You know Reg, the old white guy who writes for the Post-Gazette?  No not, him.  Not him either - that's the editor.  And, no, Brian O'Neil is the liberal guy.  The one who isn't old.  No the liberal guy isn't that black guy.  Well, yeah Tony is liberal, too, but never mind. I don't know why the women were all laid off.  Just try to pay attention.

Yesterday, Reg Henry jumped the shark into "why don't we bring back Ruth Ann Dailey FT" territory? 

Like most men of a certain era, Reg doesn't like a fuss.  He prefers the quiet kind of "pull my finger, no really" liberal analysis as a form of democratic action.  What he definitely doesn't like is the prospect of crossing Penn Avenue in the midst of a political protest.  He might be late for his Starbucks.  Or have to <gasp> read a handbill. 

The G-20 has come to be regarded by some as a grand excuse for a riot, a jackass-a-rama, a Woodstock of ratbags. A decade ago, when Seattle hosted a World Trade Organization meeting, thousands of protesters turned out to cause trouble and the police overreacted. Recently, London had its own troubles with a meeting of the G-20.

Of course, these protests change nothing. They never have a chance of changing anything. How could they? They are all about the protest, not the result. While the demonstrators say they are seeking to protest (you name it) globalization, climate change, environmental ruin or economic recession, street theater is really about disaffected people acting out at everyone else's expense.

Or so I reckon by the evidence of my own eyes. Little kids scream and stamp their feet. Some of them grow up and scream, stamp their feet and throw something at any convenient symbol of authority. If you were a world leader, would you be influenced by jackasses indulging their revolutionary fantasies? Me neither.

Huh.  I guess suffrage, the bus boycotts, Stonewall ... all a sham.  Nothing changed. Someone better inform the 5,000 homosexuals descending on Downtown this weekend to celebrate 40 years of nothing.  Oh, except without Stonewall, 5,000 homosexuals wouldn't be doing anything.  Together.  Right?

You may have gathered that I am not much for street demonstrations. You may be surprised by this, given my reputation as a liberal. However, I do recognize that the Constitution's First Amendment establishes "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

So peaceably assemble already. Petition away with my blessing. Just don't make the average Pittsburgher's life miserable because you can't make your point successfully at the ballot box. The moment you stop being peaceable is the moment you lose me and the crowd.

Your reputation is a bit misguided at best, dear Reg.  Armchair moderate is a bit more apt.

By peaceful, you mean don't block traffic.  Don't distribute literature that yinzer's throw on the ground because they can't be bothered with pesky world issues (see recycling post below).  Don't interfere with day to day life.  Most of all, please don't make us think about the connection between our Wal-Mart Penguin jersey purchases and that kid in Bangladesh.  Or the woman in Florida. 

Reg makes an artful aside to the havoc and mayhem the yinzers bring to town with any athletic event.  They block traffic (remember when Luke has his parade for winning the Superbowl?). They toss around plastic doo dads.  They commit acts of violence (burning couches is probably the least of them).  They drive under the influence.  They waste police resources (and then complain for being manhandled). 

I don't see "right to serve alcohol to stupid people" embodied in the Constitution, but no one proposes shutting down Carson Street bars to keep order.  No one sets up a "free yinzer" zone to make it safe for me to venture out of my house Friday night. 

Why not?  Oh, that's right, there's no thinking involved. Who cares?  We are the champions of something, anything.  We've got Mama's borscht so everything is all right.

But why bother?  Protests never change anything.  So can I really expect blogging to change rambling columns from the old white male liberal establishment?  Hmmmmmm

The battle wages on as valiant national LGBTQ leaders lead the charge for a federal strategy of equality.  Top among those issues is the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) which passed the House with protections for sexual orientation only. In keeping with the call for inclusiveness, leaders have vowed solidarity to keep protections based on gender identity and gender expression in the new legislation. 

You can monitor the situation via Facebook working group.  I was one of the folks who made calls to my federal officials (Doyle, Specter and Casey).  It tooks me five minutes, was free with my cell phone and I had to write down maybe 3 sentences. 

Kudos to Mike Doyle for being an absolute yes on an Inclusive ENDA.  If you see him at PrideFest, be sure to thank him.

The ENDA FB group has created a spreadsheet of undecideds in the House of Representatives.  In the entire House, there are 6 absolute yes votes and 169 probably yes.  With the probably no votes, there are 127 Representatives whose vote is undecided or unknown. 

Check out whether your legislator's position is in the undecided/unknown category on the spreadsheet link on our Inclusive ENDA page. (**I've listed PA below - Sue.)

If they are listed there, please call their office at 202-224-3121. Ask your Rep's office whether he or she has a position on an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act, and explain that means both sexual orientation and gender identity. Then, post the results of your call on the Wall below (even if it's just leaving a message).

