In Memory of Memorial Day

I admit to never knowing much how to celebrate Memorial Day. I often go to church on the Sunday of Memorial Day weekend, and will attend a picnic or barbeque, but only if invited. When I was a kid, I would sometimes wander the cemeteries close to my house on the Monday of that long weekend, and just look around. But, no celebration at my house – which is actually quite unusual, since I take every opportunity to have a party.

So no, I have never come quite to terms with how to pay homage to those – and the families of those, who have paid the ultimate price in service to country. To those who placed duty, above all. And to those who continue to do so, in this insane world we live in.

Bless them, all.



Peace.

Gay Marriage and My Pet Peeve

Things are really heating up in the debate over gay marriage in New York State. Eight State Senators are undecided, and it looks like the legislation needs six more votes to pass.

The words of State Senator Greg Ball, R-Carmel, Putnam County:

Ball opposed same-sex marriage as an assemblyman, but now says he's reconsidering his position as a first-year senator. Ball wants any legislation to include protections for religious organizations if they refuse to recognize same-sex marriage.

"I really want to see real religious carve-outs that protect the church and other religious institutions, as well as a clear division defined in the bill between civil marriage and religious marriage," Ball said.

The current bill, which has been introduced in the Assembly but not the Senate, would not compel the clergy to solemnize a same-sex marriage. But Ball said the language should be stronger.

I am of course, thrilled that Sen. Ball is reconsidering his position. But it is beyond me to understand how any public servant, educated in the civic process could actually believe a church could be forced to solemnize a same-sex marriage. Or any marriage, for that matter.

Just because I love St. Patrick’s cathedral and might think it’s cool to get married there, I highly doubt the Archbishop of New York would agree to solemnize the marriage of this non-Catholic. Rabbis traditionally refuse to perform interfaith weddings. Clergy all over this country refuse to perform any number weddings, all the time. They are already protected in their ability to do so. It would be no different for the Catholic priest to refuse to perform a same-sex marriage, as it would have been for a rabbi to refuse to solemnize my marriage.

Same goes for the division between civil marriage and religious marriage. Sorry folks, but marriage in this country is a civil institution, and religious folks should be happy about that. It is precisely what keeps them from having to perform religious rites when they don't see fit. I am married NOT because my wonderful minister said some beautiful words 11 years ago in front of my family and friends, but because the state gave me a license to wed. He could have said all he wanted, over and over and over again – if I had not been granted a license by a civic authority, none of it would have mattered.

I like to think the politicians we elect are smart enough to know all this stuff.

But, I guess if we have to reiterate the obvious in written law sometimes, even in a society where separation of church in state in paramount – so be it. If it gets us marriage equality, it’s worth it in the long run.

But it’s still my intellectual pet peeve.

The Magic Button

From Joe Walsh (R-IL), Congressional freshman.  Because after all, it's so easy for black men to get elected to the presidency of the United States.  There have been so many of them.

"Why was he elected? Again, it comes back to who he was. He was black, he was historic. And there's nothing racist about this. It is what it is. If he had been a dynamic, white, state senator elected to Congress he wouldn't have gotten in the game this fast. This is what made him different. That, combined with the fact that your profession"—another friendly tap of the bumper sticker—"not you, but your profession, was just absolutely compliant. They made up their minds early that they were in love with him. They were in love with him because they thought he was a good liberal guy and they were in love with him because he pushed that magical button: a black man who was articulate, liberal, the whole white guilt, all of that."

Unfortunately, there are lots of Republicans who agree with the good Congressman. And it shows just how out of touch these Republicans are with America.  They have no idea how much it took for America to elect someone with Barack Obama's profile.  They have no idea what the "hope" Obama offered to this country, meant to the average American.  They have no idea how much good will this country gave him, not just because of what he said, but precisely because of who he is.

The Man From Texas

Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) is all over the news this morning, as another possible-Republican-Presidential-2012-nominee-wannabe.

Just a sample:

Is he running?

He is thinking about running.

Yes, he is running.

He says he is not running.

No, he is not running.

He’s another in a long line of “good candidate, but bad President,” Texas-style. Great piece.

Why would someone who suggested Texas might want to secede from the US, want to be President, anyway?

On, and on, and on.

The Personal and the Political: The Gay Marriage Edition

Sometimes, I really hate that the personal is indeed, political. I wish our leaders would do the right thing just for the sake of doing the right thing, not because they are suddenly touched personally by an issue.

But, as I get older I have decided to look at so many issues I have believed are essentially political, through a more human set of eyes. Here is NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, on gay marriage in New York state. The emphasis is mine:

In a speech on an issue that is roiling the State Legislature, Mayor Bloomberg declared that he could “see the pain that the status quo is causing — and I cannot defend it.” And he said that New York, as the birthplace of the gay rights movement, should live up to its reputation as a beacon of freedom and tolerance.

“We are the freest city in the freest country in the world — but freedom is not frozen in time,” he said to a audience in downtown Manhattan.

It was an unusually personal address from a mayor known for dispassionate number crunching and policy analysis. Mr. Bloomberg was introduced by a niece, Rachel Tiven, who is gay. In his speech, he said that he had grown tired of trying to explain to gay friends, relatives, and staff members why the government is denying them the right to wed.

