Pam Spaulding's Blog, page 109

2012 GOP Clown Car Bigot Tim Pawlenty: if elected President, he'll reinstate DADT

It's nice to know that former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty is telegraphing his priorities for the country early on as he prepares to jump in and fasten his seatbelt to ride in the 2012 GOP Clown Car.

He kneels before the gay-hating Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association and talks about GOProud attending CPAC, his views on "traditional marriage" and other bootlicking maneuvers to please the fundie listeners. (Right Wing Watch):

Fischer: Now the Left, and homosexual activists and organizations like GOProud, one of their stated agendas is to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal law that defines marriage in federal law and for federal purposes as a union of one man and one woman. The Obama administration has made a tepid and pretty ineffective defense of that law - if you become president and that law faces a challenge under your administration, how vigorously will you defend DOMA? What will you do to make sure it's defended?

Pawlenty: I believe strongly in traditional marriage. I was co-author of the law in Minnesota that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I've been a vocal supporter of an amendment in Minnesota that would put that into our constitution. I hope that the day comes when it is put before the voters of Minnesota. And it's not just a legal issue; it's also an important cornerstone for our society and our culture. I mean, families and traditional marriage is so important to that and I don't believe all other domestic relations should be on the same platform as traditional marriage, I just don't buy and so I've been a strong supporter of traditional marriage. I also think who you appoint to courts in this regard is important and we don't have litmus tests, so to speak, but we want strict constructionists and people who take a conservative view toward the interpretation of our laws.

...Fischer: One last question, got about forty five seconds left, put you on the hot seat one more time: we just saw the ban on homosexual service in the military repealed, overturned. Conservatives will be working over the next couple of years to see that that ban is reinstated. If you become president in 2012, will you work to reinstate the prohibition on open homosexual service in the military? Would you sign such a prohibition if it got to your desk?

Pawlenty: Bryan, I have been a public and repeat supporter of maintaining Don't Ask, Don't Tell. There's a lot of reasons for that, but if you look at how the combat commanders and the combat units feel about it, the results of those kinds of surveys were different than the ones that were mostly reported in the newspaper and that is something I think we need to pay attention to. But I have been a public supporter of maintaining Don't Ask, Don't Tell and I would support reinstating it as well.

Your tax dollars at work: contractor hid in Iraq for 7 years to escape rape charge

What a sleazebag. And he was escaping from paying for his heinous crime on your dime. (Mother Jones):

A Norfolk, Virginia, man was arrested on a military base in Iraq and brought back to the States in police custody this weekend for allegedly raping a "juvenile female," then hiding out in the Middle Eastern nation as a contractor for the US government.

For seven years.

Norfolk police say Daniel Phillips, 46, was wanted in connection for the rape of an underage girl in 2004 and 2005, but when warrants were issued for his arrest, he secured employment as a military contractor in a computer-related position and left for Iraq, where he stayed until authorities started tracking him in December.

...The vetting process to become a contractor in Iraq varies from company to company, but it can be extremely thin. Once hired, these employees are supposed to go through a Contintental United States Replacement Center (CRC), an Army-run military processing facility such as this one in Ft. Benning, Georgia. There, they go through a weeklong medical and background screening, at the end of which they're issued a microchipped military ID card and put on a military flight to their destination in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or wherever.

But apparently, none of that kept Phillips from staying on as an Iraq contractor for seven years, with military-sanctioned vacation jaunts back to the States, all while authorities sought his arrest.

The President's remarks at the Memorial Service for Victims of the Arizona Shooting

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary

___________________________________________________

January 12, 2011

Remarks of President Barack Obama

At a Memorial Service for the Victims of the Shooting in Tucson, Arizona

University of Arizona, McKale Memorial Center

Tucson, Arizona

January 12, 2011

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.  (Applause.)  Thank you very much.  Please, please be seated.  (Applause.)

To the families of those we've lost; to all who called them friends; to the students of this university, the public servants who are gathered here, the people of Tucson and the people of Arizona:  I have come here tonight as an American who, like all Americans, kneels to pray with you today and will stand by you tomorrow.  (Applause.)

There is nothing I can say that will fill the sudden hole torn in your hearts.  But know this:  The hopes of a nation are here tonight.  We mourn with you for the fallen.  We join you in your grief.  And we add our faith to yours that Representative Gabrielle Giffords and the other living victims of this tragedy will pull through.  (Applause.)

Scripture tells us:

There is a river whose streams make glad the city of God,

the holy place where the Most High dwells.

God is within her, she will not fall;

God will help her at break of day.

On Saturday morning, Gabby, her staff and many of her constituents gathered outside a supermarket to exercise their right to peaceful assembly and free speech.  (Applause.)  They were fulfilling a central tenet of the democracy envisioned by our founders -- representatives of the people answering questions to their constituents, so as to carry their concerns back to our nation's capital.  Gabby called it "Congress on Your Corner" -- just an updated version of government of and by and for the people.  (Applause.)

And that quintessentially American scene, that was the scene that was shattered by a gunman's bullets.  And the six people who lost their lives on Saturday -- they, too, represented what is best in us, what is best in America.  (Applause.)

Judge John Roll served our legal system for nearly 40 years. (Applause.)  A graduate of this university and a graduate of this law school -- (applause) -- Judge Roll was recommended for the federal bench by John McCain 20 years ago -- (applause) -- appointed by President George H.W. Bush and rose to become Arizona's chief federal judge.  (Applause.)

His colleagues described him as the hardest-working judge within the Ninth Circuit.  He was on his way back from attending Mass, as he did every day, when he decided to stop by and say hi to his representative.  John is survived by his loving wife, Maureen, his three sons and his five beautiful grandchildren.  (Applause.)

George and Dorothy Morris -- "Dot" to her friends -- were high school sweethearts who got married and had two daughters.  They did everything together -- traveling the open road in their RV, enjoying what their friends called a 50-year honeymoon.  Saturday morning, they went by the Safeway to hear what their congresswoman had to say.  When gunfire rang out, George, a former Marine, instinctively tried to shield his wife.  (Applause.)  Both were shot.  Dot passed away.

A New Jersey native, Phyllis Schneck retired to Tucson to beat the snow.  But in the summer, she would return East, where her world revolved around her three children, her seven grandchildren and 2-year-old great-granddaughter.  A gifted quilter, she'd often work under a favorite tree, or sometimes she'd sew aprons with the logos of the Jets and the Giants -- (laughter) -- to give out at the church where she volunteered.  A Republican, she took a liking to Gabby, and wanted to get to know her better.  (Applause.)

Dorwan and Mavy Stoddard grew up in Tucson together -- about 70 years ago.  They moved apart and started their own respective families.  But after both were widowed they found their way back here, to, as one of Mavy's daughters put it, "be boyfriend and girlfriend again."  (Laughter.)

When they weren't out on the road in their motor home, you could find them just up the road, helping folks in need at the Mountain Avenue Church of Christ.  A retired construction worker, Dorwan spent his spare time fixing up the church along with his dog, Tux.  His final act of selflessness was to dive on top of his wife, sacrificing his life for hers.  (Applause.)

