I'm getting ready for my journey to NYC, so I'm going to throw out a few first impressions of the City Paper's cover story ananlyzing the election outcomes, the potential for the three new City Councilpeople-elect, and, of course, where blogs fit into it all.
* Interesting that Patrick Dowd and Bruce Kraus were interviewed together, but Ricky Burgess was interviewed separately. Was that a timing issue?
They also acknowledged knowing next to nothing about Burgess, the third challenger to win his primary race.
"I don't know much about his work," confesses Dowd, though he notes that he was "moved" by Burgess' yard signs, which promised "The Power of Hope."
"I really don't know [Burgess]," seconds Kraus, though he adds, "we've met a couple of times."
This comes as little surprise to Burgess. District 9 is predominantly black and poor, and it "is not the focus of a lot of people," Burgess says. "It's not surprising people don't know a lot about me."
Taking things one step further, didn't any of the progressives working so hard for Dowd and Kraus make the time to get to know Burgess? The election has been over for more than two weeks folks. I read about Burgess on the Steel City Stonewall site and noted that he was good on some issues (DP bennnies, needle exchange, history of workign with PATF) and not good at all on others (gay marriage, right to choose). But he's here and he's now and it just strikes me as odd that no one is taking the time to get to know him. Reading yard signs and the City Paper article isn't the same thing as saying "Hey, Ricky, let's you, Bruce/Patrick, and I grab some coffee at Ritter's Diner and get to know each other." To be fair, I have to wonder if Burgess' people took the time, then or now, to get to know Dowd or Kraus -- these things matter to me because I work in District 9 and a lot of my families live there.
* Blogs get a rap on the knuckles in this piece. We feasted on the setbacks of the old timers. Burgess thinks we don't pay enough attention to issues outside of our own purveuy, like the perspective in Homewood.
"The issues of some people, like those in the blogs, are not my issues," Burgess says. "What's holding our district back is the education for our kids, the violence and lack of economic development in our communities." Such issues, he notes, get very little attention from bloggers, who are much more likely to be set abuzz by the news that Ravenstahl was detained by police at a Steelers game in 2005.
Burgess admires the blogs for being an "unfiltered perception of some segment of the community." But, he adds, "The authors of the blogs are talking about the perspective they live" -- and "mostly, they aren't living in Homewood."
Ouch! <Surveying the landscape for political bloggers who aren't white or anonymously racially unknown -- Hello Three Rivers Online .....Khari --- why no updates?.>. To be fair to myself, I live in Manchester which isn't a haven of white upper class sensibilities and I do blog about local issues, but my perspective on local issues is definitely colored by the privileges of being white and middle class. I've most notably blogged about urban dumping, police indifference, political indifference and so forth, but I do think I've tried to consider the big picture.
Please note that I do have a constructive plan on this particular issue, a plan I've been hatching with Maria and Agent Ska. It will be anounced, hopefully, next week. You will all, including Chris Potter, be invited to lavish us with phrases like "Pure Genius," "Revolutionizing the Burghosphere," and "Damn, Those Chicks Are F***ing Brilliant."
* It is easy to romanticize the "progressive bloc" backing Peduto, but the CP reminds that in politics, things are never romantic. Dowd and Kraus are not clones and have philosophical differences <thank goodness they have philosophical anything>. Burgess is keenly aware of the historical isolation of his district and staking territory as his own man. It is not Peduto the progressive leader or Peduto the king-maker who is going to surge ahead with these gentleman in tow. It is Peduto's ideas -- solid, smart and good governance policies -- that stand a chance of winning the support of these gentleman. And, to be fair, these gentleman stand a chance of winning Peduto with their own good ideas.
* There's a really cute picture of Doug Shields in the story. Not really relevant to anything, but I did honestly think,"That's a cute picture." He looks like a man who wouldn't light up in a public building. Let's hope.
Alrighty then, I must go finish packing my carryon bag. Ledcat and the woofers will hold down the fort. The kitties will carry on as usual. I will probably log back on tonight and look forward to the usual hundreds of comments.
Where oh where have my little reps gone, oh where oh where can they be?
During a recent heated discussion on the Run, Baby, Run listserv, I realized that I am not sure who my Allegheny County Democratic Committee representatives are. I moved to this here neck of the woods (Manchester) in 2005 and have never been contacted, approached or sought after by anyone connected with the Democratic Party. I am not a supervoter (to my chagrin), but I have attended a lot of community meetings and events and never once have I seen anyone, male or female, identify themselves as a committee people or a ward chair or ward cleaver for that matter.
