What is very wrong with this picture?

Probably nothing unless you find out that Judge Jorge Escribano, holding a bible while wearing a judicial robe, is being pushed by some religious right groups (different from fundamentalist groups with which I have no problem) as their candidate to occupy the Supreme Court in Puerto Rico. This is the picture they chose to promote their cause, pretty transparent I’d say. This judge/preacher who almost exclusively quotes from the first testament spreads definitions of women, family, and, moral that are sexist, stereotypical, and hetero-normative.

Escribano: Final Phase in a Three-Prong Attack

The religious right in Puerto Rico has been aggressively active in lobbying the legislature for many years. Threatening lawmakers that will not do as they want and trying really hard to impose their bigoted moral values on society. The group is as small as it is vociferous.

They also found a welcoming niche in the PNP party (now in power.) Former Governor Roselló, instituted “prayer Sundays” in the governor’s house (La Fortaleza), where heads of his cabinet were forced to go and…”pray.” Most of that same cabinet were convicted for heinous corruption crimes, but it may be O.K. just because they prayed. In exchange for their vociferous support, the religious right got some juicy presents like, no reproductive rights info in government public clinics, ignoring recommendations to eliminate consensual sodomy from the penal code, (same thing did the other party for the catholic church when in power), and tasty tax concessions to their home-turned-churches.

After these conquers, they are now ready to go to the last of our bastions of democracy, the Supreme Court. Escribano, the preacher judge, is that instrument of penetration they needed.

These are some of the quotes from his supporters in Facebook:

• “He (Escribano) is a christian that will be instrument of god.”
• I support this man of god to go to the Supreme Court in Jesus’ name.
• I support his aspirations to be Supreme Justice because we need the voice of god in the Supreme Court
• I heard him preaching, …his way of seeing life, he integrates god in the solutions to social problems, ideals and moral values.
• We need god fearing people in the Supreme Court
• We need more Salomons in these times so they can carry out justice from a point of view that is focus on god’s justice, which is without doubt the true justice.
• The voice of church in the higher court in Puerto Rico. It is urgent that we have a sentinel there.
• He will be a great resource to the kingdom of god in the higher judicial authority in PR.
• The democratic party has respond to the catholics and the Mita congregation.
• Is a brutal testimony because it shows that we can use our profesions to sow the word in society for the glory of god.

I think it is important that all sectors that believe in Women’s Rights, Queer Rights, immigrant rights, and individual liberties unite, and, together with sectors that believe in a true democracy that is free of religious interference and imposition, fight to reject this nomination. The Supreme Court is trusted with protecting the individual liberties of all citizens in Puerto Rico. Nothing enriches more a democracy that a diverse, heterogeneous society that thrives in it. That richness must be embraced and protected by government. Allowing this agent of god into the Supreme Court threatens the very basic principles of separation of state and church and threatens the individual liberties of all of us, particularly, those deemed as “sinners” by the religious right.

People should avoid at all means to let this become a partisan fight, even if as I say, the current governor has commit to grant access to the religious right, we face the same problems with other administrations promising access to catholics, the focus must be kept in keeping the separation between state and church by all means in order to defend our democracy.

Here is a link to a video of one of his speeches (in both Spanish and English), where he espouses his deranged views on women and attacks gays (the old love-the-sinner-but-make-sure-that-none-of-his/her-rights-as-a-citizen-are-recognized-and-eliminate-any-protections-from-blatant-discrimination-and-violence-against-them-forcing-them-to-leave-as-second-rate-citizens). This disturbing video leaves no doubt in my mind that the pastor/judge responds to a higher authority and that he will bring a specific religious right agenda to the Supreme Court in Puerto Rico threatening everyone’s rights.

Judge Jorge Escribano from DSJ on Vimeo.

