National Geographic explains why identical twins might not share sexual orientations:

HT: Andrew Sullivan

This intelligent and reasoned young man deserves great praise. In response to a four-day long analysis of the pledge of allegiance and the statement of “with liberty and justice for all”, he concluded that such an ideal is not currently being realized, given the persistent measure of discrimination in the United States. Sighting racism, sexism, and the fact that LBGTs can not marry throughout the nation, he thus decided that he would not participate in the pledge until marriage was a right for all US citizens. Taking a such a dissenting stand at the age of 10 years old, given the ridicule he would experience in school, takes a wealth of courage and bravery. Below is the video of his interview on CNN explaining his position.

CATHOLIC  CHARITIES AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE

In the gray rain — where the only burst of color comes from the flash of an ambulance scooping up someone who is cold, sick and wet — threatening to shut a door is the cruelest answer.

“They want to stop helping us?” asked the woman tucked completely inside her wet jacket.

She is staying at the nearby John Young women’s shelter run by Catholic Charities on First Street NW. She’d heard that the Church is threatening to stop taking millions of dollars of the District’s money for services such as this shelter, adoption and medical care unless the D.C. Council changes the same-sex marriage bill it is preparing to pass next month.

For folks on the street, those words are nothing more than the sound of a door slamming shut.

“I hear they gonna put us out,” she told me.

“I don’t get it. What do gay people have to do with the shelters? They’re the Church; that’s what they do. They help. That don’t make no sense,” the woman said.

That’s right.

By trying to play political hardball with the District, no matter how carefully they word their objection to the bill, officials at the Archdiocese of Washington and Catholic Charities are telling our city’s most vulnerable people — homeless families, sick children, low-income mothers — that they are willing to throw them on the table as a bargaining chip.

What the Church is doing is an uncharitable and cruel maneuver.

Amid a recession and on the cusp of a winter that is expected to be harsh, the number of homeless women and children in the city “is skyrocketing,” said D.C. Council member Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6) when he spoke at a panel on homelessness this week.

According to the Interagency Council on Homelessness, 434 families in the District are on a waiting list for emergency shelter. This number jumped by about two dozen in just one week. For most people working in this field, it is the highest number in recent memory.

Catholic Charities runs nine homeless shelters using at least some money from the city. This is not a time to threaten any of the services those provide.

Every year I attend the National Gay Lesbian Task Force Creating Change Conference. Its a once a year LBGT Conference that is a summit of 2,000+ activist, non profit, community leaders for equality an services.

I am looking to attend this year in Dallas, Texas from Feb. 3rd to the 7th and the full costs are a whooping $990. So this year if you want to get me a holiday/winter gift, a donation to the Creating Change fund would be amazing. Every bit helps me to go and network, share research, hear new research, job hunt, and build efforts for back in Michigan in the organizations that I am invovled in which right now is the LBGTA Caucus of the Michigan Democratic Party.

If you would be willing to support please email me at adamtaylorus@yahoo.com

I will be working to develop a fund raising online page soon. To see what this conference looks like you can go to the video on the website @ http://www.creatingchange.org/

The COMELEC rejected the registration of Ang Ladlad, an LBGT (Lesbians, Bisexuals, Gay and Transexuals) group that wanted to run for the party-list elections for the House of Representatives. The reason they gave was that this group “tolerates immorality”.  To bolster their claim, they cited passages in the Bible and Koran to prove that the group “violates moral and faith”.

This decision is a gross violation of the rights of Ang Ladlad. Why are the Bible and Koran referred to in the decision of the Comelec? Aren’t they supposed to decide on the merits of the application only? As far as I know,  Ang Ladlad has met the requirements put forward by the Party List Law,  and the LBGT sector is definitely an under-represented sector in Congress. The commissioners have no right to put personal prejudices to play in this matter.

“It is a disgusting display of ignorance and bigotry. It betrays a disturbing ignorance of their mandate as a poll body, and the commissioners involved should be forced to review their duty as election officials,” Rep. Hontiveros (Akbayan  party list representative) said. “They should be made to read the constitution.”

The Supreme Court should force the Comelec to revise its decision, on the basis of the separation of Church and State.

En primer lugar, podemos argumentar, por qué es necesario o deseable que se legisle favorablemente en torno a la posibilidad de que se puedan concretar matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo.

Dentro de las razones, es posible señalar ciertos beneficios económicos para las parejas homosexuales, como la capacidad de heredar cuando uno muere, o la capacidad de poder iniciar una sociedad conyugal, tal y como los matrimonios heterosexuales.

Asimismo, existen ciertos beneficios legales, como la adopción, al cual no tienen acceso actualmente, y que marcan una diferencia con las parejas heterosexuales actualmente.

Sin embargo, cuando el tema se aborda solamente desde este punto de vista –el de los beneficios económicos y legales-, cae de cajón la reflexión típica esgrimida desde sectores más conservadores (aunque no los más conservadores, como veremos), que es ¿Por qué no se conforman simplemente con la ratificación legal de la “pareja de hecho”?

En efecto, si el perjuicio que implica no poder casarse fuera solamente económico o legal – en términos de patrimonio compartido y de la posibilidad de adopción- la regularización de las parejas “de hecho” bastaría para enmendar esa situación.

Pero la realidad es distinta; es cierto que detrás de la reivindicación del matrimonio homosexual existe un deseo por poder compartir el patrimonio, solucionar problemas con herencias y poder adoptar hijos, pero este asunto va más allá de los beneficios económicos y legales. Tiene que ver con un beneficio cultural, que se sitúa, si prefieren, en el nivel del imaginario colectivo.

Así es, porque la regulación y aprobación del matrimonio homosexual en Chile aportaría significativamente a mejorar la percepción de integración y de igualdad dentro de la sociedad chilena. ¿Por qué? Simplemente, porque dejarían de verse como casos excepcionales, que no pueden contraer matrimonio. Estarían legalmente en igualdad de condiciones que las parejas, y por ende los individuos, heterosexuales, lo que debería traspasarse al ámbito de la conciencia, fomentando a mediano plazo una disminución en la discriminación hacia lo que alguna vez fue lo “distinto”, lo “restringido”.

A su vez, la prohibición del matrimonio homosexual es una prohibición del Estado sobre los cuerpos y las autonomías de las personas, como identifica la activista española Beatriz Gimeno. Es –en términos legales- la prohibición que el Estado impone a dos personas que quieren someterse a un contrato abierto sólo para un tipo de persona, los heterosexuales. Por ello, es un acto según el cual el Estado coarta discriminatoriamente la autonomía de las personas sobre sus cuerpos: unos pueden, pero otros no.

