Read the full story here:

 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/30/health/policy/30health.html?emc=eta1

I’m REALLY angry about this one.  

I used the links below to go to their web pages for “letters.”  Then I filled out and wrote a scathing comment about “bought” legislators, etc. into the “comment” section for the first one, then copied and pasted it in for the comments to the rest of them (including Bill Nelson of Florida, the “sold out” Democrat).  

 Those comments are below.Anyway, I eMailed all of the listed in the article senators from their sites.  

I’d suggest if you’re as mad as I am, do the same thing.  Take pointers from my comments below.Here are links to some of the senators who voted “no.”

http://baucus.senate.gov/contact/emailForm.cfm?subj=issue

http://carper.senate.gov/contact/webformIQV2.cfm

http://conrad.senate.gov/contact/webformIQV2.cfm

http://lincoln.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

http://billnelson.senate.gov/contact/email.cfm

http://grassley.senate.gov/contact.cfm

You can also check out:  http://www.sickforprofit.com

Regards, Ed

*************************My “form” letter is below:

As one of the 48 million Americans who cannot (and never will be able to) afford “private” health insurance (male, over 50, monthly premiums exceed $700 a month) even though I’m “healthy as a horse”, I am mad as hell that you sold out to your buddies in the Health Care industry and rejected the Public Option.

The cost issue is simple. I’ve worked in health care much of my career. The non profit hospitals, where nuns drive Chevrolet’s, have no problem with what Medicare pays.

The private hospitals, where the administrator drives a $70,000 car and gets a huge bonus “can’t afford it”.

What’s wrong with this picture? Making a profit off of sick people, that’s what’s wrong.

In the meantime, millions of us don’t have and will never get health insurance, and you, in your wealth and comfort, don’t give a damn.

I hope they vote your sorry posterior out of office next time. It’s “bought” politicians like you that have ruined this country. You’re supposed to be working for US, not the health care industry.

Regards, Ed Garren, MA, LMFT Psychotherapist

A friend sent this excellent article, published in The Guardian (a United Kingdom newspaper).

At the risk of incurring the wrath of many of my friends, I agree with the author.  We “liberals” have been too polite, too complicit and too compliant with the onslaught of “conservatives.”  In other words, we have been “lambs” while the wolves have been tearing the country to shreds, devouring the poor, gutting the treasury, and bankrupting the country.

 Is it any wonder that the use of anti-depressant drugs has doubled in the last ten years?

 One of the reasons that Barack Obama has gained so much respect is that when someone attacked him during his campaign, he came right back with an intelligent response.

He continues to engage those with whom he has differences, and while being politically expedient, he has not been politically impotent.

One of the main reasons we “progressives” have not fared well in the last decades is that we are afraid to take on issues, bullies, malcontents and liars.  Barney Frank and Barbara Boxer seem to be the only persons in congress with good old fashioned “balls” and “backbone.”  Maybe it’s because they are both Jewish and understand that when you’re dealing with bullies, you need to fight back, period.

Until we “progressives” are willing to fight back, hard, we will continue to lose ground, which we can no longer afford to do, both for the sake of the nation and the planet.

Here it is, please feel free to comment below.

*******************

To see this story with its related links on the guardian.co.uk site, go tohttp://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/aug/29/edward-kennedy-democrats-defeat

 Ted Kennedy: a lamb, not a lion

I admired and supported Ted Kennedy ? but he was the symbol of an era when liberals lost the battles that mattered

 Muhammad Cohen

Sunday August 30 2009

guardian.co.uk

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/aug/29/edward-kennedy-democrats-defeat

Ted Kennedy was the champion of the American left during the greatest surge to the right in US political history. Rather than the liberal lion of the Senate, fiercely defending his turf, he was a lamb who failed to halt, and even abetted, the country’s slide away from his principals and ideals. The very word “liberal” morphed from an adjective to an accusation while Ted Kennedy was the keeper of its flame.

I don’t make these charges as one of the legion of Kennedy-haters. Quite the contrary: I’m a proud, card-carrying liberal. My “To sail against the wind” poster, a campaign contribution keepsake from Kennedy’s one and only presidential run in 1980, showing the senator stoutly striding to the left, has graced my walls on three continents. I would have voted for Kennedy over any presidential candidate of the past 40 years, so count me as a true believer.

