To answer a question

At this point, I think part of the problem with the Democratic party - which just helped confirm Mr. Bush's new torture-enabling unitary-executive-theory supporting atty. general in the Senate, right after helping smash the GBLT coalition into its constituent parts in the House - isn't that they don't represent their voters. I think part of the problem is that they do.

44 "no" votes. They could've stopped this nomination. It's the Senate; they had plenty of votes for a filibuster. They rely on the 60-vote requirement all the time to do stop efforts to reign in Mr. Bush - it's certainly one of the excuses I'm most often given - but then they can't seem to manage that kind of thing here. Clearly, what they wanted was a platform from which they could pretend they felt one way so they could then vote another, and they expect that to pay off in 2008. Rhetoric about being "wrong on torture" aside, they just didn't want to stop this, or, in the unlikely event they actually did, were just too damn cowardly to take the stand. Which is really the case doesn't matter.

So to answer a criticism question regularly lobbed at me; why don't I believe in trying to take over the existing Democratic party from the inside? Because that doesn't fucking work. They take over you. So we see it with this attourney general. So we see it with Barney Frank and the Human Rights Campaign. And this is why I'd rather go with the one-percenters hanging out on the fringes, hoping for an opening - because one percent is, at least, more than zero.

And today the knives are really coming out

It has been often noted that an alliance is at its most vulnerable in two stages: at the verge of defeat, and at the edge of victory. This is an example.

We've just watched the GLB portion of the former GBLT alliance throw the transgendered under the bus. That was bad - real bad - behaviour, and signals very clearly that the national GLB rights movement - particularly the G part of it, if Andrew Sullivan's commentary this morning is any indication - has reached a treasured milestone in American society: the point where they can say, "fuck you, I got mine," and knife the somewhat-more-undesirable undesirables in the back to demonstrate that there's someone else they're better than. It's kind of the welcome ceremony of American politics, really; one of the things you do is turn to some of your own and say, "thanks for your decades of work and money and blood, now here's a shiny knife for you, right between your ribs. Buh-bye!"

There's been some pretending that this is about incrementalism, but that's a lie, and I think the people spouting off about that generally know it. Civil unions vs. marriage - that's incrementalism. Job protections but not lending? That would be incrementalism. Taking part of your alliance and throwing them to the wolves as untouchables? That's not. The pretending is just that - a pretense, a way of justifying the betrayal, to turn the anger of those they've betrayed into anger of their own back at their victims. How dare you complain? How DARE you?! they howl. And then they blame you for what they've done.

Today, though, the knives are really coming out. The successful vote sealed it, I suppose; the Stranger is crowing about how Good and Right and Necessary it was, tho' this time, at least, there's much more argument than agreement in the comments so far. (This wasn't true in the previous post.) The New York Times is pushing the "incrementalist" lie, heaping praise on Rep. Frank. Andrew Sullivan is going off on how the zomg trannies were never part of his coalition, and for that matter, he's not even sure having the G and L together makes that much sense either. Gay journalist Rex Wockner pretends that the transgendered are somehow new to this whole struggle, and wants to know who the hell invited them, anyway, and why don't they do their own work - ignoring the decades of effort running the other direction, of course, and the transgendered participation in (and arguably initiation of) the Stonewall Riots, as all the people on that side of this maneuver do. And the Stranger linked to John Aravosis at AmericaBlog - commending him specifically in doing so - who is all for the knifing, spending more time blasting Inclusive-ENDA backers National Gay and Lesbian Task Force than the fundamentalists, and who holds up the 70% number in that Human Rights Campaign poll to talk more about how Good and Right it all was.

I'm genuinely surprised. I thought that the "normal" queers, having so much immediate experience with the politics of betrayal and self-sabotage, would forget less quickly, or, at least, might go, "y'know? That really sucked. I don't want any part of that." But I was wrong; apparently the reaction has been less that and more, "Man, I can't wait until it's my turn. That's gonna be great."

So. Who gets thrown under the bus next? Bisexuals, who don't really count, since a lot of them (us) end up with opposite-gender partners (tho' not in my case)? It's much easier, having that option; maybe they (we) aren't so deserving. Plus everybody knows they really want one of each, and that's not what Real Gay People Want, and is kinda icky. Kinda greedy. Or maybe even lesbians, as hinted at by Mr. Sullivan today, noting that he doesn't "really believe there is even a 'gay and lesbian community' as such"? All that time lesbians put in helping AIDS-stricken gay men in the 1980s? Screw that, there are drugs now. Ancient history.

Or maybe nobody. Maybe having played out the political blood rite, the HRC and the national GLB community will manage not to shed any more letters. It's not like they can afford the numbers. But even given the manifest stupidity of such a thing, I don't know how much money I'd want to put against it. Not today, anyway. Maybe tomorrow it will be different. Maybe Monday. Maybe the NGLTF can displace HRC as the queer organisation that people actually know. I guess we'll see.

When people reference that adage about alliances coming apart at the edge of victory, they usually forget the part where that's how alliances often lose that same triumph.

I know they've just lost me.

today i was useless and stupid

...but as far as this goes, I was a bit better than yesterday.

8 November: Got a better handle on a previously-derived new melody, fiddled with some lyrics. Reviewed a bunch of the work I've done so far. Some of it's okay, some of it's not.
9 November: Came up with a bit of a new melody, acceptably unlike other melodies I've come up with this month, I think. I'll see if I still agree tomorrow.

Definitely behind where I'd like to be. It hasn't been a good week in general.

Oh, the tiny digital voice recorder has come in handy again. So yay, that's twice in three days, and it records well enough to hear tunes even next to Bothell Way at the bus stop. So that's good.