Happy 4th of July

So it's the 4^th of July, Independence Day. Enjoy the day, just try not to blow anything up in the process. A short history lesson ....

On June 24, 1826 Thomas Jefferson wrote a letter to Roger Weightman discussing the 50^th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. In the letter he wrote the following paragraph which still has meaning today given the recent Supreme Court decisions, both the good and the bad decisions.

"All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view. The palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately, by the grace of god. These are grounds of hope for others. For ourselves, let the annual return of this day forever refresh our recollections of these rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."

On July 4, 1826, 50 years to the day after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson passed away at his home in Monticello, Virginia. Five hours later John Adams passed away in Boston, Massachusetts.

Supposedly John Adams’ last words were, "Thomas Jefferson still survives."

Observations 7.2.1

I want to briefly take you back to last Wednesday.

And a call was heard from on high that the lord god almighty himself was pissed the hell off and willed his holy minions to stamp out the pestilence of queer marriage wherever it be found in his land of all lands.

Okay, so maybe it didn't go quite like that but that's what some holy Republicans heard. Just three days after the Supreme Court ruled DOMA unconstitutional GOP Representative Tim Huelskamp of Kansas, a man who has been in Congress all of two years, submitted House Resolution H.J.Res.51 which proposes an amendment to the Constitution of The United States banning same sex marriage.

"Article: Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution, nor the constitution of any State, shall be construed to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any union other than the union of a man and a woman."

So much for states' rights. The bill has 28 co-sponsors, all of whom happen to be men and all of whom happen to be Republican. I'm not going to waste my time typing all there names but follow this link for the full text than click on the co-sponsor link for a complete list. I would however like to send special kudos to Rep. Andy Harris of Maryland who co-sponsored the bill even though his state voted for same-sex marriage in a referendum last November.

In order to send a constitutional amendment to the states it must a two-thirds vote in both the House and Senate. Currently 54 Senators and 185 Representatives are on record as supporting marriage equality making that impossible.

Now that they have this out of the way maybe Congress can get back to important work like voting to repeal Obamacare for the 39^th time.

Observations from the Coffee Shop 6.27

Yesterday was a historic day, a word that doesn't quite do it justice but is true nonetheless. At the moment I can't seem to put in words how I felt at 10:01 AM when I saw this simple tweet; "@SCOTUSblog: DOMA is unconstitutional." Maybe in a couple days I can describe the day better but for now I'm not going to try.

As expected Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote The Supreme Court's decision that ruled DOMA unconstitutional. The official legal wording of the tweet is this; "DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment." You can read the full decision and the dissenting opinions here. 

Yesterday's other major decision for all practical purposes made same sex marriage once again legal in California. In the Prop 8 decision Chief Justice John Roberts said the "petitioners did not have standing to appeal the District Court’s order." That leaves the lower court ruling that Prop 8 violated both the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution stand and re-instates equal marriage. You can read that SCOTUS opinion here and the original Ninth Circuit Court ruling here.

Yes it was quite a historic day. Finally this statement from President Obama who got the news on Air Force One as he flew to Africa:

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release June 26, 2013

Statement by the President on the Supreme Court Ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act

I applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act.  This was discrimination enshrined in law.  It treated loving, committed gay and lesbian couples as a separate and lesser class of people.  The Supreme Court has righted that wrong, and our country is better off for it.  We are a people who declared that we are all created equal – and the love we commit to one another must be equal as well. 

This ruling is a victory for couples who have long fought for equal treatment under the law; for children whose parents’ marriages will now be recognized, rightly, as legitimate; for families that, at long last, will get the respect and protection they deserve; and for friends and supporters who have wanted nothing more than to see their loved ones treated fairly and have worked hard to persuade their nation to change for the better. 

So we welcome today’s decision, and I’ve directed the Attorney General to work with other members of my Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to ensure this decision, including its implications for Federal benefits and obligations, is implemented swiftly and smoothly.