Pero, como sabemos, existen ciertos mecanismos que impiden la existencia del matrimonio homosexual. En primer lugar, podemos identificar una serie de trabas culturales, que implican su rechazo, generalmente a partir de una matriz cultural judeo-cristiana, que identifica a los homosexuales como anormales, antinaturales y pecaminosos.

Por ello, resulta provechoso tensionar un poco esos conceptos: ¿qué es lo anormal? Básicamente, lo anormal es aquello que escapa a la norma, a la mayoría. Pero el juicio de valor que se le asigna a la minoría no tiene asidero, ¿o es que acaso, los colorines son malos, por ser la minoría?

Asimismo, podemos preguntarnos ¿qué es lo antinatural? ¿Lo natural es necesariamente bueno? ¿Entonces por qué no abrigarnos mejor con nuestras propias protecciones contra el frío y el sol –nuestros vellos-, por qué no alimentarnos sólo de lo que la tierra nos da? ¿O es que vivimos en un mundo completamente natural?

Analicemos la argumentación cristiana que se da en torno al carácter exclusivamente heterosexual del matrimonio:

Primero, se señala que el matrimonio monógamo y heterosexual es patrimonio de la tradición judeo-cristiana, y que, por lo tanto, es el cristianismo –refiriéndose a sus representantes más poderosos, por cierto- es que controla cómo éste se define y en qué circunstancias se puede aplicar.

Así, el matrimonio es definido como un vínculo sagrado entre un hombre y una mujer, como una promesa que se hace ante Dios. La aplicación del matrimonio homosexual, por ende, se percibe como la perversión de este vínculo sagrado, como una afrenta contra Dios, y por ello, contra la moralidad.

Lamentablemente para estos cristianos, nuestras sociedades no son teocráticas –es decir, no se rigen por los textos sagrados de una religión ni sus líderes son líderes religiosos- y la religión está separada del Estado. Habitamos en un país cuyo Estado es laico, y donde la potestad de las Iglesias se ejerce en su propio ámbito, no sobre toda la sociedad. Por lo tanto, argumentar que algo es “pecado” no basta para prohibirlo jurídicamente.

Eso significa, también, que el matrimonio no es patrimonio de una sola religión, porque la tradición no es un derecho de propiedad intelectual, y porque la esfera de acción de las Iglesias corresponde sólo dentro de ellas, en tanto no tienen derecho de imponer sus puntos de vista sobre los del total de la sociedad. Si esto no fuera así, la figura del matrimonio civil –celebrado como un contrato laico, ante un ministro laico- no tendría sentido, y menos la del divorcio.

Con respecto a la adopción de niños por parte de parejas homosexuales, se dan otra serie de argumentos en realidad falaces. Uno de ellos es que el niño adoptado puede adquirir un concepto erróneo de familia y seguir el “camino” de sus padres: este argumento, vemos, se basa implícitamente en que las familias que no son heterosexuales no están “bien constituidas”, es decir, se basan en un juicio de valor sentado sobre patrones morales religiosos –que la homosexualidad es mala- y no laicos, pues las familias homosexuales no atentan necesariamente contra el orden público ni contra la integridad física de otras personas –invalidándose de paso el ridículo argumento que equipara la homosexualidad con la zoofilia, la pedofilia y otras parafilias completamente reprochables-.

Otro de los argumentos es que el niño adoptado puede ser molestado por sus pares. Argumento bastante pobre, por cierto, pues un hijo adoptado por homosexuales no es el único niño que posiblemente reproduzca conductas molestadas o que herede situaciones adversas. En ese caso, bueno sería también prohibir que se reproduzcan parejas heterosexuales gordas, de minorías étnicas, con enfermedades crónicas o pobres. O sea, una propuesta sin ningún asidero, más allá de la discriminación disfrazada de tradición. De hecho, lo más probable es que la liberalización del matrimonio homosexual ayude a su integración, más que a su rechazo.

Por lo tanto, la negativa a conceder el derecho de matrimonio a los homosexuales se explica solamente por una concepción mental en la cual los homosexuales son malos. Porque, como vimos, no existen más motivos de fondo para negarse.

Lógicamente, todas estas trabas culturales han encontrado su expresión política –es decir, relacionada al poder-, a través de trabas legales, que actualmente se encuentran en la legislación chilena, que impiden avanzar hacia la legalización del matrimonio homosexual.

Me refiero principalmente a aquellos artículos de la Constitución política chilena, según la cual el matrimonio está compuesto exclusivamente por un hombre y una mujer. Esta discriminación es agravada por el hecho de que la Constitución contemple que es la familia el núcleo central de la sociedad: ¿significa eso que todos aquellos individuos que no formen familia  no son parte del núcleo de la sociedad? O peor, ¿que deben ser excluidos de la sociedad? Esto, por supuesto, afecta también a heterosexuales que no han formado familias, pero afecta especialmente a aquella gente a la que simplemente no se le permite formar una familia.

Además, esta situación se ve particularmente dificultada por el carácter rígido de nuestra Constitución, determinado unilateral y autoritariamente gracias a la Constitución del ’80 que nos rige, que hace muy difícil modificar la Constitución, exigiendo una mayoría casi imposible de alcanzar debido al sistema electoral vigente, el binominal, que se encarga de sobrerrepresentar a la segunda mayoría política, que es, no tan sorpresivamente, el mismo grupo que impuso esa Constitución originalmente. Por lo tanto, este es también un problema político.

A pesar de todo esto que hemos señalado, el futuro no se ve tan negro para aquellas parejas homosexuales que quieran concretar su matrimonio, dado que en países con impedimentos similares –aunque en distinto grado- se han logrado importantes avances.

Por ejemplo, esta semana fue publicada una encuesta argentina en que el 66% de los encuestados estaba a favor de la legalización de los matrimonios homosexuales, a pesar de que el 57,3% se reconoció católico.

El otro ejemplo que puede ser esperanzador es la experiencia española. España, como sabemos, hace siglos ha sido considerada uno de los bastiones más fuertes del catolicismo, como se demuestra con su rechazo de moros, judíos y protestantes durante la Reconquista y la Contrarreforma, su historia monárquica, e incluso el carácter fuertemente católico de la dictadura Franquista.

Sin embargo, España se ha posicionado a la cabeza del movimiento que promueve esta igualdad entre géneros, como señala la ya referida Beatriz Gimeno, realizando la comparación con América Latina: “También parecía imposible en España hace diez años. Ahora no solo nos podemos casar en igualdad de condiciones con las parejas heterosexuales, adoptar hijos y las lesbianas tenerlos por inseminación artificial, sino que España ha “animado” a otros países, supuestamente más avanzados, como Suecia a aprobar dicho matrimonio.”

