A victory for the planet, a victory for us all!
Who knows which forces were behind this, but good for you, Gov. Crist!
Read about it in today's NYT.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Be Scared. Be Very, Very Scared.
Lynne Spears must be so proud! She's a grandmother for the third time. Mazel Tov!
White Picket Fences
An interesting dilemma to consider on this fine Thursday morning.
Slate has written an article about how homosexuals have fought to prove their orientation was not a choice, and science has corroborated their claims. But now... well, they said it better than I can. Here's a chunk:
A new study, published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, hints at what's coming. Previous gay-brain studies focused on structures or responses that might have been shaped by social interactions. To screen out social factors, authors of the new study relied on brain scans rather than behavioral responses, and they targeted structures known to form during or shortly after gestation...
The sample consisted of 25 straight men, 25 straight women, 20 gay men, and 20 lesbians. In overall symmetry and amygdala activity, the brains of gay men resembled the brains of straight women, whereas the brains of lesbians resembled the brains of straight men... The broader implication, one expert argues, is that "in gay men, the brain is feminized."
Are the differences genetic? Not likely. "As to the genetic factors, the current view is that they may play a role in male homosexuality, but they seem to be insignificant for female homosexuality," the authors conclude. "Genetic factors, therefore, appear less probable as the major common denominator for all group differences observed here."
So, what's the common factor? If the study's design rules out learned influences, and if the results in women rule out genetics, that leaves what the authors call "hormonal influences" or noncognitive differences in the infant environment. According to the Guardian, the same research team has "begun another study to investigate brain symmetry in newborn babies, to see if it can be used to predict their future sexual orientation." If it can, that will scratch postnatal factors off the list, and the search will narrow to hormones in the womb. Already, the authors point to evidence that homosexuality may be caused by "under-exposure to prenatal androgens" in males and "over-exposure" in females.
Where science leads, technology follows. Two years ago, scientists in Oregon reported an attempt to "interfere with defeminization of adult sexual partner preferences" in sheep. Their method, as they described it, was to alter hormonal inputs in pregnant ewes "during the period of gestation when the sheep brain is maximally sensitive to the behavior-modifying effects of exogenous testosterone." When the attempt failed, they concluded that the dosage should be increased.
Would hormonal intervention work in humans? Should we try it? Some thinkers are intrigued. Last year, the Rev. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote: "If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then developed, and if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual orientation to heterosexual is ever developed, we would support its use." Mohler told the Associated Press that morally, this would be no different from curing fetal blindness or any other "medical problem." The Rev. Joseph Fessio, editor of the press that publishes the pope's work, agreed: "Same-sex activity is considered disordered. If there are ways of detecting diseases or disorders of children in the womb … that respected the dignity of the child and mother, it would be a wonderful advancement of science."
If the idea of chemically suppressing homosexuality in the womb horrifies you, I have bad news: You won't be in the room when it happens. Parents control medical decisions, and surveys indicate that the vast majority of them would be upset to learn that their child was gay. Already, millions are screening embryos and fetuses to eliminate those of the "wrong" sex. Do you think they won't screen for the "wrong" sexual orientation, too?"
Let's digest this, let's be very honest, and very frank.
I was raised by a mother who told us that if she had become pregnant with a seriously disabled child, she would probably have aborted it. I remember discussing the issue when a Catholic family friend refused tests during her pregnancy to check for such "defects" because abortion was out of the question; she was going to have the baby God gave to her.
A mother has every right to determine that she doesn't want to have a child that is disabled, mentally retarded, etc. I am sure there are people who think I'm rather disgusting for holding those views, and they may not be wrong, but I firmly believe in a woman's right to determine the fate of her body and the fate of any child she chooses to bring into this world.
Therefore, I have to accept that some women view homosexuality as an illness, a disease, a disability, and if they can conduct tests to determine the probable sexual orientation of a fetus, and a woman doesn't want to bring that child into the world, she should have that right.
Things get tricky, though, when we start to futz with the baby itself. I've certainly heard of in vitro surgeries performed on fetuses still in the womb, to correct a weak heart, a spinal issue, etc. But how are we to feel about correcting or choosing other characteristics, like gender, sexual orientation?
I think it's safe to say every good parent hopes their child has a life with the fewest obstacles and hardships in their path, and despite great gains for equality, being gay is certainly not something a parent wishes on his child... so should they be able to wish it away?
Should we be able to make sure Billy is good at baseball, so he won't be picked last in gym class? Or good at standardized tests, so he succeeds on his SAT's? Or attractive, so he isn't rejected? Or that he won't have bad acne? Or that he won't have diabetes? Or prostate cancer?
It's really tough to try and parse out what choices are kind and protective, and what choices are just, well, creepy. Designer babies? Is this the future? I mean, yes, it's the future, but how far is too far?
