I've seen a number of people posting about this in various places along with calls to boycott, etc. The person who made the donation is a member of the board of the holding company that owns Golds Gym. The donation was not made by Gold's Gym or the holding company.

The holding company issued a press release the day this was announced stating that they did not make the donation, the donation was made by a private citizen in his own name, not the name of the business and that they, as a company, reaffirm their support of the GLBT community and it's causes. Indirectly, the person making the donation has profited from membership fees of Gold's Gym customers but that is much different from saying your membership fees were donated to this organization.

It's really frustrating to see how this has been blown up. It's, essentially, a media created story.

This is like saying that Campbell Soup supports S/M because I donated money to the IML travel fund.

I'm trying to find the articles about it. I read them last night, I think on HuffPost. The donation was made by Robert Rowlings, who's actually the CEO of TRT Holdings, not just a board member.

Here's a link to the Salon.com article that includes part of several different press releases about it.
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/10/25/san_francisco_gold_s_american_crossroads/index.html


Most of the Gold's Gyms are actually franchises rather than corporate owned. Four of the bay area locations are attempting to break their franchise agreements over this.

I don't know if the majority of TRT Holdings income is from Gold's Gym or not. I imagine that most of the income they get from GG comes from franchise fee's rather than directly from membership fees. Of course, that is paid to the franchise via membership fees at the local level.

My issue with the whole thing is this implication that he doesn't have the right to support who ever and what ever he wants to support. The donation was not made in the company's name. It's very different from Target making a corporate donation to a right wing group but the media is comparing the two and people are all up in arms about it.

That's my point. The "company" didn't donate. The holding company didn't donate. Robert Rowling donated.

I'm all about boycotting companies that do stupid shit. Hell, I still feel a little twinge of guilt when the office orders pizza from Dominoes and I think they've been "good" for 10+ years now! I don't shop at Target. I found a local pharmacy that meets Walmart prices so I don't even get my meds from them anymore.

Where do we draw the line, or do we draw the line, between the business and the individual? With the way corporations work these days, most are more than just one common brand. TRT Holdings is more than just Gold's Gym. They own hotels, various real estate businesses, oil & gas exploration and, I'm sure much more. Their principles have probably been donating to Republican, right wing, conservative causes for decades but until now, it's not been a publicized fact. I know that I don't research every aspect of a company, including the giving policies of their senior executives, before I choose a hotel or a gas station or where I want to eat lunch. Even if I did, I'm still not sure that I would base that decision on the political beliefs of the individuals over the actions of a company.

Robert Rowling made an individual donation to a conservative cause but Gold's Gym as been supporting liberal/GLBT causes for years. Does boycotting them due to to Rowling's donation help us or hurt us in the long run?

Yeah, I get that's where his money comes from and I'm not saying that you shouldn't boycott any of them. Mostly I'm just thinking out loud and trying to figure out why it irks me so much that this has blown up the way it has. I'm also not trying to argue with you, or be obnoxious, so I hope it's not coming across that way.

As I think about it, for me, it probably comes down to the fact that I'm at a point where I have to separate the business from the politics to a certain extent. I don't have the luxury of picking and choosing anymore and many of my clients are people whose politics is completely opposite of mine. My last paycheck came directly from the pockets of someone who supports many of the conservative causes that I oppose.

So while I get it on the corporate level, on a personal level, I have to hope that there are people who can see the difference between the person and the company or I'm just screwed! :)

I know you and Corkey have kind of covered this a little bit, but what about this?

From the article in question:

*Rowling, head of TRT Holdings, which is the owner of Gold's Gym, is spending quite a bit of money this election cycle. Upwards of $2 million to be exact, through both his corporate and personal bank accounts. Where is he sending that money, which he no doubt earns on the backs of many an LGBT customer?*

Before I hop on either side of the debate, I'd like to know WHAT corporate accounts, exactly.

Private Prison Industry Helps Draft Arizona Immigration Law
 

NPR

October 28, 2010

Last year, two men showed up in Benson, Ariz., a small desert town 60 miles from the Mexico border, offering a deal.

Glenn Nichols, the Benson city manager, remembers the pitch.

"The gentleman that's the main thrust of this thing has a huge turquoise ring on his finger," Nichols said. "He's a great big huge guy and I equated him to a car salesman."

What he was selling was a prison for women and children who were illegal immigrants.

"They talk [about] how positive this was going to be for the community," Nichols said, "the amount of money that we would realize from each prisoner on a daily rate."

