Saturday, November 08, 2008
WHAT IS THIS?
Oh wait -I know I know! Correct me if I'm mistaken but it looks like it's a presidential press conference with a president who knows what the F$%k he's talking about and can actually string a sentence together!
I'd forgotten what that looked like.
Aaaahhh.
Thursday, November 06, 2008
HALLELUJAH! / OH NO!
President Barack Hussein Obama.
Wow.
Just wow.
It's still settling-in how significant this is.
I was reading headlines from foreign newspapers yesterday and the overwhelming feeling from the rest of the world seems to be a huge sigh of relief. As though the rest of the world is thinking "Oh thank God, America is back". After all we are in many ways like the world's big-brother (one of them at least -the favorite one?) and I don't mean that in an Orwellian way -that's how the Bush administration sees it- I mean it more literally. The last 8 years must seem like the first time you see your big brother do something that horribly embarrasses you.
The margin of victory for Obama has proven to the world that we weren't irretrievably lost, just ill for a time, and that the very freedoms we champion allow for the possibility that unsavory elements can rise to power. Let us take that lesson to heart, as we did after the McCarthy era, and be vigilant against it.
The sentiment domestically has come to be that finally we can begin the new millennium.
*********************************************************************
Sadly, here in California the tears of joy were mixed with tears of anguish as the bigoted proposition 8, which bans gay marriage and overturns a state supreme court decision interpreting the California constitution to allow and protect it, passed.
The haters after several tries finally figured out that they couldn't simply pass the ban in CA via statute, and they were right -any statute that discriminates against a classification of people and denies them rights available and protected for other people can't withstand judicial scrutiny without a compelling (dire) or at least important reason -and no, offense to a religious moral code doesn't qualify. Therefore they had to amend the state constitution because amending the constitution means that the statute becomes a part of the constitution and therefore cannot -by definition- be unconstitutional.
Interesting too the historical timeline of the "enlightenment" of these troglodytes: First they passed the federal Defense Of Marriage Act which has only stood for as long as it has because the majority on the SCOTUS has refused to take up the issue. The reason for that is that the precedent is so clear that if they did take up the issue they would either have to allow gays to marry or ignore the entire history of Equal Rights Jurisprudence in this country which would tar their legacy forever and make them look like idiots for antiquity. As long as they can the majority 5 jackbooted thugs on the SCOTUS will therefore ignore the issue.
The bigots however realized that their days are numbered (and a look at the poll results this week confirms the writing on the wall: overwhelmingly voters under 35 voted NO.) so they began working toward a federal Constitutional amendment. The problem is that the Founders were too smart for them and made it exceedingly difficult to change the Constitution without overwhelming support. The Federal Constitution cannot be amended unless 2/3rds of BOTH houses pass the amendment and it is then ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures. Interestingly, the bigots having grasped the enormity of their task, suddenly embraced federalism and opined that it is an issue best left to the individual states.
Which brings us to today: The bigots have now passed a constitutional amendment to the California constitution banning gay marriage which means that the measure cannot be stricken down as unconstitutional.
But not so fast.
A few lawsuits have been initiated against the validity of the initiative and they appear pretty solid. I have to admit that I was pretty shocked at first to find out that the state constitution could be amended so easily -by a simple majority vote on a ballot initiative. The founders warned against a "pure" democracy because it could lead to a tyranny of the majority, and therefore placed protections for the minority into the Constitution and Bill of Rights. A simple majority is too easy to achieve and amending a constitution shouldn't be so easy.
However is appears that my concern has already been addressed: The California constitution CAN be amended via the initiative process for little stuff, but NOT for things that would majorly change the underlying principles under which it was organized. Major changes to the underlying principles of the CA constitution must pass by 2/3 in both state houses AND THEN they can go before the voters. Protecting the rights of minorities is a major principle under which the CA constitution was organized therefore simply putting it on the ballot is improper.
Moreover prop 8 bypasses the Courts and therefore deprives them of performing their essential function of protecting those same minority rights. This is a MAJOR change in the way the courts and the government function in CA and therefore cannot be determined by a ballot initiative which only requires a simple majority.
Additionally I think the CA Supreme Court is going to be a little pissed that their decision was given an end-around by a bunch of out of state religious and in-state wingnut groups and will have a serious desire to slap them back and strike it down. And BTW we need to have a serious discussion in this state about whether we want to continue to allow out-of-state groups to meddle in our state affairs with their money.
