Blah Blah Blah

Tuesday,November,04,2008

Men of God who lie

Bishop George McKinney, Bishop Harry Jackson, and Rev. William Owens are Liars.

"Thou Shalt not bear false witness”—God

In an email (included in it’s entirety below) These men of god misrepresent Barack Obama’s position on Prop 8, implying that he is in favor of the amendment to the California Constitution. While his belief is that marriage is between a man and a woman, his position is against modifying the constitution. Clearly the men sending out the email are committing a lie of omission or misrepresentation. Then they say that same-sex couples “enjoy all the rights of married couples” under domestic partnership laws. This is simply not true.  And then they imply that the democratic party is in favor of Proposition 8. Another LIE!!!.

They must know they are lying, but justify it because of their bigotry and need to impose their religious beliefs on all Californians. Apparently the end justifies the means.

Shame on them!

It make me so sad to see men that are trusted spiritual advisers, men of the cloth, men that are experts in morality, men that should be honest and forthright in their arguments, lie. There is no excuse. They should be ashamed. The issues of homophobia, bigotry, hatred and discrimination against gay people aside, I hope their beliefs about facing Saint Peter at the Pearly Gates are correct, so that they will have to atone for their LIES in this dishonest campaign. Their behavior is despicable and disgusting, and reveals their (lack of) true character.

America is on the verge of an historic election, electing the first African American president in our nation’s history. One of the most important issues on the ballot this year in California is Proposition 8, which restores the definition of marriage as being a union between a man and a woman. Here, in his own words, is how Barack Obama defines marriage:

“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. For me as a Christian it’s also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”
- Barack Obama
August 17, 2008

Proposition 8 provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Gay and lesbian Californians already enjoy the same legal rights as married spouses under California’s domestic partnership statutes. Proposition 8 doesn’t take away any of these rights.

Please join the High Impact Leadership Coalition and the Coalition of African American Pastors and other Democrats in saying Yes to Proposition 8.

Sincerely,

Bishop George McKinney
Coalition of African American Pastors
General Board C.O.G.I.C

Bishop Harry Jackson
Chairman, High Impact Leadership Coalition

Rev. William Owens
President, Coalition of African American Pastors

Feedback (0)
Posted by stevem on 11/04 at 02:36,AM • Category: Blah Blah Blah
Permalink

Share this entry with a friend

Friday,October,03,2008

Welcome to my Arizona Visitors

If you got here from the Prop 102 article on the Arizona Central web site, this posting is for you.

Please use my photos to promote equality and fairness for everyone!!!

One of the commentators (Diego400) on the azcentral web site has linked to photos on my site using them in a disingenuous attempt to support his hateful and intolerant position. I really dislike it when folks use my images to promote their narrow minded and bigoted point of view. The photos were taken in 2005 at the Pride Celebration Parade in San Francisco. Yes, skimpy clothes and sexy bodies are part of the gay pride parade culture, but to hold up a pride celebration as the sole example of gay culture is misleading and dishonest. It would be like using Mardi Gras in New Orleans as an example of straight culture. Yes, it’s one element, but absolutely not representative of the culture as a whole.

Folks who want to (in the case of California) eliminate the rights of same-sex couples to marry, or try to prevent it in the first place never seem to be able to articulate precisely how it is that same-sex marriage will hurt society. They are however very good at fanning the flames of a vague fear using dishonest and misleading strategies. Yes, Diego400, I’m talking about you! However, having been around same-sex weddings, let me tell you, there is nothing to be afraid of. The folks getting married in San Francisco in 2004 were very ordinary, bordering on boring, folks, many with kids. I don’t know how anyone could see these photos and think of these people or their marriages as a threat.  See for yourself:

Same sex weddings in 2004

Please take a moment and help support equality for all, and donate to the anti-prop 102 folks!!!

Sadly, I’m sure Diego400 is beyond hope and will continue his campaign against his fellow citizens, but maybe you can see through the lies, deception and hatred, and promote tolerance and love for all the citizens of Arizona.

