Some Thoughts on our Current Situation

So it's been about a year since I last wrote and a lot has changed. The seditious traitor is gone from the Oval Office, Joe Biden is president, Kamala Harris is the first female (and Black and Indian) vice-president, the Democrats control the House and Senate, and (thanks to some blatant hypocrisy) the Republicans have replaced RBG with Amy Barrett (basically Michelle Bachman or Sarah Palin in judge's robes). Oh, and there is a minor virus called COVID that has been wreaking havoc on the world.

I've seen a lot of people wondering why we haven't seen more of a change in governance given that the Democrats control the Senate, the House, and the White House. The reason is pretty simple. "Control" over the Senate is largely an illusion due to the rules as they currently stand. I know people say that they don't want to hear "excuses" about process, but it ain't just excuses. There are actual structural problems that need to be addressed or else they will obstruct things for a long time. But they can't be addressed right now because there are people defending them. But before we get to more explanations, here's a quick Congressional 101:

Congress is a bicameral (two-house) legislature. We have the House of Representatives where members are elected from districts that are redrawn every 10 years based on population changes and we have a Senate where 2 senators are elected from every state regardless of size. The House has short 2-year terms and was designed to channel "the passions of the people" as it was put in the Federalist Papers. The Senate, on the other hand, was originally selected by the state legislatures (not elected by the people), had longer terms (6-year terms), and was designed to be a more deliberative body. So when the rules were written for each house, they ended up having different rules based on their design. In the Senate, each individual senator has more power to stop or put a hold on legislation. There were later changes (the filibuster being the prime example) that ended up clogging the Senate up even more. When the Constitution was changed to allow for direct election of senators (17th Amendment, 1913), the other aspects of the Senate didn't change. And that is where the problems come in.

I'm not going to go into the whole history of the filibuster as there are other people who do that better than me, but suffice to say it was originally created to allow Southern senators to block civil rights legislation. The rules surrounding the filibuster have changed over time, but as it currently stands, a filibuster can only be broken by 60 senators invoking cloture. The biggest problem with the filibuster is that it has been turned into a tool for the minority party to completely block legislation they don't like rather than have a debate on it. Ideally, a filibuster would only happen on really bad legislation, but it has become the rule, rather than the exception.

This is the reason why not much can get done. Because the Democrats only have 50 votes in the Senate, it is basically impossible for them to do much since the Republicans have decided that only they have the right to rule the country and that anything the Democrats propose is inherently illegitimate and must be opposed in the most violent rhetorical (and sometime physical) ways. The Republicans have become a party that cannot be reasoned or bargained with. So, for those of you wondering why more hasn't been done, look no further than the GOP.

That is not to say that there are no concerns with the Democrats, because there are. But the problems with the Democrats are less systemic and more related to individuals. Regarding the filibuster, which should be eliminated post-haste, there are a few Democratic senators who are standing up for it and refusing to do anything to modify it. That means that very little can be done. The House can pass bill after bill and the President can talk all he wants, but unless something happens to the filibuster, very few priorities will actually happen.

"But what about executive actions?" That is a fair question. There are things that the president can do on his own, but they are limited. The first limit is based on the fact that the president has limited powers. He can't create new departments, can't create new programs or departments, and he can't stop states from doing what they want. The second problem is that when Barack Obama was president, the Republicans have taken to going to court to get nationwide injunctions for basically everything (and the Democrats have responded similarly under the seditious traitor). Also, anything one president does, another can undo, so that is a problem. If we want permanent change, we need it to be through legislation, not executive actions.

The last issue is with the courts. The Republicans have spent the last 4 years stacking the courts with aggressively regressive judges. And they outright stole 2 Supreme Court seats. In 2016, they refused to have a hearing for Merrick Garland, who was nominated in March, because it was "too close to an election and the voters should have a voice." Sounds reasonable, right? Nope, it wasn't. There have been several justices who were nominated and confirmed in election years, some much closer to the election. Then, last October, the Republicans through that rule *THAT THEY CREATED* out the window to put Amy Barrett on the Supreme Court less than a month before the election. That is two seats that Democratic presidents should have been able to fill, but were blocked by power hungry Republicans who don't give a damn about democracy. They see the Democrats as an illegitimate group who must be opposed in the most violent and destructive ways. Don't believe me? Think about the Big Lie regarding the 2020 election and the insurrection on January 6th, both happening as a direct result of the seditious traitor and the Republican party. On top of that, the Senate chose to completely ignore their sworn duty to take care of the country by not worrying about legislating and just packing the courts with judges who are looking to turn back progress that has been made.

