This Is Why I Vote for Democrats

This is why, despite how much they sometimes infuriate me, I vote for Democrats.

A prominent Democratic governor, the most powerful man in one of the most powerful states, is accused of sexual harassment.

He turns to his state’s attorney general, also a Democrat, and tasks her with conducting an independent investigation.

That attorney general hires outside counsel to conduct an independent investigation.

Four months later, that attorney general releases the findings of that investigation, which confirm that the governor sexually harassed members of his staff, retaliated against at least one accuser, and fostered a toxic work environment in his office.

The New York State attorney general has yet to decide whether Cuomo will face criminal charges, but that this point things have been handled EXACTLY the way all such incidents should be handled.

Victims came forward. The press investigated. Voters expressed concern. Enormous pressure was put on Cuomo.

Cuomo denied the allegations, but, in the end, he recognized the their seriousness and empowered an independent investigation of himself rather than completely stonewall the allegations.

The Democratic New York state attorney general did not whitewash the allegations. Instead, she launched a legitimate investigation, hiring investigators outside of her office to ensure that investigation’s independence.

The independent investigation was not a cover up. It lasted four months and was thorough. One hundred and seventy-nine people were interviewed, including Cuomo and eleven women who claimed he harassed them. Tens of thousands of documents were analyzed. The investigation reached a set of findings.

Those findings were not covered up or locked away in a vault so that the public would never see them. Instead, the investigators publicly released a 165-page report dealing with each allegation in detail and giving substantial evidence for its findings and announced their findings in a public news conference.

This drama is not over. We don’t know at this point what personal price Cuomo will end up paying for his odious behavior. He is refusing to resign as of this moment, but most likely he will end up doing so, perhaps in exchange for not being indicted.

But the Democrats in New York State took the charges seriously, investigated them thoroughly and in a timely fashion, found that their party leader committed illegal acts, and told the public about it.

The comparison with the utter corruption of the White Supremacist QAnon Party—led by a criminal, consisting only of his lackeys, and dedicated not to the rule of law but to a world in which racists, fascists, victim shamers, liars, sexual harassers and wife beaters, con men, tax cheats, and violent extremists rule—could not possibly be more stark.

“Why do we Democrats always eat our own?” some will wail. Perhaps because the party, unlike the other guys, not only talks the talk when it comes to governmental integrity, personal responsibility, and the notion that no man is above the law, but also occasionally walks the walk.

Fiona Hill wasn't shy about speaking the truth about the biggest threat to our national security: Donald Trump. The impeachment process and the 2020 campaign need to embrace this reality, too.

Our national political crisis crystalized on Thursday when Fiona Hill pointed out—to their faces—that the White Supremacist Party members of the House Intelligence Committee were willfully promoting a disinformation campaign led by Vladimir Putin. The White Supremacists showed a rare moment of fear and squealed their denials, but Hill’s point was unassailable. Donald Trump—not Russia, not Iran, not North Korea—is the greatest threat to our national security, and this has been evident since Helsinki. This core reality needs to be front and center in the impeachment process and the 2020 election campaign.

Just as there will likely be a broad article of impeachment detailing Trump’s obstruction of justice, there should be a broad article of impeachment declared Trump a threat to national security. No further hearings or documentation would be needed, as the entire case is already in the public domain. The article could reference:

·         Trump’s refusal to accept the reality of climate change, the biggest threat to our national security, and his decision to pull out of the Paris Climate Agreement.

·         Trump’s refusal to read his daily intelligence brief.

·         Trump’s persistent and public refusal to accept the fact that Russia interfered in the 2020 election and his public siding in Helsinki with Vladimir Putin over the entire U.S. intelligence community.

·         Trump’s refusal to spend money allocated by Congress to protect our elections from foreign interference or to put in place a plan for protecting the 2020 elections, despite constant warnings from the intelligence community and bipartisan Congressional committees that this is already happening.

·         Trump’s persistent and public effort to impugn the reputation of U.S. intelligence agencies, including accusing them, with no evidence, of spying on his 2016 campaign.

·         Trump’s refusal to keep records of his private, closed-door and telephone conversations with Vladimir Putin.

·         Trump’s decisions to pull the U.S. out of preexisting treaties and agreements, such as the Iran Deal, the INF treaty with Russia, our support of the expulsion of Russia from the G8, and our longstanding refusal to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, that enhanced our national security.