So the good news is that this isn't over -not by a long shot, and Jerry Brown the CA Attorney General has stated that the marriages that were performed before the ban are still legal and valid.
**********************************************************************************
Back to the WOW!
Wow.
Just wow.
It's still settling-in how significant this is.
I was reading headlines from foreign newspapers yesterday and the overwhelming feeling from the rest of the world seems to be a huge sigh of relief. As though the rest of the world is thinking "Oh thank God, America is back". After all we are in many ways like the world's big-brother (one of them at least -the favorite one?) and I don't mean that in an Orwellian way -that's how the Bush administration sees it- I mean it more literally. The last 8 years must seem like the first time you see your big brother do something that horribly embarrasses you.
The margin of victory for Obama has proven to the world that we weren't irretrievably lost, just ill for a time, and that the very freedoms we champion allow for the possibility that unsavory elements can rise to power. Let us take that lesson to heart, as we did after the McCarthy era, and be vigilant against it.
The sentiment domestically has come to be that finally we can begin the new millennium.
*********************************************************************
Sadly, here in California the tears of joy were mixed with tears of anguish as the bigoted proposition 8, which bans gay marriage and overturns a state supreme court decision interpreting the California constitution to allow and protect it, passed.
The haters after several tries finally figured out that they couldn't simply pass the ban in CA via statute, and they were right -any statute that discriminates against a classification of people and denies them rights available and protected for other people can't withstand judicial scrutiny without a compelling (dire) or at least important reason -and no, offense to a religious moral code doesn't qualify. Therefore they had to amend the state constitution because amending the constitution means that the statute becomes a part of the constitution and therefore cannot -by definition- be unconstitutional.
Interesting too the historical timeline of the "enlightenment" of these troglodytes: First they passed the federal Defense Of Marriage Act which has only stood for as long as it has because the majority on the SCOTUS has refused to take up the issue. The reason for that is that the precedent is so clear that if they did take up the issue they would either have to allow gays to marry or ignore the entire history of Equal Rights Jurisprudence in this country which would tar their legacy forever and make them look like idiots for antiquity. As long as they can the majority 5 jackbooted thugs on the SCOTUS will therefore ignore the issue.
The bigots however realized that their days are numbered (and a look at the poll results this week confirms the writing on the wall: overwhelmingly voters under 35 voted NO.) so they began working toward a federal Constitutional amendment. The problem is that the Founders were too smart for them and made it exceedingly difficult to change the Constitution without overwhelming support. The Federal Constitution cannot be amended unless 2/3rds of BOTH houses pass the amendment and it is then ratified by 3/4 of the state legislatures. Interestingly, the bigots having grasped the enormity of their task, suddenly embraced federalism and opined that it is an issue best left to the individual states.
Which brings us to today: The bigots have now passed a constitutional amendment to the California constitution banning gay marriage which means that the measure cannot be stricken down as unconstitutional.
But not so fast.
A few lawsuits have been initiated against the validity of the initiative and they appear pretty solid. I have to admit that I was pretty shocked at first to find out that the state constitution could be amended so easily -by a simple majority vote on a ballot initiative. The founders warned against a "pure" democracy because it could lead to a tyranny of the majority, and therefore placed protections for the minority into the Constitution and Bill of Rights. A simple majority is too easy to achieve and amending a constitution shouldn't be so easy.
However is appears that my concern has already been addressed: The California constitution CAN be amended via the initiative process for little stuff, but NOT for things that would majorly change the underlying principles under which it was organized. Major changes to the underlying principles of the CA constitution must pass by 2/3 in both state houses AND THEN they can go before the voters. Protecting the rights of minorities is a major principle under which the CA constitution was organized therefore simply putting it on the ballot is improper.
Moreover prop 8 bypasses the Courts and therefore deprives them of performing their essential function of protecting those same minority rights. This is a MAJOR change in the way the courts and the government function in CA and therefore cannot be determined by a ballot initiative which only requires a simple majority.
Additionally I think the CA Supreme Court is going to be a little pissed that their decision was given an end-around by a bunch of out of state religious and in-state wingnut groups and will have a serious desire to slap them back and strike it down. And BTW we need to have a serious discussion in this state about whether we want to continue to allow out-of-state groups to meddle in our state affairs with their money.
So the good news is that this isn't over -not by a long shot, and Jerry Brown the CA Attorney General has stated that the marriages that were performed before the ban are still legal and valid.
**********************************************************************************
Back to the WOW!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
