Saturday, June 14, 2008

Stuff That Goes Around the Internet

You know that there is a nutty group here in Montgomery County that wants to re-legalize discrimination against transgender people. They are opposing a new nondiscrimination law by saying that it will let perverted men go into the ladies locker-rooms. Their web site is called, though they like to say it's not all about the showers.

Somebody recently asked me about something strange on their site. Well, it's not there any more, but they did have a big page that said "Join Team 777." Here's what it said:
We're looking for 777 individuals and organization who will pledge to gather 50 signatures each. Are you up for the challenge? Join Team 777 today and get started toward your goal.

You can find this in the Google cache HERE, at least for now.

There was no follow-up on the site anywhere, and it didn't seem to make any sense.

Well, it does make some kind of sense, in a weird way. It turns out there was a bill last year in California, the Student Civil Rights Act, Senate Bill 777, which makes sure that schools monitor the treatment of gay and lesbian students, to prevent harassment and bullying. Naturally the nuts in California -- and there are more than a few of them -- are screaming bloody murder over this development. For instance, the World Net Daily quoted a guy saying:
..."This means children as young as five years old will be mentally molested in school classrooms.

"Shame on Schwarzenegger and the Democrat politicians for ensuring that every California school becomes a homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination center," he said.

We've heard that kind of talk before, right here in our suburban county.

Oh, and listen to how Free Republic played it -- this was October 15th of last year:
Governor Schwarzenegger has signed into the law the highly controversial SB 777 (Kuehl) that will permit transgender students to enter the locker rooms and restrooms of the gender with which they identify.

Under the guise of preventing discrimination and bias against homosexuals, transgenders and other sexual variants, SB 777 will force innocent school children to accept alternative lifestyles.

It is interesting to see that the locker-room angle was being explored back in October, in California, in regards to a bill completely unrelated to the one we have in our county. Our local shower-nuts only registered their Internet domain in December. And here I had given them credit with making this idiocy up!

So somebody asked me about this Team 777 business recently, and I looked at it and said that I would bet there is a web site in California somewhere that looks exactly like our shower-nuts' site. This morning it started to haunt me, and I wondered if there really is such a site. Turns out there is.

Do this. Go to Now go to Look at that red menu across the top, the blue banner below that with the faint stars on it. Look at the "Action Center" on the left.

It appears that the Citizens for a Responsible Government took this California group's web site, copied it and changed some wording. If you look at the source code you'll see the same scripts, the same code, on both sites.

The "Save our Kids" site was registered in October, 2007, before our local shower-nuts site, which was registered in December. "Save Our Kids" (what a name!) exists to oppose SB 777. They have a section on their site that says:
Join Team 777 Today. We're looking for 777 individuals and organizations who will pledge to gather 1,000 signatures each. Are you up for the challenge? Join Team 777 today.

Interestingly, the California group wanted you to get 1,000 signatures, our guys only wanted you to get 50. Also, our shower-nuts made the word "organization" singular, though it's grammatically incorrect. I can see why they'd lower their expectations on the number of signatures, but don't know why they'd screw up the grammar like that.

Actually, you can find the same grammatical error on a half-Russian, half-English site HERE. Not sure who took it from who, though. It appears that the Russian site posted it on December 9th, 2007, about a week after the MoCo shower-nuts registered their domain name.

Aren't you curious to know how this happens? The idea that you can get the public to oppose gay and transgender people by talking about bathrooms didn't originate here, we've seen it on Free Republic before our guys started saying it, and we have seen the Colorado groups pick it up and use it in their case. People don't like the idea of perverted men going into the ladies room, and though it has nothing at all to do with any law preventing discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender people it does turn out to be a good way to inflame the community and get petition signatures.

And the shower-nuts' web site was something they simply downloaded from the Internet, they changed a few words and there it goes. Out in California they oppose a law that protects kids in school, out here they oppose a law that protects transgender people, it's all the same. Change a few words and let it go. Amazingly, they even tried to use the "Team 777" stuff, though 777 has no meaning in our controversy, it's purely a California bill.

