Category: GLBT

Study Says Chicago Wal-Mart Bad for Area Jobs

Posted on by TL

According to a new study, Wal-Mart is bad for jobs in Chicago, ABC 7 Chicago reports.

From WLS:

A new study out shows the one and only Wal-Mart in the city of Chicago may not be a job-generating machine like many supporters claim. But some question the conclusions reached by local researchers.

As early as next week, the City Council is expected to revive the debate over plans for a new Wal-Mart on the South Side. But a conveniently timed study says the retailing giant leaves less of an economic footprint than you may expect.

"Usually by this time of year we have a lot. But, as you can see, it’s empty," said Mike Ramirez, thrift store assistant manager.

Mike Ramirez says given the recession, business at his West Side thrift shop should be booming. It’s not. And he blames his new neighbor.

"This new Wal-Mart is taking a lot of my customers away," said Ramirez.

The city’s one and only Wal-Mart opened in the Austin neighborhood in 2006. A new study study by researchers from Loyola and UIC claims 82 businesses within a four-mile radius of the store have closed, thanks -at least in part- to the mega retailer’s presence. That, the study’s authors say, has cost the community nearly 300 jobs, about as many as Wal-Mart added.

The WLS report says the Chicago City Council will probably consider concerns of organized labor, however, Chicago should also consider Walm-Mart’s pitiful record on diversity. The Human Rights Campaign gives Wal-Mart a low 40/100 on the Corporate Equality Index criteria. Go here for the HRC’s complete analysis.

Click here to read the study.

Defender-of-Marriage Karl Rove Divorces Wife of 24 years

Posted on by TL
Karl and Darby Rove

Karl Rove, an outspoken defender of traditional marriage and opponent of same-sex marriage, has been granted a divorce of his wife of 24 years.

From the Sun-Times:

According to Politico.com, the man famously referred to as "Bush’s Brain" for his stewardship of President George W. Bush’s successful White House bids, has divorced his wife of 24 years.

Karl Rove, former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush, was granted a divorce from his wife, Darby, in Texas according to family spokesperson Dana Perino, herself a former Bush White House staffer.

“Karl Rove and his wife, Darby, were granted a divorce last week," Politico quotes Perino as saying. "The couple came to the decision mutually and amicably, and they maintain a close relationship and a strong friendship. There will be no further comment, and the family requests that its privacy be respected.”

Privacy. That’s funny, coming from Karl Rove.

I’ll say no more, respecting Darby’s privacy.

But, Karl, we’re just getting started with you.

Welcome to GOP Grade-School Politics: Andy Martin Claims Mark Kirk Is Gay

Posted on by TL

U.S. Senate candidate Andy Martin (left) taped a commercial saying front-runner U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (right) is gay.

I’m sorry, this is just too funny.

Andy Martin, challenging Mark Kirk in the Republican U.S. Senate primary in Illinois, wants you to know about a rumor he’s heard about Mark Kirk from some other guy who claims to know lots.

From the Chicago Sun-Times:

U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk, the front-runner in the Republican primary election for U.S. Senate, finds himself the object of an unusual attack ad from one of his lesser-known opponents.

Andy Martin, once known as Anthony Martin-Trigona, who has run for numerous elective offices over the last three decades in Illinois, Florida and Connecticut, taped a commercial saying Kirk is gay.

Martin’s source? Statements some conservative Republicans made on a radio show saying they have heard “rumors” that Kirk is gay.

“Illinois Republican leader Jack Roeser says there is a ‘solid rumor that Kirk is a homosexual,'” Martin says in the ad. “Roeser suggests that Kirk is part of a Republican Party homosexual club. Lake County Illinois Republican leader Ray True says Kirk has surrounded himself with homosexuals. Mark Kirk should tell Republican voters the truth.”

Kirk, a U.S. Naval Intelligence officer, was unavailable for comment because he is on active duty over the holidays, said spokesman Eric Elk.

But Elk issued this statement on his behalf: “The ad is not true and is degrading to the political process. The people of Illinois deserve better.”

Just in case you were ever tempted to take Republicans seriously again, read all that garbage up there again. Ask yourself, why does this accusation mean anything to Republicans? Then, ask yourself why Mark Kirk didn’t make some statement, at least to say, “No, I’m not. Not that there’s anything wrong with that!”

The only response from that comes from  the campaign is an assurance that the ad is not true. If Kirk wants to garner any gay GOP voters, he’s got to do better than than.  The fact that a better response is so far an afterthought says more than any future response would.

