Solange Rips Caribou Barbie

Damn, how did I miss this one? 

According to BV's Black Spin seems a few weeks ago Bey Bey's baby sis Solange Knowles, the face of Rimmel London cosmetics, went off about Caribou Barbie dissing the POTUS and FLOTUS in her waste of trees book.

The half term quitter governor of Alaska called President Obama and the First Lady "unpatriotic" because they in her words spent "almost two decades in the pews of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's church listening to his rants against America and white people."

Yeah, right Sarah.   Your born in Idaho behind is still hatin' because you lost Miss Alaska to a sistah.  


But back to the post.    Unlike Beyonce, who is a little more guarded about sharing her opinions and political thoughts and the last time she did you feminists dissed her, little sis Solange will let fly with her political opinions and her thoughts.

And she let Palin have it via her Twitter account..

"I'm SICK of Republicans shenanigans," Knowles tweeted in response. "Sarah Palin wants to call Michelle a racist? Says that they listened to rants about white people in church & that makes them racist. So did that make her (Sarah Palin) a racist when people at HER rally were yelling out 'That n-----'? By listening to that & not stopping it? The sad and scary thing is that these fools are in office," Knowles continued. "And just how many Americans will fall for the 'okie doke.'"

When an upset Twitter follower tried to suggest Knowles should not publicly tweet about her political views, Solange put the poor fool on blast.

"Don't want me to talk about what I believe? Please. ...Exit door awaits you gladly. ...Done lost yo damn mind boy."



If y'all thought I was selling y'all woof tickets about the widespread support that President Obama has in the African-American community and just how much we really do hate Republicans, you better ask somebody and not some Oreo cookie chomping sellout like Ron 'I kiss Dubya's behind' Christie.

Solange, keep tellin' it like it T-I-S is! 

Thank You, Keith!

Keith Olbermann tells it like it T-I-S is about the Sherrod affair and the piss poor panicked reactions of the left in response to the Right Wing Noise Machine faux controversy.

Jeff Johnson Calls Out Black Community Homophobia on TJMS

You TransGriot readers know how much I love the Tom Joyner Morning Show.

The 'Fly Jock' and crew have a listening audience of 11 million predominately African American people that I'm a part of and wake up to during the workweek.

While I sometimes get annoyed with their tendency to be a little too heavy on the comedy at times, TJMS is unabashedly pro-Black. There's also no better friend and supporter to HBCU's than Tom Joyner, being that he grew up in Tuskegee, AL and graduated from Tuskegee University.

TJMS interviews a host of prominent African-Americans across a wide spectrum of our community and other peeps of interest as well.

But I tune in for their chocolate flavored political and social commentary segments from people such as CNN's Roland S. Martin, 'The Revs', Jeff Johnson, Stephanie Robinson and others.

My ears perked up when Jeff's Tuesday commentary touched on the homophobia in the Black community that reared its ugly head once again courtesy of some sellout negro ministers during the final days of Annise Parker's historic mayoral election in H-town.

You can listen to Jeff's commentary here.

Love You Rachel Maddow

One of the joys I got out of the start up of Air America was discovering a then little known progressive talk show host named Rachel Maddow thanks to Polar.

She's smart, intelligent, with an easy going sometimes humorous style that got to the meat of political issues. I began to listen to her more than Randi Rhodes, and I was happy when MSNBC and Keith Olbermann started having her appear on his show as a frequent guest commentator.

Now she has parlayed those guest appearances into her own show, and I'm loving it.

It is so much fun watching these intellectually challenged conservatives walk onto her show, think they can get away with their usual spin and lies, and she subtly uses her PhD in political science to dismantle them.

It's also a breath of fresh air to see another political commentary show besides Countdown that is entertaining and informative.





It seems that a lot of Americans agree with me as well because not only has she quickly garnered a sizable viewing audience, she's getting national politicians on her show as well.



I can guarantee you that it's one show Sarah Louise Palin will not be appearing on between now and November 4, if ever.

If Politics Isn’t Child’s Play, Why Should Sarah Palin Get the Kid-Gloves Treatment?

Wednesday, September 03, 2008
by Tonyaa Weathersbee, BlackAmericaWeb.com

It seems there’s a lot more drama tucked into Sarah Palin’s resume than rank-and-file Republicans were led to believe.

So it’s not surprising that the same moral-values zealots who were counting on her story to inject some perkiness into John McCain’s campaign for the White House would be trying to flip the script.

They are, after all, used to doing that; to using their arrogance, the media’s timidity and the public’s fickleness and short memory to obscure the real issues.

It would be a shame if they got away with it again.

The weekend had barely passed when Palin, the Alaska governor and former beauty queen who the 72-year-old McCain tapped as his running mate, was forced to out a family secret: Her 17-year-old daughter, Bristol, was five months pregnant.

Had it been Michelle Obama announcing that one of her daughters was pregnant, the same zealots that questioned her patriotism over a slip of the tongue and Barack Obama’s patriotism for not wearing a flag pin would be lambasting their parenting skills and their lack of moral guidance.

They’d be quoting Bill Cosby and salivating at the chance to plant another seed of skepticism about Obama into the minds of Americans; if he can’t manage his family, they’d say, how can he manage the country?

Oh, but they’re demanding that everyone cut Palin a break.

