Note: this is not about Vermont, but every once in awhile I need to delve into something different.  Today is National Coming Out Day, so this seems appropriate

---

I came out in a small conservative college in the Midwest.  This was in the 1980’s.  When I did so, I was threatened routinely and mostly anonymously.  

I am not going to dwell on this, but I will say a little about it later.  It’s not the point of what I’m writing.  I’m writing about this:

It started with a Twitter  message on Sept. 19: “Roommate asked for the room till midnight. I went into molly’s room and turned on my webcam. I saw him making out with a dude. Yay.”

That night, the authorities say, the Rutgers University  student who sent the message used a camera in his dormitory room to stream the roommate’s intimate encounter live on the Internet.

And three days later, the roommate who had been surreptitiously broadcast – Tyler Clementi, an 18-year-old freshman and an accomplished violinist – jumped from the George Washington Bridge into the Hudson River in an apparent suicide.

Ellen says it better than I can (embedding is disabled but you can still view the video), so please view the video and come back here, ’cause I’ve got a bit more to say.

When I came out, I did so by choice.  I knew I had to at the time, even though it was a bit of a scary prospect.  It was shortly after that that I formed a gay rights group at my college.

I didn’t do this alone.  I did it after a man named Brian McNaught came to speak at our college.  Several of us met with him for dinner and talked about the old style gay support groups which made everyone feel as though we were in hiding.  

It was through his inspiration and the work of a small number of us that were willing to be out, despite the dangers and fears, despite the death threats, despite the problems it caused for us.

I’ve known people who couldn’t live with what they knew about themselves but were unwilling to face.  Some of them have died by their own hand, unable to deal with their homosexuality or transsexualism.  Others have died the way I may have at one point in my life: not through active suicide, but simply through falling into depression and fatalism and just falling and failing until life swallows you up, either killing or disabling you.

I never let it get that far– I came to my senses long before rock bottom came and I moved myself forward and pulled myself out of that hole, but I was fortunate; I had friends and resources and interests that moved me forward.  

But what I really want to say, right here, right now, is that though things are better, they are not better everywhere.  Though conditions are improved for many of us, they’re not improved for everyone.  Coming out can still, in the wrong place and at the wrong time, get you killed.  I am isolated.  My marriage is recognized in Vermont and though I have occasionally dealt with homophobia in my personal life, such incidents are few and far behind and lack institutional support.  On the few occasions I’ve complained about my treatment by people in official conditions, I’ve been apologized to profusely, and treated extremely well in the future.  

But this does not ring true for everyone and so many of us, transsexual, lesbian, gay and bi, deal with our own roadblocks that may be common to us, but may also be unique to our own personal psyche.

So this is the thing: my coming out and my ability to be myself and recognize the parts of myself that at one point terrified me?  That was facilitated by people who came out before me and spoke in public with eloquence and grace.

Those of us who have been allowed to come out with relative safety do not have the luxury to allow ourselves to to be complacent about those who will follow, and those of us who have benefited from those before us have an obligation to continue to pave the way for others.

This story?  This story where someone gets outed and ends up dead, either quickly through violence, or slowly through the mental attrition of one’s psyche into frightened oblivion?  

It has to stop.  It has to end.  

And we have to stop it.

Footnote:

The It Gets Better Project is amazing.  Some samples:

Current Vermont Gov. Jim Douglas came to the aid of gubernatorial candidate Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie this past weekend on a two-day tour across Vermont. It consisted of eight rallies in seven counties. Together they promoted Dubie’s vision as outlined by his 26 page ,ten-point plan for growing jobs and building Vermont’s economy.  

Take a look now behind the scenes at the Dubie/Douglas Pure Leadership RV Tour inside Governor Jim Douglas’ imagined thought bubble.  

"I believe strongly in Brian's candidacy," Douglas said of Dubie. "I believe he's the best person to lead our state for the next few years."

Right.I believe strongly he wins only if a miracle happens and that’s the only reason I let them haul me out here on this Pure Leadership RV Tour. What’s with all this creepy ‘pure’ stuff anyway? Suppose that language must bring in the fringe money. That Texas money guy Brian had dinner with, Crow was his name, the one with all the statues of dictators he  must like that. Why did the Dubster get hooked-up with this out of state campaign crew? They don’t know Vermont from Texas or Virginia anyway.  

