What could slow down the GOP march toward authoritarianism?

An Associated Press article posted on Daily Kos reports that Biden has pardoned perhaps thousands of US service members who were convicted of consensual gay sex. These convictions came from the military’s criminalization of sodomy in 1951. In 2013 that law was rewritten to prohibit only forcible acts. The pardon allows former service members to recover lost pay and benefits (such as access to VA hospitals). Those now pardoned are able to apply to get proof their conviction has been erased. This is all good news! As great as the news is, those convicted of the same crime but under a different name, such as “indecency,” are not automatically included in the pardon. People with those convictions will need to request clemency which will be handled individually. Mark Sumner of Kos discussed the nasty guy’s criticism on electric vehicles. Yeah, we get that these complaints are a way to signal allegiance for the oil industry. But some of his complaints are quite strange. He has talked about EVs being able to go only 15 minutes between charging while diesel trucks can drive coast to coast without refueling (neither is true). That all EVs are made in China (news to Elon, perhaps he should say something?). That Army tanks need batteries so so big the tank needs to tow a wagon like a child (battery run tanks don’t exist, yet). Since all of these claims are obviously wrong and easily disproven one wonders why no one calls him on them. I’ve mentioned Project 2025 several times now. It’s a document close to a thousand pages long describing how the next Republican president can turn America into an authoritarian state. Joan McCarter of Kos wrote the authors are starting to enact it. The actions so far are to go through the backgrounds, social media accounts, and anything else they can look at of high-ranking civil servants of the Department of Homeland Security. Of course, the purpose of all this inspection is to determine which employees are loyal to the nasty guy. Government employees who are civil servants are not appointed by the president and are protected from politically motivated firings. That’s something the nasty guy wants to elimiate and tried to do during his first term. Once all the info is gathered the group intends to post 100 names to a website. And nothing good came come of that, even if the nasty guy never sets foot in the Oval Office again. The damage will come from the mistrust the list will create among the employees. For those who are loyal to the job and the country they will get threats from the MAGA hordes. And it will come when the list is posted, months ahead of the election. The nasty guy’s first attempt would have affected about 50,000 federal employees. A second attempt will affect far more. And will mean the federal government will stop functioning. Way back in 2021 I saved a tweet by Brian Klass. Yeah, almost three years later I’m looking at that tab. In the meantime Elon Musk bought Twitter and blocked my access to all but the first tweet of a thread. So I found it on Threadreader – with a whole bunch he’s written since. I would have simply closed the tab for something that old. But this one still resonates. Klass is an associate professor in Global Politics at UCL. He’s written a book and contributes articles to The Atlantic. In this thread from Sept. 21, 2021 he is pessimistic about American democracy because of one question: “What could slow down the GOP march toward authoritarianism?” Republicans who don’t bow down to the nasty guy are primaried with someone who will. Gerrymandering means in many places a Democrat has no chance. Because of social media nasty people like Marjorie Taylor Greene aren’t expelled, they’re treated as social media stars. Republicans who defend democracy are treated as pariahs. The Capitol attack didn’t break a the party, instead it became a loyalty litmus test.

The point is this: there are huge pressures pushing Republicans toward embracing authoritarian extremism. And here's the problem: there are no countervailing forces. There's nothing that rewards being a sober moderate who believes in democracy and tries to govern by consensus. ... Here's the bottom line: nobody has come up with a convincing explanation for how this authoritarian trend reverses itself. That's why, as someone who studies these dynamics for a living, I'm worried that the GOP is becoming irreversibly authoritarian. (Sorry to be depressing)

On November 22, 2021 Klass had a bit more to say on that subject.

When a despotic leader emerges in a democracy and captures a party, the party has two choices: push back hard and prioritize democracy, or re-make the party in the image of the would-be authoritarian. The GOP clearly chose the latter.

So how might we as a society get rid of the Republican authoritarianism? Alas, possible methods are implausible. There could be a massive voter rebuke. But so many states are so highly gerrymandered (and made more so before the 2022 election) many Republicans will win anyway. Media could call them out. But media polarization means Republicans don’t watch any source that might. A national crisis could be a jolt. And we had them – the Capitol attack and a pandemic. And they made no difference. All the incentives for zealots, like MTG, are for them to get worse. Incentives for moderates are to move further right or be primaried.

Democrats need to protect democracy, reform institutions to make them more robust, and understand that for the foreseeable future, their political rivals are authoritarian. They must therefore act accordingly.

