For Veterans

This came in via a discussion group based in Australia, from an American member. Thanks, Rock, for the information, and I hope readers wills pass it on.

For Veteran's Day, the following are for your information; please share with any active duty military or veterans that you know.

FYI - Veteran's Day Restaurant Freebies - please pass it along

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE!

***Restaurant Freebies*

Applebee's Restaurant - Free dinners to veterans throughout Veterans Day November 11th; selections will be from a new Veterans Day menu.

Chili's - Choose from 6 free entrees.

Outback Steakhouse - Free Blooming Onion and beverage.

Golden Corral- Free buffet dinner from 5-9 p.m. on Nov. 16 to anyone who has ever served in the U.S. military Staff.

In celebration of Veterans Day 11 Nov 2010, Subway is showing its thanks with free six inch subs to all Veterans or Active Duty members.

On Nov. 7, McCormick & Schmick's restaurants will offer a free entrée to military veterans for its 12th annual Veteran's Appreciation Event. Menu picks include such seafood items as parmesan crusted tilapia, roasted cedar plank salmon and almond crusted rainbow trout. "Our Veterans Appreciation Event has become a tradition that our restaurants look forward to each year," said Bill Freeman, CEO of McCormick & Schmick's Seafood Restaurants, in a statement. For more information: www.mccormickandschmicks.com

Krispy Kreme - One free doughnut of any variety.

UNO Chicago Grill- Free entree or individual pizza with an entree or pizza purchase of equal or greater value.

Coushatta Casino Resort - The Louisiana casino and resort is offering a free seven-clans lunch or dinner buffet to veterans or active military.

MarketPlace Grill & Express - Veterans and active-duty military receive free entrees.

Masala Wok - The Northern Virginian restaurant is offering a free entrée to veterans.

Hy-Vee supermarkets - The mid-western supermarket chain is offering a free breakfast to veterans.

Abuelo's Mexican Food Restaurants - All veterans and active-duty military receive a free entree.

Carolina Burgers & BBQ - In Matthews, NC is offering a free meal to all service members and veterans.

*Retail Freebies*

Brides Across America - Provides free wedding gowns to qualified military brides.

Lowe's & Home Depot - Extra 10% off to active-duty military members, National Guard and reserve members, retirees, honorably discharged veterans and immediate family members.

Sam's Club - Over 25,000 Hugo canes will be given away to U.S. veterans in need of mobility assistance. Membership is not required, but supplies are limited, so check with your local store.

Amazon.com - Free "Veterans Day Honor" MP3 album download. The album includes 12 songs by The Bands and Ensembles of the U.S.
Armed Forces.

Cabela's Outdoor Store - Offers their employee discount to all veterans, active-duty military and reserves, law enforcement, fire and EMS personnel Nov. 11-12. Discounts vary from 5% to 50%, depending on the item (Springfield)

Build-a-Bear Workshop - Members of the armed services including the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Coast Guard, and Reserve Officer Training Corps, will receive a 20% discount Nov. 11-15 on any one transaction at Build-A-Bear Workshop.

Dollar General - 10% discount for all veterans, active-duty military,
National Guard and reserve and their immediate families.

Fashion Bug - 20% off all plus-size and misses clothing purchases with a copy of military ID or spouse's military ID.

* Entertainment Freebies*

National parks, forests and monuments - Admission is free to everyone on Veterans Day.

Knott's Berry Farm - Free park admission to U.S. armed forces personnel and a guest during Veteran's Month, November 1-26.

Colonial Williamsburg - Free admission Nov. 6-11 for active-duty military, guard and reservists, retirees, veterans and their dependents.

San Jacinto Museum of History - Free visits to the Observation Deck,
theater, and special exhibit for veterans, active duty military personnel, and their families.

Historic Jamestown - Free admission to veterans, current Armed Forces members and their family members.

Battleship Cove - Free admission and a special ceremony for veterans, active, duty and reservists.

Vicksburg National Military Park - Free admission for all.

Birmingham Museum of Art - Free admission to the ticketed event "Life and Liberty" on Nov. 10-11 for veterans and active military.

Vulcan Park and Museum- In Birmingham, Alabama is offering discounted admission through November to the park and museum.

Green Bay (WI) New Zoo - Free admission to veterans and their families.

