Click on the PTODE image to enlarge.

If anyone has any recommendations for changes or additions I’m always open to suggestions.

I’ll begin by saying that the Presidential debate which I attended earlier today was very enjoyable. This was despite five of the seven candidates not turning up. Four of them simply didn’t agree to come, while one dropped out at the last second to give a television interview. Interestingly enough, of the two candidates that did show up – David Norris and Michael D. Higgins – both are former university lecturers and both repeatedly stressed the need for young people to be involved in politics. There’s a point somewhere in there, I think.

Due to the drought in candidates, the format of the meeting wound up being more akin to a presentation and exploration of ideas than a formal debate. This, in my opinion, was a welcome change from the media driven debates – read: scandal driven – that have taken place over the last few weeks. It also allowed for a more relaxed atmosphere, which I felt reflected well on both candidates.

Since Norris and Higgins are both liberals – and proud of it too, according to Norris, who lambasted the media for trying to turn it into a dirty word – there was substantial agreement on most issues. There were, of course, differences. Norris, being a social campaigner, focused more on social issues. He highlighted his success in bringing about the introduction of significant child abuse laws in the early 1990s, which placed the well-being of the child above every other consideration, and his more recent efforts to have same-sex – that’s the popular term over here – marriage legalised, resulting in the passing of a civil partnership bill.

Higgins, instead, focused more on the economic side of the issues. He attacked the Austrian economic model – by name: something which is rarely done – and it’s insistence on unregulated or lightly regulated financial systems. He pointed out that this model allows for people to be irrational, but insists that the market is always rational, which, as he said, leads to a ludicrous contradiction. Something which I agree with wholeheartedly. He ended this line of discussion by underlining the fact that we know that many of the problems today emanate from Austrian Economics and that this is being ignored by ideologues, which is exacerbating the problems and making them harder to solve.

Closer to many Planeteers , America featured rather prominently throughout the debate. When Higgins was speaking about the economics of the current financial crisis he mentioned the repeal of the Glass-Steagal Act as an example of the deregulation which ultimately created the current crisis. When speaking of the vilification of the word “liberal”, Norris mentioned that the Democrats in the United States have become afraid of identifying themselves as liberal and that such cowering is what leads to people like George W. Bush being elected, culminating in war and financial crisis.

Closer to home, both candidates denounced the bailing out of non-systemic banks such as Anglo-Irish. Norris also told the audience to see through the myth that Germany is bailing out Ireland to the reality that Ireland is bailing out German banks.

There were also one or two questions raised regarding the constitutional powers of the President and other such matters, but I won’t get into them here.

Well, I was hoping to have more to talk to you about regarding this debate, but with two candidates showing up only so much can be said. I will, however, be posting an article or two before the election on the 27 October. If you’re interested, then I hope that you’ll read them.

Recently, the fact that gay people are born with their orientation has taken off in the media. It’s increased prominence can be seen in the popularity of the song “Born this Way” by the singer-songwriter, Lady Gaga, and the rise in the number of articles and blog-posts dealing with the subject. In many ways, this is a good thing. It can be seen as an affirmation of the fact that there’s nothing wrong with being gay and as a celebration of gay identity. However, as a defence against conservative attacks, I think that it is a rather weak argument.

Stating that gay people were born with their orientation seems like the perfect counter to the conservative argument that being gay is a choice, but this life-affirming rebuttal opens the door to other attacks. Following this exchange conservatives will rightly point out, though rarely eloquently, that paedophiles are most likely born with their “orientation”, but that being born so doesn’t make their behaviour justifiable. The most common response to this is that the the two orientations aren’t equatable. The problem is this: If you base your argument that being gay is perfectly acceptable on premise that gay people are born with their orientation, then these two orientations do become equatable. In fact, if you base your argument on such a premise, then heterosexuality and paedophilia also become equatable. After all, anyone of either orientation were born the way they are.

Fortunately, there is a simple way to eliminate this problem: Unlike paedophilia, neither being gay or being straight are intrinsically harmful. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with being either gay or straight as there is with engaging in paedophilia. I hope that this analogy will expand this line of thinking:

 Both baseball and war involve tactics and strategy. However, unlike war, baseball is not intrinsically harmful. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with playing baseball.

 The beauty of this argument is threefold. Firstly, it neatly side-steps any unfortunate comparisons. Secondly, it’s a rather libertarian argument, which conservatives purport to support in other matters. Thirdly, it eliminates the choice argument that conservatives put forward by making it irrelevant if being gay is a choice or not. It boils the whole think down into a debate about freedom. Something that conservatives, if they believe their own rhetoric, should support.

Frankly, I think that this is a far superior argument than simply stating that gay people are born that way.

