I’m so sick of low-lifes treating dogs like disposable items. The rapper known as DMX (real name Earl Simmons), built his bad-ass image by filling his videos with four-wheelers, motorcycles and pit bulls; he’s one of so many losers out there clearly overcompensating for some severe personal shortcomings—and giving American Pit Bull Terriers a terrible, undeserved reputation as some sort of macho, dangeous dog. Well, now DMX can’t use dogs to pump up his ego anymore because of the cruelty charges that he has plead guilty to. See ya, DMX; hope you enjoy your 90 days in the Arizona pokey.
The report from an Arizona courtroom on Tuesday about rapper DMX sounded oddly familiar to the raid on Michael Vick’s home in 2007 for dog fighting and animal cruelty. The 38 year-old rapper, plead guilty to drug, theft and animal cruelty charges during his day in court. He will serve at least 90 days in jail for his offenses and has agreed not to own any animals in the future.
The report from an Arizona courtroom on Tuesday about rapper DMX sounded oddly familiar to the raid on Michael Vick’s home in 2007 for dog fighting and animal cruelty. The 38 year-old rapper, plead guilty to drug, theft and animal cruelty charges during his day in court. He will serve at least 90 days in jail for his offenses and has agreed not to own any animals in the future.
The rapper, whose real name is Earl Simmons was, arrested in August 2008 when police raided his home in Maricopa County after someone reported possible animal abuse. They found the bodies of three dead dogs that had been buried in a shallow grave and another twelve malnourished Pit bull terriers at the house. The starving dogs had been left in the hot desert sun without food or water.
...DMX has featured the Pit bull dogs in his music videos, but there was also a question in the mind of the court whether some of the dogs had been used for dog fighting. In the past the rapper has supported the illegal and inhumane activity and some of the deceased dogs found at his home had bite marks on their bodies.
Speaking of animal cruelty the dogs confiscated from NFL player Michael Vick are discussed in the cover story in the December 29, 2008 issue of Sports Illustrated by Jim Gorant, “The Healing Touch: What happened to Michael Vick’s dogs?” What happened was that they were rescued, rehabbed, and many rehomed, others had to go to sanctuaries, others are struggling to trust humans again after being so abused.
47 of the 51 Vick dogs were saved. (Two died while in the shelters; one was destroyed because it was too violent; and another was euthanized for medical reasons.) Twenty-two dogs went to Best Friends, where McMillan and his staff chart their emotional state daily; almost all show steady improvement in categories such as calmness, sociability and happiness. McMillan believes 17 of the dogs will eventually be adopted, and applicants are being screened for the first of those. The other 25 have been spread around the country; the biggest group, 10, went to California with BAD RAP. Fourteen of the 25 have been placed in permanent homes, and the rest are in foster care.
One of the sad things about this story is that organizations that purportedly work for fair treatment of animals wanted the Vick dogs destroyed. More after the jump.
How about this deserved treatment for the Catholic church’s sick conspiracy—Papa Ratzi’s boys in Connecticut are being charged under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), just like a bust of an organized crime family. This is a first use of the law in the state to address the criminal activity of members of the Catholic clergy.
The lawsuit says the Norwich Diocese, its former bishop, Daniel Reilly, and its current vicar general, the Rev. Thomas McBride, should be held accountable under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act — more commonly known as RICO — for conspiring to cover up the criminal conduct of abusive priests.
The complaint was brought by a Connecticut woman, identified only as “Jane Doe,” who alleges that she was molested by the Rev. Thomas W. Shea, now deceased, in 1976. Shea has been accused of sexually abusing at least 16 girls in the 11 parishes he served in the Norwich Diocese.
According to published reports and the current lawsuit, Shea was transferred numerous times from the time of the first complaints, in the 1950s, until he was placed on leave by Reilly in 1983. Reilly, who retired as bishop of the Worcester, Mass., diocese in 2004, was bishop of the Norwich Diocese from 1975 to 1994.
In addition to citing the details of Shea’s history, the lawsuit gives examples of five other cases involving priests who have been the subject of abuse accusations, including the Revs. Bruno Primavera, Robert Marcantonio, Peter Inzerillo, Richard Buongirno and Bernard Bissonnette. In all of the cases cited, according to the lawsuit, the priests were transferred to new parishes after sexual abuse complaints were made against them, at which point they abused again.