I don’t blame Kennedy for that 1980 run against Jimmy Carter, a sitting president of his own party. I don’t even blame Kennedy ? although many do ? for Carter’s subsequent defeat at the hands of Ronald Reagan. In 1979, Jimmy Carter threatened: “If Kennedy runs, I’ll whip his ass.” Kennedy let Carter whip his ass, and that’s unforgivable. Though friends and foes alike salute Kennedy’s legislative record, those bills are mere footnotes to the dominant US trend of the past 40 years, a huge ass-whipping for liberals. The Americans With Disabilities Act, No Children Left Behind and the Occupational Safety and Health Act don’t stack up to a single Clarence Thomas or Rush Limbaugh that Kennedy helped create. Kennedy was the leading light on the left during an era when liberals got whipped in every battle that mattered, a loser of historic proportion.

Kennedy didn’t just fail to stem the rightward tide, he helped power it. Through his own personal misconduct, from cheating at Harvard to Chappaquiddick to his binge with William Kennedy Smith of blue-dot rape trial fame, Kennedy exemplified the privileged irresponsibility that fueled the rightwing revolution.

The Kennedy name was said to be magical among liberals, but it became even more effective for conservatives. The mere mention of Ted Kennedy on any issue was enough to open rightwing wallets. For every dollar Kennedy raised for causes he supported, his name probably raised ten times more for causes he opposed. While portraying himself as a champion of the working class, Kennedy financed the movement that convinced millions of Joe the Plumbers to vote against their own interests.

Kennedy became a powerful symbol for his enemies of everything that was wrong with government, liberals, Democrats, and Washington, but failed to use his iconic position to inspire and move his allies. He was the one liberal politician of his time guaranteed a national audience whenever he spoke out. But Kennedy rarely chose to grasp that big stage to galvanize his side and move public opinion on key issues that defined the US over the past four decades.

Where was he on the George Bush the elder’s Supreme Court nomination of Clarence Thomas, the rightwing extremist whose lifetime appointment to the court will have a far greater impact than Kennedy and his brothers combined? When Thomas’ 1991 confirmation hearings deteriorated into a circus with pubic hair on soda cans in the centre ring, where was Kennedy to tell the president and the country that it had to demand someone better? Actually, Kennedy was right there on the Senate Judiciary Committee, gagged by his own string of sexual peccadilloes.

When Thomas cast the vote that made the younger George Bush president, where was Kennedy to say it was wrong in a democracy for nine judges to order vote counting stopped? Where was Kennedy to express liberal outrage at this farce and to lead a movement to refuse to recognise Bush as president until the votes were counted? Why wasn’t he calling on fellow lawmakers to stand and turn their backs whenever they were confronted with this immorally-appointed president?

Well, Kennedy was too busy then crafting the flawed and under-funded No Children Left Behind Act that not only made public education less effective but gave the sham president legitimacy. After asserting Bush betrayed him, Kennedy went back to work again with that same administration on prescription drug coverage for seniors, only to see his support used to create a government handout for drug companies. Fool me twice….

Where was Kennedy’s call for liberals to take to the streets to protest the invasion of Iraq, as they had to end the war in Vietnam? Where was he on the erosion of civil liberties under George Bush? Where was he over the past 40 years on taking meaningful steps to end America’s dependence on imported oil and stop fouling the planet?

Most important, where was Kennedy on the decades-long slide starting with Reagan that transformed government’s mandate and public opinion about the very mission of America? Kennedy’s silence was deafening as Republicans and Democrats alike pandered to business and cut taxes on the wealthy, mocking his brother John’s clarion call in his inaugural speech: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.”

It’s deeply ironic that Kennedy dies in the midst of a national firestorm over healthcare reform, the cause that he hoped to make his crowning achievement. He leaves the issue mired in the lies and muddle that he didn’t challenge while it spread to poison the national debate. Senior citizens with their social security benefits and Medicare cards stand up at town hall meetings today demanding, “Keep government’s hands off my healthcare,” not only because of Fox News and rightwing radio, but because Ted Kennedy refused to use his mantle to refute the noise and nonsense on the right, leaving it instead of the likes of Al Franken.

Kennedy eschewed that national spotlight to become the consummate Capitol Hill insider. His accomplishments, while noteworthy and substantial, did nothing to counteract the nation’s lurch to the right. He chose to work in the comfortable, clubby confines of the Senate while his team desperately needed a public leader. Perhaps, given the times and trends (though with Watergate, Reagan and his hoodlums, 9/11 and Iraq, the Democrats certainly have had some cards to play), Kennedy drew a Mission: Impossible ? but unlike the fictional agents, Kennedy chose not to accept his mission.

