Adrian Fenty!

Please excuse me. I did not pay a Bit of attention to the mayoral election in DC. I can now say, though, after a long overdue research mission, that I congratulate YOU Washington, DC! You made an excellent choice from what I can tell. I look forward to seeing where he takes our nation's capital.



What I know:
- Young, charismatic, truly Decent
- Will be privatizing DC's school system perhaps?
- Philadelphia has had great success with a similar privatization program
- Has received criticism for his Senior Aid durring the campaign (Sinclair Skinner)
- I'm anxious to see how that pans out. I respect his loyalty, but hope it doesn't have dire consequences.
- My gut just tells me that he might be Just what DC needs.

P.S. There is no MAYOR FENTY website that I can see. There is his Ward 4 website, there is his campaign website. PLEASE- let's get a new website going.

Everbody's doin' it...

"Former Gen. Wesley K. Clark boasts 35,000 more friends than ex-Sen. John Edwards, and there are more flattering photos of Sen. Barack Obama than Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton."

Sweet sweet Virginia.. always keeps an open door... or not..

Things have been crazy lately, and I'm sad to say that I didn't get nearly as involved in this election as I probably should have. That said, I must take a moment to comment on the enigmatic Question #1 from the Virginia ballot.

We have a problem. A very big problem in deed. Americans are on information overload... but we take the information that is most directly handed to us. I wonder, how did YOU do your research for this election? I will admit, for the first time since my 18th birthday, I did not read through the candidates websites, I did not browse through articles or watch appearances on television. I'm moving, my grandmother's in the hospital, and I am rock-bottom-broke. Still, I could have, and should have, done my homework.

Well-intentioned students and other young people have taken to becoming virtual activists, posting information on websites like Facebook and MySpace, trying to inform others like them, encouraging them to vote. This is wonderful. Unfortunately, there's no telling how trustworthy this information is. Well-intentioned, of course, but we all learned the "telephone game" lesson, didn't we?

I voted NO on Question #1, and I'm glad I did. But the hoopla surrounding it amazes me. This is what I know:

~ VA already has a law outlawing same-sex marriage, it's just not a direct part of the constitution.

~ This amendment would put a definition of marriage into the constitution, limiting it to one man and one woman.

~ There was talk that this amendment would also threaten the legal rights of other types of relationships, for example: "Unmarried heterosexual couples who receive domestic partnership benefits will likely lose those benefits... Single senior citizens who rely on friends to serve as power of attorney in health matters can no longer feel confident that such agreements will be valid... Unmarried business partners who go into private legal contracts should be concerned that those contracts may not stand before the court... all private agreements between unmarried couples, business partners and others may be affected if later contested in a court of law." (This information was taken from a Facebook group.)

~ Unfortunately, after reading the actual text for the amendment, I doubt the validity of that concern.
"There are other legal rights, benefits, and obligations which will continue to be available to unmarried persons, including the naming of an agent to make end-of-life decisions by an Advance Medical Directive (Code of Virginia § 54.1-2981), protections afforded under Domestic Violence laws (Code of Virginia § 18.2- 57.2), ownership of real property as joint tenants with or without a right of survivorship (Code of Virginia § 55-20.1), or disposition of property by will (Code of Virginia § 64.1- 46)." (Taken from the explanation issued by the state.)

~ Countless people have made the argument that this amendment was not just about gay marriage... but what if it was? I personally still would have voted against it. As I've made clear in previous posts, I believe in civil unions for all.

~ Why can't we get the straight facts here? Why doesn't anyone seem to know what's going on?

(~ Why did I think that I shouldn't vote for Webb because he supposedly is anti-woman, but now I can find no record of this?)

What has happened now is that it is officially written into our constitution that marriage can only be between one man and one woman. I'm no lawyer (yet), but I'm sure there's something to the fact that it's now a constitutional issue rather than a simple law on the books. If nothing else, think about how much better it sounds to say: "NO, you may not marry. It's UNCONSTITUTIONAL.", rather than: "NO, you may not marry. It's against the law." Well, in my head the first holds more weight. It's probably going to be a hell of a lot harder for us to turn over now. Maybe now would be a good time to reconsider an independent NOVA state?