They’ve done a bit of strengthening institutions, but not nearly enough.

Our history

I finished watching When We Rise, Dustin Lance Black’s eight-hour recreation of the LGBT civil rights struggles. I previous gave a summary of the Monday night episode here.

Wednesday night’s episode began in 1977.

I’ve heard of this kind of thing, but didn’t know gay men had adopted it. A gay man runs past, blowing loudly on a whistle. As he is cornered by men wanting to bash him many other gay men show up, including Cleve Jones. They threaten the attackers and bash their car. When police show up Cleve says something like, “We’d like you to give these men a ride in your car, like you used to do to us, though we actually have a reason.”

In 1977 Roma works to get the Women’s Building (no men’s room there) up and running. Cleve works to get Harvey Milk elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

At the same time Anita Bryant is a major force in overturning an LGBT protections law in Miami, prompting the overturn of similar laws in a couple other cities. That fight comes to California in the form of the Briggs Amendment, which said anyone doing any kind of advocacy for homosexuality could be fired from a teaching job. This included straight people advocating for LGBT people. Cleve and Roma unite their teams to campaign against and defeat Briggs, the first time that kind of law had been blocked.

Diane becomes pregnant with donated sperm and wants to raise the baby with Roma. It takes Roma a while to accept the idea.

The next chapter is 1981 and the start of the AIDS epidemic. This takes up much of the Wednesday and Thursday episodes. Ken loses his partner Richard. Because the home is in Richard’s name Ken becomes homeless and starts using drugs. He goes to the VA center for treatment. He has a hard time in his group therapy sessions because the leader pushes them to be honest, but doesn’t want the HIV-positive veterans to talk about being gay.

Cleve and his partner Ricardo find out they are both HIV-positive. Because Cleve is important to the community he gets early access to the drugs, though most of the early ones don’t work. Ricardo goes home to visit family. While there he decided he doesn’t want to face end-stage AIDS and commits suicide – at about the time Cleve gets medication that does work.

The AIDS Quilt is displayed in Washington and the Clintons take a lunch break to see part of it. Cleve challenges them to offer more help to the LGBT community to undo the harm of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and Defense of Marriage.

Annie is the daughter of Diane and Roma. In high school she struggles with having two moms. Diane and Roma put her in a Catholic school. The nuns don’t have a problem with lesbian moms – or that Annie’s father is a gay man – but they do want conformity from Annie, who learns to navigate giving the nuns what they want while keeping her own unique spirit.

The Friday episode begins in 2008 with the election of Obama – and the passage of Prop 8, in which the voters of California ban gay marriage. Cleve advocates for more inclusive civil rights laws, though is eventually won over by Chad Griffin and his effort to take same-sex marriage to the Supreme Court. Most of this episode is about that case, including a reenactment of the District Court case and the poor showing from the anti-gay side.

Roma is now a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. She helps bring about universal health care in the city. After Annie has a baby and decides to marry her boyfriend, in spite of her mothers’ insistence that the institution of marriage should be abolished, Diane and Roma become engaged.

After leaving treatment at the VA Ken gets involved in a church, one that insists in order to be rebaptized he must renounce his prior life. His allegiance shifts to another congregation that meets in the same building that is much more welcoming. By the end Ken becomes a pastor in that church, able to perform wedding ceremonies for same-sex couples as soon as the Supreme Court permits it.

I have one complaint about this last episode. It implies the Supreme Court cases to overturn Defense of Marriage and to permit same-sex marriage were argued and announced almost simultaneously. They were actually a year apart and the text of the ruling that overturned Defense of Marriage was used in a string of state cases that permitted same-sex marriage, which made the outcome of the Supreme Court case much more likely.

Welcome sinners

Gays serving openly in the military will have unintended consequences! Well, yeah. Such as this: On New Year's Eve in Neighbor's Bar, a gay hangout, in Seattle someone poured gasoline on the stairwell and set it on fire. A couple soldiers, who happen to be gay and visiting the bar, sprang into action to start putting the fire out while the patrons evacuated safely. A commenter muses that here we are dealing with being firebombed and the Fundies whine that they're being persecuted.



Timothy Kincaid of Box Turtle Bulletin has long been annoyed with the phrase, "Love the Sinner, Hate the Sin." His objection has been with the "sin" part -- the speaker is the one who defines what is sin. In addition, the speaker's actions make it clear the sinner is hated as much as the sin.