Renowned as an orator, it’s fitting that Kennedy’s best known words have come in tragedy and defeat. There’s this beautiful tribute in his eulogy for Robert Kennedy: “As he said many times, in many parts of this nation, to those he touched and who sought to touch him: ‘Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say, why not?’”

After Carter whipped his ass, Kennedy told the 1980 Democratic national convention: “The work goes on, the cause endures, the dream will never die.” In his electrifying appearance at last year’s Democratic party convention in Denver, the stricken Kennedy, whose early support helped Barack Obama secure the presidential nomination, said, “The work begins anew, the hope rises anew, the dream lives on.”

Because of Kennedy’s own failures and flaws, despite nearly half a century in the Senate, so much of what he stood for remains nothing more than dreams.

An earlier version of this article appeared in Asia Times Online.

Our president offered a very dignified and gracious greeting to the Islamic world for the beginning of Ramadan, explaining that it is a month long season of fasting, prayer and dignified celebration of the revealing of the Holy Koran to the prophet Mohammed.

While some may respond to this with shock, anger or other negative response, I am personally very pleased that our president has made this gesture of respect towards the Islamic community, a community which for too long has been perceived as being at odds with American values.

My personal experience of Islamic people has been overwhelmingly respectful, gracious, and I have experienced them as deeply spiritual people, who constantly hold their relationship with God at the center of their lives.  Generally they are gracious and humble people, filled with thanksgiving, and always open to being hospitable with strangers in their midst.  It is sad that our previous administration played upon fears and exploited the actions of a very few Muslims, and used their actions as an excuse to demonize an entire religion.

As a Gay man who is also a Christian,  I am painfully aware of how religious extremists in any religion can taint what the outside world sees regarding the entire religion.  The so-called militant clerics in Islam have about as much sanction in the larger faith as Pat Robertson, or the late Jerry Falwell had among main stream Christians.  I would not want all Christians to be judged by the actions and words of a few literalist angry judgmental men, and I suspect it is equally ignorant to cast the majority of Muslims, who are peace loving people, in with the words and deeds of a small and misguided group of angry people.

So, here is the video, and afterward is a Wikipedia link about Ramadan.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK9ThwtxzfY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramadan

From the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-james-hansen/g-8-failure-reflects-us-f_b_228597.html

Dr. James Hansen

Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies

Posted: July 9, 2009 10:33 AM

G-8 Failure Reflects U.S. Failure on Climate Change

Jim Hansen is director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, but he writes on this policy-related topic as a private citizen.

It didn’t take long for the counterfeit climate bill known as Waxman-Markey to push back against President Obama’s agenda. As the president was arriving in Italy for his first Group of Eight summit, the New York Times was reporting that efforts to close ranks on global warming between the G-8 and the emerging economies had already tanked:

The world’s major industrial nations and emerging powers failed to agree Wednesday on significant cuts in heat-trapping gases by 2050, unraveling an effort to build a global consensus to fight climate change, according to people following the talks.

Of course, emission targets in 2050 have limited practical meaning — present leaders will be dead or doddering by then — so these differences may be patched up. The important point is that other nations are unlikely to make real concessions on emissions if the United States is not addressing the climate matter seriously.

With a workable climate bill in his pocket, President Obama might have been able to begin building that global consensus in Italy. Instead, it looks as if the delegates from other nations may have done what 219 U.S. House members who voted up Waxman-Markey last month did not: critically read the 1,400-page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 and deduce that it’s no more fit to rescue our climate than a V-2 rocket was to land a man on the moon.

I share that conclusion, and have explained why to members of Congress before and will again at aCapitol Hill briefing on July 13. Science has exposed the climate threat and revealed this inconvenient truth: If we burn even half of Earth’s remaining fossil fuels we will destroy the planet as humanity knows it. The added emissions of heat-trapping carbon dioxide will set our Earth irreversibly onto a course toward an ice-free state, a course that will initiate a chain reaction of irreversible and catastrophic climate changes.

The concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere now stands at 387 parts per million, the highest level in 600,000 years and more than 100 ppm higher than the amount at the dawn of the Industrial Revolution. Burning just the oil and gas sitting in known fields will drive atmospheric CO2 well over 400 ppm and ignite a devil’s cauldron of melted icecaps, bubbling permafrost, and combustible forests from which there will be no turning back. But if we cut off the largest source of carbon dioxide, coal, we have a chance to bring CO2 back to 350 ppm and still lower through agricultural and forestry practices that increase carbon storage in trees and soil.