Central Florida Zoo - Free admission to the Sanford, Florida zoo with proper ID.

Strategic Air & Space Museum - Free admission for veterans Nov. 11-14 to
the Ashland,Neb. museum.

National Cowboy & Western Heritage Museum - in Oklahoma City offers free admission to veterans and five guests from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Veterans Day.

Natural Elements Spa & Salon - In Chesapeake, Virginia, will provide free services from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. to both active duty and retired military.

LCR vs. US -- Latest Move

LCR has appealed to the Supreme Court to life the Ninth Circuit's stay of District Court Judge Virginia Phillips' injunction. Ari Ezra Waldman has the most detailed analysis I've seen so far.

Today, the Log Cabin Republicans (LCR), through their attorneys at White & Case LLP, filed an application . . . with the Supreme Court to vacate the stay that the Ninth Circuit placed on Judge Virginia Phillips's decision that found the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law (DADT) unconstitutional. It was their next move and a good one, but the odds of success aren't great.

[. . . ]

At the center of LCR's argument to the Supreme Court is that the Ninth Circuit "abused its discretion" when it granted a stay based on incorrect reasoning and a refusal to use the proper legal test for stays. An "abuse of discretion" is a tough standard to meet simply because appellate courts have discretion to issue stays. But what they don't have discretion to do is to grant stays without requiring the party seeking the stay to prove, among other things, a "likelihood of success on the merits." All that means is that in order to properly get the stay at the Ninth Circuit, the government had to prove that it was likely to win its appeal on the merits, likely to keep DADT as good law. The Ninth Circuit, LCR argues, didn't really do that. Nor did the Ninth Circuit engage in the required balancing of harms. Before getting a stay, the government was also supposed to show that any hardship to the military or the government if there were no stay would outweigh any hardship to LCR with a stay. Finally, LCR points out that the Ninth Circuit accepted the government's injury argument based on mere speculation rather than actual evidence.

LCR's argument makes a lot of sense to me, especially since the Ninth Circuit apparently justified its stay on Judge Phillips's decision being at odds with other court decisions on DADT and generally failed to require the government to justify a stay. A stay is an example of "extraordinary relief," meaning that you don't get it just because you want it, you have to prove a lot -- meet a "heavy burden" -- to get it. At the Ninth Circuit, the government arguably did not meet that burden.

Via Joe Jervis, here's the filing:

Application to Vacate

The consensus seems to be that it's up to Kennedy now -- either he decides or he pulls in the full court.

Lessons in the Obvious (Updated)

An interesting post from David Neiwert, who's always been one of the more clear-eyed commentators on the Internet, about Patty Murray's victory in Washington and what it means:

But there are more important lessons to be drawn from this. The first and most important: Murray won not by running away from progressive Democratic values -- unlike the Blue Dogs and other Democrats who got wiped out Tuesday night by trying to proffer up Republican Lite agendas -- but by avidly embracing them.

She campaigned with President Obama. Moreover, she sturdily defended her work on the health-care reform and Wall Street reform bills (both of which Rossi wanted to overturn).

It's what most of the "professional left" have been saying for a while: if you're going to run as a Democrat, be a Democrat. The Rahm strategy was a failure from the beginning: electing DINOs might give you numbers, but it's not going to give you votes in Congress. And it's not going to give you votes in the next election. If Republican and right-leaning voters (and those who are really, really unhappy with your record to date) have a choice between a faux-Democrat and a real Republican, what do you think they're going to do?

That idea gets a strong second from Alan Grayson, who, sadly, lost to a loon (the biggest disaster of the election, as far as I'm concerned, but then it's Florida -- what did anyone expect?).

Alan Grayson, the defeated Democratic congressman of "die quickly" fame, went on the offensive Thursday, telling reporters that the Democrats' "appeasement" of Republicans cost them the election.

In an appearance on MSNBC and an interview with Salon.com, Grayson argued that the "enthusiasm gap" that prompted millions of liberal voters to stay home Tuesday happened because the Obama administration and congressional Democrats did not fight hard enough for progressive values.

"Our strategy for two years has been appeasement, and look where it got us," Grayson told MSNBC. "I think Democrats want to see a fighting leadership, they want to see a fighting president — somebody who actually accomplishes good things for constituents."