Micah Murray of Huffington Post gives another reason why that phrase is so vile. The target is never allowed to shed the label of sinner, never becomes part of "us." He also notes the phrase targets only gays. He sums it up this way:

We embrace them with arms full of disclaimers about how all the sinners are welcome here. And yet, they’re the only ones we constantly remind of their status as sinners, welcome sinners.

Alvin McEwen of the blog Justice For All is annoyed with the way Fundies lie about us, twist science to support their claims, and even propose gay genocide. Then when challenged they claim their faith permits (requires) them to say such nasty things. This vile talk did not begin with the persecution of gay people. Similar things were used in support of slavery and Jim Crow.

No negative results

It has been a year since the military ban of gay service members has been lifted. The Williams Institute, with help from professors from the Military Academy, Naval Academy, Air Force Academy, and Marine Corps War College, concluded that there have been no negative results from lifting the ban. And since the military doesn't have to spend time getting rid of gay members it is now easier for the military to pursue its mission.

A commenter reminds us that there are still homophobic soldiers and officers, just like there are members who are sexist and don't like women serving along side the men.

Watch out for the church ladies

When church ladies get fired up, things happen. And your first guess in what they did isn't correct. Minnesota has a marriage protection amendment on the ballot this fall. When the ladies of St. Luke Presbyterian church heard it they began working on ideas on how to oppose it. They went out and bought rainbow flags in bulk and distributed them to anyone in the community who would take one, engaging residents in conversation as they did so.



I wrote a while back about a highly flawed research paper by Mark Regnerus that claimed to prove gay families are not as good as straight families. So much criticism was heaped on the editor of the journal where it appeared that he asked for an audit on how the paper was handled. Summary: The paper should not have been published. "It's bull****." In addition to problems in the study itself the audit found conflicts of interest among the reviewers, those who recommend whether a paper be published. There goes the credibility of the journal and the editor. Will he retract the paper? Alas, that will make little difference in the way the anti-gay crowd will use the study to hurt us.



There were objections to the repeal of the ban on gays in the military because, so the claim goes, chaplains would have to compromise their religious beliefs. And thus we get to the curious case of Timothy Wagoner, Southern Baptist chaplain in the Air Force. He is the presiding chaplain at an Air Force chapel in New Jersey where a gay couple got married. Though he stepped aside and let another chaplain officiate, he was willingly in attendance at what was described as a joyous event.

That did not sit well with Wagoner's bosses in the SBC. Though he stated he agreed with the SBC on gay marriage, the authorities decided that wasn't good enough. They wanted him to fight against the gay menace. Wagoner switched denominations. So, yeah, a chaplain experienced restrictions to his religious freedom.



The Calif. gay marriage case is officially on its way to the Supremes. We'll know in October whether they will take the case.



The restaurant chain Chick-fil-a has a chairman who has donated heavily to anti-gay causes. Timothy Kincaid of Box Turtle Bulletin notes that social issue boycotts rarely work because most of it is about personal opinion or belief and most people don't have a problem with that (as long as you aren't the "God Hates Fags" type). So BTB has avoided the chicken wars.

In step Mike Huckabee and Sarah Palin. They declared August 1 as "Chick-fil-a Customer Appreciation Day." Though the press releases and public comments were very careful to avoid saying the appreciation had anything to do with gay people, because Mike Huckabee made a big deal about it people pay attention. And it doesn't take much effort to understand the whole thing really is about gay people. Which means the chain becomes "the brand of choice for anti-gay people."

Kincaid doesn't need to call a boycott. Huckabee, in a roundabout way, did it for him.

Confronting claims of disruption

Lots of conservatives of various kids issued dire warnings about what would happen if gays were allowed to serve openly in the military. Those dire warnings were also issued against blacks (integration of the military, Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act), immigrants, and women. "Disruption" is the easiest claim to make when the religious and moral reasons for prejudice fall flat.

But it has been three months since the DADT repeal went into effect and Western Civilization is still standing.

Dr. Nathaniel Frank says it is now time to gather up all those claims made against gays in the military and hold the speakers accountable with how wrong their predictions were.

The need for this accountability is simple -- those "disruption" arguments are still trotted out against marriage equality.

