Gainesville says no to hate; "potty humor" takes on a new meaning

Great news from the home of Gator Nation: the city's Amendment 1, which would have repealed legal protections for the GLBT community, went down to defeat in voting yesterday.

[A]pproximately 58 percent of city voters ... said no Tuesday to Amendment 1 — a ballot initiative that would have made Gainesville's anti-discrimination ordinance the same as Florida's Civil Rights Act.

Those voting no on Tuesday represents 11,717 voters, compared to the 42 percent who voted for the amendment, or 8,375 votes.

Both numbers are exceptional for a city stand-alone election that had two City Commission seats and one other amendment on the ballot.

It was roughly 27 percent of the eligible voters compared to the usual turnout of less than 15 percent for a stand-alone city election.

It's been a divisive year and a half for [Gainesville city commissioner Craig] Lowe[,] who in January 2008 paved the way for the city to enact anti-discrimination protections for transgender individuals.

Almost immediately following that vote, a conservative political action committee, Citizens for Good Public Policy, launched a campaign to put an amendment on the ballot that would repeal not only the city rights for transgender people but also rights for gay, lesbian and bisexual people who had been protected in the city since 1998.

In light of other recent hate legislation that, for example, has elevated restrictions on marriage to constitutional status in places like Florida and California, this is a significant, albeit small, victory. But defeating hate sometimes has to happen in small increments.

Proponents of Amendment 1 ran a very nasty, hateful, and incredibly stupid campaign to promote their discriminatory aims. Their goal, according to Mark Minck, chair of Citizens for Good Public Policy, was specifically to keep men out of women's restrooms.

Minck and other citizens interpreted the "gender identity" clause included in Gainesville's anti-discrimination ordinance as a vague definition that would allow men — even predators — to enter women's restrooms without an enforceable law.

Their slogan was "vote yes on Amendment 1 to keep men out of women's restrooms."

[Said Minck,] "Even thought [sic] the City Commission might see this as justification for the ordinance as worded, I'm hopeful that they will see that clearly thousands of their constituencies disagree with the portion of the ordinance that gives men legal access to women's bathroom[s]."

Jesus H. Christ on a urinal cake. They actually based their message on concern about bathrooms. One wonders whether former Fort Lauderdale mayor Jim Naugle, who himself is demonstrably toilet-obsessed, had anything to do with this.

In any event, the Right keeps coming up with dumber and dumber arguments. If it's not men in women's restrooms (I note there apparently was no concern about women in men's restrooms), it's that humans and dinosaurs lived together and the planet is only 6,000 years old. Can we please find an island to which we can ship these idiots?

Anyway, three cheers for Gainesville. Thanks for keeping hate where it belongs: in the simple minds of wingnuts.

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

Huggy Bear's America

Just grabbed this screenshot from Huggy Bear's campaign website. Notice anything about the people in the picture? Like, what nearly all of them have in common with each other?

click to embiggen

Old White Guys for McCain! (Women and people of color: you can be in the picture, just don't be particularly prominent or visible ... kthxbai)

"I BELIEVE" license plate works its way through Florida's legislature

Last week, I told you about the effort to add an openly Christianist license plate to Florida's already overflowing collection of plates commemorating (and financially supporting) sports teams, universities, environmental and artistic endeavors, and even anti-abortion zealotry. Well, the Legislature, in all its wingnutty wisdom, continues to give credence to this blatantly unconstitutional activity, as a House committee passed the license plate bill by an 8-2 vote.

Okay, here's the problem, and I'll say it in bold lettering so even you stupid fucking wingnuts can understand it: the state cannot support one religion over another. Period. Yet that's clearly the intent of the bill's sponsor, Rep. Edward Bullard.

Bullard, the plate's sponsor, said people who "believe in their college or university" or "believe in their football team" already have license plates they can buy. The new design is a chance for others to put a tag on their cars with "something they believe in," he said.

If the plate is approved, Florida would become the first state to have a license plate featuring a religious symbol that's not part of a college logo. Approval would almost certainly face a court challenge.

The problem with the state manufacturing the plate is that it "sends a message that Florida is essentially a Christian state" and, second, gives the "appearance that the state is endorsing a particular religious preference," said Howard Simon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida.

But here's the real stunner: I thought Bullard would be from the Panhandle or somewhere similarly wingnutty, like the racist moron who's pushing the Confederate Heritage license plate.

Nope.

Rep. Bullard is an African-American Democrat from Miami-Dade County. He's not even a pastor, at least not by profession -- he's an educator. You'd think an educator would know that his proposal is antithetical to every tenet of American constitutional law and scholarship since the inception of the nation. Is it possible that the Bush crime syndicate's everpresent War on the Constitution has jaded even this man, who certainly should know better?

What's even worse is that Rep. Bullard apparently is an advocate of viewpoint discrimination. That is, he's for a Christian license plate, but not, say, an atheist plate (or, one presumes, an FSM plate):

Approving the plate could open the state to legal challenges, according to Josie Brown, who teaches constitutional law at the University of South Carolina. And it's not certain who would win.

"It would be an interesting close call," Brown said.

Simon, of the ACLU, said approval of the plate could prompt many other groups to seek their own designs, and they could claim discrimination if their plans were rejected. That could even allow the Ku Klux Klan to get a plate, Simon said.

