A Different Perspective to the DC Pride Parade

How doesn't like a parade? Well, for the most part, me. However, I could not pass up the opportunity to witness the DC Gay Pride. I was fully expecting to see what these sorts of events are known for: hot guys, drag queens, Lady Gaga music, and a whole mess of inappropriate displays that would probably be illegal any other day of the year. That all occurred.

However, the begin of the parade began much differently. For the first 45 minutes, there were a flurry of politicians marching. Now, I have participated in a few parades in my life with politicians, but this experience was a little different. Why? Because as parades should be, this was truly a celebration that these politicians actually deserved to be in.

Most politicians who march in parades are doing it just for visibility. Period. And these local DC politicians were doing the same thing, but they also stepped up and delivered marriage to the LGBT community. I honestly believe for most of these DC councilmen and women they were enjoying the celebration first and campaigning second.

It's a breathe of fresh air since I sometimes feel that the National Democratic party uses the LGBT community for votes. But these officials actually delivered, and it was nice to see them with the shirtless guys and drag queens.

Bad Analysis, Worse Views

The Huffington Post recently reported on a poll conducted by the University of Washington that supposedly sheds some light into the Tea Party movement. I use the words supposedly because Huff Post, like so many other organizations, over hypes the poll and expands the result more than is appropriate. However, some of the results, even though a skeptics lens, are startling.

First, let's start out with how the poll was conducted and how it was interpreted. The poll was done specifically with residents of the state of Washington only. It might sound stupid to say this, but, therefore, the results are only pertaining to Washingtonian Tea Partiers, not Tea Partiers from across the country. Simple, right? Not for the Huffington Post. Not once in their article about this poll mention that this was for Washington residents only. You cannot interpret this as national, when it isn't. C'mon Huff Po.!

Now, in saying that, there are still some awful feelings who people that "strongly agree with the Tea Party" (which is how this poll figured out who Tea Party people were) believe. According to the Huffington Post (this is accurate), "Fifty-two percent of respondents also said that 'compared to the size of their group, lesbians and gays have too much political power.' "

Now that is plus or minus the margin off error, which is higher than the overall poll's (2.3) since this is a subgroup. However, lets say that even 45% believe this, that is ridiculous.

What power do we have? I mean honestly. When we lobbied to end discrimination in the military, what did we get? Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Wow, what a victory. Even in this current struggle to end DADT, which we have made a ton of progress in, we are not even close to finishing the job. See Politico article.

I mean I guess being able to have sex (Lawrence v. Texas) and not be thrown in jail was a victory. (I tried to put sarcasm in there, but this pisses me off so much, I couldn't). The Bush years were a real victory lap.

President Obama has done a lot to help the community. His support against DADT is welcomed, and he did sign Hate Crimes legislation. Furthermore, he has extended benefits to federal employers of same-sex partners (has he done it enough? no), and he has urged Health and Human Services to extend health benefits. But all of those victories are something every American should enjoy, not just our hetero friends. I hardly count that as a result of us being "too powerful."

But too say we are too powerful makes my blood boil. For years we have been spending and working our asses off to get Dems elected... and for what? Gay marriage is still a pipe dream, and a DADT is far from guaranteed.

If anything we need to be more powerful and actually listened to.

Everything and the Kitchen Sink

In between jobs, I had the "pleasure" to work a lovely establishment called Bob Evans. If you are not familiar with the restaurant, it was an eatery that labeled itself as "country home-cooking." You know the type. Over-sized entrees include country fried steak, biscuits and sausage gravy, chicken pot pie, and the like. Combine that with a tacky store in the front selling jars of gravy, cheap picture frames with apples on them, and discontinued Beenie Babies from 10 years ago, and you are immediate transported to a cheap knock-off of Little House on the Prairie as soon as you step foot in the door. The purpose of this blog is not to knock Bob Evans (their chicken pot pie and biscuit dinners are deadly but delicious), but to make a ridiculous, far-out analogy.

While working on "The Farm" (my pet name for Bob Evans), I would be astonished when patrons would order the stir-fry dinner. Why? Because do you honestly believe a restaurant that serves a massive bowl of mashed potatoes with chicken noodles soup on top to hundreds of customers a night would make a good stir-fry? Of course not.

This leads me to my analogy (well kinda an analogy). As I would not trust Bob Evans to make an Asian stir-fry, why would anyone trust the American Family Association to analyze health reform? You are just setting yourself up for an embarrassing failure.

I have monitored the AFAs opposition to HCR for a while, but this reason to be against "MussoliniCare" is the desperate of the desperate. Now, there are many legitimate reasons why groups would be still against the newly enacted health reform law. The costs, increased government regulation on private industry, and changes to the Medicare Advantage program. But, as the Huffington Post reported, although a majority of Americans are still against the HCR bill, a majority are willing to give it a chance.

So what has the AFA concocted to convince readers HCR is going to cause the destruction of America? Health reform penalizes marriage and encourages "fornication" and an "immoral lifestyle."

How? Because youths under 26 who are married are not permitted to be on their parents insurance plans while those who are not married are allowed. According to Brian Fischer (the genius who said Hitler used gays in his armies because we are so savage and would kill people without remorse. Click here for that masterpiece), "If you'd prefer to just shack up, however, and engage in fornication, well, that's just dandy. Mom and Dad can continue to pick up the tab for you with our full blessing and subsidize your health care and your immoral lifestyle."

It goes on. The blog by Fischer quotes someone named Wendy Lynn who starts out by saying "Yup, that's right. If you were fired up about the gay marriage issue, you should be mad as heck at this." No clue why gay marriage was brought into to this, but hey, if you have no argument, just blame the gays. She then asks (wink wink) whether HCR will cause couples to not to get married (heaven forbid).

Essentially, the AFA has run out of ideas to criticize HCR, and has made a "claim" that one provision in the bill will lead to unmarried couples. Oh yeah, and through the gays under the bus too.

First, it is true that married couples who are under 26 cannot be placed on their parents' health insurance plans. However, that changes in 2014 when ANYONE under 26 can use their parents' plan. That, conveniently, was not mentioned in the AFA piece.

So yes, we have 4 years of a fornication and immoral lifestyle bonanza ahead of us!