Honestly of the Week: 7-11-10

I suppose part of my LeBron-o-thon analysis constituted an Honestly of the Week, but there was actually a second item I had planned to devote my more irritable energies to.  The offending item in question was in the news last week, but seeing as how my next summer adventure will take me away from my computer this coming weekend, I’m publishing it now.

As part of the sluggish and uncertain process of repealing the United States military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, the Department of Defense issued a survey to 400,000 active service personnel to gauge their thoughts on gays and lesbians in the military.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates has repeatedly stated that he feels this survey, and the larger study it is a part of, needs to be completed before the President or Congress make a decision on the future of the policy.

I could craft an outraged missive about why this is a wasteful, transparent, and insulting move by the government; but I think you’ve heard enough from me these past few days.  So, instead, I’ve taken questions from the actual survey, which was leaked to numerous media outlets last Thursday, and substituted the words “gay”, “lesbian”, and “homosexual” with the words “black”, “African-American”, “female”, and “woman”–groups to which the military previously denied inclusion–to demonstrate the inexcusable condescension of this document.  (Editor’s Note: Try to ignore the loaded nature of the word “partner”, given the topic under discussion)

• If Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is repealed and you are working with a Service member in your immediate unit who has said that he or she is black, how, if at all, would your job performance be affected?
• Have you shared a room, berth, or field tent with a Service member you believed to be African-American?
• If a wartime situation made it necessary for you to share a room, berth or field tent with a woman, which are you most likely to do?  Take no action; discuss how we expect each other to behave and conduct ourselves while sharing a room, berth, or field tent; talk to a chaplain, mentor, or leader about how to handle the situation; talk to a leader to see if I have other options; something else; don’t know.
• If Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is repealed and a female Service member attended a military social function with a partner, which are you most likely to do?  Continue to attend military social functions; stop bringing my spouse, significant other, or other family members with me to military social functions; stop attending military social functions; something else; don’t know.
• If Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is repealed and you had on-base housing and a black Service member was living with a black partner on-base, what would you most likely do?  I would get to know them like any other neighbors; I would make a special effort to get to know them; I would be uncomfortable, but access to the exchange, commissary, and MWR facilities is more important to me than who my neighbors are when deciding where to live; I would be uncomfortable, but the quality of on-base housing is more important to me than who my neighbors are when deciding where to live; I would be uncomfortable, but the cost of moving makes it unlikely I would leave on-base housing; I would probably move off-base; something else.

More or less speaks for itself, doesn’t it?  I particularly enjoy the “wartime situation” modifier in the third question.  As if an individual’s particular discriminatory predilections will be more or less heightened only after a declaration of war.  Call me a crazy book-learned liberal, but in a wartime situation, my only concern would be living.  And what’s with that decidedly ominous “something else” option in the response choices?

Now, I’m not shitting on the military.  I’ve got friends and family who have served.  That’s an experience I sincerely believe I couldn’t handle, and they have my utmost respect for their commitment and sacrifice.  But it seems to me that if we didn’t lose World War II due to the introduction of the Tuskegee Airmen, and if Army brass did not resign in mass protest due to the 2008 promotion of Ann E. Dunwoody to the position of four-star general, then we don’t have much to worry about if after killing a few guys, G.I. Joe wants to come home and kiss one.

Honestly, Department of Defense.  Honestly…

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 3-20-10

This week’s Honestly is a first.  It is co-authored by my good friend and fellow musical theater enthusiast, Elena, seen here on one of our many expeditions to Broadway.

What follows is a paraphrased G-Chat conversation we had that was inspired by her G-Chat status…

Elena: “Chocolate Cheerios?’

T: “I saw those at A&P!”

Elena: “Someone said they aren’t even that good.  Stores are selling out like it’s the best thing since sliced bread or the flip-flop.”

T: “Cheerios have just given up.  So much for lowering everyone’s cholesterol.  Now they’re just like, ‘Fine, fat-ass. Can’t be bothered to have some honey nut circles instead of a microwavable Jimmy Dean artery clogger?  Here’s some chocolate fucking Cheerios.  Die a little sooner.’ “

Elena: ” ‘Dear Michele Obama, please speak to the General of Mills.  Thank you, T-Co and E-Do.’ “

Honestly, Chocolate Cheerios.  Honestly…

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 3-13-10

What the hell is going on at the yogurt section of Shop Rite?  I go to the supermarket every two weeks, typically on Saturday or Sunday, usually in the early afternoon.  Every time I go, I have yogurt on my list, so I’ve got something healthier to snack on.  And every time I go, the yogurt section looks like a Sizzler buffet after a NASCAR event.  Nothing is organized; brands, flavors, and serving sizes are all mashed together like some messy, lactic orgy.  Few cups or containers are standing right side up.  Expiration dates have been smudged by the clammy, clamoring hands of earlier shoppers.  And the kicker is that the brand I personally prefer is always cleaned out.  Who knew I was on to something?  Now, I don’t mind that the toothless septuagenarians of the neighborhood have beaten me to the punch, but why isn’t anyone restocking these shelves?  They’re wheeling out rump roasts from the butcher and replenishing that new olive bar all day long.  When’s the next wave of yogurt coming?  And if you know that this particular brand is your most popular, why don’t you have more of it and less of the shitty kind?  The continued patronage and health of your customers is at stake, good sirs and madams.  I want my fucking yogurt.

