Moving forward in a post-Prop 8 world

Longtime activist Torie Osborn has posted an indictment of the LGBT rights movement. Osborn writes:

Nobody has accepted responsibility for failure and stepped up to lead a coherent, community- wide discussion of where to from here. As a result there is too much finger pointing, and a startling loss of credibility for established LGBT organizations and leaders. Without a humble and truth-telling self-assessment, the energetic protest and proliferation of new young activists may well evaporate, or be too narrowly contained within one single – if exciting -- strand of the LGBT movement: web activism. Or, inaccurate analysis will become set in stone and lead toward division rather than powerful motion forward.

Agreed!

Let's also remember that no-one is a villain here. I'm pleased to see that Osborn, who has a great reputation, isn't suggesting tar and feathering LGBT leaders. Like her, I believe that we need honest discussion. Demonization of our leaders won't help. Driven by emotion, such attacks make it harder to understand what really happened, drive leaders from the movement and turn away emerging leaders who don't want to subject themselves to tongue lashings.

I doubt very much if the leaders of the No on Prop 8 campaign wanted to be defeated. They made mistakes. We all made mistakes, and there is much for all of us to learn.

The first step, as Osborn says, is admitting our goofs. Let the discussion begin!

Obama calls LGBT rights civil rights

[updated to include quotes]
The news is all over the LGBT corner of the web this morning: Barack Obama has posted his official agenda for LGBT people on his transition web site. 365gay.com has a good overview. Except for the lack of marriage equality, it's a fine agenda and matches his campaign promises, including repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act and a transgender-inclusive Employment Nondiscrimination Act.

But most commentators are missing something rather important in this seemingly normal post on Change.gov. LGBT rights are discussed on the Civil Rights page. In other words, Obama is declaring that our rights are civil rights. It's stating the obvious, but this is an enormously important distinction. If our rights truly are nothing more than civil rights, then how can anyone oppose them?

By the way, the top of Obama's Civil Rights page includes this quote:

"The teenagers and college students who left their homes to march in the streets of Birmingham and Montgomery; the mothers who walked instead of taking the bus after a long day of doing somebody else's laundry and cleaning somebody else's kitchen -- they didn't brave fire hoses and Billy clubs so that their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren would still wonder at the beginning of the 21st century whether their vote would be counted; whether their civil rights would be protected by their government; whether justice would be equal and opportunity would be theirs.... We have more work to do."

-- Barack Obama, Speech at Howard University, September 28, 2007

The top of the LGBT section on the Civil Rights page has this quote:

"While we have come a long way since the Stonewall riots in 1969, we still have a lot of work to do. Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us. But at its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans. It's about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect."

-- Barack Obama, June 1, 2007

Today's Act: Raise consciousness about marriage equality

I vote that we all follow Tom Ackerman's lead. Absolutely brilliant.

I no longer recognize marriage. It’s a new thing I’m trying.

Turns out it’s fun.

Yesterday I called a woman’s spouse her boyfriend.

She says, correcting me, “He’s my husband,”
“Oh,” I say, “I no longer recognize marriage.”

The impact is obvious. I tried it on a man who has been in a relationship for years,

“How’s your longtime companion, Jill?”
“She’s my wife!”
“Yeah, well, my beliefs don’t recognize marriage.”

Fun. And instant, eyebrow-raising recognition. Suddenly the majority gets to feel what the minority feels. In a moment they feel what it’s like to have their relationship downgraded, and to have a much taken-for-granted right called into question because of another’s beliefs.

Kos puts the Great Gay Awakening in context

Kos has weighed in the true meaning of the Great Gay Awakening -- the mass of protests that were touched off by the passage of Prop 8. He writes:

The protest can't be the goal in and of itself, rather, it's a tool in a broader toolbox.

In this case, these protests have served as a wakeup call to equality-minded people all over the country. It is an empowering act. But rather than people feeling they've done their part by marching for a few hours, I'm willing to bet that, just like here in California, the seeds were planted for further organizing all over the country. There is nothing more dangerous for the status quo (the "system") than people suddenly feeling empowered.

Kos does a good job of putting the protests in context. I generally agree with his assessment, but I'm not quite as optimistic as he is about the future. What Prop 8 and the protests have done is given us a moment of opportunity.

Too often in the past, though, I've seen these moments slip through our fingers. As Kos also argues, protest fails if it becomes an end in itself. Activist energy is sucked into the task of getting people onto the street and diverted away from doing the day-to-day political work needed to create real change.

We have to follow up our marches with organizing, and we need to look at models that work like MoveOn.org (although I don't think it is as effective as it could be), other campaigns and what may be the best model of all, Barack Obama's campaign. What Obama did was translate enthusiasm into action. That's what we need to do now.

Obama: Speaking softly & carrying a big warning

As President-Elect Barack Obama is fond of saying over and over again, "there is only one president at a time." Yup, there sure is. But then again, Obama is making it clear that the one president warming up the office right now is definitely on his way out.

Obama's surprise appearance via video before the bi-partisan Governors Global Climate Summit today is just the latest example of this speak-softly-and-warn-big approach.

Obama ends torture in America

For your morning smile: Tom Toles does it again. See the full cartoon, "President Obama Ends Torture in America."

Doublespeak Quote of the Day: The attack of the queer fascists

My goodness, we've kicked up a hornets nest. By daring to say that we're not, ah, particularly pleased to have our rights taken away, LGBT Americans and our allies are now being portrayed as the bad guys. The Big Brother tyrants of George Orwell's 1984 would be so proud.

In fact, the newspeak is flying so fast these days that I've decided to start an new prize for "The Doublespeak Quote of the Day."

The first honoree is Newt Gingrich. Note that Gingrich was pontificating on Nov. 14, ten days after a few churches succeeded in imposing their will on the country by taking the right to marry away from thousands in California. Gingrich told Bill O'Reilly:

"I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment.

We have a winner!

A Dose of Reality: Mormons get a lesson about politics

I've been working up a response to the absurd statement from leaders of the Mormon Church, complaining about the marriage equality protests that are sweeping the nation. In a truly Orwellian move, Mormon leaders claimed they have been victimized by the fallout from Proposition 8. What a joke!

While I was struggling with my post, Kevin Drum, bless him, came up with a post saying exactly what I wanted to say. The emphasis is mine.

I'm afraid the church elders have it exactly backward here. Churches have every right to involve themselves in political issues, but if they do then they're going to be treated as political actors. Protests, boycotts, op-eds, blog posts, and marches are exactly the democratic ideals of our nation, and being on the receiving end of them is what happens to anyone who enters the political fray. It's a little late for them to pretend they didn't know this.

People should not be persecuted for their religious beliefs, and I condemn any gay-rights supporter who does that. But I refuse to let people take my rights away and then claim that I can't fight back. Give me a break!

In case you're wondering why anyone would be miffed at the LDS, take a look at this weekend's New York Times: Mormons Tipped Scale in Ban on Gay Marriage.

