Fuck the Dead!

Ok, ok…that might be a little harsh. Maybe. But after playing Grateful Dead covers for years I kinda got sick of ‘em. But what’s more, I got sick to death of their fans. You know the ones…the ones that seem to compare every piece of music to the dead, they must hold all guitar players (from every genre) up to a special ‘Jerry comparison’ or something…I don’t know…just seemed to get old. Really. Fast.

But now I see I had a point, but about the wrong kind of Dead fan. After I read the story below, I could imagine the sound of Jerry spinning in his grave to be that of a jet engine. I mean, good god, Ann Coulter is a Dead fan? What’s next, a plague of frogs? The radical right has pulled off the biggest heist of all time! They’ve co-opted the Dead! I’d rather be in a scrum with 30 unwashed, patchouli scented, deadheads singin’ That’s It For The Other One out of tune, while shoving used Thai-sticks in my eyes, for the entirety of the rest of my life than to have Ann Coulter on this planet for a single minute more. The woman is poison. And I will speak of her no more.

Ann Coulter's Grateful Dead Sorority Mixer Memories

posted by: Amelie Gillette
June 29, 2006 - 4:44pm
Ann Coulter, of progressive-stripping-via-book-cover fame, recently gave an interview to Jambands.com, about——what else?——her love of the Grateful Dead.

I'm not kidding. (You can read the entire interview here.)
Apparently, Ms. Coulter was a Deadhead, or at least as close to a facsimilie of a Deadhead that the sisters of Delta Sig would allow:

I fondly remember seeing the Dead when I was at Cornell. It was the day of the fabulous Fiji Island party on the driveway “island” of the Phi Gamma Delta House. We'd cover ourselves in purple Crisco and drink purple Kool-Aid mixed with grain alcohol and dance on the front yard. Wait – I think got the order reversed there: We'd drink purple Kool-Aid mixed with grain alcohol and then cover ourselves in purple Crisco – then the dancing. You probably had to be there to grasp how utterly fantastic this was.

Sounds positively smashing, Ann. Really, just darling. The crazy things you co-eds do! Next thing, you'll tell me you wore different colored bobby socks and no slip to an open enrollment lecture!

Jesus. Leave it to Ann Coulter to make a Grateful Dead concert sound like an alternative to the Delta Mu spring formal after party. Also, "grain alcohol"? What are you, a Prohibition-era bootlegger? Just say Everclear. Then there's this:

Somewhat contrary to the image of Deadheads as hippies, the Dead were huge in my hometown of New Canaan, CT, which is a pretty preppie town. We toyed with the idea of making "Truckin'" our prom song with a "Long Strange Trip" theme, but we ended up with some dorky rainbow theme instead. I tend to associate the Dead with lacrosse players and my favorite fraternities, Fiji and Theta Delt.

Ok, so here's what lives next door to the Grateful Dead in Ann Coulter's mind:
1. Cornell
2. Fiji and Theta Delt (Those are, like, seriously the best frats, guys. I can't argue with her. Go Greeks!)
3. Prom in New Canaan, CT
4. Lacrosse5. Monica Lewinsky (see below)

My collection of Dead tapes, by the way, was the reason I heard one of the Linda Tripp tapes before Ken Starr did. Tripp's lawyer obviously needed to hear the tape before turning it over to the prosecutor, but he only had an old 1950's tape player and couldn't get it to work and Ken Starr wanted the tape the next morning. He was terrified he'd hit the wrong button and erase the evidence. In the wee hours of the morning, it occurred him, a Deadhead himself, that he knew one person in D.C. who definitely had a tape machine. So, at around 2 AM, he called me and asked to come over to use my tape deck.

So, see? Hilary was right. There is a vast right wing conspiracy, except it's mostly about conservatives trying to make the Dead sound as lame as fucking possible.

Dearest Smoker (is that you? I can't see through the haze...):

Ok, I can understand the sentiment regarding "it's my own life, and I'll live it however..." but when it comes to that phrase being uttered by a smoker (or pederasts or pyromaniacs or Whitney Houston) I have to draw the line. Yeah, you can smoke. Just not near me please. I'm all for separate rooms and the 'gold fish bowls' they make smokers go into in airports...by the way, aren't those funny?
"Look daddy! The last of the great American smoker!"
"don't tap the glass, son, you'll scare 'em away!"
heh, heh......Anyway...go to the 'smoking section' and give us a break. We're giving you one by making a 'smoking section' available in the first place. And if there isn't one...you must decide between: either a nice meal or perhaps a cocktail with some friends or your...butt, cig, coffin nail, gasper, pill, or skag. You know, I take it back! Those DO sound tasty!

I would take the smoking ban to mean 'no smoking in public places' and yes, that includes waiting in line outdoors or hanging out at a concert. Yeah, yeah, just 'cause there's no roof doesn't make it un-public. What smokers have to remember is that they are in an EXTREME minority and, most of us, don't care that you smoke. We would just like you to take it elsewhere. What? You have nowhere else to go? Go home then! What's that? Your wife/husband wont let you smoke inside? Isn't this all starting to tell you something? Far less addictive substances have been made illegal. Such as Heroin, Cocaine, meth-amphetamine, and in some more enlightened states, Planters Cheese Balls...man those are WAY too tasty!