Many community organizers in Puerto Rico, will agree that party loyalty will override any other conflicting loyalties you may have at election times. Whether you are trying to organize around environment, racism, labor rights, AIDS and/or LGBT rights. People will listen, maybe even understand and agree, but at the time of election, they will act like zombies walking into the electoral booth to vote according to their party affiliation. (There is a small number of mostly white elite people that will self identify as leftist, mostly in their young years, but as they grow old and become more conservative will end up being “melones.” Melones are leftists on the outside democrats at heart! (Their emphasis)

As one of the founding members of ACT-UP PR, party loyalty was one of the biggest hurdles to organize people. There are two ways how political parties tune into the people in Puerto Rico, most people are “born into their party” you are either born “penepé”(usually associated with Republicans) or “popular” (usually associated with Democrats) because your parents and your grandparents and their parents belonged to that party. The second way, is through employment (or the promise of one.) Governement of Puerto Rico is one of, if not the biggest, employer. Chances are that you, your dad, your mother, cousin, uncle, niece or cousin job will end up working for the government and you will fear for your/their job and vote to keep a party in power. You would be surprised as to the many ways in which these two different reasons are intertwined.

Activists and LG leaders in PR always struggle to keep partisan politics out of their work because they recognize that if they let it come in, that is the end to LGBT organizing in Puerto Rico. The ties to partisan politics are stronger than education, facts, numbers, friendship, etc. That is why even HIV/AIDS advocacy groups have been vocal, or not, depending which government or politician is being criticized. This is a fact, of every-day life in Puerto Rico and the best way to organize has been so far to walk around it. To continue to educate, and to not bite into it.

That is why it was very disturbing, but not surprising, the recent commotion after Cecilia La Luz, a well known lesbian activist, recently, and dare I say, unfortunately as well as irresponsibly, issued a solid endorsement of Luis Fortuño for Governor. This endorsement on spite of Fortuño’s clear alliance with the religious right and his long record of statements, supporting positions that are clearly prejudicial to the LGBT community in Puerto Rico. Cecilia, is a clear example of Puerto Ricans whose loyalty to their party colors is way above their own interests or worse, against the interests of those they strive to represent. Party loyalty for Cecilia (as well as to many, many Puerto Ricans) is more important, so much more, that Cecilia risks whatever credibility and good work she may have done in order to bring her party to power. Her integrity is at least, questionable.

It was refreshing to see other activists to quickly move to provide damage control by issuing declarations not endorsing any other candidate but certainly withdrawing, collectively, their support of Mr. Fortuño. You can read Olga Orraca here, and Pedro Julio Serrano here.

However, this is why the LG groups and LGBT community in Puerto Rico has failed to consolidate as a voting bloc and become a political force. Partisan politics in Puerto Rico has swallowed our reason, our integrity and like every other enabler, forces us every day to act, argue and negotiate against our own interests both collectively and individually.

I want the elections to be over. Elections are designed to make me fully understand how much I do not belong. Worse, I get the overpowering feeling that I will never belong!

It is always the same pattern with electoral campaigns. Candidates and parties start by telling us they really feel our pain, and want to fight for us. Then the issues that the election must address start to be pondered, identified, and, defined. For a short time in the electoral campaign you think these issues will be debated. However, soon after, it all comes down to having to watch how spineless candidates, grovel, trying to re-present and re-create themselves parading their ever-so-wholesome families to proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that they are 300% American. Whatever the fuck “American” means…it is made very clear that it is not me, that it will never be me.

So…here is a list of reasons electoral processes tell me how Un-American I am (Sorry I could not contain this list to a mere 10):

1.      I am an atheist. Apparently it does not matter my commitment and desire to make this country a better place for all. Loyalty is a mandate to worship a disaffected, warmonger, punitive, sexually repressed and sexually obsessed god.

2.      I am a Leftist.

3.      I belief we should actively and robustly pursue social justice. I believe this country should ask, and be told by its citizens what to do for its citizens (Yeah, screw JFK).