·         Trump’s refusal to abide by basic security procedures, including ensuring that security clearances are not granted to people who may be security risks, revoking the security clearances of people who disagree with him, the use of personal cell phones for highly sensitive conversations that has certainly resulted in their interception by foreign adversaries, and his sharing of classified information with Russian officials in the Oval Office.

·         Trump’s conscious strategy to not fill key national security positions, including that of the National Security Advisor and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

·         Trump’s decision to reallocate money budgeted for troop pay and pensions to pay, which are vital to troop morale, for his border wall.

·         Trump’s declaration of a phony national emergency at the southern border to justify the building of his wall.

·         Trump’s plans to transfer nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia in violation of federal law.

·         Trump’s persistent efforts to enhance the international reputations of some of the world’s most odious dictators, including Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, President Xi of China, and the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

·         Trump’s persistent and unjustified criticism of U.S. allies, especially our NATO partners in Europe, and his decisions to withhold military funding approved by Congress from allies unless they interfere in U.S. elections on his behalf.

·         Trump’s decision to renege on our promises to the Kurds and his approval of a campaign of genocide against them.

·         Trump’s promotion of racism within the U.S. and in Europe by mischaracterizing refugees as security threats and criminals, and prohibiting Muslims from traveling to the United States.

·         Trump’s persistent efforts to purge the intelligence agencies, the State Department, and the Justice Department of people he deems are not politically loyal to him.

·         The refusal of Trump and his family members to stop conducting personal business dealings with foreign governments.

·         Trump’s public endorsement of torture and his decision to not charge or try the prisoners at Guantanomo are both top recruitment tools for terrorist groups.

·         Trump’s decision to ban transgender people from serving in the military, which harms national security by creating unnecessary vacancies and damaging morale.

Likewise, the Democrats need to openly campaign in 2020 against the effort by Trump and the White Supremacist Party to destroy our national security along with our institutions and the rule of law. This is not a Republican versus Democrat election. This is an existential political contest and the security of the United States is at stake. Trump and the White Supremacist Party members in Congress are not acting for political gain and not for anyone’s definition of the best interests of the United States. We must take a cue from Fiona Hill and confront their treason head on.

The Democratic Party Caves to the pro-Israeli Lobby

Democrats hate it when being pro-choice is equated with condoning murder.

Democrats hate it when being critical of Trump is equated with being unpatriotic.

Democrats hate it when a more equitable distribution of income in America is equated with promoting class warfare.

Democrats hate it when government-run health care is equated with communism.

Democrats hate it when fighting climate change is equated with being against coal miners.

Democrats hate it when challenging sexism is equated with being against men.

Democrats hate it when a humane immigration policy is equated with “open borders.”

Democrats hate it when fighting for voting rights is equated with voter fraud.

But Democrats love it when opposing the Israeli government is equated with anti-Semitism. Today it is literally impossible for an elected Democratic official to criticize the Israeli government without being tarred as someone who despises the Jewish people. This is not only un-American and nauseating but illustrates the Democrat Party’s utter hypocrisy when it links opposition to Israeli government policies with anti-Semitism but sees no relationship between attacking Trump’s racism and corruption and being un-American.

It’s not anti-Semitic to challenge why the rights and perspective of the Palestinians is not given equal weight to the rights and perspective of Israelis by our government and our media.

It’s not anti-Semitic to acknowledge that the Israeli government’s 11-year blockade of Gaza has subjected its two million inhabitants to collective punishment and a growing humanitarian crisis.

It’s not anti-Semitic to ask why Israeli snipers in Gaza have targeted people clearly identifiable as children, health workers and journalists.

It’s not anti-Semitic to claim that Israel’s policy of expanding its West Bank settlements and infrastructure is illegal and makes a peaceful settlement impossible.

It’s not anti-Semitic to point out that the Israeli lobby has a major influence on American politics.

It’s not anti-Semitic to say that the Israeli government is corrupt and racist. Prime Minister Netanyahu was just indicted on corruption charges. Israeli police had previously recommended that he be indicted on three other occasions for bribery and fraud. Just ten days ago, Netanyahu announced a political alliance with the openly racist Jewish Power and Jewish Home parties—the first time odious racist extremists in Israel have been invited to be close to the center of power in that country.