I don't think there's anything wrong with stealing stuff from the Internet, by the way. The fact that digital information can be reproduced easily is what makes the net so powerful, there's nothing wrong with "borrowing" somebody else's source code. It's nice to give credit, but we all understand that stuff goes around the Internet without credit given. I'm not criticizing the shower-nuts for stealing code, that's a time-honored Internet tradition.

I do wonder how much collaboration there is between these groups. Is there some newsletter they send around, that says "Tell people that men will go into the ladies room, that really works"? Did our shower-nuts ask these California anti-gay nuts if they could borrow their web format, or did they just take it? And what did they think "Team 777" was, really, when they put that on the Internet?


Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

What's interesting is that they reduced the number to 50 signatures per person because they knew that's what they needed. 777 x 50 = 38850, which is 56% more signatures than they thought they needed. If they had used the total voter registration number of ~ 560,000, that would have been 35% more than needed, also a safe cushion.

Had they succeeded, the Board's error would have had little impact, and there wouldn't have been a legal challenge. For such an example, that was the case recently in California on marriage, where the fundamentalists collected a sufficient cushion to preclude a challenge.

June 14, 2008 3:51 PM  
Blogger BlackTsunami said...


we know there is more collaboration amongst these groups then they care to admit. I find it ironic that these so-called family groups are constantly claiming that lgbts are universally coordinating a plan to turn society into our image. If you looked and analyzed how things have been happening in Maryland, California and basically all over the country, you will realize that our opposition has accused of the that things they themselves are guilty of.

June 14, 2008 7:09 PM  
Blogger BlackTsunami said...

sorry, typing too fast. i meant to say: "that our opposition has accused us of the very things they themselves are guilty of."

June 14, 2008 7:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, fascinating. Yaawn!

"People don't like the idea of perverted men going into the ladies room, and though it has nothing at all to do with any law preventing discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender people it does turn out to be a good way to inflame the community and get petition signatures."

You'd think the gay advocacy would get the message and stop trying to sneak the bathroom issue into the law.

People will obviously use the most egregious feature of a proposed law as an argument against it. Competent lawmakers know this and adjust. Sometimes, the radicals get too cocky and overplay their hand, putting at risk what they consider most important.

Here in Montgomery County, it cost you.

June 14, 2008 10:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


You are indeed correct - the sites derive from the same source. Check out the page source and you will find the following credit on each:

Author: Eric King
This script is free to use as long as this info is left in
Featured on Dynamic Drive script library (

So is CRG stealing? No - the page designer gives out the design for free with the appropriate credit. Did CRG take their page from Save Our Kids? Probably.

June 15, 2008 2:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In the capitol of California there is a very large Eastern European presence -- so much so that the suburban city of Rancho Cordova is known in the area as 'Rancho Kiev'. The Russian/Lithuanian/Ukranian mix is very fundamentalist and very anti-LGBT. Last summer, Satender Singh was killed by a group of these immigrants who used gay slurs before and during the attack. One of the attackers fled the country, and authorities believe he's living in Kiev now. To the Christian Right, they are willing shock-troops in their battle against the LGBT community.

I read/listen to the rhetoric of the foes of the LGBT community. They talk about how LGBTs are attempting to destroy their way of life, about how LGBTs coordinate to recruit young kids into the fold, take over city governments, et cetera. I'm sure you have read the same trash and just shaken your head at the crazyness.

They take it very seriously. Why else would someone expend the effort to wake up at 2 am to 'take over' from the previous person in their prayer-circle and take a shift so that someone is praying 24 hours a day seven days a week for victory against the abominable LGBT community.

They will spend/waste resources to achieve their goals. The 'bathroom' issue gets them results the fastest and cheapest, and exploiting the trans comunity for the 'ick' factor has a huge return on investment.

Read their rhetoric. The tactics they accuse the LGBT community of using -- recruitment, organizing, getting our operatives into positions of authority -- are the tactics we need to employ to succeed in our goals, and we need to employ them as a long-term strategy. After all, it worked spectacularly for the religious right, culminating in the massive influence they wielded via the Bush Administration, congress and the judicial branch.