Honestly, yogurt section of Shop Rite.  Honestly…

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 1-23-10

Why is it that no matter how carefully or tightly I coil up my iPod headphones before I stick the little bastard in my pocket, when I take it out it’s tangled up like yarn that just fell afoul of a kitten?  What the hell is going on in my pocket?  Are my gloves coated with some static cling that causes the wires to writhe around like evangelicals at the latest Billy Graham crusade?  Is my phone jealous and teaching the iPod who’s boss among my limited collection of technogadgets?  I really don’t understand it.  Is this a design flaw that has yet to be addressed by Steve Jobs, despite his multiple enumerations of said device?  I’m all for progress, but before you give me a phone that does my taxes and wipes my ass, how about giving me some headphones that won’t tumble into some freakin’ Gordian knot without any provocation.

Honestly, iPod headphones.  Honestly…

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 1-16-10

Why is it that when you apply to a job online, among the first things they ask you to do is to upload your resume…and then they demand that you retype what amounts to essentially your entire resume in a series of “required fields” before you can finally submit your application?  I found a job to apply to and spent more time filling out page after page of these empty prompts than I did writing my tailor-made cover letter.  Is this just some kind of endurance test; to see if you have the patience to complete this ridiculous, redundant process?  Or is it some kind of idiot test; to see if you’re stupid enough to do whatever someone in a position of authority tells you?  Given that there was no way to skip to the “submit” option, I’m guessing it’s the former…which makes them the idiots.

Honestly, online job applications.  Honestly…

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 1-9-10

It’s back for the new year…

On Thursday, the New Jersey State Senate, that august body of my current state of residence, convened to vote on whether to allow gay marriage in the Garden State.   Outgoing Governor John Corzine had dangled the carrot in front of social liberals by saying he would sign such a bill into law if it came to his desk before his term expired.  Sponsors and supporters of the bill hurried along, knowing that future cardiac patient and Governor Chris Christie would sooner sign a bill outlawing mayonnaise and fudge before he would approve gay marriage.

The measure was defeated by a vote of 20 – 14.  Those against gay marriage recanted their usual talking points about how the sanctity of traditional marriage and the stability of the American family had been preserved.

Days before the vote, ABC’s newest edition of The Bachelor, a game show in which two dozen harlots degrade themselves by participating in a series of competitions to win the affections–and ultimately the proposal–of a man they have known for little more than two weeks, debuted to stellar ratings.  It was watched by 9.1 million people, making it the most watched major network program for that night, second only to the Fiesta Bowl.

Honestly, New Jersey State Senate.  Honestly…

~ T

The State of the Blog Address

Readers,

I apologize if my output has been lacking lately.  As much as I enjoy sticking to my resolution and providing you with some digital entertainment, and providing myself with a creative outlet, some other resolutions are taking precedence lately.  Equally disappointing is the fact that I’m not really at liberty to discuss those developments with you; but I promise, when all is said and done, these projects will have yielded buckets of good material.

I’m still going to write for the blog, but postings may be a bit less frequent.  For example, I’m not going to have time to recap/review my favorite shows on a weekly basis.  Oh, I’ll be sure to comment on any major developments or to post particularly awesome scenes (i.e. great performances from Glee), but a post-per-episode committment is not one that I can make.  I’d feel worse about this if I knew that my shows are even going to be worth writing about; I lost interest in Brothers & Sisters, Ugly Betty, and The Office last spring, and if The Office‘s return last week is any indication, nobody’s doing much to restore my faith.

Perhaps the most notable absence on The Honestly Blog has been, well, the Honestlys.  I can offer no explanation for this other than to say that there just hasn’t been that much to piss me off lately.  Oh, I’m sure if I looked hard enough, I’d find plenty; but maybe this lack of psychosis isn’t such a bad thing.

There’s still plenty that I plan to write about.  I’ve got plenty of books on the shelf, a new season on Broadway is about to begin, the Yankees are looking strong for October, and there’s always more kickball to had.  So stay tuned.  There may be a slight decrease in quantity, but certainly not in quality.

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 6-27-09

Drop.  Fucking.  Dead.

I don’t give a shit about your marriage, your divorce, or the battalion of clones that emerged from that uterine Chernobyl you call a womb.  Get off my TV, find real jobs, go to counseling, and keep the kids’ interests first.  Fail to do any of that, and may you both contract venereal diseases from your rebound fucks and die.

Honestly, Jon and Kate.  Honestly…

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 6-13-09

I try not to be vocal about my politics, in life or on the blog, but sometimes an exception to my self-imposed restraint presents itself.

This week, it was announced that the Supreme Court would not hear a case that challenged 1996′s Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  The announcement wasn’t a terrible surprise in and of itself.  What was surprising was that this decision was supported by the Obama Administration.  Curious, since the president listed the repeal of the military’s anti-gay “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and the creation of stronger hate crime laws among the things on the top of his White House To Do List while campaigning last year.

