Who knew the trasition from blog to magazine would pay off so quickly? The Talent Show^{[1]The magazine, not the blog. Yeah, I know it’s easy to mix the two up.} was just featured on MSNBC. PoliticalTeen has the video. Thanks for the shout-out Jeralyn.

Speaking of getting props from the MSM™, back when this site was still a blog^{[2]Last week.}, we were featured on CNN’s Inside the Blogs segment. Needless to say, my reaction wasn’t very gracious. Hopefully I can make it up to them by saying thank you, thank you, thank you for mentioning us again today :

TATTON: Yeah. And back to the left side. I just mentioned Atrios. This is Escaton who up until yesterday was a blogger, now announcing himself — Escaton, an online magazine of news, commentary and editorial. And you’ve got the background how all that happened.

SCHECHNER: We’ll tell you how this evolved.

So, Duncan Black is one of several bloggers who has been testifying before the Federal Elections Commission over the past couple of days. They have been addressing the issue of who is a journalist, who is a blog. How should campaign regulation be extended into the blogosphere, if it should at all. They are all saying no, it should not.

But Duncan has some questions, wondering why he was treated differently as a blogger than he would be as a media entity. For example, why is Salon.com entitled to the media exemption, but not him. This sparked something.

TATTON: Yeah. Those questions raised over at Escaton. This post here from the talentshow.org, also until yesterday a blog. The site’s host realized the potential pit falls of being a blogger in this day and age of potential FEC regulations. So, they’ve taken drastic measures. They’re no longer calling themselves a blog, instead, a web magazine.

They say the content’s going to look the same, the site’s going to look the same, but the changes as far as the FEC is concerned will be drastic. Just in the name there. Starting tomorrow, my days as a blogger are ending and my days as a writer are beginning. Now, this has sparked lots of different people getting on this bandwagon doing the same thing. They update today looking at some of the sites doing the same thing. One of them is talkleft.com, who declared the day the bloggers died saying that we are now the online magazine for liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news. So, lots of people jumping on this.

SCHECHNER: Over at Swing State Project, Bob Brigham doing the same thing, saying he used to be friends with bloggers and now he is friends with members of the press. So you too can improve your social standing with one single post.

TATTON: So, lots of fun posts on this. But this is a very important topic to bloggers with a very important message out there for the FEC. Do not regulate us. We’ve been saying that all week. And that concludes today’s installment, Suzanne, of inside the online magazines, back to you.

Sorry I was a dick last week, CNN. And thanks for helping shine a light on this issue.

Hi everyone, Cub Reporter Ross Lincoln here again. I’m about to be extremely profane.

I’d like you to take a look at the following image. It’s not pretty people, and you’re going to be amazed, and offended.

Now have a look at this one:

If you’re like me, you’re probably a little freaked out by this shit. There’s just no way to look and not see Minstrel-Steppin Fetchit-Aunt Jemimah-”Mammy!” racism in every stroke. It’s the sort of neutered-primateesque portrayl of young black people (especially black males) common during the days of segregation and lynching. Ridiculing Black potential and intelligence has long been a way for white men to feel less threatened by Blackness - It’s imagery more at home in the 1920s and 30s, at the height of mass-media racist campaigns against black people.

Only it’s actually quite modern.

What you’re seeing is art from the long running, racist-as-a-motherfuck Mexican Comic Book, MEMÍN PINGÜÍN. (WARNING: The Wikipedia Entry is incomplete and inaccurate. I only link to it for general info.)

MP depicts the adventures of a bunch of kids, normal looking (presumably) mexican children of varying brown and white appearances, and their freind, the star of the comic and little Black Sambo stunt double, Memin, whose “amusing” appearance is the basis for much of the series’ humor. I AM NOT MAKING THAT LAST BIT UP.

And it’s now the subject of a new issue of stamps in mexico:

The series of five stamps released Wednesday depicts a hapless boy drawn with exaggerated features, thick lips and wide-open eyes. His appearance, speech and mannerisms are the subject of kidding by white characters in the comic book, which started in the 1940s and is still published in Mexico.

Activists criticized the stamps as offensive, though officials denied it.

“One would hope the Mexican government would be a little more careful and avoid continually opening wounds,” said Sergio Penalosa, an activist in Mexico’s small black community on the southern Pacific coast.

