living a lie?

The Salt Lake Tribune has an interesting article today about being openly gay, married and LDS. The first man profiled, Ben told a Jessie before proposal that he was gay: "They talked a lot about it. They prayed about it. They both felt it was what God wanted them to do.
Now Ben and Jessie have two children..."

There are also support groups for folks like Ben and Jessie, unofficial of course. These LDS folks who are gay "talk about trying to change, their temptations, addictions to pornography, guilt and denial as well as faith, their marriages and their notions of eternity." I think there is a big difference between discovering you are gay during a marriage and knowing well in advance then deciding to get married to someone of the opposite sex and have kids anyway.

A gay man marrying a heterosexual woman "is just wrong," says Craig Steiner, an activist who was married for 12 and 1/2 years and has two sons.
"You are not being true to who you are and it traps women in an unhealthy relationship," says Steiner
[...]
Idaho State University professor Ron Schow has studied LDS homosexuals. Of 136 he surveyed in 1994, 71 percent were returned missionaries and 36 had tried marriage. Only two of the 36 were still married.

That is a pretty small sample size, but still, I bet it is hard to find that many, especially those who are willing to participate in that study.

The article lists three blogs of such openly-gay LDS men Ben's blog is: fobcave.blogspot.com,Landon's blog is: ardentmormon.blogspot.com; "Jason"'s blog is: gaymormonandmarried.blogspot.com. I have yet to read any of them, but if I think I will add them to my Utah section if they are from the Beehive state.

So far, Ben's attempts to be 'cured' have failed: "therapy before and after his two-year mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That helped him resolve issues with his father and other men, but it didn't diminish the strong attractions he felt for other men. He doubted those would ever go away." Yet, he believes God wanted him to marry.

Remember "The LDS Church says it's not a sin to have same-sex attraction, only to act on it." Langdon "doesn't believe he chose to be gay, so he doesn't feel guilty about having same-sex attractions. He agrees with the LDS Church's distinction between desire and actions and is trying everything he can to resist those desires, or even overcome them." "Jason" says, "Contrary to common misconception, I was never attracted to my [male] companions, and there was very little risk of problems arising from my attractions. It was a wholesome, formative experience, and was a paramount time period in my development and manhood."

As Jason anticipated making love to his wife for the first time, the thought was repulsive. He had a gnawing anxiety that he wouldn't be able to do it. But he was.
"I am surprised at how fulfilling my sex life is with my wife," he says. "It definitely exceeded my expectations."

I am just going to leave that one alone, but an interesting quote nonetheless. "Jason" married the girl he confided his homosexuality to all those years before.

So are these guys in denial, are their wives? Religious belief and faith is a big thing, and so is societal pressure. Yet all of these men (and it says something I think that this seems to only happen to gay men and not lesbians) know on some level that they will never stop having homosexual desires and/or attractions. They are trying to rectify their faith their beliefs and their heritage with who they really are. It is sad that the LDS church and the culture of its members makes them feel compelled to do so.

On another level, I think this is deeply irresponsible. If you want to try out straight marriage and still be openly gay, that is your choice with the prospective spouse. But once you create children, you are putting them in a situation not of their choosing. Given that study quoted above, these family's are extremely likely to head to divorce, probably more so than any other demographic. Divorces can be very hard on children. That isn't to say that parents shouldn't get divorced, but that they shouldn't take the whole marriage thing so lightly before they decide to get married and definitely before they decide to have kids.

There are no easy answers for folks like Ben, Langdon, and "Jason." Either they leave The Church, or remain single, or marry someone who they may love but aren't sexually attracted to. All are fraught with difficult, negative outcomes.

Reading stories like these makes me feel lucky that I have found the love of my life (whom I am attracted to) and that society condones our marriage. I wish everyone the same blessings I enjoy.

Quote of the Day

Courtesy of Media Matters

RIVERA: You know, Comedy Central is now a big hit, Stewart and the Colbert guy.

O'REILLY: Yeah, they do OK. They do OK.

RIVERA: They make a living putting on video of old ladies slipping on ice and people laughing. That's their life. That's their life. They exist in a small little place where they count for nothing. The history will be made by those who have affirmative thoughts, who make, you know, innovative suggestions in life and are inclusive.

Yet another reason I can't wait to watch the Colbert Report and The Daily Show with Jon Stewart tonight. That's right I like the Colbert Report now. Oh and I will be adding Jack Carter on to my totally dead ActBlue page. Those latest polls, reading about the candidate and their strategy make me think that if this really is a tidal wave election, the son of the former president could be a Senator in January.