A responder notes the anti-gay industry is changing their tune a little bit. Massachusetts has, after all, had gay marriage for seven years now. The tune now is, well, nothing has happened yet but a couple generations from now things like religious liberty will be gone.

A kiss for equality

When a Navy ship pulls into port, one sailor is selected to be the first off the ship to give their significant other a symbolic welcome home kiss. Sometimes that selection is done by a raffle. So Marissa Gaeta won the raffle and was given the honor of kissing her partner Citlalic Snell. Quite appropriate for the day before the first anniversary of Obama signing the bill that eventually resulted in the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell last September.

Feeling good about not being special

Matthew Phelps is a captain in the Marines and is also gay. In a long essay he talks about the pressure of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Then he talks about the pressure of its repeal -- everyone seems to be watching the gay guy, waiting for him to screw up, so they can pounce, "See, I told you allowing gays to serve openly was a bad idea!"

Then Phelps tells us about his experience of taking a date to the annual formal Birthday Ball, when the corps celebrates the date the Marine Corps was founded.

I introduced Brandon and they were all as nice as could be. My Regimental Commander, a colonel, asked him if it was his first Marine Birthday Ball, I think realizing as soon as the words left his mouth how silly the question must have sounded. The memorable part of that moment, however, wasn’t the potential embarrassment of asking the gay date of the gay Marine if he’d been to such an event before, but that he asked the same exact question he would have asked any Marine’s date. I wasn’t pretending to fit in any more, trying to disguise the unique part of me that I couldn’t tell anyone about, I was just another Marine celebrating the birthday, and Brandon was just another date. Never before in my life had it felt so good to be no one special.

There were lots of comments to this series of posts, some apparently from the Marines who serve under Phelps. I didn't read them all, but those I read were all supportive.

Capable of serving the greater good

I hope you've heard about the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell a couple days ago (though if you watch Fox News, maybe you didn't). Jim Burroway notes we are now free of legally approved governmental investigations into our love lives. Sure, we don't have equality yet -- no marriage equality, no adoption rights, no job protections -- but we no longer face investigations because of who we are.

As a sign of the end of the military ban, a marine recruiter set up a booth at the gay community center in Tulsa. He talked to a handful of lesbians.

Nathaniel Frank, writing in Huffington Post Politics, comments on the end of DADT.

That's why the right wing fixated on gays in the military -- because if the world could see that gay men and women were proud, effective warriors, and were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country, it would shatter the careful apparatus of myths they'd spent generations creating, the fiction that said gay people were only interested in their own pleasure and not, in equal parts to everyone else, in the noble effort to serve the greater good. It would shatter the myth that gay people are incapable of self-sacrifice and unworthy of first-class citizenship.

Frank goes on to say our work isn't done yet. Savor the victory and get back to work.

Soon free to serve

Obama, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mike Mullen, and Sec. Defense Leon Panetta have signed a certification that the Dept. Defense has put all necessary policies and regulations in place and that allowing gays to serve in the military does not disrupt military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting, and retention. That means 60 days from signing, Sept. 20, the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy will be revoked. Gays may then serve openly.

One befuddled bully

Some of the things of note while I was gone.

The record high temperature has been tied or broken 900 times across the central part of the country in the last month. The report doesn't say how many times in how many different cities, though it indicates the heat is a problem from Texas to North Dakota to Michigan (at least). Insert your favorite global warming jokes here.



The Michigan legislature may be working to push gays back in the closet, but there is an increase in the number of gays in local offices and candidates for the next election. Charles Pugh is Detroit City Council President. Craig Covey used to be mayor of Ferndale and is now on the Oakland County Commission. Chris Swope is City Clerk of Lansing. And three gay candidates are in the running for seats in the Lansing City Council.



Gary Glenn is the head of the Michigan chapter of the American Family Association (declared by the SPLC to be a hate group). He has been very good at making gay lives miserable in the state, for starters he spearheaded the 2004 marriage protection amendment here. He will be making next year's campaign to try to replace senator Debbie Stabenow a bit more interesting by hinting he might be a candidate. Some wonder if he is really all that different from the rest of the GOP field. I wonder if it is better to have him in the race or out of it. Will the spotlight show how ridiculous he is or will it make the rest of the GOP field look moderate in comparison?


Gay marriage begins this Sunday in New York. Among the first couples will be Rod and Ricky, two puppets from the off-Broadway show Avenue Q. Some think it is cute. Others think we're handing a weapon to our opponents.



