my life in words

we are the world.

Thu, 02 Jul 2009 08:15:16 GMT

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Monday, June 29:

Stay in balance -- just because you're single doesn't mean you're less than whole. Lavish some of your caring and compassion on yourself, and treat yourself with the sensitivity you show toward others.

what a strange, strange week where i find myself filling myself up with the narratives of every image and storyline served up by the media because i have so little of a story line myself. first of all, i've become so enraptured with my two summer shows that my weeks literally fly by in rich anticipation of watching "kings" on saturday night and "true blood" on sunday night. besides my shows, i've found myself senselessly watching the coverage of the recent passing of michael jackson and its ability to erase out of the news almost every other substantial news story. penultimately, the past two weeks witnessed the menswear shows in milan and paris and i found myself occupying my daytime hours in online forums discussing such nonsense as whether or not the givenchy menswear presentation by tisci found itself relevant to the fashion of the contemporary man. finally, we've almost witnessed the complete dismantling of the social conservative wing of the republican party as we know it. and since i find that most interesting, i'll start there: on "kings," this past sunday it discussed the way people in power grapple with their secrets and how they choose the people who they can trust with those secrets: prince jack determined he couldn't share his secret love with anyone even the object thereof and as a result, not only did he lose that love to suicide, but his secret almost got out to the entire kingdom and he had to finally come to terms with who he really is; princess michelle and her lover decided to only confide their love to each other and of course, this while seemingly perfect, also caused tension when it came out not because they had done anything wrong, but because they did not trust the ones who love them the most with their secrets; finally, the king himself decided to share his secret with someone outside of his circle, outside of his family, outside of his colleagues, and it backfired because he came to find out that the man he trusted with his secret did not seem to trust him enough to share his. what better corollary could we have for the heads of the national republican senatorial committee and the republican governors association? "for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known. therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops" (Luke 12:2-3). while the ensign affair passed under my nose as just another republican scandal highlighting the hypocrisies of the social conservative movement, the sanford affair, in my mind, showed not only that there's something calculated in exposing this hypocrisy but that there's something of a movement in the way these affairs receive treatment by their actors and by the press. while we have grown accustomed to the wife standing by the side of the man caught in an affair, the sanford wife stood apart. and while we're normally used to hearing a quick resignation and/or an "error in judgement" mea culpa, the most interesting development of this scandal comes in sanford bearing his heart to the world saying that he'd not only fallen out of love with his wife, but that he's fallen in love with his "soul mate." now, while i know this may never lead to the sort of discovery i'd like, it would thrill me if some more critically thinking republicans and sympathizers might finally understand that that impulse remains exactly the type of thing that happens with gay men and women every day. and i don't know if he will do this, but one wonders if he'll finally stop living a lie and go be with the person he truly loves. his soul mate. it ties in so perfectly with my favorite scene from this week's "true blood" where the dumb hick hoyt develops feelings for the young vampire girl who has moved into his town. in an unlikely poignant scene, she hides her fangs in shame and he tells her that she has no reason to hide because that's why he likes her. that moment represents the height of controversial love in any relationship. when you realize your difference is what your object appreciates about you. and while i find this all to syrupy for words, it brings me to the jubilation that in the midst of all of this turmoil in the republican party, the democrats have seized sixty votes in the senate which means they now have no reason not to completely push forward their agenda seeing as that's stood as the reason they've put forward on so many of my issues. while i generally only have one, it's interesting to watch as none of the four obama promises in that vein find themselves accomplished as of yet.

with respect to those issues, last week, i did almost nothing with regard to my career nor my love life, but i did, for some reason, feel a reason to go out and celebrate. on thursday night, i went out with my high school friend and my seat warmer to the only bar in town and i had a bunch of fun, but i went home and went online and thought i'd met someone who pushed all the buttons i referenced above and made me feel all cute and special only to leave me -- literally -- waiting by the side of the road in the rain. seriously. what is my life? also, the hot latin who i tried to hook up with weeks earlier also reached out to me. i deferred thinking i had met a soul mate. isn't that a barrel of laughs? on friday, i went to the comedy show with my high school friend where he consumed fourteen glasses of wine and proceeded to make a fool of himself and i in front of my old coworkers. i literally ran out of the venue in shame. i went out afterward and had quite a bit of fun but met no one. that sucked. on saturday, i walked in the parade with the human rights campaign and that held a bunch of fun and i should have hung out with someone besides my high school friend, but i couldn't because there are issues, so then i decided to just stay in after than and pretended to be sick. sunday, monday, and tuesday passed without incident and here we are. i must make a go at actually meeting someone again tomorrow, but as for right now, i'm going to start a kristen scott thomas marathon and go back to debating the relative merits of the givenchy collection. i mean, michael jackson is dead. he represented the last semblences of an actual globalized culture. everyone knew the moonwalk. everyone saw his big video premeires. everyone knew his every eccentricity. not just here, but worldwide. we loved him anyway. as he dies, so does the idea that the world will some how congeal into this one-world-culture. we're only now becoming aware of how we've split ourselves into niches contained in niches ever more exclusive circles. his death signifies that. we can't even agree what he means or what we should concentrate on. i choose to focus not on the moonwalking in my socks in the living room or the debates i had about his scream video or how i sung "butterflies" in the shower with the first love i'd ever had or how i'd do the shimmy dance to "P.Y.T." getting ready for a great night now, i choose to focus on givenchy because the other memories are just too hard.

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Wednesday, July 1:

If there were a road sign for the state of your heart right now, it'd be 'Caution: Curves Ahead' or maybe 'Limited Visibility.' Expect some emotional ups and downs, and possibly a little fog.

AP Newsbreak: SC gov 'crossed lines' with women
By TAMARA LUSH and EVAN BERLAND, Associated Press Writers Tamara Lush And Evan Berland, Associated Press Writers Tue Jun 30, 7:47 pm ET

COLUMBIA, S.C. – South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, already struggling to salvage his family and his political career after admission of a scandalous affair, added explosive details Tuesday, including more visits with the mistress he calls his "soul mate" and additional women in his past.

The once-promising presidential prospect said he is committed to reconciling with his wife, but professed to The Associated Press his continued love for the Argentine woman at the center of the firestorm that gutted his political future.

In emotional interviews with the AP over two days, he said he would die "knowing that I had met my soul mate."

Sanford also said that he "crossed the lines" with a handful of other women during 20 years of marriage, but not as far as he did with his mistress.

"There were a handful of instances wherein I crossed the lines I shouldn't have crossed as a married man, but never crossed the ultimate line," he said.

Sanford insisted his relationship with Maria Belen Chapur, whom he met at an open air dance spot in Uruguay eight years ago, was more than just sex.

"This was a whole lot more than a simple affair, this was a love story," Sanford said. "A forbidden one, a tragic one, but a love story at the end of the day."

Even with the latest revelations, Sanford maintains he is fit to govern and has no plans to resign.

"I've been able to do my job and in fact excel at it," Sanford said, while acknowledging he is a spectator at his "own political funeral."

During more than three hours of interviews over two days at his Statehouse office, Sanford said he is trying to fall back in love with his wife, Jenny, even as he grapples with his deep feelings for Chapur.

"I owe it too much to my boys and to the last 20 years with Jenny to not try this larger walk of faith," he said.

Sanford detailed more encounters with his mistress than he had disclosed during a rambling, emotional press conference last week. The new revelations Tuesday led the state attorney general to launch an investigation of Sanford's travels, and some legislators to repeat calls for him to step down.

He delivered a personal check late Tuesday for nearly $3,000 to reimburse the state for a 2008 state-funded trip to Argentina where he visited Chapur, and he insists no public money was used for any other meetings with her.

House Speaker Bobby Harrell, who would chair any forced ouster of the governor by the Republican-controlled Legislature, said it's premature to heed calls from those in his own party to remove Sanford.

"I want to see what the investigation finds before I'm willing to discuss that topic," said Harrell, a Charleston Republican.

Sanford, at times crying and unabashedly emotional, acknowledged in the AP interview that he had casual encounters with other women while he was married but before he met Chapur. They took place during trips outside the country to "blow off steam" with male friends.

"What I would say is that I've never had sex with another woman. Have I done stupid? I have. You know you meet someone. You dance with them. You go to a place where you probably shouldn't have gone," Sanford said, declining to discuss details. But he said those encounters were nothing like his relationship with Chapur.

"If you're a married guy at the end of the day you shouldn't be dancing with somebody else. So anyway, without wandering into that field we'll just say that I let my guard down in all senses of the word without ever crossing the line that I crossed with this situation."

Sanford also detailed more visits with Chapur, including an encounter that he described as a failed attempt at a farewell meeting in New York this past winter, chaperoned by a spiritual adviser and sanctioned by his wife soon after she found out about the affair.

But he saw Chapur again, this time over Father's Day weekend and after his wife expressly told him not to, leaving the country without telling his staff and instead leading them to believe he was hiking the Appalachian Trail.

By the time he returned to a puzzled public, staff and family, his public image and emotional state had unraveled. He admitted the affair at a news conference televised nationally, but at the time said there were only four meetings with his mistress.

Sanford told the AP he saw Chapur five times over the past year, including two romantic, multi-night stays with her in New York — one in Manhattan, one in the Hamptons, both paid for in cash so no one would know — before they met in the city again with the intention of breaking up.

He said he saw her two other times before that, including their first meeting.

"There was some kind of connection from the very beginning," he said, though neither that first encounter nor a 2004 coffee date in New York during the Republican National Convention were romantic.

Their relationship turned physical, he said, during a government trip to Brazil and Argentina in June 2008, and when he returned, the e-mails that had started years earlier began to reflect anguish over what they had done.

"Now I am frightened," he told the AP, describing his state of mind at the time. "It was before safe. But now it's not safe. We gotta put the genie back in the bottle."

He has said he will reimburse the state an undetermined amount of the more-than $8,000 in taxpayer money spent on the trip, and he insists no public money was used for any other meetings with her.

Critics have charged that Sanford should resign or be impeached because he was unreachable during the latest Argentina trip and that no one was in charge of state government during his secret absence.

In the interview, he said he first became aware that officials were looking for him Monday evening, June 22 — four days after his departure for Argentina — when he checked his cell phone voice mail.

"I was reached ultimately on Monday evening," he said. "I was contacted and called (chief of staff) Scott (English) back that Tuesday morning." Sanford said he then changed his flight to return to South Carolina that evening.

He and Jenny, parents of four sons, say they are trying to reconcile their marriage but have not been sharing the same house for several weeks. Jenny Sanford found out about the relationship in January when she discovered a letter the governor had written to his mistress. She did not immediately return messages seeking comment Tuesday and was not at their coastal home on Sullivans Island.

___

Associated Press writer Brett J. Blackledge contributed to this report.
Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

###

Sen. Ensign Acknowledges an Extramarital Affair

By Paul Kane and Chris Cillizza
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Sen. John Ensign (Nev.), considered a rising star in the Republican Party, yesterday acknowledged an extramarital affair with a former campaign staffer who is married to one of the lawmaker's former legislative aides.

Ensign, a member of the Senate Republican leadership, disclosed the affair at a hastily arranged news briefing in Las Vegas, his home town. He flew home yesterday morning after informing GOP leaders on Capitol Hill of his impending announcement, missing a vote on tourism legislation considered important to Nevada's casino industry.

The news was the latest setback for a party that suffered losses of at least 13 Senate seats in the past two elections and saw Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) defect to the Democrats in April. Any further instability in their ranks is unwelcome news for Republicans, who viewed Ensign as a telegenic communicator who could deliver the conservative message on political talk shows in a congenial matter.

Ensign did not directly comment about his political future but said he was "committed to my service in the United States Senate." He does not face reelection until 2012 and had taken preliminary steps to explore a run for the White House that year, making a trip three weeks ago to Iowa, the first testing ground on the presidential primary calendar.

"I deeply regret and am very sorry for my actions," Ensign said, reading from a prepared statement and leaving without taking questions. Ensign's wife, Darlene, was not at her husband's side during the short briefing but issued a statement saying the couple's marriage has become "stronger" after the affair.

"I love my husband," she said in her statement.

Other members of the Senate Republican leadership declined to comment yesterday on Ensign's admission. GOP leaders had hoped to spend the next few months focused on Nevada's other senator, Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D), who is up for reelection in 2010 and is considered potentially vulnerable to a challenge.

Ensign is considered a leading voice among social conservatives in the GOP. In 1998, as a House member running against Reid, he called on President Bill Clinton to resign after revelations about his affair with a White House intern. "He sent taxpayer-paid staff out to lie for him, and that is a misuse of office," Ensign said, adding that the president had "no credibility left."

In September 2007, Ensign called then-Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Idaho) "embarrassing" after Craig was arrested in an airport men's restroom and pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct in a sex sting. Ensign played the leading role in an unsuccessful effort to force Craig into resigning from the Senate immediately.

Ensign's affair began a few months after he called for his colleague to resign, according to a timeline provided by his office. Beginning in December 2007 and continuing until last August, Ensign had a "consensual affair" with a campaign staffer who was "married to an official Senate staffer," the statement from his office said.

Ensign said both the husband and the wife had left his political or legislative payrolls by May 2008.

GOP strategists were divided yesterday about the impact of this latest revelation on the party's image. Some argued that it would reinforce voter impressions of a Republican brand that has been dogged by controversies over the past several years, from Craig's sex scandal to the investigations of imprisoned lobbyist Jack Abramoff's dealings with congressional Republicans.

"This is yet another reminder as to why the American people have chosen new management for the foreseeable future," said John Weaver, a former senior adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). "Nothing is shocking in Washington, of course, except the audacity of politicians who believe rules don't apply to them."

Others suggested that Ensign's affair was an isolated incident that would have little impact on the party. "This news is a personal issue affecting John Ensign, his family and their privacy," said Kevin Madden, a Republican consultant and senior adviser to former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. "I'd argue that it's an analytical reach for opponents to try and assign a negative political impact on the fortunes of the national party because of this revelation."

Ensign acknowledged in a recent interview with The Washington Post that he was seeking to raise his national profile out of a belief that a dearth of effective GOP messengers was handicapping the party's comeback. "We have a responsibility to get our message out," Ensign said. Asked directly about his presidential ambitions, he said that most children dream of being president one day and that it was "not something I would ever rule out."

Ensign's political career appeared to be all but dead a decade ago, after he lost to Reid by the razor-thin margin of 428 votes in their bitter 1998 race. But then Nevada's other senator, Democrat Richard H. Bryan, announced his intention to retire in 2000, and Ensign jumped into that race, easily winning office and quickly becoming a favorite of GOP leaders.

The son of a casino magnate, Ensign is a prodigious fundraiser and was tasked with chairing the National Republican Senatorial Committee in the 2008 election cycle, a brutal period for Republicans. Despite overseeing the loss of at least seven seats, Ensign was not blamed and instead was promoted to be chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, the No. 4 leadership position for Senate Republicans.

Ensign's personal life has caused other absences from the Capitol in the past.

In February 2002, Ensign took an unexplained two-week leave from the Senate, citing "personal reasons." When he returned, he told the Las Vegas Sun that he was "not making any comments one way or the other. I'm just asking people to respect my privacy."

Staff writer James V. Grimaldi contributed to this report.

###

May 11, 2009
Charlie Crist to Run for Senate
By Julie Bolcer

Florida governor Charlie Crist, a central subject of Outrage, Kirby Dick's new documentary about closeted gay politicians, will announce his plans to run for a U.S. Senate seat on Tuesday, reports the Tallahassee Democrat.

Crist, a Republican, was elected governor in 2006 and enjoys approval ratings above 65%, according to an April poll from Quinnipiac University. Nonetheless, in the Senate primary in 2010, he is expected to face a formidable challenger in former state house speaker Marco Rubio. The latter likely will point to Crist’s acceptance of federal stimulus money as proof that the governor is not conservative enough.

Candidates will vie to replace outgoing U.S. Senator Mel Martinez, a Republican who is retiring.

Crist, 52, is a focus of Outrage, a documentary by Kirby Dick that reveals the secret gay lives of politicians who publicly endorse antigay positions.

Gay rumors have long circulated around Crist, who announced his engagement to wife Carole Rome in July. Critics charged the wedding was timed to increase his palatability as a running mate for Republican presidential hopeful John McCain, who did not select him.

Crist supported, but did not campaign fervently for, Amendment 2, the state ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriage and civil unions in November.

A former state senator, Crist lost an attempt to unseat former U.S. Senator Bob Graham in 1998. He is expected to make his announcement about his latest bid at the state capital in Tallahassee.

###

Dad jailed in attack on sons

By Richard Danielson, Elisabeth Parker and Kim Wilmath, Times Staff Writers

Published Sunday, June 21, 2009

TAMPA — Former Hillsborough County Commissioner Brian Blair spent Father's Day in jail after his arrest early Sunday on charges that he punched his two sons.

Blair, 52, was arrested shortly after 5 a.m. after an altercation at his family's home in the Forest Hills area of Tampa, sheriff's Deputy Larry McKinnon said. Blair and his wife, Toni, have two sons, Brett and Bradley, according to his campaign Web site.

Blair, a former professional wrestler who is 6 feet tall and weighs 235 pounds, pushed his older son Brett, 17, in the chest about 4 a.m., according to an arrest report.

The teen tried to walk away, but Blair grabbed him and punched him in the face with a closed fist, leaving a red mark and swelling, the arrest report said.

Blair then put the 17-year-old in a choke hold, causing him to have trouble breathing, according to the report.

Deputies said Blair then let go of his older son and grabbed his younger son by the throat. He punched the boy, leaving a bump on his head, the arrest report said. In the report, a deputy gave the younger son's age as 12, though Blair's campaign Web site said he is 13.

Both sons identified their father as the person who attacked them, deputies said.

Blair was booked into the Hillsborough County jail on two felony counts of child abuse. As is standard procedure for someone facing a charge involving domestic violence, he was being held without bail Sunday. He is scheduled to appear today before Hillsborough Circuit Judge Walter Heinrich.

A woman at Blair's home did not open the front door late Sunday afternoon, but said, "I don't talk to reporters. Thank you, though."

Blair, who was part of a tag-team wrestling duo known as the Killer Bees, was elected to the District 6 countywide seat on the County Commission in 2004.

Last November, Blair was defeated for re-election by financial planner Kevin Beckner. After the election, Blair sued Beckner, contending that Beckner's campaign attacks on him were so over the top that they amounted to libel.

Beckner's attorneys have responded that the statements in dispute were nothing more than typical campaigning. Beckner merely reprinted or summarized statements that had already been made by or about Blair during the political contest, they said.

In addition to wrestling and politics, Blair has previously owned several Gold's Gyms, but his booking report indicated he is currently unemployed.

This is not the first time Blair has faced an allegation that he punched someone close to him.

On Sept. 25, 1984, a woman he had dated told a Hillsborough sheriff's deputy that Blair beat her during an argument inside her apartment, according to the deputy's report.

She told the deputy Blair had been drinking, threw her over a sofa, punched her 10 to 12 times in the head and pulled out a clump of her hair, and hair was retrieved as evidence. The woman said Blair also took more than $2,000 worth of gifts he had given her during their relationship.

The report indicates Blair was slated to be charged with battery and grand theft after a deposition at the State Attorney's Office. The report notes that no attempt was made to pick him up because he was out of the country.

Blair was never questioned, arrested or charged, though he returned to the country a few days later. He was also in the country for more than a week after the alleged incident.

Blair has acknowledged there was an unpleasant breakup, but said he was never violent.

"The whole thing was fabricated," he told the Times in 2002. "I absolutely swear to that."

Times staff writer Bill Varian contributed to this report.

© 2009 • All Rights Reserved • St. Petersburg Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111

###

Politics of personal perfection
By: Eamon Javers
June 25, 2009 04:59 AM EST

Let’s be honest: Barack Obama is better than you are.

He’s a better father — taking breaks from running the world to cheer on his daughters at soccer and basketball games.

He’s a better husband — zipping his wife off for dinner in New York and Paris.

He’s got a better diet — nibbling on vegetables from his homegrown garden to keep his love handles in check.

And he’s got a terrific jump shot.

You? Not so much.

Call it the politics of personal perfection. The Barack Obama brand is as much about being a personal example to the nation as it is about being a political figure. But the danger of that frothy mix of glamour and domesticity is that President Obama could become in the public mind something he never sought to be: the Martha Stewart of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

And political veterans say the fine line between what’s inspiring and what’s annoying can be difficult to spot in advance.

Obama veered further toward Martha Stewart Living territory in an interview with a Pakistani newspaper on June 21. He told the interviewer about his college travels in Pakistan and talked about the exotic dishes he learned to cook there.

“Keema ... daal ... you name it, I can cook it,” Obama said.

Also, the president noted, he reads Urdu poetry.

All this is driving certain people — mostly Republicans — nuts.

“This is a guy who was elected as a celebrity and is governing as a celebrity,” said Republican consultant Rick Wilson. “If George Bush had been photographed taking his daughters out for ice cream [as Obama was on Saturday], it would have been: ‘Nero fiddles while Rome burns.’”

Comedian Jon Stewart, exasperated by the Obamas’ high-visibility romance and date night on Broadway, complained that the president was making life tough on men across the country. “How do you compete with that?” Stewart griped. “Take it down a notch, dude.”

Obama’s image as a family man is shining even brighter today, against a backdrop of marital calamity engulfing the Republican Party over the past week.

Being too perfect can be dangerous for politicians. Just ask Mitt Romney. The former Massachusetts governor and GOP presidential candidate is a spectacularly good-looking man, extremely wealthy, well-spoken and accomplished in his professional career. And a segment of the voting public hated him for it.

Says Republican media strategist Mark McKinnon, “President Obama and his team should be careful about trying to be perfect. Voters are suspicious of perfect. They actually prefer someone who is human. And has flaws. Like them.”

Michael Feldman, a former senior adviser to Vice President Al Gore, says White Houses sometimes need to “let a little air out of that bubble” by reminding voters of a president’s foibles. “Shining a little light on a flaw is not a bad thing,” Feldman said.

Don’t look for help with that project among the professional brand-management set — the industry seems to be in collective awe of Obama.

“He’s so g-ddamned smart and such a good representative for the country,” said Alan Siegel, a corporate branding expert and CEO of the marketing firm Siegel & Gale. “I admire him.”

“They’ve just done so many things so well,” said Susan Hodgkinson, principal of The Personal Brand Co. “You have to tip your hat to them and say, ‘Brilliant.’”

Can it ever be too much?

Conservative pundit Tucker Carlson doesn’t think so. “My instinct is that people are like dogs,” he said. “They want a leader they think is better than them.” And Carlson thinks it’s working well for Obama. “People naturally defer to others they think are superior.”

Superior or not, pollsters find that Barack Obama the man is immensely popular.

According to a Pew Research Center report released June 18, 72 percent of Americans have a favorable impression of the president, and only 25 percent have an unfavorable opinion. Those figures are extremely high — in July 2001, George W. Bush netted a mere 61 percent favorability score, but that was enough that the pundit class deemed him extremely popular at the time.

Higher still are the popularity numbers for the first lady. Seventy-six percent of Americans have a favorable impression of Michelle Obama, the poll found, and only 14 percent had an unfavorable opinion. (In July 2001, then-first lady Laura Bush scored higher than her husband, too, with 64 percent favorability, Pew reported.)

But Democrats say the president is just being himself. “Voters react badly to politicians who are sanctimonious or hypocritical but not to those they see as genuinely virtuous,” said Jim Jordan, a longtime Democratic consultant. “The quality of his performance is just first-rate. There’s nothing artificial about it.”

And on the issue of his performance as a husband and father, Jordan says there’s little downside for the new president, even though every recent White House eventually has faced scandal of one kind or another.

“It’s almost inconceivable that he’s going to be linked to some scandal that goes to personal morality,” Jordan said. “It’s an extraordinary thing that we are debating whether the commander in chief is too virtuous.”

To be fair to Obama, he went out of his way to point to his own weaknesses as a father — highlighting his brutal travel schedule, which made it difficult to spend the time he wanted to with his daughters. And Michelle Obama has repeatedly done what she can to bring the president down a peg or two — remember her comment in 2007 about her husband being “snore-y and stinky”?

That may be because the Obamas know personal perfection is not what Americans always want — or get — in a president. We like our chief executives with endearing flaws, imperfections that show their human side — the side that, perhaps, is most like ourselves.

George W. Bush could never quite pronounce “nuclear.” Bill Clinton used to love to jog but often ended up at McDonald’s wolfing down Big Macs. George H.W. Bush didn’t like to eat broccoli — and banned it from the White House.

It’s very hard to imagine Barack Obama barfing on the lap of a foreign head of state, as the elder Bush once did.

The closest thing Obama has to a character flaw to date is his inability to stop smoking. Republican strategist McKinnon thinks that may be just the humanizing flaw the president needs now. “Yes, it’s a terrible example. An awful habit. Sends all the wrong signals,” McKinnon said. “But it brings him down to earth and makes him more interesting and accessible.”

Still, the president can’t quite bring himself to confess. Obama bristled at a news conference on Tuesday when Margaret Talev of McClatchy asked about his smoking.

Obama called himself a “former smoker,” adding, “I constantly struggle with it. Have I fallen off the wagon sometimes? Yes. Am I a daily smoker, a constant smoker? No. ... I would say I’m 95 percent cured.”

Which makes smoking, perhaps, 5 percent of the flaw Obama needs.

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

###

July 1, 2009
Franken’s Win Bolsters Democratic Grip in Senate
By MONICA DAVEY and CARL HULSE

After nearly eight months of waiting, almost 20,000 pages of legal briefs, and millions of dollars in election costs, Al Franken emerged Tuesday as the next United States senator from Minnesota, ending one of the most protracted election recount battles in recent memory.

Mr. Franken, 58, a former comedian and author, could be seated in the Senate as early as Monday, leaders there said, providing Democrats with something they had long hoped for: 60 votes, and thus at least the symbolic ability to overcome filibusters.

Norm Coleman, a Republican who had held the seat for a term, conceded on Tuesday afternoon, hours after the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a ruling in Mr. Franken’s favor, the latest in a series of findings that had left Mr. Franken ahead in the count. In weeks past, some Republican leaders had urged Mr. Coleman to press on to the federal courts if need be, but those calls faded Tuesday.

“Ours is a government of laws, not men and women,” Mr. Coleman, 59, said in a statement he read before reporters outside his home in St. Paul. “The Supreme Court of Minnesota has spoken, and I respect its decision and will abide by the result. It’s time for Minnesota to come together under the leaders it has chosen and move forward. I join all Minnesotans in congratulating our newest United States senator — Al Franken.”

It was an oddly abrupt ending to an election contest that had left Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat, handling the state’s business alone and had left many ordinary Minnesotans weary of the fight.

All along, the candidates had been separated by the slightest of margins. With 2.9 million Minnesotans casting ballots last November, one early count showed Mr. Coleman ahead by 206 votes. Then, in a statewide hand recount set into motion by the close vote, the numbers fluctuated in the estimations of the campaigns and others trying to track them. Ultimately, a three-judge panel announced that Mr. Franken had won by 312 votes.

In issuing its 5-to-0 opinion, the Supreme Court found that Mr. Coleman, who had argued, in part, that thousands of absentee ballots had been wrongly excluded from the count, had failed to prove that “the trial court’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous or that the court committed an error of law or abused its discretion.”

Late Tuesday afternoon, outside his town house in downtown Minneapolis, Mr. Franken appeared jubilant at a news conference that at times looked more like an election-night rally. Passersby stopped, and one called out: “We have a senator! We have a senator!”

“When you win an election this close, you know that not one bit of effort went to waste,” said Mr. Franken, who has already hired senior staff to prepare for his transition to the Senate. His wife, Franni, had for months kept a packed suitcase at the ready like an expectant mother, Ms. Klobuchar said, should the family be called to Washington for a swearing-in.

President Obama called Mr. Franken to congratulate him on Tuesday, aides said, and he issued a statement saying he looked forward to working with the senator-elect “to build a new foundation for growth and prosperity by lowering health care costs and investing in the kind of clean energy jobs and industries that will help America lead in the 21st century.”

Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, signed Mr. Franken’s election certificate early Tuesday evening. Senate Democrats said they would like to seat Mr. Franken as quickly as next week, giving the party a crucial vote as it moves to difficult debates over topics like climate change and health care.

Democrats had held some committee posts for Mr. Franken, potentially including the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee that is in the middle of drafting a health care overhaul.

With 60 votes (including those of two independents) now most likely aligned with the Democrats, the party could avoid filibusters.

But Mr. Franken swiftly made it clear that he did not view himself as the Democrats’ No. 60. “That’s not how I see it,” he said, adding that he was “going to be the second senator from the state of Minnesota, and that’s how I’m going to do this job.”

Though Republicans expressed disappointment at the outcome, they had in recent weeks become increasingly resigned to Mr. Franken joining the Senate.

On Tuesday, they joined Mr. Coleman in acknowledging defeat and immediately sought to raise expectations for Democrats.

“With their supermajority, the era of excuses and finger-pointing is now over,” said Senator John Cornyn of Texas, who heads the National Republican Senatorial Committee. Mr. Cornyn said it was “troubling to think about what they might now accomplish with 60 votes.”

But whether Democrats can consistently rely on 60 senators being present is in question. Two veteran Democrats, Senators Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia and Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, are ailing and have regularly been absent from the Senate. In addition, a handful of moderate to conservative Democrats have shown a willingness to break from the party, and even liberals will do so on some issues.

In the Twin Cities, there was widespread relief on Tuesday. Minnesotans are viewed as among the nation’s most politically engaged and involved voters, but even there, patience had grown thin. “It went on forever,” Paul Mathey, 70, of St. Paul, complained.

The race was not the only long standoff in Senate history, nor was it the longest. Among others, the 1974 race between John A. Durkin and Louis C. Wyman left the Senate seat from New Hampshire in doubt for 10 months. The election was finally resolved when the seat was declared vacant and a special election was held, declaring Mr. Durkin, a Democrat, the winner in September 1975.

This time, the battle ended with a phone call between two men who had appeared to talk only through their opposing lawyers and spokesmen for months.

On Tuesday afternoon, Mr. Coleman called Mr. Franken to tell him he was giving up. Mr. Coleman, who some in Minnesota were already speculating might run for governor in 2010 (for now, he would not comment) described the call as “a very personal discussion, a very positive discussion.”

Mr. Franken said that the two had talked about the difficulty of the long fight on their families, and that Mr. Coleman had told him, “This is going to be the best job you’ll ever have.”

After so much turmoil, the phone call was warm and gracious, Mr. Franken said, adding later that he had recalled thinking in the midst of it: “This is nice. This is a nice way to end it.”

Christina Capecchi and Karen Ann Cullotta contributed reporting.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

Despite Majority, Obama to Be Tested
Diverse Ideology Cuts Democrats' Edge

By Shailagh Murray and Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, June 30, 2009

After a series of early and relatively easy victories on Capitol Hill, the White House appears certain to face a more difficult road when Congress returns to work next week.

Not content to task lawmakers with passing an ambitious agenda of record new spending, sweeping health-care reform and other major initiatives, President Obama yesterday nudged the Senate to move ahead with its version of a landmark energy bill the House passed on Friday. In recent weeks, he has also revived the idea of pursuing broad changes in immigration law.

Obama and his aides have proved adept at navigating the politics and eccentricities of the legislative branch. But as lawmakers attempt to navigate much trickier and more contentious issues in the second half of the year, the narrow margin of Friday's energy vote served as a warning: The higher the stakes, the tougher the challenge in finding consensus within what has become a diverse Democratic majority.

The legislation represented the first big test for one of Obama's biggest and most controversial domestic priorities, stemming climate change. Democrats who voted against the bill came from all over the map, from coal country to Midwestern factory towns to rural swaths of the Great Plains. Each of the regions helped swell the party's ranks in the 2006 and 2008 elections, and Democrats think they represent the linchpin to an enduring congressional majority.

But an energy bill that to a California Democrat represents a historic first step in slowing climate change appears to a Rust Belt colleague to be a redux of the 1993 energy-consumption tax that the House approved by a nearly identical 219 to 213 vote -- only to be brushed off by the Senate and resurrected by Republican candidates on the 1994 campaign trail.

"It's like you have a big umbrella and you're trying to fit 10 people under it, but if you move it in one direction, you're going to leave some people out," said Rep. Dan Maffei, a member of the class of '08 and the first Democrat to represent his Upstate New York district in nearly 30 years.

The energy bill will face an even stiffer challenge in the Senate, where the Democratic caucus is an array of conservatives, liberals, and just about everything in between, and these lawmakers are making very different calculations about the big items on Obama's legislative wish list.

At its core, Obama's domestic agenda is a liberal wish list of health care for all, tough new environmental regulations and government solutions to crises ranging from failing schools to faltering auto companies. But as the party's ranks expanded in 2006 and 2008, its center of gravity shifted to the middle. And the key to a durable majority, White House officials and party leaders agree, is adapting old policy goals to new political realities.

Sen. Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), a member of the Democratic leadership, said the party is coalescing as an amalgam of "activist centrists" who think government has a role in solving problems but are more pragmatic than ideological. "I think that's where the president is, and that's where we are," he said. "When you win red states, strange things happen."

The battle for energy votes isn't the only sign that despite Democrats' margins in the House and Senate, unity isn't a foregone conclusion. In recent weeks, lawmakers have ignored a veto threat to save a stealth fighter jet, rejected Obama's request to delay action on a costly highway bill and balked at the administration's request for funding to close the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Hoping to succeed where other presidents have struggled in implementing their agenda, the Obama White House has attempted to work Capitol Hill with a blend of agenda-setting and deference. Obama outlines ambitious objectives, then leaves lawmakers largely in charge of their final shape.

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) enlisted two senior committee members to help assemble the House energy bill: liberal Rep. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts and conservative Rep. Rick Boucher, from coal-producing southwestern Virginia. The authors' bottom line was a cap that would gradually reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ultimately achieving 80 percent reductions from 1990 levels by 2050. Everything else was negotiable. When Obama entered the fray on May 5, summoning all 36 committee Democrats to the White House, he didn't make a single demand. Rather, participants say, he pointed to a portrait of Abraham Lincoln and said, "He had a chance to affect history. You, too, have a chance to affect history."

The House bill rejects Obama's proposal to auction 100 percent of emissions allowances, and instead calls for distributing 85 percent of allowances free of charge. The concession effectively defers the additional costs that polluters would incur, but the bill wouldn't have passed the chamber without it.

"We were given broad encouragement to report a bill in a timely manner," Boucher said. But Obama "made it clear he was expecting us to work out the details."

At the same time, Obama and a team of top White House officials -- many of them Hill veterans -- have been extraordinarily attentive to individual lawmakers, showering them with invitations and responding quickly to requests, concerns and criticisms.

"There has been a very, very high level of contact and dialogue. They've covered the ground," said Steve Richetti, who ran the congressional liaison office in the Clinton White House. And he noted the deference paid to the legislative branch, adding that, on health care and climate change, "they have tried to allow the process to work without intervening beyond what would be acceptable on the Hill."

Maintaining a sense of common interest across the party is a paramount goal. Early on, administration officials and Democratic leaders agreed they would steer clear of controversial social issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. And to the discontent of many liberal Democrats, Congress intends to remain generally silent on those fronts.

"They know the consequences of '94. It looms," White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said of the legislative debacles in President Bill Clinton's early tenure that produced the 1994 Republican landslide. "That division led to failure. . . . Our chances for success only come about by unity. That, as a culture up there, has been enforced by enough people that enough members believe."

For the White House, the trick is to keep a firm grip without appearing overly meddlesome.

Along with House and Senate leaders, Emanuel and his team are sharply focused on new lawmakers most likely to become Republican targets. Rep. Jason Altmire, elected in 2006, was invited to a breakfast in March with Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric K. Shinseki to discuss issues related to the large population of veterans in Altmire's western Pennsylvania district. Altmire's office and the VA now communicate regularly. Maffei was given a leading role in pressing two popular bills, to curb credit card practices deemed harmful to consumers and to protect auto dealers.

Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-Colo.), a member of the class of '06, said he has had extensive discussions with top administration officials on financial regulatory reform, another Obama priority. When he expressed to a White House official his interest in talking with Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan about a piece of legislation, he got a call the next day setting the meeting for three days later. He has met with three other Cabinet officials to discuss bills.

"We're supposed to legislate. They're supposed to execute," he said of the relationship between Congress and the White House. "When you give people a chance to participate, you get people moving in the same direction."

At least some Republicans are also a focus of the outreach effort. Democrats are seeking support on health-care reform from Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Finance Committee. But GOP leaders complain that the phone calls and White House invitations have slacked off -- perhaps because Obama's early efforts to woo Republicans yielded few votes.

"I think that in the beginning they seemed a lot more willing to go in and engage with us," said House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.).

So far, the major votes have broken along party lines, forcing Obama to rely almost entirely on his own diverse body of Democrats. Pressure built on them as last week's final energy vote drew near. Even Boucher was targeted when House Republicans circulated a letter from MeadWestvaco, a major employer in western Virginia, warning that 1,500 packaging jobs in Covington, Va., could be at risk.

Boucher, a 14-term incumbent, was unwavering, but others were unmoved. Altmire had bad news for Emanuel when his 2006 campaign mentor called Wednesday about the impending vote.

"I'm a firm no," Altmire replied. "I wouldn't waste any more time talking to me."

© 2009 The Washington Post Company

###

Givenchy Glam
Riccardo Tisci holds court in L.A.
11/29/2007 4:16:00 PM

(LOS ANGELES) Katherine Ross and husband Michael Govan opened their Hancock Park home-- gloriously traditional on the outside and highly modern on the inside, befitting a couple who are involved with LVMH and the L.A. County Museum of Art--on Thursday night to welcome Givenchy designer Riccardo Tisci to the West Coast.

Tisci, in a sharp Hedi Slimane-designed Dior Homme jacket and jeans, had a fabulous time meeting Christina Ricci upon his arrival. "Riccardo's clothes are so sharp and cut like architecture, but they're still feminine, which makes wearing them a joy," she purred. "And it's nice to know the designer is as great looking as his designs!" Tisci, for his part, was thrilled with his return to the City of Angels. "I was here once, before I became the designer for Givenchy," he confided. "But that visit was a whole other aesthetic. We spent time watching the skateboarders and observing L.A. street culture. I would love to come back for the Oscars, especially to see how my designs work in L.A."

Among his cheerleaders on hand were Liz Goldwyn, who first met Tisci at a Givenchy couture show in Paris about two years ago. "I loved his show like mad," she said, clad in a fall collection Givenchy paisley-print halter dress with a cinched waist. "Then, like a month later, a huge Givenchy cream box with black lettering arrived at my house. Inside was a black coat with ostrich feathers! I mean, it came from nowhere--I couldn't believe it! Now Riccardo and I are in love and have a long-distance relationship. When I'm in Paris, we have tea. And he just sent me these leopard couture shoes that take twenty minutes to get on and lace up, which I of course think is highly erotic!"

Goldwyn wasn't alone, as all the ladies turned out in their Givenchy best. "I'm actually wearing my own Givenchy, from fall," said Jamie Tisch of her black dress. "Katherine sent me over some spring pieces, but I felt like wearing my own dress." Anne Crawford wore a 1940's-style black dress with bell sleeves that was very femme fatale (paired with Roger Vivier shoes which she'll be divvying out during awards season), while the hostess donned a knockout white blouse and a tight, tailored black skirt. "Michael and I wanted Riccardo to meet some of the most interesting people in L.A.--from the worlds of fashion, art, and entertainment," Ross explained. "He's very inspired by culture and we wanted him to see what inspires us about Los Angeles."

While stalwart members of the fashion scene were present, including Riley Keough, Jenni Kayne, Maria Bell, Rachel Zoe, Katy Rodriguez, Arianne Phillips, Shiva Rose, Kendall Conrad, Rosetta and Balthazar Getty, and Johnson Hartig, there was also a smattering of L.A.'s art world: Bettina Korek ("In my grandmother's YSL coat--I snagged it!"), and gallerists Honor Fraser and Shaun Regen. "I'm very happy to know the art people and the fashion people came together for me," said Tisci, observing the scene. "This is the first time I've met the glam L.A. people, and my God! L.A. is the Monte Carlo of the U.S.!"

MERLE GINSBERG

© 2002-2007 Fashion Week Daily

Givenchy
runway review
June 27, 2008

Gothicism and Catholicism have been cornerstones of Riccardo Tisci's growing reputation in womenswear, so why would his first foray into menswear start anywhere else? Except it didn't. It actually started with the San Francisco Symphony Orchestra sawing its way through Metallica's “Nothing Else Matters,” and the ambiance of the metal mosh pit hung heavy over the shorts-over-leggings proportion that opened the show (there were leather and lace versions). It was so…definite that it was easy to imagine the stylists in the audience getting excited by all the great pictures they'd be able to extract from such outfits. One supposes the retailers were slightly less thrilled. And that was even before the black shorts, voile blouse, and black leather kerchief.

The boy-scout-gone-bad look aside, there were fortunately some expertly tailored suits, which suggested that Tisci does have a grasp on what the style-conscious male might be craving. The sight of Brazilian Evandro Soldati in a Givenchy football jersey was also a valuable reminder that Tisci is a child of sport-crazed Italia just as much as he is a product of Central Saint Martins in London, where tyro designers learn to turn all that is conventional in the world into decadent extravagance. And BOOM! A head-to-toe fuchsia outfit, at least the fifth such since the Spring season opened in Milan a week ago. Theories on a postcard, please.

— Tim Blanks

Givenchy
runway review
January 23, 2009

The hollering Teutons on the soundtrack set a stridently military mood that was immediately amplified by models with severe GI cuts (they're clearly not intending to work for any other designers this season). Thus did Riccardo Tisci define the parameters of his second menswear collection for Givenchy. Actually, it cleaved relatively closely to the limits of the first one. Style magazines flipped their wigs for Tisci's shorts-and-leggings combo for Spring 2009, so he clearly decided this should be his leitmotif for Fall. But the motif wasn't so much leit as lead. The leggings were delivered in knit and leather, the more laced the better. The alternative—Frankenstein boots in glitter—scarcely seemed an easier option. And the shorts were so studied (surely that wasn't duchesse satin?) that they would be better on a Busby Berkeley hoofer than a twenty-first-century gent. There was a bandage element that recalled Hervé Léger's heyday: an orthopedic gut-grabbing top, a little harness bolero, shoes that bound the feet. Such pieces illuminated the distinctly fetishistic and uneasy nature of the collection, as did the section I will forever think of as "The Cruel Baron," all swish and cape. One clutched at pieces that stood alone in the shadows, like a washed-leather caban or a parka with an alluring tech sheen. But one was also disconcerted by a sense that it would be interesting to probe Tisci's mind, to learn if or where the men he imagines in his clothes actually exist.