Wanda Sykes comes out & speaks truth

Some folks are calling the events of the last two weeks the Awakening. In my latest Political IQ column, which will be out soon, I dub this the Great Gay Awakening, just to be a tad fancier. No matter what you call recent events, though, things are happening so fast that it is hard to keep up.

My goal over the next week or so is to post various interesting bits of news that come my way about the Great Gay Awakening. Instead of attempting to cover everything, I'll be picking out the events and speeches that stand out for one reason or another.

Here's comedian Wanda Sykes addressing the crowd Saturday in LA. She comes out and gets mad.



Hat tip to Americablog.

500 brave the cold in Kansas City to protest for marriage equality

Starting the rally with a convocation.

Sen. Jolie Justus

Kansas City School Board Member Airick Leonard West.

Lining the Street near The Plaza.

Cheering for horn honking gay-rights supporters.

Brrrrrrrr.... I just got back from the demonstration in Kansas City for marriage equality, and I have to admit that I'd much rather have been protesting in someplace a bit warmer. The rally started with sunshine and brisk winds and ended long after it had clouded over and started spitting pellets of ice on us.

My friend Colleen and I had driven into KC from Lawrence, and we were both thrilled that we attended. Colleen spoke for many, I think, when she said after the rally that she felt better for having made the trip, broken her silence and stood up for her rights.

At the rally, a United Methodist minister gave the convocation. Representatives of the Kansas-Missouri ACLU, the Lesbian and Gay Community Center of Kansas City, PROMO and GLSEN are among those who spoke. Kansas City Councilmember Beth Gottstein also revved up the crowd.

However, the speakers who energized the crowd the most were Jim MacDonald of the Four Freedoms Democratic Club, Missouri state Sen. Jolie Justus, D-Kansas City, and Airick Leonard West, a member of the Kansas City, Mo., School Board. West wasn't originally on the list of speakers, but asked to added after showing up in the crowd. Justus took to the stage shouting that she was proud to be a senator and an out lesbian. West was greeted with a roar when he declared that gay rights ARE civil rights.

After the rally ended, we lined the streets with our signs and waved and clapped as passing drivers honked in support. There were a handful of anti-gay demonstrators, and I do mean a tiny handful. I only saw three or four shivering with their signs.

By the way, the crowd estimate is mine.

UPDATE -- I forgot to note that several people who spoke like Gottstein and West identified themselves as straight supporters. I know other straight supporters were in the crowd. I saw young and old there.

The Future of LGBT America

In my new column, I ponder a post-Proposition 8 world.

When I saw a photo of Proposition 8 supporters celebrating their victory over marriage equality in California, I was enraged. I wanted to run howling into the street. I felt the urge to break, smash, and destroy with all my might. Read more.

KC joins national day of protest against Prop 8

Call this spontaneous grassroots combustion: A national demonstration protesting the passage of Proposition 8 in California and same-sex marriage bans in Arizona and Florida has been set for Saturday.

In Kansas City, the demonstration will be held at 12:30 pm at J.C. Nichols Fountain, 47th and J.C. Nichols Parkway next to the Plaza. The KC protest is being pulled together by the Lesbian and Gay Community Center of Kansas City, the local ACLU, PROMO and the Four Freedoms Democratic Club. The Pitch has more.

The nationwide protest is a product of true grassroots organizing, born of a blog, Twitter, Facebook, and word of mouth.

I'll be at the demonstration. Will you?

A straight man tells the truth about gay marriage

Sometimes I get very tired of Keith Olbermann. I get tired of him ridiculing people and being, well, just outright nasty. Yesterday, though, in a moving Special Comment he nailed the meaning of the passage of Proposition 8 and the battle over marriage equality.

Celebrate our victory, but don't give up the fight

By Nancy Jane Moore

I have mused at length over the Obama victory and the need to keep up the struggle against the religious right and for progressive changes like gay marriage over on my new blog Blending on Open Salon. Drop by and comment.

California speaks on the topic of animals vs. gays

... And the voters "words" aren't pretty. Tom Toles shows what the passage of Proposition 8 really means. See the full cartoon here.

More after Prop 8 musings

Virginia Postrel argues that we can't win on same-sex marriage if we hide the queers in the closet. I couldn't agree more. In fact, the most ironic thing about Proposition 8 and the entire battle over marriage is that the religious right may now have proven that the only way we can win is to do what they fear: Change the country's mind about queers. Given that we will continue to face voter initiatives designed to smear us and take away our rights, the only way we can protect our families may well be to win the hearts and minds of straight America.

Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan.

How LGBT Americans can best handle their post-election blues

Longtime politico David Mixner weighs in on the LGBT community's stunning loss on Proposition 8, and comes up with a list of questions we need to answer

Now is the time for patience and knowledge. We need facts to find out how to do our job better next time. And those answers require patiently going over the election returns astutely and avoiding quick, 'feel good' proclamations that might lead us into the wrong direction in the future. For example, when the returns are totally completed, we should put together a group of real political experts to see just exactly what happened. Did we have the right ads? Did we attempt to make others love us at the cost of good hard hitting ads? Did we start the right ads soon enough? Did we make the best use of our grassroots network? Did we involve enough people outside our community soon enough? Where we too insular? How did our national leadership and organizations respond and could they have been used better?

I like Mixner's list, and I second his call to stop the blame game and to keep hope. This needs to be a time for evaluation and review for the LGBT movement, not scapegoating.

Painfully bittersweet

Last night I cheered Barack Obama's historic victory and toasted him with champagne. This morning I'm overwhelmed by pain.

Voters in Arizona and Florida banned marriage equality. Voters in Arkansas denied lesbians, gays and single heterosexuals the right to foster children and adopt. And most horrific of all, it looks like voters in California are taking the right to marry away from lesbian and gay couples.

To put this into perspective...

* If the Arkansas ban had been the law in Kansas when my life partner died of cancer, I would never have been able to adopt the son I had raised. Because she was his biological parent and I was invisible under the law, he would have lost both parents because of the death of one.

* Nearly 20,000 same-sex couples in California no longer know whether their marriages are legal. And the children of all same-sex couples throughout this nation woke up this morning to once again learn that their families are reviled.

A president we can be proud of

By Nancy Jane Moore


My friends Mark and Mary Gayle and I started to believe that Barack Obama might actually win this election when MSNBC told us he'd carried Ohio. But his electoral vote count stayed at 207 for about an hour and nothing seemed to be happening, so we switched over to Comedy Central to see what Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert had to say.

They were clowning around, occasionally interviewing some people (like Charles Ogletree of Harvard Law School, who was pretty damn funny for a law professor), and then the clock ticked over to 10:01 PM (CST) and Jon Stewart suddenly had an important -- and real -- announcement: "Barack Obama has been elected President of the United States."

Obviously every news outlet -- even The Daily Show -- was just waiting for the polls to close on the West Coast.

We confirmed things on MSNBC, made a quick check of Fox News, just to be sure, and then broke out the champagne and waited for the speeches.