Ultimately, each parent must set her own limits, and people who view homosexuality as a disability will be able to alter their children (for the better). I don't have the ability to bring a child into the world, I don't have to carry it in my womb for nine months, so I don't feel comfortable imposing my own views when I don't have to live with the consequences.
But I offer some thoughts-- not spouted with vitriol-- merely presented for a continued dialogue on this most important topic.
If there's a biological/sociological function gay people fill, how will our society suffer if we weed out our gay brethren? There was an article in New York magazine a year or so ago explaining how in many native cultures with big families, gay sons are often born last, and often help their sisters take care of their children while tending to their elderly parents.
For an already small and marginalized culture, if we decrease the number of gay children, how will that impact the gay kids whose parents didn't alter them? What will their lives be like? They didn't chose to be gay, but their parents chose to keep them that way. What will that mean, for them, and for all of us, if some of our parents made us "perfect" and some of our parents knowingly kept us imperfect?
What would our bookshelves look like, our runways, our theatres, our galleries, our piano scores, without the product of gay artists?
And perhaps most depressing, consider the terribly interesting people we will never get to know because their parents were trying to protect them from a tougher life.
Tough is good. It makes us stronger.
Our greatest selves emerge from the battles that test our limits and nearly break us, but don't.
Remove those fighters from the fight, humanity loses a bit of its luster.
Slate has written an article about how homosexuals have fought to prove their orientation was not a choice, and science has corroborated their claims. But now... well, they said it better than I can. Here's a chunk:
A new study, published Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, hints at what's coming. Previous gay-brain studies focused on structures or responses that might have been shaped by social interactions. To screen out social factors, authors of the new study relied on brain scans rather than behavioral responses, and they targeted structures known to form during or shortly after gestation...
The sample consisted of 25 straight men, 25 straight women, 20 gay men, and 20 lesbians. In overall symmetry and amygdala activity, the brains of gay men resembled the brains of straight women, whereas the brains of lesbians resembled the brains of straight men... The broader implication, one expert argues, is that "in gay men, the brain is feminized."
Are the differences genetic? Not likely. "As to the genetic factors, the current view is that they may play a role in male homosexuality, but they seem to be insignificant for female homosexuality," the authors conclude. "Genetic factors, therefore, appear less probable as the major common denominator for all group differences observed here."
So, what's the common factor? If the study's design rules out learned influences, and if the results in women rule out genetics, that leaves what the authors call "hormonal influences" or noncognitive differences in the infant environment. According to the Guardian, the same research team has "begun another study to investigate brain symmetry in newborn babies, to see if it can be used to predict their future sexual orientation." If it can, that will scratch postnatal factors off the list, and the search will narrow to hormones in the womb. Already, the authors point to evidence that homosexuality may be caused by "under-exposure to prenatal androgens" in males and "over-exposure" in females.
Where science leads, technology follows. Two years ago, scientists in Oregon reported an attempt to "interfere with defeminization of adult sexual partner preferences" in sheep. Their method, as they described it, was to alter hormonal inputs in pregnant ewes "during the period of gestation when the sheep brain is maximally sensitive to the behavior-modifying effects of exogenous testosterone." When the attempt failed, they concluded that the dosage should be increased.
Would hormonal intervention work in humans? Should we try it? Some thinkers are intrigued. Last year, the Rev. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote: "If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then developed, and if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual orientation to heterosexual is ever developed, we would support its use." Mohler told the Associated Press that morally, this would be no different from curing fetal blindness or any other "medical problem." The Rev. Joseph Fessio, editor of the press that publishes the pope's work, agreed: "Same-sex activity is considered disordered. If there are ways of detecting diseases or disorders of children in the womb … that respected the dignity of the child and mother, it would be a wonderful advancement of science."
If the idea of chemically suppressing homosexuality in the womb horrifies you, I have bad news: You won't be in the room when it happens. Parents control medical decisions, and surveys indicate that the vast majority of them would be upset to learn that their child was gay. Already, millions are screening embryos and fetuses to eliminate those of the "wrong" sex. Do you think they won't screen for the "wrong" sexual orientation, too?"
Let's digest this, let's be very honest, and very frank.
I was raised by a mother who told us that if she had become pregnant with a seriously disabled child, she would probably have aborted it. I remember discussing the issue when a Catholic family friend refused tests during her pregnancy to check for such "defects" because abortion was out of the question; she was going to have the baby God gave to her.
A mother has every right to determine that she doesn't want to have a child that is disabled, mentally retarded, etc. I am sure there are people who think I'm rather disgusting for holding those views, and they may not be wrong, but I firmly believe in a woman's right to determine the fate of her body and the fate of any child she chooses to bring into this world.
Therefore, I have to accept that some women view homosexuality as an illness, a disease, a disability, and if they can conduct tests to determine the probable sexual orientation of a fetus, and a woman doesn't want to bring that child into the world, she should have that right.