I had written about the extensive research by Jim Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin that showed how the anti-gay treatment Kirk Murphy got at age four from George Rekers was the reason why Kirk committed suicide three decades later. Burroway now describes four other children that Rekers cited in research. Alas, he doesn't know the real names of these children or what happened to them in the last 40 years. Rekers claims success. Burroway says we only have his word on it.



Several bishops (though not all) of the Episcopal Church in New York have told their gay clergy that now that gay marriage is legal, if they have a partner they must get married. The reasoning is that the church has asked all people to live in committed monogamous, faithful relationships and pastors must demonstrate what that is like. If a straight couple must marry, so must a gay couple.

Bishop Provenzano of Long Island also drew a strong distinction between church and civil marriage. Marriage is of the church and it also happens to create a civil agreement. He has no interest in that civil agreement. But if you want a church wedding you must profess the teachings of the church.



Stephen Colbert adds a story to the It Gets Better project. When he was young he was bullied. Another guy was bullied too and was called "queer". The kid responded. Yes, I am queer. Kiss me and let me prove it. Result: one befuddled bully.



San Diego held its Pride Parade this past weekend. A large (reportedly 350) contingent of military service members, perhaps 70% of them active, marched in the parade. They wore t-shirts showing which branch they serve in. This is important because (1) it's a first, (2) it shows the swiftness of change, (3) it shows most military men are fine with having a gay colleague, and (4) with Don't Ask, Don't Tell still officially on the books there could be disciplinary problems for those who marched.

Greater and lesser harm

I think I have this right… Log Cabin Republicans files suit to get the military Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy overturned. They succeeded in a district court not long before Congress passed the complicated repeal law. The 9th Circuit said, fine, let the process work its way out and the LCR ruling is stayed.

LCR went back to court and said DADT is still in place and the government's process is taking too long (and gay soldiers are still being discharged). A federal appeals court agreed, lifting the 9th Circuit's stay. DADT is unconstitutional and must be ended now, with no need to wait for Dept. of Defense certification and a 60 day waiting period. Yeah, the whole thing is a bit confusing right now because it doesn't seem proper for a lower court to lift a stay set in place by an upper court and I'm not real sure which court has done what.

There are some interesting aspects of the ruling, no matter which court it came from.

This time around it is unlikely to be appealed. I've heard from other reports that the Dept. of Defense has agreed to the ruling and will assume that DADT must be ended now.

It means that Congress or a future president cannot reinstate DADT. Matters of housing or full inclusion are not simply policy (some differences maintained because of Defense of Marriage Act) but could be constitutionally challenged in court.

The big change is that a court has determined a stay of a discriminatory policy is more harmful to gays than to those who want to discriminate. Read that one carefully. The anti-gay crowd has been claiming harm. This panel of judges say that harm isn't as bad as the harm done to gay people. The declaration that the Calif. gay marriage law is unconstitutional is also under a stay. Look for the lawyers in that case to ask that stay be lifted too.

Incapable of defense

Last week I had written that Obama and the Department of Justice will no longer defend Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act. Here is a list of all the cases challenging Section 3 along with an explanation of what Obama's announcement might mean.

Part of all that is a discussion of levels of scrutiny and the consequences. In rational basis scrutiny the government only need supply a rational reason for the discrimination. In heightened scrutiny the standards are higher. What Obama's announcement said is in gay rights cases heightened scrutiny must be used. Obama didn't say he doesn't want to defend the law. He said that under this level of scrutiny he is incapable of defending it because there were simply no arguments that would pass the standards.

Since that announcement…

John Boehner will decide by the end of the week whether the House will take over defense of DOMA from the DoJ. Many in his party are calling for it, even if, as he says, it benefits Obama. It is unclear whether the House can act on its own or needs authorization and funding with Senate approval and Obama's signature.

Obama's DoJ will no longer defend the constitutionality of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Since the policy isn't actually gone yet, there is a lawsuit proceeding through the courts to force its end. The DoJ is still taking part in it. However, they have asked the judge to change the question being considered. Is DADT unconstitutional, as a lower court has said? The DoJ agrees. Instead, the trial should be about whether the DADT repeal process (the one that requires certification and a 60 day wait) is constitutional. The DoJ will defend that. But it isn't clear the court will allow that kind of switch.

