Prop 8: Heads in the Sand Works, right?

The LA Times’ Meghan Daum takes a crack at the “gay indoctrination in the schools” thing the right-wingers are trying to convince Californians.  Funny thing here, the real world and our popular culture pretty much made that moot:

And, wait a second: If gay marriage would have to be taught, is heterosexual marriage already in the curriculum? Do teachers say “Today, boys and girls, we’re going to learn about passive aggressive behavior related to laundry”? Are there workbook exercises called “Ten things I’m accusing you of that really have to do with my own insecurities”? And don’t those lessons already cross over to gay marriage?

As it turns out, the only thing in the education code related to marriage has to do with teaching “the legal and financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood.” Moreover, it’s only a requirement for school districts seeking state funds for health education, which not every school does.

***

As for the Proposition 8 supporters who apparently fear that such discussions would be tantamount to promoting gay marriage — how can I say this without hurting your feelings? Perhaps your invitation to the popular culture’s collective and ongoing celebration of same-sex matrimony has been lost in the mail, because I don’t see how you could think that kids haven’t already been “indoctrinated.”

As she points out, any Californian, or really any American, would have to be blind to miss the changes of the past few months.  While it probably goes back to 2004 and the Massachusetts ruling, when it happened in California, the center of creativity and popular culture, it became nearly impossible to miss. You see it on daytime tv with Ellen. You see it in the aisles of the grocery store. It’s not indoctrination, it’s people simply living their lives.

So, at some point, these people will take their heads out of the sand.  We’ll be waiting for them, cocktail in hand.

House Dems Short $14 Million in DCCC Dues

We are now in the final month of the 2008 election campaign. On the House side of the equation, our field of battle is changing with pickup opportunities expanding, not contracting. More and more Republican seats are becoming vulnerable, be the DCCC does not have the funds needed to take full advantage. Making matters worse is the $14 million in dues unpaid by members of Congress to the DCCC, according to the subscription-only Roll Call.

House Democratic leaders made an impassioned final plea Thursday night to get their rank and file to cough up more money for their effort to expand the party’s majority, just as Members are set to head home to hit the campaign trail a month before Election Day.

In a closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen (Md.) implored their colleagues to come up with the $14 million in Members’ dues needed to meet their overall $50 million goal, according to people who were present.

At the outset of the cycle, Van Hollen told lawmakers that the committee’s goal was to raise $150 million, with $50 million each coming from political action committees, individual donors and Members.

Sources said the leaders impressed upon Members that making up the financial disparity would make the difference in the size of their majority next Congress. Democratic lawmakers who are not politically in danger or in competitive races are collectively sitting on roughly $153 million in their re-election accounts, according to party tally sheets.

“We need to make sure we wake up the morning after Election Day and that we have no regrets,” Pelosi told the Caucus. “We will have the money from major donors and from the grass-roots donors. Where we are short is the Members. The moment of truth is now.”

Several Members announced on the spot that they were writing checks, according to sources in the room.

Rep. Chet Edwards (Texas), who is included in the DCCC’s “Frontline” program for vulnerable incumbents even though his re-election in November seems certain, said he wouldn’t be in Congress if it weren’t for the generosity of the Caucus and announced he was giving $100,000 — news that elicited audible gasps from his peers.

Chet Edwards is in strong shape this year, but he is not “safe”. And despite that fact, despite the fact that he represents Bush’s district and that he does not back down from progressive stances, he was willing to turn over $100k for the effort. There are many safe Democrats this year, some of whom did not pay dues. I am asking all of you who live in safe districts to call or write your member and ask if they paid their dues in full. If not, ask them why, and if the asnwer is lame (most are) push them. Two years ago we thought the 2006 elections were a once in a lifetime election and we were wrong. This is a once in a generation election and we need to make sure everyone is doing their part.