I wasn't sure if I was going to take the time to comment on this whole ordeal, but then I saw this away message on Facebook: "***** is glad gays can't marry, disappointednted that things aren't looking so good for Allen." SO BOLD. So daring. I wish you weren't dating the sweetest girl in the world.

P.S. Eddie From Ohio, please excuse me for abusing your lyrics for use in my title. I love you.

God Bless Obama!

Sen. Obama is going to Kenya to visit his grandmother, etc. But the real awesomeness is that he will be tested for HIV at one of the clinics there. Stigma surrounding HIV/AIDS prevents many from even being willing to be tested. Obama's example might do wonders for that community. THIS is what politicians should do!
LOVE HIM!

Step away from the craig.

http://www.craigslist.com
Go ahead- click it. Look at the housing ads. They don't look so scary or offensive to me.

In case you haven't heard- craigslist is being sued due to housing "ads" that go against anti-discrimination laws. Craig says (in my words): but I have 21 employees- post at your own risk, read at your own risk- you don't like something? Flag it and we'll review it and remove it if it's inappropriate. That's the beauty of craigslist! It's free both financially and ideologically.

On NPR this morning, they cited examples of posts saying things like: "looking for another gay latino man to share apartment with", "prefer you to be Christian", and "African Americans and Arabians tend to clash with me so that won't work out". (remember- their words- not mine.)

This lawsuit is based on the Federal Fair Housing Act, which prohibits "discriminatory preference".

But I gotta say- sure, these people who have such specific preferences might be narrow-minded, they might even be racist. BUT, they are not posting hate messages or insults. They are looking for someone to share a living space with them. If they have these "preferences", I think it's their right to say so. First off, I wouldn't want to live with someone who would prefer not to live with me. Secondly, maybe this is something that whoever the FFHA needs to reconsider- but I do not think that individuals are the same as companies. Meaning- I agree that an apartment complex, a property management group with a business liscence, or a home owners association cannot say that it is a "whites only" community. But an idividual? Horrible as it is, how can you stop them? Third, this is a question of appearances. Even if one does not state these preferences in their post or ad, upon meeting the potential roommate, they are bound to still have the same preferences. So essentially, this meeting was a waste of time for both of them. And finally- in terms of craigslist's responsibility? See the opinion from "other guy" below. It's a community message board- Craig doesn't own these properties that are for rent. So I don't find him responsible for what gets posted.

This guy supports craigslist.
These internet gods support craigslist.
One other guy (who I cannot re-find for the life of me) supports craigslist (c-list) by reminding everyone that c-list is not the same as newspapers- the "ads" on c-list are not ads at all- but posts. They are free. C-list does not = publisher. The users are the publishers, readers, and editors, all rolled into one.
What Craig says:
craigslist Disputes "Fair" Housing Lawsuit

Do you know this man?

Supreme Court Blocks Some Guantanamo Trials

Justices rule 5-3 that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military tribunals for detainees. At left, an unidentified prisoner at Guantanamo Bay.

Read the Court's Ruling
Detainees at Guatanamo

Trust me- this is exactly what the front page of npr.org looked like just before 1pm today. That's funny to me.

Internet Trends in Bahrain

Just in case anyone is interested, I posted the results from my survey about internet use and freedom of speech in Bahrain. (Only 12 people actually took it... but that's ok.) Please see my other blog...
http://portfreedom.blogspot.com

The ultimate political survey?

This is me:
Economic Left/Right: -2.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.36

To put that into perspective:
That is the lower left hand side of a grid. X-axis is Left vs. Right economic views. Y-axis is Authoritarian (top) vs. Libertarian (bottom).

Others with similar results:
Ghandi
Dalai Lama

Priceless!

Take it yourself: http://politicalcompass.jpagel.net/

*WE* are in dire need of a sanity check.