Reed's master stroke

The man from Searchlight, Nevada seems to have made another cunning move. Steve Clemens of The Washington Note has sources that say that Senator Harry Reed offered Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton the Maj./Min. Leader's desk in 2008, claiming to be ready to give it up. I bet having to deal with all those egos especially going into 2008 when something like 5-10 Democratic Senators think they will be president (none of them will be) will be aweful.

But this offer makes sense for both Reed and Clinton (and Democrats generally), that's why it is a master stroke. For Clinton, she gets to turn down running for president, something she personally isn't that interested in. Clemons explains: "Reports are that Senator Clinton herself knows this [that she has a high unpopularity rating which will make it difficult to win, especially against popular McCain] and that her own enthusiasm for running actually trails that of her husband, her advisors, and her staff -- whose enthusiasm for the race is ranked in that order with Hillary the least enthusiastic." That is the most believable part of the story-- that Bill is dying to run again, as is her staff. Hillary loves the Senate it seems, and gets along well with conservative Senators, a skill necessary for being an effective a Democratic Leader. She also must like the fact that she is doing well where he husband never did, in the legislative branch. Bill ran for Congress in the mid-70s and was trounced. After that, he decided to go the AG-Gov-Pres route.

Hillary is dying to prove that she is her own person, that she isn't just Bill's wife. And even if she was to run for president, how many stories or mentions would there be about the First Gentleman? Bill loves the spotlight and would steal it from the first woman president, before and after the election.

This deal also would be great for Reed. He gets to spend more time being a king maker in Nevada, a crucial early state now in the 2008 Democratic Presidential Primaries. Right now, Edwards has a big edge with his links to hotel unions in Las Vegas, but if Reed were to endorse someone else, things could change fast. Reed also would get credit from all 2008 condenders for getting rid of their toughest competition. By falling on his sword, Reed would become even more powerful in a strange way. All those Democratic Senators would owe him, even Dodd might let Reed sink into the Whip position and give up hopes of gaining the Leader's chair.

To quote CNN's Bill Schneider, "Our political play of the week" is Harry Reed's overture to Hillary Clinton. Another deft move from the old boxer.

Not impressed with Ned

I watched Lamont's hyped TV 'interview' with Stephen Colbert on the Colbert Report. As glad as I am that he listened to Al Franken's advice to not try to be funny (every politican should follow that advise for all talk shows), I don't think Ned helped himself all that much.

A vote for Lamont in my mind is still an anti-Lieberman vote rather than a pro-Lamont vote. He forcefully answered most questions, but Colbert served him up a softball, and he wiffed it. Specifically, Colbert asked Lamont what other issues he cares about, how he differs from Lieberman on anything besides the war. Instead, Lamont answered with a MoveOn.org ad from 2004. That is, we could have spent more on education, health care, etc. were it not for the money going to fight the Iraq war. As true as this is, this could have been the time Ned talked about Joe's "short ride" comment on rape victims and Catholic hospitals, or Joe's vote for cloture on the terrible Bankrupcy Bill, or vote for cloture on Alito, or his vote for Condi, his Michael Brown confirmation hearings, or his lack of oversight as Government Reform Chairman in 2001-02.

Still, I would like to get rid of Lieberman because of his piss poor political calculus. Every decision he makes poltically is a disaster. And now that he is personally in charge of his reelection campaign, you can see how bad it has been. Creating a third party, making buttons without a union bug, failing to knock down rumors that he would accept the Republican nomination for several hours, screaming at local media, having no public events, tacitly accepting support from College Republicans, etc. I still think Ned will win the primary, but I am a bit sad that all he will be is a Democratic Rubber Stamp.

Putting your money where my mouth is

If you agree with my opinions on various races around the country, please contribute to the campaign I have listed here on My ActBlue page.



The cool thing about ActBlue is that anyone can raise money for the Democratic canidate of their choice without it costing them a cent. Some online tools take a percentage.

Contrary to what some might think, I do read your comments very carefully. This week, I got one comment (or rant) about illegal immigrants and one asking me to explain my views on Gov. Huntsman.

For those who are unitiated in the ways of the internets, let me just point out that comments other than by DaveB are not my own and I take no responsibility for them. Afterall, I can't take them down even if I hate them (that would require me to pay for my Haloscan account, and to remember my login information)

Anyway, even if illegal immigrants are the root cause of everything that my commenter opines about, his math is wrong. I doubt 50% of the Hispanic population in Utah is illegal. It is probabbly a much smaller (but still sigificant) percentage. Crime, amoung other social ills, has gone up in Utah because the population has increased as has poverty. He also claims illegals "believe they should have more rights than the Legal ones. They fill our Community Health Centers, our Welfare Offices, our Emergency Rooms, and any other Assistance meant for Citizens of Our nation."

