't have been long after they were married. They did manage to have my mother, but the marriage was never happy in her memory. My grandma never felt that Papa Tony ever made enough money to keep her in the lifestyle in which she felt she deserved. She also sang quite a bit with her church, even forming gospel groups trying to get a recording contract. That was the time the affairs started. She usually slept with her lead singer, although God only knows if there were others.

Her penchant for adultery resulted in a heavy price for my mother at age 7. My grandmother dropped my mom off at her sister's place so that she could run off with her lover and go "parking" along a country lane. I imagine they were probably doing it in the back seat, since I'm sure the guy was married too. Well, my grandpa got wind of it, became enraged, grabbed his rifle, and went looking for my bad grandma. Word reached my Aunt Janie (the sister looking after my mom), and she sent someone to go tell my Grandma so that she wouldn't be caught in the act. My grandma did make it back to Aunt Janie's house in time to reapply her make-up and pretend nothing was amiss. My grandpa reached the house, and when Aunt Janie wouldn't let her in, he hit her with his fist, knocking her down. He found my bad grandma in a spare bedroom with my 7 year old mother.

During the confrontation that ensued, my grandfather raised his rifle to my grandmother. Now most mothers I have known in my life would immediately think of protecting their child in this situation, likely placing themselves between the weapon and their child. Not my bad grandma! She figured that my mom was insurance that Papa Tony wouldn't pull the trigger, so she placed my 7 year old mother between the barrel of the rifle and herself. The result was that my grandfather was pointing a loaded rifle directly at the head of my 7 year old mother, his daughter. He did relent, but to this day, my mother cannot see a gun in person without almost going into a panic attack.

She continued to carry on her affairs, but with more discretion. She mostly tormented my grandfather and brought out the worst in him. He held down two jobs, but he drank a lot. They finally divorced in 1968 just as my mom was going to college at the University of TN. My grandma decided to shame and guilt my mother into dropping out of school only 6 weeks into her freshman semester to come home to Nashville and be with her while she went through the divorce. Again, most parents would be glad their child was off at school during such a difficult time, but not my bad grandma!

On my mom's wedding day, my grandmother refused to attend if my grandfather was allowed to come. My grandfather also didn't want to come if my grandmother was going to be there, so they forced her to choose. My grandma implied that if my mom chose her father, the rest of her extended family would boycott the wedding in protest. So my mom chose my bad grandma and had to have an uncle walk her down the aisle and give her away. Even on my mom's wedding day, my bad grandma made it all about her.

Next stop on her greatest hits was my birth. My grandma decided to set her wedding date just days before I was due to be born. She wanted my mother to be in the wedding, but there was no way a doctor would let my mother travel out of state so close to her due date. My grandma, however, would not budge and insisted she had to be married that very weekend before I was due. So my mom simply did not go to her mother's 2nd wedding. Don Swaringim was no prize. I vaguely remember him as this creepy old guy. My mother has stories of him flirting inappropriately with her. Of course, while my grandma was in the hospital with a hysterectomy in the late 1970s, Don moved in with his girlfriend at the time.

Anyway, I was born while my grandma was honeymooning in Hot Springs, AR. For my dad's parents, the second my mom's water broke, they called into work, and hit the road for Lexington, KY to be there for my birth. My bad grandma couldn't be bothered to come see her first (and turns out, only) born grandchild until sometime in mid-July when I was 6 weeks old.

Starting from my earliest memories, my bad Grandma (who's nickname was Snookie... don't ask, I don't know) would tell me how stupid my mother was. She went on and on about how she didn't know how her daughter could be so dumb when she had been so smart. She was valedictorian of her high school class after all. My mother, on the other hand, was lucky to get out of algebra with a D. She did well in language arts and history, but none of that matter to my grandma. She also would rave about how lucky my mom was to have landed a man such as my father. A man with a good job and brains.

When it appeared that I too might be gifted in the classroom, my grandmother was thrilled. She said it was obviously due to HER GENES and my father's. As if my mother had nothing to do with it. As if my mother was not a stay-at-home-mom, giving her her nursing career to be able to raise me at home and instill a love of learning that continues to this day. My mother never got credit for any of that, just the humiliation of having her mother tell her child IN HER PRESENCE how stupid she was.

She also had a little trick to play on my grandpa. Seeing how close my mother and I were, my grandma once told me that as a child, my grandpa had beaten my mother. Now you have to understand that I kind of found Papa Tony to be a creepy old guy. His father had beaten his mother while she was pregnant with him in 1912, leaving him with a speech impediment. Since my dad's parents were so young (they were 42 and 44 when I was born), I thought all old people were like my Papa Tony. I couldn't understand him, and he scared me as a result. Hearing that he used to beat my mom as a little girl made me hate him. Finally, when I was about 9, my mother pulled me aside and asked why I was being so hateful and rude to my grandfather. I told her that I knew he had beaten her as a child, and she was dumbstruck. She said that was a lie, he had done no such thing! Where would I have heard such a thing. When I told her it was my bad grandma, it all made sense. My mother later told me how angry her dad got when she told him what my grandma had done. He muttered something about her secrets, but never clarified. I kinda wish he had.

So after Don and my bad grandma divorced, she had a run of pretty bad credit problems. I remember having to go to Nashville at least every 6 months to move my grandma so that she could stay one step ahead of HUD. At one point, she started dating men who were willing to give her money. It wasn't strictly a business arrangement, but she'd only go out with men who were willing to help pay her bills. She had a car repossessed. She even embezzled $25,000 from her own brother's garbage business. Of course, blood being thicker than water, he forgave her and did not press charges.

After my grandmother got on her feet, her self-centered nature continued to express itself. The summer between my senior year of high school and first semester of college, she had to have a quadruple bypass. My dad was with his dad in Alaska on an extended road trip. I was working every day at IBM as part of a scholarship I had received. Mom had never left me alone overnight with no adult around at all. I was 18, so I didn't think it was a big deal, but for her, it was. Nevertheless, she went to Nashville to be with her mom and I happily stayed at home alone, enjoying honest-to-God adulthood for the first time.

My mom stayed about a week and then returned to Lexington after making sure my grandma had her rehab lined up. For my grandma, this wasn't enough. During the fall of my freshman year in college, she wrote me a letter whose main purpose was to tell me what a horrible daughter my mother was. Why was my mother such a horrible daughter? Well, despite having spent over a week with her during and after the surgery, my mother did not drop everything and move in with her for the duration of her 3 month recovery. I'm not sure why she thought this would impress me, but I immediately picked up the phone and read the letter to my parents.

Later, after another heart surgery, my mother had a breast cancer scare. She was unsure what to tell my bad grandma, if anything, because the surgery had left her weak. Eventually, the doctor told my mom to go ahead and tell her because she could handle it. Well, my poor mom had the misfortune of telling my grandma about her possible breast cancer on the same day that her dog Mitzi died. My grandmother's response to my mom's news? I was there. She said, "Oh you'll be fine. But my Mitzi is gone forever!" I love my dogs, but I hope if I had a child of mine tell me that he/she might have cancer, that the loss of my beloved pet would take immediate 2nd place. Not so with my bad grandma.

When my grandpa finally died after a series of really bad strokes and 10 yrs in a nursing home, my grandma's response was to show up at our hotel to gloat that she had outlived her ex-husband. She wanted to come to the funeral too, to play the supportive mother, but my mom had the sense to refuse her.

At my college graduation, my Aunt Janie, Cricket, and bad grandma came to Virginia Tech to see me on the big day. My grandma bitched and moaned the whole time. She drove my Aunt Janie so nuts that she vowed never to travel with her again. Aunt Janie had a the patience of a saint. She loved all her nieces and nephews as if we were her own. She treated us like we were hers too. Even family members who ended up stealing from her to support drug habits never had Aunt Janie completely turn her back on them. She could give tough love when needed, but family was everything to her. Even my bad grandma pushed her to the limit to a point that she cut her out of her life. I don't know how Aunt Janie lasted as long as she did.

When Aunt Janie died a few years ago, all my grandma could do at her baby sister's funeral was bad mouth Aunt Janie about how well she took care of herself. Then she'd turn the story back to her and how "badly" Aunt Janie had treated her. This...at the woman's funeral!! She's lucky no one in the family punched her lights out.

Another fun story of my grandmother's unmitigated gal and selfishness is from a time that most of my immediate family, especially on my dad's side, met at a Cracker Barrel to eat. During this breakfast, my bad grandma decided to tell my GOOD grandma in front of everyone that the only reason my parents and I preferred to stay with my good grandma is because she cooked for us. Can you imagine the lack of MANNERS that would lead a person to make such a declaration in such a setting??? My good grandma took it with a grain of salt, but my mother was humiliated.

The stories of my bad grandma's meanness, pettiness, and selfishness could go on and on. I think I have made my point with these stories, though. My bad grandma is now 83 years old, and she has systemically driven away anyone and everyone who cared for her or even loved her. Yet, she thinks the fault lies with everyone else. She cannot understand that it is HER PERSONALITY and ACTIONS that have driven everyone away from her in the sunset of her life.

This past weekend, my bad grandma struck again! Turns out, three cousins died this weekend within one hour of each other. One died of cancer, and within an hour, two more died in a bad car accident. So the family is having a triple funeral this week. These are all people my mom played with as a child.

My mom had been visiting me, and when she got home, she received a call from the Tennessee Division of Adult Protective Services about my bad grandma. I have no idea who turned her in, but they were calling to say my bad grandma could no longer live alone. She also refused assisted living because after she would pay her fee, she’d only have $2 to her name a month. Not enough to exactly eat. The guy asked if there was anyone who could help her financially, or if she could live with my mom. Now my mom is worried she won’t be able to afford HER rent, let alone take in her mother. Besides, it would take less than a week before my mom would likely kill my bad grandma. She told him that everyone in her family was about as old as she was, and there wasn’t anyone to take her in. My grandma is such a horrible person that she has driven away anyone and everyone who has ever cared about her. She is reaping the bitterness she has sown throughout her life. Who knows what will happen to her now?

It gets better. At 11:15pm, my bad grandma calls my mom. My mom goes to bed at 9pm most nights. She called to bitch about the family and how no one calls her. She then told my mom that the reason she never called to tell my mom that her favorite aunt (my grandmother’s sister) had died was because my Aunt Janie had not returned any of her previous 11 phone calls. So she didn’t tell my mother that the woman died out of a snit over not having HER phone calls to Aunt Janie returned! How narcissistic can you be? She then complained about the person who was going to take her to the funeral because they weren’t going to the visitation or the burial site. She also shared this gem… the cousin that died of cancer had fought it for 5 yrs, and she said she was sorry that Sarah had suffered as much as she did, but that it must have been God’s will for her. WHO says shit like that?!?! It’s frightening to think she’s blood.

Poison Pen - Bad Grandma's Last Attack

2010-10-15T22:49:00.000-04:00

As I had mentioned on Facebook a couple of weeks ago, my Bad Grandma left a poison pen letter that she did not intend to be read until after her death. She did not know that her final months would require a power of attorney that would reveal this letter before her death. This letter is handwritten on yellow lined note paper. I am going to transcribe it now. I will italicize her words, and interject my own commentary in bold. Any misspellings are hers.

8-6-07

People that helped Tony Milliken turn my daughter, Pam, against me.

*1. Tony Milliken, 1st husband (my grandfather)
*2. Mary Patience Felts, Mother (my great-grandma, who died before I was born)
3. Mary Ella Watts, Sister (my great aunt, who is now suffering from Alzheimer's)
*4. Janie Chance, Sister (my great aunt, who was one of the best people I've ever known)

No telling how many more family members I'll find out later. They all resinted me because I would not sit back and let them rule my life, tell me what to do and when.

*Now dead.

Add Pam Cecil name to the above listing of names. Resentment of me is now Pam and 4 other family members.

Pam and 4 other family members against me through many lies. Family members resented me from first school years until their death, except Buck and Sis (two of her older siblings who died before I was born). Since I was the only honor student of the 12 children, that caused jealousy for many since there was 12 of us, I was born #8, 10-23-25. I always tried to be the best student in each class while growing up and drew many rewards from teachers for being No. 1, that caused much resentment to family members. Then I received top honors in high school being Senior Class President in 1944 Joelton High School. Also, was on honor roll all through high school, having 95 average on all 4 subjects monthly. Graduated 1944 with grade average of 98.6 Senior year. Then, Sept 1944 married Tony Milliken, he would not let me go to college even though I was offered scholarships from 2 colleges.

Since Tony would not let me go to college, I went to work in office for Franklin Limestone Co. Worked there 19 years. Owner died ad Co. sold to Lambert Bros.

Worked other accounting jobs until 1982, went to work for Funky But Music, name at that time. Later changed to Morningstar Management. Owners, Kyle Lehning, Engineer, Tony Gottlieb, office and Gen. Manager. Was hired by music co. 2-10-82. Kyle Lehning moved to Nashville and built a recording studio at residence. I continued working in gerneral office and accounting until July 7, 2007. Worked 25 years for Kyle Lehning, one of the best people in the world. Very pleasant and loved by everyone that knew him.

Kyle has produced many of the big acts in Country Music, such as Randy Travis, Dan Seals, Seals & Crawford and many others.

(Here, the ink changes) He is the best man anyone has ever known as chief in the Music Business World.

Bought up as an only child in Cairo, Ill., the best there is anywhere.

Wilmoth Swaringim
Jan. 21, 2008

Am I alone in thinking that she was obviously in love with Kyle Lehning, who kept her employed well beyond her usefulness to him? And these lies that she accuses my mother and other family members of spreading about her...what are they? What's the truth in her eyes? Who knows? She goes from the paranoia in the first part of the letter into something that sounds like a eulogy for a man she adored. I also find it amusing that she ends up adding my mother to the list of people who turned my mother against her! How does that work? How can you turn YOURSELF against someone with lies?

I think this letter exhibits her self-centeredness. I don't know why she thought everyone was just jealous of her. From everything I saw, her siblings looked at her as someone they tried very hard to love, no matter what she said or did to them.

I think her story about having college scholarships and my grandfather (born August 1912, so he was 32 when they married) forbidding it sounds true. One thing my grandma did not mention is her frequent charge that her mother "forced" her to marry my grandfather right after she graduated from high school. If my grandfather did prevent her from going to college, he was wrong. He was also a product of the times and place (rural Tennessee).

Tomorrow, my grandmother has her funeral. My cousin, Mary Francis, who cared for her at the end like a saint, felt it was important to give her the full 4 hours of visitation my grandmother wanted. I have no idea how many will come, but my mom and I won't show up until 12:30pm. Mom cannot emotionally stand much longer than that. She's also worrying about being judged by people who only knew my grandma and the way she talked about my mom like a dog. Luckily, we're all southerners with enough manners to be nice (I hope). But if anyone tries to be snide to my mom, I WILL read them for trash in front of everyone.

Trying to be the Good Son

2010-08-13T17:58:00.000-04:00

I got a call at work from my mother today, and I thought it was weird because it was the 2nd call from her in an hour or so. The first call was her telling me that she kept getting a message on her computer that her McAfee anti-virus was expiring. I thought I might have to have the computer to re-up the subscription, but that was not the case. I figured out how to do it through the McAfee website signed in as my mother. (Ain't technology grand!) Sure enough, her anti-virus was going to expire a couple of days before her birthday, which is next Thursday. It made the most sense for me to update her for 2 years, so that's what I did. Money's tight for me right now, but I can make it work at the moment. I told her it would be her birthday gift (and I still have to get a card for her and my Good Grandma, whose birthday is the day after my mom's) and left it at that.

So the second call had me perplexed as to why she would be calling. As soon as I picked up the phone, I regretted it. My mother was partially sobbing into the phone. She started telling me how worthless she was, how I was going to dread it every time I saw her number come up on the phone, how she does nothing to add to my life and only takes, how all she does is ask me for money, and how that ain't right, and she's going to push me away because of it, and I work hard for my money, and it's not right for her to take it from me, and did she mention how worthless she was, how nothing she did was enough, no matter how hard she worked or tried, she couldn't escape needing to ask me for money, which was going to make me hate her, and she couldn't stand that, but she couldn't stand being a leech on my life.

I wrote that last sentence as a run-on on purpose, b/c that's how the whole conversation felt to me. First, I HATE IT WHEN SHE CRIES. I have always hated it when she cries. There's nothing I can do when she cries, and I didn't understand why she was unburdening herself on me. What was the point of calling me up to berate herself for the help I give her? Did she think I wanted her to do that? Did it make her feel better? (I did ask that question, and the answer was "no".) Was it supposed to make me feel so bad about how my charity to her is making HER feel that I'll turn her down in the future?