“I cannot tell them that marriage is not for them,” he said at Cooper Union, which was founded by an abolitionist, Peter Cooper.

I remember many years ago -- 1998, to be exact -- when then-New York Senator Alfonse D'Amato got the endorsement of the Human Rights Campaign in his reelection campaign against now sitting Democratic Senator Charles Shumer.  It was all about what the large, gay rights organization considered to be his good record on gay issues.  My immigrant mother was absolutely convinced there was NO WAY someone like D'Amato could have come to be pro-gay rights all by himself.  Simply because it was the right way to be.  She was insistent it had to be because someone he loved and cared about had come out of the closet.  And that this was a not-a-very-good-thing.  Not good public policy, so to say.  Basing political decisions, on personal happenstance.

I suspect that is not the case with Mayor Bloomberg.  But it has got me thinking about it all today, nonetheless.

This Day in Labor History

Just as a County Circuit Judge struck down Wisconsin's controversial collective bargaining law today, the Maine state legislature has revised a "right to work" bill.

From Wisconsin:

Ruling that Republicans in the State Senate had violated the state’s open meetings law, a judge in Wisconsin dealt a blow to them and to Gov. Scott Walker on Thursday by granting a permanent injunction striking down a new law curbing collective bargaining rights for many state and local employees.

Judge Maryann Sumi of Dane County Circuit Court said the Senate vote on March 9, coming after 13 Democratic state senators had fled the state, failed to comply with an open meetings law requiring at least two hours notice to the public.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments in the case on June 6 , and Republican lawmakers are hoping that the court overturns Judge Sumi’s ruling and reinstates the law.

From Maine, thanks to Rachel Maddow:

In Maine, the state legislature has revised a bill that would make membership in a public-employees union optional. They call it "right to work," and there's no finer way to siphon power from unions and drive wages down -- that's why business interests want these laws and union workers hate them. Indiana Republicans gave up on a "right to work" bill this year rather than pick this particular fight.

But in Maine, a "right to work" bill has just come back around on the fast track, the Lewiston Sun-Journal reports. Governor LePage has been negotiating with school and other state workers -- weakening their unions now would help him. "It's the continuation of the anti-worker sentiment of this governor, from the labor mural to child labor laws," Chris Quint of the Maine State Employees Union tells the paper. "We're going to fight this thing every step of the way."

 Let's hope that as Maine goes, does-not-go-the-nation.

Arizona in the News

I am with the Supreme Court on this one. It's time those with the money, power and control be held to their responsibility. Nothing will change until this happens.  And no, I don't think it's a stretch.  The emphasis is mine:

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that Arizona may revoke the business licenses of companies that knowingly employ illegal immigrants, rejecting arguments that the state’s law intrudes on the federal government’s power to control immigration.

The court ruled 5 to 3 that Congress specifically allowed states such an option, and dismissed the objections of an unusual coalition that challenged the state law: the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, civil rights groups, labor unions and the Obama administration.

The 1986 federal Immigration Reform and Control Act generally preempts states from using employer sanctions to control immigration. But Arizona took advantage of a parenthetical clause in the statute — “other than through licensing and similar laws” — to go after companies that knowingly and intentionally hired undocumented workers.

And let's not forget that this ruling has nothing to do with the more recent law that would see police stopping people to question their immigration status.  That case may indeed reach the Supreme Court soon.

See Sarah Run

UPDATE:  The multi-city tour, to begin!

Sarah Palin, in the news. A lot, this week.

Rumors abound that she has bought a house in the lower-48, perhaps to serve as the base for a 2012 Republican Presidential nomination campaign.

Palin’s plans have become the subject of recent and furious speculation following reports that she and her husband Todd have purchased an 8,000 sq. ft. house for about $1.7 million in Scottsdale, Ariz., one that could be used as a national campaign base. (Good thing TLC's “Sarah Palin’s Alaska” was canceled—or that could be awkward.)

Then, there is Sarah Palin -- the movie. Called nothing less than, The Undefeated.

It might just be Sarah Palin's last chance to re-establish herself as a viable presidency candidate ahead of the 2012 US elections in the wake of a disastrous PR run. A new film commissioned by Palin, the former governor of Alaska, will present her as a Joan of Arc-like figure beset at every turn by vicious leftwing enemies seeking to thwart her ambition of reviving the conservative legacy of Ronald Reagan.

The Undefeated has been shot by rightwing film-maker Steven K Bannon, who met the documentary's $1m costs from his own pocket. Palin initially reached out to the director with the aim of recruiting him to work on videos pushing her cause, but Bannon offered to make a feature-length film instead.

Rife with religious imagery, the movie will chart Palin's rise from Alaskan "soccer mom" to vice-presidential candidate. Drawing on content from Palin's book Going Rogue: An American Life, which has sold more than 2m copies, the film will seek to explain her decision to step down as governor of Alaska following her unsuccessful run alongside John McCain in 2008.

"This film is a call to action for a campaign like 1976: Reagan v the establishment," Bannon told the RealClearPolitics website. "Let's have a good old-fashioned brouhaha."

The film will debut in Iowa, with plans to take it on the road to New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada.

Then, there is the case of Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin: A Memoir of Our Tumultuous Years.  It's a tell-all book written by Frank Bailey, a former campaign worker and Palin administration official who paints quite an unflattering picture of the former Governor. Most interesting is the fact that the book draws upon tens of thousands of e-mails from her time in Alaska.  Watch the CNN interview with the author.