The march was about getting the SAME rights as those who were legal, not more. Currently, illegal immigrants cannot receive federal or state funded welfare (you need a valid SSN for that), but they can and do use emergency rooms and other health care centers as ERISA requires hospitals to not turn them (or other poor human beings) away. If there were not so many uninsured, this drain would be much less.

Preventative medicine is much cheeper than ER medicine. Just ask every other industrialized nation that has universial health care. It is hard to tell just how much of a drain illegals are on the health care system, but I doubt they make up much of the tens of millions (40-50) of uninsured in this country.

As to Derek's question about why I consider Gov. Huntsman a political hack. Let's see: he is supporting frontrunner McCain over fellow LDSer Romney, he was a political appointee as Bush's Singapore Ambassador (which means he has given lots of money and sucked up to the right people in the GOP establishment, since he isn't a personal friend of Bush) and he is pushing for making the Utah tax code even more regressive. A flat tax is Steve Forbes' and Dick Armey's (ex-House Maj. Leader) wet dream.

Granted, Huntsman is much better than almost any of the other possibilities offered by the Utah Republican party (save maybe Oleen), and the fact that he passed up on Enid Greene Waldholz says much good about him. He also ran a dignified campaign against Scott Matheson. But then again, he could afford to. Johnny Jr was the annointed one like George W. Bush was in 2000. The son of a rich man, the insiders tried to clear the field for him, even shooing aside an acting governor, and it nearly failed. Scott was only tied in one Democratic poll, and was consistantly 10 points back in most the others. Scott never went negative; so why would Huntsman have had to?

Huntsman is the most popular governor in the country, but he seems aleady to be thinking of pulling a Leavitt and asking President McCain for a plum cabinet post so he can be as partisan and unaccountable as he wants. Why else would you endorse a guy who hasn't even announced they are running for president now?

topsy turvy

Remember way back, back in 2002, when members of Congress (Republicans and moderate Democrats) were dying to air campaign ads with footage of Bush supporting them? What a difference four years makes.



Now Iraq war Vet and Democratic candidate Patrick Murphy is running against George W. Bush while actually campaigning against Mike Fitzpatrick (R-PA). Here's the Ad. Here's the text (courtesty of Hotline On Call)

BUSH: "I'm the decider and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain the Secretary of Defense" [on screen: Decided on Rumsfeld]. BUSH: "And Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job" [on screen: Heckuva Job Brownie]. BUSH: "Jim Gerlach and Mike Fitzpatrick are really talented congressmen" [on screen: Endorsed Fitzpatrick. Bush decided on Fitzpatrick. Have you?]



Not only does Murphy take advantage of some of the many dumb things Bush has said (watch the Daily Show's "The Decider" faux-comic book series) but he also has a picture of Bush at a fundraiser for two of the three endangered GOP congressmen from the Philly Burbs (Curt Weldon is the other), and shaking their hands. The ad even asks a fair question: "Bush decided on Fitzpatrick. Have you?"

All in all a great ad (and great campaign), and one that is emblematic of the GOP's inherant disadvantage this fall.

Are Utah's juries too white?

Defense Attorney Michael Esplin thinks so, and is suing the 4th district court (Utah County/Happy Valley) on grounds that Hispanics are underrepresented in jury pools. The Deseret Morning News explains the current system:

In compiling a statewide jury pool, state agencies gather information from driver's license and voter-registration forms, Esplin said. However, providing information about ethnicity on such forms is voluntary.
Jury questionnaires from 4th District Court ask about jury availability and previous felony convictions — but not race.

Are Hispanics being underrepresented because they don't have driver's licenses or aren't registered to vote? Illegal aliens don't have the right to sit on juries, that's a pretty firm rule of law. But there is precedent for challenging a jury's lack of ethnic, racial, or gender diversity prior to empanelling the jury (swearing them in etc.) So are Hispanics underrepresented because of their illegal friends and relatives, or are they being underrepresented more than the number of illegals?

Vincent Fu, a professor of sociology at the University of Utah, testified that census data show Utah's Hispanic population of adults 20 years and older is nearly 8 percent of the population.
But Utah's master jury list — the pool of potential jurors — shows the Hispanic population at 4 percent.

There could be some major impacts in the short term with Esplin's case:

If Davis opts to rule in Esplin's favor, it could prevent any jury trial in the state until the system is fixed. It could also open the door for appeals of old jury trials — within an appropriate window of time.

Let's hope that we can get the system right without delaying justice unnecessarily.

The Destiny Press Conference

Man, are the press idiots or what? "I know you can't comment on this, because you have said 20 times that you cannot say anything outside the Information, but..."