McCain's concession speech was decent enough to remind me that in the past he'd had the reputation of being a more honorable man than his campaign suggested. But mostly I was just glad to know that it was the last word I'd have to hear from him for some time to come.

And then Obama made the kind of speech you want to hear from a president and I was moved. I wasn't just happy because I voted for him, or because I agree with him on many (though not all) of the issues before us or even just because it means Bush will soon be gone. I was deeply moved because he speaks so well and with so much depth and substance, and because his speech reflects an intelligent man who gives great thought to what he says and does.

And his victory reflects a man who knows how to bring the right people together to get the job done.

It occurs to me that for once in my lifetime, I might have a government that I can be proud of, one that at least reaches for the idealism that we were all taught about in high school while being competently run.

I was, in fact, so moved that I suddenly had the desire to go to Obama's inauguration.

You should know that I recently moved back to Austin, Texas, so going to the inauguration is a lot harder than it was when I lived in Washington, where I could just hop on the subway.

You should also know that as near as I can remember, it's always cold as hell in Washington on Inauguration Day. And I really hate large crowds. And it's easier to see and hear what's going on if you watch the swearing in on television.

In fact, I lived in Washington, D.C., for 28 years and never -- ever -- went to see the president inaugurated. Not even Bill Clinton.

But you know, I'm actually thinking about going.

One More Thing: My family & today's election

This morning three generations of my lily white family, ranging in age from 22 to 81, voted for a black man for president. And we did it in Kansas, even though we knew that Barack Obama doesn't have a chance in holy heck of taking our state's electoral votes. We did it because it was the right thing to do. We did it because we think Obama is the right person for the job.

It wasn't until after I cast my vote that I realized how emotional I feel about finally having the opportunity to vote for an African American for president. It makes me want to cry to see this country live up to its promise. I can only pray that the people of California, Florida, Arizona and Arkansas will continue to support that promise by turning their backs on discrimination.

The youth vote

My son moved back home a few months ago so that he could stop paying rent and afford to finish college. Since then I've gotten reacquainted with his habits, including his intense love of sleeping in. He considers a 10 a.m. class to be excruciatingly early. This morning, my son got up 45 minutes early so he could vote for Barack Obama and get to class on time.

VOTE!

Vote as if your life depended on it -- because it does.

This will be an historic election -- if Obama wins

By Nancy Jane Moore

I've had the radio going all day, and about every fifteen minutes someone mentions that this is going to be an historic election -- usually in the context of encouraging everyone to vote.

But it's only going to be an historic election if Obama wins. If he loses, we're going to get business as usual, not to mention four more years of failed policies that are likely to finish destroying our country.

So go out and vote for Obama and make some history.

Clio, the Muse of History
painted by Vermeer

Want to be a hero? You have the power to stop Prop 8

Midnight tonight is the deadline to You can still donate to the No on 8 campaign in California. Make a gift NOW. Also, call, visit, volunteer, argue, urge and get out the NO vote!

Meanwhile, Towleroad has a great roundup on all the latest happenings in the campaign.

Five Days to the Election: Where are all our heroes?

In my latest column, I wonder where all of our heroes have gone.

On November 5, we will awake to a changed world. Depending on the vote, LGBT families in four states will either be less or more secure; we will be more oppressed or freer. The outcomes of the presidential and congressional races will also determine whether we have more chances for equality in the future or fewer. Unfortunately, the hope for victory for LGBT Americans is dimming.

This is fun.

I'm barreling down the hill of life towards a huge deadline. Thus, no blogging for me right now. (sigh) But I did come across something to lift the spirits of any Obama voter.

Dozens of call center workers refuse to read McCain script

Who says hope isn't part of politics? This is the most amazing and beautiful story I've read in weeks.

A tie between the worst of times and the 2008 Election

By Nancy Jane Moore

In case you tend to think the U.S. Civil War is ancient history, here's a story to ponder: The Austin American-Statesman has a feature on the daughter of a slave who just voted for Barack Obama. She's 109.

I think there's something very joyful about that. Here's a person who is tied by family to one of the ugliest parts of our history and yet she has been fortunate enough to live long enough to vote for an African American for president. I'm sure it will make her very happy if Obama wins next week.

The real problem with Palin's $150,000 wardrobe

By Nancy Jane Moore

Joan Walsh on Salon summed up the real problem with the McCain campaign spending $150,000 to outfit "the already beautiful Palin":

Sarah Palin didn't need the best clothing and stylists money could buy; she needed tutoring and coaching on the issues. ... The fact that the highest paid staffer on the troubled McCain team this month is Palin's makeup person is also ludicrous; you can't make this stuff up. But it proves that the campaign values Palin primarily for her star power.

It also destroys any remaining claim that the McCain/Palin ticket is "feminist." Obviously the campaign honchos think it's more important for Palin to look good than to know what she's talking about. You can't come up with a more traditional way of marginalizing women than that.

Of course, Palin was picked as the VP candidate to shore up McCain with the extreme religious right, not just to be attractive. And given the apparent depth of Palin's ignorance of the important issues of the day -- which appears to rival or perhaps even exceed Bush's -- perhaps the campaign figured coaching her on the issues was impossible. If so, that just emphasizes what a bad choice she was, given the mess the country's in.

It was a big enough insult to women in this country for the Republicans to assume that women would flock to a female VP candidate whose policies as governor and stated political and religious beliefs undermine the rights we've worked so hard to attain. But to now treat that candidate as if she were running for first lady instead of vice president is even worse.

Sarah Palin is nothing but a token. How embarrassing for the Republicans; how personally humiliating for Palin. I just hope this campaign destroys her political future so thoroughly that her current political office is her last one.

This country has just suffered through eight years under a person who holds extreme right wing religious beliefs, doesn't understand the important issues of the day, and prides himself on his lack of intellectual curiosity. It can't afford another president like that.

In fact, it can't afford any more senators and governors like that, either.

Proposition 8: How can an attack on your family NOT be personal?

I've always been stunned by how anti-equality forces like to argue that their attacks on marriage aren't personal. I've seen this happen in state after state, and I've come to believe that they will continue to win until we can convince voters of the truth -- that marriage bans hurt people. Bans hurt families and children. Nowhere is that more clear than in California where Proposition 8 would eliminate a right that already exists.

A gay man in California makes the case vividly to a Yes on Prop 8 volunteer he encountered in a supermarket parking lot. He blogged about the encounter.

“Don’t take it personally?! Don’t take it PERSONALLY?!” I nearly yelled back, “This amendment you are pushing will strip the rights and protections of MY family, how can I not take that personally!?”

Hat tip to Marriage Equality News.

Houston Chronicle endorses Obama

The Houston Chronicle has endorsed Barack Obama. According to my inside source -- the guy who actually got to write the editorial -- it's the first time the Chron has endorsed a Democrat for the White House in 44 years, meaning that the last Democrat the paper supported for president was Lyndon Johnson.

The times, they are a changin', folks.