Reporters and pundits who dare infer that the 44-year-old Palin, who not only has a pregnant teenage daughter but an infant son with Down’s Syndrome, might have too many family issues brewing to be a heartbeat away from the presidency should McCain win, are quickly dismissed as sexist. No matter that it’s a legitimate concern -- and a concern that I would have if Palin were a man.

I’d have that concern because children with special needs tend to need more attention than other children. Add a pregnant teenager to that mix who is on track to becoming a child bride, and the possibility for more family drama is upped exponentially.

That’s a common sense concern, not a sexist one. Because if McCain wins and dies in office -- which would be a real possibility considering his age and his numerous bouts with skin cancer -- this woman would be in charge.

Ironically, many of the people who are playing the gender card to defend Palin’s working mother bona fides are some of the same people who are the most hostile when it comes to supporting things that impact the lives of average working mothers; things like subsidized day care and equal pay.

On top of that, the moral values crowd that is praising Palin for being true to her “pro-life” values because Bristol “chose” to have and keep her baby are the same ones who continue to push saying no to sex instead of pushing safe sex.

They are also the same ones who talk forgiveness and mercy for girls like Bristol who engage in sex outside of marriage, but who elevated Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction” at the 2004 Super Bowl to a national symbol of moral decay.

And, eerily enough, it helped get George W. Bush -- perhaps the worst president in history -- re-elected.

I hope that people won’t be cowed by the machinations of the zealots and pundits who now, all of a sudden, are demanding that everyone treat Palin’s issue with her pregnant teenage daughter as a private family matter -- especially when they cared little about the privacy of former President Bill Clinton’s family as they waved a sperm-stained blue dress at him.

And while I’m certainly not suggesting that people condemn Sarah or Bristol Palin, or that the press stalk and harass them, I do believe that the media shouldn’t back off on airing legitimate concerns as to whether any parent with a special needs infant, a pregnant teenager, a thin intellectual resume and little exposure to international issues is best suited to be a heartbeat away from the toughest job in the world.

Most of all, I hope people don’t fall into that same line of thinking that cursed us with another four years of George W. Bush -- that because Palin is going through what a “normal” family might go through, that means she’s qualified to run the country.

A lot of people voted for Bush because they believed that he was an average Joe; a guy they could sit down and have a beer with.

And look at what happened.

My Podcast With Ethan Is Online

Last Sunday I sat down with Ethan St. Pierre and talked about a few issues in the transgender community on his podcast. He shot me an e-mail Friday informing me that the podcast is now online and up at TransFM and podomatic.com

If you wish to hear the TransGriot pontificating on a few issues, click on this link to listen to the show.

It can also be accessed by going to the TransFM website, click on my name and hear the show that way as well.

But since I already did the heavy Net lifting for you, just check it out.

Early Reviews-The World Likes Barack Obama

TransGriot Note: One of the more asinine comments I heard expressed early in the presidential primary season was the laughably ignorant assertion that electing Barack Ovama to our country's highest political office would lead to 'embarrassment' around the world.

Hell, the current inarticulate dumbass who stole two elections has cornered the world market in bringing shame, guilt and embarrassment to America's good name and standing around the world.

Judging by these snippets of editorial pages around the world, these international writers seem to suggest that Sen. Obama becoming our next president would be a huge improvement and go a long way toward repairing our reputation around the world.


Ray Hartley,
Editor,
The Times, South Africa: "Barack Obama has captured the Democratic Party's nomination for the position of U.S. president to be decided later this year. His ascendancy has raised the hope that the United States will finally assume its role as a responsible superpower that will extract itself from the conflict in Iraq. … There can be no doubt that Africa is celebrating his victory, which signals the long overdue deracialization of American politics. ...

Should he become president, it will go a long way toward removing racial loyalty from politics. … The question that remains is: Will he be able to deliver on his promises, or will he succumb to powerful interests?"

The Times,
London, in an editorial:

"Obama … has already rekindled America's faith in its prodigious powers of reinvention — and the world's admiration for America. … It has been a bruising journey. … But today at least the tide of history seems to be with him. Win or lose in November, he will have gone farther than anyone in history to bury the toxic enmity that fueled America's Civil War and has haunted it ever since. … Details of the delegate count no longer matter. This moment's significance is its resounding proof of the truism about America as a land of opportunity: Obama's opportunity to graduate from Harvard and take Washington by storm; the opportunity that the world's most responsive democratic system gives its voters to be inspired by an unknown; the opportunity that outsiders now have to reassess the superpower that too many of them love to hate."


Schmuel Rosner,
columnist and U.S. correspondent, Haaretz, Israel:

"Obama's victory is not surprising. The epic duel with (Hillary) Clinton gave everyone, including past and present Israeli officials dealing with the United States, time to prepare. … AIPAC's (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) wily and experienced lobbyists predict the first year of an Obama presidency will be challenging for Israel, not because he has bad intentions, but because they might be too good. Until then, Israel will unwillingly be at the heart of the storm of the presidential race. … There are enough reasons to prefer (John) McCain to Obama, or Clinton to Obama, regarding their intended policy toward Iran. But even those who oppose him should put aside their political preferences, fear of the future, and their pros and cons list for just a moment. Now is the time to take in Obama's astounding political victory, if one can still feel awe for anything in this day and age. Against all the odds, the campaign broke down the boundaries of bias and race, and brought out voters to cast their ballots. They may be naive, but they are not indifferent. They may be a little childish, but they aren't cynical."