Things get tricky, though, when we start to futz with the baby itself. I've certainly heard of in vitro surgeries performed on fetuses still in the womb, to correct a weak heart, a spinal issue, etc. But how are we to feel about correcting or choosing other characteristics, like gender, sexual orientation?
I think it's safe to say every good parent hopes their child has a life with the fewest obstacles and hardships in their path, and despite great gains for equality, being gay is certainly not something a parent wishes on his child... so should they be able to wish it away?
Should we be able to make sure Billy is good at baseball, so he won't be picked last in gym class? Or good at standardized tests, so he succeeds on his SAT's? Or attractive, so he isn't rejected? Or that he won't have bad acne? Or that he won't have diabetes? Or prostate cancer?
It's really tough to try and parse out what choices are kind and protective, and what choices are just, well, creepy. Designer babies? Is this the future? I mean, yes, it's the future, but how far is too far?
Ultimately, each parent must set her own limits, and people who view homosexuality as a disability will be able to alter their children (for the better). I don't have the ability to bring a child into the world, I don't have to carry it in my womb for nine months, so I don't feel comfortable imposing my own views when I don't have to live with the consequences.
But I offer some thoughts-- not spouted with vitriol-- merely presented for a continued dialogue on this most important topic.
If there's a biological/sociological function gay people fill, how will our society suffer if we weed out our gay brethren? There was an article in New York magazine a year or so ago explaining how in many native cultures with big families, gay sons are often born last, and often help their sisters take care of their children while tending to their elderly parents.
For an already small and marginalized culture, if we decrease the number of gay children, how will that impact the gay kids whose parents didn't alter them? What will their lives be like? They didn't chose to be gay, but their parents chose to keep them that way. What will that mean, for them, and for all of us, if some of our parents made us "perfect" and some of our parents knowingly kept us imperfect?
What would our bookshelves look like, our runways, our theatres, our galleries, our piano scores, without the product of gay artists?
And perhaps most depressing, consider the terribly interesting people we will never get to know because their parents were trying to protect them from a tougher life.
Tough is good. It makes us stronger.
Our greatest selves emerge from the battles that test our limits and nearly break us, but don't.
Remove those fighters from the fight, humanity loses a bit of its luster.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
I Now Pronounce You, Husband And Husband
If you are a gay boy born in California today, you can grow up dreaming of the day when you will hear those magical marriage words.
That is, if you can find someone to marry you. Good luck with that. Ugh.
Read more here.
That is, if you can find someone to marry you. Good luck with that. Ugh.
Read more here.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Here She Is, Miss America (Part II)
Please meet our 10 Republican semi-finalists for our first ever Senate Beauty Pageant! (And don't forget to vote for your favorites)!!
Miss Alaska- Lisa Murkowski
This 51-year old native beauty from our nation's northernmost state enjoys spending time with her husband, Verne, and their two sons, Nic and Matt. After Daddy gave up his Senate seat to take over Alaska's governorship, he appointed Daddy's little girl to the Senate, but she's since won re-election on her own! You go, girl! Lisa loves to ski, fish and camp in the wilds of Alaska, and has two really cute puppies.
Platform Issue: National Arts & Crafts Program
Talent: Spin-Art
Mr. Florida- Mel Martinez
Born in Cuba and brough to Florida as a teen, this tall, 61 year old Latin lover tore it up in college at Florida State University, where he was a proud Alpha Tau Omega. Now he enjoys spending time with his wife- a true blonde bombshell- and airing ads against his opponents who support hate crimes legislation by referring to them as, "darling(s) of homosexual extremists." Good sense of humor, this one.
Platform Issue: Free Hair Coloring for Greying Men
Talent: Flute
Mr. Louisiana- David Vitter
This statuesque brunette is more than a pretty face-- he's a Rhodes Scholar, and knows how to have fun, too! Triple threat! 47-year old David seems to have weathered the storm when stories of his trysts (in diapers) with D.C. prostitutes surfaced last year, despite the fact that during the Lewinsky scandal, Vitter's wife said, "I'm a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary. If he [Vitter] does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony trust me."
Mrs. Vitter- don't do it! Yes, he's a bad boy, but look at that face-- soooo cute!
Platform: Affordable Diapers
Talent: Playing Baseball Without a Cup
Miss Maine- Olympia Snowe
At 61, this Greek Orthodox is one stunning brunette! Born in Augusta, Maine, this survivor was orphaned by the age of 9 when her mother died of cancer and her father of a heart attack. She was raised by her Uncle... until he died, too. And her first husband was tragically killed in a car accident when she was just 26 years old. But don't let her tragic past fool you- this broad hangs tough in the Senate's Gang of 14.