But Nichols wasn't buying. He asked them how would they possibly keep a prison full for years — decades even — with illegal immigrants?

"They talked like they didn't have any doubt they could fill it," Nichols said.

That's because prison companies like this one had a plan — a new business model to lock up illegal immigrants. And the plan became Arizona's immigration law.

Behind-The-Scenes Effort To Draft, Pass The Law

The law is being challenged in the courts. But if it's upheld, it requires police to lock up anyone they stop who cannot show proof they entered the country legally.

When it was passed in April, it ignited a fire storm. Protesters chanted about racial profiling. Businesses threatened to boycott the state.

Supporters were equally passionate, calling it a bold positive step to curb illegal immigration.

But while the debate raged, few people were aware of how the law came about.

NPR spent the past several months analyzing hundreds of pages of campaign finance reports, lobbying documents and corporate records. What they show is a quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to help draft and pass Arizona Senate Bill 1070 by an industry that stands to benefit from it: the private prison industry.


Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, pictured here at Tea Party rally on Oct. 22, was instrumental in drafting the state's immigration law. He also sits on a American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) task force, a group that helped shape the law.

Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce, pictured here at Tea Party rally on Oct. 22, was instrumental in drafting the state's immigration law. He also sits on a American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) task force, a group that helped shape the law.
The law could send hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants to prison in a way never done before. And it could mean hundreds of millions of dollars in profits to private prison companies responsible for housing them.

Arizona state Sen. Russell Pearce says the bill was his idea. He says it's not about prisons. It's about what's best for the country.

"Enough is enough," Pearce said in his office, sitting under a banner reading "Let Freedom Reign." "People need to focus on the cost of not enforcing our laws and securing our border. It is the Trojan horse destroying our country and a republic cannot survive as a lawless nation."

But instead of taking his idea to the Arizona statehouse floor, Pearce first took it to a hotel conference room.

It was last December at the Grand Hyatt in Washington, D.C. Inside, there was a meeting of a secretive group called the American Legislative Exchange Council. Insiders call it ALEC.

It's a membership organization of state legislators and powerful corporations and associations, such as the tobacco company Reynolds American Inc., ExxonMobil and the National Rifle Association. Another member is the billion-dollar Corrections Corporation of America — the largest private prison company in the country.

It was there that Pearce's idea took shape.

"I did a presentation," Pearce said. "I went through the facts. I went through the impacts and they said, 'Yeah.'"

Drafting The Bill

The 50 or so people in the room included officials of the Corrections Corporation of America, according to two sources who were there.

Pearce and the Corrections Corporation of America have been coming to these meetings for years. Both have seats on one of several of ALEC's boards.

Key Players That Helped Draft Arizona's Immigration Law
And this bill was an important one for the company. According to Corrections Corporation of America reports reviewed by NPR, executives believe immigrant detention is their next big market. Last year, they wrote that they expect to bring in "a significant portion of our revenues" from Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency that detains illegal immigrants.

In the conference room, the group decided they would turn the immigration idea into a model bill. They discussed and debated language. Then, they voted on it.

"There were no 'no' votes," Pearce said. "I never had one person speak up in objection to this model legislation."

Four months later, that model legislation became, almost word for word, Arizona's immigration law.

They even named it. They called it the "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act."

"ALEC is the conservative, free-market orientated, limited-government group," said Michael Hough, who was staff director of the meeting.

Hough works for ALEC, but he's also running for state delegate in Maryland, and if elected says he plans to support a similar bill to Arizona's law.

Asked if the private companies usually get to write model bills for the legislators, Hough said, "Yeah, that's the way it's set up. It's a public-private partnership. We believe both sides, businesses and lawmakers should be at the same table, together."

Nothing about this is illegal. Pearce's immigration plan became a prospective bill and Pearce took it home to Arizona.

Campaign Donations

Pearce said he is not concerned that it could appear private prison companies have an opportunity to lobby for legislation at the ALEC meetings.

"I don't go there to meet with them," he said. "I go there to meet with other legislators."

Pearce may go there to meet with other legislators, but 200 private companies pay tens of thousands of dollars to meet with legislators like him.

As soon as Pearce's bill hit the Arizona statehouse floor in January, there were signs of ALEC's influence. Thirty-six co-sponsors jumped on, a number almost unheard of in the capitol. According to records obtained by NPR, two-thirds of them either went to that December meeting or are ALEC members.