The Times of India,

in an editorial: "Finally, Sen. Obama is the one who will lead the Democratic charge for the White House. … With the stage set for Obama's face-off with McCain, campaign season promises to get tougher and meaner. … As far as India is concerned, Obama is perhaps the least known for his views. McCain and Clinton have a clear position on where New Delhi fits in the emerging world. In that scheme, India ranks pretty high. Obama appears to share no such vision, at least not yet. But, irrespective of whether eventually McCain wins or Obama does, there's no denying that a page has been turned in America's history."


Alphayo Otiento,
journalist, in Daily Nation, Kenya:

"A core element of that Obama message has always been hope and inspiration. This is the one political message that simultaneously persuades swing voters and motivates mobilizable voters who rarely go to the polls. … Obama showed that appeals to division — whether from elements that stirred up fear that a 'black candidate couldn't win,' or from his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright — could be overcome by America's overwhelming hunger for unity. … Now it will be up to every Democrat, every progressive, to take advantage of this historic opportunity to make Obama the American president who leads the world into a new progressive era of unprecedented possibilities."

Caroline Kennedy Endorses Barack Obama

A President Like My Father
By CAROLINE KENNEDY
Published: January 27, 2008
From the New York Times

OVER the years, I’ve been deeply moved by the people who’ve told me they wished they could feel inspired and hopeful about America the way people did when my father was president. This sense is even more profound today. That is why I am supporting a presidential candidate in the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama.

My reasons are patriotic, political and personal, and the three are intertwined. All my life, people have told me that my father changed their lives, that they got involved in public service or politics because he asked them to. And the generation he inspired has passed that spirit on to its children. I meet young people who were born long after John F. Kennedy was president, yet who ask me how to live out his ideals.

Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible.

We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960.

Most of us would prefer to base our voting decision on policy differences. However, the candidates’ goals are similar. They have all laid out detailed plans on everything from strengthening our middle class to investing in early childhood education. So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual.

Senator Obama has demonstrated these qualities throughout his more than two decades of public service, not just in the United States Senate but in Illinois, where he helped turn around struggling communities, taught constitutional law and was an elected state official for eight years. And Senator Obama is showing the same qualities today. He has built a movement that is changing the face of politics in this country, and he has demonstrated a special gift for inspiring young people — known for a willingness to volunteer, but an aversion to politics — to become engaged in the political process.

I have spent the past five years working in the New York City public schools and have three teenage children of my own. There is a generation coming of age that is hopeful, hard-working, innovative and imaginative. But too many of them are also hopeless, defeated and disengaged. As parents, we have a responsibility to help our children to believe in themselves and in their power to shape their future. Senator Obama is inspiring my children, my parents’ grandchildren, with that sense of possibility.

Senator Obama is running a dignified and honest campaign. He has spoken eloquently about the role of faith in his life, and opened a window into his character in two compelling books. And when it comes to judgment, Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning.

I want a president who understands that his responsibility is to articulate a vision and encourage others to achieve it; who holds himself, and those around him, to the highest ethical standards; who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again that our country needs every one of us to get involved.

I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.

Caroline Kennedy is the author of “A Patriot’s Handbook: Songs, Poems, Stories and Speeches Celebrating the Land We Love.”

You Think Race Explains Oprah's Choices? Better Check The Record

TransGriot Note: Excellent column in the C-J by Betty Winston Baye. Seems like some of her pale fans don't like the fact she's supporting Obama.

December 27, 2007
Courier-Journal.com

Oprah Winfrey has been called out as a racist. That's the fad now, you know -- to brand as racists African Americans who love themselves and seem in general to also love their people.

So now, Oprah is getting her comeuppance. Who does she think she is, detractors ask, to be openly supportive of Barack Obama in his bid to secure the Democratic Party's presidential nomination?

Oprah is showing her "true colors," one critic said, as if Oprah's "true colors" have ever been in doubt?

The mere fact that she is revered by millions of every race the world over shouldn't reduce her to being a slave to others' fantasies.

The idea that Oprah somehow unfairly favors black people over others belies her public record.

Just ask "Dr. Phil."

Who was he before Oprah took a liking to him and rewarded the help that he gave her during a very difficult time in her career, by regularly featuring him on her show, and then by spinning Phil McGraw off into his own show? Today, McGraw is a millionaire several times over, and the last I knew he was very white.

Here lately, every time you turn Oprah on, there's "Dr. Oz," and he's not black.

Or, how about the many scribes, living and long dead, but decidedly not black, whose books Oprah has catapulted into the realm of bestsellers. In fact, most authors that Oprah has championed over the years aren't black and aren't writing about black topics. That's true even in this era, when more blacks than ever are writing and buying books.

Those who've held their head trials and have found Oprah guilty of betraying them by backing Obama should ask Oprah's legion of non-blacks (cooks, personal trainers, designers, wedding planners and actors who are now living the lives that they dreamed of, in large part because a black woman smiled on them) whether Oprah is a racist.

John Travolta, I'm sure, isn't complaining about being Oprah's good friend.

Or how about the fact that any number of black artists have recorded Christmas CDs and no doubt would have loved Oprah's blessings. Yet Oprah chose to anoint Josh Groban's as the must-have Christmas CD for 2007. I doubt that, on the way to the bank, he's thinking Oprah is a racist.