In a recent tweet about the GOP attacking critics of Israel, Minnesota Representtive Ilhan Omar responded with “It’s about the Benjamins, baby.”

U.S. politicians were outraged—outraged!—at the inference that they are pro-Israel because they get paid to be so, but Omar was in fact pointing out that the Israeli lobby pays American politicians who are pro-Israel. This is not a slur. This is a fact—for both Democrats and Republicans. Nevertheless, the Democratic Party demanded that Ilhan apologize for publicly acknowledging this obvious truth.

Then a 2012 tweet from Omar surfaced in which she stated “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doing of Israel.” Critics insisted, preposterously, that Omar was regurgitating an old anti-Semitic trope about Jews possessing secret, dark powers and that “the evil doings of Israel” meant that Jews were evil, when in fact Omar had specifically focused in her tweet on the actions of Israel and not on Jews in general. Once again, the Democratic Party forced Omar to apologize or be ostracized.

Now Omar is being vilified again, this time for saying this at a recent event: “I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay for people to push for allegiance to a foreign country.” Attackers are claiming that this statement accuses American Jews of possessing dual loyalties—to this country and to Israel—when in fact she is making the point that stifling any and all criticism of Israel rises to the level of a pledge of allegiance to that country.

The Democratic Party’s response to this latest completely legitimate statement of Omar’s is to introduce a Congressional resolution condemning anti-Semitism. It’s a brave party that tries to muzzle one of its own members by passing a resolution to protect its funding by the pro-Israel lobby that completely mischaracterizes that member’s legitimate criticism of that very lobby.

Let’s get real here. Omar is one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress. Her references to Allah disturb many Americans. She is also a vocal supporter of boycotts, sanctions, and divestments against Israel, which are perfectly legitimate—if unpopular—responses to the actions of the racist Israeli government. While she has apologized for the impact of some of her tweets, she continues to insist on exercising her right to criticize the Israeli government.

“I should not be expected to have allegiance/pledge support to a foreign country in order to serve my country in Congress or serve on committee,” she said recently. “I have not mischaracterized our relationship with Israel. I have questioned it and that has been clear from my end.”

Republicans, predictably, are now calling for her resignation and linking her with 9/11, a slaughter that was committed by citizens of another country sheltered from legitimate criticism by a very strong American lobby—Saudi Arabia. The Democrats are punishing Ilhan Omar as demanded by the pro-Israel lobby. If the Democratic Party is anything like the party it claims to be, it would be focused not on silencing its members but on condemning and countering the disastrous and racist Trump/Netanyahu partnership.

The Show Trial of Ilham Omar

I am a registered Democrat. One reason for that is that I want to be associated with a political party that supposedly has no tolerance when it comes to racism, religious bigotry, xenophobia, and misogyny. So I am glad that the Democrats in Virginia are calling for the resignations of their own who cross those lines—that’s the kind of political party with which I want to be associated. That other party is the home of racists, religious bigots, false patriotism, and miserable patriarchy.

That said, I have issues with standard Democratic Party ideology, and the one that simultaneously depresses and infuriates me the most, not surprisingly, is the topic on which the Democrats and the Republicans are virtually indistinguishable: Israel.

For centuries anti-Semites have stereotyped Jews in terms of their relationship to money, promoting a vicious caricature of them as scheming misers and unethical money lenders, and spreading insane conspiracy theories that claim that Jewish money is financing most if not all of the evil in this world. No moral or thinking person would hold or promote such beliefs.

The corrupting influence of money on politics is, however, a very real thing and, in my view, the root of quite a bit of the depravity in American politics.

Since the wave of Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe that begin in the 1880s, American Jews been associated with liberal politics, the labor movement, and civil rights. The majority of Jewish Americans have voted Democratic since 1916. FDR got 90% of the Jewish vote in 1940 and 1944. More than 75% of Jewish voters voted Democratic in the 2018. Jews represent 2% of the American electorate, but they are responsible for 50% of all financial contributions to the Democratic Party. With the skyrocketing cost of political campaigns and the legalization of dark money, the influence of Jewish donors has increased, as have the efforts of the GOP to use support of Israel as a wedge to divide the Democrats and to start redirecting Jewish donations in its direction. Jewish businessman and donor Sheldon Adelson, who contributed $150 million to the GOP in 2012 and $100 million to the Trump campaign, is one of the most powerful people in the Republican Party.