Platform Issue: Skunk Extermination
Talent: Basket Weaving
Mr. Minnesota- Norm Coleman
Don't let first impressions fool you. At 58, Norm may look chipper and sweet, but he has a wild streak just like any other true-red bad boy. His wife is model Laurie Coleman, who as recently as 2004 posed for "boudoir" photos in the Washington Post, he spent his 20th birthday partying at Woodstock, and in high school, he ran for student council by claiming, "these conservative kids don't fuck or get high like we do." Yes, my friends, he was once a liberal. If that's not wild, I don't know what is.
Platform: National Holiday: Make Wednesdays Cuddle Day!
Talent: Silent But Deadlies
Mr. Nebraska- Chuck Hagel
This attractive 61 year old Purple Hearted Vietnam War Vet put himself through college working as a bartender. Well, Chuck, you can tend bar for me any day! With a mop of graying hair and those sunken, almond-shaped eyes, Hagel's dream-boy face won't be visible much longer on the Senate floor- after 2 terms, he's retiring. Although he's an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, this married father of two isn't always so serious: in Halloweens past, he's dressed up as Joe Biden, Colin Powell & John McCain.
Platform: Clean Fingernails
Talent: Kazoo
Mr. Oregon- Gordon Smith
Perhaps this 56 year old Oregonian Mormon wears a toupee, but who cares-- with his warm smile and elegant features, this Brigham Young alum is a keeper. A moderate, Gordo favors a quick withdrawl from Iraq, and has even been lauded by the HRC for his pro-gay stance on certain issues. When his son committed suicide in 2003, he wrote a book about it and helped secure funding for suicide prevention programs at colleges across the country.
A caffeine-free Mormon with a heart of gold? You don't find that every day.
Platform: Puppies
Talent: Flossing
Mr. South Dakota- John Thune
He's young (47) he's hung (we presume) and he's hot as hell. He can play with the big boys-- after all, he ousted former minority leader Tom Daschle, but this corn-fed, native South Dakotan has a sweet side, too; he supports the war in Iraq because, "liberating Iraq from decades of tyranny and dictatorship, bringing about political freedom, will create an atmosphere of where religious freedom will come to Iraq. And that opens the door, obviously, for the Christian faith there as well." That said, he did name his daughters Brittany and Larissa-- see you at the Black Hills Strip Club! And if that weren't enough to get your goat, how about this: He's the Chief Deputy Whip. Mr. Thune, you can whip me any time you like!
Platform: Cheaper Leather Goods
Talent: Rubs His Stomach While Balanced on One Foot and Patting His Head
Mr. Tennessee- Bob Corker
Ms. Texas- Kay Bailey Hutchison
All I can say is, Damn!!! Girl looks good for 64! This Pi Beta Phi sorority cheerleader from UT-Austin has still got it-- the gams, the gums and those killer light brown eyes. But she's not all goody-goody. She received more money from Big Oil than any other congressman or woman, and got a rating of zero (0) from the League of Conservation Voters, so watch out: this bad girl ain't no Erin Brokovich. She's that other woman, the one who Julia Roberts tells, we brought that water in fresh for you folks from Hinckley. Remember her? Maybe not. But you'll never forget Kay Bailey.
Platform: Saving The Trees... On Her Property
Talent: Cooks Seven-Course Meal with Oil (Not Olive Oil)
Miss Alaska- Lisa Murkowski
This 51-year old native beauty from our nation's northernmost state enjoys spending time with her husband, Verne, and their two sons, Nic and Matt. After Daddy gave up his Senate seat to take over Alaska's governorship, he appointed Daddy's little girl to the Senate, but she's since won re-election on her own! You go, girl! Lisa loves to ski, fish and camp in the wilds of Alaska, and has two really cute puppies.
Platform Issue: National Arts & Crafts Program
Talent: Spin-Art
Mr. Florida- Mel MartinezBorn in Cuba and brough to Florida as a teen, this tall, 61 year old Latin lover tore it up in college at Florida State University, where he was a proud Alpha Tau Omega. Now he enjoys spending time with his wife- a true blonde bombshell- and airing ads against his opponents who support hate crimes legislation by referring to them as, "darling(s) of homosexual extremists." Good sense of humor, this one.
Platform Issue: Free Hair Coloring for Greying Men
Talent: Flute
Mr. Louisiana- David VitterThis statuesque brunette is more than a pretty face-- he's a Rhodes Scholar, and knows how to have fun, too! Triple threat! 47-year old David seems to have weathered the storm when stories of his trysts (in diapers) with D.C. prostitutes surfaced last year, despite the fact that during the Lewinsky scandal, Vitter's wife said, "I'm a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary. If he [Vitter] does something like that, I'm walking away with one thing, and it's not alimony trust me."
Mrs. Vitter- don't do it! Yes, he's a bad boy, but look at that face-- soooo cute!