Meanwhile, who has ever confused O magazine, to which I am a faithful subscriber, with Essence, Ebony or Jet?

The attacks that Oprah has endured for supporting Obama, unfortunately, aren't surprising to those of us who are aware that, in order for some people to really admire a black person, that black person must never be "too" black, which explains why any number of black people in public life -- at no small price to their mental health, I should say -- invest a lot of energy fleeing from the obvious.



Oprah has given her reasons for supporting Obama. Yes, he and his wife are fellow Chicagoans and dear friends. But she also has said, "We need somebody who is committed to the welfare of all Americans… We need a new way to do business in Washington, D.C., and in the world."

And for sure, a lot of Americans share those feelings.

Meanwhile, Oprah has said that she never has openly supported a candidate before, but that she's doing it now because, she said, and rightly so, "If we continue to do the same things over and over, I know you get the same results."

And yes, for Oprah and millions of others, and not all of them black people, Barack Obama is, in fact, the substance of things hoped for.

If George W. Bush, whose lack of qualifications should be painfully obvious to all by now, can be considered fit for the presidency, surely Obama has every right to aspire to the job.

Even so, Obama doesn't have a lock on the black vote, just as it cannot be argued that Hillary Clinton has the women's vote all locked up. Clinton's black support runs deep and strong. Scores of African Americans, including Maya Angelou, one of Oprah's dearest friends, have thrown their support to Clinton. Angie Stone, in a song titled "My People" on her new CD, has gone so far as to include Bill Clinton on the list of "My People."

Are Oprah's attackers equally upset that there are women who support Hillary Clinton chiefly because she's a woman and because they believe that it's time for a woman to be in the White House, not merely as first lady but running the joint?

Oprah's critics, I do believe, need to search their own souls for good answers as to what exactly is offensive to them about a black woman supporting a black man's aspirations. And while they do that, other Americans are simply deliriously happy to have options that we haven't seen in a while.

Snatching Rancor From Victory's Jaws

by PAUL SCHINDLER
Gay City News
11/15/2007

Last week, for the first time in history, a house of Congress voted to approve a gay rights measure. Oddly, nobody on our side is walking away from the field of political battle feeling all that energized.

Barney Frank, the chief sponsor of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and one of only five out gay or lesbian Americans to have ever served in Congress, felt compelled to call a press conference a month ago to rally his fellow Democrats against portions of the LGBT community.

The Human Rights Campaign has been pilloried by many in the community for what critics say were duplicity and compromised insiderism. It will take political vapital for HRC to mend fences with transgender rights groups and other leading LGBT organizations, who for their part feel aggrieved that a longstanding game plan was abandoned, but only at the last minute, by HRC and a Democratic leadership, both of whom failed to level with them.

And if HRC's poll is correct that two thirds of the community agreed with the compromise it made, then many gay and lesbian Americans, if not transgenders, are likely confused about what the shouting over the past seven weeks was all about.

A few parting shots are in order.

In February, Frank and Tammy Baldwin, an out lesbian Wisconsin Democrat, introduced ENDA with protections against employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. As early as last November, right after the Democrats gained control of Congress, HRC's Joe Solmonese told Gay City News he was "absolutely" confident the measure would be taken up by both the House and the Senate. Since 2004, HRC's board had a policy that ENDA be fully inclusive, so that statement of absolute confidence meant something very specific.

As late as September 14 of this year, Solmonese was still confident, pledging, at a gathering of transgender activists, to "oppose" anything that did not protect gender identity.

But surely Solmonese knew that Frank, for one, was less than absolute in his posture. After last year's elections, asked whether he yet had any notion of an ENDA tally, Frank told Gay City News, "What would be the point of a count?" as he emphasized that the House had never looked at a trans-inclusive version of the bill before and it was too early to speculate.

Some have claimed in recent weeks that Frank, in fact, is transphobic, which I believe is unfair, but I do think it's reasonable to observe that he has at times demonstrated difficulty in artfully discussing the gender identity issue, a charge that on almost any other matter cannot be leveled at him. In 2004, as HRC weighed adopting its pro-trans policy on ENDA, Frank told this newspaper, "There are people who are transgendered who have not had the physical change. If you're talking about workplaces with gyms, it's just not practical." On other occasions, he shorthanded the issue by mentioning the "group showers issue."

This is not a useful starting point in educating the American public or wavering members of Congress about the realities of life as a transgendered person - and about their crying need for anti-discrimination protections. Surely, HRC was aware of Frank's limitations on this score.

If HRC had the commitment it said it did to transgender inclusion, it was incumbent on the group in February - not in September, but six months earlier - to make clear to Frank that gender identity was non-negotiable in moving ENDA forward. Solmonese has argued convincingly that HRC could not oppose a gay rights bill that the Democratic leadership took to the House floor. Fair enough. But the House leadership would never have dreamed of taking the ENDA it passed to the floor had a bottom line been established upfront.

Related to the problem of what apparently was left unsaid in February is what clearly went undone since then. Frank and the Democratic leadership have explained that the shortfall on votes for a trans-inclusive ENDA only became clear when the "whip count" was done in late September. Members of Congress ask each other for their final calls on a vote only as floor consideration approaches.

