Perez Hilton Takes It Way Too Far
While this is typically out of the realm of what I blog about, I find it absolutely necessary to comment on the horrific actions that Perez Hilton and other bloggers have taken in response to homophobic comments from Louisiana Rep. Sally Kern.
Look, I’m well aware of the deep hurt homosexuals feel over her statements – and rightfully so. I can understand the reaction that would come from hearing such things, but instead of responding to Kern in a more appropriate manner, Perez wrote a post entitled “Poor Repressed Homo.” The following note appeared under a picture of Kern’s son:
“How cute is he?? That is Jesse Kern, the gay son of homophobe Sally Kern, Oklahoma Republican and state representative. Jesse has been so f***** in the head by his mom that he claims to be celibate, as a gift to God. Poor kid!”
First and foremost, get the story straight, Perez (no pun intended). Priests and other clergy members choose to be celibate. There is a deep religious belief that is founded upon the religious inclination that it is better to serve God than it is to become wedded to another individual. This, again, is the basis for individuals who wish to become priests, nuns, sisters, etc. While you and I might not choose that same path, being so insensitive to those who have is pretty disgusting.
Interestingly, Perez chose not to research the inflammatory information he (or his staff) posted about Kern’s son. Not only is her son not gay (by his own account), but he also doesn’t agree with the statements made by his mother. Had Perez or his associates researched a bit harder, they would have found the following information, reported in Tulsa World on March 14th:
Disagreeing with Sally Kern is one thing, but dragging her innocent son into the mix is damn-right evil. And her son does have a point about the damage that this is causing to him and his family. Is he a public figure? That is a question I’d be extremely concerned about if I were Perez – or any other the other bloggers who continue to slander him.
Read the following, posted by The Gaytheist:
Absurd! If her son were gay and had admitted it, posting these comments would be a bit more justified. But, that simply isn’t the case. If you want to hate Sally Kerns, go for it. I’m not sticking up for her my any means; her comments have no room in the public square. But, attacking her son who had nothing to do with her homophobic rant is uncalled for.
2008 Unleashed: The Dem’s, McCain and Our Nation’s Future
What’s most perplexing about the 2008 presidential campaign is the unadulterated love and support Barack Obama has received from America’s young generation (and from American media, but that’s for an entirely different piece). While this support has brought Obama a long way on the seemingly never-ending path toward possible presidential supremacy, Clinton is hanging tough. While I am not a Democrat by any stretch of the imagination, I fluctuate between supporting Obama and Clinton (and by “supporting” I mean “selecting the candidate who won’t make me cry myself to sleep every night if my preferred candidate, Arizona Sen. John McCain, happens to lose in November).
Luckily, on the Republican front McCain has officially been granted the candidacy. Instead of debating back and forth with vying party rivals, he can face the complexities associated with the general election, focusing the breadth of his energy on his upcoming battle with a Democratic contender – whomever he or she may be; this is a clear advantage that some Democrats may be underestimating.
When it comes to the overall political spectrum, one cannot help but wonder how the Democrats will possibly rectify the deep divide that the Obama vs. Clinton charade has manifested. With the Republicans losing out in 2006 – a prime example in political theory of “surge and decline” – mixed with an overall distaste for the Bush administration and its policies, left me more than concerned about the prospect of the Republicans losing out in 2008. Bearing in mind Bush’s unpopular status, one might say I had quite a bit to fear. But, then — as it often does in politics — the sociopolitical climate changed.
While many talking heads spouted off about an impending civil war amongst members of the Republican Party, conditions seem to be turning around quite rapidly. Sure, there have been spats and disagreements, but the battle for the Republican nomination is sealed and the focus of political fury has been placed upon the two Democratic contenders who have their hearts set on “making history.” While they’re out pledging to fulfill empty promises that they dress up with elaborate diatribes about “hope” and “change,” McCain is left alone to concentrate on better positioning himself among members of his party who still haven’t accepted him as the most applicable choice – and on the general election, of course. But the Democrats – they’re still battling one another and it isn’t pretty.
The gender and race cards are being pulled so fast that the deck is damn near empty. The other day I was in an elevator and I overheard an African American woman speaking with a man behind me. She was talking about how wonderful it was that a black man had made it so far in America (i.e. Obama). She went on to explain that this was the primary reason she’d be voting for him (assuming he receives the Democratic nomination).
Now, this is where my frustration over the Obama phenomenon reaches its max. While I truly love and value diversity, I would never support an individual on the sole basis of race or ethnicity. In fact, I think it is morally irresponsible to make such an important decision based primarily on an external factor that really bears no affect over the actual ability to lead.
If Barack Obama were Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice, I would be more than supportive (pending that the reason for said support was not based solely on ethnicity). I’m all for diversity, but merit should be based primarily on experience. Unfortunately, Barack Obama does not have the experience one would expect to find in a candidate in the running for the American presidency. Feel free to debate me on that, but it’s basically unarguable at this point.