On an issue as sensitive as this, knowing that Americans hold a wide range of views based on deeply held beliefs, maintaining our nation’s commitment to religious freedom is also vital.  How religious institutions define and consecrate marriage has always been up to those institutions.  Nothing about this decision – which applies only to civil marriages – changes that.  

The laws of our land are catching up to the fundamental truth that millions of Americans hold in our hearts:  when all Americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we are all more free.

6/29 update - "At the President’s direction, the Department of Justice will work expeditiously with other Executive Branch agencies to implement the Court’s decision." From Attorney General Eric Holder's statement on the Wednesday's DOMA ruling. Read the full statement here.

Observations from the Coffee Shop 5.10

I tend save way too many links to articles I want to read later, sometimes I do read them and sometimes they just clutter Chrome until I delete them. The coffee shop is where I do most of my catching up so for the hell of it here is a selection from this week.

There was an article in New York Magazine about NYU Abu Dhabi, a satellite campus that opened in 2008. Their website says it was built because of "a common belief in the value of a liberal arts education" which isn't exactly something that comes to mind when I think of Middle Eastern states. It might have more to do with the $50 million NYU Chancellor Sexton pried from the UAE, a major reason Sexton is known as the Emir of NYU at it's New York City campus. What intrigues me is the new campus they are building on Saadiyat Island, a satellite of a satellite if you will, which is scheduled to open in 2014 and will be located next to the Louvre and Guggenheim, Abu Dhabi of course.

Last Sunday the Daily Mail ran a Piers Morgan interview with Lindsay Lohan. Normally I wouldn't have cared at all but the headline caught my eye so I saved it and ended up reading it. When I finished I quite literally pitied Lohan because the girl has absolutely no clue. In it she says she only did cocaine ‘four or five’ times, that rehab is a joke, and that she doesn't consider herself a heavy drinker. The interview than ran with copies of her six mugshots including the two for DUI. Morgan notes that the interview was done a few weeks before Lohan was scheduled to begin a new court ordered stay in rehab which will be at least her fifth visit in the past six years. Lohan also takes Adderall which, in my un-professional opinion, explains so much..

Also last Sunday The New York Times ran a story on the U.S. Supreme Court and how the Roberts' court could be remembered more for its pro-business decisions than upcoming social ones. It mentions a report in The Minnesota Law Review which ranked all the 36 SCOTUS justices since 1946 for their pro-business votes and found five of the current court's were in the top ten. It has all been very hush hush so you may not have noticed.

Along the same lines comes a column from The Huffington Post about warehouse workers who are suing Amazon over unpaid time, up to an hour, that they spend in security checkpoint lines at the end of their shifts. I love Amazon but maybe if they paid their workers a little bit more they wouldn't have to stop and frisk them on the way out. Amazon reported profits of $621 million in 2011, they reported an actual loss in 2012 but that was due to investing in new product lines.

So you see sometimes my thinking goes off in weirdly differing tangents. I didn't even mention that the Pulse Art Fair began yesterday or that the Frieze begins today.

Observations, Why Now?

Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer

The SCOTUS arguments made for an interesting week, interesting and thought provoking. I did a lot of reading, talking, and thinking about the subject because there was just so many opinions and articles out there. Everybody seems to have an opinion on same sex marriage now, it's an amazing thing to watch. One thing I know, you simply can not hear the forty year love story of Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer without tearing up. I suppose you can but than you probably don't understand what these arguments are all about. If you want to read about them this BuzzFeed article is a good place to start, "Meet The Hero Of The Marriage Equality Movement."

I have to be honest and say some of what I read has me stepping slightly back from what I said a couple days ago. While I still think Bill Clinton signing DOMA when it went against everything he stood for is political cowardice I can see where people have been evolving. One thing in particular has me saying that now and it's something I didn't realize before or I should say something I just learned. During the original 2008 Prop 8 vote the Mormon Church and it's members donated an estimated $20 million to help pass the measure. During the 'four state' campaign last year, that resulted in the first four same sex marriage wins at the ballot box, the church gave nothing. On one of its websites the church now says that homosexuality is not a choice. There is a good article on Reuters and if you dare the Mormon website is here.