— Tim Blanks

Givenchy
runway review
June 26, 2009

Michael Jackson found out about Riccardo Tisci through the pieces of Givenchy's womenswear he'd been wearing, and that's how Tisci came to be working on costumes for Jackson's engagement at the O2 Centre in London. The potential collaboration inspired the gold-star-studded pieces the designer showed in Givenchy’s new menswear collection. He was due to meet his new client for the first time on Monday. Then Destiny intervened—meaning those pieces may eventually be Elvis-like holy relics. But they were scarcely the high points in a presentation that saw Tisci finally coordinating ambition and reality. Put simply, he loosened up—mostly. After the show, the designer claimed his retail success with his leggings and Bermudas (the mosh-pit couture that defined his first two menswear collections for Givenchy) had given him the confidence to try something more elegant, hence the occasionally overwrought tailoring in the show, including trousers with a built-in cummerbund and a silk-lapelled suit. But with Tisci insisting his theme was "Latino Boy Goes to Morocco" (his Latino boy is always going somewhere), the real heart of the collection was surely in the North African-inflected, layered activewear. It gelled very effectively with the shorts-over-leggings silhouette he's been offering for the past two seasons (which seems to have been adopted for Spring 2010 by a flying wedge of his peers), and gave the clothes a ferociously sexy athleticism, helped along by a model casting that ranged far and wide across the globe. Using high-performance fabrics in a mosaiclike print founded on the star motif, Tisci came up with his own version of a sports uniform. The gladiator footwear suggested something arena-based.

— Tim Blanks

May 16th, 2009
Runway To Sidewalk - Michael Jackson In Givenchy

I don’t normally blog on Saturday’s, but I wanted to catch up on the Cannes events before they started to pile up.

Whilst browsing photos I came across Michael Jackson wearing clothes from womenswear AGAIN.

You may remember the first time he was papped wearing a Balmain Fall 2009 top a few weeks ago, well this time he is wearing a gold studded top, and jacket from the Givenchy Fall 2007 collection.

The scary thing is, the look totally works for him. Who knew cross-dressing Michael could look so chic?

http://www.redcarpet-fashionawards.com/2009/05/16/runway-to-sidewalk-michael-jackson-in-givenchy/

time to pretend.

Mon, 22 Jun 2009 06:55:42 GMT

fight or flight. i've clearly come to a crossroads in my life and i'm not entirely sure how i'll cross it. last friday, i received my final severance from my former employer and i also received word that my second interview did not result in a job offer, but in a faceless, un-signed, and generic letter expressing regret.

now, two weeks ago, i found myself leaving my worries behind as i set off for my annual trip to disney world for drinking and experiencing the trepidations that can only come from not knowing the next steps of my life. at that point, i had buoyed myself with my hopes pinned on a second interview scheduled for when i returned with one of the media competitors i often sold against. on thursday, my high school friend and i drove up to orlando and settled into our hotel room and quickly discovered that without an endless bank account, thursday night no longer held much allure as the annual employee-only party at pleasure island would not take place due to the renovations taking place at that attraction. so we went to the pool party and danced and had fun and went to various hotel rooms and imbibed various things and right when i got into the grove of my drunkeness and wanted to jet downtown to the parliament house, we made it back to our hotel room and passed out before i could even finish ironing the shirt i wanted to wear out. the next day, we spent the day shopping at the mall at the millenia -- where i racked up on west elm towels, glassware from z galerie, and ridiculous amounts of bath and body works stuff since it's their annual give-the-store-away sale -- and then to the premium outlets -- where i overdosed at banana republic as the usual it's-so-cheap-it's-free clothes actually went for even cheaper. after shopping, we went to the expo at the host hotel and it blew but i ran into my very first adult crush in life. now, i'm not sure i can express the import of this event: this very first crush -- short, blond, blue-eyed, and forever cherubic -- not only ushered me out of my high school persona and my freshman fantasy into the adult i've become, but became one of the pillars of attractiveness which i've sought out ever since. so, although we bought nothing, and no dramatics ensued, i raced back to the room to tackle a bottle of champagne before we went out to dinner. after a meal of too much sushi and even more plum wine, we went back to the room to change for pulse. oh, pulse: who knew that places existed where every girl found herself consciously and commendably trying to imitate sasha fierce. unfortunately, i found myself having to play sober mom -- although anything but in reality -- since for every vodka cranberry i ordered, my high school friend ordered a double. after four, i found myself dancing, and my friend found himself moping, and by the end of the night, i found myself in good enough spirits to meet a friend of our st. petersburg friends who stood short, blonde, blue-eyed and not-quite-cherubic wearing one of those typical abercrombie looks -- shell necklace and all -- and to whom i spent too much time -- and tongue -- saying goodbye. on the ride back to the hotel, my high school friend and i fought about the fact that i made out with the one person he marked as attractive that night. i didn't think i did because our tastes differ so much -- how could we be each others wing men if not?! -- but it kept us being catty well into the wee hours of the morning. on the morn of the next day, we ventured to disney world and for the first time since we've made this annual pilgrimage, we did not hang out with the nerd patrol and hung out with normal twentysomething professionals. at the park, we saw everyone including kevin beckner and partner, the film festival people, my former coworkers (also laid off), one buckeye who now lives in baltimore (and who has gone so completely wierd that he belongs to the hat rescue society and even people i knew from my exsomeone's old church. for some reason, i had the most fun i have EVER had since going with my ACTUAL friends rob and alex. after the park, we went back for more sushi and then for a siesta back at the hotel room before the deborah cox concert at parliament house. i had made plans to see the doctor at parliament house since the doctor lives in orlando now and we found each other only for me to find out that the doctor came with a new significant other. and then i killed myself. yeah. so besides that, we hung out with our old st. petersburg friends in a hotel room that laid out a great spread of liquor, good looking eligibles.....plus. so then we watched deborah cox perform and i met the doctor's significant other but i blew off after the show as i could not withstand that awkwardness and went back to the hotel room for more festivities and then danced my ass off until the bar closed and then back to the hotel room where drunkenness plus clouded my mind such that i could not decide who i liked more -- the person i made out with the night before (who we resolved was not the same person who caught the eye of my high school friend) or another new doctor who lives in st. petersburg. by the end of the night, i wanted the same person i wanted at the end of the previous night. somehow, we got un-invited from the after-after hours party where they were going to get in a jacuzzi! so we went back to our hotel room VERY frustrated and ostracized. the end. we went back home the next day.

on the next wednesday, my interview went really well as long as i maintained that newspapers were dying. i thought i breezed through it, but apparently i did not blow them away. on thursday, i did nothing, but i did meet someone off the internet who serves as the HOTTEST person i've met in three years. seriously, latin, full-on muscular, and with endowments that made me blush. yeah. unfortunately, apparently, not my cup of tea because certain members of my anatomy did not respond accordingly. on saturday, i went out with my high school friend again and though i felt that some of our high school antics might get in the way of good old fashioned fun, z grille instituted a ten o' clock happy hour and i got to meet my seat warmer -- without money, i haven't been able to keep up my old social schedule so my high school friend has enlisted another person to knock back the booze with -- and we all went to the only bar in town. i had a blast because i felt like i went to a family reunion since i saw EVERYONE including my former coworker (who got fired) who i developed a small work crush on.

on sunday, my day revolved around the new season of "true blood" starting which remains my favorite new show. right now, i have a television roster of "gossip girl," "desperate housewives," "brothers & sisters," "mad men," "kings," and now, "true blood," all of which have characters to which i relate, love, or loathe, but cannot live without. i let the week slip by without job searching because i wanted to give the interview time to blossom into an actual job opportunity. on thursday, i went out to the only bar in town and once again had an incredible blast with my high school friend and my seat warmer. unfortunately, i felt that my high school friend sought to make things awkward with the seat warmer which never works. on thursday, i also saw the stockbroker who told me i'm too intelligent and creative to stay here. it's time for me to move to another city, like chicago. and that's what got me thinking. while i did do other things after that -- furniture shopping friday day, a party friday night, followed by a quick trip to z grille, the only OTHER bar in town (empty), the only bar in town (even more empty) -- the genuine concern and 20/20 hindsight from the stockbroker really rattled me to my core. so much so that tonight's episode of "true blood" nor last night's "kings" could not distract me. nor could the exsomeone's stop over earlier this week. nor silly drama at pier one. i found that at moments like these i don't fight or flight. i nest or respond on impulse. right now, i'm nesting which reminds me of the penguins i read about. it's what's holding me back. the possibility to create a simple, clean existence here. or the adventure that would lie in a chicago or new york. i'm having trouble figuring out which part of me is more real. which is the real me? the crazy party person or the person who has the perfect apartment and job. should i reach for the cherub or settle for its shell-necklace wearing imitation?

in the most recent episode of kings, prince jack's lover asks, "just tell me so i know: was it real?" to which prince jack responds, "you're the only real thing i've ever touched."

Time To Pretend -- MGMT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVnRzEjpUmE

I'm feeling rough, I'm feeling raw, I'm in the prime of my life.
Let's make some music, make some money, find some models for wives.
I'll move to Paris, shoot some heroin, and fuck with the stars.
You man the island and the cocaine and the elegant cars.

This is our decision, to live fast and die young.
We've got the vision, now let's have some fun.
Yeah, it's overwhelming, but what else can we do.
Get jobs in offices, and wake up for the morning commute.

Forget about our mothers and our friends
We're fated to pretend
To pretend
We're fated to pretend
To pretend

I'll miss the playgrounds and the animals and digging up worms
I'll miss the comfort of my mother and the weight of the world
I'll miss my sister, miss my father, miss my dog and my home
Yeah, I'll miss the boredom and the freedom and the time spent alone.

There's really nothing, nothing we can do
Love must be forgotten, life can always start up anew.
The models will have children, we'll get a divorce
We'll find some more models, everything must run it's course.

We'll choke on our vomit and that will be the end
We were fated to pretend
To pretend
We're fated to pretend
To pretend

Yeah, yeah, yeah
Yeah, yeah, yeah
Yeah, yeah, yeah
Yeah, yeah, yeah

###

New Hampshire legalizes gay marriage
By Andrew J. Manuse Andrew J. Manuse Wed Jun 3, 7:19 pm ET

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (Reuters) – New Hampshire on Wednesday became the sixth U.S. state to authorize gay marriage, deepening a New England niche for same-sex weddings and the spending that comes with them.

New Hampshire's Democratic-controlled House of Representatives endorsed gay marriage in a 198-176 vote, hours after the state Senate approved the legislation 14-10 along party lines, making the state the fourth this year to back gay marriage in the United States.

Governor John Lynch, a Democrat, signed the bill, which goes into effect on January 1.

"Today, we are standing up for the liberties of same-sex couples by making clear that they will receive the same rights, responsibilities, and respect, under New Hampshire law," Lynch said in a statement.

The law also recognizes out-of-state gay marriages and civil unions, which are legal in just a handful of U.S. states including New Hampshire. Same-sex couples who have civil unions in New Hampshire will automatically be married January 1, 2011.

Last month, the New Hampshire House rejected a similar bill. But Senate and House members met last week to approve new language giving clergy and religious institutions opposed to gay marriage greater protections, including the legal right to decline to marry same-sex couples.

Opponents, mostly religious conservatives, see gay marriage as a threat to the "traditional family" that is ordained by God and the foundation of civilization. Supporters often compare it to the path blazed by the civil rights movement.

PROTECTING RELIGIOUS BELIEFS

New Hampshire's bill says religious organizations, associations or societies will have "exclusive control" over their religious "doctrines, teachings and beliefs".

Organizations affiliated with religious groups that operate for charitable or educational purposes can deny marriage services to gay individuals, it adds.

"The (changes) strike the appropriate balance between two important values we believe New Hampshire residents support: equal rights for all and the rights to religious freedom," said state Senator Deborah Reynolds, a Democrat.

Senate Republicans said the amendment did little to change a bill they oppose. Republican state Senator Sheila Roberge said Democrats should support Republican calls for a referendum so voters can decide the issue.

Only a few countries, mostly European nations, allow gay marriage. Forty-two U.S. states explicitly prohibit same-sex marriage, including 29 with constitutional amendments.

Last week, California's supreme court backed a ban on gay marriage by upholding a voter-approved proposition defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

In stark contrast, gay-marriage laws are expanding swiftly on the East Coast, especially in New England where Massachusetts became the first state to allow gay people to marry five years ago.

Gay and lesbian weddings have boosted the Massachusetts economy by about $111 million, according to a study by the Williams Institute of the University of California.

Same-sex couples have been getting married in Connecticut since last year and in Iowa since April. Gay marriage laws in Vermont and Maine are due to take effect in September. The New York State Assembly passed a gay marriage bill last month, but it faces an uphill battle in the state Senate.

With the vote in New Hampshire, five out of six New England states now have passed legislation authorizing gay marriage, making Rhode Island with its large Roman Catholic population the region's only hold-out.

(Editing by Jason Szep and Mohammad Zargham)
Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

###

May 29, 2009
N.H. Compromises on Marriage Bill
By Amita Parashar

New Hampshire house and senate negotiators agreed on new language in the state's same-sex marriage bill late Friday, reports The Boston Globe .

The bill will be voted on Wednesday, the next time the legislature convenes. The new version specifies that all religious organizations have exclusive control over their religious doctrines, policies, and beliefs on marriage.

Last week, the house turned down a revised same-sex marriage bill that included religious exemptions mandated by Gov. John Lynch. The senate had passed the revised bill and the full legislature had passed original versions of the bill earlier this year.

The new language does not differ much from the earlier version -- churches are still exempt from providing insurance and other benefits and services to same-sex partners of employees. Governor Lynch reportedly agrees to the compromise.

Rep. Anthony DiFruscia, a Republican member of the bipartisan negotiating team, told the Globe, "hypothetically, if I'm a Nazi -- which I'm not -- and I felt white supremacy should take place, do I now get an exemption because my conscience says if you're not blond and blue-eyed, I can discriminate against you?"

On Thursday New Hampshire's state senate voted down a referendum aiming to bring same-sex marriage to a vote in the state. All 14 senate Democrats opposed the measure while all 10 Republican senators backed it. State senator Deborah Reynolds told the Nashua Telegraph that the state supreme court has held since 1781 that statewide ballot questions are unconstitutional.

Sen. Sheila Roberge, who supported the statewide vote, was reportedly removed from the negotiating committee because the compromise needed to receive unanimous support. She was replaced by senate Democrat Matthew Houde, who voted with the committee to move the bill forward.

If the marriage bill passes, New Hampshire will become the seventh state to legalize same-sex marriage and the sixth with laws currently affirming marriage equality, following the ban imposed on same-sex marriage via Prop. 8 in California. Currently, same-sex marriages are being legally performed in Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Iowa, with Maine and Vermont due to begin marrying same-sex couples in September 2009.

###

January 02, 2008
New Year Brings New Unions in N.H.

New Hampshire is becoming the fourth state to legalize civil unions, and about 20 couples have decided to be the first to take advantage of the new law with a late-night ceremony on the statehouse steps in Concord Monday night.
New Hampshire is becoming the fourth state to legalize civil unions, and about 20 couples have decided to be the first to take advantage of the new law with a late-night ceremony on the statehouse steps in Concord Monday night.

Jennifer Major of Gilmanton, who helped organize the group ceremony, said festivities would begin at about 11 p.m. Monday with poetry readings and live music. The civil unions can take place once the law takes effect at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday.

Major and her partner, Kelley Morris, planned to be among the couples saying ''I do.''

''Every single night ... I come home from work and say, 'Guess what we're doing on Monday?' She says, 'Getting marriaged,''' Major said last week. ''We have to keep pinching ourselves because it's Monday, not next Monday or two weeks from Monday.''

Snow and freezing temperatures were forecast during the night. ''I don't have any winter coats with rhinestones and glitter, so I'm just going to dress warmly,'' she said.

At the bill signing in May, Gov. John Lynch called civil unions for same-sex couples a matter of conscience. ''How could any one of us look into the eyes of our neighbors, our friends, or our loved ones if we continued to deny them these basic legal protections?'' he said.

New Hampshire joins Vermont, Connecticut, and New Jersey in legalizing civil unions. Massachusetts is the only state that allows same-sex marriage.

The new law says civil unions will provide same-sex couples with the rights, responsibilities, and obligations of marriage, except the name.

It also says New Hampshire will recognize legal same-sex unions from other states, but a group of conservative Republicans in the legislature is working to undo that part of the law. A hearing is scheduled for January 24.

The state estimated 3,500 to 4,000 civil unions will be performed in the first year. (Beverley Wang, AP)

###

NH Bishop to testify at gay marriage hearing
January 30, 2009

CONCORD, N.H. --The Rev. V. Gene Robinson will testify Thursday before the New Hampshire House Judiciary Committee on a bill to allow gay marriage in the Granite State.

In 2003, the Episcopal Church consecrated Robinson, the church's first openly gay bishop. That prompted a rift in the global Anglican Communion, which the church belongs to.

Democratic state Rep. Jim Splaine, the bill's sponsor, said Robinson wants to see marriage equality in New Hampshire.

A state law granting civil unions to gay couples took effect last year. More than 600 couples have had civil unions since then.

© Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

NH bills would legalize opposite sex civil unions
March 1, 2009

CONCORD, N.H. --New Hampshire lawmakers are considering a new twist in the debate over gay marriage -- whether to allow heterosexual partners to enter into civil unions.

The House will hold hearings on two bills Tuesday to allow the unions. New Hampshire established civil unions last year for same-sex couples as an alternative to marriage. The unions carry all the responsibilities and duties of marriage but not the name. The House has yet to vote this year on legislation to allow gays to marry.

© Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

Chanel Fall 2007 Ready-to-Wear
PARIS, March 2, 2007
By Sarah Mower

There were an ice rink, banks of snow, and, up above, a suspended skyscape of tulle clouds, gently puffing vapor into the atmosphere under the glass dome of the Grand Palais. Welcome to Chanel, where Karl Lagerfeld picked up on the idea of cold-weather college-girl styling that's emerging as a Parisian subtheme. How can "random" and casual work for one of the great establishment names of the City of Light? Lagerfeld approached it by turning the house bouclé tweeds into colorful checks, punching them up with magenta and turquoise, and adding a load of bobbly crochet, striped sock hats, sequined rugby vests, stacks of plastic geometric cuffs, and shiny breastplate necklaces.

Since Coco Chanel co-opted Tyrolean felted jackets as one of the inspirations for her classic genre, there was a vague link between the past and Lagerfeld's references to, say, snowboarding and skiwear—like the puffer-sleeved tweed with a cowl hoodie and narrow fur skirt, shaved to look like corduroy. A sense of all this is going on in fashion at large, and it wasn't a bad device for loosening things up at a time when "ladylike" is feeling distinctly over. Still, though Lagerfeld proved yet again that he is a canny barometer of every change in the fashion atmosphere, he's eternally careful not to lose sight of the fact that Chanel is for a woman who essentially wants to feel put-together and dainty. Example: She might now want to wear one of Chanel's standard creamy blouses untucked, with a rugby-striped sequin vest over a pair of skinny pants, or make an impeccable black shift look futuristic with a flash of beige patent in the neckline. By evening, in any case, Lagerfeld had cleared the way for a plain view of little black dresses, now with draped shoulder lines, bows, and flyaway trails that looked light and lovely in movement. For the faithful, that was just enough youthfulness to keep the appeal of Chanel feeling perfectly current, even if, as a whole, this didn't quite come up to the level of one of Lagerfeld's blockbusters.

###

Kids to meet gay dad's partner on Father's Day
By GREG BLUESTEIN, The Associated Press

10:54 a.m. June 20, 2009

ATLANTA — Eric Mongerson's kids couldn't meet his partner of two years, much less join the couple for ice cream. His friends couldn't cheer on the children at concerts or Little League games.

The divorced dad spent thousands of dollars fighting an unusual ban imposed by a county judge in 2007 that kept the three minors from having any contact with his gay friends or partners.

He felt unfairly scrutinized every moment he spent with the kids, though he never was looking to make a statement. He just wanted to spend a day with his kids and his partner, Jose Sanchez – together.

This Father's Day, he finally will.

"It's a fairy tale ending," he told The Associated Press after the Georgia Supreme Court overturned the ban.

The ban stemmed from the bitter divorce between Mongerson and his ex-wife, Sandy, who were married for almost 20 years and had four children. Mongerson said the marriage ended when his wife discovered he was gay in November 2005, but he would not elaborate.

The dispute played out the next few years in court, as Sandy's attorney claimed he had several affairs with other men and subjected the kids to an array of "wholly inappropriate conduct" during a trip to Arkansas.

The arguments helped sway Fayette County Superior Court Judge Christopher Edwards to award Sandy Kay Ehlers Mongerson custody of the children. The judge also issued a blanket order banning Eric Mongerson from "exposing the children to his homosexual partners and friends." A fourth child is an adult over 18 and had no restrictions on contact with Mongerson or his gay friends.

Edwards said in his ruling that the decision was meant to reflect "the trauma inflicted upon the children" during the Arkansas trip.

Mongerson, though, said it only made him feel like he was being targeted for coming out of the closet. For almost two years, Mongerson said he feared losing more time with his kids and walked on egg shells during their weekly four-hour visits.

He didn't hide the fact he was gay from the kids, but they couldn't be around his partner, Sanchez. He was afraid to invite straight friends who might be accused of being gay. And he wouldn't dare bring his children to his place in downtown Atlanta, even though his wife once brought a boyfriend to his daughter's concert.

"I was always afraid of the 'What if?'" Mongerson said. "I felt isolated, alone. She could go get friends, have them watch the kids, but I could never because I was gay."

Sanchez, fearful of somehow violating the order, would run through all sorts of scenarios.

"What if you and I are on a plane, and your kids happen to be on the plane?" he would ask incredulously. "Do I jump out?"

Mongerson, a restaurant manager who routinely works 13-hour shifts into the night, said he scrounged together more than $10,000 to challenge the judge's decree, partly by wracking up debt on his credit cards.

In court arguments in January, attorneys Hannibal Heredia and Kimberli Reagin contended the judge had no evidence that exposing the children to Mongerson's gay friends would damage them.

On Monday, the Georgia Supreme Court unanimously agreed. Justice Robert Benham wrote in the scathing 10-page ruling that the trial court abused its discretion without evidence of harm to the children. He concluded it "flies in the face of our public policy that encourages divorced parents to participate in the raising of their children."

The decision was quickly applauded by gay rights advocates who say the judge's order was rooted in decades-old misconceptions about gays and lesbians. Jeff Graham of Georgia Equality called the top court's decision a dose of "common sense and fair mindedness."

Sandy Mongerson's attorney, Lance McMillian, said the mother does not plan to appeal.

"My client is interested in putting it behind her," he said. "Other than that, we don't have anything to say about it."

As news of the court's ruling filtered down to Mongerson on Monday morning, he picked up the phone and called his partner. It didn't take long to work out their schedule for Father's Day, when they'll finally go out for that ice cream.

"I cry at commercials – he cries before commercials come on," Sanchez said. "He's very emotional. He said, 'Happy Father's Day. You get to meet my children.'"

–––

On the Net:

http://www.gasupreme.us

Find this article at:
http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/jun/20/us-fathers-fight-062009/?nation

###

Friday, Jun. 19, 2009
Why Some People Are Gay: Notes (and Clues) from the Animal Kingdom
By John Cloud

We have known for at least a decade that hundreds of animal species — including birds, reptiles, mollusks and, of course, humans — engage in same-gender sexual acts. But no one is quite sure why. After all, same-sex couplings don't usually result in offspring. (I say usually because when male marine snails pair with other males, one partner conveniently changes sex, allowing for reproduction.) Evolutionarily speaking, homosexuality should have disappeared long ago.

A yearlong study just completed at the University of California at Riverside offers several fascinating competing theories about why same-gender sexual behavior has endured. And although it's gay-pride month — and the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall riots that sparked the gay-rights movement — not all the theories will give same-gender-loving humans a reason to celebrate. (See the top 10 animal stories of 2007.)

One particularly charged finding is that in most species besides humans, same-gender pairings rarely lead to lifelong relationships. In other words, when one attractive bonobo male eyes another in a lovely patch of Congo swamp forest, they occasionally kiss and then move on to other oral pleasures, but they don't bother anyone afterward about trying to legalize their right to an open-banana-bar ceremony. In fact, they are likely to move on to girl bonobos: most animals that engage in same-gender sex acts do so only when an opposite-sex partner is unavailable.

And yet the study's authors, Nathan Bailey and Marlene Zuk of UC Riverside's biology department, report some exceptions, like the laysan albatross. Last year, researchers studying a Hawaiian colony of albatrosses found that nearly a third of all the couples involved two females who courted and then shared parenting responsibilities. (Albatrosses don't have U-Hauls, so no lesbian jokes, please.) Male chinstrap penguins also form long-term relationships, at least in captivity. And some male bighorn sheep will mount females only after the females adopt male-like behaviors.

What explains all these variances? Here are some hypotheses I collected from Bailey and Zuk's paper as well as from some of their original sources:

1. The boys-in-the-locker-room theory. Any guy who played sports in high school knows that homoerotic jokes and towel-snapping are an underlying part of the subculture. Similarly, male bottlenose dolphins use same-sex sexual behavior to maintain and strengthen their social relationships — although dolphins are far more explicit about their homosexual play, regularly mounting one another and (hide the kids' ears here) sticking their noses into certain boy-dolphin parts. (Very regularly: roughly half of male dolphin sex occurs with other males.) Among bonobos, same-sex sexual behavior is also thought to ease social tension and facilitate reconciliation. And among garter snakes, male-on-male contact may allow some solitary males to thermoregulate and, therefore, survive.

2. The emasculation theory. Some male animals might mount other males as a way of denying them access to the ladies. For instance, as the Journal of Natural History noted in 2006, male dung flies often must compete violently to impregnate females. In those situations, "the most sensible strategy for beating a competitor in the race to an arriving female would be to mount him and remain in situ for as long as possible." Then, when the lady dung fly finally sails by, the aggressor male can pull himself out from the dominated male and — because he is on top — get above to the female faster.

3. The "oops" theory. Among insects, same-sex sexual behavior is usually a case of mistaken identity. Male fruit flies, for instance, may romance other males because they lack a gene that enables them to distinguish between sexes. Even more surprising, male toads can't tell the difference between girl toads and boy toads, so males will routinely embrace other males, although the subordinate ones are equipped with a call that quickly results in the dominant male releasing. In other species, the "straight" males get tricked by other wily straight males who dress in animal drag: male goodeid fish, for instance, sometimes have a black spot that resembles a spot that females get when pregnant. Dominant males then court them rather than fight with them. While the dominant guys are busy courting the subordinate, ladylike fish, the latter are able to "sneak copulations with females," as Bailey and Zuk write. I'm going to dub this the Hugh Grant Theory: it's not always the most masculine guy who gets the most girls.

4. The let's-see-how-this-thing-works theory. Younger animals (particularly males, and including humans) sometimes engage in same-sex sexual behavior as practice, which may improve their reproductive success when they are ready for a heterosexual relationship later. Fruit flies who experiment with other members of the same sex as youngsters may have more baby fruit flies later on than those who don't experiment.

5. The two-plus-one theory. Among flour beetles, males routinely force themselves on other males. According to Bailey and Zuk, there's some evidence that sperm deposited during this male beetle rape is sometimes transferred to a female later on, increasing the chances that she will have offspring.

What all these theories have in common is that same-sex sexual activity is either an accident or a quirky genetic method of helping males impregnate females. Which raises the evolutionary question of why men and women who are exclusive gay and lesbian exist. One answer is that exclusive gays and lesbians are a relatively new creation: the concept of exclusive homosexuality barely existed before modernity; even a century ago, most same-sex-attracted men and women got married and had kids. (Read "Do Monkeys Pay for Sex?")

As Bailey, Zuk and many others have pointed out, no one has offered an adequate evolutionary explanation for the relatively recent development of exclusive homosexuality among humans. In January, the journal Evolution and Human Behavior published a paper exploring the idea that certain alleles increase the likelihood of homosexuality by blocking the effect of androgens during fetal development. Having all those alleles hampers the masculinization of some parts of the brain that affect personality, making you gay, the theory goes. Brothers of gay men who have only some of the alleles would turn out straight but less aggressive than typical guys. And because those brothers exhibit less psychopathology, they would attract more women and therefore have more kids. It was a provocative theory, but it turned out not to be proved: gay men's brothers don't actually have more kids than straight men's brothers do.

So we're stuck at square one. As the 40th anniversary of Stonewall approaches, the question that Alan Miller and Satoshi Kanazawa ask in their 2007 book about evolutionary psychology, Why Beautiful People Have More Daughters, has never been more relevant: Will "the liberation of homosexuals, which allows them to come out of the closet and not pretend to be straight" actually turn out to "contribute to the end of homosexuality?" We may not know for a thousand years, but it's a great question.

Copyright © 2009 Time Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

###

'Gay penguins' rear adopted chick
Two "gay" male penguins have hatched a chick and are now rearing it as its adoptive parents, says a German zoo.

The zoo, in Bremerhaven, northern Germany, says the adult males - Z and Vielpunkt - were given an egg which was rejected by its biological parents.

It says the couple are now happily rearing the chick, said to have reached four weeks old.

The zoo made headlines in 2005 over plans to "test" the sexual orientation of penguins with homosexual traits.

Three pairs of male penguins had been seen attempting to mate with each other and trying to hatch offspring from stones.

“ Since the chick arrived, they have been behaving just as you would expect a heterosexual couple to do ”
Bremerhaven zoo
Three pairs of male penguins had been seen attempting to mate with each other and trying to hatch offspring from stones.

The zoo flew in four females in a bid to get the endangered birds to reproduce - but quickly abandoned the scheme after causing outrage among gay rights activists, who accused it of interfering in the animals' behaviour.

The six "gay" penguins remain at the zoo, among them Z and Vielpunkt who are now rearing the chick together after being given the rejected egg.

"Z and Vielpunkt, both males, gladly accepted their 'Easter gift' and got straight down to raising it," said a zoo statement.

"Since the chick arrived, they have been behaving just as you would expect a heterosexual couple to do. The two happy fathers spend their days attentively protecting, caring for and feeding their adopted offspring."

Humboldt penguins are normally found in coastal Peru and Chile, but their numbers have been dwindling due to overfishing, reports the AFP news agency.

'Drive to mate'

There have been previous reports of exclusive male-to-male pairings among penguins, some of which have also included the rearing of chicks.

Homosexual behaviour in is well documented in many different animals, but it is not understood in detail, says Professor Stuart West, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Oxford.

Professor West says it has been suggested that homosexual activity could serve various purposes - for instance, it may relate to social bonding and establishment of dominance among bonobo chimps, while in some bird species, females may come together to rear young.

Other animals may simply exhibit a "drive to mate", while others may, like humans, enjoy non-procreative sexual activity.

"Homosexuality is nothing unusual among animals," Bremerhaven zoo said on Wednesday.

"Sex and coupling up in our world do not necessarily have anything to do with reproduction."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/8081829.stm

Published: 2009/06/03 17:50:18 GMT

© BBC MMIX

###

Gay Penguins Take a Chick
June 04, 2009

And baby makes three for two gay penguins at Germany’s Bremerhaven Zoo. "Z" and "Vielpunkt" have adopted the baby chick they were tasked with looking after before it hatched.

And baby makes three for two gay penguins at Germany’s Bremerhaven Zoo.

"Z" and "Vielpunkt" have adopted the baby chick they were tasked with looking after before it hatched.

“Another couple threw the egg out of their batch,” the zoo’s vet said in a statement. “We picked it up and put it in the nest of the gay penguins.”

The penguin duo immediately took over and looked after the egg for 35 days before it hatched. The chick was born on April 25, and the penguin duo has been looking after it since.

This isn’t the first time gay penguin parents have been in the news.

Central Park Zoo’s Roy and Silo made headlines for trying to incubate a rock in their nest. A zookeeper eventually gave the penguins a fertile egg to hatch. Months later, a chick was born.

Scientists eager to prove that homosexuality is not a choice have used Roy and Silo as an example, arguing that if it happens among animals in nature, it can't be immoral.

Advocate.com © 2009 Regent Entertainment Media Inc. All Rights Reserved.

angels in america

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 20:57:36 GMT

Focus on Practical Issues
Stabilize ... and realize!

This week begins with a healthy reality check as Saturn squares the curious Gemini Sun on June 5. Then, love planet Venus enters Taurus on June 6, stabilizing your relationships and turning your attention to money and value issues. The full Moon in restless Sagittarius on June 7 reminds you to expand your vision beyond what you already know.

i've found myself questioning whether or not i have the ability to "close the deal." not just figuratively, but literally in terms of my job as a salesperson. as i muddled over my last rejection from my former employer, the words "we're looking for someone with more proven closing skills." while i generally dismiss this sort of criticism thinking that my confident veneer represents so much of who i am, seeing as i spend eighty to ninety percent of my day within the confines of my apartment, i've had more than enough time to do some not-so-constructive introspection where i've asked myself whether i have the ability to close the deal in any aspect of life. at pier one, it's silly to hold myself to that standard but after every single person who walks out the door, i ask myself "did they leave because we didn't have what they want or because i don't know how to sell?" i've officially nominated a new fantasy customer as my work time obsession. in the past two weeks, i've seen this customer three times and while i've dispatched my eyes and ears -- my sales associates in the name of "getting to know the customer" for stictly professional sales purposes only thankyouverymuch -- and have found out that my new work crush lives in sarasota and kayaks and doesn't have a significant other. so. but even in that situation, i have to ask, do i just not have what it takes to grab what i want in life and make the world comply? is that even possible? seriously, on a philisophical level. after that horrific night at the bar last thursday, i have to wonder, do i simply not know how to meet people anymore? honestly, how does one meet anyone anymore?! i refuse to accept the bar and the internet as the only two options however, the other options -- given the lack financial indepedence at the moment -- don't seem to come up and slap me in the face. i mean, really. and yesterday, again, in the store -- honestly, where else? -- i helped this hollister-wearing shortie looking for potporri for the bedroom. this customer kept standing (this) close so i'm thinking, "hey, why not?" but no sale. no nothing. have i become so insecure from this process that i've comprimised my own self-esteem!? it went further as when i went to chipotle after work on monday, i ran into my high school friends and i felt myself CONSUMED in the teenage less-than feeling creep up on me as i sat there with the prom king/mr. LHS/basketball star extraordinaire and the valedictorian. yeah, that kind of night.

meanwhile, i'm preoccupied with preparations for disney so i really do have to get ready for all that but i posted because i'm so tickled pink by the controversy spurred by one straight actor and another staight musician -- all terms used loosely, let's be clear -- playing a not-so-cleverly staged prank on the mtv movie awards. i love how the boiling bubbles of homophobia and heteronormativeness bubbled up on the blogosphere as diehard fans of the eminem brand of masculinity expressed such uproar while not knowing how or who to denigrate: sasha baron cohen, mtv, eminem, or all of the above? well, that little prank worked on me and i will watch bruno just because. it's this sort of predictable and staged gamesmanship that i've come to appreciate in the obama administration. i mean, even as it has continued to deal with even more mounting problems -- since i last checked, we've added supreme court confirmation fight, north korean missile crisis, and domestic terrorism into the mix -- he's managed to continue to deplete the notion of the northeastern republican from our memories by nabbing another for a near-cabinet post. if only he pursued other agendas with the same persistance and dedication.

CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS – DEFENSE
Updated June 2, 2009 – 12:14 p.m.
Obama Taps GOP Rep. McHugh as Army Secretary
By John M. Donnelly, CQ Staff

President Obama announced Tuesday that he is nominating John M. McHugh of New York, the ranking Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, to be the next Army secretary.

If confirmed by the Senate, McHugh would be the second high-ranking Republican at the Pentagon, joining Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates .

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin , D-Mich., said he would work toward a speedy confirmation process.

“I think he’s well-qualified, he has experience with the Congress, and he has an excellent temperament for a difficult job,” Levin said.

Sen. James M. Inhofe , R-Okla., another Armed Services committee member, also endorsed the choice. “He should be very good,” said Inhofe, who added that the selection came as a surprise to him.

Moderate Voting Record
McHugh is a moderate who has crossed party lines to vote with Democrats more than most House Republicans — 26 percent of the time in the 110th Congress (2007-08). That’s more than all but 11 other House Republicans.

The nine-term lawmaker has long served on the Armed Services Committee and is well-versed in both the broad policy issues and everyday challenges facing the Army. McHugh was chairman of the Personnel Subcommittee for six years before Democrats took control of the House in 2007. He understands issues that affect military personnel and their families, from medical care to pay bonuses. And McHugh has represented Fort Drum, a major Army base that trains some 80,000 soldiers annually.

“I grew up in the shadow of Fort Drum,” McHugh said. “The Army’s always had a special place in my heart.”

Obama said, “John is a distinguished public servant who will help keep us safe and keep our sacred trust with our soldiers and their families. He is committed to keeping America’s Army the best-trained, the best-equipped, the best-led land force the world has ever seen.”

Obama said McHugh “shares my belief that a sustainable national security strategy must include a bipartisan consensus at home, and he brings patriotism and a pragmatism that has won him respect on both sides of the aisle.”

McHugh, however, has been a critic of Obama’s proposed level of defense spending and some of his proposed cutbacks in weapons, such as missile defense initiatives. He has been supportive, though wary, of the buildup of troops in Afghanistan and the drawdown of forces in Iraq.

He would arrive as Army chief at a time of great pressure and transition in the service. After more than seven years of war, soldiers and their families are strained. Suicides are on the rise and Army leaders worry about how many young officers will stay in the service.

Congress has boosted the Army’s ranks, but some want it to grow further. The pay and benefits of soldiers are rising, putting increasing pressure on the budget. The Army has gone back to the drawing board on a program to develop a new generation of vehicles.

And the military’s fundamental strategy — which has been for decades to prepare to fight two major wars — appears to have been discarded by top officers, though what will supplant it is far from clear.

Committee Vacancy
His departure from Congress would create a transition on the Armed Services Committee. It was not immediately clear who might succeed McHugh as top Republican on the panel.

Roscoe G. Bartlett of Maryland is next in seniority, but GOP leaders could prefer someone lower down in the ranks. The No. 3 committee Republican, Howard P. “Buck” McKeon of California, is already ranking on the Education and Labor Committee. No. 4 is William M. “Mac” Thornberry of Texas.

McHugh edged out Thornberry earlier this year in a Republican Steering Committee vote for ranking member on Armed Services, GOP aides said. Bartlett was interested in the job, but he had irked Republican leaders with some of his positions, including his opposition to detaining people at a military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and his criticism of the Bush administration’s use of abusive interrogation techniques, the aides said.

In the race to replace McHugh in the top GOP spot on Armed Services, Thornberry and Bartlett intend to be contenders again, their spokesmen said Tuesday. McKeon also may be in the mix. Even though McKeon is ranking member on Education and Labor, his spokeswoman, Lindsey Mask, said McKeon is giving “serious consideration” to competing for the Armed Services slot.

House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton , D-Mo., said the Army would be “in excellent hands” under McHugh. “As secretary of the Army, John McHugh will have the opportunity to make significant contributions to our national security and do even more to support our service members and their families,” Skelton.

Josh Rogin, Matthew Johnson and Michael Teitelbaum contributed to this story.

First posted June 2, 2009 10:55 a.m.

CQ © 2007 All Rights Reserved | Congressional Quarterly Inc. 1255 22nd Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 | 202-419-8500

###

June 4, 2009
Obama Names a Republican to Lead the Humanities Endowment
By ROBIN POGREBIN

President Obama intends to nominate Jim Leach, a former Republican congressman from Iowa who is now a professor at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, as the next chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities, the White House said on Wednesday.

“I am confident that with Jim as its head, the National Endowment for the Humanities will continue on its vital mission of supporting the humanities and giving the American public access to the rich resources of our culture,” Mr. Obama said in a statement.

In an interview on Wednesday, Mr. Leach, 66, said humanities had “long been an interest.” During his 30 years in the House of Representatives he founded and was co-chairman of the Congressional Humanities Caucus, which advocates on behalf of the humanities in the House and seeks to raise the profile of humanities nationwide.

The endowment is a federal agency with a budget of $155 million that gives grants to support research, education, preservation and public programs in the humanities.

“America somehow thinks that leadership relates to governance, and it certainly does,” Mr. Leach said. “But society is much bigger than governance, and some of the truly great leadership of our society is outside the governance arena. Our culture is more shaped by the arts and humanities than it often is by politics. And in difficult times the arts, sciences and humanities vastly increase in significance. And this is one of those times.”

Mr. Leach left Congress in 2007. He said he had not intended to leave academia, and had declined several offers to join the financial sector. He also said that he felt comfortable serving a Democratic administration, despite being a Republican; he endorsed Mr. Obama in last year’s election. “I think we have a unique, uplifting presidency,” he said. Mr. Leach said he had started the humanities caucus partly to counteract the attacks against the National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Endowment for the Arts during the 1990s.

“I’ve always been on the side of the two endowments,” he said. “What the arts and humanities are all about is providing perspective, that culture is bigger than politics and that culture is what we ought to be celebrating in the United States, and it ought to be an aspect of human endeavor that brings people together rather than divides.”

Robert L. Lynch, president of Americans for the Arts, a lobbying group, called the selection “a home run for the humanities,” adding that Mr. Leach had a strong record on the arts and humanities as a congressman. Last month Rocco Landesman, the New York theatrical producer, was nominated as chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts. Both positions require Congressional confirmation.

Mr. Leach belongs to the Council on Foreign Relations, is vice chairman of the Century Foundation, and has served on the boards of the Social Science Research Council and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He suggested that the National Endowment for the Humanities could depoliticize terms that have been co-opted by interest groups. “There are words bandied about that are being misused — words like socialism, words like communism, words like fascism,” he said.

“I think America is going to have to think through whether it wants to uplift the political dialogue or advance an approach that divides and, frankly, can lead to violence,” he added. “I just think this is a time to reflect vibrant differentnesses with greater decency. And that is an enormous challenge.”

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

Exclusive
White House offered Ireland ambassadorship to GOP Rep. King

By Kenneth R. Bazinet
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

Monday, June 15th 2009, 6:53 PM
Rep. Peter King Miller/News

Rep. Peter King

WASHINGTON - The White House dangled the ambassadorship to Ireland in front of GOP Rep. Pete King, even before that coveted post went to the owner of the Pittsburgh Steelers, the Daily News has learned.

King (R-L.I.) chose to remain in Congress despite the Democrats' desire to wipe out all the Republican members of Congress in the Northeast.

"I'm shocked [King] didn't pursue it," said an inside source. "He loves Ireland almost as much as he loves the U.S."

King, who embraces his Irish roots, was a key player in peace talks between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland during the Clinton administration.

Despite some random incidents of violence, that peace has held for more than a decade.

The GOP lawmaker, who regularly visits Ireland, declined to comment on the offer made by White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel.

"I talk to Rahm about about a lot of things, but I keep those conversations private," he said.

King has long respected Emanuel as a man who keeps his word, but still has no doubt that Obama's top aide would target his House seat if the opportunity arose. Now that Obama has tapped GOP Rep. John McHugh to be his Army secretary, there are only two Republican congressmen remaining in New York state.