Duh.

(Here's a recommendation for Grayson from Dan Savage. Sounds like a good idea to me.)

Update: And an excellent analysis from Kerry Eleveld at The Advocate:

The turnout and voting patterns were a symptom of the fact that during his first two years in office, President Barack Obama and his White House delivered nothing short of a true progressive’s most fiendish nightmare: He governed from the middle but failed to enlist enough GOP help to tag them with partial responsibility. Then he simultaneously left the substance of his centrist policies to be framed by the right, who naturally painted his initiatives as dangerously liberal and even socialist in nature.

The result of that toxic formula is that progressives didn’t get much of they wanted and yet the population as a whole has been left to believe that America has jumped off the liberal deep end.

The thing is, it's not like all of this is Monday-morning quarterbacking: we all knew this, we've known it for a while, and we've been talking about it. Obama would rather listen to Republicans, for some reason.

Story of the Week (Updated) (Updated Again) (And Yet Again)

This one is all over the place. This is the world's greatest mom:

It is obvious that I neither abuse nor neglect my children. They are not perfect, but they are learning how to navigate this big, and sometimes cruel, world. I hate that my son had to learn this lesson while standing in front of allegedly Christian women. I hate that those women thought those thoughts, and worse felt comfortable saying them out loud. I hate that ‘pink’ is still called a girl color and that my baby has to be so brave if he wants to be Daphne for Halloween.

And all I hope for my kids, and yours, and those of Moms ABC, are that they are happy. If a set of purple sparkly tights and a velvety dress is what makes my baby happy one night, then so be it. If he wants to carry a purse, or marry a man, or paint fingernails with his best girlfriend, then ok. My job as his mother is not to stifle that man that he will be, but to help him along his way. Mine is not to dictate what is ‘normal’ and what is not, but to help him become a good person.

I hope I am doing that.

And my little man worked that costume like no other. He rocked that wig, and I wouldn’t want it any other way.

Update: I saw a post on this story yesterday but didn't have time to pursue it. Reader Nigel was kind enough to leave a link:



My reading is that the psychologist got cut off at the knees and spent the rest of the segment trying to recover. Hooray for Sarah.

Update II: Here's a bit from Timothy Kincaid that highlights one of Gardere's comments that bothered me:

“I have to tell you, I work with many heterosexual as well as, uh, gay couples and it is the worst nightmare of both the heterosexual and the gay couples to have to fathom that their child may be gay.”

Mmm -- that's an attitude that speaks volumes about Gardere. I don't know what kind of people he's working with, but that statement just doesn't hold water, at least not in this world. I think the man's probably an idiot, and quite possibly not qualified to be doing what he's doing.

Update III: Gardere takes an opportunity to expand his remarks. This makes more sense, but it's still not quite on point:

"What the full statement should have been and what I always say because I do work with straight and gay parents, it is a real issue for them because they are afraid, and this is the part I didn't say and what I should have said, and you can go back and research it and you'll see that I've said it in every other place. And that is my fault and I accept complete responsibility for not saying that. Those parents, even gay parents say it, as controversial as that will sound, do not want their children to have to deal with the pain and the isolation and a lot of the emotional trauma that they have to go through as far as coming to terms with their sexuality. They know that they went through it and they prefer that their kids not go through it. And that's what the full statement should have been."

What's missing from this, and I think what he should have brought up in this context, is the role that parental support plays in that, and how strong support at home goes a long way toward ameliorating that pain and suffering.

So maybe he's not a total idiot.

Wow!

Amazing pictures of a comet passing:



It's weird -- the comet is shaped like a dumbbell. I always just thought of them as lumps.

Net Neutrality

This is bad.

Republican lawmakers largely oppose the idea of Net neutrality. Though a majority of Democratic lawmakers support the issue -- all of the 95 candidates that said they would support Net neutrality on the left-leaning Progressive Change Campaign Committee's website were Democrats -- they have been divided on whether to pass the FCC's proposed legislation.

The widespread Democratic losses made an already uphill battle even tougher. More than a dozen incumbent congressmen who had voted for a similar Net neutrality bill in 2006 were voted out of office on Tuesday, most notably Rep. Rick Boucher, D-Va., a 28-year House veteran.