The question quickly becomes why now? What suddenly changed over the past few years? The obvious first answer is demographics or, as someone said this week, everyday there are more of us and less of them. But demographics alone isn't an answer. What makes people, or a entire church, suddenly change it's mind about gays and same sex marriage?

There is another obvious answer but one I didn't think about until this week, one I didn't really hear discussed much until this week. Every day more and more gays come out of the closet. When I was in high school I sometimes felt like I was alone because I was the only out queer in my class. Not that many years later I know of a handful of others out in that very same class. Being the rebellious outsider sort I relished it at times but at other times I have to admit it did hurt so I'll always say having supportive parents made all the difference in the world. Just ten years later my sister's experiences were so very different than mine.

No matter what your moral, religious, or political thoughts on same sex marriage it's very hard to look a friend, family member, or co-worker in the eye and tell them that they shouldn't have the same rights as anybody else. That they shouldn't fall in love, shouldn't be allowed to have a family, that they shouldn't be allowed to marry. A perfect example is Republican Senator Rob Portman of Ohio who happens to be a GOP presidential hopeful and whose son is gay. On March 14 he announced that he now supported same sex marriage saying that his son was entitled to the same happiness that he and his wife share.

In 1978 Harvey Milk first gave what became known as his 'Hope Speech' at San Francisco's Gay Freedom Day Parade. "On this anniversary of Stonewall, I ask my gay sisters and brothers to make the commitment to fight. For themselves, for their freedom, for their country. We will not win our rights by staying quietly in our closets. We are coming out to fight the lies, the myths, the distortions. We are coming out to tell the truths about gays, for I am tired of the conspiracy of silence, so I'm going to talk about it. And I want you to talk about it. You must come out."

Makes so much more sense today.

Observations from the Coffee Shop 3.28

While I was reading some articles last night I found one on Gawker called "Cowardice As A Political Philosophy" that is very good and worth reading. It's about both the Iraq War and same sex marriage but includes a few paragraphs about Bill and Hillary Clinton that struck a nerve. Now I love the Clintons and I always will but what Nolan says is all too true and is also the politics of same sex marriage in a nutshell. In the end it doesn't always mean somebody needs to evolve on the issue.

"People like the Clintons - cosmopolitan, well traveled, well educated, well connected, and liberal - do not really believe that gay marriage is some great threat to America. They would no doubt laugh at the simple-minded odiousness of such a position, in private. But in public, they were all too happy to embrace it for their own political gain.

Bill Clinton signed into law an act which banned gay marriage, because he feared the political consequences of vetoing it. That is a fact. And it is disgusting. Hillary Clinton, like many of her peers, supported that act, and continued to oppose the right of gay people to marry up until just this year. That she supported "domestic partnerships," the most intellectually laughable attempt at a middle ground since the the Three-Fifths Compromise, only serves to expose her own hypocrisy more easily.

Let us be clear about what this is: this is an example of some of the most powerful people in America spitting upon the basic civil rights of a minority group in order to further their own political power. This is the opposite of courage. This is cowardice in all of its repulsive glory."

Observations 3.27

Upon further review, well, maybe I spoke too soon. I'm going to stand by what I wrote yesterday about the Supreme Court and Prop 8 because I still think the Obama "nine state" decision is one of the possible results. After listening to some of the audio I'm not so sure it's very likely. More likely seems that either the court simply dismisses the case entirely or agrees with the appellate court. Either result ends Prop 8 in California but doesn't effect the rest of the country. Listening to the audio you get the feeling that for the most part they wish it would just go away so maybe a dismissal. I don't know, I'm just thinking out loud.

As expected what Justice Kennedy thinks will be more important than the other justices, especially the ravings of a mad hatter like Scalia. Kennedy seems to be struggling with the issue, wanting to do what he knows is right but probably goes against his own personal beliefs. Justice Kennedy asked Charles Cooper, attorney for Prop 8, a question about the 40,000 children in California who just want their parents married, "the voice of those children is important in this case, don't you think?" Not wanting to say the children didn't matter Cooper evaded the question. Later Justice Kennedy was the first to bring up just dismissing the case while Chief Justice Roberts and Kennedy both questioned whether Prop 8 backers had any legal standing for defending it in court.