That same week, the Corrections Corporation of America hired a powerful new lobbyist to work the capitol.

The prison company declined requests for an interview. In a statement, a spokesman said the Corrections Corporation of America, "unequivocally has not at any time lobbied — nor have we had any outside consultants lobby – on immigration law."

At the state Capitol, campaign donations started to appear.

Thirty of the 36 co-sponsors received donations over the next six months, from prison lobbyists or prison companies — Corrections Corporation of America, Management and Training Corporation and The Geo Group.

By April, the bill was on Gov. Jan Brewer's desk.

Brewer has her own connections to private prison companies. State lobbying records show two of her top advisers — her spokesman Paul Senseman and her campaign manager Chuck Coughlin — are former lobbyists for private prison companies. Brewer signed the bill — with the name of the legislation Pearce, the Corrections Corporation of America and the others in the Hyatt conference room came up with — in four days.

Brewer and her spokesman did not respond to requests for comment.

In May, The Geo Group had a conference call with investors. When asked about the bill, company executives made light of it, asking, "Did they have some legislation on immigration?"

After company officials laughed, the company's president, Wayne Calabrese, cut in.

"This is Wayne," he said. "I can only believe the opportunities at the federal level are going to continue apace as a result of what's happening. Those people coming across the border and getting caught are going to have to be detained and that for me, at least I think, there's going to be enhanced opportunities for what we do."

Opportunities that prison companies helped create.

Produced by NPR's Anne Hawke.

I am so sick of corporations driving this country's politics.

I love watching the snails pace at which this sort of news travels.

The private prison scheme was first reported in the local news, which pretty much no ones pays attention to. Radical lefty Rachel paid attention, and covered it a couple of months ago. The story now seems to be drifting toward the center, as elitist NPR is finally reporting it. If it can get pushed to the liberal NYT and WaPo, then perhaps the liberal televised MSM will report it, and eventually CNN will put it up on a big graphic with some accompanying twitter posts from viewers. I can't wait to hear how Faux Republican Party Newz will spin it into a Kenyan conspiracy.

I hope this gets out there more and more- MsD is right, Rachael covered this a few back. I hope it takes hold as a mainstream media story.

As messed-up as it is, the only way we can know if a major business we want to do business with is LGBTIQ friendly, is to do research BEFORE joining or buying from them.

Also, there are several websites that identify large corporations as well as small businesses all over the US that are either for or against us. After researching, as individuals, we have to make decisions about who we will buy from (or what gym, etc. to join). I hate WalMart and Target for example, yet, times are tough for a lot of people and I have access to more local type businesses because of where I live. So, I have more choices than many people in more rural areas. Plus, my kid is raised, but there are a lot of people here raising (and supporting) children and trying to make ends meet. We also have quite a few military people/families- and they sure as hell don't make a boat load of money!

On the other hand, our wanting less expensive goods has contributed to large corporations producing goods in countries that it costs less to do so. We can't have it both ways. Are we going to support labor in the US and bringing back manufacturing here. And are we willing to pay more for this? No, we shouldn't have to pay crazy proces, but, we won't be getting things at the prices we now see due to what has gone on with trade in the US.

North Korea opens fire at South Korea

Tensions escalated along the North Korea-South Korea border on Friday after the North fired two rounds at its southern neighbour.

South Korean troops immediately fired back, an official told The Associated Press.

The shots from North Korea were fired towards a South Korean guard post in the Demilitarized Zone between the two countries, an official at the Joint Chiefs of Staff in Seoul told AP.

No one was injured and it wasn't clear whether the shots represented a military action or were an accident.

However the shots came just hours after the North vowed to retaliate after the South rejected a Pyongyang proposal for military talks.

FBI: Same Gun Used in Military-Related Building-shootings



The same gun was used to shoot at the Pentagon, a Marine Corps museum and a military recruiting center, the FBI said Thursday. The conclusion was based on testing of evidence at the FBI Laboratory in Quantico, Virginia. All shootings happened to the buildings at night when nobody was there.

Panel: Halliburton knew of faulty cement mixture used to try to seal BP well

WASHINGTON – Halliburton officials knew weeks before the fatal explosion of the BP well in the Gulf of Mexico that the cement mixture they planned to use to seal the bottom of the well was unstable but they still went ahead with the job, the presidential commission investigating the accident said Thursday.

In the first official finding of responsibility for the blowout, which killed 11 workers and led to the biggest offshore oil spill in U.S. history, the commission staff determined that Halliburton had conducted three laboratory tests that indicated the cement mixture did not meet industry standards.