I can see the way this is going to play out already: you'll either pay more for the stuff you want to access, or you'll learn to live with the stuff your Internet provider decides you can access.

By the way, you'll see some reports that claim that all 95 congressman who support net neutrality -- Democrats all -- lost on Tuesday. If you think about it, that's not possible. (Update: It was not 95 congressman, it was 95 Democratic candidates. That slip-up came from Towleroad, but even so, it strikes me as overstating the case, just a wee bit.)

One Bright Note

The Blue Dogs got creamed. At least the Democrats in the House are all Democrats now.

How do you feel about that, Rahm?

And he's running for mayor. That should be fun.

The Morning After the Morning After

Illinois still doesn't have a governor. The Republicans still control of Congress and the White House. (You can talk about majorities all you want to, but the Republicans have been in control all along.)

I'm going to take a break unless I find an interesting story that has nothing to do with Washington, the election, teabaggers, or politics.

Maybe I'll break Reviews in Brief out of their Sunday slot for a while -- I have a bunch of new stuff.

The Election

I don't have anything to say about it. I don't see that anything has changed much: the Republicans have been in control of Congress for the past two years anyway, and Harry Reid is already nattering about "compromise." We see where that's gotten us.

So please tell me, what exactly is new?

The Election

I'm sick of it. It's been the top story online for the past seventy-jillion years, and I'm over it.

I'm going to vote, and I'm going to vote a straight Democratic ticket because the Republicans are all crazy and pernicious. It's a habit I'd like to be able to break, but not until the Republican party is no longer the party of crazy perniciousness.

Gays in Court

Timothy Kincaid has compiled an excellent summary of the amicus briefs supporting the plaintiffs (now the appellees) in Perry vs. Schwarzenegger. It's quite an impressive roster.

Also follow the links in his last paragraph to the amicus briefs filed by supporters of the defendant-intervenors, now the appellants. They're a scream. It's hard to pick out a favorite from the loony bin, but there's one from NARTH (yep, full of references to outdated and superseded research, with a good dose of Paul Cameron), and good old Mat Staver couldn't keep his fingers out of it. NOM weighs in (of course). There's some pretty funny stuff in there.

The Proponents, even if the court decides they have standing and it goes to a hearing, are going to lose big-time. They just have no case.

Less funny is the Ninth Circuit's decision to stay the district court's injunction against DADT. At the Circuit level, it's all about forms and procedures, but the decision sounds a little sketchy to me.

From Bloomberg:

In a 2-1 decision, the court said it was persuaded by the government’s argument that there could be immediate harm unless there was proper training and guidance in the military and ‘an orderly transition in policy.”

“The public interest in ensuring orderly change of this magnitude in the military -- if that is what is to happen -- strongly militates in favor of a stay,” the court said in yesterday’s order.

The government's argument, based on events of the past ten days and outside evidence, strikes me as thin, at best. There are also references to decisions by other circuits, most of them pre-Lawrence, which as Judge Phillips found (and quite rightly, I think) makes it a whole new ballgame. I'm seeing some over-deference to Congress and the military here.

That one's kind of iffy. If the government loses in the circuit court (which is chancy, I think), Obama would be wise not to appeal. (That's based on the assumption that no matter what happens in today's election, the Senate is going to sit on its hand in the lame-duck session, which seems these days to be what it does best. And here you thought kabuki was Japanese.)

You have to wonder.

Land of equal opportunity -- that's us. Sort of. It's odd, though, how conservative we are in some ways, and I'm not just talking Bible-thumper brand hate politics. Brazil has now elected a woman president. Another area where we don't lead the world, and when you think of some of the countries that have already had women as heads of government, it's sort of interesting. Sure, Iceland and Finland are full of socialists, and so is Germany -- but among the first to have women Prime Ministers were Israel, India, and Sri Lanka. And we all remember Margaret Thatcher, don't we? (Not fondly, by most accounts, but there she was.) And now Argentina and Brazil have both elected women to the highest office.

And yet we've had women as governors and senators, and women have run for president fairly regularly over the past generation or so, but the only serious contender was Hillary Clinton. I sort of wish I had voted for her. I know I'd vote for Nancy Pelosi without blinking -- she's the most effective leader in Washington right now.