Now I have something to say about what has happened in Montgomery county. I've been watching with interest as this issue unfolds. During the time that CRWhatever was 'collecting' signatures, your side felt that it was sufficient to organise and deploy the 'decline to sign' crews to educate potential signers as to what the issue really was, and that the gatherers were misrepresenting the law, using the bathroom issue, to coerce people into signing.

You assumed that people were reasonable, and that the truth would naturally spread, and that your efforts, as difficult as they were to resource and organize, would somehow be sufficient. After all, the truth is on your side.

I've been right before, and still lost. Many time.

While you were standing out in the cold, you reached maybe one tenth of one percent of the eligible voters. The newspaper coverage maybe reached one percent. But because you saw faces and saw the print article, in your mind the penetration and effectiveness of your message was several orders of magnitude above what it was in reality. And while you were out in the cold, other gatherers were inside the churches where you couldn't reach, and perhaps some were breaking the law for a good cause, forging signatures, just to be sure their side won.

How much TV news coverage did your side get? How much TV news coverage did CRW get, including the staged fitness club incident?

The won. And they won. And they won.

What could you have done to improve your chances? Is it illegal to take out advertisements in newspapers, radio and TV? Getting the message out as to the CRWs deceptive message BEFORE people encounter the signature-gatherers would have been expensive, but would have greatly diminished the number they collected.

What are you going to do if they win in November? Do you have a long-term strategy to win it back two years later, and keep it? You need to start laying the groundwork now. But this goes for the trans community, and the larger LGBT community nationwide.

Activism. Recruitment. Education. Putting our people in key positions of authority.

I hope you win in Montgomery County before Christmas 2008. But if you're in the right but lose anyway, add that to the foundation of your eventual win.

Sorry to be such an armchair quarterback. Montgomery county is just one battle. There's California with it's marriage amendment referendum on the ballot, and a petition circulating to change SB 777, removing the language protecting sexual orientation and gender identity. Colorado could see a challenge to its recent law, and there are other areas watching and waiting. And the foes of the LGBT community are coordinating.

We're in the right. Dammit, let's start winning our rights!

June 15, 2008 3:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The tactics they accuse the LGBT community of using -- recruitment, organizing, getting our operatives into positions of authority -- are the tactics we need to employ to succeed in our goals, and we need to employ them as a long-term strategy."

Don't know if you're an ignorant idiot or just a liar but gay advocates are already doing all this. The locals here have gotten training and money from national gay advocacy groups.

"Now I have something to say about what has happened in Montgomery county."

Thanks. We've all been waiting for some uninformed guy from the other side of the continent to share.

"I've been watching with interest as this issue unfolds. During the time that CRWhatever was 'collecting' signatures, your side felt that it was sufficient to organise and deploy the 'decline to sign' crews to educate potential signers as to what the issue really was,"

Confronting petitioners out on the street is actually a provocative and rare tactic. It also shows how desperate the local gay group is. If a referendum is on the ballot, they'll have a fair chance to make their case. Why be seen trying to stop the electorate from weighing in, unless they already know they're going to lose and this is their only chance to stop it.

and that the gatherers were misrepresenting the law, using the bathroom issue, to coerce people into signing.

June 15, 2008 7:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oops, missed the grand finale:

"and that the gatherers were misrepresenting the law, using the bathroom issue, to coerce people into signing."

Two lies here. Is this guy just one of the locals posing? They've done it before.

First of all, a judge just ruled that the petition did not misrepresent the law.

Seocnd, here's the definition of "coerce":

"to restrain or dominate by force"

If anyone has any evidence that CRG did this to get signatures, let's see it.

In truth, the petitioners went about their task peacefully despite TTF attempts to cause a ruckus.

Conversely, there is filmed evidence that an employee of the elected official who authored the bill drove around trying to prevent people from signing the stop by having a group surround the table and telling the petitioners that their petitions were illegal.

Sounds like TTF's tactics were close to coercion and CRG didn't do anything that could be misconstrued as such.

June 15, 2008 7:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous said:

“In truth, the petitioners went about their task peacefully despite TTF attempts to cause a ruckus.”