Everything -- everything -- Gabe Zimmerman did, he did with passion.  (Applause.)  But his true passion was helping people.  As Gabby's outreach director, he made the cares of thousands of her constituents his own, seeing to it that seniors got the Medicare benefits that they had earned, that veterans got the medals and the care that they deserved, that government was working for ordinary folks.  He died doing what he loved -- talking with people and seeing how he could help.  And Gabe is survived by his parents, Ross and Emily, his brother, Ben, and his fianc?e, Kelly, who he planned to marry next year.  (Applause.)

And then there is nine-year-old Christina Taylor Green.  Christina was an A student; she was a dancer; she was a gymnast; she was a swimmer.  She decided that she wanted to be the first woman to play in the Major Leagues, and as the only girl on her Little League team, no one put it past her.  (Applause.)

She showed an appreciation for life uncommon for a girl her age.  She'd remind her mother, "We are so blessed.  We have the best life."  And she'd pay those blessings back by participating in a charity that helped children who were less fortunate.

Our hearts are broken by their sudden passing.  Our hearts are broken -- and yet, our hearts also have reason for fullness. Our hearts are full of hope and thanks for the 13 Americans who survived the shooting, including the congresswoman many of them went to see on Saturday.

I have just come from the University Medical Center, just a mile from here, where our friend Gabby courageously fights to recover even as we speak.  And I want to tell you -- her husband Mark is here and he allows me to share this with you -- right after we went to visit, a few minutes after we left her room and some of her colleagues in Congress were in the room, Gabby opened her eyes for the first time.  (Applause.)  Gabby opened her eyes for the first time.  (Applause.)

Gabby opened her eyes.  Gabby opened her eyes, so I can tell you she knows we are here.  She knows we love her.  And she knows that we are rooting for her through what is undoubtedly going to be a difficult journey.  We are there for her.  (Applause.)

Our hearts are full of thanks for that good news, and our hearts are full of gratitude for those who saved others.  We are grateful to Daniel Hernandez -- (applause) -- a volunteer in Gabby's office.  (Applause.)

And, Daniel, I'm sorry, you may deny it, but we've decided you are a hero because -- (applause) -- you ran through the chaos to minister to your boss, and tended to her wounds and helped keep her alive.  (Applause.)

We are grateful to the men who tackled the gunman as he stopped to reload.  (Applause.)  Right over there.  (Applause.)  We are grateful for petite Patricia Maisch, who wrestled away the killer's ammunition, and undoubtedly saved some lives.  (Applause.)  And we are grateful for the doctors and nurses and first responders who worked wonders to heal those who'd been hurt.  We are grateful to them.  (Applause.)

These men and women remind us that heroism is found not only on the fields of battle.  They remind us that heroism does not require special training or physical strength.  Heroism is here, in the hearts of so many of our fellow citizens, all around us, just waiting to be summoned -- as it was on Saturday morning. Their actions, their selflessness poses a challenge to each of us.  It raises a question of what, beyond prayers and expressions of concern, is required of us going forward.  How can we honor the fallen?  How can we be true to their memory?

You see, when a tragedy like this strikes, it is part of our nature to demand explanations -- to try and pose some order on the chaos and make sense out of that which seems senseless.  Already we've seen a national conversation commence, not only about the motivations behind these killings, but about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental health system.  And much of this process, of debating what might be done to prevent such tragedies in the future, is an essential ingredient in our exercise of self-government.

But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -- at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -- it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we're talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.  (Applause.)

Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world, and that terrible things happen for reasons that defy human understanding. In the words of Job, "When I looked for light, then came darkness."  Bad things happen, and we have to guard against simple explanations in the aftermath.

For the truth is none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack.  None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped these shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man's mind.  Yes, we have to examine all the facts behind this tragedy.  We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence.  We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of such violence in the future.  (Applause.)  But what we cannot do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on each other.  (Applause.)  That we cannot do.  (Applause.)  That we cannot do.

As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility.  Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let's use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy and remind ourselves of all the ways that our hopes and dreams are bound together.  (Applause.)

After all, that's what most of us do when we lose somebody in our family -- especially if the loss is unexpected.  We're shaken out of our routines.  We're forced to look inward.  We reflect on the past:  Did we spend enough time with an aging parent, we wonder.  Did we express our gratitude for all the sacrifices that they made for us?  Did we tell a spouse just how desperately we loved them, not just once in a while but every single day?

So sudden loss causes us to look backward -- but it also forces us to look forward; to reflect on the present and the future, on the manner in which we live our lives and nurture our relationships with those who are still with us.  (Applause.)

We may ask ourselves if we've shown enough kindness and generosity and compassion to the people in our lives.  Perhaps we question whether we're doing right by our children, or our community, whether our priorities are in order.

We recognize our own mortality, and we are reminded that in the fleeting time we have on this Earth, what matters is not wealth, or status, or power, or fame -- but rather, how well we have loved -- (applause)-- and what small part we have played in making the lives of other people better.  (Applause.)

And that process -- that process of reflection, of making sure we align our values with our actions -- that, I believe, is what a tragedy like this requires.

For those who were harmed, those who were killed -- they are part of our family, an American family 300 million strong. (Applause.)  We may not have known them personally, but surely we see ourselves in them.  In George and Dot, in Dorwan and Mavy, we sense the abiding love we have for our own husbands, our own wives, our own life partners.  Phyllis -- she's our mom or our grandma; Gabe our brother or son.  (Applause.)  In Judge Roll, we recognize not only a man who prized his family and doing his job well, but also a man who embodied America's fidelity to the law. (Applause.)

And in Gabby -- in Gabby, we see a reflection of our public-spiritedness; that desire to participate in that sometimes frustrating, sometimes contentious, but always necessary and never-ending process to form a more perfect union.  (Applause.)

And in Christina -- in Christina we see all of our children. So curious, so trusting, so energetic, so full of magic.  So deserving of our love.  And so deserving of our good example.

If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate -- as it should -- let's make sure it's worthy of those we have lost.  (Applause.)  Let's make sure it's not on the usual plane of politics and point-scoring and pettiness that drifts away in the next news cycle.

The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better.  To be better in our private lives, to be better friends and neighbors and coworkers and parents.  And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their death helps usher in more civility in our public discourse, let us remember it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy -- it did not -- but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to the challenges of our nation in a way that would make them proud.  (Applause.)

We should be civil because we want to live up to the example of public servants like John Roll and Gabby Giffords, who knew first and foremost that we are all Americans, and that we can question each other's ideas without questioning each other's love of country and that our task, working together, is to constantly widen the circle of our concern so that we bequeath the American Dream to future generations.  (Applause.)

They believed -- they believed, and I believe that we can be better.  Those who died here, those who saved life here -- they help me believe.  We may not be able to stop all evil in the world, but I know that how we treat one another, that's entirely up to us.  (Applause.)

And I believe that for all our imperfections, we are full of decency and goodness, and that the forces that divide us are not as strong as those that unite us.  (Applause.)