The corrupting influence of money American politics due to money is fundamental to the progressive movement in the Democratic Party that was ignited by Bernie Sanders in 2016 and that saw some notable successes in the 2018 midterms. It is literally impossible to discuss this issue without touching upon the sizeable political contributions by American Jews. That is not an endorsement of age-old anti-Semitic stereotypes.

The country of Israel is overwhelming Jewish. But the actions of its government are not synonymous with the Jewish faith or the Jewish people, any more than Donald Trump’s GOP is synonymous with Americans and American values. No country in the history of humankind has ever been beyond reproach, and that includes Israel and the United States. Many of Israel’s actions in the West Bank have been criminal and racist. Americans who criticize the actions of their government are not un-American, and Americans who criticize the actions of Israel are not by definition anti-Semites.

The Republicans are running with this anti-Israel con just like they used to accuse Democrats of being soft on crime and weak on terrorism. And the Democrats are falling for it.

Ilhan Omar, one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress in November, suggested in a Tweet that some politicians in Washington have been influenced by campaign donations from Jewish lobbyist groups.

This is just true—just as it is undeniably true that politicians are influenced by donations from the NRA, labor unions, billionaires, Wall Street, the banks, manufacturers, the pharmaceutical industry, insurance companies, casino owners, movie producers, tech companies, and on and on and on.

The Democratic leadership, which claims to be fighting to the influence of money on politics, responded to Omar’s truth telling by frog marching her out in front of her colleagues and the media to apologize for her “insensitivity.” In her apology, Omar thanked her “Jewish allies and colleagues who are educating me on the painful history of anti-Semitic tropes.”

Omar never used such a trope. Her “crime” was that she didn’t exclude pro-Israeli-government lobbyists from her absolutely justified condemnation of the system of legalized bribery that is American politics today. The Democratic Party still has a long way to go.

Beware of Billionaires Bearing Bipartisanship

The American electorate is deeply divided. Bipartisanship and compromise are essential to bringing the country together, but the dramatic leftward shift of the Democratic Party is making this more difficult. Voters are anxious to vote for an independent moderate who occupies the political space between the two parties. 

Horseshit. 

Yes, the actions of our government should reflect the desires of the majority of our citizens. And you can make the case that much of the progress the United States has made has been the result of 250 years of middle-ground compromises between conservative and liberal constituencies. 

Today, however, those constituencies and the parties that have historically represented them are no longer roughly equal in size or representative of traditional conservatism and liberalism. Most Americans don’t hold political beliefs that occupy a space halfway between the policies of the GOP and the Democratic parties.  

We only have to look at the recent examples of Howard Schultz and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes to understand this. 

• Howard Schultz, a billionaire businessman, steams his imperial yacht into Presidential waters on behalf of the 40 percent of American voters who self-identify as independents, who he claims are desperately looking for a national savior in the form of a billionaire coffee executive and failed sports-team owner who opposes the “extremes” of both parties.  

• Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Congressional rookie, has proposed to tax the rich at a 70-percent rate after their first $10 million—an idea that has been greeted by Republicans as a “leftist fantasy program.”  

If Schultz is to be believed, these developments serve as good examples of the difference between the moderate “silent majority” and the “extreme” wing of the Democratic Party. 

How have American received these proposals from a classic moderate and an “extreme” democratic socialist? 

• Polls show a scant 7.7% of voters supporting Howard Schultz’s Presidential aspirations. The only major political figure who applauded Schultz’s flirtation with throwing his hat in the ring was Donald Trump—polls show that Schultz would draw most of his scant support from Democrats. A “major policy speech” by Schultz at Purdue University this week drew a tiny crowd and on online audience that peaked at 200.  

• A Hill/HarrisX poll taken last month, on the other hand, shows AOC’s “tax the rich” proposal supported by 59% of Americans—in fact, by the majority of women and men in all regions of the country. Even 45% of Republicans say they like the idea. 