Next few years’ .Oh what the hell if Brian tanks young Gibbs will be all set to glide in after his grooming tour as Vt. Secretary of State.  

Note to self: remember to tell Jason to watch that late night driving. Can’t afford to lose anyone, our line-up is pretty thin now.  

Douglas noted. "What we need is balance in Montpelier," Douglas said.

Man that’s Brian, pure Brian all right, a great big counterweight, door stop, or anchor. That’s balance.    

Douglas said, citing Shumlin's proposals for government-run health care and universal preschool. "I think we know what happens when politicians make promises."

Heh, yeah, promises I’ve been there, Jim=Jobs, E-State up and running by 2010, man, the empty promises I pulled off in office.  

Asked whether Dubie ever lobbied him on issues, Douglas couldn't provide an example, but he said, "Brian is not at all reluctant to tell me how he feels about things in a respectful and cordial way.”

Provide an example! Ah, the remaining Vermont press. They want an example! I should give it to them. Lord, I don’t think I had a serious conversation with Brian in eight years. He always drones on about how he’s an airline pilot and then I zone out and almost doze off.

How long is this RV tour for? Eight stops! Ugh the stuff I do for this party…going to owe me big-time after this.

Unimagined quotes from Burlington Free Press

The Messenger (not online, just in the Weekend Edition):

From the outset, the moderator of a lackluster legislative forum held at the Franklin County Senior Center Thursday night warned the panel of candidates they would listen more than talk.

She was right.

About 35 people sat in folding chairs and listened for 90 minutes as 14 legislative candidates–with all but one from Franklin County–skimmed the surface of two hot-button issues: health care and early childhood education.

…

The structure of the night did not leave any room for candidates to debate, and many of them could not elaborate on their views during the one-minute time limit they had to respond to a short list of prepared questions.

…

Todd Pritsky, an independent House candidate from Fletcher, said the state should readopt the “Snelling model”–an allusion to the late Gov Dick Snelling–that protected the social contract while seeking new revenue streams.

First of all, I'm pleased I made it into the article, and with a fair summary of my few minutes of answers.  I brought up Snelling twice, as well as the need for stimulus and the Vermont Constitution.

Second of all, I very much appreciate the three groups who organized this forum–and the series of 15 statewide–and the Senior Center for hosting it.  I also applaud the folks who attended, especially those who stood to give their witness to pressing issues and asked questions of people who want to work in our citizens' legislature.

Third of all, I think Leon's right that overall the forum was a bit lackluster.  Sometimes friends need to provide honest, constructive feedback, and I have to say that the format was quite a problem.

I understand and totally support the basic notion of a “people's forum” wherein citizens get to present their concerns and ideas to their (prospective) representatives.  It's a very powerful and important part of engaging in effective self-government.  That said, I think the introductory statements were overly long and the questions were not entirely clear.

As a result, there really wasn't enough time for candidates to share their views, nor for audience members who weren't delivering the prepared comments and questions to actively participate.  I think it was valuable, though wonder if it would've been more so had the opening speeches been more succinct, and candidates had perhaps an additional 30 second answer round for rebuttal, summing up, etc.

Anyway, I'm happy these events are going on and that I was able to participate.  We need more of this sort of thing not just during campaign season, but during the legislative session as well.  That's how we get better feedback, transparency and accountability.

todd

(cross-posted at Todd for Vermont House)

Alternative photo caption: Brian Dubie: The fish that got away was this big.

Original photo (via Bennington GOP yfrog photo stream), here.

Notice how carefully the Freeps front page story on the Agency of Human Services embezzlement skirts the issue of Tom Salmon’s culpability? It is raised and dismissed in barely two sentences late in the article:

The case has triggered debate in the race for state auditor, with challenger Doug Hoffer asking why incumbent Tom Salmon’s office did not catch the alleged five-year scheme.  However, Human Services Secretary Hoffman and DCF Commissioner Steve Dale had closer oversight responsibilities of the division in which Lantagne worked.