Image via Wikipedia

Last week, I was here in Las Vegas to celebrate the end of DADT. Once (and hopefully future) Congresswoman Dina Titus discussed what happened in the last session of Congress to make this happen, and representatives from Harry Reid‘s office and Shelley Berkley’s office were also on hand to share their congratulations on this win and continued support for LGBTQ equality.

One would think this would be a nationwide celebration. After all, repealing DADT has broad national support. It was the end of a stupid, discriminatory policy that kept our military from keeping the best and brightest on the job protecting our country. But during the event, I was thinking about who was NOT present as much as I was noticing who was there.

At our event in Las Vegas last week, no one from Senator Dean Heller’s office even bothered to show up. Hell, no one from GOProud or Log Cabin Republicans even bothered to show up. Why is that? For a party that seems to love to talk about “personal liberty” and “military strength” so much, why wouldn’t we see stronger Republican support for ending a policy that restricted personal liberty while simultaneously endangering our military’s strength and our national security?

Well, I guess we all had to learn the hard way later in the week.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKtzOjAWGIE

Who would have guessed that a decade after 9/11 and less than a decade after the start of the Iraq War, Republicans would be the ones booing an active duty soldier in Iraq? Were their promises to “support the troops” really that hollow? Does “support the troops” mean nothing if those troops happen to be gay?

Believe it or not, Andrew Sullivan really nailed it on the “support the troops… But not really” hypocrisy coming out of today’s Republican Party.

But somehow the fact that these indignities were heaped on a man risking his life to serve this country, a man ballsy enough to make that video, a man in the uniform of the United States … well, it tells me a couple of things. It tells me that these Republicans don’t actually deep down care for the troops, if that means gay troops. Their constant posturing military patriotism has its limits.

The shocking silence on the stage -- the fact that no one challenged this outrage -- also tells me that this kind of slur is not regarded as a big deal. When it came to it, even Santorum couldn’t sanction firing all those servicemembers who are now proudly out. But that’s because he was forced to focus not on his own Thomist abstractions, but on an actual person. Throughout Republican debates, gays are discussed as if we are never in the audience, never actually part of the society, never fully part of families, never worthy of even a scintilla of respect. When you boo a servicemember solely because he’s gay, you are saying he is beneath contempt, that nothing he does or has done can counterweigh the vileness of his sexual orientation.

I’ve had discussions with LGBTQ equality activists before when they have bemoaned matters of equality morphing into partisan political flash points. And I genuinely understand their disappointment and frustration. But honestly, can any of us ignore Republicans’ tolerance of bigotry any longer?

And can we ignore the stark differences between President Obama and the Republicans hoping to unseat him? President Obama fulfilled his promise to repeal DADT, and has not ignored the plight of LGBTQ Americans during his Presidency. The Republican candidates, on the other hand… Well, you get the picture.

I just hope Senator Chris Coons (D-Delaware) is right that one day, this too shall pass.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCf9daodNf0

And I hope Senator Mark Udall (D-Colorado) is also proven right.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2NHfcbbFKA

We’ve got campaigns across the board making the case that every American deserves to have the promise of the Declaration of Independence made real. We’re created equal. We have an equal opportunity — equal rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Republican party candidates are going to be proven wrong, I think not only in the long run, but also in the short run, because these are backwards policies. These are policies that don’t fit in the 21st Century. It’s disturbing, but again, the voters are going to weigh in and they’re going to weigh in for a progressive 21st Century approach to sexual orientation. [...]

If Americans of all backgrounds, all regions speak up and draw attention to those discriminatory thoughts and policies, they’re going to fall through their own weight. They’re not going to last. They never do.

Bigotry, discrimination, and hatred should have no place in today’s America. And equality should not be a partisan political issue. However, that’s not the reality of contemporary American politics. And it will not be reality as long as Republicans continue to allow so much bigotry to flourish in their party.

Ms. B:

My partner and I stayed at the MSC South Shelter on July 9th. I am writing to express my gratitude for the exceptional efforts put forth by your staff during our stay.

By now you probably already recognize my name, as the supervisor at the front desk Sunday morning said she was going to file a report in appreciation for my presence and cooperation. I do not know the woman’s name, as she was not wearing her photo ID and name badge, and when I requested her name, she gave me the impression that information is only released on a need-to-know basis and lesser beings such as myself do not need to know.

My partner, ▌name redacted▐, and I arrived before 10 a.m. on Saturday morning to sign up. This was indeed exciting for both of us. Staff were as pleasant and polite as could be expected in your fine establishment. The two men at the front desk went above and beyond expectations to provide us with confusing and contradictory information such as “go over there and talk to the lady with the long hair”.

I must confess that my partner and I broke protocol when we finally located “the lady with the long hair”, by attempting to be friendly and pleasant while she laboriously moved her mouse pointer from field to field and typed information one character at a time to avoid overloading your excellent computer systems.