Gee, you think?

Carlos Caballero, assistant marketing director for the Mexican Postal Service, said the new stamps are not offensive, nor were they intended to be.

“This is a traditional character that reflects part of Mexico’s culture,” Caballero said. “His mischievous nature is part of that character.”

It always amazes me how quickly people move to defend inexcusable defamations as expressions of Culture. Whether bigots in the American south defending the Stars and Bars as expressions of pride, ignoring how the popularity of the Confederate Flag rose in direct relation to the fight against civil rights, or the Queen’s Consort’s amazing penchant for glib bigotry, it’s clear that PC behavior is a bigger propblem for people on the right who need to justify resentment and mistrust of people who don’t look like themselves. For proof that stupidity is an ailment not limited to English speakers, look no further.

Publisher Manelick De la Parra told the government news agency Notimex the character would be a sort of goodwill ambassador on Mexican letters and postcards. “It seems nice if Memin can travel all over the world, spreading good news,” de la Parra said, calling him “so charming, so affectionate, so wonderful, generous and friendly.”

It’s true, and you know what else? He’s so well-spoken, so articulate. I’ve known so many black people in my life, but this little boy is definitely one of the good ones.

I’d like to invite you to take a close look at this next image:

How could anyone look at this and not see a monkey being attacked by normal looking latino children? Anyone who defends this sort of trash ought to be considered socially dead. It’s offensive that anyone would even try, and to them, I ask, how would you feel the US put Speedy Gonzalez on our stamps?

Fortunately, El presidente himself is here to make sure this issue is given the treatment it so seriously requires:

In May, Fox riled many by saying Mexican migrants take jobs in the United States that “not even blacks” want. Fox later expressed regret for any offense the remarks may have caused, but insisted his comments had been misinterpreted.

It’s true. The remarks were actually part of the following statement (Pardon the bad translation):

“If I were going to say something incredibly Racist, something that would instantly offend people who have more than three functioning brain cells, and possibly tarnish my own good name, I’d probably make some kind of flippant remark about illegal immigrants, who take jobs not even blacks want. But because I’m not a fucking idiot, I’d never say such a thing.”

Seriously Liberal media, why do you keep having to quote people accurately? Don’t you know that being held accountable for one’s words and deeds is a communist, pro terra anti freedom tactic? Of course, I know how he feels. I myself hate it when the Jews get upset when we point out their obsessive greed for money.

One Rainbow people. Many colors. And apparently, some of those colors need to quit bringing down the property vaules and stay the fuck away from the white women.

Found via the race traitor Jesse at Pandagon.

Rob Long over at Arianna’s watercooler has an interesting post about Tom Cruise’s bizarre proselytizing^{[1]Which always annoys me, regardless of what religion it is.} :

So why the snickers and derision and spooky-voice reaction to what is, let’s be honest, an eccentric but not totally nutty set of beliefs that somehow leads actors to avoid drugs and write thank-you notes? Sure it’s weird when you get really into it, but then, no one has ever clearly explained the idea of the Holy Ghost to me, either. And then there’s the Great Flood, and the Burning Bush, and don’t get me started on why Good Friday is supposed to be so “good.”

So maybe Tom Cruise – who used to have the office upstairs from mine on the Paramount lot, and who was, let me just say, incredibly polite and nice whenever I saw him – so maybe he’s a little intense or tightly wound or believes that we’re all descended from space aliens, and maybe the Katie Holmes thing makes some of us uncomfortable in some non-specific way. I don’t know, maybe Scientology is what Christianity was in pre-Christian Rome: a creepy, disturbing, all-encompassing cult that irritated and infuriated the establishment. If there’s one thing I know about Los Angeles in 2005, it’s that it’s not too different from ancient Rome.

If Tom Cruise were appearing on talk shows touting “the healing power of prayer”, he’d be treated like a national hero. If anyone tried to criticize his behavior, they’d be called out for hating Christianity. Yet here we are bashing the guy for saying things that are weird, but still on par sanity-wise with what you’d see on an episode of The 700 Club. Apparently religious tolerance only goes in one direction in this country. Sorry, Tom. Your religion^{[2]Yes, I’m very familiar with how crazy Scientology is. I’ve been to the L. Ron Hubbard Life Exhibition more times than I can count and it never stops being funny.} isn’t popular enough to deserve respect.