Por lo tanto, es necesario preguntarse cómo se explica que en países predominantemente católicos y tradicionalistas ocurra esto. La respuesta es simple: porque el catolicismo no es necesariamente discriminador, como muestra el caso argentino, en el que, a pesar de haber mayoría católica, se apoya abiertamente un avance en la materia. Es por eso que la negativa católica es, cada vez más, una negativa en las cúpulas de la Iglesia, más que en sus bases.

Este cambio paulatino se ha manifestado, por ejemplo, en la apertura de muchos políticos chilenos en torno al tema, por lo menos discursivamente. Es cierto que muchos han manifestado apoyar solamente discutir sobre las “uniones de hecho” entre homosexuales, promesa de futuro debate doblemente débil, ya que como vimos, estas uniones son insuficientes. Pero, a la vez, sería míope el desconocer que el solo hecho de que se reconozca que existe un problema es un avance. Nadie se habría imaginado hace 10 o 20 años que el candidato presidencial de la derecha manifestara un apoyo a las uniones de hecho entre homosexuales –aunque nunca sabremos si en realidad cree en ellas o sólo es parte de su discurso presidencial. Pero, en efecto, podría ser peor, pues hoy en día es la minoría conservadora que se opone siquiera a discutir el tema, ilustrada, por ejemplo, con las pataletas del Diputado Kast.

LGBTA Caucus November Newsletter

I will be effective immediately be slowing down my volunteerism until Jan of 2010 due to health and concerns. In the last 10 days I have had 3 migraines each worse then the last. The last one hit last night just before the City Hall meeting and rapidly I was unable to handle lights, or noise and the pain was so great it induced vomiting repeatedly.

I have been having increased anxiety attacks coping with demands of working to graduate with 12+ hour university days 4-5 days a week with moving to Lansing combined with starting a Masters program in Grand Rapids. All this while volunteering. Due to the health affects of my body telling me he can not do all this sadly I have to cut volunteering down to a minimal maybe none at all for the first time in more than half a decade. I am not very happy with having to put volunteer and activism to a crawl or stop for the next 6 weeks but with everything on my plate I am of no good to anyone or my own needs with the current stress levels.

I hope everyone can understand, if you can not respect this I will be sternly dishing out NO’s which I have lately learned very well how to say. I hope to graduate settle in the new home and go through the crazy rituals of the winter/holiday festive times before diving fully back into the world of activism and politics.

Join Kalamazoo City Commissioners and residents tonight for the Swearing In Ceremony of the 48th Kalamazoo City Commission.

Monday November 9th at 8 pm at City Hall – 241 W. South Street – 2nd floor in the Commission Chamber.

Please come early to get a seat! There will be a reception in the atrium of City Hall immediately following the ceremony.

PLEASE COME! Everything is free and open to the public and there is NO dress code.

To celebrate this, we have a new commissioner, Terry Keueske who is the first openly gay candidate to run and first openly gay candidate to be elected in Kalamazoo. Bringing diversity to the Kalamazoo City Commission. Terry has worked heavily previously with the City Commissioners from Transit, Development and Ord1856.

Earlier this week the people of Maine, via a ballot initiative, repealed a law which affirmed the right of same-sex couples to marry.

I guess this a triumph for democracy. A minority group has been blocked of a right held by the majority. Does this seem right?

But we live in a democracy. It was what the majority of the people wanted. Right?

To be honest, I skew towards John Adams. Majority rule could be a terrifying thing, hence all the checks and balances in the US government, as well as elected representatives. Look at California’s budget disaster. The use of ballot initiatives has allowed them to vote for spending as if they were socialists and taxes as if they were libertarians. In Maine, as in California, people who want to enter into a legal commitment to each other are blocked from doing so. Or if they are fortunate, forced into a “separate but equal” recognition of their relationship.

Ive heard the religious arguments against same-sex marriage. And to be honest, I don’t give a damn about them. We have no state religion. The religious beliefs of one group should have no impact on the rights of a group not affiliated with that religion. I don’t see anyone in a hurry to inscribe Sharia law at the local, state, and federal levels of the United States.

But isn’t this to protect the institution of marriage, whose purpose is to produce children? I don’t buy that for one second. Elderly men and women, after the death of a spouse, often remarry. Should we require 80-year old men and women to take fertility tests and if they fail give them a civil union, which is just as good, right? What about couples who are infertile? Or who just don’t want kids?

Speaking of kids, I’ve heard the argument that this means parents won’t be able to protect their kids from the “gay agenda” in schools. You know, there are gay people out there right? And lots of other people who don’t live a life you consider moral, right? Should we deny that men and women ever cohabitate? Or that there are single parents? Let’s have a little perspective. Kids are going to grow up in a multicultural society. They are going to be exposed to different morals and ideas. At my Catholic high school we were educated on different religions. Not once was such a discussion begun with “this religion, which is wrong and whose adherents will go to hell…” We were taught to respect other beliefs. Heck, a more than trivial number of the student body was of other religions — either other Christian denominations or Muslim or Jewish. My daughter’s school has members of all those faiths, atheists, Hindus, Buddhists, and probably a lot more.

Rereading this I see that it sounds angry. But I am angry. I keep thinking of what American attorney David Boies once said: “If we were prepared to consign minority rights to a majority vote, there would be no need for a constitution.”

Over the past few days we have been talking about Washington State’s Referendum 71, which was voted on this week. If passed, the Referendum will codify in law certain protections for same-sex couples.

In the first story of our three-part series we discussed Washington’s unusual vote-by-mail system; in the second we examined the pre-election polling.

Today we talk about what happened Election Night at the R-71 event and where the vote count stands today…and where it might end up when we’re all done.

We have lots of geeky electoral analysis ahead—and as a special bonus, we have video of the event, including an exclusive interview with Charlene Strong, the woman who became one of the icons of the pro-71 campaign.

It’s a lot to cover, so we better get right to it.

The Big “Catch-Up”

If you are new to this story, we’ll give you a real quick “catch-up”:

On Tuesday’s ballot Washington voters were asked to consider Referendum 71, which is going to decide whether E2SSB 5688 (passed by the Legislature and “[e]xpanding the rights and responsibilities of state registered domestic partners”) shall be allowed to go into effect. (E2SSB, by the way, stands for “Engrossed Second Senate Substitute Bill”.)

Voting to approve means the bill will go into law, voting to reject will prevent the bill from having any force or effect under law.

Washington State votes almost entirely by mail, and all ballots postmarked by midnight, November 3rd will be counted. Since lots of voters put their ballots in the mail on November 3rd (myself included), that means, when things are close, that the outcome of any particular question might not be known on Election Day.

About 2/3 of Washington’s population of 6.8 million is concentrated in the Western portion of the State; 3.5 million of those residents live in just three counties: King, Pierce, and Snohomish (Seattle, Tacoma, and Everett being the largest cities in those counties). 25% of the State’s population (1.9 million) resides in King County.