Bullard, the plate's sponsor, isn't sure all groups should be able to express their preference. If atheists came up with an "I Don't Believe" plate, for example, he would probably oppose it.

Nope. Can't do that, Rep. Bullard. You can't pick and choose which religious plates are okay. You get a Christianist plate through, just get ready for the onslaught.

And you'll have only yourself to blame.

UPDATE (6:42 pm 4/24/08): Brian at Incertus examines the issue in a different light, but comes to basically the same conclusion: this license plate is a fucking joke. (And next time I'll try to remember to check there before ranting ...)

Huggy Bear hates women

There's a reason why another good nickname for Huggy Bear is "McSame." He's just the same as his BFF and hug buddy, Drunky McStagger.

Today, Huggy shows us that he really can't stand women -- you know, unless they are hot blonde lobbyists or obscenely wealthy trophy wives. He doesn't believe women should get equal pay for equal work.

Republican Sen. John McCain, campaigning through poverty-stricken cities and towns, said Wednesday he opposes a Senate bill that seeks equal pay for women because it would lead to more lawsuits.

Senate Republicans killed the bill Wednesday night on a 56-42 vote that denied the measure the 60 votes needed to advance it to full debate and a vote. Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had delayed the vote to give McCain's Democratic rivals, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, time to return to Washington to support the measure, which would make it easier for women to sue their employers for pay discrimination.

McCain skipped the vote to campaign in New Orleans.

"I am all in favor of pay equity for women, but this kind of legislation, as is typical of what's being proposed by my friends on the other side of the aisle, opens us up to lawsuits for all kinds of problems," the expected GOP presidential nominee told reporters. "This is government playing a much, much greater role in the business of a private enterprise system."

The bill sought to counteract a Supreme Court decision limiting how long workers can wait before suing for pay discrimination.

Sure, Huggy says he's for pay equity, but his vote proves otherwise. You know, Huggy, sometimes government has to step in to regulate private enterprise, to ensure that said enterprise doesn't discriminate. Sometimes lawsuits are a good thing, Huggy, because they ensure that injured people are compensated appropriately for their injury -- or the discrimination against them. But I guess discrimination isn't something you really care about, is it, Huggy? After all, if you were the least bit discriminating -- in a good way -- you wouldn't embrace (figuratively and literally) the Worst President Ever.

Then again, for a guy utterly devoid of integrity and positive character attributes, ol' Huggy's still done a pretty good job of taking care of the person who matters most to him: himself.

New motto for Largo, Florida: City of Discrimination

The mission of the City of Largo (west of Tampa, north of St. Petersburg) is: To provide superior services that enhance the quality of life and community pride.

I'm not sure what pride they can take in discriminatory employment practices:

The City Commission voted to begin the process of firing a top official less than a week after he announced plans to pursue a sex-change operation.

The 5-to-2 vote Tuesday started a three-step process to remove City Manager Steve Stanton from the job he's held for 14 years.

Stanton, 48, confirmed last week that he is a transsexual. With a solid reputation as a forceful and energetic leader, he had hoped to keep his $140,000-a-year job as he underwent the gender reassignment process.

"It's just painful to know seven days ago I was a good guy and now ... I have no integrity," Stanton told the commission. "My challenge here has always been that someday I was going to leave this organization. So I am going to do it with a smile on my face."

Stanton can appeal the decision, though his contract says he can be fired without cause at any time.

He will be placed on paid leave while the city begins the legal process to end his contract. The council must vote again to formally fire him.

I didn't practice in the area of employment law, but I have a hard time believing that the Commission's rationale, at least as stated by one commissioner, can withstand judicial challenge:

Commissioner Mary Gray Black said Stanton's surprise announcement last week "caused stress, turmoil, distraction and work disruption" among other city employees.

"I do not feel he has the integrity, nor the trust, nor the respect, nor the confidence to continue as the city manager of the city of Largo," said Black, who introduced a resolution to fire Stanton on Monday.

About 500 people attended the meeting. Dozens signed up to speak, some praising Stanton and others saying the exposure of his secret life undermined his ability to lead the city.

City officials say they have received hundreds of e-mails about Stanton's announcement, most calling for his removal.

I used to live not far from Largo. I still travel there and nearby fairly regularly. And I'm surprised to hear that it's as intolerant a place as it appears to be.

The "stress, turmoil, distraction and work disruption" argument reminds me of a story from my student teaching days, back in 1989. The middle school where I was posted (thankfully, for only five weeks) had an African-American boy who cut his hair so that it was hair on top, shaved in the middle (all the way around), and a "puff" on the bottom. The school's dress code prohibited "designs" in the hair as well as "more than one part." The administration put this kid in in-school suspension for a week and conducted three faculty meetings to discuss whether the student's new haircut was an impermissible design or just one big part.

Point is, the distraction lasts a day or two at most. The adverse effects on the livelihood of the city manager -- not to mention the loss of goodwill for the city, the business cost of removing a successful manager and having to search for and train a new one, and the dissension caused within the city -- will have much more far-reaching impact.

In short, this is a colossally stupid decision by Largo, and quite possibly illegal to boot. Please join me in registering your displeasure by calling the Commission's offices at (727) 587-6702 or by e-mailing them.