I simply do not understand, and I resented it. I resented her dumping this on me. What was I supposed to do? She's my MOTHER. She is trying the best she can to make her ends meet, and it's not working. The economy sucks ass, and no one wants to hire a nearly 60 year old woman anyway. She's cut out every luxury from her life. She applies to jobs, and she goes to hers every day, even when she doesn't want to. This morning she said she was "sooooo tired" but she took every ounce of strength she had to come to work. In my view, this is her contribution. She's doing the best she can. I expect no more of her. As long as I can meet my bills and help her, I will. She's my mother, and we are really the only family each other has. But goddamn it, don't dump your emotional shit on me that results from me trying to help you! I don't need it. Find a friend to weep and wail about this stuff. I worry about her enough as it is; I can't take the burden of guilt that I'm making her feel worse about herself by the very act of behaving like a good son!

My Letter to Saxby on DADT Repeal

2010-02-02T13:53:00.004-05:00

After watching today's hearing live on the web, I knew I had to write MY United States Senator Saxby Chambliss about his remarks. Whether he likes it or not, he has gay and lesbian constituents both in and out of the armed forces. On most controversial issues, my two senators are die-hard Republicans, and I know that my voice doesn't matter to them, so I don't bother to contact them. Why waste my breath? But today, I put aside the likelihood that I'm wasting my time to write Saxby through his website. The following is the body of my letter:

Dear Senator Chambliss:

I watched the live feed of the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) hearing during today’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. Your comments filled me with shame that my Senator would continue to belittle and demean the service of gay and lesbian service members, many of whom are based right here in Georgia. During the war on terror, we have fired over 300 talented linguists (many of them fluent in Arabic) and medics. This has been done at a time of two wars when many service members have been forced into 3 or 4 deployments thanks to “stop loss” provisions. We need the service of every qualified American who is willing to serve, including the gay and lesbian Americans. To continue to have this law on the books is un-American, costly to the taxpayer (all that training, especially for linguists, is lost), and makes no sense when virtually ALL of our allies have openly gay and lesbian service members serving along side our American troops without a problem.

I understand there is no “constitutional right to serve” in the military. It takes a special person to serve successfully in our military, and sexual orientation should not be a bar. Gay and lesbian people serve in the military now with varying degrees of openness. In most units, if you spoke them with assurances of confidentially, everyone knows who the gay and lesbians are in the unit. Most don’t care. Even without DADT, good order can be maintained with regular discipline. Our allies have shown us that it makes no difference in morale, retention, or recruitment when openly gay and lesbian service members are allowed to serve. They should be under the same behavior restraints as heterosexual service members.

The old stereotypes about showers, sleeping quarters, etc is a red herring, and I suspect you know that. The notion that drag queens would try to serve is equally ridiculous. You won’t find the gay stereotypes rushing to sign for military service. Even if they did, they would never make it out of basic training. Secretary Gates, who was originally appointed by President Bush, has realized how outdated this law is, and that is needs to be repealed. I understand you wish to play to the bigotry that is inherent in Georgia regarding anything to do with gay and lesbian citizens. I would urge you to ultimately support repealing the DADT law so that the military can find a way to rationally and systematically implement the honorable service, without the lies that DADT demands, of gay and lesbian Americans who are otherwise eligible to defend our freedoms.

I don’t expect you to openly support repeal of DADT as I am not that naïve. However, it would be nice if you wouldn’t embarrass yourself by making nonsensical and bigoted arguments in public on this issue. I would ask that you simply remain silent, push the military to consider all the issues of implementing repeal, and vote “Aye” on the Defense Authorization Bill when it comes to a vote with DADT repeal attached to it.

Thank you,

Jason A. Cecil
Decatur, GA

The Conundrum of Monogamy

2010-01-29T06:37:00.000-05:00

I thought the phenomenon was fairly unique to Atlanta. With all the gay boys here from all over the Southeast, I figured the proverbial pond had too many fish. It seems like boys in relationships here always have one eye on the crowd to see if they might not be able to find someone "better". Rarely do you see people actually enjoying the person they are with. It's the most frustrating and depressing part about being single in Atlanta.

Yet, here comes a new study on gay monogamy (or lack thereof) from San Francisco State University, featured in the New York Times. The Gay Couples Study followed 556 male couples for three years, and about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners. The study reveals that monogamy is not a central feature for many same sex relationships. Some gay men and lesbians argue that, as a result, they have stronger, longer-lasting and more honest relationships.

The key to success are rules. The rules agreed to by the couples vary, but one couple said their rules were: complete disclosure, honesty about all encounters, advance approval of partners, and no sex with strangers — they must both know the other men first. I guess for them, a trip to the sex club is out. The notion of interviews for potential playmates seems to me to be odd, but if it works for them, that's great. The only "cheating" that can occur is if the agreement is broken. The study found that open relationships were just as happy as monogamous ones.

I realize that as men, we think of sex differently. For most us, there's not a very long road to separating sex and love. You can deeply love someone and still have emotionless sex with another person. I don't think the situation is ideal, because there is something about sex with someone you love.

My other question for these couples is: Do you still have sex with each other? I've known several "open" couples who spend most of their free time together looking for playmates online. Personally, one of the of the benefits of a relationship is not having to waste all that time looking for the false intimacy of a trick. If you don't have sex with each other, then aren't you just glorified roommates? How's it different than living with your best friend? Is that a real romantic relationship?

I have very mixed feelings. The first emotion that came up was anger. Such a study is not helpful when we are trying to win gay marriage. That is why most couples contacted by the Times declined to be interviewed. Why anger? To me, it seemed greedy. These people have found love and companionship, and now they're still out playing the field, competing for attention with guys like me who are alone. Maybe some open couple becomes fuck buddies with a guy that would be perfect for me, but hey, he's getting regular sex, so why bother with an actual relationship with someone?

I have been struggling mightily over the last couple of years with my perpetual single state. I am 34 years old, and I thought by now I'd be settled down with someone. When my parents were my age, I was NINE. The fact that I'm single with no prospects makes me feel like a personal failure. Intellectually, I may know that's poppycock, but it is how I feel. I'd like to find a guy who will choose to love me like I'm family. I'm talking the kind of love that your parents have for you, or maybe your siblings...with a sexual flavor of course. But it's the kind of love that you can be totally secure in; no matter how badly you might fight over something, they are not going to stop loving you. They will stick with you through thick and thin, not because you are blood, but because they choose to love as if you are blood. There's no question about severing the relationship except under the most dire circumstances.

If I found a man to love me like that, would I agree to an open relationship? Not at first. I think it's crucial to have a period where you are monogamous as you build the love and trust between you. There has to be a period where it's just you. I'd love that period to last the life of the relationship, but if I found a guy who loved me as I have just decribed (and who I loved the same way in return), I don't know how how I'd feel 5-6 years into the relationship and he/I/we wanted to explore opening it up. I don't know what rules I'd need to feel comfortable with that arrangement. I do know that it could not include stopping sex with me. Openness should enhance, not replace the relationship you have already. Of course, if the guy who loved me the way I described wanted monogamy for life, I think I'd be fine with that. The hunt for physical intimacy is tiring.

But until I find my prince charming (I'm trying to keep hope alive that a match for me exists... and that is a very difficult fight for me to wage), I do have some resentment of the folks who have their cake, but would like to eat mine too.

Poor, Sad Harry Reid

2010-01-11T14:10:00.002-05:00

It appears that Mr. Reid, Democratic Senate Majority Leader, really stepped in it when he told an author on the record that Obama could win the Presidency because he was "light skinned" and didn't speak with a "Negro dialect" unless he wanted to. The Republicans, digging up the corpse of Trent Lott from 2002, have been screaming for Reid's immediate resignation and/or ouster. It's only fair, they say. Trent was run out of town for saying less. If Reid isn't ousted, it proves there is a double standard! Reid's just shown he's a big ol' racist, and we can't have that!

First, I think Harry Reid's comments were impolitic, and his use of "Negro dialect" was idiotic. It's 2009, Harry; "Negro" as a term has long fallen from the American lexicon. It's not nearly as toxic as "n*gger", but it's awfully close. FYI, we also no longer use the word "colored" to describe people of African American descent.

Second, who in the Democratic race didn't wonder if a black man or a woman could be elected in 2008? We knew we stood an excellent chance with the disaster that was the Bush presidency, but no one was sure how the general election would go. There were people who didn't think Hillary could be seen as "tough enough" in an era of terrorism. Others thought she was "too hard". I'll never forget the night of the JJ Dinner in Atlanta on the day that Edwards ended his campaign when I heard *many* stalwart party members swear, "Well, I know one thing, I'll never vote for that fucking bitch!" (emphasis NOT mine) In my mind, that answered the question of which was stronger in Georgia: racism or sexism. Turns out, having a penis was more important than being white, at least when voting for President of the United States. I estimate that about 95% of Edwards' vote in Georgia went straight to Obama.

My point is that everyone was speculating about the role of race and gender in the 2008 election! Many black folks wouldn't give Obama a second look until he proved he could get white folks in Iowa to vote for him. To have a quote from Reid during that primary remarking on the strengths of being biracial or "light skinned" in presidential politics is not racist. It was a fact. In Georgia, we were forced to attempt overcoming racism in some of our voters by urging them to for Obama's "white half". That was a disgusting argument to be forced to make to voters who normally voted Democratic, but it was one we used. Whatever would earn their vote for Obama was what we'd use. If a racist has to comfort himself by voting for Obama's "white half", then so be it; at least he voted for Obama.

As for his speaking style, Obama's oratorical skills have been noted since he came on the national scene in 2004. Even Biden got in trouble during the primary by saying Obama was "well spoken" and "clean". I never did understand the "clean" part because I haven't found that African Americans are dirty unless they just got off a construction site where EVERYONE is filthy. If Obama had not been the articulate candidate he was and instead spoke in either Ebonics or another street vernacular favored by today's hard-core rap artists...would he have stood a chance? I'd love to hear a serious argument that he would have stood a chance in such a circumstance. As it is, if Obama ever trots out a rapper dialect, I'd dissolve in laughter because it just wouldn't be believable. Likewise, if Obama started wearing blue jeans so big that he showed us his underwear, I'd be convinced that: A) Michelle had left him, and B) he'd lost his mind. That was the argument that Reid was getting at with his "Negro dialect" remark. A better characterization is an "urban street" dialect because it spoken by white and black alike in the areas where it is used.

Finally, when thinking about the Lott comments that our nation would have been better off if Strom Thurmond had been elected President in 1948 so we could have avoided "all these problems" over the years, I am struck by the truthfulness of those remarks versus Reid's comments. Lott was lamenting that an ardent segregationist had not won the White House in 1948, and "all those problems" could only be described as the dismanteling of the aparteid system in the United States at the time. It is DEMONSTRABLY FALSE that the United States would have been better off had Strom Thurmond been elected President in 1948. His election would have set our nation back DECADES, and likely have resulted in a much more violent civil rights movement. Anyone wistfully remembering segregation and wishing it could have been prolonged, and saying it would have been GOOD for the country is lying.

With Reid, who can say his statement was false? How would Obama's chances at election have changed if he had a darker skin color? What if he wasn't nearly as eloquent, and spoke instead in a general urban street dialect favored by hard core rappers? Who can seriously argue that making such a change would not have killed his chances at election? I don't know how his skin hue would have changed things, but I do know that skin tone is still a huge issue in the African American community, where lighter skinned folks are seen as "better" somehow in the media and by the public in general. We're trained to think "dark" is "sinister" and "bad". If we only changed his skin hue, would Obama have won? I don't know. I'd hope so, but I simply do not know. Reid did not speak a lie when he made his remarks, unlike Lott when he made his.

Finally, I think it does make a difference when a public official makes a stupid statement like Reid did with "negro dialect" to look at his public record. Harry Reid has been pro-diveristy and has worked on behalf of black Americans during his career. Trent Lott, on the other hand, did little to nothing for black people, and could be argued to have had a career that was outright hostile to them and their interests. Such a record DOES make a difference. Lott had a horrible record on helping black Americans, and his statement was an ugly, bald faced lie. Reid's statement was ignorant, but his assessment of the role of race in the election was a common one, and made by political people from the grassroots to the very highest levels. His assessment was also truthful, even if we find its discussion embarassing.

That's why the Reid and Lott situations are different, and why Reid does not need to step down.

IF Republicans Ruled

2010-01-07T08:45:00.002-05:00

Let's pretend that the American people simply lose their collective minds, and completely hand over control of the US Government to Republicans. I'm talking 90-95 seats in the Senate, 90-95% of the seats in the House. Oh, and they would also need to control state legislatures in at least 36 states. Yes, that's an obscene majority that would not happen in reality, but IF it did happen, what would be the consequences? What would be the wet dream of Hannity, Faux News, Rush, the Tea Baggers, and all other "conservatives"? My take is based off all the crap we hear on talk radio, as well as the GOP platform, along with arguments I've had over the years with Republicans.

US CONSTITUTION

With this kind of majority, the Constitution could be amended at will. Here are the changes to look for:

Amendment XVI (Income Tax) - REPEALED
Amendment XVII (Direct election of Senators) - REPEALED. This would put us back to the system where state legislatures elected Senators.
AMENDMENT: Presidential Candidates must provide any evidence demanded by a member of the Electoral College as to qualifications for holding the Office of President. (sop to the birthers)
AMENDMENT: Human Life Amendment, which will give the status of personhood and US citizenship from the moment of conception. (Bye, bye Roe, hello rusty coat hangers!)
AMENDMENT: Balanced Budgeet Amendment, requiring balanced budgets every year but with a 75% vote required to waive this requirement in times of war ONLY (this is for you, Tea Baggers!)
AMENDMENT: Will require that the Constitution be interpreted using word definitions in place at the time of adoption. (Originalist dream... anything the founders could not have forseen in 1787 will be unconstitutional without amendment. Amendments will be interpreted only as they might have been understood at adoption. That means the 14th amendment can only be looked at through the lens of 1868.)
AMENDMENT: Federal Marriage Amendment that will adopt language of "Super DOMA" amendments of states banning same-sex marriage AND any benefits resembling marriage for same-sex couples nationwide. Amendment will also clearly undo any marriages that have already occurred.
AMENDMENT: Citizenship granted only at birth for children whose parents are already citizens.
AMENDMENT: Stating that the United States is based on Judeo-Christian tradition and values, and to protect our freedoms, no law may controvene that tradition.

LAWS AND AGENCIES

With their reconfiguring of the US Constitution finished, the GOP will then turn its eye on laws and agencies they hate.

Social Security Act - REPEALED (not in one swift act, but those not already on Social Security at time of passage will not have it available. They'll let seniors currently in the system stay in it until they die off.)
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and Education - ABOLISHED completely. All other departments, except Defense, will be seriously scaled down to about 10-20% current size.
Food and Drug Act - REPEALED. Oversight of food and drug production only hampers business and increases prices, after all. Caveat emptor bitches!
Health Reform - REPEALED. Whatever the Dems may pass this year will be repealed in its entirety. In its stead, the GOP will institute its "reforms": a) allow interstate sales of insurance (helps companies make more profit in low-cost areas by charging everyone as if they lived in NYC), b) BAN all medical lawsuits except in cases of gross negligence (to be fair, actual negliance could also be used, which is a lower threshhold), and that would be about it. Medicare/Medicaid REPEALED, although people currently in the system will be allowed to stay in until they die or are no longer eligible.
Immigration Reform - Build a fortified wall on the Mexican border. Order all people deported to their country of origin who cannot provide absolute proof of legal residency. Legal residency will have an English fluency requirement. All government communications will be in English only without any translation provided. All illegal immigrants will be banned from any public service whatsoever, including schools and hospitals, even emergency rooms.
Labor - All pro-labor laws and regulations will be REPEALED. The United States will become a "right to work" nation with the minimum wage also ABOLISHED.
Education - States will be mandated to provide vouchers, although there will be no requirement that private schools accept any children they don't want to accept, and will be free to charge any amount they wish above the voucher limit, which the parents must pay or their children will not be allowed to attend. Teachers unions ABOLISHED and BANNED.
Taxes - All income and inheritance taxes are REPEALED. Capital Gains Tax also repealed. Everything replaced with a 23% national sales tax.
Environment - Endangered Species Act, Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, etc all REPEALED. EPA ABOSLISHED. All regulations repealed; they only interfere with private enterprise anyway.
Voter Reform: All "motor voter" laws REPEALED. Only people who prove that they have paid federal taxes may vote. No one on public assistance may vote until they are off public assistance. Felons banned from voting for life. Absolute proof of citizenship required to be shown before voting.

These are the top initiatives I believe would be swifly enacted with a GOP dominance of our government. I'm sure it would make the tea-baggers and other frothing conservatives very happy to see all these policies enacted. However, as we have seen time and again with legislation, unintended consequences would be a bitch. This America is not one that I would recognize, and if the people of this country approved of such changes, I would no longer feel welcome in my own country. I'd have two choices before me in such a scenario: join an armed rebellion to allow more liberal states to secede, or find another country in which to live. Neither option is palatable for me.

I hope this horror scenario will inspire you to not sit on your hands this year. We need to RETURN to the polls, no matter how disappointed we may be in this Congress and President Obama. It's important to remember that even with our large majorities, the Republicans have been dedicated to obstruction and forcing failure on all of our initiatives. We Democrats certainly have played our part in helping them out, but we've never been a party like the GOP that has sought to impose the absolute iron discipline on all of our members. It leads to problems, but I prefer it over the command and control style of the Republicans.

