Humor: Obamney

Photoshopping by Rob Beschizza of BoingBoing!

When I noticed this on Boing Boing today, I could not stop staring.  The purpose was to catch the attention of Boing Boing regulars and remind them of commenting guidelines for the politcal election season.  Still, that picture.

Praise: Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day

If you have time, the whole message is worth hearing.  If you have never listened all the way through, please consider doing so. This speech gives life to a rich history, good and bad, of the United States through 1963 and a compelling insight into the future, into our time. Dr. King's words inspired people then and now, including the peaceful Occupy Movement that continues around the world.  Please listen to the rhythm, the pacing, the individual words, and the references to great works that came before.  Magnificent.



Dr. King was assassinated in 1968.  His wife, Coretta Scott King, lived until 2006.  Here are a few quotes from Ms. King.

• I support the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 1994 because I believe that freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit political convenience. My husband, Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." On another occasion he said, "I have worked too long and hard against segregated public accommodations to end up segregating my moral concern. Justice is indivisible." Like Martin, I don't believe you can stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others.
  So I see this bill as a step forward for freedom and human rights in our country and a logical extension of the Bill of Rights and the civil rights reforms of the 1950s and '60's.
  The great promise of American democracy is that no group of people will be forced to suffer discrimination and injustice. I believe that this legislation will provide protection to a large group of working people, who have suffered persecution and discrimination for many years. To this endeavor, I pledge my wholehearted support.
  • Press Conference on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 1994, Washington D.C. (23 June 1994)

• I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people and I should stick to the issue of racial justice. But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream to make room at the table of brother- and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people.
  • Reuters (31 March 1998)

• Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood. This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group.
  • Chicago Defender (1 April 1998)

• I've always felt that homophobic attitudes and policies were unjust and unworthy of a free society and must be opposed by all Americans who believe in democracy.
  • Chicago Sun Times (1 April 1998)

• Hate is too great a burden to bear. It injures the hater more than it injures the hated.
  • As quoted in Understanding Cultural Diversity in Today's Complex World‎ (2006) by Leo Parvis, p. 54

• I'm more determined than ever that my husband's dream will become a reality.
  • Statement soon after her husband's slaying, as quoted in CNN obituary (January 31, 2006)

A great man.  A great woman.  A great American family.  A day worthy of celebration.

Thanks to Secret Asian Man for the YouTube link.

Pattern: October Surprise?

This morning Joe My God ran a clip from Reuters on Russia warning the United States against attacking Iran.  At the same time, all of the Republican contenders, with the notable exception of Ron Paul, are saber-rattling against Iran.  This set me thinking about October 1980, but the story starts much earlier.

In 1921, Reza Shah Pahlavi overthrew the Persian government, a Turkish family having held the seat for a couple of centuries.  He sought to modernize Iran without Westernizing the country.  As part of the battles of World War II, Britain and the Soviet Union invaded Iran and sent him into exile.

In 1941, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the last Shah, the son of the exiled ruler, was placed on the throne.  A decade later there was a coup and the last Shah fled the country.  Two years later the United States and Britain overthrew a constitutional government to force the last Shah back onto the throne.  The last Shah fled Iran again in 1979 as the modern theocracy took over.

It is important to go back to the Pahlavi dynasty to understand why Iranians today hold animosity toward the United States.  While these are not recent events to many of us, they are not forgotten in the ancient land of Persia.

In November 1979, fifty-two Americans were taken hostage at the United States embassy in Tehran.  They would be held for 444 days.  This would be part of why President Jimmy Carter failed to win a second term.  Mr. Carter did endeavor to free the hostages, both by negotiations and by military extraction.  All efforts failed.  To make matters worse for the President, media coverage was greater and more persistent than it had ever been previously, including the introduction of Nightline to cover the hostage drama.

On 20 January 1981, minutes after Ronald Wilson Reagan was sworn into office as the fortieth President of the United States, the hostages were freed.  The timing inspired conspiracy theories.  I was serving in the U.S. Navy at the time and there were many rumors, scuttlebutt it was called, floating around about both Mr. Carter and Mr. Reagan.  The truth would not come out until several years later.

In 1988 fourteen of the released hostages filed suit against the U.S. government for collusion with the Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini to delay the release until after Mr. Reagan was sworn into office.

To support the lawsuit's charges, Davis cited recently declassified top- secret documents and court transcripts. He is relying mostly on statements by two self-described former CIA agents: Richard Brenneke and Heinrich Rupp.

The two claim to have played roles in three meetings between Reagan campaign officials and Iranian officials in Paris on Oct. 19-20, 1980.

Brenneke, an Oregon businessman and former arms dealer, told a federal judge in Denver last month that he attended one of the meetings along with William Casey, then-chairman of the Reagan campaign and later the director of the CIA, and Donald Gregg, now George Bush's national security adviser. He said he was not at an Oct. 19 meeting that he was told included Bush.

The group discussed trading weapons for a delay in releasing the American hostages until after the election, Brenneke said.

''The logistics of transferring $40 million for the purchase of weapons was worked out,'' Brenneke said in his testimony. ''That was the figure that William Casey and Mr. Gregg discussed at the meeting as being available for the purchase of weapons.''

More information came out in the book October Surprise in 1991.

Now let's look at 2012.  There have been tensions between Iraq and Iran for a long time.  Our withdrawal from Iraq has left an opening for Republicans to question whether this helps Iran (a fair question).  The second nuclear scientist assassinated in Iran in a short period leaves Iran blaming Israel and the United States (perhaps correctly, I don't know).  Russia is on Iran's side so that it can ensure its own delivery of oil from the Persian fields.  And the Republican contenders for President are rattling their sabers.