...The lawsuit accuses the defendants of “intentionally, recklessly and/or negligently” concealing the criminal conduct of certain priests, failing to report criminal conduct, obstructing justice, evading criminal investigation, prosecution and liability, bribing victims to keep criminal conduct secret and engaging in mail and/or wire fraud, among other things.
Just mind-blowing. Former Constitution shredder Alberto Gonzalestold the WSJ that he hasn’t found gainful employment (or a publisher for this fish wrapper) and blames everyone except himself for f*cking up and politicizing the Justice Department.
The onetime Bush Attorney General admitted Tuesday that “skittish” law firms won’t hire him after his departure under fire from the Justice Department surrounding his role in the political firings of nine US Attorneys. He says he considers himself a victim of the “war on terror,” though his firing actually came after what seemed to be a war on US Attorneys who didn’t cleave to Administration policies.
Sounding dumbfounded, the 53-year-old former judge and corporate lawyer told the Wall Street Journal, “What is it that I did that is so fundamentally wrong, that deserves this kind of response to my service?”
He says he’s delivered a few paid speeches, done mediation work and arbitration.
In the interview, he also said he’s writing a book but hasn’t yet found a publisher. He also sounded flummoxed by the amount of rancor leveled at his stewardship of the Justice Department, saying he wasn’t the one to blame.
“For some reason, I am portrayed as the one who is evil in formulating policies that people disagree with,” Gonzales said. “I consider myself a casualty, one of the many casualties of the war on terror.”
Jon Perr over at Perrspectives does a nice summary on this, including Gonzales’ view of the infamous thuggish visit to “extremely ill and disoriented” former Attorney General John Ashcroft’s hospital bed (following) emergency gall bladder surgery trying to get the ailing man’s John Hancock on renewal of Bush’s illegal domestic surveillance program.
He has a lot to offer a company like Wal-Mart. If someone asks him where to return merchandise, he could tell them he doesn’t recall, or better yet, say something like, “You did not buy that here; you built it in your garage,” or “Uh, you’re at the wrong place. This isn’t Wal-Mart. Nancy Pelosi switched our signs during the night.”
High school music teacher Matthew Cox didn’t make it home to Michigan for Christmas. Instead, he was allegedly murdered by one of his own students. On December 20, the 32-year-old Cox picked up Basic High School student Juan Aguirre and his brother Jose Delatorre and took them back to his house in Henderson.
The brothers told police in the report that they played video games with Cox. Before leaving, however, they say Cox went upstairs with Juan. Juan says that while they were alone, his teacher became sexual with him and made him feel uncomfortable.
OK, now here is where the garbage defense unravels; the thugs choke Cox for 10 minutes, until he stops moving, and tie up his hands and feet. Do the the sexually terrorized young men call 911? Do they run to their home and ask for help? No.
Jose drove them back to Cox’s house, where the two teens stole his electronics. The brothers left Cox’s dead body on his couch and Juan says he kissed his teacher’s cheek before they left. The teens say they didn’t mean to hurt him, they just wanted to rob Cox. Juan also told police that their mother helped them to hide Cox’s car at a local casino.
As I mentioned above, gay panic worked in a case in Grand Rapids, Michigan in April; Steve Scarborough was charged with felony murder and faced mandatory life in prison without parole for the murder of Victor Manious. Mind you, Scarborough admitted in a taped confession that after an alleged sexual advance by Manious, Scarborough hit Manious with a bat, stuffed him in a car trunk, then went on a four-day binge, using the dead man’s cell phone and credit cards for shopping sprees, gas and air fare to Texas.
What was the verdict? Voluntary manslaughter, which carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison. The jury was aware that Scarborough had a previous criminal record, but obviously believed that he was a victim of an assault by Manious and the victim must have had it coming to him.
Let’s hope this kind of defense can be put to bed in 2009. I won’t hold my breath.