Libertarian Solutions for Health Care

2009-12-28T13:08:00.003-05:00

The Libertarian Party issued a press release entitled "How Liberty Makes Healthcare Virtually Universal". By themselves, the 5 ideas are interesting, but I have some concerns, especially since there are no studies or other data to back up any of the claims. I will present the 5 arguments and my thoughts about each.

1. Allowing individuals, as well as businesses, full tax credits/deductions for medical insurance and/or medical expenditures. In the interim, encourage the use of HSAs by increasing the amount of tax-deductible contributions (currently $3000) that a person can make each year.

Yes, I am aware of how insurance has masked the true cost of healthcare, thus driving up the costs. There are many studies to show how this has happened. Yet, the Health Savings Account (HSA) is not a pancea since you cannot get enough people to adopt them to make a dint in prices. HSAs only work currently if you never go to the doctor for anything. If you have a chronic condition, you are SOL.

The current tax code does allow you to deduct your medical expenses, so long as those expenses are more than 7.5% of your income (it could be 7%...my point is not the actual number but that such a deductibility currently exists). Perhaps it's that 7.5% threshold that Libertarians are objecting to. I admit that I don't know if businesses are able to deduct 100% of their health costs from their tax liability. If that's the case, then I would support individuals doing the same.

I also love my Health FSA (Flexible Spending Account), which is like an HSA, except I use pre-tax dollars to pay for health-related items, including all co-pays. The downside is that in a FSA, unlike the HSA, at the end of the year, you lose any money you haven't spent.

I don't see how this proposal will reduce costs OR increase coverage. I understand the economic theory behind it, but I don't see how it works in real life.

2. Ending insurance mandates that states impose. As an interim measure, allow insurance sales across state lines so that consumers can choose the insurance plan that best fits their needs, rather than be limited to what state legislatures allow.

The idea that selling insurance across state lines would somehow be a panacea to the cost of insurance is attractive on its face. What I don't understand is how you prevent the insurance companies from simply raising the rates to cover the cost of the most expensive areas of the country. If selling a NY resident AL insurance is a money loser, then how do you stop the insurer from simply raising the price of AL insurance? Wouldn't truly national policies price themselves up to the most expensive market and therefore create an increase in the uninsured?

This brings up the idea of the nature of health care. It is not a commodity like clothing, tires, or any other widgit you could name. People generally do not DIE because they can't afford a certain car or brand of clothing. Health care, however, touches at our ability to survive, our right to life, if you will. If there is not some basic standard of health care, then you doom the poor to a shorter life by denying them treatment of diseases or conditions that could extend their lives. You are saying only the wealthy truly deserve to have good health care. Only the wealthy have lives "worth" saving. The very life of a rich man is worth more than the life of a poor man. The poor are disposable, and the rich are not. That is the underlying message of those who say health care is nothing more than a commodity like clothing. One reform I'd love to see is requirement that all health care entities be non-profit. They still have to survive, but their goal should be to provide quality health care to customers, not to get rich. The current bills touch on this idea with the requirement that a certain percentage of premiums MUST be spent on health care.

It's also useful to look at why states created mandates in the first place. Mostly, it was because of blatant discrimination against certain groups. I especially think of women, whose needs were certainly NOT covered. Women couldn't get basic preventative measures like mammograms or pap smears covered. That is what drove people to the legislature to REQUIRE such coverage. The insurers wouldn't do the right thing until they were forced. Again, the result of repealing all state mandates would be to say that only the wealthy should be able to get certain services covered. In the realm of a person's health, that seems wrong.

3. Making doctors and their insurers liable only for actual negligence and malpractice. In the interim, caps on non-economic damages, such as those in California and Texas, lower insurance costs, but may prevent victims of actual malpractice from being appropriately compensated.

Over 30 states have caps on liability in medical malpractice, but the cost of malpractice insurance keeps going up. Why is that? Making physicians liable for actual negligence is not a bad compromise with the usual plan to basically ban all medical malpratice suits through a standard of GROSS negligence. If I actually believed that conservatives gave two shits about peoples' health care, I'd strongly support including malpractice reform like this to gain their support for other, more liberal measures. However, in the end, conservatives have shown they'd tell us to "fuck off" in the end while they filibuster.

4. Ending the regulation of medical professionals and employing a system of voluntary certification instead. Studies show that certification increases the amount of quality care delivered, especially to the poor. Since practitioners are usually certified on the basis of competence, rather than on politically-correct regulations, their number and quality increases, while prices decrease.

I'm not sure where this proposal is coming from. I am guessing they'd like to take away the authority of the state of license medical professionals period. "Voluntary" certification is a joke. How do you stop any tom-dick-or-harry from saying they are an MD? The "market" won't catch these fools until it's too late, and people are already dead or maimed. There's safety issues here. Unless you require certification, how can you ensure any kind of quality? And if you require certifcation for insurance coverage, etc, how is that different than the system we have now? I am not aware of any "politically correct" regulations in the licensing of doctors. I'd like to have those pointed out if they exist. I know for a fact that neither Virginia nor Georgia has any "politically correct" regulations when it comes to the licensing of lawyers. You don't get any bonus points on your bar exam for being a minority. I'm confused by this proposal.

5. Ending FDA regulation of pharmaceuticals and employing a system of third-party certification instead. The FDA doesn’t test any drugs, but simply looks over the data provided by manufacturers. Underwriters’ Laboratory (UL), which certifies electrical appliances, actually tests the products that bear its “Seal of Approval.” Such third-party testing is an excellent model for drug certification.

Oh yes, let's turn the clock back to the late 1800s when there was no FDA, and any charlatan could roll into town with his concocation of the day and make whatever claims he/she wanted in order to sell to an unsuspecting public. I do not think we should set the standard as "claim what you want until someone can prove it's false". Not for pharmaceuticals or for supplements (which is what the regime that supplements currently fall under). I am not opposed to setting up an independent entity like UL that would do independent testing and certification of safety and claims. Such an entity could be set up by fees paid by drug companies who develop these drugs. Somehow, I don't think that's what the libertarians have in mind. They seem to want no penalty at all for companies that put drugs on the market that don't have certification that it actually works. They think the "market" will take care of that. Again, the market probably would, but not until people die.

The GOP Purity Test

2009-11-30T16:26:00.006-05:00

The proposed GOP Purity test, which the GOP swears is not really a purity test, could marginalize the party even more. This is especially true with the mandate that a "real" Republican must agree with 8 out of 10 propostions. Of course, like our Constitution, the GOP Purity test has flexible language you could drive a truck through. The key is how one defines certain words.

I will try to present the GOP Purity Test as proposed and then divine what they REALLY mean by it:

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;

We believe that only the Department of Defense should exist. All other departments need to be dismantled. Stop all social spending, especially anything for the lazy poor. Also, ban all taxes. Government should pass a collection plate, like in church. Of course, if the community I happen to live in has a government funded project, that is money well spent.

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

We love Jesus and Capitalism. Health care is not a right. Letting poor people die is God's way of weeding out the lazy. If you can't afford healthcare, it's because you haven't pulled yourself up by the bootstraps and tried hard enough. All government regulation should be banned.

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

The private market has done a great job of taking care of our energy needs. Gas is so much cheaper here than in Commie, Freedom-Hating, Godless Europe as a result. If we just let energy companies drill wherever, whenever, and however they wanted, we'd be fine. The Endangered Species Act needs to be repealed too. No regulations! No Rules! Let companies do what they need to do!

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

We like how companies can stack the deck in a union election, forcing employees to sit through hours of lectures of how evil the unions are, firing union organizers, and such. We want to go back to a real capitalist economy circa 1890 when there was no rules to get in the way of profit like minimum wage, safety regulations, and the like. Unions should be crushed, not allowed to bully people into signing some card!

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

We're all for people coming to America. But there are rules. First, learn FLUENT G-D English! I don't want to hear no accent from a foreign land. Second, you better learn to accept Christ. We won't tolerate no terrorist-loving towel-heads here! Not in OUR country! Third, learn to dress like we do. None of this wearing veils or other
non-American clothing. You came here because we're free! If you don't like how we do things, go home! We also need to build a big wall on the southern border to keep those brown people out. Canada's OK...they talk like us. Dress like us in the winter too. After all, a wall worked in Berlin!

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

We love our servicemen, so long as they aren't our sons and daughters! Other peoples' kids are fine. Whatever our generals say they need, they get, no questions!!!! Why can't we nuke the terrorists?

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

Bomb the shit out Iran and North Korea! Teach them to cross us!

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

Homosexuals are against God's Plan. Revoke all "special rights" that name homos. We shouldn't have to live near them, work with them, or have anything to do with them. We should never give them any recognition for their so-called "relationships" which are based on nothing but blasphemous fornication.

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

The private sector and the church can give out charity care. Those institutions will provide everything that the too-stupid-or-lazy-to-get-a-GOOD-job need. We definitely think all abortion should be banned. Birth control too.

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership;

All current gun regulations should be repealed. The 2nd Amendment is absolute. No restrictions on gun ownership of any kind. If I want an Uzi, I should have one, even if I'm a felon.

Wrestling with the Darkness

2009-11-25T17:17:00.000-05:00

On November 8, Georgia Speaker of the House Glenn Richardson (R-Hiram) tried to commit suicide. The Speaker released a statement that a deep depression had led to his suicide attempt. Two days after the story broke, and eight days after he tried to take his life, the 911 tape of his mother calling for help was released. Apparently, the Speaker took sleeping pills, and then decided he'd call his mother to say good-bye. That indicates to me that a part of him wanted to be stopped, or he wouldn't have called.

My immediate reaction upon hearing the news, followed seconds later by deep shame, was that it was a pity Richardson did not succeed in his suicide attempt. The immediate shame came from being someone who knows exactly what kind of anguish would lead a person to contemplate suicide, and someone who knows what's its like for loved ones left behind. As despicable as I find Glenn Richardson to be as a politician, and no matter how much I think his ideas on how the world should work disgusting, mean spirited and cruel, he is still a human being in a tremendous amount of pain. He is arguably the 2nd most powerful man in state government after the governor, but even he felt life was not worth it.

The police report states that they found him in the master bath, sitting on the edge of the tub, with a .357 Magnum in front of him on the sink. He was semi-conscious and unresponsive to commands. The Speaker had written two suicide notes which were beside him as well.

To be filed in the category of "Maybe Republicans Do Have a Human Heart", there has been no move to force Richardson out of the Speaker's chair. The comments from the public, though, have not been so kind. There have been many people who say that running the State House of Representatives at a time of budget crisis is too much for someone who is depressed and has suicidal tendencies. They have spoken of depression as disqualifying mental disorder for any significant public trust.

These people commenting obviously have no idea what it's like to suffer from depression.

When you are depressed, it's like a heavy blanket is surrounding you every moment you are awake. Your heart FEELS heavier, and the thought of actually going out, interacting with people, getting out of bed, getting dressed, etc just seems to require way too much energy. Everything looks gray. Sometimes your body can ache. It's nothing like growing pains, or aches you have when you're sick with the flu. It's a very subtle ache, but it's very real, and the burden of it is oppressive. Much of the time, it feels like you are moving in slow motion. Your thoughts are slower, your movements are slower. People around you may not notice these things, but in your depressed mind, that is what you experience.

The depressed mind stops caring about things. You begin to not care what you look like, smell like, or when you'll eat. The future looks bleak, and all you can see on the road ahead of you is more of the same. This whole cycle will feed on itself unless you get help. Of course, even getting help does not guarantee you will get better, but it does give you the tools to fight the encroaching emotional darkness. This may be the step that Glenn Richardson did not take. As the GOP House Speaker, seeking psychiatric help would probably not go over well in the "Daddy Party" where everyone tries to outshine each other with their jingoistic patriotism, Godliness, and general "manhood". Of course, now that he's attempted suicide, there's not a decent human being who would argue the Speaker shouldn't get help.

Another irony is that the Speaker brought on the circumstances surrounding his descent into depression and despair himself. He is the one who is rumored to have had a notorious affair with the chief lobbyist of Georgia Power. If he's like other Georgia power-brokers, he was chasing tail all over Atlanta just because he could. Unlike most political wives, the former Mrs. Richardson wouldn't tolerate it, and divorced him. It was this divorce that started his spiral into despair.

My father's birthday was yesterday. Had he not committed suicide in 2001, he would have been 59 years old. His birthday had me thinking about Speaker Richardson, and how my dad planned an attempt on his life that I foiled before he succeeded. My hope is that Richardson, his friends, family, and coworkers, don't think this is over for him. Just because everyone will be watching him more closely now that he's actually attempted to take his life doesn't mean the danger has passed. My father fooled not only his family, but his psychiatrist and counselor into thinking he'd turned a corner. That corner, represented by a sense of peace and greater levity of spirit, turned out to be nothing more than a final decision and foolproof plan to kill himself. Most people who commit suicide seem to get better right before they end their life, mostly because they see a certain end to their anguish.

My dad's birthday, and Speaker Richardson's suicide attempt have made me think of my own struggles with depression. It's been a cyclical thing with me, with a major depression appearing about every 10 years. According to my psychiatrist, that kind of cycling is highly unusual. Usually, people with depression see their cycles get more intense and closer to one another, especially without treatment. Having a pattern of a major depression every 10 years is unusual, and it figures that I'd be the exception to some kind of rule.

One thing that frustrates me is that I'm very aware of what's going on when I have a little depressive cycle, or when I slide into a major depression. I've learned enough over the years to see the signs. I had hoped that taking anti-depressants would break the cycle, but no such luck. First, there's the insomnia which wreaks havoc with your mental capabilities over time even without depression. Then there is the lethargy, related to the exhaustion of not getting enough sleep. Then the feeling of heaviness, darkness, and approaching gloom followed by despair. Even when you know the things you feel are irrational and not true, it doesn't stop you from feeling them. At least that is my experience. I've always had the "talent" (not sure this is the right word for it) of being quite aware intellectually of my emotions. I've been able to largely name them, describe them (at least to myself), and even know when the emotions are irrational, unfounded, and not based in reality. Yet, I have not been able to control those emotions. Usually, I have to wait for them to pass.

Depression is not quite so easily dispatched. You have to force yourself out of bed. You have to force yourself to do the things you know you NEED to be doing. Living alone doesn't make that task easy. Even having two wonderful dogs that depend on me doesn't make it easier. It also doesn't help that my depression (in its current form) has fixated on my inability to find a boyfriend, let alone a partner to build a life with. Intellectually, I know this is silly. I'm only 34, and while I would have thought I'd be long settled down by now, I'm far from being without hope. Yet that is the very place I find myself desperately trying to not reach...a place of hopelessness that I'll ever find someone. Intellectually, I know it's silly, and I haven't met the right guy yet. Intellectually, I'm pretty sure it will happen. Emotionally, though, doubt, panic, despair, longing, loneliness, and hopelessness have all conspired together in one big ball of Depression Nasty to try to bring me down.

Some days are better than others, and on some days the beast seems to have gone into hibernation. Usually, when I'm around friends or at work, the monster sleeps. Although people can say something to awaken him at any time. But make no mistake - it is a struggle. Like every person with depression, I wrestle with the darkness because I refuse to let it overtake me. I've been lucky that I've learned some skills in conducting this fight. Most importantly, the experience of my father's suicide has taken such a path off the proverbial table for me. I can't imagine forgetting what it does to friends and family when a person commits suicide. I hope things never do get that bad. My father got to a place where he believed that everyone was truly better off without him. He was blind to the pain he was about to inflict on us all. He gave into the darkness.

I never will because I can't.

Atlanta Stonewall Democrats 2009 Endorsements

2009-09-25T17:22:00.007-04:00

As a board member of the Atlanta Stonewall Democrats, I wanted to share our press release regarding endorsements in Atlanta city elections, along with the special election in State House District 58 and Decatur City Commission. I believe the release speaks for itself.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Wednesday, September 23rd, 2009 – ATLANTA – Atlanta Stonewall Democrats announces endorsed candidates in Atlanta Mayor and City Council races as well as State House District 58.

Our Process: Candidates for Mayor, City Council President, City Council, Decatur Commission, School Board and State House District 58 were sent an email upon closing of qualifying for their respective offices directing them to www.atlantastonewall.org where they could find the 2009 Endorsement Questionnaire from Atlanta Stonewall Democrats (ASD). While some candidates chose not to seek our support, many others did. The answers to our questions revealed a broad spectrum of responses, not only on LGBT Equality issues, but also on questions regarding knowledge of their district, the problems to be solved, and what they as an elected official would and could do to address the needs o f their constituents.

Atlanta Stonewall Democrats was generally pleased with the candidate responses. Indeed, in some races there was more than one excellent candidate. The focus among almost all candidates seemed to be on Public Safety/Crime and Economic Development/Jobs. Although responses and approaches to these two areas varied, there was a general feeling that nearly all candidates in the various races understand the overwhelming pressure and influence these two issues are placing on our city’s residents, elected officials and civil service employees.