Thanks for stopping by!

By the way, here’s the photos Diego400 wanted you to see.

Feedback (0)
Posted by stevem on 10/03 at 12:43,PM • Category: Blah Blah Blah
Permalink

Share this entry with a friend

Sunday,June,29,2008

San Francisco Pride Parade Photos

A Gallery of photos and images from the 2008 San Francisco Pride Parade

Visit the Gallery

Visit the Gallery

Feedback (0)
Posted by stevem on 06/29 at 11:05,PM • Category: Blah Blah Blah
Permalink

Share this entry with a friend

Saturday,June,28,2008

2008 Trans March

A gallery of photos from the 2008 Trans Festival and March in San Francisco

Visit the Gallery

Visit the Gallery

High Rez video slideshow with music:

Feedback (0)
Posted by stevem on 06/28 at 01:24,AM • Category: Blah Blah Blah
Permalink

Share this entry with a friend

Thursday,June,14,2007

What the fuck is wrong with “The System”?

An identity thief on probation causes six months of hell and 30k in lost income to 1 victim, yet gets only time served and probation!

This story on SF Gate shows why identity theft is such a great crime, if you’re a criminal…

The story is titled, “How victim snared ID thief.” But it should really be called, “How an identity theft victim got screwed twice, once by the criminal, and once by the (in)justice system.”

The cops don’t pursue the criminals, and when the courts get ahold of the scummy bastards, they don’t do jack shit. The only reason the criminal was caught was because the indignant and brave victim chased her down. The criminal, Maria Nelson, was on probation for one of 8 previous fraud convictions.  You’d think someone on probation would do some real jail time… But not in this case, Maria Nelson, pleaded guilty to ONE(!) count of fraudulently using someone else’s identity, and Superior Court Judge Harold Kahn sentenced her to the 44 days she had already served in county jail and three years’ probation. Like the victim, Karen Lodrick, said, “I went through six months of hell, and she’s going to get probation? She was on probation when she victimized me. Obviously, probation’s not helping.”

Until the cops, DA and the courts recognize the severe and costly impact of identity theft on the victims that are left to sort out the mess that is made of their financial and personal lives, and start treating the perpetrators of this crime as the mangy, costly and devastating criminals that they are, we will continue to see people victimized by identity thieves operating with almost complete impunity.

I’m sickened by this case!  The DA, and Judge Harold Kahn should be ashamed. Maria Nelson should have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law for each and every crime that could be pinned on her (god knows there were enough she committed), and then sentenced to the maximum allowed by law. She is an unrepentant repeat offender, and obviously a professional thief, she had a perfect fake drivers license and a key to the mailbox cluster, etc. Who knows how many innocent people she has victimized. Who knows how much she has cost these victims in time, money, and security… She has really hurt people… And yet she gets time served and probation. Excuse me while I puke.

Hey Assistant District Attorney Reve Bautista and Judge Harold Kahn, when you’re handed a criminal on a silver platter, do something about it… You guys are fucking assholes! I hope Maria Nelson has a key to your mailboxes; obviously you both can use a lesson on the impact of identity theft. But I’m sure you have nothing to worry about, Nelson is on probation… I’m positive she’d never violate the terms of her probation…

A local copy of the story is saved here

Feedback (0)
Posted by stevem on 06/14 at 09:32,PM • Category: Blah Blah Blah
Permalink

Share this entry with a friend

Monday,February,05,2007

The answers to my Iraq War Questions of March 2003

Herein I publish answer to my own questions

Sorry, It’s a work in progress. More answers coming soon. Running out of time right now, but wanted to get this posted.

Question:
Does Iraq currently pose a “clear and present danger” to the US?

Answer:
The Bushies sure said it was: In Their Own Words: Iraq’s ‘Imminent’ Threat
Overblown: How Politicians and the Terrorism Industry Inflate National Security Threats, and Why We Believe Them

Question:
Will the world (and the US) be safer without Sadaam running Iraq?