Now I know from previous comments that people are busy working hard and feeling disconnected for advocacy.  But I'm asking you to stop and think about this legislation (and HB 300) in the context of your own life.

Have you experienced discrimination or felt discriminated against in the workplace?  Based on anything - gender, race, religion, ethnicity, etc.  Does your employer have a viable means of reporting and addressing this discrimination?  A lot of people tell me no.  They either suck it up or find somewhere else to work. 

That's wrong.  And I'm going to guess that the lack of protections or enforceable protections hits disproportionately in workplaces that suck to begin with -- low wages, undesirable working conditions, hard hours and so forth.  Because employers that don't try to create a decent working environment (to the best of their ability) probably aren't worried that someone called you a fag in the breakroom?  Right?  (This is where you might begin to see the affinity between labor and the LGBT equality movement).

Unless they might be fined for it.

I'm sure not saying that ENDA or HB 300 is going to cure your work woes, but it is an important tool to fight back and send a message that we are not second-class citizens.  That YOUR work is as important and valuable as your heterosexual counterparts.  That you deserve to work harassment free so you can do your job plain and simple.

Why inclusive?  Well, first because we can't leave people behind on the path to equality lest we prove ourselves willing to tolerate a three tiered separate but equal society.  (Wrong).  There's a also a fine line to understand -- for example, women who don't "express" the kind of female identity that society lifts up as ideal could be fired for being a disruptive influence.  You aren't fired for being a dyke, you are fired for not being femme.  Gussy yourself up and you'll be fine.  (Wrong). 

I know all of you gay people reading this have encountered gender role crap before.  Either you look too gay or your don't look gay at all.  Your hair is too short or your hair has too much product.  Your wallet chain is too masculine or your purse is too pretty.  One might get you fired, but my sisters who get the you don't look gay crap can empathize with this situation, right? And men, too, by all means.

So we all have a very clear investment in this legislation which would apply across the nation.  The national organizers want that one simple call outlined above.  The more calls they get, the more effort they will put into the issue.

Kathleen Dahlkemper (Butler Armstrong, Venago, more**)

Jason Altmire (Western PA)

Glenn Thompson

Jim Gerlach

Christopher Carney

Paul Kanjorski

John Murtha (Western PA)

Charles Dent (Republican)

Todd Platts (Republican)

So let's focus on Murtha and Altmire who are in our neck of the woods, okay?  You know people who live there.  You probably know gay people.  God knows there are plenty in Cranberry Township which is ironically suffering a dearth of qualified blue collar workers who can't afford to  live there.  Plus, there aren't enough bus routes to transport folks from the big-bad-tax-levying City.  Huh. 

So call.  Join the FB group.  Post your results on their Wall.  See if we can knock 127 down a bit. At least by two.

Finally, don't forget HB 300.  Or the County Ordinance.  There's a synergy between all three.  While you are making calls, why not call three - your County Councilperson, your State Representative and Altmire/Murtha? 

First, watch this video from 60 Minutes on the lethal impact of toxic electronic dumping:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/18/tech/main3518429.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Today's Post-Gazette: EPA Accused Electronics Recycler of Violations

The company does seem to have ran afoul of the EPA, in spite of the protests of their ardent local defenders, er defender.  Who works for them. Go figure. 

I'm getting heat from animal advocates telling me that I should not be critical of the organizations that were scammed by this man.  I disagree.  Scammed, duped, misled, etc does not absolve them from some culpability, especially when the news headlines are filled with compaints about their missing money. 

Is the missing money really the issue?  I mean do you think the mother of the children playing near the toxic waste dump is wishing to take her kids to Disney Land or a home with a non-glow-in-the-dark playground? I get that these organizations need the money and put the eggs in the wrong basket. That's disappointing, I'm sure.  But it is also foolish greed. 

It seems improbable that all of these educated animal welfare volunteers missed the huge media coverage on this issue.  It doesn't take a 60 Minutes geek like me to have picked up on the fact that there's a reason ALL of the electronic recycling companies charge people to dispose of these items. 

But fine, let's leave it that they were duped and lost money they could have been raising with that energy and time.  Fine.  The question becomes how are they going to undo this damage?  I don't mean the money or the fact that they look rather foolish, but what are they going to do about the collateral damage from their decisions to participate --- the humans and the animals living near the toxic dumps?  Will any of these groups step forward with whatever proceeds they use and ensure that items sitting in the containers in Monroeville or wherever don't sit there forever?  I guess the best case scenario is that they are seized by the feds or the state and disposed of -- on our public dime -- appropriately. 

To be fair, it seems like none of the items collected in Western PA made it to the dumps.  That's a huge relief.  But they still exist. 

Does anyone feel anything but anger about the money over this?  I love the animal welfare groups and what they do, but it appalls me that people seem to think the lives of our domestic pets are more important than the wildlife and the human beings in these toxic dumps.  I guess we don't see enough barefoot children trekking through the local dumps for it to seem real, huh?