For days, the quote running through my head has been from JFK:

"Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans - born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage - and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world. "

I tried Wednesday to explain to the lovely Boomers on my board what this election meant to this Gen X girl. I think maybe we understood each other better than we have ever done in the past.

As I just posted on the other prop 8 thread, the appropriate response to this heartbreaking outcome is to take a deep breath and gear up for a fight that is by no means over. As Obama is fond of saying: Yes. We. Can.

- A strong majority of voters under thirty repudiated this proposition.

- Opposition to gay marriage has rapidly dropped from %61(the amount that voted for Prop 22 a few years ago)to %52.

- The No on 8 effort was disorganized and was taken by surprise at the fervor and dishonesty of the Yes on 8 crowd. A lesson to be learned.

Our president may not be willing to publically support gay marriage (and does anyone doubt that such support would have made it much more difficult for him to attain the white house?), but he also addresses citizens gay and straight openly and clearly at the beginning of his acceptance speech. That is significant. We aren't disappearing, and our movement is not going away. It's just going to get more organized and effective over the next few years. There is much reason for hope and, to once more quote the president elect, "there is nothing false about hope."

My joy over Obama's election was tempered by my awareness that Prop 8 was on its way to victory. Today I will attend an interfaith gathering of community organizers, including many clergy, all of whom will be devestated by this outcome. Many will be taking this very personally and painfully.

That being said, I think that many people who voted for this proposition did so because of the misinformation campaign perpetrated by its supporters, especially the Mormon church. The Yes on 8 adds forwarded the idea that voting yes was a vote /for/ equal rights (free speech, religion). This argument was based on empty rhetoric and lies. However, the No on 8 campaign did not do a good enough job countering these messages. I'm sure that for many the "free speech/freedom of religion" argument was just a cover for prejudice, but I think soem people were sincerely duped.

There is much reason for hope, though that won't be much comfort to those whose lives are immediately effected by this outcome. The under-thirty crowd voted overwhelmingly against Prop 8. We know what the future holds. And a few years ago the margin for Prop 22 (similar but didn't target the consitution) was much bigger, so there have been changes in hearts and minds over the past few years. I remember activist friends telling me eight years ago that gay marriage was not a possibility in their lifetimes (sound familiar?). But, as we've learned on a national scale this week, the proper answser to this result is "YES WE CAN." Gay marriage will be a reality in CA again.

And I agree that the state's proposition system is absolutely stupid. It puts major decisions (sometimes fiscally rather complicated ones) in the hands of an underinformed public. We are a republic and not a strict democracy for a reason.

Maddow is fantastic, and one of the things that I appreciate about her is precisely that self-aware nerdiness that allows her to seem genuine, and not a-sexual, without in any way being marketed for her femininity (at least as far as I can tell). She seems a lot less like someone who is projecting an image of herself than, say, Olberman. Interestingly, she's also the one on whom I and many folks I know (male and female) have a bit of a crush. (And she dresses like anything but a "dolly")

A reverse issue, I think, regarding that pair is how male commentators with a liberal pov (not to mention male politicians), especially those who have come into their own in the last eight years routinely get accused of being insufficiently masculine and often seem a bit like they are overcompensating.

Am I the only one who thinks of Olberman as a bit of a peevish kid trying to out O'Brian O'Brian? His "worst person" segment is just ... kinda Jr Highish to me. At the lest, it's missing the aspect of playfullness that Madow's segments tend to have (but then, he's not packaged that way, is he). Maddow gets to be impish and playful but Olberman is ostentatious and comes across as overly serious even when his segments don't seem to be trying for seriousness. I wonder how much of that is also a gender thing and how much of that is something of a Daily Show effect.

One tiny complaint about the article, though --

"girl-volution"?

/barf

Is that a third wave thing? Sounds like a third wave thing.