Clark County, which is immediately adjacent to Portland, Oregon (largest city: Vancouver), is slightly smaller in population than Eastern Washington’s largest county, Spokane, which has a population of roughly 450,000.

As it happens, the voting on R-71 is rather close, which is consistent with the pre-election polling…which means at this point you’re pretty well caught up and we’re ready to move on to new business.

The morning sun rose above the Cascades and reflected its dusky orange glow off the bottom of the thin clouds Wednesday morning, enveloping those who were awake with a blanket of soothing daylight.

The night before, however, supporters of same-sex marriage had gathered, in their goat leggings and leather, to engage in a horrifying bacchanal involving the setting of bonfires, the invocation of incantations, and the sacrifices of—

Well, actually, none of that ever happened…but it sounded like a lot of fun, didn’t it?

What Actually Happened

Instead, a crowd of roughly 250 gathered at Seattle’s Pravda Studios to wait for the results. The event was quite upbeat before results were announced, and that mood was reinforced when it was announced that seven Western Washington counties, including King County, were voting to approve the Referendum.

I was lucky enough to get some insight as to how that happened when I interviewed Charlene Strong, who tragically lost her partner three years ago. Her face and her story have figured prominently in this campaign—but as she pointed out to me, the seeds of whatever happens in this election were planted years ago:

…”…the citizens of Washington State…put a Governor in place that is all about equality and a Legislative team that is all about equality and I feel very proud tonight to be a citizen of Washington State, and I’m sure I’ll be feeling that way for quite some days to come…”

(I am not, and have never been, a camera operator for the MTV Networks. Instead, I’m still getting used to my little Flip Video camera…which is why much of the interview appears to have been conducted with the most gracious Ms. Strong’s shoulder. Mea culpa.)

Numbers, Numbers, Numbers

And with the stage having been set, let’s get geeky:

Washington’s Secretary of State keeps track of statewide ballot measures (including verifying the petition signatures), and it is on their site where we will find statewide results. At the moment (the moment being 6:24 PM, November 4th) 593,956 voters have voted to approve and 556,090 voted to reject, which means R-71 is leading 51.65-48.35%.

Ballots representing almost 33% of the State’s voters have been counted so far, and it is estimated that 394,482 ballots are on hand, around the State, waiting to be counted.

Here’s how the five largest counties are shaping up:

King County Elections reports that R-71 is passing by a 66-33% margin (202,125 to 101,403), with a total of 438,557 votes having been received so far from the County’s 1,079,842 registered voters. These numbers tell us that 135,029 votes are currently on hand, waiting to be counted. (63,446 votes came in today.)

It is likely that 90,000 of those uncounted votes are going to be “approved” votes, based on current trends. If a similar number of votes came in tomorrow, roughly 40,000 more votes would be “approve votes”, suggesting as many as 130,000 more “approved” votes could be waiting to be tallied up.

(Based on these numbers, we already know that King County will exceed the 51% statewide turnout rate that the Secretary of State projected before the election.)

Snohomish County Elections reports that 101,737 votes have been received so far, with 45,000 votes currently uncounted. Voters are approving the measure, but with a much closer margin: 51.72-48.28% (51,222-47,809). The remaining 45,000 votes should add about 1,000 votes to R-71’s lead.

We do not know how many votes were received today by the County, but if we assume that 50% of the total number of votes were in the mail in Election Day, then another 50,000 or so votes should be still on the way, which should also increase R-71’s lead by about 1,000 votes, if current trends hold.

(If we assume that the County will achieve a 50% turnout rate, roughly 40,000 Ballots should be in the mail, which only adds 800 additional votes, not the 1,000 estimated in the precious paragraph.)

The Pierce County Auditor reports that 90,367 votes are in, and the “rejected” votes are leading, 47,307 (53.08%) to 41,809 (46.92%). The estimate is that 50,000 ballots remain to be counted. 60,000 additional votes would be needed for the County to reach a 50% turnout rate, and if you projected that 110,000 votes onto the current trend the “approve 71” final vote should decline by about 6,500 votes.

Clark County Elections indicates that R-71 is losing there as well, with 36,206 (46.01%) voting to approve and 42,481 (53.99%) voting to reject. 13,000 ballots are reported to be uncounted. Clark County has 215,626 registered voters, and based on these numbers it would take an additional 14,450 votes to get to a 50% turnout. That suggests the “approve R-71” vote should decline by about another 2,000 votes.

Finally, Spokane County. There are 257,092 registered voters in the County, and they came out against R-71 in a big way, with 38,079 (39.98%) voting to approve and 57,169 (60.02%) voting to reject. The estimate is that 35,000 votes remain to be counted, and it’s likely those votes will decrease the “approve R-71” lead by about 6,000 votes.

The County has exceeded 50% turnout, and we do not know how many votes arrived today. If we assume 60% turnout, another 25,000 votes would be in the mail, reducing the “approve R-71” lead by another 5,000 votes.

The Big “Wrap-Up”

So what does all this mean?

How about this: I have forever told people that if the candidate or measure you support can win, with a reasonable margin, in Washington’s five largest counties, you’re gonna win the election.

With that in mind, let’s tally up the numbers and see where we are:

The King County tally, by my guess, will add another 130,000 “approved” votes to the statewide total. Snohomish County voters could add 2,000 more votes. Pierce, Clark, and Spokane Counties should reduce the “approve” votes by about 14,500 votes.

Add it all up, and I’m estimating that R-71 could gain 117,500 votes…but that number will certainly go down because of the votes of the rest of the State…so if I had to guess (and I guess I am) I would project that R-71 is going to pass with a margin of victory somewhere in the range of 80-100,000 votes, as opposed to the current margin of roughly 37,000 votes.

There are lots of caveats here: the estimates of incoming ballots could be off, the 50% turnout estimate could be inaccurate, and currently uncounted votes might not follow the trends of the votes counted so far.

Additionally, I will freely admit that I’m biased: I support R-71 (and to take it further, if same-sex couples want to marry…as long as I don’t have to buy all of them presents, I don’t see the problem), and this bias could be affecting my judgment.

So that’s today’s story: based on the return data that is known, and my own guess on what’s likely, I’m going way out on the proverbial limb and projecting that R-71 wins by somewhere between 80-100,000 votes, primarily on the strength of the uncounted King County vote and an estimate of votes that will arrive over the next 48 hours.

As with any modeling project, there are a lot of potential problems that might affect the model’s output—including my own biases—but I feel good about this estimate, and over the next week or so, we’ll see if I’m right.

Additionally, we got to have an inside look at the “process” of R-71…and we got to have an exclusive conversation with Charlene Strong’s shoulder—which, I promise, will become a “teachable moment” for yours truly as we grow, going forward, from a “words only” storytelling service into a video storytelling service.