In response to "...all the rules and regulations! Why don't we ban drinking again?" Have you noticed that you can't drink on the sidewalk in front of the bar? In fact, have you noticed that you can't just walk into a store, grab a bottle of liquor, lovingly remove the foil, place it to your lips, and take a long satisfying pull from it? (I bet you want a cigarette right now don't you?) In fact most stores won't let you enter with any open beverage of any kind...don't they love America? Have they never heard of Live Free or Die? Yes, dear reader, they must be communists!! Have you noticed there seems to be very few folks (and even fewer communists) just walking down the street enjoying a nice Mai Tai? That is because there are myriad rules and regulations regarding the consumption of alcohol. In comparison I see hardly a rule regarding smoking. Smokers tend to be one of the most vocal minorities out there and I, for one, am getting a bit tired of having to listen to 'em...and they're breath? Yikes!
But don't worry kids, the likes of Phillip Morris wont be dieing out any time soon. As I understand it the U.S. is probably tailing third for cigarette consumption in the world. I hear Asia and Europe are the ones really 'Live Free AND Dieing' by sucking up a lot of cigarettes not us. (What? We're number THREE? How can that be? USA! USA! USA! ...Umm...wait a minute...) And as it becomes less profitable for the big cigarette companies to support you, you will see the worm turning away from tolerating smoking in public places. Why would they abandon you? Because cigarette smokers are a VAST MINORITY in the United States! Remember that, and try to be polite. Here, have a mint.

Reply to: Bike Week Petition

(regarding Bike Week '04)

Editor, The Citizen:

(all of Mr. Cayer's words are in quotes)

"Does anyone really believe you can just pass a petition around to scale back or stop bike week? Apparently those who don't understand what bike week is all about seem to think so."

Please enlighten me...what the heck is motorcycle week(end) all about? All I can see/hear are a few races, a bunch of bikers who seem to think they are 'entitled' to the lakes region, and a lot of noise.

"Since when can you legislate where people go, how they get there and how long they stay?"

Ummm...since like forever? I'll bet they wont let you have a bike rally, for any amount of time, at Los Alamos, or runway B of Logan Airport, or Fenway Park, or, well, anywhere 'they' decide you can't congregate. You have to get a permit. And 'they' can decide not to give you one. And if you decide to ignore that, we have a whole judicial system in place to take it from there.

"Does "Live Free or Die" ring a bell?"

Yeah, it's the state motto right? Does 'Vacation State' mean that nobody works in Maine? (I know that's not their state motto, its: Dirigo. Which means 'I direct'. But that doesn't work nearly as well for my point. Ok, how about Kansas. Their motto is: Ad Astra Per Aspera, which means "To the Stars Through Difficulties". Does that mean everyone is an astronaut in Kansas? Or at least big Star Trek fans?) Oh, and 'Live Free Or Die' is OUR motto. Not the motto of tourists everywhere...

"I suppose you can stop the street vendors by not issuing peddlers permits. But if you believe that bikers come together to spend a week because of the vendors you fail to understand who bikers are and why they gather."

Yes! You're absolutely right! ...I still don't understand...

"The fact is vendors follow the bikers."

Everywhere? That must become somewhat of a drag after a while...

"Anyone who believes they can stop bikers from riding to a certain area at a certain time is kidding themselves."

Well, once again I think your wrong as to whether or not you can stop 'em. WILL they stop them is another question all together.

"Bikers are a close community. Ever witness bikers pass each other on the road and wave to each other? It's not because they recognize each other personally. It's because they recognize another biker. Total strangers acknowledging each other because of what they drive."

And your point is? I watched Sesame St. when I was a kid too! "...One of these things is not like the other... it's a motorcycle Mr. Noodle!"
...wow... I wave at Ford drivers too...but I drive a Chevy! Drives 'em nuts! What were we talking about?

"How about the bikers who return with their families in their cars and mini vans to spend their time and money. What message are you sending them? We'll like you more if you leave the bike home?"

Umm...this is a trick question right? I'll guess: yes? Or more precisely ‘don't all of you come on your motorcycles all at once.’

"Remember NH is a tourist state. Lose the tourist, lose your revenue."

The question has been posed, and the answer has not been forthcoming, as to just how much the state makes on the whole affair. After figuring in the extra police, the strain on the infrastructure, the extra hospital staff and emergency personnel, and the cost of the endless patience of those of us who just wished we could just hear ourselves think, I can't see how the state is gaining any revenue at all.

"It might even be suggested that an effort to stop bikers from coming could have quite the opposite effect. By bringing attention to your cause, you may end up rallying even more bikers to come to your community next year just to show their support for each other and the rally. You think 300,000 bikers is a lot? There's plenty more where they came from."

Oooohhhh! Threats! Now this is getting good! I think you've seen Blazing Saddles one too many times! I can see Slim Pickens now! "We'll ride into town! A-whoopin'-and-a-hollerin'..." heh, heh...yeah, yeah, ok...settle down now.

"I managed to get up there at least once all 10 days this year. I was there the first weekend and witnessed something interesting. As anyone who was there will agree, there were many many bikes there for the
first weekend. The crowds were fairly large all over. The nice weather had a lot to do with that. But what was interesting was how there were no road blocks or traffic patterns, yet the traffic flowed well. People were being very polite and well behaved. I saw no trouble anywhere. And it all happened with very little police presence to be seen."