Some candidates did falter on an overall understanding of the LGBT communities and the fact that our communities share a common interest with other Atlanta communities. Focusing solely on LGBT issues would be appropriate if LGBT issues were ASD’s only mission. But it is important to know that the members of Atlanta Stonewall Democrats not only advocate for LGBT Equality inside the Democratic Party, we are also involved in matters of equality and fairness for all. We are actively connected to the Democratic Party and to the diverse coalitions that make up the Atlanta Progressive Community. Some of the candidates recognized this connection and addressed their responses in a way that showed ASD’s board that they clearly understood the overall mission of Atlanta Stonewall Democrats. Sadly, other candidates did not.

The Atlanta Stonewall Democrats is dedicated to engaging in conversation with traditionally Democratic constituency groups and potential allies of the LGBT community. We recognize that the road to equality must be paved by fair-minded Democrats.

The work of Atlanta Stonewall Democrats is based on a long-term strategy, rooted in coalition-building and grassroots organizing, to move us forward in building a fair-minded Democratic majority in Georgia.

We are an affiliate of National Stonewall Democrats, a nation-wide, grassroots federation of more than 90 other LGBT Democratic chapters. We are committed to working closely with other LGBT organizations, along with our allies in progressive communities and traditionally Democratic constituency groups to build a fair-minded Democratic majority in Georgia.

After much deliberation, and a thorough review of answers from candidates, the board of Atlanta Stonewall Democrats is pleased to offer the following endorsements in advance of elections to be held on November 3rd, 2009:

KASIM REED FOR MAYOR OF ATLANTA

ASD was impressed with the problem-solving ideas put forward by many of the candidates for Mayor, but one candidate stood out not only in presenting his forward-thinking solutions for the ills and concerns of the City of Atlanta, but in a knowledge of and past dedication to the LGBT Communities and concern for the greater good of all Georgians.

Kasim Reed has spent the last 11 years representing Atlanta in both houses of the Georgia General Assembly. During that time in office, he has a 100% voting record from Georgia Equality and other LGBT-advocacy organizations. He has delivered concrete results and advanced progressive policies to level the playing field and give more protections to the LGBT community. As a State Representative, he was the chief House sponsor for Georgia’s Hate Crimes Bill that included protections for LGBT individuals, and fought to keep those protections over the objections of a number of Republican and Democratic legislators. He secured state funding for an LGBT tourism study for the City of Atlanta, and feels that Atlanta needs to invest in more aggressive marketing to solidify Atlanta’s standing as an LGBT destination in light of strong competition from other cities. He also believes that Atlanta should have an entertainment district that would allow us to truly be a 24 hour international city.

We are aware that Kasim has stated his support of civil unions with full benefits. However, Kasim has proven his commitment to full legal equality for same sex couples when he led the effort in the State Senate against the Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage. He has also been a key ally working with Rep. Karla Drenner to stop attempts to ban gay adoption in Georgia. During the last legislative session, he sponsored and passed legislation that now requires Georgia to test prisoners exiting the state’s penal system for HIV/AIDS and to provide counseling. This will help prisoners know their health status and seek the help they need before they are released. Kasim’s statement on the Eagle raid made clear that he would not tolerate a police department that violates the civil rights of any citizen. He vows to continue to work equally as hard when Mayor to ensure that LGBT citizens are all treated fairly and equally.

What earns Kasim our endorsement in a race where nearly all the candidates voice support for LGBT equality is performance over promises. We value his strong record in the legislature, his status as one who can bring a fresh, outsider’s vision to a city government that has largely broken down, and his proven ability to establish productive relationships with a Republican state legislature and governor. As Atlanta attempts to recover from the current financial struggles, Kasim’s solid leadership, proven results and knowledge of all levels of government are what Atlanta needs in a Mayor.

Kasim has also received the endorsement of the Atlanta Progressive Firefighters; openly lesbian State Rep. Karla Drenner; State Representatives Kathy Ashe, Roger Bruce, Rashad Taylor, and Rahn Mayo; State Senators Horacena Tate, Nan Orrock, David Adelman, Valencia Seay, and Minority Leader Robert Brown; the Sunday Paper; Ambassador Andrew Young; and the Atlanta North Georgia Labor Council AFL-CIO.

CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT – Caesar Mitchell

Caesar Mitchell is currently a City Councilman At-Large. He has long worked to cultivate a strong relationship with LGBT Atlantans, promoting various non-profit and civic engagements devoted to civil rights. Caesar is strongly committed to protecting existing domestic-partner benefits for Atlanta city employees, while also working proactively to urge the state Legislature to pass anti-bullying legislation. Caesar also recognizes that the city has room for improvement in how it supports transgender Atlantans through municipal policies, and supports improving those policies as City Council President.

CITY COUNCIL POST-1 AT-LARGE – Adam Brackman

Adam brings a forward thinking, fresh outlook to City operations. Having organizational experience from his IBM career, he is already proposing ways to make the City Council and its operations more open, honest and transparent for city residents. A well qualified candidate, who happens to be gay, he is one of the more impressive and aggressive thinkers on the campaign trail. With his ear to the ground from neighborhood meetings and community involvement, he has focused on what people want: safer streets, a city government that can manage its finances, and productive, efficient and responsive services. His expertise in analyzing the efficiency of government service delivery will be a welcome addition to the Council.

Adam has received the endorsement of the Victory Fund.

ATLANTA CITY COUNCIL POST-2 AT-LARGE – Aaron Watson

Aaron has served on the Atlanta School Board both as a member and as Board President. He has proven his commitment to equality in this difficult arena as well as scored 100% on our survey. His Board service also included chairing the critical Finance Committee and overseeing an annual operating budget of $450 million and a capital improvement budget of $430 million, funds used to build new schools, renovate decaying ones, and install modern information technology for all students. Aaron’s elected office experience shows how he understands budgeting, the effective implementation of accountability standards and the need to fulfill a group leadership role. Since his school board service, Aaron has most recently been working on the challenges of establishing sensible transportation options. He seeks to link neighborhoods, promote smart land use, controlled housing density and establishing protected green space.

ATLANTA CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 4 – LaShawn Hoffman

LaShawn has received recognition as one of Atlanta's most distinguished young civic leaders. He is a consummate community advocate who also serves as the CEO of the Pittsburgh Community Improvement Association, one of the more successful neighborhood-based community development corporations. He is a former chair of Neighborhood Planning Unit-V and has served on numerous community boards in both Atlanta and Fulton County, including the local school council boards for C.L. Gideons Elementary School and W.L. Parks Middle School and the Atlanta Citizen Review Board. In addition to scoring 100% on our survey, LaShawn brings true grassroots energy and leadership abilitiesto a Council that could use a good dose of both.

COUNCIL DISTRICT 6 – Steve Brodie

Since the election of Cathy Woolard to this seat in 1997, District 6 has been known as the “Gay Seat” on City Council. With 6 candidates in the race, three of them gay, there is no guarantee that the seat will remain “gay”. LGBT voters need to consider not just the sexual orientation of a candidate, but who is qualified and can win. We believe Steve Brodie is the strongest candidate in this race, having run in 2005 and coming within a handful of votes of election. He is a gay candidate who has been actively involved in issues that directly affect the interest of the voters, gay and straight: public safety, zoning, land use, the BeltLine, and the budgeting process. He has worked to prioritize public safety for major events in Piedmont Park, fix miles of sidewalks, and he successfully represented the neighborhood positions on land use issues. Steve played a significant leadership role in the start-up of the Safety Committee and Neighborhood Watch Program in Candler Park, and was a leader and fundraiser for the Midtown “Light the Streets” program. Many candidates who run for public office and do not win often get discouraged and disappear. Steve Brodie has remained deeply engaged in the community and the District he seeks to represent.

Another issue of concern in the District is a vibrant nightlife. When Steve was first elected to the MNA Board of Directors and the NPU-E Board as the representative for Midtown, both boards had a strong contingency that were dedicated to the closure of gay bars. He was a forceful advocate for complete cessation of these actions and was able to create a majority to take all closure/harassment actions off the agendas of the organizations. He spoke out when anti-gay activists directly attacked African-American LGBT citizens in Piedmont Park on Sundays, even though some thought his position put him at political risk.

Although our constituency forms the heart of District 6, Steve is not just an LGBT advocate. He understands that the issue of crime affects all residents, and has a track record of working successfully on this issue. As a city council member, he will be best able to move the levers of city government to keep those issues on the front burner of the new Council and Mayor’s agenda. Of all the candidates, he has done the best job of laying out specific ideas on public safety and suggesting concrete actions needed to fund improvements.

Steve has received the endorsement of the Atlanta Police Union, and the Sunday Paper.

STATE HOUSE DISTRICT 58 – Simone Bell

Simone is running for the recently vacated District 58 seat that serves portions of incorporated east-central Atlanta in both Fulton and DeKalb counties, plus adjacent portions of unincorporated DeKalb County. She has been a resident of Atlanta for 20 years and of District 58 for 10 years. She is a graduate of Agnes Scott College and has spent the majority of her working life as a community organizer with local non-profit organizations.

Simone has worked as an activist and advocate in Atlanta and across the South for more than 20 years. Her education and work in health care, experience advocating for women’s health, African American and LGBT rights at ZAMI, the Atlanta Lesbian Health Initiative and Lambda Legal have all given her the tools and perspective to advocate on behalf of the residents of District 58. When elected, Simone will be the first openly gay African-American woman State Representative in the United States. Considering her experience, broad knowledge of quality of life issues, commitment to the under-represented and community involvement, Simone is uniquely ready for this position.

She has also received the endorsement of Georgia Equality and Victory Fund.

CITY OF DECATUR COMMISSION DISTRICT 2 – Kyle Williams

At the age of 32, Kyle is already an accomplished community leader. He has held leadership positions in groups like the Red Clay Democrats and Generation Green. In addition, Kyle served on Georgia Equality’s Board of Directors from 2004 to 2007, eventually serving as president his final year. As an attorney, Kyle has been recognized three times as a Georgia “Rising Star” in Litigation, Land Use and Zoning by Georgia “Super Lawyer” and Atlanta Magazine. Southern Voice named him one of the top 20 young gay leaders in the Atlanta metropolitan area. Kyle hopes to advance his ideas to modernize Decatur and bring innovation to the City Commission. He is a candidate with solid credentials and is devoted to LGBT equality. The Commission is currently one of the more effective local governing bodies and it would take a lot for a new member to be quickly productive and contribute. We believe Kyle has the credentials and the vision necessary to not only serve but be a stand out.

Kyle has also received the endorsement of Georgia Equality, Victory Fund, and Log Cabin Republicans.

At this time there are some contested races where we found incomplete or unverifiable information and our decision was to not make an endorsement. This should not be interpreted as a positive or negative reflection on the candidates and we will continue to monitor these contests and assess any need to revisit evaluations.

Support LGBT Federal Employees! Support the New Definition of Family!

2009-09-14T17:24:00.003-04:00

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management has proposed a change to the definition of “Family” to include same sex domestic partners so that LGBT employees can use vacation and sick leave just as straight people can. These changes would implement Section 1 of President Obama's June 17, 2009 Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination and ensure that agencies are considering the needs of a widely diverse workforce and providing the broadest support possible to employees to help them balance their increasing work, personal, and family obligations. I’m sure once the right learns that comments are open through 11:59 pm on November 13, they will be all over it. So we have to make sure our folks are writing in too!

You may submit comments, identified by RIN number ``3206-AL93,'' using either of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
US Mail: Jerome D. Mikowicz, Deputy Associate Director, Center for Pay and Leave Administration, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Room 7H31, 1900 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20415-8200.

The text of the changes are below. If you go to http://www.regulations.gov and put in any of the following, it should get you there:

Document ID: OPM_FRDOC_0001-0338
Docket ID: OPM_FRDOC_0001
Document Type: proposed rules
“Absence and Leave; sick leave

If you choose to comment, you will be asked to fill in your name, etc. I filled it out as “citizen” since I am speaking for myself, but it does ask you to list an organization even if you are commenting as a citizen. I’m a bit confused by this, and wonder if it’s not a programming error on the site. However, I would propose for people who aren’t comfortable with putting “Young Democrats” , "Stonewall Democrats", or even "Democratic Party" as the organization, perhaps retype “Citizen” or “US Citizen” in the organization blank so that your comment goes through.

Please support the Obama Administration and leave positive comments supporting these changes. If you have ways to make the changes stronger, suggest them. Either way, we need to really support President Obama and openly-gay OPM Director John Berry for making this first step toward LGBT equality in the federal government.

OPM's proposed regulations would amend the definition of family member in
part 630, subparts B (Definitions and General Provisions for Annual Leave and
Sick Leave) and I (Voluntary Leave Transfer) and immediate relative in subpart H
(Funeral Leave); and include new definitions for committed relationship,
domestic partner, parent, and son or daughter. We are also making conforming
changes to subparts J (Voluntary Leave Bank Program) and K (Emergency Leave
Transfer Program) because both subparts reference the current definition of
family member. The definitions are being changed as follows.

The current definition of family member at 5 CFR 630.201 and 5 CFR 630.902
reads-- ``Family member means the following relatives of the
employee: (1) Spouse, and parents thereof; (2) Children, including adopted children and spouses thereof; (3) Parents; (4) Brothers and sisters, and spouses thereof; and (5) Any individual related by blood or affinity whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship.''

We are modifying the definition of family member to include domestic
partners, grandparents, and grandchildren.

Our proposed definition reads-- ``Family member means an
individual with any of the following relationships to the employee: ``(1) Spouse, and parents thereof; (2) Sons and daughters, and spouses thereof; (3) Parents,
and spouses thereof; (4) Brothers and sisters, and spouses thereof; (5) grandparents and grandchildren, and spouses thereof; (6) Domestic partner, including domestic partners of any individual in paragraphs (2)-(5) of this definition;
and (7) Any individual related by blood or affinity whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship.''

We are also defining the terms committed relationship, domestic partner,
parent, and son or daughter. The proposed definition of domestic partner
reads-- ``Domestic partner means an adult in a committed
relationship with another adult, including both same sex and opposite sex
relationships. Committed relationship means that the employee,
and the domestic partner of the employee, are each other's sole domestic partner
(and are not married to or domestic partners with anyone else); and share
responsibility for a significant measure of each other's common welfare and
financial obligations. This includes, but is not limited to, any relationship
between two individuals of the same or opposite sex that is granted legal
recognition by a state or by the District of Columbia as a marriage or analogous
relationship (including, but not limited to a civil union).

The proposed definition of parent reads-- ``Parent means-- (1) A biological, adoptive, step, or foster parent of the employee, or a person who was a foster parent of the employee when the employee was a minor; (2) A person who is the legal guardian of the employee or was the legal guardian of the employee when the employee was a minor or required a legal guardian; or (3) A person who stands in loco parentis to the employee or stood in loco parentis to the employee when the employee was a minor or required someone to stand in loco parentis. (4) A parent, as described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this definition, of an employee's domestic partner.''

Finally, we are also proposing a definition of son or daughter, which
reads-- ``Son or daughter means-- (1) A biological, adopted, step, or foster son or daughter of the employee; (2) A person who is a legal ward or was a legal
ward of the employee when that individual was a minor or required a legal
guardian; (3) A person for whom the employee stands in loco parentis or stood in loco parentis when that individual was a minor or required someone to stand in loco parentis; or (4) A son or daughter, as described in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this definition, of an employee's domestic partner.''

We are also proposing a new definition of immediate relative for the
purposes of funeral leave under subpart H, which uses the same categories of
relationship as the definition of family member. In order to be consistent with
the definition of family member of subparts B and I, we are also taking the
opportunity to write the definition of immediate relative in the present tense
and to define immediate relative by relationship to the employee rather that by
relationship to the deceased. The proposed definition reads--
``Immediate relative means an individual with any of the following relationships
to the employee: (1) Spouse, and parents thereof; (2) Sons and daughters, and spouses thereof; (3) Parents, and spouses thereof; (4) Brothers and sisters, and spouses thereof; (5) Grandparents and grandchildren and spouses thereof; (6)
Domestic partner, including domestic partners of any individual in paragraphs
(2)-(5) of this definition; and (7) Any individual related by blood or affinity whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship.''

In the Voluntary Leave Transfer Program regulations in 5 CFR part 630,
subpart I, we are proposing the same change to the definition of family member
and the addition of the same definitions of committed relationship, domestic
partner, parent, and son or daughter as we are proposing in 5 CFR 630.201. In
the voluntary leave bank and emergency leave transfer programs, we are
referencing the changes we are making in the definitions section of the
voluntary leave transfer program.

What did Lesbians Ever Do to Atlanta Cotillion?!?