I did happen to learn by quirk that a neighbor down the street may or may not be the female committee person. She's a very nice lady, but when I saw her at the post-endorsement Bill Peduto (sigh) rah-rah meeting she was more interested in playing with the hosts' children than doing any networking or socializing. In fact, most of the old school long-time muckety muck white people there pretty much talked with their friends and ate blue cookies. She also tends to brag that she's been a committeewoman for like 25+ years or some ungodly amount of time and that "they won't let me retire." I'm hopeful she's talking about her employer, but I doubt it.
So I was encouraged by ACDC guru herself Dianna Wentz to call the office and get the scoop. The number is 412-321-2995.
Being an intrepid blogger, I tried their website first. No dice. Lots of pretty red, white and blue fonts to convince me how patriotic I am for being a Democrat (something you never reinforce often enough I suppose), but not a lot of actual information to be had.
Today, I called and left a detailed message. Dianna cautioned me that they have a lot of calls and an overworked staff, so I'm willing to wait a few days and see what happens.
Anyone else know their committeepersons? Do they go to meetings? Contact people? Identify themselves? Show up period?
I completely missed this. The Post-Gazette ran an editorial on May 21 opposing extending federal hate crimes legislation to include sexual orientation and gender identity.
At the end of the day, we are troubled by making distinctions that implicitly give a greater importance to one crime over a similar one simply because of the motivation of the perpetrators (a determination that has a Thought Police aspect to it) or because of how one victim can be categorized demographically.
The same desire that moves us to support equal treatment of all -- men and women, black and white, gay and straight -- also propels us to think that an assault is an assault, a murder is a murder and that crimes should be prosecuted without making invidious distinctions in the eyes of the law, before whom all should stand equal.
In an ideal world, that's nice. Was Tony Norman off on this day? Because no one claims that the murder of a heterosexual white Catholic male is less devastating and horrific than the murder of a person who is African-American, Jewish or gay. But very rarely is that individual murdered with the intent of creating a chilling effect on the larger minority community.
Expanding federal jurisdiction is necessary to ensure fair and equal treatment of crimes motivated by hate, especially when state and local authorities can't or won't investigate or prosecute. How an editorial board so in touch with the modern trend of states abridging basic civil protections of the LGBTQ community can fail to see the need for this protection is beyond me. Remember when states refused to investigate voting discrimination against African-American citizens? Remember when states wouldn't let black students in public schools? Why was federal intervention okay in those instances, but not when it comes to queers and trannies?
I sure as hell don't trust Pennsyvania to do a good job investigating hate crimes against LGBTQ citizens. At least not all of Pennsylvania. Most of our so-called Democratic legislators from Western Pennsylvania voted for amending the constitution to protect marriage from the queers before they voted against it. Politically expedient for their careers, but a clear message to us here in da' burgh that we cannot count on anyone to respect and value us as full and equal citizens in the Commonwealth.
Or how about the now and future Sheriff of Allegheny County telling a crowd of gay people that there really aren't any problems around gay issues for local law enforcement, even after 20+ years on the Pittsburgh police force. Do you think he's going to be receptive to a hate crime investigation when a transexual prostitute is beaten to a bloody pulp in South Park? Hmmm ....I know that would be the County Police, not the Sheriff but the point is about his attitude, not his jurisdiction. He's a law enforcment leader and should be setting the bar high for protecting all residents of the County.
For a clear analysis on the revision of the federal hate crimes legislation, check out what the YWCA has to say here. The Southern Poverty Law Center has some other interesting stuff.
Back here in Pittsburgh, two letters to the editor about Hate Crimes legislation moving through the federal level.
Robert Timm of Mt. Lebanon agrees with the Post-Gazette.
I can't seem to find the difference between murder. Why is there a difference between the murder of a white, a minority or a homosexual person? If they were all murdered by the same person, why should one be treated any differently than the other two?
In my opinion they are all the same. Hate is hate, and should be handled according.
Timm doesn't seem to get that it is not the crime, but the motivation for the crime that's at stake. No one is suggesting going easier on crimes against the majority population. If a serial murdered kills a random group of people, the death of the homo is not greater than the death of the hetero. But when a group of frat boys target and beat up a young man because he is gay, they are trying to send a message to gay people. Why is that so hard to understand?
While all Americans -- men and women, black and white, gay and straight -- should be treated equally under the law, the same cannot be said for crimes. While it would certainly be easy to simply say that one murder is as awful and should be treated the same as any other murder, the facts do not bear this out.
