The Drag Queen Posse

Nails’ life (38 pics)

We think that after some point, Madonna is going to have to admit to HERSELF that she is over 50. Yes, the yoga body is something all us muscle queens might aspire to in our middle-aged years, but at some point, it might be nice to se her with maybe just a little makeup, no lighting kits by the SUN to dodge out wrinkles in the photograph, and NO MORE PHOTOSHOPPING.

How about some nice portraiture that says “Hey, I’m over 50, and still fabulous - get into the real beauty of a woman.” That’s one of the reasons we adore Isabella Rossellini. She does not give a SHIT about Photoshop, or how she looks on camera, just whether or not you care about her PERFORMANCE. And yes, you REALLY, REALLY MUST see her film shorts on the Sundance Channel (or online for free), called GREEN PORNO.

Madge, we’d still love you anyway - you don’t have anything left to prove to anyone. Just yourself, and we suppose that monster will haunt you until the day you die.

Photos at Fashionologie.

Here is live rehearsal footage from the Staples Center in L.A., 2 days before Michael Jackson’s death. The performance was recorded with state-of-the-art RED cameras, which deliver as good, if not better quality than film. AEG Live, which was funding the tour, is deciding to release the performance as a live album, and the show may be converted into 3D for projection into digital cinemas. It will later be released onto DVD & Blu-Ray so that they can attempt to recoup the tens of millions of dollars they have lost in the production, as well as refunds to fans.

A release date has yet to be announced, but we’re certain it will be a few months down the line after music clearances and rights can be obtained. As well as time to allow for Mr. Jackson’s autopsy/toxicology reports to come and go, and for the interest in the final package to reach a fever pitch.

From the footage here, he looks like he was doing just fine. Who would have thought he’d be gone less than 48 hours later?

Sorry - the footage is from Fox “News.”

Glitz Glam, RuPaul Drag Race – Season 2, Round 2 submission video.

No one can say we didn’t try — at least she made it into the top 100 drag performers in the USA. Not too shabby!

Thanks again for voting…

Watch Now:

 Podcast Video [ 3:58m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download | Embeddable Player | Hits (130)

The event will stream live at 4:25 pm EST (hmmm?! — 5 min. for a smoke break Mr. President?).

Here is the streaming link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/live

Streaming? We suppose we’re not good enough for TV? We’ll watch for any mention of it in prime-time other than 30 seconds with a little video clip that includes applause.

He doesn’t deserve applause at the moment, he deserves silence coupled with the sound of crickets chirping…

Why? Welllllll….where to start! Here is a breakdown of the D.O.M.A. Brief (Defense of Marriage Act, yes, we roll our eyes too on that one). Forgive our language, but the further down we go in repeating this stuff online, the angrier, and angrier we get…

1.) Here is the request by the President to DISMISS a motion to hear our marriage case in CA:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16355867/Obamas-Motion-to-Dismiss-Marriage-case

2.) In that brief, GLBT people are compared to incestuous persons and pedophiles:

“The courts have followed this principle, moreover, in relation to the validity of marriages performed in other States. Both the First and Second Restatements of Conflict of Laws recognize that State courts may refuse to give effect to a marriage, or to certain incidents of a marriage, that contravene the forum State’s policy. See Restatement (First) of Conflict of Laws § 134; Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 284.5 And the courts have widely held that certain marriages performed elsewhere need not be given effect, because they conflicted with the public policy of the forum. See, e.g., Catalano v. Catalano, 170 A.2d 726, 728-29 (Conn. 1961) (marriage of uncle to niece, “though valid in Italy under its laws, was not valid in Connecticut because it contravened the public policy of th[at] state”); Wilkins v. Zelichowski, 140 A.2d 65, 67-68 (N.J. 1958) (marriage of 16-year-old female held invalid in New Jersey, regardless of validity in Indiana where performed, in light of N.J. policy reflected in statute permitting adult female to secure annulment of her underage marriage); In re Mortenson’s Estate, 316 P.2d 1106 (Ariz. 1957) (marriage of first cousins held invalid in Arizona, though lawfully performed in New Mexico, given Arizona policy reflected in statute declaring such marriages “prohibited and void”)…The fact that States have long had the authority to decline to give effect to marriages performed in other States based on the forum State’s public policy strongly supports the constitutionality of Congress’s exercise of its authority in DOMA.”