A while back, I had a thought that went like this:
U.S. Reactions (Dubai Ports + Immigration + China deficit) = Questionable turn in U.S. Policy.
I titled this thought "Turnin' Isolational".

As it turns out, that's not all. Cabin fever much???

Today, Washington is obsessed with "gay marriage". Maybe I'm just getting older, maybe I'm finally paying attention to Washington- but OMG has ever a year gone by with so much pittiful and blatant issue grabbing for attention?? It's like the issue fairy decended on Washington, threw out an assortment of issues, and left politicians, lobeists, and people with nothing better to do to fight over who gets what. NOBODY IS MAKING ANY SENSE!

Allow me to share my views on "gay marriage". You may be wondering why I insist on putting this in quotation marks. I HEREBY CHALLENGE WASHINGTON TO START THINKING MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT THEIR VOCABULARY CHOICES. I don't mean to pick on just Washington. I HEREBY CHALLENGE EVERYONE IN THE WORLD TO START THINKING MORE CAREFULLY ABOUT THEIR VOCABULARY CHOICES. Just because we've always recognized the word marriage as the legal form of joining two people... doesn't mean we should. The word marriage is slanted. To marry is slanted. Maybe it's because it's a little too close to matrimony. Maybe it's because it's a little too old.

Seperation of church and state... hmmmm... I really want to use this argument right now... but I realize that we've never really upheld that rule. (not very well...) Oh, what the hell. I think I will anyway.
Meanings, definitions, institutions often become outdated. The idea of "marriage" being a state institution is one of these circumstances. It doesn't really matter what the original idea was. Humanity in general has changed; law can, and should, reflect this. CIVIL UNIONS. This is what the government needs to be concerned with. Civil unions screams "of the law"! Good! GO with it. All kinds of laws can deal with people who are IN a civil union. (taxes... and other things... I'm sure.) Why don't we just get rid of the word "marriage" from anything the government talks about. Why don't we leave the judging and condeming to the churches (not that I want them to be like that either, but better the church than our government). Let a priest tell a gay couple that the church won't recognize or bless their union. Let the government say, congratulations, pay more taxes now. That's it! It can be that simple.

**I now pronounce you civil partners, Dick and Jane. I now pronounce You civil partners as well, Michael and John. Ahhh what a wonderful world.**

BTW, I think this post sounds a little angry... a little void of any emotional plea here. So let me just say, I do support gay rights, with every inch of my being. I support them in the fullest. I take this particular approach to the situation because changing laws based on emotional pleas rarely stick. I propose my solution based on terminology because I'm so adimant about seperation of church and state. That's not their job. I believe the term in economics is"cost benefit"? The church is "better" at "moral things", so let them do it. The state is "better" at making laws and keeping people safe, so let them do that. I want the law to change not just to fix the inequality as far as "marriage" or civil unions, but to reinforce what this country should stand for (equality in general, seperation of church and state, and other nice things).

A funny thing happened on the way to work...

Drivin' up 28, mindin my business, cursing the traffic. I'm forced to switch lanes, and I think to myself... Mr. Policeman, was it really necessary to pull someone over durring rush-hour?? And then as I pull up along side this undercover cop car with a big manly man behind the wheel, I realize that he is actually escorting a family of about 15 geese to safety. The babies can't fly, so he is driving slowly behind them while the geese swiftly, and orderly, make their way down the "slow lane". There was only maybe another 1/4 mile left to go before they would get past the cement road divider that was preventing them to get off the road. *No, this picture is not actually from this morning. I SO wish I had had the time to pull out my camera, but alas- then everyone would have been cursing me. It was absolutely the most adorbable thing I have ever seen. A good Friday it is.

Mason lightin' up with Phillip Morris?