Obama named Pittsburgh Steelers chairman Dan Rooney to be ambassador to Ireland on St. Patrick's Day.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2009/06/15/2009-06-15_white_house_offered_ireland_ambassadorship_to_rep_pete_king.html?print=1&page=all#ixzz0IfQpRcDy&C

###

Stealth war: Obama sabotages GOP
By: Charles Mahtesian
June 3, 2009 04:15 AM EST

Tuesday’s announcement of Rep. John McHugh (R-N.Y.) as President Barack Obama’s nominee for Army secretary makes perfect sense from a policymaking standpoint. It’s hard to find a member of Congress who’s more well-respected or more steeped in military personnel issues than McHugh, a senior House Armed Services Committee member who has wrestled with issues ranging from recruitment to base closure to the role of women in combat.

Yet it’s also hard to find a choice better calibrated to meet the Obama administration’s political imperatives. All at once, Obama has selected a nominee who burnishes his bipartisan credentials, opened up a seat prime for Democratic pickup and drained the GOP reservoir of one of the few remaining Northeastern moderates.

It’s an event that’s happening with enough frequency to suggest the presence of a design, a plan that not only sketches the outline of a reelection strategy but manages to drive a wedge into the opposition at the same time. Call it a Sherman’s March in reverse — an audacious attempt by Obama to burn down any lines of escape for Republicans from their one refuge of popularity, the deep South.

Since taking office in January, Obama has made an effort to convert GOP moderates in nearly every region of the country, ranging from a former Midwestern congressman, Ray LaHood, who became transportation secretary, to Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who was recently named ambassador to China.

Obama also made a play for two of the four remaining Northeastern Republican senators — meeting with success in the case of party-switching Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter and near-success in the case of New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, who initially accepted the president’s appointment as head of the Commerce Department before backing out.

And with McHugh’s appointment, Obama has managed to cut New York’s ever-shrinking GOP House delegation by one-third. The state delegation now includes just two Republicans in its 29-member contingent — down from 10 as recently as 2004.

Between high-profile conversions from the Northeast to the Midwest to the Rocky Mountain West — not to mention Obama’s warm relations with the nation’s two most prominent moderate Republican governors, California’s Arnold Schwarzenegger and Florida’s Charlie Crist — it’s beginning to look like a strategy that isolates conservatives, reinforces the impression that the GOP is defined by the borders of the Deep South and all the while underscores Obama’s stated goal of working across party lines.

The Politico 44 Story Widget Requires Adobe Flash Player.

“It’s very smart politically on a lot of levels. First, it’s a demonstration that he’s keeping his promise to govern in a bipartisan way. Second, the fact is, every time you open up a seat in the House or Senate that an incumbent Republican holds, you give your party an opportunity to win one back. And some of those seats may come our way,” said Tad Devine, a veteran Democratic strategist. “It forces Republicans to defend their own territory and spend money on defense.”

“Boxing the Republicans into a South-dominated party is very good strategy, because the more you reduce the Republican Party, the more conservative and reactionary it will become, and thus less attractive to moderates,” said Tom Schaller, a University of Maryland-Baltimore County professor and the author of “Whistling Past Dixie: How Democrats Can Win Without the South.” “The Midwest and the Northeast are the places where there are still remnants of old-line Rockefeller Republicans. And these are the places where the Democrats will build durable majorities.”

The National Republican Congressional Committee made reference to the political calculus in a memo released after McHugh’s nomination Tuesday.

“Make no mistake about it, John McHugh is an incredibly qualified nominee for secretary of the Army, and he deserves a swift confirmation,” the memo said. “With that being said, there is no doubt that White House chief of staff and former DCCC Chairman Rahm Emanuel was well aware of the political ramifications surrounding this selection when this plan was hatched. The party boss in the West Wing saw a political opportunity and he seized on it.”

“They’re making some really strategic moves in terms of sending them to China or plucking them out of New York,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.). “It’s obviously a loss to us, a loss to Republicans in the House and a loss to the party in that region of the country and generally, but obviously a great get for the new administration. I just hope [McHugh] would stay here instead of going there.”

Former moderate Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) dismissed the notion that politics has played a significant role in White House appointments, noting instead that the administration is simply following up on campaign promises to change the climate in Washington.

“It is a considered endeavor that is very much a part of the president’s personal philosophy, and it’s to be commended,” said Leach, who himself has been mentioned for a possible Obama appointment. “I don’t view this in any way as Rovian politics. I view it as a Lincoln-esque political effort to unify.”

“The truth is that once you put emphasis in the campaign that you’ll put good Republicans in the administration, the media and the pundit class starts counting,” said Democratic strategist Bill Carrick, a veteran of numerous presidential campaigns. “But there’s this value-add to it: [McHugh] is from a region where the Republicans are incredibly embattled. Republicans are almost extinct in those areas.”

Republicans were reluctant Tuesday to criticize the well-regarded McHugh, but they also were sensitive to the impression his departure might foster — that moderates like him were deserting the party because conservatives were running roughshod over them.

“John was very dismissive to me about that,” Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) told reporters Tuesday, relating details of a phone conversation he had with McHugh earlier in the day, during which McHugh told Pence that he felt very welcome as one of the few remaining moderates in the conference.

Terry Nelson, a Republican strategist who served as political director for former President George W. Bush’s 2004 reelection campaign and who worked briefly for the 2008 McCain campaign, said McHugh’s nomination alone shouldn’t be viewed as a strategic play because one House seat by itself makes no difference given the current Democratic majorities. Rather, the strategic benefit of the appointment is the message it sends.

“Broadly speaking, it’s clear they’re working to put forward as bipartisan an image as they can,” he said. “The strategic advantage is to put forward the bipartisan facade, because they know the American electorate is much more centrist than left-leaning, and they want to put forward a centrist face.”

Patrick O’Connor and Manu Raju contributed to this story.

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

###

Fla.'s 'Father Oprah': Church is about forgiveness
By SUZETTE LABOY, Associated Press Writer Suzette Laboy, Associated Press Writer
Sun May 31, 7:58 pm ET

BISCAYNE PARK, Fla. – A popular Miami priest nicknamed "Father Oprah" said Sunday that "church is about forgiveness" during his first sermon since leaving the Roman Catholic Church to become Episcopalian amid an uproar over published photos of him kissing his girlfriend on the beach.

The Rev. Alberto Cutie (pronounced KOO'-tee-ay) gave the sermon at the Episcopal Church of The Resurrection in Miami. Episcopal priests can marry, unlike their Catholic counterparts. It will take him at least a year to become a priest in his new church.

The cozy church was overflowing with supporters, most having to stand along the aisles or lean against the walls. Many in the crowd said they were not members but came to support Cutie.

"This little church has been neglected, and membership is not great," said Jackie Fernandez, who attends another Episcopal church in the Miami area. She said within the year that will all change thanks to Cutie.

Cutie said in a TV interview in early May that he was in love with the woman in the photos and that they have been romantically involved for about two years after being friends for much longer. His girlfriend has been identified in local media as 35-year-old Ruhama Buni Canellis. He has not said if he plans to marry her, but noted in a statement this week that as he became an Episcopalian, he "has seen the ways that many of my brothers serve God as married men."

"If love was his mistake, then I'll still support him. Love makes the world go round," said Ysset DeCarlo, 44. She brought along her 17-year-old daughter Stephanie, who made her confession to Cutie for her confirmation.

Cutie received a standing ovation and told several jokes, quipping that "my stuff is in storage." He didn't directly address his relationship with his girlfriend.

"The spirit of God has been with me," he said. "And I'm going to tell you something: God is the only one we follow."

He also said church was about seeking God, not people, and added: "Church is about forgiveness."

Cutie has said his decision to switch was made over time, not since the photos in a Spanish-language magazine rocked South Florida's Spanish-speaking community, where he was known for his good looks and as the host of a TV show on which he gave relationship advice, earning him the "Father Oprah" moniker.

He was removed from his Miami Beach Catholic parish after the photos surfaced in early May.

His decision to switch has drawn harsh words from Archbishop John Favalora, who said he met with Cutie after the photos were published and the priest didn't mention changing churches. Favalora has admonished Cutie and Episcopal leaders in Miami.

Cutie headed the archdiocese's Radio Paz and Radio Peace broadcasts, heard throughout the Americas and in Spain.

The Cuban-American priest was born in Puerto Rico and previously hosted shows on Telemundo, the second-largest Spanish-language network in the U.S. and the Western Hemisphere. He is also a syndicated Spanish-language columnist and author of the book "Real Life, Real Love: 7 Paths to a Strong, Lasting Relationship."

Ignacio Bolivar, 65, said he thought Cutie was intensely conflicted about his relationship with the woman and his views on marriage.

"I think he tried to tell the Catholic Church what he wanted to do. That he wanted to get married," Bolivar said.

Bolivar also joked about Cutie's talents as a speaker and good looks, in light of his switch: "The Catholic Church has to put ugly priests up there."

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

###

Fla. priest known as 'Father Oprah' leaves Catholic Church

MIAMI (AP) — A popular Miami priest and media personality known as "Father Oprah" has left the Catholic Church and joined the Episcopal Church after he was photographed cavorting on the beach with his girlfriend.
The Rev. Alberto Cutie (KOO'-tee-ay) was removed from his Miami Beach church after photos of him kissing and embracing a woman appeared in the pages of a Spanish-language magazine earlier this month.

He was received into Episcopal Church in a ceremony Thursday at Trinity Cathedral and may later announce he will marry his girlfriend, which is allowed in that denomination. He must complete other requirements before serving as an Episcopal priest.

Cutie spoke briefly at a press conference and read a statement in English and Spanish. He quoted from the book of Psalms and said, "More than ever, I'm assured that God is love."

He continued, "I have searched my soul and sought God's guidance for a long time."

Before walking away without answering questions, Cutie thanked supporters and asked the media to respect his privacy.

"I thank God for the many people in our community who have shown me their love and support," Cutie said in a statement released earlier Thursday. "Your prayers have truly sustained me at this time of transition in my life. With God's help, I hope to continue priestly ministry and service in my new spiritual home."

Cutie has previously said he supports the Catholic Church's stand that priests should be celibate and does not want to become the "anti-celibacy priest."

The Cuban-American priest was born in Puerto Rico and previously hosted shows on Telemundo. He is also a syndicated Spanish-language columnist and author of the book "Real Life, Real Love: 7 Paths to a Strong, Lasting Relationship."

He headed the archdiocese's Radio Paz and Radio Peace broadcasts, heard throughout the Americas and in Spain, and earned the nickname "Father Oprah" for his relationship advice.

Earlier this month, Cutie told CBS he has been romantically involved with the woman in the photos for about two years after being friends for much longer.

"I believe that I've fallen in love and I believe that I've struggled with that, between my love for God, and my love for the Church and my love for service," Cutie said.

After the scandal, more than 100 people gathered outside Cutie's former parish in Miami Beach, waving posters and chanting their forgiveness following the scandal.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-05-28-priest-father-oprah_N.htm?csp=34

###

Florida priest in compromising photos admits 2-year affair
Posted by Theresa Collington Date last updated: 5/12/2009 10:30:42 AM SmallerLargerPrint ArticleClose Page
Rev. Alberto Cutie

An internationally known Catholic priest who was shown in photographs last week embracing a bathing-suit-clad woman on a Florida beach has admitted they had a two-year affair.

MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- An internationally known Catholic priest who was shown in photographs last week embracing a bathing-suit-clad woman on a Florida beach has admitted they had a two-year affair.

The Rev. Alberto Cutie -- sometimes called "Father Oprah" because of the advice he gave on Spanish-language media -- said Monday on CBS' "Early Show" that he is in love with the woman and is considering his options: Whether to break up with her or leave the priesthood and marry her. The woman, who has not been publicly identified, wants to get married, Cutie said.

The priest was removed from his duties last week at St. Francis De Sales Catholic Church in Miami Beach, Florida, and on the Radio Paz and Radio Peace networks.

"I take full responsibility for what I did, and I know it's wrong," he said Monday.

The photos of the Cuban-American priest, also known as "Padre Alberto," appeared on the cover of last week's TV Notas magazine and on eight inside pages. The cover says in Spanish: "Good God! Padre Alberto. First photos of a priest 'in flagrante' with his lover."

Other media outlets throughout Latin America, including the official Notimex news agency in Mexico, picked up the story, and it became an Internet sensation. Cutie has millions of followers in the Spanish-speaking world.

In a message posted on the Miami, Florida, archdiocese Web page last week, Archbishop John C. Favalora apologized to parishioners and radio listeners for what he called a "scandal."

"Father Cutie made a promise of celibacy and all priests are expected to fulfill that promise with the help of God," Favalora said. "Father Cutie's actions cannot be condoned despite the good works he has done as a priest."

Cutie expressed his regret in an online statement last week and again Monday on the CBS program.

"I deeply apologize to the Catholic community and especially to my bishop and to my brother priests who are faithful and who are committed to celibacy," Cutie said.

The priest said he believes in celibacy but thinks it should be optional. He said he had never had a sexual relationship with anyone other than the woman since leaving the seminary 15 years ago. Video Watch Father Cutie question the celibacy requirement »

"I don't support the breaking of the celibacy promise," Cutie said. "I understand fully that this is wrong.

"I don't want to be the anti-celibacy priest. I think that's unfortunate," he said. "I think it's a debate that's going on in our society, and now I've become kind of a poster boy for it. But I don't want to be that. I believe that celibacy is good, and that it's a good commitment to God. This is something I've struggled with. And something that I never expected to become a public debate."

He also talked about the woman, saying they have been friends for a long time and the attraction was there from early on, but it was not acted on until a couple of years ago. They have "both struggled" with the relationship, he said.

"She's also a woman of faith," Cutie said. "She's also somebody who cares about the priesthood, who cares about these things. So it hasn't been easy. And those who have helped me through this process know it hasn't been easy. Obviously, you know, through the photos, it looked like a frivolous thing on the beach, you know, and that's not what it is. It's something deeper than that."

Cutie was the first Catholic priest to host a daily talk show on a major secular television network, his information on the LinkedIn online professional network says.
advertisement

In addition to his TV and radio appearances, he has written newspaper advice columns and a self-help book, "Real Life, Real Love."

Before being removed, he was president and general director of Pax Catholic Communications, home of Radio Paz and Radio Peace in Miami.

CNN.com

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/15/us/15weakland.html?th&emc=th

Former Catholic head of Milwaukee admits he's gay
By RACHEL ZOLL, AP Religion Writer Rachel Zoll, Ap Religion Writer
Tue May 12, 12:11 am ET

NEW YORK – A Roman Catholic archbishop who resigned in 2002 over a sex and financial scandal involving a man describes his struggles with being gay in an upcoming memoir about his decades serving the church.

Archbishop Rembert Weakland, former head of the Milwaukee archdiocese, said in an interview Monday that he wrote about his sexual orientation because he wanted to be candid about "how this came to life in my own self, how I suppressed it, how it resurrected again."

Called "A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church: Memoirs of a Catholic Archbishop," the book is set to be released in June.

"I was very careful and concerned that the book not become a Jerry Springer, to satisfy people's prurient curiosity or anything of this sort," Weakland told The Associated Press. "At the same time, I tried to be as honest as I can."

Weakland stepped down soon after Paul Marcoux, a former Marquette University theology student, revealed in May 2002 that he was paid $450,000 to settle a sexual assault claim he made against the archbishop more than two decades earlier. The money came from the archdiocese.

Marcoux went public at the height of anger over the clergy sex abuse crisis, when Catholics and others were demanding that dioceses reveal the extent of molestation by clergy and how much had been confidentially spent to settle claims.

Weakland denied ever assaulting anyone. He apologized for concealing the payment. The Vatican says that men with "deep-seated" attraction to other men should not be ordained.

In an August 1980 letter that was obtained by the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, Weakland said he was in emotional turmoil over Marcoux and that he had "come back to the importance of celibacy in my life." He signed the letter, "I love you."

The revelations rocked the Milwaukee archdiocese, which Weakland had led since 1977. He was a hero for liberal Catholics nationwide because of his work on social justice and other issues,

The archbishop, now 82, said he seriously considered the potential pain for the archdiocese of renewing attention to the scandal and thought about waiting "until I was dead" to have it published. But he decided to move ahead with the project.

"What I felt was that people who loved me as bishop here, when they read the book will continue to love me. The people who found it difficult, I hope will be helped a little bit by the book," he said.

In a sign of the deep emotions still surrounding Weakland and his departure, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee has released a public statement alerting local Catholics to the upcoming book.

"Some people will be angry about the book, others will support it," the archdiocese said.

Weakland also writes about his failures to stop sexually abusive priests. In a videotaped deposition released last November, Weakland admitted returning guilty priests to active ministry without alerting parishioners or police.

"Any deposition is just a part of a whole picture and that picture has not been painted yet. And anybody can take out of that any sentence they want," Weakland said in the interview.

"I try to deal with this, I hope in an honest way, admitting my weaknesses in not being able to see this earlier, but at the same time doing what I could confront it."

Advocates for abuse victims said that Weakland's cover-up of his own sexual activity was part of a pattern of secrecy that included concealing the criminal behavior of child molesters.

Weakland, a Benedictine monk, served in Rome as leader of the International Benedictine Confederation and also worked on a liturgy commission for the Second Vatican Council, which made reforms in the 1960s meant to modernize the church.

Weakland said he wrote in the memoir that he was unprepared for "how lonely it is" to be a bishop and how difficult it can be to get the "feedback and support you need."

U.S. Catholics have long debated whether the priesthood had become a predominantly gay vocation. Estimates vary from 25 percent to 50 percent, according to a review of research on the issue by the Rev. Donald Cozzens, author of "The Changing Face of the Priesthood."

Weakland said Christians needed to speak more openly about gays in the priesthood without the "hysteria" that often characterizes the debate.

The archbishop has been living in a retirement community near the Milwaukee archdiocese and plans to move to St. Mary's Abbey in Morristown, N.J., this summer. He said he was not bitter about how the scandal had eclipsed his decades of work in the church.

"I refused to let myself become a victim and refused to let myself become angry," he said. "I want to take responsibility but I want to move on."

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

###

Correction: An article Tuesday about former Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland's new book incorrectly stated that he resigned in 2002 after it became public that the archdiocese paid $450,000 to a man who claimed Weakland sexually assaulted him in 1979. Weakland retired on his 75th birthday, April 2, 2002, as required by church law. His request was expedited by the Vatican, at Weakland's request, after the $450,000 payment became public.

Proceeds from Weakland memoir to benefit charity
By Annysa Johnson of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: May. 11, 2009

Retired Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland said Monday that he plans to donate the proceeds from sales of his forthcoming memoir to the Catholic Community Foundation, a local organization that funds programs in southeastern Wisconsin.

The memoir, "A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church," is due out in June. In it, the retired archbishop writes openly about his homosexuality and his failure to oversee pedophile priests, according to Publisher's Weekly, which called it "a moving personal confession."

"I was very careful and concerned that the book not become a Jerry Springer, to satisfy people's prurient curiosity or anything of this sort," Weakland told The Associated Press. "At the same time, I tried to be as honest as I can."

Weakland resigned abruptly in 2002 after it was revealed that he had paid $450,000 in archdiocesan funds to a former Marquette University theology student who accused him of date rape in 1979. In 1998, the man, Paul Marcoux, attempted to extort $1&enspmillion from Weakland in exchange for a love note the archbishop had written years earlier, according to court records.

A spokesman for the archdiocese said Monday that it is unlikely to seek restitution of the funds paid out by Weakland from the book's profits because they were repaid previously by the retired archbishop and a group of supporters.

Weakland, 82, declined to discuss the book with the Journal Sentinel, which has extensively covered his personal scandal and his alleged role in covering up sex abuse by other priests, now the subject of civil lawsuits.

But he told The Associated Press that he wrote about his sexual orientation because he wanted to be candid about "how this came to life in my own self, how I suppressed it, how it resurrected again."

The archbishop said he considered waiting to publish the book posthumously, but decided against it.

"What I felt was that people who loved me as bishop here, when they read the book will continue to love me. The people who found it difficult, I hope will be helped a little bit by the book," he told the AP.

Weakland is a key witness in a series of civil fraud cases brought against the Milwaukee Archdiocese by victims of alleged clergy sex abuse. In a deposition released in November, he admitted that he transferred priests with a history of sexual misconduct back into churches without alerting parishioners and did not report alleged abuses to police.

He dismissed that testimony while speaking with the AP, saying that "any deposition is just a part of a whole picture and that picture has not been painted yet. And anybody can take out of that any sentence they want.

"I try to deal with this, I hope in an honest way, admitting my weaknesses in not being able to see this earlier, but at the same time doing what I could (to) confront it," the AP quoted him as saying.

Weakland said he wrote in the memoir that he was unprepared for "how lonely it is" to be a bishop and how difficult it can be to get the "feedback and support you need," the AP reported.

Weakland told the AP that Christians needed to speak more openly about gays in the priesthood without the "hysteria" that often characterizes the debate.

Weakland, a Benedictine monk known during his tenure in Milwaukee as an outspoken liberal in the American Catholic Church, plans to move to St. Mary's Abbey in Morristown, N.J., this summer.

Find this article at: http://www.jsonline.com/features/religion/44756432.html

###

May 15, 2009
Ex-Archbishop Speaks About Catholic Church and Homosexuality
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN

In spring 2002, as the scandal over sexual abuse by Roman Catholic priests was escalating, the long career of Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland of Milwaukee, one of the church’s most venerable voices for change, went up in flames one May morning.

On the ABC program “Good Morning America,” the archbishop watched a man he had fallen in love with 23 years earlier say in an interview that the Milwaukee archdiocese had paid him $450,000 years before to keep quiet about his affair with the archbishop — an affair the man was now calling date rape.

The next day, the Vatican accepted Archbishop Weakland’s retirement.

Archbishop Weakland, who had been the intellectual touchstone for church reformers, has said little publicly since then. But now, in an interview and in a memoir scheduled for release next month, he is speaking out about how internal church politics affected his response to the fallout from his affair; how bishops and the Vatican cared more about the rights of abusive priests than about their victims; and why Catholic teaching on homosexuality is wrong.

“If we say our God is an all-loving god,” he said, “how do you explain that at any given time probably 400 million living on the planet at one time would be gay? Are the religions of the world, as does Catholicism, saying to those hundreds of millions of people, you have to pass your whole life without any physical, genital expression of that love?”

He said he had been aware of his homosexual orientation since he was a teenager and suppressed it until he became archbishop, when he had relationships with several men because of “loneliness that became very strong.”

Archbishop Weakland, 82, said he was probably the first bishop to come out of the closet voluntarily. He said he was doing so not to excuse his actions but to give an honest account of why it happened and to raise questions about the church’s teaching that homosexuality is “objectively disordered.”

“Those are bad words because they are pejorative,” he said.

Archbishop Weakland’s autobiography, “A Pilgrim in a Pilgrim Church” (William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company), covers his hardscrabble youth in Pennsylvania, his election as the worldwide leader of the Benedictine Order and his appointment by Pope Paul VI to the archbishop’s seat in Milwaukee, where he served for 25 years.

“He was one of the most gifted leaders in the post-Vatican II church in America,” said the Rev. Jim Martin, a Jesuit priest and associate editor of America, a Catholic magazine, “and certainly beloved by the left, and sadly that gave his critics more ammunition.”

In an interview at the Archbishop Weakland Center, which houses the archdiocesan cathedral offices in downtown Milwaukee, Archbishop Weakland said the church opened itself to change in the 1960s and ’70s after the Second Vatican Council but became increasingly centralized and doctrinally rigid under Pope John Paul II.

Archbishop Weakland was among those who publicly questioned the need for a male-only celibate priesthood. He also led American bishops in a two-year process of writing a pastoral letter on economic justice, holding hearings on the subject across the country.

A later effort by the American bishops to issue a pastoral letter on women was quashed by the Vatican, he said, because the Vatican did not want to give the national bishops conferences the authority to issue sweeping teaching documents.

The archbishop said it was partly because of his strained relations with Pope John Paul II that he did not tell Vatican officials in 1997 when he was threatened with a lawsuit by Paul J. Marcoux, the man with whom he had a relationship nearly 20 years before and who had appeared on “Good Morning America.”

Mr. Marcoux said then that he had been deprived of income from marketing a project he called “Christodrama” because of Archbishop Weakland’s interference. Archbishop Weakland said he probably should have gone to Rome and explained that he had had a relationship with Mr. Marcoux, that he had ended it by writing an emotional letter that Mr. Marcoux still had and that the archbishop’s lawyers regarded Mr. Marcoux’s threats as blackmail.

But, the archbishop said, a highly placed friend in Rome advised him that church officials preferred that such things be hushed up, which is “the Roman way.”

“I suppose, also, being frank, I wouldn’t have wanted to be labeled in Rome at that point as gay,” Archbishop Weakland said. “Rome is a little village.”

Asked if he had regrets about the $450,000 payment to Mr. Marcoux, he said, “I certainly worry about the sum.”

The morning in 2002 that Mr. Marcoux surfaced on national television, Archbishop Weakland said he phoned the pope’s representative, or apostolic nuncio, in Washington — Archbishop Gabriel Montalvo — who, he said, told him, “Of course you are going to deny it.”

Archbishop Weakland said he told the nuncio that while he could deny emphatically that it was date rape, “I can’t deny that something happened between us.” (Archbishop Montalvo died in 2006.)

Archbishop Weakland is still pained that his scandal, involving a man in his 30s, became intertwined with the larger church scandal over child sexual abuse.

But at the time, many Catholics in Milwaukee said they were angrier about the secret settlement with Mr. Marcoux than with the sexual liaison.

Archbishop Weakland and the Milwaukee archdiocese are also the target of several lawsuits accusing them of failing to remove abusive priests, allowing more minors to be victimized.

In the interview, he blamed psychologists for advising bishops that perpetrators could be treated and returned to work, and he blamed the Vatican’s tribunals for spending years debating whether to remove abusers from the priesthood. In one case, he said, the Vatican courts took so long deciding whether to defrock a priest who had abused dozens of deaf students that the priest died before a decision was reached.

“The concern was more about the priests than about the victims,” Archbishop Weakland said.

In Milwaukee, Peter Isely, the Midwest director of the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, said Archbishop Weakland ultimately failed his people.

Mr. Isely pointed out that while Archbishop Weakland was waiting for the Vatican courts to defrock abusive priests, he allowed them to continue working in ministry without informing parishioners of their past. And he said the $450,000 payment was particularly galling to victims because many received “no compensation whatsoever.”

In June, Archbishop Weakland, who has been living in a Catholic retirement community since his resignation, is moving to St. Mary’s Abbey in Morristown, N.J., where he said he would be closer to his family in Pennsylvania and grow old in the care of a community of Benedictine monks.

Robert Herguth contributed reporting from Milwaukee.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

Video: Eminem vs. Sacha Baron Cohen's 'Bruno.' 07:34 AM PT, Jun 1 2009
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2009/05/eminem-vs-sacha-baron-cohens-bruno.html

Eminem and Sacha Baron Cohen have had their share of success at taking on easy targets. In his songs and videos, Eminem had lashed out at Britney Spears, Moby and Jessica Simpson, among others, and Cohen's personas, be it Borat, Ali G. or Bruno, goad unsuspecting victims into embarrassing, potentially character-damaging moments. Sunday night at the MTV Movie Awards, Cohen landed one right in Eminem's face.

In an effort to promote his upcoming July film "Bruno," about the colorfully gay character of the same name, Cohen dropped in -- bottom-side up -- on Eminem on live television. Was Eminem in on the joke? He certainly didn't look pleased, but the rapper is a relatively adept actor.

Eminem fans don't seem to be happy. The initial comments that have been pouring in on an earlier post seem to think MTV was in the wrong, and went too far. Wrote B. Davis, "if that wasn't staged it was sexual assault," and another commenter called it "one of the most pathetic and embarrassing moments in television's history." Another wrote, "What MTV did was just low and they should be ashamed of doing it to a great artist."

Meanwhile, Peg thought Eminem deserved what he got, writing, "He can get up and rap to insult and humiliate as many people as he can, but can't take it when the tables are turned on him." Another reader wrote, "For someone who finds it funny to disrespect, degrade, and be vulgar towards women, Eminem has little sense of humor when the joke is directed towards him."

After the awards aired, MTV posted the clip online, with a rather choice screen-grab. It's after the jump.

They're calling it an "awkward" moment. We're just wondering if this means Eminem won't be back for the Video Music Awards. But that may have more to do with the summer sales of "Relapse" than Cohen.

-- Todd Martens

###

ADVERTISING | JUNE 2, 2009.

In Promoting 'Bruno,' Universal Quietly Pursues a Raunchy Buzz .

By LAUREN A. E. SCHUKER

How does a major Hollywood studio promote a movie so raunchy and offensive that it initially got an NC-17 rating? By staying under the radar.

"Bruno," the latest opus from Sacha Baron Cohen, creator and star of the 2006 mockumentary "Borat," is about a flamboyant, Austrian fashion correspondent, who shocks and horrifies the unsuspecting real people he encounters and interviews along the way, including celebrities like Paula Abdul and Ron Paul.

Some industry analysts and studio executives believe the movie has the potential to be the summer's top-grossing comedy. But the studio releasing it -- General Electric Co.'s Universal Pictures -- is taking a low-key approach.

Through a spokeswoman, the studio declined to comment on its strategy.

For months, Universal has been forgoing big-ticket marketing moves -- such as trailers in theaters and television spots -- that are normally de rigueur for launching a big comedy.

Instead, industry watchers say, it has pursued a subtler strategy it hopes will create enough buzz to pique audience curiosity about the film, which ultimately garnered an R rating after some cuts.

Hollywood studios typically spend between $30 million and $40 million to market a big summer comedy, but Universal appears to have spent just a fraction of that sum so far. Its boldest effort as yet has been to hang "Bruno" posters -- featuring Mr. Baron Cohen in high-waisted yellow shorts -- in movie-theater lobbies.

A studio with a big summer release would normally place trailers in theaters during the preceding winter months. Instead, Universal, which is scheduled to release "Bruno" July 10, uploaded a "red band," or age-restricted, version of the movie's trailer to the social networking site MySpace on April 2. And it didn't release a theatrical trailer until late last month, coinciding with the Memorial Day weekend debut of "Terminator Salvation."

The online-only trailer includes scenes of Bruno shopping, at fashion week, attending a "swingers" party and appearing on a daytime talk show purporting to have adopted a black baby.

Movie-marketing campaigns are one of the trickiest and most expensive parts of the film business, and often cost as much as or more than the movie itself. Analysts estimate that the global marketing budget for DreamWorks Animation SKG's "Monsters vs. Aliens," for example, was in excess of $175 million, more than the film's production cost.

Universal, which paid a hefty $42.5 million for the rights to "Bruno" in 2006, appears to have based its marketing approach to the film in part on lessons learned from the 2006 release of "Borat."

Beyond its novel brand of humor, "Borat" was notable for the way it defied Hollywood conventions. The film didn't score well in pre-release "tracking," the advance surveys of audience awareness studios use to predict a film's performance. But it quickly became a box-office sensation, grossing more than $260 million world-wide.

The title character of the Twentieth Century Fox film also became a cultural icon, winding up on T-shirts, posters and in the lexicon of fans around the globe. Twentieth Century Fox is a unit of News Corp., which also publishes The Wall Street Journal.

"One of the things about 'Borat' was that it surprised everyone," says Robert Marich, an industry analyst and author of "Marketing to Moviegoers." He adds, "It had a much bigger opening than tracking surveys indicated because it had such a viral buzz. The challenge here for Universal is to sustain that with 'Bruno,' which isn't always easy with high-concept movies because they're not so fresh the second time around."

Rather than try to explain that high concept to audiences, Universal has been trying to keep them guessing. That's in part because the studio wants to extend the film's momentum, says Perry Stahman, an independent consultant who ran marketing for MGM until last year and who isn't involved in the "Bruno" campaign.

"This isn't the kind of movie where you open it and see a traditional decline in audiences after the first weekend," he says. "This way, Universal is keeping the brand fresh and will be able to keep throwing new things out there to maintain a new audience."

But relatively little of "Bruno" has been shown publicly so far -- another rarity for Hollywood, where studios often test-market their films to gauge audience reaction.

The closest thing to a sneak preview of "Bruno" the studio has done was 22 minutes of footage it showed at the South by Southwest festival in Austin, Texas, in March. Only a few hundred people saw the three sequences, which were shown along with prerecorded introductions by Mr. Baron Cohen.

Write to Lauren A. E. Schuker at lauren.schuker@wsj.com

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A19

Copyright 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

###

Dr Boyce: Eminem's Hip Hop Humiliation - The Impact on Eminem's Brand
Posted Jun 2nd 2009 1:43AM by Dr. Boyce Watkins, PhD
Filed under: BlackSpin

The other night on the MTV Video Music Awards, the rapper Eminem faced off with someone's bare behind. He also faced one of the most embarassing experiences of his entire career. In a moment that has rocked the blogosphere, the rapper had another man's "significant body parts" pressed to his face by Sasha Baron Cohen (of Borat fame). The event captivated the entire world, and led to Eminem storming out of the show.

No one knows exactly what happened. But the stunt appears to have been choreographed, although it is not clear as to whether or not all parties were in on the joke. What is known is that there are some serious PR issues for Eminem, and major publicity implications for both MTV and Sasha Baron Cohen's new film. MTV gets a ratings bonanza. Creating the biggest TV moment of the last 10 years will have next year's audience on the edge of their seats waiting for the next shocking debacle. Cohen's movie is also going to sell a boat load of tickets. But what about Eminem? He may end up spending most of the revenue from his next album paying a therapist to get over the trauma of his experience.

Eminem was an easy target for this one. He is regularly accused of homophobia, and has made his career by making fun of other celebrites. It seems only natural that someone would literally make him the butt of the biggest joke in America. But there is the deeper question: Did Eminem deserve this? Also, what does this do to the financial value of the Eminem brand on the brink of his album release?

"Eminem was humiliated in front of a large audience," said Dr. Alicia Taylor-Mclaughlin, Assistant Professor of Social Work at St. Francis University. "He was probably already quite insecure after having been out of the game for so long and having so many enemies in the celebrity world to begin with."

The truth is that these may have been hip hop chickens coming home to roost for Eminem, who has more issues than Time Magazine. There is also the "rep" factor in hip hop, laced with the hyper-masculinity that leads to tremendous intolerance for homosexuality. Getting punked by a homosexual character on national TV is not exactly good for your street cred.

One will never know if Eminem handled the situation correctly. He could have laughed it off and stayed for the rest of the show. At the same time, it might actually help his reputation that his body guards punched Cohen a few times and left the building. What about his album sales?

"I don't think this will hurt his album sales at all," said Tarin Donatien, a New York Publicist and founder of The Donatien Group. "But if I were his publicist, I would have released a statement by now."

To hear more of Tarin Donatien's remarks, along with Dr. Taylor-McLaughlin, please click here.

Based on what I've heard from my friends in the industry, I don't believe that Eminem was in on the joke. There isn't an actor on earth who could make his neck stretch as far as Eminem's did to get away from Sasha's bare booty. But Eminem has been begging for this moment for years, by consistently degrading the gay community, other celebrities and perhaps even himself.

If it was deliberate, there is a reason MTV chose Eminem for this stunt. Any fan of Eminem's knows that he is not a psychologically healthy human being. In fact, the talented rapper got his career started by writing a song called "Just the Two of Us," in which he kills the mother of his child and then drives with his daughter to throw her mother's body into the river. Given Eminem's psychological challenges, the brains behind the MTV move likely knew the rapper would go off and have a reaction that is TV-worthy in an age of ADD television viewers. Eminem's flow is "sick", but unfortunately, his mind appears to be sick as well. I also can't help but wonder if this was a stealth political statement being made by an ambitious MTV producer, against the backdrop of gay marriage debates and Eminem's reputation for homophobia.

Eminem's brand will probably rebound from this incident, and his albums will still sell like greasy chicken at a fat farm. But the truth is that MTV should have let Eminem know what was going on, since you "just can't do a brother like that." At the same time, Eminem needs MTV more than they need him, so he is probably just going to have sit there and "take it" - no pun intended.

Dr. Boyce Watkins is a Professor at Syracuse University and author of "What if George Bush were a Black Man?" For more information, please visit www.DrBoyceWatkins.com. To listen to Dr. Alicia Taylor McLaughlin and Tarin Donatien analyze the Eminem case, please click here.

###

MTV Hits Ratings Jackpot!!!!!!!
http://perezhilton.com/2009-06-02-mtv-hits-ratings-jackpot
Filed under: TV News > MTV

It seems that Bruno's bare ass brings in the voyeurs viewers!

According to the Nielson ratings, the 2009 MTV Movie Awards delivered a 4.8 rating for people ages 12-34, which means 5.3 million people tuned in for the show. By itself that's not very impressive. But….

Viewership was up 78% from last year and MTV's largest audience in 5 years!

The Movie Awards even garnered a larger audience than the 2008 VMAs, which featured the highly anticipated Britney "comeback"!!!!!

Unbelievable!

Nudity + Confrontation = HUGE Ratings!!!!!!

P.S. We also think Robert Pattinson and the premiere of the New Moon trailer also had a lot to do with the show's success.

Posted: June 2, 2009 at 10:30 am

###

RR Exclusive: Eminem Speaks On MTV Stunt And Robbery Rumors Wednesday, June 03 2009 8:48:27 pm PDT
http://www.rapradar.com/qa/rr-exclusive-eminem-speaks-on-mtv-stunt-and-robbery-rumors.html

Three days ago at the MTV Movie Awards, Sacha Baron Cohen caused a firestorm as "Bruno" when he landed ass first on Eminem. Many speculated for the days whether the stunt was staged or real, with everyone speaking except the man himself. Breaking his silence, Em spoke exclusively to Rap Radar about the entire "ordeal".

RR: Can you clear up the Bruno stunt at the MTV Awards? Was it staged or planned?
Eminem: Sacha called me when we were in Europe and he had an idea to do something outrageous at the Movie Awards. I'm a big fan of his work so I agreed to get involved with the gag.

If it wasn't planned the way you agreed to, do you hold MTV or Sacha responsible and will you take any kind of action?
I'm thrilled that we pulled this off better than we rehearsed it. It had so many people going "nuts" so to speak. Everyone was blowing me up about it.

After you left the ceremony, where did you go?
After the ceremony I went back to my hotel and laughed uncontrollably for about 3 hours. Especially after I saw it on air.

There is a rumor that you hotel room was robbed and theives got 60K and your laptop while you were at ceremony. Is that true and if so what would someone find on your computer?
The only thing was that I lost a Nike watch that we were looking for. The rest it is made-up like half the other stuff out there.

How do you think the show with Jay went and how did it feel performing "Renegade" again?
I love performing with Jay. Its the third time we've done the song together live and its always fun. It was an honor to share the stage with him again and to work with his band.

MTV Shows

an alternate reality?

Sat, 30 May 2009 08:04:30 GMT

yesterday, i learned that that my relationship with my former employer had truly come to an end: my two internal interviews had both soured and the only thing i had left coming from my former employer remains a severance check and a box fill of my personal effects. the accumulation of five years of employment that gave birth not only to this live journal, but to everything i find familiar in my life at the moment. and now, given the economic condition of this country, state, and metro area, and given the financial binds of my life, i'm prepared to do something that i have absolutely NO heart to do. not only did i spend two hungover hours -- thursday night, i went to ceviche with the sis and then to the bar to no avail -- talking with my formerly favorite coworker about the perils of sustained unemployment, but i re-watched "star trek" (third time in the theatre at this point which is why i titled this post after my favorite line from that film) and "milk" (i've decided that the seventies RUINED the way so many people looked) and it just strikes me that everything that excites me and intrigues me in life will get put on the sacrifice table for this silly job that i feel i won't like at all. i mean, it's a job. and if i don't miss a check, that'll be ideal. and if i don't spend through my severance, that'll be ideal. i just have to keep looking. this isn't the final stop if i get it. also, if i get it, i will have a healthier attitude about this job. the entire "do what you enjoy" job hunt only makes sense until you lose the job you enjoy. i remember as a child wondering what it meant to sell your soul to the devil. i never understood it. i always thought, "well, DUH, if the devil came and asked me for my soul, OF COURSE, i'd say, 'no.'" however, while i'm not signing over my soul to the devil in any literal or figurative way, i just feel that i may have to put myself in a position where i may or may not lose/gamble away a lot of the networking connections i've built up over the years. in a media that's even more close to death than my former employer. at least, i'm going with the biggest in its format again. i get an established list again. oh well. it's a job. it's a check. i get to continue living according to the lifestyle to which i've become accustomed.

and it's truly going around. in another reality, i'd have a job so good that i'd have flown to new york this weekend to see/stalk prince harry and the social thunderclap he'll bring to the city of new york as only the beautiful people will have the money and the will to don their best to get even a glimpse of the spare prince. and even as my balmainia boils over into hot-blooded obsession, we have to witness another french house file for bankruptcy. christian lacroix remains one of the last geniuses in fashion -- his looks from twenty years ago so potent, they have inspired ENTIRE collections and colors and shapes this very season. in fact, i'd argue that it's the lacroix season.

addendum: the obama's suprise dinner-and-a-show perfect date in new york encapsulates everything fabulous about the city of new york. it's interesting to watch how george w. bush once spent weeks (literally) in crawford to clear his mind where this president takes a load off by spending time with his wife enjoying the finer things in life like great food and great culture. besides, what sort of night would it be for both prince harry and the obamas to be in town!?!?!?????

Christian Lacroix Files for Bankruptcy
French couturier the latest luxury brand hit hard by the economy
http://www.fashionweekdaily.com/news/fullstory.sps?iNewsid=6633393
5/28/2009 3:41:00 PM

(NEW YORK) Christian Lacroix has filed for court protection from creditors, equivalent to a voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in the U.S. The company, a former LVMH brand founded in 1987 by Lacroix and Bernard Arnault, was sold in 1995 to the Florida-based Falic Group, owners of duty free chain Duty Free Americas. "We think it's very well positioned," chairman Simon Falic told WWD at the time of the acquisition. "So much money has been invested in this brand, and Mr Lacroix is such a highly-regarded talent in the fashion industry. I honestly believe we can double the sales volume in five years, maybe sooner."

Lacroix's reputation as one of Paris' most relevant couturiers led the company to focus directly on the luxury market, a move that offers little for customers looking increasingly towards bridge collections. "Since the acquisition of Christian Lacroix SNC, we have been committed to the brand and to its high-end development," said Lacroix CEO Nicolas Topiol in a statement released today. "We will continue to do so but the sharp downturn of the luxury market has significantly hurt our revenues."

The company has pledged to continue producing both couture and ready-to-wear collections, even promising to show a small couture collection during July's couture season, but the future of the Lacroix is in limbo. Ready-to-wear sales for the Fall 2009 season were down 35 percent, with 2008 losses of $14 million on overall revenues of approximately $42 million. Plans to strengthen the company by way of financial partners and investors have been put on hold. Topiol's statement continued, "this process, which was in its final phase, was directly hit by the conditions of the financial markets and could not be finalized prior to the filing."