UPDATE : The last line in this comic made me laugh so hard I choked on my iced tea (via Oliver) :

Hi everyone, Talent Show Cub Reporter Ross Lincoln here!

As you know, for the last several months we’ve held auditions for American Idol: Justification. In secret bunker locations/studios all across this great land, we’ve been searching for the perfect catch-all reason to invade Iran. Folks, the hard work has finally paid off.

It’s been rough finding that just right sort of bullshit.

* It’s got to fall apart on the closest scrutiny, but sound plausible enough to the masses of xenophobic, racist morons who make up the republican constituency that even when confronted with the truth, they’ll do the hard work of keeping themselves in the dark for us.

* It has to combine primal, childish emotional reactionism with American pride, while at the same time having the veneer of legitimate, grievance bitching rhetorical cover to those allies poor enough to be bribed by the ever-shrinking U.S. government coffers.

* The emotional response should also be transferable, so that when we inevitably abandon the excuse as it falls apart, we can continue to channel the anger generated by the excuse to other quickly hashed out reasons, for the common good. In this case, the common good being yet another unneccesary patriotic war.

* Most importantly, it has to come factory direct with neat turns of the phrase, and built-in implications that our allies are against us. I seem to recall that France and Germany seem to be fond of Persian food, dont you?

As our beloved mongoloid president is so fond of saying, It’s Hard!

First, we gave freaking people out about Iran’s nuclear program the old college try. For a while there it almost looked like this going to be our golden god, the perfect raison d’guerre. Unfortunately, after that little lack of WMDs in Iraq, we realized that we’ve squeezed out most of the good will we’re ever going to get from that one, and wisely decided to let sleeping dogs tell falsehoods.

Then we tried the feminism route - Pointing out how oppressive Iran is to women sure made us feel better about Afganistan, I mean, something. Look, you get it, right? Unfortunately, the bulk of our voters are either terrified or deeply resentful of empowered women, and more honestly, when they look at cultures like Iran, they tend to think they’re mostly okay, except for the darkie/burka/pagan god thing. Our voters want their theocracy to come draped in the good ol’ red white and blue, preferably with a country-rock soundtrack.

We were forced to seek our fortunes elsewhere. Luckily, there’s just no shortage of American ingenuity when it comes to deeply dishonest and delusional forms of persuasion, and I’m proud to announce, at long last, the Official Justification For Invading Iran:

REVENGE MUTHAFUCKA!!!

WASHINGTON - President Bush said Thursday that “many questions” have been raised by allegations of some former American hostages that Iran’s president-elect was one of their captors in the late 1970s.

“I have no information,” Bush said in an interview with foreign reporters ahead of a trip to Scotland next week. “But obviously his involvement raises many questions.”

Afterward, White House press secretary Scott McClellan said that Bush was referring to reports suggesting Iranian president-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s involvement in the 1979 hostage crisis at the U.S. embassy in Tehran.

…

Former hostages Chuck Scott, David Roeder, William J. Daugherty and Don A. Sharer told The Associated Press that after seeing Ahmadinejad on television, they have no doubt he was one of the hostage-takers. A fifth ex-hostage, Kevin Hermening, said he reached the same conclusion after looking at photos. A close aide to Ahmadinejad denied the president-elect took part in the seizure of the embassy or in holding Americans hostage.

The hostage-taking, which came in reprisal for Washington’s refusal to surrender ousted Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi for trial there, contributed substantially to then-President Jimmy Carter’s defeat by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 election.

I’m outraged, OUTRAGED! How dare the Iranians elect someone like this! We in the US would never, NEVER allow unreformed criminals and thugs to have any measure of influence in our affairs on any level, at least not without brutally slandering the opposition, relativising the facts and announcing that we’re not “dwelling” on the past! The thought that these horrible, Persian looking infide- I mean, Islamofacists could so blantantly disrespect our Nation in such serious, post 911 times in which everything is different just chaps my hide.

Unfortunately, there are a few french speaking Blame Americists who can’t see that Everything Is Different Now, and they’re going to have to be dealt with:

Another former hostage, retired Air Force Col. Thomas E. Schaefer, said he doesn’t recognize Ahmadinejad as one of his captors. Several former students among the hostage-takers also said they did not believe that Ahmadinejad had taken part in it.