Cooper, responding to a question from Justice Sotomayor, fully admitted that, other than marriage, he could not think of any legal reason to treat gays differently than anyone else. I found this interesting because I didn't see it mentioned much in the media yesterday.

I guess we'll find out in June.

Today SCOTUS hears the DOMA arguments, again beginning at 10 AM, with audio and transcripts to follow in the early afternoon. My gut feeling prediction on this case is easy, DOMA is dead, especially if the court isn't going to broadly rule on the Prop 8 case.

update - Here are the links for both the audio and the written transcript from today's DOMA oral arguments at the Supreme Court. Also here are a pair of links to the Prop 8 and DOMA transcripts on the Oyez Project website. The Oyez Project is at the Chicago-Kent Law School and is a multimedia archive of SCOTUS cases. What makes these transcripts interesting is that they are searchable by word and by speaker. To search the transcript click on the 'oral argument' link near the bottom of each page.

Observations 3.26

At 10 AM this morning the Supreme Court of The United States will begin hearing arguments in California's Prop 8 case. They are scheduled to last one hour, give or take, with arguments in the DOMA case scheduled for Wednesday at the same time. Transcripts are supposed to be released no later than 2 PM both days and I'll pass along links when I have them. Decisions in both cases probably wont be announced until the end of the court's term which, one way or another, will make the end of June rather interesting. Not too any years ago I wondered if I would see legal same sex marriage across the country in my lifetime. Now, other than the flyover belt of the country, I wonder how soon I will see it become a reality. At the end of June I may just find out.

I thought I should throw my opinion out there before arguments start on the remote chance that at some point I'll be able to say I told you so.

The main argument against same sex marriage now comes down to that marriage is between a man and a woman because it "furthers society’s vital interests in responsible procreation and child rearing." That is it, that is their argument. Narrowly the worst case scenario is that the court takes the position that the constitution has no position on the issue thus leaving it completely to the states. It will in no way decide that same sex marriage is unconstitutional because it can't without destroying the right's beloved states rights position. This decision would allow Prop 8 to stand and set in motion a vote to repeal Prop 8 in a state where same sex marriage now is favored by 67% of the voters. In California it's only a matter of time.

The other extreme, and to me just as unlikely, is that the court makes some sweeping decision that hypothetically legalizes same sex marriage nationwide. In all honesty this may be worse than the worst case I just mentioned because, while a reason to celebrate, it would just crystallize opposition from every direction. At the same time this possibly the best result for the Republican Party. Anybody in the party with any kind of sense could walk away from a no win issue, than again this is the Republican Party where common sense is currently in a limited supply.

What remains are the two middle options where I think the decision will fall. The first possibility is to simply uphold the decision of the Ninth Court of Appeals which says California, or any other state, can't take away a gay persons right to marry once the state has given them that right. At the time of the Appeals Court's decision it was thought Judge Reinhardt wrote it with SCOTUS in mind. This is the easiest way for Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kennedy to rule in favor of same sex marriage in California and not have it effect the rest of the country. Along the same lines the court could simply dismiss the case allowing the Ninth's decision to stand as is.

But I think Roberts will do more as he did in ruling Obamacare was constitutional. John Roberts is a student of SCOTUS' history and sees his position as Chief Justice as caretaker of the court's legacy. With the rest of the government SCOTUS lives in a bubble but in the court's case it can be a very leaky bubble and public opinion has shifted twenty percent since 2008, Roberts knows this. Roberts also knows he will be on the court for a long time, he is 58, and probably doesn't want to be remembered for a decision that became meaningless while he was still on the court. It's probably just my gut feeling but I think Roberts and a majority of the court will go with the option favored by the Obama administration and rule that a state can't deny the word marriage to gays while granting them all the rights of marriage in civil unions. This decision would effect the states of California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Colorado.