In addition to Christian Lacroix's fashion business, the brand has branched out into other projects, from decor for the French TGV to hotel interiors and uniforms for Air France. It is unknown whether the company will continue to participate in these other projects.
EMILY GYBEN

###

Christian Soldiers On. 01 June 2009, 11:20AM
http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/daily/090601-christian-lacroix-vows-to-fight-to-.aspx

DESIGNER Christian Lacroix has confessed that even he is owed money from his ailing company and has been designing collections "free of charge" for several months.

The legendary designer revealed in a statement to his 125 employees that he is "not ashamed" to admit he is owed money, but assured them that he intends to give "200 per cent" to keep the label afloat and secure.

The company filed for bankruptcy, as reported on VOGUE.COM on Thursday, in order to protect itself from the creditors currently chasing payment.

Lacroix himself is not a salaried employee of the house, WWD reported this morning, but rather is contracted to design the collections in the same way as he has undertaken other solo projects; including creating opera costumes and hotel interiors.
Lauren Milligan

###

In The Red. 28 May 2009, 12:30PM
http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/daily/090528-lacroix-files-for-bankruptcy.aspx

FRENCH design house Christian Lacroix has reportedly filed for voluntary bankruptcy as the label seeks to protect itself from an onslaught of creditors. The economic crisis, which has harmed the global wholesale business in particular, combined with Lacroix's recent brand expansion have been blamed for the financial strife.

"According to our information, Christian Lacroix was declared insolvent on Friday," French newspaper Le Figaro said today. "The representatives of the employees were informed yesterday evening at a works council. The Commercial Court of Paris will decide next week on a receivership or liquidation [approach]."

Sources within the house, however, are hopeful of recovery and are still seeking a buyer for the label, which was established as a couture house in 1987. The LVMH conglomerate, which owned the Lacroix name since its inception, sold the brand in 2005 to US group Falics - which has since been approached by a Swiss buyer.

Despite the current financial upheaval the label insists it will continue to produce its ready-to-wear and couture lines - and will be a presence at Couture Week in July. Couture is Lacroix's, "most flexible business," Nicolas Topiol, Lacroix's chief executive officer told WWD, "because we do most of it internally and we have a very dedicated group of clients."

"The perception of the brand and its power is very strong," he asserted. "It's the key to future development."

Lauren Milligan

###

Lacroix Couture for John Demsey's Bride-to-Be
Hello Kitty ring replaced with James de Givenchy sapphire

Friday, July 13, 2007

(NEW YORK) Helping celebrate Aerin Lauder’s Private Collection launch wasn’t the only tall order on John Demsey’s mind Thursday night. The Estée Lauder Cosmetics group president, who oversees the Estée Lauder, M.A.C Cosmetics, Sean John Fragrances, and Tom Ford Beauty empires, is busy making the final arrangements for his July 27 wedding to Anouschka Izmirlian—an intimate ceremony that will take place at La Grenouille for family and close industry friends. While Demsey’s outfit is ready to go—a Timothy Everest bespoke suit in dark navy with brocade detail—his bride-to-be’s will remain a surprise until the big day.

But that’s not to say Demsey, who attended the Elie Saab and Christian Lacroix couture shows in Paris last week, isn’t privy to a detail or two. “She’s wearing a Lacroix couture dress,” he revealed at Saks during the fragrance unveiling, adding that Izmirlian is a personal friend of the French designer. “I haven’t seen it and I don’t know the color; in fact, I had to cover my eyes at the end of the show!” As reported, Demsey proposed to his girlfriend in the kitchen of his apartment at the Museum Tower in Midtown in May with a ring from the Kimora Lee Simmons Hello Kitty collection after the original bauble was delayed. The beauty and cosmetics executive was happy to report that the whimsical token of affection has finally been replaced with a sapphire from Taffin by James de Givenchy.

###

A Lesson in Fashion History
Christian Lacroix presents his first retrospective at Musée des Arts Décoratifs
11/9/2007 8:47:00 PM

(NEW YORK) How to celebrate 20 years at the top? For Christian Lacroix, it's all about getting a retrospective. "Christian Lacroix, Histoires de Mode," tells the story of fashion from the 18th century to the present, straight from Lacroix's mouth.

To prepare for the historic extravaganza, the couturier holed up in the museum's storeroom for months, examining every garment and accessory before conceiving the presentation. "I selected the most inspiring pieces, some of which have never been shown, to recount the history of fashion the best way possible, like the museum curator I would have liked to have become," Lacroix said of the experience. The end result showcases more than 400 garments that have both influenced the history of fashion and his own designs, such as the entirely beaded and embroidered 1930s dresses by Mainbocher, in addition to 80 of Lacroix's own creations. The designer, along with Jean-Michel Bertin, also designed the exhibition space as well as a special mannequin for the event.

© 2002-2007 Fashion Week Daily

###

A Dubai Debut
Christian Lacroix inks deal to design high-rise
4/23/2008 8:46:00 PM

(PARIS) Christian Lacroix's popularity is soaring to new heights--literally. The designer has been tapped to infuse his trademark design skills on an avant-garde new high-rise in Dubai.

Today, the designer and boutique Middle East property developer Abyaar announced a joint venture which will establish a residential tower in one of Dubai's most exclusive beachside suburbs. The 38-unit, coastal Jumeirah-based tower will incorporate a Lacroix-designed façade, expansive lobby, and luxury interiors.

Although Lacroix has worked on several Parisian boutique hotel interiors, this is his first residential offering.

"We approached Lacroix because he is known for his exceptional design skills and theatrical style, both on and off the catwalk," said Marzooq Al Rashdan, vice chairman and managing director of Abyaar, the three-year old real estate development firm jointly run by Kuwait's Aayan Leasing and Investment Company and Al Rashdan Group. "This is the start of a long-term partnership that places Abyaar on the luxury development map internationally." Al Rashdan added that the company is working with Lacroix on "something special that will tell a Middle Eastern story." "The interiors will be based on paradox," added Lacroix, who was recently in New York to christen his new boutique on East 57th Street. "Contemporary and baroque, blending East and West, old and new, inspired by history and folklore."

Further details on the tower, which is yet to be named, have not been released. The developer did not indicate when the project will launch or how the units will be priced

Lacroix will be sourcing and creating unique materials to be used in the interior design. "The Middle East is a pioneering place where creative freedom is unshackled," Lacroix continued. "We are pleased to be entering the region with a developer like Abyaar who caters to a select audience, favoring the extraordinary."

Among his non-catwalk pursuits, Lacroix has designed several boutique hotels, interiors for the French chain of Gaumont cinemas; TGV trains to Strasbourg; tramway cars in Montpellier, and the costumes for the Marriage of Figaro at the Aix-en-Provence festival.

© 2002-2007 Fashion Week Daily

###

APRIL 9, 2009.

Fashion House Lacroix Seeks Partner
By VANESSA O'CONNELL

The owner of the iconic but unprofitable Christian Lacroix couture fashion house is in talks to sell a stake in the firm to private investors, people familiar with the matter said, as cutbacks by U.S. department stores take a toll on apparel designers.

Paris-based Lacroix, one of a tiny and shrinking club of haute-couture design houses, has looked for investors amid falling sales of luxury goods. Neiman Marcus Group Inc., Saks Inc., Nordstrom Inc. and Barneys New York have reduced orders for fall 2009 merchandise from designers.

Neither the terms being discussed by Lacroix's privately held owner, Florida-based Falic Group, nor the identity of the investors could be immediately learned. The talks were reported earlier by Women's Wear Daily. The negotiations could still fall apart, the people said. Other luxury goods makers, such as Italy's Brioni Roman Style SpA, also have been seeking investors amid weakening sales.

Investors are eyeing purchase of a stake in designer Christian Lacroix.

U.S. stores "aren't taking any risks" on designer labels that might not sell well at their stores in the recession, said Pierre Mallevays, managing partner of Savigny Partners LLP, an advisory firm in London. Retail buyers "are favoring brands that have a proven sales record -- and even then they are cutting orders by 20% or 30%," he added.

Spokesmen for Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus said their stores dropped Lacroix after carrying it last year. Buyers for Saks purchased Lacroix's spring styles but didn't place any orders for its fall 2009 collection, unveiled earlier this year.

Barneys New York, a unit of Istithmar World, an investment arm of the Dubai government, placed orders for fall 2009 Lacroix merchandise, according to a person with knowledge of its plans.

Lacroix, whose spring collection includes a $6,685 silk calligraphy print gown and a $4,505 silk trench-coat, generated 2008 wholesale volume of about $27 million and about $54 million in total sales at retail stores, according to people familiar with the matter. Lacroix recently incurred "significant" losses, one of these people said.

Falic Group didn't respond to requests for comment. It is controlled by brothers Simon, Jerome and Leon Falic and operates over 100 duty-free shops in airports and border towns across the U.S.

"An haute couture business is very, very expensive to maintain," said Imran Amed, a consultant to luxury goods firms. Lacroix has that "big cost structure but hasn't realized the revenue streams on the other side to offset that," he said. Chanel and Christian Dior Couture, by contrast, get royalties from licensing those brands in fragrance and sunglasses.

Falic bought the House of Christian Lacroix from LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA in 2005. Under its ownership, Lacroix opened two of its own boutiques in the U.S., one in New York City and the other in Las Vegas.

Write to Vanessa O'Connell at vanessa.o'connell@wsj.com

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page B9

Veronique Branquinho
PARIS, September 30, 2008
By Nicole Phelps

Chalk it up to her late time slot or the inconvenient location, but Veronique Branquinho has fallen off the radar for a lot of big editors and retailers. The fact that she's no longer the new kid on the block probably plays into it, too: The cool hunters have chewed up and spit out a couple of generations of "next big things" since she first hit the scene in 1998.

But those who've stuck around noticed a positive development this evening. Last season, a heavy, awkward silhouette sometimes got the best of her; here, she lightened things up considerably, starting with the landscape prints—mountain, desert, ocean—that decorated easy shifts. The suits with which she made her name were back to their simple-chic proportions, too. Instead of tricking out the shoulders, she spliced strips of futuristic-looking iridescent material into the jackets and trousers. But the dominant look here was a loose, oversize vest, worn as a jacket over shorts, that negotiated the delicate balance between pulled-together and edgy. It just might draw some eyes back her way.

###

Veronique Branquinho
June 26, 2008

An ocean backdrop, the sound of breaking waves, a summer collection…ah, yes, but Veronique Branquinho is from Antwerp, so the sea she was thinking of was probably a chilly Nordic body of water, rather than some balmy tropical spot. And there, in a nutshell, was the existential crux of her collection. She mentioned a road trip in her show notes, and a tee sported the message "The highway is for gamblers." But the Talking Heads song on the soundtrack was "Road to Nowhere," so the gambler clearly lost.

There is surely no better designer than Branquinho to dress him when he's down. A dark, glazed linen suit for those darkest hours before the dawn, a tequila sunrise-colored tux jacket for those moments of false elation, a pinstripe all-in-one for that giddy plunge into oblivion—you could create a character arc in the minutes her show took to unspool. And, should you be more inclined to simply reflect on the items the designer was offering for the upcoming season, you might notice the ingenuity of sweaters that disappeared into their own little pocket, the incongruity of shorts over leggings—or the ankle-lacing shoes.

— Tim Blanks

###

Dark Days
29 May 2009, 11:01AM

BELGIAN designer Veronique Branquinho has been forced to close her eponymous label due to the pressures of the recession, it was revealed today. Branquinho's business, like Christian Lacroix which entered bankruptcy proceedings this week, relied heavily on wholesalers - who have seen their buying power greatly cut this year.

Branquinho's company, James NV, of which she owns the majority, has begun a court-appointed liquidation period for the next three months - and will continue to trade from the label's only standalone store, on Nationalestraat in Antwerp, to clear residual stock.

It is understood that the designer, who was one of a new wave of Belgian talent in the late Nineties which included Raf Simons, Olivier Theyskens and A.F. Vandevorst, will now focus on her role as the new artistic director of Belgian leather goods brand Delvaux and will continue as a professor at the University of Applied Arts in Vienna.

Lauren Milligan

May 31, 2009
Politics Can Wait: The President Has a Date
By JULIE BOSMAN

The Obamas escaped Washington on Saturday in search of a quintessential New York evening: dinner and a Broadway show.

They found it at Blue Hill, a low-key Greenwich Village restaurant, and at the Belasco Theater near Times Square for a performance of “Joe Turner’s Come and Gone,” the August Wilson play.

It was the Obamas’ first joint visit to the city as the first couple.

Times Square was even more frenetic than usual, as pedestrians lined several blocks waiting to catch a glimpse of Mr. and Mrs. Obama. At the corner of Broadway and 44th Street, a crowd stood and watched expectantly, even though they were so far away they could barely see the old-fashioned sign for the Belasco, illuminated in light bulbs.

“It’s going to be so cool to go to school and say I saw the president," said Jessica Allen, a 16-year-old who landed a prime spot across the street from the theater, hours before the show began.

Just before 8 p.m., the crowd erupted in cheers as the couple arrived in a black limousine.

The audience inside buzzed with excitement over the Obamas, but more than 15 minutes later, the Secret Service was still guiding theatergoers through metal detectors.

The presidential date night began with a late-afternoon flight from Andrews Air Force Base, with Mr. Obama wearing a dark blue suit (no tie), and Mrs. Obama a black cocktail dress and a sleek updo, holding a turquoise clutch.

The couple left Air Force One behind, and instead took a smaller Gulfstream jet.

They landed at Kennedy International Airport at 4:45 p.m. and after taking a quick helicopter ride to Lower Manhattan, the presidential motorcade snaked its way up to Blue Hill, a restaurant off Washington Square Park that specializes in cuisine from the Hudson Valley. (It sounded suspiciously like the choice of Mrs. Obama, who favors local food.)

The visit clogged streets in Greenwich Village, where passers-by crowded outside the restaurant to gawk at the Obamas. In the Theater District, police cordoned off the entire block of 44th Street between Avenue of the Americas and Broadway, the site of the Belasco.

Hours before the show began, tickets were still available at the box office. Outside the theater, one of the actors in the play, Chad L. Coleman, signed autographs and spoke with reporters, wearing a broad smile and an Obama baseball cap.

He said he was excited and honored that Mr. Obama would be there.

“There are no words for it,” he said. “I told people I got two in one: a Broadway debut and the president attending.”

Mr. Coleman said Mr. Obama’s presence would be especially poignant, because Mr. Wilson, who died in 2005, could not be there to see the president walk into the theater.

“I hope he’s smiling somewhere,” he said. “Because this is huge.”

While the Obamas’ visit to New York was considered private, there was some very public criticism of the trip. The Republican National Committee suggested that that the outing was inappropriate and that Mr. Obama was out of touch, especially given the looming bankruptcy of General Motors.

The committee issued a press release on Saturday afternoon that read, “Putting on a show: Obamas wing it into the city for an evening out, while another iconic American company prepares for bankruptcy.”

Showing that the White House was sensitive to the criticism, a White House press secretary, Josh Earnest, quickly relayed a message to reporters from Mr. Obama.

“I am taking my wife to New York City,” the president said in the statement, “because I promised her during the campaign that I would take her to a Broadway show after it was all finished.”

Karen Zraick contributed reporting.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

BARACK OBAMA TAKES MICHELLE ON NYC DATE
By CHARLES HURT IN DC and STEFANIE COHEN IN NY

May 30, 2009 -- WASHINGTON -- President Obama is giving his first lady a date night she'll never forget.

Today, he whisked her off to the Big Apple, and treated her to a fairy-tale version of dinner and show.

"I am taking my wife to New York City because I promised my wife during the campaign that I would take her to a Broadway show after it was all finished," the president said upon arriving in Gotham.

The stylish couple left the babysitter behind to board a small Air Force jet at Andrews Air Force Base this afternoon.

They cut quite the dashing figure: she in a sleeveless black cocktail dress adorned with fringe, and pair of low, strappy heels; he, tieless in a dark suit and white shirt with the top button opened.

The couple landed at JFK Airport at 4:45, took a chopper to the Wall Street helipad, and then sped up West Street to the swanky Greenwich Village restaurant Blue Hill.

The two then will head to the Tony Award-nominated "Joe Turner's Come and Gone" by August Wilson at the Belasco on West 44th Street.

Taxpayers footed the bill for the big night on the town, which included orchestra seat tickets going for $96.50 apiece, and thousands more on Secret Service and police security, the helicopters and motorcade, and the flight.

Obama's plane, a fancy Gulfstream 500, served as a more modest Air Force One for the day in place of the customary presidential 747.

The Obamas' entire weekend was cleared of business and filled with family activities.

In addition to the couple's first-class date, the Obamas watched daughter Malia's soccer game today morning in a neighborhood not far from the White House.

Younger daughter Sasha draped herself over the railing of the White House's top balcony, waving and calling out to her parents as they set off on their jaunt.

The couple has always enjoyed their private time together, and both are known to be food and wine lovers. In their hometown of Chicago, they were a fixture on the restaurant scene. For their first date night after the historic election last November, they hit a favorite, Spiaggia Italian restaurant, for a three-hour dinner.

The president knows how to treat a lady.

For his first date with his bride-to-be, he impressed her with a day at the Art Institute of Chicago, topped off with a drink at the John Hancock Center, followed by a movie, Spike Lee's "Do the Right Thing."

churt@nypost.com

Copyright 2009 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.

###

May 30, 2009
Categories: Barack Obama

(Over)Interpreting 'Joe Turner' and Blue Hill

The Obamas are at "Joe Turner's Come and Gone" in New York tonight, an August Wilson play dealing with the legacy of slavery in the North, and one that's up for a Tony.

If you're looking for Obama-esque symbolism of racial reconciliation and complexity, there's another reason to eye the production: It's been the subject of a minor controversy over the producers' choice of a white director to put on the play; Wilson had, Pat Healy wrote back in August, an "all-but-official rule" against using white directors:

The selection of Mr. Sher by the producer, Lincoln Center Theater, has prompted concern and even outrage among some black directors, who say this production represents a lost opportunity for a black director, for whom few opportunities exist on Broadway or at major regional theaters. Wilson himself felt that black directors best understood his characters, and he saw his plays as chances to give them high-profile work. Wilson’s widow, Constanza Romero, however, approved Mr. Sher as director.

This production of “Joe Turner” also stands as an unusual collaboration, and by all accounts a happy one, between a white director and an almost entirely black cast on Broadway, a rarity itself. At times the actors were directing the director, as they discussed the ways that black Americans relate to one another and to their white neighbors and nemeses.

“I’ve learned more from this cast than any group that I’ve ever worked with,” said Mr. Sher, who won a Tony for “South Pacific.” “But I also learned an enormous amount about the lack of opportunity in theater today. More Ibsen should be directed by black directors. More Shakespeare. More Chekhov.”

The evening also showcases the Obama's contemporary, urbanite tastes: They're eating at Blue Hill, a well-regarded, understated place at the front edge of the local food movement.

By Ben Smith 08:21 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8073096.stm

Prince Harry to Invade New York’s Harbor 5/13/09 at 11:17 AM
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/05/prince_harry_to_invade_new_yor.html?mid=daily-intel--20090513

Prince Harry, third in line to the throne of the United Kingdom, will make his first official visit to the United States at the end of this month. He'll be here to participate in the second annual Veuve Clicquot Manhattan Polo Classic on May 30. His visit will also correspond with the 400th anniversary of New York (whatever that means) and opening day of Governors Island, and will benefit American Friends of Sentebale, a U.S.-based charity that supports at-risk children in Lesotho, Africa. In case you didn't know this was going to be a big deal, London's Daily Mail laid it out a week ago when they first reported the visit:

Harry, who is one of the most popular members of the Royal Family, has a huge following in America. Stories of his exploits and romantic entanglements frequently make the front pages of the country's best-selling magazines and newspapers. The country still views his late mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, with enormous adulation and recent visits by the Queen and, to a lesser extent, Prince Charles literally stopped traffic.

Mmmm. See, this is why the British don't really understand Americans. It's not his exploits, or romantic entanglements, or even his mother or grandmother that explains why we love him. It's that he is gorgeous. Ten years ago, the youth were gaga about Prince William, but then that thing happened to his hair — and shortly after, a completely different and wonderful thing happened to Harry's torso (probably from his military training, which makes it even hotter), and presto! America has a new favorite prince. Long live the Ginger Fox!

Harry saddles up for his first official visit to the States [Daily Mail]

By: Chris Rovzar

Filed Under: harry windsor and our libido of fire, governors island, polo, prince harry, united kingdom

Prince of Polo
Prince Harry to make first formal U.S. visit--for Veuve Clicquot's Manhattan Polo Classic
5/13/2009 3:22:00 PM

(NEW YORK) Ralph Lauren signifies classic Americana, but his symbol--the polo pony--has its roots on the other side of the pond. The United States and the United Kingdom will come together, however, at the end of the month, when Prince Harry of Wales will make his first formal visit to America to play in the second annual Veuve Clicquot Manhattan Polo Classic on May 30. Proceeds from the event will benefit American Friends of Sentebale, a U.S.-based charity that supports at-risk children in Lesotho, Africa (co-founded by Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso Bereng Seeiso of Lesotho in honor of their mothers, Diana, Princess of Wales and Queen 'Mamohato).

In true polo form, traditional dress is required--that's hats for the ladies, summer suits for the boys--and the St. Regis New York will provide the afternoon tea and refreshments. Prince Harry will play on the team captained by Nick Roldan, and Nacho Figueras, world-renowned Argentine polo player and new face of Ralph Lauren's Polo Fragrances, will captain the opposite playing team.

© 2002-2007 Fashion Week Daily

Good Deeds
Prince Harry Helps War Hero Make Trip to N.Y.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20281248,00.html
By Simon Perry

Originally posted Wednesday May 27, 2009 09:05 AM EDT

When he visits New York this weekend, Prince Harry has more to focus on than action on the polo field and fund-raising for his Sentebale charity for African children. He'll pay special attention to the sacrifices made by servicemen and women around the world.

With this in mind, he has helped facilitate a dream trip to the U.S. for a young British marine who lost both his legs in a blast in Afghanistan.

Commando Joe Townsend, 21, was horrifically injured when he stepped on an anti-tank mine in Helmand province last year. Harry, 24, was serving in the same region (though they were not together) at the time.

While they are not traveling together to Manhattan, the pair will meet up privately during the prince's two-day stay. The veteran will join the prince on a tour of the facilities of a post-traumatic stress disorder treatment clinic at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Manhattan.

The original idea came from New York Mets owner Fred Wilpon, who approached royal staff and said he would pay for the trip. Harry – having heard of what he went through – nominated war hero Townsend.

A St. James's Palace spokesman tells PEOPLE that Harry was "absolutely delighted" to be able to invite Townsend. He says, "Prince Harry has long been a supporter of efforts to support the work and sacrifice of so many British servicemen and women. The prince is enormously grateful to Fred Wilpon for his generosity in making Joe's trip possible."

Joe Townsend

The New York visit will be Harry's first official tour to the U.S. He will be joined for some of it by his friend and co-founder of Sentebale, Prince Seeiso of Lesotho. Seeiso has described his friend to PEOPLE as a down-to-earth fellow who "warms to children."

Copyright © 2009 Time Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

May 30, 2009
Prince Harry, in His Mother’s Footsteps
By RALPH BLUMENTHAL
It wasn’t exactly what the British press had flown 3,500 miles to see: Prince Harry upstaged by a tree.

But there was the seething mass of news people penned behind police barricades, there was the tree — a Magnolia “Elizabeth,” just planted in a downtown Manhattan memorial garden — and there was His Royal Highness, Princess Diana’s younger son, third in line to the throne and a veteran of the Afghanistan war, shoveling soil, half-hidden behind the leaves.

“Harry, we can’t see you!” voices brayed. “Come around front!”

The young prince obliged, happy no doubt to be making the kind of news that would not leave his family cringing.

Twenty years and four months after his mother enraptured New York with her own royal visit, Prince Harry, 24, arrived in a city fought over by his forebears, with a ginger toe-dipping in the waters of international relations, centering on acts of charity and a commemoration of the Sept. 11 attacks. It was a somber visit clearly designed to temper the prince’s tabloid reputation as a hearty partier with a penchant for gaffes, like making derogatory videos and wearing Nazi regalia to a costume party. Flag-waving crowds lined up to cheer him, with adoring young women particularly plentiful. One was Roseanne Krylowski, 25, a Rutgers University student, who waited in the financial district with a sign that said “NYC ♥ Prince Harry.”

“I’m hoping to have a detailed conversation that ends with him asking for a date,” she said.

Within hours of arriving from London on Friday on a commercial ticket that was privately paid for by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth, the strawberry blond prince, in a dark blue suit, blue-and-white striped shirt and the maroon-and-blue striped regimental tie of the Household Division, laid a wreath at the site of the World Trade Center.

He spoke to firefighters and relatives of 9/11 victims and looked over blueprints for the site’s reconstruction. “Big question,” he asked at one point. “When is this supposed to be finished?”

Then he dedicated the British Garden at Hanover Square, between Stone and Pearl Streets, which is a memorial to the 67 British people killed at the trade center. He planted the magnolia there and attended a private meeting with victims’ families.

The garden, paved in Scottish stone with markings to evoke the British Isles, is under the patronage of his father, Prince Charles, who visited in 2005. “So you’ll be able to tell him the progress,” said Camilla Hellman, president of the garden trust.

“Very, very well done,” said Harry, who spoke sparingly.

In the afternoon, accompanied by a British soldier, Joe Townsend, 21, who lost his legs in Afghanistan, Prince Harry, who is training to be a helicopter pilot like his elder brother, William, toured the Veterans Affairs Hospital on East 23rd Street.

He visited a prosthetics section, shaking the artificial hand of a gulf war veteran, Paul Yarbrough, and jokingly wincing at the strong grip: “Owww!”

He met behind closed doors with other wounded veterans, and afterward, John Loosen, the chief of prosthetics, said the prince spoke of their camaraderie. “He commented on how he felt people who didn’t do what they did don’t understand,” he said.

On Saturday morning, Harry is scheduled to visit the Harlem Children’s Zone with Prince Seeiso of Lesotho, a kingdom-enclave within South Africa, who is his co-patron in a charity called Sentebale.

And in the afternoon, the prince, an accomplished polo player, is to take part in a match on Governors Island sponsored by Veuve Clicquot, the Champagne label, with proceeds going to American Friends of Sentebale.

He plans to leave for home right after the match. The schedule left little time for personal amusement — which seemed to be the point.

Peter Brown, a British publicist in New York who once ran the Beatles’ management company and advised the Consulate on Princess Diana’s visit in February 1989, said it all sounded familiar. When he was helping to plan Harry’s mother’s trip, the directive was clear: “She must at no time look like she was enjoying herself.”

Diana managed to enthrall anyway, wowing an audience at the Brooklyn Academy of Music and attending a banquet at the World Financial Center. But she also toured the Henry Street Settlement on the Lower East Side and cuddled children with AIDS — pointedly without donning gloves — in the pediatric unit at Harlem Hospital Center.

Her second son, who was 4 at the time of his mother’s visit, won high marks from some for his performance on Friday. “It’s easy to be rude to the royal family but they’ve been hugely supportive,” said Alex Clarke of London, who lost her 30-year-old daughter, Suria, an employee of Cantor Fitzgerald, in the trade center attack.

Suffering a twinge of disappointment was Ms. Krylowski, the Rutgers student, who was standing behind a barricade that Harry did not stop at. “I won’t be a princess after all,” she said.

Also keeping hope alive for some more reportable news were members of the British press.

“He’s got 24 hours to go,” said Jonathan Hunt, a British journalist at the Fox News Channel in New York. “He could still do anything.”

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

ROYAL MALLET MAN SCORES
By GINGER ADAMS OTIS and AMBER SUTHERLAND

May 31, 2009 -- Prince Harry ended his first official US visit yesterday with a display of polo prowess in front of a celeb-studded crowd on Governors Island.

Prince Harry Plays Polo, Visits Harlem School

As stars from Madonna to Kate Hudson looked on, the redheaded royal assisted with the winning goal, clinching the Veuve Clicquot Manhattan Polo Classic 6-5 against a team that included top pro player Ignacio "Nacho" Figueras.

The crowd of notables watched from white VIP tents where seats went for $25,000 to $50,000. Proceeds went to Princess Diana's AIDS charity in Lesotho, Africa.

Madonna arrived at halftime accompanied by her sons, Rocco and David, whom she adopted from Malawi, Africa.

Her Brazilian boy toy Jesus Luz stood quietly by the pop star's side as she chatted with designer Marc Jacobs. In the 80-degree weather, the sun-phobic Madge covered up in jeans, a long denim jacket and a plaid derby cap.

Behind her, Hudson wore an airy summer dress and huge hat, as she mingled with actress Chloe Sevigny and models Veronica Webb and Alek Wek.

Queens-born rapper L.L. Cool J, attending his first polo event, shared a joke with the royal before the match.

"Are you going to win?" he asked.

"Hmmm . . . I don't know. Hopefully it's fixed," the prince quipped.

Before heading to Governors Island yesterday afternoon, the former bad-boy prince stopped by a charter school in Harlem.

He talked with students, ate cafeteria food and even competed in an obstacle-course race that ended with the prince popping a balloon by sitting on it.

Inside the Harlem Children's Zone school, where he met with Rep. Charlie Rangel, Harry asked students preparing for a math exam who the best pupil was. He then confessed: "I was always the worst."

Later, the 24-year-old prince jokingly covered his eyes while a student worked on fractions.

"Flashbacks!" he exclaimed.

His cordial and fun-loving demeanor won over both the students and their parents.

"He's such a people person," said Sarah Frierson, a community supporter of Harlem Children Zone who donned a large pink hat the color of English roses for her meeting with the prince.

"I was just fascinated by him. He looks just like his mother, and I loved her so much."

Harry's trip, partly intended to erase his youthful troublemaker image, began Friday with a prayerful stop at Ground Zero.

He also spent 15 minutes quietly speaking to a half-dozen relatives of 9/11 victims.

gotis@nypost.com

Copyright 2009 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.

Taking the Town
http://www.newyorksocialdiary.com/node/424950

June 1, 2009. Yesterday was a sunshine sparkling Sunday in New York. Warm enough for sunbathers in the parks and by the rivers with a slight cool breeze that picked up and rushed the trees by nightfall.

Prince Harry came to New York on Friday and was on his way back to London by Saturday evening. But in the meantime, he took the town – the little that he saw of it and that it saw of him. He has his mother’s common touch and his own zest for life.

On Friday he visited Ground Zero and paid his condolences. On Saturday morning before the polo match on Governor’s Island he visited a community organization for kids in Harlem called Harlem’s Children Zone with Prince Seelso of Lesotho.

The polo match was a fundraiser for Sentebale, the charity that Harry and Prince Seelso have created to help poor children and AIDS orphans in Lesotho. Free to the public, the VIP tent brought up to $50,000 per table and there was a $500 ticket for picnicking on the grass.

The world already knows Madonna was there, looking very retro-Carnaby Street, with her adopted son, as was the designer Marc Jacobs and his fiancé Lorenzo Martone; Kate Hudson, Chloe Sevigny, LL Cool J, not to mention Debbie Bancroft, Cornelia Guest, Debbie Bancroft, Amy Sacco, Samantha and Aby Rosen, Euan Rellie and Lucy Sykes, Bronson Van Wyck, Byrdie Bell; the first lady of New York State, Michelle Paterson, Donna Karan, David Lauren, Veronica Webb, Rachel Roy.

Polo, long called the Sport of Kings, is a rich businessman’s sport in America, as opposed to its earlier incarnation in the first half of the 20th century when the main poloists were the scions of American wealth, many of whom had estates on Long Island. Cornelia Guest’s father, Winston Guest, was one of the few American 10-goaler indoor poloists.

The crowd who turned out at Governor’s Island came to see England’s Prince Charming, the boon to the tabloids, a celebrity/boldfaced crew scions and sirens of glitz and bling.

America knew nothing about the personality of Prince Harry, aside from his famous parents, grandmother, brother, and of course his tabloidal adventures in late-night club-going. What they discovered was an enthusiastic fellow with a good sense of humor, a deftness with a polo mallet, a sensitivity to the world surrounding him and especially to the children. Right after the polo match, he made a visit to the USS Intrepid and then was on a plane back to the UK. No nightclubbing over here for the dear boy, tch-tch. And don’t think the crowd who paid tribute (and big bucks) to see him at wield his mallet on Governor’s Island wouldn’t have like to seen him in action in the late night clubs. But uh-uh; the Palace calls it.

Americans have always loved the English princes. The first great visit was that of Prince Harry’s great-great-great-grandfather Edward VII, who, as then Albert Edward, the Prince of Wales, son of Queen Victoria, came to America at age 19, almost a hundred fifty years ago in 1860.

Bertie, as he was called by his family, visited Canada and then came into the US via Detroit (almost forty years before it became the auto city). He traveled to Chicago, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Washington, and finally arrived in Manhattan in early October of that year.

At 19, the prince already was working his way into the character of international playboy prince that he was to become — much to the dismay of his mother. In Philadelphia he’d seen the famous sopra no Adelina Patti and was so knocked out by her (and her performance — Verdi called her the greatest vocalist that he ever heard) that he requested an audience with her after the show.

In New York half a million people lined the harbor and the streets to catch a glimpse of him as he and his entourage made their way in carriages up to the new Fifth Avenue Hotel on Madison Square.

The Fifth Avenue Hotel was where Lincoln had stayed only months before when he made a speech at Cooper Union which launched him eventually to the Presidency.

The hotel’s reading room was a hub for some of the town’s most prominent businessmen, politicians and operators like Boss Tweed, Jay Gould, Commodore Cornelius Vanderbilt. General Ulysses S. Grant launched his Presidential campaign at a dinner at the hotel. It was a cool place for a young visiting prince.

The social highlight of Albert Edward’s visit was a ball at the Academy of Music, a large concert hall/theatre located on Irving Place and 14th Street. The Academy of Music preceded the Metropolitan Opera House as the premiere venue for opera in New York.

Three thousand were invited to the ball for the prince. The city’s grandest grandees and biggest bankrolls were all scrambling to get a ticket. There was the inevitable question: who would have the honor of dancing with the prince. Everybody loved the prince. No doubt dreams of marital possibilities danced in the heads of many young women and many a mother and father.

The ball turned out differently than planned and ended up just this side of catastrophe. The weight of the three thousand guests was more than the floor in part of the concert hall could bear, and it collapsed — although only two people were slightly injured in the crush — and the prince, thankfully, made it back to the Fifth Avenue Hotel in one piece. Oh those Americans.

Prince Albert Edward after his visit to the city ventured north to Boston where he was presented to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Oliver Wendell Holmes, three of the greatest Americans.

In Boston the prince was also introduced to a man named Ralph Farnum, then an octogenarian who was the sole survivor of the Battle of the Bunker Hill in the American Revolutionary War against Great Britain and George III, the great-grandfather of Prince Albert Edward. The prince was evidently very charming to Mr. Farnum who was quoted as having expressed no hard feelings over the prince’s visit.

Prince Albert returned to England by sea in a special frigate escorted by three other warships. The trip across was hazardous and they ended up way off course so that their arrival in England was long over due. The voyage took three and a half weeks, and there was a moment when they had no idea back at the palace if the prince would be returning. However, as we know, he did. He was Prince for the next forty-two years after that as Mama lived on and on and on.

In 1924, Prince Albert Edward/Edward VII’s grandson Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David, Prince of Wales, known as David to his family, came to America, just like his great-grandnephew Prince Henry this past weekend, for a polo match.

The Prince started out his trip, just like his grandfather did in 1860, in Canada. When he crossed over the border at Detroit, he was entertained by the automotive tycoon Henry Ford and his son, Edsel Ford at the Ford estate Fairlane.

He arrived in New York via Long Island where he’d gone ashore in Glen Cove and immediately went to an estate lent to him by James A. Burden, “Woodside in Syosset. The 120 acre estate came with stables for riding and a farm to provide the supplies for the family and staff, (now the Woodcrest Country Club).

The Burden estate was within driving distance of Meadow Brook where the international polo event took place. This was a very prestigious affair and played by some of the greatest poloist in the history of the sport in America – including Devereux Milburn, Tommy Hitchcock, Winston Guest. The polo club invited European royalty, Indian maharajahs and others prominent in the sport, and many of them attended. The games were accompanied by a lively social life on the players’ private estates in the area.

Besides the games, the Prince of Wales was feted wherever a hostess could get him. He was guest of honor at a party given by Mrs. James Mackay at Harbor Hill, the fabled estate of her son Clarence Mackay (later famous as the father-in-law of songwriter Irving Berlin). Although he was mainly out of sight for the public, his presence titillated New York society who had houses on the North Shore. A popular song in America the following year was “I Danced With the Man Who Danced With the Girl Who Danced With the Prince Of Wales.” Swoon.

The Prince had a reputation for his time that was somewhat like that of Prince Harry. He loved the nightlife, jazz and parties best exemplified by American popular culture, and he adopted a lot of it. It was one of the things that gave him his reputation early on for being frivolous. He also was, comparatively speaking – considering that he was heir to the throne of what was the greatest military and economic power in the world (about to enter its nadir as it were) – he was an informal-ish fellow. He liked good times, music, dancing, and as it turned out, older, married, domineering women.

All of these characteristics and qualities along with his lofty international title, made him Prince Charming for Americans.

He barely saw the city that trip (thirty years later as the Duke of Windsor, he’d have an apartment with his duchess in the Waldorf Towers). He did visit the American Museum of Natural History, had a short ride on a subway, and played polo with the great Ziegfeld star Will Rogers.

When the Prince of Wales returned to England in October 1924, he declared his trip to America as “one of the most wonderful times of my life.” Prince Harry pronounced his visit “fantastic,” and his forebear Prince Albert Edward loved every minute of it too.
It’s been a mutual love affair forever.

###

Prince Harry has homophobia licked: gay rights campaigner
Wed Jan 14, 9:36 am ET

LONDON (AFP) – Prince Harry, under fire over alleged racism, received rare praise from a leading gay rights campaigner Wednesday who said he was "liberated and enlightened" for kissing and licking a male friend.

Harry, a serving army officer, was widely criticised earlier this week after footage emerged of him describing a colleague as a "Paki" in 2006.

The video, obtained by the News of the World tabloid, also includes images of Harry on a night out with friends in which he mouths to one soldier: "I love you" before kissing him on the cheek and licking his face.

Another extract shows Harry asking a colleague how he felt after an army exercise, adding: "Gay, queer on the side?"

But Peter Tatchell, an Australian-born human rights activist who made his name focusing on gay rights, said he had no problem with Harry's use of the word "queer" and praised his show of affection.

"For him to happily give his soldier friend a public kiss and lick his face strikes me as rather liberated and enlightened, for a straight man," he said.

"If only more heterosexual men were relaxed about same-sex affection like Harry, the world would be a better place."

Tatchell added: "The context and intention of words is crucial in deciding whether they are offensive or not. I don't find anything objectionable about the context in which Harry used the word queer."

Heterosexual men rarely kiss their male friends or family members in stiff upper lip Britain, preferring to greet each other by shaking hands.

A new royal race row emerged Tuesday when it was revealed that Harry's father Prince Charles calls his Indian-born friend Kolin Dhillon "Sooty".

Harry and his brother William also reportedly use the nickname, which Dhillon said was "a term of affection".

Copyright © 2009 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AFP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Agence France Presse.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/8074999.stm

super tuesday.

Tue, 26 May 2009 20:53:55 GMT

i've never found myself so fraught with indecision on a day of such monumental decisionmaking in our nation. i must decide today whether to pursue a career where i have to swallow my own personal political proclivities in the name of selling media that (mostly) works against the platform i've come to embrace over the past five years recorded in this very blog. while nothing has set itself in stone as of yet, my three interviews -- two within my former company in different territories, one for clear channel -- have made me feel like i need to go for something outside of the company as the perception of my work experience within my former organization has come under a light skewed by the opinion of my former boss. the problem with pursuing this other job comes in the fact that i'm not sure i can mask my own political disagreements with the commentators while selling commerical spots around their shows. in response, i have applied at one other huge content provider in our area even though it's a lower position and i'll see how that pans out. however, i have to give an answer with regard to moving forward today. i'm making that decision at four o clock today. last thursday, i didn't go to my hrc social event after my clear channel interview because of the rain and the distance and i'm mad at myself for that. on friday, after i had my second internal interview at my former company, my sister and i went to the brandon town center which served as a complete waste of my time, life, and money, and then we went to ikea, where i prospected a couch although it's not quite what i had in mind with regard to refinement and stylishness, and then we went to banana republic and p.f. chang's and finished the night out with terminator salvation which made my trip to brandon town center seem as fruitful as important biomedical research. yes, it's that bad.

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Monday, May 25:

It might be best to put that next romantic move on hold for the moment. There's plenty of other stuff to keep you occupied, and adding more into the mix is likely to leave you feeling a bit overwhelmed.

now it couldn't come on a more tough day for our country nor a more important one. while i think that the political calculus behind the sotomayor nomination got figured out very soon after souter's announcement, i don't understand how anyone with any regard for our american constitution can stand by the california supreme court decision. while it's clear to everyone that the constitutional system in california has fundamental flaws subject to the whim and caprice of the voting majority, it effects more than budgetary matters, it has now created this unprecedented legal quandary where you have a class of people who have been married legally existing in the same community as those who cannot get married. what sort of legal construct does this provide and what sort of constitution crisis does this bring on where we have separate but equal conditions in the same state regardless of where the court falls on the whole "suspect class" question. and it brings into focus that the republican party as it stands now -- hostage to fringe interests in the social conservative movement, the project for a new american century movement, and the cut taxes while still spending like crazy movement -- that's more willing to scratch the backs of the last few political contribution makers than stick to actual principles like individual rights for all, non-interventionist foreign policy, and actual fiscal restraint. anywho. not sure i can bark up that tree if i take this job and while it's not the most clear throughline, these are the thoughts that weigh down on me at present. colin powell stands as someone so close to my politics that i find this entire debate interesting to watch though his lens. if he's not a republican, there's no way any other moderate can claim to be one either.

Separate Fact from Fiction
Stay grounded!

You will need to be very aware and on top of things this week in order to avoid losing your way. On May 27, expansive Jupiter conjuncts dreamy Neptune, when idealism is in full bloom. Then, Neptune turns retrograde on May 28 and Mercury turns direct on May 30, when you will need to separate fact from fiction. Finally, feisty Mars enters practical Taurus on May 31, and we can all get our feet back on the ground!

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prop8-decision27-2009may27,0,6677891.story

From the Los Angeles Times
Prop. 8 upheld by California Supreme Court
The justices uphold the same-sex marriage ban but also rule that the 18,000 gay couples who wed before the November vote will stay married. The decision is sure to spark another ballot box fight.
By Maura Dolan

10:08 AM PDT, May 26, 2009

Reporting from San Francisco — The California Supreme Court today upheld Proposition 8's ban on same-sex marriage but also ruled that gay couples who wed before the election will continue to be married under state law.

The decision virtually ensures another fight at the ballot box over marriage rights for gays. Gay rights activists say they may ask voters to repeal the marriage ban as early as next year, and opponents have pledged to fight any such effort. Proposition 8 passed with 52% of the vote.

