Leave the jokes to Will & Grace

In response to Governor Mitt Romney's anti-same-sex-anything speech, Arline Isaacson of the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus released the following statement, according to the Boston Herald:

"The governor's kind of bi about this issue. In one venue he swings for civil unions and in another venue he says he has always been against them.''

The Governor's flip-flop on this issue certainly provided more than adequate reason for a response from the Massachusetts GLPC, but the one they gave was childish and demeaning to the community they purport to defend. Ms. Isaacson may have thought her quips about the Governor being "bi" or "swinging" this way or that are cute, but if they were uttered by someone on the other side, she (and the folks over at GLAAD would likely find it offensive.

There's enough mockery and offense directed toward the GLBT community from outside sources, it seems hardly necessary to propagate it from the inside on such a serious political issue.

Governor Romney, President Romney

It could be the sign of the longest Presidential campaign season in recent history. Just barely a month hence the Second Inaugural of George W., Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is making a few strategic stops as well as a few strategic speeches.

In South Carolina this past Monday, Romney gave a speech outlining his hard line stance against not only gay marriage but against all psuedoforms of it as well, including civil unions. Now, this wouldn't be too odd, considering President Bush recently held the same position - at least until his announced support for state-based civil unions a week prior to the election. However, the position of Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney doesn't seem to jibe with Governor Mitt Romney.

The Boston Herald reported this week on the Presidential hopeful's speech to South Carolina conservatives and noted that while in his home state of much-more-liberal Massachusetts, the Governor has actually supported civil unions. So which one of them is running for President?

The Governor's office is quick to note that the Governor's support for civil unions was only a last-ditch effort to stop May 17th's same-sex marriage fiesta from happening, and under less than Defcon 1 circumstances, he's still opposed.

So, I guess it's only when he's against the fence that his staunch values can be subject to compromise. Very Presidential.

It's a different world...

Just shy of five years ago, a new era of equality for gay Americans was ushered in as Vermonters trekked to their town clerk to get civilly unioned. The court-forced action was heralded as a triumph for gay rights; men and women flew in from all across the nation to marry... well, men and women (respectively).

Just last year, the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts handed down and edict to the Legislature: legalize gay marriage. The legislature did, but not before considering a constitutional amendment to ban it. The measure still requires further legislative action before it can move forward, but gay marriages have moved forward for nearly a year.

Flash forward to the present and once again to gay-friendly New England. In the legislature of the State of Connecticut, two bills were being considered. One would grant same-sex couples the right to marry; the other would grant them the right to a civil union. Only this time, no one said they had to. Voluntary legislative action, it's a wonderful thing.

Or is it? Gay activists should be hailing this as a milestone. The argument (though I consider it to be disingenuous) from gay marriage opponents has been rooted in the fact that these "activist judges" must be stopped and that gay marriage should not be decided by unelected leaders. (If Connecticut's leaders decide to allow it, that tune will change.) But for now, voila, here we go.

Of course, it wouldn't be progress if there weren't a few hurdles in the way. Hurdle number one to marriage and/or civil unions? Gay activists.

The Connecticut rights group Love Makes a Family decided that they would support marriage, as opposed to civil unions. Fine. That should be the ultimate goal of any gay rights group, right? They've taken their preference to the next level, however - and as the Connecticut Legislature's Judiciary Committee voted out a civil unions bill on an impressive 25-13 vote, Love Makes a Family decried their actions as a "step backward for Connecticut," according to LMAF President Anne Stanback. Huh?

I certainly see where they're going - civil unions are separate but equal. But this is a state-level legislative body voting without a mandate to grant marriage rights to gay citizens - and the top gay rights group in the state responds as if it's an insult.

What a difference five years makes.

RNC's New Glass Headquarters

It's old news by now, but the Republican National Committee sent an early Valentine's Day present to Senator Reid earlier this month in the form of a research paper titled "Who is Harry Reid?" The collection of quotes is valid, but some of the attacks hit a little too close to home for the Grand Old Party.

One section accuses the venerable Nevadan of being "out of touch with mainstream America" because he lives in a $750,000 condo in the Ritz Carlton in Foggy Bottom. Problem is, they're not looking in the mirror too closely: Reid's counterpart on the right owns a multi-million dollar home in Washington and commutes to work on a private family jet.

There's nothing wrong with Frist's wealth, or with Reid's $.75 million condo. But if the RNC is going to make arguments, at least make ones that hold water. Errr, Evian.