The result of at least one of those tests was given March 8 to BP, which failed to act on it, the panel's lead investigator, Fred Bartlit, said in a letter delivered to the commissioners Thursday.

"There is no indication that Halliburton highlighted to BP the significance of the foam stability data or that BP personnel raised any questions about it," Bartlit said in his report.

Another Halliburton cement test, carried out about a week before the blowout of the well on April 20, also found the mixture to be unstable, meaning it was unlikely to set properly in the well, but those findings were never sent to BP, Bartlit found after reviewing previously undisclosed documents.

U.S. Senate
 

Note how wealth is passed on from generation to generation. Also, notice the pace at which personal wealth can increase once you are elected into public office. If you are working class, middle class, how and when will you deal with the obvious disparity, if ever?
______________________________________________


Senate Procures Influx of Millionaires
Oct. 28, 2010
By Jennifer Yachnin
Roll Call Staff


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Senate’s famed “millionaires club” is becoming a little crowded.
According to a Roll Call analysis of Senate financial disclosure forms filed in 2010, more than half of the chamber’s membership, 54 lawmakers, reported a minimum net worth of more than $1 million. Another four Senators fell short of that mark by less than $100,000.
In addition, more than half of the Senate’s membership saw their individual fortunes grow in 2009, the period covered by their most recent disclosure reports.

Those increases are reflected in the chamber’s combined minimum wealth, which increased to about $680 million in 2009, or more than 4 percent higher than the previous year.

Roll Call’s analysis of Senators’ wealth is based solely on the information lawmakers provide in their annual reports. The minimum value of all liabilities is subtracted from the minimum value for all assets.

Among the Senators who tallied the largest percentage increases in wealth in 2009, several lawmakers benefited from inheritances. Sen. John Cornyn reported four new investment funds and a retirement account valued at a combined $96,000, inherited from his mother. The additional funds increased his minimum net worth 550 percent, to at least $130,000.

Despite his significant percentage increase, the Texas Republican is among the 10 poorest Senators, tied with Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) in 90th place.

Sen. Sherrod Brown saw his bottom line increase to $370,000, nearly 429 percent over the minimum net worth of $70,000 he disclosed in his previous report.

That increase results from an uptick in the value of the Ohio Democrat’s investment in the Mansfield, Ohio-based Brownlea Farm, which rose to at least $250,000. He had previously valued his investment in his family farm, which he first began reporting in 1992, at $15,000.

According to his office, Brown’s family had the farm reappraised in 2009 following the death of his mother. An amendment Brown filed in May states he should have previously reported his share of the farm at the higher value.

Along with another amendment Brown filed in March reevaluating his investment in his state’s pension plan, the Ohio Senator’s minimum net worth for 2008 would have been reported at $384,000.

His current $370,000 net worth places him 77th among his colleagues, tied with Sen. Dick Lugar (R-Ind.).

Sen. Jeff Sessions, whose mother also died in 2009, reported an increased value in several properties, noting in his report that the parcels are being appraised as part of his mother’s estate.

The Alabama Republican reported the value of the largest asset, 1,100 acres of timberland, at $1 million to $5 million.

He also reported 500 acres of farmland in Wilcox County, Ala., valued at $500,000 to $1 million. He previously reported a half-interest in the same property, valuing it at $250,000 to $500,000. The report also lists three other tracts of Alabama timberland comprising another 63 acres.

Sessions’ minimum net worth increased 124 percent from $1 million to at least $2.24 million in 2009. He is now the 33rd wealthiest Member of the Senate, tied with Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.).

Both Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) also reported gains of at least 100 percent — catapulting both lawmakers out of the red after each reported a negative net worth the previous calendar year.

Baucus no longer reports a $100,000 line of credit from Sun Trust Bank, increasing his net worth to about $10,000.

Stabenow likewise dropped a $15,000 revolving line of credit from a Lansing, Mich.-based credit union, which brings her reported net worth to $0. She reports no assets and no liabilities.

It is possible that both Senators are worth significantly more, however.

While lawmakers are required to disclose their personal finances annually, the forms allow Senators to report their assets and liabilities in wide ranges, providing a sometimes imprecise summary of each lawmaker’s fiscal state. The financial disclosure process also shields certain assets from public view, including primary or secondary residences that do not produce income, as well as artwork, antiques or other collectibles not held for investment purposes. Payments from federal retirement accounts and Social Security also are exempt from the reporting requirements.