That's what I believe, in part because that's what a child like Christina Taylor Green believed.  (Applause.)

Imagine -- imagine for a moment, here was a young girl who was just becoming aware of our democracy; just beginning to understand the obligations of citizenship; just starting to glimpse the fact that some day she, too, might play a part in shaping her nation's future.  She had been elected to her student council.  She saw public service as something exciting and hopeful.  She was off to meet her congresswoman, someone she was sure was good and important and might be a role model.  She saw all this through the eyes of a child, undimmed by the cynicism or vitriol that we adults all too often just take for granted.

I want to live up to her expectations.  (Applause.)  I want our democracy to be as good as Christina imagined it.  I want America to be as good as she imagined it.  (Applause.)  All of us -- we should do everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children's expectations.  (Applause.)

As has already been mentioned, Christina was given to us on September 11th, 2001, one of 50 babies born that day to be pictured in a book called "Faces of Hope."  On either side of her photo in that book were simple wishes for a child's life.  "I hope you help those in need," read one.  "I hope you know all the words to the National Anthem and sing it with your hand over your heart."  (Applause.)  "I hope you jump in rain puddles."

If there are rain puddles in Heaven, Christina is jumping in them today.  (Applause.)  And here on this Earth -- here on this Earth, we place our hands over our hearts, and we commit ourselves as Americans to forging a country that is forever worthy of her gentle, happy spirit.

May God bless and keep those we've lost in restful and eternal peace.  May He love and watch over the survivors.  And may He bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

                            END           7:17 P.M. MST

Why Transgender Activism

I work on LGBT community issues, as well as transgender community issues. I have, and will continue to work with LGB and T activists working on issues that effect transgender and LGBT community. From what I've learned and experienced within LGBT community, and activism within the transgender subcommunity of the LGBT community, I know why for many of us there is LGBT community activism; I know why for many of us there is transgender activism.

And, I would begin by having us look at Asian-Pacific Islander (API) community activism. There are differences between those of Samoan ancestry and those of Chinese ancestry; there are differences between those Americans who have familial or ancestral ties to Japan, and those Americans who have familial or ancestral ties to Indonesia. But along with differences between ethnic groups that fall under the API umbrella, there are also many similarities and many commonalities. And the commonalities include the discrimination they experience that's based in racism. Many of those who discriminate against API community members can't tell a Korean-American apart from a Chinese-American from a Japanese-American; these racists discriminate against all who have gathered under the API umbrella equally because they don't see any difference between the subcommunities of the Asian-Pacific Islander community.

For similar reasons, there is a transgender umbrella, and an LGBT umbrella. We have gathered under community umbrellas in part because the prejudice and discrimination we face is based in how those homophobic/transphobic people don't bother to differentiate between crossdressers, drag queens, feminine gay males, and transsexual women; apart. We have gathered under community umbrellas in part because the prejudice and discrimination we face is based in how those homophobic/transphobic people don't bother to differentiate between masculine lesbian women, drag kings, and transsexual men. We, in their minds, all are in violation of societal sex and gender norms, so they engage in bigotry and discrimination against those who have gathered under the LGBT umbrella -- they don't see any difference between the subcommunities of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community.

Everyone who is African-American doesn't appear to be black. In African-American community, its community members are familiar with the word "passing." Before the civil rights movements of the '50's and '60's, many African-Americans who could pass as Caucasians hid their heritage and ancestry. Many others who could "pass" as Caucasian choose not to publicly deny their heritage and ancestry. During the civil rights movement, those African-Americans who could have passed as Caucasian, but chose not to, stood with their African-American peers because African-American community was their community.

Many who are gay, but "pass" as straight, still publicly identify as gay -- even when that subjects those folk to discrimination. Many who are lesbian, but "pass" as straight, still publicly identify as lesbian -- even when that subjects those folk to discrimination. Many who are bisexual, but "pass" as straight, still publicly identify as bisexual -- even when that subjects those folk to discrimination. And, many who are transsexual, but "pass" as natal men or women, still publicly identify as transgender -- even when that subjects us trans folk to discrimination. Sometimes, it's not about individuals, but about the "we" of community.

With legislative or regulatory language, there is no way protect against discrimination of the gender identity of transsexual people without protecting the gender expression of genderqueer people and crossdressers. When a newly out transsexual comes out in the workplace, protecting gender identity doesn't protect the gender expression of someone who is still legally not the sex and gender to which these someone's identify. If an employer defines an individual as male, but the gender expression of that individual as female, the lack of protection of gender expression means an employer can fire someone in the first year of transition -- assuming a transsexual follows the transition standards of the Harry Benjamin Standards Of Care. One cannot separate, for the protection of transsexual people in the workplace, gender identity and gender expression without providing employers a loophole for firing transsexual people early in transition.

But not every individual who belongs to subgroups that fall under the sociopolitical transgender community umbrella chose to identify as transgender. It's equally true that not every individual who identifies as gay or lesbian chooses to identify as members of the LGBT community umbrella.

And, this is true in other sociopolitical umbrella communities. Not every individual who identifies as Chinese-American, Samoan-American, Korean-American, Japanese-American, Indonesian-American, etc. choses to identify under the API community umbrella.

Sociopolitical umbrella communities still exist even if individuals who could define themselves as members of a sociopolitical umbrella community choose not to personally to step under a particular sociopolitical umbrella.

[More below the fold.]
The common interest in protecting the gender expression of feminine men (to include feminine gay men), masculine women (to include masculine lesbian women), and all people who choose to stand under the transgender umbrella is probably the most important impetus for why transgender community activism exists. Gender expression is the commonality that binds transgender community and its activists.

And gender expression isn't just a transgender issue. For example, school bullying of those males who don't conform to societal sex and gender norms for masculinity are presumed to be gay, school bullying of those females who don't conform to societal sex and gender norms for femininity are presumed to be lesbian -- it's this kind of bigotry that makes gender expression a broader LGBT community issue.

If sexual orientation becomes a protected class without gender identity and gender expression, then peers and employers can discriminate against or harass males for appearing to those peers and employers as too feminine, or can discriminate against or harass females for appearing to those peers and employers as too masculine. If gender identity and gender expression is protected without protection of sexual orientation, then it won't be gender expression that will be a tool for firing those not conforming to societal sex and gender norms. It will then instead be that those who don't conform to societal sex and gender norms will find themselves being defined as gay or lesbian, and that definition will leave them subject to discrimination based on perceived sexual orientation.

It's advantageous for people to organize under umbrella community designators to address issues related to their commonalities. It's advantageous for broader communities to focus common issues that effect broad numbers of people because numbers do matter to legislators and regulators. This is a truism for transsexual, genderqueer, and crossdressing people who choose to fall under the sociopolitical transgender umbrella; this is a truism for LGB and T people who fall under the sociopolitical umbrella for the LGBT community.