Platform: Affordable Diapers
Talent: Playing Baseball Without a Cup
Miss Maine- Olympia SnoweAt 61, this Greek Orthodox is one stunning brunette! Born in Augusta, Maine, this survivor was orphaned by the age of 9 when her mother died of cancer and her father of a heart attack. She was raised by her Uncle... until he died, too. And her first husband was tragically killed in a car accident when she was just 26 years old. But don't let her tragic past fool you- this broad hangs tough in the Senate's Gang of 14.
Platform Issue: Skunk Extermination
Talent: Basket Weaving
Mr. Minnesota- Norm ColemanDon't let first impressions fool you. At 58, Norm may look chipper and sweet, but he has a wild streak just like any other true-red bad boy. His wife is model Laurie Coleman, who as recently as 2004 posed for "boudoir" photos in the Washington Post, he spent his 20th birthday partying at Woodstock, and in high school, he ran for student council by claiming, "these conservative kids don't fuck or get high like we do." Yes, my friends, he was once a liberal. If that's not wild, I don't know what is.
Platform: National Holiday: Make Wednesdays Cuddle Day!
Talent: Silent But Deadlies
Mr. Nebraska- Chuck HagelThis attractive 61 year old Purple Hearted Vietnam War Vet put himself through college working as a bartender. Well, Chuck, you can tend bar for me any day! With a mop of graying hair and those sunken, almond-shaped eyes, Hagel's dream-boy face won't be visible much longer on the Senate floor- after 2 terms, he's retiring. Although he's an outspoken critic of the war in Iraq, this married father of two isn't always so serious: in Halloweens past, he's dressed up as Joe Biden, Colin Powell & John McCain.
Platform: Clean Fingernails
Talent: Kazoo
Mr. Oregon- Gordon SmithPerhaps this 56 year old Oregonian Mormon wears a toupee, but who cares-- with his warm smile and elegant features, this Brigham Young alum is a keeper. A moderate, Gordo favors a quick withdrawl from Iraq, and has even been lauded by the HRC for his pro-gay stance on certain issues. When his son committed suicide in 2003, he wrote a book about it and helped secure funding for suicide prevention programs at colleges across the country.
A caffeine-free Mormon with a heart of gold? You don't find that every day.
Platform: Puppies
Talent: Flossing
Mr. South Dakota- John ThuneHe's young (47) he's hung (we presume) and he's hot as hell. He can play with the big boys-- after all, he ousted former minority leader Tom Daschle, but this corn-fed, native South Dakotan has a sweet side, too; he supports the war in Iraq because, "liberating Iraq from decades of tyranny and dictatorship, bringing about political freedom, will create an atmosphere of where religious freedom will come to Iraq. And that opens the door, obviously, for the Christian faith there as well." That said, he did name his daughters Brittany and Larissa-- see you at the Black Hills Strip Club! And if that weren't enough to get your goat, how about this: He's the Chief Deputy Whip. Mr. Thune, you can whip me any time you like!
Platform: Cheaper Leather Goods
Talent: Rubs His Stomach While Balanced on One Foot and Patting His Head
Mr. Tennessee- Bob CorkerHe may be the junior Senator from Tennessee, but there's nothing junior about this stud! This 55 year old Sigma Chi was on the other end of the infamous Playboy party "Harold, call me" ads that knocked out his 2006 Democratic opponent, Harold Ford, Jr. (who, had he won, would surely have been competing in our Democratic pageant). But this Southern gent isn't always such a party pooper-- right before the election, photos surfaced on facebook of his hot young daughter making out with another girl. Cue sexy porn music... now!
Platform: Promoting Tolerance for Same-Sex Kissing (Which Does NOT Make you Gay).
Talent: Kissing People of the Same Sex.
Ms. Texas- Kay Bailey HutchisonAll I can say is, Damn!!! Girl looks good for 64! This Pi Beta Phi sorority cheerleader from UT-Austin has still got it-- the gams, the gums and those killer light brown eyes. But she's not all goody-goody. She received more money from Big Oil than any other congressman or woman, and got a rating of zero (0) from the League of Conservation Voters, so watch out: this bad girl ain't no Erin Brokovich. She's that other woman, the one who Julia Roberts tells, we brought that water in fresh for you folks from Hinckley. Remember her? Maybe not. But you'll never forget Kay Bailey.
Platform: Saving The Trees... On Her Property
Talent: Cooks Seven-Course Meal with Oil (Not Olive Oil)
Monday, June 9, 2008
Here She Is, Miss America (Part I)
The great story in this election year is not the fact that a black man or a white woman had a serious shot at the White House. It's the fact that a Senator is now certain to be our next President. And what's more, a sitting Senator will be President. Believe it or not, there are only two (count em, 2) instances in our nation's history when someone went directly from the Senate to the White House, and they both happened in the 20th century: Warren G. Harding, in 1921, and JFK in 1961. Since Kennedy, the only Senators to make it the White House were LBJ and Nixon, both of whom served as Vice-President prior to their takeover at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Yes, Kerry & Dole, you ran at the wrong time, my friends.