Oh, and another thought about Iceland -- not only is the president a woman, she's an open lesbian.

We've got a way to go.

Cluelessness Squared

The anti-gay right in 51 seconds:



I only have one question: Melody, were you born that dumb, or did you have an extra study hall?

Reviews in Brief: Ayano Yamane's Finder, Vol. 1: Target in the Viewfinder

Ayano Yamane was one of my early favorites among mangaka doing yaoi, and Finder is one of her best-known series. Volume 1 has come out in a new edition, so I thought it was worth a try.

This volume is a story collection, with the Finder series forming the core. The title story, the following entry, "Fixer," and the final story, "In the Heat of the Night," all center on a young freelance photographer, Akihito Takabana, who gets his first big scoop -- and manages to run afoul of the crime lord Asami. Takabana is conflicted about the whole thing -- Asami is not the tenderest of lovers, but for some reason, Akihito keeps coming back for more.

The next two stories, "Love Lesson," about a first-year high-schooler who runs afoul of the student council president, and "Plants in Love," about two track stars who discover that their fathers are romantically involved, are pretty much throw-aways. The stories are thin, somewhat contrived, and mostly an excuse for sex scenes.

The remaining story, "Risky Society," about a group of "gifted" young men who work as a special ops force for the government, is somewhat more substantial and deserves to be continued. In fact, I found this one the most appealing story of the group, probably because it's the one with the most "story."

The saving grace here is Yamane's drawing, which is lush, rich, and full-bodied. Almost sounds like a good wine, doesn't it? She does have a definite character "type," although she does show some variation -- once again, mostly apparent in "Risky Society." Layouts are fairly pedestrian, and sex scenes are, as usual, quite explicit.

Yamane can come up with some good, tight, absorbing stories, although this is not a prime example. The "Finder" stories are fairly predictable, and the two "inside" stories are pretty much as I mentioned -- excuses for sex scenes. It will be interesting to see if she manages to salvage "Finder," although in my own opinion, "Risky Society" has a lot more potential.

From Juné.

Clint McCance

I haven't commented on the Clint McCance story -- enough people have -- but here's an excellent segment from Anderson Cooper on it:



I'm going to be very charitable and point out one thing about McCance's "apology" that no one else seems to have stated directly: he just doesn't get it. Dr. Phil has it right in one regard: McCance is displaying some of the characteristics of a sociopathic personality. How much of that is actually his personality and how much is the standard for "apologies" these days is up for debate -- how many have we seen that are not apologies at all? In this case, and what's more germane, is that without the huge outpouring of very negative reactions to his horrific post, it never would have occurred to him that he'd done anything wrong.

And the problem, of course, is exactly what Dr. Phil points out: McCance is apologizing for his words, not for the attitudes those words came from. He says that his core beliefs haven't changed, and I suppose he thinks that's somehow admirable. It's a pity that the core beliefs of his brand of Christianity don't include compassion and understanding -- if your core beliefs are that repellent, not changing them is not something to be proud of.

At least we've seen the "free marketplace of ideas" in action. Are you listening, Tony Perkins?

Stray Thoughts: Hillary Clinton

It occurs to me that Hillary Clinton has led the president on a couple of things concerning gay civil rights. She instituted the partner benefits mandate at State before he did it for federal employees overall, her It Gets Better video appeared a couple of days before his. I don't know if she's acting as the canary in the coal mine or pushing him a little. (It's entirely possible that there's a little bit of oneupmanship going on.)

She hasn't been real visible on DADT, but then, that's not her purview. Gates is leaving soon -- wouldn't it be interesting to see Clinton as SecDef? I'd bet there would be some action on DADT toute suite.

Michelle Obama and Ellen DeGeneres

She talks about bullying, and has a good message, but I'm reposting this mostly because it's just great.



She comes across as very real and very human. And of course, there are those who thinks this is horrible. Pity them.

Teenage Sex, European Style

This, by Rachel Phelps, is one of the most illuminating things I've seen recently.

In contrast with many Americans, the Dutch view teen sexuality as being "right." The Dutch use the phrase "being ready" to talk about how their teens will know they are prepared to have sex. They spend less time and effort trying to prevent young people from becoming sexually active, and more on educating them to be responsible when they do.