Frederick Clarkson has a great piece up, “The Religious Right isn’t going anywhere,” that gives a roundup some of the more rancid fundnut activities in 2008, along with commentary that these creationism proponents and bedroom and womb peepers will continue the culture wars for years to come, focusing on throwing up roadblocks at the state level, since they aren’t going to get much accomplished at the federal level with the regime change. Here are his Snapshots from the Culture War in the States this year:
* Anti-marriage-equality initiatives prevailed in Arizona, Florida and California in 2008. Fueled with funding from politically animated Mormons, Catholics and Protestant evangelicals at the urging of religious leaders, the initiatives passed, and for the first time in American history, rolled back a court-ordered civil rights advance.
* While Rhode Island and New York recognize the validity of same-sex marriages from other states, the 1996 federal Defense of Marriage Act allows states to refuse to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages. The Supreme Court has so far declined to hear constitutional challenges to DOMA. So far, 30 states have passed anti-marriage-equality initiatives; and 10 states passed statutory DOMAs.
* New York and New Jersey: The conservative religious coalition that passed the stunning reversal on marriage equality in California plans to take the battle to these eastern states.
* Constitutional Convention initiative in Connecticut: Every 20 years, the state is required to have an initiative asking the voters if it is time for a state constitutional convention. Following the state’s Supreme Court legalization of same-sex marriage, the Religious Right and the Catholic Church seized on the initiative, purchasing a large, last-minute TV ad campaign. While this effort was unsuccessful, we can expect further battles in Connecticut.
* Failed efforts to get other anti-abortion or anti-gay initiatives on the ballot: Montana, Arkansas and Massachusetts. Even in losing, the Religious Right has considerable capacity to keep its issues on the front burner.
* Texas: The elected State Board of Education appointed three prominent “intelligent design” advocates to a six-member science-review panel. The chairman of the SBOE wrote in an op-ed, “Science education has become a culture war issue” and that the claims of scientists “will be challenged by creationists.”
The final nail in the coffin to the dignity and civil rights of the 18,000 same-sex couples who married in California. The proponents of Prop. 8 have filed a motion (Strauss v. Horton, S168047) asking the Supreme Court to nullify all existing same-sex marriages. It makes you sick. BTW, Ken Starr, of the salacious, blue dress-sniffing Starr Report, will argue before the court on behalf of the haters. When will we get to vote on his marriage?
The Yes on 8 campaign filed a brief arguing that because the new law holds that only marriages between a man and a woman are recognized or valid in California, the state can no longer recognize the existing same-sex unions. The document reveals for the first time that opponents of same-sex marriage will fight in court to undo those unions that already exist.
“Proposition 8’s brevity is matched by its clarity. There are no conditional clauses, exceptions, exemptions or exclusions,” reads the brief co-written by Kenneth Starr, dean of Pepperdine University’s law school and the former independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.
The campaign submitted the document in response to three lawsuits seeking to invalidate Proposition 8, the constitutional amendment adopted last month that overruled the court’s decision in May that had legalized gay marriage in the nation’s most populous state.
...The Supreme Court could hear arguments in the litigation as soon as March. The measure’s backers announced Friday that Starr, a former federal judge and U.S. solicitor general, had signed on as their lead counsel and would argue the cases.
Meanwhile, California Attorney General Jerry Brown has changed his position and is now urging the state Supreme Court to overturn Proposition 8:
After studying the matter, Brown concluded that “Proposition 8 must be invalidated because the amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification.”
Backers of Proposition 8 expressed anger at Brown’s decision not to honor the will of voters, who approved the measure in November.
“It’s outrageous,“said Frank Schubert, campaign manager for Proposition 8. “it is unconstitutional to deny a fundamental right, said Equality California Executive Director Geoff Kors. “We are very pleased that upon review of the law, he has moved from his previous statements that he would defend Prop 8. As the state’s highest attorney, Jerry Brown has done his job today to defend the Constitution and protect the rights of minority groups, including the more than 18,000 same-sex couples who married in California.”
“Attorney General Brown’s position that Proposition 8 should be invalidated demonstrates that he is a leader of courage and conviction,” to defend the Constitution and protect the rights of minority groups, including the more than 18,000 same-sex couples who married in California
A reaction from one of the commenters at my pad in reaction to this news that their marriage will be one of the ones dissolved is below the fold.