2009-09-08T18:18:00.002-04:00

The Atlanta Cotillion has always been a fun event. For several years, the Young Democrats had an unofficial table organized by current DNC Member from Georgia Page Gleason. I chose to pay extra in order to wear a tux mostly because I make one ugly woman, and I wasn't sure that the sitting President of the Young Democrats of Georgia (2007-09) should be photographed in full on drag. The heterosexual men at our table all dressed as ladies for the occasion, to some hilarity as well as surprise at how pretty a woman some of them made! It was all for a good cause, supporting AID Atlanta in its work preventing HIV infection as well as supporting those who have HIV/AIDS.

This year, a very good friend of mine decided to become a Cotillion Debutante. Debutantes are generally "tapped" by a member of the previous year's class and are men who have not done drag before. They make up a name, a history, and then spend the late spring and summer hosting fundraisers for their "cause". There is a competition to raise the most money, as that Debutante is crowned Queen. My friend John Michael Roch chose the name Liberty Belle O'Hara as a nod to his heritage as a yankee from Philly, as well as a nod to his "drag mother" who tapped him for Cotillion, whose last name was O'Hara.

John not only set an ambitious goal for his fundraising, he spent many hours and a lot of his own money pursuing the fundraising parties that fuel the Atlanta Cotillion fundraising. He has made good headway in meeting his goal, with the last hurdle being getting people to buy tickets off of his fundraising page for the Cotillion itself on Sept 19. And for folks feeling the pinch of this recession, he's asked for them to just give whatever they could afford.

UPDATE:

I have been asked, in the strongest terms possible, to remove this post in its entirety. It turns out that the Cotillion board did not make the decision referred to the original post. The co-chairs did, and the "bylaws" which I suppose the mean the handbook, specifically state that "gentlemen" must be the escorts. So for now, I just ask you donate to John's deb page.

However, I am accurately quoted by Southern Voice:
http://www.sovo.com/blog/blog.cfm?blog_id=27103

A Difference Without a Real Distinction

2009-04-28T18:27:00.002-04:00

Today, the proposition was laid before me that the consumer or collector of child pornography was a far lesser criminal than the actual child molester. After all, the consumer of child porn was not actually touching a child. My initial reaction was that this person was trying to split hairs where the difference in the two crimes was not that important. Quite frankly, his notion offended and angered me.

There was a rationality to his argument. After all, the consumer of child pornography is not actually TOUCHING a child. However, what that person is doing is just as bad. The consumer of child porn is still violating a child. It is his (I'm sure women can be child porn consumers too, but I'm going to stick with the male pronoun.) sexual desire for children that creates the market for actual child molesters to thrive. I believe that every time someone consumes a piece of child porn, they are violating that particular child all over again, even if they never physically touch that child. They are creating and expanding a demand for children to be victimized. After all, the child porn cannot be created without a child being TOUCHED by someone.

Just because he is not the one touching the child, he is not absolved of his involvement in the crime. Neither is his crime THAT much less severe than the actual child molester that it warrants a distinction. The child molester and the child porn consumer are two peas in a pod. Yes, they are different, but not different enough to make a real difference. Every piece of child porn that is consumed resulted in the physical violation of the child. It doesn't matter that he wasn't the one doing the touching. It's really only a matter of time until he does actually touch a child. That's the harsh reality.

Perhaps my vehemence is related to my own molestation by a stranger at age 11. I managed to overcome the shame and guilt, and the suspicion planted by my church at the time that it was God's punishment of me for having homosexual thoughts as my body plunged into puberty. My molester was never caught, although I'm pretty sure that had the internet been as developed then as it is now, he certainly would have had quite the collection of child porn.

My friend was dead wrong in his presumption. The child molester and the consumer of child porn are two sides of the same horrible coin.

Leaving YDG in Safe Hands

2009-04-20T18:20:00.002-04:00

Contested elections can be an envigorating thing, but they always make me nervous. Perhaps it is because I usually lost contested elections in high school. The one exception was the year that I beat a basketball star for the post of Treasurer of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. (Yes, I can sense your snide remarks!) It could also be that the contested elections I've seen as an adult have usually descended into bitterness, acrimony, and recriminations that last long after the vote has been held.

The chance for nastiness in the race to succeed me as President of the Young Democrats of Georgia was particularly high because of the participation of Brad Barnes who I believe has shown on more than one occassion in his home town an ability and eagerness to play dirty to get what he wants. In Rome, his manipulations were more easily successful, although even there, the only thing he truly won was control of his local chapter. That he was trying to take his "show" statewide alarmed me more than I can ever relay.

What's so wrong with Brad? When he first came around, we were thrilled to just have someone up in Rome, GA working with young democrats. He provided us with membership lists and always talked about different activities going on. There was no reason to not believe him at the time. My biggest wake-up call came at the Macon convention last year when Brad tried to derail all the reforms I was attempting to pass in how YDG was structured and operated. He did this despite having been part of the management group that worked with our consultant as part of the GO Grant. He knew why the reforms were happening, and he'd never raised a single objection. He also had ample opportunity to provide feedback at a Charter and Bylaws Convention or even via emails since I made no secret of my intentions. Yet, there he was, having not even bothered to show up to the Charter and Bylaws committee meeting at convention, challenging me on the floor and trying his damnedest to derail carefully considered reforms.

His behavior infuriated me, especially after he lost the argument when I got the 2/3 vote I needed to pass the reforms and then turned around and got himself elected as the North GA Regional Representative, a position he had just fought so hard to stop. However, I was aware now that Brad was secretive, not a team player, and would work to undermine my administration for whatever personal reasons he had.

It did not take long for Brad's behavior in Rome to become known to me. I received an official complaint from the Floyd County Democratic Party about a smear campaign being run by my Vice President of Membership, complete with affidavits and evidence. The thing was, the smears were carried about by my VP of Membership, but the whole plan was put together by Brad, who was smart enough to give him plausible deniability by leaving his direct fingerprints off the whole matter. There were threats of lawsuits being filed, but I quietly issued a reprimand to my VP of Membership and let the matter drop. No lawsuits were filed. The whole scandal was over a race for Clerk of Court, and Brad was trying to flex his muscles with the county party after he'd tried and failed to take them over. So his campaign spread smears and rumors about this poor man (who turned out to be the uncle of another officer at Georgia Tech, and the father of the UGA Finance Chair) and defeated him on primary election day.

It was around this time that actual elections were held for the Rome YD chapter, and it ended up that Brad lost control. Yet, he cried foul, screamed bloody murder, and spread lies about the subversion of democracy to demand an election do-over. The person who had beat him agreed just to end the raging controversy. Brad, however, was not finished with him yet. Part of his smear campaign against this guy was to spread rumors that he not only had AIDS but was trying to spread it and other STDs around the Rome area. Rome, GA is not a large city. The people with roots there know each other well, and it's a conservative area. Spreading these kinds of false rumors is bad enough in Midtown Atlanta where there are enough HIV+ people around that you can feel safe just living your life. But to spread this in a rural, conservative town? That was reckless and dangerous. I even had someone write out by hand that Brad had told him this specific rumor personally in case I ever needed it.

The "redo" election happened, and Brad got his brother to bus in all of his GOP-leaning friends, none of whom paid dues that anyone can tell. Brad got the treasurer of his group to refuse to allow his opponent to pay dues in an attempt to claim he wasn't a member of the chapter. In the end, Brad won back his chapter...and then promptly skipped the STATE to go work for Obama in Pennsylvania. He disappeared for months, and left his chapter so divided and ruined that they were useless in our #1 targeted state house district. Our candidate lost in a year he should have won, and if Brad hadn't destroyed his chapter for personal gain, it's likely the work that needed to be done by the YDs would have made the difference.

After that episode, I was done with Brad. He cares only about personal power and aggrandizement, doesn't follow established rules and procedures, shows a willingness to destroy whatever he can't control, and lies with an ease and casualness that exposes a very dark soul. I am no Polyanna when it comes to politics. You often have to fight hard, and rough, to get your way. But there is an unspoken code of conduct that people are expected to honor. Brad shows no willingness to follow any code of conduct at all. In fact, during the whole dust-up with the Clerk of Court primary there, I had more than one person from Rome tell me that Brad "is a cancer on the body politic." That's pretty serious. Usually, you hear opponents derided as idiots, dolts, assclowns, etc. But calling someone a CANCER ON THE BODY POLITIC takes it to whole new level that sends shivers down my spine. However, I have come to agree with that assessment.

This was the person who was trying to succeed me. Of course, true to form, he had no intention of announcing until the last minute. I suppose he thinks that no one talks to me about anything, or that I don't reach out to many different people to know what's going on in my organization and state. I suppose he thought I'd be caught by surprise at his announcement, or the rumors that he was going to bus in 60 people to vote for him. He even refused to participate in our room block at the hotel to keep us guessing.

After many discussions with many different people, I had decided to support Jane Bradshaw, my National Committeewoman, to succeed me. She has deep Georgia roots (over 7 generations), has worked as a paid member of a campaign staff as well as a paid legal counsel for the state House Democrats. She's bright, hard working, and understands the organization. She gets what the Young Voter Revolution is all about... empowering our generation and turning them into Democrats! She was an Obama delegate to the DNC in Denver last year, and people in the party know and like her. I felt that she was a strong contender to responsibily take over from me, and I wasn't alone. So Jane announced after I opened nominations, and seemingly ran unopposed while Brad was scurrying around the state whispering the mantra of "change" to undo the "cabal" in Atlanta that I had formed. Or something equally stupid.

Sure enough, Brad announced the last day of qualifying. He actually emailed me his declaration with 3 hours to spare, which did surprise me because I fully expected him to wait until 5-10 minutes before the deadline. I suppose he did not want to chance something happening in cyberspace to delay his email. Also at the last minute, George Seaborough, who had been our paid staffer in Savannah for the fall 2008 campaign, announced for Executive Vice President (EVP). I found that declaration strange since he had not spoken to anyone about running for anything. Usually, people do not just come out of the blue and announce for something without at least talking to others first. Turns out, he had talked... to Brad.

The campaign was mostly one of whispers, but luckily, enough people had had interaction with Brad that there was no way they would vote to turn the organization over to him. Still, I worried. Despite our best organizational efforts, it was possible to legally come in and take over the convention and work your will. We had to outdo Brad, and that's what we did. True to form, he didn't even follow the simple rules we had for convention. He did not turn in any credentials until the last minute, and I'm betting a good number of the people listed are not legitmate members, let alone Democrats.

On Friday, April 17, the convention opened. We had a rules meeting where we passed rules that would have prevented Brad from disrupting the convention. I had a Parliamentarian and the Judicial Council ready to respond to any controversies that Brad might stir up. Knowing how he craves his own aggrandizement, I had to prepare for about anything. It was like preparing for a trial! My legal education came in handy.

The "candidate debates" became a social after it was clear no one wanted to listen to speeches, and the candidates present were mingling. Of course, Brad and George (who by this time were running mates), showed up very late, and handed out plastic cups with their pictures plastered on them. As usual, Brad showed up looking like a slob. His weight is not the issue, because I have known many people who are much heavier than he is who managed to still look neat and put together. More often than not, Brad's idea of dressing up is a new pair of "stretchy pants" and a dress shirt that's untucked and usually has food stains on it.

George looked good and campaigned hard. I liked a lot of his ideas, but by hitching his wagon to Brad, he had destroyed any chance that many of us might have considered his candidacy seriously. When you associate with trash, the stink inevitably rubs off on you. But his opponent, Katie, is not a natural campaigner (which I COMPLETELY relate to) so there was anxiety that people would vote for Jane and then for George.

Saturday morning, I discovered my Credentials Chair was not going to make it. She had suggested that I use someone from her chapter to replace her. That I would not do, because I knew that a challenge had been filed regarding the Rome Chapter's credentials, should they ever be turned in. I was upset at first until I realized that I could appoint my predecessor in the Presidency, Billy Joyner. He has experience working through difficult issues like this through committee, and it turned out to be my best appointment.

Billy had control of the meeting from the start. A crowd had gathered, knowing that something big was likely to go down at the meeting. He methodically went through all the credentials, and gave people chances to correct and update them. Then he pulled out the challenged that had been written up earlier in the week outlining all the charges I've discussed earlier. The challenge asked that Rome's credentials be denied, which basically strips them of their charter. That is when all hell broke loose.

Carry from Savannah State (who now lives in Chattanooga) rose up to decry the charges, the attack on democracy, our lack of love for fellow democrats, etc. It was a loud, bravado performance that turned most people off. At first, Brad tried his wide-eyed innocent routine, and then he tried to throw my VP Membership under the bus by claiming he was shocked SHOCKED that such an underhanded thing had been done. But then my VP Membership stood up and implicated Brad quite clearly. It was at this point where Brad started demanding evidence of wrongdoing. That's usually what happens when we catch him in a lie, he goes from the doe-eyed innocent to a calculated stare and some variation of "You don't have the proof." It's interesting that he never denies it, but just states you don't have the evidence to tie him to anything.

What was happening in that room was a very public political humiliation. We did have evidence, which was printed and circulated... and everyone knew in their hearts that Brad was guilty as sin. As it got more heated, eventually the challenge was withdrawn. But the damage was done. Brad was exposed for the fraud he is.

After the meeting, Brad, face flushed with rage, asked me when I had found out about the charges. I casually told him that we'd received the challenge earlier in the week. He retorted, "And you didn't think you should notify me?" I looked at him and responded, "The challenge was addressed to me and the committee. I saw no reason to act on it until the committee met." Privately, I thought, "And why would I give you a heads up so that you could just craft more lies?"

By this time, we were heading to the floor of convention for General Session. We started off with general announcements and then committee reports. One big surprise for me was a resolution that thanked me for my service as President. It was very nice and flattering, and touched my heart. As it was announced, the convention gave me a standing ovation. I never expected such a show of thanks and love. I've never felt more appreciated in all my life. I'm usually not speechless, but I was at that point. I'm luckily, I didn't cry.

We saved Charter and Bylaws for last since that was the most controversial. We had two proposals for maps. One was a 5 region map that created two HUGE South Georgia districts and the other was a more equitable 6 region map. However, to get 6 regions with votes on Exec, we had to eliminate one of the 15 Exec votes that existed. The management consultant was pretty clear that going above 15 exponentially decreased the effectiveness of your board, so I felt the one most easy to get rid of was the rotating caucus vote. That was the part I knew would be controversial, and it was. We managed to table the discussion to move on to elections.

Luckily, President was voted first. As the votes came in, it was obvious that Brad was going to lose, and lose badly. Georgia Tech's chapter put Jane over the top, and she ended up winning 147-45. The only reason Brad got that many votes was due to the distance weights for himself, University of West GA, Chatham County, and Savannah State. But the will of the convention was clearly to reject him and his politics.

The next office was EVP. Atlanta chapter had decided to throw nearly all their votes to George to "punish" Katie for not supporting their guy for Regional Director. UPDATE: Apparently, I was misinformed. While Katie told Nikema she was not going to vote for Nikema's finance for Metro Atlanta Region Director, Nikema did not discuss that with the chapter or engineer a "punishment." Therefore, I stand corrected! UGA then had an unusually high number of abstentions that resulted in Katie being ahead at the end, but not enough to win. UGA then amended its vote to put Katie over the top.

The next move was for George to throw Haley Shank under the bus. She had recruited him to run for EVP because she didn't think Katie was a strong enough leader for EVP. Haley, however, could not attend convention due to being in a community place and was having to campaign from afar. That did not go well. Stephen Ratner from Emory was also running, but he was relatively new. Atlanta opened the floor and nominated George. He had previously promised to support Haley even if he lost, but he saw his chance and took it. He squeaked through to victory over Stephen, draining all votes that might have gone to Haley.

Daniel was unopposed for his office, but Savannah State, Chatham, and Rome decided to be bitchy and deny the convention the ability to elect by acclamation. They didn't bother putting up even a token candidate. They just made everyone go through role call as a way to "punish" Daniel. Talk about not knowing how to win friends and influence people. First, the screaming fit in Credentials, and now needlessly dragging out elections. The body was NOT pleased, and showed it by moving to have 1 minute voting periods (eventually became 5 seconds) for the uncontested races. I suppose they got satisfaction out of it, but they sure left a bad impression with everyone else.

When it came to Secretary, we also had a bit of drama. We knew the two declared candidates were nonstarters. One was Brad's minion from Rome, and the other was absent. We fully intended to nominate and elect from the floor. A guy from UGA named Carter offered himself as Secretary and we went with it. The interesting thing was that Brad's minion came up for his speech and withdrew trying to mumble about dirty politics or something. The result was that Carter won all but 10 votes.

Treasurer, National Commiteeman and National Committeewoman were all uncontested, but we slated them and then had a 5 second vote before sending forth vote totals for all three offices. The Savannah State-Chatham-Rome petulant section offered up varying degrees of "abstentions" to show displeasure. Apparently, Nikema was the one they liked best because she got the fewest abstentions.

Then we returned to the maps. Everyone was all up in arms as we broke into regions to discuss the maps and getting rid of the rotating caucus vote on Exec. The compromise was to open the slippery slope of adding a vote without taking one away. So now Exec has 16 votes on it. I didn't care as much in the end, although I found the arguments of "disenfranchisement" and "robbing the voice" of the caucuses to be childish and immature. In a fit of pique when I was approached by the Women's Caucus Chair about adjourning in time for her program, I snapped, "I don't know! I don't care. You can suck it." Not my proudest moment.