I will concede this point to you! The 'first' motorcycle weekend went very smoothly. And I too think it had to do with the nice weather. I think it dispersed folks a bit farther a field. Perhaps to have a nice ride in the beautiful country...ahh...

"The following weekend there were the usual blocked off streets and traffic patterns which get people good and frustrated and you wonder why you start having problems. And what was the idea behind one way traffic on Rollercoaster Road? It almost seems at times as though there is an unspoken policy to make it difficult for bikers by making it hard for them to get around in hopes of discouraging them from returning."

I'm sure there were a lot more people around for the second weekend, added to the fact that everyone goes to the Weirs 'cause that's where it's 'going on'...right? And, by the way, I'm with you on that whole Roller Coaster road thing...what WAS that about?

"Actually I think bikers may be starting to change motorcycle week on their own. They are choosing to show up the weekend before the traditional bike weekend so they don't have to deal with traffic patterns, blocked roads and dare I say the watchful eye of "big brother"."

Aww, man, we're sorry! Next year we'll send all the cops home, evacuate our homes and just let you nice kids have a good time! Our bad!

"Which goes to prove my point, the only people who truly control bike week are bikers."

Bikes don't control people, people control bikes, and they're bikers, and they're in control of their bikes, when they're at bike week,
controling...I'm sorry, what were we talking about?

"If you think having 300,000 plus people come to your area for a week and drop a few million dollars into the economy is a problem, lets hear your ideas for how to raise revenues in a state that relies on tourism for revenues."

Just how much revenue does the state make during that week compared to, say, the same week just on the seacoast? Or any given week in Lincoln during ski season? I think the state would get along just fine thank-you-very-much! Remember this whole big bike week thing is a relatively recent event.

But you're missing the point. The point of the petition is to keep a handle on the whole thing. Did they say that you couldn't come a week early? Nope! They just didn't want the vendors to set up that early. And by your own admission 'the vendors follow the bikers.' Remember? Then I said "all the time?" and it was pretty funny? Remember?

"Since the state reaps the benefits through taxes..."

Hey wait! Is there a 'hey your on a motorcycle' tax at the NH boarder? I thought we just had one-way tolls...

"...the state should share in more of the expenses for the week."

SHARE more of the expenses?!! Who in your 'check my ride...recognize!'
group of bikers is picking up even a modicum of the expenses now? Oh wait! Let me guess, you go out and...well, no, not you. You live here and presumably pay taxes. Did you pay an extra "I'm going to bike week tax"? I didn't think so. So where is your share of the cost?

Anyway, a biker comes to NH and will probably pay for a hotel, buy dinner, have a couple drinks, and buy a fanny pack or something from a street vendor...Except for the vendors, who (as we've established) follow bikers around and pay for a permits, all those businesses are there the whole rest of the year and pay the same taxes whether or not they are open for bike week. It seems to me the state is picking up the WHOLE tab now. Maybe if the bikers had to share in the cost of the event they would appreciate our LENDING them the lakes region for a week.

"It would be a drop in the bucket for the state and a great return on investment. It shouldn't fall back on the local community alone. Bike week is a good thing for the state as a whole. Let's put more effort towards solving problems, not creating them. Bike week can't be turned on and off like a light switch. Perhaps the best solution is to accept that it is here to stay and deal with it. As long as bikers decide they want to gather at the big lake in NH for a week in June, there will be a bike week."

I have absolutely no doubt bike week (end) will always be around in some form. And your right, we should look "towards solving problems, not creating them." But I think, for many residents, the problem lays a couple sentences down when you say, "Perhaps the best solution is to accept that it is here to stay and deal with it." I think that is precisely the attitude that has driven some residents to start the afore mentioned petition.

In response to the essay ‘A Brutal Reminder’.

(originally printed in the Laconia Citizen 6/29/04)

Dear Sir or Madam:
Don’t delude yourself with visions of flying flags, hotdogs, and children holding their parents hands regarding your ‘Churchill-like’ view of the ‘war on terror’ (we will fight them on the land, on the sea…blah, blah, blah…). You, and everyone else seem to neglect to mention what the most important factor in this ‘war on terror’ is: Why are they so mad at us?

As far as I can tell there are two major reasons and a myriad of smaller ones. The first, the oldest, and the most discussed, is our support of Israel. I’m not condoning or condemning our support Israel, but the ‘A-number-one’ reason for middle eastern, or radical Islamic terrorists to even care about us at all is our support of Israel.

The second reason is far less complicated. It’s the same reason a Confederate soldier gave to a Union soldier when asked why he was fighting. ‘Because you’re here!’ We’ve been involved in the Middle East for decades, and I’m sure all our meddling has made some folks rather cranky.

We’re not innocents in this. We’re all Americans and are, by proxy, responsible for whatever shenanigans our government gets up to in order to keep the oil flowing for our new SUV’s. I too feel saddened by the execution/murder of Mr. Johnson and my condolences go to his family, and your right, none of us are safe anymore. But we will never have a solution to the problem of people willing to sacrifice their own lives, or the lives of innocents, to make a ‘political statement’ until we can provide some concrete solutions to the problems that have been festering in the Middle East for the last 90 years. That’s right 90 years! The west has been fooling about in that region at least since WWI. Remember thy history! Terrorism did not spring out of a vacuum, or start yesterday.