After a while, it had to have become obvious to everyone in Illinois that talking to Rod Blagojevich about anything involving his office was like talking to a pedophile about the location of the nearest Toys R Us. It’s why this idea that Jesse Jackson, Jr. was participating in some sort of bribery scandal didn’t really seem to pass muster: in Illinois, the two people least likely to get away with anything would be the son of Jesse Jackson talking to the world champion target of federal investigations.
The news that Jackson, Jr. was working with federal investigators regarding Blago comes as little surprise, then (except to sundry wingnuts). What’s most amazing about this entire thing is that it now appears as if Blago was not only talking to anyone he could find about potential bribes, but virtually everyone was wired in response - he’s the kind of guy who brings a case of beer to an AA meetup and thinks everyone’s staring at him because he reeks of awesomeness, rather than, say, stale hops.
They are using the prosecutor as a “fig leaf” to avoid answering questions just now, [Robert] Luskin (as in Karl Rove’s lawyer Robert Luskin) said. They could just as easily have decided that assuring the public about their actions is more important than acceding to the prosecutor’s request.
Perhaps the single greatest change from the Bush administration to the Obama administration will be that the latter will no longer act with the balls-out disregard for anything resembling the law when it’s politically convenient to ignore it. I kind of miss the days when Presidents didn’t just openly dismantle federal investigations to get better press coverage. It was a symbol of a more innocent time, when we listened to things called “compacted discs” and proto-hipsters actually considered wearing flannel. Magical.
Law enforcement agencies in Canada are banning the shock device in the wake of a study by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation:
The study includes a medical analysis that concluded someone shot with a Taser could face as high as a 50 percent chance of cardiac arrest.
The Taser company, however, still says its weapons can’t kill.
“It is unfortunate that false allegations based on scientifically flawed data can create such uncertainty,” Steve Tuttle, a Taser vice president, told The Arizona Republic.
Stories of Taser-related deaths have stacked up over the years, many involving police officers who never realized the harm their Taser could cause.
A man described as “emotionally disturbed” fell to his death after police Tasered him on fire escape. The officers who gave the order took a Glock 9mm from the locker room and shot himself in the head.
And, as I blogged earlier this week, an Oklahoma man in diabetic shock was Tased first, with questions asked later.
El Reno police officers approached a vehicle that had spun-out on the interstate. Inside was a man who they thought was drunk or on drugs. The man was wrestled out of his truck on Interstate 40 because he wasn’t cooperating with police. Moments later police tazed the man.
After several attempts officers were finally able to get the combative man into custody. What they don’t realize is the 53-year-old wasn’t drunk or on drugs. He was in severe diabetic shock. In fact, his blood sugar level at the time was 11.
...“Eleven is pretty low blood sugar and he would not be able to process those commands coming from the officers,” explained Dr. Mary Ann Bauman.
I recently received an email from the Reverend Randall J. Keeney, who is an Episcopal priest in Greensboro, NC. Keeney and two retired priests will introduce a resolution at the Episcopal church’s convention in January 2009 that will surely roil the gathering. While it is self-evident to reality-based people that civil and religious marriage are separate matters, it’s quite controversial in the church for faith leaders to point out the obvious. Keeney is putting his position on the line since he’s still a member of the clergy at St. Barnabas.
I was given permission by Rev. Keeney to publish the resolution—it will go out in preconvention mailings beginning early in January. Rev. Keeney wrote to me:
The purpose of the resolution is to separate church and state in the contracting of civil marriage. One of the main issues in debates about marriage is the fact that it is tied to the ordained clergy of the Christian, Jewish, Muslim, and “you name it” faith traditions. The result is that arguments about marriage become enmeshed with theology and theologically based bigotry.
...My hope is that by separating the issues, people in the church can be freed up to challenge the civil rights aspects of marriage. This really is about two separate issues: “rights” and “rites”. Many clergy, churches, and dioceses around the country can and do bless relationships. But if the state won’t contract them as marriage, there is really no change the status of relationships.
Take a look at the frank language of the resolution - it pulls no punches in challenging the church and goes further by calling for the church to stop blessing civil marriages as well.
Resolution Concerning Clerical Presidency in Civil Marriage
Resolved that this 193rd Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina hereby encourages clergy, pursuant to Title I, Canon 18, Section 4 of the Canons of The Episcopal Church to decline to function as agents of the State of North Carolina or other states in the contracting of Civil Marriage.