"Taxes are necessary for the common good."

Pop quiz: Which Republican told reporters today that "taxes are necessary for the common good?" The times really ARE changing. And then, of course, there is Colin Powell's withering critique of John McCain's campaign. See below.

"Voter fraud" = poll tax revisited

By Nancy Jane Moore

Remember the poll tax? It was a fee charged for registering to vote and it existed in the United States up to the mid-1960s, when it was outlawed by a Constitutional Amendment and subsequent Supreme Court decisions.

The poll tax was clearly designed to keep poor people -- and particularly African Americans -- from voting. Sometimes the rules were even written in such a way as to only charge those people. And it was often accompanied by literacy tests, which were generally incredibly difficult if you were someone the powers that be didn't want to vote.

The Republican cries of voter fraud are just a more sophisticated version of the poll tax. They know that illegal voter registrations are not a big problem in this country, and they also know that if they scare people into thinking they might have done something wrong, they'll keep them from voting.

There's a long history, even here in the so-called land of the free, of methods of keeping ordinary people from voting. The first elections only allowed men who owned real estate to vote. Eventually, the vote was given to all white men. After the Civil War, it was ostensibly expanded to male former slaves, though anyone who's followed the history of the Civil Rights Movement knows it took until the 1960s for that to become a reality.

Outside of a few places -- like Wyoming -- women in the US didn't have the vote until 1920. (There are still women alive today who didn't have the right to vote when they were born.) The age was finally dropped to 18 from 21 in the early 1970s.

In all these cases, it took a real fight to expand the right to vote to all adult citizens, because the power structure never favors wider voting rights. Women, poor people, African Americans, young people -- they all bring wild cards and new agendas into the equation.

Now that everybody gives lip service to universal suffrage, the right has come up with voter fraud allegations as a way to discourage participation. Given that the actual challenges to election outcomes from the 2000 and 2004 elections involved voting machine irregularities that seemed to favor Republicans, this "voter fraud" campaign smacks of serious hypocrisy.

You know, in past years people complained about the poor participation in US elections -- fifty percent of registered voters is often considered a good turnout -- complete with editorials that would note how other nations had hundred percent participation. But now that it looks like people who never before bothered to vote are registering, the Republicans cry fraud instead of applauding.

The New York Times sums up the issue well: "The real threats to the fabric of democracy are the unreasonable barriers that stand in the way of eligible voters casting ballots."

"A Holy God" won't tolerate marriage equality

In another good review of the marriage battle in California, Karen Ocamb provides this perspective from the far right.

"Thirty-five years of an American abortion holocaust, the civil imposition of homosexual 'marriage' upon America and the indoctrination of America's public school children in pro-homosexual ideology are practices that a Holy God will not tolerate," FRC's National Prayer Director Rev. Pierre Bynum said in an e-mail.

Ocamb reports that the Mormon Church has contributed more than $9 million to Proposition 8.

How to Lose California

My latest column is out. Given that polls now show the No On Prop 8 effort trailing, I'm worried that the dire prediction in my column will come true.

The Bay Area Reporter has a good overview of the struggling No on Prop 8 campaign.

The Silly Season

We've reached the Silly Season in politics. With weeks still left in the campaign, pundits have decided that they know exactly who will win. The candidate who is sinking in the polls, which may or may not be measuring reality, is throwing everything and the kitchen sink at his opponent. Bloggers are ramping up their rants, and the one thing that is absolutely indisputable is that it is now impossible to escape campaign ads. (Heck, you can't even get away from them in video games anymore.)

After we've all taken deep breaths and nice, long calming walks in the woods, we need to do whatever we can to ground ourselves in reality. Here are a few ideas on how to do that.

• Remember: No one has won the presidency yet. Days can equal years in politics. Withhold your celebrations or depressions until the night of Nov. 4.
• Ignore the polls. Unless you're a pollster or on Barack Obama or John McCain's campaign staff, they'll only drive you crazy and possibly mislead you. No one wins or loses until all the voters vote. If this election matters to you, it's still important to give money and time to your favorite candidate.
• Read every blogger, including me, with a healthy dose of skepticism. Bloggers tend to view the world through ideology-tinted glasses. That article they claim shows how everyone hates Sarah Palin, for example, may actually say nothing of the sort. Check out the article for yourself.
• And above all, fact check everyone, and that includes me.

Arrogance is the first refuge of the incompetent

By Nancy Jane Moore

At a recent Aikido seminar, my teacher, Mitsugi Saotome, pointed out that the country where an idea developed tends to take the arrogant attitude that only its residents truly understand the concept.

He was speaking of Aikido and Japan -- I should note that he is from Japan, though now a U.S. citizen -- and pointing out that although Aikido was created by the Japanese genius Morihei Ueshiba, excellent Aikido teachers are now running schools in the U.S. and other countries. You don't have to train in Japan to become a master of Aikido.

The same analysis can be applied to the U.S. and our concept of democracy. We are arrogant in our promotion of democracy throughout the world, as if we are the only people who truly understand the concept.

And given that we have allowed the Bush administration to undermine some of the very foundations of our democracy, it is questionable whether we even understand our own ideas, much less have any ability to transmit them to others.

Isaac Asimov had a character in the first book of his Foundation series who often observed, "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."

I suspect arrogance is the first one.

Congratulations Paul Krugman!

My favorite economist has just won the Nobel Prize. I hope this means more governments will listen to him.

Connecticut overturns marriage ban

Wow.

Raising my "Political IQ"

Q Syndicate has renamed my column, and I'm very pleased with the change. Here's the release. (And yes, it includes enough praise to make me blush bright, bright red, but this is publicity, ya' know.)

Q Syndicate Op-Ed Column Gets New Name

The popular "Lesbian Notions" op-ed column, syndicated since 1997, will undergo a name change in November, when it officially becomes "Political IQ," Q Syndicate announced today.

Veteran journalist Diane Silver will continue giving readers the inside scoop on topics she knows and loves - Washington politics, LGBT families, the religious right, local and state struggles, and the meaning of queer life in the 21st century. Her most recent column, "How to Lose California," for example, predicted the shift against marriage rights in California before Rex Wockner, Andrew Sullivan, or John Aravosis were on the story.

"The column has clearly outgrown its birth name," says Q Syndicate editor in chief Paula Martinac, who created "Lesbian Notions" 11 years ago as a progressive op-ed. "The old title suggests primarily lesbian topics, but in fact it's a really solid, well-written, and savvy op-ed column on all things LGBT - written by a lesbian. The name change will better reflect the actual content of the column."

Silver loves the new name. "I remain an out and proud lesbian, and I certainly continue to be full of notions, but the new, broader name does a better job of reflecting the content of my work," she says. "In this time of upheaval, breathtaking challenge, and an ever increasing role for government, we had all better raise our political IQs, or we’ll suffer the consequences."