However, I commend you on not wasting money on a mount for the webcam used to take pictures of potential residents. Your donors must be proud of the way you saved their money for more important things. Since the crash of the double-sided sticky tape futures commodities market, that could have destroyed your budget.

After our “profile” was created, we went back to the front desk,. where one of the men there affixed a red wristband to the hair on my forearm. I was very surprised at this, usually I have to pay exorbitant amounts of money for this privilege.

Before we walked into the drop-in center, one of the men at the counter told us that dinner was served at 6 pm, so we should get back early if we decided to go anywhere else.

When we came back to listen for our names to be called, shortly before 5, imagine our surprise to learn that if we were in the drop-in center at 6:30 our “reservations” would be cancelled. We spent the time out on the sidewalk, until, a few minutes before six, we were told to get back inside or we wouldn’t get a bed. We then sat and waited, completely confused and wondering what was going on. We attempted to correct our confusion, not understanding that this against the mission of your organization, but staff was very helpful in making sure we didn’t break any of the rules which have, as I understand from observation, a shelf-life of about ten minutes or less.

When my partner and I were each assigned a bed, we waited with bated breath to find out what was next. And we kept waiting. Finally one of the other shelter clients, who was a veteran of your gauntlet and broke ranks to advise us, against policy and tradition (I will not identify him by name or description, I am sure he was unaware of the heinous sin he was committing), advised us to walk over to the front desk and check-in. We did so, and immediately surrendered our reservation pages. My partner was assigned a bed and I was assigned to bed 57.

When I got to bed 57, it was already occupied. My partner was very upset about this, as his bed did not come pre-supplied with company. Additionally, we are actually registered domestic partners, and he can get a bit jealous.

After a bit of negotiations, in true Keystone efficiency, I was told bed 57 was in fact mine, and the other gentleman was not supposed to be there. That was approximately 7:45 pm.

At 8:05 (approximately), I returned to my bed, after having a conversation with my partner, to find my possessions placed on the floor between beds and someone else’s belongings on top of the bed. I went to Gregory, he checked, and he told me that the belongings were the possessions of the other gentleman. Gregory took the belongings away and told me it was my bed.

At approximately 9 p.m., I was sent back to the front desk to wait for Lynnae, the shift supervisor. Eventually, Lynnae assigned me to bed 272.

While talking to Lynnae, I informed her that Monday morning I needed to be at the mental health clinic before 8 a.m. Monday morning, which would prevent me from being at MSC South at 10 to sign up for a bed again. She looked at me, and in the finest traditions of customer service, shrugged.

Gregory led me to bed 272. Which was occupied by “other gentleman #2″. Gregory then led me to the open area of the men’s floor, told me to wait there, and went off to figure out what was wrong. Please forgive Gregory this lapse in protocol, it really does seem that he was overwhelmed and probably just forgot himself. I am sure that in the future Gregory will cover himself with glory by adhering more strictly to your procedures.

When Gregory came back, he told me that Lynnae had assigned me to bed 308. Bed 308 was empty, and everyone pretended relief that I was not too put out by this lack of customary amenities.

Afterwards, I went down to the front desk to give back the two breakfast tickets that I had now received (#57 and #272). The gentleman at the front desk took the #57 and told me that the #272 “is enough for you”.

I was relieved, at 10 p.m., and again at lights out, that bed 308 was still mine. I took a shower, and went to bed.

Imagine my relief when, shortly after midnight, a new staff member woke me from my doze to inform me that I needed to prove that I belonged in 308. In my groggy state, I tried to tell the staff member that Lynnae and Gregory were aware of the total situation, and why I did not have a ticket for bed 308, but he stuck to procedure. Please accept my humble apologies for my violate of the precepts of your organization.

I got dressed and collected my possessions while the staff member stripped the bed of blanket and linens. I trooped back downstairs, passing Gregory along the way. I confess that I, in my befuddled state, assessed some blame to him, and, to my eternal shame, favored him with a very foul look.

At the front desk, I addressed a completely new staff person, while two others (one of which was the man who had assured me ticket #272 was “good enough”) laughed at the entertainment staff and I had conspired to provide them. We then waited several minutes for them to locate Lynnae, with Gregory showing up for, I came to understand, my support (again, please do not discipline him too harshly).

Lynnae showed up, and as she started to ask her first question when she received a personal phone call on her cell phone. Honoring her priorities, she took the call while I and the other staff waited. When her call was over, she proceeded to investigate the issue.

Meanwhile, I had given her back ticket #272, which she proceeded to tear up.

The issue revolved around the fact that your “booking” system is far too delicate and sophisticated to be loaded down with irrelevant features, such as changing a bed assignment. Lynnae had, previously, told someone else not to book anyone else to bed 308 as she had just given it to me. The person she had talked to had, in the finest traditions of your agency, promptly forgotten the entire conversation.