But what about HRC? The fully inclusive version of ENDA had 171 co-sponsors, out of 218 needed for passage. Presumably the 171 were solid - that is, even if opponents tried an amendment to force an up-or-down vote on the gender identity language alone, the co-sponsors would hold tight. It was the backbone of the 47 members who would have to be added to gain a House majority that everyone worried about in the event of mischief by those looking to kill ENDA.

But for a lobbying group as large as HRC, gauging the views of 47 or 50 or even 70 members of Congress shouldn't be out of its grip. How is it that on September 14, when Solmonese appeared before transgender activists and pledged his fidelity, he was unaware that the effort for a trans-inclusive measure was falling short by dozens and dozens of votes?

By contrast, in the 11 months from the time the New York high court ruled against the right to marriage for same-sex couples to when the State Assembly passed Governor Eliot Spitzer's marriage equality bill this past June, the Empire State Pride Agenda kept a running tally of those supporting the measure, updated continually and posted on its website. To be sure, its vote-counting led to tensions with Assembly Democrats leading the charge, but ESPA remained committed to knowing the score itself.

It is fair to ask why HRC did not have the same command of the ENDA count.

But is also appropriate to pose challenges both to those organizations who
stood against HRC on its ENDA strategy and to the community as a whole.

During the second week of October, as advocates for a fully-inclusive ENDA scrambled to salvage that approach to the bill, Matt Foreman of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force told Gay City News that his group and its allies were targeting roughly 65 House members considered key to turning the issue around - that is, mostly ones thought to be in need of shoring up on gender identity. He said that out of between 25 and 30 with whom they had already had substantive conversations, support for opposing anything but a trans-inclusive bill was running five to one.

But on November 7, only seven members of the House voted against ENDA because it lacked transgender protections. Asked to explain that, Mara Keisling of the National Center for Transgender Equality, which worked closely with the Task Force, said that was due to HRC's last-minute announcement that it was supporting Frank's version of ENDA and intended to penalize principled dissenters on its legislative scorecard.

That last day of HRC lobbying and a scorecard threat did not produce such a political sea change. The die was cast in late September when Frank felt comfortable telling the world he was moving forward the way he saw fit. For that, HRC alone is not responsible. The entire community failed.

We have simply not made the case for protecting transgendered Americans or for the corollary - that without gender identity and expression language, effeminate gay men and butch lesbians are also at risk.

Maybe at heart, that's because we are not yet convinced of it ourselves.
Look at the HRC poll; even if it's not a perfect measure-and the group could have done a heck of a lot better sales job when rolling it out - surely it gets it largely right. Challenging gender norms threatens many Americans.
It's a shame that it also threatens so many gay and lesbian Americans.

©GayCityNews 2007

HRC Pastoral Letter Debunked

TransGriot Note. HRC has been on a 'schmooze and confuse' charm offensive in the wake of the odious transgender-free ENDA vote last week trying to get back in the community's good graces. (good luck with that) This was a pastoral letter they sent out to GLBT ministers. A response to it came back from Reverend Paul Turner of Atlanta, GA who I had the pleasure of meeting at the 2004 SCC.

First, the letter from Harry Knox.

Dear Colleagues and Friends,

Now that the vote on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) has
taken place in the House, I want to write to all of you to reconfirm
our commitment in the Religion and Faith program toward educating
people across the country about transgender people, the particular
struggles they face, and why a fully inclusive ENDA is essential for
all of us. In the days ahead we will be talking with many of you as
we make our plans; we'll also want to know how we can help you with
your work on transgender issues.

I am writing today, however, to speak to the hurt, anger, and feelings
of betrayal many of you have felt as a result of the recent struggle
in our community around this bill. The last four weeks or so have
been among the most painful of my career as I have heard transgender
sisters and brothers I love express their hurt over being left out yet
again. I have agonized with many of you, my colleagues, over
strategic decisions that seemed to put us over against each other,
even as we leaned heavily on personal regard for each other and
commitment to the long term success of our whole LGBT community to get
us through.

At this point you know that HRC made a political calculation over what
we thought was the best position we should take moving forward. The
bill passed by the House yesterday is not the bill any of us wanted.
After a deep and painful process we made the decision to stay at the
table with Congress and support the non-inclusive ENDA legislation, HR
3685 in the House.

Our president, Joe Solmonese, has consistently stated our ultimate and
unequivocal commitment to a fully inclusive ENDA. Supporting HR 3685
was, in his mind, the best way toward getting a truly inclusive bill
passed as quickly as possible. I believe his sincerity and trust his
political instincts. In addition, I personally believe that we never
win by standing still. To not move forward at this point would have
set back our work in significant ways - our choice was between moving
forward and falling backward.

I believe that if members of Congress have a positive experience
voting for employment protection for gays, lesbians, and bisexuals and
getting re-elected in the process, they will be more likely to support
a fully inclusive bill in a year or two. However, if the bill had
died in committee or had been voted down on the floor, the negative
experiences of members of Congress would ensure that we would have
little chance of getting any bill to the table in the foreseeable future.

I also know that many of you disagree. As your colleague and friend,
I honor your feelings and respect your wisdom. That we have disagreed
over this strategic decision is painful for me and I hold in my heart
the pain it has caused you.