But, you well might ask, wasn’t Tom Salmon the state’s elected auditor  for much of the five year period over which the embezzlement took place?  Perhaps other heads should roll as well, but few would argue that the “buck” doesn’t stop in full on the desk of the state auditor.

I listened with interest to a recording of the October 5 VPR debate between Doug Hoffer and incumbent, Tom Salmon.  I really wanted to understand Tom Salmon’s rationale for his office having overlooked this huge discrepancy; but I got nothing.  Not only on the topic of the embezzlement, but on many other questions put to Mr. Salmon, his replies were lost in a sea of incoherent double-speak that seemed to go nowhere.  His contempt for his opponent was, to say the least, thinly-veiled; but he was factually challenged with regard to Mr. Hoffer’s credentials, and had apparently made little effort to inform himself, making Mr. Salmon come off as petty and ineffectual.  He wasn’t even aware of audit reports authored by Mr. Hoffer that are included on the state auditor’s own website! The longer Mr. Salmon spoke in response to most questions, the further he strayed from the point.  In sharp contrast to Mr. Hoffer’s concise and focussed remarks, Mr. Salmon’s were vague and often emotionally charged. In defense of his flip to the Republican party, Mr. Salmon characterized himself as an “original thinker.”

Toward the conclusion of the debate, Mr. Salmon proposed that the office of Auditor might better be filled by appointment; and perhaps for a term of ten years!  To some this might suggest that Mr. Salmon has found the demand for timely accountability to the electorate something of a burden.  It would certainly have been handy not to come up for reelection in the immediate aftermath of what represents one of the most glaring thefts from a state agency that Vermont has ever seen; and to have a term of office sufficiently long to effectively “bury” any embarrassing failures.  When asked if appointment wouldn’t compromise the integrity of the office,  he quickly volunteered that, rather than the governor making the appointment, he envisioned  a “government accountability committee” performing that function.  How this additional layer of bureaucracy would be created he left to the listeners’ imaginations.   When the moderator turned to Doug Hoffer to ask if he agreed with each of Mr. Salmon’s radical suggestions, his reply was an emphatic and repeated “No!”

One is left with the impression that Mr. Hoffer is the man with boots-on-the-ground knowledge and skill, while Mr. Salmon comes off a poor second, having, at best, faintly quixotic pretensions, and at worst, a nasty inclination to duck responsibility.  

(Two diaries by Jim Condos. GMD policy says Democratic candidates for statewide office get front paged. Here’s the other one:

“Jim Condos Applauds Vermont Supreme Court Ruling on Public Records”

– promoted by kestrel9000)

Jim Condos has received endorsements for Secretary of State by over 135 individuals to date. Endorsements came from across all party lines and include:

• Over 20 Vermont State Senators

• Over 45 Vermont State Representatives.

• Many supportive individuals concerned about our democracy

“The people who have endorsed me,” stated Jim Condos. “share many of the same visions, objectives, and goals that I have – all leading to achieving excellence in the Office of Secretary of State.”

Condos has also been endorsed by prominent statewide officials, including:

U.S. Senators Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders, U.S. Representative Peter Welch, Governor Howard Dean, Secretary of State Deb Markowitz, and Treasurer Jeb Spaulding.

Here is what some endorsers have had to say about Condos:

“I worked with Jim when he was in the Senate. He is the only candidate running for Secretary of State who has ever worked in local government, and that is critical in this Office.” – Governor Howard Dean

“I have known Jim for many years. His background and experience make him an ideal candidate for Secretary of State.” – U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy

“Jim has years of experience in municipal government, which is key to being Secretary of State. He was instrumental in developing affordable housing in South Burlington and has a local government perspective that is necessary to get the job done right.” – U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders

“I worked with and got to know Jim when we served together in the Vermont Senate. He always has the best interests of Vermonters at heart. With his experience and dedication, Jim will make an excellent Secretary of State.”  –  Congressman Peter Welch

“We need non-partisan, competent leadership in the Secretary of State’s office. That person is Jim Condos! As a State Senator he worked with my office to make it easier to do business in Vermont so small businesses can create jobs. We developed legislation to protect Vermont consumers from incompetent and unethical professionals.  And we invested in the future of Vermont and our children by creating and supporting civics education.” – Secretary of State Deb Markowitz

For a complete list of individual and organization endorsements, please visit http://www.jimcondos.com/endor…

# # #

This past week, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that Burlington acted improperly in denying a request for documents related to the adjudication of a speeding ticket. In making its ruling, the court stated that government actions must be open to scrutiny by citizens.

