Carrie Prejean gets worked up on the Today Show, says she was “set up”

lgbt, religion, video 4 Comments »

Carrie Prejean on the Today ShowFORMER Miss California Carrie Prejean appeared on the Today Show this morning with Matt Lauer, claiming she was set up and the ONLY reason she was no longer Miss California was because of her answer on same-sex marriage. For a glimpse of the real Carrie Prejean, watch…

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Below is a sampling of some leaked emails sent by Prejean to her boss Keith Lewis, director of the Miss California USA pageant:

From: cprejeanXXXXSent: Friday, May 29, 2009 7:57 AMTo: Keith LewisSubject: Re: Messages

You do not cooperate with me, and you pick and chose the the things YOU want me to do. That is not happening anymore. Stop speaking for me. I have MY own voice. What are u gonna do fire me for volunteering for the special olympics hahaha ur crazy No I am doing this appearance. You do not need details. Its for the SPECIAL OLYMPICS!!! You just need to know I will be doing it alright

You will not facilitate this appearance

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

———————————————-

From: cprejeanXXXXSent: Friday, May 29, 2009 7:40 AMTo: Keith LewisSubject: Re: Messages

I expect you to be forwarding me ALL email requests and interview requests to me. I know how you are and its not right if you are selecting things for me. Thanks for your cooperation And fyi I am a presenter of medals at the special olympics in a few weeks for the summer games. So now u know I am doing this and I expect your full support. Also I was asked to fill in for a dj on a local radio show.. Ill be reading from a show biz script monday. I am doing this

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

———————————————-

From: cprejeanXXXXSent: Friday, May 29, 2009 7:42 AMTo: Keith LewisSubject: Re: Messages

Just as you need details for things so do I. Also nice move trying to make money off of my appearances Also.. Do not try and silence me by saying I do not have a comment about the prop 8 ruling. Maybe you don’t. I do

Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

Doesn’t sound very Christian to me. Wait a minute… Rude. Arrogant. Self-righteous. On second thought…


McCain re-affirms DADT support in interview, not a “civil rights” issue

audio, lgbt, politics 2 Comments »

John McCain on DADTIn an interview with Air America’s Ana Marie Cox, Senator John McCain  re-affirmed his support for Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT). When Cox compared DADT to Truman’s forced de-segregation of the armed forces as a civil rights issue, a testy John McCain replied: “Well, you are entitled to your opinion. But I don’t think so.”

An excerpt from the interview below:

MCCAIN: My opinion is shaped by the view of the leaders of the military. The reason why I supported the policy to start with is because General Colin Powell, who was then the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is the one that strongly recommended we adopt this policy in the Clinton administration. I have not heard General Powell or any of the other military leaders reverse their position, just like when on other issues, that people are expert and knowledgeable of, I rely on their opinion. But this is unique. These military leaders are responsible for the very lives of the men and women under their command, and that’s why I am especially guided, to a large degree, by their views.

COX: Now, you know that Truman de-segregated the military through executive order. And he did it against the wishes of some people in the military. There were some studies that had been shown and some panels that suggested that integration was actually good for the forces.

MCCAIN: Let me tell you again. Colin Powell was asked exactly that question, as an African-American. He was asked that question exactly, and he answered it hundreds of times. And he said, “I do not equate ethnicity with sexual orientation.” I agree with him.

COX: Well, actually, there’s something to that, because obviously, right now there’s no segregation at all of gay people and straight people because we don’t know who is gay. So I guess I have to ask…

MCCAIN: But the two issues are not comparable. So I’m not sure why you’d bring that up.

COX: I think they’re comparable in that they are both civil rights issues.

MCCAIN: Well, you are entitled to your opinion. But I don’t think so.

The full interview will air on Saturday 9am. An audio clip is available on the Air America website.


DOJ motion cites incest, underage marriage to dismiss DOMA challenge

lgbt, politics Comments Off on DOJ motion cites incest, underage marriage to dismiss DOMA challenge

DOJ defends DOMAThe U.S. Department of Justice filed a motion late yesterday to dismiss a federal court case which calls for states to recognize same-sex marriages performed legally in other states, challenging the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). From SFGate.com:

The motion, filed late Thursday, argued the case of Arthur Smelt and Christopher Hammer does not address the right of gay couples to marry but rather questions whether their marriage must be recognized nationwide by states that have not approved gay marriage.

“Under the law binding on this Court, the answer to these questions must be no,” the motion states.