Houses bought. Movies made. Books written. None of this will change the views people already have of Sarah Palin. From now on, anything she says or does will only serve to re-enforce opinions Americans already have of her.  And this is true whether she is indeed running for President, or doing this all in order to garner attention for some other reason(s).

Happy (Belated) Birthday, Bob Dylan!

The last video, I promise.



Happy Birthday, nonetheless.

Not in Kansas, Anymore

Does it get any worse for us, than this?

During a recent debate over a bill that would make it necessary for women to buy separate, abortion-only insurance policies to cover the expensive procedure, some Kansas lawmakers questioned whether it was realistic to expect women to prepare in advance for a rape or an unplanned pregnancy.

Rep. Pete Degraaf (R-Mulvane), in response, compared an accidental pregnancy to a flat tire.

"We do need to plan ahead, don't we, in life?" said Degraaf during the House debate. "I have a spare tire on my car."

Someone really, really, really needs to tell me how to prepare in advance for an unwanted pregnancy that results from rape.

All Things Irish

I couldn't help myself, given that despite all evidence to the contrary, I am convinced I am Irish in there, somewhere.



And indeed, like President Obama, I hope the future of Ireland is brighter than her present.  I am in the middle of reading Ship of Fools, Fintan O'Toole's excellent reporting on how the Celtic Tiger was dragged down by lies, short-term thinking, corruption and sheer stupidity.  If you are interested, Tom Ashbrook interviewed the author on his WBUR radio show On Point, last year.  Worth a listen, here.

NY-26: Pundit Round-Up

So. Was last night’s Democratic victory in solidly Republican NY-26 all about Medicare, or the Tea Party? Or somewhere in between?

A sampling.

John Nichols at The Nation:  Despite the fact that Kathy Hochul started out a terrific candidate, her campaign was going nowhere until Paul Ryan and Medicare vouchers came into the picture.

David Weigel at Slate: The Republicans were a total mess, starting with the demise and resignation of the sitting Republican Congressman, and continuing into their choice of candidate and the continued presence of self-professed Tea Partier, Jack Davis.

Chuck Todd and The First Read folks over at MSNBC strike a balance:

2012 won’t be just like 2010: Of course, it’s important not to make too much out of a single special election; after all, Democrats won a majority of last cycle’s special elections, but got crushed in the midterms. And, of course, Davis’ third-party candidacy played a role (Dems wouldn’t have played in the race without him). But you also can’t dismiss last night’s outcome. Hochul’s 47% in this essentially three-way race outperformed Obama’s 46% in this district in 2008. The GOP outside group American Crossroads acknowledged this reality of the NY-26 race: “What is clear is that this election is a wake-up call for anyone who thinks that 2012 will be just like 2010. It’s going to be a tougher environment, Democrats will be more competitive, and we need to play at the top of our game to win big next year.”

John McCormack at The Weekly Standard agrees that while it’s always good to win a seat in the House, there is a much-ado-about-nothing sense going on here:

So, for all the attempts by Democrats and many news reporters to spin this race as a referendum on Medicare reform, Republican scandal and division in this race make NY-26 a poor test case. I think Charlie Cook's analysis from last week still holds true: "[I]mplying that the outcome of this race portends anything about any conventional race next year amounts to cheap spin and drive-by 'analysis' of the most superficial kind, which is sadly becoming all too prevalent in Washington. There are a lot of folks in D.C. who would be well-served switching to decaf."

And finally, Chris Cillizza and friends at The Washington Post:  A reminder that Independents continue to be extremely dissatisfied with politics as usual, and wonders if Democrats will re-take the house in another wave election.

For my part, in thinking about whether Kathy Hochul can hold on to the district, I think it’s extremely important that Jack Davis was kept to single digits.  The race to keep the seat in 2012, starts today.  That is, if the district continues to exist, when New York state loses two seats to redistricting.

The Rapture, Take Two (Or Three, Or Four...)

We do indeed, still have the rapture to look forward to:

Good news for Rapture lovers! The world is going to end after all – only it's going to take a little longer than predicted.

Harold Camping, architect of Saturday's dramatic events in which Judgment Day came and went without so much as an earthquake, has revealed what went wrong. He took to his show on his network Family Radio to reveal the simple truth: the Apocalypse was imminent, he'd just been out by five months. So now the world is going to end– really and truly this time – on 21 October.

Here's to enjoying the wait.



Since I live just a few towns over from the home of Harold Camping's Family Radio, I will let you all know as soon as the new billboards start springing up.

On The Social Contract

Whatever small ways this country has historically understood government and its citizens as being in right relationship with each other, are slowly disappearing.  This, from House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-VA:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said Monday that if Congress passes an emergency spending bill to help Missouri's tornado victims, the extra money will have to be cut from somewhere else.

"If there is support for a supplemental, it would be accompanied by support for having pay-fors to that supplemental," Mr. Cantor, Virginia Republican, told reporters at the Capitol. The term "pay-fors" is used by lawmakers to signal cuts or tax increases used to pay for new spending. 