A fulltime writer, Silver's work has appeared in Ms. magazine, Salon.com, and other national publications. Her book, The New Civil War, was published by Franklin Watts in 1997. She has covered politics, government, disasters, and even a bit of murder for a McClatchy newspaper and United Press International. Silver has edited magazines and taught reporting and writing at two universities.

During her interlude in politics, Silver served as a press secretary for a Democratic candidate for governor in Kansas, directed communications in a statewide effort to defeat a marriage ban, and helped found the first LGBT PAC in Kansas and the first unified LGBT political organization in that state. Silver can be found online at www.dianesilver.net.

Founded in 1995, Q Syndicate is the largest supplier of content to the LGBT media. More than 100 gay and lesbian newspapers, magazines, newsletters, and websites throughout the world have run Q Syndicate columns, puzzles, and cartoons. If you are already subscribing to "Lesbian Notions," there's no need to do anything - the op-ed will begin to appear on your Q Syndicate content page as "Political IQ" with the November 3 installment. To subscribe to "Political IQ," contact Q Syndicate Editor in Chief Martinac at paula@qsyndicate.com.

Red Alert on marriage equality in California

The leaders of No on Prop 8 say they need at least $10 million to have a chance to defeat the proposition that will take away the rights of same-sex couples to marry in California. Without that money, the campaign to protect lesbian and gay families can't get its ads on TV.

Internal polling sponsored by No on Prop 8 confirms the latest public polls, showing proponents of the marriage ban pulling ahead.

Donate NOW.

"I'm not going to the back of the bus!"

Thank you, Donna Brazile.

Hat tip to Andrew Sullivan. Like Andrew, I got tears in my eyes when I watched this. Perhaps that's because we're both gay and understand what it is to be a oppressed, or perhaps that's because we're both human and know truth when we see it.

PS - Be patient. This video seems to take forever to load. It's at the bottom of the page under a bunch of rather irritating graphics.

Anti-marriage advertising may be working in California

A new poll shows that the foes of marriage equality could win in California. The shift occurred after the group's first ad hit TV.

An estimated 11,000 same-sex couples have married since it became legal in June. If the Proposition 8 ban on same-sex marriage passes, the future of those marriages is in doubt. The families who don't make the deadline will also be hurt if Prop 8 succeeds, a fact that I shouldn't even have to mention.

Now is the time to get involved and give money and time.

Our families are also under attack in Arizona, Florida and Arkansas.

It's time to turn our backs on McCain

I usually urge people to pay attention to political campaigns, but sometimes candidates sink so low that all you can do is turn away. Such is the fate of John McCain, a man I used to admire. McCain is now so desperate that he has sunk to using the Manchurian Candidate strategy against Barack Obama. Swampland provides an overview of the attack and Obama's response.

And just who was the Manchurian Candidate? Wikipedia tells all.

Today's Must Read: Why the SEC failed

Here's the Bush Administration at it's "best" -- deregulating, setting the fox to guard the hen house, and oh yes, betting the country's financial future on a pair of crossed fingers.

Today's report from the New York Times is a must read on the Securities and Exchange Commission and a 2004 change in the rules that helped set up today's crisis.

“I’m very happy to support it,” said Commissioner Roel C. Campos, a former federal prosecutor and owner of a small radio broadcasting company from Houston, who then deadpanned: “And I keep my fingers crossed for the future.”

Don't vote

Why McCain & Palin's tactics matter

I dissect John McCain and Sarah Palin's tactics in my latest column. Can you say "lipstick on a pig?"

Today's Must Read: And the most presidential candidate is...

Joe Klein describes John McCain's anger management issues and quotes Karl Rove to make his point. The bottom line: "When was the last time Americans elected an angry President?"

And in case you missed it, Klein blogs about yet more evidence that McCain is unfit to lead.

Mental Health Break

I suspect I'm not the only one who needs a Mental Health Break right now, not to mention the fact that I miss my now-departed cats, Charlie and Ernestine.

Schadenfreude v. Apocalypse Now

By Nancy Jane Moore

Bob Herbert nailed the truth this morning:

I would like to see the self-proclaimed conservative, small government, anti-regulation, free-market zealots step up and take responsibility for wrecking the American economy and bringing about the worst financial crisis since the Depression.

Both he and I know they won't. The true believers among them are busy proposing a cut in the capital gains tax to solve the economic woes! At least they're sincere enough to allow major companies to crash rather than part from their principles.

Meanwhile the big business core -- the pragmatists who will talk against government but use it to benefit themselves -- are running around reworking the bailout, trying to get the most for their Wall Street comrades without subjecting them to too much regulation or having to fix the harm they've done to ordinary folks.

On the left, people are angry about bailing out those who caused the problem. I sympathize with this view: For years we've been lionizing the high fliers of Wall Street, who make nothing but money -- amazing amounts of money -- and it certainly gives me a certain since of schadenfreude to think of them begging for spare change among the ranks of the homeless.

But somehow I suspect that if the Wall Street crashes lead us into the depression my father and others who lived through the 1929 crash keep predicting, it won't be the bulk of big business or high fliers that will pay. It will be you and me.

When I write near-future apocalyptic science fiction, I always assume an economic meltdown not unlike this one. I am not alone -- an economic crash as well as global warming underlies Gwyneth Jones's brilliant Bold as Love series.

But recognizing the coming of a depression doesn't mean I want to live through one.

Due to 401(k) plans and other laws encouraging investment, many ordinary people have their retirement and other savings tied up in the stock market. Most of the money is in some kind of fund and the investors don't even know if it's tied up in the shaky businesses or not. A significant crash can ruin a lot of lives. And crashes on Wall Street seem to trickle down to the rest of us a whole lot faster than good times on Wall Street do.

The best fix for the situation is to put regulations back in place and improve government oversight -- in other words, undo all the destruction of our government that started in the Reagan years. I don't say go back to FDR and the New Deal; those ideas were good for the time, but now we need some fresh approaches.

Of course, that's not something even a functional Congress can do overnight, and probably not something that can be done under the failed Bush administration. And I admit that leads me to wonder why this came to crisis mode at precisely this time, when the presidential election is at its height and Congress just wants to go home.

Was it just because the Bush administration kept putting off dealing with things until they got too bad to ignore? Or was it that they hoped to rush through a plan that would simply bail out the bad guys without protecting the rest of us?

Maybe this is our October surprise. Though for now it seems to be tilting things toward Obama, so it may not be the last one.

Right now I'd like to see a short term fix that gets the overall economy breathing easier and a significant plan under what I hope is an Obama administration to fix the excesses that led to this collapse. I hope that's what we get.

Of course, it could be that total collapse will open the door to a better society. On the other hand, since I'm currently reading Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine, I worry that either total collapse or a badly structured bailout will just open the door to an even grimmer economy for ordinary people.

So I'm hoping for a fix I can live with. I don't really want to live in one of my apocalyptic futures.

The Train Wreck

This and this are like watching a train wreck in slow motion. O.M.G. The problem is that we're on the train. Salon sums up the situation clearly.

