RECALL MAYOR RAY NAGIN!

Mr. Chocolate City

Tomorrow will be one year since hurricane Katrina devastated New Orleans and one year later that Mayor Ray Nagin is still shucking and jiving. During a 60 Minutes inteview last evening, Mayor Nagin came across as the person he is - stupid and arrogant. He is probably the most stupid person I've seen on television in a long time. During the interview with correspondent Byron Pitts, Nagin came across as the local pimp selling his wares to new customers. And he has ben selling his wares to the poor of New Orleans ever since.

Standing at the base of a newly constructed wall he answers Pitts question, "And will it hold in the face of a Category 3 or Category 4 storm?" with enough arrogance to fill the Superdome that housed thousands of Katrina victims. In his slickster fashion Nagin responds by rapping the wall with his knuckles and stating, "Look at this man, where's this gonna go?" This is a man who didn't call for a mandatory evacuation. This is a man who let hundreds of buses flood when he could have used the same buses to evacuate people from before the hurricane hit. This is a man who cavalierly chided New York for the hole in the ground. This is a man who supposedly cares about the poor of New Orleans but have agreed to build high rise condos that many if not all cannot afford. Yes, Trump Towers will be coming to New Orleans at whose expense?

RECALL MAYOR RAY NAGIN!

I thought this wasn't about race Mr. Reed.

Mr. Chocolate City

I think it would be wise for Mayor Ray Nagin to shut up. His recent remarks about the "fixing the hole" at ground zero reinforces his stupidity and refusal to accept responsibility for his ineptitude.

Similar Situation With A Twist

The controversy surrounding the Congressional seat being vacated by Major Owens in Brooklyn seems to have spilled over into the state of Alabama - with a twist. It seems that this race is about more than race but that of the candidates sexual orientation.

Go Dems, Go!

I love to see when Democrats beat up on one another. And this fight is even more heated than any other because "race" takes a front seat. I find it hard to believe that in 2006 four candidates are fighting over who should represent a district based on skin color. Is it a birthright of Chris Owens? Does the color of the candidates skin bring more jobs and money to the district? And what about Ms. Clarke? Word had it that she was a former Republican until this seat became available. And, not having a degree is not something you forget. This should shape up to be an interesting run to the primary.

A Good Article For A Lazy Friday

I couldn't have said it better.

Is She Running?

Ok, what's better to do on a rainy Friday morning than wonder if Hillary Clinton is going to run for president in 2008. So, if you are so inclined write and tell me if you think Hill is running, is she not or you don't give a darn. Then you can go back and do something special with your Friday.

Ok, let me see if I get it. Ex-president Clinton stumps for the incumbent (let's call him a friend) who is beaten in the primary because of his vote on the war. Now the winner meets with another Clinton (former friend of the incumbent) who voted for the war but is not facing a tough primary because of it. Hmmmm, I think they call this politics or is it more of a double standard?

He Doesn't Get It

I admit it, I was a fan of Tom Cruise. I first saw him in Risky Business and really liked him and Cocktail is still my favorite movie. Unfortunately, and I'm not simply jumping on the "tear Cruise apart bandwagon," I think he has lost every ounce of sense he purportedly had. The Oprah couch jumping was one thing but when he said to Matt Lauer, "You don't know psychology Matt, I do" that was enough to split a gut. Because in the end this is all meant for the funny pages. The only question I have is, when did Tom Cruise received his medical degree so that he could evaluate pregnant women?

His over the top behavior has become de rigueur in Hollywood so I don't see any change coming anytime soon. A morals clause is a good way to head off obnoxous and stupid behavior but how many will actually sign one. Not the ones listed here.

I Hope He Goes Down In Flames

It seems that Rick Santorum is gaining on Bob Casey, the state treasurer in Pennsylvania. I hope come November 7th that Mr. Santorum goes down in flames as I have no use for any Republican who uses me as fodder. Rick Santorum is an evil man and one that does not deserve re-election. Here is just one reason why he should not retain his seat.

Blaming The Victim

I don't think its blaming the vicitm if a reader asks the question, "What was she doing out on the West Side Highway at that hour?" I don't think its blaming the vicitm if a reader asks, "Where were her friends?" I don't think its blaming the vicitm if a reader asks, "Why didn't she go with her friend in the ambulance?" Since when is asking questions immediately assumed to blame the victim? I've have done some stupid things myself as a youngster and I would bet a dollar that my family would ask some of those questions. Maybe asking some of those questions will go a long way in saving lives as opposed to looking back and wondering how this could have happened in the first place.