Umbrella communities are an aspect of community building. Building bridges between large numbers of people who associate themselves with subcommunities in a broad coalition -- under sociopolitical umbrellas -- means there is a greater pool of activists to draw upon to address common community issues. Broad community formed under sociopolitical umbrellas create opportunity for solving common community issues for the broadest range of community members -- to result in the broadest range of legal and regulatory protection for the broadest number of human beings sharing significant commonalities.

Those involved in the practical considerations of drafting legislation and regulations know that language which just picks/addresses the issues one narrowly defined group fails. Just as legislation that protect against discrimination of Chinese-Americans but not Japanese-Americans would leave gaping holes where Chinese-American could be discriminated against because an employer or peer could perceive as Chinese-American as a Japanese-American, there are holes in protecting people based on sexual orientation without protecting against discrimination based on gender identity or gender expression. If government or employers designate sexual orientation as a protected class without defining gender identity and gender expression as a protected class, that leaves legislative and regulatory holes that all LGBT community members can fall through.

And too, language that is not based on broader, umbrella definitions is going to be exploited by people who wish to divide the umbrella communities that share notable commonalities. Does anyone remember the what the happened with regards to the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007/2008? The division of community that occurred didn't even benefit the gay, lesbian, and bisexual people who were left in the bill when gender identity (to include gender expression) was taken out of ENDA -- we still don't have a federal law that protects based on sexual orientation, let alone one protects on sexual orientation and gender identity and gender expression. Community numbers, and broad community solidarity, when pushing for freedom, equality, and justice -- for civil rights -- matter.

Transgender activism exists because people in groups that fall under the sociopolitical, transgender community umbrella have common issues that can be addressed by common legislation and regulation. Transgender community members who fall under the sociopolitical, LGBT community umbrella have common issues that can be, and should be, addressed by common legislation and regulation that protects LGBT community members.

And, there are other models of sociopolitical umbrella communities working on common issues -- the sociopolitical API community being one example of such a community.

There is a case to be made for transgender community activism, even if a significant number of transsexual people don't want to themselves fall under the transgender umbrella. There is a case to be made for transgender community activism within LGBT community, even if a significant number of transgender people don't want to themselves fall under the LGBT umbrella.

Those transsexual people who don't wish to identify as transgender are not required to identify as transgender -- but at the same time, transgender community activists are equally free to push forward on legislation and regulation that addresses the transgender community issues based on the community commonality of gender expression. That these transsexual people don't want to align themselves with transgender community activism won't stop transgender activists from working on transgender community issues; it won't stop transgender community activists from working on LGBT community issues.

The transgender community, as a sociopolitical umbrella community, is here to stay. Transgender activists are here to stay too.

.

NC: GOP lawmaker - need marriage amendment; cut HIV $ for adults 'living in perverted lifestyles'

"I'm not opposed to helping a child born with HIV or something, but I don't condone spending taxpayers' money to help people living in perverted lifestyles."

-- Rep. Larry Brown (R-Forsyth) who ran unopposed in the November election to win a fourth term.

The 2010 midterm turnover of our legislature here in NC -- it will now be under GOP control for the first time since Reconstruction -- is such a horrific development that it is no surprise that the emboldened good old country boys are going right for the throats of the LGBT community.

Out of the box there is talk not about jobs and the economy, but cutting funding for HIV/AIDS and pushing a marriage amendment, which has been killed repeatedly in committee when the GA was under Dem control.

Witness additional commentary from bigoted lawmaker Rep. Larry Brown, as reported by the Winston-Salem Journal. Brown was being interviewed about his goals for the upcoming session of the lege.

He began by discussing his support for a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to a union between one man and one woman, which would forestall any efforts to allow same-sex marriage.

...Brown said Tuesday he's not trying to say how people should lead their lives but that it is a higher priority to treat people who have diseases "with no fault of their own." He said he doesn't oppose those with HIV or AIDS getting treatment, but he doesn't think the government should pay for it.

"I think people with HIV have legitimate fears and probably need support, but when it comes down to priorities, my priorities would be in other directions," he said.

Brown drew criticism in October for an e-mail he sent to other state Republican lawmakers in which he used disparaging language about gays. After lawmakers were told about a legislative leadership award being given to then-House Speaker Joe Hackney, Brown sent his e-mail to House Minority Leader Paul Stam saying: "I hope all the queers are thrilled to see him. I am sure there will be a couple legislative fruitloops there in the audience."

Sadly, Brown is not alone when it comes to bigotry. The Republicans cannot wait to put a marriage amendment on the table. Expect NOM to pour money into the effort.

Email: Larry.Brown@ncleg.net

Phone: 919-733-5607

***

UPDATE: HRC responds:

"Rep. Brown's ill-informed comments are not only hateful rhetoric, but they are also extremely dangerous," said HRC President Joe Solmonese. "Hysterical, judgmental and inaccurate statements like Brown's create an environment that prevents many from getting tested and seeking treatment, thereby furthering the spread of HIV and AIDS. Larry Brown's conduct reflects poorly on his constituents and other elected officials. The people of North Carolina deserve better."

"Larry Brown's views are out of line with the fair-minded people of North Carolina," Solmonese added. "Sadly, he won a fourth term in November unopposed.  Expressions of such bigotry and ignorance have no place in the North Carolina Legislature."  

Related:

* NC legislator e-blasts a bigot eruption referring to 'queers' and 'fruitloops'

* NC: wingnut - 'save' marriage or there will be man-robot nuptials

* NC: Catholic bishops and legislators foment anti-gay hate at presser

* NC braces for introduction of a marriage amendment bill...AGAIN

* NC: PHB exclusive video of NOM's Brian Brown at Raleigh rally - plus I am mistaken for a fundie (!)

Netroots Action for Marriage Equality in Delaware

This is Bill Humphrey, and he's the statewide director for Delaware Right to Marry Political Action Committee. He's got a little problem, really, just a little one. And I know we at the Blend and in the Netroots can help him out.

This has been Cross-Posted to the Daily Kos. Please Rec if you can.
First, here's a special note to Pam's House Blend from Bill:

We at Delaware Right to Marry are grateful for the chance to address readers of Pam's House Blend directly today. If you read the "About" page by Pam, she cites "the right to marry" as one of the issues that led her to start the site in the first place. It's an interesting choice of words: the right to marry. A lot of people don't think marriage is a right. Having grown up in Massachusetts during the transition to marriage equality, I firmly believe that it is a right (as you can tell by our organization's name), and it's one of the reasons I started the organization last year here in Delaware, where I now live.

In April 2009, Nate Silver estimated that Delaware voters would be ready to accept marriage equality by 2011 if it were put to a vote. However, unlike in many states, there is no ballot initiative process (which is a good thing since people should not be able to vote on other people's rights), nor is there an equal rights clause in the state's constitution to allow for a court ruling in favor of marriage equality, as in Massachusetts or Iowa. So in Delaware we have to go the legislative route. That means appealing to legislators, by showing them that marriage equality is right and (we hope) popular. That's where you come in.

A note to the transgender community: We are very supportive of promoting transgender rights in the state of Delaware, and members of our staff are heavily involved in other projects for transgender individuals outside our organization. For example, our assistant director is currently leading a project for gender-neutral housing options for students living on campus at the University of Delaware.