Bob Stott rocked the house and really showed why he is the press guy for the D.A.'s office. He had the press under control kept them chuckling. I can't wait to see him in court. Here's the press release.

What we learned that was in the Information: Gregerson talked to Destiny, convinced her to come over to his house, she screamed, he smothered her, she suffocated and died. Then he performed a sex act with her dead body. Oh and some time later, he put her inside a plastic container in the basement. After that, he joined the citizen's search for Destiny and allowed the police to search his home. It was unclear whether he limited the search (no basement, don't open closed containers etc.) or he sufficiently hid the container amongst all his other crap in the basement that the police didn't see her body at the time.

Later the FBI interviewed him, because law enforcement still had him on their list, and somehow he confessed. Polygraphs were conducted on suspects, it is unclear, however, whether he was among those tested. Gregerson confessed to the FBI; based off the information provided in the confession, the police obtained a search warrant, and found Destiny's desecrated body.

Stott is charging Gregerson with Aggravated Murder, a First Degree Felony that carries with it the possibility of a Death Sentence (because it was committed during the commission of a Kidnapping and because he desecrated her dead body), and Kidnapping, also a First Degree Felony but carries a lesser sentence.

We also learned that the Press has no clue about the law, especially the basic part about not biasing the outcome by disclosing stuff prior to trial. They kept asking questions they knew or should have known Stott or the police chief couldn't answer. I guess they were trying to get their pet theories out: that Gregerson meant to silence her, not suffocate her, that Gregerson wanted to do his necrophilia needs the whole time, etc.

If the press had any brains, they would have talked to the other prosecutor, who was in the room with the file...and that file had the police report etc. But of course, they shouldn't have and she wouldn't have talked to the press.

Also, I want to take back any insinuation that I might have thought the police did a bad job investigating this. I didn't know the facts that I know now, and given what I have learned (which is the same as the informed public), the police did everything properly and the whole thing only lasted a couple days because of the interaction with SLCPD and the FBI.

UPDATE: here's the summary story.

Gregerson's rap sheet

Linda Thomson of the Deseret News did some digging into the court filings, and found lots of violence in the past of Destiny Norton's alleged killer, Craig Roger Gregerson.

Here are the low lights:

1. "Gregerson, 20, pleaded no contest in Sandy Municipal Justice Court to a Dec. 23, 2004, incident in which he shoved his mother-in-law against a wall with his hand around her throat and punched her twice in the face with his fist while her 17-year-old son was present." He entered a plea in abeyance to Class B Misdemeanor, which was conditioned him taking anger management classes


2. "A "notice of completion" report of the domestic violence therapy from Valley Mental Health is on file with the Sandy court bearing a March 10, 2006, date — only three days after a 3rd District Court judge dismissed a protective order that Gregerson had sought against his wife, Catherine, 22." Lucky break for him, otherwise, he would have had to go to jail on the 2004 charge.


3. 'Respondent (Catherine Gregerson) is a battered wife who has put up with it because she loved the petitioner and felt a need for his love,' attorney Delano S. Findlay said in documents filed in 3rd District Court on March 3." Sounds like a keeper to me.


4. In the same complaint, Catherine's attorney claimed "Gregerson had abused his wife repeatedly in the past, including several episodes of hitting her, punching her in the stomach when she was pregnant and possibly triggering a miscarriage, shoving his fingers into her nostrils and punching her in the head with his fists while she was holding their baby.
   Findlay also described a time when Gregerson threw the baby across the couple's queen-size bed because the child had tipped over some food he was eating. ...'He grabbed (Catherine) by the neck and strangled her until she could hardly breathe before she was able to get away from him. At the same time, he told (Catherine) that he didn't care if he killed her, that it would be better to be in jail than living with her,' ...Findlay also refers to an incident in which Gregerson accused Catherine Gregerson of choking him. The police subsequently charged her with assault. Findlay wrote that Catherine didn't remember doing that but 'was convinced' by her husband that she had and, upon the advice of a lawyer, pleaded guilty and is on probation. 'Looking back, (Catherine) now believes those allegations were fabricated'" These are signs of an abuser.

Then again Catherine has quite a rap sheet of her own...

1. Catherine "was charged with third-degree felony attempted aggravated assault, which was amended to a class A misdemeanor. She also was charged with assault on a health-care provider, a class A misdemeanor."


2. The charges stem from an December 18, 2004 incident wherein"Catherine Gregerson decided to choke her husband with a piece of string and when it broke, she used a necklace-style ID badge holder, stopping when she felt he was going to pass out. ...while she was being taken to the hospital for psychiatric evaluation, she bit a Sandy firefighter."


3. Jail time was suspended and like her husband, was placed on probation that required her to get a mental health evaluation.