Resolved further, nothing in this resolution shall be interpreted to discourage clergy from blessing marriages that have been established by secularly appointed state agents.
Furthermore, the 193rd Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina resolves to ask the next General Convention of the Episcopal Church to disallow clerics from acting as agents of all states in the contracting of Civil Marriage.
the Rev. Randall J. Keeney St. Barnabas Greensboro, NC
It’s nice to see rapist/murderer-releasing ex-governor, Baptist minister-without-a-theology-degree and failed GOP prez candidate Mike Huckabee engaging in the Oppression Olympics when it comes to doling out civil rights. In this appearance on The View, the former Arkansas chief executive thinks homos should get a taste of the Bull Connor violence in order to rise to the level of respect to beg to receive the same rights as other Americans. (h/t JMG):
HUCKABEE: It’s a different set of rights. People who are homosexuals should have every right in terms of their civil rights, to be employed, to do anything they want. But that’s not really the issue. I know you talked about it and I think you got into it a little bit early on. But when we’re talking about a redefinition of an institution, that’s different than individual civil rights.
BEHAR: Well, segregation was an institution, too, in a way. It was right there on the books.
HUCKABEE: But here is the difference. Bull Connor was hosing people down in the streets of Alabama. John Lewis got his skull cracked on the Selma bridge.
Here I am about to kick back and relax my weary bones and then this completely deranged document lands in my inbox.
After today’s news about the California Supreme Court’s decision to review Prop 8’s constitutionality, we got wind of this amicus brief filed in support of letting Prop 8 stand from some outfit called The Kingdom of Heaven World Divine Mission. You have to read it to believe it…it’s filed on behalf of God and His Plan. I’m not sh*tting you.
I. OVERVIEW STATEMENT OF FACTS
Throughout the world, each and all countries have constitutions and federal laws. These laws must be enforced accordingly. In the United States of America, we have the United States Constitution and federal laws. In addition, each and all states in the Union have State Constitutions and State laws.
Whether a law is created under the United States Constitution or an individual state’s constitution, the enforcement of all laws is vested to the people!
The House and Senate members represent people, and they must always act on the desires of the majority of their constituents.
Throughout the world, it is the responsibility of judges and justices to interpret the laws accurately, and they must then issue their opinions based on the laws and the merits of these cases. Judges and justices are prohibited from making laws from the bench.
The power of making laws in the United States and State of California is vested to the people, not to judges or justices. On November 4, 2008, the majority or 52% of California voters voted “YES” on the Proposition 8 initiative and Constitutional Amendment: Marriage between one man and one woman! These 52 % of voters obeyed the order of the Almighty Eternal Creator of the earth and human race as recorded in the Holy Bible in Genesis 1: 26-27.
The Almighty Eternal Creator created all planets, including the earth and all living creatures, including human souls. Through elections and appointments, Global government leaders and officials are selected by the Almighty Eternal Creator to serve the people. The Almighty Eternal Creator is the sole owner of the earth and everything above, below, and in it. Global government leaders work under authority of the Almighty Eternal Creator. Therefore, throughout the world, government legislatures and people must make laws under the Almighty Eternal Creator’s Laws. Global government leaders, judges, justices, and law enforcement officials must practice the sole owner of the earth’s Laws in their daily practice.
The Kingdom is just getting warmed up. The unhinged document continues below the fold, as it goes into detail about why the Almighty Eternal Creator’s Laws overrule global government laws when it comes to the homos.
One of the most grating habits picked up by the mainstream media and politicians is talking about a sort of universal “faith” as some sort of great good shared by all decent Americans. It’s grating because it was picked up from right wing sources that are trying to trick people that belong to the various faiths that aren’t stripes of socially conservative Christianity to believe they should align themselves with right wing Christians against atheists. Mitt Romney was poised to exploit this, delivering a speech that said just that when his Mormonism became an issue. I hate it, because it’s misleading. The natural allies to religious people not in the religious right are atheists, secular humanists, and the whole hodge-podge of disbelieving grumpypants who want the government to be scrupulously neutral on the subject of religion. Because if you aren’t in an approved religion, then guess what? The government isn’t going to respect your faith once they have license to put the religious over the non. Even if you’re religious, you’re getting grouped with us anyway, because having the “wrong” religion is just as bad as having no religion at all. (I highly recommend this recent podcast of Skepticality featuring a speech by Lori Lipman Brown for more thoughts on this one. She explains, interestingly, that the people to reach out to are Wiccans and Unitarians, who generally don’t get included in the “people of faith” wide net and are well aware that the net will get much smaller once the broad net has performed its job.)