Although the court split 6-1 on the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the justices were unanimous in deciding to keep intact the marriages of as many as 18,000 gay couples who exchanged vows before the election. The marriages began last June, after a 4-3 state high court ruling striking down the marriage ban last May.

In an opinion written by Chief Justice Ronald M. George, the state high court ruled today that the November initiative was not an illegal constitutional revision, as gay rights lawyers contended, nor unconstitutional because it took away an inalienable right, as Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown argued.

Only Justice Carlos R. Moreno, the court's sole Democrat, wanted Proposition 8 struck down as an illegal constitutional revision.

Justice Joyce L. Kennard, who voted with the majority last year to give gays marriage rights, joined George and the court's four other justices in voting to uphold Proposition 8.

The case for overturning the initiative was widely viewed as a long shot. Gay rights lawyers had no solid legal precedent on their side, and some of the court's earlier holdings on constitutional revisions mildly undercut their arguments.

But gay marriage advocates captured a wide array of support in the case, with civil rights groups, legal scholars and even some churches urging the court to overturn the measure. Supporters of the measure included many churches and religious organizations.

The legal fight over same-sex marriage in California began in San Francisco in 2004, when Mayor Gavin Newsom spurned state law, and the city began issuing marriage licenses to gay couples. Long lines of couples showed up to marry and celebrated within view of the court with rice and champagne.

Those marriages sparked a national debate about gay rights and made the marriage question a political issue in an election year. Dozens of states later adopted constitutional amendments to bar same-sex marriage.

Those gay couples who wed in San Francisco later had their marriages rescinded by the California Supreme Court, which ruled that a city could not single-handedly flout state law. But the court said supporters of marriage rights could challenge the ban in the lower courts.

The legal fight moved to San Francisco Superior Court, where a judge struck down the marriage ban as unconstitutional. A Court of Appeal in San Francisco later overturned that decision on a 2-1 vote. The state high court eventually took up the case, which culminated in a May 15 ruling last year declaring gays could marry each other.

Before last fall, California was one of only two states -- the other was Massachusetts -- to permit same-sex marriage.

Iowa, Connecticut, Vermont and Maine have since legalized it, and lawmakers in New York, New Jersey and New Hampshire are considering bills of their own.

California's historic 2008 ruling, written by George, repeatedly invoked the words "respect and dignity" and framed the marriage question as one that deeply affected not just couples but also their children. California has more than 100,000 households headed by gay couples, about a quarter with children, according to 2000 census data.

As soon as the ruling was final, thousands of gay couples showed up at city halls around the state to marry, and many flew in from elsewhere for California weddings. While the wedding business was brisk, opponents mounted a heated campaign with the help of churches and conservatives to overturn the court's action.

Even with the court upholding Proposition 8, a key portion of the court's May 15, 2008, decision remains intact. Sexual orientation will continue to receive the strongest constitutional protection possible when California courts consider cases of alleged discrimination. The California Supreme Court is the only state high court in the nation to have elevated sexual orientation to the status of race and gender in weighing discrimination claims.

maura.dolan@latimes.com

###

California Supreme Court Upholds Proposition 8; 5/26/09 at 2:10 PM
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/05/california_supreme_court_uphol.html?mid=daily-intel--20090526

In a widely anticipated decision, the Supreme Court of the State of California voted 6–1 to uphold Proposition 8, the constitutional amendment adopted by voters in November that stripped the right of gay couples to wed. The same court had ruled such unions legal in March of last year. The narrow silver lining on this decision — which, according to Chief Justice Ronald M. George, still allows gays the right to enter into civil unions — was the part of the decision that let stand the roughly 18,000 same-sex nuptials that were performed while it was legal. This irregular setup will then leave some gay couples with rights equal to those of straight couples, and some without — serving as, at the very least, a glaring reminder of the inequality on the books in that state. It's our experience that those kinds of inconsistencies do not go unchallenged, for better or for worse, for long.

California Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Same-Sex Marriage [NYT]

By: Chris Rovzar

Filed Under: equal rites, california, gay marriage, gays, marriage equality, proposition 8

###

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-constitution31-2009may31,0,6485922.story

From the Los Angeles Times
Prop. 8 ruling draws attention to state's easy amendment process

California Supreme Court majority hinted that reforming the amendment process may in order, but experts say voters are unlikely to curtail their own powers even as they clamor for change.
By Maura Dolan

May 31, 2009

The California Supreme Court decision upholding Proposition 8's same-sex marriage ban illuminated the history and oddities of the state Constitution, provoking renewed discussion about whether voters can too easily amend it.

Whereas the U.S. Constitution has been amended only 27 times, California's top legal document has been altered more than 500 times, often by voter initiative. The state's Constitution is the third longest in the world, exceeded only by those of India and Alabama.

Inscribed within its venerable pages are a ban on gill net fishing, a statement that English is the state's official language, and an assortment of requirements involving liquor and criminal defendants.

Californians can amend their Constitution by obtaining a simple majority vote on an initiative. Chief Justice Ronald M. George observed in Tuesday's ruling that many other state constitutions are more difficult to amend. Although the court did not call for limiting the amendment process, the majority said such a move would be possible and maybe even proper.

As in other states that allow initiatives, California's ballot measures have sometimes been used to take away rights from minorities.

"We have seen a whole bunch of law review articles saying that in general the initiative process has been used more against minority groups than to help them," said Jon W. Davidson, legal director of the gay-rights group Lambda Legal.

California ballots have carried initiatives to ban gays and lesbians from teaching and quarantine people with HIV -- both rejected -- and to permit race discrimination in housing, require English literacy and repeal affirmative action, which passed. The state high court later overturned the housing law on federal constitutional grounds.

In upholding Proposition 8, George disputed the challengers' contention that the measure was unprecedented in taking away a fundamental right from a minority.

He cited a voter-approved 1894 amendment that withdrew the right to vote from anyone not literate "in the English language." The provision remained in effect until 1970, when the state high court struck it down as a violation of the federal Constitution.

"People don't understand that the people of California can change their Constitution," Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar said in an interview. The Proposition 8 case "was about procedure," she said.

Despite some activists' anger over Proposition 8, voters are unlikely to restrict their own power to tinker with the state's most important legal document, experts said. Voters could make it more difficult to amend the Constitution by requiring larger margins at the polls or approval by two-thirds of the Legislature.

At least five commissions have been formed during the past 20 years to look at the initiative process, and not one measure to change it has made it to the ballot, said Fred Silva, senior fiscal policy advisor at California Forward, a nonpartisan, nonprofit group concerned with fiscal reform and state governance.

"There are people on both sides who don't want anything done -- both liberals and conservatives," said Bob Stern, president of the Los Angeles-based Center for Governmental Studies.

Still, the state budget fiasco has made constitutional reform a more pressing issue, and even if voters refuse to change the initiative process, Stern believes "the public is ready for an examination of the Constitution."

An initiative expected to qualify for next year's ballot would authorize a constitutional convention, where delegates could take a red pencil to the state's massive tome.

Stern cited a daylong conference on constitutional reform held in Sacramento in February. Attendees had to pay $89 for admission, he said. More than 400 people showed up and some had to be turned away.

"I was stunned," he said.

When voters amend the Constitution, the state high court can overturn the amendment only if it decides it was a more sweeping revision, which must be put on the ballot by a constitutional convention or two-thirds vote of the Legislature, or because it violated the federal Constitution.

The court concluded that Proposition 8 was not an impermissible revision because it did not alter the governmental plan or framework.

But given the court's historic May 15, 2008, ruling affirming the right of gays and lesbians to wed, the court might well have found the measure violated federal constitutional equal protection guarantees.

Anti-Proposition 8 lawyers did not pursue that argument, however, fearing that a reversal in the U.S. Supreme Court would set the marriage movement back decades.

Same-sex marriage activists looked askance when two high-profile lawyers, Theodore Olson and David Boies, announced Wednesday that they are challenging Proposition 8 in federal court. For the U.S. Supreme Court to rule in favor of a federal constitutional right to marry, it would have to reject the views of 44 states, 30 of which have constitutional amendments banning gay and lesbian nuptials, Davidson said.

Olson and Boies "believe they know a lot about the Supreme Court, but the reality is they have never done any lesbian and gay rights litigation nor even really any civil rights litigation from the plaintiffs' side," Davidson said.

Civil rights groups have tended to choose litigation carefully, starting with issues they think they can win to establish building blocks for matters of more consequence later on. The National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People first attacked school segregation with a case against law schools, Davidson noted. They have tried to avoid cases that could set an unfavorable precedent.

For now, most activists would prefer to overturn Proposition 8 at the ballot box in 2010 -- a repeal measure could appear alongside the initiative to hold a constitutional convention.

maura.dolan@latimes.com

###

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-sonia-sotomayor27-2009may27,0,3835713.story

From the Los Angeles Times
Sonia Sotomayor is Obama's Supreme Court nominee
Federal jurist Sotomayor would become the first Latino member of the high court. The president calls his nominee 'inspiring' and says he wants a justice with 'a common touch.'
By Mark Silva

8:05 AM PDT, May 26, 2009

Reporting from Washington — President Obama today nominated federal judge Sonia Sotomayor of New York for the Supreme Court, positioning the longtime federal jurist to become the first Latino and only the third woman on the nation's highest court.

Sotomayor became a judge on the federal district court for the Southern District of New York in 1991 and was elevated to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1998.

Obama, who has said that he wants a new justice with "a common touch" and a measure of "empathy," also is offering a measure of ethnic diversity to a court dominated by white men in his replacement of the retiring Justice David Souter. The nine-member court includes just one female justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and one black justice, Clarence Thomas.

"I have decided to nominate an inspiring woman, who I believe will make a great justice," said Obama, standing with Sotomayor by his side in the East Room of the White House.

The president said he had considered many factors.

"First and foremost is a rigorous intellect, a mastery of the law, an ability to hone in on key issues. . . . Second is a recognition of the limits of the judicial role . . . that a judge's job is to interpret, not make law," he said. "Yet these qualities alone are insufficient. We need something more."

What's also needed on the high court, the president said, is "experience that can give a person a common touch and a sense of compassion, an understanding of how the world works and how ordinary people live."

Sotomayor, who was raised in a Bronx housing project and attended some of the nation's most prominent universities, spoke of the inspiration that both her family and the law have provided.

"I chose to be a lawyer and ultimately a judge because I find endless challenge in the complexities of the law," she said. "For as long as I can remember, I have been inspired by the achievement of our founding fathers. They set forward principles that have endured for more than two centuries. . . .

"It would be a profound privilege for me to play a role in applying those principles in the . . . controversies we face today," the president's nominee said. "I am an ordinary person who has been blessed with extraordinary opportunities and experiences."

Sotomayor, 54, has a life story with a compelling narrative, the kind likely to appeal to many of the senators who will consider her confirmation to the high court.

Her parents moved to New York City from Puerto Rico during World War II, and Sotomayor was raised by her mother in housing projects in the South Bronx after her father, with a third-grade education, died during her childhood. Her father's death came one year after Sotomayor was diagnosed with diabetes -- a diagnosis she says spurred her to give up her dream of law enforcement for a career in law.

Sotomayor graduated from Princeton University and Yale University's Law School, where she was an editor of the Yale Law Journal.

"I stand on the shoulders of countless people," she said as the president presented her for nomination today.

"Yet there is one extraordinary person who is my life's inspiration," she said of her mother, in the audience. "My mother has devoted her life to my brother and me. . . . She often worked two jobs to help support us after Dad died. I have often said that I am all I am because of her. And I am only half the woman that she is."

Out of school, Sotomayor secured a job as an assistant district attorney in the Manhattan office of the legendary Robert Morgenthau. She was working in private practice before Bush named to her to the federal district court.

Sotomayor not only has legal wisdom, Obama said, but also "the wisdom accumulated from an inspiring life's journey."

Among the 450 cases that she has been involved in, the president cited one, an injunction in the Major League Baseball strike, ordering team owners to return to bargaining. "Some say the judge, Sotomayor, saved baseball," Obama said.

Born in the South Bronx, she was raised near Yankee Stadium, the president noted of his nominee, a "Yankee fan."

Yet some conservatives are critical of Sotomayor, whom they consider a "judicial activist," signaling a robust debate over Obama's appointment as the Senate Judiciary Committee holds expected confirmation hearings in July.

"Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written," said Wendy E. Long, court counsel for the Judicial Confirmation Network, in a statement issued today. "She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench."

Sotomayor has long been viewed as a potential Supreme Court choice, and her nomination rewards Latino advocacy groups, who have long championed a Latino nominee. Obama was elected president with a strong majority of the nation's Latino vote, and community leaders have urged both Obama and his predecessor to nominate a Latino justice. Sotomayor has frequently spoken about her Latina identity.

In a speech at UC Berkeley in 2001, Sotomayor suggested that her background and heritage helped guide her decision-making. "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life," Sotomayor said.

That quote -- and that speech -- will be cited by opponents, who will charge that Sotomayor will not serve as the sort of neutral "umpire" that Chief Justice John Roberts claimed to be during his confirmation hearings in 2005. Instead, they will argue that Sotomayor will favor disadvantaged groups over others.

The president, who will travel to Egypt next week for an address to the Muslim world and then travel through Germany and Africa, wants to see his Supreme Court nominee confirmed before the Senate's August recess and ready for the start of the high court's fall term in October.

In securing the nomination, Sotomayor was chosen over considerable competition, including U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan and federal appellate judge Diane Wood of Chicago, whom many viewed as the favorite because of her connection to Obama's hometown. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano also was reported to be one of the president's four finalists.

mdsilva@tribune.com

Washington correspondents James Oliphant, Peter Nicholas and Christi Parsons contributed to this report.

###

Sotomayor Is the GOP’s Latest Headache; 5/26/09 at 1:40 PM
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/05/sotomayor_is_the_gops_latest_h.html?mid=daily-intel--20090526

The first Republican reactions to President Obama's nomination of the Bronx's own Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court have already begun trickling in, and they're not quite as bitingly partisan as one might expect. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell released a statement saying that his party "will treat Judge Sotomayor fairly," but will "thoroughly examine her record" and judicial philosophy. Mitt Romney calls her nomination "troubling" but looks forward to a "fair and thorough hearing," Michael Steele says the GOP will "reserve judgment," and Mike Huckabee is calling her Maria. Republicans throughout the Senate are holding their fire as well. So what's with the relatively underwhelming reaction? Well, not only do Republicans have almost no chance of blocking her confirmation, but even simply giving it the old college try might be hazardous this time around because of Sotomayor's ethnicity and gender. Well played, Obama, well played.

• Mark Halperin lays out the "mistakes mainstream Republicans can make on the Sotomayor confirmation process," including appearing anti-woman, anti-Hispanic, or sore losers. [Page/Time]

• Tom Goldstein analyzes the likely Republican lines of attack, either publicly or in the press. They'll say Sotomayor "is not smart enough for the job" and that she "is a liberal ideologue and 'judicial activist.'" They'll also say she's "unprincipled or dismissive of positions with which she disagrees," and finally, they'll "characterize her as gruff and impersonable." None of these arguments are supported by the facts, so likely won't be effective. [New Republic]

• Nate Silver suspects that "Obama may be trying to carefully calibrate the amount of Republican resistance: enough that there's a chance that they'll do something that makes them look silly, but not enough for them to seriously threaten Sotomayor's nomination with a filibuster." [FiveThirtyEight]

• Jennifer Rubin says Sotomayor will "be acclaimed as a 'breakthrough' pick and will be to some degree a harder target for senators who are always looking over their shoulders for criticism of their 'insensitivity.'" [Contentions/Commentary]

• Rod Dreher at least "takes comfort" in the fact that Sotomayor "did not choose a liberal justice who can match intellects with Roberts and Scalia." [Crunchy Con/BeliefNet]

• Michael Tomasky thinks that the pick "tells us that the White House knows that even a much-discussed piece like [Jeffrey Rosen's critical profile in The New Republic] is discussed only by a few hundred or at most a few thousand people, while the rest of America says, "uh, The New what?" [Guardian UK]

• Scott Lemieux calls it "a good, solid pick," though Diane Wood, another viable candidate, might have been a more liberal choice. [Tapped/American Prospect]

• Jack Balkin thinks "the careful positioning of Sotomayor as not the most liberal candidate Obama was considering helps to make her confirmation easier and also helps establish Obama's own image as a non-doctrinaire pragmatist." [Balkinization]

• Glenn Greenwald notes that Obama's pick is a commendable example of how he "ignores and is even willing to act contrary to the standard establishment Washington voices and mentality that have corrupted our political culture for so long." There were picks that would have more easily placated the left and the right. [Salon]

• Chuck Todd and friends write that while "[s]ome Senate Democrats worry she'll be a heavier lift than others he could have nominated (like Diane Wood or Elena Kagan)," she may "blow them away," as she did President Obama, once they meet her. Plus, "would Republicans dare vote against the first Hispanic, especially after their rhetoric during the immigration debate of 2006–2007 clearly hurt them with this important voting bloc?" [First Read/MSNBC]

• Marc Ambinder hears that Obama was eying Sotomayor just days after his election. He and his advisers believe that her "hard-scrabble upbringing, combined with her tough-as-nails realism, combined with her respect for the rule of law, combined with her academic achievements, combined with her — yes — identity as an Hispanic female — provides a walking, talking counterpoint to the clubby formalism of the modern Supreme Court." [Atlantic]

• Alex Koppelman says Team Obama sought "a different kind of American story: Another woman to make the Supreme Court feel less like a boys' club, a Hispanic and, most of all, someone with an inspiring story, a rags-to-riches tale who will make the public empathize with her as much as she'll empathize with those who come before her, a quality Obama had said he'd been seeking." [War Room/Salon]

• Matt Yglesias thinks Sotomayor's life story is one that "makes you feel good about America and that still resonates as quintessentially American even though social mobility in the United States isn’t quite what we like to think." [Think Progress]

• Jonah Goldberg contends that "one advantage for Obama in picking the most left-leaning Hispanic possible/confirmable is that it actually allows the Democrats to — once again — cast Republicans as anti-Hispanic." It probably wasn't a "key factor in his decision, but you can be sure the White House will love casting conservative opposition in those terms." [Corner/National Review]

• Ed Whelan claims that "Obama abided by his dismal and lawless 'empathy' standard and, in his selection of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, picked a nominee whom he can count on to indulge her own liberal biases." [Bench Memos/National Review]

• Chris Cillizza writes that "[b]ridging the gap between the GOP and the Hispanic community just got a lot more difficult" with the Sotomayor pick, which Republicans "have fretted openly" could make them a "permanent minority." [Fix/WP]

• Michael Scherer expects conservatives to attack Sotomayor on "policy making from the bench, affirmative action, and second amendment rights." [Swampland/Time]

• Andrew Sullivan calls the pick "both a defensible policy pick and a brilliant piece of domestic politics. The visuals of Jeff Sessions laying into her will not help the GOP in exactly those places it desperately needs. Advantage: Obama." [Atlantic]

• William Kristol suspects that the "confirmation could be an interesting 'teaching moment' — a politically important teaching moment — for constitutionalists who would beg to differ from Sotomayor's vision of the appropriate role of the federal judiciary." [Blog/Weekly Standard]

• Stuart Taylor Jr. thinks the Republicans lose politically whether they go after Sotomayor or not. [National Journal]

By: Dan Amira

Filed Under: what other people think, barack obama, politics, sonia sotomayor, supreme court, the supremes

###

Friday, May 29, 2009
Pro-life Catholic leader roots for Sotomayor
Victor Morton

A prominent pro-life Catholic says he will be quietly rooting for Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be confirmed to the Supreme Court and said she may even be an improvement over retiring Justice David H. Souter - as both sides of the abortion issue try to discern her position.

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said Judge Sotomayor's record has more bright spots than conservative Catholics can reasonably expect to get from an appointee of President Obama.

"If the Republicans are smart, they would not fight this one," he told The Washington Times in an interview Thursday.

"I wish I knew more about her. But from what we know, it looks like she'll be at least a wash with Souter, and maybe we'll even see improvement."

Judge Sotomayor's record on abortion-related cases is thin and tangential. She ruled on the right of pro-life protesters to sue on charges of police brutality and on a challenge to the "Mexico City policy," which prevented U.S. government funds from going to aid organizations that counsel for or provide abortions.

The White House said that Mr. Obama did not specifically ask her about her views on the issue but that the president is confident she agrees with him on the fundamental constitutional issues.

But pro-choice groups are uncertain about Judge Sotomayor, and this week they called on senators to ask her directly how she would rule on Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that established a constitutional right to an abortion.

"We encourage the Senate Judiciary Committee to engage Judge Sotomayor and any future nominees to the Court on their commitment to the principles of Roe v. Wade," said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights. "Anything less threatens not only a woman's constitutional rights, but her life and health."

Pro-life groups also said senators should press for answers.

"We believe it is critical that senators thoroughly explore whether Judge Sotomayor believes that Supreme Court justices have the right to override the decisions of elected lawmakers on such issues as partial-birth abortion, tax funding of abortion and parental notification for abortion," said Douglas Johnson, legislative director of the National Right to Life Committee.

In the protester case, she said the pro-lifers had a right to have their police-brutality claims adjudicated by a jury rather than be summarily dismissed.

In the 2002 Mexico City policy case, Judge Sotomayor rejected claims from the Center for Reproductive Rights and its attorneys, based on both appeals court and Supreme Court precedent.

Although the decision didn't deal with the fundamental constitutional issue of abortion rights, she said in the Mexico City case that the "Supreme Court has made clear that the government is free to favor the anti-abortion position over the pro-choice position, and can do so with public funds."

Mr. Obama ended the Mexico City policy soon after taking office this year.

At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs said Mr. Obama did not ask Judge Sotomayor about her views on the legality of abortion but asked her enough to be comfortable that she sees the constitutional issues the same way he does. Mr. Obama is pro-choice.

"I think he feels comfortable in asking her to describe the way she interprets, to describe her views on that. He felt comfortable that they shared a philosophy on that interpretation," Mr. Gibbs said.

He said Mr. Obama and Judge Sotomayor discussed both unenumerated rights and what constitutes settled law.

In 2005, President George W. Bush found himself having to defend his own Supreme Court nominee, Harriet Miers, against complaints from conservatives and pro-life activists who said she lacked a paper trail to prove her conservative credentials.

Miss Miers eventually withdrew her nomination.

Mr. Donohue was not alone among conservative Catholics in calling for pro-lifers to hold their fire.

"My concern is that the people in Obama's on-deck circle are much worse," said Steve Dillard, an adviser to the 2008 presidential campaign of Mike Huckabee and founder of the site Catholics Against Rudy. He called Judge Sotomayor "the best of the worst."

"Do you really want to win this battle only to get Diane Wood?" said Mr. Dillard, a lawyer and former clerk at the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, where Judge Wood, whom he called a brilliant radical, sits.

Beyond abortion, Mr. Donohue said, he saw in Judge Sotomayor's record a history of backing religious liberty claims.

"She said it was wrong to prohibit a menorah on public ground; I like that. She talks about the religious rights of prisoners; I like that too," he said.

Mr. Donohue also mentioned a more personal angle: his identification with New York's Puerto Rican community, from which Judge Sotomayor comes. He mentioned leading the Puerto Rican Day Parade at St. Lucy's Catholic Church in Spanish Harlem and taking "groups of 15, 16 kids to Yankee Stadium."

"All these things put together, I'm gonna quietly root for her," said Mr. Donohue, who has never met the nominee.

Mr. Donohue also suggested that opposing Judge Sotomayor's confirmation would not be wise in the short term, in terms of who the alternative nominee might be.

"I am looking at this pool of likely competitors, and, far and away, Sotomayor is the best candidate," he said, adding that making too big a political fight over the Sotomayor pick "might look like we have an agenda that will not look good to many in the Latino community."

• Stephen Dinan contributed to this report.

###

May 27 2009, 3:26PM

Politics

Sotomayor and Sisterhood

Sonia Sotomayor is either an injudicious advocate of identity politics or candidly realistic about the possibility of entirely objective decision-making. "Whether born from experience or inherent physiological or cultural differences ... our gender and national origins may and will make a difference in our judging," Sotomayor observed in a now widely quoted 2002 speech at U.C. Berkeley law school. " ... I simply do not know exactly what that difference will be in my judging. But I accept there will be some based on my gender and my Latina heritage."

That different people perceive these comments differently is perhaps evidence of Sotomayor's point ("I rest my case," she might declare after reading varying interpretations of her speech offered by readers with varying political sympathies.) But the speech itself alternates between commonsensical observations about the difficulties of entirely transcending "personal sympathies and prejudices" and ideological assertions about the virtues of celebrating rather than trying to transcend demographic difference: "I wonder whether by ignoring our differences as women or men of color we do a disservice both to the law and society," Sotomayor asked, adding, in her most inflammatory statement, "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."

I can't help but wonder if Ruth Bader Ginsburg would entirely agree (at least with regard to the superiority of women's wisdom.) In the early 1970s, as founding director of the ACLU Women's Rights Project, Ginsburg led a groundbreaking battle against discriminatory laws that meted out rights or entitlements on the basis of sex and assumptions about characterological, temperamental, and intellectual differences between men and women. Ginsburg was at the vanguard of second wave, equality feminism, fighting to ensure that women would be treated as individuals under law, not stereotypic representatives of their sex (or their "gender" as Ginsburg learned to say, incorrectly but strategically, reportedly to avoid titillating or distracting the male justices who decided her cases.)

Her own life story testified to the ability of a woman to compete with men intellectually and professionally, even when held to higher standards and handicapped by the legalized discrimination in education and employment that prevailed throughout the early years of her career. When Ginsberg briefed the landmark case of Reed v Reed in 1971 and helped win the first Supreme Court decision striking down a state law on grounds of sex discrimination, law schools still discriminated against female applicants with impunity. (Sex discrimination in education was finally outlawed the following year, with passage of Title IX of the Civil Rights Act.) Ginsburg is an exceptionally brilliant and apparently driven woman who succeeded without the aid of legal protections, affirmative action programs, or social and political mandates to diversify. Recently, however, as the lone woman on the Supreme Court, she has clearly indicated her desire for company, and President Obama was under obvious pressure to choose the next Supreme Court justice partly on the basis of sex.

Women's groups have generally responded to Sotomayor's nomination with predictable, grateful enthusiasm (mitigated by a little cautious optimism from some abortion rights advocates.) "We urged President Obama to choose a qualified woman, and he did just that," Ellen Malcolm, President of Emily's list, rejoices. "What more do women want? We want a swift confirmation in the U.S. Senate ...," NOW President Kim Gandy declares. "Who's we," I can't help responding. Statements like this make me wary of my own preference for a second female justice. Does the chauvinistic reaction to Sotomayor's nomination represent a repudiation of Ginsburg's fight for equality?

The short answer is probably no, but it requires some explaining. There's an obvious tension between demanding an end to the differential treatment of men and women under law, and the stereotyping it reflected, and celebrating the president's apparent consideration of sex (or gender) in making a judicial appointment. But it's an unavoidable essential tension at the heart of virtually all civil rights movements.

Discrimination against any particular demographic group necessarily relies on assumptions that people within each group share characteristics that justify or even demand laws that treat them differently. If, for example, women are regarded as naturally pacific, physically and emotionally fragile, submissive, or inept at math and science relative to men, then laws and customs exempting them from the draft, limiting their admission to engineering schools, or disqualifying them from leadership positions in politics or the private sector are easily rationalized. Discrimination treats people as prototypes or "average" members of targeted groups. Since ideas about "average" women, and "average" African-Americans, Asians, or Hispanics are compendiums of prejudices and since none of us is merely average anyway, equality requires recognizing that each of us is an individual. Politics, however, requires solidarity. In order to inspire people to organize against their discriminatory treatment, you have to convince them that they are not only individuals but members of a collective with a common history of subordination and perhaps a common culture, forged in no small part by legal segregation.

So to suggest that female justices are apt to be more alert to the subtleties of employment discrimination against women, as Justice Ginsburg has suggested in criticizing the Court's recent rulings on pay and pregnancy discrimination, is not to gainsay the virtues of gender neutrality under law. And it was not mere sentimentalism - or inappropriate judicial empathy -- that led Ginsburg to decry the evident inability of her male colleagues to recognize the shame a junior high school girl feels when strip-searched by school administrators who suspect her of hiding advil in her underwear. How might a judge determine what constitutes an unreasonable search without the ability to understand its actual effect on the actual human being subjected to it?

Right and left, people demand empathy from judges; they differ only in choosing its beneficiaries: Anti-abortion activists want judges to display empathy for fetuses; abortion rights advocates want empathy for young women seeking abortions who are confronted by angry protesters on their way into clinics; free speech advocates want empathy for protesters effectively silenced by buffer zones. Justice is a bit like literary criticism: it requires engagement and detachment, empathy tempered by ruthlessness.

Reason itself requires " a continued ability to experience feelings," neurologist Antonio Damasio wrote in Descartes Error. Of course emotions can "cause havoc in the processes of reasoning," Damasio acknowledged. But the "absence of emotion and feeling is no less damaging ... certain aspects of the process of emotion and feeling are indispensable for rationality." Justice Scalia, whose opinions are often as angry as they are tightly argued, might agree.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/mt-42/mt-tb.cgi/9179

###

Monday, May 25, 2009
Powell says GOP must expand its 'very, very narrow base'
Sean Lengell

Former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said Sunday that he will not leave the Republican Party, although he thinks its future is threatened by a shift too far to the political right.

"I have always felt that the Republican Party should be more inclusive than it generally has been over the years," said Mr. Powell on CBS' "Face the Nation" program. "I believe we need a strong Republican Party that is not just anchored in the base, but has built on the base to include more individuals."

He said that if the party doesn't expand its "very, very narrow base," it will "watch the world go by."

"The Republican Party has to take a hard look at itself and decide what kind of party are we," he said.

But Mr. Powell dismissed criticism by former Vice President Dick Cheney that the former secretary of state was a Republican in name only and attacks by conservative radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh that he should leave the party.

"Rush will not get his wish, and Mr. Cheney was misinformed; I am still a Republican," Mr. Powell said.

Mr. Powell defended his endorsement last year of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, saying that in five decades of voting in presidential elections, he has always backed the person he thought was best qualified to lead the nation.

"Last year, I thought it was President-now Barack Obama," he said.

The former Joint Chiefs chairman also pushed back at accusations from Mr. Limbaugh that he only voted for Mr. Obama because both men are black.

"He put it in that racial context, and I thought that that was very unfortunate," Mr. Powell said.

Mr. Powell said he also voted for past Democratic presidential candidates John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter.

He also took the former vice president to task for criticizing Mr. Obama's plans to close the terrorism-suspect detention facility at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, saying that President George W. Bush also wanted to shut down the controversial facility.

"President Bush stated repeatedly to international audiences and to the country that he wanted to close Guantanamo," he said. "The problem he had was, he couldn't get all the pieces together."

Responding to Mr. Cheney's accusations that the Obama administration wants to close Guantanamo to satisfy "European intellectuals," Mr. Powell, who also supports closing the prison, said, "We're doing it to reassure Europeans, Muslims, Arabs - all the people around the world - that we are a nation of law."

Mr. Powell did mildly criticize the president for asking Congress for $80 million to close Guantanamo without first drafting a plan of what to do with the prison's 240 or so inmates.

"President Obama didn't handle it very well," he said, adding that the president's inaction gave "enough time to opponents of it to marshal their forces as to why we shouldn't do this."

On the issue of waterboarding and other controversial interrogation techniques used on captured terrorism suspects, Mr. Powell said that it's "easy now in the cold light of day to look back and say you shouldn't have done any of that."

But he added that when waterboarding was being discussed inside the Bush White House in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, he and others were assured the technique "met the standard of the law."

"If we had another attack like 9/11, say on 9/11 a year later, nobody would have forgiven us for not doing everything we could," he said.

© Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC

###

Powell fires back
By: Jonathan Martin
May 24, 2009 12:56 PM EST

In the latest round of the increasingly heated intra-GOP feud, former Secretary of State Colin Powell Sunday defended his Republican credentials and fired back at radio host Rush Limbaugh and former Vice President Dick Cheney, saying the party had to expand beyond its conservative base.

“Rush will not get his wish and Mr. Cheney was misinformed – I am still a Republican,” Powell said in a much-anticipated interview on CBS’s “Face the Nation” two weeks after Cheney suggested on the same show that the retired general had left the party by endorsing Barack Obama last fall.

Powell outlined his party bona fides, noting his votes for and services under a string of Republican presidents, and said it was not up to Cheney and Limbaugh – the radio host has kept up a steady drumbeat of criticism since Powell's cross-party endorsement last year – to determine who belonged in the GOP.

“Neither [Cheney] nor Rush Limbaugh are members of the membership committee of the Republican Party,” Powell said.

Powell suggested that there were a number of moderates in the party who shared his concerns but were hesitant to speak out “because if you are vocal you’re going to get your voice mail filled up and get lots of e-mails like I did.”

One such Republican did seem to take Powell's side of the fight today, as Former Homeland Security Secretary and Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge also joined in the criticism of Limbaugh Sunday.

“I think Rush articulates his point of view in ways that offend very many,” Ridge said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

“It's a matter of language and a matter of how you use words. It does get the base all fired up and he's got a strong following. But personally, if he would listen to me and I doubt if he would, the notion is express yourselves but let's respect others opinions and let's not be divisive.”

Ridge also split with Cheney on the vice president's claim that Obama's policies were making Americans less safe. "I do not" agree with that, Ridge plainly told CNN's John King, adding, "Yeah, I disagree with Dick Cheney."

Powell also found a less likely ally in former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who said on "Meet the Press" that "I don't want to pick a fight with Dick Cheney, but the fact is, the Republican party has to be a broad party that appeals across the country," adding, "To be a national party, you have to have a big enough tent that you inevitably have fights inside the tent."

Pointing to President Ronald Reagan's at appealing to Democrats and independents as he carried 49 states in 1984, Gingrich – himself a potential 2012 contender for the party's presidential nomination – concluded, "I think Republicans are going to be very foolish if thy run around deciding that they're going to see how much they can purge us down to the smallest possible space."

It's a point Powell made, even as reiterated his commitment to the GOP, stressing that the party had to broaden itself to stay relevant, framing his critique as the political version of a military after-action report following last year’s election.

“I think the Republican Party has to take a hard look at itself and decide what kind of party are we,” Powell said. “Are we simply moving further to the right and by so doing opening up the right of center and the center to be taken over by independents and be taken over by Democrats.”

Powell – who held up the late Jack Kemp as a model for the party, a conservative who was inclusive – also had some choice words for his two critics.

Reiterating his support for closing down the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Powell said Cheney’s opposition was an affront to Obama’s predecessor as well.

“Mr. Cheney is not only disagreeing with President Obama’s policy, he’s disagreeing with President Bush’s policy,” Powell said.

And, citing Cheney’s suggestion in a speech last week that President Obama only wanted to close Guantanamo to make Europeans happy, Powell said, “No, we’re doing it to reassure Europeans, Muslims, Arabs, all the people around the world, that we’re a nation of law.”

Lending credence to Democrats argument that moving the Gitmo detainees to American soil would not put the country in danger, Powell said he was “not terribly worried about one of these guys going to a super lock-up.”

As for Limbaugh – whose name Powell pronounced as “Lim-bow” – the former secretary of state said he was an “entertainer” but who had such influence over the party that officials had to live in fear of offending him.

He lamented that RNC Chairman Michael Steele had “to lay prostrate on the floor” apologizing to Limbaugh after criticizing him and that other GOP members of Congress had to be similarly repentant after taking on the radio host.

“Well, if he’s out there he should be subject to criticism, just as I’m subject to criticism,” Powell said.

Steele, who's giving on Tuesday what the RNC is touting as a major speech out his vision for the party, said in an interview this week with "Fox News," that "I want a party that speaks to people. The idea that we only narrowly speak to one segment of the population is boneheaded and it's not reflective of the history of this party," adding, "How is kicking Colin Powell out or kicking Dick Cheney out or Rush Limbaugh in going to feed a child who's hungry tonight?"

In an appearance on "Fox News Sunday," Karl Rove dismissed the dust-up between Cheney and Powell, since "neither one of those two are candidates," and deemed the fight "a false debate that Washington loves."

Asked if he agreed with Cheney's contention that Limbaugh was better for the Republican Party than Powell, Rove said: "Yes, if I had to pick between the two."

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

###

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-powell25-2009may25,0,715310.story

From the Los Angeles Times
Powell cautions against a GOP slide to the right
The former secretary of State aims his remarks at conservatives such as Rush Limbaugh, who he says is stifling debate on the party's future.
By Mike Dorning

May 25, 2009

Reporting from Washington — Former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell warned Sunday that ideological conservatives, particularly radio commentator Rush Limbaugh, had gained a hold over the Republican Party that risked driving the GOP into an extended exile from power.

Powell cast his warnings in unusually personal terms as he answered recent charges from two champions of the Republican right -- Limbaugh and former Vice President Dick Cheney -- that he was no longer a Republican.

"Rush will not get his wish, and Mr. Cheney was misinformed," said Powell, whose resume includes military advisor to President Reagan, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President George H.W. Bush, and secretary of State under George W. Bush. "I am still a Republican."

Powell, a moderate who has been featured prominently over the years by GOP candidates trying to broaden their appeal, repeatedly clashed with Cheney during the George W. Bush administration. He bristled at critics' charge that he had left the party.

"Neither [Cheney] nor Rush Limbaugh are members of the membership committee of the Republican Party," Powell said. "I get to make my decision on that."

Powell's public retort adds to the often acrimonious conflict between Republican moderates and conservatives that has left some centrists feeling alienated.

Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter, for example, became a Democrat last month after 28 years as a Republican senator. He cited GOP hostility to his vote in favor of President Obama's economic stimulus package, among other things. Maine's two moderate GOP senators -- Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe -- also have expressed misgivings about the atmosphere in the party.

Nor was Powell the only Republican moderate to caution the party Sunday. Former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that if the GOP wanted "to restore itself, not as a regional party but as a national party, we have to be far less judgmental about disagreements within the party."

Ridge, who served as secretary of Homeland Security under George W. Bush, reportedly was among those passed over as running mate to GOP presidential nominee John McCain last year because McCain didn't want to alienate conservatives.

Powell reflected moderates' angst in an interview on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” criticizing "diktats that come down from the right wing of the party."

Two weeks earlier, Cheney said on "Face the Nation" that Powell had "left the party" when he endorsed Obama for president late last year. "I assumed that that is some indication of his loyalty," Cheney said.

Limbaugh had begun the drumbeat on his radio show earlier this month.

"What Colin Powell needs to do is close the loop and become a Democrat, instead of claiming to be a Republican interested in reforming the Republican Party. He's not. He's a full-fledged Democrat," Limbaugh said, according to a partial transcript of a May 6 show on Limbaugh's website.

On Sunday, Powell targeted Limbaugh for the most severe criticism, accusing the radio host and his followers of using intimidation to stifle competing voices in a necessary debate on the party's future after disastrous electoral losses in 2006 and last year. Limbaugh, he said, "shouldn't have a veto over what someone thinks."

Powell cited the experience of Republican Party Chairman Michael S. Steele, who in March described Limbaugh as a mere "entertainer" with an "incendiary" radio show. When Limbaugh criticized Steele in response, Steele quickly apologized and hailed him as "a national conservative leader."

Two Republican congressmen also reversed themselves and apologized to Limbaugh after making similar comments recently, Powell noted.

Powell, like Steele, used the word "entertainer" to describe Limbaugh and said, "If he's out there, he should be subject to criticism."

He urged the party to undergo a wide-ranging "after-action review," saying its successive losses demonstrate a "leakage [that] cannot continue if the Republican Party is going to play a major role in the life of our country."

Powell cited polls showing plummeting numbers of people who identify themselves as Republicans, as well as the party's dwindling competitiveness in most of the country outside the South.

"The Republican Party has to take a hard look at itself and decide, what kind of party are we?" Powell said. "Are we simply moving farther to the right and by so doing simply opening up the right of center and the center to be taken over by independents and to be taken over by the Democrats?"

mdorning@tribune.com

"i want your soul"

Thu, 21 May 2009 07:10:09 GMT

this is what uncertainty feels like. as the first and second week of my underemployment have passed without incident and three interviews, i've found myself returning to my core: now, one might think given my birthday resolutions to resume my travel schedule and get back to those things that made me happy so many years ago that i'd have already have done some of these things, but it's taken an unduly amount of free time and the absence of the ability to spend as freely and carelessly as i might have with my next check just a pay period away, i've gotten back to the things that have made me happy. it started when i got back to reading kate christensen's jeremy thrane, a book i had read so long ago back when i wrote and thought the world an oyster.

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Tuesday, May 12:

If your usual group isn't taking you romantic places, plan some solo outings. Look for gallery openings, political events, readings -- whatever floats your boat. Bonus: You're much more approachable on your own.

well, unlike most of my posts, almost nothing has transpired at all since i last wrote except a misplaced friday night out in search of lychee martinis that resulted in -- OF COURSE -- going to z grille and then nautico and then me being so drunk i don't remember and that's it. this weekend promises better given the holiday and the hrc social tonight -- yes, it is that late, isn't it? and actually, i'm going alone so it's okay -- but i just don't know how to carry myself amongst so many of my friends when my employment picture just isn't clear. i had an interview on tuesday with a manager in my building and it lasted for an hour and a half and since i got to the interview fifteen minutes early and had to wait in the lobby -- no badge anymore to get past security -- i had to confront the humiliation of seeing so many of my coworkers and watching everyone of them giving me that sad head tilt face and offering these pathetic apologies so pitiful that i don't know what i'd even do should it happen in a social occassion. while i felt the interview went ostensibly well -- it lasted an hour and a half after all -- i'm not sure i want to work for that particular manager because she's kind of militaristic. now, i had an interview slated for the same position in brandon with which i feel more comfortable because the manager behaves in a much more reasonable way -- with much more palatable expectations -- and might make it easier to transition to other roles. however, there's also the prospect of the rather large severance package should i move on to another company. i also have a "chat" with clear channel tomorrow although i'm not getting my hopes up about that either. it's like i'm at this crossroads where i'm both afraid that my experience might not cut it but also that it's too late to learn something new. i've entered a world where i'm cloaked - quite figuratively -- in inadequate experience and education and i'm running scared because i'm naked underneath and i'm not sure that i'm enough. it goes back that fundamental insecurity that i've had all along and it's finally just coming out. well, it always comes out, but it's manifested itslef for the first time in my professional life for the first time anyway. this isn't about someone i didn't feel hot enough to approach in the bar -- sans drink in hand -- this isn't about proving myself to mother or father or uncle or aunt or cousin or grandparent. it's about proving myself to me.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/us/politics/25huntsman.html?th&emc=th

###

May 18, 2009
Gay-Friendly Utah Gov. Tapped for China Post
By Julie Bolcer

Utah governor Jon Huntsman Jr., a popular Republican moderate considered a contender for the 2012 presidential nomination, was nominated by President Barack Obama for the post of ambassador to China on Saturday. The potential appointment leaves gay rights advocates wary of his more conservative successor, Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert.