Fucktards, I want to marry my boyfriend, not my uncle or brother. Seriously, the right-wing uses this tactic EVERY TIME. Then they say: next thing you know we’ll have to acknowledge plural marriages and bestiality, and the world will fall to pieces. Last time we fucking checked, polygamy was still being practiced since, oh, BEFORE the concept of marriage even existed amongst us primates, and people still fuck animals — it’s mentioned in the Bible and we’ve been unfortunate enough to open emails that had them as a joke. Right now, it’s another pretty, picture-perfect day in San Diego. No plague of locusts, check, no blood in the rivers/ocean, check, no frogs falling from the sky, check, no sun, check, no first-borns have died en masse, check, no plague of lice, check…

3.) The Federal Government does not want to allow same sex marriage because it saves them money. Oh, yes, they went there…

“The constitutional propriety of Congress’s decision to decline to extend federal benefits immediately to newly recognized types of marriages is bolstered by Congress’s articulated interest in preserving the scarce resources of both the federal and State governments. DOMA ensures that evolving understandings of the institution of marriage at the State level do not place greater financial and administrative obligations on federal and state benefits programs. Preserving scarce government resources — and deciding to extend benefits incrementally — are well-recognized legitimate interests under rational-basis review. See Butler, 144 F.3d at 625 (”There is nothing irrational about Congress’s stated goal of conserving social security resources, and Congress can incrementally pursue that goal.”); Hassan v. Wright, 45 F.3d 1063, 1069 (7th Cir. 1995) (”[P]rotecting the fisc provides a rational basis for Congress’ line drawing in this instance.”). Congress expressly relied on these interests in enacting DOMA: Government currently provides an array of material and other benefits to married couples in an effort to promote, protect, and prefer the institution of marriage. . . . If [a State] were to permit homosexuals to marry, these marital benefits would, absent some legislative response, presumably have to be made available to homosexual couples and surviving spouses of homosexual marriages on the same terms as they are now available to opposite-sex married couples and spouses. To deny federal recognition to same-sex marriages will thus preserve scarce government resources, surely a legitimate government purpose.” (Emphasis added by us.)

4.) They claim that D.O.M.A. is Constitutional, so, we’re fucked if we want to sue.

“The constitutionality of Section 2 of DOMA is further confirmed by the second sentence of the Full Faith and Credit Clause, which expressly empowers Congress to prescribe “the Effect” to be accorded to the laws of a sister State. See U.S. Const. art. IV, § 1, cl. 2. Although the broad contours of this provision have not been conclusively established, the power exercised by Congress in enacting DOMA clearly conforms to any conceivable construction of the effects provision….

Under this view, Congress obviously acted within its plenary effects power in enacting Section 2 of DOMA. If the Constitution itself does not declare “the effect” of the law of “one state in another state,” McElmoyle, 38 U.S. (13 Pet.) at 325, but instead leaves that “power in congress,” Mills, 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) at 485, then Congress clearly had the authority in DOMA to declare that no State is “required to give effect” to the same-sex marriage laws of other States. 28 U.S.C. § 1738C.”

5.) The Feds also claim that D.O.M.A. meets Equal Protection and Due Process principles ::coughbullshitcough::.

“DOMA Is Consistent with Equal Protection and Due Process Principles Plaintiffs further allege that DOMA violates their rights under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, including its equal protection component. DOMA, however, merely preserves for each State the authority to follow its own law and policy with respect to same-sex marriage for purposes of State law. And it maintains the status quo of federal policy, preserving a longstanding federal policy of promoting traditional marriages, by clarifying that the terms “marriage” and “spouse,” for purposes of federal law, refer to marriage between a man and a woman, and do not encompass relationships of any other kind within their ambit. Thus, because DOMA does not make a suspect classification or implicate a right that has been recognized as fundamental, it is necessarily subject to rational-basis scrutiny, see National Ass’n for Advancement of Psychoanalysis v. California Bd. of Psychology, 228 F.3d 1043, 1049 (9th Cir. 2000), which it satisfies.”

6.) GLBT people have no right to marriage, period.

“Plaintiffs are married, and their challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act (”DOMA”) poses a different set of questions: whether by virtue of their marital status they are constitutionally entitled to acknowledgment of their union by States that do not recognize same-sex marriage, and whether they are similarly entitled to certain federal benefits. Under the law binding on this Court, the answer to these questions must be no. (”Under the law binding this court,” allows them to weasel out - saying that they have to go by the letter of the law, not interpret it. Also, since the laws are binding and CANNOT BE CHALLENGED as mentioned above, this will not change.)”