4.      Same set of rules for all citizens, all citizens first-class citizens, regardless of buying power, age, sex, language, ethnic background, sexual orientation, disability, religious or non-religious background, political or lack of political affiliation or gender representation.

5.      I believe poor people matter, you must talk about the poor and your plan to end poverty during your campaign.

6.      I do not hate immigrants and believe there must be a path to citizenship that is just and fair to all.

7.      I believe in a big government that will actively and loyally protect me from: Greedy Health insurers, Corrupt Banks, discriminatory and oppressive lending practices, exploitative employers, polluters, gentrifying and unscrupulous, real estate scalpers and the police.

8.      I believe in free Universal Single Payer Health Care and free education including Graduate School.

9.      I value education and deplore anti-intellectual rhetoric.

10.  I have contempt for mediocrity.

11.  I believe in a small government that will be out of my personal life, will stop spying on me and will not regulate my every day activities. From forbidding dance outdoors, to closing parks at night, to having a beer on a sidewalk! From entrapping people to criminalizing sex work, from telling me who to date and who I can marry (and divorce!), to telling me whether I can adopt or not.

12.  I oppose the Death penalty and oppose torture of prisoners, including prisoners of war.

13.  I am not a warmonger and I believe it is OK to question and criticize a president’s decision to go to war.

14.  I believe citizens have a right to organize and participate in the political life of the country.

15.  I believe all people are free to self-determine gender identity and expression, without facing harassment, discrimination or violence.

16.  I believe men should be able to marry men and women should be able to marry women, even if they never have to visit one another in a hospital!

17.  I greatly enjoy having non-marital, non-procreational sex in many different positions.

18.  I live and thrive in a big city.

19.  I do not feel more threatened by Muslims than by Christians.

20. I am a feminist

21. I am Latino

22. I am queer

23.  I donate and ask you to donate to the Sylvia Rivera Law Project.

On September 30, 2008, I went to Rutgers University in New Jersey, to attend my dear friend Chaco’s defense of his Doctoral dissertation:

Getting Life in 2 Worlds:
Prevention and Power in the New York City House Ball Community

In discussing his dissertation Rivera-Colón pointed out that in looking at the whole of his investigation, he realized that among other achievements, his work ultimately, is a narrative of the “failure of the Gay and Lesbian Liberation Movement of the 70’s to incorporate Black and Latino people.”

His Dissertation Committee Comprised by, Louisa Schien, thesis chair, Associate Professor
Department of Anthropology, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey; Peter Guarnaccia, Professor and Chair of the Department of Human Ecology and Investigator at the Institute for Health, Health Care Policy and Aging Research; Ana Yolanda Ramos-Zayas, Associate Professor in the Departments of Anthropology and Latino & Hispanic Caribbean Studies; and, Carlos U. Decena, Assistant Professor, Latino and Hispanic Caribbean Studies, and Women’s and Gender Studies.

Carlos U. Decena, another Latino scholar whose important and ground breaking contributions to theory are on my watch, described the last Chapter of the dissertation (on the renowned film: Paris Is Burning,) as a “gift” every person in the committee agreed and encouraged for its publication.

Trough his work, advise and discussions I learned to see the House Balls in NYC on a complete different light. Chaco’s ability to apply complex theories to his observations of the House Balls and his talent to explain them in lay words to me. allowed me to have a better, enhanced understanding of the House Balls and continue to have fun watching them. Watching Paris Is Burning again after beneffiting from his insight was amazing!

As a Latino anthropologist with expertise in HIV prevention among queer communities of color, I am sure Edgar’s work will continue to contribute to this field.

Among those attending this occasion were Edgar’s sister Lilliam and her wife Elsa , Jason, long time friend, partner, support of Edgar. Below are some pictures of this event of which I was proud to attend. If you have Edgar’s e-mail please write to him to congratulate him, leave him a message here, or both.

