Obama Wants The Gay Vote, Sort Of

Obama wants the LGBT vote, insists campaign manager Steve Hildebrand. Just not enough to ask for it. Not directly anyway.

Speaking at the Dem Convention's LGBT caucus yesterday Hildebrand said had this to say:

I believe that our campaign has not done the effective job it needs to do to persuade and convince LGBT voters that Barack Obama is someone who will lead for them, who will fight for them, fight for us. That’s a failure on behalf of our campaign in my opinion, and I've played a role in it. What we need is for all of you to be our voices in our communities and to work tirelessly to give every single day, as much time as you can give, to know Barack’s record and to know John McCain's failed record and to go out and talk to people who care about the future of LGBT people in this country.

Here's the thing. I know Obama's record. And, as I've pointed out recently, that record includes McClurkin and Meeks. But really, aside from that, what is the campaign saying? That McCain is worse than Obama? Yeah, we know. We all know that. We've never said otherwise. But you know what? That old saw is not exactly change I can believe in. It's the same old bullshit I've been hearing for most of my life. And I need something more than that.

But should I expect it? Not according to The Advocate: "For any gay voter waiting to hear someone from the Obama campaign ask for their support, there it was." Really? That's it? Not even a word from the candidate himself? That's nice.

Michelle Obama did speak at the LGBT delegate luncheon on Tuesday, and spoke for nearly 30 minutes. Too bad Michelle isn't running for president. Too bad the man who wants the LGBT vote couldn't deliver that request himself.

As the article also notes, "[t]hree major convention speeches – those of Sen. Hillary Clinton, President Bill Clinton, and Sen. Ted Kennedy – have included references to LGBT Americans." It remains to be seen if Obama will add his name to that list.

To Nora Ephron And Friends

Nora Ephron has a new post up at Huffington lambasting Hillary Clinton for last night's performance. Was Ephron unhappy with Clinton being deferential, strong, gracious, persuasive, or any of those other fine and appropriate adjectives Liss used? No. Ephron's ire is with what Clinton didn't do last night. (You know, aside from Clinton generally being an opportunistic narcissist.)

...She never once referred to Roe vs. Wade. She never once mentioned choice. She never once said the truth, which is that any Hillary supporter who doesn't understand that this issue alone is the reason to vote for Obama has no business pretending to be a Democrat.

Ah yes, there we are. Again. Roe. Roe! Blah blah blah. It's "this issue alone" that, according to Ephron, should define Democrats, and by extension, the Left as a whole. But I'm going to kindly disagree with that. (For the record, I am an unreserved ally in defending women's reproductive rights, and will do everything I can to make sure that all women have affordable, safe access to every reproductive choice that should be available to them, but Roe is an issue will never affect me the way it will women.) I'm a gay man, and so refer Mrs. Ephron to one Donnie McClurkin. And when she's done making herself familiar with McClurkin, I'd like to point her toward James T. Meeks.

You see, there are other things that are important to me; this isn't a one issue election. And I have a very big problem voting for a candidate that uses anti-gay bigots as part of their campaign, regardless of the threat McCain may pose to Roe v. Wade.

But that's just me.

While we're on the subject of things that are important to different people, let me address the Obama supporters out there who insist on repeatedly telling me how wonderful their candidate is, while dismissing Clinton out of hand. Yes, you like him. I get that. That's okay. That's your choice. I know you had lots of very good reasons, legitimate reasons, you've supported him instead of Clinton (or Edwards, or whomever). So, by that very same token, I'd hope you be able to see that I, and everyone else, had very good reasons, legitimate reasons, for supporting someone else.

The Geek

This is an odd one. For a supposed sex flick, there's not too much screwing going on, and what of it there is features a guy in Sasquatch suit. And as interesting as that may sound, it isn't at all.

I'm not an expert or anything, but if seven minutes of your fifteen minute film consists of footage of people walking, and your film isn't about people walking, then something is terribly, terribly wrong. You see, this movie is about Bigfoot. This movie is about fucking. This movie is about Bigfoot fucking.

The Geek opens with some text about Sasquatch, and footage from someone's home movies, seemingly taken while on vacation in the Pacific Northwest. This partially explains the credit "Filmed on Location in Washington, Oregon and Alberta." Either that or my copy was missing a few reels*. The text is followed by narration about Sasquatch. Yes, this film is about Bigfoot, in case you missed that. Just don't expect to see him anytime soon.

Oh, and then comes the walking. And walking. And walking. And walking. And walking. And walking. And walking. All this accompanied by stock music. Six hikers, three men and three women, traverse up hills, through trees, into the brush.

After half the film is taken up with footage of them walking, the hikers finally stumble upon the first evidence of Sasquatch. The leader of the expedition describes it as a footprint, and we'll take his word for it that's what the ripple in the dirt is. A few moments later, they find a pile of Bigfoot turds and decide this must be the beast's camp.

And they're right.