In truth, I had never heard of TTF until I went down to help my friend Maryanne one Saturday talk to the petitioners and potential signers. I met Jim and Chris that day for the first time and went home later to look up their website.

In truth, we did not attempt to cause a ruckus. In truth, we tried to confront the lies about transpeople being “mentally ill” and how there was no exception for someone looking for a roommate, as well as point out the semantic word game the CRG was playing to put the deleted bathroom code back in the bill.

In truth, the brown bag you see me carrying half-way down the page here:
was filled with dozens of bite-size chocolate candy bars. I keep a stash of candy at my desk at work in Germantown for my co-workers. I brought them with me to hand out to potential signers as a conversation starter. If I had really wanted to cause a ruckus, I could have thrown them at petition gatherers instead. Obviously I didn’t, or you would have heard no end about a “mad trans woman attacking us with half-frozen chocolate bars.”

In truth, if you want to define what I did as coercion, you’d have to broaden the definition of “coercion” to include handshakes and hugs.

I was there that Saturday because I felt, in truth, that once you meet a living, breathing, intelligent, articulate, and friendly transperson like me, it’s a lot harder to sign a petition exploiting people’s ignorance and fear of transsexuals.

In truth some of the CRG activists don’t know much about 23-07, even today. One of them I talked to out in front of the Marriot at the gala was surprised to learn that 23-07 covered discrimination in cable television service. He thought that was kind of odd and funny. Why don’t they tell their own folks the whole story about the bill? Are they afraid if they had all the information in their own hands at once they’d see the truth?

In truth, I live my life just as most other 40-year old women do. This past Friday I had my first mammogram. I found the procedure to be quite uncomfortable and painful – I’m not looking forward to that again. Yesterday I went swimming at my local YMCA. There were no incidents of indecent exposure on anyone’s part, and the only girly bits I saw were my own – I was just a tall skinny chick in her burgundy bikini doing a few laps in the pool. No police were called; no children were herded out by scared-off parents. No one was indoctrinated into the so called “trans lifestyle.” Go figure.

In truth, I have a full day of yard work ahead of me I need to attend to, so I’ll have to stop here.



June 15, 2008 10:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks to both Hazumu and Cynthia for interjecting a much-needed breath of fresh air and intelligent insight into this so-called "debate" with the CRGers and their cronies ("Anonymous"). You both hit the nail squarely on the head.
The CRG is nothing but a pox on the intelligence and soul of Montgomery County residents who are accepting of the differences within our citizenry. The CRG is engaged in a calculated effort to destroy the humanity of our society...they are intolerant, bigoted, anti-democratic, immoral, ignorant, so-called "Christians" who do not know the meaning of "Judge not, lest ye be judged". In the end, as history teaches us, they will be consigned to the trash heap of pitiful lost-causes and losers in the battle to uplift humanity by recognizing the inherent worth of all people. Now there's a Christian principal they haven't allowed themselves to be exposed to yet!
Montgomery County Citizen

June 15, 2008 11:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greetings, 'Anonymous' who responded to my post. Did you google my nom de plume, 'Hazumu Osaragi'? Let me 'splain it to you.

'Hazumu' is a character in a Japanese comic book who has an alien space ship accidentally crash-land on him. The aliens are remorseful, and use their advanced technology to rebuild him from the DNA found in the goo that was once his body. But they make a mistake, and now Hazumu is a girl -- which is kinda' what she wanted all along. et voilà, the secret, inescapable dream of every transgender come true.

Did you google Hazumu and then figure it out? Did you then decide to refer to me by male pronouns because that's what you 'know I am'? Nice.

So, though I'm not living in Montgomery County, I'm very interested in what goes on there, for I'm a trans-woman.

I also have done work-related travel that took me to the area of Montgomery County for extended periods -- I have a passing familiarity of the area. They speak English, they have the same TV shows as in my area, and the money looks like mine. Big-assed gas-guzzling SUVs with stick-figure 'family' decals on the rear glass are usually but not always owned by bigots who hate LGBTs out of hand. Y'know, there are a lot of similarities. I miss the crab cakes, though.