Well, after serious family problems, disasters, emergency health issues and drama (I swear we should be removed from our families at birth!) I am trying to make a comeback lite, with this present. This is a video response to Daddy Yankee’s infamous endorsement of McCain. Although I am very thankful we were not submitted to vomit inducing images of McCain and Cindy “perreando”, I was still nauseated by McCain looking for an endorsement from a friend “from Puerto Rico” whose colonized American citizens can’t vote for a president.

I’ll try to come back more regularly

Enjoy:

There was a full room at the GENDA Forum that took place April 22nd, at the LGBT Community Center in New York City. The room was full with enthusiasm. This forum was strategically scheduled before the April 29th, LGBT Equality & Justice Day in Albany with the intention that the people that attends will also talk to the legislators asking for support for GENDA that purports to prohibit discrimination based on gender identity or expression in the state of New York.

The forum was hosted by Ray Carannante, Associate Director, Center CARE, Coordinator, Gender Identity Project and moderated by Desma Holcomb, Empire State Pride Agenda. Panelists were,(in order of presentation):

Melissa Sklarz, Director, New York Transgender Rights Organization; Lourdes Hunter, Counselor and Case Manager, Housing Works; Gabriel Arkles, Staff Attorney, Sylvia Rivera Law Project; Elizabeth Rivera, Program Coordinator: TransJustice, Audre Lorde Project; and, Kenyon Farrow, Board Chair, Queers for Economic Justice

Panelist and longtime activist Melissa Sklarz presented a very complete historical context for the bill, as well as an honest assessment as to why the bill did not pass last time it was up for a vote. I do not think the forum, as it progressed, ever recognized Melissa Sklarz’ instrumental and relentless work in getting the bill to where it is at this moment in history.

Panelist Gabriel Arkles, staff attorney for the Sylvia Rivera Law Project, gave a clear, sober and informative presentation. His call for strong clear anti-discrimination laws was very exciting. He presented a fair, potent account of the state of current law and how necessary are strong, solid anti-discrimination protections in the state and supported it with some of the achievements made by the Sylvia Rivera Law project, benefiting from the inclusion of gender identity/expression categories to the anti-discrimination laws in the city of New York.

It was however Mr. Arkles’ warning and opposition to the hate crime component of the bill that dominated the rest of the panel presentations and discussion. I believe his opposition to the Hate Crime component of the Anti-Discrimination bill was supported by clear arguments as well as solid, undisputed facts.

Elizabeth Rivera, Program Director of TransJustice, an Audre Lorde Project program proceeded to also express support to the bill, admitting that until very recent (I suspect the same day) she did not know about the Hate Crimes component of the bill and then read a prepared statement from ALP stating their opposition to this type of legislation.

Last panelist, Kenyon Farrow, Board Chair, Queers for Economic Justice started his presentation by pointing out how important it is when doing this and other kind of political work to maintain the ability to build and support coalitions. He went on to discuss how he believes this type of legislation has been used by the Department of Justice to increase its persecution and incarceration of people in poor communities and communities of color. He also warned that Hate Crimes legislation are regularly and unfairly used precisely against the youth, the poor, the black, the brown and the transgender communities and the intersections of these communities.

Most of the Q&A went to people making statements against the Hate Crime component of the bill. One of the attendants asked how the provision “ slipped” into the bill. The panel moderator from ESPA, explained that the way the Hate Crime legislation is written, all categories added to the non-discrimination charter will be de-facto added to the Hate Crimes legislation. WHOA, only in the Law & Order regime we currently experience as “life in the USA” you can find such logic! In order to win protection from discrimination in employment, public accomodations and Housing, you have to expand the powers of the Department of Justice, so they can “enhance” sentences, (where the word enhance serves the same purpose it serves in “enhanced interrogation practices.” I think The Department of Justice’s record on race, LGBT issues, youth issues, class issues, and others has to improve a lot before we trust giving them more power.