As they watch the nearby tree line, they suddenly spy Bigfoot. Quite clearly it's just a guy in a very fake gorilla suit sans the head, with hair glued on his face. He grunts and growls, in his poorly-dubbed way, but he doesn't frighten the hikers. No, if he did that, there'd be no Bigfoot fucking, would there?

So, one of the hiker guys grabs one of his lady friends by the hand and pulls her toward Bigfoot. He coaxes her into making contact with the beast. Demurely, she approaches and holds out her delicate hand. Bigfoot sniffs her politely, then, overcome, shoves her to the ground.

The creature rips her panties off, flips her over on her belly and mounts her Bigfoot style. (N.B.: Bigfoot style is identical to doggy style.) The young lady tries to resist at first, but soon enough her expression changes to one of ecstasy. Yup, this girl likes the Bigfoot cock. Now, let me tell you, Bigfoot isn't going to be penning any books on the technique of lovemaking, as he's spent and done in about a minute.

It's only then that the three men in the party attempt to intervene. Of course, they attack the beast with the time-honored strategy of coming at him one by one, thereby allowing him to repeatedly put the smackdown on them. Bigfoot's fighting technique is as nuanced as his lovemaking technique. Whenever one of the hikers approaches, he grabs them by the head and shoves them into the dirt.

This goes on nearly as long as the sex scene, but is only mildly less interesting, and after a time Bigfoot scurries off, presumably bored as the rest of us. It's only then the other hikers lend a hand... to one of the injured men. The girl who got raped, I guess she's on her own.

All that is left now is the very long scene where they all walk out of the woods.

Directed by Unknown • Not Rated • Year Unknown • 15 minutes

*After to a bit of research, I discovered The Geek is available in two versions. There is a longer cut that includes two hardcore sex scenes between the hikers before they meet Bigfoot. I can't imagine this improves the film any.

Just One Question

Is this thing supposed to look like a second-rate video game?

When Leni Met Milli

God bless those fascists and their love of propaganda. The latest news out of China's near-Goebbelsesque spectacle is a small controversy about a young girl deemed "not cute enough" by the State. It seems the precocious child seen belting out "Ode to the Motherland" for the whole world to see, one Lin Miaoke, wasn't actually the vocalist behind the performance. No, that was Yang Peiyi, who had the misfortune of being less cute (because of an imperfect set of teeth, it seems) than über-charmer Miaoke.

"The national interest requires that the girl should have good looks and a good grasp of the song and look good on screen," Chen [Qigang, the ceremony's chief music director] said. "Lin Miaoke was the best in this. And Yang Peiyi's voice was the most outstanding."

Uncensored Chinese bloggers are at odds over the decision:

On the side of dissent (soon to be quashed), a middle-aged retail worker laments: "This is like a voice-over for a cartoon character. Why couldn't they pick a kid who is both cute and a good singer? This damages the reputation of both kids for their future, especially the one lip-synching. Now everyone knows she's a fraud. Who cares if she's cute?"

But sucking up to the Politburo, a Beijing-area marketer responds: "I can understand why they picked the prettier girl. They need to maintain a certain aesthetic beauty during the opening ceremonies. This situation is not so bad, especially since it gives two people an opportunity to shine rather than just one."

So, what say you? Fraud or a case for aesthetic beauty?

Meant To Be A Joke

We talked at length earlier today about racism, specifically in regards to the Chinese and their hosting of the Olympics. Coincidentally, while we were knee-deep in this conversation, this charming little gem appeared in my inbox at work, courtesy of a co-worker:

FREE TICKETS AND ALL EXPENSES PAID INCLUDING AIR FARE TO THE 2008 OLYMPIC GAMES IN BEIJING, CHINA

To participate is easy - just view the attached photo, correctly answer the following questions and send in your answers.

1. Which student seems to appear tired / sleepy?
2. Which ones are male twins?
3. Which ones are the female twins?
4. How many women are in the group?
5. Which one is the teacher?
6. Which two just finished a joint?


I guess you're not going either !

To which I tersely replied:

hey betty*

i found this "joke" racist and offensive. please do me a favor and don't forward any more of these emails.

thanks so much,

deeky

cc: Manager, Department Head

I don't have anything brilliant to say here, partly because it should be obvious to anyone with half a brain how offensive this "joke" really is (that it throws sexism in there on top of the racism is just a bonus), and partly because other posters and commentors here have already put it in words far more eloquently than I have or even could. But it is painfully clear to me, no great revelation this, that we've a long way to go before we can say racism is no longer an issue in this country. Anyone who doesn't believe that can come clean out my inbox for me.

* Name changed to protect the guilty.

The Lost Weekend

If you're curious to know what the weekend was like with Liss and Spudsy staying at Château Deeky, you just need to watch the following video. It, more than anything, captures perfectly the early-August zeitgeist of rum-drunk conversation, late night dinners, and the nine-thousandth variation of "lol your (insert sophomoric joke here)."



I had a great weekend, you two. Come back soon.