The executive office is about to get a President without executive experience, and that seems to be a-ok with the people Americana. But it does require that we give our humble body of ego-maniacal Senators the once-over. And I think the best way to do that is by holding a good old fashioned beauty pageant. That's right folks, a pageant. Get ready to send in your votes. We have 49 Republicans and 49 Democrats competing for the crown (lucky for us, neither of our sexy aging New England independents- Sens. Lieberman and Sanders- made the cut-off).
Tomorrow, we'll meet our 10 Republican semi-finalists, and then later in the week, we'll meet the Dems. This is open to members of all genders, ages, and parties (except you independents). The only criteria is that you're in the Senate, and you're cute.
I hope you boys and girls are practicing your baton twirling!
For the folks at home: get out your ballots and get ready to rock this vote.
The Ladies Who Lunch In The Senate
Currently, 16 women serve in the Senate, and after November, that number might just increase... to 17! Let's look at the 6 women running for the United States Senate.
In this corner, we have our one sure thing, Senator Susan Collins, the other female Republican Senator from the state of Maine. She first won a seat in 1996, and was re-elected in 2002. This isn't a great year for Republicans, but she's got a 10-point lead as of now. Stay tuned.
In this corner, we have our one sure thing, Senator Susan Collins, the other female Republican Senator from the state of Maine. She first won a seat in 1996, and was re-elected in 2002. This isn't a great year for Republicans, but she's got a 10-point lead as of now. Stay tuned.One state sure to send a woman to the Senate is North Carolina. Current Republican Elizabeth Dole
is running for re-election against Kay Hagan, a state Senator who defeated openly gay Jim Neal in the Democratic primary. The race is a statistical dead heat. Who knows how it will all play out with the presidential election-- bad year for Republicans hurts Dole, popular presidential candidate among Blacks also hurts Dole. The question will be how many inroads Obama can make in the state with white voters. Looks like Kay's just along for the ride of her life, on his coattails.
is running for re-election against Kay Hagan, a state Senator who defeated openly gay Jim Neal in the Democratic primary. The race is a statistical dead heat. Who knows how it will all play out with the presidential election-- bad year for Republicans hurts Dole, popular presidential candidate among Blacks also hurts Dole. The question will be how many inroads Obama can make in the state with white voters. Looks like Kay's just along for the ride of her life, on his coattails.The third female incumbent hoping to hold onto her seat is Louisiana Democrat Mary Landrieu. Sweet, sweet Mary's
never had it easy. Yes, Daddy was the mayor of New Orleans, and her brother is the Lt. Gov of the state, but because of the strange way Louisiana votes, one has to win a majority (50%+) of the state, and in both of Landrieu's elections, she's not captured enough on the first ballot to secure her seat. In 1996, after coming in 2nd place on the first ballot, she won on the 2nd by fewer than 6,000 votes. As the incumbent in 2002, she didn't have it much better, winning 46% of the vote on ballot 1, and then only holding onto her seat on ballot 2 by 4 percentage points. She barely leads her competitor, state Treasurer John N. Kennedy. With a large segment of the urban New Orleans community scattered throughout the country post-Katrina, Landrieu might have a hard time winning a 3rd election.
A possible Democratic upset might come in one of our nation's most independent states, New Hampshire. Jeanne Shaheen, the former Governor, is contesting Republican incumbent John Sununu, and recent polls put her ahead by as much as 8%. However, McCain is popular in the granite state, which bodes well for Sununu, and he beat Shaheen six years ago. But maybe the New Hampshire folks are ready for change? Paging Barack Obama...And finally, one woman who, sad to say, will never see the light of day in the United States Senate (at least, not as a Senator) is
Ms. Vivian Davis Figures, Democratic state Senator from Alabama. She is challenging incumbent Rep. Jeff Sessions, who was re-elected to a second term in 2002 by nearly 60%. Maybe Obama can win our nation, but forgetting the birds-eye view for a moment, a black female Democrat from Alabama ain't beating the incumbent white Republican guy. Think I'm wrong? Please see Denise Majette, Georgia 2004.Also, her bio on her website is ridiculous.
So in conclusion: 3 female seats up for grabs. NC definitely goes for a woman. ME probably holds onto its honey. If Mary can retain her seat, then we're still good at 16, and if Shaheen rides in on Obama's wave, we're up to 17.
Sorry, Viv. You're still out. And fix your bio.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Paging Peter Morgan
You know, the author of FROST/NIXON and THE QUEEN?
I think he needs to write a play about Clinton's one hour sit down meeting with Obama in the home of Senator Feinstein (who, it appears, served them water). What was said? How will history be shaped by these two titans facing off, chair to chair, in a room alone, with no cameras, no reporters, no posturing, not even secret servicemen.