Post Debate: The Mom-Meter

For what it's worth, my 81-year-old mother was not impressed with John McCain last night. She is a confirmed Democrat, so take this opinion with a grain of salt. However, I was curious about whether McCain's approach and age would comfort her.

I questioned her closely about how she felt about McCain's constant references to his experience, and her comment was that she had heard it all before. She said she has heard all of his ideas before, and is sick of the old way of doing things. Her bottom line? What we need is something new, and at least Barack Obama seemed to have new ideas.

The debate is back on

The New York Times and others are reporting the news. Shall we recap the events?

• John McCain "suspends" his campaign and declares that he won't debate until the financial crisis is solved.
• Republicans and Democrats in Congress announce that they have a deal to pass a modified bailout plan.
• "Suspended" McCain campaign continues running ads and attacking Barack Obama via surrogates, while the news media report that McCain is putting "country first."
  
• McCain flies to Washington, DC, and arrives with much fanfare.
• Announced bailout plan crashes and burns.
  
• McCain declares victory and announces that he will (tah dah!) debate Obama as planned.
• Congressional leaders and Bush Administration go back to what they were doing before McCain intervened. A grateful nation holds its breath and prays for a real solution.
  

What was accomplished? McCain got a ton of news coverage.

Why I like Rachel Maddow

New MSNBC host Rachel Maddow has made me a fan with the depth of her knowledge and her light touch, and I'm not alone.

The American Prospect writes:

She is liberal without apology or embarrassment, bases her authority on a deep comprehension of policy rather than the culture warrior's claim to authenticity, and does it all with a light, even slightly mocking, touch. She proves that liberals can attract viewers on television when they actually act like, well, liberals.

Maddow actually steers the conversation on TV to substance. And then there's this:

She is in some ways the first post-Bush liberal pundit, having arrived on the national scene at a time when the country was collectively fed up with the Bush years and audiences were genuinely ready to hear liberal perspectives.

The times really are changing.

The religious crusade against marriage equality

AP reports on what we're up against in California. By the way, I don't use the word "crusade" lightly in the headline.

Campaign to beat California's Prop 8 could be in trouble

Not to be alarmist, but money wins elections. The LA Times reports that the promoters of Prop 8 -- the proposal to rip marriage rights away from same-sex Californians -- have raised far more money than the opponents of the ban.

Give now to the Vote No On Prop 8 campaign. If you've already donated, give again. It doesn't matter where you live. This proposal matters to us all.

The Big Bailout: David Cay Johnston pleads with journalists

Back at the dawn of time when the Internet was barely a glimmer in anyone's eye, I worked for the Detroit Free Press under Pulitzer Prize winner David Cay Johnston. He not only taught me how to write, but also which questions to ask. I have never seen a reporter who worked harder than Johnston.

Today, a letter from Johnston has been posted at Romenesko, an insiders blog for journalists. In it, Johnston pleads with his fellow reporters to do much, much more than they are now in reporting the proposed bailout.

The Administration has scared the markets and some key legislative leaders, but it has not laid out a coherent, specific and compelling need for this enormous proposal, which is the equivalent of a one-time 55 percent income tax surcharge. (Instead the money will be borrowed, so ask from whom and how this much can be raised so quickly if the credit markets are nearly seized up with fear.)...

As of now we are, as a group, behaving just as we did the last two times the administration sought to rush through a hastily thought out, ill-conceived plan. Why in the world are we being so gullible and naive? whatever happened to the core value of journalism -- check it out?

We may need this bailout, and we may need it soon. But if we don't understand exactly the why, how, who and what, then the United States may be in very deep trouble.

Socialism for the rich only

E.J. Dionne makes some interesting points on the bailout today.

Socialism, you say? We're already into that. The administration's plan amounts to socialism for the rich only.

... and...

(I)f Congress can appropriate $700 billion for Wall Street, where is the help for everyone else hurting in this economy? Isn't it strange that an administration that could not come up with a comparatively modest sum to increase the number of children with health insurance could suddenly find all this cash for the financial industry?

Here's my message to Congress: Do what you must to fix the economy, but be sensible.

Thank YOU Spielberg and Capshaw!

Steven Spielberg and his wife Kate Capshaw have followed Brad Pitt's lead and donated $100,000 to the campaign to defeat Proposition 8 in California.

Spielberg and Capshaw said in a statement, "By writing discrimination into our state constitution, Proposition 8 seeks to eliminate the right of each and every citizen in our state to marry regardless of sexual orientation. Such discrimination has NO place in California's constitution, or any other."

Most of us won't be able to give in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, but we can give $10, $50, $100, $1,000 or more. Go the No On Prop 8 page and donate today.

The Bailout Stampede: Let's take a breath

Add my voice to the rising chorus urging both action and caution on the financial bailout. We have to do something, but allowing ourselves to be stampeded into the wrong decision will cripple the economy and this country.

Count me as one more person in agreement with Sen. Chris Dodd as quoted today by AP:

"I understand speed is important," he said. "But I am far more interested in whether or not we get this right. There is no second act to this."

A passing acquaintance with the truth

The McCain campaign vs. the Truth.

Mainstream Media & the Bailout: Getting the story wrong

One of journalism's biggest problems is a tendency to get the facts right, and the story wrong. Such is the case of the coverage of the whopper of a bailout now under debate. One of the story lines being promoted by journalists is that the bailout will hamstring the next president.

McClatchy Newspapers on Friday:

The next president will take office in January with little hope of getting his pet programs enacted quickly, if at all, because of already-massive budget deficits likely to balloon even further from the hundreds of billions expected to be used to bail out Wall Street.

Time magazine today:

For at least the next year, and perhaps for years after, Treasury's spending authority will make it harder for the next President to fulfill campaign promises and pump money into new priorities.

I added the italics.

The problem with both of these passages is that they turn this into a story about the problems of a politician. The idea that it's only this poor soul's "pet programs" and his ability to "fulfill campaign promises" that is hurt is complete and utter garbage.

While it is factually true that the new president will face problems, his tussles will be tiny compared to what's going to happen to the rest of us.

This bailout -- no matter how necessary -- means that you and I won't get universal health care, at least not anytime soon. Crumbling bridges may well not be fixed because the U.S. government won't have the money. (Can anyone say "Minneapolis?") FEMA may be even less effective than it is now. Financial aid for college students could well shrink. Medical research and other scientific research could be hampered because the U.S. Treasury is strapped for cash. The list goes on and on.

There will be much less money available to provide the kind of services citizens need and should expect from their government.

By framing the story as being about presidential problems, journalists make it appear as if this is a mere political hassle for one guy who lives in the White House. Who cares if a politician has to wrestle with campaign promises?

From my vantage point, the Bailout looks a tad too much like highway robbery. It could hurt all of us for decades to come.

Republicans, deregulation, and the current financial mess

By Nancy Jane Moore

Has anybody else noticed that three major financial crises -- ones brought on by excess, greed, and, most importantly, insufficient oversight -- came during Republican administrations?