The essential step, then, is to phase out coal emissions over the next two decades. And to declare off limits artificial high-carbon fuels such as tar sands and shale while moving to phase out dependence on conventional petroleum as well.

This requires nothing less than an energy revolution based on efficiency and carbon-free energy sources. Alas, we won’t get there with the Waxman-Markey bill, a monstrous absurdity hatched in Washington after energetic insemination by special interests.

For all its “green” aura, Waxman-Markey locks in fossil fuel business-as-usual and garlands it with a Ponzi-like “cap-and-trade” scheme. Here are a few of the bill’s egregious flaws:

• It guts the Clean Air Act, removing EPA’s ability to regulate CO2 emissions from power plants.

 

• It sets meager targets — 2020 emissions are to be a paltry 13% less than this year’s level — and sabotages even these by permitting fictitious “offsets,” by which other nations are paid to preserve forests - while logging and food production will simply move elsewhere to meet market demand.

 

 

• Its cap-and-trade system, reports former U.S. Undersecretary of Commerce for Economic Affairs Robert Shapiro, “has no provisions to prevent insider trading by utilities and energy companies or a financial meltdown from speculators trading frantically in the permits and their derivatives.”

 

 

• It fails to set predictable prices for carbon, without which, Shapiro notes, “businesses and households won’t be able to calculate whether developing and using less carbon-intensive energy and technologies makes economic sense,” thus ensuring that millions of carbon-critical decisions fall short.

There is an alternative, of course, and that is a carbon fee, applied at the source (mine or port of entry) that rises continually. I prefer the “fee-and-dividend” version of this approach in which all revenues are returned to the public on an equal, per capita basis, so those with below-average carbon footprints come out ahead.

A carbon fee-and-dividend would be an economic stimulus and boon for the public. By the time the fee reached the equivalent of $1/gallon of gasoline ($115/ton of CO2) the rebate in the United States would be $2000-3000 per adult or $6000-9000 for a family with two children.

Fee-and-dividend would work hand-in-glove with new building, appliance, and vehicle efficiency standards. A rising carbon fee is the best enforcement mechanism for building standards, and it provides an incentive to move to ever higher energy efficiencies and carbon-free energy sources. As engineering and cultural tipping points are reached, the phase-over to post-fossil energy sources will accelerate. Tar sands and shale would be dead and there would be no need to drill Earth’s pristine extremes for the last drops of oil.

Some leaders of big environmental organizations have said I’m naïve to posit an alternative to cap-and-trade, and have suggested I stick to climate modeling. Let’s pass a bill, any bill, now and improve it later, they say. The real naïveté is their belief that they, and not the fossil-fuel interests, are driving the legislative process.

The fact is that the climate course set by Waxman-Markey is a disaster course. Their bill is an astoundingly inefficient way to get a tiny reduction of emissions. It’s less than worthless, because it will delay by at least a decade starting on a path that is fundamentally sound from the standpoints of both economics and climate preservation.

Former Defense Secretary Robert McNamara, who died this week, suffered for 40 years — as did our country — from his failure to turn back from a failed policy. As grave as the blunders of the Vietnam War were, the consequences of a failed climate policy will be more severe by orders of magnitude.

With the Senate debate over climate now beginning, there is still time to turn back from cap-and-trade and toward fee-and-dividend. We need to start now. Without political leadership creating a truly viable policy like a carbon fee, not only won’t we get meaningful climate legislation through the Senate, we won’t be able to create the concerted approach we need globally to prevent catastrophic climate change.

 I read the story in the Oregonian, and then the legions of comments after, mostly disgraceful, negative, mean spirited stuff, all hidden behind monikers and “post names”, never the real identity of the person.   A link to the article is below:

 http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2009/07/challenge_may_follow_renaming.html

This is what I wrote as my comment, and as always, I used my real name.  Please feel free to comment, here or at the Oregonian article comment section.

*****************************************************************************

Street names get changed all over from time to time.  In the county I grew up in, which has grown significantly in the 35 years since I left, the entire county (actually the entire state) switched to a “central grid” street numbering scheme because the old RFD system of Route numbers and Box numbers gave no clue as to where the house actually sits.  Emergency services could find the house quickly, nor could anyone else without elaborate directions.  This didn’t just happen in Florida, but all over the country, even the remote mountain cabin my brother lives in (in the mountains of western North Carolina).