My hunch? Hillary wanted to enlist Barack's help to pay off her debts. And maybe discuss how he'll help the black politicians who supported her. I doubt they went deep into a debate about the Vice-Presidency.
And I'm sorry, but Dianne Feinstein didn't just serve water. She's a bubbie! You know she said, "Wouldn't you like something to eat? Some cookies? Pretzles? Just something to nosh, nu?"
Whatever they discussed, I'd love to know what Peter Morgan imagines was said...
I think he needs to write a play about Clinton's one hour sit down meeting with Obama in the home of Senator Feinstein (who, it appears, served them water). What was said? How will history be shaped by these two titans facing off, chair to chair, in a room alone, with no cameras, no reporters, no posturing, not even secret servicemen.
My hunch? Hillary wanted to enlist Barack's help to pay off her debts. And maybe discuss how he'll help the black politicians who supported her. I doubt they went deep into a debate about the Vice-Presidency.
And I'm sorry, but Dianne Feinstein didn't just serve water. She's a bubbie! You know she said, "Wouldn't you like something to eat? Some cookies? Pretzles? Just something to nosh, nu?"
Whatever they discussed, I'd love to know what Peter Morgan imagines was said...
Thursday, June 5, 2008
The Numbers Game
Now we have our nominee, so lets look at our map and see what possibilities lie ahead...
Sure Things
Obama has the following states in the bag:
California (55), Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), Hawaii, Illinois, Oregon (7), Maine (4), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (12), New Jersey (15), New Hampshire (4), New York (31), Rhode Island, Vermont (3), Washington (11), Washington D.C. (3).
That gives him 194 votes.
New Jersey's the only one that might be a little tricky, but it's pretty reliably Dem. As long as NJ doesn't get lost in the shuffle, those are solidly blue.
I would argue that Michigan, Minnesota & Wisconson aren't seriously in play, either. They've all voted Dem in the last four presidential elections. Both senators and govs from WI and MI are Dem. Minnesota might be a little trickier, but they recently elected a Dem to the Senate, and Obama's midwestern machine should put him over the top.
That brings him up to 231.
A Look at the Little Guys
Everyone talks about the big boys, but as Obama's party nomination strategy proved, you don't have to win Ohio to win the ballgame.
Iowa voted for Bush in '04, but voted for a Dem in the 3 previous cycles, has a Dem Governor, a powerful former Dem Governor, and a Dem in the Senate. He picks that up and adds 7.
Though it's gone Republican in the last 3 presidential elections, Montana would seem red, but with a blue governor and 2 blue senators (incl. the recently elected Jon Tester), let's add their 3 votes to the tab.
In the southwest, New Mexico and Nevada were reliably blue during the Clinton years. Can Richardson deliver New Mexico? Can Harry Reid rally Nevada? Let's not count on both, but let's assume one comes thru. Add 5 more delegates.
We're up to 246.
The Big Boys
I firmly believe Florida is not in play. Even Bill didn't win it in '92. Charlie Crist took over for Jebbie, pumping some fresh Republican blood into the state, but Florida represents that rare anamoly where age works to McCain's advantage. The state was made for him.
Pennsylvania is a more realistic option for Obama. They ousted Santorum 2 years ago, Rendell is a popular Democratic governor, and the state's gone blue in the last 4 presidential elections. 21 for Obama.
267, baby.
So That Leaves Us
Just 3 delegates shy of the nomination. Obama can lose Ohio & Florida and still have plenty of options. He has to put into play some of the smaller, forgotten states-- sure, Virginia would be a coup (and if he adds Virginia to this tally, he's over the top)-- but if he pours his resources into places like New Mexico, Montana, and Iowa, and works hard to hold onto the Pennsylvania-Michigan base, he can really take this. Without Florida. Without Ohio. Really. Yes, really.
He Just Needs Those 3 Delegates, Which Will Come From...
There's talk that Colorado is in play-- that gives him 9. With the help of the divine Claire McCaskill, Missouri could add 11. Simply go after a Dakota, and the game is over.
But let's make this really easy. Let him lose Colorado. Lose West Virginia. Let's even take Iowa back from him. All he needs are 5 states, and he can do this. Use the big guns in Michigan and Pennsylvania. Use a big gun in Missouri, too. And then, go out West and duke it out in New Mexico & Montana.
That easy. Game over. He makes 271. (The 231 safe-bet figure, which includes Michigan, Wisconson and Minnesota, plus PA's 21, NM's 5, MT's 3 and MI's 11).
MICHIGAN. MINNESOTA. WISCONSON.
PENNSYLVANIA. MISSOURI. NEW MEXICO. MONTANA. (and don't forget new jersey!!)
Barack, put your money into those states, don't stress about Florida and Ohio, and then go pack your bags. You'll be moving to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Feel free to offer your own, more elegantly structured wins below.
You can play and make your own map on USA Today.