Huntsman, 49, brings to his prospective diplomatic position fluency in Mandarin garnered from years in Taiwan as a Mormon missionary. He served as ambassador to Singapore in the early 1990s.

Recently elected to his second term as governor, in February Huntsman expressed his support for same-sex civil unions and a package of basic LGBT rights proposals -- known as the Common Ground initiative -- in the Utah legislature. The legislation failed to advance this year.

Huntsman’s successor, Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert, is widely considered more conservative on social issues. In an interview on Sunday with the Daily Herald newspaper, the former Utah County commissioner downplayed the significance of gay rights issues in the state, saying they had been “blown out of proportion.”

Rep. Christine Johnson, an openly gay state legislator from Salt Lake City, expressed some concern about Herbert’s position to the Salt Lake Tribune .

"Herbert most likely will take the state back a few notches as far as being traditional and as far as being more [concerned with] state's rights and more conservative, frankly," Johnson said. "I think that is clearly reflective of a backward thought process."

As an acting governor under state law, Herbert will face a special election in 2010 to retain the post.

###

Republican Governor of Utah Selected to Be Envoy to China

By Michael D. Shear and Chris Cillizza
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, May 16, 2009

Utah Gov. Jon M. Huntsman Jr. (R) will be introduced today as President Obama's choice as ambassador to China, a source familiar with the decision said last night.

Huntsman, 48, was mentioned this spring as a potential Republican contender for the White House in 2012, and Obama's former campaign manager recently suggested that he is a rising force in the GOP.

Several Salt Lake City media outlets reported last night that Huntsman had accepted the offer to head the U.S. mission in Beijing, and that Lt. Gov. Gary R. Herbert would replace him as governor. The Salt Lake Tribune reported that Huntsman was in Washington last night, but that calls to his spokeswoman and various staffers were not returned.

Huntsman was elected in November to a second term as Utah's governor, drawing 70 percent of the vote. He served in the George W. Bush administration as deputy U.S. trade representative from 2001 to 2004 and, for President George H.W. Bush, was ambassador to Singapore. He is an expert on China, and he speaks Mandarin Chinese fluently.

Huntsman has been getting informal advice from national political consultants, helping to stoke rumors that he might be positioning himself for a run at Obama in 2012.

As governor, Huntsman has built an impressive record of economic recovery and growth. He has pushed for an overhaul of the state's health-care system, and he has lobbied for his party to do more on the environment. He has also promoted in Utah, a state where Republicans dominate, the power of bipartisanship.

"Most Americans are fed up with the idea that partisanship has stood in the way of progress," Huntsman said in an interview late last year.

David Plouffe, who managed Obama's presidential campaign, told U.S. News & World Report this month that Huntsman was "the one person in that party who might be a potential presidential candidate."

© 2009 The Washington Post Company

####

May 25, 2009
In Utah, a National Debate About the G.O.P. Plays Out on a Smaller Stage
By KIRK JOHNSON

SALT LAKE CITY — Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. of Utah, a hugely popular Republican from one of the nation’s most conservative states, made waves and headlines in recent months by suggesting that his party would need to move toward the center to start winning national elections again.

With his support for President Obama’s economic stimulus plan, his successful effort to ease the state’s method of regulating liquor sales and his advocacy of civil unions to protect same-sex couples, Mr. Huntsman ignited a debate over what the Republican Party here should be.

Now he has been chosen by the president to be the next ambassador to China. But in exiting stage left, assuming Mr. Huntsman is confirmed by the Senate, he leaves the debate he began unfinished.

Conservative Republicans say the state party will stay right of center; Democrats agree and say they think voters will respond by looking for moderate alternatives in the mold of Mr. Huntsman — perhaps Republican, perhaps even Democratic.

Scholars say that Utah’s demographic portrait is changing, especially with the fast growth of the Hispanic population, but that only time will tell where those changes go and how prescient Mr. Huntsman proved to be.

His would-be successor, Lt. Gov. Gary R. Herbert, is regarded as a staunch conservative and is already distancing himself from some of Mr. Huntsman’s positions, including support for same-sex civil unions. Supporters say Mr. Herbert, who has said he will run in a special election next year to fill out the rest of Mr. Huntsman’s second term, through 2012, will lead the party back to conservative orthodoxy. Other conservatives have said they may challenge him for the nomination if he does not.

“Conservatives are shouting from the rooftops,” said Adam Brown, an instructor in political science at Brigham Young University in Provo.

But Democrats, in expressing their own hopes, are suggesting that Mr. Huntsman was right in his take on the demographic trends that are driving the electorate. They point to the drift away from the Republican brand in last fall’s election by younger and first-time voters in Utah, and to the growing numbers of Hispanic voters, who tend to support Democrats. Mr. Herbert, they say — in tipping their hand about the likely tone of the next campaign season — is too conservative for the evolving, diverse, urbanized state that Utah is becoming.

The added wild card, both sides say, is Mr. Obama. Although he lost in Utah last fall, he won in Salt Lake County, the biggest county by population, although his victory was by a slim 296-vote margin over Senator John McCain out of about 370,000 votes cast.

By selecting Mr. Huntsman, who is lionized in much of the state and won re-election in November with 78 percent of the vote, Mr. Obama has linked his name to Mr. Huntsman’s golden glow, further spicing a stew that might blur party lines and loyalties in the special election for governor.

“Obama will be an important figure for Western Democrats,” said State Senator Patricia W. Jones, a Democrat and the minority leader. “The fact that he picked our Republican governor — not only was it the perfect choice, it says a lot about the president.”

Mr. Herbert said in an interview at the Capitol that he mostly intended to stay the course Mr. Huntsman set, especially on fiscal and economic affairs. But where they differ on social and environmental issues — Mr. Huntsman, for example, supported initiatives to fight climate change, while Mr. Herbert said he thought the science was still out on how much global warming is caused by human activity — Mr. Herbert said he will speak to and for Utahans in a way that Mr. Huntsman, whose presidential ambitions are well known, did not.

“Governor Huntsman has been talking to a national stage,” said Mr. Herbert, a 62-year-old real estate developer. “I’m talking to a State of Utah stage, and that’s a different audience.”

Mr. Huntsman declined an interview request because of the pending Senate confirmation hearings.

Geography may also partly dictate whether Utah swerves right or follows Mr. Huntsman’s playbook toward the center. Salt Lake County has elected increasing numbers of Democrats to local and state legislative offices. And it went for Mr. Obama in November. But that was more than countered by Utah County, the second-biggest county by population, where Mr. McCain got more than 75 percent of the vote. Utah County, with Provo as its largest city, is Mr. Herbert’s home base, and he served on the county commission for 14 years.

Utahans have elected Democratic governors in the past, most recently Scott M. Matheson, who served from 1977 to 1985. And the Matheson name is another potential wrinkle standing in the way of what Republicans hope will be a restoration of traditional party spirit after Mr. Huntsman.

Representative Jim Matheson, a Democrat, is the son of the former governor and a possible challenger to Mr. Herbert. He is popular among Republicans in much the same way Mr. Huntsman was among Democrats in his first election as governor in 2004 and again last fall.

Mr. Matheson represents Utah’s Second Congressional District, which comprises the eastern half of Salt Lake County, the northern tip of Utah County and 14 eastern and southern Utah counties. In each of his last four elections, he got more Republican votes each time — peaking last fall at 30 percent among people who described themselves as “strong Republicans” and at about 65 percent among “weak Republicans,” according to a study at the Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at Brigham Young. (Mr. McCain got 62 percent of the vote in Utah.)

“It’s not the doom of the Republican Party in Utah, but it does suggest some warning signs,” said Quin Monson, an assistant professor of political science at Brigham Young, who conducted the study.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

Chanel

PARIS, March 10, 2009
By Sarah Mower

In a season when coat-dresses and skirtsuits have risen to somewhere near the top of the item charts, Chanel presented a series of fashion's most poised and charming versions. That formula transmitted some of the loveliness of Karl Lagerfeld's sublime origami-paper Spring Couture collection into super-feminine white collar and cuff treatments—frothy plissé ruffs, chiffon camellias, and French maid frills encircled the neck or sleeves on soft, fitted black silhouettes. Cleverly, today's outing also achieved a rare balance between being grown-up and youthful—a note set by the casting of Karen Elson to open the show. Here was a fabulous-looking 30-year-old woman, rather than some anonymous waif.

Lagerfeld tagged the collection "Belle Brummell," a gender-reassigned quip referring to the British Regency dandy who dictated men's fashion by tying his cravats in ever more elaborate configurations. The pun also gave full permission to bring the classic Chanel white georgette blouse into play, a perfect device for subtracting the austerity from black in a distinctly Rue Cambon manner. Lagerfeld worked it every which way, in bouclé, lace, knit, satin, and paillettes, while also making a witty swerve in the direction of the season's motorcycle leathers (interpreted here in slim drop-waist dresses) and puffer jackets.

What color there was turned up in brief passages of pale green or baby pink. Admittedly, that green wasn't the most felicitous shade in the palette for clothing, but it was really there to underline the presence of the jade Deco-style pendants and neckpieces—a further echo of which could be found in the jade rings implanted in several pairs of heels. All in all, though, this wasn't one of Chanel's more playful simultaneous broadcasts to the world—more a serious reinforcement of the brand's eternal attractions.

###

Chanel's Cruz, 15 May 2009, 01:19PM
http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/daily/090515-chanel-dress-penelope-cruz-in-new-f.aspx

A CHANEL wardrobe is surely the envy of most people but for Penelope Cruz it's a reality - albeit the one of her alter ego Lena, the character she plays in the upcoming film Broken Embraces.

To be screened on May 19 at Cannes, the Pedro Almodovar-directed film sees the actress dressed by the fashion house in a combination of pieces from both past and current collections - a sheath dress from the spring/summer 1992 haute couture collection, a navy blue knitted suit from the cruise collection 2007-08 among them, as well as quilted 2.55 bags and statement CC earrings.

"Chanel is one of the best inventions of the 20th Century," Almodovar told Beverly Hills Weekly back in 1991 - when his appreciation for the label began.

Jessica Bumpus

###

NEW YORK (RESORT 2007),
MONTE CARLO (PREFALL 2007),
LOS ANGELES (RESORT 2008),
LONDON (PREFALL 2008),
MIAMI (RESORT 2009),
MOSCOW (PREFALL 2009),
VENICE (RESORT 2010).

###

Viennese Waltz
The 17th Annual Life Ball

The Vienna Life Ball isn't one of those fancy dress parties with a few C-list socialites in borrowed gowns. With 2.5 million liters of water trucked in to surround the town hall, in keeping with this year's aquatic theme, and 40,000-plus guests, Saturday night's 17th annual installment of the HIV/AIDS fundraiser could only be described as, well, splashy. Katy Perry and Róisín Murphy performed and Pamela Anderson, Eva Longoria Parker, and Bill Clinton, whose foundation was one of the event's beneficiaries, made cameos. "Many of you know me as the Nanny," said Fran Drescher, introducing Clinton. "But I'm also the public diplomacy envoy for women's health issues, which means I answer to Hillary Clinton. Do you think you can put in a good word for me, Bill?" The former POTUS laughed. "She's a tough boss," he said.

Clinton had plenty of fans, but the evening's star attractions were the costumes people put together. There were sexy pirates, mermaids and mermen, kinky sailors with anchor-shaped nipple clamps, starfish, gallons of body paint, and more underwear-as-outerwear than a Victoria's Secret catalog. "My only complaint is that every time someone asks for a picture with me I walk away covered in body glitter," Perry joked after her performance, which had her climbing out of a giant shell à la Venus. "But I've been covered in worse."

— Derek Blasberg

May 15, 2009, 4:20 pm

Depth in Venice | Chanel’s Cultural Cruise
By Stefano Tonchi
From Paris to Venice with love,

Mid-season collections have been a market reality for many years. They used to be called Cruise Collections, referring to those clothes designed for the tropical weather of winter holidays. Today, they are called pre-collections to indicate clothes that are more realistic – and, presumably, more salable — than the runway collections that are shown in February and September.

In the last few years, Karl Lagerfeld has given his Chanel mid-season collections a special twist, usually in the form of some geographic theme that figuratively and logistically moved the clothes — not to mention the journalists and buyers who follow them — out of the comfort of the Paris showrooms and into real life sets. First it was New York and then Monte Carlo. Miami and then Moscow. And last night, Venice. (We are talking Venice, Italy, not Venice, California.) Karl took each one of these trips as everything else in his life, with great connoisseurship and grandeur, going deep into the theme and each time merging the Chanel spirit with the local flavor. The production value was always outrageous — even more so in these economic times. Venice had a lot to offer for Karl’s appetite. Few cities, in fact, have more literary, visual and cinematic references to offer. The obvious starting point for this German gentleman was Thomas Mann and Luchino Visconti in Venice. Sailor dresses, striped mariner shirts and the bourgeois richness of every Visconti movie.

The location was not the expected Piazza San Marco or the glorious Caffe’ Florian (I can remember only one other designer showing here and it was Walter Albini in the mid-70’s) but the beach on the little Venice Lido in front of the “Arabian Nights” revival building of the Excelsior Hotel, which had been completely refurbished in Chanel whites and camellias for the evening dinner and disco party. Even if the original “Death in Venice” was shot at the Grand Hotel des Bains, still the Excelsior offered the same kind of cabanas, white tents and chaise lounges that you saw in the movie, only now populated by journalists and buyers. The beach was the catwalk, the dark and romantic sea at dusk the background. You could imagine Tadzio his mother and his sister emerging from the dark.

But taking Venice as a reference, Karl could not avoid his favorite century, the 1700s. The masks, the fans, the Venetian carnival fare, the musicians. The black lace, the sense of drama and a taste for the absurd brought to mind Fellini’s “8 1/2″ and “Juliet of the Spirits.” On the beach, illuminated by small dim lights, models appeared in big black capes and swimsuits. There were black lace dresses with bows and ribbons and the grand finale, one in gold lamé. The Marchesa Casati hairdos and black liquid murky makeup (executed fantastically by Peter Philips, the creative director of Chanel Beauty) left everybody speechless. The young beautiful dark haired boys walking with the models on the desolate beach added a touch of tragedy as in a Pier Paolo Pasolini movie. (And, perhaps, a specific image from the recent “Gomorrah” where boys in their swimsuits play with guns at sunset.) As the late Times architecture critic Herbert Muschamp often said, Venice is so many things, the past that is always present. Wasn’t Venice the first ever megalopolis? The first multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, overpopulated, over-stimulated, over-corrupted city in the world?

Stefano Tonchi is the editor of T: The New York Times Style Magazine.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company Privacy Policy NYTimes.com
620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

###

Cruising in Venice
Karl Lagerfeld presents Chanel's Resort 2010 collection on the banks of the Lido
5/15/2009 3:02:00 PM

(NEW YORK) Karl Lagerfeld certainly knows how to put on a cruise show, whether it's poolside in Miami or at an airplane hangar in Santa Monica (complete with models deplaning to walk the runway). For Chanel's Resort 2010 collection, Lagerfeld refused to let that nagging little economy issue bring him down, staging a luxurious sunset show on the banks of the Lido in Venice where Gabrielle "Coco" Chanel frequently visited in the 1930s. Over the course of three weeks, 10 tons of sand were brought to the venue to level the beach, while custom Chanel cane furniture, bamboo, banana trees, and 300 peonies and hydrangeas were transported by boat. The runway was made of 150 meters of natural wooden slats to simulate a boardwalk. Guests were seated in 38 vintage changing room cabins, which were covered with beige canvas and equipped with sound and light.

As far as the clothes went, Lagerfeld hit all the right notes of gothic glamour, preppy nauticalism, and even a few traces of the gilded aesthetic of his Paris-Moscou pre-fall collection. The spectacle opened with a barefoot, black maillot-clad Tanya D. swinging a cloak---Lagerfeld's signature drame coupled with the levity of the occasion where these looks will eventually be worn. The shades-on-a-stick fetish was a deliberate riff on Venetian masks. Next up? All things nautical, from sailor stripes to boatnecks and high-waisted pants. The daywear gave way to more glamorous pieces in the form of dresses rendered in gold and deep reds. Those tweed suits abounded, as always; same goes for relatively straightforward gowns. But a lace-trimmed bicycle short introduced the icing on this delectable collection--a stretch of lacy gowns in red, white and black that reminded the front row that at Chanel, it's always about renaissance.

© 2002-2007 Fashion Week Daily

###

Chanel

VENICE, May 14, 2009
By Sarah Mower

A cruise show on a boardwalk snaking along the Venice Lido with the sun about to set, gentle waves rolling in, and a whisper of a breeze to make sinuous shapes flutter in movement…it couldn't have been a more poetic or, given the times, more uniquely audacious Chanel moment. "I wanted to reinvent the mystique," said Karl Lagerfeld, talking about locating the collection in one of Coco Chanel's favorite summer haunts—she visited Venice for almost ten years beginning in 1919 and met Diaghilev here. But Lagerfeld might also have been speaking about reinstating the long-lost leisurely sensation of a fashion show as an exceptional one-off experience. The 350 guests reclining on sun beds in the famous white tented cabanas certainly felt privileged to be witnessing the extreme glamour of the designer's learned-but-light invocation of an important part of Coco Chanel's biography, one that was overlaid with passing allusions to Visconti, Fellini, the Venice carnival, and the city's art treasures.

"Coco on the Lido," as Lagerfeld called it, started with a tableau of figures in tricorne hats and cloaks—cover-ups for a play on girdles and bras as bathing suits. Next came Tatjana Patitz promenading in creamy lace as the picture-hatted Edwardian mother in Death in Venice, her sailor-suited son Tadzio and his two sisters in ingenue fan-pleated dresses trailing behind. From there, the sequence took off into matelot- and gondolier-inspired stripes, interpreted in long-line fine-knit cardigans and playful beachwear with funny red and white striped wedge booties. The references kept streaming out—a halterneck dress fashioned in plissé knit to suggest Fortuny, the deep Doge red and the golden lion motif of the city flag, shimmery sequins and glass embroidery made to imitate the light of Venice glancing off water.

But for all that, not to mention the silent-movie hair and makeup that strung it together, the show avoided too slavish a narrative. There were moments of silliness as well: The Chanel sunglasses recast as Venetian masquerade lorgnettes and the flashes of eroticism in the exposed corsetry spelled fun for the novelty-seeker. But the star pieces here were pure Chanel, un-themed save for their classic elegance: a long black column with a sexily tied narrow trailing scarf, a cream sequin-edged matching jacket and dress, and the unmistakable frothy silk blouses of the rue Cambon. In spite of all his extensive erudition on the art, culture, and personalities of the Venetian past, Lagerfeld concluded, "I don't use it to make costume. I was actually more interested in the café society of the thirties and the life Chanel lived here, which is gone now." True, but as guests wend their ways home after two days of roaming the museums, churches, bars, restaurants, and nightclubs of Venice, they're returning with tales of a happening few would believe could really take place in 2009.

###

Def in Venice
Chanel's Night to Remember
http://www.style.com/peopleparties/parties/scoop/global-051409_Chanel_After_Party/

Karl Lagerfeld with Anna Mouglalis and Rinko Kikuchi more photos ›Karl Lagerfeld and co. would have made legendary Venice resident Peggy Guggenheim proud last night, so convincingly did they turn the patio of the Hotel Excelsior Lido into a decadent dance club. "It's like a movie set, of a movie I would really want to be in," said Francesco Vezzoli. Jefferson Hack was more concerned with the math: "If just one of these bungalows is a few hundred euros for the day, how much would all of them be? Do you think you get every tenth one free?" Maybe Chanel skimped on the bar: Champagne and wine were the only alcoholic beverages on offer—not that that stopped anyone from imbibing. When Disco Inferno, a cover band that specializes in ABBA hits, took the stage, models by the dozen hit the dance floor, bumping and grinding on men in sequined jackets who were only too happy to be vastly outnumbered.

It was a scene that none who were present will soon forget, but Lagerfeld, as ever, played it cool. Later at dinner, when talk turned to his generous gift to the director of the Peggy Guggenheim Collection—he presented her with a pair of the art patron's original bat-winged shades along with their monogrammed case—he quipped, "What was I going to do with them? I have my own glasses."

— Derek Blasberg

i'm in miami bitch.

Sun, 10 May 2009 05:59:40 GMT

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Saturday, April 25:

Work or play? Left up to you, it's the latter. But don't shirk your responsibilities, even when that crush of yours sends you an email or text, enticing you away from your priorities. Deal with the serious stuff before you run off.

i've begun concerning myself about the construction of perfect days. we all understand that there's no such thing, but sometimes when one fights, struggles, and refuses to compromise, one gets so close that it becomes imperfect perfection. barack obama had one of those days two wednesdays ago: while the chattering classes attempted to box barack obama into this corner where no level of success and crisis management would satisfy their stanadard -- even as the president managed the largest post-war economic downturn, the resolution of the conflict in iraq, the ramping up of forces in afghanistan, the murderous violence on our border with mexico, the piracy attacking our ships abroad, AND an encroaching pandemic, they kept going on about the president's inability to create a new atmosphere in washington where the parties could disagree without the disagreeableness. well. as much as they managed expectations and talked about their strengths and acknowledged their challenges, they received the gift to silence their most ardent critics: the defection of senator arlen specter. honestly. talk about taking control of the news' cycle. and for anyone who has come anywhere near politics, it's clear that the timing came as part of the deal. just as like joe lieberman held the most power in the last term of the senate (by holding the majority-casting vote), arlen specter has made himself easily the most powerful senator by holding the cloture vote. now, we will see if barack obama can move his agenda with the pace of change he promised. there's nothing standing in his way. that's a perfect day.

similarly, i had a perfect day two saturdays ago: while i had to fight hard for that day, it's something i'm not going to let stand alone in this year which just got a lot harder. i awoke on south beach in the hotel catalina and we ventured to biscayne bay national state park and went sea kayaking. after that, we went to the beach to sun bathe for a bit. after that, we caught a late bite to eat at bond street's south beach outpost -- the same restaurant sara and i went to two years ago in new york -- and then to the redoubtable mansion nightclub where i had the best night out i've had in sometime as i pilfered away so much on $13 belvederes-on-the-rocks (no grey goose available) and danced along with dj miss cady and her balmain shoulders. but i suppose. i should really start with what's happening right now, because it colors the happiness with which i cherish that moment.

last monday, my boss called me into a meeting at 2:00 P.M. and told me that my position had been eliminated. of course, i believe she just stopped liking me and that our department didn't have the payroll to support both myself and "some fresh blood to go after tampa customers," a woman who has been through six positions in my time there and three positions which also have been eliminated in recent years. and i wanted to wait to update until it "sunk in" but with the severance package i received, i'm not sure it will until the money actually runs out and given that i'm spending money more carefully than an ellis island immigrant during the thirties, that should take a while. hell, i was supposed to go to an equality florida reception tonight -- $100/ticket -- where the mayor of tampa, and kevin beckner, and several others were to speak after cocktails and dinner. yeah. i'm home watching the whote house correspondents' association dinner and getting comfortable for the justin timberlake hosted episode of saturday night live.

so. miss two weeks. miss alot. yeah. i guess i had it comin'. i had a month where my sales were off plan by 60% and that birthed in me a fearful feeling. now, i did make up for it the next month by attaining 95% of my goal, but i fear the dye had been cast. so. two thursdays ago, i faced an existential crisis: should i go to miami despite the vacilations of my boss -- who would not clearly state whether or not she approved my absence in writing although i had made the plans MONTHS prior and made the request MONTHS prior -- or should i come to work on friday despite the fact that i felt my job insecure even if i stayed. eventually, thanks to technology, she gave written approval and i made my suitcase and made my way, but not without staying in the office until midnight to make sure that everything got taken care of before my absence. after this silliness, i went home and de-stressed until about two and then packed until five and then laid down for a few minutes before my father picked me up to take me to the airport.

after i touched down in ft. lauderdale, i had to wait an hour at the starbucks before sara came and retrieved me. we went back to her graduate-student dorm which -- to the untrained eye -- looked like maximum security prison with unreasonable guards and all. so the trip down judgement lane started when we had to pick up our third travel companion even though we stayed at a hotel specicially because it had a free shuttle to and from the miami airport. well, at the airport, we wasted a full half hour trying to find our friend since we kept going to the terminal area for arriving flights while our third travel companion decided to stand in the departing flight area. as i began to burst with excitement as we drove into south beach, we got kind of lost because i didn't realize the hotel we chose sat on the north part of miami beach and not south beach as i knew it. while that bumped me from the navigator spot for the trip, we arrived with lots of fanfare so much that our third travel companion jumped out of the car and went into the room while we spent another thirty minutes trying to find a parking spot. something we could have done straight-away should we not have gone to the airport. because, of course, we also chose the hotel for the nearby parking according to our third travel companion. we chose not to valet because our third travel companion said that they'd lose the car despite the fact that it saved little in the long run. yeah.

in the room, we unpacked and de-stressed and went to the liquor store to stock up. we came back and went to the free happy hour in our hotel and then went to the pool. after that, we went to kung fu sushi in our hotel. nothing special, but hot miami beach people of course. i had a lychee martini and it tasted horrible. after that, we got ready to go down to lincoln road and to see score. yeah. when we arrived, i loved the place even with half the bar closed. at midnight, the rest of the bar opened up and everyone stood around in this awestruck circle around a runway. now, i found myself quite inebriated at this point and didn't understand why no one danced seeing as the music was good and the dancefloor empty. plus, i had on my new diesels and felt particularly skinny. so i proceeded to ask those around me including a san franciscan marathon runner/banking consultant and these two girls who worked for vogue magazine. well, sara said then is wheni ruined the next thirty years of my life because i thought the san franciscan very nice, but not interested so i opted to talk to the odd new york girls who worked for vogue because, i mean, it's miami and they might know the right kind of people. but apparently, through my drunkeness, i did not notice that the san franciscan may have taken an actual liking to me although i did say that we should hang out and the san franciscan begged off. needless to say, i drank a lot more and a danced a lot more and an hour and a half later a runway show started that made no sense whatsoever and so we eventually left and then got some late night grub somewhere -- we somehow obtained sara's friend who obtained a bmw who drove us around: all of which i don['t reallly remember -- and passed out at home. the next morning, i've described: not only did we arrive at biscayne bay only to find that not enough people had signed up to warrant a snorkeling trip, but that they wouldn't let us go anyway so we went sea kayaking instead and there's photographic proof so shut the fuck up because i know it sounds like something i'd never ever do. then we came home and spent -- i don't know -- three or four full hours getting ready to go to the beach for maybe two hours of sun. yeah. frustrating. then i left because i was bored and it was dark. then, it took us FOREVER AND EVER to decide on dinner because sara and i found ourselves on the same wavelength as far as fabulous miami beach loacales while our third travel companion wanted to go to somewhere that cost under $30 for dinner. so after i dismissed this recommendation out of hand, we made a reservation for bond st. and dressed in our finery -- this evening's wardrobe called for a white blazer; when in rome -- sara and i went to bond street by ourselves. i fully expected our third travel companion not to show up. we waited forty five minutes and then decied that perhaps we should order when our third travel companion came bumbling in. first, let me set the scene: as i described two years ago bond street is ridiculous-fabulous. it's one of those sex and the city restaurants. seriously. second, the miami beach outpost remains even more singular because it's like a room full of new york in south beach. cokehead model types and all. i even got mistaken for an artist. yeah. well, not only did our third travel companion come late wearing the complete wrong thing. he came bumping into other patrons -- we sat next to a table of seriously, seriously the type of girls you see in movies and the guest of honor at their party had one of those new silver chanels that girls like that throw away -- and then spilled my drink -- a pink concoction that contained come odd fruit and sake -- all over me and my true religions. no apologies. no acknowledgement. so i ordered four as to maintain appearances and not complain. yeah. and our third travel companion was stinking drunk. five shots the third travel companion said. five shots, we'd later learn, of our grey goose, not the stoli raspberry the third travel companion bought. but i was in good spirits and we were going to mansion. we stepped to the front of the line. but we almost didn't get in because we didn't have the correct male-female ratio. after the doorman saw that i was willing to ditch our third travel companion, he let us in as to avoid a scene and while the first three rooms were boring, when we entered the main room with dj miss cady, i went crazy because not only did the music blow my mind, but it was SO MUCH BETTER than our third travel companion had made it seem like it was going to be. "it's going to be jungle house and i just hate jungle house and the reviews online said this dj sucks" and all i kept saying to our third travel companion as we danced our ass off because the music was that good that i could not leave the dancefloor was "JUNGLE!?" and then she played kid cuddy's "day and night" and robyn's "show me love" and the belvedere -- seven of them; all on the rocks -- took over and i'm told i danced with every single girl there and then with some of the guys and then insisted we leave to go to twist because i felt frustrated there, but then some song came on and i dragged them back in. then, somehow, we went to twist. i spoke in spanish to a drag queen. i don't EVER remember going in. next thing i know, i'm waking up in bed with sara. how, what, where, how?! no idea.

because i'm sure i hadn't nearly sobered up, i went to buy to bottles of champagne for the beach and became militant about getting to the beach earlier than we did the day before at all costs. so when i got back, i acted particulary belligerent and we got to the beach at a reasonable hour and i got lots of sun and watched lots of gorgeousness and drank one and a half bottles of champ -- half the bottle went to our third travel companion who earlier had insisted that the only thing the third travel companion may have wanted to drink ALL DAY on the beach was mountain dew -- and afterward we came back and changed to go to nikki beach. more overpriced sushi -- the leitmotif of my weekend for sure -- and then i wanted to go home because i didn't want to spend anymore money, but the third travel companion insisted we pay twenty dollars to go inside although no one was there and the music comprised itself of overly long transitions and jungle house. yeah. so then, i did two shots, couldn't get into the party, and went back to the hotel. of course, the next morning, i was up and adam in a reasonable amount of time, but the third travel companion rushed us because of the airport although, once again, there was a free shuttle going there that would have allowed sara and i not only to sleep in, but stay in south beach to shop. anyway, after we got done dropping our third travel companion off, we went to aventura mall -- have you heard of adolfo dominguez??! -- and then i fell asleep on sara's couch and then i came home.

the next day, my boss made me update my contacts and i thought something was wrong and it proved right in just one week. anyway. that's about it. on friday, i went out with my coworker -- now, former coworker -- and got hammered on a bottle of merlot at happy hour and then came home and went on a website to meet this person who wanted to hook up at one o clock in the morning, so i went to dinner and drinks at z grille with my high school friend (despite our issues), and then went to nautico where i met up with my coworker again (they had gone to the baseball game in the interim): well, i don't know what i did or said, but not only did my high school friend walk out in a huff leaving me, but i remember showing my coworker and partner the nasty text message my friend sent me about them. finally, i went home with one of the members of the four-gy i had a few weeks back. yes, i was ossified drunk (another bottle of champ at z grille, two grey goose rocks at nautico and a shot somewhere in the mix). i guess i felt particularly emboldedned since i had my yearly physical and all tests came back clear. and yeah, it was another night of debauchery. plus.

May 06, 2009
Maine Gov. Signs Marriage Bill
By Michelle Garcia

Maine governor John E. Baldacci signed legislation Wednesday that will enact marriage equality for the fourth state in New England.

After the house of representatives approved the bill Tuesday, as the senate had last Thursday, it was uncertain whether Baldacci would support the measure.

"I have followed closely the debate on this issue," Baldacci said in a statement. "I have listened to both sides, as they have presented their arguments during the public hearing and on the floor of the Maine senate and the house of representatives. I have read many of the notes and letters sent to my office, and I have weighed my decision carefully. I did not come to this decision lightly or in haste."

There is still the threat of a "people's veto," which would initiate a referendum on the marriage law.

###

Maine Becomes 5th State to Allow Same-Sex Marriage
Gov. Balducci Promptly Signs Bill, NH could quickly follow
By GLENN ADAMS

The Associated Press
AUGUSTA, Maine

Maine's governor signed a freshly passed bill Wednesday approving gay marriage, making it the fifth state to approve the practice and moving New England closer to allowing it throughout the region.

New Hampshire legislators were also poised to send a gay marriage bill to their governor, who hasn't indicated whether he'll sign it. If he does, Rhode Island would be the region's sole holdout.

The Maine Senate voted 21-13, with one absent, for a bill that authorizes marriage between any two people rather than between one man and one woman, as state law currently allows. The House had passed the bill Tuesday.

Democratic Gov. John Baldacci, who hadn't previously indicated how he would handle the bill, signed it shortly afterward. In the past, he said he opposed gay marriage but supported civil unions, which provide many benefits of marriage.

Debate was brief. Senate President Elizabeth Mitchell, D-Vassalboro, turned the gavel over to an openly gay member, Sen. Lawrence Bliss, D-South Portland, to preside over the final vote.

Republican Sen. Debra Plowman of Hampden argued that the bill was being passed "at the expense of the people of faith."

"You are making a decision that is not well-founded," warned Plowman.

But Senate Majority Leader Philip Bartlett II said the bill does not compel religious institutions to recognize gay marriage.

"We respect religious liberties. ... This is long overdue," said Bartlett, D-Gorham.

Maine is now the fourth state in New England, to allow same-sex marriages. Connecticut enacted a bill after being ordered to allow gay marriages by the courts, and Vermont passed a bill over the governor's veto.

New Hampshire's House was also expected to vote on a bill Wednesday and send it to Gov. John Lynch, a Democrat.

Massachusetts' high court has ordered the state to recognize gay marriages. In Rhode Island, a bill to legalize same-sex marriage has been introduced but is not expected to pass this year.

Outside New England, Iowa is recognizing gay marriages on court orders. The practice was briefly legal in California before voters banned it.

Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Copyright © 2009 ABC News Internet Ventures

###

Maine Gay Partners Get Family Medical Leave Rights
by 365Gay.com Newscenter Staff

Posted: June 6, 2007 - 11:00 am ET

(Augusta, Maine) Legislation has been passed in Maine allowing gay and lesbian workers to take time off to care for a sick partner or child.

The amendment to the Family Medical Leave Act makes Maine one of the few states to mandate employers grant limited time off to workers to care for sick kin.

Maine already has a limited domestic partner law.

Under the changes to the Family Medical Leave Act, to be eligible for time off a worker must have been employed for 12 consecutive months by the same employer. Workers can receive up to 10 weeks of family medical leave under the law.

The bill passed both houses with wide support. In the House it was approved by a vote of 95-41 and in the Senate by 28-5.

A spokesperson for Gov. John Baldacci said the governor will sign the measure.

“This was the fair thing to do for LGBT Mainers, and shows that the legislature understands that LGBT people are not just workers, but also have families,” said Betsy Smith, executive director of EqualityMaine.

“Now LGBT employees, who still cannot marry their partners, won’t have to choose been taking care of a sick family member and keeping their jobs.”

During hearings on the bill, members of the Labor Committee heard moving testimony from people whose domestic partners had died.

Sandy Osterby’s partner of 23 years, Donna, passed away after a grueling year’s battle with lung cancer.

Osterby had to use her sick and vacation time, and then rely on the kindness of her co-workers, in order to be with Donna in her time of greatest need.

“I was extremely fortunate to have caring, compassionate and generous co-workers who donated their vacation time to a catastrophic leave pool so that I could spend the last weeks of my partner’s life caring for her,” said Osterby. “But gay and lesbian workers should not have to rely on the generosity of others to care for their families.”

Over 4,000 Maine households are comprised of same-sex couples, as counted by the 2000 U.S. census. Many of these families are raising children said Smith. Nearly 30 percent of female partner households have a child under 18, as do about 20 percent of male partner households, she said.

©365Gay.com 2007

###

GOP Senator Specter's Party Switch Gives Obama a 100-Day Gift
By MASSIMO CALABRESI AND JAY NEWTON-SMALL Massimo Calabresi And Jay Newton-small
Tue Apr 28, 2:55 pm ET

Pennsylvania Republican Senator Arlen Specter turned the 111th session of Congress upside down Tuesday, announcing that he will switch parties and become a Democrat. The move was the product of weeks of intensive negotiation between Specter and Democrats in the Senate and the White House, and it favorably alters the balance of power for President Obama as he is facing tough votes in the months ahead on health care, energy and budget bills. "We are thrilled to have you," Obama reportedly told Specter on the phone just a few minutes after he learned of the switch Tuesday morning.

In a statement, Specter said, "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans." (Read Senator Arlen Specter's statement.)

Specter was facing a nearly impossible primary challenge from his conservative nemesis, Pat Toomey, whom he defeated by just 17,146 votes (or 1.6% of the vote) in 2004. Specter's unpopular vote in support of Obama's stimulus package in February drove many of Pennsylvania's diminishing Republican votes to Toomey, giving him an edge of 41%-27% in one recent poll. This came after some 200,000 Republicans had switched parties to vote in the Democratic presidential primary last spring and have not switched their party registrations back. The combination made it extremely unlikely that a moderate like Specter would emerge victorious from a GOP primary next year. "I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate," Specter said in his statement. "I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania."

The switch dramatically alters the political terrain for Obama as his second hundred days in office begins - and as his allies in Congress try to turn his campaign promises into legislative realities. With the increasing likelihood that Minnesota's Al Franken will be seated in the Senate after his contested election last fall against incumbent Republican Norm Coleman, the Democrats will reach the all-important 60-vote threshold that could allows them to override any Republican filibuster, at least in theory. "Senator Specter will strengthen the hand of mainstream, pragmatic Democrats, particularly on health care," Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said. Democrats have not had a reliable, working fillibuster proof majority since FDR in the 1930s, though Specter made it clear in his statement that "my change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans." (Read more about a filibuster-proof majority)

Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, the most conservative Democrat in the caucus, admitted that the switch does not mean an automatic 60 Democrats on every vote. "The switch shows just how diverse a caucus we are," Nelson said, "adding his only surprise was that Specter's growing doubts took so long to percolate. "We worked closely together on the stimulus and I saw it then."

While acknowledging that his party has to broaden its appeal, Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, claimed the Dems' potential 60-vote majority could actually make recruitment easier for the GOP. "They'll say we may be the only thing between them and a radical agenda," Graham said. The switch "puts a lot of pressure on Red State Democrats who campaigned on platform of bipartisanship. I hope they will live up to the rhetoric and join us when things get radical."

Specter's move comes after a career of sometime high profile maverick stands. He cast a pivotal vote against the confirmation of Judge Robert Bork for the Supreme court and voted "not proven, therefore not guilty" on the impeachment of Bill Clinton and is a rare pro-choice Republican. A sometimes abrasive, but highly effective Senator, he has consistently secured valuable projects for Pennsylvania, protecting shipyards and funding university research. His latest move to dodge political death mirrors his surviving multiple battles with life-threatening disease, as a survivor of open heart surgery, brain cancer and lymphoma.

Several Republicans greeted the news with dismay. "I think this is about Senator Specter's sense of political preservation," said Senator John Cornyn of Texas. "Its a purely personal decision." Added Senator John McCain, "I regret it."

Copyright © 2009 Time Inc. Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

###

April 25, 2009
White House Memo
Obama Takes 100th-Day Hoopla and Runs With It
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
WASHINGTON — When it comes to the whole 100 Days hoopla, President Obama and his team were against it before they were for it.

To hear the White House tell it, Mr. Obama never much cared for the idea of marking his 100th day in office, next Wednesday. A trumped-up journalistic convention, senior aides called it. (O.K., they have a point.)

“Not a ton different than the 99th,” declared Mr. Obama’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs. “A Hallmark holiday,” said a senior adviser, David Axelrod.

But even as they professed their disdain for the pseudomilestone, Mr. Obama’s advisers have quietly embraced it. Through a meticulously planned schedule — a town-hall-style meeting in St. Louis on Wednesday, followed by a prime-time news conference — and sophisticated management of the news media, the White House is harnessing the insatiable public appetite for all things Obama and turning the 100 Days moment to the president’s advantage.

“Amazing Candid Shots of Obama,” screams the headline in Slate, the online magazine. No wonder the images are amazing; they were taken by Mr. Obama’s official photographers, released on Mr. Obama’s 81st day in office. There Mr. Obama is with the first lady, sharing a private moment, foreheads touching. There he is, midair, playing basketball with his education secretary. There he is again, in Strasbourg, France, deep in conversation with Mr. Axelrod.

“It’s like that old borscht belt thing where the comedian is standing in front of the audience saying, ‘Stop applauding!’ and then he’s motioning them to keep clapping,” said Richard Stengel, the editor of Time magazine. “They’re doing that same thing, saying, ‘This isn’t important, but it’s important.’ ”

Mr. Stengel should know. His magazine is featuring its own 100 Days spread, including a cover story by Joe Klein, written with obvious cooperation from the White House, and plans for 100 pictures online.

Mr. Obama began trying to tamp down the expectations for his presidency within hours of his election. “We may not get there in one year or even one term,” he declared, to tens of thousands of cheering supporters that November night in Grant Park in Chicago. It was an unmistakable echo of another young new president, John F. Kennedy, who proclaimed on his Inauguration Day, “All this will not be finished in the first 100 days, nor will it be finished in the first 1,000 days.”

But now that the 100th day is upon the White House, it makes political sense for the administration to engage. Polls (yes, the 100th Day polls are out — who cares if Friday was only the 95th day?) show that roughly two-thirds of the public approves of the job Mr. Obama is doing. So there is no reason for the White House to run away from the occasion.

Instead, Mr. Obama’s advisers are trying to “manage it,” in the words of one senior official, by putting forth their most effective pitch man — the president — to deliver a progress report to the nation. Mr. Obama will make the case that while he has begun tackling the most challenging problems facing the nation, there is still much work to be done.

“Clearly, they have made the judgment that they are going to have enough attention from the American people that it is smart for him to communicate directly,” said Anita Dunn, a Democratic media strategist who has informally advised the White House on its 100th Day strategy

And indirectly. With so many news outlets preparing 100 Days packages, top aides to Mr. Obama are trying to shape the coverage. Mark W. Lippert, a top foreign policy adviser, sat down with a small group of reporters Friday; Mr. Axelrod entertained questions from columnists in the Roosevelt Room on Wednesday.

While it is true that 100 days is not enough time to assess a presidency, Mr. Obama is not governing in ordinary times. He has come to power in a moment of crisis, with an agenda more ambitious than any president since the one who established the 100 Days convention, Franklin D. Roosevelt. So perhaps it is appropriate to take note.

“If I were writing about George H. W. Bush, I don’t think I’d spend two seconds on his first 100 days; I’d say the same thing about Nixon,” said Michael Beschloss, the presidential historian. “But in this case, if you’re imagining a future historian in a distant moment looking back on an Obama presidency, it’s very hard to imagine where what he’s doing for the first three months does not loom very large.”

On Bill Clinton’s 100th day, he was photographed with the king of Spain, and some Lubavitcher rabbis dropped by to present him with a skullcap inscribed with his name, in Hebrew and English. George W. Bush marked his 100th day on the 101st (the 100th was a Sunday) by inviting members of Congress to the White House for lunch to “celebrate our 100 days of working together.” Fewer than half showed up.

The Obama 100 Days hype seems unparalleled. The news media learned long before Inauguration Day that the Obamas sell. Now universities, advocacy groups, public relations firms, even comedians are getting into the 100th Day act.