As for Andy Martin? For some reason, I feel I must quote another queen, Shakespeare’s Queen Gertrude, ” The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

Gay GOP Group Co-Sponsors Conservative Conference, But Not Allowed to Speak

Posted on by TL

Now this just takes the cake.

From AlterNet:

Earlier this month, conservative gay rights group GOProud announced that it would be a co-sponsor of this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). But the group’s inclusion as a co-sponsor has led to a backlash from the anti-gay right, some of whom are threatening to boycott CPAC if GOProud’s sponsorship isn’t removed. CPAC director Lisa De Pasquale told Hot Air last week that she was “satisfied” that GOProud “do not represent a ‘radical leftist agenda’ and thus “should not be rejected as a CPAC cosponsor.” But David Keene, the head of CPAC’s main organizing group, tried to calm the potential boycott by using a different tactic. In an e-mail to a right-wing radio host, Keene promised that GOProud would not have a speaking spot and that gay rights issues would not be “open to debate.”

The GOP: still crazy after all these years.

Read more here at AlterNet.

Salvation Army Still Hostile to Gays and Lesbians

Posted on by TL

I don’t vote on one issue, but I won’t donate to organizations that are hostile to people and organizations I support.

The Salvation Army is openly hostile to our gay and lesbian friends, and they won’t get a penny from me this holiday season.

From Lisa Neff at 365Gay.com:

Many, many good people — my friends and neighbors — ring the bell for the Salvation Army during December.

And many, many good people — my friends and neighbors — donate to the Salvation Army’s red kettles during December.

But I do not. I do not ring the bell for the Salvation Army. I do not donate to the Salvation Army, because the Salvation Army discriminates against gays and lesbians in employment, works to defeat civil rights measures that protect gays and lesbians and promotes position that gay relationships “do not conform to God’s will for society.”

Some will say, but the Salvation Army performs good work — the organization feeds the hungry, shelters the homeless, clothes the impoverished, whether gay or straight.

Yes, yet there are many other organizations performing the same work as the Salvation Army that do not discriminate against gays and lesbians, that will not use your donation against you.

From the Salvation Army’s Web site: “The Army regards the origins of a homosexual orientation as a mystery and does not regard a homosexual disposition as blameworthy in and of itself or rectifiable at will. Nevertheless, while we are not responsible for what we are, we are accountable for what we do; and homosexual conduct, like heterosexual conduct, is controllable and may be morally evaluated therefore in light of scriptural teaching.

“For this reason, such practices, if unrenounced, render a person ineligible for Salvation Army soldiership.”

I can find a charity more worthy of the stray dollar in my pocket.

As do I. There are more worthy charities out there.

Mexico City Assembly Changes Definition of Marriage

Posted on by TL

From NPR:

Mexico City lawmakers on Monday made the city the first in Latin America to legalize same-sex marriage, a change that will give homosexual couples more rights, including allowing them to adopt children.

The bill passed the capital’s local assembly 39-20 to the cheers of supporters who yelled, “Yes, we could! Yes, we could!”

Leftist Mayor Marcelo Ebrard of the Democratic Revolution Party is widely expected to sign the measure into law.

The bill calls for changing the definition of marriage in the city’s civil code. Marriage is currently defined as the union of a man and a woman. The new definition will be “the free uniting of two people.”

The change would allow same-sex couples to adopt children, apply for bank loans together, inherit wealth and be included in the insurance policies of their spouse, rights they were denied under civil unions allowed in the city.

Read more here.

Obama Will Win: Why and How His Critics from the Left and Right Will be Proven Wrong

Posted on by TL

Wise words from Frank Schaeffer.

I love Crazy for God. I intend to read Patience with God: Faith for People Who Don’t Like Religion (or Atheism).

I like Frank.

From The Brad Blog:

Before he’d served even one year President Obama lost the support of the easily distracted Left and engendered the white hot rage of the hate-filled Right. But some of us, from all walks of life and ideological backgrounds — including this white, straight, 57-year-old, former religious Rightwing agitator, now progressive writer and (given my background as the son of a famous evangelical leader) this unlikely Obama supporter — are sticking with our President. Why? Because he is succeeding.

We faithful Obama supporters still trust our initial impression of him as a great, good and uniquely qualified man to lead us.

Obama’s steady supporters will be proven right. Obama’s critics will be remembered as easily panicked and prematurely discouraged at best and shriveled hate mongers at worst…

Read the rest of the commentary here.

