Red Maryland

• The Jimmy Braswell Experience: 2/7/12
  
  Listen to internet radio with redmaryland on Blog Talk Radio
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• The Jimmy Braswell Experience returns tonight
  The Jimmy Braswell Experience returns live tonight at 8 with Jimmy and Ethan.
  
  Once again U.S. Senate Candidate William Thomas Capps is scheduled to appear.
  
  Greg Kline will also make an appearance to talk about The Walking Dead.
  
  Listen in or watch live tonight at 8 PM.
  
  
  
  
  
• Transgender Laws and Public Accommodations, Coming to a Baltimore County Restroom Near You
  
  Ifone happens to be a father – particularly one who is raising daughters – thensurely this inquiry rings familiar: “Dad, where can I go to the bathroom?”
  Now,at home or at grandmas or even in, say, a state park, this would notnecessarily present a problem. But when that father/daughter combination is outand about and using public accommodations – especially when the child happensto be too young to do so on her own – it becomes a complicated test ofparenting skills.
  Doesdad subject her to the men’s room? Does he accompany his daughter into theladies’ room? Or, does he send her into the women’s facility on her own andwait nervously for her to emerge?
  Intoday’s politically-correct-run-amok climate none-of-the-above seems the safestchoice (specifically in regard to the second option), although if the Baltimore County Council has its way the line between gender-specific restrooms is aboutto become unbelievably blurry.
  Currentlybefore the council is Bill 3-12, an act “concerning human relations” that, ifpassed, would prohibit “discrimination against a person in certain matters onthe basis of a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity or expression;defining terms; and generally relatingto discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity orexpression.”
  Inplain English: those who engage in discriminating against any person who assumes a “gender identity”other than the one assigned to said person at birth will be prosecuted underthe county’s human rights laws.
  Whilesuch legislation will protect those questioning their sexual identity from beingdenied housing, employment, education or financing, it will also allow thoseconsidering a new sexual identity to use a bathroom facility with which theymost identify.
  Discriminationas a result of that person’s “appearance” will also be a violation of the humanrights laws, thereby opening the door for anyone dressed as a woman (crossdressers,transvestites, pre-op transsexuals, etc) to use a public facility currently designatedfor a female whose sexual identity was ‘assigned (and agreed upon) at birth.’
  Translated:as currently written, Bill 3-12 would allow someone dressed as Dustin Hoffman’s“Tootsie” character to enter the female locker room in your neighborhoodfitness club and do so with the full protection of the law.
  Thereare now more than 140 jurisdictions in the United States that have transgenderdiscrimination laws in place, yet many of them do not address the issue ofpublic accommodations – the matter of allowing males who have yet to undergothe surgery that would make them a female access to private areas currentlyfrequented by our mothers, sisters, wives and daughters (or in the case of afemale-to-male transgender our fathers, brothers, husbands and sons).
  Why?Because if there’s one feature elected officials from all across the countryhave in common it’s their collective ability to avoid difficult decisions andsettle for a knee-jerk (re: easy) resolution to the problem.
  Inthis instance it was the hasty reaction of county councilman Tom Quirk(Catonsville) who introduced this legislation as a result of a 2011 attack on atransgendered woman – Chrissy Lee Polis – in a Baltimore County McDonald’s.
  Butjust as the laws against murder do not prevent killings; or the laws againstrobbery do not prevent car theft; or the laws against public officials takingbribes from grocery stores do not prevent state senators from taking bribes from grocery stores,having hate crime legislation on the books would not have prevented Ms. Polisfrom suffering the beating she received at the hands of the animals thatattacked her last April.
  Somemay argue that this type of legislation may result in even more violenceagainst transgenders, especially in such instances where one’s “appearance”leaves little doubt as to the “sexual identity” disguised beneath the clothing.
  ThinkRobin Williams as Mrs. Doubtfire… with five o’clock shadow.
  Regardlessof what public accommodation supporters argue, not addressing this aspect ofany transgender discrimination law will allow any man (or woman) who is soinclined to enter a restroom, locker room, dressing room, etc that is patronizedby members of the opposite sex.
  Andwhile the transgendered (or those transitioning to a different sex) ask thatthey not be stereotyped as sexual predators, those satisfied with their currentsexual identity ask that they not be branded bigots or hateful just becausethey are uncomfortable with the prospect of being forced by law to inhabit thetoilet stall next to a man in woman’s clothing.   
  No,this is not an effort to lump all transgender men with transvestites, andneither should the transgendered see it as an opportunity to pretend thatsexual predators do not come in all shapes, sizes, appearances and genderidentities.
  Which begs the question: If sexual predators are already stalking victims in public areas then why would a county council vote to give them protection?
  Inthe end we can all count on government to get this issue – like so many that havepreceded it – spectacularly wrong.
  Transgenderpeople have been using public restrooms since, well, the advent of public restrooms,and until lawmakers nationwide brought the focus to the forefront (only to ignore it) sharedaccommodations has been the Spot-a-Pot version of ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.’
  Bill 3-12 does littlemore than put both sides of this argument at a higher risk of victimization, butit should at least make those dad/daughter restroom decisions much easier –especially if papa starts packing around a Bouffant wig and a pair of PradaSlingbacks.
  