When you put all of this together, we have major structural issues that are blocking progressive bills from becoming law. They have to be changed if we want the country to survive. We need to:

[1] Eliminate the filibuster
[2] Prevent individual senators from killing bills

[3] Expand the courts to try and undo the damage the Republican Party has inflicted

[4] Expand the Supreme Court to try and undo the damage the Republican Party has inflicted

[5] Modify the Senate to make it more proportional so that people from more populous states have the same proportional influence as people from less populous states

After that, we can hopefully pass and sustain progressive representation to allow this country to become what it should be: an example of equality and democracy. There is a lot that needs to be done and we need to do it sooner, rather than later.

On What Bravery is and Being Tired

I have seen a lot of people recently talk about how various former officials from the Orange Menace's administration are so brave for speaking out against him after they leave office.  Or you hear about how brave Republican lawmakers are who vote against what he wants.  Neither is what I would consider brave.

If they were brave, they would be consistently resisting his usurpations and abuses of power.  If they were brave, they would openly work against him while they were a part of his administration, not just talking about it after they leave.  If they were brave, they would be willing to completely risk their jobs and power to prevent him from doing the truly awful things he does.  If they were brave, they would fight tooth and nail to force him out of office.

But they don't.  Instead, they issue tepid statements and belated "condemnations".  Instead they wait until there is nothing that can be done and then blare their objections.

And I can't say the Democrats are much better, for the most part.  There are some who are fighting back as hard as they can, but most are too enamored with their power to really fight like they should.  I do understand their pragmatic instincts, but this is not a time for pragmatism.  This is a time to fight and to resist with everything we have and to the extent we are able.

I know that I wish I could do more, but I literally can't afford to take time off of work to join protests.  If I did, I wouldn't be able to pay my bills.  I don't have health insurance, I don't have job security, and if I miss work, I don't get paid.  So all I can do is write and encourage others who can afford to protest and do more.

All the same, I am mortally tired.  I am tired of the emotional drain from this leech on our body politic.  I am tired of having to justify my existence and my rights to people who believe that I am lesser merely because of my sexuality and gender identity.  I am tired of seeing people spew vitriol at those who are already oppressed.  I am tired of watching the Orange Menace get away with all sorts of shit because the Republican Party doesn't give a shit about the Constitution or the American people.  I am tired of hearing people who claim to be Christians going against everything that Christ taught about supporting and upholding the poor, the widowed, the powerless, and the disenfranchised.  I am just mortally tired.

I don't know how much more energy I have to keep on going.  It's not that I don't care or am not outraged, it is that I am lacking the energy to express the outrage.  And no amount of "me" time seems to help.

I am just tired.

On the Impeachment of the Orange Menace and How We Got Here

I haven't written a lot about politics in the last year or so and that is on purpose.  While I do love politics, I have found the last few years to be beyond depressing.  The GOP, which claims to be a party that will defend liberty and the constitutional order, has turned into a political party that wants to control people's bodies, enshrine religious bigotry into law, and support one of the most lawless and corrupt men to occupy the Oval Office.  They have supported bigotry, misogyny, racism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, and all manner of ills because they have gotten power.

I grew up as a Republican and was proud to be one for years.  Around the time I came out, I also allowed myself to moderate politically.  Before that, I had been one of the most conservative people I know.  It was like coming out of the closet gave me permission to be who I truly was.  Also, I started to realize that Catholic social teaching (I was Catholic then), led me to some more moderate, even liberal, conclusions.

In 2008, I seriously considered voting for Barack Obama and only didn't because of the issue of abortion.  Fast forward to 2010 and the Tea Party.  That is when the GOP took a hard right turn and left me.  By that point, I hadn't changed that much.  I was a slightly right of center moderate, and I watched in horror as the GOP started to morph into a horrific version of itself.  Conservatives had taught me that my rights ended where someone else's began, now these same people were advocating for their rights to "religious liberty" trumping everyone else's rights.  No less a conservative icon than Justice Antonin Scalia insisted that if there was a law that was generally applicable, it did not allow for exceptions based on religion.  But now that Tea Party insisted that their rights to "religious liberty" could trump any law.  The party that claimed it was for fiscal responsibility nearly drove the country off the cliff financially by refusing to compromise.  The party that claimed to be for family values was fine with slashing and destroying programs that helped families and children survive.  And they embraced some wacky and off the wall conspiracy theories to justify the vitriol they spewed at the first black president in US history.