And This Man Wants To Be President?

It seems as though George Allen needs to do more than apologize he needs to educate himself on US history. Whatever his hopes are of running for president should be put on the back burner until he learns from Virginia's history. Its obvious that he has learned nothing from his past actions as presented here.

Its Not Just About Asians Councilman Liu

Its one thing to address the concerns of your constitutents and another to do so at the expense of others. Anyone driving through Flushing, NY would wonder if they had just entered Chinatown. The inlfux of Asians is quite obvious as one drives along Northern Boulevard. On every block establishments are adorned with Chinese and other languages non of which can be translated by non-Asians. This is very sad for the whites that live in these neighborhoods who have to travel miles to shop at an English speaking supermarket. These are the things that Councilman John Liu need to address as an elected official. His district is made of more than Asians who vote. Here is the money quote from Madhulika Khandelwal, director of Asian/American center at Queens College, “You could say he made history in this sense, but I think the next step is more important, and that is having this elected official appeal to New Yorkers across ethnic and racial lines,” she said. “It is a huge hurdle.” Listen up Councilman Liu.

My Case For Excluding The T

In 1996, I attended a Creating Change Conference in Chicago. I attended the conference as the co-president of a local gay and lesbian community center. The conference was organized and hosted by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF). NGLTF is a gay and lesbian advocacy group that had its beginnings in New York City in the 1970’s. In 1985, the organization changed its name from NGTF to NGLTF to include lesbians: “To make clear gender parity and lesbian issues.” It was in 1996, by my observations, that the organization was once again about to make a change. During the four day conference, as I was taking a break between sessions, I happened upon a protest of sorts. It seems that the transgender contingent was protesting the organization because they were not being heard. They wanted the "T" for transgender to be added to the acronym that was NGLTF. And by including the "T" there was an implicit request to start including transgender issues. I was rather dismayed at the protest and suggested to one of the organizers that educating gays and lesbians about transgender issues was a far more effective strategy than simply adding another letter to an already crowded acronym. My suggestion, however, was met with blank stares and annoyance at being asked to educate rather than harangue. How dare I ask for pragmatism rather than brute action? That was my introduction to the trans community. In that same year, Kerry Lobel, executive director, said the following: “NGLTF strongly supports civil rights protections and affordable health care for transgender [people]. We loathe discrimination and violence perpetuated against transgender people and stand in solidarity with transgender people in their struggle for respect, inclusion, equality and justice.” Thus began the love affair between gay and lesbian organizations with the transgender community.

Years later, I share comments about the transgender community with trepidation as they may be viewed as discriminatory by many. However, I have very strong opinions on this issue and cannot control the comments or feelings of my readers. In the Sunday New York Times styles section the following article appeared on its front cover. My take on gender reassignment is very similar to those of the lesbians interviewed for the article with some additional comments. The history of the gay movement has shown the gradual inclusion of lesbians, bisexuals and transgender people to the fold. Over the years organizations like NGLTF have broaden their definition of gay by including bisexual and transgender. But the problem is that bisexuality and transgender people cannot be automatically classified as gay. Bisexuals, in my limited experience with them, do not necessarily consider themselves gay nor do transgender people. So why are community centers, gay rights organizations etc., extending the acronym and confusing the issue? I have several reasons for this lumping of all that claim discrimination.

First, in politics and to politicians numbers play a crucil role hence the lumping of bisexuals and transgender numbers. So, show me the numbers and I'll show you my support. For this I blame the gay organizations. Second, gender identity is light years away from being the same thing as sexual orientation. As one interviewee stated in the article, “I am a lesbian because I am attracted to women and not men.” I continue to say this when groups keep insisting that the T be added to the l&g. Third, and I think this most important, gender reassignment does not mean that the person will then remain "gay or lesbian" as is obvious in the article.

When a man transitions from male to female and continues to date women he cannot be considered a lesbian because by definition he is a man. Lesbians don't date men. And when a woman transitions from female to male "she" cannot consider herself a lesbian - simple end of story. Fourth, none of these people can consider themselves truly the opposite sex because they have not changed their x & y chromosones. Fifth, the confusion that this causes children will make the g&l struggle even harder. Sixth, the struggle for transgender rights is not my fight and I will not take it up. In 2000 when the sexual orientation non-discrimination act - SONDA was about to pass Senator Tom Duane (D-NY) almost derailed it by his 11th hour plea to include transgender rights. Thank goodness it was not included and the votes went forward to enact SONDA. So, my point here is simply this, the "T" should not be added to l&g because it is completely different than that of sexual orientation. I do not deny equality to transgender folks I just don't want gender rights lumped with my rights as a lesbian who has no wish to become a man.