7.) “DOMA reflects a cautiously limited response to society’s still-evolving understanding of the institution of marriage.”

8.) No Federal support to allow “right to travel.”

“On the merits, plaintiffs’ claims that DOMA violates the Full Faith and Credit Clause and their “right to travel” both fail as a matter of law. In allowing each State to withhold its recognition of same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, Congress was merely confirming longstanding conflict-of-laws principles in a valid exercise of its express power to settle such questions under the Full Faith and Credit Clause. That Clause ensures that each State retains the authority to decline to apply another State’s law when it conflicts with its own public policies. DOMA is fully consistent with that constitutional principle, as it permits States to experiment with and maintain the exclusivity of their own legitimate public policies — such as whether that State chooses to recognize or reject same-sex marriages.”

9.) We don’t deserve the same assistance in court as other minorities, according to the Feds.

“Because DOMA does not restrict any rights that have been recognized as fundamental or rely on any suspect classifications, it need not be reviewed with heightened scrutiny. Properly understood, the right at issue in this case is not a right to marry. After all, the federal government does not, either through DOMA or any other federal statute, issue marriage licenses or determine the standards for who may or may not get married. Indeed, as noted above — and as evidenced by the fact that plaintiffs have married in California — DOMA in no way prohibits same-sex couples from marrying. Instead, the only right at issue in this case is a right to receive certain benefits on the basis of a same-sex marriage. No court has ever found such a right to federal benefits on that basis to be fundamental — in fact, all of the courts that have considered the question have rejected such a claim. (And even if the right at issue in this case were the right to same-sex marriage, current Supreme Court precedent that binds this Court does not recognize such a right under the Constitution.) Likewise, DOMA does not discriminate, or permit the States to discriminate, on the basis of a suspect classification; indeed, the Ninth Circuit has held that sexual orientation is not a suspect classification.”

10.) No (and Fox Channel LOVES to use this phrase) “activist” judge rulings. Never-fucking mind that a JUDGE’s place is not just to uphold the law, but to interpret it for JUSTICE (which is SUPPOSED TO BE BLIND).

“DOMA therefore must be analyzed under rational-basis review. Under the highly deferential rational basis standard, moreover, a court may not act as superlegislature, sitting in judgment on the wisdom or morality of a legislative policy. Instead, a legislative policy must be upheld so long as there is any reasonably conceivable set of facts that could provide a rational basis for it, including ones that the Congress itself did not advance or consider. DOMA satisfies this standard.”

11.) This is so appalling, you just have to read it:

“Likewise, Section 3 of DOMA merely clarifies that federal policy is to make certain benefits available only to those persons united in heterosexual marriage, as opposed to any other possible relationship defined by law, family, or affection. As a result, gay and lesbian individuals who unite in matrimony are denied no federal benefits to which they were entitled prior to their marriage; they remain eligible for every benefit they enjoyed beforehand. DOMA simply provides, in effect, that as a result of their same-sex marriage they will not become eligible for the set of benefits that Congress has reserved exclusively to those who are related by the bonds of heterosexual marriage. In short, then, the failure in this manner to recognize a certain subset of marriages that are recognized by a certain subset of States cannot be taken as an infringement on plaintiffs’ rights, even if same-sex marriage were accepted as a fundamental right under the Constitution.”

“EVEN IF” our forefathers had placed this in the Constitution!!! Or, interpreted another way, judges were to see no reason why people should be denied these rights under the Constitution!!!  I am preparing my Vintage Stonewall Brick to go into its Vintage Stonewall Purse, to go with some Vintage Drag Queen Ass-Kicking, Police-Car-Burning, GLBT Pride Screaming Megaphone as I head down to the offices of whatever bigoted, assholic (Penn & Teller have used it too, it’s lexicon now, bitches), fat-cat attorneys and cause another riot. Riots seem to get things done, rather than sitting on our asses and waiting for someone else to fuck us over, AGAIN. We’d rather do peaceful, non-violent demonstrations, but what’s happened since Stonewall? The answer: not much, and arguably backwards more in plenty of instances…

12.) GLBT people have no right to privacy.