While, our organization right now is solely single-issue (marriage equality for same-sex couples), there are other organizations in the state with a broader policy agenda for LGBT people, and my assumption is that they are working to add transgender protections at some point in the near future. However, I can't speak for those organizations, and we did not exist when the previous nondiscrimination legislation, which some of you may know about, came up for debate. I am personally supportive of transgender rights and in the future, it may be something we add to our mission.

See, Bill's working to get marriage equality onto Delaware's legislative agenda this session. And if it gets off the ground, its got a good chance of passing. The problem is, it's been a long time since anyone checked in with good people of Delaware about how they feel about LGBT issues. And it seems, these issues are on an upswing, so there's good reason to believe when the news comes back it'll be good. And as he said, king of polling, Nate Silver agrees.

But, polls don't conduct themselves. So, Bill needs just $2,250 dollars to pay Public Policy Polling to conduct a poll on Delaware residents' attitudes about marriage equality.

Big Money

I know, it's gauche to ask for money. I personally believe I was made for better things. But the reality is the anti-gay hate industry is rich. Very rich. And they are powerful, and have the ears of some powerful folks. Just one group, National Organization for Marriage (NOM), is estimated in 2009 to have collected $3,000,000, including a single donation of $1,400,000 from Catholic Church affiliated Knights of Columbus. And they sunk millions into a variety of races around the country. In this last cycle they spent half a million dollars to go after those judges in Iowa.

NOM also sunk half a million dollars going after Governor Lynch in New Hampshire for signing a marriage equality bill. They didn't get their prize. (Yay!) But they're not backing down. They're gearing up to spend at least $100k in Rhode Island.

They have lots of money. Fortunately, we have the arc of a just universe on our side. And, we also have facts. But Bill and his group just need the money to mine for those facts.

Little Money

When Bill's request came to me I was struck by its quaintness. $2,250 is not much, it's pretty obtainable. I mean, I'm used to reading these budgets of six digits. So, I figure, if everyone donated just $10 (the cost of a movie ticket!), we'd only need 225 nationwide to chip in. (Of course, if you give more, that's great!) And we can help Bill and Right to Marry lay the a solid groundwork for a nice victory in Delaware. Let's go to it.

Now, think carefully. And remember, the extremists in Delaware must be pretty dispirited that their teabagger Queen Christine O'Donnell got Royally trounced in the last election. They lost their chance to make masturbation illegal. I imagine the left scoring a marriage equality victory in 2011 would be a real kick in the pants, wouldn't it? And wouldn't that just be a shame?

Transcript for the video impaired.

Hi. My name is Bill Humphrey, and I'm the statewide director for Delaware Right to Marry Political Action Committee.

We are leading the effort to pass legislation this year for civil marriage equality in the state of Delaware. Our bill is modeled upon the 2009 New Hampshire marriage equality law and contains clear protections for unhindered freedom of religion. We believe we have a very strong draft law, which we hope to have introduced soon. [Read the proposal outline here.]

Today, I'm here with a pretty simple request. There hasn't been a poll done in the state of Delaware on any LGBT issues for several years. We think that opinions have shifted significantly just in the last few years, and we're ready to put that to the test. However, in order to do that, we still need about two thousand dollars for our poll by Public Policy Polling. We're an all-volunteer organization, and we are absolutely counting on small-dollar donations from the netroots to help pay for the poll.

We also should note that we have to get this poll done in the next several weeks in order to be able to move our effort legislative ahead this year because the legislative session in Delaware is fairly short. Right now we also have a pro-LGBT Democratic governor, a Democratic supermajority in the House, and a Democratic Senate majority. We don't know how long that situation might last, and we don't want to fight this out in an election year either. That makes this period extremely critical.

Donations of any amount - big or small - are deeply appreciated.

If you would prefer to just write a check, there's a link below with information on how to do that. Otherwise, you can just use the ActBlue link below to donate securely and instantly.

Thanks again for your support. It really makes a difference.

Donate on our ActBlue page to help pay for the poll:



Or How to donate by check.















Thanks for watching, and reading. Two prior diaries by Bill:

? Why Does Marriage Equality Matter to You ? Help Us Bring Marriage Equality to Delaware

? You can follow the news of this story at Delaware Right To Marry's Facebook page.

Special Note: Please welcome Bill to the Blend, he's posting under the handle, Delaware Right To Marry and will be taking questions at 11:00 am EST on Wednesday.

The Corporate View, Part 3: What the new CEI criteria means for transgender-inclusion, etc.

Part 1 - ENDA is the Floor

Part 2 - A Useful Tool

Part 3 - What the new CEI criteria means

Part 3a - Transgender Health Benefits

Since 2002, the CEI has emerged as the consensus benchmark for LGBT-workplace equality in the U.S. – it’s because of that status that the changes occurring in the criteria this year will have a big impact going forward.

When we started the last decade, 89 companies participated in the survey – and had to answer 10 basic questions. In the last cycle, the number of companies has grown to 477… and the survey now asks detailed questions on 40 specific policies and practices ranging from pension benefits administration to gender transition guidelines.  (377 of these companies scored a 100% rating… and these companies employ 8.3 million full-time workers in the U.S.)

Starting with the 2012 survey (to be sent in by June this year), the standards are higher and will really push companies who want to receive a 100% rating.  Two areas that are of particular interest:  spousal benefits equality & transgender health benefits.

Benefits Parity for Same-Sex families
Parity between employees with different-sex spouses and same-sex partners or spouses in the provision of the following benefits: COBRA; dental; vision; legal dependent coverage; bereavement leave; employer-provided supplemental life insurance for a partner; relocation/travel assistance; adoption assistance; qualified joint and survivor annuity for partners; qualified pre-retirement survivor annuity for partners; retiree healthcare benefits; and employee discounts.

The old criteria only required coverage of 3 or more of the above benefits – and while this may not be a big leap for most companies, it will require that the benefits be explicitly available to same-sex families.

In addition, CEI is now tracking those companies that are now offsetting the disparate federal tax treatment of these benefits for same-sex families.  (Current tax law considers insurance benefits to be “imputed income” even if you are legally married.)

Impact: For companies that are already at 100%, most (if not all) already are at parity – but this change should prompt a review to ensure that the benefits are in place and equally important: employees know about them.  For companies that are just now considering providing benefits to employees with same-sex partners or spouses, there’s no way to just “ease in” – or like the Obama administration, claim provision of benefits when clearly parity isn’t there.
Although no points are allotted for “taxing-up” salaries to eliminate the added tax burden, by including this in the survey (and potentially assigning points in the future), businesses are on notice to do a couple of things:  support changes in the federal tax code that would eliminate the added tax burden on employees (and additional cost of benefits administration to the business) and/or follow the leaders in this area to retain their best and brightest LGBT employees.