What you may not know is that Schaefer used to go windsurfing every weekend with John kerry, that is when he wasn’t inventing the internet with Al Gore and wiping Clinton-Seed off of Monica’s dress. So you know he can’t be trusted.

Some former hostages couldn’t be sure about their captors. Former Marine embassy guard Paul Lewis of Sidney, Ill., said he thought Ahmadinejad looked vaguely familiar when he saw a picture of him on the news last week, but “my memories were more of the gun barrel, not the people behind it.”

“I cannot postively identify the individual. When I was interrogated, I was blindfolded and shackled,” said Alan Golancinski, one of the former hostages who is retired and now lives in Ponte Vedra Beach, Fla. “He does look familiar, but I have no way of postively identifying the individual,” he said.

Well, you know what we always say: Absence of evidence is not evidence of absinth. Or whatever. Look bitches, either you’re down with dropping some serious War on terra knowledge on these evil Islamofuckers, or you’re a homosexual lesbian with a tiny penis. Do you love America, or do you love french cock?

For the rest of you who aren’t licking treasonous ballsacs, rich kids can sign for the Slander patrol on the right, and poor kids can join Team America: Cannon Fodder on the left. Gooooo USA!!!

What’s that? Oh, don’t worry guys, as soon as we’ve turned the corner in the last throes of freedom’s march in Iraq, we’ll be manufacturing gathering evidence that North Koreans masturbate to pictures of the baby Jesus. We don’t want to over extend ourselves, do we?

Apologies to the General for basically ripping off his delivery.

How would the FEC define “blog”? Like every other website you visit, this site is serving content via HTTP protocol on port 80. As far as the guts of the site, Movable Type considers itself a “publishing platform” these days. Like Slate, this site has multiple authors, covers a variety of topics, and updates sporadically throughout the day. If the FEC wants to draw a line between the online world and print, I’d love to see a comparison between the traffic statistics of NYTimes.com and the circulation numbers of The New York Times print version. Then again, the difference between whether or not I’m allowed to discuss politics could be as simple as not using the word “blog” anymore. Semantic restrictions are meaningless when you’re a template change away from avoiding legal scrutiny.

Then again, I guess it’s all a moot point now that I’ve stopped being a blogger. As much as I miss the blogosphere, at least I’ve got some company. So far, Atrios, Americablog, Crooks & Liars, Sadly, No!, Swing State Project, Law Dork, Dispassionate Liberalism, Chaos Digest, The Political Forecast have all joined me in the exciting world of online publishing. Am I missing anyone?

Conservatives, feel free to ditch your blogs as well. It affects you guys too.

UPDATE : The list of former bloggers has grown to include DirtyGreek.org, The Poorman, Jesus’ General, Archy, TalkLeft, The Whiskey Bar Times, This Space For Rent (sorta), Balloon Juice (our first conservative!), Instapundit, Annatopia, Left in the West, Unconventional Wisdom, Daily Pundit, The Reality Base, Dr. Laniac…

(I’ll be updating this post throughout the day to include new additions to the world of online magazine publishing.)

Atrios asks some good questions about the FEC’s proposed regulations on bloggers :

Why is somebody who prints up and mails out weekly vanity newsletter entitled to the media exemption but not me?

Why is Michael Savage entitled to the media exemption but not me?

Why is Salon.com entitled to the media exemption but not me?

In order to avoid any potential pitfalls, let me use this opportunity to announce that this post will be the last one on The Talent Show blog. Starting either late today or tomorrow, I will relaunch (without any fanfare whatsoever) my new web magazine, The Talent Show. I will still be the primary writer around here, but the traditional blog posts will be replaced with articles of varying lengths and topics. I will also be replacing the comments with article specific message boards. The look of the site, the writing style, the subject matter, the content, and the technological back-end will be identical to what I’m using now, but the change (as least as far as the FEC is concerned) will be drastic. Starting tomorrow, my days as a blogger are ending and my days as a writer begin.

I’ve been pretty harsh on CNN in the past, but I gotta give their anchors credit for this smackdown :

KAGAN: One Republican congressman insists the president was right to tie the war in Iraq to 9/11 in last night’s address. He talked with our Carol Costello earlier this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. ROBIN HAYES (R), NORTH CAROLINA: It’s very clear the terrorists are connected to what Saddam Hussein was all about. And that again faces us as the most severe threat going forward.