History is a fickle thing but when its time comes nothing can stop it. Whatever the court decides I think history's time has come and sorry will be those on the wrong side of it. I just don't think John Roberts will be one of them.

update - Here is the link for the audio of this morning's Prop 8 hearing at the Supreme Court. The text should follow but I'm not sure when.

update 2 - I'm a little slow with this but here is the link to a pdf file of the hearing transcript. While I'm at it here is a link to SCOTUSblog which is a very good site to find out what is going on at the court.

Observations 3.21

Next Tuesday and Wednesday the Supreme Court will hear arguments on both California's Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. The court has announced that it will post audio recordings and transcripts on the SCOTUS website no later than 2 pm on those days.

Twelve year old Daniel's letter to Chief Justice Roberts ....

"My name is Daniel Martinez-Leffew. I'm 12 years old and I live in northern California. I have a younger sister named Salina, and we were adopted by two dads. We were adopted when I was five and my sister was about twelve months old. When I was in foster care I was told that I was considered unadoptable because of my Goldenhar syndrome. That is a genetic disorder that affects the whole left side of my body. I lost my little brother Emilio because some people wanted to adopt him, but they weren't willing to adopt me because of my medical conditions. Lucky for me, that's when my two dads came along.

I recently found out that you yourself adopted two kids, a boy and a girl, kind of like me and my sister.

Family means a lot of different things to a lot of different people, but some people believe that you have to have the same blood to be a family. You and I both know that family goes deeper than blood. I was lucky to be adopted by two guys I can both call dad. They give me and my sister so much love. My dad Jay works in San Francisco as a deputy sheriff, and my dad Bryan stays at home and takes care of me and my sister. My dads really encourage me to excel in life. Since I want to be a cook when I grow up, they're letting me take cooking classes. My parents want me to improve, whether it's schoolwork, or my social life.

I know you have a tough decision to make with the gay marriage issue, but my family is just as valuable and worthwhile as any other. It's especially tough for you because I know you don't necessarily believe in gay marriage religiously. Lucky for us, though, you also don't believe in taking away a right, even from people like us. My family and I have spent the last four years making YouTube videos to show people who don't understand that our family is like any other. If Prop 8 is allowed to stand, imagine the pain we would feel knowing that we are not considered equal to everyone else.

I guess to end this, it is important that all families are protected and valued. In our country we may not all be the same, but we are all Americans and deserve an equal chance at bettering our lives. I hope you make the right decision in the end."

link
Published on Mar 17, 2013

"So our kids know that Prop 8 is coming to the Supreme Court soon and that could be a very big deal for our family. When they found out that one of the Justices hearing the case had two adopted children, they said, "Hey! They're just like us!" And so, in a moment that made his dads very proud, Daniel decided to write a letter to Justice Roberts in the hopes that he will see that our families are not so different."

Observations from the Coffee Shop 2.28

Next week is Armory Week but the kids who play at politics in Washington just wont to get out of the way. I say play at politics because at the moment they seem more like spoiled brats on the playground than leaders of anything important. Tomorrow the sequester will take effect, yes will take effect, and the current debate centers more on whose idea it was than on how to deal with it. Even Wall Street may have finally said the hell with them as the stock market nears an all time record high. Of course eventually the cuts will be felt and we can all watch as it crashes back down. The only idea Republicans have is to give President Obama the authority to move the cuts around, in effect making all the cuts the President's, something he refuses to accept.

Elsewhere in the nation's capitol Senators for all practical purposes scolded police chiefs who support background checks for gun purchases. During the Senate Judiciary Committee Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham told the police chief of Milwaukee that the limited resources of police departments is a reason to bolster gun ownership and not limit it.

Also The Supreme Court, on the same day a statue of Rosa Parks was unveiled in the U.S. Capitol, announced it is considering part of the 1965 Voting Rights Act and whether there is still a need for an important part of it. The section SCOTUS will look at requires that states with a history of discrimination get approval before making changes to how they hold elections. Rather than try and explain it I'll leave this link to a good article in the Miami Herald.