I am in no way condoning the actions of these people, but we should walk a mile in their shoes before trying to find a solution to our mutual problems.

What’s done is done. And some of what is done is concretely our fault. We can’t take back our support of Israel, we can’t take back our support for Saddam during the Iraq/Iran war (and after), we can’t take back our support/creation of Osama Bin Laden during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan (remember kids Afghani Freedom Fighters = Taliban! They were/are the same guys!), we can’t take back our support of the Shah of Iran and his tyrannical ‘democratic’ government, our British friends can’t take back their decades long occupation of Iraq, and we can’t take back our current occupation of Iraq. But what we can do is remember these things when trying to come to a solution and not act like our hands have never gotten dirty.

Hi there!

Welcome to 'the American Why!' Just wanted to let anyone who happens to stumble onto this page that the posts below essentially represent the last couple years worth of printed 'letters to the editor'...more or less...unfortunately, when I was posting them, I did it in reverse order! so replys to my letters come BEFORE my letter does, and a couple letter re: the last pres. election are right at the top, and a letter re: the houses recent 'non-binding' shinanigans are at the bottom...ah, well. I'm new to this. I'll get it together, eventually! In the mean-time I'll probably add more stuff, perhaps in order this time, but who knows!
~steve

Re: Larry Wyatt - Liberals lost the election

(Originally printed in Laconia Citizen 9/1/04)

Mr. Wyatt,
You said in your letter that if I were “well-informed you would know that 78% of the American public do not want gay marriage.” Once again, dear respondent, your missing my point. I am perfectly aware of these statistics. It still doesn’t make it right. It still leaves me with the conclusion that, by your admission, 78% of you are homophobes! And as for everyone’s denial, not one of you who have responded has given me the slightest proof that you’re not. You simply rely on the fact that you’re in the majority. Yes, majority rule is ‘Democracy in action’ as I’ve said in these pages. But, for a bunch of folks who say they voted based on ‘moral issues’ it seems pretty funny that you’re so very prejudiced and willing to take refuge in the crowd.

You then went on to say; “…If you were well-informed, you would know that 62% of the American public do not want abortion on demand, financed by the federal government, and implemented by liberal federal judges.” You’re right about the majority not wanting ‘abortion on demand’. I don’t think anyone, even the liberal apparitions that disturb your sleep, want abortion used as birth control. And I’m assuming that’s what you’re getting at. The stat that you fail to list is that the majority of people also still want it available in certain situations, such as rape and health issues to the mother. As for your ‘liberal judge’ comment…well, what can I say? We didn’t vote for these guys. But many of the people we did vote for appointed these guys. And just because you’re upset that the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled in favor of gay marriage, we now have ‘liberal judges’ with ‘activist agendas’?

As I understand it here’s what happened: the Mass legislature was considering allowing civil unions for same sex couples, but wasn’t sure if having two standards for legally binding two adults would be allowed under the Massachusetts Constitution. So they kicked it up to the Mass Supreme Court for a ruling. The Supreme Court said, “No, under the Mass Constitution a double standard is not allowed”. That’s it. Now they’re all ‘activist judges’? It’s so easy to just dismiss ‘the other guy’ if you have a good label for them isn’t it? Like ‘trial lawyer’ or ‘liberal’…

Then it was: “If you were well-informed, you would know the United States is the only country that can ultimately defend freedom around the world, and yes, by itself if needed.” Whether they want it or they don’t eh?!

One more time (again with feelin’!) no WMD’s, no demonstrable terrorist ties, not one Iraqi on any 9/11 planes…wow we’re so nice! They did nothing for us, and we’re still giving them ‘freedom’! So far they get the freedom to be kidnapped by criminals, shot at by insurgents, and bombed…but wait! That’s not all! They get no electricity, no sewer, no jobs, their cities and their bureaucratic infrastructure, necessary for what we understand to be ‘normal life’, all destroyed as well. I guess I have a different definition of ‘freedom’.

And ya brought it on home with: “I am a Republican, proud of it, and in your eyes probably not very politically correct, but please, don’t insult my intelligence and that of the Republican "majority" by telling us we are ill-informed.” No, I have no problem with your ‘political correctness’. I just think you need to reexamine the ‘morals’ and ‘values’ your party is always so happy to bandy about. What ever happened to values like tolerance, or empathy and ‘loving your neighbor’ or ‘do unto others’? I don’t think there’s an ‘except if’ in any of those values or statements. Am I insulting your intelligence? Not on purpose. I think your doing yourself a disservice by not, at least, taking into consideration that there’s people who think ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ have different shades than you do, and then examining them carefully. At the very least use the excuse ‘know thy enemy’! but get your information first hand. Not from a sound bite or a political hack or just one newspaper. You have to really dig around to find the ‘whole’ story. I’m not innocent either, but I try to find as many sources, left AND right, as I can.

And in the light of your telling me to ‘get over it’, you may chuckle when I once again point out that just because you’re in the majority, it doesn’t mean your morally correct.