Lambda Legal Blasts Feds for Again Denying Spousal Benefits to Federal Court Employee

Posted on by TL

Lambda Legal released the following statement today:

In response to a decision by the Federal Government to ignore a ruling by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that one of its employees, Karen Golinski, is entitled to spousal health benefits, Lambda Legal Marriage Project Director Jennifer C. Pizer issued the following statement:

We are once again surprised and shocked that the Obama Administration is rejecting another chance to do the right and legal thing, disregarding both the order, and the substantive analysis, of the Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit about what federal law and the Ninth Circuit’s employment rules require in this case.

Chief Judge Kozinski has concluded that the Ninth Circuit MUST not discriminate against Karen Golinski with respect to the health insurance benefits portion of her compensation, and that the Separation of Powers doctrine of the U.S. Constitution authorizes the court to take appropriate steps to treat its workers fairly, and prevents employees of the Executive Branch from interfering with the functioning of the Judicial Branch in these circumstances.

Judge Kozinski, a Reagan appointee, is widely regarded as among the brightest judges on the federal bench, an expert in issues of judicial independence, and notable for his common sense approach.

Lambda Legal believes Judge Kozinski is clearly correct that employees of OPM and DOJ do not have superior authority to interpret federal law than federal judges. Lambda Legal also finds it troubling and very disappointing that the Obama Administration has chosen to express its views of these legal questions through Friday-afternoon press statements stating that it will not comply with Judge Kozinski’s direct orders, rather than by presenting its legal reasoning to Judge Kozinski in this proceeding so that we can respond on Ms. Golinski’s behalf in the duly-established administrative forum in which Ms. Golinski is required to present her discrimination claim.

OPM has never disputed that this administrative forum is the appropriate venue for this discrimination claim, and yet has refused to participate and present its views, and now, again, refuses to respect both Judge Kozinski’s duly-issued order and his direct and clear legal analysis. This is not the approach to issues of LGBT equality we had anticipated and deserve from the Obama Administration.

Lambda Legal is representing Karen Golinski in this matter with the Morrison & Foerster LLP law firm.

Good News from the Nation’s Capital: DC City Council Votes To Legalize Gay Marriage

Posted on by TL

Hats off to the Washington, D.C., City Council!

From WTAE Pittsburgh:

The Washington, D.C., City Council voted Tuesday to legalize gay marriage in the nation’s capital, handing supporters a victory after a string of recent defeats in Maine, New York and New Jersey.

Mayor Adrian Fenty has promised to sign the bill, which passed 11-2, and gay couples could begin marrying as early as March. Congress, which has final say over Washington’s laws, could reject it, but Democratic leaders have suggested they are reluctant to do so.

The bill had overwhelming support among council members and was expected to pass, though opponents have vowed to try to get Congress or voters to overturn it.

David Catania, who introduced the bill and is one of two openly gay council members, called the bill a "matter of social justice" before the vote.

Two members voted "I do" when their names came up, and when the vote finished a packed chamber erupted into cheers and clapping. The "no" votes included former mayor Marion Barry, now a council member.

Thank you, D.C.! And hats off to WTAE, once again the first to get breaking news to my inbox!

Read more here.

Gay Marriage is Not Inevitable

Posted on by TL

Gay marriage is not inevitable. Legalized marijuana is probably inevitable. But not gay marriage.

Maggie Gallagher at the National Review gives us seven reasons that gay marriage is not inevitable. Here are the top five:

1. Nothing is inevitable.

We are talking about the future here. It’s weird to have “reporting” that something that has not yet happened will certainly happen. The future is never inevitable.

2. Young people are not as unanimous as most people think.

In California, the young-adults vote split 55 percent to 45 percent. Is it so hard to imagine 5 percent of those young people changing their minds as they move through the life cycle?

3. The argument from despair is bait and switch.

They are trying push the idea that gay marriage is inevitable, because they are losing the argument that gay marriage is a good idea.

4. Progressives are often wrong about the future.

Here’s my personal litany: Progressives told me abortion would be a dead issue by today, because young people in 1975 were so pro-choice. They told me there would be no more homemakers at all by the year 2000, because of the attitudes and values of young women in 1975. Some even told me the Soviet Union was the wave of the future. I mean, really, fool me once shame on you. Fool me over and over again . . . I must be a Republican!

5. Demography could be destiny.

If there is one force that directly contradicts the inevitability argument, it is that traditionalists have more children. Preventing schools and media from corrupting those children is a problem, but not necessarily an insoluble one. Religious groups are increasingly focused on the problem of how to transmit a marriage culture to the next generation (see the USCCB’s recent initiatives).

Read the other reasons here.

And don’t get complacent. Don’t give up the fight.