“Nobel Laureates Critique First 100 Days,” came one e-mail pitch, offering up interviews. The National Jewish Democratic Council will hold a conference call Monday to discuss “the Jewish perspective” on the occasion. In Manhattan, the humorist Andy Borowitz is the featured entertainer at the 92nd Street Y’s 100th Day event. Human Rights Watch issued a report Friday on Mr. Obama’s “100-Day record on counterterrorism reform.” New York University held a conference. Politico published a glossy magazine.

Can 100th Day mugs be far behind?

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: April 28, 2009
An article on Saturday about the White House’s strategy for dealing with coverage of President Obama’s first 100 days in office referred incorrectly to the administration’s release of official photographs to Slate, the online magazine. The images, though published by Slate last week, were released on Mr. Obama’s 81st day in office; they were not among the photographs handed out by the White House just in time for the 100 days coverage.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

Tuesday, Apr. 28, 2009
Statement from Senator Arlen Specter

I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania's economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords' switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy's statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

Click to Print Find this article at:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1894384,00.html

Copyright © 2009 Time Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

###

April 29, 2009
Op-Ed Contributor
We Didn’t Have to Lose Arlen Specter
By OLYMPIA SNOWE
Washington

IT is disheartening and disconcerting, at the very least, that here we are today — almost exactly eight years after Senator Jim Jeffords left the Republican Party — witnessing the departure of my good friend and fellow moderate Republican, Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, for the Democratic Party. And the announcement of his switch was all the more painful because I believe it didn’t have to be this way.

When Senator Jeffords became an independent in 2001, I said it was a sad day for the Republicans, but it would be even sadder if we failed to confront and learn from the devaluation of diversity within the party that contributed to his defection. I also noted that we were far from the heady days of 1998, when Republicans were envisioning the possibility of a filibuster-proof 60-vote margin. (Recall that in the 2000 election, most pundits were shocked when Republicans lost five seats, resulting in a 50-50 Senate.)

I could have hardly imagined then that, in 2009, we would fondly reminisce about the time when we were disappointed to fall short of 60 votes in the Senate. Regrettably, we failed to learn the lessons of Jim Jeffords’s defection in 2001. To the contrary, we overreached in interpreting the results of the presidential election of 2004 as a mandate for the party. This resulted in the disastrous elections of 2006 and 2008, which combined for a total loss of 51 Republicans in the House and 13 in the Senate — with a corresponding shift of the Congressional majority and the White House to the Democrats.

It was as though beginning with Senator Jeffords’s decision, Republicans turned a blind eye to the iceberg under the surface, failing to undertake the re-evaluation of our inclusiveness as a party that could have forestalled many of the losses we have suffered.

It is true that being a Republican moderate sometimes feels like being a cast member of “Survivor” — you are presented with multiple challenges, and you often get the distinct feeling that you’re no longer welcome in the tribe. But it is truly a dangerous signal that a Republican senator of nearly three decades no longer felt able to remain in the party.

Senator Specter indicated that his decision was based on the political situation in Pennsylvania, where he faced a tough primary battle. In my view, the political environment that has made it inhospitable for a moderate Republican in Pennsylvania is a microcosm of a deeper, more pervasive problem that places our party in jeopardy nationwide.

I have said that, without question, we cannot prevail as a party without conservatives. But it is equally certain we cannot prevail in the future without moderates.

In that same vein, I am reminded of a briefing by a prominent Republican pollster after the 2004 election. He was asked what voter groups Republicans might be able to win over. He responded: women in general, married women with children, Hispanics, the middle class in general, and independents.

How well have we done as a party with these groups? Unfortunately, the answer is obvious from the results of the last two elections. We should be reaching out to these segments of our population — not de facto ceding them to the opposing party.

There is no plausible scenario under which Republicans can grow into a majority while shrinking our ideological confines and continuing to retract into a regional party. Ideological purity is not the ticket back to the promised land of governing majorities — indeed, it was when we began to emphasize social issues to the detriment of some of our basic tenets as a party that we encountered an electoral backlash.

It is for this reason that we should heed the words of President Ronald Reagan, who urged, “We should emphasize the things that unite us and make these the only ‘litmus test’ of what constitutes a Republican: our belief in restraining government spending, pro-growth policies, tax reduction, sound national defense, and maximum individual liberty.” He continued, “As to the other issues that draw on the deep springs of morality and emotion, let us decide that we can disagree among ourselves as Republicans and tolerate the disagreement.”

I couldn’t agree more. We can’t continue to fold our philosophical tent into an umbrella under which only a select few are worthy to stand. Rather, we should view an expansion of diversity within the party as a triumph that will broaden our appeal. That is the political road map we must follow to victory.

Olympia Snowe is a Republican senator from Maine.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

Wednesday, April 29, 2009
TOOMEY: Arlen Specter's betrayal
Pat Toomey

COMMENTARY:

Sen. Arlen Specter's switch to the Democratic Party has implications on a personal and national scale.

For Pennsylvanians, who must decide who will represent us in the U.S. Senate next year, the stakes are personal. A central question will be whether Mr. Specter can be trusted on anything.

In recent weeks, Mr. Specter has made numerous statements about how important it is to deny Democrats the 60th seat in the U.S. Senate and how he intended to remain a Republican to prevent one-party dominance in Washington. What Pennsylvanians have to ask themselves now is whether Mr. Specter is, in fact, devoted to any principle other than his own re-election.

On that question, there is much evidence. Mr. Specter began his political career as a Democrat, switched to the Republican side out of political convenience and has switched back for the same reason. On issue after issue, he has changed his position over the years to benefit his political calculations.

The most recent example is card check, which denies workers a secret ballot in labor-union elections. First Mr. Specter supported it, then he opposed it when faced with Republican primary opposition, and now, who knows? That's something Pennsylvania Democrats will have to contend with. Do they really want to nominate someone who will switch his principles on a dime?

If Mr. Specter's political expediency were only a personal matter, it would hardly be worth noting. However, the national implications are more serious. By switching parties, Mr. Specter guarantees the very thing he has vocally warned against: a one-party Democratic monopoly of the federal government.

Just a few months ago, Mr. Specter said avoiding one-party dominance was vital for our country. He was right then. Unfortunately, his desire for political self-preservation trumped his previously stated view of the vital interests of our country.

But Pennsylvania voters will have the ability to correct this situation in next year's election. I believe the Democratic Congress' reaction to the current recession has brought our country to a crossroads. On one path, we have the most massive growth in federal spending in our nation's history. The biggest debt in history. Taxpayer-funded bailouts of failed Wall Street firms and Detroit automakers, the likes of which we have never before seen. And the promise of massive tax increases next year.

Mr. Specter, of course, voted in favor of all of this when he was still a Republican, so in that sense, not much will change. But he will embolden House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to take our country even further down the road to a European-style welfare state.

The other path is more familiar to Americans. It is the path of limited government, free enterprise and personal responsibility, which have been the hallmarks of America's success for generations. That is the path that will lead us to economic recovery. It is the path I will advocate in my campaign for the U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania.

I do not believe that the rejection of the Republican Party in the 2006 and 2008 elections was a rejection of those principles. Rather, too many Republicans in Washington became enamored with, and indeed corrupted by, big government. After all, the "Bridge to Nowhere" was a Republican-sponsored earmark.

Voters threw the Republicans out of Congress because they didn't like the Republicans' performance. And there was much to dislike.

Unfortunately, the pendulum has swung much too far in the other direction, with record-shattering wasteful spending increases. Now, the Specter-empowered Democratic supermajority will go even further.

In 2010, voters will say "Enough is enough." In the parlance of economics, there will be a "market correction." Americans who voted for the nice-sounding but content-free notion of "change" in 2008 will vote again to say "not so fast; even more power in the hands of Washington politicians is not the change we had in mind." And when Pennsylvanians look at Arlen Specter's role in this political power grab, they will reject him, too.

Pat Toomey is a former Republican member of the House of Representatives and is a candidate for his party's nomination to the U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania.

###

Specter loses seniority on committees
By: Manu Raju
May 5, 2009 10:38 PM EST

Sen. Arlen Specter lost big under a resolution approved by the Senate Tuesday night: He won't be able to retain his seniority on five committees this Congress.

In announcing his switch to the Democratic Party last week, Specter said that Democratic leaders assured him that he would be treated as if he were elected as a Democrat 29 years ago — essentially allowing him to leapfrog most Democrats and put himself in line to become a committee chairman if he wins reelection in 2010. Several Democrats have taken exception to the notion that Specter would be taking possession of their prized real estate.

By voice vote on Tuesday night, the Senate sided with that sentiment in approving a resolution that adds Specter to the Democratic side on Judiciary, Appropriations, Veterans Affairs, Aging and Environment and Public Works — expanding Democrats' majority on those panels.

Specter will be treated as the most junior member of those panels — putting him last in line in speaking time during committee hearings and limiting his influence on those panels. When the Judiciary Committee considers Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Specter will be the last Democrat to speak, and he's last in line to chair the committee if the current chairman, Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.), steps down.

The move may have come as shock to Specter. Speaking on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday, he said that it's an "entitlement" for him to retain his seniority on those committees.

"I was elected in 1980. I think that's not a bribe or a give for something extraordinary," he said. "I'll be treated as a Democrat as if I was elected as a Democrat."

A Democratic aide said Tuesday night that Specter's fate was sealed by comments he made suggesting that he wanted Norm Coleman to win the disputed Minnesota Senate race and by senior Democrats who were angry at the prospect of losing seniority to Specter.

© 2009 Capitol News Company, LLC

the watchmen

Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:10:24 GMT

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Friday, April 10:

An fanciful breeze is blowing in your life and it's creating the most preposterous ideas in your head. Warning: Don't let crazy romantic ideas override the rationality and pragmatism that you tend to lack on a good day. Go with it, but allow the feelings to come out and play without committing too soon.

although i could let this post devolve into all the ways the film, "the watchmen", has made me attracted to the selfsame people in different ways than i even thought imaginable -- seriously, even with an ugly hair piece, supposed weight gain, and awkward makeup/wardrobing -- i will focus on the things currently occupying my mental space at the moment. now, if this is what it felt like for all of those people raving over obama, i finally get. i have seriously caught balmainia: i know, i'm a follower and i'm easily influenced, but it can't be that because as i perused my fashion magazines this weekend, they were oddly devoid of advertising for this brand and sparsely covered even in editorial. and it's WILDLY expensive. that's the allure for me. i just got my hands on a vintage stephen-sprouse-ian grey and red leopard print tie with which i'm ardently looking for an outfit to wear -- methinks a white shirt with grey pinstripes and a substantial tropical wool pant -- but seriously it has transported me back to those days as a child of the eighties enthralled with the over-the-top stylings of michael jackson and seriously that there's a jacket CALLED the "michael jackson" just sets me off even more especially since in my crazy mind, i believe christopher decarnin somehow inspired the king of pop to hold off on selling his own jackets that served as the jumpboard for many of the jackets from spring and fall. how intensely fabulous would a woman have to be to actually snap up one of those authentic "michael jackson" jackets to intersperse with her balmain "michael jackson" jacket. yes, these are my obsessions of the moment. and in a completely opposite vein? marriage equality: i have prayed and prayed for this day. the day when this issue became a non-issue. as most people know, i'm completely addicted to political talk shows and i thought that last sunday, i'd get to see some old crossfire-esque debating over the marriage issue because of the four advances -- iowa, vermont, obviously, but also d.c. recognizing those done in other states and the new york governor proposing it -- that the movement had had. well. thank goodness for piracy. an economic meltdown. continuing problems at home and abroad because literally, everyone had more important things to talk about -- with the odd exception of cnn's "state of the union" -- and that's just wonderful. as i've blogged about earlier, schwarzenegger really dealt the strongest blow in his vaciliations on the marriage equality issue in his state because california could have done what vermont did so long ago: pass marriage equality into law without the mandate of the courts. well, we all see how that played out but that issue could have gotten neutralized by schwarzenegger because if we had a very popular republican supporting that issue, we would have seen the ardent opposers pushed to the fringes. as it stands, it's still a potent issue -- millions of dollars get raised on both sides -- but it's quickly becoming a non-issue. new york's the next test. if it passes. and if it, too, barely gets "above the fold" coverage, we will have witnessed a sea-change. then we just need doma repealed as promised.

now, this isn't an easy transition, but last night, the exsomeone came over to watch my sunday primetime shows -- since the exsomeone returend from spring break, the exsomeone has had company as a childhood neighbor has found a job down here as the executive chef for the green iguana but has not yet found a place to stay -- and although we spent much of the time during the latest episode of "brothers and sisters" creating an episode of a different order, i did manage to have my eyes open enough to witness the scene between kevin and scotty and chad and felt myself so re-affirmed -- although it's a choice that neither the exsomeone nor i would have EVER made -- that the most beige, boring, conventional marriage on the show remains that between kevin and scotty and not that between the matriarch and her cheating husband, the oldest daughter, now divorced, the next oldest daughter whose engaged in an emotional affair despite being married to rob lowe, and the brother who has LEFT THE COUNTRY with his wife and child uncared for. honestly. anywho. another glimmer that an issue may become and non-issue perhaps? but yes, last night, the exsomeone came over and came over and that stood as an unexpected turn since i hadn't seen the exsomeone since spring break really. where should i start? well, the hrc social really presented a lot of opportunity to expand my community roots because the entire leadership team of hrc got dismantled last year mostly to work on local/statewide/national campaigns and went to work for those candidates that won and yeah, that leaves a power vacuum and a great way for me to expand my network ever further beyond the two city chambers, the young black professional set, and the advertising world. the only problem with the hrc social came with my high school friend and the odd competition/petty jealousy that seemed to sprout when i got this pink-polo-shirted attendee to engage me in conversation when my high school friend so clearly could not. and although i felt moderately miffed at this silliness, i wound up with my high school friend at ceviche spinning drunk and passed out moments after the scallops hit my throat and my high school friend dropped me off at home.

on friday, i spun though work wonderfully liberated since the grey goose clearly had not siffened through my system and i had lunch with the hot latin sales assistant and we caught up on our lives -- i foolishly spoke about my "live wire" status; the hot latin sales assistant ruminated about the professional cheerleader that the hot latin sales assistant currently counts as a significant other. so much so that they're contemplating moving in with each other. after one month. yeah. and it's been almost a month since we've supposed to have had lunch. not that anything even remotely would even happen. i'm just saying. that timing sucks. but during lunch, the hot latin sales assistant invited me to a post-poned birthday party given by the beautiful people from my job in the hot latin sales assistant's honor. i said yes, but didn't really know because i had to work at pier one and would not go by myself and yeah. of course, i completely rearranged everything and went shopping and enlisted my lawyer friend and made sure that i could go and yeah: although i was only half-invited and no one had my personal cell phone number and i thought it could be cancelled, re-scheduled, or held somewhere else, when we arrived at bella's, it was as if i walked into a grand ballroom full of friends and the night went off seamlessly and after that, my lawyer friend and i went to aquaknox (a bust, but beautiful) and ocean prime (not a bust, but woefully expensive for cocktails) and then since the lawyer and i had spoken about the stockbroker and how the lawyer became a client of the stockbrokers as a favor to me, i sent an inappropriate text message to the stockbroker and then went a shook my booty at the only bar in town and came home and passed out.

the next week sped by without much incidence. my boss had been off so not much happened besides me inching closer to my sales goals which made me feel good. at pier one, i had to send an employee home and faced other useless nonsense. oh yeah, and the hot latin sales assistant raved about how the mother just absolutely loved me which made me feel good. on thursday, i had to go to the other only bar in town to support a friend doing an amatuer night drag show and encountered this med student who was so cocky -- literally and figuratively -- that i found myself oddly intrigued althoguh such pansexuality rarely intrigues me outside of drunkeness. and my high school friend once again marshalled me out of that bar althoguh i had a good time. and since i clearly had not lost enough weight for my nudie jeans (to be worn sans blazer, cardigan, or anything) i did not have fun at the only bar in town. on friday, i read my fashion magazines -- what's up with everyone shunning balmain (the label) while completly borrowing the look in their editorials? i mean, it was on the cover of bazaar last month with gisele in imitation balmain jeans and not one single piece featured on their pages -- and then on saturday, i spent most of the day shopping for miami and being drunk at the p.r. girl's cookout/party for her mother who came to town to visit. finally, i was supposed to go to the beach after our store meeting yesterday, but that fell through when the p.r. girl did not send me a text message. i loafed around all day until the exsomeone decided to come over to watch the sunday night shows and we all know what happened after that. today, we hosted education and career fair and i ran into kevin beckner's other half and i asked for cheaper tickets to the gala affair featuring the mayor of tampa and kevin beckner himself. we'll see where this goes. i will say i had never seen kevin beckner's other half in full police regalia and it was a site to behold. so.

April 17, 2009
Paterson Introduces a Same-Sex Marriage Bill
By JEREMY W. PETERS
Gov. David A. Paterson introduced a bill on Thursday to legalize same-sex marriage, vowing to personally involve himself in the legislative debate at a level that is rare for a chief executive in New York.

Throwing the weight of his office behind legislation that still faces considerable obstacles in Albany, Mr. Paterson said he would leverage the personal relationships he developed over two decades in the State Senate to see the bill voted on — and passed. The vote is expected to turn on the thinnest of margins in the Senate, and some advocates say Mr. Paterson’s direct involvement could prove pivotal.

At a news conference in Manhattan on Thursday, Mr. Paterson, a Democrat, invoked the abolitionist movement of the 1800s, the writings of Harriet Beecher Stowe and the Supreme Court’s Dred Scott decision to argue that New York had neglected civil rights for gays and lesbians for too long. “I’m putting a stop to it,” he said. “We have a duty to make sure equality exists for everyone.”

The announcement came amid growing activity around the country on same-sex marriage: Iowa and Vermont have legalized the practice in the past month, and the New Hampshire State Senate has been debating it this week. Massachusetts and Connecticut already have gay marriage, and a campaign is under way to extend it across New England by 2012.

In New York, the State Assembly passed a same-sex marriage bill in 2007 by a vote of 85 to 61, a margin expected to widen when the measure is reconsidered this spring. But the path in the Senate is less clear: 32 votes are needed, and Democrats say about 25 of their 32 members now support it. So the outcome will most likely hinge on whether Mr. Paterson and other advocates can persuade Republican senators reluctant to break ranks with their leaders to back the bill.

Gay-rights advocates expressed confidence on Thursday that Governor Paterson’s personal involvement could make a difference, despite his dismal approval ratings and struggle to advance other aspects of his agenda. They said lawmakers sometimes feel less confined by partisan loyalty on civil rights issues like same-sex marriage.

“This isn’t something that hinges on his popularity — it’s too personal of an issue,” said Alan Van Capelle, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, the gay-rights group pushing same-sex marriage. “It defies ordinary Albany political logic.”

Mr. Van Capelle and other advocates pointed out that in 2002, 13 Republicans joined 21 Democrats to pass a law that specifically banned discrimination based on sexual orientation. The outcome of that vote was in doubt until the last minute — an uncommon occurrence in Albany, where the leaders of the Senate and the Assembly rarely allow bills to reach the floor without being sure they will pass.

Some supporters of same-sex marriage, most notably Mr. Paterson, are pushing for a similar approach now. By forcing a vote without knowing its result, the logic goes, dubious senators might feel pressured to support the bill for fear of appearing hostile to gay rights.

Gay advocacy groups are a powerful force in Albany. The Human Rights Campaign, Gill Action Fund and Empire State Pride Agenda funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars into a handful of competitive campaigns last year, helping Democrats pick up two seats to capture a majority in the Senate for the first time in more than four decades.

“It’s sort of a carrot and stick argument,” said Daniel J. O’Donnell, an assemblyman from the Upper West Side who is leading the effort in that house to shore up support for Mr. Paterson’s bill. “If you move ahead with the bill, you could use the stick and say, ‘You’re not our friend if you vote against us, and we’re going to find someone to replace you.’ ”

But Austin Shafran, a spokesman for the Senate majority leader, Malcolm A. Smith, said on Thursday that the bill would “be brought to the floor as soon as there are enough votes to pass it.”

Mr. Paterson’s role in steering the bill through Albany, which is still being worked out among his aides, legislative officials and lobbyists, is the latest in a list of personal campaigns on gay-rights issues throughout his career.

As a rank-and-file state senator in the 1980s, Mr. Paterson led the first effort to establish hate crimes laws in New York. Years later, when a hate-crimes bill passed, in 2000, it included protections for gays and lesbians at Mr. Paterson’s urging.

In 2002, as the Senate minority leader, Mr. Paterson led Democrats in rounding up enough votes to pass the law prohibiting discrimination against gays and lesbians. He has frequently attributed his passionate advocacy of gay rights in large part to his close relationship with a gay couple who were friends with his parents in Harlem. He still affectionately refers to the couple, now deceased, as Uncle Stanley and Uncle Ronald.

His emotional investment in the issue was on display Thursday in a 15-minute speech that placed gay marriage in the historical context of slavery, disenfranchisement of women and shunning the disabled.

“We have all known the wrath of discrimination,” said Mr. Paterson, New York’s first black governor. “We have all felt the pain and the insult of hatred. This is why we are all standing here today.”

Surrounded by some three dozen members of the state’s political establishment, including members of Congress, senior state legislators and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, he added: “We wish to fulfill the dreams of those Americans, both the living and the dead, who struggled unremittingly and courageously over the past two centuries to expand those freedoms to more Americans. Often we have fallen short, but the marvel and the miracle of America is that we keep marching forward for justice.”

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

April 19, 2009
Op-Ed Columnist
The Bigots’ Last Hurrah
By FRANK RICH
WHAT would happen if you crossed that creepy 1960s horror classic “The Village of the Damned” with the Broadway staple “A Chorus Line”? You don’t need to use your imagination. It’s there waiting for you on YouTube under the title “Gathering Storm”: a 60-second ad presenting homosexuality as a national threat second only to terrorism.

The actors are supposedly Not Gay. They stand in choral formation before a backdrop of menacing clouds and cheesy lightning effects. “The winds are strong,” says a white man to the accompaniment of ominous music. “And I am afraid,” a young black woman chimes in. “Those advocates want to change the way I live,” says a white woman. But just when all seems lost, the sun breaks through and a smiling black man announces that “a rainbow coalition” is “coming together in love” to save America from the apocalypse of same-sex marriage. It’s the swiftest rescue of Western civilization since the heyday of the ambiguously gay duo Batman and Robin.

Far from terrifying anyone, “Gathering Storm” has become, unsurprisingly, an Internet camp classic. On YouTube the original video must compete with countless homemade parodies it has inspired since first turning up some 10 days ago. None may top Stephen Colbert’s on Thursday night, in which lightning from “the homo storm” strikes an Arkansas teacher, turning him gay. A “New Jersey pastor” whose church has been “turned into an Abercrombie & Fitch” declares that he likes gay people, “but only as hilarious best friends in TV and movies.”

Yet easy to mock as “Gathering Storm” may be, it nonetheless bookmarks a historic turning point in the demise of America’s anti-gay movement.

What gives the ad its symbolic significance is not just that it’s idiotic but that its release was the only loud protest anywhere in America to the news that same-sex marriage had been legalized in Iowa and Vermont. If it advances any message, it’s mainly that homophobic activism is ever more depopulated and isolated as well as brain-dead.

“Gathering Storm” was produced and broadcast — for a claimed $1.5 million — by an outfit called the National Organization for Marriage. This “national organization,” formed in 2007, is a fund-raising and propaganda-spewing Web site fronted by the right-wing Princeton University professor Robert George and the columnist Maggie Gallagher, who was famously caught receiving taxpayers’ money to promote Bush administration “marriage initiatives.” Until last month, half of the six board members (including George) had some past or present affiliation with Princeton’s James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions. (One of them, the son of one of the 12 apostles in the Mormon church hierarchy, recently stepped down.)

Even the anti-Obama “tea parties” flogged by Fox News last week had wider genuine grass-roots support than this so-called national organization. Beyond Princeton, most straight citizens merely shrugged as gay families celebrated in Iowa and Vermont. There was no mass backlash. At ABC and CBS, the Vermont headlines didn’t even make the evening news.

On the right, the restrained response was striking. Fox barely mentioned the subject; its rising-star demagogue, Glenn Beck, while still dismissing same-sex marriage, went so far as to “celebrate what happened in Vermont” because “instead of the courts making a decision, the people did.” Dr. Laura Schlessinger, the self-help media star once notorious for portraying homosexuality as “a biological error” and a gateway to pedophilia, told CNN’s Larry King that she now views committed gay relationships as “a beautiful thing and a healthy thing.” In The New York Post, the invariably witty and invariably conservative writer Kyle Smith demolished a Maggie Gallagher screed published in National Review and wondered whether her errant arguments against gay equality were “something else in disguise.”

More startling still was the abrupt about-face of the Rev. Rick Warren, the hugely popular megachurch leader whose endorsement last year of Proposition 8, California’s same-sex marriage ban, had roiled his appearance at the Obama inaugural. Warren also dropped in on Larry King to declare that he had “never” been and “never will be” an “anti-gay-marriage activist.” This was an unmistakable slap at the National Organization for Marriage, which lavished far more money on Proposition 8 than even James Dobson’s Focus on the Family.

The Obamas’ dog had longer legs on cable than the news from Iowa and Vermont. CNN’s weekly press critique, “Reliable Sources,” inquired why. The gay blogger John Aravosis suggested that many Americans are more worried about their mortgages than their neighbors’ private lives. Besides, Aravosis said, there are “only so many news stories you can do showing guys in tuxes.”

As the polls attest, the majority of Americans who support civil unions for gay couples has been steadily growing. Younger voters are fine with marriage. Generational changeover will seal the deal. Crunching all the numbers, the poll maven Nate Silver sees same-sex marriage achieving majority support “at some point in the 2010s.”

Iowa and Vermont were the tipping point because they struck down the right’s two major arguments against marriage equality. The unanimous ruling of the seven-member Iowa Supreme Court proved that the issue is not merely a bicoastal fad. The decision, written by Mark Cady, a Republican appointee, was particularly articulate in explaining that a state’s legalization of same-sex marriage has no effect on marriage as practiced by religions. “The only difference,” the judge wrote, is that “civil marriage will now take on a new meaning that reflects a more complete understanding of equal protection of the law.”

Some opponents grumbled anyway, reviving their perennial complaint, dating back to Brown v. Board of Education, about activist judges. But the judiciary has long played a leading role in sticking up for the civil rights of minorities so they’re not held hostage to a majority vote. Even if the judiciary-overreach argument had merit, it was still moot in Vermont, where the State Legislature, not a court, voted to make same-sex marriage legal and then voted to override the Republican governor’s veto.

As the case against equal rights for gay families gets harder and harder to argue on any nonreligious or legal grounds, no wonder so many conservatives are dropping the cause. And if Fox News and Rick Warren won’t lead the charge on same-sex marriage, who on the national stage will take their place? The only enthusiastic contenders seem to be Republicans contemplating presidential runs in 2012. As Rich Tafel, the former president of the gay Log Cabin Republicans, pointed out to me last week, what Iowa giveth to the Democrats, Iowa taketh away from his own party. As the first stop in the primary process, the Iowa caucuses provided a crucial boost to Barack Obama’s victorious and inclusive Democratic campaign in 2008. But on the G.O.P. side, the caucuses tilt toward the exclusionary hard right.

In 2008, 60 percent of Iowa’s Republican caucus voters were evangelical Christians. Mike Huckabee won. That’s the hurdle facing the party’s contenders in 2012, which is why Romney, Palin and Gingrich are now all more vehement anti-same-sex-marriage activists than Rick Warren. Palin even broke with John McCain on the issue during their campaign, supporting the federal marriage amendment that he rejects. This month, even as the father of Palin’s out-of-wedlock grandson challenged her own family values and veracity, she nominated as Alaskan attorney general a man who has called gay people “degenerates.” Such homophobia didn’t even play in Alaska — the State Legislature voted the nominee down — and will doom Republicans like Palin in national elections.

One G.O.P. politician who understands this is the McCain-Palin 2008 campaign strategist, Steve Schmidt, who on Friday urged his party to join him in endorsing same-sex marriage. Another is Jon Huntsman Jr., the governor of Utah, who in February endorsed civil unions for gay couples, a position seemingly indistinguishable from Obama’s. Huntsman is not some left-coast Hollywood Republican. He’s a Mormon presiding over what Gallup ranks as the reddest state in the country.

“We must embrace all citizens as equals,” Huntsman told me in an interview last week. “I’ve always stood tall on this.” Has he been hurt by his position? Not remotely. “A lot of people gave the issue more scrutiny after it became the topic of the week,” he said, and started to see it “in human terms.” Letters, calls, polls and conversations with voters around the state all confirmed to him that opinion has “shifted quite substantially” toward his point of view. Huntsman’s approval rating now stands at 84 percent.

He believes that social issues should not be a priority for Republicans in any case during an economic crisis. He also is an outspoken foe of the “nativist language” that has marked the G.O.P. of late. Huntsman doesn’t share “the view of some” that “the party was created in 1980.” He yearns for it to reclaim Lincoln’s faith in “individual dignity.”

As marital equality haltingly but inexorably spreads state by state for gay Americans in the years to come, Utah will hardly be in the lead to follow Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont. But the fact that it too is taking its first steps down that road is extraordinary. It is justice, not a storm, that is gathering. Only those who have spread the poisons of bigotry and fear have any reason to be afraid.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

http://www.latimes.com/features/la-ig-trends22-2009mar22,0,329868.story

From the Los Angeles Times
THE RUNWAYS: WHAT YOU'LL WEAR
Top fashion trends for fall
Classic looks are big with some designers. Others channel the '80s with power shoulders, boyfriend blazers, leggings, leather and exposed bras.
By BOOTH MOORE
Fashion Critic

March 22, 2009

There was a luxe trashiness to many of the collections for fall that's curious when everyone is in survival mode. Between Alexander Wang in New York, Pucci in Milan, Balmain and Givenchy in Paris, I was left with a distinct morning-after feeling. But why, especially now, would you want to wear a mini-dress the size of a postage stamp that makes you look like a street walker? I suppose it would get you noticed.

This is the cutting edge of fashion, the thing that's making magazine editors giddy. And there were more measured takes on the tough chic look -- black leather leggings worn with a long boyfriend blazer, the black leather bustier or bomber jacket. I guess if nothing else, sex always sells.

Other designers leaned on their heritage (Burberry's checks, Missoni's layered knits, Ralph Lauren's manor style and Chanel's Barbie-like kits of Madame's iconic accessories), or the heritage of others (Balenciaga's ode to Yves Saint Laurent), offering the kind of tweedy coats, cozy sweaters and pretty evening looks that store buyers were referring to as "investment pieces."

There was a lot to wear: Prada's earthen-hued skirt suits, Michael Kors, Narciso Rodriguez and Marc Jacobs' sportswear classics with flashes of neon, Lanvin's elegant, bias cuts, the everyday jackets and pants at DKNY, Derek Lam, Etro, Dries Van Noten, Chloe, YSL and Stella McCartney.

Now we just have to wait and see if anyone's going to buy. Here, a rundown of the season's top trends:

Most likely to already be hanging in your closet: A black leather jacket. If not, they were everywhere, the best with a subtle, studded collar at Yves Saint Laurent.

Outta my way: Power dressing manifested itself in strong shoulders, leg o' mutton sleeves and one-sleeved dresses.

Sandals aren't just for summer anymore: If it's cold, wear them with tights. If it's slushy, try the season's other big footwear trend, over-the-knee boots.

To shop for at the vintage stores: Anything 1980s, especially long boyfriend blazers in geometric prints and sparkly mini-dresses.

New "it" color, besides black, that is: Jade green as seen at Chanel and Louis Vuitton. Wear it sparingly or risk looking like a leprechaun.

If money is no object: Go for the Michael Jackson look at Balmain, the crystal-studded jackets and disco mini-dresses. Or buy the real thing at the Jackson memorabilia auction in Beverly Hills next month.

Most dubious trend: Capes, especially Marc Jacobs' neon, crossing-guard versions.

Trend that refuses to go away: Leggings. For a newer look, try high-waisted, pleated and peg-legged pants.

Trend we thought would never come back: Exposed bras, as seen at Balenciaga and Miu Miu.

Most timeless trend: Classical draping, as seen at Balenciaga, Viktor & Rolf, Versace, Bottega Veneta, Derek Lam and Donna Karan.

Most ingenious invention: Lanvin's knit-backed fur stoles, which can be pulled down over jackets, sweaters or coats.

Most annoying beauty habit: Hair crimping, which was responsible for at least one late runway show start.

Recession, what recession? Nadia Swarovski, sixth-generation member of the Swarovski family, which has built an empire by supplying crystals to fashion designers, sprinkled fairy dust on nearly every runway collection. She is the season's biggest winner.

booth.moore@latimes.com

###

Social intelligence

Blasblog From Moscow: Where Trends Are Born?
April 10, 2009

Sartorially speaking, the thing I’ve noticed here is how this city’s chic set really latches on to a trend: I’ve seen so many Balmain shoulders I sometimes think I’m in a game of kinky, high-heeled touch football. And don’t even get me started about the fur chubbies. I mean, I knew that fur would be big here—but it’s, like, really big here. But just when I was convinced that this town took all its cues from Paris, I discovered it might also have the ability to subversively inspire a few trends of its own. Yesterday, a bunch of us piled onto a bus (I totally called the backseat) for a tour of the city, and a very chic thing happened when Julia Restoin-Roitfeld, Byrdie Bell, and Sophia Hesketh tried to get into the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. Because Restoin-Roitfeld was in a scandalously tight pair of leggings, Bell’s long hair was down, and Hesketh dared to expose her legs, all three had to nick their friends’ scarves—which naturally happened to be cashmere and from Vuitton or Burberry—and whip their legs and hair into looks that were both orthodox and surprisingly fashion-forward. That’s them outside the church in their layered glory. So the question is: After slap bracelets, will these ladies bring back the sarong? The more I think about it, the more I realize how appropriate a multitasking, two-in-one scarf skirt is for times like these. What’s more, it being mere days before HBO’s Grey Gardens premieres, there couldn’t be a better tribute to Little Edie, whose odd circumstances encouraged her to make convertible skirts of her own.

—Derek Blasberg

Photo: Courtesy of Derek Blasberg

tags: Balmain, Burberry, Byrdie Bell, Julia Roitfeld, Louis Vuitton, Sophia Hesketh

Q&A

Blasblog From Moscow: Meet The City’s Other Chic Entrepreneur
April 9, 2009

It’s no secret that I’m a major fan of Dasha Zhukova, the Moscow-born, California-raised beauty who has founded a museum, launched a fashion label, and was recently named the new editor of Pop—all before the age of 28. Here in Moscow, I’ve met another Russian stunner who’s a master at multitasking (and, like Zhukova, has a closet full of Balmain). Meet Aizel Trudel. The daughter of a Russian diplomat, Trudel grew up all over the world and developed an obsession with fashion that she’s put to good use: She now operates a collection of stores in Moscow, including two Louboutin shops, two Diane von Furstenberg stores, the Marc Jacobs boutique and another for Marc by Marc, a J. Mendel location, and five Aizel stores of her own, which were the first to stock the likes of Proenza Schouler and Balmain in Russia. And it looks like that’s just the beginning.

How did you get into the fashion business?

I was the head of PR and advertising for a company here in Moscow that worked with Donna Karan, Christian Lacroix, Thierry Mugler, and a slew of other brands, but when I turned 25 I wanted a change. A few years ago my friend Santiago Gonzalez and I went to a party at Saks Fifth Avenue in New York, and as I was going down the escalator I saw Christian Louboutin with Diane von Furstenberg going up the other way. I realized that was my chance to meet him, so I ran up the escalator to catch him and started shouting “Christian!” That was the start of our great friendship and business relationship. It was a fruitful meeting because it introduced me to DVF as well.
Continue reading ›

tags: Aizel Trudel, Balmain, Christian Lacroix, Christian Louboutin, Dasha Zhukova, Diane von Furstenberg, Donna Karan, J Mendel, Marc by Marc, Marc Jacobs, Oscar de la Renta, Proenza Schouler, Saks Fifth Avenue, Thierry Mugler

Social intelligence

Blasblog From Moscow: Balmains By The Truckload
April 8, 2009

One of the questions people ask when they see the hefty price tags for Balmain’s tiny cocktail dresses is who exactly is buying this stuff. Well, I figured out the answer last night: rich Russian ladies. At a dinner for Dasha Zhukova’s museum in Moscow, Julia Restoin-Roitfeld thought she would represent the French label in a sparkly pink metal mesh number. (That’s her in the picture, though you should ignore the iridescent straps on her legs—those were a regretful late-night styling tip from a friend who found a storage of VIP slap bracelets at the after-party.) Too bad two Russian gals had already beat her to the punch: Aizel Trudel, a businesswoman who opened the Louboutin boutique here, showed up in the sparkly green number most recently seen on Jennifer Connelly; and Liza Molchanova, a housewife who wore a jacket often described as the Michael Jackson (think lots of sparkly bits and epaulets). Apparently, in this part of the world, there are whole factions of housewives who are desperate to get their hands on Balmain. “Like crack,” someone put it, which I think is a great analogy. So now that we’ve answered the question about where one finds all the world’s Balmain, it’s time for another one: How do I become a Moscow housewife?

—Derek Blasberg

Photo: Courtesy of Derek Blasberg

tags: Balmain, Dasha Zhukova, Jennifer Connelly, Julia Roitfeld

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-parisfashion7-2009mar07,0,3962304.story

From the Los Angeles Times
PARIS FASHION WEEK
Christophe Decarnin's Balmain show flashes back to Michael Jackson, MC Hammer
Olivier Theyskens' collection for Nina Ricci bucks the retro trend and steps into the future. Nicolas Ghesquiere makes recession-friendly fashions for Balenciaga.
By BOOTH MOORE
Fashion Critic

March 7, 2009

Reporting from Paris — Michael Jackson couldn't have picked a better time to make a comeback. There he was on Thursday, the fashion muse of the fall season, announcing his "final" tour in London while dressed in a sparkly, "Thriller"-era jacket that looked a lot like the ones coming down the runway at Balmain just hours before at Paris Fashion Week.

Balmain designer Christophe Decarnin, who has been cribbing from Jackson and other '80s icons for a while now, is to blame for fashion's current crystal addiction, for sparkly biker jackets and disco-ball micro mini-dresses that have crept into the wardrobes of Gwyneth Paltrow and Kate Moss, and onto nearly every runway this season.

Decarnin is the reigning king of trashy luxe. So, not surprisingly, he gave us a repeat performance for fall. His collection was one of several bold but varied statements in the opening days of the fall collections here, where expectations are high after lackluster weeks in Milan and New York.

I never thought I would see MC Hammer pants on the runway, but there they were, sprinkled with crystals, of course, and worn with a biker jacket. (Mr. Hammer, it's your agent calling -- have you thought about a comeback?)

But aside from those ballooning pants, sliced open over the leg, and a few crystal-striped T-shirts, this show was a par-tay of barely there, butt-grazing mini-dresses.

They came in quilted black leather or electric blue, with silver chain details or covered in a grid of crystals. They came strapless or sporting enormous shoulders, with trains, frills, pouf skirts or a single crystal-studded sleeve. After a while, they all started to look the same. Which raises the question, what's next for Balmain?

Future rock

With his thrilling collection for Nina Ricci, Olivier Theyskens captured the season's rock 'n' roll edge by looking to the future instead of the past.

Theyskens hit the scene after Madonna wore his black satin coat dress to the 1998 Academy Awards. But this collection did not go into goth. His mistresses of the night were otherworldly, stilt-walking on some of the most outrageous shoes to come down the runway in years.

The dangerously high black or pink glitter platform boots, scooped out where the heels should have been, were a sendup of the current craze for sky-high heels. They were also a platform for his elongated silhouette and glossy clothes -- mostly black with flashes of silver, red, pink and purple -- which seemed to reference Thierry Mugler and Ziggy Stardust, but with a look all their own.

The tailoring was sharp and angular -- jackets with sculpted shoulders and pointy lapels, and skirts with jagged hems. Mini-dresses and jeans came dusted with cosmic-looking stones or spliced with crystal thunder bolts. Shimmery sheer pajama pants that poured over the shoes were topped by oversized knits or some of the season's best leather jackets. And gowns were a cascade of undulating frills.

Rumor has it that this is Theyskens' last collection for Nina Ricci, which may be why it felt as if he had an eye toward his own future rather than that of the more romantic house.

Toning it down

Putting aside the sci-fi fantasy that has driven him creatively for the past few seasons, Nicolas Ghesquière came down to Earth with a soft and wearable, recession-friendly collection for Balenciaga. How else do you explain something so basic as a beige coat with a sash belt coming from the designer who gave us robotic-looking C-3PO leggings?

Changing his venue from the dark Left Bank Balenciaga showroom space to a sunny Hotel de Crillon salon overlooking the Place de la Concorde breathed new life into the collection, which was a feat of drapery and classic French chic.

Soft femininity was the starting point for swagged silk charmeuse skirts suspended from banded waists, with tweedy metallic tops tucked in. Black point d'esprit stockings and high heels with fabric ankle ties completed the picture.

For women not shaped like curtain rods, there were satin-trimmed velvet coat dresses and blazers with draped silk charmeuse bodices, worn over uncomplicated cigarette pants in solids or pinstripes. Black lace bandeau tops were the underpinnings for the collection, adding a flirty touch to colorful dappled print dresses with plunging necklines.

For evening, those dresses were covered in sequins, crystals and bits of degrade velvet. With puffed up sleeves, they too struck an '80s note.

It was lovely and ladylike but not nearly as directional as we've come to expect from Ghesquière. Guess he's leaving that to Decarnin for the moment.

booth.moore@latimes.com

###

Monday, 13 April 2009
Runway To Sidewalk - Michael Jackson In Balmain
http://www.redcarpet-fashionawards.com/2009/04/runway-to-sidewalk-michael-jackson-in.html

This is a first time I have ever done a runway comparison with a male celebrity.

When it comes to Michael Jackson, I thought he was done shocking me, but when I saw this picture of him leaving a meeting in LA last week wearing a Balmain Fall 2009 black and silver embellished top, my jaw hit the floor.

Even female celebs would find it hard to get their hands on pieces from this coveted Fall 2009 collection.

After this collection was presented, a few journalists had said 80s Michael Jackson must have been the inspiration for this collection, with the crystal-studded jackets and disco mini-dresses. I guess they were right.

I wonder what he will wear next.

###

Michael Jackson's Balmain Moment
http://www.femalefirst.co.uk/lifestyle-fashion/stylecelebs/Michael+Jackson-8156.html
15-04-2009 11:00

Uh oh we think the Balmain bubble may have just burst and it's all thanks to Michael Jackson.

The King of Pop has recently stepped out in a crystal embellished, ladies, zebra print T-shirt with a blazer, blue trousers, bedazzled belt and umbrella, despite the glorious sunshine. Not a good look!