“Second, the right to privacy encompasses only rights that are constitutionally fundamental, and, as noted earlier, the right to receive benefits on the basis of same-sex marriage (as well as same-sex marriage itself) has not been recognized by the courts as a fundamental right.”

13.) Congress doesn’t want to rock the boat, so, instead of taking initiative and granting Federal rights in those states that DO allow gay marriage, they will abstain completely, so as to appear “neutral.” That’s not “neutral,” THAT’S TAKING SIDES.

“Section 3 of DOMA reflects just such an approach: it maximizes democratic flexibility and self-governance under our federalist system, by adopting a policy of federal neutrality with respect to a matter that is primarily the concern of state government. Because all 50 States recognize heterosexual marriage, it was reasonable and rational for Congress to maintain its longstanding policy of fostering this traditional and universally-recognized form of marriage. At the same time, because Congress recognized both the freedom of States to expand the traditional definition, and the freedom of other States to decline to recognize this newer form of marriage, a policy of neutrality dictated that Congress not extend federal benefits to new forms of marriage recognized by some States.”

14.) This is not just GLBT oriented. The D.O.M.A. language, when taken out of bullshit legalese and into something we can ALL understand is essentially allowing state law interpretation to go so far, it could be interpreted once more to allow for miscegeny laws once more:

“[T]he public policy doctrine, which has long recognized the sovereign authority of the States to decline to give effect to the laws of a sister State at variance with their own legitimate public policy. Section 2 of DOMA merely confirms the specific applicability of that longstanding principle in the context of laws regarding same-sex marriage.”

15.) Silly faggots, D.O.M.A. wasn’t made with ANY animosity in mind:

“Under our federalist system, preserving the autonomy of state and federal governments to address evolving definitions of an age-old societal institution is itself a legitimate governmental interest. Moreover, because DOMA protected “the ability of elected officials to decide matters related to homosexuality,” including their right to recognize same-sex marriage, it plainly was not born solely as a result of animosity towards homosexuals.”

16.) Don’t compare GLBT marriage equality to that of the marriage equality of African-Americans (even if that’s with caucasians/other), because, you know, GLBT rights are not the same.

“Finally, regardless of whether same-sex marriage is appropriate policy, under current legal precedent there is no constitutional right to it, and that precedent is binding on these parties and this Court. While the Supreme Court has held that the right to marry is “fundamental,” Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 383-87, 98 S. Ct. 673, 54 L.Ed.2d 618 (1978), that right has not been held to encompass the right to marry someone of the same sex. To the contrary, in Baker v. Nelson, the Supreme Court dismissed a claim that the Constitution provides a right to same-sex marriage for lack of a “substantial federal question.” 409 U.S. 810, 93 S. Ct. 37, 34 L.Ed.2d 65 (1972) (Mem). In Baker, the Minnesota Supreme Court had rejected the contention that a State statute limiting marriage to one man and one woman violated federal due process and equal protection principles. The court found no “fundamental right” to same-sex marriage, 191 N.W.2d at 186-87, and concluded that the traditional definition of marriage effects no “invidious discrimination,” and that the definition easily withstood rational-basis review. Id. at 187.”

17.) Stupid queers, D.O.M.A. doesn’t deny you benefits, just marry a straight person and “BAM!” instant benefits!

“Plaintiffs also maintain that DOMA discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, in violation of their right to the equal protection of the law, see Complaint, ¶ 20, but DOMA is not subject to heightened scrutiny on that basis. As an initial matter, plaintiffs misperceive the nature of the line that Congress has drawn. DOMA does not discriminate against homosexuals in the provision of federal benefits. To the contrary, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is prohibited in federal employment and in a wide array of federal benefits programs by law, regulation, and Executive order…. Section 3 of DOMA does not distinguish among persons of different sexual orientations, but rather it limits federal benefits to those who have entered into the traditional form of marriage.”

18.) Again, don’t compare GLBT marriage to African-American/White ones:

“Loving v. Virginia is not to the contrary. There the Supreme Court rejected a contention that the assertedly “equal application” of a statute prohibiting interracial marriage immunized the statute from strict scrutiny. 388 U.S. 1, 8, 87 S.Ct. 1817, 18 L.Ed.2d 1010 (1967). The Court had little difficulty concluding that the statute, which applied only to “interracial marriages involving white persons,” was “designed to maintain White Supremacy” and therefore unconstitutional. Id. at 11. No comparable purpose is present here, however, for DOMA does not seek in any way to advance the “supremacy” of men over women, or of women over men. Thus DOMA cannot be “traced to a . . . purpose” to discriminate against either men or women. Personnel Adm’r v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256, 272, 99 S. Ct. 2282, 60 L.Ed.2d 870 (1979). In upholding the traditional definition of marriage, numerous courts have expressly rejected an alleged analogy to Loving.”