So the 303 E. Bougainvillia of my childhood (and until I was in my early 50s) has now become a five numbered address in the NE section of the county, and my brother’s home, which was for decades, Route 6, box 355, Burnesville NC, is now 627 Winter Star Road.

I know people don’t like change.  My only point is, it happens.  One of the reasons I had suggested “Division” as the choice is that absolutely no one, even a friend in his 70s, a Portland native, who was a county planner his whole life, can tell me how and why Division got it’s name.  Who was Division?  Why Division?  What did it divide?  No one seems to know.My choice was Division, though Grand or Broadway would have made more sense too.  But the “hoopla” about any of those streets forced it over to 39th.

This “majority” thing is tricky.  We actually live in a Constitutional Republic, not a pure “Democracy”.  Will of the majority can be very brutal at times.  I grew up in the civil rights era, and I can assure you that white people everywhere were not at all willing to consider the issues of non white people.  Some of the most brutally racist events in history occurred in Chicago, Boston, and yes, here in Portland.

As a gay man, who has had my existence, dignity, humanity and civil rights put on a ballot measure every two or four years for over 30 years (my entire adult life), and then I get to see the percentages of people who hate me when the ballots are counted, I can assure you that not all things should be determined by majority rule.

As someone who is not a native to the region, who was born in a state with a Spanish name, in a city with a Spanish name, and lived another 22 years in a city with a Spanish name, I find all of this objection sadly provincial at best, and disgustingly racist at worst.

Within days of John Kennedy’s assassination, Grand Central Blvd. in Tampa Florida, which was the main street through the heart of the city (much like Burnside here) was changed to Kennedy Blvd.  The only people who objected were the ones who thought his getting shot was a good idea.

None of we whites in the south wanted integration.  But a couple of years later, most of us realized what idiots we’d been for having made such a fuss.  The rest died with a hardened heart.  Is that what some of you will do?  Stay angry because the world has changed and you don’t like it?  Carry that grudge till you die?

One of the reasons integration had to happen was that national and international business would never relocate to a segregated area.  Look at the south now, an economic powerhouse, because it changed.  Long held traditions, in a region which is the most “historically oriented” region in America, realized that some traditions are not worth keeping.

Cesar Chavez made a difference, and not just for Latino people, what he did, and stood for affected us all, he fought against abusive use of pesticides on produce, and civil rights for GLBTQ people, something he championed decades ago when it was not popular to do so.

Every time you bring produce home from the store you are benefitting from his work.

Our city does not need a reputation as a back water, provincial place.  That’s how we lose opportunities. Displaying a progressive posture, yes, with a street named after Mr. Chavez, helps us attract businesses and jobs of the future.

I’m truly sorry that this is so difficult for some people here, but all this spewing of ignorance and narrow mindedness simply demonstrate why the name change needed to happen.

Ed Garren

www.edgarren.us

I wrote this to our City Commissioners on Tuesday night, after returning home from testifying.

*****************

Testimony below

Packed Gallery above

(My testimony tonight was) Not my best night for focus, sorry for that.

And that is indicative of the process, which is what I was trying to articulate, though not very successfully (even I have “off” days).

This situation has evolved into a classic “lose/lose” situation.  It also appears to have become a lightening rod for all of Portland’s least attractive passions.

I urge you all to consider that while the process has met all the legal requirements, and will offer a sense of accomplishment, it will be a Pyrrhic Victory at best.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory

There will also be a lot of bruised, bleeding and very angry, vindictive people left in the aftermath.  They will take those passions out on the Latino community, and do we really need more of that?

I urge you all to consider appointing an independent committee, or something that can work through all the passions, actually ask a neighborhood to volunteer a street, or some other opportunity for the city to show it’s better side.

The current PROCESS is screaming at us that it is flawed and not working very well, that’s my point.

You always have the option to table this paradigm while you try something else.  You can then create a situation in which a better solution can be created.  I don’t think a solution can come out of the current city rules.  That is evidenced by how clearly those rules and procedures are not working in this situation.

A citizen committee that is appointed with representatives from all “sides” can make a recommendation based upon community wisdom, form the bottom up, instead of the top down.  It might actually improve race relations too.

I’m glad to talk with any of you about this if you need some fleshing out.

As much as I want this street (or bridge, or both) to happen, this is not the way to do it.