 And this, from Georgia. The emphasis is mine:

WASHINGTON -- Rep. Rob Woodall, a Georgia Republican, made a vigorous ideological defense of ending Medicare as it currently exists, telling seniors at a local town hall that they ought not look to the government to provide health care for the elderly just because their private employer doesn't offer health benefits for retirees.

A Woodall constituent raised a practical obstacle to obtaining coverage in the private market within the confines of an employer-based health insurance system: What happens when you retire?

"The private corporation that I retired from does not give medical benefits to retirees," the woman told the congressman in video captured a local Patch reporter in Dacula, Ga.

"Hear yourself, ma'am. Hear yourself," Woodall told the woman. "You want the government to take care of you, because your employer decided not to take care of you. My question is, 'When do I decide I'm going to take care of me?'"

Watch.  If you can bear it.



It's all about ME.  ME. ME. ME. ME. ME.  

Empowering Grandmas in NY-26

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) went on Fox News Sunday this weekend, interviewed by Chris Wallace. Some of his views on Medicare. The transcript is here.  The emphasis is mine.

WALLACE: Well, I wouldn't say it's subtle. But, question -- what do you think of the Ryan plan on Medicare?

MCCONNELL: Well, what Paul has done here is implement a premium support proposal at the end of the period, which is a very sensible way to go to try to save Medicare...  So, let's just stipulate that nobody is trying to throw grandma off the cliff. Medicare is in serious trouble, serious trouble, and soon. The president would ration care, which will adversely impact grandma.

What Paul Ryan would do is to empower grandma in the private market, to shop and get the best possible deal. But regardless of which approach you take, Medicare is going to change or it won't be there for anyone.

Because after all, EVERY grandma I know can't wait to get into the private market to get the best deal on health insurance.  No, your average grandma doesn't have enough to worry about in her every day life.  And there is never enough empowerment in America, anyway.

Today is the special election in NY-26, a heavily Republican district that may go Democratic tonight.

This district actually voted for Republican (and Tea Partier) Carl Paladino in last November's governor's race, when Andrew Cuomo beat him with 62% of the vote statewide.  It's close, close, close.  Some think it may come down Medicare. From today's Buffalo News:

The campaign for the special election in the 26th Congressional District ended Monday much as it began -- mired in squabbling over the future of Medicare.

And with the debate about Medicare continuing to affect the tight three-way race, one-time Republican front-runner Jane L. Corwin acknowledged that she would have addressed the issue earlier and differently if she had it to do over again.

"I probably would have addressed the Medicare message -- coming out at my opponents -- quicker," Corwin said in response to a reporter's question at the Amherst Senior Center.

"I have to admit that when she started making these comments, I thought these are so outrageous that probably no one would ever believe it," she said, referring to Democratic opponent Kathleen C. Hochul.

"Apparently some people did."

So, we are left to see today how many grandmas in NY-26 will vote to empower themselves in the private market and shop for the best possible deal they can get on health insurance.  The country is awaiting the outcome.

Happy (Real) Birthday, Bob Dylan

70, today!



Enjoy!

Mitch Daniels, Out

One more 2012-Republican-presidential-nominee-maybe-wannabe, out of the race.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels told supporters early Sunday morning that he has decided not to run for president. In an email sent just after midnight Eastern time, Daniels said that "the interests and wishes" of his family led him to decide not to make the race.

Does indeed look like the wishes of his family took precedent over everything else.

“In the end, I was able to resolve every competing consideration but one, but that, the interests and wishes of my family, is the most important consideration of all," the e-mail said. "If I have disappointed you, I will always be sorry. If you feel that this was a non-courageous or unpatriotic decision, I understand and will not attempt to persuade you otherwise. I only hope that you will accept my sincerity in the judgment I reached."

Well, at least he won't have a chance to essentially defund Planned Parenthood in another 49 states.

End Times

Guess it didn't happen.  My tribute.



Enjoy!

Travel To Cuba

Not sure I care for the imagery conjured up in the article, but good news nonetheless.

(05-21) 09:15 PDT HAVANA, Cuba (AP) --

The forbidden fruit of American travel is once again within reach. New rules issued by the Obama administration will allow Americans wide access to communist-led Cuba, already a mecca for tourists from other nations.

Within months or even weeks, thousands of people from Seattle to Sarasota could be shaking their hips in tropical nightclubs and sampling the famous stogies, without having to sneak in through a third country and risk the Treasury Department's wrath.

Essentially, we are talking about more travel groups being able to obtain licenses to operate in Cuba.  The Bush administration clamped down in 2004, and began denying State Department licenses to many tour operators, under the guise that they violated the ban on tourism that is part of the U.S. embargo.  And Miami-based elected officials are beginning to come out against the plan.

Not so sure about the shaking hips and salsa dancing stuff, but I am particularly excited about the opportunities for educational exchanges.  They especially, are a win-win situation.

Special Election in NY-26

Big Siena poll out this morning on Tuesday's special election in NY-26.  From Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo:

The special election for New York's 26th district is this Tuesday. And the latest poll has Democrat Kathy Hochul taking a lead over Republican Jane Corwin by 4 points among likely voters.

Hochul 42%, Corwin 38%, Davis 9%, Murphy 1%.

Key point. Hochul has jumped 11 points since the last poll, pretty much all from Davis. So the Tea Party candidate is faltering and his support is swinging overwhelmingly to Hochul.