And don’t even get me started on Hillary Clinton. The last thing this nation needs is another Clinton in the White House – but I digress. Supporting someone based primarily on race or gender is silly and unbelievably naive. Real leadership comes from within (and from the experiences gained in the many instances that shape our hearts and minds).
And let’s not forget about “hope” and “change” – the weasel words that he and Hillary throw around so spuriously that one cannot help but wonder if they ever deviate from their scripted banter.
The fact of the matter is this: We need a president who is ready and willing to take on the complex issues that are stampeding our nation – and our world. While all three contenders are more than willing, are they ready?
The only candidate who has proven longitudinal experience coping with peace, war and the institutions that govern the American political schema is John McCain. Argue with me all you’d like, but the facts, the timelines and all other secondary sources of data point to his experience and willingness to reach across the aisle (something that is desperately needed when considering the level of stagnation that has been created by partisan politics in recent years).
Let’s hope Americans realize this unalienable fact before it’s too late.
HIV/AIDS: Bush Saving Millions in Africa?
Bob Geldof penned an intriguing piece for TIME Magazine last week about George W. Bush and America’s commitment to the African continent. While I disagree with Geldof’s take on the Iraq war and other associated stances, this piece opens up necessary dialog surrounding HIV/AIDS and the legacy of America’s forty-third president.
After the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Bush’s approval ratings declined and have remained relatively low since early 2005. Iraq and the blunders that plagued U.S. operations in the Middle East have created international and domestic resistance to the Bush administration and its policies. The Iraq War and the American-led War on Terrorism have so dominated the sociopolitical spectrum, that the events have collectively eclipsed the majority of media coverage concerning Bush’s other presidential duties.
When it comes to accomplishments, George W. Bush is rarely recognized. The hurt and anguish many have internalized over what they see as divisionary tactics has dirtied his image to such a degree that he is denied all attribution for the good he has done in various regions across the globe.
Particularly in Africa, Bush has made an impact that is literally saving millions of lives. Geldof’s piece seeks to understand why the American people are vastly unaware of Bush’s work on the African continent. Perhaps the most interesting portion of Geldof’s article centers on what he calls “the great unspoken.” While Geldof was aboard Air Force One to discuss U.S. aid to Africa, Bush sought to connect the dots between the sociopolitical landscape in Africa and the antisystemic forces that have continued to hamper U.S. operations in Iraq:
Geldof: “I don’t know how, but eventually we arrive at the great unspoken.
In an effort to avoid conflict (since Geldof disagrees with Bush entirely concerning U.S. actions in Iraq), he attempted to divert the conversation toward a subject that would create less contention. After what the author calls an “uncomfortable” exchange, the conversation progressed.
Due to the negative connotation Bush’s name brings to the international “table,” he may, indeed, be ignored for his impressive actions in Africa. Unfortunately for Bush’s critics, ignoring his successful assistance programs in the region is nothing short of avoiding reality. Bush deserves recognition for these accomplishments. After all, Geldof points out that in 2003, only 50,000 Africans were taking antiretroviral drugs. Even more unconscionable, these people were paying for their own medication. But today, treatment is much more widespread. In fact, there are 1.3 million individuals receiving medicines free of charge, which can mostly be attributed to George W. Bush and his Republican administration.
According to Geldof, “Bush…initiated the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) with cross-party support led by Senators John Kerry and Bill Frist.” The Bush Administration has also fought tuberculosis, malaria and HIV/AIDS (the U.S. provides a substantial amount of funding for the Global Fund). Unfortunately, the American people remain vastly unaware of these advancements.
George W. Bush’s commitment to Africa should not be eclipsed by negative commentary or partisan political angst. While one may not agree with the aggregate of George W. Bush’s domestic of international policies, there is no contesting the positive impact this American president has had on the African region.
Iran: Number One World Power? Nope, Not Today
“Iran is the number one power in the world” – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
No, the aforementioned text has not been lifted from a “Saturday Night Life” script. According to FOX News, Ahmadinejad uttered these words this past week in a speech to the families of Iranians who perished in the Iran-Iraq war that occurred more than 20 years ago. And, yes. He was being serious.
In what serves as yet another example of his refusal to let go of the past, Ahmadinejad showcased his unadulterated lunacy in his assertion that he is leading the world most powerful country.
This baseless statement is more than laughable, especially when considering the fact that Ahmadinejad and his government deny the existence of homosexuals in Iran, authorizes the murder of gays and restricts the rights of women. I suppose these components contribute to his idea of what it takes to become the “number one world power.” Unfortunately, these are traits of an ideologically torn nation that is ruled by a cruel despotic figurehead – not indicators of a good or decent nation by any means.
“Today the name of Iran means a firm punch in the teeth of the powerful and puts them in their place.” - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Whose teeth is he referring to? And the American liberals think Bush is a brainwashing buffoon (my guess is that this story will go widely unpublished amongst liberal bloggers who are probably more concerned with statistically predicting Bush’s next bowel movement)?
Ahmadinejad’s latest verbal assault on reality is unbelievable to say the least, but what else are we to expect from a man who seems determined to solidify his nation as the diaper rash of the world.