Such exemptions likely account for the more than 43 percent drop in wealth Sen. Amy Klobuchar reported in 2009. The Minnesota Democrat, who claimed about $300,000 in 2008, reported transferring assets from four private 401(k) retirement accounts to the government’s Thrift Savings Plan, which Senators are not required to report.

As Roll Call reported in its 50 Richest Members of Congress survey in September, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) remains the wealthiest lawmaker, with $188.37 million. Another 21 Senators also are among the richest Members.

Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) ranks as the poorest Member of Congress in 2009, despite the fact that he likely is among the richest.

Like most lawmakers, Kohl uses only the broad reporting categories required in the financial disclosure forms to provide information on his finances. Those forms limit the greatest minimum value of an asset to “over $50 million.”

On the forms, Kohl places the value of his NBA franchise, the Milwaukee Bucks, in the more than $50 million category. Forbes estimated in December that the team is worth $254 million.

But with the NBA franchise contributing only $50 million to Kohl’s wealth, according to the form, and liabilities related to the team counted elsewhere at $115 million, Kohl’s minimum net worth on financial disclosures settles at negative $4.64 million.



2010 © Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.

Tsunami baby found alive in storm drain
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39905639...s-asiapacific/

I wonder how long it will take the Pentagon to actually release the FULL Report and analysis. Then what is the timeline for the U.S. Senate and Congress to review the report and actually take action?

As for the Dream Act being attached to this bill, if it is true, I don't think it was a wise decision to attach two controversial pieces of policy and potential legislation into one piece. IMO, throwing other non-related, nor relevant piece of legislation into other legislation is a common action taken in our Senate and Congress, but it does not make it ethical, nor in the best interest of the people of the USA.

The Dream Act is about helping the children of Illegal Immigrants that are U.S. Citizens by birth and are here through no fault of their own. How is this related to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?"

Finally, before anyone interprets that I do not support the Dream Act, please read my words again. I do not support "pork barrel legislation." I think it is used in the belief that most Americans are too stupid to notice.

________________________________________
________________________________________


DADT STUDY: Majority Of Troops Would Not Object To Serving Alongside Gay Soldiers

Tonight, NBC News’ Richard Engel has learned some early results from the Pentagon’s Working Group study of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. According to military sources who have seen the report, a majority of American troops would either not object to serving alongside openly gay troops or would raise any concerns directly with their gay peers:

ENGEL: The findings are that for most soldiers, and this wasn’t the sum total of all soldiers, it wasn’t that big of a deal…The majority — the number one answer, first answer was ‘I don’t care.’ That’s significant.

MADDOW: Predominant answer is ‘no big deal.’

ENGEL: Most common, number one. Number two was, ‘I would deal directly with the person involved.’ So when you put the two of those together, it is the majority. Now, there were some people who said, three, they would go to the chain of command and some four, who hated it, hated it. But the answers one and two are considered positive. So these studies show a relative if not positive outlook, at least an accepting outlook.

MADDOW: So the military study is, as you said, the survey of the troops is part of it. It’s an overall study of the feasibility of the issue….this survey of the troops, what you’ve learned is that a majority of troops it’s not going to be a major deal.

ENGEL: Not a deal breaker, that they they’re not going to be running from the army in droves. A key thing this study kept coming back to is that it’s very important about the chain of command. What commanders say. How far commanders act. What tone they set. The marines were the most negative out of the services. They had the most people who were — with negative responses. And the marine corps leadership has taken a stance and has been very vocally against this issue. And the study found that most soldiers and sailors and all different service members follow a chain of command. So if the chain of command accepts this as the law, the data is that so will the soldiers.

The study, which Engel described as the ‘core’ of the Pentagon’s review, is particularly significant since moderate Republicans have pledged to listen to the troops before voting to repeal the policy. In fact, when Republican (and several Democrats) filibustered the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — the bill in which the amendment to repeal the ban is housed — most argued that their final vote would depend on the study. Now that the results seem positive, they should have no reason to oppose the measure:

– SEN. OLYMPIA SNOWE (R-ME): “We should all have the opportunity to review that [DADT] report which is to be completed on December 1, as we reevaluate this policy and the implementation of any new changes.”

– SEN. SCOTT BROWN (R-MA): “The Pentagon is still in the midst of its study of the matter, and its report is due in December…. I am keeping an open mind, but I do not support moving ahead until I am able to finish my review, the Pentagon completes its study, and we can be assured that a new policy can be implemented without jeopardizing the mission of our military.”