A job only half done

The repeal of the law behind Don't Ask, Don't Tell means that gays will soon be able to serve in the military without the threat of discharge looming over their heads. However, Obama and the Pentagon are making it very clear that if a gay soldier comes out and then experiences harassment, or simply no longer gets promotions, there is no legal recourse available. The discrimination protection was bartered away to make sure the basic repeal passed. The job is only half done.

Things have changed!

A year ago to get a hate crimes bill that protected gays through Congress it had to be attached to a must-pass military spending bill. The GOP squawked, but enough voted for it to get it passed.

One year later. The Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal was included in a must-pass military spending bill. Amazingly, that important bill did not pass. Some say it was because of DADT, some said because of other provisions in the spending bill. Gay activists thought the effort was dead when Harry Reid asked for a cloture vote when he knew some key backers weren't able to vote.

So DADT was pulled out of the spending bill, sponsored by an Independent and a Republican (!), and declared it didn't have to waste time in any committee. The House passed it a few days ago 250-175 -- and not strictly along party lines. The Senate held a cloture vote this morning and it passed. The GOP waived their right to debate, so the vote for the actual bill was this afternoon.

And it passed. 65-31.

Obama will sign it within the week.

This duck ain't so lame.

To top it off we have the opportunity of watching John McCain's head explode.

Yup, a year ago a gay friendly bill needed to be buried inside a must-pass bill. This time a gay friendly bill failed when it was buried and succeeded when it stood on its own. A first!

Definite progress!

However, the policy of discharging openly gay soldiers from the military is not gone. Obama has not, though urged by Reid, declared that dismissals will stop immediately. This bill only says the Dept. of Defense has the permission of Congress to end the policy, which is no longer required by law. It will still take six months to a year before gays can serve openly without fear of dismissal. The Sec. Def., Prez., and chairman of the Joint Chiefs need to certify they have a plan of implementation that won't impede military readiness.

A big improvement but still tainted

The Pentagon report on the survey of the troops and their families about the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't tell was released last Tuesday. I wasn't all that interested to read all 267 pages, so I'm glad Timothy Kincaid of Box Turtle Bulletin summarized the recommendations. The report had two parts, what the survey told the military leaders and the recommendations for how to proceed with repeal (once Congress gives permission).

The report is a gigantic step in the right direction, but it is not all roses. Many recommendations are quite good. Some recommendations are constrained by the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that says the government cannot recognize gay marriages. Other recommendations are tainted with heterosupremacy -- the belief that straight relationships are inherently better than gay relationships. Here's a summary of the summary.

1. Don't treat full integration of gays in the same manner as integration by race. Don't place sexual orientation alongside race, color, religion, sex and national origin as a class eligible for diversity programs and tracking initiatives. Yes, orientation is not to be a factor in promotion and personnel decision making, and cases of abuse should be handled as all other such cases are handled. Alas, we've seen that when sexual orientation isn't specifically mentioned in anti-bullying laws students still feel free to bully gay kids.

2. Don't track the effectiveness of integration -- don't ask service members if they are gay.

3. There is no need to change policies to address fears of homosexual behavior. Current standards of conduct, applied without regard to orientation, are sufficient.

4. No need to change Chaplain policies. If atheists, Christians, and Muslims can serve together, so can those with varying views of the sinfulness of homosexuality.

5. Repeal the ban on "sodomy" between consenting adults.

6. Orientation is not to be considered when assigning rooms. If a raging homophobe objects to rooming with the gay guy, handle it on a case-by-case basis.

7. Separate showers are not necessary. Gays already share showers with straights in hundreds of thousands college dorms, school gyms, professional sports locker rooms, police and fire stations, and athletic clubs. We should now be able to lay this particular bogeyman to rest.

8. Revise regulations so that gays can appropriately define "dependent" and "family member" for benefits. Alas, a gay spouse isn't seen for the relationship, but only as a "designee." Gay couples do not get military housing in the same way that unmarried straight couples are not eligible for such housing.

9. Don't rewrite regulations to allow same sex partners be accommodated in duty assignments.

10. There are already regulations concerning HIV in the blood supply, so they don't need to be changed.

11. Those who were dismissed under DADT can reenlist, provided they still qualify in all other respects.

12. Those who threaten to quit rather than work with gays should not be accommodated.

John McCain has been blubbering that the survey should have asked whether the soldiers believe DADT should be repealed. The report says if it had been done that way it would have been a referendum on the policy and the military does not make decisions by referendum.