Some interesting statistics included. In both the U.S. and Europe, teens become sexually active at age 17, on the average. Our incidence of teen pregnancy is three to six times higher than theirs. Germany's incidence of HIV infection is six times lower than ours. And there's one key factor that makes a difference.

The Dutch see love as common, ordinary, and something teens as well as adults can expect to experience. Their corresponding expectation is that sex only occurs within a loving, committed relationship. Here is the Dutch government's public health campaign: "Step 1: You fall in love. Step 2: She feels the same. Step 3: You kiss. Step 4: You use a condom." There are probably a few steps between 3 and 4, but you get the idea. Research shows that 74 percent of Dutch teens are in a committed relationship with their sexual partner and 80 percent enjoyed their first sexual experience.

The attitude in Europe is infinitely more commonsensical and, ultimately, caring than what we find here:

Another difference across the pond is the role that parents play. In the United States, sex is generally kept secret from parents. In a 2004 study, Schalet asked parents: "Would you permit your son or daughter to spend the night with a girlfriend or boyfriend in his or her room at home?" Not surprisingly, nine out of 10 American parents said, no, often adding, "Not under my roof!"

Contrast those findings with this French television ad. A pharmacist dad watches a boy buy five condoms and then lets his daughter go out with him. We see him take a deep breath (it's true, this is not easy!), and then advise his daughter to "make sure to wrap up well." The message is that you want your daughter dating the boy who prepares well by carrying condoms.

The big difference seems to be a sort of basic honesty: sex is normal, sex is fun (or should be), teenagers are learning about love and sex and their parents are there to help them, and being responsible about it is a given. It would be nice to see that attitude here.

Via Sullivan. And click through on the link above to see the whole thing -- it's a slide show with text, condom ads, and commercials. It's a real eye-opener on how different -- and how sane -- European attitudes are.

The "Survey" Leak: Update

An update to this post from yesterday. Ran across this from Timothy Beauchamp at AmericaBlog Gay:

Color me one of the first gay veteran surprised that the leaked survey's findings were positive. I do NOT mind and am actually excited about being wrong on this one. The indirect pressure that I thought would have been placed on troops to answer questions in the negative was an overestimation. Especially dismaying was the way the questions were worded and the use of the term "homosexual" to describe gay troops. Well, according to anonymous sources, the results of the survey are in our favor!

Being the trusting individual I am, I suspect an end-run around the brass on this, maybe an attempt to forestall them massaging the results. You will remember that this is the same Pentagon that commissioned a study from Rand Corporation in 1993 on this same issue, and then suppressed it when they didn't like the results. This is also the same Pentagon that lobbied fiercely for the imposition of DADT in the first place. (Not all the same people, obviously, but the same attitudes.) Gates and Mullen can sit in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee and testify that they favor repeal, and maybe they actually do, but let's face it -- the president's stated policy position is repeal. What else are they going to say? In the meantime, the opponents of repeal, including a large number of senior officers, are stalling like crazy. You can tell this is hitting a nerve simply by the fact that they decided these surveys were necessary -- of the now 26 other countries that have adopted open service policies, not one of them polled the troops to see how they felt about it. They announced the policy and then implemented it. (I understand that Britain made the change in a month.) We, for some reason, have got to fart around on it because -- our officers can't control their troops? Hah?

At the very least, taken in context I think this points to a major division of opinion within the Pentagon. I suspect that they're banking on the "compromise" language (known in chez moi as the "sell-out language", and why was Winnie Stachelberg involved, anyway?) to torpedo the whole thing.

And it's sort of appalling that I've developed such a jaundiced view of this administration that I can even consider that.

"Our Economy Is An Ecosystem"

Watch this (the audio is weak). And then read Karoli's post:



The gentleman who accuses Hanauer of misrpresenting the "no taxes creates growth" case doesn't ring true to me. Illinois has relatively modest taxes (give or take the 10% sales tax in Chicago), and it's hurting. And I don't see that Washington is an economic powerhouse right now -- it's running about median in unemployment, at 9.1%. Angry Bear has some information on corporate tax rates and their relation to unemployment. I don't see much of a pattern there, and I suspect the relationship between unemployment and the marginal tax rates for the very wealthy is even sketchier.

Done on the fly -- nail me if I'm wrong on this, but I think I've got a good take.