I don't like conspiracy theories.  I would hope that no American who seeks the presidency would be dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration's defeat.  But that apparently did happen just thirty-two years ago.  Could history repeat itself?  What sort of surprise might October 2012 hold?  I offer no predictions, just concern.

Praise: Judge Solomon Metzger Rules on Public Accommodations

In 2007, Harriet Bernstein and Luisa Paster booked the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association's Boardwalk Pavilion, part of the Grove Hall Retreat Center, for their Civil Union Ceremony.  Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association is a Methodist organization.  They were then turned away because the ceremony would not be in keeping with the religious views of the owners.  Because the Boardwalk Pavilion was a public accommodation, Ms. Bernstein and Ms. Paster sued.

On Friday, Judge Metzger ruled in favor of the couple.  The Cliffview Pilot takes up the story.

“The Camp Meeting Association could have used the pavilion exclusively for its own purposes,” said Lawrence Lustberg of Gibbons, P.C., who represents the couple as a cooperating attorney for the ACLU-NJ. “The judge found, however, that the association opened the pavilion up to the public and thus was obligated to follow anti-discrimination laws.”

“We are pleased with the judge’s findings,” said Harriet Bernstein. “When we first started planning our civil union, we had no idea that it would come to this.  We weren’t asking the association to change their beliefs. We just wanted them to give us the same opportunity to use a beautiful space that we had seen open for public use.”

The ruling was not about religion.

In his written decision, Judge Solomon A. Metzger of the Office of Administrative Law ruled that the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association breached its agreement to make the pavilion available to the public on an equal basis.

The association was also required to make the pavilion public in exchange for a state tax exemption it received that requires equal access on a non-discriminatory basis, the judge said.

Metzger also noted that while the association is free to practice its mission without government oversight, it had never attached any religious ministry to the wedding venue until it received Paster and Bernstein’s application.

“(The association) was not, however, free to promise equal access to rent wedding space to heterosexual couples irrespective of their tradition and then except (Bernstein and Paster),” Judge Metzger stated.

With New Jersey in the Marriage Equality spotlight, Garden State Equality's Steven Goldstein wrote, in part:

In a claim that strained credulity, the Association postured that the public pavilion was private even though the Association had accepted a public subsidy for the facility and had signed an agreement to make it open to public on a nondiscriminatory basis.   Over the years, opponents of equality have consistently left those crucial facts out of their propaganda.  Instead, they have falsely claimed that the case represents an infringement on religious civil rights.   Let’s make this clear:  Garden State Equality and our partners in the movement for equality passionately oppose forcing religions and clergy to marry anyone they don’t want to marry.  We oppose with equal fervor forcing any house of worship or other religious institution to host any ceremony they don’t want to host.   The new marriage equality bill, The Marriage Equality and Religious Exemption Act, has religious exemptions that reinforce and strengthen those constitutionally guaranteed religious rights.

This is a tremendous victory for the ACLU of New Jersey, the lawyers in the case, and for their cocounsel, the Gibbons law firm.  The ACLU of New Jersey, Gibbons and Gibbons’ partner in charge of pro bono work who worked this case, Larry Lustberg, have all been honored by Garden State Equality in recent years.  Gibbons, incidentally, is cocounsel to Garden State Equality and same-sex couples in the marriage equality case now before the New Jersey courts, Garden State Equality v. Dow.   Larry is among the amazing lawyers, along with Lambda Legal, presenting our marriage equality case before the courts.  We’re in the very best of hands.

Of course, that didn't stop those opposed to equality from twisting the tale.  Good As You points out that Fox News site Fox Nation claims that Judge Metzger ruled against the Christian faith, with this title:

Judge Says Following Christian Faith is Wrong

The full article at Fox News is without such a huge lie.  The side of the Alliance Defense Fund attorney is given, along with his slippery slope conclusion about the judge's ruling.

Jim Campbell, an attorney with the Alliance Defense Fund, said the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association has been operating on the Jersey shore for more than 125 years and has its history rooted in the Methodist Church.

“According to their Book of Discipline, they cannot host same sex unions on their property,” Campbell told Fox News & Commentary. “He is saying they engaged in wrongdoing under the law simply for refusing to use the property in a way that would violate their religious beliefs.”

But that’s only part of the judge’s concern. In 1989, Ocean Grove applied for a Green Acres real-estate tax exemption for a section of land that included the pavilion and the boardwalk. One condition of the exemption is that the property had to be “open for public use on an equal basis.

When they first applied for the tax exemption, civil unions were not yet legal in New Jersey. That changed in 2006 when the New Jersey Supreme Court granted same-sex couples equal rights under the state constitution.

The judge’s decision suggests that he doesn’t see a conflict with religious liberty in the case, Campbell said. Metzger rejected the church’s contention that the pavilion was an extension of its wedding ministry.
But Campbell said the ruling could have troublesome implications for religious groups across the state –including the possibility that churches may be forced to host same sex unions in their houses of worship.

“That’s the danger of this ruling,” Campbell said. “It could be applied to other religious entities and it could be applied to other places of worship.”

No.  The ruling was specific.  The goals of the LGBTQ Community, as expressed by Mr. Goldstein are specific.  There is no threat to religion in New Jersey.

Kudos to Judge Metzger and the New Jersey ACLU.  May New Jersey find swift passage of their marriage equality legislation.