It's a complicated election.  A referendum on Medicare, of sorts.



But also an election where the Tea Party candidate is pulling voters away, presumably from the Republican.  For some reason, Jane Corwin let last year's very, very, very failed Republican candidate (and Tea Partier) for NY Governor, Carl Paladino, speak on her behalf this week.  He only garnered 34% of the vote last November against Andrew Cuomo.  Watch the clip -- it's says a lot, and not just about what's going on in economically devastated Western New York.



If Jack Davis really falters on Election Day, and Hochul still wins, I will be proud of NY-26.  I wear my affection for Western New York on my sleeve, having lived in the neighboring district in Buffalo for some years.  It is only recently that my denial has let me come to accept just how Republican NY-26 really is.

We'll be following the live-blogging on Tuesday night.  And probably eating Buffalo chicken wings.  And drinking Genessee beer, if we can find it.  And hopefully, rejoicing in the good people of NY-26 coming to their senses, and stopping the nonsense of continually voting against their own best interest.

Don't Say Gay

From the great state of Tennessee:

NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- A bill passed Friday by the Tennessee Senate would forbid public school teachers and students in grades kindergarten through eight from discussing the fact that some people are gay.

Opponents deride the measure as the "don't say gay bill." They say it's unfair to the children of gay parents and could lead to more bullying. Supporters say it is intended to give teachers clear guidance for dealing with younger children on a potentially explosive topic.

The bill isn't likely to be taken up by the House before lawmakers adjourn this spring, but the sponsor there has said he would push it forward in 2012 when the General Assembly comes back for the second year of the session.

Looks like passage would make Tennessee the first state in the nation to enact this type of legislation.  Under the unfortunate circumstance that it makes it all the way through, let's hope it's the last.

Why I Want To Be Your President: Republican Round-Up

With all the emphasis on Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich this week, let’s see what everyone else was up to.

If you believe the media, Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is getting a second look. Seemingly, he will also be formally announcing his run for the 2012 Republican nomination on Monday. He will announce in Des Moines, Iowa.

Proving that "Minnesota nice" can be an acquired taste, former Gov. Tim Pawlenty is getting a new and apparently approving look by GOP establishment and conservative leaders now that others in his lane like Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour and Mike Huckabee have rejected running and Newt Gingrich has stumbled out of the gate.

And for those disappointed by Barbour and Huckabee, Pawlenty could be the choice should Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who's laboring over running for the GOP presidential nomination, become the third prominent Republican to skip the 2012 race.

Says one conservative publisher: "I think a lot of people are giving Pawlenty a good first look or a critical second look now. And you know, when you spend some time with him, he comes off really well." 

Love the idea of these guys (and gals) announcing in a state where gay marriage is legal.

The Atlantic is telling me Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels is the Tea Party’s “dream candidate.”

Put another way, today's conservative entertainers are selling out their professed beliefs for an emotional high and a ratings boost -- and perhaps with the realization that effective conservative governance, achieved without intellectually dishonest bombast, is an implicit repudiation of their whole worldview. Tea partiers, many of whom revere talk radio, are being misled into thinking that Daniels isn't a desirable conservative candidate. If they are earnest in what they say about America's fiscal situation, however, a Daniels Administration is the best triumph for which they can reasonably hope.

Funny. Just last year he was calling on a truce on social issues.

Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum has been sparring publicly with the last Republican Presidential nominee, John McCain.  He seems to have forgotten the good Senator spent some time as a prisoner of war.

In a radio interview this afternoon, Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum tried to end the back-and-forth between him and GOP Sen. John McCain over so-called enhanced interrogation techniques.

Calling from an Amtrak train headed to his next campaign stop, Santorum told conservative radio host Steve Malzberg that he respects McCain’s opinion on the issue, but remains convinced those interrogation methods are effective in obtaining information from high value detainees.

"I feel nothing ill towards John McCain," Santorum said. "I respect his opinion. But I think he's wrong."

The spat between the two men when McCain, a prisoner of war in Vietnam, penned a Washington Post op-ed arguing that Osama bin Laden’s death can’t be traced to waterboarding or other forms of torture to get information from terror suspects. McCain later took to the Senate floor and, in an impassioned speech, argued against the abusing prisoners to siphon intelligence.

"In my personal experience, the abuse of prisoners sometimes produces good intelligence, but often produces bad intelligence," McCain said. "Under torture a person will say anything he thinks his captors want to hear -- whether it is true or false -- if he believes it will relieve his suffering."

That drew a response from Santorum, who said on Hugh Hewitt's radio program that McCain did not "understand how enhanced interrogation works."

Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann may be in:

Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann is likely to formally announce her presidential candidacy in Des Moines next week, the Polk County chairman of the Republican Party says.

Bachmann is scheduled to be the keynote speaker at a fund-raising dinner for the party Thursday evening. Kevin McLaughlin, the party’s county chairman, said there is a good chance she will make her announcement there. He said the event, at the downtown Marriott Hotel, will provide an interesting alternative for Republicans who were disappointed by Thursday’s news that New York billionaire Donald Trump was canceling a dinner speech he’d been scheduled to give in Des Moines June 10.

Should make for some fun talk this weekend.

And former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman gave an interview to ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. Good read. He. Ain’t. Going. No. Where.