Community Rights Commission News Release

I heard this story on the news this morning. So... Mason's LEC gets funding from Philip Morris... Now according to the LEC, no individual donor provides more than 2% of their budget. So why would Philip Morris call the LEC one of their key allies? The CRC site has all the links... or that's what it looks like. I can see proof that Philip Morris funds the LEC. Ok. In 1999, $10,000. Since I can't see the LEC's budget, I wonder if anyone can tell me what percentage of their budget this is. The news release itself seems very slanted. In fact, even the radio program seemed slanted. I have a tendancy to think, who cares where they get their money??? Unless their handing out monogramed Joe Camel silk pajamas at the junkets, what difference could it possibly make. I also have a slight tendency to want to smack Philip around a little bit... did they knowingly or unknowingly just screw Mason over? But, true enough, it does need to be discovered, WHY would Philip Morris call us a key ally? Oh... where's the Broadside when you need it. Oh wait, they wouldn't very likely want to get into this anyway.

The Dream Act

On the radio this morning, I was listening to a story about the huge numbers of students in the US who came with their parents to this country, and are still undocumented. As they graduate from highschool, they're faced with the realization that to go any further might be out of the question for them. I think they said that California is the only state in the US that allows undocumented students to attend community colleges at in-state rates. In other states, more often than not, these students are required to pay either out-of-state tuition, or international student rates. The price difference is astronomical.

I listened to Laura, who has a 4.1 GPA, relate her story , her realization that she may at best get to go to a community college; her frustation over seeing less qualified students, who didn't work as hard as she, get into better schools, and even with scholarships; and her fear regarding what would be in her future.

Once again, this morning I was informed of something that I never knew existed- the Dream Act. This act would recognize those undocumented students who have worked exceptionally hard, and are in persuit of the "American Dream", by making allowances for them to continue their education and realize their full potentials. (The Dream Act- summary)

When I posted about W's immigration speach to Congress, I mentioned that he didn't really cite any concrete suggestions on what to do for/with existing illegal immigrants in the states. From what I understand, this Dream Act is currently tacked on to whatever is being proposed by the Senate. It's hard for me to put all of these pieces together... but if that's true, then students like Laura might be on the verge of having their dreams realized. There are so many other illegal immigrants that are not in the same situation as students like Laura, but I think the Dream Act would be one good step. These children did not originally make the choice to come to the US illegally; but growing up here, they've made the decision to work as hard as they can, and to realize their dreams. Since this country is built on immigrants with dreams, it would be pretty unpatriotic to deny these students that opportunity.

**The Dream Act Portal**

Fair Immigration Reform Movement

National Council of La Raza

People for the American Way (on the Dream Act)

AIDS Walk NYC... done and done.

Got back into DC early this morning from yesterday's AIDS Walk. It was outstanding. I don't know how many people were there, but the paths were packed! The final total for the event was over 6.4 million dollars, which I believe is a one million dollar increase from last year. Spirits were high the whole day and people seemed to be having a lot of fun. I'm glad I had the opportunity to be a part of it. And man, do I love New York!

Talkin' Bout the Immigration

I listened to W's speech on what he wants to see Congress do about immigration last night. I gotta say, he didn't do half bad. I don't know what to do with myself... but once again, I find myself proud of him. He struck a good balance- placating the conservatives, but at the same time appearing sympathetic and supportive of our beloved immigrants. The only part of the speech that somewhat threw me off was the total lack of concrete suggestion regarding what to do with illegal immigrants who are already here. He's not supporting assylum (out of respect for those trying to do it legally), and he's not supporting deportation en masse (or turning them into fugitives). So? Congress has one month to figure out how to reach a compromise between the two extremes. Good luck!
Did you miss it? Here's a link to the audio clip from NPR: W's Immigration Speech

AIDS Walk- NYC 2006

http://aidswalknewyork2006.kintera.org/lucijean

I'm going to New York on the 21st for the annual AIDS Walk. I've joined the HERO team with the UNA-USA... We are ear-marking the funds we raise to help children in Africa who are living with HIV/AIDS or affected by the epidemic in other ways. Please give what you can! You can donate on line, or if you prefer cash or check, please let me know. Thank you!