I'm speaking of the Great Depression, the savings and loan crash of the 1980s, and the current mess, which, according to what Kevin Phillips said on Bill Moyers Journal last night, might be worse than the Depression. (I'm paraphrasing from vague memory -- Phillips' pessimism scared me so much that I couldn't stand to watch and switched to a DVD of Battlestar Gallactica instead of listening to him as I should have.)

These three crises happened after years of administrations that opposed regulation, took steps to deregulate institutions that cry out for regulation, and appointed people as regulators who oppose the whole idea of oversight.

I know there have been other crises in recent times, but most of the others strike me more as the usual ups and downs of a market-based economy. These three, though, came about because the administrations did what they could to block regulation, allowing as so-called unfettered market.

As near as I can tell, all an unfettered market does is allow people to make money doing things that provide nothing to the economy as a whole -- such as creating hedge funds and other financial instruments most ordinary people can't comprehend -- and to get insanely rich, until the whole thing crashes, at which point we the taxpayers bail them out so that our economy doesn't go down with them.

The Depression came about after the corrupt years of Harding following by Silent Cal Coolidge and Herbert Hoover, neither of whom did anything to get in the way of their money-making pals. It took a long time to rebuild after that, but rebuild we did, with increased regulation and protection for ordinary citizens. There were ups and downs after that, but on the whole, the economy did pretty well.

And then Reagan came along with his deregulation ideas, which were followed by the crash of the high-flying, over-extended, deregulated savings and loans. As crashes go, this one may seem like a blip, except that it so exactly presaged what we're seeing now.

At least I understood what happened with the savings and loans. I don't really comprehend the financial side of how the investment banks got into all this trouble -- and I actually do know something about real estate financing. The most obvious thing to me -- especially given that the ratings organizations continued to rate investments in and by these firms at the highest levels -- is that everybody took care of everybody else and nobody paid attention to the fact that housing prices couldn't go up forever.

I'm currently reading Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine, in which she explains Milton Friedman and his argument for completely free markets, and points out how "shocks" -- both economic and political -- paved the way for other countries to try his methods. By rights, here in the land of Friedman, we shouldn't bail these companies out, but just let them fail and our economy with them. Supposedly our society would end up better off, never mind how many of us might suffer.

Of course, even Republicans don't do that. With luck, along with this massive bailout we'll get some revived and even improved regulation.

Though as Klein warns us, don't think you've seen the death knell of the "free market uber alles" argument. It'll be back as soon as we get things put back together and it could screw up the other things we need to deal with, like climate change for example.

Given the depth of the crisis, many of us may not live to see the next round.

Here's another suggestion for something we can do -- besides voting Democratic this time and making sure Congress actually passes some meaty regulatory schemes: Lobby the high schools to teach economics. Make it a required course, just like civics and history. Given the complexities of modern finance, everyone needs at least a basic grounding in how economic systems work.

Used to be everyone needed to know how to raise food, build houses, cook, and sew. These days, what everyone really needs to know is how to manage their own money -- and how to control those who manage vast amounts of it.

Lessons from Denver & St. Paul

Karl Rove is alive and well; the Log Cabin Republicans made a bold, but costly move; and other lessons from the political conventions are revealed in my latest Lesbian Notions column.

Obama talks strategy on gays in the military & marriage equality

Philadelphia Gay News Publisher Mark Segal finally got his interview with Barack Obama. The Democratic nominee says he won't pull a George W. Bush and sneak a repeal of "don't ask, don't tell" into a signing statement. Obama also talks strategy for repealing the Orwellian named Defense of Marriage Act.

I think Obama's strategy is right. It's scary. I want him to jump up and down and scream that he'll ram equality down the throats of anyone who disagrees with him. That kind of response would certainly be emotionally satisfying, but it wouldn't bring about a lasting victory for us.

By the way, Segal also asked for an interview with John McCain, but (here's a shock) McCain declined.

A sinking ship?

Princeton economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman is now comparing the news from Wall Street to the Titanic. This is not making me feel better.

John McCain meet Herbert Hoover

As anyone who reads this blog knows, I'm a confirmed Paul Krugman fan. I value his knowledge, his political perspective and, most of all, his ability to explain the economy in terms that make sense. Today Krugman brings a couple of interesting facts to our attention in his blog. He reminds us of how John McCain is sounding eerily like Herbert Hoover on the eve of the Great Depression, and then points us toward the "postmodern bank run(s)" happening now.

Update
Updated with image of Hoover.

The economy does better under Democrats

Michael Kinsley isn't the first writer to argue that the economy does better under Democrats than Republicans, but he does have the latest statistics.

After a hurricane, we are ALL family

Here's a reason to smile. In the aftermath of Hurricane Ike's devastation of Galveston, a gay bar has become a home away from home for all -- straight and queer alike. Reuters reports:

Tina Turner is the artist of choice at the bar, given that she survived another Ike -- her abusive husband Ike Turner.

Today's Must Read: What Republicans know & Democrats don't get

This is a bit long, but it is well worth reading to learn What Makes People Vote Republican.

University of Virginia Psychology Professor Jonathan Haidt explores different approaches to morality and concludes that people don't vote Republican because they're duped. They simply view the world, and morality, differently than Democratic voters.

I'm not certain I agree with all the solutions he proposes for Democrats, but Haidt's piece offers a fascinating review of the psychology of morality and voting behavior.

Another reason to vote for Sen. Obama

By Nancy Jane Moore

I'm traveling, so I get my news in lumps. This morning I read about the Merrill Lynch and Lehman Brothers collapses; now I see that the Dow dropped over 500 points.

The NY Times reported the reactions of the two presidential contenders to the financial news.

Barack Obama said the current situation was "the most serious financial crisis since the Great Depression" and added, "This country can’t afford another four years of this failed philosophy."

John McCain said that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong."

I can't respond better than Sen. Obama did: "Senator McCain, what economy are you talking about?"

Tom Toles: A picture is worth a thousand words

Sometimes a picture really is worth a thousand words. Tom Toles sets the record straight. The entire cartoon is available here.

Must Reads: Sarah Palin as president

In case you missed them on Sunday, do go back and read the New York Times and Washington Post stories reporting on Sarah Palin's governing style. Both stories provide a vivid look at how a Sarah Palin presidency might work. It isn't a pretty picture.

This election isn't about lipstick on a pig

This morning it's worth noting the conjunction of the crisis on Wall Street with the McCain-Palin outrage over Barack Obama's use of a common saying about pigs and lipstick. Our financial system is teetering, and the Republicans are furious over a manufactured, non-existent slight. The issues we confront are too serious for that kind of stupidity.

Here is today's most chilling sentence. From Princeton Economist Paul Krugman:

Will the U.S. financial system collapse today, or maybe over the next few days? I don’t think so — but I’m nowhere near certain

Joan Garry vents her fury over the Log Cabin endorsement of McCain

Joan Garry writes that the Log Cabin Republican's endorsement of John McCain is like chickens voting for Col. Sanders. I concur.