Read more at the Atlantic, Salon and Huffington Post.
Sure Things
Obama has the following states in the bag:
California (55), Connecticut (7), Delaware (3), Hawaii, Illinois, Oregon (7), Maine (4), Maryland (10), Massachusetts (12), New Jersey (15), New Hampshire (4), New York (31), Rhode Island, Vermont (3), Washington (11), Washington D.C. (3).
That gives him 194 votes.
New Jersey's the only one that might be a little tricky, but it's pretty reliably Dem. As long as NJ doesn't get lost in the shuffle, those are solidly blue.
I would argue that Michigan, Minnesota & Wisconson aren't seriously in play, either. They've all voted Dem in the last four presidential elections. Both senators and govs from WI and MI are Dem. Minnesota might be a little trickier, but they recently elected a Dem to the Senate, and Obama's midwestern machine should put him over the top.
That brings him up to 231.
A Look at the Little Guys
Everyone talks about the big boys, but as Obama's party nomination strategy proved, you don't have to win Ohio to win the ballgame.
Iowa voted for Bush in '04, but voted for a Dem in the 3 previous cycles, has a Dem Governor, a powerful former Dem Governor, and a Dem in the Senate. He picks that up and adds 7.
Though it's gone Republican in the last 3 presidential elections, Montana would seem red, but with a blue governor and 2 blue senators (incl. the recently elected Jon Tester), let's add their 3 votes to the tab.
In the southwest, New Mexico and Nevada were reliably blue during the Clinton years. Can Richardson deliver New Mexico? Can Harry Reid rally Nevada? Let's not count on both, but let's assume one comes thru. Add 5 more delegates.
We're up to 246.
The Big Boys
I firmly believe Florida is not in play. Even Bill didn't win it in '92. Charlie Crist took over for Jebbie, pumping some fresh Republican blood into the state, but Florida represents that rare anamoly where age works to McCain's advantage. The state was made for him.
Pennsylvania is a more realistic option for Obama. They ousted Santorum 2 years ago, Rendell is a popular Democratic governor, and the state's gone blue in the last 4 presidential elections. 21 for Obama.
267, baby.
So That Leaves Us
Just 3 delegates shy of the nomination. Obama can lose Ohio & Florida and still have plenty of options. He has to put into play some of the smaller, forgotten states-- sure, Virginia would be a coup (and if he adds Virginia to this tally, he's over the top)-- but if he pours his resources into places like New Mexico, Montana, and Iowa, and works hard to hold onto the Pennsylvania-Michigan base, he can really take this. Without Florida. Without Ohio. Really. Yes, really.
He Just Needs Those 3 Delegates, Which Will Come From...
There's talk that Colorado is in play-- that gives him 9. With the help of the divine Claire McCaskill, Missouri could add 11. Simply go after a Dakota, and the game is over.
But let's make this really easy. Let him lose Colorado. Lose West Virginia. Let's even take Iowa back from him. All he needs are 5 states, and he can do this. Use the big guns in Michigan and Pennsylvania. Use a big gun in Missouri, too. And then, go out West and duke it out in New Mexico & Montana.
That easy. Game over. He makes 271. (The 231 safe-bet figure, which includes Michigan, Wisconson and Minnesota, plus PA's 21, NM's 5, MT's 3 and MI's 11).
MICHIGAN. MINNESOTA. WISCONSON.
PENNSYLVANIA. MISSOURI. NEW MEXICO. MONTANA. (and don't forget new jersey!!)
Barack, put your money into those states, don't stress about Florida and Ohio, and then go pack your bags. You'll be moving to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Feel free to offer your own, more elegantly structured wins below.
You can play and make your own map on USA Today.
Read more at the Atlantic, Salon and Huffington Post.
When Old People Die, Pigs Will Fly
Maybe the USA Today has upped its liberal readership, but these numbers shocked me. According to their Gallup Poll, 63% of Americans now say the decision for a same-sex couple to marry should be private; in other words, the government ought to have no right to impose laws preventing same-sex marriage. That's kind of a shockingly high number.
And for people aged 18-29, well, 79% of them are in favor of gay marriage. As old people die, once-impossible dreams will come true...
And for people aged 18-29, well, 79% of them are in favor of gay marriage. As old people die, once-impossible dreams will come true...
There Are Worse Things I Could Do
Than go with a boy or two...
So went the famous words in Grease. But for Obama, there are few things worse he could do for his campaign than to ask Queen Clinton to join his ticket. After much speculation that he might offer her the spot, it's refreshing to see an article that says even the number two spot is slipping from her grasp. Thanks, WSJ!
So went the famous words in Grease. But for Obama, there are few things worse he could do for his campaign than to ask Queen Clinton to join his ticket. After much speculation that he might offer her the spot, it's refreshing to see an article that says even the number two spot is slipping from her grasp. Thanks, WSJ!
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)