Donald Trump fired himself, and won’t even keep his previously promised engagements. Mike Huckabee is sticking with television. He did start out his career in radio, once upon time.

And if you have not had enough of Newt, then here, here, here and here. Some good tidbits, actually. Especially good is the “Dancing Queen” Ringtone story.

Enjoy the weekend! Rapture, and all!

Happy Birthday, Bob Dylan!

In honor of Bob Dylan's 70th.  And the rapture, of course!



Happy weekend, all!

Majority of Americans Favor Gay Marriage

Today, released by Gallup. The results are based on a poll done earlier in the month. They have been tracking attitudes towards legalizing gay marriage for 7 years.

PRINCETON, NJ -- For the first time in Gallup's tracking of the issue, a majority of Americans (53%) believe same-sex marriage should be recognized by the law as valid, with the same rights as traditional marriages. The increase since last year came exclusively among political independents and Democrats. Republicans' views did not change.

 From the analysis:

This year's nine-percentage-point increase in support for same-sex marriage is the largest year-to-year shift yet measured over this time period. Two-thirds of Americans were opposed to legalized same-sex marriage in 1996, with 27% in favor. By 2004, support had risen to 42% and, despite some fluctuations from year to year, stayed at roughly that level through last year.

Republicans remain unmoved on this one. While democrats' and independents' support for same-sex marriage increased this year by 13 and 10 points, respectively, republicans' views on the issue did not change at all from last year.

And not surprisingly, the younger you are the more likely you are to be in support. 70% of those aged 18 to 34 support legalized same-sex marriage, while there is only 39% support in the 55 and older demographic.

Clearly, this remains a divisive issue with lines drawn along various lines including: political party affiliation, age, religious affiliation and marital status. However, the train has indeed left the station.

Newt and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day

I guess Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich did not have a very good day yesterday.  Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo summarizes it well:

I was traveling and in meetings most of the day. So unlike most every other day, I was almost totally off the news grid. I caught a few headlines here and there on my iPhone about the unfolding Newt implosion. But, my God, I couldn't quite grasp the scope until I got back to my hotel room and started reading our stories. And now it comes out that this afternoon Newt was compelled to personally call Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) to apologize for questioning and criticizing Ryan's Medicare phase-out plan. His spokesman publicly stated that Newt apologized. Publicly. On the record. Voluntarily.

I mean, wow. Watching TV just now, I see that South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) is now lashing out at Gingrich as some sort of GOP health care policy traitor.

What's breathtaking about this isn't just the reckless ridiculousness. That's Newt's trademark. But I can only imagine Newt's mortification. This is a man of no little ego. Whatever else you want to say about Gingrich, he is a genuinely historic figure in the history of American politics. And he's called on the carpet and has to apologize to these newcomers who couldn't have been out of their 20s when he was in his early 90s heyday?

I can only imagine.

And a fabulous take last night from Rachel Maddow, which shows that as much as anything, it is his reaction to the uproar which is doing him in as much as the attack itself.  Blaming the liberal media?  Really.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

So, what is this all about?  That you can't be an "ideas" guy in the Republican party, because after all to intellectualize public policy issues inevitably means stepping on toes?  Is it about Newt's cluelessness?  Simply about any Republican candidate needing to tow a particular party line, at any given moment?

This probably is indeed the nail in Newt's coffin.  But frankly, he didn't have a shot to begin with.  So there.

Florida to Cuba Travel Ban

An interesting case, out of Florida:

WASHINGTON — A controversial Florida law that restricts state colleges and universities from traveling to Cuba and other "terrorist states" could be headed to the U.S. Supreme Court for review.

The high court on Monday invited the Obama administration to file a brief, outlining the United States' stance on the 2006 law, which bars public schools and universities in Florida from using state money for travel to countries considered by the federal government to be "sponsors of terrorism" — Cuba, Iran, Sudan and Syria.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the faculty at the University of South Florida, the University of Florida and Florida International University in March asked the high court to review the law — which was declared unconstitutional in 2008 by U.S. District Judge Patricia Seitz in Miami — but upheld by a federal appeals court in September.

There was no word yet Monday on whether the U.S. solicitor general, who would file for the administration, would file in the case. But the ACLU said it was pleased the high court was "taking this seriously."

Essentially the ACLU is arguing that allowing Florida to prevent such travel is tantamount to permitting states to maintain their own foreign policy.  Supporters of the ban believe it is a way to ensure public dollars are not used to subside travel to terrorist countries -- Cuba included in that definition.

These types of academic exchanges are precise examples of positive ways our two countries can come together.  Public and private universities in Florida are some of the best places in the word for the study of Cuban history and culture, as well as housing historical archives and other documents related to modern-era Cuba.  Cutting them off from the ability to visit Cuba is no way to achieve academic excellence.  Academic exchanges with Cuban universities such as the University of Havana offer an array of scholarly opportunities to both sides.

Not sure whether this is about the state of Florida maintaining its own foreign policy.  But suppressing the exchange of ideas within academic settings is never a good idea. 

Newt Gingrich, Ideas Man

Lots of talk about Newt Gingrich, coming off his formal declaration as a candidate for the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination. Newt Gingrich, the man with the ideas.