4. "[A] pending case against a Catherine Gregerson, again same birthdate and address of residence for the woman married to Craig, of domestic violence in the presence of a child and criminal mischief, both class A misdemeanors, that allegedly occurred June 14 [, 2006].

Destiny's [alleged killer's] date with the DA

For those of you who are hoping that my clerking for the District Attorney will provide you with the inside scoop on what is happening in the Destiny investigation, sorry.

Unlike last time when I spilled the beans during Massachusetts' Constitutional Convention surrounding Gay Marriage, I have a ethical and legal duty not to divulge attorney work product and attorney-client privledged information. I might have severely worsened my relationship with my Boss since I was not supposed to tell the internets the strategy of the pro-gay marriage folks. For that I appologize. But now I have the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE) to take next Friday as part of the Bar. So I can't pretend I don't know.

I don't want to prevent from ever getting hired before I even graduate. Plus, I don't know anything more than you do right now other than Dep. DA Bob Stott is personally screening the case. Screening is the process by which the District Attorney's office decides whether to prosecute a given suspect whose sitting in jail on police charges. If the case looks weak, or the charges seem exaggerated, the DA has the power/discretion to drop the case or to reduce what the police want charged and what ends up getting charged. Since Utah is an "Information" state rather than an indictment state, we don't both with the whole grand jury thing.

So assuming Stott, who is a great crafty guy and great attorney, decides to go forward with the case, he would then write up a Probable Cause statement, which would end up in an Information and the then-Defendant would have the right to a preliminary trial to determine whether there is probable cause to bind him over for trial. From what I have read in the news, I would bet all of these steps would be pretty straight forward. After all, her body was found in his basement.

Next, there would either be some discovery/investigation prior to the trial, or a plea. My bet is that Salt Lake Legal Defenders (or whomever gets the case) will take a very aggressive approach to the defense since this is high profile.

I will be happy to explain the legal process to readers as it unfolds, but keep in mind I will just be going off publicly available documents and what I know about Criminal Procedure. My opinions are not those of my employer and are not intended for jurors or the media.

Destiny and the 4th Amendment

Rarely have a seen a shocking a headline as "Bill of Rights puts limits on searches" byy the Deseret Morning News--shocking as in dumbfounded that people are so dumb. On the local Fox affiliate this morning, they acted as if the Deseret News had a breaking, innovative angle on the whole mess. I was assuming there would be more factual details about the police's attempts to search the home of the alledged killer.

Instead, it was Criminal Procedure/Constitutional Law 101. I should have expected as much from the morning show crew at Fox News. Prof. Luna, whom I did some pro bono work for, was explaining to the paper that the police can't ransack through everyone's home just because. The only thing we learned is that the alledged kidnapper /agravated murder didn't give police permission to search his house. Of course, you can't use the lack of permission to get a warrant. The only thing Luna said that made this case a close case is that there might be a "exigent circumstances" exception to the Fourth Amendment. Of course, the court hasn't decided if a search for missing child is exigent enough to exempt Fourth Amendment requirements. "Luna estimated that had police argued for a warrant citing the exigent circumstance of a missing child, the warrant would have likely gone to the Utah Supreme Court — taking weeks if not years." Not very exigent any more if it takes years to resolve. This is probabbly why the Court has not yet ruled on the issue.

Apocolapse Soon

Prominant members of the Republican party apperatus, former elected and appointed officials are calling the Israeli-Hesbolah-Lebannon part of "World War III" and talking about Iraq, as the Secretary of State did as suffering through the "birth pangs" of democracy. It is no accident that these lines of rhetoric match up with lines from the Holy Bible, especially the Revelations of St. John.

Condi Rice didn't show up to the Southern Baptist Convention's annual meeting recently just for fun, but to send a coded message to Bush's most ardent supporters: we are entering the End-Times, don't worry about the implications of our foreign for the middle east or world peace, because Jesus is on his way.

This morning on the Today show, it was Reagan's anti-Education Secretary Bill "Slot Machine" Bennett who repeated the Apocolaptic talk. The world is indeed going to Hell in a Handbasket, but it is not because the world is coming to an end and Jesus is about to return, it is because George W. Bush has made the world, and especially Americans, less safe, less peaceful, and less prosporous.

The idea that we can steer the ship of state off a waterfall because Jesus will return any minute now is disasterously wrong both morally and policy-wise. Whenever the second coming is, whether it be when we each die or some time next week, we shall all be judged by our deeds, what we have done, and what we have left undone. Whether we have loved our neighbors as ourselves. Whether we have forgiven those who have trespassed (as in sinned) against us. How we have handled temptation. How we have treated the poorest, weakest, and most vulnerable amounst us. How we as stewards of God's Earth (and Universe) have tended the garden while he was away.