It’s a great place to end Part Three—and it leaves us perfectly positioned to move on to a discussion of what we can learn from Tuesday’s skirmishes—but for now I have to go and strap on the goat leggings and get back to work.

After all, the doomed won’t sacrifice themselves, will they?

UPDATE: 11/05/09, 8 PM PST

After looking at tonight’s numbers, I’m now thinking that the margin of victory will be closer to 30-35,000, rather than 80-100,000.

This is because King County now has only 13,800 uncounted votes, far fewer than I predicted. However, I also checked to see if my own ballot packet had arrived, and it has not. This tells us there are an unknown number of ballots that were mailed on Election Day but have not yet arrived.

An additional clue? Turnout is currently reported at 34.93% for King County, which is 15% below the projected State average. If we assume the County will make that 50% turnout number, that means 150,000 ballots are currently unaccounted for…in a County that’s voting 2:1 in favor of the Referendum.

If that many votes do turn up, my 80-100,000 vote margin of victory estimate will again be looking pretty good.

The other big question mark is Pierce County. They report 50,000 uncounted votes–but that is also the exact number they reported yesterday, which makes me think that estimate might be…shall we say, inaccurate?

Snohomish County is now also reporting 56,000 uncounted votes, but they are running something like 52-48%, and as a result I don’t expect those uncounted voted to affect the outcome in any significant way.

Spokane County reports 15,000 uncounted votes, and they are voting 60-40% against, which should reduce the margin of victory by about 10,000 votes.

Clark County has 750 uncounted votes, and they are also trending against, but near 50-50, so even if a lot of votes do come in, the effect should be minimal either way.

The quick summary?

I’m now highly confident that R-71 will win. The margin could be as low as 30-35,000 or as high as my original 80-100,000 estimate if all those King County votes come in.

I don’t think the votes in the other counties are going to change the outcome–and while it’s not yet official, I think you can start to maybe breathe just a bit easier.

I have in this week had a many updates to my facebook status and with some things some have expressed confusion or lack of knowledge on symbols such as @, # used in the status. I will explain matters here.

I am very active in politics and social justice, with the focus on LBGT, Equality issues. I am a Vice Chair of the Michigan Democratic Party. I Chair the Executive Committee that has active members in 15 congressional districts. I am invovled in the operations of the MDP as well. I am a political science BA holder in 42 days, and starting a Masters in Public Administration so clearly I am passionate and my life is focused on the sphere of politics, and LBGT rights.

Therefor my status are majority of the time related to the affairs of LBGT actions, and with the current landscape many things are moving fast that need action on more than just the organizers and leaders within the movement, but the members and allies to the movement. AKA why I message out on the elections, from Maine, Washington, and Michigan this week. We recently saw Hate Crime Pass, the National Equality March, Ord 1856 in Kalamazoo, and new bills in Michigan House pass for equality. We can only move forward if we have people backing it, that are not into politics but want to know when they are needed to get out and do an action ie, vote, call your elected offical, know what is the current news.

I update via twitter. I use twitter in two accounts, @adamleben which leben is German for life, so Adam’s life. I have this twitter linked to my facebook page for updates. I tweet throughout the day. I tweet fare less on my adamleben then I do on my political tweet @progressiveMich which I created two months ago to allow my sometimes dozens of tweets a day.

Next on twitter the use of @insert name puts that persons or twitter name on their profile and yours and allows people on twitter to click it and go to the page. The use of # is a hash tag, it tags that term so if I am on twitter and I say read a tweet on Equality, and its #equality I can click and see the recent tweets on equality.

Now I have over 2,300 people on facebook and most do not ever comment, a good few hundred comment on my status, and hit the share, or like button daily, yes daily I see a dozens to hundreds of comments. I try and read to all them and respond to which ones I see a need to.

I lately am getting comments from what is odd to me gay males only, who are wondering why I update so often well I just enumerated why. If you still do not like my updates you are always free to stop reading the updates, or stop following the updates. I have my facebook set up to what I would like to express, for me political chat is social and professional to me. If you feel otherwise that is your right, but please know the facts and that is my matter for the day.

Last night Kalamazoo passed Ord 1856 that ended discrimination for sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression in housing, employment and public accommodation. Now today the House (Dem controlled) passed through the Judiciary Committee the House voted 9-5 for a state wide expansion to end discrimination in this protected classes now in Kalamazoo.

Now it has to go to the Senate, which is often where progressive bills go to die the saying has come to stand in Michigan as the Republicans who dominate in the Senate vote many progressives bills down. The change the Democrats are calling for is a 2010 campaign goal to de-seat enough Republicans so that the Democrats can end the 26 year hold on the Senate to allow us to pass progressive bills such as this, in our State.

Kalamazoo is in Senate District 20 where House incumbent Robert Jones is running as a Democrat in the opening Republic Seat to try and help in this plan and is a stance ally.

The Michigan Democratic Party LBGTA Caucus, is meeting this Saturday after the victories of election night with openly gay candidates in Detroit and Kalamazoo getting elected, and the passage of Ord 1856 in Kalamazoo. The plan is to develop more congressional districts grass root supports for the 2010 campaign goals of pushing equality further. We need people to come out, and we need people to come out to the meeting and do remember we need our Allies in this movement as much as the African American Movement needed its white allies in the 1950-60s.

*MI Dems LBGTA Caucus Call to Action on November 7.

The National Equality March on Washington was just the start of a bigger LGBT grassroots movement. Join the LGBT Caucus and its chair Phil Volk will talk about the need for activists to join the LGBT Caucus for a state-wide campaign strategy. Get involved! Join us at 10 am on Saturday, November 7 at the Ypsilanti Public Library, 5577 Whittaker Road, Ypsilanti, MI 48197. Can’t attend? Check out our website, www.mdplgbt.org for more information.

For more information email adamtaylorus@yahoo.com

Today at around 8:45pm the word came out that 25% of the Kalamazoo residents turned out to vote far exceeding the usually 15% for city elections to vote a landslide 65% YES for Ord 1856 ending discrimination of employment, housing and public accommodation for sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression. This comes after a year of the matter being put through the Democratic Process of City Hall, forums, city sub committees and full support from the 7 members of the City Commission.

As a resident of Kalamazoo I write this with tears of joy in my eyes. I remember in late 2007 the first meetings with Michigan Equality, ACLU and Kalamazoo GLBT and Allied leaders to begin the drafting of this document. Today 2 years later we see victory.

The city of Kalamazoo is toasting tonight, and many people after working for weeks at 16+hour days are celebrating and awaiting the poll updates from Maine, New Jersey and telling our brothers and sisters in WA to still get out to vote for Ref 71!!