Bill Dobbs, a gay activist that has opposed Hate Crime legislation since forever I remember asked Rep. Gottfried, who sponsors the bill, and who happened to be present, what did he think in listening from the organizations and the participants’ opposition to the Hate Crime component of the bill. Mr. Gottfried replied that it was “ unfortunate” and that he supports Hate Crime legislation. Seemed like yet one more case of an elected official that believes he/she knows more than his/her constituents and in that reasoning finds a justification to ignore his/her constituents requests or needs.

At one point someone from the public, asked the panelists if their position was “ Genda with no Hate Crimes component, or No bill at all. Mr. Arkles and Ms. Rivera did not fall for that bait, they both replied something like: (I am paraphrasing) “We continue to support the bill, but we are now aware that there is a lot of work we must continue to do and hopefully when the bill is ready to be passed all hate crime provisions will be out of it”.

I think the real scandal in this story is that many of these organizations and individuals (Cyborg included) have been supporting this bill for a long time, probably years, without ever reading it. There is a strong lesson to be learned here. We are all responsible for this.

I believe in the end of the night Melissa Sklarz, whom I respect a lot, may have felt disappointed. Melissa has been working very hard and has provided excellent leadership in lobbying the legislature to get TG protections to New York, as well as Federal protections through ENDA. It is my understanding she has been trying to involve for a long time into this work, the same organizations that last night expressed opposition to the Hate Crime component of the bill. If I was her, I would be furious.

While Cyborg was pleasantly surprised with the strong reactions from the public opposing the damn hate crimes provisions of this important bill, I did not enjoy the controversy. After all this is a bill we want to support and pass and some of us heard last night that the hate crime provision is added by default to any anti-discrimination bill or category. What a fucking high price to pay to get these protections!

For the record, Cyborg has been opposed to Hate Crime legislation for over a decade and supports the statements made from the panel against the hate crimes component of this bill.

This blogging thing is interesting. One thing is that you can’t predict what people will comment on. Much to my surprise, I’ve gotten reactions, from some very dear friends, that I would risk categorizing as “lefties”, to the little square that has the picture of Obama in it. Unfortunately, except for Chaco (soon may be a guest blogger here,) who did engage in a serious conversation with my alter ego, no one else tried to engage Cyborg Yoryie in a private or public conversation. Instead, it is usually a cynic, rather dismissive and/or condescending comment; something like, “you are now drinking the Obama Kool-Aid!” Of course, this comment or “joke”, does not pursue the idea of asking me why do I support Obama. In addition it does not take into consideration Cyborg’s extensive political background, as well as Cyborg’s academic history, which although it does not preclude the possibility that I may be drinking Kool-Aid, at least makes it suspect. As dear as these friends are to me, I can’t avoid thinking these dismissive jokes, come from far above me, from some place between the clouds where the truth, recluse and inaccessible to me, co-exists with them.

So…. I decided to compile “a la Letterman” my own list of reasons for which the Cyborg, MIGHT be supporting Obama, else than the ‘Kool-Aid theory.”

10. Cyborg is a Misogynist. PERIOD

9. Cyborg is not a misogynist but still hates Hillary.

8. Barack Obama is Black. PERIOD

7. Barack Obama is black and that in itself will create changes to the institution of the presidency regardless of who he is (and pray no one knows or forgot who Clarence Thomas is)

6. It is a strategy against Hillary, as soon as she loses the nomination Cyborg will take off the sign of support for Obama. ( See 10 & 9)

5. If Obama wins, Cyborg will have a “mucho” paying contract in his administration.

4. Cyborg is Obama’s long lost blood relative.

3. A god told me to do it (ok, that would be Kool-Aid)

2. Cyborg is a closet republican or a republican mole, trying to get the weakest candidate nominated.

1. Barack Obama looked sooooooooooooooo cute dancing with Ellen Degeneres! Yes, He Did!

Wow, it just occurred to the cyborg today while watching Body of War, that one of the possibilities of this blog is that I can promote a documentary! My good friend, Da Dobbs, recommended this wrenching documentary to me including a link to the Washington Post review of it. I’ll say at moments where it seems so many forces are so hard at work to make sure we forget we are at war, these type of documentaries are necessary, because the patriotic reaction to those forces that try to make us forget is to continue to pay attention to this war and to increase the pressure to end it.