Given that prominant Republican leaders, including the President and his Cabinet, have started a war out of vengence, lust for oil and power, ignored genocide, disease, and famine, formented hatred towards our neighbor to the South, succumed to greed by defrauding stockholders and taxpayers, created more crime and poverty and made live more difficult for the poorest weakest and most vulnerable, as well as pillaged the Earth for its resources with reckless disregard for the Earth, I would have to guess that Jesus would give them a big thumbs down on Judgment Day.

People of faith need to reject this fundamentally selfish and shortsighted view of the world, even if it is encoded in biblical language. The modern Republican Party is the party of Me. How do I get richer, how do I keep healthy, how do I protect my family?

The Democratic Party, by contrast, is the party of We. How do we combat poverty, disease, homelessness, hopelessness, corruption, war, hatred, and fear? We are all in this together. Whether we like it or not, this world is so interconnected and interdependent that we cannot go it alone and lookout only for ourselves. Because selfish actions only come back to bite you twice as hard as socially-conscienious decision would. That doesn't mean you let others walk all over you, but you approach matters in a way that looks out for everyone's interest such that we all benefit.

Was it Destiny or incompetence?

SLCPD is taking heat for its handling of the Destiny Norton missing person-cum-murder investigation. From the Salt Lake Tribune:

A few hundred people gathered outside the home of Destiny as well as that of Craig Gregerson, where the girl's body was found, on 500 East near 700 South.
Many were shouting profanities at the police who stood on the other side of yellow tape ensuring no one tampered with what was still considered a crime scene.
...
About midnight, the crowd was enough that police closed traffic on the block.
Salt Lake City Police Chief Chris Burbank arrived to try and quell the crowd and take some questions from reporters and residents.

There is something wierd about this case, something that hasn't been told or isn't yet known. While hundreds of people were out searching for her, Destiny was either dead or dying in the basement of her neighbor's house.

Jeannie Hill, who acted as a spokeswoman for the Nortons during the search, ... levied her own criticism of the investigation. In an interview, she accused the Salt Lake City Police Department of not taking Destiny's disappearance seriously. The first night Destiny went missing, Hill said, police told the family to go home; that police would go out and search.
Hill said the lack of seriousness was in part because of the previous dealings the Nortons and their extended family had with police.
Hill described the group as people who used to "sit on the street and beg for beer money" and who used to "smoke pot in the park."
"We've always known they've had a bit of a vendetta against us," Hill said.
The police and the FBI also focused too much on the possibility someone in the extended family took Destiny, Hill said. The Nortons claim kinship with a large group of people whom they will call by familiar titles though there is no blood relation.
...
Some people in the crowd accused police of not applying themselves toward finding Destiny because of her low socioeconomic status.
Chellie Ehrhart, who said she is a friend of the Nortons from Riverton, claimed police didn't apply the same amount of resources that were used to find Elizabeth Smart.

So this might be the piece that is missing...her "family" and that law enforcement were certain that one of these folks did it, just like they focused on that handyman of the Smart family. Maybe they zeroed in on this hunch and failed to look into the obvious next-door neighbor. The neighbor even went on searches for Destiny, just to throw the police off his trail.

The socioeconomic complaint feels valid. I recall that the same time Elizabeth Smart went missing, a black girl from the South Side of Chicago went missing, but the story vanished because the family didn't live in a McMansion or have a spokesman, or make the talk show circuit.

Oh, Pioneers!

CREDIT: "Re-enactment of Mormon pioneers arriving in Salt Lake Valley, Pioneer Day 1997." Photo by Jeffrey D. Allred, courtesy of the Deseret News, for "Utah Pioneers," a Utah Local Legacies project
Happy Pioneer Day!

For those of you who don't know, Utah's one state holiday is Pioneer Day, the day [in 1847] Brigham Young and several wagons full of LDS religious devotees first glimpsed the Salt Lake Valley via Emigration Canyon, where the Donner Party had decades before lost critical time on their ill-fated way to California. Brigham, who was sick at the time (folks feared he might die soon, but that was far from the case), declared from his stretcher, "This is the Place."

Ever since then, our ancestors have celebrated the day as the day of effectively the state's founding (even though it did not become a state until 1896). I saw "our ancestors" becuase my fore bearers were in the second set of wagons that came after Brigham's set of elites.

Utahns celebrate this day as if it was the other July holiday-- July 4th. At every LDS Meeting House (or "Ward"), U.S. flag line the walkways. Utahns can buy fireworks for the whole month of July basically for either Independence Day or Pioneer Day.