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: But there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was connected in any way to al Qaeda.

HAYES: Ma’am, I’m sorry, but you’re mistaken. There’s evidence everywhere. We get access to it. Unfortunately, others don’t.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: And according to the record, the 9/11 Commission in its final report found no connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

More of this, please.

Close your eyes and imagine the wingnut response if John Kerry had said something like this in a speech :

Some wonder whether Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. Among the terrorists, there is no debate. Hear the words of Osama Bin Laden: “This Third World War is raging” in Iraq. “The whole world is watching this war.” He says it will end in “victory and glory, or misery and humiliation.”

The terrorists know that the outcome will leave them emboldened, or defeated. So they are waging a campaign of murder and destruction. And there is no limit to the innocent lives they are willing to take.

Yeah, I know it’s a bit of a straw man argument, but let’s be serious here. If John Kerry had said the exact same thing last year, Republicans would have gone hoarse shouting “Kerry agrees with Bin Laden?!” and accused him of emboldening our enemies or other such nonsense.

Hi Everyone, Ross here. The following are my views. My comments on a certain moderate blogger’s veiws reflect my opinion alone.

In the post before this one, Greg links to Kevin Drum, citing his (rightful) disagreement with that fat Drunken waste of oxygen, professional asshole Christopher Hitchen’s ridiculous homophobia. Unfortunately, Drum isn’t so mindful when it comes to the drive to point out the unexpressable hypocrisy present in conservative war supporters without the balls to serve.

In the same post Greg linked to, Drum also opened his keyboard and allowed this to slip out:

I actually agree with the overall gist of Christopher Hitchens’ latest column in Slate. He argues that it’s absurd to think you’ve scored some kind of withering putdown of war supporters by pointing out that most of them (and their sons) haven’t volunteered for duty. Since I support police, fire, and social welfare programs despite the fact that I’m not a police officer, a firefighter, or a social worker, I think he’s right on this.

Really Kevin? REALLY? I mean, you’re not kidding?

You honestly can’t see the goddamned difference between supporting community protection, and urging the nation to fight an unjust war based on lies, and not having the balls to fight in the war?

You can’t see how ridiculous it is that the biggest supporters of the war can’t be bothered to risk their precious, pathetic privileged little lives, to fight in it?

While friends of mine are one transfer slip away from being blown up in Baghdad because they had the courage to do what these little republican pansies can’t, which is to enlist? While people I know came back from that war unable to sleep, changed into people I barely recognize? For a lie?

Luckily, Digby, who is far more capable of processing outright disgust without resorting to profanities than I am, had this to say about Drum’s absurd inability to see the difference between things that are so obviously different that even difference itself is forced to distance itself from the concept. Here’s digby:

Joining up to fight a war you support is quite different from these other things. A war is a temporary emergency while police work and firefighting are ongoing necessities to deal with everyday occasions of individual misconduct or accident. If there was an earthquake in Kevin’s neighborhood and they called for able bodied men and women to volunteer to help dig bodies out of the rubble, I suspect he’d be there.

But this war in Iraq, like Vietnam, presents an even more obvious illustration of why this is true. Any nation that wages a war of choice wholly for ideological and political reasons, particularly when it is opposed by large numbers of its own citizens, should require that those who share those ideological and political goals help with the physical fighting. In fact, they should lead the fighting. It is unfair in the extreme that stop loss orders and extended tours are being forced upon the “volunteer” army when those who support the war are unwilling to put themselves in physical danger. Self defense is one thing. Requiring others to die for your crusade is another.

The reason, in Kevin’s unjustly snarky terminology, that it’s a “withering putdown”, is that people are in Iraq, right now, today, and they’re dying for a lie. A lie that Kevin was only too happy to push in the runup to war, even if he didn’t think it was a lie at the time.

I don’t mean to make this personal, and I’m trying not to. I dont doubt that Kevin is a good person, but I can’t handle such brazen, self centered myopia.

Kevin got credibility during the lead up to the war as a ‘reasonable liberal’, but like everyone else who entertained notions that there might be a reasonable justification for invading iraq, he was wrong. If only people like Kevin Drum could simply admit, just one fucking time, now, that not only was the war wrong, it IS STILL wrong. And furthermore, that the people supporting it, the ones who don’t fight, are brazen hypcrites, cowards, less than scum who risk everything this country stands for so they can feel like their dicks are enormous.