Then came 2016 and the Orange Menace was selected to be the standard bearer for the GOP against the first woman to be nominated by a major political party for the presidency.  Despite more and more news coming out about his manifest unfitness for office whether it was because of sexual assault, misogyny, racism, or any other multitude of sins, the GOP continued to stand by him.  And the GOP politicians who initially opposed him fell into line like a bunch of lap dogs.  Rather than make a principled stand, they couldn't lick his boot fast or long enough.  And if they didn't, they were forced out of the party.

From the first day he occupied the Oval Office, the Orange Menace and his lackeys have lied repeatedly about any and every subject.  Whether it was the size of the crowds coming out to see him or the so-called greatness of his picks for positions, there was no subject too small for them to lie about.  He also blatantly violated the Constitution by refusing to divest from his holdings and financially benefiting foreign leaders staying in hotels with his name on them.  The people around him were shown to be corrupt and many were thrown in prison.  But the GOP refused to do anything to force him to follow even basic political rules and norms.  They just sat back and invented reason after reason why this was ok.

Finally, in 2018, the Democrats won the House and started the investigations that should have been ongoing.  The Republicans have never been able to refute a single thing that has been proven, instead they have continually changed the parameters for what is considered unacceptable.  Everytime that the Orange Menace crosses the threshold of what they have deemed unacceptable, they come up with an excuse as to why that is actually ok and say that something worse is unacceptable.  Every time he did something worse, people would keep on hoping that there would be some Republicans who would stand up to him, but that never happened.  And whenever the Democrats would investigate and try and provide oversight, the  Orange Menace and his minions would stall and refuse to cooperate, thwarting the Constitutional power of Congress.

So then came news that the Orange Menace conditioned aid to Ukraine, which was mandated by Congress, on their helping him investigate his political enemies and then the excuses kicked into high gear.  The GOP claimed that what happened was perfectly normal and that there was no quid pro quo.  Then this was proven wrong and they said that it was ok because it came to naught.  They claimed that he was truly concerned about corruption so what he did was not a bad thing.  But he was impeached anyway, so now the Senate is holding a "trial".  I use quotes because the results are foreordained because the GOP senators are continuing to provide as much cover as they can.

The Orange Menace refused to let people who had worked for him testify in the impeachment hearings, and the GOP whines that the Democrats aren't allowing him to defend himself.  The GOP senators refused to vote to allow witnesses in the initial rules and then complain that the Democrats aren't providing them with witnesses to testify.  The Orange Menace's attorneys make up defenses out of whole cloth, claiming that if the person who occupies the Oval Office believes that the nation is best with them in charge, they can do what they want to stay there.  Basically, they have argued that the interests of the nation are the same as the Orange Menace's, thus making him incapable of breaking the law.  Or as Louis XIV said "L'etat c'est moi" or "The state is I."

At the base, this is all about power, not what is best for the nation.  The GOP wants to enshrine fundamentalist "Christian" dogma as law and they will stop at nothing to do so.  Whether it is voter suppression, controlling women's bodies, controlling the bodies of trans people, invading the bedrooms of queer people, or keeping out people of color, they have succumbed to the basest and worst impulses of humanity.  I truly fear for the future of the country.  I don't know what will happen next, but I do know that the GOP (as it currently exists) needs to be destroyed if we are ever to hope to regain sanity in this country.  The GOP has truly become a truly regressive party that must be stopped.  That is what I know with absolute certainty.

On Churches Being Political

Over the last couple of years, I have heard a few people from my church complain that the church has become "too political".  From what I can tell, these people seem to be complaining because the pastor often talks about how we need to hold those in power accountable for their corruption and the abuse of their authority when they seek to lift the rich and powerful higher and higher while further marginalizing those who are already marginalized: the poor and the outcast.