This poignant documentary follows Iraq wounded veteran, now anti-war activist, Tomas Young, through his daily routines and political activism. Parallel to this, the documentary also shows the shameful moment in history in which congress abdicated its constitutional duties to the mad man in the white house. How pathetic to watch most senators act like parrots, repeating ad nausea anything that came out of the mad man’s born again mouth.

If this great documentary, is not in a theater close to you, call and ask for an explanation as to why is not being shown ans ask that your theater schedules it.

Below: A trailer of the documentary, an Interview with one of the directors, Phil Donahue.

I was perusing through Lady Bunny’s blog page, when I ran into the Ellen DeGeneres video addressing the murder of Lawrence King, 15 who was killed by a 16 year old classmate. I’ve seen the video in many other blog sites after that. I was genuinely touched by Ellen’s plea for all of us to “change the message” as well as for her important declaration, that neither Larry King, a 15 year old gender non-conforming adolescent (who self-identified as gay) nor herself, a 50 year old white gender non-conforming person are second class citizens. And, isn’t that what we all strive for? First Class Citizenship, not the other one(s). We know too well the differences. These differences are shoved in our faces most days of our lives. They are mainly shown to us through exclusions, exclusions from neighborhoods, exclusions from families, exclusions from peace, exclusions from better (or any) jobs, exclusion from political candidates’ speeches and national parties platforms, exclusion from the basic definition of human being. This list can go on, and on, and on.

But what is “the message” that must be changed? Or who is sending it? I propose the answer to this is very complex. Recently The Advocate tried to address the issue from a different perspective, wondering whether we, as a community (LGBT) are sending mixed messages. This effort, I am sure was as well intended as misguided, and has elicit several responses. However, I think is worthy to explore what messages our allies and we as a community are sending that may be supportive of the idea that gender non-conforming folks as well as trans folks are indeed second class citizens, therefore unworthy. This is where Senator Kennedy fits in this post. Senator Kennedy announced he will push ENDA in the senate without protections for trans or gender non-conforming folks. Bill Browning at The Bilerico Project asked the right question:

“George W has already said he’d veto the legislation. Today’s million dollar question? What’s the rush if it’s not going to make it into law to start with? Why alienate a large segment of the LGBT community? “

I propose that the issue of ENDA and the staunch opposition to include transgender protections from employment discrimination by some elected officials that we consider allies, as well as some LG groups indeed sends a message. It says to me that trans and gender non-conforming folks are indeed second class citizens even within their/our own communities.

The rift caused across our communities nationally as well as the angry tone (on both sides,) for or against gender expression protections in this legislation, contributes to an environment that may be more fertile for transphobes and their ilk, to act on their hate, or contempt of trans and gender non-conforming people. The opposition by congress to listen to a huge coalition of groups and individuals that demanded the restoration of protections to trans and gender nonconforming folks indeed sends the wrong message, it establishes a hierarchy, it shows who is disposable, it shows who we are willing to alienate.

We can make a list of groups we alienate, immigrants of color; people on the sex-work industry; homeless people, transgender people, poor people, and a common characteristic we will find is how much violence these groups face on a daily basis. The level of alienation from society and the lack of protections society extends to its first class citizens becomes evident as the violence becomes endemic to their being.