My hope and prayer is that you will see in the actions of the HRC
Religion and Faith Program the commitment to building support for a
truly inclusive ENDA that I have felt and seen in my colleagues here
at HRC over the last few weeks. There are about 60 districts
represented by members of Congress who were ready yesterday to support
protections for LGB folks, but not yet ready to do so for transgender
people. Sharon, Kyla, and I plan to make our commitment to justice
for transgender people manifest in our hard work to educate the people
of those districts and ultimately, the men and women who represent
them in Congress.

I don't ask that you put your hurt and pain behind you; those
experiences have a great deal to teach us about how we can move
forward. What I do hope is that our pain will not prevent us from
taking the necessary next steps together. All of us are precious in
God's eyes and all of us are necessary for the hard work ahead.

Please pray for me and all your colleagues at the Human Rights Campaign.

God bless you all,
Harry Knox, Director
Religion and Faith Program
Human Rights Campaign Foundation
1640 Rhode Island Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20036
202.716.1612 (cell)
harry.knox@... (hrc.org)

****


Reverend Turner's response

Dear Harry,

Nice try with this letter, but it does not wash.

The transgender are real flesh and blood people and are not HRC's bargaining chip.

<<"At this point you know that HRC made a political calculation over
what we thought was the best position we should take moving forward.">>

There is no going forward if everyone is not with us.

This is not Animal Farm where "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal then others"!

HRC has made a horrible and tragic miscalculation...a poll of 500 people does not speak for the entire LGBTQ community.

HRC sold it's sisters and brothers down the river for a bill they knew was not going to pass or have a chance in hell of becoming law.

When a house is on fire you don't stand outside and decide whom you are going to rescue, the attempt is made for all.

If the hypocrites in congress didn't want transgender people in the bill, then they should have been forced to make an amendment to take it out from the floor...not have HRC bargaining and agreeing that a part of our community was expendable and could simply wait for another day.

By removing Transgender people from the bill y'all sent a clear message to everyone concerned that the transgender community is somehow not on equal footing with the rest of the community.

This was wrong and you my friend know it. Pastorally speaking you and the rest of HRC chose to be the Esther who didn't bother to go before the King. Shame on you. I wonder how many Transgender people will die because even HRC thinks they are not worthy of protection? This was a time for leadership, guts and courage.

Y'all said it couldn't get through with Trans as apart of it, that it would have lost...well my friend you may have won the battle but HRC may have cost themselves far more then they think.

I cannot express how sad and disappointed I am in you...as a pastor you should know that God's people are not expendable at any price!

So your attempt to "explain" to "sooth", to "justify" this despicable act on the part of HRC falls far short.

I am no longer a supporter of HRC, nor will I honor their name or pass on their e-mail with their weekly calls for money. They will not again receive one dime of my money or the church's and I will certainly encourage folks to find other organizations to give to other then HRC. I do believe there are organizations out there that still understand the meaning of community and that without all the hard work of the Trans community we would be nothing.

I know this doesn't mean a hell of lot to you, as I am not one of the high profile pastor's that you run with these days, nor is our church all that important to you or HRC, but you have lost my support and more importantly my respect.

I am of a mind to call for a boycott of the HRC dinner in Atlanta as well as any other HRC events in this city that seek our hard earned money. I might be persuaded to change my mind providing HRC admits their mistake and makes amends with the transgender community...but hey you and I both know that is not going to happen.

It is truly a sad day.

Reverend Paul M. Turner
Sr. Pastor
http://www.gentlespirit.org

Sign Of The Apocalypse-Me and Rush Agree

TransGriot note: I never thought I see the day when Rush Limbaugh and I actually see eye to eye on something. Here's a transcript from OxyContinin Man's November 8 show about the ENDA mess.


Democrats Shaft Transgenders

RUSH: By the way, this next stuff is great. Let me preface it by giving you a little story here of what's going on out in San Francisco. "National civil rights organizations are celebrating the passage by the House of legislation that would add 'sexual orientation' to a list of federally protected classes, but some San Francisco groups refuse to take part in the party." They're not happy about it.

They are the transgender and transsexuals, and they're at the back of the bus on this civil rights issue. "The vote Wednesday on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, also known as ENDA...was ultimately revised to remove protection for transgender workers, which upset gay rights groups here and across the country.

'People are livid,' said John Newsome, co-founder of And Castro for All, a bias awareness group. 'If the first step out of the gate leaves people behind, it is an ill-conceived first step.'" Barney Frank was getting tarred and feathered over this, and he told the transgenders and the transsexuals (paraphrased), "Just take your time. You're going to screw up this whole thing. We'll get this done in steps," but they're not listening. They're not happy. Here's John Lewis, who marched with Dr. King and got beat upside the head several times in the Selma march and so forth, late yesterday on the floor of the House of Representatives.


LEWIS: I, for one, fought too long and too hard to end discrimination based on race and color, not to stand up against discrimination against our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters. During the 1960s, we broke down those signs that said "white" and "colored." Call it what you mean, to discriminate against someone because they are gay, is wrong, it is wrong! It is not right. Today we have an opportunity to bring down those signs! Now is the time to do what is right, what is fair, what is just! The time is always right to do right. Let us pass this bill.

RUSH: And next up, Barney Frank, a portion of his remarks.