The Michigan Democratic Party is happy to see this pass and as the appointed LBGTA Caucus spokesperson I state that defeat to Discrimination for GLBT or any minority population in housing, employment and public accommodation, is never discrimination, and to say otherwise only upholds the discrimination. Today we have seen what was chanted in the National Equality March in DC less than a month ago, “This is what Democracy looks like, This is what Equality looks like!”

We will use this as a stepping stone for further state equality in Michigan for GLBT. Visit our website at http://mdplgbt.org/

If you have questions for the Caucus you can email me at adamtaylorus@yahoo.com for questions on the Ordinance contact the office of OneKalamazoo, @ www.onekalamazoo.com

Mr_faust said, “Fuck you, Owen.”

I was intrigued.  I read the link, and I’m forced to agree: Owen Gleiberman, possibly through no fault of his own, has not grasped the point of Let the Right One In.  Let me show you two quotes from his review:

Where, I want to know, in all this girl/boy, normal/vampire, angel/demon spiritual diddling is the heat, the confusion, even the anguish of young love?

And, sorry, I still think it lacks coherence. Why do a bunch of cats turn demonic and attack a woman who has been attacked by a vampire? And why the sudden, excessive carnage of the swimming-pool massacre?

Are you confused or not, Owen Gleiberman?

Yes.  You are confused.

And this is a point of the movie: the confusion of young love isn’t confusion about love exclusively.  It’s confusion about everything in life.  Why do things appear to happen suddenly? Because when you’re young you have no clue about how to unravel cause and effect, intent and circumstance, mistake and resulting cock-up.  When you are young things simply happen.

This is blindingly obvious to your detractors, many of whom are young, but despite watching it twice with a trained eye, you have missed it. Consider the “utter lack of reaction” you decry as “totally false” and “uninteresting.”

This moment literalizes, and sentimentalizes, one of the most enduringly facile of all trendy academic ideas: that gender is just a “construct,” and therefore far less important than it seems.

It’s called an ideal.

I get that you miss things, so read that again: it’s called an ideal.  The point isn’t that in real life, gender doesn’t actually matter.  It’s that gender shouldn’t matter.  That is what makes protagonists heroes: they go a little beyond what is realistic, what is plausible, and they show us a world of the impossible.  If this is false, it’s false in the way that Superman bouncing a bullet off his chest is false.  It’s false in the way that Neo kicking Agent Smith through a wall is false.  It’s false in the sense that a hero standing up for what’s right and always getting the girl at the end of the movie is false.  It is a necessary falsity, because the entire movie is a construct of fiction.  This is how film works.

Gender ambiguity – or more precisely, gender equality – doesn’t sit well with Owen Glieberman.  Merely because something is “trendy” (and how “trendy” gets mixed up with “academic” beats me) does not mean that it is false. I could point out that equal rights for women has been a social justice issue since before Constantine ruled Rome: hardly “trendy” by any normal use of the term.  But more importantly, consider that the long history of abuses of women has been perpetuated precisely because people – people like Owen Glieberman – denied gender equality as an ideal.  If it’s silly to think of women as being equal to men, then it follows logically that women cannot have the same rights as men.  The entire slippery slope of sexism proceeds from that fundamental idea of inequity: the glass ceiling, the concept that it is okay to talk about a secretary as a “hot piece of meat,” non-virginal status used against the female victim in rape cases, and so on.

If men and women are really, truly equal, then all of this becomes quite impossible. It stands revealed as the absurdity that it is.  And if, in relationships, the protagonist is always expected to react with shock and horror because they got someone’s gender wrong, that denies the existence of bisexuals.  It denies the concept of love that transcends gender.

Owen Glieberman does not, perhaps cannot, see that.

His loss.

Hey all, today marks the last story in the 12 Days of Halloween story sequence.  For those of you who don’t know, I wrote a short story, or a poem, for every day of the 12 days leading up to Halloween.  Tomorrow is Halloween so today is the last story.  It’s a bit of a misnomer, actually, because today’s post is a story-poem.  I always find that rhyming is a powerful device to control rhythm and tempo, and both those things contribute immensely to creating a ’scary tone.’  Or maybe it’s just that my early readings in ’scary’ literature had heavy focus on rhyme and meter.  As always, comments welcome!

Angry Mob by dpsullivan on Flickr.com

This tale we tell on Halloween
regards the frightening and unseen
horrors that might split the seam
of sanity down the middle. 

But If you listen carefully,
with open minds judgement free,
beyond our pomp hyperbole,
you might just hear a riddle. 

Sphinx our story does not hold,
but riddles make the truth unfold,
and monsters often are truth untold,
so lets tell truths on Halloween. 

Our first regards young Billy Blane,
who habits alley and dirty lane,
endures conceit and much disdain,
from most who bare to look on him. 

He lost his job and now casts spells
with condoms and lubricant jells,
he helps rid men of work day shells,
before they see their family. 

And when they burn him at the stake
a curse will smoke and fire make
so all that watch will never shake
his screams from their memory. 

For no true witches ever lived.
Those who burn them seldom forgive
the choices some folk make to live.
The monster is the mob. 

And what of Sally Tuberdale
who ran from parents raged on ale
and sleeps on streets though oft regales
she’s better off without them. 

For here can she hold the hand
of any lover, woman or man,
and public eyes daily withstand,
the sight of true love’s fancies. 

And so she sleeps beneath a bridge
content with homeless pilgrimage.
The monster is that the life she lives
resides not in a home. 

There’s Cindy Sayer, the local mayor,
who robs blind honest tax payers
to funds bad projects so she can say her
term was not for not. 

The friends she’s made with greenbacks paid,
the crowds she’s stayed with media aid,
and all the voters she has played,
will not save her humanity. 

For in her quiet well kept house,
no spoiled child or trophy spouse,
will suffice to quiet doubts,
that plague her lonely dreams. 

The truth is she would rather die
than ever admit to a single lie,  
and in the end she’d most deny,
that power makes a monster. 

And last we see those daily races,
workers working at crazy paces,
and squashing flat all of the faces
that plead for a slower lane.

The great machine we grease with blood,
the dams we built so we can flood
our verdant valleys with seas of mud,
so we can keep our jobs. 

The riddle now becomes much clearer,
if monsters live in every mirror,
appear amongst us mad or sober,
in every month, not just October,
then can we also therefore deem,
that everyday is Halloween?

We are now about two weeks away from the November election in Washington State, and one item on the ballot that has national attention is Referendum 71, the so-called “everything but marriage” proposal that would give same-sex couples more rights and protections than they have today.

There has been a lot of conversation about whether it will or won’t pass—and a lot of conversation about whether it should pass.

I hope it does, and if you live here I encourage you to vote “yes” November 3rd.

But that said, you may not be aware that Washington has an electoral system in transition, and that as a result of the transition Washington has some idiosyncrasies that will make forecasting the results a bit tougher, and determining the results a bit slower.