I am not saying Senator Kennedy, or Congressman Frank or even the Human Rights Campaign Fund, want this as a result of their dismissal of trans people. I am not saying that because of their unwillingness to stand up to trans phobia and gender expression discrimination, violence is inflicted on these groups. What I am saying is that every time a politician fails to stand up and include gender expression in a diversity curriculum in school, every time a politician says she/he does not “understand” this thing about gender expression, there is a message. Every time an executive director goes back in his words and refuses to use his/her organization’s resources to include transgender people and there is NO consequences, there is, again the message, loud and clear: Transgender people are expendable; we will not go the extra mile for them; we can lie to or betray them without serious consequences; these messages whether intended or not can contribute to the climate of intolerance against transgender individuals. I’ve seen some very angry letters demanding restoration of transgender protections to ENDA, I have also seen some very hateful letters opposing it. In such climate of intolerance, violence thrives. We should be aware of this.

p.s. For the record Cyborg Yoryie only supports a strong ENDA with protections for gender identity and expression included in the legislation.

Job Application

Position: Elected Official

Primary requirements:

• Candidate must be asexual but not aromantic. In the alternative, if sexually active, candidate must be married to the person with whom they are sexually active, AND this spouse must be from a different sex AND a different gender identification than the candidate.

• Candidate must show that sex is not for pleasure, but for reproduction, every time we do it. Have at least one child with the spouse mentioned above, (friendly reminder: This spouse MUST be from a sex different than yours AND have a gender identification different than yours.

• Candidate must prove that never did and never will perform sex in any position other than the missionary position. If candidate can substantiate that falls asleep during sex, you are strongly encouraged to apply!

• Candidate must also prove that never did and never will have sex with a person of the same sex and/or same gender identification.

• Candidate must also prove that never “experimented” sexually with tongue, fingers, fruits or vegetables.

• Candidate must act self-righteous and condemning when referring to sex that is not missionary specially if position can not result in pregnancy.

• Candidate must commit to have a “sex-panic attack” every time someone says the word “sex” in the same sentence with any of the following: freedom; public; homo; kinky; tolerance”.
• DO NOT GET CAUGHT! Or you will force all of us to see ourselves in you.

Secondary requirements

• Person must be anti-drugs. In the alternative, if using drugs, they must be legally prescribed by a physician licensed to do so. (It is OK if the physician is your relative, longtime friend or the godfather of your children, remember you are both protected by doctor-patient confidentiality.)

• Due to recent “incidents” we now require that you must have started taking a hair follicle drug test every three months for at least 20 years prior to this application.

• You must always show a strong desire for vengeance and punishment when talking about drugs.

• You must always show contempt and disgust for those people that use any drugs.

• Always act like you never EVER met a person that used recreational drugs before.

Last but not least Requirement

• You must be Christian and when possible quote from the bible. If you can quote more from the Old Testament than from the New Testament, you are strongly encouraged to apply.

If you belong to the group of millions and millions of people unable to fulfill all or any of the requirements above, do not panic. Don’t be embarrassed just join the mainstream media and follow their cue! It is very simple, just:

• Act SHOCKED every time an elected official is caught having sex outside of her/his hetero marriage.

• Act offended while searching for every single detail, be extremely voyeuristic.

• Pretend that you believe the “average person” could easily qualify for this job.

• Ignore and refuse to discuss how any of the above makes a person un-fit to be an elected official by default .

• Blatantly ignore the elected official’s record while in office, it is irrelevant.

• Refuse to acknowledge good, fair legislation authored or co-sponsored by the elected official.

• Refuse to investigate whether the person’s actions as an elected official benefited the constituents.

• Refuse to even consider the possibility that her/his constituents MAY NOT GIVE A DAMN about private sexual behavior or drug experimentation, but about decent jobs, a roof over their heads, good, affordable education, single payer universal health care!

• Assume everyone is as outraged as you think you have to be.

• Demand resignation of any elected officer that failed to comply with the requisites of this position regardless of whether this resignation is or isn’t in the best interests of the constituents.

• Be impervious to the fact that your voyeurism and lust for scandal may have resulted in the removal from office of a competent, efficient elected official for doing something that has nothing to do with her/his capacity to get the job done.