FRANK: I feel an obligation to 15-year-olds dreading to go to school because of the torments, to people afraid they'll lose their job in a gas station if someone finds out who they are. I feel an obligation to use the status I have been lucky enough to get to help them, and I want to ask my colleagues here, Mr. Speaker, on a personal basis, "Please, don't fall for this sham. Don't send me out of here having failed to help those people." Yeah, this is personal. There are people who are your fellow citizens being discriminated against. We have a simple bill that says, "You can go to work and be judged on how you work, and not be penalized." Please don't turn your back on them. (applause)

RUSH: Yup. San Francisco values have to be brought to the House of Representatives here, and guess who the speaker is? Speaker is Nancy Pelosi.


PELOSI: It's not that we're tolerant in my district in California and San Francisco. It's that we have so much respect for the role that each person plays in our society. So tolerance, maybe. Respect, definitely. But let me also add, that it is the pride that we take in that diversity, and it is the pride that I take in the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community that brings me to the floor today to urge a "yes" vote on this important legislation.

RUSH: But it left out the transgenders! It left out the transsexuals, and they're casting this as a civil rights issue. The transgenders and transsexuals were told by the House of Representatives to go to the back of the bus. That's what your House of Representatives was doing yesterday, ladies and gentlemen.

In Need of Statesmen (and Stateswomen too!)

By Cornel West
From the Covenant With Black America Blog
April 25, 2007

We are facing a crisis in the quality of leadership in our country. Our people and our country need more statesmen (and stateswomen), as statesmanship is qualitatively different than the garden-variety leadership that we’re experiencing.

Statesmen take seriously the ability to be themselves, as opposed to the many spinsters who are willing to pose and poster, to pander to a particular group, rather than be real. Opportunism is pervasive and has left us with just a few folk who will not allow themselves to be grinded up by a mechanical formulaic structure. There are some who are shaping the climate of opinion; they’re our thermostats and not thermometers. They’re not satisfied with simply recording, but shaping the dialogue. Our brothers and sisters who are engaged in that kind of education elevate the citizenry of this country.

The continuing challenge at hand for statesmen and stateswomen is to operate above the political fray, to preserve their integrity. True statesmanship is rooted in the hopes and aspirations of the people, and is also informed by the voices of the people.

Throughout our history, ordinary people who believed enough in themselves to try to transform the cynicism and the threat to statesmanship have been the crux of social movements. As a people, we are capable of producing great social change. Look within and you will realize that YOU are the leaders you’re looking for.

So, how many statesmen and stateswomen are in the house?

—Cornel West

Christine's Rebuttal to A Reader

Some of you may have heard about longtime LA Times sportswriter and syndicated columnist Mike Penner's April 26 announcement that he was beginning his transition to become Christine Daniels.

Christine is still working at the Times and is now maintaining a blog on her transition called 'Woman In Progress'. She recently had a christobigot write in and here was her response.

---------------------
Email from the edge

Now that I've changed my email address, I'd like to address my email.

Or, rather, one email in particular.

Ninety-nine- point-and- then-some percent of the messages I have received in the last week, my first week out as Christine, have been supportive, sympathetic, encouraging, understanding, touching, and moving-- basically, the most overwhelmingly pleasant shock of my life. I would like to individually thank everyone who has written, but if I did, I'd get even less sleep than I did before my concerned psychiatrist wrote me up a prescription for a sleeping aid on Tuesday.

I never expected anything close to this sort of response.

In fact, on the eve of my coming-out column's publication, I feared I would be hit with more of the kind of email Mike from Rancho Santa Margarita lobbed my way a couple days ago.

From Mike:

"I have long considered the Times' sports page to be the best in the state, if not the nation. However, I am appalled and disgusted at your column on Thursday, April 26. To say that humans are 'wired' that way is just denying absolute truth. I know that in today's secular progressive society, we're taught to 'accept' everyone, but this is going beyond acceptance. We are being asked to accept something that is morally repulsive. In no way is this anywhere near normal human behavior.
I have prayed for you, and will continue to do so. I have always admired your writing, but I will no longer read any article written by you. I am by no means advocating your firing. Instead, I felt it necessary to make you aware that your actions are Biblically unacceptable. "

Dear Mike,

I don't know what Bible you're using, but you might want to check the pull-date on that one. My Bible is the same one used by my pastor, who has counseled me throughout the early stages of my transition, helping me to stay on track and continue moving forward, because that is the plan God has s for me.

My transition has rekindled my spirituality, I am happy to say.

Often, too much focus gets placed on the physical changes brought about by a transsexual's transition -- through hormones, electrolysis and surgery. More than anything, my transition has been a spiritual journey, soul-searching and intense introspection accompanying every step of the way.

Why is my soul filled with so much feminine energy?

Why was I given such an agonizing burden to carry?

Did God simply decide it was time to draft a high-profile journalist with communication skills and a powerful platform for the task of spreading the message of transgender tolerance and acceptance_ a message that was long and painfully overdue?

Who can say? I do know this: God loves transgender people. He created transgender people. In some cultures - the world does not begin and end at U.S. borders, despite what our current administration thinks _transgender people are considered closer to God. They are revered as "two spirited" by these cultures, who often turn to transgender people as their spiritual healers and shamen.

I attend church every week. My church and clergy are more than supportive of my transition. In fact, they have encouraged it.