  
  
  
  
  You can contact the Baltimore County Council by clicking this link or by calling 410.887.3196
  
  
  
  
• The Broadside 2/6/12
  Hope you caught another exciting episode of The Broadside on The Red Maryland Network
  
  
  Thanks to our guests, Ali Akabar from Blog Bash, Maryland's next US Senator Daniel Bongino, and our own Red Maryland Network colleague Greg Kline.
  
  
  Remember you can subscribe to the Red Maryland Network on iTunes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Listen to internet radio with redmaryland on Blog Talk Radio
  
  
  
  
• The Broadside Tonight 7pm
  Tonight on The Broadside at 7pm
  
  
  We continue out CPAC 2012 preview with Ali Ackbar from Blog Bash
  
  
  We play Andrew's conversation with entrepreneur Bob Davids
  
  
  US Senate candidate Daniel Bongino will also join us to talk about the campaign.
  
  
  All that and more tonight on The Broadside--only on the Red Maryland Network
  
  
  Watch the show on BroadsideTV on UStream.
  
  
  
  
• Citizen Journalism Training Resources
  This past weekend I had the honor to give a presentation to the Franklin Center/MDCAN Citizen Journalism Training Seminar.
  
  
  I can't express how important it is for more of us to become information activists and start digging into government documents and data.
  
  
  One way to start changing Maryland for the better is start holding Governor O'Malley and the Democratic monopoly accountable. We do that by finding and disseminating information that reveals their fallacies, exposes their corruption, and follows their money.
  
  
  Below is a Word document I used for the presentation. It is chock full of links to help you send a Public Information Act Request, find government data and information, and how to use social media to leverage your research findings.
  
  
  Citizen Journalism Training Resources
  
  
  
  
• Rosenberg, Reznik believe in state control of information?
  One of the key tools that we have in Maryland to keep our legislators accountable are public information requests. This blog has a long history of sunshine in government, and Delegate Sandy Rosenberg seems to think that the public knows too much:
  

  In Virginia, the attorney general, skeptical of global warming, tried to use his subpoena powers to build a fraud case against a climatology professor.

  In Wisconsin, Republican Party officials sought the emails of a history professor, trying to demonstrate that he had misused his public account to stir political unrest during the state's highly publicized battles over organized labor.

  Maryland Del. Sandy Rosenberg, a Baltimore Democrat, has cited these controversies, which garnered national attention, as he vows to prevent a similar situation from arising here. Rosenberg introduced a bill being considered in the General Assembly that would extend broader protection from public information requests to professors at the state's public universities.

  But as it has elsewhere, the issue has sparked a debate pitting academic freedom against freedom of information. Rosenberg's efforts have drawn praise from academics and raised concerns among open-government advocates.

  Nse Ufot, government relations officer for the American Association of University Professors, said some of the great discoveries in history were deeply unpopular with contemporary political and social leaders, but scientists were free to make them without scrutiny at every step.

  "We fear losing the culture of deep knowledge if every email that's written is risking public ridicule," she said. "If we lose that, it doesn't bode well for us as a nation."

  You know, it's kind of funny that we're seeing this bill from Rosenberg (which is curiously sponsored by Kirill Reznik, who was born in Soviet Ukraine). Liberals like to run around saying that Republicans are anti-science, pro-secrecy, and pretty much want to keep the general public shielded from facts and information. Except in this case we have a Democrat that is trying to use the power of government to restrict the flow of public information, particularly to academics.

  What does Rosenberg think that the state government has to hide from scientific scrutiny? His reasoning for this legislation is mind-boggling:

  Rosenberg agreed: "There is a pattern of requests that appear very political in nature, and I want to make sure that similar harassment inquiries cannot be made in Maryland." He added that public information requests made for political reasons or to quash research "could have a chilling effect on academic freedom."

  Requests for "political reasons..."could have a chilling effect on academic freedom?" How is restricting the flow of information to any academics anything BUT a chilling effect on academic freedom. In fact, restricting the flow of information to any citizen is certainly a chilling effect on the freedom of any state citizen.