When a young man is viciously beaten and left to die in the cold and isolation of an October night in Wyoming simply because he is gay, that crime has ramifications far beyond its own awful brutality.
Hate crimes by their very nature aim to instill terror within an entire community. While one person may be left with the physical wounds and scars of an attack, similar people from across a community, state or even country are left to wonder if they could be next.
Hate crimes are about isolating, silencing and making people cower in the corners. The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act is a good bill and should be signed into law.
I think these answers are consistent with what we've heard so far from John Edwards, along with an clear statement that he supports the repeal of DOMA, which is what stands in the way of marriage equality on paper. Every single candidate who is in favor of civil unions cannot realistically expect to earn a gay vote without crossing this bridge.
That said, there is a follow-up question that needs to be asked, with companies denying benefits to couples in civil unions, how will Edwards or any other candidate will ensure that gay and lesbian couples will be treated equally under the law in a separate-but-equal on paper legal arrangement that cannot be called "marriage?" Civil unions, domestic partnerships and any other half measures are going to fail because they are not culturally equal. The word, even when referring only to civil marriage, is universally understood and accepted.
My understanding is that Edwards has been the first Dem presidential candidate to get his answers out there. I'm personally not impressed with Hillary and Barack at this point -- I have significant suspicion that they would sell out the LGBTQ community to curry favor among socially conservative Democrats, especially people whose faith pronounces us immoral.
However, I'm not convinced Edwards wouldn't do that same. Saying that he's "not there yet" on gay marriage is a bunch of hooey. Denying Ledcat and I 1,000+ federal benefits because of his personal morality is just wrong. Especially since I suspect his personal morality is about political expediency and the "faith" vote.
However, I agree with Pam that Edwards is worth a second or third look. I've been saying all along that its going to be Edwards for Pres and Obama for VP. That's still my call.
First, I'll be around 2:20 this afternoon to chat about Mary Cheney and Heather Poe's baby son.
Second, I got a nice shout out as a "sometimes political" blogger who confirmed Bruce Kraus' gayness. If you want to know who else is gay, but not open about it and usually voting against our community, check aht www.blogactive.com If you want to read what John McIntire thinks about it all (Kraus, not closeted self-loathing Republican homos), click on "nice shout out" and check aht his City Paper column.
The Post-Gazette reports that local gay business owner and community advocate, Jay Bernard, has passed away. Jay and his business partner Bill Stanhope owned Jay Design in Lawrenceville. Jay was the founder of the Boys of Lawrenceville "a benevolent organization of gay men" and the author of a monthly column about pet adoption. I've heard of Jay, but did not have the opportunity to meet him. Jay's company donated some items to an event I am hosting tonight for my day-job. I will be thinking of him when we raffle off those items. God speed.
The Presbyterian debate over gay marriage continues. From the PG:
A regional Presbyterian court's decision yesterday upheld Pittsburgh Presbytery's ban on gay marriage ceremonies, and reiterated the national church's stance that ordination requires chastity in singleness or fidelity in heterosexual marriage.
But the language was such that both sides of the local debate regarding the ban on actively gay clergy in the Presbyterian Church (USA) found aspects of the ruling acceptable.
Several Middle Eastern governments have filters in place to prevent their citizens from accessing gay and lesbian sites.
Iran, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen had the strictest social-filtering practices, blocking pornography, gambling and gay and lesbian sites.
That's interesting. I usually have at least one IP address a day based in those very countries that visits my site, usually with a keyword search for "hot lesbians" or "lesbian photos" or "naked lesbians." Once it was "nudie lesbians." I chalk that up to a translation issue. Someone is getting through that filter.
Meanwhile, today's Trib runs this nice little affirmation of Falwell from the self-described "mean girl" Ann Coulter:
Let me be the first to say: I ALWAYS agreed with the Rev. Falwell.
Coulter sets the record "straight" on Tinky Winky's sexual orientation and explains why he didn't go far enough identifying who was responsible for 9/11 (hint: he's a Kennedy).
Meanwhile, South African churches get the go ahead to perform same-sex marriages.
Reports say that 5,000 people turned out for the Warsaw gay rights parade in spite of government sponsored crackdowns. Anti-gay crusaders want to ban gay propaganda in the schools. Does that sound familiar?
And, closer to home, Kent State has installed a "gender neutral" bathroom to accomodate transgender male and female students. Nearby Oberlin has a residence hall specifically for transgender students. The times they are a changin'.