Feel free to sound off on this bullshit.

Much thanks to AmericaBlog News for their in-depth review of the D.O.M.A. brief, which is in greater entirety here:

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/obama-justice-department-defends-doma.html

Excuse us, we need a liquor lunch now…

Here is Glitz Glam and one of the two new videos for Round 2 of RuPaul’s Drag Race!

Please vote for Glitz at: http://rupaulcasting.com/people/GlitzGlam

Go now!

Less than 3 days left!!!

Watch Now:

 Podcast Video [ 6:15m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download | Embeddable Player | Hits (146)

Please vote every day for all, if one or more of us get on, we promise to serve for your nerves!

We’ll make Season 2 of Drag Race one you won’t forget!

Glitz Glam: http://rupaulcasting.com/people/GlitzGlam

Daisy Deadpetals: http://rupaulcasting.com/people/DaisyDK

TP Lords: http://rupaulcasting.com/people/TPLORDS

What are you waiting for? Go and vote!

Click the photo to go to Calpernia.com

Click here for the website of the movie Transproofed, as well as the link to the e-store! You can even purchase a deluxe version of the DVD with Calpernia’s autograph!

Co-founder and content creator/producer for Deep Stealth Productions, Inc., as well as the creator of TSRoadmap.com, and Calpernia’s friend and co-star of Transproofed & TransAmerican Love Story, Ms. Andrea James.

Click to hear streaming samples of Calpernia’s single Stunning, and to purchase!

Calpernia Addam’s Autobiography.

The unforgettable, tragic, true love story of Calpernia’s younger, adult life.

In the first few minutes of TransAmerica, you’ll notice this series of DVDs being played on the TV in the background of the main character’s home, played by Felicity Huffman (of Desperate Housewives fame). Click text or picture to purchase.

Listen Now:

 Standard Podcasts [ 40:09m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download | Embeddable Player | Hits (78)