The case was originally filed last year in California State Court before heading to federal court. It claims violation of a number of federal rights including the right to privacy, the right to travel and the right of free expression under the First Amendment.

The government’s filing said the suit would fail under each of those grounds. While it addressed each argument, it claimed the suit should be dismissed for lack of standing by the plaintiffs to bring the claim in federal court.

What’s more startling, as discovered by John Avarosis at AMERICAblog, the DOJ motion cites cases involving incest and underage marriage to defend DOMA. Relevant cases underlined in passage below:

The courts have followed this principle, moreover, in relation to the validity of marriages performed in other States. Both the First and Second Restatements of Conflict of Laws recognize that State courts may refuse to give effect to a marriage, or to certain incidents of a marriage, that contravene the forum State’s policy. See Restatement (First) of Conflict of Laws § 134; Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 284.5 And the courts have widely held that certain marriages performed elsewhere need not be given effect, because they conflicted with the public policy of the forum. See, e.g., Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, “though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th[at] state”); Wilkins v. Zelichowski, 140 A.2d 65, 67-68 (N.J. 1958) (marriage of 16-year-old female held invalid in New Jersey, regardless of validity in Indiana where performed, in light of N.J. policy reflected in statute permitting adult female to secure annulment of her underage marriage); In re Mortenson’s Estate, 316 P.2d 1106 (Ariz. 1957) (marriage of first cousins held invalid in Arizona, though lawfully performed in New Mexico, given Arizona policy reflected in statute declaring such marriages “prohibited and void”).

The fact that States have long had the authority to decline to give effect to marriages performed in other States based on the forum State’s public policy strongly supports the constitutionality of Congress’s exercise of its authority in DOMA.

It’s deeply upsetting that the DOJ is defending DOMA at all, much less citing cases involving incest and underage marriage in the process. I suspect that many who have been vocal supporters of the President, who have been asking for patience on LGBT issues, are now feeling betrayed… myself included.

We can be loyal only for so long, before we become apologists.

UPDATE: Today happens to be the anniversary of  Loving v. Virginia, which overturned the ban on interracial marriage. Oh the irony. (again from Americablog).


Rockstar Energy Drink threatens gay blogger with lawsuit over boycott

activism, lgbt 1 Comment »

Rockstar Energy DrinkRockstar, Inc., the company that makes Rockstar Energy Drinks, has threatened to sue the LGBT blog The Bilerco Project for alleged inaccuracies in a post which called for a boycott of the popular product. The CEO of Rockstar, Inc. is Russell Weiner, son of the notoriously anti-gay radio personality Michael “Savage” Weiner. The claimed inaccuracies were that Rockstar Energy Drink was co-founded by Michael Savage and that he continues to reap profits from the company. From Bilerco.com:

Rockstar’s lawyer complained to me that [guest blogger] Michael’s article contained two inaccurate sentences and that the gist of the article was “Michael Savage is a filthy creep and he has deep connections with Rockstar energy drink.” While the attorney made it perfectly clear he agreed Savage was a disgusting pig, it was unfair to the company to link Rockstar with Savage just because Michael Savage’s son, Russell Weiner, is the current CEO of RockStar.

According to Rockstar’s attorney, Savage only advised his son on the drink and not the company. They dispute that Savage directly profits from sales of the energy drink as well.

However an archived version of the Rockstar website seems to suggest otherwise (archive has been blocked and is no longer available):

“I was very fortunate to have been raised by two of the leading herbalists in the world, Dr. and Mrs. MICHAEL WEINER, Ph.D. … From my earliest walking days, I remember exploring the jungles of the South Pacific on expeditions WITH MY PARENTS. … MY FAMILY HAS taken that spirit and experience – their lifetime journey – and DEVELOPED the most complete, most unique, most powerful, and most honest energy beverage ever created: ROCKSTAR.” – CEO RUSSELL GOLDENCLOUD WEINER

Russell Weiner’s mother, Janet Weiner, wife of Michael Savage, happens to be CFO of Rockstar, Inc. And while Michael Savage may not be “directly” reap profits from the company, the household likely does.

The Bilerco Project is not alone in being targeted by Rockstar’s legal team. They have also contacted a number of other websites about the disputed claims and were successful in shutting down a Facebook group with over 12,000 members that had also called for a boycott of the drink.

Since when is it illegal to call for a boycott? Christian anti-gay groups do it all the time.