Turning to the petty side of politics the wingnuts continue to snub New Jersey Governor Chris Christie by not inviting him to speak at CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference. Apparently the conservatives still blame Christie for President Obama's reelection and don't care that he is the only Republican with an approval rating, currently an unreal 74%, to rival Hillary Clinton's. To Christie's credit he said this; "So I didn't know that I hadn't been invited to CPAC until like two days ago when I saw it in the news. It’s not like I’m lacking for invitations to speak, both here or around the country, it’s not like I have a whole lot of openings in my schedule."

The current list of those speaking instead of Christie includes the winners Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Allen West, Rick Santorum, and Sarah Palin. As a bonus Wayne LaPierre will be speaking. Somehow the wingnuts see their losing past as the best hope for their winning future.

I have no words.

update - Barring any totally unforeseen and just as totally unexpected, changes the sequester games officially begin at 11:59 p.m. Friday. Why than? According to both sides, the White House and Republicans actually agree, President Obama can decide at what time to start the cuts. He just has to do it by 11:59 p.m. Friday.

Observations from the Window 2.20

In a little over a week the sequester returns. Sequester is a word that will go down i history as a euphemism for totally self-inflicted unnecessary economic pain on a national scale. It's also one of the reasons politics isn't exactly my favorite thing right now. While a majority of the American people worry about jobs the Republican party obsesses over spending cuts that will cut those jobs. You think letting the auto industry crash and burn would have hurt the economy watch the ripple effects of cutting government spending to the bone.*

A few examples off the top of my head. Police, fire, teachers, and EMT will see job cuts around the country. Those free national museums your'e going to visit in Washington? Closed. The national parks on your itinerary this summer? Closed. If you are flying anywhere get to the airport early because the TSA lines will be unreal then once you get through pray that lonely air traffic controller at the end of a double shift is awake. Oh and be careful what you buy at the grocery store because there wont be as many meat, fish, and poultry inspectors, not that there are nearly enough now. Worried about the border and immigration? Worry some more because there will be fewer border guards. Traveling overseas legally? You better have your passport because it will probably take longer to get one and when you return be ready for longer waits at customs.

The Pentagon will see massive, probably necessary, cuts but at all the wrong places. We can keep fighting our wars, because the cost of them is not in the budget, but wont be able to hold military funerals at Arlington or pay for prosthetic limbs for disabled veterans.

You get the idea, it goes on and on. The problem is Congress members will have none of these problems because a majority are rich anyway. They have the best healthcare in the world and pensions that set them up for life. I wont even get into the unlimited "campaign" contributions they now can take from corporations thanks to SCOTUS' Citizens United decision.

The hell I wont.

While you were out walking the dog or looking for a job SCOTUS quietly made a minor announcement yesterday. It seems they have decided to hear a case brought by our friends at the Republican National Committee. Some of the few election fiance controls remaining are the amount of money individuals can donate to a candidate, currently $2,000, and the total an individual can donate to all parties or candidates in any election cycle, currently $123,000. In a lower court decision Judge Janice Brown, one of the most conservative judges in the country, said that lifting these limits would corrupt the system even more than it now is.** Not good enough for the GOP, they may be fiscally conservative when it comes to spending on you but they themselves want to drown in cash. The Supreme Court that gave them Citizens United is probably about to let them.

Was there another time in American history where an entire political party didn't care about anything but cold hard cash?

* OMB Report Pursuant to the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012

** Shaun McCutcheon, et al., v. Federal Election Commission 

2/21 update - Yesterday USA Today had a good article about the effects the sequester would have on air travel. Each member of the FAA's work force will be furloughed one day out of every two weeks while customs employees will be off 12 to 14 days each over the course of the year. Taken together all the cuts will add up to three hours to the time it will take to get through an airport before and after an international flight. Also the Department of Defense announced 800,000 civilian employees will be laid-off should the cuts take effect. So much for the Republican Party's caring about jobs. The sequester could add two percentage points to the unemployment rate.