We’ll talk about that today, and by the time we’re done you should have an appreciation of the odd way in which things can work out—and that, absent a landslide, we aren’t likely to know the results on Election Day.

These Are Not Normal Times

We have the strangest weather here: it is not quite 50 degrees F. as I write this, in midafternoon; but by tonight it’s expected to get warmer as the rain moves in.

In normal times, this is the kind of thing experts would be considering as they tried to estimate what turnout might be in the upcoming election—but these are not normal times. After the November ’08 election, Washington, following Oregon’s lead, became the second “vote-by-mail” state, and now the question has become not whether weather will impact the turnout…but if it will matter at all.

“Democracy is only an experiment in government, and it has the obvious disadvantage of merely counting votes instead of weighing them.”

–Dean William Ralph Inge, “Possible Recovery?”

The first unusual thing about Election Day in Washington is that there no longer is an Election Day. Voting now begins when the ballots begin to arrive in voters’ homes (20 days before Election Day), and as of Sunday, October 25th, King County Elections (Washington’s largest county; the county that includes Seattle and almost 1/3 of the State’s population) reports that 8.59% of the ballots are already in. All ballots with a postmark before November 4th will be counted, which means there will be new ballots arriving for several days after the “polls close”.

(As you may have guessed, each county operates their own elections office. All elections in the State are regulated by the Washington Secretary of State, which is also the office that handles paperwork for State-level candidates, initiatives, and referenda.)

This is driving the professional political community nuts, because it means every day there is a smaller pool of voters to influence, even though the cost of advertising time isn’t going down. Additionally, it is at the moment unclear exactly who has voted and how; over time, I think we’ll begin to see patterns emerge.

For example, in King County in this election cycle, the locations most likely to have already voted are, for the most part, the wealthiest regions of the county. A group of six communities clustered around Bill Gates’ house all have “in” rates above 10.5%, including three above 13%. The Town of Beaux Arts Village is at the top of that pack, running almost double the countywide rate at 16.74%.

The other communities most likely to have already voted are among the most rural in the County. Skykomish has 16.31% in, Enumclaw 12%. Unincorporated rural King County, however, is only running 8.49%, suggesting that the trend to vote early among the wealthy is more predictable than that same trend among the rural voters.

Among the many communities with average “in rates”, however, are clusters of low- and upper-income housing—and that’s where it is impossible to determine precisely who’s voted already and who is left to influence. With polling reports on Election Day you can track by precinct (and that type of tracking will be available after November 3rd), but for now an effective method of tracking has not emerged.

We assume that over time we’ll see the development of some form of “exit polling” of those who have already voted…but this is the first significant election since all-mail voting began, and prediction tools are as of yet untested.

“Message, We Have A Problem”

All of this is affecting advertising—after all, if you don’t know what portion of the electorate has already voted, how do you target your message to the remaining voters? When we get a week out, if we have 20% or more of the ballots in, this question will begin to loom very large as campaigns have to decide whether they have spent enough campaign dollars to buy airtime…or not…and whether the target audience they seek to influence is actually responding to the message…or not.

This all becomes even tougher to figure out because it’s a series of state and local races that are being contested in this election; as a result there is no daily tracking poll data available from which we might draw some near real-time conclusions.

Speaking of polling data: here’s some. A Survey USA poll conducted October 3rd and released October 6th of 548 likely voters suggests R-71 was winning 45%-42%. Women were both more likely to vote for the measure and more unsure as to how they would vote, relative to men (48% yes, 36% no, 16% unsure for females; 42% yes, 46% no, 12% unsure for males).

Voters 35-49 were simultaneously the least supportive of the measure and the most unsure as to how they’ll vote (35% approve, 49% reject, with 20% unsure). Voters over 65, the group most likely to vote, were supporting the measure (44%-40%, 16% unsure) as of October 6th.

The poll has a 4% margin of error, and some of these results are within that range, so as of October 6th this was still a race that’s very much up for grabs.

There are no Federal or State offices being contested in this election, and the only other statewide ballot issue, Initiative 1033, seeks to limit the growth of State income. The presence of the two ballot measures is likely to increase voting by 3% to 8%. It is suggested that a lower turnout will help the anti-71 crowd, a higher turnout, the pro-71 crowd.

All of this has had a major impact on “get out the vote” efforts as well—for example, no one volunteers to drive voters to polling places anymore…because there aren’t any polling places left. (There are a few exceptions for the disabled.) Instead, the effort here is to make sure those ballots get in mailboxes before Election Day.

It is possible to construct ads that attempt to “close the deal”: suggesting, in the last 20 days, that voters vote right now for or against the candidate or issue, but I haven’t seen ads of that type yet.

Finally, a few words about the “after Election Day” action. If this election is close, the number of votes that are in the mail in the days following the close of voting (and where they’re from) will be critical—and in the ‘08 cycle 50% of the total votes cast were in that “in the mail” category.

(Washington has been moving to voting by mail for some time, and in the 2008 cycle more than 90% of the votes cast were mail-in ballots. At that time 37 of the State’s 39 counties were voting entirely by mail.)

The bad news: it could take anywhere from several days to several weeks before we absolutely know the results. This process may include “reevaluation” of votes after Election Day and efforts by either party to disallow votes based on what they think they can get away with, and the result could be litigation.

The good news: there are no electronic voting machines in this system, and every ballot is a paper ballot. This means we can determine, eventually, exactly how the votes were cast—and if it takes a few recounts before we know the results, well, that’s what it will take.

So as of right now, that’s where we’re at: it’s the first major election since mail-in voting was adopted statewide, we are not sure of exactly how the impact of early voting is being felt, even though we know that almost 10% of the votes are in, professionals are still not exactly sure of what’s going on, and there should be a higher turnout due to the fact that we have two questions on the ballot for the entire voting public to consider.

Don’t expect a final result on Election Night, and if we do have to go to a recount, there won’t be any electronic voting machines to screw things up. Instead, every vote will be on a paper ballot. Most importantly of all: this ain’t Florida, we’ve been through recent close elections and recounts before—and we were able to work things out just fine.

Today I was one of a possible 200+ people that gathered in Kalamazoo to rally and than march from Wesley Foundation on Western Michigan University campus to the Strutt. Lead by One Kalamazoo the march pushed for the Ordinance 1856 for a yes vote on November 3rd. If passed in 9 days it will end discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodation in Kalamazoo for sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

After 2 years of work, city officials from the Mayor Hopewell to City Commissioners, Moore, Cooney, Anderson, came out to speak. Also was Terry K a author of the ordnance and openly gay candidate to Kalamazoo City Commission.