Dan Blaz has told me so in the Washington Post:

Still, Gingrich brings to the race an unparalleled record in his party as someone who has remained in the forefront of the public policy debate over a span of decades. If he has lacked discipline in other areas, the one consistency in his public career is a devotion to the intersection of ideas and politics. He has made himself a force in whatever role he has played: as a backbencher, as House leader, and for more than a decade as a politician without office or official portfolio.

Through intellect and ambition, Gingrich has kept himself in the middle of public policy debates on health care, education, energy and foreign affairs. “Newt’s been the Republican Party’s main idea man for close to a generation,” said Terry Holt, a Republican strategist who closely observed Gin­grich as speaker. “This is a guy who brings unlimited energy and creative thinking to a race that needs new ideas.”

And I woke up to Mara Liasson telling me much that same, on NPR's Morning Edition Sunday this weekend:

Newt Gingrich is an intellectual force in the party. He has the ability to set the terms of the debate, although there are questions about whether he has the discipline for this kind of campaign. And there're questions about whether his personal life and his three marriages will hurt him in his bid. But he certainly is an idea machine and I think that's the role he will play.

Well, by now it's all over the press that the Former Speaker of the House is having a little bit of trouble articulating his ideas about health care reform. First he goes on NBC's Meet the Press and distanced himself from a House GOP plan to make cuts to Medicare, calling it “too big a jump" for the American people.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Then, the backtracking.  After a lot of criticism from fellow Republicans.

After Gingrich criticized the plan during his appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday, his spokesman Rick Tyler attempted to clarify his remarks, saying there is "little daylight" between Gingrich and Ryan when it comes to Medicare reform.

"Newt would fully support Ryan if it were not compulsory," Tyler told the Weekly Standard. "We need to design a better system that people will voluntarily move to. That is a major difference in design but not substance."

Something that did not get a lot of press, was Newt Gingrich's interview this last Sunday with Jorge Ramos on his Univision show Al Punto. Read the interview. It's interesting. He certainly intellectualizes in some areas -- particularly in talking about comprehensive immigration reform and the Dream Act -- while yet coming short of his own ideas. But, he does seem to have one idea down. Giving undocumented immigrants a status short of legal citizenship. The emphasis is mine:

First, somebody who’s been here 20 years, somebody who’s been here 20 years and is married and has three kids and has been paying taxes and lived a totally peaceful life and is a citizen – but by the way they came here 20 years ago outside the law. We got to find the way to routinize and get them in the law without necessarily getting them on a path to citizenship. Now there ought to be a way to do that. And one of the things I’m looking at, and this may come as a surprise to you, is in World War II we had a selective service board where every local community could apply common sense to the draft process. We may want to think about a citizen board that can actually look at things and decide, is this a person that came in two months ago and doesn’t nearly have any ties here? Or is this a person who clearly is integrated into the society but unfortunately has been undocumented, therefore, we have to rethink how we are approaching them.

Gives "separate but equal" a new meaning.

In reality, there is a big difference between being an intellectual, and actually having ideas.  Practical ideas.  Ideas that can implemented.  Particularly ideas that can have an impact in the public policy arena.  Newt Gingrich is a trained academic.  A PhD in history and former college professor.  And as such, he's not too bad at tearing apart other people's ideas. Deconstructing the ideas of others.  Being a public intellectual, of sorts.  Time will tell whether he can formulate and articulate his own ideas, particularly public policy imperatives.  And whether they can hold through a Presidential nomination campaign, where he is sure to get sliced and diced by the Republican opposition -- particularly when he is perceived of as not towing the party line.

False Equivalencies in Wisconsin

Anyone who thinks signing up for a domestic partnership registry is "substantially similar" to marriage, does not know much about the rights associated with marriage. This from Wisconsin. The emphasis is mine.

Madison - Gov. Scott Walker believes a new law that gives gay couples hospital visitation rights violates the state constitution and has asked a judge to allow the state to stop defending it.

Democrats who controlled the Legislature in 2009 changed the law so that same-sex couples could sign up for domestic partnership registries with county clerks to secure some - but not all - of the rights afforded married couples.

Wisconsin Family Action sued last year in Dane County circuit court, arguing that the registries violated a 2006 amendment to the state constitution that bans gay marriage and any arrangement that is substantially similar.

In reality, this is just another example of the Republicans trying to position conservative stances on social issues within an economic framework.  Something I maintain we will be seeing more of as the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination race heats up.

"We don't believe it is in the best interest of the state and its taxpayers to spend additional time and resources defending the legislation," he said in an email.

So, they get to stop defending a law they don't agree with, based on the best economic interest of the state. But, the law will still be defended in court because the gay rights group Fair Wisconsin intervened in the case last year.  And what's at stake?  No, not rights such as adopting children together or filing joint income tax returns.  We are talking about taking medical leave to care for an ill partner, making end-of-life decision and conferring hospital visitation rights.

Bob Dylan at 70

Bob Dylan turns 70 later this month.  Expect a series of video postings these next two weeks!



Enjoy!

The Republican Round-Up: On Words

Recently elected Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) seems to think that because I believe healthcare to be a right rather than a privilege in this country, I also must then believe in slavery:

"With regard to the idea of whether you have a right to healthcare, you have to realize what that implies. It’s not an abstraction. I’m a physician. That means you have a right to come to my house and conscript me," Paul said recently in a Senate subcommittee hearing.