The New Administration’s goals for civil rights:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/civil_rights/

CIVIL RIGHTS

“The teenagers and college students who left their homes to march in the streets of Birmingham and Montgomery; the mothers who walked instead of taking the bus after a long day of doing somebody else’s laundry and cleaning somebody else’s kitchen — they didn’t brave fire hoses and Billy clubs so that their grandchildren and their great-grandchildren would still wonder at the beginning of the 21st century whether their vote would be counted; whether their civil rights would be protected by their government; whether justice would be equal and opportunity would be theirs…. We have more work to do.”

– Barack Obama, Speech at Howard University, September 28, 2007

President Barack Obama has spent much of his career fighting to strengthen civil rights as a civil rights attorney, community organizer, Illinois State Senator, U.S. Senator, and now as President. Whether promoting economic opportunity, working to improve our nation’s education and health system, or protecting the right to vote, President Obama has been a powerful advocate for our civil rights.

• Combat Employment Discrimination: President Obama and Vice President Biden will work to overturn the Supreme Court’s recent ruling that curtails racial minorities’ and women’s ability to challenge pay discrimination. They will also pass the Fair Pay Act, to ensure that women receive equal pay for equal work, and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity or expression.
• Expand Hate Crimes Statutes: President Obama and Vice President Biden will strengthen federal hate crimes legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew Shepard Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of Justice’s Criminal Section.
• End Deceptive Voting Practices: President Obama will sign into law his legislation that establishes harsh penalties for those who have engaged in voter fraud and provides voters who have been misinformed with accurate and full information so they can vote.
• End Racial Profiling: President Obama and Vice President Biden will ban racial profiling by federal law enforcement agencies and provide federal incentives to state and local police departments to prohibit the practice.
• Reduce Crime Recidivism by Providing Ex-Offender Support: President Obama and Vice President Biden will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama and Biden will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.
• Eliminate Sentencing Disparities: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.
• Expand Use of Drug Courts: President Obama and Vice President Biden will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

Support for the LGBT Community

“While we have come a long way since the Stonewall riots in 1969, we still have a lot of work to do. Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us. But at its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans. It’s about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect.”

– Barack Obama, June 1, 2007

• Expand Hate Crimes Statutes: In 2004, crimes against LGBT Americans constituted the third-highest category of hate crime reported and made up more than 15 percent of such crimes. President Obama cosponsored legislation that would expand federal jurisdiction to include violent hate crimes perpetrated because of race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, or physical disability. As a state senator, President Obama passed tough legislation that made hate crimes and conspiracy to commit them against the law.
• Fight Workplace Discrimination: President Obama supports the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and believes that our anti-discrimination employment laws should be expanded to include sexual orientation and gender identity. While an increasing number of employers have extended benefits to their employees’ domestic partners, discrimination based on sexual orientation in the workplace occurs with no federal legal remedy. The President also sponsored legislation in the Illinois State Senate that would ban employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
• Support Full Civil Unions and Federal Rights for LGBT Couples: President Obama supports full civil unions that give same-sex couples legal rights and privileges equal to those of married couples. Obama also believes we need to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and enact legislation that would ensure that the 1,100+ federal legal rights and benefits currently provided on the basis of marital status are extended to same-sex couples in civil unions and other legally-recognized unions. These rights and benefits include the right to assist a loved one in times of emergency, the right to equal health insurance and other employment benefits, and property rights.
• Oppose a Constitutional Ban on Same-Sex Marriage: President Obama voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment in 2006 which would have defined marriage as between a man and a woman and prevented judicial extension of marriage-like rights to same-sex or other unmarried couples.
• Repeal Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell: President Obama agrees with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a willingness to serve. Discrimination should be prohibited. The U.S. government has spent millions of dollars replacing troops kicked out of the military because of their sexual orientation. Additionally, more than 300 language experts have been fired under this policy, including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic. The President will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals.
• Expand Adoption Rights: President Obama believes that we must ensure adoption rights for all couples and individuals, regardless of their sexual orientation. He thinks that a child will benefit from a healthy and loving home, whether the parents are gay or not.
• Promote AIDS Prevention: In the first year of his presidency, President Obama will develop and begin to implement a comprehensive national HIV/AIDS strategy that includes all federal agencies. The strategy will be designed to reduce HIV infections, increase access to care and reduce HIV-related health disparities. The President will support common sense approaches including age-appropriate sex education that includes information about contraception, combating infection within our prison population through education and contraception, and distributing contraceptives through our public health system. The President also supports lifting the federal ban on needle exchange, which could dramatically reduce rates of infection among drug users. President Obama has also been willing to confront the stigma — too often tied to homophobia — that continues to surround HIV/AIDS.
• Empower Women to Prevent HIV/AIDS: In the United States, the percentage of women diagnosed with AIDS has quadrupled over the last 20 years. Today, women account for more than one quarter of all new HIV/AIDS diagnoses. President Obama introduced the Microbicide Development Act, which will accelerate the development of products that empower women in the battle against AIDS. Microbicides are a class of products currently under development that women apply topically to prevent transmission of HIV and other infections.