Sarah Palin vs. The Big, Bad Media; or how did she do on her home turf in front of a lone interviewer?

[updated]
I was unable to watch last night for a variety of reasons, but the first reviews are kind of interesting.

Apparently, in the most low-key of settings with a sweet, ole' guy interviewer, Palin didn't do too well, except if you're judging on personality and tone. And as the New York Times TV reviewer reminds us, that may be all that matters to some. (Apparently the Times thinks American voters are a tad stupid.)

Slate: The ABC News anchor flummoxes the GOP amateur

Salon: Making a mockery of 9/11. Writer and Salon Editor-in-Chief Joan Walsh gets the award for the best line of the day. In talking about the Palin interview, she wrote:

It's the day we learned beyond any doubt that John McCain put his manhood in a blind trust to win the presidency.

New York Times: Showing a confidence in prepared answers. The Times TV reviewer thought tone mattered more than, well, expertise or competency.

Kevin Drum does his own review of reviews and notes one attitude from the right: The idea that Charlie Gibson had some gall to actually ask Palin substantive questions and expert real answers from a person who could become president.

James Fallows: Palin's lack of knowledge of the Bush Doctrine probably disqualifies her for the job.

What Sarah Palin revealed is that she has not been interested enough in world affairs to become minimally conversant with the issues. Many people in our great land might have difficulty defining the "Bush Doctrine" exactly. But not to recognize the name, as obviously was the case for Palin, indicates not a failure of last-minute cramming but a lack of attention to any foreign-policy discussion whatsoever in the last seven years.

Josh Marshall calls this moment "painful" and provides the video to prove it.

[updated 11:21 a.m. Central]

More links to reviews.

Hat tip to Media Bistro for providing the first few links in its Morning Newsfeed.

Today's Must Read: Everybody take a deep breath

I agree with David Broder that both Democrats and Republicans need to chill out. In talking about the presidential election, Broder writes:

...the uncertainty of the outcome is overwhelming.

Remembering

Dueling Lesbians: Perhaps someone should tell conservatives there's more than one of us on the air

Ahhh, you just can't make this stuff up.

Tim Graham, director of media analysis for the conservative Media Research Center, is upset by the addition of "this lesbian" Rachel Maddow to the MSNBC lineup. Graham appears to be as outraged by Maddow's sexual orientation as he is by her leftest opinions. In his appearance on Fox, Graham doesn't waste any opportunity to repeat that Maddow is a lesbian. (Oh, the infamy of it all!)

Meanwhile, Graham seems to have failed to notice that CNN now has its own lesbian commentator, Hilary Rosen.

Court declares Florida gay adoption ban to be unconstitutional

Circuit Judge David J. Audlin Jr. says the ban hurts children and violates both the state and federal constitutions, The Miami Herald reports.

A proposal that would ban same-sex couples from fostering or adopting children in Arkansas is on the ballot in November.

Billie Jean King clarifies that she's an Obama supporter

The tennis great, Billie Jean King, clears up the confusion.

Open Letter to Progressives: Let's not let ourselves get "Braziled"

As the Obama-Biden ticket tumbles in the post-convention polls, there is more than a whiff of panic in the air of ProgressiveLand. You can smell it in the blogosphere and in the e-mails, Twitterings and Facebook messages flying around the Internet.

Joan Walsh summed the facts and the feelings up nicely on Salon.com today.

Democrats traumatized by the surreal losses in 2000 and 2004 feel like it's déjà vu all over again, with the sudden surge of John McCain and Sarah Palin in the polls. It's like a bad dream: Even the Obama fundraising juggernaut is stumbling, according to the New York Times, missing its internal targets and having to push harder for cash. Meanwhile, white women have flocked to the ticket with the white female vice president; according to the most recent ABC News poll, Barack Obama had an 8-point lead among white women voters last week; now he's trailing McCain by 12, a 20-point swing in one week.

I'm not writing to say that everything is going to be OK. To do so would be a lie because no one, absolutely no one, knows who is going to win on Nov. 4. Any pollster, any pundit, any beer-drinking buddy from down the street who says that this election is already locked up for John McCain or for Obama is simply a fool.

But I would like to offer some perspective on the psychology of this moment. To understand what may be happening, we have to understand the psychology of competition. Any individual competitor -- or a campaign or political movement -- can defeat itself. Right now, that's what I see as the biggest danger for Obama fans.

To fully explore this idea (and explain my headline), I need to detour into women's soccer. I suspect that Brazil's 1-0 defeat in the gold medal game had more to do with what was going on between the ears of Brazil's players than with what happened on the field.

If you follow the women's game at all, you know that the U.S. once dominated the world (and Brazil), but recently our team has been, at best, a fading power, while the immensely talented Brazil has been ascendant. To make matters worse, our star player, Abby Wambaugh, suffered a broken leg just before the Olympics. Few expected the U.S. to win gold, but we triumphed despite the fact that Brazil played brilliantly for most of the game.

While providing color commentary on the Olympic telecast, former national team star Brandi Chastain offered the best explanation I heard for Brazil's defeat. The U.S. has beaten Brazil so many times in the past that the Brazilians simply couldn't believe that they would win, Chastain said.

Action followed belief.

Reality blossomed out of prophecy.

Today progressives find themselves in the same position as Brazil, except that the stakes are far higher than an Olympic medal.

No one knows what will happen on Nov. 4, but there is one way for progressives to guarantee failure, and that's to remain convinced that we can't win.

For more perspective -- some cheerful and some not -- see these links.

A Democratic pollster puts the latest polls in perspective.

Jonathon Capehart from The Washington Post considers the situation.

CNN does a poll of polls and considers the electoral map.

Tied

The newest poll shows that the Republican National Convention gave John McCain the momentum, but it also shows that the race is now tied. Other polls gave McCain the lead.

All together now: Who decides a tie in a presidential race? Voters do. That's you and me, folks.

Post-convention bounce puts McCain ahead of Obama

[updated]

Now Obama is running to catch up, according to post-convention polls by USA Today/Gallop and three other pollsters. Nate Silver (no relation) tries to make statistical sense of it.

[update 10:58 am Central]

Ana Marie Cox adds more perspective and provides reasons for everyone, both Ds and Rs, to take a deep breath.

Today's Must Reads: The Republican assault on truth

There are two great entries today in the must-read category.

Leonard Pitts:

Yes, we’re all intellectually dishonest on occasion. But no one does it like Republican conservatives. They are to intellectual dishonesty what Michael Jordan was to basketball or the Temptations to harmony: the avatar, the exemplar, the paradigm. They have elevated it beyond hypocrisy and political expedience. They have made it ... art.

Joe Klein:

Maybe I'm getting old, maybe it's that I've seen this act so often before, maybe it's that the people I talk to when I go out on the road really are having a harder time paying for things like health care, gasoline and college tuition, but I'm finding the Republican attempts to derail the conversation from the actual state of the country really depressing and disgraceful this year. They practice Orwellian politics of the crudest sort.