Part of the problem is that people seem to be conflating two types of politics into one thing.  There are churches which are "political" in a narrow, partisan sense.  They explicitly advocate for particular political candidates or parties and seek to have their religious opinions enshrined as secular law; in other words, they want a theocracy.  Then there are churches which are "political" in a much broader sense, they are advocating for justice and equality on a much larger, society-wide scale.  They don't advocate for particular candidates or parties, although their ideas may align more neatly with one party or another.

The first type of political church is a problem.

The second type is not.

If it is a Christian church, then the second type is definitively fulfilling the mission of the Church as set for by Jesus: to care for and love the poor, outcast, and marginalized as Jesus did.  This is what churches are supposed to do.  As the church, we are called to love, we are called to hunger for justice, and we are called to take care of those who society has rejected.

During times like the one we are in now, where there is a corrupt oligarch occupying the highest office in the land, we must speak out just as the prophets in the Old Testament did.  We are called to make sure that we stand with those who are made voiceless by laws that seek to disenfranchise or marginalize them.

So, if you are Christian, I hope your church is political.  It must be, otherwise it is not fulfilling the mandate set forth by Jesus.  If you are not Christian, I hope that your church is political as well, that it stands with the poor and oppressed, that it seeks to uplift those who are being held down.

I am proud that my church is political and I pray that it continues to be so for a long time to come.

Some thought on Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission

I just finished reading the decisions in the case of Masterpiece Cakeshop vs. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.  Obviously, I was disappointed by the decision and by the fact that both Justices Kagan and Breyer signed onto the decision (although Kagan did write a concurrence).  I was somewhat relieved that Justice Kennedy wrote it, if only because I knew that by having him write it, the damage to the queer community would be limited.  If the decision had been written by Justices Thomas, Gorusch, or Alito, the damage would have been much worse, as is evidenced by the concurrences of Justices Thomas and Gorusch.  Had Chief Justice Roberts written it, the decision would probably have been worse, but maybe not as bad as Thomas or Gorusch would have done.

Basically, Kennedy's decision was that the Civil Right Commission was mean to the Philips (the owners of Masterpiece Cakeshop) because they noted that if you own a business you must follow generally applicable non-discrimination laws regardless of your religious belief per Employment Division v. Smith (1990) and because they said that religion has been used to justify all sorts of evil acts (including slavery) and that this use of religion is despicable.  Both statements are undoubtedly and objectively true.  The last portion about that use of religion being "despicable" is most definitely value based, but hardly displays any sort of hostility towards religion.  The hostility (if there is any) is directed against the particular way religion has been used.  If you read the opinion, it really feels like Kennedy was looking for a reason to overturn the decision without allowing for unfettered discrimination, so he came up with an incredibly flimsy pretext.  He also argues that because no one on the commission objected to the statements and the Colorado Court of Appeals didn't do anything about them, it was obvious that there was impermissible religious viewpoint discrimination.  He also said that the fact that a man who wanted 3 cakes from 3 different bakeries, all with words written on them that was homophobic (as opposed to a generic wedding cake that the Philips were asked for) was not able to get them was somehow analogous to the situation at hand.  So, somehow getting cakes inscribed with discriminatory speech is equivalent to getting a generic wedding cake.  Sure.  That makes perfect sense.  (Please note that the sarcasm is like Niagara Falls at this point.)

What gets me here is that the initial decision, which both the Civil Rights Commission and the Court of Appeals upheld, was determined by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and no one has said that the ALJ screwed up in how they handled things.  There is nothing in the opinion that indicates that the ALJ had any sort of "impermissible religious discrimination", yet their decision was confirmed (not decided) by the Civil Rights Commission and the Court of Appeals. So even assuming that there was religious bias (which I do not by any means), the underlying decision was untainted by any such bias and thus (presumably) should have held up.  Unless, of course, the person reading it is looking for discriminiation, in which case they will find it no matter what.

Gorusch and Thomas both issued predictably regressive opinions that mirror the nonsense laid out by the homophobic groups sponsoring this lawsuit, so we'll just ignore them because they don't do legal analysis, rather they do political punditry.

Kagan wrote a concurrence, which Breyer joined, and agreed that there was bias against the Philips.  However, she made it clear that she did not agree that the other cakes (the 3 from the different bakeries) were similar to the case at hand, even if Kennedy thought that they were.