Observations from the Window 1.24

It has been a fun couple of days to be a progressive/liberal/gay/woman or any one of the above. On Monday we had President Obama's Inaugural speech and than yesterday Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified to Congress on the tragedy in Benghazi, Libya. After seven hours of testimony nobody was talking about what she said but what an awesome job she had done and how bad some of the wingnuts looked. Clinton looked every bit one of the most popular politicians in the country that she currently is. Confident, intelligent, at times emotional, she made a woman proud.

But enough before I get too serious because this is going to be an almost comedic post. I just wanted to share some of the things I have heard coming out of cloud coo coo land because, to quote Rush Limbaugh, "it's a puke fest out there." For the first time, and in all probability the last, I have to agree with him.

In his Inaugural speech President Obama mentioned gays for the first time in an Inaugural and he also mentioned Stonewall. On Fox Pat Buchanan asked "What was he talking about? Stonewall. That's a barroom brawl in Greenwich Village in 1969, when cops were hassling gays and their bar, and the gays fought back and threw them all out. Does that belong in a presidential inaugural?" As Jon Stewart later remarked yes that was Pat Buchanan for the wrong side of history.

During the Clinton testimony wingnut Senator Rand Paul said this; "I think that ultimately, with you leaving, that you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that. Had I been president at the time and I had found that you had not read the cables from Benghazi, you had not read the cables from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post. I think it’s inexcusable." I wont get into what dreamworld Paul lives in to think he would ever be president but I do wonder why 4 dead in Libya qualifies as the worst tragedy since 9/11 and not the deaths of over 4,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan. I should also add that in 2011 Paul proposed cutting the State Department's budget by 70%.

There are so many more of these I could post from Wisconsin wingnut Ron Johnson suggesting Clinton should have just called Benghazi on the phone to find out what was going to NRA President Wayne LaPierre quoting one of the more liberal justices in the history of the Supreme Court. In a totally unnecessary rebuttal to the President's speech LaPierre quoted Hugo Black as saying that there were absolutes in the Constitution that couldn't be debated. LaPierre didn't mention that Black had specified the second amendment as one of the exceptions to that rule.

One of the few politicians as popular as Hillary Clinton is New  Jersey Governor Chris Christie. Again I give you Senator Paul this time on the N.J. Governor and again showing why he will never be president. "I think criticizing the Second Amendment movement and the over the top ‘give me my money’ stuff, ’I want all 60 billion now or I’ll throw a tantrum,' I don’t think that’s going to play well in the Republican primary."

Why do I love politics? The thought of a Rand Paul - Chris Christie debate is all the reason I need.

update - My brother reminded me that Senator Johnson was the same Johnson who as a Senate candidate said of global warming, "I absolutely do not believe in the science of man caused climate change. It's not proven by any stretch of the imagination." In the same interview he also described believers in man made causes of climate change as crazy and "it's far more likely that it's just sunspot activity or just something in the geologic eons of time."

Observations from the Coffee Shop 12.7

I'm hoping to finish an art post later today but I have a few updates to throw out here. The first is just a link to a list of the 38 Senators who voted against the U.N. disabilities treaty, The List: The 38 Senators Who Voted Against The Disabled. As David Badash wrote with the list, "If there is a Hell, these 38 just earned some frequent flyer miles toward a long-term stay there."

by Meryl Schenker

In some better news yesterday was the first day same sex couples could get a marriage licence in Washington and a lesbian couple who had been together 35 years was the first, getting theirs in Seattle just after midnight. They might not have been the first but this couple, 56 year old Larry Duncan and 48 year old Randy Shepherd, certainly has left the most memorable photo of the day. If these two don't become the new poster guys for gay marriage I don't think anybody should. The first day same sex couples can get a marriage licence in Maine is December 29^th and January 1^st is the first day in Maryland.