Lynnae told me to go back to bed 308, that it was mine for the night. I then asked if I might have a ticket with the proper bed number on it. Delivering service with flair and distinction, she scribbled the bed number on a new ticket and threw it at me.

Once back upstairs, I apologized to Gregory for the dirty look I gave him. After all, I was only there for staff’s titillation, not to pass judgment. Once again, I was assured by Gregory and William Mack that I would not be disturbed further.

At approximately 4 a.m., this prognostication was shown to be the Satanic illusion that it was. I was woken by a completely new staff member and informed in broken English that I had to go down to the front desk and account for my presence at MSC South without authorization.

When I arrived downstairs, I was ready for the next act, despite not having gotten any sleep since midnight. However, I was not prepared for the diction and tone of the commands offered by the new front desk supervisor (who, as I mentioned before was not wearing a name tag or ID). When demanded to show my ticket, I confess that, seized by one of the frequent anxiety attacks I have been experiencing for the past several years, I made the mistake of refusing.

Several times I tried to regain control of myself, but there must have been some harmonic property of the supervisor’s harsh demands that kept me in a very apprehensive and defensive state of mind.

The supervisor ordered me to go into the drop-in center and sleep in one of the chairs there, since there was no proof that I belonged there. I tried to explain what had transpired all evening, but she rightfully presented the official position of the MSC South, namely, that I had nothing to say that was of the slightest interest to anybody, using the simple and expedient method of interrupting my explanation with demands for information regarding the actions, and motivations behind those actions, of Lynnae in the booking system. Unfortuantely for me, I had left my psychic abilities in my other pants and was unable to reliably read Lynnae’s mind.

I confess that, in my state of mind, at several times I used words that the supervisor took exception to. I realize that any report that she made, regarding my “being disrespectful to staff”, was fully earned. You see, I am of the heretical viewpoint that “respect is given where respect is earned”. Yes, I know, but I fully expect the Grand Inquisitor to correct this at any time. Perhaps your front desk supervisor could assist?

In the lobby, while other staff members were summoned to witness the fun, I tried to get in touch with my partner by cell phone. The floor supervisor proceeded to repeatedly order me into the drop-in center.

You see, I am, as yet, unable to sleep upright in a hard plastic chair. I have tried to get this corrected, but Parris Island keeps telling me I am too old to go through their Urban Survival course.

I gave back the ticket for bed #308 and went outside. I waited for my partner to respond, as I did not want to give him undue concern over my absence when he awoke in the morning.

While smoking a cigarette, the front desk supervisor came to the window overlooking the sidewalk to rap on the window. Obligingly, I moved farther down the street to smoke. She continued to rap on the window. I continued to move down the sidewalk.

Then a staff member came out to tell me that the supervisor had “found” me a bed. I got rid of my cigarette and walked back in.

The front desk supervior proceeded to inform me that I was supposed to have been in bed #57 all night, and if I had done this, none of the hassles would have occurred. It was my fault that I was not in bed #57 and I should not have, of my own volition, moved to bed #308. She then demanded to see the reservation paper that I had been given in the drop-in center the previous evening when my name was called. The one that front desk had taken away when I checked in.

I was momentarily concerned for my partner, since front desk had also taken his reservation page from him. But, since everyone knows that people like us don’t have real feelings or form real relationships, I quickly shrugged this off.

Meanwhile, the front desk supervisor was demanding that the man who had been in bed #57 all night go back to the drop-in center to sleep instead (because, obviously, somebody needed to sleep in the drop-in center). The man in bed #57 kept insisting that he had a ticket for bed #57 but did not know where it was.

I tried to inform the front desk supervisor that Lynnae had determined that bed #57, which had a 90-day ticket, had been “released early” by error. However, being a lowly piece of subhuman garbage, my input was rightfully ignored.

Finally, unwilling to watch as the front desk supervisor tried to remove another person from his bed (I’m irrationally squeamish that way), I left the shelter and waited for my partner outside. I do apologize for the immense amount of litter I left on your sidewalk, namely tears, but I’m sure that with continued contact with your staff I will overcome this weakness.

By the way, the streets of San Francisco are quite pretty at 5 a.m. in the morning. I’m unclear why your Marketing Director hasn’t capitalized on that on your website.

Once again, my abject apologies for any disrespect or animosity toward your staff. It was unreasonable and sacriligious for me to expect a Christian organization to practice demonic values such as compassion, justice, equality, and empathy (Jesus wrote a whole Psalm about that you know. I think it’s in Leviticus).

Sincerely,

Reverend Mitchel McAllister
(#4113)

Reverend Mitchel McAllister, or 2ndClassCitizenPundit, can be reached at Budg...@lunatextpublications.com, and also twits about the War on the Homeless via @dabblerx. Any resemblance to any real valued person, living, dead or voting, is already being prosecuted by Homeland Security.