There are other people from afar who are interested in the transgender issue in lil' ole' Montgomery County. Here is a flyer designed by a (trans)woman from Australia.

Pay attention, the men pictured have vaginas, the women pictured were born with the other genitalia. And Zoe picks up -- from the "Not My Shower" website, no less -- that the CRWhatever wants to exclude transgender from:

(1) restaurants, soda fountains, and other eating or drinking places, and all places where food is sold for consumption either on or off the premises;
(2) inns, hotels, and motels, whether serving temporary or permanent patrons;
(3) retail stores and service establishments;
(4) hospitals and clinics;
(5) motion picture, stage, and other theaters and music, concert, or meeting halls;
(6) circuses, exhibitions, skating rinks, sports arenas and fields, amusement or recreation parks, picnic grounds, fairs, bowling alleys, golf courses,
gymnasiums, shooting galleries, billiard and pool rooms, and swimming pools;
(7) public conveyances, such as automobiles, buses, taxicabs, trolleys, trains, limousines, boats, airplanes, and bicycles;
(8) utilities, such as water and sewer service, electricity, telephone, and cable television;
(9) streets, roads, sidewalks, other public rights-of-way, parking lots or garages, marinas, airports, and hangars; and
(10) places of public assembly and entertainment of every kind.

Here's the highlighted version:

Someone said that the LGBT -- and especially transgender -- community is seeking special rights. No, we're seeking redress of special wrongs.

There's a difference between a racist bigot and a sex/gender bigot. The race bigot can exercise their first amendment rights and talk smack about the hated group, but is prevented by law from denying goods and services nor access to [see list above] to the hated group. I want to see the equal treatment for sex/gender bigots.

I really have to stop wasting time on you onsies-twozies, Anonymous. I need to ignore you and devote my energies to convincing people who are convince-able. There will always be people like yourself who will remain hating bigots, no matter the evidence. And I'm not really writing this for/to you, but for the reasonable people out there. Maybe instead I should design a killer TV ad for our cause...


June 15, 2008 1:32 PM  
Blogger BlackTsunami said...


regardless of how you feel about this issue, namecalling shows your lack of maturity in this situation. I was speaking as to how the anti-gay industry claim that the lgbt community are following plans put out by a book called "The Overhauling of Straight America," while not showing actual proof that lgbts decided to adopt the book as a "manifesto."

Meanwhile, many members of the anti-gay industry meet and organize coordinated attacks on hate crimes legislation, marriage equality, adoption by lgbts and other issues that will benefit the lgbt community.

June 15, 2008 2:13 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

There's is actually a piece of good news from the anti-gay front. Focus on the Family spokesman, Gary Schneeberger, admitted this past week that there have been no Theresa Rickman-like attacks by trans women to date. Apparently he read her interview explaining that Rio was a hoax.

Of course, he's concerned that such events could happen, as the laws have been in place for such a short time (over thirty years, in one instance), and we all know that this country desperately needs discrimination against law-abiding citizens because one day a predator just might take advantage of civil rights laws. Of course, the same logic was used for decades to keep black men away from white females, but that's history, so who cares?

Still, progress is progress.

June 15, 2008 8:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"and we all know that this country desperately needs discrimination against law-abiding citizens because one day a predator just might take advantage of civil rights laws"

Nobody has advocated discrimination, lying lunatic. They've just opposed discrimination for this group.

Not the same.

Your post is a lie.

June 15, 2008 10:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"regardless of how you feel about this issue, namecalling shows your lack of maturity in this situation"

Don't think I called you a name, Alvin. The oragami guy's post was deceitful enough that he deserved it.

June 15, 2008 10:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For those of you who were shocked, just shocked, that the U.S. is now winning the war in Iraq, here's an editorial from today's Post explaining how the Democrats' current proposals would squander our pending success:

"THOUGH IT was hardly noticed in Washington, Iraq's Shiite-led government sent a powerful message to Iran and to the Middle East last week. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose coalition is often portrayed as an Iranian client, traveled to Tehran for a meeting with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The ayatollah bluntly declared that Iraq's "most important problem" was the continuing presence of U.S. troops. He pressured Mr. Maliki to stop negotiating a package of agreements with the Bush administration that would delineate a "strategic framework" between Iraq and the United States and provide for the deployment of U.S. forces beyond the expiration of a U.N. mandate at the end of this year.