Finally I know what I said just yesterday about those end of the year lists but this one is just awesome. From BuzzFeed LGBT comes the 60 Reasons to be Proud in 2012. Number has 14 the best photo and number 31 is the best fact but you're going to have to go look yourself.

For now it's back to waiting for those first infallible papal tweets. I can't wait. Happy Friday.

update - The Supreme Court decided today it would hear cases involving both DOMA and California's Prop 8. The DOMA case wasn't surprising because a federal court had ruled a federal law unconstitutional so SCOTUS has the final say. Prop 8 is the surprising one, what they could ultimately decide is whether or not a state can take away a right once it is given. The problem with that is if they say yes same sex marriage is never totally safe. All very confusing but the cases will probably not be heard until maybe March.

Observations 11.26

Originally the Supreme Court was to announce on November 20^th whether or not it would hear cases on California's Prop 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Instead it announced a ten day delay in that decision which could be good or bad, who knows. If the court decides not to rule on the Prop 8 case, much more likely than not ruling on DOMA, the Ninth Circuit ruling will stand, Prop 8 will be viewed as unconstitutional, and California will become the tenth state in which same-sex couples can legally marry.

This ad began airing yesterday during the Sunday morning news shows. Such a voice ....

Dawn of a New Day for Marriage Equality


link

Published on Nov 24, 2012 by hrcmedia
Freedom, justice, and human dignity have always guided our journey for a more perfect union. With historic victories for marriage, we've delivered a mandate for full equality. The wind is at our back, but the journey has just begun.

Please Vote

When I first voted in the Village a few years ago I was a little uncomfortable, I was never quite sure why. Either it was a feeling I didn't belong there or the fact that after years of voting in a firehouse I was now voting in St. Anthony's Church, it just didn't seem right. I was up early today to vote before the lines got too long and I didn't have that feeling at all but I was uncomfortable for another reason. After a seemingly endless campaign it's finally over but I'm not sure a majority of Americans have any idea what it was about or just how important this election is. The winner of today will in all likelihood appoint more than one Supreme Court Justice, four of the current justices are 74 or more years old, and decide the direction of this country for generations to come. The addition of just one more conservative member to the court would completely tip the balance of the court and women, minorities, and the poor could say goodbye to any rights they once had.

So please go vote, it really is that important.

For the record I voted for President Obama and Senator Gillibrand.

Observations on the 2012 Election 10.3

Tonight is the first of three debates between Willard and President Obama as the Presidential election campaign enters its final phase. No matter what the talking heads on both sides say I have to wonder just how important this phase is. Early voting has already begun in seven states, the latest being the all important Ohio where it began yesterday. Still a committed political geek can't help but be excited if just for the debate's entertainment value. The entertainment started early when poor Willard couldn't even get his campaign through debate prep without messing up. It was leaked by his handlers that during debate prep Willard had been given a bag full of 'zingers' to use on the President. This is nothing new, unless they are literally talking about twinkies, but you aren't supposed to announce it ahead of time. It's supposed to at least seem like the candidate came up with them on his own.

Something sure to be debated after the election is the effect that the billions of dollars poured into the campaigns by corporations had. This is the first Presidential election since the United States Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case in 2010. The Court, in a 5-4 decision, said that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations or, as Willard himself put it, corporations are people my friend. It just doesn't seem to be having the effect the Repubes and wingnuts wanted but it still needs to be overturned, something that should be high on any list of possible legislation for an Obama second term.

The dissenting opinion was written by Justice John Stevens who showed how strongly he felt by actually reading a large part of it from the bench. Stevens than retired as the third longest serving justice in the history of the court. Below are a pair of excerpts from that opinion, if you are brave, bored, or just a total political fool like me you can read the complete opinion here.

"In the context of election to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office. Because they may be managed and controlled by nonresidents, their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The financial resources, legal structure, and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process. Our lawmakers have a compelling constitutional basis, if not also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard against the potentially deleterious effects of corporate spending in local and national races....

At bottom, the Court's opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics."

If you got this far thanks for reading and that concludes today's lesson. Don't forget, the circus begins tonight at 9 PM Eastern.