Cuba

Jude
Cuba
2008

Anything I say about this record would probably pale in comparison to Jude's own words about it:

Please buy this CD and support my artistic lifestyle :) Or buy two and support me while giving a friend the musical equivalent of a hug and then a little jumping up and down together. Because I'm told that's what it is... Or buy TEN and whimsically open up a music store in your neighborhood. Oh, you'll go broke in time, but not before you've made all kinds of new friends and heard tons of cool music. Plus, some bands will come by and give you free t-shirts and stuff. And maybe the quiet guy from the sandwich shop next door - or the girl who works across the street whom everybody wonders about because she's so pretty but never talks to anyone and seems a little sad - will start dropping by for little talks.

Then maybe start bringing sandwiches by and having lunch with you on the counter by the register. And more sweet stuff like that, until one day you end up in a crazy make-out session in the front of the store. Then that'll probably be weird for a little while. Or maybe it'll be awesome and the start of your new life together. It's your choice, really. Music changes everything...

That says all you need to know about Jude's songwriting, really. Romance, humor, and a great voice.

Holy Ghost in the Machine

I never understood those "In case of Rapture, this car will be unmanned" bumper stickers. Truthfully I never understood anything about the Rapture. So, what, Jesus is going to suck all the True Believers up to Heaven, and leave all us sinners and unsaved down on Earth to get smacked around by Satan? And everyone Left Behind™ will, after seven years of the Tribulation, go to Hell? Except those who decide to become Christians in the meantime. Correct? They get to go to Heaven too, right? (That's the whole point of all those books, isn't it?)

See, it's that big exception that always gets me. Undermines the whole concept of faith. But nevermind: this post is no more about faith than it is about Dog the Bountyhunter's über-skanky mullet.

The other thing about the Rapture is how so many are conviced they're among the chosen getting vacuumed up by Jesus. Always makes me think about that old-timey spiritual "Everybody Talkin' 'Bout Heaven Ain't Goin' There." Which could be a serious flaw in this service:

For forty bucks a year the good folks at You've Been Left Behind will ensure your unrepentant loved ones and business contacts (and Facebook friends) will receive an email from you after the Rapture, just to let them know how fucked they are.

Aside from telling them to get right with God, you could also send them documents to grant them power of attorney, and give them domain over all your worldly goods. You know, so they can sell them and go on one last coke-and-cocksucking-binge before they're barcoded by the Lord of Lies.

(This could put you in a bind though, if you happen to be unlucky enough not to get the evite to God's Big Going Away Party. Imagine sitting there a week after the Rapture to find out you've turned over all your assets to your burnout brother Marty? Not only have you not been Rapturized you've also given your house the guy who picked a fistfight with your father two Thanksgivings ago before tearing ass down the street in his primered Z-28, beer in one hand, cigarette in the other, neither on the steering wheel.)

Here's how the service works internally: Everyday four red-state dwellers scattered about God's Favorite Country™ (Take that, Israel!) must log into the You've Been Left Behind server. If three of the four fail to log in, the server assumes they've gone to heaven and (after another three day failsafe, just to be sure everyone's not at a Promise Keepers meeting) lets loose with its emails.

But what happens if, like the song says, everybody talkin' 'bout heaven ain't goin' there and all those righteous server guards are still sitting around Pensacola come R-Day because of that porn they downloaded back in 2002? What then? Who sends them emails saying they've been left behind?

Slut-Shaming: L.A. Edition

Is this 1953? Why is my head suddenly filled with images of Dudley Smith once again running things in L.A.? Of course, he's not and all I've got is real life LAPD Chief William Bratton running his mouth.

Recently a measure was introduced by the City Council to put tighter reins on the paparazzi. But the proposal is an "unnecessary farce" according to Bratton. Why? Well, you see, there'd be no trouble with the paparazzi if the famous womenfolk of Los Angeles "started wearing clothes and behaving." Umm… okay.

In an interview yesterday with NBC Bratton said:

"If you notice, since Britney started wearing clothes and behaving; Paris is out of town not bothering anybody anymore, thank God, and evidently, Lindsay Lohan has gone gay, we don't seem to have much of an issue."

See? It's all the women's fault. It's not like male celebrities ever get drunk and crash their cars and injure two people and end up on the surgeon's table being sewn back together. Hell, that type of thing didn't even happen just this week. No, men, in Bratton's view apparently, don't misbehave. I guess that's just boys being boys. That's different.

And really, the paparazzi aren't vultures either. Like moths to a flame, they're merely lured to celebs by the siren song that is their bad behavior. You know how it is, they just can't help themselves. If only women would just stop dressing provocatively and going outside and visiting restaurants and such, the paparazzi would surely just leave them alone. Right? Right.

(By the way, what the hell does "evidently Lindsay Lohan has gone gay" even mean? I'm trying to wrap my head around the connection between "going gay" (as if there's such a thing to begin with) and "behaving." I'm also trying to wrap me head around the news that Lohan has "gone gay." Did she come out as a lesbian recently? Oh, nevermind. I'm sure I don't care.)

(Thanks to Liss for the awesome Photoshop job.)