Everyone Should Be Outraged

If this article is not enough to outrage parents and those without children then nothing will. I do not have children but I'm mad as hell abou this and we all need to do something about this. Pedophiles should and must be stopped at every turn. Thanks to former district attorney Jeanine Pirro, law enforment officials have the capability to catch these people. To suggest that these comments may not be real but fantasy assumes that fantasy is less immoral than the real thing.

I Don't Think So Natalie

So, I'm watching LOGO television last night and the Dixie Chicks are being interviewed about their latest album. LOGO television is a gay network that shows gay movies, shorts, documentaries etc. I had my doubts about it but its not a bad network. Some of the shows are a bit much for me but overall its not horrible tv. In any event, I'm sitting there watching the Chicks and they are going on about some video they did for the new album and they are asked the question, "Why do you think gay people like you?" And their answer is, or I should say Natalie Maines' answer is, "Well I think its because we know what its like to be discriminated against." Hello, what the hell do you know about discrimination? Discrimination is when someone tells you that you can't sit somewhere because of the color of your skin. Discrimination is when you are fired from a job simply because your gay. Discrimination is NOT when radio talk show hosts speak out against you for saying you apologize for being from the same state at President Bush. Discrimination is NOT when concert goers refuse to buy your tickets because they disagree with you. Discrimination is NOT when your record sales drop because people don't want politics mixed in with their music. Please don't equate your stupidity with the pains that come about from discrimination. I'm sick and tired of gays and lesbians associating themselves with every and anyone who they deem victims of attacks. Natalie Maines and her "sisters" know nothing about discrimination so please don't lump them with me.

Enough About Racism

I'm tired of people yelling racism every time someone calls for English only - be it street signs or in the work place. Here is a perfect example of such rhetoric as Councilman Tony Avella is attacked for his advocacy of English only signs in Queens. The original issue was over the attack on young Asians by bigoted thugs but easily turned into overt racism because of the councilman proposing English only signs.

Is This The Best They Can Do?

I have to admit that I tuned in late to the Democratic debate for attorney general last evening and by all accounts I was happy to be late. Within five minutes I asked my self the question, is this the best they can do? All four candidates behaved like errant schoolboys playing tit for tat in the schoolyard. Ok, maybe it was better in the first half an hour and deteriorated by the time I tuned in and if so it is unfortunate. By far, the most prepared were Cuomo and Green and now we know why they are ahed in the polls. All the candidates behaved like they were at their local bar backslapping and handgladding one another as they consumed more beer.

In one instance, Charlie King compared himself to Elliot Spitzer when answering a question on Medicaid fraud by saying, "We were born three days apart, we both attended Harvard - I didn't stay." Could someone tell me what the hell that has to do with Medicaid fraud? Sean Patrick Maloney - the least prepared of all, seemed like he was rehearsing for a stint on Saturday Night Live and kept repeating, "I'll do my job, I'll do my job and kept insisiting that he would be independent. I don't know if Mr. Maloney knows this or not but the attoney general position is not an independent position. His smiles seemed inappropriate at times and I wondered if he thought he was posing for a magazine ad.

Of the candidates, Cuomo and Green were more prepared and actually answered questions in an intelligent manner. There were, as to be expected, swipes at one another as Green accused Cuomo, as head of HUD, of failure to comply with laws to reduce pesticides use to lessen the risks to children. He went on to say that a suit was brought by Spitzer to comply with these laws. Cuomo kept insisting that the suit was filed after he left HUD but that he would look into it. Sounds a little suspicious to me but is worth soem research.

The debate, in my opinion, is a clear indication that these candidates are not ready for prime time. In their closing remarks Sean Maloney attacked the president of the United States and his administration. I don't know if anyone told Maloney this but the attorney general position has no bearing on arresting and killing Osama Bin Laden and his attack on the president was an obvious ploy on the part of his handlers. I see whay he has only 3% of the votes.

While Mark Green and Andrew Cuomo were the stronger of the four candidates the question still stands, is this the best the Democratic party can do? It seems clear to me that the best candidate for the position of attorney general is the Republican candidate, Jeanine Pirro. Pirro is not only the best candidate for this position but could easily run circles around these guys even on her off day. For those interested here is what the Times had to say about the debate.