My pastor has told me repeatedly, "Christine, God created you the way you are. He made you a special person. He put you on this journey for a reason. By completing your journey and becoming the person God intended you to be, you are honoring Him."

Secure in my spirituality,
Christine
May 04, 2007

Copyright Los Angeles Times

Say It Loud: I'm Elite And Proud!

Why is the country run by people who celebrate mediocrity and recruit from Pat Robertson's law school? Because the right-wing crusade to demonize elites has succeeded.

By Bill Maher
From Salon.com

Say it loud: I'm elite and proud! The right-wing crusade to demonize elites has paid off. Now the country's run by incompetents who make mediocrity a job requirement and recruit from Pat Robertson's law school. New rule: Now that liberals have taken back the word liberal, they also have to take back the word "elite." By now you've heard the constant right-wing attacks on the "elite," or as it's otherwise known, "hating." They've had it up to their red necks with the "elite media." The "liberal elite." Who may or may not be part of the "Washington elite." A subset of the "East Coast elite." Which is influenced by "the Hollywood elite." So basically, unless you're a shitkicker from Kansas, you're with the terrorists. If you played a drinking game in which you did a shot every time Rush Limbaugh attacked someone for being "elite" you'd almost be as wasted as Rush Limbaugh.

I don't get it: In other fields -- outside of government -- elite is a good thing, like an elite fighting force. Tiger Woods is an elite golfer. If I need brain surgery, I'd like an elite doctor. But in politics, elite is bad -- the elite aren't down-to-earth and accessible like you and me and President Shit-for-Brains. But when the anti-elite crowd demonizes the elite, what they're actually doing is embracing incompetence. Now, I know what you're thinking: That doesn't sound like our president -- ignoring intelligence.

You know how whenever there's a major Bush administration scandal it always traces back to some incompetent political hack appointment and you think to yourself, "Where are they getting these screw-ups from?" Well, now we know: from Pat Robertson. I wish I were kidding, but I'm not. Take Monica Goodling, who before she resigned last week because of the U.S. attorneys scandal, was the third most powerful official in the Justice Department of the United States. Thirty-three, and though she had never even worked as a prosecutor, she was tasked with overseeing the job performance of all 95 U.S. attorneys. How do you get to be such a top dog at 33? By acing Harvard, or winning scholarship prizes? No, Goodling did her undergraduate work at Messiah College -- home of the "Fighting Christies," who wait-listed me, the bastards -- and then went on to attend Pat Robertson's law school.

I'm not kidding, Pat Robertson, the man who said gay people at DisneyWorld would cause "earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor," has a law school. It's called Regent. Regent University School of Law, and it shares a campus with Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network studios. It's the first time ever that a TV network spun off a law school. And that's all America needs -- more Christians and more lawyers. You see, years ago Pat became concerned that our legal system was coddling criminals, forgiving them instead of meting out that Old Testament "eye for an eye" justice Jesus Christ never shuts up about. So Pat did what any red-blooded, Hindu-hating, gay-baiting, glue-sniffing Christian would do: He started his own law school. And what kid wouldn't want to attend? It's three years and you only have to read one book. The school says its mission is to create an army of evangelical lawyers, integrating the Bible and public policy, and producing graduates that provide "Christian leadership to change the world." Presumably from round back to flat.

U.S. News and World Report, which does the definitive ranking of colleges, lists Regent as a tier-four school, which is the lowest score it gives. It's not a hard school to get into. You have to renounce Satan and draw a pirate on a matchbook. This is for the people who couldn't get into the University of Phoenix.


But there's more! As there inevitably is with the Bush administration. Turns out she's not the only one. Since 2001, 150 graduates of Regent University have been hired by the Bush administration. And people wonder why things are so screwed up. Hell, we probably invaded Iraq because one of these clowns read the map wrong. Forget religion for a second, we're talking about a top Justice Department official who went to a college founded by a TV host. Would you send your daughter to Maury Povich University? And if you did, would you expect her to get a job at the White House? I'd be surprised if she got a job on the "Maury" show. And then it hit me: This is why Bush scandals never catch on with the public -- they're all evangelicals of course, and nobody is having sex.

So there you have it: It turns out that the Justice Department is entirely staffed with Jesus freaks from a televangelist diploma mill in Virginia Beach. Most of them young women with very little knowledge of the law, but a very strong sense of doing what they're told. Like the Manson family, but with cleaner hair. In 200 years we've gone from "We the people" to "Up with people." From the best and brightest to dumb and dumber. And, come on, America is a big, well-known, first-rate country, and when we're looking for people to help run it, we should aim higher than the girl who answers the phone at the fake abortion clinic. It's not just that this president has surrounded himself with a Texas echo chamber of war criminals and religious fanatics. It's that they're sooooo mediocre. This is America. We should be getting robbed and fucked over by the best.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) asked at a hearing, "Should we be concerned with the experience level of the people who are making these highly significant decisions?" But in the Bush administration experience doesn't matter. All that matters is loyalty to Bush and Jesus, in that order. And where better to find people dumb enough to believe in George W. Bush than Pat Robertson's law school. The problem here in America isn't that the country is being run by elites. It's that it's being run by a bunch of hayseeds. And by the way, the lawyer Monica Goodling just hired to keep her ass out of jail went to a real law school.

Bill Maher is the host of HBO's Real Time With Bill Maher.