Then, it was over. We adjourned, went into regional caucus, and elected Regional Directors. But I had made it, and the right people had largely been elected. The unmitigated disaster of a Brad Barnes presidency was averted.

At dinner that night, I could finally relax. Senator Max Cleland was our featured speaker, and he was magnificant. We got to eat dinner with him, although there wasn't much talking at the table. Jane Kidd, the Democratic Part of Georgia chair, gave a very nice speech too. We also got to hear from two of our declared gubernatorial candidates. All in all, a very nice dinner.

We ended with awards. We had a nice slate of winners this year. Jason Chitwood from Cobb County was named YD Male of the Year. Nikema Williams was named YD Woman of the Year. UGA was named Chapter of the Year. Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College was named New Chapter of the Year. Cobb County was named Most Improved Chapter of the Year. Ed Hula won Jackass of the Year for an unprecedented 2nd time in a row, and the committee said he would not receive it again because it was unfair for "mere mortals to have to compete against a professional." Ed's not too happy about that. Finally, Democrat of the Year went to Juliana Illari, who was quite deserving of the honor.

I then started what I hoped would be a new tradition. I brought Jane up to the stage, and swore her in to office using the US Presidential oath as a template. People laughed when we got to the part about swearing to "preserve, protect and defend the charter and bylaws of the Young Democrats of Georgia", but the effect was just as I hoped. It was a clear and visible transition of power, and I ended it by bowing and saying, "Congratulations, Madam President" as I handed Jane the gavel, and gave her a bag with all the files, credit cards, IDs, etc that I had accumulated as President. I whispered that it was "the YDG Football". She got a kick out of that. Then Jane called up the other newly elected officers and swore them in too. I hope that tradition continues.

Tim had a surprise for me in his closing announcements when talking about the Leadership Academy. He talked about someone who had inspired him and had been not only a good friend but a good boss too. Then he and Jane presented me with a basket of goodies and a gorgeous, fabric bound book with a seal on it about Law in America that's largely legal history, but just the sort of thing I adore to read. I was completely touched by the gesture. I've never felt so good about myself in my whole life.

When I came into the Presidency two years ago at Jekyll Island, I simply wanted to continue the work we'd done in the last 5 years I'd been involved. Most of all, I wanted to NOT mess it up! I wanted to grow the Youth Voter Revolution as we planned. I tried to continue to run things by consensus without being afraid of acting on my own when necessary. If you were open and honest with me and worked as part of the team, things were good. For people like Brad, who wish to obstruct for the sake of obstruction, I had no tolerance. When you are a president, things you do will be questioned, and no one will be happy with you all the time. You'll even make a few enemies. I always acted with what I believed to be the best interests of the Young Democrats of Georgia. My needs or political ambitions did not matter. It was about building a youth political machine for Democrats....and we are starting to deliver. After two years, you'd expect many to be sick of me, but the honors they gave me with the gifts, the resolution, and the ovation, make me believe I did something right. I maybe even did a lot right, and I thank God for that. My worst nightmare would have been to disappoint everyone.

I have left the Young Democrats of Georgia in good hands. Our work will continue, and it will continue to succeed.

The Love Hypothesis

2009-04-02T14:03:00.003-04:00

Recently, I had a conversation with someone who posited the following hypothesis:

Love is about control. That which you control and dominate, you tend to love. Likewise, that which dominates and controls you, you also tend to love.

I found this hypothesis to be instantly repugnant at first. It seemed to violate something deep within my soul. Yet, I was unable to articulate why. My friend went on to give the example of a dog. There is no reason for people to love their dogs, or the dogs to love us. We love our dogs because we absolutely control and dominate them. Our dogs, in turn, love us because we dominate and control their existance.

I understood where the philosophy came from, and I hated to admit that there did seem to be some validity to it. I still couldn't shake the feeling that something was being left out of this Love Hypothesis. I have quietly reflected on the matter for days, and I am convinced that the original hypothesis is too cold and simplistic to boil down a concept like love so easily.

Going with the pet motif, I offer the example of a cat. Before I rile up any cat lovers, I know they make wonderful pets, and some are quite loving, etc. More often than not, though, cats tend to be solitary creatures, often ignoring their "masters" unless it's time to be fed, watered, or have the kitty litter changed. Even with kitty litter, sometimes, Kitty will simply take a dump on the master's bed to show displeasure. Cats clearly do not love their humans like a dog does, although they seem to recognize that humans control the food supply. Still, if the Love Hypothesis as stated was correct, cats would adore their humans as much as dogs do.

So what's missing? I think it is true that when we dominate and control something, we have a tendency to love it. I also think it's true that if you are dominated or controlled by someone, you tend to love that as well. Think of the Stockholm syndrome where a kidnap victim starts to identify with his/her captors and behave in ways that would indicate to most of us having a "love" for those captors.

The Love Hypothesis is missing the characteristic of emotional intimacy. This is the idea that it is safe to make yourself vulnerable to another person. If you simply love someone because you dominate and control them, it does not follow that you are emotionally intimate. In fact, there would be no reason to be emotionally intimate since that would threaten your control. I suggest that love based through domination and control is not love for that person at all; it is merely love of the situation. You love BEING controlled or CONTROLLING another person. You are not emotionally intimate with them, so you cannot really LOVE the person at all. You don't even really know the person in those situations.

When I think of love, I do not think of control unless it's in a fluid sense within the relationship. Sometimes you will control things, and other times, the other person. When you both try to control, conflict can occur, and you have to negotiate that. What makes love worthwhile to me is knowing that someone has my back, knows my secrets and still thinks I'm a good person to be with, and with whom I can be emotionally vulnerable and know that it is safe to do so.

That last part is the real kicker for me. I find it difficult to trust that a love interest is not going to use my vulnerability against me. I also find it hard to trust that such a person is being "real" with me, and returning the favor of emotional trust. Part of this is through personal experience, and some of it comes from watching what has happened to friends. For me, to really be in love with someone, I have to feel completely comfortable that he is not going to just leave me on a whim. I need to know in my heart that even when I mess up badly, he will still love me (even though he might be really angry with me for a while) and will not abandon me lightly. And I would want him to know the same thing about me. It's much like how I feel about my family. I know they will be there for me and love me no matter what. Even when if I did something horrible, they wouldn't abandon me. That's a real comfort, especially in a world where it's so easy to feel alone and isolated.

So, I would add emotional intimacy to the mix to explain love. The domination piece can and does play a role, but that alone cannot explain why people love. You have to be able to expose your innermost self without fear of ridicule, betrayal, or descruction. That goes for the "dominant" person in the relationship as well as the "submissive" person, and it goes double for relationships where neither person really dominates.

Top 10 Arguments Against Gay Marriage

2009-03-27T13:44:00.004-04:00

First, I have to thank lesfriendly.com for directing me to these ridiculous Top 10 Reasons for Opposing Gay Marriage.

This topic seems appropriate considering the Vermont Senate and the New Hampshire House BOTH passed Gay Marriage bills for their respective states this week!

Anyway, the homophobes who first screamed "Let the People Decide!" all across the nation as LGBT lives were put up for a VOTE via constitutional amendments to make sure our relationships are never recognized are now screaming foul that the PEOPLE'S Representatives are looking like they will pass laws.

The "Top 10" reasons to oppose gay marriage are so stupid, it actually makes gay marriage look good.

In a nutshell, the ten arguments are as follows (comments in italic):

Argument #1.
It will destroy the institution of marriage and lead to massive numbers of children born out of wedlock.

I don't get it. How exactly does expanding marriage destroy it? Right now, same sex couples with children are technically "single" parents... but those children still have TWO loving parents, even if the state refuses to grant them any of the rights their heterosexual peers possess.

Argument #2
The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead directly to polygamy, incest, bestiality and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions.

This is the old man-on-dog argument. Marriage is a special contract between two unrelated people. The argument is that if you say it can be between two men or two women, then you open the door to EVERYTHING. That is not true. Marriage would still be between two unrelated people. Why unrelated? Genetics will tell you that. But gay people can't reproduce you say! Ummm, ever heard of a sperm bank? What about the sister of a gay male partner agreeing to donate her egg so that her brother and his husband can have a child? I personally know people who have done both. So you rule out polygamy and adult incest marriages. Just because you need help to reproduce does not make the reproduction less valid. As for the arguments that gay marriage leads to marrying children and pets, neither children nor pets are legally able to make binding contracts or decisions for themselves. They are not able to consent to a marriage, so those two scenarios are also red herrings.

Argument #3
With the family out of the way, all rights and privileges of marriage will accrue to gay and lesbian partners without the legal entanglements and commitments heretofore associated with it.

That's preciously the point? How is this an argument AGAINST gay marriage? :)

Argument #4
With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman.

I think moral lessons are better left to church and home than public school. There's no reason for public schools to do anything than acknowledge the existence of different types of families, without judgment.

Argument #5
From that point forward, courts will not be able to favor a traditional family involving one man and one woman over a homosexual couple in matters of adoption. Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad.

Wow, end discrimination, and you can't legally discriminate! Glad you get it!

Argument #6
Foster-care parents will be required to undergo “sensitivity training” to rid themselves of bias in favor of traditional marriage, and will have to affirm homosexuality in children and teens.

Not being a foster parent, I have no idea what kind of training they have to go through. However, I do not see a problem in being trained on how to handle a gay teenager, especially when gay teenagers have such a higher percentage of suicide than heterosexual teens. Yeah, I can see how letting gay children or teens know that they aren't disgusting, hated by God, etc. would be a BAD thing. *sigh*

Argument #7
How about the impact on Social Security if there are millions of new dependents that will be entitled to survivor benefits? It will amount to billions of dollars on an already overburdened system. And how about the cost to American businesses? Unproductive costs mean fewer jobs for those who need them. Are state and municipal governments to be required to raise taxes substantially to provide health insurance and other benefits to millions of new “spouses and other dependents”?

This is the lamest of the arguments. Gay people pay social security taxes just like anyone else. Our families SHOULD be entitled to the same benefits. Studies have shown that where same-sex couple benefits are concerned, the cost to localities is minimal. This argument relies on the assumption that same-gender couples are beneath contempt.

Argument #8
Marriage among homosexuals will spread throughout the world, just as pornography did after the Nixon Commission declared obscene material “beneficial” to mankind.11 Almost instantly, the English-speaking countries liberalized their laws against smut. America continues to be the fountainhead of filth and immorality, and its influence is global.

Considering that South AFRICA offers gay marriage, along with a good portion of Western Europe, America is already behind the curve. If we do set an example, though, that is not a bad thing.

Argument #9
Perhaps most important, the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed. The family has been God’s primary vehicle for evangelism since the beginning.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ says nothing about Gay Marriage. Christ himself never mentioned the concept, let alone condemned or endorsed it. This makes the assumption that gay marriage is not compatible with Christianity. Again, a falsehood. Anyone doubting this needs to come visit All Saints Episcopal Church for more examples than you can shake a stick at of committed same-sex couples brimming with enthusiasm and passion for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You might actually win back some lapsed Christians who think the church is full of nothing but right wing bigots.

Argument #10
The culture war will be over, and I fear, the world may soon become “as it was in the days of Noah” (Matthew 24:37, NIV). This is the climactic moment in the battle to preserve the family, and future generations hang in the balance.

Raise your hands if you think the "culture war" ending would be a GOOD thing! It's kind of funny how underlying these arguments is that if gay marriage is OK, then seemingly heterosexual men will drop their wives and take up with each other in DROVES. Now I enjoy same-gender lovin' as much as any gay man, but I fail to see how heterosexual men would suddenly give up the va-jay-jay for man-on-man lovin'! No one chooses their sexuality, one way or the other. And for the beleaguered bisexual, gay marriage would give them two perfectly valid options for building a life with the person of their choosing. No longer would society's pressure be exclusively on the bisexual settling down with an opposite gender spouse.

So those are the Top 10 Arguments Against Gay Marriage. It just goes to show how far ignorance and fear can take a voter.

Eight Years

2009-02-13T07:34:00.001-05:00

This post is not cheery, and it concerns the 8th anniversary of my father's suicide on February 13, 2001. It is an essay I feel compelled to write, but I understand if you don't want to read it.

I was sitting in the Juris Publici (law school student newspaper of which I was editor-in-chief) office when I received the instant message to report to the Dean's Office. I had finished all my classes in the morning, and had contemplated going home for an afternoon nap, but decided not to do that. It's unusual to be summoned to the Dean's office, so I immediately thought I was in trouble. Was I being accused of cheating? Had I turned in anything that could remotely cause a professor to think I might have cheated? I couldn't think of anything as I made my way to the Dean's office.

When I got there, I was directed into the Dean of Student Life's office, and she asked me to shut the door. Another bad sign. What is going on? I thought. The Dean told me that my mother was on the phone and would like to speak to me.

That's when I knew. I knew in my heart why my mother was calling. She was going to tell me that my father had done it. He had committed suicide.

My father had been spiralling down for months. It started in May 2000 when a relationship he was in suddenly ended. He seemed OK at first, but he began to brood more and more. The woman was named Sophia and she worked with him at IBM. In early July, she annouced she was engaged to another man. Turns out that while she was with my dad, she was also seeing an old high school flame on the side who lived in Indiana. That's when the bottom fell out for him.

Having suffered through serious depression myself, I knew the symptoms and signs. When he came to visit me in early September 2000, it was obvious to me that he was NOT in good shape at all. I took matters into my own hands and wrote his therapist. I knew her name, and my mom got me her address. I mailed her a letter telling her my concerns and observations. Turns out that my dad's shrink (he was on anti-depressants at this time) also became concerned and contacted his therapist within a day of my letter reaching her. The one-two punch was alarming enough that she had him come in, and he started more intensive therapy.

I remember wondering if he'd be angry with me, but he wasn't. He knew why I had written the letter, and he seemed relieved and grateful that I had. He kept having anxiety attacks though, especially when he would run into Sophia. His friends were a lifeline in trying to keep them apart as much as possible.

Things continued along, and Christmas break came. I was in Lexington and staying with my dad who had an extra bedroom in his apartment. What I observed there really alarmed me. My dad, the ultimate pack rat, had done some spring cleaning in the middle of December. He threw out a bunch of things, and he had everything else sorted and labeled. Growing up, my dad hated cleaning out the garage, and he certainly never did it after the divorce in 1998. He had a brick from his childhood home in Nashville that is now underneath an airport runway that he was giving back to his parents. I found a copy of the book "Final Exit" which was the notorious "how to" manual for euthanasia.

My dad also gave strange Christmas gifts that year. Along with the brick from his childhood home that he gave to his parents, he gave me a framed picture of himself. Christmas night, as we were getting ready to go to bed, my grandma said, "You think your dad will be alright, don't you?" I don't know why, but something told me to spill my guts on my concerns and observations. My mom joined in the conversation, as did my grandpa. My dad had retired an hour or so earlier. We talked for a good hour about our observations of him, conversations he had had with each of us. My father was very smart...he gave each of us a piece of the puzzle. It wasn't until we compared notes that a picture began to form.

My grandfather was suspicious that my dad wanted to reclaim his Glock that he'd given to them for safekeeping when the serious depression started in the summer. My grandfather went to the hiding place, and the Glock was gone. He confronted my dad, and I'll never know what was said, but my dad turned over the gun, and my grandfather cried. My grandfather never cries, but we didn't see all that. We just knew my dad was acting strange.

A day later, my dad admitted to me what he had been planning. He confessed to me, my mom, his therapist, and his friends. He had been planning on killing himself just after the New Year, Jan. 3 to be exact. At this point, I had a very open and frank discussion with my dad. I begged him not to hurt himself, hold him how much I loved him and needed him in my life even if I was about to graduate from law school. I got to say all the things in my heart that a lot of people leave unsaid until it's too late. In that respect, I have no regrets.

My dad underwent intensive therapy. I tried to talk him into going into a mental health facility just until his mood stabilized, but he refused. He was convinced that if he ever went into a hospital, he'd never get out. I tried to assure him that would not be the case, but he wouldn't be budged. Things seemed to be looking up for him. Since mid-January, his mood had noticeably improved. I thought, along with everyone else, that he had turned a corner.

It was not to be. The mood improvement was a result of his final decision to die. This is common in suicides. Once the person commits to death, he/she knows their pain is about to end, so that makes them happy. My father's pain is something I hope I never feel. I know I was close in 1998, and my dad said to me that if he had known how bad it was for me then, he would have been by my side. I hope my example of beating back depression would show him that he too could win. But his despair was to a point that my example was no comfort.

I took the phone and sat in the Dean's offered chair. My mother told me that my father had died that morning. She was trying like hell not to cry, but I could hear the torment in her voice. It was 11:30am. I responded, "He killed himself, didn't he?" She said he had. She then told me that a plane ticket had been purchased for me to come home, and that the Dean agreed to take me home, help me pack, and get me to the airport.