Another reply to either 'Stranger in a strange land!' or my 'gay marriage' letter...who knows?: Liberals lost the election by Larry Wyatt

Originally printed in Laconia Citizen 12/1/04)

Editor, The Citizen:
This letter is in response to Stephen McBrian. With all due respect, I think you are the one who is ill-informed. If you were well-informed you would know that 78% of the American public do not want gay marriage. If you were well-informed, you would know that 62% of the American public do not want abortion on demand, financed by the federal government, and implemented by liberal federal judges. If you were well-informed, you would know the United States is the only country that can ultimately defend freedom around the world, and yes, by itself if needed. Germany and France will not keep us free of tyranny, nor will the United Nations.
I am a Republican, proud of it, and in your eyes probably not very politically correct, but please, don’t insult my intelligence and that of the Republican "majority" by telling us we are ill-informed.
The Democrats and the liberals lost the election. So in your own words Mr. McBrian, get over it!
Larry Wyatt

Re: Steven R. Snow - Still the Same Country

(Originally printed in Laconia Citizen 11/22/04)

It's still the same country? Unfortunately it is...we still have the same &^%$& president, we still have a republican dominated house and senate, we still have a republican majority of governors and the Supreme Court? It's just too depressing to bring up... Yes, you're right. Nothing much has changed. I think that was my point. It's one thing to have an election decided by the Supreme Court, it's another thing to have just barely half of the American people 'rubber stamp' the mess that is this once and future administration.

I couldn't see how the American public, given the overwhelming facts, could still vote for this guy. And after a bit of reflection, what I've decided is that the American public was ill informed. We, as a people, need to reach out and get our news from anywhere other than the TV and political ads. My father in law just said to me the other day; "what's the difference? The TV and the papers have the same news." Well that's the problem. The newspaper can spend several columns or even pages discussing the (new four letter word) 'nuance' of a given topic. The TV gives you, at best, a sixty second summery. We can’t survive on news bites...we need a meal.

Mr. Snow said in his response to my letter "Why did Mr. McBrian call people homophobes, just because they reaffirmed what nearly everyone has understood since time immemorial, that marriage can only be between a man and a woman?"

Nearly everyone? Time immemorial? Oh! Ok, I see...then we should bring back the prohibition of interracial marriages, outlaw divorce, and generally turn back the clock on all things regarding marriage? And while we're at it, let's take away women's right to own property and to vote too! And yes, those who oppose gay marriage are homophobes. Tell me I'm wrong! It's like saying "I'm not prejudiced against black people, I just don't think they should be able to marry". The only reason I can see for this attitude is as I said before: they're homophobes. The whole 'gay marriage' issue ends up just being a 'safe' or, dare I say, 'chic' way of expressing it. What is the problem? Is it 'the church'? Gay marriage has nothing to do with 'the church' in any way shape or form. For that matter, if the church marries you and you don't get a state marriage license, that marriage isn't legal. There is nothing telling the church that they have to marry gays, any more than there is a law telling me I must get married in a church. Oh, and as for the Bible (Leviticus 18:22 I think...), if you buy the 'homosexuality is against the law of god' thing, then you better take the rest of Leviticus at face value too. It says that eating shellfish is a big no-no too. So, looks like a whole bunch of you will be sharing a Jacuzzi with a gay man in hell! I ask you all, once again, what is it that bothers you all so much about two dudes or two gals kissing? They're in love and want the same legal protection we take for granted. And yes, we take it for granted. We must if the divorce rate is climbing to 50%. So get over it! No one is going to make you go to 'gay school' or something. (And no, I'm not gay...or am I? Heh, heh...)

Furthermore, you point out that the defeat of Roe V. Wade would simply put the onus back on the states. Well, then how can you support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage when, as we've unfortunately seen, the states already have the power to ban it themselves? You can't have it both ways...
As I said at the beginning of this decade, 'tolerance' should be out new motto...apparently it's actually in-tolerance. And it's too bad really, because Americans really are a nice bunch of folks...once ya get to know most of us. Oh, and by the way, no I'm not moving to Canada. And it's not because it's not a nice place. I like it right here. And as so many conservatives like to say: 'America, love it or leave it...' but they forget the rest of the quote (and I'm paraphrasing) '...but give me the courage to stay and change it for the better...'

Stranger in a strange land - A reply! by Steven R. Snow

(originally printed in Laconia Citizen 11/4/04)

Still same country
Editor, The Citizen:
I'm not sure why Stephen McBrian felt like he had awakened in a different country Wednesday morning. After all, nothing much really has changed. George W. Bush is still the President, and the Republicans still have majorities in both houses of Congress, although the majorities are slightly larger now. We lost a Republican governor in this state, and the state went for Kerry, which should have made Mr. McBrian happy. Mr. McBrian thinks that voting for President Bush is worse than voter fraud? May I infer that he would have condoned election fraud by the Democrats if it had resulted in the defeat of President Bush? I sure hope that is not what he meant. Why did Mr. McBrian call people homophobes, just because they reaffirmed what nearly everyone has understood since time immemorial, that marriage can only be between a man and a woman?
As for Roe v Wade, he spreads a misconception that women will lose the right to abort their pre-born babies if that ruling is overturned. Actually that is not generally true. It would mean only that jurisdiction over abortion law would revert to the states, the way it was before Roe v Wade. In New Hampshire, for example, all of the state's abortion laws were repealed during Jeanne Shaheen's tenure in the Governor's office, so even if Roe v Wade were to be overturned, New Hampshire women would continue to enjoy that right. There may be some states with laws against abortion still on the books, but those laws could be repealed if the majority of citizens of those states want them repealed.
A conservative Supreme Court could be good for liberals, too. If the Court truly interpreted the Constitution literally (the dream of most true conservatives!), then it would act to protect the states and the people from an overly powerful central government, whether that government was controlled by conservatives or liberals. Since the Constitution reserves the power to declare war to the Congress, one could envision that strict interpretation of the Constitution might restrain the President from entering into a war not supported by the Congress. Mr. McBrian might appreciate that, I think. If not, Canada is not far away, Mr. McBrian. You might like it better there.
Steven R. Snow