This should not be surprising, given that polls taken over the past year show that the majority of Americans also support: 

• Medicare for all (70%) 

• Free public college (63%) 

• Stricter gun control laws (68%) 

• Legal abortion (57%) 

• Taking action to reduce global warming (66%)

• Overturning Citzens United (87% of Democrats, 82% of independents, and 60% of Republicans) 

 Recent polls also make clear what the majority of Americans are AGAINST: 

• Building a wall on our southern border (60% oppose) 

• Donald Trump (56% oppose) 

• Partisan gerrymandering of legislative districts (71% oppose) 

• The deportation of illegal immigrants (84% oppose) 

 Polls are not scientific or infallable, but these large majorities clearly show that the politicians who best represent the majority of Americans are not Howard Schultz or Donald Trump but AOC, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders. 

Obviously, the balance of power in Washington does not reflect the desires of the majority of Americans. There are three primary reasons for this—the extreme rightward shift of the GOP, the Republicans’ success in establishing a tyranny of the minority, and the corrupting influence of money on every level of politics and in both parties. 

Donald Trump’s GOP is not the party of conservatism. The traditional conservative principles of conservatism—a small federal government, fear of deficits, support for free trade, and respect for the social hierarchy and social institutions—have no place in Trump’s GOP, which is a proudly fascist, white-supremacist party that has openly declared war on the rule of law in America. 

The Republican Party has brilliantly managed their core problem—that their voter base represents a minority of Americans and is shrinking every year. Rather than respond to this reality by increasing the party’s appeal, the GOP has worked tirelessly—and successfully—to establish a tyranny of the minority for by suppressing voting, taking over governorships and state legislatures to gerrymander as many safe Republican districts as possible across the country, leveraging the undemocratic institutions in our Constitutional framework (e.g., the Senate and the Electoral College), and attempting an end-around against future populist legislation by packing the federal judiciary and stealing a seat on the Supreme Court. And the GOP has cunningly used racism and wedge issues like abortion to convince Americans vote against their own economic best interest.

Money has completely corrupted our political system. It is an existential threat to our politics equivalent to the threat of global warming to our planet. AOC did a brilliant job of explaining of demonstrating this during a recent Congressional hearing. Both the Democrats and the Republicans have participated in the disastrous reduction of the corporate tax rate from 90% in the 1950s to the 21% rate we have today.  

'We have a system that is fundamentally broken.' - Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is explaining just how f*cked campaign finance laws really are. " Subscribe to NowThis: http://go.nowth.is/News_Subscribe In the latest liberal news and political news, New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez made headlines at a recent congressional hearing on money in politics by explaining and inquiring about political corruption.

Howard Schultz and Michael Bloomberg are classic examples of the rich, socially liberal donors who have typically supported the Democratic Party—until that organization starts talking about helping unions, making the ultra-rich shoulder a fair tax burden, providing universal health care or offering free higher education.

When Democratic-leaning billionaires like Schultz and Bloomberg accept their tax windfalls and then explain that we have to focus on the deficit and that we can’t afford anything for the middle class, they reveal themselves not as moderates but as rich people who are just as disinterested in the success of the majority of Americans as anyone in the Flying Monkeys Party. 

Bipartisan “compromises” between the Democratic progressivism represented by AOC, Warren, and Sanders on the one hand and the fascist GOP would not reduce political polarization by moving this country to the political center. AOC, Warren, and Sanders ARE that center, or at least very close to it. Bipartisanship today is just another con by the Trumpists who want to move the country to the right and by rich Democrats who want to protect their wealth. The tension and polarization in this country is the result of the failure of both parties up til now to stand for the 99% of Americans. 

Don’t be confused by the GOP’s constantly moving the political goal posts as it becomes more extreme and more criminal, by the false notion that Creature From the Past Lagoon Joe Biden is the only candidate who can beat Trump, or the claim by Howard Schultz that he represents the “silent majority.”    

We can all take heart that the only fan of Schultz’s weak brew is Donald Trump, that the Democratic Party has universally condemned him, and that AOC and Warren and Sanders and the voters who have been inspired by them are guiding that party not to an “extreme leftward shift” but to the real political center of this country. 

The face of a new Democratic Party?

The narrative being promoted by much of the media and some moderate Democrats that Andrew Gillum, the new Democratic nominee for governor in Florida, is an extreme-left candidate is predictably bogus. My Facebook feed is replete today with posts from traditional Democrats contending that Gillum's victory was a huge mistake and that he will take the party down to defeat.