The military brass, in hearings before the Senate, have been saying forcefully that repeal should happen by law and not by the courts. If the courts have their way the policy must be repealed immediately. If done by law the Pentagon can implement changes carefully with minimal disruption. Care about combat readiness? Then repeal the law.

Harry Reid has released the Senate calendar for the time until adjournment on Dec. 17th. DADT repeal and the defense spending authorization is not listed. Obama will either change the policy through executive directives (with the risk that the next president will reinstate it) or wait for the courts to repeal it. Perhaps he'll do both.

Illinois!

Illinois has approved Domestic Partnerships! Both state house and senate passed it with comfortable margins. The governor will sign it soon. It's not marriage, but it is a step in the right direction.


Jon Stewart has the latest on the Senate hearings on Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He even flattens McCain, the biggest obstacle. For those that don't recognize the two fighting knights, it is from Monty Python's spoof on King Arthur. And it was very effectively used.


Most maps don't show population density, so it isn't obvious how packed China is and how sparse much of Russia is. So here's another way to look at the population of each country. Reassign the country with the most land to the citizens of the country with the most people. Do the same with the second largest area and second most populous country, and the same on down the list. The Chinese take over Russia, the Indians take over Canada. USA (3rd), Brazil (5th), Yemen, and Ireland stay put. It makes for some interesting neighbors. Look here for more explanation and here for a map with enough detail to actually read (once loaded it can be enlarged).



Rafi Ron used to work as the Director of Security at the Ben Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv (and was on duty there when 9/11 happened). He says the TSA's reliance on technology won't work. The terrorists are already a step ahead. Instead of focusing on the gadgetry, screeners should be studying the people -- human nature hasn't changed and a watchful and well informed screener can uncover explosives that machines can't. We spend too much time annoying harmless passengers and not enough time on actual threats. However, this makes me think the real goal (at least in the USA) is to annoy harmless passengers to get us used to excessive government intrusion and think it is normal and appropriate.

Some things get better, some get worse

Several gay fathers, with their kids around them, add their voices to the It Gets Better project. Once they realized they are gay they thought they could not have a family. They are all quite pleased that they found a way. The video is less than 6 minutes.



Jon Stewart takes a look at McCain's tactic of continually requiring more proof (the latest being a different kind of study) before supporting Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The segment, a little over 5 minutes ends with several actors (one of them Sean Hayes) presenting an "It Gets Worse" public service announcement. McCain's reputation can only get worse the longer he stalls the process.



The United Church of Christ has issued a call to its members to get involved in the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Good to see a Christian denomination get behind ending discrimination.



Rachel Maddow reports that there exist at least 60 votes to stop a GOP filibuster of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

I haven't gotten the answer I like yet

I reported last Friday that Cindy McCain had spoken against Don't Ask, Don't Tell while her husband John is the big reason why the repeal hasn't been passed. Less than 24 hours after the video that included her remarks went public she issued a retraction, saying she agrees with her husband.

When the issue of DADT repeal began hitting the news last spring, John McCain said that he wouldn't vote for it unless the Sec. of Defense was for it. Soon, Robert Gates said just that. Then McCain wanted the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to confirm it. And Admiral Mullen said just that. Then McCain demanded we all wait for the service members to be surveyed and the report to be issued. The report results have been leaked, saying service members have no problem with repeal. Now McCain is saying we did the wrong kind of survey. The survey that was done asked how such a repeal should be implemented and it should have surveyed whether the repeal should happen. Actually, many gay organizations were annoyed that such questions were in the survey. Put another way, McCain hasn't gotten the answers that confirmed his bigotry, so he wants more times to get the answers he wants. He's now threatening to demand Congressional hearings, which would drag the process long enough that a vote couldn't happen until the new Congress was seated. Joe Lieberman is telling McCain to shut up.

The political jungle

This could cause a few domestic fireworks. Cindy McCain has been speaking out about the need to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Her husband John is a big reason why the repeal hasn't happened yet.


The Supremes decided that Don't Ask, Don't Tell can remain in effect while the case is before the 9th Circuit Court. The earliest that court can rule on the case is March.


Iowa GOP leaders have been crowing about how three state supremes were ousted because they mandated gay marriages. They're now saying let Iowa citizens vote to ban gay marriage or we'll oust the other four justices who approved it. Nothing like an ultimatum to start off a legislative session. The Dem leader in the state Senate is holding firm.