“We do not overstate the case in saying that open access to governmental records is a fundamental precept of our society” and is “in the public interest,” the court determined. “That policy goal would suffer were we to allow agencies resisting disclosure to avoid it merely by invoking the magic word ‘relevant’ under the litigation exception. To do so would threaten to cut off valuable information not only to the parties to the litigation but to all Vermonters.”

“As a City Councilor and State Senator, I have fought for open access to public records,” said Jim Condos, Democratic Candidate for Secretary of State. “As Secretary of State, I will continue to do so. When government hides information from the public and operates in secrecy, it erodes our democracy.”

Condos’ plan is to ensure that the current Douglas Administration’s practices of secret meetings and denial of access to public records (which his Republican opponent defended as a senior aide to the Governor) does not continue to be a barrier to open government.

Condos believes that Vermonters should not be treated as adversaries of government; we are all a part of government.

“Certainly, the tenure of Katherine Harris as Secretary of State of Florida demonstrated what could happen when a political operative with long-term ambitions occupies the office,” states Condos.  “I believe that openness will strengthen our democracy and promote efficiency, accountability, and effectiveness in government. An effective government fosters a vibrant economy. Closing the door on government to prevent the public eye from looking in is just plain wrong!”

Jim has a unique and relevant background for the Secretary of State position. He has over 20 years of elected public service including 18 years on South Burlington City Council, 8 years as a Vermont State Senator, and over 30 years of private sector business experience. He has focused on open and transparent government throughout his elected service.

# # #

The issue is not whether Brian Dubie can have his questions answered.

The issue is “Under what conditions will you, Brian Dubie, support reopening Entergy Nuclear when the old place offially expires in 2012?”

What do you need to know, Brian Dubie, right now and before November 2010 that will allow you to determine whether an old, broken and expired nuclear power plant should return to producing nuclear power after 2012?

The burden is not on you, Brian Dubie, to come up with a reason to NOT support Entergy Nuclear; the burden is on Entergy Nuclear to demonstrate to you, Brian Dubie, the reasons WHY TO SUPPORT, the restarting an expired nuclear power facility in 2012.

So, Brian Dubie, under what conditions — Under what objective criteria — will you support relicensing and going forward with an expired nuclear power faciilitly in 2012apply your brilliantly informed critical thinking skills

Suggestions for alternate text are welcome.

Ouch. Daniel Barlow has announced he’s leaving his reporter job at the Vermont Press Bureau this month. For those who don’t know how it works, the Bureau is a group of, at present, three reporters (Barlow, Louis Porter, Peter Hirschfeld) who provide the political reporting for The Times Argus and the Rutland Herald. And of those three, Barlow stood head and shoulders above the others in terms of his thoroughness in covering a story, and his clarity in presenting unfiltered facts.

Hirschfeld tends to skimp mightily on details – particular in the “both sides” department. Possibly he just has a tendency not to look beyond the press releases he’s received from the Douglas administration. Whether its that or ideological leakage, a political story under his byline is often not the full story, and has tended to only support the Governor’s messaging.

Bureau Chief Porter on the other hand, tends to comes off as the sort of journalist who doesn’t want to simply report the news, but wants to be its gatekeeper, deciding what really matters and what doesn’t in an idiosyncratic way and reporting from that subjective position (this was often Chris Graff’s problem at the AP as well). I suspect he’d be much happier as a columnist. A particularly disturbing example comes from earlier in the year, and his bizarre (and repeated) brazen misrepresentation of Governor Douglas’s budget proposal in a manner consistent with GOP talking points (see here and here).

So anyway, it’s not hard to understand how someone with Barlow’s obvious talent and intelligence would like to move on, but its a blow for Vermonters – and another nail in the coffin of the Times Argus and Rutland Herald, who seem to be determined of late to hasten their own demise.