Answer:
From the Washington Post: Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Hurting U.S. Terror Fight
NIE says no

Questions:
Has there been any evidence that Iraq has supported any terrorism?
Has there been any evidence that Iraq has supported any terrorism aimed at the US?

Answers:
From the Washington Post: Iraq’s Alleged Al-Qaeda Ties Were Disputed Before War

Question:
Has there been any proof that Iraq still has WMD?

Answer:
From MSNBC: CIA’s final report: No WMD found in Iraq
From CN: Iraq war wasn’t justified, U.N. weapons experts say

Question:
Can we contain the Iraqi threat *without* war?

Answer
Well, it’s kinda hard to prove what “could have been”, but I think it’s clear that what we did failed:

Answer:

Question:
Who stands to gain financially from war with Iraq?

Answer:
The usual war profiteers

Question:
Do we have a plan for what to do after we topple Sadaam?

Answer:
From the Guardian: US postwar Iraq strategy a mess, Blair was told

Question:
Are we going to be able to put in place a Democratic government in a
country that is populated by hugely different ethnic groups that don’t
like each other, and may lack the societal acumen to make democracy
work?

Answer:
From Foreign Affairs: Was Iraq a Fool’s Errand?
Iraq lacks any of the preconditions academics generally accept as being necessary for democratization to succeed. It has no middle class to speak of independent from the state; oil revenues, the life-line of any Iraqi regime, are notorious for their ability to centralize rather than democratize power; the country has no tradition of limited or responsible government; national identity is weak in the face of rival religious or ethnic loyalties; regional neighbors will do what they can to undermine whatever democratizing movements exist......

Question:
Is the estimated $100 BILLION that we’ll spend on Iraq best spent there?

Answer:
You tell me… From ABC News: Who’s Counting: How Iraq Trillion Could Have Been Spent

Question:
What are the econmic consequences of war, both for the US and the world?

Answer:
Wikipedia is tallying the US: cost

Question:
Could war cause more terrorism, and further alienate us from
Arab/Muslim people?

Answer:
Like Margie said in Fargo, “You Betcha”
From the Washington Post: U.S. occupation has become a potent recruiting tool for al Qaeda and other terrorist groups,

Question:
Is it possible that we aren’t going to get what we think we will from
invading Iraq??

Answer:

Feedback (0)
Posted by stevem on 02/05 at 02:14,PM • Category: Blah Blah Blah
Permalink

Share this entry with a friend

Sunday,February,04,2007

What I said about Iraq, and when I said it

I’m not one to say I told you so.... But.... in March of 2003....

When I first heard in 2002 that the Bush administration was going to launch a preemptive war against Iraq, I thought to myself that they would never be able to sell this to Americans. We were too smart. We would see through the lies and deception of the Bush administration. We would never waste our brave soldiers lives in such folly.  Obviously I was wrong. I underestimated the ability of the Bushies to pander to the fear of terrorism, and deceptively tie Iraq to the attacks of 9/11 by repeatedly mentioning them both in the same breath. Over and over and over again!  I underestimated the cowardice of most of the Democratic Party.

However, I don’t think I was too far off the mark with my estimation of how a war in Iraq would play out.  I was amazed at the number of people on the two email lists where I posted these messages that shouted me down and insisted that invasion of Iraq was a “good thing”. I knew that time would deliver a quagmire, thousands of dead US soldier, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, Billions of dollars wasted, global instability, and insecurity, nearly universal hatred of the US, and ultimately vindication for those of us that opposed the war.

Here’s snippets from a couple of emails that I wrote in March of 2003, at the start of the war in Iraq (for the full emails, click the “more” link below):

Subject: [SFG] Alternatives to US war against Iraq WAS: Logical -- blah blah blah…
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 19:17:52 -0600 (CST)


The links I posted specifically refered to non-violent options. I'd like
to think that non-violence could solve most conflicts, but reality is
that not all can be solved that way… Maybe violence is required to
overthrow Saddam.  *IF* that is true, I'd much rather see the violence
happen in the context of an uprising by an organized opposition that
is ready to step in and run the country upon victory rather than at the
hands of an occuyping force like the US.