Mr. Maliki refused. He assured his Iranian hosts that Iraq would not be a launching pad for an American attack on Iran. But he pointedly told a press briefing that negotiations on the strategic partnership would continue. He repeated that commitment on Friday, even after warning that the talks had "reached a dead end." In effect, the Iraqi prime minister was saying that his country does not want to become an Iranian satellite but an independent Arab state that would look to the United States to ensure its security.

This would seem to be an obvious U.S. gain in what, according to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) as well as President Bush, is the urgent task of countering Iran's attempt to dominate the Middle East. It means that Iraq, a country with the world's second largest oil reserves and a strategic linchpin of the Middle East, just might emerge from the last five years of war and turmoil as an American ally, even if its relations with Iran remain warm.

So it's hard to fathom why Democrats in Congress have joined Ayatollah Khamenei in denouncing the U.S.-Iraqi agreements even before they are written. Critics such as Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) are professing to be outraged that the Bush administration might be forging a relationship with Iraq "that parallels the Korea-Japan history," as Mr. Webb put it. They claim to be shocked by the suggestions of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that U.S. forces might remain in Iraq for decades without controversy if they did not suffer casualties, as has happened in Japan and South Korea. Yet the U.S. alliances with Japan and South Korea have been among the most successful in this nation's history. While building a similar bond with Iraq may prove impossible, it's hard to understand why Democrats would oppose it in principle.

In fact, much of the controversy over the negotiations is based on misinformation, some of it spread by Iran's proxies in Iraq. There are claims that the Bush administration is seeking to establish scores of permanent U.S. bases. In fact, Iraq has merely asked that the agreement list the bases from which American forces would be permitted to operate. It is claimed that the deals would perpetuate the U.S. "occupation." In fact, they would be a major step in the opposite direction, by placing American troops under the sovereignty of the Iraqi government rather than the United Nations.

If the United States were to make a formal commitment to defend Iraq from external aggression, congressional consideration and approval of the pact would be appropriate. For now, the biggest risk is that Tehran and its allies will pressure Mr. Maliki into backing away from a partnership with Washington. In that case, Iran would hasten to substitute itself as Iraq's defender and strategic ally, with momentous implications for the rest of the Middle East. Surely this is not what the Democrats want."

June 15, 2008 10:39 PM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

"Lying lunatic." How absolutely mature of you, Anon.

Maybe you'd like to write the amicus brief for CRG this week. I'm sure the judge would love your sense of humor.

June 15, 2008 11:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, Dana. You may not believe this but I meant to delete that part before I posted. That's the problem with the internet. It reads your mind.

June 15, 2008 11:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The conventional wisdom holds that John McCain should lean to his right in making his choice for a vice presidential candidate. This wisdom is completely wrong. Most of the names being bandied about would make terrible choices for McCain. I don't claim to be a political expert in the manner of Dick Morris, but I think the best choice for McCain would be Colin Powell.

Yes, Colin Powell. And here are the reasons why. First, Powell has an independent mind. He is not a captive of the right, and consequently he reinforces the public perception that McCain is not a pawn of Bush. True, Powell served in the Bush administration, but his disagreements with Bush are well known. Obama is trying to portray McCain as a Bush clone. Powell will help McCain convince independent voters--the ones he needs most--that his administration would not constitute a third Bush term.

Second, Powell has experience. The man has served honorably and responsibly in more high positions than Obama and all the other Democratic candidates combined. Moreover, Powell has gravitas while Obama merely has the gift of the gab. So Powell helps to highlight how green and goofy Obama really is. The point is not to contrast one African American with another, or to show how Powell like Obama has immigrant roots. Rather, it is to dissolve the race issue by showing that capability and experience, not race and skin color, are the real issues here.