Stranger in a strange land...

(originally printed in Laconia Citizen 11/4/04)

I woke up Wednesday morning feeling like I had awakened in a different country. I thought my worst nightmare was the possibility of voter fraud. This is far worse. Who knew that so many people were jingoistic homophobes who don't read? I know that now because if anyone read the occasional paper instead of allowing their opinions to be formed by sound bites or network news, they would know what the administration gets up to, and if they weren't homophobic there wouldn't be eleven states banning gay marriage, and if they weren't jingoistic they wouldn't have rubber stamped the war. So let's bid a fond farewell to Roe Vs. Wade, affirmative action, fiscal responsibility, and our personal rights and say hello to the new draft, more war (Iran anyone?), more spending, more lost jobs, more tax breaks for corporations, and an ever growing deficit.

On behalf of my son, I would like to say; Thanks everyone! Thanks for the crushing debt I'll grow up with and have to pay for, thanks for the looming specter of a draft, thanks for the open ended war on terror (An aside from Dad: Did anyone notice that both of the U.S. cities that were actually attacked by terrorists went for Kerry? Apparently, they don't feel so safe with Mr. Bush.), and thanks for the (possibly) four new Supreme Court judges that, given the current feeling in the land, will certainly take away a woman's right to choose. Thanks America! Peace (is really) out!

Stephen McBrian

Same sex marriage: what’s the big deal?

(originally printed in Laconia Citizen 2/11/04 and, in edited form, the NH Union Leader)

In the following paragraphs I would like to address some of the issues I’ve been hearing repeatedly regarding the issue of same sex marriage.

The Sanctity of marriage: What ‘sanctity’? How can you even bandy about terms like ‘sanctity’ in a country where the divorce rate sits at a solid 60%! SIXTY PER CENT!!! You read it right! Heck, maybe if we allow a few other people into the ‘marriage club’ we can bring that number down! Furthermore marriage is a civil institution that is then sanctified, if one chooses, in the church, synagogue or mosque of ones choice. For instance, a Justice of the Peace married my wife and me. Does that mean our marriage is some how sub-par? And that, by my support of same sex marriage; I will some how ruin the sanctity of the Laconia Country Club where the service was held? And what’s more, I better not find that ONE of you that are against same sex marriage has been divorced or had their marriage annulled! And if you did, you better not have re-married! Sanctity of Marriage INDEED!

Without children there is no Marriage: This one really gets my goat! So, let me understand this, if my wife and I never have kids our marriage is a sham? I don’t think I’m alone in thinking that statement ridiculous, and pretty damn annoying. There are also the recent studies that tell us there are more than 150,000 same sex couples raising kids in the U.S. today.

We want to promote strong family values: Conservatives should be jumping for joy! Allowing same sex marriages would just promote family stability! And family stability promotes strong family values! And that’s what I’m hearing those opposed to same sex marriage saying they so desperately want! And remember folks, we (supposedly) have a separation of church and state, so ‘family values’ does not necessarily mean ‘Judeo-Christian’ values.

The Bible says homosexuality is wrong: Yeah, yeah, yeah, there is a mention of that in Leviticus (Lev. 18:22 to be precise). Leviticus also says some other cool things too! For example: eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 10:10), Lev. 20:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight (not only will Mao brand you an intellectual for wearing glasses, but God doesn’t want to ‘see’ you either!), it also allows that I may ‘…buy slaves from the nations that are around…’ (Lev. 25:44) I think, perhaps, we should start with ‘…do unto others…’ with a heavy dose of ‘…let he who cast the first stone…’ and go from there.

All you need is Love: What in the heck bothers everyone so much about this? I just don’t understand! This really isn’t a ‘moral’ question. I think it’s more of a legal one. Same sex couples would like to enjoy the same rights and privileges that any other legally bound couple has in this country. Would you deny a loved one visitation rights if they were in an accident just because they’re the same sex? Would you deny them health insurance (and don’t say AIDS will cost us a fortune, or I’ll start quoting the health care costs related to smoking! Trust me, there are a lot more smokers than people sick with AIDS.), or the ability for them to inherit their loved ones possessions just because they’re the same sex? When did being in love, and wanting to spend the rest of your life with one person become such a horrible thing?

Why are people so afraid of gay folk? They’re not vampires!

“Whatever you do don’t touch ‘em…or you become one!”