Maybe it's my "Inner Republican" speaking, personal (and societal)
responsibility matters. I think it's important that the US and the world
do not decide who needs help and decide to *impose* help upon them. A
people need to want liberation from a tyranical government bad enough
to move in that direction before outsiders should step in.  I believe
that if a people is unwilling to take action against a dictator, even a
brutal, ruthless, evil dictator like Saddam, any solution imposed upon
them from the outside will ultimately not solve the societal problems
that resulted in the dictator in the first place.  The ability to manage
democracy successfully comes in part from the struggle for it and the
process of earning it..

And some questions that I asked in another email:

From: "Mr. Steve" 
Subject:      War? was:Antiwar Demonstrations
Status: RO
Date: Mar 14, 2003 09:40:07 AM

Does Iraq currently pose a "clear and present danger" to the US?
Will the world (and the US) be safer without Sadaam running Iraq?
Has there been any evidence that Iraq has supported any terrorism?
Has there been any evidence that Iraq has supported any terrorism aimed at the US?
Has there been any proof that Iraq still has WMD?
Can we contain the Iraqi threat *without* war?
Who stands to gain financially from war with Iraq?

Do we have a plan for what to do after we topple Sadaam?
Are we going to be able to put in place a Democratic government in a
country that is populated by hugely different ethnic groups that don't
like each other, and may lack the societal acumen to make democracy
work?

Is the estimated $100 BILLION that we'll spend on Iraq best spent there?

What are the econmic consequences of war, both for the US and the world?

Could war cause more terrorism, and further alienate us from
Arab/Muslim people?

Is it possible that we aren't going to get what we think we will from
invading Iraq??

click “more” for the full text of my emails

Here is the Full text of both emails that I sent:

Subject: [SFG] Alternatives to US war against Iraq WAS: Logical -- blah blah blah…
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 19:17:52 -0600 (CST)

At some earlier point in time 'Petro' shaped the electrons thus:

>On Wed, Mar 26, 2003 at 02:16:54PM -0600, Mr. Steve wrote:
>> Here's a couple of alternatives:
>> http://snowcoalition.org/site/resources?show=resources&sub=iraqnv
>> and
>> http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/pubs/02mercury.html

>
>    Do you really believe that either of these are a viable alternative
>    in this case? 

Imagine if we spent some portion of the $75,000,000,000 that we're slated
(so far) to spend on this war (not including reconstruction costs)
on improving the living conditions, communications infrastructure
(both internal and external to the world media), education, medical
training and facilities, military training, defensive capabilities,
agricultural infrastructure etc of the Kurds in Northern Iraq, or the
Shiites in the south?  We could offer to fund UN peacekeeping forces.
For a fraction of the money (and American blood) that we'll be spending
destroying Iraq, we could nurture and support a popular revolt.

The links I posted specifically refered to non-violent options. I'd like
to think that non-violence could solve most conflicts, but reality is
that not all can be solved that way… Maybe violence is required to
overthrow Saddam.  *IF* that is true, I'd much rather see the violence
happen in the context of an uprising by an organized opposition that
is ready to step in and run the country upon victory rather than at the
hands of an occuyping force like the US.

Maybe it's my "Inner Republican" speaking, personal (and societal)
responsibility matters. I think it's important that the US and the world
do not decide who needs help and decide to *impose* help upon them. A
people need to want liberation from a tyranical government bad enough
to move in that direction before outsiders should step in.  I believe
that if a people is unwilling to take action against a dictator, even a
brutal, ruthless, evil dictator like Saddam, any solution imposed upon
them from the outside will ultimately not solve the societal problems
that resulted in the dictator in the first place.  The ability to manage
democracy successfully comes in part from the struggle for it and the
process of earning it..