The label has been the epitome of cool recently with anyone who's anyone stepping out in their sequined mini dresses and exaggerated shoulder jackets. Balmain has a huge celeb following including Heidi Klum, Victoria Beckham and Kylie Minogue.

Now we know the Jacko is big news in the music industry but in fashion he's not exactly known for his great style is he. We're pretty sure Balmain would have preferred to see Nicole Richie or Lauren Conrad in the black and silver T-shirt.

Comment on this Article
But we suppose Balmain is all about 80s style and no-one was bigger in the 80s than Jacko so maybe this is the ultimate compliment for the label.

We wonder what designers he will be wearing next!

FemaleFirst - Jessica Watson

###

Michael Jackson Auction Averted

Associated Press
Wednesday, April 15, 2009; C07

LOS ANGELES, April 14 -- A collection of Michael Jackson's possessions from Neverland Ranch is safe from the auctioneer's gavel now that the pop singer and Julien's Auction House have reached a settlement to their dispute over whether 2,000 items were ever intended for sale.

Specific terms were not disclosed Tuesday. But, in short, Jackson keeps his things, while Julien's keeps its promotional exhibition, which is open to the public and is scheduled to run through Tuesday.

"There was so much interest from so many of Jackson's fans that instead of putting the items in the hands of private collectors, Dr. Tohme and Julien's Auction House have made arrangements that will allow the collection to be shared with and enjoyed by Jackson's fans for many years to come," read a joint statement from Jackson spokesman Tohme R. Tohme and auction organizer Darren Julien.

Jackson's production company, MJJ Productions, sued Julien in early March, seeking to halt the sale by arguing that Jackson hadn't authorized it. A judge blocked one effort by MJJ Productions to cancel it earlier this month, and another judge was scheduled to hear arguments Wednesday for an injunction.

Julien has said he spent $2 million organizing the sale, which another auctioneer estimated could have fetched $12 million after its April 22 start. The exhibition in Beverly Hills costs $20 to attend.

Julien said all of Jackson's possessions, which the auction house took directly from the Neverland Ranch property, would be returned to the pop singer. He would not say where they would be taken.

"It's been our hopes to resolve this in the beginning, when the lawsuit was filed," Julien said Tuesday by telephone. "I guess you could call it the greatest auction that never happened."

The singer has struggled financially following his arrest in 2003 on charges that he molested a 13-year-old boy. A jury acquitted him of all charges.

Last year he faced foreclosure on Neverland, the 2,500-acre property nestled in the hills of Santa Barbara County's wine country, 120 miles northwest of Los Angeles. He was bailed out by Colony Capital, and months later transferred the deed to Neverland to another entity he partially controls.

© 2009 The Washington Post Company

###

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-jackson12-2009may12,0,2710159.story

From the Los Angeles Times
POP MUSIC
Michael Jackson rehearses near Burbank airport
The erstwhile King of Pop has a lot riding on his upcoming 50 sold-out shows at London's O2 Arena.
By Harriet Ryan and Chris Lee

May 12, 2009

Four mornings a week, an SUV with darkened windows bears Michael Jackson through the gates outside a nondescript building near the Burbank airport. He spends the next six hours on a soundstage in the company of 10 dancers and pop music's best-known choreographer.

The details of rehearsals for Jackson's upcoming concerts in London are closely held secrets, but what's at stake for him is not. The ambitious schedule of 50 sold-out shows could turn out to be the final, sad chapter of Jackson's storied career -- or one of pop music's all-time greatest comeback stories.

When -- or if, in the view of many industry skeptics -- Jackson takes the stage at the O2 Arena July 8, it will be his first extended concert run in 12 years. Doubters cite his long hiatus from performing, health problems, a onetime prescription pill addiction, age -- he is 50 -- and his reputation for flaking out on performances and business deals.

But the concert promoter, Los Angeles-based AEG Live, insists that Jackson is prepared mentally and physically and that the show, called "This Is It," will break new ground in both artistry and sheer cost. The production budget is "north of $20 million," a price tag that will include as many as 22 different sets, said Randy Phillips, the company's chief executive.

"It's going to be the biggest, most technologically advanced arena show -- and the most expensive -- ever mounted," Phillips said.

On Monday, the company announced that choreographer and director Kenny Ortega, the force behind the movie "Dirty Dancing" and the "High School Musical" series, as well as Jackson's Dangerous and HIStory tours, has signed on to direct and design the shows. Ortega agreed to work around his schedule as director of the planned remake of the 1984 movie "Footloose" to take on Jackson's shows, according to AEG.

In a statement, Ortega called Jackson "the greatest entertainer of our generation" and said he was eager to collaborate with him again. "My answer without a beat was nothing could keep me away," he said.

In Ortega, Jackson chose someone who has achieved what he could not -- continuous cultural relevance after great success in the 1980s. He tapped as the show's choreographer and associate director Travis Payne, who worked with Jackson in the mid-1990s. Payne's recent work includes routines for Beyoncé and Madonna, as well as a "Dancing With the Stars" tribute to Jackson.

Also involved are younger choreographers who rose to prominence translating Jackson's style for a new generation. Todd Sams, who has worked with Usher, is collaborating on the show, according to a representative, and Rich & Tone Talauega, a duo who have choreographed Chris Brown's moves, were present for auditions last month.

The two-day casting call drew 700 dancers to downtown Los Angeles' Nokia Theatre. "They were from the elite agencies across the world -- London, France, New York," said Australian dancer Nandy McClean, who was not chosen. "There were hip-hop dancers and jazz dancers. You could tell a lot of them were crazy Michael Jackson fans who grew up watching him."

In the end, eight men and two women were selected. Jackson attended the second day of tryouts -- one agency head compared the experience to basketball players auditioning for Michael Jordan.

"Dancing for an artist who is so amazing and who everyone looks up to was the best feeling of my life," said Atlanta dancer Victor Carter, who did not make the cut. "He perfected the profession."

Jackson is taking a hands-on role in coming up with routines, according to Ortega and Phillips. The singer is developing a move that he hopes will be as distinctive as the moonwalk, Phillips said. "He's working on it," he said, refusing to say more: "I'm sworn to secrecy."

When the public last got an extended look at Jackson -- during his 2005 molestation trial -- he appeared in no condition for a grueling concert schedule. He was hospitalized during the proceeding, his clothes hung on his gaunt frame and at times he seemed to have difficulty walking. He later acknowledged an addiction to painkillers.

But AEG's Phillips said Jackson had "filled out" by last November, when discussions about the London concerts began. He said a four-hour physical with an independent physician this spring found no medical problems. In preparation for the shows, Jackson is doing aerobics with a personal trainer and has had no difficulty keeping up with dancers half his age during rehearsals in Burbank, Phillips said.

Those practice sessions occur in secrecy, thanks to security patrols and confidentiality agreements. There have been rumors, especially in the British media, that the production will include a duet with Jackson's eldest son, Prince Michael, a stage filled with Jackson look-alikes, and a cast of monkeys and elephants.

Beyond denying the last report -- "No animals. No animals!" Phillips said -- producers are tight-lipped about what the 20,000 fans in the arena will see. Jackson will perform between 18 and 22 songs. Some choreography will feature aerial dancing similar to routines by Cirque du Soleil, he said.

The singer has said he will sing his hits, telling a March news conference, "I will be performing the songs my fans want to hear."

The concert preparation has not been spared the lawsuits and threats of suits that seem to be a given in any dealings with Jackson. Last week, he was sued by his former publicist and the actress who co-starred in the 1983 "Thriller" video. On Monday, a New Jersey concert promoter sent a cease and desist letter, alleging the London appearances violated terms of an agreement to play a Jackson Five reunion concert.

Phillips said the claim was "meritless" and had not affected rehearsals.

harriet.ryan@latimes.com
chris.lee@latimes.com

http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2009/04/talbots_down_3665_million_mich.html

live wire, sick bed, iowa, and vermont.

Thu, 09 Apr 2009 06:21:00 GMT

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Tuesday, March 17:

Men and women really can't be friends. And if you need more proof, see what happens when you hop in bed with your 'pal.' If you acknowledge what happened and maintain an open, honest line of communication, you should be able to salvage this relationship.

what has this world come to when my greatest escape comes in a newly unfurled obsession with the works of sebastian stan. between sillily wicked carter baizen on "gossip girl," the oddly homoerotic chase collins in "the covenant," and now, the intensely closeted prince jack benjamin in "kings" to which i've become addicted on hulu.com. why does this represent such watershed moment? well, generally, i'd find myself taken with my newly blossoming social life -- which has truly kept me away from livejournal in any real way as i always said it does when its good -- my tumultuous professional life -- which has again brought me to the brink of sanity -- and my political obsessions -- which have folded more excitement into my life than seeing a woman in a new balmain jacket. let's start with vermont because it really begins and ends with vermont: as i referenced in my post talking about the new balmain and the seventeenth amendment, if our united states senators found themselves subject to the will of the state legislatures, i doubt we'd have these silly battles over social issues at all, but now, marriage equality has finally has a state where the people's representatives have voted into law these reforms and not the courts. we almost had it in california, but we got obstructed by the governor of that state, thrown a bone by the courts, and a blow by a too-loose constitutional amendment process. now, i've said that there's something about a republican executive and an overwhelmingly democratic legislature that tends to serve up these marriage equality victories: first, massachusetts ("goodridge v. department of public health," november 18, 2003), then, california ("in re: marriage cases," may 15, 2008), connecticut ("kerrigan v. commissioner of public health," october 10, 2008), and now, the exception, iowa ("varnum v. brien," april 3, 2009). so yeah, exciting times and i know we're going to see a lot more full faith and creditchallenges coming to the fore as these laws solidify into our legal framework as a country. what next? oh yeah, my crazy social life: how i manage to still have one after expanding my availability at pier one continues to baffle me not to mention where i find the money, energy, or willpower to make an effort at work at having one, but last friday, i had to work at both jobs and i thought i looked woefully cute in this j.crew pima cotton polo and these banana republic almost-pajama pants, but planned, nonetheless, to come home and read that article on alex rodriguez that has caused so much of a stir because of some perceived homoeroticism -- is autoeroticism really the same thing as homoeroticism?! -- but i resolved to drop by the only bar in town to give my high school friend the money for the kathy griffin tickets. well. i stayed for a drink -- and the most horrible cabaret act possible -- and somehow got convinced to go to z grille and three rounds later, i'm changing clothes, popping in my contacts, and heading to nautico which is quickly replacing the only bar in town as the only other bar in town and needless to say, witnessed the best cabaret show and proceeded to get spinning drunk and when i stopped spinning found myself at an afterhours party with one couple, two singles, my high school friend, an out-of-drag drag queen, and an odd punky girl thrown in for good measure. well, hours passed with me drinking the grey goose bottle dry and then working on miscellaneous cocktail when my high school friend came out of the bedroom tapping his nose in a way i haven't seen since 2002. i mean, how unsubtle can one be in a party?! well, the couple had left and the two singles had disappeared into the bedroom with my high school friend ages ago and when i went in to the bathroom with one of the singles, that's when it began. it started as forced intimacy to keep the party going but quickly became a blowjob which quickly becamea shared blowjob between both of these singles and somehow -- though we NEVER touched -- and then my high school friend. eventually, the drag queen out of drag crashed and the girl powdered her nose and drove home, but it became the most debaucherous night out i've had in sometime as the party's host and i proceeded to engage in sexual acts all around the house from the living room to the kitchen to the pool to the office to the dining room and back to the living room. my high school friend and the host's friend fell asleep in the bedroom so we camped out in the office until we couldn't keep our eyes open anymore and after my friend crashed for a bit and went home, i moved into the bed with the host of the party and the friend with whom my high school friend. yeah. awkward night. i have never been so drunk/high/horny/uninhibited since i've lived down here. it was scary/thrilling/worrying/emboldening. the next morning, i got driven home and literally slept ALL DAY until six thirty in the evening which means that my high school friend and i had to race to the kathy griffin show. yeah. i cried with laughter and after the show we went to ocean prime -- where we stood inches away from the hogan family (hulk, brooke, and nick) -- and then ate their food which was divine. we then went to christopher street, but that was a dud so i got driven home. so yeah. this has been the year of the livewire. i don't know what's going on with me since that hookup after my birthday. it's like i'm insatiable. while the first week started with its normal drabness, by tuesday, i felt really sick so i called off and thought i'd recover by wednesday, but still couldn't manage it and called off both places. while i went to work on thursday (and drove with the exsomeone up to zephyrhills) and friday, i didn't do anything all weekend because i felt so under the weather. a part of me thinks that my party wasn't as good as expected and that my allergy toward certain substances evidenced itself with my sickness those two days. by the next week, i found myself back in true form although i have NEVER felt my job in danger as much as i did that week. i'll get into that more later. and one of these days, i actually fucked the exsomeone but now i can't remember which day: it's either the monday before (which feels right) or the next week. the significant part about that encounter wasn't the actual fucking which wasn't altogether that pleasant to be honest except for the actual fact of it, but afterward, i don't know what it was, but lying their naked cuddling with the exsomeone -- and getting naked bas been quite the fetishistic and exhibitionist leitmotif of my sexual encounters lately -- the exsomeone kept wrapping legs around me trying to get me to stay over which caused one or two bubbles of feeling accidentally escape to the surface. needless to say, the exsomeone went on spring break later that week to ohio so yeah, that didn't last and has hosted company since returning to town.

Here is your single's love horoscope
for Sunday, March 29:

It's a time of rediscovery and seeking the truth about yourself. If your life seems difficult in any way, that's an indication you're not living it in accord with your true essence. Get back to the basics -- what are your basic motivations? Build a new perspective on that information.

but last tuesday, after a particularly tough day at work, i went to ceviche and had a three martini late night dinner with red snapper and scallops and eventually wound up on that regrettable site again but this time with less regrettable results except for the fact that this result did not arrive at my doorstep until 1:30 in the morning. yeah, after i ejaculated three times and sent the result on its way, i somehow felt drunk enough to send a text message to the stock broker who immediately answered back giving me a virtual pat on the back for my exploits. we texted all the next day but nothing developed of that. on wednesday night, i slept throughly. on thursday night, after work, i had determined that my serach result had begun to stalk me almost so i went over to the p.r. girl's house to have a fun night in with a couple of bottles of champagne. on friday night, i went to a mixer for black young professionals at the venue where i slurped up three splits of piper (and finding myself wildly attracted to someone i met through tampa organization of black affairs who clearly was not that into me but one of those people who likes to be the center of attention at all costs) before going to z grille with my high school friend, getting drunk on grey goose and sweet spicy jumbo shrimp they do so well there, and then went to nautico, but nothing scandolous (outside of me being too drunk for my own good and dancing my ass off). that basically wraps up my social recall besides the fact that i've posted an ad on craigslist for a new girlfriend since the p.r. girl is too broke to ever do anything and rarely likes going downtown, my bubbly pier one coworker isn't a good fit (as she's a little too old and pure), and my two good girlfriends live in manhattan and ft. lauderdale. so. now, i've been on pins and needles at job number one because my sales have been so low and for the first time in my tenure in my department, i've been questioned as to when i come in which is always a sure sign that the shit has hit the fan. i'm given relative autonomy as long as business is good, but now that business has dried up, all eyes are on me and i can't stand the amount of closed door meetings where I KNOW my name has come up in a negative context. but that's been mollified by this week where i've proven my worth by making so many sales happen that i've done the business of two desks in the span of seven days. so yeah. at pier one, i got formally written up for tagging pillows wrong for a sale. this is my life. pillows. well, it's now three o clock in the morning and i have to be at pier one at nine o clock tomorrow morning (which is actually refreshingly late for me) and then work at the main job and then i have an HRC social for the remainder.

Biography for
Sebastian Stan More at IMDbPro »
advertisementDate of Birth
13 August 1983, Constanta, Romania

Nickname
Sebs
Baz

Height
5' 10¾" (1.80 m)

Trivia
Is still in contact and close friends with his co-stars Toby Hemingway and Chace Crawford from The Covenant (2006).

Is a Romanian-American.

He is an only child.

Moved from Romania to Vienna, Austria at age 8 with his mother who was employed as a pianist.

Moved to Rockland County, New York at age 12 when his mother married the Headmaster of an American private school.

Graduated from Rutgers University in New Brunswick, New Jersey with a BFA in Acting.

Attended the famous performing arts summer camp Stagedoor Manor.

Actress Leighton Meester is his girlfriend [2008].

Did all his own stunts in the movie 'The Covenant'.

Engaged to girlfriend Leighton Meester.

Personal Quotes
"To be honest, as this world goes, is to be one man picked out of ten thousand."

"It was like a huge master class every day in rehearsal with [director] Bob Falls and [star] Liev Schreiber. I spent the whole time at the table taking notes on everything Liev was saying: quoting Shakespeare and how [Talk Radio] was similar to this or that play. I'd come in and be so hyped up and he'd be like, 'Listen. It's all great, but you gotta figure out what you want here and why.' It can't just be one huge, sort of, vomit thing." To Broadway.com, 3/07

Where Are They Now
(April 2007) Is starring in the play "Talk Radio."

###

Filmography
Jump to filmography as: Actor, Self
Actor:
"Kings" .... Jack Benjamin (12 episodes, 2009)
- The New King: Part One (2009) TV episode .... Jack Benjamin
- Brotherhood (2009) TV episode .... Jack Benjamin
- Judgment Day (2009) TV episode .... Jack Benjamin
- Insurrection (2009) TV episode .... Jack Benjamin
- First Night (2009) TV episode .... Jack Benjamin
(7 more)
"Gossip Girl" .... Carter Baizen (4 episodes, 2007-2009)
- The Grandfather (2009) TV episode .... Carter Baizen
- The Age of Dissonance (2009) TV episode .... Carter Baizen
- Hi, Society (2007) TV episode .... Carter Baizen
- Bad News Blair (2007) TV episode .... Carter Baizen
Spread (2009) .... Harry
Rachel Getting Married (2008) .... Walter/Bowtie Party Guest
The Education of Charlie Banks (2007) .... Leo
The Covenant (2006) .... Chase Collins
The Architect (2006) .... Martin Waters
Red Doors (2005) .... Simon
Tony N' Tina's Wedding (2004) .... Johnny
"Law & Order" .... Justin Capshaw (1 episode, 2003)
... aka "Law & Order Prime" (USA: informal title)
- Sheltered (2003) TV episode .... Justin Capshaw

Self:
Breaking the Silence: Exposing the Covenant (2007) (V) .... Himself

Kings Reopens Biblical Gay Debate
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/03/kings_re-opens_biblical_gay_de.html?mid=daily-intel--20090316

3/16/09 at 2:30 PM

Gay people whose opinions we respect have raised eyebrows over the treatment of Sebastian Stan's Jack on the new NBC show Kings. It's ripped from the Biblical story of King David and Jonathan, son of Saul. It's been long debated whether the pair had an intimate relationship, and what that means for gay people. We expect the debate over what Jack's flawed queer character on Kings will mean for gay people will be equally intense, but perhaps not for as long. [Defamer, AfterElton]

By: Chris Rovzar
Filed Under: hellivision, gays, sebastian stan, the bible

###

“Kings” Warps the Story of David and Jonathan
by Brent Hartinger
March 16, 2009

This article contains major plot points from Sunday night's episode of Kings, as well as minor spoilers for the next two episodes.

The new NBC show Kings that premiered last night in a two-hour movie is supposedly a modern-day retelling of the Biblical story of David. Sure enough, the main character defeats “Goliath” – which, in the case of Kings, happens to be a tank.

And the character of Jack, the prince and “true” heir to the throne that David is destined for, is gay – just as his biblical counter-part, Jonathan, probably was.

But that’s just about the only gay element that Kings gets right.

In the Bible, Jonathan definitely loves David – and it’s literally love at first sight. “When David had finished speaking to Saul, the soul of Jonathan was bound to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul,” says the Bible’s Book of Samuel of Jonathan and David’s first meeting.

Later, Jonathan is a strong ally of David. He’s the one who warns David that King Saul is plotting to kill him, because Jonathan “took great delight in David.” Even though he’s the actual heir to the throne, Jonathan recognizes that David is the true king, chosen by God.

But in Kings, Jack is mostly a villain – and a pretty stereotypically gay one at that: pretty and perfectly groomed, self-centered and vain, bitter and entitled, scheming, yet ultimately cowardly.

It’s familiar gay ground, in movies such as such as Cruel Intentions and in virtually every vampire movie ever made. Indeed, the actor who plays Kings’ gay prince, Sebastian Stan, even played a similar role before, in the 2006 film The Covenant.

In the first four episodes made available to AfterElton.com for preview by NBC, Jack isn’t an ally of David’s; instead he repeatedly tries to undermine him. And he does all this in his scheming, mostly cowardly way.

He’s a rich, complicated character, but he’s still a bad guy, the “dark” entitled prince up against the “light” chosen prince, competing for the affections of the current king: think Val Kilmer’s “Iceman” in Top Gun versus Tom Cruise’s “Maverick.”

Ian McShane (left) as King Silas and Christopher Egan as David

In addition, while there are several hints that Jack might be attracted to David, he seems to be motivated not by love, but by jealousy because David loves his sister, the princess, and not him.

But by far the biggest difference between Kings and its Biblical source material is the fact that in the Bible, David is probably gay or bisexual too, and he loves Jonathan back.

“David rose from beside the stone heap and prostrated himself with his face to the ground,” the Bible reads. “He bowed three times, and [he and Jonathan] kissed each other, and wept with each other. David wept the more.”

When Jonathan is killed, David mourns him, saying, "I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan; greatly beloved were you to me; your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women."

Whether or not David and Jonathan were actual lovers is the subject of debate, but many scholars interpret the relationship to have been a romantic one. Indeed, unless you’re blinded by anti-gay prejudice, it’s almost impossible not to see it as such.

In short, the biblical chronicle of David and Jonathan is one of the Bible’s few gay love stories. It’s also one of very few positive gay elements in the entire notoriously homophobic Bible.

Despite Kings’ claims that it is a “retelling” of David’s story, a gay love story is clearly not the direction the show is going. In the show, Jack may yet express his open love for David, and might even assist him somehow. But it seems pretty clear that David is thoroughly heterosexual and will almost certainly never love Jack back.

In other words, Michael Green, the creator of Kings, has chosen to keep the Bible’s likely-gay aspect of the character of Jonathan, but then turned him into a scheming villain, while at the same time, completely eliminating any “gay” element to the story’s primary hero, David.

It’s part of a long history where characters based on gay figures from history or legend – people such as Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Achilles, Gilgamesh, Alexander the Great, and the ancient Spartan warriors – are “de-gayed” for movie or TV adaptations. In addition, Hollywood has a history of turning gay characters from fiction into heterosexual ones for the film versions, in projects such as Fried Green Tomatoes, and the plays of Tennessee Williams.

“I think what you might be concerned about, or what your readership might be concerned about is that we’re playing into the cliché that the straight guy is great and the gay guy is evil," Michael Green, Kings' creator, tells AfterElton.com in an interview in response to this essay. "I don’t think we fall into that cliché at all. I think if you give us your time and attention, you’ll be very surprised at what both of those characters are capable of in the positive and in the negative sense. No one in our show is clearly good. No one in our show is clearly evil. They have far, far different journeys to go on."

Green admits that the character of Jack's homosexuality was inspired by the interpretation that the biblical character was also gay, but promises that the character is no cartoon villain.

"My goals are to take my characters and put them in the most interesting situation and then see how they behave, so I can’t give Jack any special protection because he’s gay or straight," he says. "I think that would be the more backwards way of looking at it. There are times [Jack] does incredibly noble things. There are times he does incredibly shitty things. And he is a character, and this season perhaps more than any other, who is struggling between his better and lesser angels, or his angels and demons, if you will. And a lot of that has to do with the world he was brought up in. I am much more interested in Jack as a character who, if he had been brought up in a kinder family, might have been a kinder person. He might have been a happier person. But he was born into a family where the presumption is that power is an inherent good that you must want more of, and that colors his personality far more than his preferences."

Read the entire interview with Michael Green here.

There's no denying that Jack is an interesting, multi-dimensional character. But in the first four episodes at least, David is very clearly the hero, and Jack is just as clearly his adversary, and pretty vicious to boot. Meanwhile, while Jack is gay, David is not.

Kings is a great show, and these may even be great storylines. But as in so many other retellings, Kings is almost the complete opposite of its historical source, the Bible, at least when it comes to the gay parts.

Copyright © 2006 AfterElton.com

###

April 9, 2009
Op-Ed Contributor
Iowa’s Family Values
By STEVEN W. THRASHER

IF it weren’t for Iowa, my family may never have existed, and this gay, biracial New Yorker might never have been born.

In 1958, when my mother, who was white, and father, who was black, wanted to get married in Nebraska, it was illegal for them to wed. So they decided to go next door to Iowa, a state that was progressive enough to allow interracial marriage. My mom’s brother tried to have the Nebraska state police bar her from leaving the state so she couldn’t marry my dad, which was only the latest legal indignity she had endured. She had been arrested on my parents’ first date, accused of prostitution. (The conventional thought of the time being: Why else would a white woman be seen with a black man?)

On their wedding day, somehow, my parents made it out of Nebraska without getting arrested again, and were wed in Council Bluffs, Iowa, on March 1, 1958. This was five years before Nebraska would strike down its laws against interracial marriage, and almost a decade before the Supreme Court would outlaw miscegenation laws throughout the country in Loving v. Virginia.

When the good state of Iowa conferred the dignity of civic recognition on my parents’ relationship — a relationship some members of their own families thought was deviant and immoral, that the civil authorities of Nebraska had tried to destroy, and that even some of my mom’s college-educated friends believed would produce children striped like zebras — our family began. And by the time my father died, their interracial marriage was seen just as a marriage, and an admirable 45-year one at that.

That I almost cried last week upon reading that the Iowa Supreme Court overturned the state law banning same-sex marriage will therefore come as no surprise. I’m still struck by one thought: over the years, I’ve met so many gay émigrés who felt it was unsafe to be gay in so-called flyover country and fled for the East and West coasts. But as a gay man, I can’t marry in “liberal” New York, where I’m a resident, or in “liberal” California, where I was born, and very soon I will have that right in “conservative” Iowa.

Of course, the desire to define relational rights and responsibilities with a partner, to have access to the protection that this kind of commitment affords, is rather conservative. But it’s a conservative dream that should be offered to all Americans. Though it takes great courage for gays to marry in a handful of states now, one hopes that someday, throughout the nation, gay marriages, like my parents’ union, will just be seen as marriages.

It’s safe to say that neither the dramas of our family, nor its triumphs, could have been possible without the simultaneously radical and conservative occasion of my parents’ civil marriage in Iowa. And so when the time comes, I hope to be married at the City Hall in Council Bluffs, in the state that not only supports my civil rights now, but which supported my parents’ so many years ago.

Steven W. Thrasher is a writer and media producer.

Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company

###

Pretty amazing statement from Iowa House & Senate leaders
By Jennifer Vanasco 04.03.2009 1:46pm EDT
News & Politics
A statement released today on gay marriage from Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal and House Speaker Pat Murphy (thanks to Evan Wolfson from Freedom to Marry for the tip).

Iowa continues to be a leader in guaranteeing civil rights

This is a joint statement from Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal and Iowa House Speaker Pat Murphy on today’s Supreme Court decision:

“Thanks to today’s decision, Iowa continues to be a leader in guaranteeing all of our citizens’ equal rights.

“The court has ruled today that when two Iowans promise to share their lives together, state law will respect that commitment, regardless of whether the couple is gay or straight.

“When all is said and done, we believe the only lasting question about today’s events will be why it took us so long. It is a tough question to answer because treating everyone fairly is really a matter of Iowa common sense and Iowa common decency.

“Today, the Iowa Supreme Court has reaffirmed those Iowa values by ruling that gay and lesbian Iowans have all the same rights and responsibilities of citizenship as any other Iowan.

“Iowa has always been a leader in the area of civil rights.

“In 1839, the Iowa Supreme Court rejected slavery in a decision that found that a slave named Ralph became free when he stepped on Iowa soil, 26 years before the end of the Civil War decided the issue.

“In 1868, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that racially segregated “separate but equal” schools had no place in Iowa, 85 years before the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same decision.

“In 1873, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled against racial discrimination in public accommodations, 91 years before the U.S. Supreme Court reached the same decision.

“In 1869, Iowa became the first state in the union to admit women to the practice of law.

“In the case of recognizing loving relationships between two adults, the Iowa Supreme Court is once again taking a leadership position on civil rights.

“Today, we congratulate the thousands of Iowans who now can express their love for each other and have it recognized by our laws.”

###

Vermont Legalizes Gay Marriage With Veto Override
04-07-2009

Vermont has become the fourth state to legalize gay marriage -- and the first to do so with a legislature's vote.

The Legislature voted Tuesday to override Gov. Jim Douglas' veto of a bill allowing gays and lesbians to marry. The vote was 23-5 to override in the state Senate and 100-49 to override in the House. Under Vermont law, two-thirds of each chamber had to vote for override.

The vote came nine years after Vermont adopted its first-in-the-nation civil unions law.

It's now the fourth state to permit same-sex marriage. Massachusetts, Connecticut and Iowa are the others. Their approval of gay marriage came from the courts.

Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

###

GAY MARRIAGE'S EARNED VICTORY
By KYLE SMITH

April 12, 2009 -- Uh-oh. Now gays really, legitimately, democratically and completely non-sneakily have won the right to marry, in Vermont. Next thing you know gays preparing to wed will be everywhere, threatening our way of life by picking out china patterns in Bloomingdale's and bickering about where to seat Uncle Floyd at the reception.

News stories about the Vermont decision implicitly recognize that this one really counts, by emphasizing the fact that this is the first state to approve gay marriage through a legislature rather than impose it from the bench, where judges pretend the right has been there all along without previously being detected. Vermont has made the change the proper way, and it ought to be congratulated.

Those who chafe at the decision -- and the passage of Prop. 8 in California, which Obama carried by 24 points, suggests that the opposition is hardly limited to Republicans -- should reexamine their arguments.

Does the Bible forbid gay relationships? Maybe. But if God didn't want there to be gay people, He shouldn't have made them. Who seriously believes that being gay is any more of a choice than being black?

Besides, not even the most fervent Christian would want to live in a Biblocracy. Covet your neighbor's wife, or even his kitchen appliances, and go to jail? If that were government policy, how many informers would it need on the payroll to monitor the neighbors' comments about saucy Serena (or her Sub-Zero?) Does God's idea of civilization look like East Berlin in 1981?

The Bible is about you and your soul, and if you think your neighbor is going to hell you can't stop him. And if you think gay relationships are immoral, surely it's the physical act that bothers you, not the signing of licenses, not the public vows of love and fidelity, not the matching tuxedos. Not the smiling faces. Yet few will make the case for police investigations of what people do between the sheets.

"Same-sex marriage," wrote Maggie Gallagher in National Review, "asks religious Americans," by which she means Christian Americans, "to surrender a core belief -- not only Leviticus (disapproval of gay sexual acts), but Genesis (the idea that God himself made man as male and female and commanded men and women to come together in a special way to image the fruitfulness of God)." But Christians are surrendering nothing. They remain free to disapprove of homosexuality just as they remain free to disapprove of their neighbor's alcoholism or adultery or bad taste in lawn ornaments. They also remain free to move to a country that enforces religious views.

If marriages that can't produce children by the traditional method ought to be illegal, then half my straight friends' marriages would never have taken place. This offends me on a personal level, because I would have been deprived of a lot of free Champagne and several choice opportunities to dance the horah. Since when is there a fertility test to marriage? Moreover, gay couples can and do produce children who would not otherwise have existed, with the participation of one or both partners (Molly's egg, meet Julie's womb).

Those who say that gay marriage just isn't popular should take note of Vermont's unusually muscular notion of representative government. As the Gay Patriot blog notes, Vermont has so few residents and so many elected representatives -- its lower house has nearly twice as many lawmakers as California's -- that there's practically no boundary between the people and the politicians, who anyway legislate only part-time and live in such a small state that they spend most of their time home with their constituents.

As older generations are replaced by young voters, acceptance of gay marriage will become the norm. Opponents will seem marginal, perhaps even despicable. An Iowa poll released this month put statewide support for gay marriage at 36% -- but nearly 60% among voters under 30.

Conservatives who are in favor of more children being born into and raised by two-parent families, social mechanisms to limit promiscuity, decentralized political decision-making and the supremacy of lawmakers rather than judges in non-Constitutional matters have much to cheer in Vermont. Gay-marriage opponents should ask themselves whether their reasoning is something else in disguise.

Kyle.Smith@nypost.com

Copyright 2009 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.

###

Sweden Becomes 5th European Country to Allow Gay Marriage
Wednesday, April 01, 2009

STOCKHOLM — Sweden became the fifth European country to allow gay marriage.

Parliament on Wednesday adopted a new law that gives same-sex couples the same marriage rights as heterosexuals.

The Parliament's Web site says the new law will take effect on May 1.

The Netherlands, Norway, Belgium and Spain also allow gay marriages.

Sweden has recognized civil unions between homosexual couples since 1994. However, the old law stopped short of calling them marriages, which gay rights activists said was discriminatory.

It will still be up to individual churches to decide if they want to wed gay couples.

Swedish news agency TT says the 349-seat legislature passed the measure in 261-22 vote, with 66 lawmakers abstaining or absent.

###

Sources: US to sign UN gay rights declaration
By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer Matthew Lee, Associated Press Writer
Wed Mar 18, 12:28 am ET

WASHINGTON – The Obama administration will endorse a U.N. declaration calling for the worldwide decriminalization of homosexuality that then-President George W. Bush had refused to sign, The Associated Press has learned.

U.S. officials said Tuesday they had notified the declaration's French sponsors that the administration wants to be added as a supporter. The Bush administration was criticized in December when it was the only western government that refused to sign on.

The move was made after an interagency review of the Bush administration's position on the nonbinding document, which was signed by all 27 European Union members as well as Japan, Australia, Mexico and three dozen other countries, the officials said.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because Congress was still being notified of the decision. They said the administration had decided to sign the declaration to demonstrate that the United States supports human rights for all.

"The United States is an outspoken defender of human rights and critic of human rights abuses around the world," said one official.

"As such, we join with the other supporters of this statement and we will continue to remind countries of the importance of respecting the human rights of all people in all appropriate international fora," the official said.

The official added that the United States was concerned about "violence and human rights abuses against gay, lesbian, transsexual and bisexual individuals" and was also "troubled by the criminalization of sexual orientation in many countries."

"In the words of the United States Supreme Court, the right to be free from criminalization on the basis of sexual orientation 'has been accepted as an integral part of human freedom'," the official said.

Gay rights and other groups had criticized the Bush administration when it refused to sign the declaration when it was presented at the United Nations on Dec. 19. U.S. officials said then that the U.S. opposed discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation but that parts of the declaration raised legal questions that needed further review.

According to negotiators, the Bush team had concerns that those parts could commit the federal government on matters that fall under state jurisdiction. In some states, landlords and private employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation; on the federal level, gays are not allowed to serve openly in the military.

It was not immediately clear on Tuesday how the Obama administration had come to a different conclusion.

When it was voted on in December, 66 of the U.N.'s 192 member countries signed the declaration — which backers called a historic step to push the General Assembly to deal more forthrightly with anti-gay discrimination.

But 70 U.N. members outlaw homosexuality — and in several, homosexual acts can be punished by execution. More than 50 nations, including members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, opposed the declaration.

Some Islamic countries said at the time that protecting sexual orientation could lead to "the social normalization and possibly the legalization of deplorable acts" such as pedophilia and incest. The declaration was also opposed by the Vatican.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.

###

Lambda: Gay not defamatory
By 365gay Newscenter Staff
03.17.2009 2:30pm EDT
(New York City) Lambda Legal has told a federal court that calling someone gay is not defamation and the court should dismiss a lawsuit by Howard K. Stern against former MSNBC host Rita Cosby.

Send / ShareAdd CommentIn her book, “Blonde Ambition: The Untold Story Behind Anna Nicole Smith’s Death,” Cosby claimed Stern, Anna Nicole Smith’s lawyer and boyfriend, had a sexual encounter with Larry Birkhead, Smith’s former boyfriend.

Cosby quoted two former nannies as confirmation, but both women later said they made no such claims.

In 2007, after the book was published, Stern filed suit claiming that Cosby, in calling him gay, was being defamatory and as a result he was entitled to collect damages.

This week Lambda Legal filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York arguing that Stern’s claims of defamation rest on the flawed premise that being called gay would expose someone to public hatred and shame.

Lambda argued that the premise is disproved daily throughout New York, including through the service of New York’s many openly gay and lesbian public officials.

Validation of this type of defamation claim, and its underlying premise, would have a demeaning effect toward gay men and lesbians, similar to the effect caused by state sodomy laws before they were struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas the amicus brief stated.

“Saying that someone is gay is not an insult. Being identified as gay is neither bad nor shameful — in life and under the law,” said Thomas W. Ude, Jr., Senior Staff Attorney at Lambda Legal.

“At its core, defamation is about disgrace. Recognition of this defamation claim would demean gay men and lesbians by giving credence to antigay biases that New York has repeatedly rejected.”

In Lawrence v. Texas Lambda Legal scored a major LGBT rights victory leading to a number of other successful LGBT cases at the state level.

###

Lambda Legal Urges Federal Court to Reject Gay Defamation Claim
http://www.lambdalegal.org/news/pr/lambda-legal-urges-federal-1.html

Saying that someone is gay is not an insult. Being identified as gay is neither bad nor shameful – in life and under the law.’

(New York, March 13, 2009) — Today at the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Lambda Legal filed a brief arguing that the Court should reject Howard K. Stern's claim that being called gay is defamatory per se and entitles him to collect damages.

"Saying that someone is gay is not an insult. Being identified as gay is neither bad nor shameful — in life and under the law," said Thomas W. Ude, Jr., Senior Staff Attorney at Lambda Legal. "At its core, defamation is about disgrace. Recognition of this defamation claim would demean gay men and lesbians by giving credence to antigay biases that New York has repeatedly rejected."

In 2007, Howard K. Stern filed a lawsuit claiming that he was defamed by passages in a book titled Blonde Ambition: The Untold Story Behind the Death of Anna Nicole Smith. Lambda Legal's friend-of-the-court brief argues that Stern's first two claims of defamation rest on the flawed premise that being called gay would expose someone to public hatred and shame — a premise that is disproved daily throughout New York, including through the service of New York's many openly gay and lesbian public officials. Validation of this type of defamation claim, and its underlying premise, would have a demeaning effect toward gay men and lesbians, similar to the effect caused by state sodomy laws before they were struck down by the US Supreme Court in Lawrence v. Texas, Lambda Legal's 2003 landmark victory. These claims are out of step with New York law and public policy, which has repeatedly affirmed the rights and dignity of gay men and lesbians.

The case is Howard K. Stern v. Rita Cosby et al.

Thomas W. Ude, Jr., Senior Staff Attorney at Lambda Legal is handling the matter for Lambda Legal.

###

Erin Baer 212-809-8585 ext 267; Email: ebaer@lambdalegal.org

###

Who's Gay on Gossip Girl? Find Out! Kristin Dos Santos
Wed Apr 23, 5:56 AM ET

This just in from the Upper East Side: Sources confirm exclusively that one of the main characters on Gossip Girl is gay—and the way it's revealed will leave your jaw on the floor. (Hint: Scandalous hookup! Yay!)

If you want to find out who is coming out, and who'll be dabbling in a little same-sex tonsil hockey very soon, get the full story in Watch with Kristin...

Copyright © 2008 E! Online, Inc.

Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

Burberry Gossip
Westwick and Barneys fête Burberry's Spring/Summer Collection
3/17/2009 4:16:00 PM

(NEW YORK) "First thing that I do in New York is run straight to the Apple store," laughed guest of honor Christopher Bailey at Barneys last night. "Run" was a key word for the celebrated Burberry creative director--he was in town for only four hours before catching a plane back to London. But the main characters at the cocktail to fête the arrival of Burberry Prorsum's Spring menswear collection were all a bit busy last night too. Host Ed Westwick was shooting scenes for Gossip Girl a few blocks away for most of the day and had to pop into the event in between kissing scenes with Leighton Meester. "I watched a bit of the show back home," said Bailey. "And Ed is really a nice guy and impressive actor, even if he's a bit naughty as Chuck."

Guests like Mary-Kate Olsen, Leigh Lezark, Max Minghella, Zanna Roberts, Poppy Delevigne, Ingrid Sischy and Sandy Brant, Claire Bernard and Dani Stahl all came by to greet Bailey and listen to DJ Nate Lowman's musical masterminds. "My necklace sounds like a flock of reindeers," pointed out Stahl as she jiggled her Burberry accessory to the music. Bailey, meanwhile happily discussed gardening as one of the inspirations for his Spring line. "I have a house in Yorkshire where I garden," the Brit said with a smile. "I'm going there in a few weekends and I honesty love soil and digging. I love gardening when it involves expansion of energy."

Jamie Burke meanwhile discussed his own agricultural potential. "I used to live on a farm when I was a little kid, so I grew things here and there," said the musician who's heading to South by Southwest with his new band this week. "But Chris is really one of the essential English designers but we Brits don't all know each other. So I came by to finally meet him." Simon Doonan, meanwhile professed his love for Bailey too, not for his birthplace. "I left England so long ago so I don't fetishize my homeland as much," he said. "Though Chris has done it brilliantly, of course. But I've been on this side of the pond for 40 years!"
VALENTINE UHOVSKI

Ed Westwick at the Knicks Game: Gay or European?
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2009/03/ed_westwick_at_the_knicks_game.html?mid=daily-intel--20090317
3/17/09 at 1:40 PM

We've been seeing this picture floating around the Internet all week, and the other day, while on a plane, we saw it in In Touch. The celebrity weekly did everything in its power not to call Ed Westwick gay, but they came close. "Ed's girlfriend and co-star Jessica Szohr was noticeably absent," they observe. "But fans shouldn't be worried about his 'bromance breakup' with Chace [Crawford], says an insider. 'That will never be over — they're both too needy!'"

Let's be clear: We don't think Ed Westwick is gay. We've met him in person and he oozes dudeness, and plus, one of our girlfriends totally hooked up with him. (As did, we occasionally suspect, Intel commenter Sarcastic Meow.) But there is something so bizarre about this picture! So we polled all of our friends who are both gay and European to see whether they think Ed is just acting out his naturally British impulses with this mystery man, or acting out impulses of another kind.

THEIR LIPS ARE PRACTICALLY TOUCHING!
Photo: Getty Images

Unfortunately, our experts were split. "Either he's insanely gay, or is just out of Italian Gigolo boot camp and finding it hard to brush off the skills he was taught," fashion and travel writer Mark Ellwood opined. "They are at a Knicks game ... so I'm thinking European, not Gay," mused Nike Communications' Peter Malachi. And Nick Denton, who is not one to hold back from gay speculation, firmly declared the situation "European" nonetheless. What do you guys think?

By: Chris Rovzar
Filed Under: the greatest show of our time, ed westwick, europeans, gays, gossip girl

We have never seen a straight ankle touch ever before in our lives.
Photo: Getty Images