C’mon! If you believe that: Hey! Look there’s a rainbow! Did you know that Santa helps the Easter Bunny collect the leprechaun gold that’s in the pot right at the base of that rainbow?

I just don’t understand.
From now on, if anyone asks, I am a gay man married to another man and we’re raising a child together! And if you don’t like it go burn a bull on the alter of sacrifice so it ‘…may present a pleasing odor unto the lord…’ (Lev. 1:9) and pray for my families’ damnation. I know I’ll be praying for the scales to fall from your eyes.

FYI: ‘Turn Signals’

(originally printed in Laconia Citizen 3/11/04, read on-air at NHPR 6/16/06)

I’ve just learned something that I must let all of you in on!

The other day I discovered a switch on the steering column in my car that, when shifted to an ‘up’ position, causes a little light on the right-front and right-back corner of my car to blink.
“How curious.” I said.
I looked this up in the owner’s manual and apparently it’s called a ‘turn signal’.
“This really is fascinating stuff! I should have read this year’s ago!” I shouted.
As I read on, the book revealed to me that if I shifted the switch to a ‘down’ position it would do the same thing for the little lights on the left-hand side of my car.
“Amazing!”

Now I’ve been driving for years in NH and I hardly ever notice these ‘little blinking lights’ on other cars. Perhaps these lights are some special option only available on my car? The car I drive is, after all, from Japan. As it turns out, every car sold in the U.S. comes with these ‘turn signals’ standard! So, now, I was wondering what are these blinking lights for? What is this ‘turn signal’ thingy anyway?

With that question in mind I sat down and did some very extensive research. I did a search on Nexus/Lexus, consulted with AAA, and even put in a call to Click and Clack at ‘Car Talk’, and this is what I found out: it seems that these ‘turn signals’ are there to actually ‘signal’ your intent to ‘turn’! Did you guys know this? I was amazed!
I asked them, “Do you mean that I don’t have to just guess what the guy in the car in front of me is up to?”
“That’s right!” they said.
“Let me get this straight; there is a system in place to allow a car in front of me to telegraph, if you will, his or her intentions through this system of blinking lights?” “Indeed!” They replied.
“Incredible!” I raved. “It truly is a great time to be alive!”

Let the word go forth! Shout it from the mountaintops! There is a way, when driving, to ‘signal’ your intent to ‘turn’! And the little switch that many folks seem to accidentally hit in the middle of a turn, or apparently know nothing about, is indeed the way to let people know where and when your turning!

Use your turn signals! And use them to signal your intent to turn, not just while your turning!

P.S. and while I’m at it, those little white lines in parking lots are there to park in between, not over!

Feed free or die!

(response to letter printed in Laconia Citizen)

Ms. Cote in her letter of the 15th was bemoaning the possibility of paying $1000 fines for leaving her bird feeder up all summer. She feels that her rights are being trampled. Her letter reminded me of another letter complaining about the possibility of having to wear a helmet whilst riding a motorcycle. That person too felt their rights were being trampled. Well, if you’re willing to pay the bill, you can keep your ‘rights’ in tact. Here’s what I mean:

If a bear comes into the neighborhood to eat out of your bird feeder, and destroys something (of yours or your neighbors), or gets into your garbage, or kills a pet, or gets into someone’s home, or (god forbid) attacks somebody, please don’t call the forestry service or the police. And if you do, expect to receive a bill for their services. You exercised your ‘right’ to leave that feeder up. If you would like someone to take care of the bear problem YOU can pay to have it removed. It will also be YOUR responsibility to recompense for any damage done to your neighbor’s property. Same thing goes for the guy without the helmet. If you get into an accident, and your not wearing a helmet, your insurance company should cut you off, you should have to pay for your ambulance ride, for the police, for the services of the emergency response team, your hospital stay, your emergency room visit, etc.

I know it seems odd, but sometimes laws are enacted (or should be) for the benefit of the public as a whole. Not to persecute backyard ornithologists, or irresponsible motorcyclists.

PS: …and I don’t wanna hear any of you giving me that whole ‘Live Free Or Die’ song and dance that some folks like to trot out whenever they find it useful or convenient…I’m sure that motto was adopted by the governing body of NH and may even be mentioned as such in our state constitution. So unless you’re willing to dissolve the state government and the constitution that it upholds (all in the name of a motto that was selected and adopted by the same governing body) please give it a rest. What’s more, the motto was ‘coined’ by Major General John Stark (Revolutionary War) in a note sent to a reunion of his command that he was unable to attend. Those words are: “Live Free Or Die – Death is not the worst of evils.” He spoke those words, I’m assuming, in reference to the War of Independence and his belief that death was preferable to living under a ‘tyrannical’ rule. Fast forward to the present, I’m pretty sure that having to wear protective headgear and the inability to feed birds in the summer time doesn’t fall under the heading of ‘tyrannical rule’ do you?

We need a flag amendment?

(responce to letter printed in Laconia Citizen)

We need a flag amendment – just like we need a non-binding resolution to win the ‘War on Terror.’ Hey, does everybody’s arm hurt from patting yourselves on the back?