I'm not saying that either one of those links is *the* answer at this
time, as our policies have so alienated us that it would be difficult for
us to achieve credibility among the Shiites or the Kurds.  We encouraged
them to revolt against Hussein in 1991, and then all but abandoned them.
AFAIK, all we gave them (after several massacres) is "no fly zones". But
we've had 12 years since we bombed the shit outta Iraq, if we had invested
wisely in nurturing the desire and abilities of two of the three ethnic
(and geographic) groups in Iraq, perhaps Iraqi's would have already
removed Hussein. Under the scrutiny of the world, and without the US to
help cover his attrocities with chemical weapons as we did in the 1980's,
a point would have been reached where he wouldn't have the option of
crushing an uprising unchallenged by the world.

However I am absolutely saying that there are solutions to the Iraqi
"humanitarian crisis" that do not involve war or a US invasion/occupation.

stevem

and the second email:

From: “Mr. Steve” 
Subject:      War? was:Antiwar Demonstrations
Status: RO
Date: Mar 14, 2003 09:40:07 AM


First, let me express my appreciation for the sacrifices and service of
the people that are our military… While I may question the policies
and actions of our government, my support for the brave men and women
of our military is unconditional and my respect unbounded.


If it was simply a matter of we wage war against Iraq, and the world
becomes a safer place, I’d be all for it…


The single biggest concern that I have right now is that we as a country
have adopted the “you’re either with us or against us” attitude that
President Bush expressed post 9-11. We are an open and democratic country,
yet the patriotism of anyone that questions the wisdom of a pending war
with Iraq is questioned. Members of Congress are busy changing menus to
eliminate the word “french” rather than debating the pressing issues of
our foreign policy. Open discussion and debate about a topic as critical
as WAR needs to happen. Not to prevent war, but rather to be sure that
war is the RIGHT answer. If war is the right answer, as ugly as it is,
it is necessary, but we need to be sure or what we are doing. The lack
of debate is most troubling… Why is debate unpatriotic today?


Some questions I have:


Does Iraq currently pose a “clear and present danger” to the US?
Will the world (and the US) be safer without Sadaam running Iraq?
Has there been any evidence that Iraq has supported any terrorism?
Has there been any evidence that Iraq has supported any terrorism aimed at the US?
Has there been any proof that Iraq still has WMD?
Can we contain the Iraqi threat *without* war?


Do we have a plan for what to do after we topple Sadaam?
Are we going to be able to put in place a Democratic government in a
country that is populated by hugely different ethnic groups that don’t
like each other, and may lack the societal acumen to make democracy
work?


Is the estimated $100 BILLION that we’ll spend on Iraq best spent there?


Could we get more bang for our buck elsewhere?


If the reasoning is that Sadaam is a bad man that terrorizes his people,
and should be removed from power, why aren’t we applying this logic
elsewhere in the world? There are lots of tyrants that are destined
for hell after they are done abusing their people here on earth. Even
so, just because he terrorizes his people doesn’t make him a threat to
US.


Why aren’t we addressing North Korea’s threats?  Everyone here on the
west coast of the US is within range of North Korea’s missles. It’s
acknowledged that they have nuclear bombs. They are loudly rattling
their sabre… They do present a “clear and present danger” to US.


Who stands to gain financially from war with Iraq?


Even if you think that war with Iraq is necessary, can we talk about
possible outcomes and costs?  Like:


What will the effect on our place in the world community be if we wage
war in without UN resolution/authorization?


What will the effect be if we wage war in VIOLATION of UN resolution?


What are the econmic consequences of war, both for the US and the world?
Could war cause more terrorism, and further alienate us from
Arab/Muslim people?


What will the ramifications of abandonding decades of foreign policy
that extolled the virtues of nonagression and international cooperation
for one that employs unilateral preemptive ware against those countries
that we think might threaten us someday?


Is it possible that we aren’t going to get what we think we will from
invading Iraq??







				



Feedback (0)


Posted by stevem on 02/04 at 12:14,PM

•


Category: Blah Blah Blah



Permalink

Share this entry with a friend


			





Page 1 of 6 pages  1 2 3 >  Last »








<< Previous Page
Shooter.net Home