  When it comes to information in Maryland, the Democrats probably do have a lot of things that they would prefer to keep out of the hands of academics. I'm sure there is plenty of fodder there for folks doing research on global warming, fracking, wind farms, bay pollution, and a host of other things. We should be encouraging research into this issues and scientific study of data gathered by the state.

  Why do Rosenberg and Reznik want this?
  

  
  
  
  
• Welcome J. Doug Gill
  As heard on WBAL Radio last Friday, We are pleased to announce our newest contributor J. Doug Gill.
  
  
  Doug is a longtime journalist and currently is the Maryland State House Examiner for Examiner.com
  
  
  Doug is regular guest and host on WBAL.
  
  
  Welcome aboard Doug.
  
  
  
  
• The Consistently Specious Rhetoric of The New York Times Op-Ed Page
  --Richard E. Vatz
  
  A good rhetorician loves good argumentative clash and is frustrated at intelligent pundits who deceptively misrepresent the truth to create straw man arguments.
  
  This is, parenthetically, one of the reasons that I like The Washington Post's and dislike The New York Times' op-ed pages.
  
  The former typically sports liberals and conservatives who clash in fair interpretation of reality. The latter typically sports liberals, at least, who apparently feel no compunction in changing facts ever so slightly or misrepresenting an opponent’s argument to make easier a challenge or criticism.
  
  This is not a comprehensive overview with evidence of columnist Paul Krugman or columns by Charles Blow, but it is a critique of columns yesterday and today which are synecdoche of these two authors’ prose.
  
  Yesterday, Krugman focused on Mitt Romney in a column titled, “Romney Isn’t Concerned.” Four points are illustrative, if not exhaustive:
  
  1. He quotes Romney as saying, “I’m not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there.” Romney’s next line was, “If it needs repair, I'll fix it.” That is a significant point of reassurance. Why does Krugman leave it out? Because it makes his attack more difficult to sustain.
  
  2. Krugman wrote, “Still, I believe Mr. Romney when he says he isn’t concerned about the poor...” That is literally what Romney said, but he meant it in the sense that mitigating governmental policies makes unnecessary active concern; he didn’t mean he doesn’t care. If I say I’m not concerned about Iran’s nuclear program because Israel will destroy it if necessary, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t concern me.
  
  3. Romney’s saying that current programs are inefficient – right or wrong – leads to Krugman’s apotheosis in non sequitur: “So Mr. Romney’s position seems to be that we need not worry about the poor thanks to programs that he insists, falsely, don’t actually help the needy, and which he intends, in any case, to destroy.” Where is evidence of Romney making these points?
  
  4. Krugman depicts Romney and Republicans’ support for “tax breaks” for the highly taxed well-to-do as “tax cuts.” The consistent argument by liberals like him -- that whatever the taxing percentage was previously must be reasonable because it simply existed as such and that any decrease would be an undeserved windfall for the wealthy -- is transparently fatuous. Mutatis mutandis, if income taxes approached 90% for the wealthy during the Eisenhower Administration, one could argue that anything below that would be an undeserved windfall for the rich.
  
  5. Krugman disagrees with Romney about the effectiveness of governmental “safety nets,” so he calls Romney’s sentiments not “incorrect,” but a “whopper.”
  
  Today’s column in the Times by Charles Blow at least quoted Romney fully regarding his position regarding worrying about the poor. However, just to take one fatuous misrepresentation from that article, Blow states, “This is the same man who bragged last month that he liked to fire people at a time when nearly 13 million people are out of work.”
  
  Let me just say that this little act of rhetorical legerdemain leaves out significant aspects of the following quote: ”I like being able to fire people who provide services to me. If someone doesn't give me the good service I need, I'm going to go get somebody else to provide that service to me."
  
  These mini-deceptions which pervade Krugman and some others’ columns in The New York Times would be cute and clever if the writers were teenagers. For serious pundits, it is unforgivable, especially as serial disinformation.
  
  The Times, apparently mystified by Paul Krugman’s intelligence and Blow’s provocativeness, doesn’t want sincere, honest clash.
  
  It is almost unspeakable that the country’s newspaper of record could be so irresponsible.
  
  Professor Vatz teaches Media Criticism at Towson University and is author of The Only Authentic Book of Persuasion (Kendall Hunt, 2012)
  
  
  
  
• Special Announcement Tonight
  I'll be on 1090 at Night tonight at 9:35 with J. Doug Gill discussing O'Malley State of the State address and the current legislative session. I will also be making a special announcement regarding Red Maryland. Tune in to AM 1090 or listen online at WBAL.com
  
  
  
  

Additional Information