Yesterday, the Supreme Court listened to arguments on a case that I suspect will be controversial no matter what happens, and will therefore demonstrate that the term “people of faith”—-you know, real Americans instead of the fake atheist ones—-only seemed to be broad.
Out of the 43 men who have been raised to the office of the presidency, exactly 43 have been some version of professed Christian. How genuine or thorough their beliefs were or are is, of course, an area of debate, but it’s simply inarguable that each of them claimed to adhere to some belief in Christ as a divine savior. According to Ken Blackwell, American Christians are to this day persecuted, and should rise up and take to the streets to fight for their beliefs and representation in our public discourse.
Out of the 43 men who have been raised to the office of the presidency, exactly one has been black. We can be pretty sure of that. According to Ken Blackwell, racism’s pretty much dead, and black people should stop whining about how hard things are for them.
Again, to clarify: Christianity being a de facto qualification for the highest office in the land is indicative of how many obstacles there are to Christian advancement in public life; one black president in nearly two and a half centuries means that all barriers to black advancement have fallen. There is one thing about Blackwell’s argument that deserves a deeper look, though, and it’s this:
There was no mandate to change our social culture.
The most visible social issue in this election is marriage. State constitutional amendments protecting traditional marriage passed in all three states where it was on the ballot. While such measures passing in Florida and Arizona is no surprise, the fact that it also passed in California, a liberal state, is proof that the vast majority of Americans regard marriage as a union between a man and woman.
Another cultural measure is racial preferences. The U.S. Supreme Court has struck down racial quotas as unconstitutional. In 2003, the Court also struck down a race-preference program that resembled a quota by giving extra points to the college applicants because of race. And in 2007, the Court also struck down a public-school districting program that made race a major factor in determining which school a student attends.
The thread of thought inherent in Blackwell’s remarks hearkens back to this famous passage:
The argument also assumes that social prejudices may be overcome by legislation, and that equal rights cannot be secured to the negro except by an enforced commingling of the two races. We cannot accept this proposition. If the two races are to meet upon terms of social equality, it must be the result of natural affinities, a mutual appreciation of each other’s merits, and a voluntary consent of individuals.
That’s Plessy v. Ferguson.
It’s hard to look at modern-day arguments against such steps as affirmative action and same sex marriage and not come to the conclusion that this same principle of culture superceding rights still governs the right today. Sure, they’re willing to accept those steps which are universally agreed to have been good for us after the fact (who didn’t support desegregation - except for the parts where they actually made people desegregate?), but Blackwell openly mirrors this rationale. Society (by which we mean his brand of Christian) cannot be forced to recognize the rights or even, necessarily, the humanity of those against whom they are bigoted until such point they decide to do so. Anything else is an unfair incursion upon their liberties, answerable only by social action focused on preserving their right to refuse the recognition of others as full members of society.
You could almost appreciate the originalist adherence to one of the most shameful moments in our nation’s history if it wasn’t coupled with the embrace of a totally ahistorical victimology. We’re supposed to resist the revision of our social history while guided by an even larger and far more dangerous revision of the exact same social history. Being a lying, hateful jackass isn’t justified by the fact that the lie would make your hatred the national pastime.
Joey got a warning because it would look bad for the Toledo Police Department if he got a ticket.
If Barack Obama wants to repeatedly talk about me in his victory speech tonight, I’ve always wanted to really open up my Elantra. Let’s rock - I’m willing to be a pretend lawyer looking to buy a firm I don’t work for. That, or a rocket ship pilot.
UPDATE: Toledo’s handing out riot gear. Well, obviously. You tell Joe the fucking Outlaw Plumber that the law doesn’t apply to him, he’s gonna treat Toledo like his own personal game of Grand Theft Auto.