I wish Brigham had planned it out better. The 24th of July is a terrible time to have a holiday. It is far to hot (today it is 97, about average) and dry (with a chance of thundershowers, which is rare, it is up to 25% hummidity) for sitting outside, wearing pioneer costumes, watching parade, and dangerous to allow fireworks in such a tinderbox environment.

Oh well, at least we Utahns get a day off for our troubles. Too bad my wife works for a national company that doesn't respect this holiday. Maybe they don't like the whole Church-State melding, or maybe they just want to make more money.

So far I did some yardwork before the sun crested over our hedges, and have been cleaning up the house for the Mrs. Our kitchen remodeling is finally done and I still think it was worth the pain, cost, and time.

Anyway, raise your non-alcoholic glass to the Pioneers, whose brave trek from Missouri to Utah created this fine state.

Leavitt takes a page from Abramoff

Jack Abramoff, Ralph Reed, and Grover Norquist would approve of ex-Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt's (current Bush secretary of HHS) sham charity. After all, its what they used to funnel money to their favorite cause: themselves.

The Leavitts used nearly $9 million of their assets to set up the foundation in 2000 under an obscure provision of the federal tax code. In 2002, 2003 and 2004, the Leavitt organization donated less than 1 percent of its assets.
...
While Mike Leavitt alone has claimed about $1.2 million in tax write-offs since 2000, the foundation gave away only $49,000 in 2002 and $52,000 the next year, according to tax returns and other documents filed by the foundation. Meanwhile, the foundation's assets have been used for a $332,000 loan to Leavitt Land and Investment Inc., in which the secretary owns a significant stake, and other secured loans for insurance and real estate deals, said Alan Jones, a trustee of the organization.
Leavitt Land and Investment, in turn, extended an interest-free loan to Leavitt in 2002 valued at more than $250,001, according to a recent financial disclosure.

Oh millioniare's and their tax loopholes. This is why I can never be a tax attorney. You have to figure out ways to make the rich even more rich while knowning that what you are doing directly hurts the poorest of the poor who get health care and other vital services from the government.

As glad as I am that this partisan hack millioniare is no longer my governor, it is too bad that we have a partisan hack billioniare as our current governor. I am sure even if Scott M. Matheson, Jr. had this kind of money, which he doesn't, he wouldn't do this kind of thing. Nor would Scott push for a tax cut for the rich and push the tax burden onto the middle class of Utah. Because that's the kind of guy he is.

photo of the day

Courtesy of BAG News Notes

This in a nutshell, or bombshell, is the war in the land of Canaan/Phoenica. Look at the propraganization of the youth by Israel, and then compare it to the school books in surrounding Arab countries, and you will see that the powers that be don't want this mutual hatred ever end. They are prepping the next generation to join in the conflict whether by being members of the Israeli army or that of Jahadi's.

This image is so emotionally charged that it would make Karl Rove and Goebels blush. But it just makes me sick. Our photo of the day.

Utah still in the race to the bottom

Governor and billioniare John Huntsman Jr. is reviving his "tax reform" proposal that creates a "flater tax" designed to appeal to the uber-Rich, to entice them to move to Utah. That is why the rule against perpetuities has been basically abolished (estates can keep divvying up the dead man's money 1,000 years after he's gone by will).

Utah's Republican leadership still believe in the economic fallisy that if you give away enough to the rich and/or corporations, they will want to move here and spend their money/create jobs in this state. This is what I call joining the race to the bottom. Because other cities and states are playing the same game, all trying to out bid another by stripping out their tax revenue, giving away land, giving favorable loans, etc. The result is that all of these states lose. The best way to create economic growth that will aid the state coffers and make live better is to create an environment that employees not employers, find appealing.

Attract the smartest, most tallented, creative types, and you get the high paying jobs that contribute back to your community. How do you do it? Create great schools, safe neighborhoods, clean livable streets, nice shoping centers, walkable downtowns, a nightlife, and lower cost of living by lowering or eliminating taxes on groceries, clothing, etc. Utah already has a great advantage over other states. We have great weather, great outdoor activities, a relatively low crime rate, cheep housing, friendly people, and relatively light traffic.

But our public schools are a mess, and traffic/crime are getting worse without any leadership from Johnny on either. Didn't Huntsman run primarily on education, and moving the prison out of Draper? Funny where his focus ended up being: on the ultra-rich and mega-corporations. You shouldn't have to bribe companies (or sports teams) to move to your state. It is better for everyone if they move because they want be in the ideopolis.

"Was tuen Sie denn?"