In a recent letter Mr. Allen Gurney wrote; “"Old Glory," a nickname for our flag and all of us should be proud of having such a beautiful and loving flag, a symbol of the United States of America. So, we all should pray that bill SJR12 will pass and be done with it.” I agree it’s a grand looking flag; it comes when I call, never tracks mud in the house, yes, all in all a very loving flag…(down Old Glory! What I tell you about getting on the furniture?)…But seriously, folks…

What’s the point of passing shrill ‘oh-my-god-we-must-protect-the-sanctity-of-our-flag’ measures when we still allow “Old Glory” to be printed on t-shirts, bumper stickers, and product advertisements? Personally I think using the flag for symbolic political reasons, such as burning in protest, (or trying to pass holier-than-thou flag protection legislation for the sake of re-election) to be far more palatable than seeing ‘Old Glory’ plastered across the background of a Harley Davidson poster, or on a ‘these colors don’t run’ bumper sticker. Both of which are cynically preying on your patriotism to make a buck. That’s disgusting.

The crass commercialization of our national symbol is what you should be getting all up in arms about, and banning that type of exploitation is a piece of legislation I could get behind. Until then, I expect all you flag protection supporters to start treating our ‘national symbol’ with the proper respect. This would include the removal of any stickers depicting the flag from your cars, refusing to buy products that use the flag as a marketing tool and the disposal of all such products currently in your households (such as t-shirts, lighters, sparklers, mugs, etc.), properly dispose of tattered and or faded flags (this means either burning or burying I believe) and replace them with new ones. And remember the flag should be taken in every night, properly handled and not allowed to touch the ground. If you have a flag being displayed flat on a wall the blue field should always be in the upper left portion of the flag. I’m sure, as patriots, and lovers of our ‘beautiful and loving’ flag all of you who support this bill already follow all these rules and have the utmost respect for our flag and it’s image.

There are many ceremonial rules regarding the handling, care and display of our flag, and they can be located anywhere from a Boy Scout manual to the Internet. If SJR12 will end the flag being considered a great idea for a t-shirt or a television ad, if SJR12 ends the blatant commercial exploitation of our national symbol, come talk to me. Until then I would posit this is nothing more than a politically motivated legislative campaign used to make dupes and fools of those who really want to see the flag treated with respect.

*SALON.COM EDITORS PICK!

Non-binding Resolutions?

I’m writing in reference to the recent non-binding resolution passed by the House of Representatives that declared our ‘intent to win the war on terror’ and our ‘support of the troops’ etc.

Um, so, if it’s like, ‘non-binding’ what’s the point? Could it be (gasp!) that they’re playing politics! No! Not the Republicans! Only Democrats do that TO Republicans…not the other way ‘round! I know this because I keep hearing Republicans say that, so it must be true…right? Ok. It’s either the Democrats or the ‘Eastern Liberal Media!’ Yeah! That’s it!

SIDEBAR: (Ahh, if there only were a Liberal Media…hmmm…(fade in “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” by the Beach Boys) But, obviously, there isn’t ‘cause if there were a liberal media don’t ya think it would lean more to the left, would be sanitized of any ‘conservative’ points of view, and would actually take the current administration to task for it’s alleged misdeeds? Well? I’m waiting… And if there really is a Liberal Media, then why do I keep hearing all those Republican talking points from virtually every media outlet? One last thing, take a quick peek at who OWNES the large media outlets and see to which party they made donations to. Then come talk to me about ‘Liberal Media.’)

In honor of the great strides they’re making in the House, I would like to announce my own non-binding resolution! I pledge (within the context of said non-binding resolution) that I will make my best effort to appreciate the music and movies of Mariah Carey! I will soon announce this to my wife (who’s not really a fan) and immediately set about accusing her of being ‘Against Mariah!’

Now, I’m not really a fan at all, and I probably will never be, but when I speak at the Mariah Carey fan club dinner and I announce that I put forward legislation (non-binding of course) wherein I pledge to become a Mariah fan, I’m gonna get the big standing-O. And how do you think the fan club will react when I tell them that my wife voted against Mariah appreciation? Voted to ‘cut and run’ from the mellifluous, slightly loopy, character with the dog whistle-like voice that is Mariah? She’ll be lucky to get out of there alive!

Let’s review! What did my non-binding resolution accomplish other than politically embarrassing my wife and painting her into a corner regarding a recording artist that neither of us cares for? Nothing! Now you see what the leaders of the House mean when they say they want a ‘real debate’ about the war. They mean ‘shut up’ about it already. They mean ‘y’all either wid us or agin us.’ It all meant NOTHING. Thanks guys! Heck of a job y’all are doin’!

This latest move is very much like the one pulled by a Republican member of the Senate a couple years ago when the ‘talk on the street’ was suggesting that the administration might want to reinstate the draft. What did that Republican Senator do? Why, he himself put forth a proposal to bring back the draft just so he and others could vote it down and say, “Ya see? Don’t be silly; we’re not bringing the draft back! Look! We just voted not to!” Gosh, that sure seems like playing politics, but I must be wrong. They wouldn’t waste our time and money like that would they? I mean, they’re Republican, they’re supposedly ‘fiscal conservatives’, they would never force us to think one way or the other, they stand for ‘less intrusion’ into our personal lives! Right? They wouldn’t pull a fast one like that just to make a couple points with the public in an election year? Would they? What about our ‘contract with America’? Help us Newt! They wouldn’t let us down like that! Would they? …?