Of course, much of this could be completely short-circuited with full marriage equality in the legal sense at the federal level – and frankly, there’s a compelling fiscally conservative argument that says marriage equality would lessen the burden to business by eliminating dual compensation systems – and at the same time help simplify the tax system… not to mention making it easier to move employees around (and handle visa issues for bi-national couples) but I doubt you’ll hear from GOProud on that.

Transgender Health Coverage
Equal health coverage for transgender individuals without exclusion for medically necessary care is required.  This includes removal of “transgender-exclusion” clauses from benefits plans and includes clear language that affirms coverage, including services and benefits related to transition: short term medical leave; mental health benefits; pharmaceutical coverage (e.g., for hormone replacement therapies); coverage for medical visits or laboratory services; and coverage for reconstructive surgical procedures related to sex reassignment. 

To receive full credit in this area, coverage should have no lifetime or annual caps, conform to WPATH Standards of Care (SOC), and address delivery (network adequacy) among other requirements.

Impact:  Even if, as a transgender individual, you neither want nor need GRS, these changes should have a positive impact overall when it comes to medical care.  Removal of the transgender exclusion language that has been a standard for insurance companies can begin to erase the notion that anything transgender-related is “cosmetic” or not really medically necessary.

By requiring conformance of treatment to WPATH Standards of Care (SOC) and ensuring companies address health provider and network adequacy, will also have a large impact – even for those who do not work for companies that provide these benefits.

Adequacy of care – and standards – is something that everyone faces… but for the transgender individual (who is already dealing with enough), the current medical gauntlet is bewildering if not depressing.

WPATH has done a good job of defining SOC, but the health care system has yet to address issues of availability, certification, portability and coverage.  The new CEI criteria put a starting framework around this and are an important start. 

I would like to see WPATH SOC board certification as well as a physicians registry along with governance and monitoring within the health care industry – not something that’s in the CEI area, but to my mind is intertwined.

(See Part 3a for additional details.)

The rest of the changes

With the exception of the new “negative points” section which begins to grapple with anti-LGBT political activities, the rest of the change are more geared toward what I term “creating an inclusive environment”.

Key changes here deal with organizational competence – such as ensuring that new employees have training that includes employment non-discrimination and anti-harassment policies that explicitly include gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender issues (ditto for diversity training for existing employees). 

This is an area that really benefits from having company operations in a state like California or Washington where the anti-harassment training requirements must include LGBT-specific elements in order to pass legal muster.  Most companies buy their training tied to the highest standard they have to legally follow and don’t buy something different for areas in the U.S. where that standard is non-existent or not as rigorous. 

Regardless, my recommendation is to make sure that someone who is LGBT reviews any training before it’s implemented to make sure that it really is inclusive.

One new element calls for allowing employees to self-identify according to sexual orientation and/or gender identity either in the company HR system or in a company survey… checking these systems for adequate privacy protections and opt-in/out procedures will be a must, but the overall thrust is about making sure that employee recruitment and retention efforts specifically include LGBT people.

The requirement for having an LGBT employee group or a firm-wide diversity council that explicitly includes LGBT employees remains – and it’s a critical piece to having the rest of the CEI actually happen.

Presidential candidates and Congressional leaders to mingle with anti-gay hate groups

crossposted on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters

From People for the American Way's Right-Wing Watch:

In April, the Freedom Federation will host its second annual "Awakening" conference entitled "Raising Our Voices: Equipping and Empowering a New Revolution" which organizer hope will feature a mix of right-wing activists like Lou Engle, Tony Perkins, Mat Staver, Frank Gaffney, Wendy Wright, David Barton, and Gary Bauer with Republican leaders like Cuccinelli, Michele Bachmann, Marco Rubio, Alan West, Mike Pence, Newt Gingrich, and Mike Huckabee

The following are the list of speakers, some of which are a cornucopia of anti-gay voices:

I see that Mike Huckabee, Sen. Marc Rubio, and Reps. Mike Pence, Allen West and Michelle Bachmann are going to be at the conference and thus will be hobnobbing with members of the Family Research Council (Tony Perkins), the Traditional Values Coalition (Andrea Lafferty), and Concerned Women for America (Wendy Wright) - three anti-gay hate groups according to the Southern Poverty Law Center,

The designations was given to these three organizations not because of their "religious beliefs" regarding homosexuality and gay marriage but because of their insistence in spreading false and ugly propaganda about the gay community (i.e. homosexuality and pedophilia are connected.)

One has to wonder what the panel discussions at the conference will be this year. Last year, Lafferty and the Liberty Counsel's Matt Barber led a panel discussion on the so-called dangers of homosexuality. It was during this discussion that Lafferty made the absurd claim that pro-gay nondiscrimination laws will lead to the molestation of crippled war veterans.

No doubt, Huckabee and company will probably still attend this conference even after told about these organizations and no doubt they will give a false explanation of why they will mingle with anti-gay groups if asked - something along the line of "it's unfair that these groups are being called hateful simply because their religious beliefs."

But the fact that these folks will attend a conference with anti-gay hate groups is good to know, especially in light of the knowledge that Huckabee, Pence, and Bachmann are possible Presidential candidates.  All the more reason that they become three people who have no place residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

Loughner's parents may issue public statement shortly; plus the MSM and its 'expert' interviewees

Since the elder Loughners have not been accessible to the media since the tragedy, so this would be the first time the public would hear the family's reaction to their son's arrest. This WSJ article paints a strange portrait of the Arizona shooting suspect's parents, perhaps unnecessarily negative since, as usual, the MSM has to hunt around for neighbors to talk to to fill space on a hot story.

Even in normal times, many on his block describe the elder Mr. Loughner as a reclusive man who had little time for neighborhood niceties...The parents told investigators they didn't realize the severity of their son's problems, say people familiar with the matter.

...Residents interviewed on the block said they barely knew the Loughners. Stephen Woods, who lives next door, had run-ins with Mr. Loughner over uncollected trash that he said were vituperative and hostile.

Once, Mr. Woods said, Mr. Loughner spotted him from a distance in a Wal-Mart parking lot and repeatedly shouted "Trash people!"

Speaking of filling space/air time, I saw a pathetic interview the other day on MSNBC. I don't recall the anchor, but she was interviewing some young woman who "knew" Jared Lee Loughner.

It didn't take long to figure out that the person didn't know anything about the suspect that was worthwhile -- she last saw/interacted with him in 2007! All she could convey is that he told her that he said he wanted to "change the world." Of course that only led the anchor to try to ascertain what that meant, which led nowhere. The whole segment was a flush down the crapper. I know producers want to book "experts" but this was so pathetic I just had to turn the channel.

***

PLUS: Interview with Tucson's mayor

There was an interview with Tucson's Mayor Bob E. Walkup by Gwen Ifill of PBS Newshour about the attempted assassination of Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. She asked about the tragedy's effect on Tucson, and his thoughts on the political discourse that may have fueled the rampage. The transcript is below the fold.

GWEN IFILL:  Now, for more on the tragedy in Arizona, we turn to Mayor Bob Walkup.  He joins us from Tucson.

Welcome, Mr. Mayor.