Bernie Sanders brought a compelling progressive platform and a small army of devoted followers to the Democratic Party in 2016. Not surprisingly, his insurgency angered many Democrats, because he didn't register as a Democrat until he ran for President. In turn, Clinton's victory incensed many Sanders supporters who bought into a false narrative that Clinton had stolen the nomination. Sanders' progressivism did not attract enough minority voters. Clinton did not inspire enough younger voters or independents. The biggest danger the Democrats face in this fall's midterms is a continuation of the Sanders/Clinton divide. The ideal Democratic dynamic for November's critical election is one in which the two sides move past 2016 and create a majority coalition, and candidates that represent that coalition, to take down Trump.

Gillum is not a far-left extremist. He is, in fact, the personification of a new, bigger-tent, post-2016 Democratic Party.

Yes, Bernie Sanders endorsed Gillum, as did pro-Sanders groups Democracy in Action and the Working Families Party. But Gillum was a strong Clinton supporter in 2016; he spoke on her behalf at the Democratic convention. Gillum's Florida candidacy was endorsed by Julian Castro, BlackPAC, Color of Change, Tom Steyer's Next Generation America, and Moms Demand Action--who all supported Clinton in 2016.

Gillum could lose in November. The Florida gubernatorial election will be the most pathologically savage campaign that we have ever seen. But the old practice of nominating candidates indistinguishable from Republicans or former Republicans like Crist led to losses in 2010 and 2014. Gillum and Stacey Adams in Georgia are committed to a strategy of not apologizing for being a Democrat and of running on a progressive campaign that could unite the opposition in Florida. The outcome will say a lot not only about the future of the Democratic Party but about the future of the country.

The crisis is already here

While Trump and the GOP are aggressively destroying our law-enforcement system, the careers of dedicated public servants, and the Congressional process, the Democratic leadership responds with--a limp warning. Specifically, that the firing of Rosenstein and Mueller "could precipitate a constitutional crisis."

Shouldn't that be "WOULD constitute a constitutional crisis," Senator Durbin?

In their Year of the Long Knives Trump and the GOP haven't been sitting idly by. They got Comey. They got Yates. They got McCabe. They have identified, publicly, out in the open. that their next targets are Rosenstein and Mueller. They've nuetered Sessions and Wray. They are arguing from the floors of Congress and in the media that being a Democrat and being a traitor are synonymous. They and Fox News have successfully engineered a steep drop in the public's faith in the FBI and the DOJ and convinced millions that Mueller's investigation--which they claimed to support a year ago--is dead on arrival. They have purposefully misinterpreted classified information and released it to the public to help Trump without allowing the release of any rebuttal. These people have no taste for governing, but when it comes to destroying government and the rule of law, they are working it.

The response by the Democrats in Congress has been to issue toothless statements of outrage, engineer a confused and squeamish government shutdown that lasted about two minutes, and to beg the Republicans to please release their memo, too.

Surely, at this point in the active war against our national system, with real bodies piling up and with 35% of the population being constantly whipped into a froth against our law enforcement agencies, Congressional Democrats should be making it crystal clear that firing either Rosenstein or Mueller will absolutely mean--no ifs, ands, or buts, no compromises--a complete legislative shutdown and the active mobilization of massive public protests. STAND FOR SOMETHING, DONKEYS! RESIST!
 

Unemployment rate for republicans on the rise

Savoring an election night for a change. Northam, who many considered to be a weak candidate who might lose, wins the Virginia governorship by exceeding Clinton's 2016 vote totals in that state. Democratic voters showed up at the polls. The Democrats swept all three statewide races in Virginia tonight. Virginia voters felt that the most important issue--by far--was health insurance. Murphy handily puts an end to the dark Christie era in New Jersey. The Democrats will pick up many seats in the Virginia legislature. Sweetest of all is the victory tonight of Danica Roem, who became the first open transexual to win a seat in the Virginia legislature by beating Republican Bob Marshall, a 26-year veteran of the legislature, by double digits. Marshall sponsored an anti-LGBT bathroom bill, refused to refer to Roem by her correct gender, refused to debate her, and proudly called himself "Virginia's homophobe in chief." Tomorrow he'll begin looking for a new job.