From that point, things were a whirlwind. The Dean had sent someone to the Juris Publici office to pack up my books and computer. She told me that my car would be safe in the law school parking lot and not to worry about a thing regarding my classes and such. She said I could have as much time as I needed, and just to keep in touch. I was in emotional shock at this point. I went with the flow. I knew I had to get home to Lexington, KY.

Back at my apartment, I threw a few things together that I knew I would need. A suit, regular clothes, etc. I kept trying to call S and tell him what happened. He was very difficult to reach, but I finally did reach him and told him what happened. He didn't have much to offer in the way of comfort, and I am not sure why I thought he would. Little did I know he was on the verge of divorce, so he had his own troubles to deal with.

Turns out that my dad had talked with my mom about what he wanted her to do should something happen to him. He wanted her to drive to Richmond, VA personally and tell me. That was ridiculous. But with my history of depression, she was afraid that this news of my father's suicide would send me into some kind of tailspin and that I'd end up offing myself in response. I understand that worry, but it wasn't realistic. Especially then. Once you've experienced the suicide of a loved one, that option is forever off the table for you, because you know all too well the emotional devastation it causes. No matter much pain you are in, you could never do that to your loved ones. It's a scar that never goes away, and you have no right to inflict it on others, especially those you claim to love.

The next couple of weeks were a blur of activity. As the sole heir, I had to make a lot of decisions, and I followed my dad's wishes as closely as I could. He wrote a total of 9 suicide letters addressed to various people. Mine was a co-letter with my grandparents. Of course, the police had to read all the notes in their investigation. He even had left a note in Sophia's office. One of the small comforts I have is that Sophia had a lengthy interview with the police at IBM. I hope she was humiliated by that. I also made it known she was not welcome at the funeral or the visitation. If she showed up, I would not be responsible for what I'd do. She was smart, and acquiesced to my wishes.

My dad really planned out his suicide well. He spent the night before writing the notes on his computer. From the time/date stamps, we could tell what order he wrote the letters in and what time. He was drinking screwdrivers, although we didn't know that until a blood screen was done. We thought it was OJ, because my dad was not a drinker, but my mom remembered that screwdrivers were his favorite. He burned a funeral CD for us to use at his services, fully labeled and everything. His notes explained everything and left instructions about his funeral. He put on a John Denver CD on repeat, went to the bathroom one last time, and crawled into bed. At this point, he took a handful of the anxiety pills he'd been hording for the last six-seven months to make him go to sleep. He had several blankets on the bed to keep his body warm. It was about 5:30am at this point, and he called his friend Michelle to tell her what he had done and to call the police. He did this knowing that she came in later in the morning due to getting her kids off to school. He also had a lunch date in case Michelle didn't come to work for some reason. Between the two of them, he knew his body wouldn't sit for long. Then, following the instructions of Chapter 13 from "Final Exit", he put on an allergy mask and secured two trash bags over his head with heavy duty rubber bands. The allergy mask is to prevent the bags from being sucked into the mouth. The body's response to suffocation is to claw that the mouth to get air. The mask would prevent this reflex, and the drugs would heavily sedate him, further lessing the impulse to get air. According to the book, this method takes 30 minutes to work. That means my dad died a little after 6am on February 13, 2001.

Today is the 8th anniversary of his suicide. The world has changed so much in that time, and even I am a very different person. I miss him every day, but time has healed. For a few years after his suicide, I used to brood over it from Christmas until the anniversary. The last 2-3 years, I only became melancholy and brooding for a few weeks in late January until the anniversary. Last year, I only started thinking about it the day of. Perhaps that was due to the excitement of the Presidential Primary in Georgia. But this year has been different. Since just after New Year's Day, I have been on an emotional roller coaster, usually feeling fine when I'm at work or out with friends, doing something. It's coming home where I have descended into a dark place. I think about death a lot, especially his. I've even thought that I couldn't half-way blame him for thinking the way he did. That kind of thinking has scared me, because I know what it's like to be left behind. As a result, while I can understand WHY he did it, I have a hard time thinking that I could ever actually do it. Then I am home alone, just me and my dogs, and I feel quite lonely. He must have felt that way too. But I know that as of today, this mood shall pass. It always has. The anniversary is kind of rough, but I think it always will be.

In the years since, another friend of mine committed suicide suddenly and violently. He not only cut his throat, but he hung himself too. I was fortunate that I was not asked to help pack up his place after the funeral. We largely kept the circumstances a secret out of respect for the family. Plus, he left no clues as to why. No note, no diary, nothing. He seemed fine until his body was discovered. Another dear friend lost her father this past October. He shot himself in the head in his car. I know what kind of pain my friend is going through. I wouldn't wish it on anyone. In some ways, I'm lucky. I know why my father killed himself. I have the comfort of knowing I did and said everything I possibly could to convince him to LIVE. Most survivors don't have that comfort. They haunted by "what if" questions, even though those questions are pointless. Someone who is determined to die will find the means to accomplish the task, no matter what we do.

Hopefully, no more of my friends will ever know what surviving suicide is like. But if you ever do, know that it does get better. We did everything we knew to save my dad from himself, but it wasn't enough. Ultimately, he had a choice to make, and he made it. It was the wrong choice, but a person determined to die will find a way.

Tonight, I have some dear friends who are going out to dinner with me for the sole purpose of giving me something else to think about, new memories to make. I am grateful to them for their love and friendship. Eight years seems like a lifetime ago in some ways, but in others, it's hard to believe he's been gone that long.

Les Misbarack

2009-01-19T22:42:00.001-05:00

Very nice...if you don't like musicals, you should probably skip.

Run-Off Blues

2008-12-04T17:42:00.002-05:00

The run-off election results were largely a disappointment in Georgia, and I have heard some wailing, gnashing of teeth, and rendering of garments as a result. As the Young Democrats of Georgia, we worked *very* hard to turn Georgia blue in 2008. Obama got 47% of the vote in Georgia, which is the highest percentage won by a Democratic presidential candidate in

Georgia

since Jimmy Carter won the state in 1976 and 1980. Before Carter, the last time Georgia had supported a Democrat for President was Kennedy in 1960! Georgia supported Goldwater in 1964 and segregationist George Wallace in 1968. It’s been a GOP love-fest since, with exceptions for Carter and Clinton in 1992. Even when Clinton won in 1992, he won with 43.47% of the vote. We came agonizingly close to winning Georgia in 2008, and we certainly made the state competitive. While our electoral votes went to McCain, we still should be very proud of how well Obama did.

The youth vote is still strange in Georgia. It very much behaves as a swing vote. In national elections, the GOP is getting about 52% of the vote for president. In 2006, the youth vote was the only demographic won by Democrat Mark Taylor on his way to getting 38% of the overall vote for Governor. For the 2008 primary, youth vote tripled, and our share of the Democratic electorate shot up 4 points. The 2008 youth vote for President seems to have mirrored the state results in Georgia, although nationwide, Obama won the youth vote with about 68% to John McCain’s 32%.

We continue to improve, though. So many of Georgia’s youth vote GOP because their parents do. The more our message gets out, the more those youth realize the GOP offers them nothing, and that their beliefs place them firmly in the Democratic Party. Every cycle, we do a little bit better. We are close to parity now, and it won’t be long before we will regularly win the youth vote not only in state and local elections, but national as well.

The run-off results are also set up for a GOP victory. You have to remember that the run-off rules are a relic of the segregationist past. They were set up to ensure that the old (white) guard maintained control of the Democratic Party. Remember, until 2002, Democrats had ruled Georgia since Reconstruction. As the civil rights movement gained momentum, Georgia Democrats adapted by creating an uneasy alliance between urban blacks and rural whites. This maintained Democratic dominance until 2002, when the effort to remove the Confederate battle flag from the Georgia state flag combined with pissing off teachers resulted in Roy Barnes’ defeat. The GOP is stocked with Dixiecrats who left the Democratic Party to join the GOP as the “white” party in Georgia. The GOP has continuously pushed the notion that Democrat = black in an effort to “ghettoize” the Democratic Party. Sadly, it has largely worked. In 2008, for the first time ever, the majority of the Democratic primary electorate was black. The GOP is hoping this means that what is left of the “old guard” in Georgia will flee the Democratic Party for the GOP as the black share of the Democratic electorate continues to grow.

For the Democratic youth, this racial stuff doesn’t matter nearly as much as it does to our elders. We care much more about policies and getting things done than the exercise of raw (or, more accurately, imagined) power. You do see moments where young people try to emulate their elders by trying to incite racial bias, but those efforts are not widespread. They also usually fail.

The Georgia Run-off law requires a winning candidate for any office other than President to get an absolute majority of 50% plus one. If you look at the 1990 Democratic primary for governor, you will understand the usefulness to the white power structure of the run-off law. Since the Democratic nominee always won the general election, open Democratic primaries were crowded. The top two vote getters in July 1990 were Zell Miller and Andrew Young. For whatever reason, it is an accepted fact in Georgia that black voters do not turn out for run-offs. You see a significant drop-off in participation all over the electorate, but it tends to be especially dramatic for black voters. White voters will come out again in much higher numbers for a run-off. This is especially true of white Republican voters. Of course, in 1990, the 2008 white GOP voters were still pulling a Democratic ballot, and they certainly were not going to support a BLACK man for Governor. So Andy Young got his clock cleaned by Zell Miller, who went on to win the election in November.

Another example is 1998 when Mary Margaret Oliver faced off with Mark Taylor for the Lt. Governor nomination. Oliver, a liberal Democratic white woman from DeKalb, came in 1^st place with 29% of the vote. Taylor, a rural white boy from Albany, came in 2^nd with 21% in a primary with 6 candidates. Counting on the fact that Oliver’s base of black support in Atlanta wouldn’t show up again, Taylor whipped up the conservative white boys into a frenzy and won the run-off with 57% of the vote. The whole point of the run-off system is to be sure that rural white guys would win the day at the end.

We knew going into 2008 that we had an uphill climb. Georgia has only become more red since 2002. The mass exodus of DINOs (Democrats In Name Only) to the GOP followed the rise to power of the GOP. These people would become Socialists if it meant being with the party in power. They generally have no moral compass other than their personal aggrandizement. Such party switchers include people like Lauren “Bubba” McDonald, who was defeated from the Public Service Commission in 2002 as a Democrat only to switch parties so he could reclaim “his” seat in Tuesday’s run-off. Another such party switcher who’s sole concern is personal power and aggrandizement is State Rep. Mike Jacobs. The man was a hard-core Democrat until he realized that to get real power in the state house required him to become a Republican.

I never thought that winning GA for Obama (or Hillary) was realistic in 2008. My stated goal was to make Georgia competitive. For me, that would be a win. Oh, we definitely campaigned to win, and our efforts worked. The state was competitive for Obama, and Georgia had the most extensive volunteer-driven network for Obama in the nation. That is why we won a record 47%, and held McCain to 52%...in GEORGIA. This is the state that gave Bush 58% in 2004, and 55% in 2000. The fact that we saw presidential ads in Georgia is a win if you ask me since the last time you saw any advertising for a presidential candidate may have been Clinton in 1992.

Unseating Saxby was also going to be difficult. When the primary season started, we had about 5 candidates who were fairly lackluster. No one really sparked a huge fire, although we did have a couple of interesting choices. We also had the Saxby-financed Vernon Jones campaign (it was an open secret in DeKalb that Saxby asked his builder buddies to finance Vernon’s campaign) since Saxby knew that Vernon as the Dem nominee would assure his reelection. He might as well not have an opponent as to have Vernon.

In the end, though, Jim Martin came through and decided to run. He started late, though, and required a run-off to secure the nomination. Even then, it was going to be a huge uphill fight. We had hoped that people excited about the Obama win would come back out to support Jim on Tuesday, but that did not happen. Despite ads and robo-calls from Obama to the black community, and rap artists pleading for turnout, the huge black turnout for Obama in November did not materialize in December. Of course, the turnout with white progressives was not so great either. I know many people were turned off by all the ads and calls as the eyes of the nation focused on Georgia. Many of those simply did not vote, which I think is silly. Although, it’s also silly for candidates to call people on Thanksgiving.

The results showed that people who turned out to re-elect Saxby just went to the PSC race and voted for the Republican. They didn’t care who it was, so long as the “R” was by his name. That is the only reason Jim Powell lost, as he was CLEARLY more qualified and independent than Bubba. Georgia voters, who supposedly hate taxes, just elected a man who will ensure that our utility rates increase. Way to go, Georgia!

Saxby’s campaign again was full of lies and distortions about Jim Martin. Saxby got his feet wet in 2002 by strongly hinting that triple-amputee and Vietnam veteran Max Cleland was a supporter of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin-Laden because he supported labor rights for the new Homeland Security department. It was a despicable charge against an honorable man who left three limbs on the battlefield for his country while Saxby got 5 deferments for a “bad knee”. A knee so bad, apparently, that Saxby is practically a professional golfer. Amazing how that works.

This year, Saxby basically ran a campaign that said Jim Martin was a child murdering, child prostituting, and inveterate tax raiser who also liked to line his own pockets with public money. Anyone who has ever met Jim Martin knows what a pack of lies these charges were. Jim Martin is an honorable and decent man who has always cared more for results than getting credit. He is one of the most decent people I’ve ever seen in politics, especially when compared to Saxby “Big Daddy” Chambliss who has few morals and even fewer ethics. Saxby always leaves me feeling dirty, and I have the impression that he is a bad person. I do not say that lightly. Generally, I feel Republicans are good people, just misguided.

A bright spot in the run-off election results was the win by Sara Doyle for GA Court of Appeals. While she is a consistent Republican voter, she was not nearly as rigid or ideological as her opponent, “Christian” Taliban tool, Mike Sheffield. I put “Christian” in quotation marks because I consider the man to be anything but a true Christian. His philosophy and beliefs are anything but Christ-like. But he calls himself a Christian, so I’ll put it in quotation marks. He would have added a highly partisan and extremely right wing voice to the Court of Appeals, and defeating him was a real victory.

It does feel like we got our asses handed to us in Tuesday’s run-off election. We have not mastered the art of turnout for a run-off, especially around the holidays. It is not a reason to despair. No one would have thought we could force Saxby into a run-off even as late as September. The “smart” money was on a Saxby easy victory on election night. That we forced Saxby into a run-off and drained away all that GOP money is a victory for us. It may feel hollow, but that is the reality.

So, my fellow Democrats, do not despair. We started out in a very deep hole, and we got close enough to feel the edges. Maybe next time we can pull ourselves out. That is what we are working toward. It is not likely that Georgia will ever go back to the years of Democratic dominance that many of us remember from childhood. We are making Georgia ever more competitive, though….and there will be a time in the near future where Georgia is not considered an automatic lock for the GOP. That is what we are fighting for. When that victory does come, it will be very sweet, especially for those of us who have toiled, and will continue to toil, in the darkness of GOP power in this state. We keep chipping away at the GOP majority, so keep your eyes on the ultimate prize.

We can and will win Georgia again. We cannot allow ourselves to get discouraged. We must learn from the mistakes we make, correct them, and move on to the next battle. We cannot cede this state to the reactionary forces of the GOP. That would be bad for Georgia, bad for us, and bad for the nation. Georgia deserves better than to be a GOP, right wing ghetto. The South deserves better. WE deserve better.

That’s why we fight…and in the end, that is why we will win.

Special Comment on Gay Marriage ~ Keith Olbermann

2008-11-11T18:51:00.001-05:00

Olbermann says it all.

John McCain's Rage is a National Security Concern

2008-10-09T15:58:00.001-04:00

Creepy... McCain's temperament is a serious concern in this election.

"If you don't vote, you're a moron!"

2008-09-26T14:13:00.001-04:00

I can add nothing to Ferguson's message.

John McCain's ads are LIES. Here's the video proof.

2008-09-11T16:05:00.001-04:00

Sen.McSame used to be a maverick and a truth teller. That man is now dead. It is obvious that McSame would rather lose his HONOR than lose this election. His lies cannot go unpunished.

Sarah Palin is Not MY Mother -- Thank God

2008-09-07T23:23:00.003-04:00

The adoration from the religious right over Sarah Palin's GOP nomination as the Vice President should send chills up the spine of anyone who loves the United States of America and its Constitution, especially the 1st Amendment. I especially reference the part about forbidding the establishment of religion. The Bush years were not able to usher in an uber-right "Christian" Theocracy, but hope springs eternal with the nomination of Sarah Palin, who is a true believer in some really crazy stuff. Bush and Cheney have done unspeakable harm to this nation, but if Sarah Palin reaches the White House with McSame, I sure hope McSame has a food taster, because the right will be looking to send him to meet Jesus sooner rather than later and get their darling in Oval Office.

The right wing curmudgeon of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Jim Wooten, practically slobbered over himself praising the virtues of Gov. Palin in a recent column. I especially became nauseated at the following passage:

Palin’s story is our story. Her life is our life.

She and McCain will carry the South because her values and his are ours.

She is not of Washington.

She is of us.