You are quoted at saying this weekend that this was a tragic lesson.

For whom?

ROBERT WALKUP, Mayor of Tucson, Arizona:  Well, it is a tragedy.  It's a tragedy for the city of Tucson clearly.

But it's also a tragedy for the state of Arizona, and I think it's a national tragedy that something like this has occurred.  It is a time for learning and it's a time for prayer.  And it's a time for understanding how something like this could really happen.

GWEN IFILL:  As an elected official, as a lawmaker in Arizona, in Tucson, what is it that you think you could have, should have, should be done to avoid something like this?

ROBERT WALKUP:  Well, I can tell you that since I got word of this on Saturday morning, and I went directly to the hospital, and then late in the evening participated in the candlelight vigil outside the hospital, I think it's becoming very clear that the citizens of the city of Tucson believe that it's time for us to get back to civility.

It's time for us to start caring about each other.  It's time for us to be kind to each other.  And we really need to start the process, so that all of us don't have to fear an event like this that takes the lives of six people and injures another 14 people.  That's what I'm hearing from the citizens of Tucson.

GWEN IFILL:  Are they asking you to do anything in particular, rather than pray and hope that things get better?  Is there anything specific they're asking of their elected leaders?

ROBERT WALKUP:  Oh, absolutely.

And I think that they're -- not only what they're asking, but we really need to take a look at the issue of security and how did something like this happen.  And a lot of people are trying to figure that out.

But what I think that we need to do is, we really need to -- as a society, we need to establish civility, a pledge that all of us are going to get back to how we treat each other and kindness.  That does not mean that we can't debate issues.

But we don't have to target people.  And we don't have to deal with people in great anger.  I -- this is a time for caring.  This is time for understanding.

GWEN IFILL:  Mr. Mayor, you're making a link between people caring for each other and civil discourse and a person who allegedly is unstable, mentally unstable.

In fact, we hear tonight late reports that his family has built a barricade and won't let people in the house, the FBI in the house.  How do you make that link between those two kinds of behavior?

ROBERT WALKUP:  Well, I think this is something that society has really got to work with, because mental illness is not just a local issue.  This is a national issue, where we really need to put more emphasis in really understanding mental disease and mental issues.

This individual had, apparently, a considerable history that we should have begun to understand.  And we really need to -- we in the political jobs in support of the people that have elected us, we get that kind of e-mail all the time.  And I think that it is time for us to say, you know, these are serious threats that we get.

We just cannot dismiss them as being somebody that cannot effect damage within a community.  We need to take it seriously.

GWEN IFILL:  You have been to the hospital.  And you have met with Gabrielle Giffords' husband and also relatives of other victims.  How are they holding up?

ROBERT WALKUP:  Well, we're down to a total number of the -- total number of 14 people that were injured that were treated.

We're down to 10 people, and it looks as though another three have been released today.  So I think we're going to be starting tomorrow with about five to six people that are still -- maybe seven -- still remaining in the hospital.  

They're doing well.  Gabby is doing as well as we could expect.  Her husband and I had a chance yesterday to go to her bedside and just stand and kind of look at her and kind of talk to her, even though she couldn't hear us, and just pray for her recovery, which we all believe is essential and a great possibility for her to come back and do the job that she was elected to do.

GWEN IFILL:  You obviously worked closely with the congresswoman in her years in Congress.  She's been there for a few years.  You have been mayor for a while.

What kind of a colleague was she?  What kind of a congresswoman was she, is she?

ROBERT WALKUP:  Well, I -- yes, is she.

And it goes back to the time before she was even elected to the state legislature, back in the late 1990s, when she was a businessperson in the city of Tucson.  I knew her then.  But, interestingly enough, in the 2000-2003, she was a legislator and we worked on what we can do in Tucson to ensure that the University Medical Center had a very high-tech, functional, world-class trauma center.

She was involved in that process back in 2003.  And we have one of the best.  And, as I looked down at her, I was reminded of how we worked together to provide the trauma center that is saving her life.  And it was -- for me, it was a very moving event.

GWEN IFILL:  Are there any plans so far for a public memorial or observance?

ROBERT WALKUP:  Yes, there is.

As a matter of fact, we haven't scheduled it yet, but we believe that we're going to try to get everybody together, bring in all the people that would like to -- in a public way to be able to say we're praying for all of the victims, the people that have died.  Funerals are scheduled for this week and next for all those people that just want to come together.

I believe that it's going to be some time this Friday that we will have a public memorial service in the city of Tucson.  For all of the people that want to come and say, boy, we're sorry, and we're praying for you, and we're praying for gabby to recover and get back on the job.  We love her dearly.

GWEN IFILL:  Tucson Mayor Bob Walkup, thank you so much for joining us.

JIM LEHRER:  The aftermath of the Tucson massacre unfolded on two fronts today.  The accused gunman was in court, while Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords lay gravely wounded in a hospital.

"NewsHour" correspondent Tom Bearden begins our extended coverage.

TOM BEARDEN:  Mourners gathered again today at a makeshift memorial in front of the University Medical Center in Tucson for wounded Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the other victims of the shootings.

Inside, her doctors continued to express guarded optimism.

DR. G. MICHAEL LEMOLE JR., Chief of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center:  With regard to Congresswoman Giffords' recovery at this phase in the game, no change is good.  And we have no change.  That is to say, she is still following those basic commands.  On top of that, the CAT scans are showing that there is no progression of that swelling.  We're not out of the woods yet.

TOM BEARDEN:  During the evening, a steady stream of well wishers came to add to the memorial, leaving flowers, lighting candles.

WOMAN:  I mean, it's just an absolutely profane act.  It's shocking.  It's been surreal.  And, you know, it really has, you know, obviously taken a toll on everybody here in Tucson.  It's very, very saddening, deeply saddening.

TOM BEARDEN:  Giffords remains sedated three days after being shot in the head at point-blank range.

She had been greeting constituents at a supermarket in her Tucson area district when a lone gunman shot her, then opened fire on the crowd.  The suspected shooter, 22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner, was apprehended at the scene.

Six were killed and 14 others were injured, including Giffords -- among the dead, Gabe Zimmerman, Giffords' director of community outreach, who had organized the day's event, federal Judge John Roll.  He had just left church and stopped by to support Giffords, a good friend.  Phyllis Schneck, a retired librarian, Dorothy Morris -- her husband is also among the wounded -- Dorwin Stoddard, a retired construction worker, and 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green, recently elected to her school's student council.  She was there because of her interest in government.

In Phoenix, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer pronounced her state grieving, but strong.  She appealed for unity in her annual state of the state address.  And she praised the young intern who applied pressure to Giffords' head wound soon after the shooting.  The young man used his bare hands on a spot where a bullet entered her head and applied pressure to stem blood loss.

GOV. JAN BREWER (R), Arizona:  Daniel Hernandez, a University of Arizona junior, showed no fear in the face of gunfire.  His quick action in going to Gabby Giffords' aid likely saved her life.

Daniel is here today.  And I'm going to ask him to stand and receive the thanks of a very grateful state.