Finally, who apart from the Obamorons can doubt that Powell would make a capable president? This is especially important given the fact that McCain is over seventy. A Powell choice would also reinforce the big question about the man at the top of the Democratic ticket: Is he ready? I am not going to say that Obama can never be a good president, but I seriously doubt that he is mature enough to climb into the saddle. Who would you trust--Powell or Obama--to better handle a national emergency?

Now all of this could be idle speculation, because Powell may not want to be vice president. I keep hearing about how his wife is so completely against the idea. But this could be one of McCain's first tasks: to persuade Powell to do it. This wouldn't be the first time that this soldier has been asked to put personal considerations second and to take on a great challenge for the future of his country.

June 16, 2008 12:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Montgomery County Citizen said:

“Thanks to both Hazumu and Cynthia for interjecting a much-needed breath of fresh air and intelligent insight into this so-called "debate" with the CRGers and their cronies ("Anonymous"). You both hit the nail squarely on the head.”

You are welcome, and I’d like to take this opportunity to thank you for your support. I come to this site with a great deal of ambivalence… there is the opportunity for me to get some facts out there to folks, but it is tempered with knowledge that there are plenty of comments about me and my kind being “confused,” “mentally ill,” “ guys who think they’re girls,” and “fascist Nazi transgender gang-bangers.” It’s refreshing not to be summarily dismissed and derided for my medical history.



June 16, 2008 7:56 AM  
Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

Not that it's relevant to this discussion, but I heard Powell said the other day that he might very well be voting for Obama. Now that would be a pretty sight, the VP candidate of the Republicans voting for the Democrat.

And, Anon, I accept your apology. I have no reason to disbelieve you, so I won't.

June 16, 2008 7:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

April 10, 2008 the NYTimesBlog reported

"Mr. Powell, the nation’s first black secretary of state, told “Good Morning America” host Diane Sawyer Thursday... “I’ve seen other individuals come along who didn’t have that breadth of experience and what they do is surround themselves with people who do bring that experience.”

“With Senator Obama, he didn’t have a lot of experience running a presidential campaign, did he?” he asked. “But he seems to know how to organize a task and he seems to know how to apply resources to a problem at hand. So that gives me some indication that (with) his inexperience in foreign affairs or domestic affairs, he may be someone who can learn quickly.”

Mr. Powell has connections to the other contenders too. He donated $2,300 to John McCain’s campaign last year, and he served as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the early days of Bill Clinton’s presidency. Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested last fall that she’d like to make Mr. Powell a kind of goodwill ambassador in her administration.

“I’m looking at all three candidates,” Mr. Powell said. “I know them all very, very well. I consider myself a friend of each and every one of them. And I have not decided who I will vote for yet.”

Mr. Powell, who has served under both presidents Bush and President Reagan, took a similar nonpartisan line when talking to CNN’s Wolf Blitzer last February.

‘’Every American has an obligation right now at this moment in our history,'’ Mr. Powell said back then, ‘’to look at all the candidates and to make a judgment not simply on the basis of ideology or simply on the basis of political affiliation, but on the basis of who is the best person for all of America. And what does that party look like?'’ "

The GOP is a party that's trying to disassociate itself from its lamest leader ever, Bush. Just the other day the Washington Post had articles up saying that GOP politicians Elizabeth Dole and Mitch McConnell, who are running for reelection in what were solidly red states in 2004, do not mention their support of Bush's policies for the last 8 years because they know it will cost them votes. They don't even mention their party:

What's NOT in the ads is just as important as what is. In none of the three commercials is President Bush's name mentioned, nor do the party affiliations of Dole and McConnell make an appearance. Remember, these incumbents represent states where Bush won with 60 percent (Kentucky) and 56 percent (North Carolina) of the vote in 2004. That's a testament to just how badly tarnished the Republican brand is across the country.

McConnell and Dole have apparently reached the conclusion that the only message that can win for a Republican in an environment like this is a purely transactional one: Reelect me and I'll continue to bring back lots and lots of money for this state.

Bridge to nowhere anybody?

June 16, 2008 8:48 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home