Stranger still was the even more recent publication of a legal brief, written by the Assistant Attorney General and other top figures within President Obama’s Justice Department, that said the Administration would continue to support DOMA, and gave a half dozen examples based on flawed, circuitous logic as to why.

Let’s boil things down to the basics, because I’m no John Jay here.  Hell, I’m not even an Elle Woods.

DOMA’s two main effects are such:

1) No state needs to treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.

2) The federal government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

Bottom line?  DOMA doesn’t outlaw gay marriage; it just says that state and federal governments have no obligation to recognize gay marriages.  And by “not recognizing” them, it means not affording committed homosexual couples the same socioeconomic benefits (property rights, insurance coverage, matters of inheritance, etc.) afforded to committed heterosexual couples.  Separate and not quite equal.

With that in mind, take in this sentence from the Obama Justice Department’s concluding argument in the aforementioned brief:

“In short, therefore, DOMA, understood for what it actually does, infringes on no one’s rights.”

Um…I disagree.

Being pressed on the matter almost immediately after the brief began to be circulated through the media yesterday afternoon, the White House offered the following statement:

“As it generally does with existing statutes, the Justice Department is defending the law on the books in court. The President has said he wants to see a legislative repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act because it prevents LGBT couples from being granted equal rights and benefits. However, until Congress passes legislation repealing the law, the administration will continue to defend the statute when it is challenged in the justice system.”

So, the Administration is basically saying that they’d love to grant equal rights to one and all, but they’d rather that somebody else do it.  President Obama wants the motion to come from the floor of Congress, not from his desk.  Not a very assertive standpoint from the guy who said he was all about, you know, changing things.  I mean, I guess his hands are tied after all.  It’s not like the president can, you know, issue an executive order, effectively immediately, to rectify such a delicate situation as defending Americans’ civil rights.

Oh, wait.  He can.

And check it out, kids!  Other presidents have done just that in the past.  Harry Truman signed Executive Order 9981, which desegregated the military.  Richard Nixon, that bastion of moral fortitude, still managed to sign Executive Order 11478, which outlawed racial, ethnic, gender, age, and sexual orientation discrimination in the federal government’s civilian workforce.  And let’s not forget that Abraham Lincoln issued what is officially cataloged as Executive Order 1: the Emancipation Proclamation.

Smell that, Mr. President?  It’s called irony, and sometimes it’s positively rotten.

All right, now suppose President Obama has his reasons for not wanting to issue an executive order.  Maybe he’s not too keen on wielding his pen like the Royal Blessed Imperial Sceptre and flexing the might of the Oval Office, particularly after the last guy to sit behind that desk took so much flak for doing the very same thing.  Understood.  But encouraging the Supreme Court to turn away a case?  That’s an abuse of power if I ever saw one.

Look, if President Obama is backing off his promises to the LGBT community because he fears losing some traction on other initiatives on his agenda, so be it.  It sucks, but it’s what any other politician would do; and I think it’s clear that for all his talk of change, the president is not much different from any other politician.  He plays the game; arguably, he plays it better than anyone else.

But if President Obama, a man who is the product of a marriage that itself was considered illegal before a Supreme Court case (the ironically if appropriately named Loving v. Virginia) declared such statutes unconstitutional, sincerely believes that gay and lesbian couples do not deserve to have their unions recognized, protected, and upheld by every level of government in this country…well, then he had better look for some nice real estate back in Chicago.

Honestly, Barack Obama.  Honestly…

Nice ring. Did you bring enough for everyone?

~ T

Honestly of the Week: 6-06-09

I really like my neighborhood.  One of the choice things about it is that there’s plenty of open space.  In fact, a mere two blocks from my apartment is a park.  It’s not terribly big, but it’s got a lot to offer: two tennis courts, a basketball court, high-tech playgrounds for the lil’ pookas, and a tremendous gazebo/bandshell right smack dab in the center.  It may only be about two city blocks in size, but it’s perfect for the neighborhood.

Of course, it could stand for some improvement.  Those tennis courts are in pretty bad shape, and there are patches of lawn that have been reduced to lifeless dirt due to the abundant foot traffic.  So, there’s work to be done.  That’s all right.  It’s work that needs to be done.

But does it need to be done now, when the sun is shining, the skies are clear, and everyone and their Great Aunt Tilly is desperate to spend their extended daylight hours under a tree?  I’m not just talking about some seeding and repaving here.  This park is completely closed off.  There is an eight-foot high fence running the entire perimeter of the park.  Behind the chain-link fence, the park has effectively been turned inside out.  They’ve got machinery in there that looks like it belongs across the Hudson, working downtown.  They’re digging away at the guts of this park, and they’ve given no indication of when they plan to be finished.

So, let me get this staight, Department of Public Works, or whoever is in charge here: in order to make this park nicer for the community, you’re going to close it off idefinitely through the summer, so that we can enjoy it…when?  Late autumn?  Winter?  Next spring?  Give us a ballpark figure.  What units of measure are we dealing in?  Weeks?  Months?  A little clarification would be nice.

Honestly, people working on the park.  Honestly…

~ T