Ginsberg, who was joined by Sotomayor, looked at the case and said that the statements at hand did not rise to the level needed to reverse the case.  She argued that what Philips discriminated against the gay couple because they were gay whereas the other man was turned away from the three shops because what he wanted to be made would not be made by the shops no matter who was asking for them.  Thus, the couple was discriminated against illegally, but the man was not (Kagan wrote the same thing), which makes their cases very different and thus not usable for comparative purposes.  Ginsberg also argued that there were so many layers of people making the same decision that a couple of statements, even if they expressed bias (which, as I said, is debatable at best, a fiction at worst), should not have invalidated the entire decision.

So basically, the ruling was narrowly for Cakeshop on procedural grounds and the Court punted the decision on the merits down the road. 

Post-Election Thoughts

I could have sworn I wrote about this already, but looking at my blog, I did not.  So, here are my post-election thoughts.

First off, to say that I was in shock on November 9th would be an understatement of biblical proportions.  While I may not have been one of the people this article is addressed to, I do feel the sense of disillusionment the article mentioned.  My disillusionment stems not from faith in the system (although I suspect that I had more faith in it than other people), but from a faith in a basic decency in most human beings.  I honestly thought that people would be disgusted enough by Trump's unflinching, brazen, and flagrant racism, sexism, Islamophobia, xenophobia, and lack of anything resembling morality.  The fact that there were as many people who voted for him as did shook me to my core.  I know there are problems in the system and with people, but I thought that; while they accept hidden bigotry; people would reject the open bigotry that Trump showed during the campaign.

On November 9th, I would not be exaggerating to say that I was in mourning.  While I was upset that Hillary Clinton lost the election, I could have accepted her loss to almost any other Republican.  But the open embrace of Trump and his vitriolic nastiness and bigotry floored me.  I know that someone is going to say that they voted for Trump to oppose Hillary, but that is bullshit.  Voting for Trump means that you are agreeing with his platform (such as it was).  Every person who voted for Trump has exposed themselves as either racist, bigoted, Islamophobic, xenophobic misogynists or someone who is fine with those ideas.  Either way, they are hateful people and un-American.

Since the election, Trump has merely reinforced my disdain and disgust.  He has proposed people for every department who are unfit to run those departments, many of his appointments would probably try and dismantle the departments they were selected to run.  Trump and his lackeys have also shown a reckless disregard for anything resembling the truth.  Not to mention that his "victory" (in the Electoral College only, he was soundly whipped in the popular vote) has emboldened the racist fringe in the country.

Then there are the revelations about Russian manipulation of the election and the FBIs appalling breach of protocol by inserting itself into the election with the release of the letter regarding the emails that turned out to be nothing.  Taken together with everything else, it is not hard to see why people are doubtful about the legitimacy of the election.  Between foreign involvement in the campaign, the chief federal law enforcement agency inserting itself into the election, and Clinton winning the popular vote by almost 2.9 million votes, there is no way Trump can legitimately claim any sort of mandate.

Then you throw in the Republican trend towards trying to delegitimize the opposition.  Since the 1990s, the Republican party has become increasingly hardline and does everything it can to try and reshape reality to fit their twisted political ideology.  For example, the Republican party this year held up the nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in defiance of longstanding practice.  They claimed that since there was an election in the fall, the next president should be allowed to select the Supreme Court justice, a claim which is breathtaking in the amount of bullshit it contains and in its audacity.  Then comes North Carolina, where the governor and legislature rushed through not one, but several bills over the course of the year.  First there was HB2 (discussed at length elsewhere) and then there were a series of bills meant to strip a lot of power away from the incoming Democratic governor before he even took office.  Basically, the legislature and ousted governor decided to try and undo the election as much as possible and maintain the Republican's grip on power in the state.

These things, taken together with the way the Republican party has kowtowed to Trump and the unprecedented obstruction taken during President Obama's terms, show that the Republican party has completely abandoned any semblance of political norms that have allowed government to function.  The Republican party and Trump must be opposed and resisted at every level and every step along the way.

We cannot allow Trump and his hatred or the Republicans unmitigated gall to become normalized.  We cannot allow the hate that has been fostered to scare us into submission.  I am frightened for myself and every other minority because of what a Trump presidency and Republican rule over government will probably mean.  Rights curtailed, disastrous conservative ideas enacted, the social safety net dismantled, and attacks on minorities are probably going to become more commonplace.  Reckless disregard for science and proven facts will become rampant as conservatives try and force their ideology onto government agencies and deny scientific facts like climate change.  In short, the next four years will probably be a disaster.  I am hopeful that people will vote in Democratic majorities to the House and/or Senate so that there can be some type of roadblock to Trumps and the Republicans' disastrous agenda.