Daniel.

(APPLAUSE)

Arizona is in pain, yes.  Our grief is profound.  We are yet in the first hours of our sorrow, but we have not been brought down.  We will never be brought down.

(APPLAUSE)

TOM BEARDEN:  In Washington, President Obama led the nation in a moment of silence to remember the victims.

Down Pennsylvania Avenue, members of Congress and staff filled the steps of the Capitol, and, at the Supreme Court, justices paused between arguments on two cases.  And in Earth orbit, Giffords' brother-in-law, Commander Scott Kelly, led NASA ground control in a moment of silence from his position aboard the International Space Station.

SCOTT KELLY, NASA Commander:  As I look out the window, I see a very beautiful planet that seems very inviting and peaceful.  Unfortunately, it is not.

The crew of ISS Expedition 26 and the flight control centers around the world would like to observe a moment of silence in honor of all the victims, which include my sister-in-law Gabrielle Giffords, a caring and dedicated public servant.

TOM BEARDEN:  And, at the White House this afternoon, President Obama again expressed remorse.

BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States:  Obviously, all of us are still grieving and in shock from the tragedy that took place.  Gabby Giffords and others are still fighting to recover.  Families are still absorbing the enormity of their losses.

We have a criminal investigation that is ongoing, and charges that no doubt will be brought against the perpetrator of this heinous crime.

TOM BEARDEN:  The shopping center where the shootings took place partially reopened this morning, but the crime scene itself is still surrounded by yellow tape.

FBI agents used metal detectors to comb through the gravel in the parking lot median looking for more evidence.  The accused shooter is maintaining his silence, according to police.  He made his first appearance in federal court in Phoenix.

Loughner made no statement, but answered questions from the judge and said he understood the charges against him.  He was ordered held without bail.  Authorities filed five counts against Loughner yesterday, including attempted assassination of a member of Congress.  More charges are expected.

Meanwhile, more details emerged about Loughner's life before the shooting, with friends and fellow students painting the picture of a disturbed and paranoid social outcast.  He had a history of drug use and was rejected by the Army for failing a drug test when he attempted to join after high school in 2008.

This fall, he spiraled deeper, dropping out of community college after being cited for multiple disruptions and receiving a suspension in September.  Loughner was told he would need a mental health review before returning.

In a June 14 e-mail, a classmate wrote: "We have a mentally unstable person in the class.  He is one of those whose picture you see on the news after he has come into class with an automatic weapon."

Prosecutors also said a letter found in a safe at the home where Loughner lived with his parents indicated he planned the rampage ahead of time.  The note contained the words, "I planned ahead, my assassination and Giffords'."  There was also a letter from the congresswoman thanking Loughner for attending an event at a Tucson mall in 2007, indicating they had had previous contact.

?MDNM?CAITLIN ANN PARKER, Friend of Jared Lee Loughner:  He asked her some question that made absolutely no sense to me.  But he said: "I can't believe she doesn't understand it.  Politicians just don't get it."

TOM BEARDEN:  Also providing clues, several YouTube videos posted by Loughner featuring rambling text against a dark background.  In one, he described inventing a new U.S. currency and complained about illiteracy in Giffords' Arizona congressional district.  And versions of MySpace page since pulled from the Internet included a mysterious "Goodbye friends" message published hours before the attack.  He also added, "Please don't be mad at me."

Saturday's deadly shooting spree was not a surprise to one of Loughner's neighbors.

MAN:  I told my mother I thought he was a serial killer the first time I saw him.

TOM BEARDEN:  Back in Washington, congressional business was postponed, including a vote scheduled this week to repeal the president's health care law.

Democratic Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy of New York said she planned to introduce legislation in the coming days to limit access to the type of gun Loughner legally purchased, a Glock .9-millimeter handgun.

Nine-one-one calls released from the scene describe that weapon.

CALLER:  Looks like the guy had a semi-automatic pistol.  He went in.  He just started firing.  And then he ran.

CALLER:  She's hit.  I do believe she's breathing.  There's multiple people shot.

911 OPERATOR:  OK.  Oh, my God.

TOM BEARDEN:  There was beefed-up security at Giffords' office today, and federal law enforcement officials are planning a security briefing for members of Congress on Wednesday.

SLDN's Comm Director Trevor Thomas joins Socarides, Eleveld at Equality Matters

This evening I received an email from Trevor Thomas, the ace communications director at Servicemembers Legal Defense Network announcing his move to Equality Matters, the new rapid-response LGBT venture of Media Matters for America. He will serve as Programs Director alongside President Richard Socarides and online editor Kerry Eleveld; he starts at EqM on January 24th. (MetroWeekly): Socarides:

"He is an incredible advocate and forthright spokesperson. We are excited he has agreed to join us and continue his work on behalf of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community at Equality Matters."

In an email sent this evening to friends and colleagues that he gave permission for Metro Weekly to publish, he wrote of his time at SLDN, "When I arrived to SLDN, I viewed it broadly as another gay rights group.  It didn't take long to recognize SLDN was a military group first and foremost.  For so many on the staff and board, ending 'Don't Ask' was deeply personal. Many of them were discharged or served in fear and silence.

"In my own life, my brother Ricky enlisted in the United States Army at age 18. My father served in the 126th Infantry of the Michigan National Guard. And my grandfather served as a U.S. Army Corporal during World War II. I've been fortunate to find my own road to pay it forward."

***

On a semi-related note, as Kerry Eleveld wraps up her stint at The Advocate, don't miss her latest interview -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. A snippet:

Feeling your way through an interview with one of the world's most powerful women is more art than science. Marriage seemed like the place to start, since Clinton had been caught off guard by a recent inquiry on the issue while visiting Australia. Her husband has said that he now supports full marriage equality: Many of his gay friends are in committed relationships, former president Bill Clinton said in 2009. As far as marriage goes, he said, he had just been "hung up about the word."

Did she share his experience? I wondered. Was she at odds with President Barack Obama's stated position in support of civil unions but against marriage equality?

But on the phone, Clinton is circumspect about her husband's comments. "Well, I share his experience because we obviously share a lot of the same friends, but I have not changed my position," she says without elaborating. The secretary wasn't taking any political bait, nor was she going to tangle with anything that could figure negatively for her boss.

Clinton's chief of staff and counselor, Cheryl Mills, had modeled the same on-message discipline when I sat down with her a few weeks earlier, avoiding any comparison between the secretary's movement on LGBT issues and the president's. Mills and Clinton have been friends for nearly 20 years, dating back to when Mills served as deputy White House counsel for President Clinton. She arrived on the national stage as part of a legal team defending the president during the 1999 impeachment trial. A quick Google search of Mills's name turns up the crux of her argument, spoken on the Senate floor from the perspective of an African-American woman: "I'm not worried about civil rights, because this president's record on civil rights, on women's rights, on all of our rights, is unimpeachable.... I stand here before you today because President Bill Clinton believed I could stand here for him."

(Note/disclaimer and all that jazz - I am a member of the Equality Matters advisory board.)