Like most people I know, I spent the inaugural week weeping more than occasionally with joy for all that has happened.  Here in Portland’s “Q Center” the boxes of tissue were being passed like communion trays as we all watched on Tuesday morning.

My personal “tear jerker” are the words of Dr. King ringing in my head, “I may not get there with you, but we as a people will get to the promised land.”

 I am thanks-filled that so many people, including Rev. Lowery, have lived to see this day.

 Here is the transcript of his benediction, which for me, was the best part of the event. 

Many of you will recognize the last verse of “Lift Every Voice and Sing”, by James Weldon Johnson (a native of Jacksonville Florida) who also penned “The Creation”, which opens this prayer.   

Transcript courtesy Federal News Service  and my friend John Burnett who sent it to me.

************************* 

God of our weary years, God of our silent tears, thou who has brought us thus far along the way, thou who has by thy might led us into the light, keep us forever in the path, we pray, lest our feet stray from the places, our God, where we met thee, lest our hearts, drunk with the wine of the world, we forget thee. Shadowed beneath thy hand may we forever stand — true to thee, O God, and true to our native land.

We truly give thanks for the glorious experience we’ve shared this day. We pray now, O Lord, for your blessing upon thy servant, Barack Obama, the 44th president of these United States, his family and his administration. He has come to this high office at a low moment in the national and, indeed, the global fiscal climate. But because we know you got the whole world in your hand, we pray for not only our nation, but for the community of nations. Our faith does not shrink, though pressed by the flood of mortal ills.

For we know that, Lord, you’re able and you’re willing to work through faithful leadership to restore stability, mend our brokenness, heal our wounds and deliver us from the exploitation of the poor or the least of these and from favoritism toward the rich, the elite of these.

We thank you for the empowering of thy servant, our 44th president, to inspire our nation to believe that, yes, we can work together to achieve a more perfect union. And while we have sown the seeds of greed — the wind of greed and corruption, and even as we reap the whirlwind of social and economic disruption, we seek forgiveness and we come in a spirit of unity and solidarity to commit our support to our president by our willingness to make sacrifices, to respect your creation, to turn to each other and not on each other.

And now, Lord, in the complex arena of human relations, help us to make choices on the side of love, not hate; on the side of inclusion, not exclusion; tolerance, not intolerance.

And as we leave this mountaintop, help us to hold on to the spirit of fellowship and the oneness of our family. Let us take that power back to our homes, our workplaces, our churches, our temples, our mosques, or wherever we seek your will.

Bless President Barack, First Lady Michelle. Look over our little, angelic Sasha and Malia.

We go now to walk together, children, pledging that we won’t get weary in the difficult days ahead. We know you will not leave us alone, with your hands of power and your heart of love.

Help us then, now, Lord, to work for that day when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, when tanks will be beaten into tractors, when every man and every woman shall sit under his or her own vine and fig tree, and none shall be afraid; when justice will roll down like waters and righteousness as a mighty stream.

Lord, in the memory of all the saints who from their labors rest, and in the joy of a new beginning, we ask you to help us work for that day when black will not be asked to get back, when brown can stick around — (laughter) — when yellow will be mellow — (laughter) — when the red man can get ahead, man — (laughter) — and when white will embrace what is right.

Let all those who do justice and love mercy say amen.

AUDIENCE: Amen!

REV. LOWERY: Say amen –

AUDIENCE: Amen!

REV. LOWERY: — and amen.

AUDIENCE: Amen! (Cheers, applause.)

Below is a link to the song that the “Black, Brown, White” part of the benediction was inspired from.  The expression, “If you’re white, you alright, if you’re brown, stick around, if you’re black, get back!” is a very old one in much of this country.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZLw5ahxm-Q