 |
|
Pen Points
Letters to Gay Today |
|
Remembering the World's
The response to the website has put a glow in Mike's and my heart that will remain always, and we have had a wonderful time meeting and corresponding with all of you from around the world. We hope the celebration of this great man's life will continue to grow, and people will visit his grave or celebrate his life every August 28. You may reach the Memory Book in two ways: www.angelfire.com/fl3/celebration2000/memory.html or www.angelfire.com/fl3/celebration2000 and then selecting "Memory Book 2000" in the table of contents. Mike and I are still receiving additional material from many countries, so, it may be worth your while to check back to see what is new. Of course, feel free to send me anything you would like added. With best wishes and many thanks, Paul Nash (and Mike) www.angelfire.com/fl3/celebration2000/memory.htmlKarl Heinrich Ulrichs: MEMORY BOOK 2000 P.S. Your entry in Karl's Guest Book would be greatly appreciated! Would Falwell Hire a Drunk to Drive the Church Van?
All sorts of delicious questions about who knew what when come to mind, but the main thing is that young Mr. Bush either thought he could get away with it, or that he had to try. How many times have we seen this played out around the question of somebody's sexuality? How much damage do we know it does to the ability of the person in question to get their work done. How much does that matter if the relevant person's job title is "President of the United States of America"? As usual, Falwell gets it just a little bit wrong. The correct response to learning that a job applicant for a church van driving position has concealed a DUI or two, is, "Do Not Hire." Absolution is usually thought to be available only to those who confess in the first place. (Parenthetically, I have to wonder just how much money pads Mr. Falwell's conceptual universe; The church I go to has a nice physical plant, and a tidy, though not vast endowment, but we just about always look for volunteers to haul folks around if they cannot or should not drive themsleves.) Jonathan Justice Blame Nader? Give Me a Break!
One, look at the numbers. How many Democrats in Florida voted for Nader? How many Democrats voted for Bush? Over ten times more self-identified Democrats voted for Bush than Nader. Anyone with counting skills could figure out Bush is the "spoiler vote". Two, neither Democrats or Republicans have an inherent right to be the only parties in control of the country. Nor do they have an inherent right to any votes. They have to be earned. With all of this anger directed at Nader and his voters for "betraying" the Democratic candidate, you should remeber the Democratic Party is not the official party for which one automatically has to vote. The rhetoric reeks of anti-democratic sentiment ridiculed when it happens elsewhere in the world. Three, you should be thanking Nader voters for showing up at the polls, as their votes often went to progressive state propostitions and Democratic candidates for state and local offices. You should likewise thank the Nader campaign for bringing out more Democrats to vote (many of those worried that Nader would cost Gore the election). Four, no Gore supporters ever answered the question, posed by Nader amongst others, as to why Gore was running a neck and neck race with one of the most incompetent politicians in the country. That a man like Gore, who has spent his life running for public office, couldn't even win his own state (or Bill Clinton's state) let alone easily defeat Bush nationally and allow for a progressive challenge to shave off a few points says alot about both Nader and Gore. It says that Nader is a much more effective campaigner than many realized, considering Nader spent a fraction of what the Democrats spent, was shut out of the debates, ridiculed or ignored by the press until late October when he was attacked by "liberal" leaders, yet still received millions of votes and drew far more people to his political rallies than either Bush or Gore. It says that Gore appointed a poor campaign team and, in Democratic Leadership Council fashion, is willing to take the left of the Democratic Party for granted if he can get the "moderate" vote. Four, I don't remember this level of "spoiler" / "how dare he run" rhetoric from Democrats when quirky millionaire Ross Perot was challenging Clinton and Bush in 92. In fact, editorials generally commented that Perot was adding ideas to the debates and bringing more citizen interest into the political process. Five, I think demonizing Nader has to do with both his pointing out the difference between the rhetoric and the reality of the Democratic Party and bringing up issues of corporate and media power in the political process. That touched a major nerve, especially amongst major corporate media, former Nader supporters turned Monsanto spokesperson such as Toby Moffet and mainstream civil rights and environmental organizations, whose mostly uncritical support for the Democratic Party regardless of its actions began to be revealed during the last weeks of the campaign. Ultimately, until Democrats start looking at what their party did wrong rather than blaming Nader, until Democratic Party leaders stop giving unanimous votes for Supreme Court nominees like Scalia (there's also the 11 Dems who voted for Thomas) rather than wail "Oh think of the Supreme Court!" every four years; until a Democratic president addresses the growing inequality between rich and poor through other methods than welfare abolition; until Democrats start changing the party's support for heavy financing of the Pentagon, NASA, and the military rather than bomb a medicine factory in Sudan and give weapons to human rights violaters like Saudi Arabia and Israel; until more Democrats really start fighting for workers by pushing to repeal the Taft-Hartley Act and pushing fair trade agreements rather than GATT and WTO agreements; and until a Democratic presidential candidate says gay/lesbian/bisexual and transgendered Americans should be legally recognized as equal citizens under the law instead of supporting legislation like DOMA, you can count on more people voting for someone other than the "lesser of two evils". Unfortunately, given the response of citizens and Democratic Party officials to the elections and Ralph Nader, I suspect people will learn nothing other than the value of scapegoating. I am sorry to see so many gays and liberals taking part in this reactionary tradition.
Jack Tilney |
Karl Heinrich Ulrichs 
I read with little surprise the letters blaming Nader
for Gore's potential loss in Florida. The sentiment
is not based on the facts, makes little sense and is
leading more liberals to take up scapegoating as a
political tactic. The reasons are as follows:
© 1997-2000 BEI