Others that attended were the Kalamazoo County Chair, Adam Taylor (myself) of the Michigan Democratic Party LBGTA Caucus which help get the word out, and supported. The LBGTA Caucus is a endorses of the bill. Note the MDP is a supporter.

The College students of Western Michigan came out in high numbers to Wesley Foundation. David Topping president of the Outspoken group spoke for safety of the students and ability to feel safe coming out.

City Commissioner Moore spoke of the African American vote coming out in strong support of this. That the opposition should not and can not count on the African American community to vote against their brothers and sisters who are GLBT. She spoke and sang as a strong Christian African American women and a city commission.

David Garcia of the Kalamazoo Gay Lesbian Resource Center spoke of gay morality being high jacked by conservatives and to have our straight allies as they are the white people to the African American Civil Movement.

University of Michigan Dems sent a group of 25 volunteers across the state for the day, to call, canvas and march.

I did some recruiting bringing Kzooers, Lansing, Grand Rapids, and Ann Arbor to the march.

One Kalamazoo the spotlight of Michigan GLBT movement as what happens in Kalamazoo does not stay in Kalamazoo. When passed Kalamazoo will be the 16th of nearly 1600 municipalities in the state to have this protection.

To hep in the final days of the campaign go to http://onekalamazoo.com/

To see videos of the march and rally go to: http://www.youtube.com/adamleben

To see photos go to: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2084377&id=15304966&l=7c4f6470fc

interview is from the source
Beth Ditto is vomiting. Not in the good way, either. But with Gossip on tour in support of its breakthrough release, “Music for Men,” the singer can’t really take a day off. Produced by beardy studio wonder Rick Rubin and featuring a staggering disco-punk single called “Heavy Cross,” the album’s chances of measuring up to the singer’s huge persona are certain. The Portland, Ore., trio plays tonight at the Regency Ballroom in San Francisco. We spoke with Ditto by phone last week.

Q: When you were throwing up earlier, was it the good kind where you got too drunk, or the bad kind, where you ate too many fish sticks?

A: Probably the bad kind, where I had a virus. I don’t know if there is a good kind. Maybe if it’s before you go to bed, but definitely not when you wake up. Actually, now I have a really bad sore throat and a head cold and a fever. It’s been a crazy ride.

Q: Hey, it’s a great excuse to lock yourself in a hotel room and watch bad TV.

A: I wish I had a hotel room! We’re touring in a bus, which is better than a van. But it’s stupid cold in here. Earlier I sneezed and shot all this snot all over my hand, and I was in the top bunk, so I couldn’t even move. I had to wait for someone to walk by and I was like, “Please, somebody give me some toilet paper!”

Q: You need a Neti Pot.

A: I don’t think I could do it. I never put anything in my nose, ever. But I did put a rock in my ear when I was in day care.

Q: I’m thinking we could somehow spin this into another great rumor. Do you read all the crazy things people write about you?

A: I never read anything. I think the one way to stay sane and maintain your faith in the world is not to read what people write about you. I haven’t even looked at my Wikipedia page.

Q: It says you’re from Arkansas. How did you ever get out?

A: I knew I was different. I knew I was gay since I was 5. I had been a self-professed feminist since I was 12. But I was trapped in this Christian hell. One day my mother’s co-worker’s daughter showed up with all this stuff she had taped off MTV, mostly Hole. Through her I met all these really rad kids and discovered punk music and riot grrrl.

Q: Now Rick Rubin is producing your albums. Does he really have a bird nest in his beard?

A: No. The rumors are not true. But he does have a really great beard. He actually approached us. Like everything else in my life, it was extremely fateful. He has a reputation for being really hands off, but he was there every day and very validating. He gave us a lot of confidence, a lot of advice. He tried to teach me about keys and notes and octaves, and I told him, “I have no idea what you’re talking about.”

Q: Do you ever secretly wish you could sing like Tori Amos?

A: I love Tori Amos. As a kid, I was always told I was too loud and took up too much space, so I really resented my voice for a long time. And then I started listening to punk music and all the women had these loud, crazy voices. What bit me in the ass is I didn’t have a punk voice. I had a conventional voice that was really loud. It wasn’t until two records in that I realized I had a good voice.

source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/23/PKTI1A6JPP.DTL

Michigan Democratic Party’s LGBT and Allies Caucus

November 2009 newsletter (part 2)

*Tuesday, November 3 is Election Day!

Kalamazoo Get Out To Vote for Equality!!

Tomorrow is the final day: Election Day. Kalamazoo is up for some major equality voting at the ballots.

1. Vote YES on Ordinance 1856, a.k.a. the Non Discrimination Ordinance, giving protection on housing, employment, and public accommodation for sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

2. Vote YES on Terry Kuseske, the first openly gay person to run for Kalamazoo City Commission. Terry was a County Commission in Cass County from 1978 to 1982, has served on several Kalamazoo development committees, and transit committee. He was chair of the Political Action Committee of Kalamazoo Alliance for Equality that drafted the Non Discrimination Ordinance, and has served on the Board of Michigan Equality. A vote for Terry is a vote for Equality in Kalamazoo and a united Kalamazoo .

3. Vote YES on the Transit mileage, remember that people ride the buses to either go earn a wages or to spend them, it boosts our economy and is helpful to the environment.

The following City Commissioners who are up for re-election have supported the Ordinance and stood up for equality in vote, in public support and in month after month of the campaigning. We thank these amazing allies for their unwavering support for a united Kalamazoo :

City Commissioner Anderson

City Commissioner Cooney

City Commissioner Moore

Mayor Hopewell

To new candidates up for election that are affirming we have Kilbourne who is a charter member of PFLAG, and his campaign is jobs, equality and diversity.

As Terry has said what happens in Kalamazoo does not stay in Kalamazoo. Kalamazoo citizens: tomorrow the polls are open from 7am to 8pm get out and vote. If you need a ride, or help getting to your polling place, call the Kalamazoo Democratic Party at 269.342.4217 or you can stop by our office at 3254 S. Westnedge Ave. Kalamazoo , MI 49008

*Caucus Call to Action on November 7.

The National Equality March on Washington was just the start of a bigger LGBT grassroots movement. Join the LGBT Caucus and its chair Phil Volk will talk about the need for activists to join the LGBT Caucus for a state-wide campaign strategy. Get involved! Join us at 10 am on Saturday, November 7 at the Ypsilanti Public Library, 5577 Whittaker Road , Ypsilanti , MI 48197 . Can’t attend? Check out our website, www.mdplgbt.org for more information.

*Dining for Equality

Join the Caucus for a Fund (and Fun!) Raiser on Saturday, November 14 from 11:30 am to 1:30 pm at the Ann Arbor Brewing Company, 114 E. Washington Street , Ann Arbor . Check out the event’s Facebook page, too. Can’t attend? Donate online via www.mdplgbt.org.