Great news on two fronts in the fight to ensure marriage equality is preserved in California.
First, a new statewide survey released by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) with funding from The James Irvine Foundation (PDF) has found that Prop 8 is now losing among likely voters, 52 percent to 44 percent.
The gap between likely voters in favor and opposed to Proposition 8 (44% yes, 52% no) has narrowed since September (41% yes, 55% no) and August (40% yes, 54% no). Compared to last month, more Republicans (70% today, 62% September) would vote yes on the measure, which would eliminate the right for same-sex couples to marry that the state Supreme Court granted in May.
Opposition is 4 points lower among Democrats (67% today, 71% September), but 5 points higher among independents (58% today, 53% September). At least half of men, women, Latinos, and whites oppose Proposition 8. Regionally, majorities of likely voters in the San Francisco Bay Area (67%) and Los Angeles (55%) are opposed. But majorities in the Central Valley (54%) and in the “Other Southern California” region that includes Orange, San Diego, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties (52%) favor the measure.
On the more general question of how they feel about allowing gay and lesbian couples to legally marry in California, likely voters are divided, 47 percent in favor and 49 percent opposed. These attitudes are largely unchanged since 2005. In an indication of how strong voters’ motivations are to cast their ballots on this measure, supporters of Proposition 8 are far more likely (69%) than opponents (49%) to say the results are very important.
Those close numbers mean we have to forge ahead in these last few days and that leads to the second bit of great news…
Your generosity since Monday has been overwhelming! 8 Against 8, an effort by eight lesbian bloggers to raise $8,000 in 8 days for the No On 8 campaign reached its goal in three days - at 11:45 PM ET on Wednesday, we went over the top with $8015 in donations! The 8 Against 8 fundraising effort continues through October 27th. Donations can be made at the following URL: http://www.8against8.com. 100% of all donations made through “8 Against 8” goes directly to Equality California’s No on Prop 8 campaign.
Our first donor via PHB has claimed an ad for the effort - reader Chino Blanco’s statement of support will run on the Blend:
The report from an Arizona courtroom on Tuesday about rapper DMX sounded oddly familiar to the raid on Michael Vick’s home in 2007 for dog fighting and animal cruelty. The 38 year-old rapper, plead guilty to drug, theft and animal cruelty charges during his day in court. He will serve at least 90 days in jail for his offenses and has agreed not to own any animals in the future.
Speaking of animal cruelty the dogs confiscated from NFL player Michael Vick are discussed in the cover story in the December 29, 2008 issue of Sports Illustrated by Jim Gorant, “The Healing Touch: What happened to Michael Vick’s dogs?” What happened was that they were rescued, rehabbed, and many rehomed, others had to go to sanctuaries, others are struggling to trust humans again after being so abused.
How about this deserved treatment for the Catholic church’s sick conspiracy—Papa Ratzi’s boys in Connecticut are being 
As I mentioned above, 
After a while, it had to have become obvious to everyone in Illinois that talking to Rod Blagojevich about anything involving his office was like talking to a pedophile about the location of the nearest Toys R Us. It’s why this idea that Jesse Jackson, Jr. was participating in some sort of bribery scandal didn’t really seem to pass muster: in Illinois, the two people least likely to get away with anything would be the son of Jesse Jackson talking to the world champion target of federal investigations. 
One of the most grating habits picked up by the mainstream media and politicians is talking about a sort of universal “faith” as some sort of great good shared by all decent Americans. It’s grating because it was picked up from right wing sources that are trying to trick people that belong to the various faiths that aren’t stripes of socially conservative Christianity to believe they should align themselves with right wing Christians against atheists. Mitt Romney was poised to exploit this, delivering a speech that said just that when his Mormonism became an issue. I hate it, because it’s misleading. The natural allies to religious people not in the religious right are atheists, secular humanists, and the whole hodge-podge of disbelieving grumpypants who want the government to be scrupulously neutral on the subject of religion. Because if you aren’t in an approved religion, then guess what? The government isn’t going to respect your faith once they have license to put the religious over the non. Even if you’re religious, you’re getting grouped with us anyway, because having the “wrong” religion is just as bad as having no religion at all. (
Joey was 