The question arises, who fits the definition of "us"? Does one have to attend a rigid, far right evangelical, perhaps penecostal, church? Do you need to eschew birth control and other forms of family planning? Do you need to viciously attack people who cross you, aiming to destroy their lives? Do you need to a white, heterosexual family living in a rural, or maybe ex-urban, area? Do you need to have come out of the womb with a shotgun? Do you need to mock people when you sense they are better than you...or at least as Christian, even if they don't agree with you on issues? Do you need to support prayer as a way to convert LGBT Americans from their "sin"? Do you need to brow-beat any Jews you know to accept Jesus or face eternal hellfire and damnation? Do you need to eschew science, and advocate patently false teachings that the earth is 6000 years old and that early man frolicked with the dinosaurs (or "Jesus horses" as our beloved Superindent of Education here in GA once called them)?

If so, then I am certainly not of the "us" that Wooten refers to. Her story is NOT my story. Her life is NOT my life. Her values are CERTAINLY NOT my values. We're both not "of Washington", so I suppose we have that in common. Since I obviously don't fit in to the definition of "us", I'm not lumped in that category with Gov. Palin.

What I am is a white, gay, southern male who is progressive, Christian, and concerned for the future of my country. This brings to me another part of Wooten's column that touches on something that annoys me.

People in the small towns where she grew up, “love their country, in good times and bad, and they’re always proud of America.” It’s not conditional love. It’s not love based on whether we behave and believe as others wish. It’s lasting and unconditional.

Just like I grew tired of being told that I couldn't possibly be a Christian because I was a gay Democrat, I am SICK TO DEATH of hearing the GOP mantra that to challenge your country in any way is somehow "hating America" and near-treasonous. For the record, I love my country in good times and bad. But like my parents always said to me growing up, "We will always love you, no matter what. We may not like what you do sometimes, but that will never mean we love you any less." If I had turned out to be a mass murderer, my mother (since Dad's dead) would still love me with all her heart. She certainly wouldn't be PROUD of my actions as a serial killer though, and the horror I had done would break her heart. But she would love me to her dying day. THAT is unconditional love.

I may not have a child, but I do unconditionally love my country. That does NOT translate into unconditional approval of actions my country may take. I love America, but I am ashamed that we fell for the trap of George W. Bush, especially in 2004 when we should have known better. It was clear the man had manipulated intelligence to get us into a war we should not have been in. It was clear that he was ready to divide the country by attacking gay people in order to win votes. Yet, we voted him back into office. My country is better than that, and I am ashamed of what we did on election day, 2004. I am ashamed that my country has countenanced torture against sometimes innocent people, and disregarded the human rights upon which our government is founded. We should be better than that. I still love my country though, even when it became clear how badly we'd gone astray at Abu Garib prison and at Guantanimo Bay. I found it embarassing that we impeached a president over a sexual infidelity, but I still loved my country. I can, and have, deeply loved my country without always being proud of it. And where I am not proud of my country, I am proud of the spirit that allows me to work to make it better. I love my country as it is, but I want it to be better... just as any parent would want his/her child to do better when you know that child is capable of so much more. It is that criticism and the attempt to make it better that shows how much I do LOVE my country. If my love was conditional, I would simply give up on America, on the ideals that make up the American spirit. I would drop out, stop engaging, and cease to care one way or another.

In an AP article by Sara Kugler, the response to Palin has included such statements as: "She's every mom," said Lindsey Denny, a mother of 7, including a set of quintuplets, two of whom have special needs like Palin's infant son with Down syndrome.

Every mom? Really? I don't think so.

My mother had one child, and even that was a struggle. She stayed at home with me, and instilled a love of learning and curiousity that has served me well. She prayed that I would be smart and do well in school, remembering well how her own mother had belittled and mocked her because my mom struggled in classes, especially math and science. She loved me unconditionally, but her discipline was firm. When I came out of the closet, she struggled, but never once did I think she would disown me. She left a church that she had attended for years because of the way that church drove me from its membership, and the membership of any church, for seven years. Today, she bristles when people trash LGBT Americans. She has even taken to speaking up on our behalf with friends, although she still struggles with whether to reveal that her only son is gay. My mother believes that women deserve equal pay for equal work. She believes that health care is a right, and that we all deserve basic coverage, no matter our station in life or what job(s) we have. My mother believes in science, and reveres the Bible without worshipping it blindly. My mother has a strong faith in God, but she does not believe she is called for force everyone to believe as she does, nor does she think the power of government should be used to coerce her opinions on others. My mother is pro-choice, believing that the decision to carry a pregnancy to term is intensely personal, between a woman, God, and her doctor. She would never presume to impose her choice on someone else. My mother does not belittle others, no matter what their circumstance. More often than not, she seeks to help people in any way she can, over-empathizing in their plight. My mother is terrified of guns, having had a rifle pointed at her head at age seven by her own father. She cannot face a dead animal. She is rarely sarcastic and never mean.

In other words, my mother is everything that Sarah Palin is not. The only thing they have in common is anatomy and a deep belief in God. Even that belief takes them to very different places. My mother is a southern girl from Tennessee who worries about paying her bills, having health insurance, and making ends meet. I thank God that Sarah Palin is not MY mother.... and I will work my butt off to make sure she doesn't become my Vice President.

The REAL Sarah Palin

2008-09-05T11:08:00.003-04:00

This email letter came to me this morning from a colleague. It seems to be bouncing around the country, but it's written by someone who is from Wasilla, Alaska and who knows Sarah Palin. It's worth reading. I will certainly have more to comment in the future as this race heats up. Anne Kilkenny has taken a real risk. After the nasty, demeaning attacks against Barack Obama and ANYONE who works in their community to make it a better place during her acceptance speech, this lady has put herself in real jeopardy. Talk about an American hero!

>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> From: Anne Kilkenny
>> Date: September 1, 2008 12:20:01 AM PDT
>> Subject: re: SARAH PALIN
>>
>>
>> Dear friends,
>>
So many people have asked me about what I know about Sarah Palin in the last 2 days that I decided to write something up . . .
>>
>> Basically, Sarah Palin and Hillary Clinton have only 2 things in common: their gender and their good looks. :)
>>
>> You have my permission to forward this to your friends/email contacts with my name and email address attached, but please do not post it on any websites, as there are too many kooks out there . . .
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Anne
>>
>>
>> ABOUT SARAH PALIN
>>
I am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the residents of the city.
>>
She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe".
>>
It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.
>>
She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.
>>
She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.
>>
She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.
>>
Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans. Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.
>>
She's smart.
>>
Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.
>>
During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had given rise to a recall campaign.
>>
Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a "fiscal conservative". During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.
>>
The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? Or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.
>>
While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once. These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.
>>
As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state. In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs.
>>
She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.
>>
While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.
>>
Sarah complained about the "old boy's club" when she first ran for Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State's top cop (see below).
>>
As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's Police Chief because he "intimidated" her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support.
>>
She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn't like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness. Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.
>>
When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the "old boys' club" when she dramatically quit, exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).
>>
As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the "bridge to nowhere" after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.
>>
As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects--which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance--but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as "anti-pork".
>>
She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative.
>>
Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her "Sarah Barracuda" because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.
>>
As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as "AGIA" that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum.
>>
Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned "as a private citizen" against a state initiative that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or b) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State's lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior's decision to list polar bears as threatened species.
>>
McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being President.
>>
There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she.
>>
However, there are a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.
>>
>>
>> CLAIM VS FACT
*"Hockey mom": true for a few years
*"PTA mom": true years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since.

*"NRA supporter": absolutely true

*social conservative: mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconstitutional).

*pro-creationism: mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it.

*"Pro-life": mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation

*"Experienced": Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000.

*political maverick: not at all

*gutsy: absolutely!

*open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions.

*has a developed philosophy of public policy: no

*"a Greenie": no. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR.

*fiscal conservative: not by my definition!

*pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards.

*pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents

*pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla's history.

*pro-labor/pro-union. No. Just because her husband works union doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union.
>>
WHY AM I WRITING THIS?
>>
First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.
>>
Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.
>>
Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that's life.
>>
Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship.
>>
Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.
>>
>> CAVEATS
I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor) from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.
>>
You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The day Palin's selection was announced a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was 5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90's.
>>
>> Anne Kilkenny
>> annekilkenny@hotmail.com
>> August 31, 2008

OBAMA FULL SPEECH: Offers Policy Specifics, Goes on Offense v. McCain

2008-08-29T13:12:00.001-04:00

I cannot tell you how amazing this speech was as I watched it with 400 or so Democrats last night at Amsterdam Bar in Atlanta. He even talked about gay rights in a way that made me so proud to be a Democrat.

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) addresses the DNC

2008-08-29T11:43:00.001-04:00

Hillary Clinton shows why she was such a formidable candidate and why the Democrats' cup raneth over in this year's presidential primary. It was a shame that we had to pick one, but her speech shows the class, character, style, and intelligence that I love about Hillary... and that the Republicans never have understood and never will.

Governor Brian Schweitzer (D-MT) at the DNC

2008-08-28T16:58:00.001-04:00

Some of you might have missed Gov. Schweitzer's folksy, fun, and brilliant performance at the DNC unless you are a C-SPAN watching nerd like me :)

Guys like this give me great hope that we can WIN this election despite all the nasty, negative, racist attacks the GOP will continue to throw at us.

What's Up with the Twink Worship?

2008-06-13T14:03:00.003-04:00

Many of us have different definitions of what a "twink" is. I did an online search, and I had a heck of a time finding a good definition, although I did find one here. One that made me laugh was from something called "The Jargon File" which said a twink is "gay slang for a cute young thing with nothing upstairs (compare mainstream `chick')." That definition probably comes the closest to what I think of when I think of a twink. Combined with the requirement that you be under the age of 25, as well as having a certain amount of shallow vapidness... I'm not a fan of the twink.

Yet, I find that the gay community is virtually obsessed with them, including guys who would never stand a chance of landing a twink unless he first showed his bank statement. Lately, I've had a slew of friends who have expressed varying degrees of twink worship that I find disturbing. I've never liked the overly skinny mostly because I first felt that I could break them too easily. I'm a relatively strong man, and if I want to give my guy a bear hug, I do not want to have to worry that I'm going to break bones doing it. Then, after I gained weight myself, I had a new reason to dislike the twink: the twink's obvious, public, and utter disdain for my very existence.

I respect people having different things they are attracted to. Lord knows I have my own quirks. One thing I strive never to be, however, is downright rude. The twinks I've run into have made rudeness an art form. Last Thursday night when I was out for my birthday with friends, I was feeling pretty good, and I was smiling and nodding "hello" to anyone to caught my eye. It wasn't a come on; I was genuinely in a great mood and just being friendly. However, I started getting a string of disgusted looks, eye rolls, and heads whipping in the opposite direction that it threatened to sour my evening. And the perpetrators of this behavior were the twinks. Others either politely smiled back, ignored me, or otherwise didn't react - all fine reactions. But acting like I had walked up to them and asked to fuck them in a public toilet was uncalled for....but with twinks, I find it's typical.

Perhaps it is the worship all things young and thin in the gay community that causes twinks to think that they are better than anyone else who is NOT them. I have no idea, and I'm not particularly interested in why they behave the way they do. I do have friends who qualify as twinks who aren't such insufferable assholes, but they seem to be the exception that proves the rule. It's not like these twinks have anything to particularly be proud of. They are young, which is an accident of birth...but time spares none of us. They won't be twinks but a few years. They are skin and bones thin, and look like young boys for the most part....an accident of genetics, drugs like crystal meth, or both. They usually haven't even graduated college if they went at all. Many of them dropped out of school to work full time in retail, figuring that having money to go out and party was more important than an education. And those who are in college have the added irritation of feeling superior in intellect as well as body and looks....and they let you know it. Their favorite hangout is the gay bar or club, and they usually can be found there a majority of nights, even during the week. They sneer at those of us considered to old, too fat, or too WHATEVER to even breathe the same air they breathe. Yet the gay community as a whole worships them, even those who should know better.

Maybe this is what my friends feel when they meet some of the guys I date. Maybe they feel the same sense of frustration, thinking "What in the HELL is going through his head?!?" as they resist the urge to shake some sense into me. I don't know. It just makes me sad when I see great guys who have a lot to offer mindlessly chase twinks for relationships because they somehow fetishize the type. They think the twink they settle on will be different...one of the good ones. They somehow think that the nightly bar hopping, and the lack of a real career or motivation to excel in the one they are in is somehow going to change once they are together. Even when burned, my friends seem not to learn the lesson that perhaps they should expand their horizons a bit and be open to non-obvious attractions. That's a lesson I've had to learn. I have things that I'm heavily attracted to, but I don't limit myself to that. If I click with a guy, I'm open to pursuing that unless there is simply no attraction whatsoever. Sometimes you can't help that...no matter how great the guy, if there is zero interest, there is zero interest.

But the twink worship continues. For my part, I would be happy to let the twinks have their own little fantasy world where everyone can be young, rail thin, and "fabulous" forever going from bar to bar and party to party. Someday they all have to grow up (one hopes), even if that transition is tough for them. I just don't have the patience to deal with the drama and bullshit that twinks dish out. They have no interest in knowing me as a person, and I'm certainly not going to waste my time trying to convince them I'm worth knowing.

I just wish I could convince several of my friends of this....but I fear they may need to get hurt badly (again) in order to learn the lesson.

Why YOU Should Vote Republican

2008-06-12T16:16:00.000-04:00

Getting Older Doesn't Have to Suck

2008-06-12T15:52:00.001-04:00

I turned 33 years old last Thursday. It still feels weird to say that, let alone type it. I remember when my parents were 33, since I was 8 years old then. That was the year that I started attending Sayre after the disastrous 2^nd and 3^rd grade merger in my public school. I can’t imagine having an 8 year old right now. Shoot, I can’t even find someone to date, let alone someone willing to share my life.

That leads me to the edge of the spiral that I went down in the days before my birthday. I never thought I’d be 33 years old and alone. My plan had been to settle down between ages 25 and 30, then maybe have a kid or two. Being gay did not change this initial plan, just the gender of my spouse. Of course, I never anticipated that I would have such poor judgment when it came to picking men to date. I never knew that I’d have this “rescuer” complex where I try to take on the wounded and troubled in hopes of helping to “fix” them which would result in their undying love and devotion toward me. I never knew that I’d try to settle with a guy that I wasn’t in love with simply because he seemed to “make sense”. So now I find myself at age 33, alone, and with no prospects for that changing anytime soon.

The night before my birthday, I was really wallowing in the self-pity. My dinner that night consisted of a bottle of Amarula, my favorite liqueur from southern Africa. It’s not a heavily alcoholic drink, so I just got a healthy buzz. The thing about alcohol being a depressant is that while it gives you a buzz, it also keeps you down in the dumps. And boy was I depressed about my birthday the next day.

Then my actual birthday arrived. I was determined to feel bad all day about growing older, being alone, being overweight, and having no prospects that things would ever turn around. However, I started getting the legion of happy birthday notes and emails not only from Facebook but through general email. Many weren’t just birthday wishes but some said things like “Sure am glad you were born!” and “I hope you have a fantastic day!” I found it impossible to maintain my bad mood in the face of all this love coming from the greater world around me.

By the afternoon, I even had plans for my birthday night. At first, I had no plans at all, which also contributed to the general “I’m a loser” feeling I had approaching my birthday. My friend John had said that we’d go have dinner, but I hadn’t heard anything else about that. Turns out he forgot, but invited me to tag along on a planned trip to the Botanical Gardens for Cocktails in the Garden. I’d never been, so I decided to accept the invitation. Then I made dinner plans with Daniel, who just got paid, and was in the mood for some hibachi.

Dinner was great, as usual, and I left feeling stuffed. The Garden was nice, but it was HOT as hell. It didn’t really cool down until 8:30pm or so. The cocktails in the park were weak, too. We even had a stalker who followed us around after eavesdropping on the conversation in line.

After the garden, we decided to head to Apres Diem for some real drinks. I had four Hendrick’s martinis, extra dry, with a twist. They were really good. Turns out high quality gin tastes a lot better than the cheap stuff. The conversation was really good, and we definitely decided not to drive home. In fact, we didn’t go home at all, but walked to Blake’s where I proceeded to have 2-3 more gin and tonics.

Turns out I can hold my liquor better than John or Meg, so by the time we got a cab to take us back to their neighborhood in Grant Park, they were both pretty much passed out. We did get Meg in the house, and her sister drove John and I to his house where we crashed.

We awoke about 9am, and had to scramble to figure a way back to our cars. Luckily, Tim was driving to work, and when I told him the situation, he came and picked us up to return us to our cars. I had a presentation at 10:30am on the health plans for McCain and Obama, and I wasn’t feeling it. My head didn’t pound, but I sure did feel nauseated. Luckily, they had water, and I somehow muddled through it. I was a mess, but I didn’t care… my birthday had been a blast!

McCain on LGBT issues

2008-06-12T15:42:00.001-04:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtZlR3zp4c

John McCain is such a douche bag.