Our photo of the day:

Can Bush stop embaressing himself and the U.S. during the G8 conference? First he talked with is mouthful to British PM Tony Blair as if he really was his lapdog (then they both talked about a different Middle East than the one that exists), before that actually was the pig roast, and now "the grope"

Appearantly Bush is just like those bosses that touch you in uncomfortable ways at awkward times. Just because she is a 'conservative' woman doesn't mean you get to give her an unasked-for backrub. Bush has shown off the worst sides of his personality: his boorish and imature behavior, his lack of knowledge (and lack of interest) in important world affairs, and his general inability to do any policy (foreign or domestic) right.

["Was tuen Sie denn?" Means "What are you {formal} doing?" in German]

Matheson is cruising

Today, the local papers finally got around to covering the Matheson/Christensen race, such as it is. The general assesment is right: Jim will have an easy time and part of that is because he is an encumbent, part because he worked so hard to develop his reputation with conservative voters.

I must take issue with this line, however: "Utah's lone Democratic representative in Congress has commandeered traditionally conservative values like fiscal responsibility, multiple use of public lands and protecting children from violence." These are not conservative values, these are DLC/Blue Dog values, and really fiscal responsibility has become a mainstream Democratic value since about 1993. Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and other New Dems triumphed these values and ideas for decades. Everyone wants to protect their children from violence, some just don't see the harm in violent video games and movies. Others find sex in video games and movies more troubling than violence (Christian Conservatives).

As far as the St. George land deal goes, I don't know the specifics and haven't talked to any knowledgable environmental friends of mine about it, so I can't comment on the propriety of the Matheson-Bennett bill on a policy level. But on a political level, it is a no brainer. Jim has surely shown that he is not beholdant to the environmental wing of the party and given Washington County voters another reason to vote for him.

After learning he was being redistricted into Southern Utah, Jim made it his goal to deliver for Washington County, especially since it nearly cost him his seat in 2002. So Jim got a nice airport for St. George, and this land-deal would help development which would be key for swingish voters in the area. Smart moves all.

The payraise move Jim makes every year gets him editorial mentions around the nation and is also good politics. But it also good policy. Why should Congress give itself a raise when it won't raise the minimum wage or reign in spending on boondoogles?

Christensen's slam is to call Jim's legislative career as "representation by press release. Hopefully, he can find one bill that can pass. That would be great." It would be great if he could pass a bill, but guess how many House Democrats get their bills passed in a GOP controlled House, especially ones from potential GOP pick-up seats? I am guessing a handfull at best, and all of those are probabbly much more senior than Jim. So it is a nice line, but has no real substance behind it. Then again, this is the same guy that said "Tolerance is the religion of people who no longer believe in anything."

That has to be the most bigoted and hate-filled statement I have heard in a while. Even if Christensen was running against a pol as disgusting as Joe Biden or Joe Lieberman, I would still vote against LaVar. I have no tolerance for such intolerance.

VRA now a tool of GOP majorities

Don't get me wrong, I think the Voting Rights Act is one of the best pieces of legislation ever divised by Congress. But thanks to the Supreme Court's unwillingness to step in and create clear, bright-line rules about redistricting (and deciding this year to allow re-redistricting) and advances in software, the GOP is able to use the VRA to ensure they stay in power. How? By using majority-minority districts to their advantage:

The Republicans are more than happy to cede 40 or so majority-minority Democratic big-city districts, carved to the specifications of the Voting Rights Act, in exchange for a lock on the far more numerous [white,] suburban districts.

One of surest ways to make seats more Democratic leaning is to spread the black vote around several districts, such that there is a sizable minority (20-40%) but not an overwhelming presence (so that the rest can be divvyed up in other districts. But this could violate the VRA, which prohibits diluting the votes of minorities. New York Magazine has the goods:

"It seems clear that the VRA doesn’t serve us well," says a Democratic congressman who’s tried to push the issue with colleagues. "But a weird, self-interested math comes into play. Black Democrats don’t want to appear retrograde; whites don’t have the courage to stand up and try to fix it without blacks standing alongside them; and Republicans like the outcome that they’re getting, which enables them to have perpetually lily-white suburban southern districts. And then there’s so much animus—not between the parties, but between white Democrats and black Democrats, in lots of parts of the South. So any effort to ‘fix’ the thing is a nonstarter. But I’d be a better congressman if my district were more diverse, and Democrats would have better chances of winning if there were more ‘swing’ districts."

Such swing districts would be more progressive and ultimately more favorable to the interests of African-Americans. But not necessarily Black politicans. I hope that by 2006, a district without a majority of minorities could elect a minority to represent them. Of course, I am not so naive not to recognize that people vote against minorities all the time just because they are minorities and folks like Barrack Obama are the exception rather than the rule.

Still CBC members should look beyond their own selfish interests into what is best for their constituents-- having a Democrat-controlled House-- and not what is best for them personally.