– SEN. GEROGE VOINOVICH (R-OH): “The DREAM Act deals with immigration and shouldn’t be on this bill. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ is a controversial issue that needs to be debated on the Senate floor but I believe it would be logical to wait for the Department of Defense to issue its report on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

– SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): “I do not support the idea of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell before our military members and commanders complete their review. This so-called compromise would repeal the legislation first then receive input from the military. This is not the proper way to change any policy, particularly something as controversial as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

– SEN. MARK PRYOR (D-AR): “Let’s let the military professionals work through their process. I’d hate to kind of short-circuit that with congressional action, so I’d rather let that occur before we start making policy here on ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.”

The final results are due the first week of December. Earlier today, Alex Nicholson of Servicemembers United outlined a strategy for how advocates could use the study to urge the Senate to repeal the policy in the lame duck session.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/20...adt/?wpmp_tp=1

I so love it that Whitman and McMahan (the the World Wrestling airess) are way down in the polls! I think that most "just regular" voters are sick to their stomachs with these billionare candidates spending this kind of money to get elected.

Look at what the Supreme Courts election funding-related decision has done! As if it wasn't bad enough before!

I am discusted. But, maybe, the people will now see what is going on and rise up! Can happen!

I know, I am sick to my stomach with this!

Um
 

There is some chance that I am standing about 15 feet from Sharon angle at the moment. Should I throw my shoe at her? Jk these shoes are way too fabulous.

OMG! You poor woman!

Isshhhh... I actually have relatives in Nevada that are voting for her- mainly because they want Reid out. One of them (we were arguing on the phone- I called all of my GOP relatives for "a talk") actually said, Oh hell, I know she's an idiot, but I want Reid gone"! This is what we are dealing with!! We'll just vote her out in 6 years."

I was stunned. This goes right along with the GOP having nothing but beating Obama in 2011 and not a care in the world about our country and just how scared and hurt our citizens are. I don't believe I have ever been as disturbed with politics as I am right now, not in all the years I have been a voter (age 21, couldn't at age 18- wasn't passed yet). I feel like so much of what I am countless others stood and worked for throughout the 60's and 70's (beyond, really) with the Vietnam War, Civil Rights and the Woman's Movement and onto early Gay & lesbian rights (now the issues for all Queers) has been in vein. It feels like losing a child, so deep.

I know I will regain hope as I found the spark during Obama's election, but, I am concerned about the lack of outrage and activism we have now during these mid-term elections. They are critical and it seems that people are just not doing anything to stop the madness.

There has to be less splintering and more cohesion among liberal, progressive and moderate voters to do anything about the whacko ultra conservative tide.

I've heard people in Nevada say the same stuff - they don't seem to care how awful she is - they just hate Reid. I actually shared a plane with this woman from Vegas to Reno. It may not have been her but she looked like her, had an entourage of men in suits, took pictures with some other folks on the plane, and a guy in line told me that was her. I said very loudly, "isn't she the lady who is using all those racist tactics in her campaign?" and the guy said "I don't know" and quit talking to me. But I'm not sure it was her. My partner didn't think she looked quite like her.

I'm not sure that she's worth wasting the bail money for....

Sounds about right. Most white, rich, Republican, trust fund brats do notserve in the military and look how many did not during time of war. One, I respect very much is Colon Powell, not white.

Thinking about troops today- just about the same break-down as during Vietnam in terms of POC and lower economic classes as well as age. Many POC and people that just have no way to get an education or good job training join the military and do right out of high school.

ADVIRTISEMENT...
 

VOTE TUESDAY!!

Offer rides to the polls to friends and family..... I know, sometimes it feels futile, but, it is more important than ever to vote and we need to organize in a more central manner!

PLEASE- spend some time each month from now until the 2011 General Election volunteering time to Democratic candidates in your state! Contact all queer-based organizations you like and make the case for OUR NEED FOR COHESION on a national levbecome a force. el. Stop the splintering over issues and combine efforts! This is exactly how and why the Tea Party has become a force and it is threatening our cicil liberties on every front! They like it that we remain divided.

Going to a more moderate position at this time is needed to build a strong liberal base. We can't afford continuing to be at the far left until we have some money and power and get the GOP and Tea Baggers out of any office they hold!

Thank you for the reminder Corkey.

Yes, thank you!

I really like that show and Mathews. Please tell me all the pundits are wrong about the GOP winning so many seats!!!