by Scott David

Dance Diva. Beauty Queen. Vegas Showgirl. Gay Icon. With 13 No. 1 Billboard Dance hits since her first worldwide hit, “Feel What You Want,” Kristine W’s soulful vocals have been among the most popular soundtracks at gay clubs, bars and pride events the past decade. Kristine spoke to us about her acclaimed new album, “The Power of Music,” while preparing for performances at an HRC Gala Dinner and the annual HIV/AIDS fundraiser Broadway Bares in NYC. You have become one of the top 5 Billboard dance artists along with Madonna, Janet Jackson, Donna Summer, and Mariah Carey (and she’s tied at No. 2 with Beyoncé for hits since 2000). Like those artists, you have a strong gay fan base. When did you first become aware of your gay following? Kristine W - I first found out I was a gay icon when I flew from the UK to NYC and performed for a party being DJ’d by Junior Vasquez. I walked onto the stage in front of a few thousand hot, shirtless men and thought, “Wow, I have died and gone to heaven.” Then I quickly figured out none of them were interested in anything other than my voice (Kristine laughs)!! I have been in love with gay audiences ever since. In addition to 14 new songs, the new CD features your 4 most recent No. 1’s, “Walk Away,” “Never,” “Love is the Look,” and your remake of Diana Ross’ classic “The Boss.” Since you write many of your songs, including winning an ASCAP Award for co-writing “One More Try,” how did you decide to take on Miss Ross and make “The Boss” and “I’m Coming Out”(a bonus iTunes track) your own? Kristine W - My idols growing up in Washington state were Donna Summer and Diana Ross. I just loved them and was always singing their songs and studying them. When I decided to start my own record label in January of 2008, I knew “The Boss” would be the perfect first single to put out. I was taking control – being “The Boss” of my music, sink or swim – and I put all I had into that single and those remixes. It was so well received globally that I was really a bit taken back by it. In addition to the singles, you independently released “The Power of Music,” and it is already a Top Five Dance Album on iTunes in its first week out. What were the biggest challenges releasing the singles and CD on your own label and being both businesswoman and artist? Kristine W - The big challenges are always the same: time and money. Like Diana, there are quite a few Kristine W drag queens. Who are your favorite drag performers? Kristine W - That is why I featured Crystal Woods in “The Boss” video. I just wanted to pay homage to Crystal and those like her that bring so much joy to us all with their performances. I have so many favorites and there are so many talented drag queens across the US that the list would be a mile long. I have so much respect for drag queens because it is so demanding if you are a true artisan. RuPaul is the godfather, of course, and always amazes me, Chad Michaels (Cher) in San Diego, who is a friend and confidant, Crystal Wood (Miss Ross) in Las Vegas, and Laritza Dumont in Orlando. I make a point to watch them when I can because they inspire me. Speaking of videos, the video for “Walk Away” is pretty hot, including the hunky male model. Did you cast him personally or did famed gay director/photographer Mike Ruiz find him? Kristine W - Mike Ruiz found Matus Valent, and yes, he is a gorgeous man. We actually still keep in touch. How do you like making videos compared to recording? Kristine W - Videos are very demanding and time consuming. Honestly, I don’t really enjoy doing them but they are a necessity and a time capsule for the music. They are a lot more work then anyone knows and usually very unglamorous. Did fighting leukemia earlier this decade and having friends with HIV/AIDS impact the themes of your songs and the many causes you support and actively promote in your blog? Kristine W - Having battled leukemia for a few years, I understand what people with AIDS go through, waiting for your blood counts, hoping that you will stay healthy and not go backwards. AIDS and diseases of all kinds are an ongoing uphill battle for humanity. I am always humbled by how fragile life really is, and yes, it is always a part of my music. Your new single, “Be Alright,” is an uplifting summer song, and the overall album is a great antidote to the current state of the world. How did “Be Alright” come about? Kristine W - I actually wrote “Be Alright” four years ago with my guitar player Tommy Cameron while I was getting better and trying to stay in remission from leukemia. My grandfather died a few months after I got out of the hospital, and I was able to see him and spend time with him before he passed. I wrote the first verse after his funeral, and I was really missing him. He was failing while I was at the UCLA hospital. A huge fear of mine was that he would die before I got back to Washington to see him. I never told him I had leukemia and told everyone else not say anything. He was too frail and that would have put him over the edge. I would call him from UCLA and tell him I was fine, and I was actually terrified. That is the only time I ever lied to him. We were very tight, and I always wondered if he knew but didn’t say anything. “Be Alright” features dance mixes by Hex Hextor, Offer Nissim, the Perry Twins, and more, including exclusive remixes on Masterbeat. Your songs are remixed by the top dance producers and DJ’s in the business. Are you ever surprised by the results? Kristine W - I am always surprised by remixes, and that is why I love them so much. It is so fun to write a song and then hand it over to someone and have them bring their own interpretation. I am currently in love with the Perry Twins’ “Los Angels and Demons” mix of “Be Alright.” That mix is so full of emotion and takes me on a journey. Your landmark show at the Hilton Las Vegas led to several “Entertainer of the Year” awards and even “Kristine W Day” on June 28th in Nevada. You just performed again in Vegas at the Miss USA pageant. As a former winner of the Miss America talent competition, did performing during this year’s Miss USA show bring back any crazy beauty queen memories? Kristine W - Oh, yes!! I immediately remembered how cutthroat the pageant world is but that is life. It is a good but painful education. What do your two young kids think when they see Mom turn into the larger than life performer you become on stage – singing live, playing instruments, wearing outrageous costumes, surrounded by a team of dancers? Kristine W - They always ask when I am going to turn into Kristine W again. I am like Wonder Woman to them. One minute I am driving them to school, the next minute I am driving an audience crazy. I love it!! I am a true Gemini.

Click the photo to hear the new album stream for free.

Here is the information from the BBC.

The L.A. Coroner has confirmed as of 2:26 p.m. PDT, that Michael Jackson, forever the King of Pop, has died today.

He will be often imitated but never duplicated.

Rest in Peace.

Wait a minute, we hear you say - but he promised ALL of the SAME AND EQUAL RIGHTS as heterosexual couples on a Federal level!