People are dying for the ego, impotence and greed of sad, miserly cowards too chickenshit to ever set foot in combat, much less risk even joining the military of which they claim to be so proud. Kevin’s obtuse observations are simply disgraceful.

A better comparison than the inept one made by Drum would be, oh I don’t know, how about this one:

Lets imagine a rich unintelligent cokehead, the son of a Senator and vice President, who abused mind erasing drugs, and used connections to get out of well deserved jailtime for Drunk Driving, and then having the audacity to call himself a “Law And Order” type.

Let’s imagine also that same shithead, using daddy’s connections to get out of the war in vietnam, a war he supported.

Let’s imagine even more also that same shithead, using daddy’s connections to get out of the war in vietnam, surrounding himself later in life with people who never bothered to serve in a war they supported, now sending the sons of the poor to die for them.

How’s that? Any clearer?

UPDATE: Thank God that Kevin’s readership is also capable of seeing through this incredible, inexcusable bullshit. Click the link to read through the comments. There’s also something else I hadn’t considered. not only is Kevin just being dickishly obtuse, he’s also being politically retarded:

As one of his commentors said:

His argument may be logical. It may even be mathematically correct.

But politics isn’t about logic and the integrity of axiomatic systems.

….

That the argument may have a fine-line flaw doesn’t matter.

What matters is that it makes repugs recoil.
It is like a hard smash to the tip of the conservative nose.

Furthermore it appeals to people’s passions.

Which is to say: you wanted the fucking war moron, now go fight it.

That’s simple and powerful and fundamentally true.

But oh no… leave it to the learned egghead liberal elite to toss this live ammo into the sand by comparing the domestic need for nurses to strapping on an AK-47 and doing Bush’s gamma-minus work in Iraq.

Not only is he being willfully clueless, he’s also dismissing and disrespecting his own side, giving aid and comfort to the Republicans who despise him.

And you know, I didn’t even mention how the Yellow Elephant tactic is also politically effective. Not only is it the morally right thing to do, it’s also fun to point out how the sniviling cowards who started this war are, in fact, sniveling cowards. Kevin’s unnesccesary dis makes me wonder if he’s just uninterested in actually winning against the Republicans.

I admit I’m being prickly about this - I’m sick and tired of seeming yes-men liberals soaking in the impression that people like Kevin are more eager to show how reasonable and agreeable they are, giving the appearance of currying favor, than they are in backing up the people on whose side they claim to be.

This isn’t patty cake, this is a war, and years from now we’ll recognize the defining political characteristic of our age as which side were you on. However, in the meantime, not only is he spouting off a ridiculously easily smashed logical fallacy, not only is he giving us yet another example of “see, even so-and-so doesn’t like the liberals”, he’s also wrong on this issue specifically. Kevin should be ashamed.

Kevin Drum is right to point out this piece of Christopher Hitchens idiocy :

Come to think of it, what happened to the loud and widespread demand that gays be allowed to serve in uniform? Surely that was not just a Clinton-era campaign to be dropped in favor of gay marriage at just the time when the country needed troops in Afghanistan (generally agreed) and in Iraq (much disputed)?

I don’t intend a taunt in the above sentence (it’s more of a tease, really, as well as a serious question to which I have heard no answer)

If you haven’t heard an answer, it’s because you aren’t paying attention, Mr. Hitchens. Pretty much every progressive blogger I know has written numerous posts about how “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” hurts the war on terror (mine are here, here, and, here). It was also addressed by Wesley Clark and John Edwards during on the Democratic primary debates a year and a half ago.

Since it didn’t sink in the first hundred or so times, here’s the crux of the liberal argument. According to various inquiries into the 9/11 attacks, the government’s lack of qualified Arabic translators is “one of the most serious issues limiting the Intelligence Community’s ability to analyze, discern, and report on terrorist activities in a timely fashion.”(PDF), yet gay translators are still being discharged. This is a serious issue that goes well beyond gay rights, yet the President is too cowardly to stand up to the hateful segments of the Republican party do the right thing. Considering that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is a Presidential order away from being overturned, it’s hard to avoid the conclusion that the George W. Bush’s homophobia is hurting national security.