LGBT groups in more than 50 countries will participate in the initiative, which was launched in 2005 to mark the day in 1990 when the World Health Organization removed homosexuality from its list of disorders.
I work for a mental health provider that just extended health insurance coverage to employees in domestic partnerships. So an important day to commemorate say the lesbians.
In conjunction, Human Rights Watch has identified the worst offenders in the homophobic Hall of Shame:
"This `hall of shame' does not claim to include the worst offenders, but it highlights leaders who have lent their authority to denying basic human rights," said Scott Long... "Bush and Pope Benedict both speak of human dignity, but their homophobic words and actions undermine families and endanger health."
Top on the list? Pope Benedict XVI for undermining families. Then comes President George Bush for jeopardizing public health with his abstinence only programs. Next is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for violating the right to privacy on a widespread scale. Poland and the Philippines are represented as well.
Interesting day to be a gay Catholic American (from Poland?).
You mean other stuff happened yesterday? Here's a smattering ...
Scott Weber of Shaler wrote to the Post-Gazette urging people to recognize the value of gay parenting.
In describing his country's new civil partnership law, British Prime Minister Tony Blair spoke about what he called "the civilizing effect" the policy has had on society far beyond the gay and lesbian community. Gay and lesbian parents deserve understanding and the same legal safeguards as other parents.
The Rev. Jane Adams Spahr a North Side Presbyterian native will speak Sunday at East Liberty Presbyterian Church.
PG sports columnist Shelly Anderson takes a peek at discrimination in the sports world.
Perhaps, on the surface, we don't really care if athletes, coaches and management are black, white, Asian, gay, straight or Libertarian, as long as they come across as decent people, although it's telling that gay athletes aren't lining up to go public during their playing days.
In reality, we probably have a long way to go. For now, sports can still be defined as black, white and misread all over.
I chatted with my friend Councilman Bill Peduto about the election outcome and congratulating him. The Burghosphere has been bursting with analysis of the Peduto impact -- the Pedutocrats.
Here's what Bill had to say about it all (I refer to him as Bill on account of us being friends n'at.):
"Thanks, Sue - but it wasn't me - it was a few hundred activist Democrats (the lifeblood of our party) that never stopped campaigning after my announcement. They went to work for Bruce, Patrick, Heather and some to Brenda. Interesting to watch my friend Michael Nutter's victory in Philadelphia against the machine and the coming of age of the independent, progressive, reform democrats in Pittsburgh. Interesting times, indeed."
With Bruce Kraus' victory in the Democratic primary, today is an historic moment for Pittsburgh and all of Western Pennsylvania. Kraus is the first openly gay person to be headed for the hallowed halls of the City Council of Pittsburgh. In fact, he is the first openly gay elected official in Western Pennsylvania. Well, he will be after the General Election in November. But you know us Pittsburghers -- it is all primary, all the time for local races.
What does this mean for your everyday average queer? Puh-lenty.
First, it means that Pittsburghers are more progressive and openminded than the Allegheny County Democratic Committee and others would have you believe. A progressive gay man defeated the incumbent, party-endorsed candidate. Change can happen.
Second, it means that the rest of the elected officials are going to have to interact with a real live homosexual on a regular basis. I relish this because, in my experience, this kind of personal interaction is the best vehicle to break down prejudice and build understanding. We cannot underestimate the power of these relationships to bring about change for all Pittsburgh residents, gay and straight.
Third, it means we finally get to see someone who "looks" like us AND acknowledges he is "us" in a leadership position. Not another closeted wink, wink politico. Not someone we speculate about every so often. Rather, someone who is proud and confident enough in his identity to share this part of life with the entire electorate. Kraus told Pittsburgh's OUT newspaper that his campaign is about more than his sexuality (no weblink available). That's certainly true, thank goodness, but I think it is good for the regional LGBTQ community to savor this moment.
Finally, it means we get a progressive, energetic and dedicated member of city council to join our allies Bill Peduto and Doug Shields. Kraus campaigned on the loss of Community Development Block Grant monies for organization such as the Gay & Lesbian Community Center, Shepherd Wellness Center and Persad, the region's LGBTQ mental health provider. He wants to do something about the liquor license situation on the South Side. He has a proven record of community involvement and civic leadership. He won the endorsements of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Steel-City Stonewall Democrats and the Gertrude Stein Political Club of Pittsburgh. He garnered the support of the Victory Fund.
Bruce Kraus is our candidate. Soon he will be everyone's member of Council. Hallelujah!