What happened? Well, if you’ve been reading this blog, or read the news, you’d know by now that the White House webiste did some Spring Cleaning a while back and removed more than 2/3 of the campaign promises President Obama made to his GLBT supporters. The hate crimes bill, a.k.a. The Matthew Shepherd Act, which had no oposition, and was followed so vividly in the press, died on the floor with no support (in committee), much like the individual for which it was named.

Why can’t/won’t Obama do something about it? Simply put, he would have to end D.O.M.A. (The ridiculously named federal Defense of Marriage Act), which specifically proclaims marriage as between one man and one woman, thus denying key benefits like health insurance and retirement benefits. He could end it be Presidential decree and further down the road approved by legislators or The Supreme Court, but, alas, it would alienate too many straight voters, so, he isn’t going to touch it. Fucked again. And Again. And Again.

This was a presidential “memo,” NOT an Executive Order, and does NOT include health nor retirement benefits. The kind of “benefits” gay spouses can look forward to are things like “relocation assistance.” That’s great (sigh), but what about the other 1,600+ benefits that heterosexual people get? That’s what we voted for. That’s the person we believed in, you know, the one who was supposed to give us CHANGE, for the better. Instead, we keep getting pushed back and back, and the message we get is that our bloc of voters is not important to the administration. Instead, all we see is political cowardice, hedged bets, and broken promises.

That won’t get you a second term, dear Mr. President. We urge you to look back at one of your speeches from 2007, titled “The Fierce Urgency of Now,” and get someone to interpret that phrase for you in a queer context.

We realize you have a lot on your plate, but if you and your colleagues can make time for fundraisers that will pile your coffers for the next election round, you can make time for us. If you don’t make good on the promises you made, expect a backlash unlike any delivered by a group of disenfranchised people to a President, dealt with the same technological prowess by which you became the leader of our country.

A larger article with more links is available at OutGayLife.com

Sadly, this Angel is now gone, but the girl lived a life most would be envious of…and we know that she LIVED it too! Take a look at the now infamous David Letterman apearance in 1997 to promote her Playboy spread and video at age 50. She looks awful skinny here, but we want to know just one thing: What was she on, and can we have any?

The reality of “Happily Ever After,” referred to as “Fallen Princesses,” on Vancouver Photographer Dina Goldstein’s website.

The pics are beautifully staged, detail to the Disney cartoons is very precise, and the dark, black humour that surrounds it is hysterical and worth a look. We’d love to see her do more of these!

Well, if you haven’t noticed by now, the online voting for RuPaul’s Drag Race Season Two was CLEARED OUT overnight…are Mama Ru and/or Logo noticing the people cheating online (?), because they were not removed, the same people are still there! They’re still just robo-voting…

However, this means a fresh start for both Glitz Glam and Daisy Deadpetals!

What are you waiting for? Please go and vote!

We can’t vouch for the authenticity of these illustrations. The first photo of the Mad Hatter, to be played by Johnny Depp, looks more like Elijah Wood in heavy clown makeup. As for the other designs, they can obviously only be achieved with puppets and/or digital effects. If he can even come close, and he did with Willy Wonka’s concept art, then this should be a fertile ground for Mr. Burton’s imagination to thrive, and for us to enjoy.

Here is the link courtesy of ThinkHero.com

So. FL Drag Pageantry System 2008; Part 3, Evening Gowns (Continued)

Videography by Mr. Mark Demeter, courtesy of Robert Scott

The Drag Queen Posse podcast is kept FREE and made possible ONLY by donations and $1 monthly, recurring subscriptions by audience members. Please help keep the site, drag performance art, and this LGBT portal available for all by donating/subscribing on our podcast website: www.TheDragQueenPosse.com

Watch Now:

 Podcast Video [ 9:05m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download | Embeddable Player | Hits (194)

Stay tuned later this week for our in-depth conversation with the lovely Ms. Calpernia Addams, you might just be surprised by some of the things she has to say!

South Florida Drag Pageantry System 2008 Part 2 Evening Gowns

Videography by Mr. Mark Demeter, courtesy of Robert Scott

The Drag Queen Posse podcast is kept FREE and made possible ONLY by donations and $1 monthly, recurring subscriptions by audience members. Please help keep the site, drag performance art, and this LGBT portal available for all by donating/subscribing on our podcast website: www.TheDragQueenPosse.com

Watch Now:

 Podcast Video [ 9:22m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download | Embeddable Player | Hits (128)