I want to state one thing with unwavering clarity:  Trump is #NotMyPresident.  There is such a cloud hanging over this election that I cannot accept it's legitimacy without a major independent investigation confirming it.  I reject his hatred, his bigotry, his Islamophobia, his sexism, his xenophobia, his misogyny, his homophobia, and his transphobia.

And to those who would tell me to "Just get over it!" or "Just accept it!", fuck off.  I will never accept this nor will I get over it.  This election has exposed the Republican party and the conservative movement to be nothing more than a dressed up version of the old-fashioned bigots.  I reject them and I reject what they stand for.

I know what I stand for: inclusion, equal rights, equality of opportunity (which we don't have right now), help for the historically disenfranchised or oppressed, environmental protection, solid and sound science, and a progressive agenda to help make this country great after the disaster that is about to be inflicted upon it.

I am a part of the resistance to Trump and the GOP.  I will not back down, I will not yield, and I will not compromise since compromise is impossible with the current Republican party.  We must prevail or else I fear the consequences.

Some Thoughts About Moving Past the 2016 Election

As we look beyond the election, I see people talking about how we are all Americans and that we need to come together regardless of who wins. The funny thing is, most of the people I see saying it are on the right side of the political spectrum. While I want to, with all my heart, say that we can do that, I am not at all sure I, for one, will be able to.

This election has exposed many of the so-called family values conservatives to be nothing more than hypocritical political opportunists who don't really care about family values as much as they do about getting their political platform enacted. Otherwise, why would they be supporting a sexist, racist, bigoted, misogynistic man for the presidency? And don't give me any crap about them doing it to oppose Hillary Clinton. If that is all they wanted, they could have supported another candidate. To support Donald J. Trump is to support what he stands for and what he stands for is the worst in humanity.

How am I, as a gay, genderqueer (therefore trans*) person, supposed to even pretend that I can want to work with a party that denies my rights, denies my identity, makes laws targeted at the LGBTQIA community, and pretend that everything is "all right"? How can anyone work with a party that has shown itself to run towards the epic vileness that is the alt-right, a party that denies the reality of climate change, a party that made it possible for a person like Donald Trump to come as close to the presidency as he has?

Are we supposed to simply ignore the fact that the Republican party has done everything in its power to delegitimize the first black president in American history? That the Republican party has endlessly investigated the other party and rarely (if ever) found actual crimes? That the Republicans in the Senate has failed in their duty to consider the nomination of a well-respected, moderate judge for the Supreme Court for nakedly political reasons wrapped up is bullshit and is now threatening to stop a potential President Clinton from getting her choices on the Supreme Court because they disagree with her political philosophy? While Trump may have shattered the political norms that a functioning democracy needs, the GOP started on the path long before he was running and showed him the way.

For these reasons, I cannot respect or be friends with anyone who votes for Donald Trump. It has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with basic human decency. To vote for Trump is to say that you agree with his bigoted attacks on all sorts of minorities. To vote for Trump is to try and normalize him. And that, I cannot and will not put up with. Vote for someone other than Hillary Clinton if you must, but don't vote for Donald Trump.

I'm sure someone is going to say that if I support Hillary Clinton, then I support everything she stands for,  I know this and acknowledge it.  I find myself agreeing with most of her political positions and the ones I disagree with, I can live with the differences.  As far as her so-called "scandals", Hillary Rodham Clinton is one of the most investigated politicians ever, and it's not because she is an awful person.  Repeatedly, investigations from *Republican* investigations have shown that she has not done anything wrong.  Hillary Clinton has put up with more bullshit and vitriol than other candidates, not because she is a bad person, but because she is a Clinton and a woman.  She is facing double standards and obstacles that men simply don't have to deal with, and she does it with grace and poise.

I hope that you vote for hope and for the future.  Reject the hatred, bigotry, fear, and anger that forms the modern Republican party.  Is Hillary Clinton perfect?  No, she is not.  But she is eminently qualified and well deserving of the title Madam President.