"It means you believe in slavery. It means that you’re going to enslave not only me, but the janitor at my hospital, the person who cleans my office, the assistants who work in my office, the nurses," Paul said, adding that there is "an implied use of force."

"If I’m a physician in your community and you say you have a right to healthcare, you have a right to beat down my door with the police, escort me away and force me to take care of you? That’s ultimately what the right to free healthcare would be," Paul said.

If the good Senator wants to argue that healthcare is not a right, so be it.  For better or worse, there is a philosophical and public policy debate in there. But slavery? Last time I looked, the implementation of Medicare didn't cause an upturn in slavery.  Or physicians escorted away in the middle of the night by the police.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich called President Obama, the "food stamp President." Whatever that means.

“President Obama is the most successful food stamp president in American history,” Gingrich said. “I would like to be the most successful paycheck president in American history.”

If Gingrich is looking to blame the bleak economic environment on President Obama rather than his predecessor, he is going to have to do better than throwing around phrases like "food stamp President."

And finally, former Republican Gov. Jon Huntsman of Utah is having a difficult time explaining his relationship to the Mormon Church.

The would-be GOP presidential candidate appeared to distance himself from his faith in a new Time magazine profile posted online Thursday, describing himself as proud of his Mormon roots, but more spiritual than religious.

Asked directly if he was still a member of the church Huntsman answered, "That's tough to define. There are varying degrees. I come from a long line of saloon keepers and proselytizes, and I draw from both sides."

I for one, am extremely sympathetic to the personal subtleties involved in professing religious affiliation. And respecting those subtleties, as well.  But, it's one thing to be vague about religious affiliation, and quite another thing to waffle on whether or not one is a member of a church.  Unfortunately, he is going to have to do a better job of explaining this one to the American people.

Much more, later!

The Big Immigration Speech

Via my Twitter Feed this morning, the White House is asking me to “join the conversation on how we can fix the #immigration system for American’s 21st century economy.” Squarely positioning immigration within the larger issue of the economy – whatever that means.

Being the good American citizen I am, I checked out the accompanying link to see just how I can join in on the conversation. It seems I can do three things:

1)  Take action by hosting a roundtable on immigration. They even provide me with a “tool kit” to do so.

2)  I can “advise the advisor.” A way to “help senior staff at the White House stay connected to the American people.”

3)  I can read the Blueprint for Immigration Reform, which I take to be the document President Obama largely based yesterday’s big immigration speech on.

The website goes on to tell me what the “President’s Vision for Reform” is, which I again take to be a short summary of the speech he gave yesterday. The White House also bullet-points the “progress “ made in improving the immigration system within the boundaries of existing laws. These include spending more money to secure the border, making enforcement “smarter and more effective,” and working to improve our legal immigration system.

So what’s missing from this glance – the website the White House is directing us to if we are interesting in learning more about the administration’s stand on immigration reform? What is missing is any word about what the President is going to do. Directly do. No timelines. No hard initiatives. No mention by direct name of who he will be directly working with in order to advance his own beliefs.

And sadly, no direct mention of the Dream Act, which you might remember would provide legal status and a path to citizenship to young people who were brought to the United States illegally as children and receive a college education or want to enter the military. While President Obama did indeed (briefly) mention his support of the Dream Act during his speech yesterday, it does not appear in his vision statement today, on the newly enhanced website. All in the context of working within the boundaries of existing laws – which I take as code for I-am-not-going-to-use-my-bully-pulpit-as-President-to-rock-the-boat. Not going to advice the Justice Department to push the envelope.

The time for any more roundtables on this issue is long gone. I am tired of talking about this with my friends. And frankly I am quite sure senior staff at the White House have heard from plenty of people like me who think the President has to show real leadership on this issue, instead of just talking about building bi-partisan consensus. And throwing hands up in the air in argument that the administration lacks legal authority in various realms related to immigration due to boundaries of existing laws.

Oh, and the part about fixing the immigration system for the 21st century economy? While of course, this is overwhelming about the economy – poor people who need to make a living at any cost and greedy folks who want to get richer off the backs of those they can exploit – this is also about individual people. Families living in fear of being torn apart. Young adults who have so much to give to the only country they have ever known. All of us who cherish living in a democracy.

And one more thing. From the New York Times:

On the heels of President Obama’s renewed call to overhaul the nation’s immigration laws in Texas on Tuesday, Senate Democrats are reintroducing a bill that would give legal status to some illegal immigrants who came into the United States as children.

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, along with Senators Dick Durbin of Illinois and Robert Menendez of New Jersey, said the Senate will revive the Dream Act, one of the few signature pieces of Democratic legislation that failed during the lame-duck session of the last Congress, when Democrats controlled both chambers.

This will undoubtedly increase the pressure on President Obama to use his executive power to stop deportations of youths eligible for the DREAM Act. Will the President listen?

Why NY-26 Matters

For a few years in the mid 2000’s, I lived a stone’s throw from the NY-26 Congressional border. The Buffalo, New York suburbs. I never understood the Republican voting history of the district. Head-scratching, really. I even doubted just how Republican the district really was.

Rachel Maddow convinced me last night that indeed, NY-26 is an unquestionably Republican district. Listen. Watch.  An important story, about an interesting all-American place.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Here’s to hoping the good citizens of NY-26 finally stop voting against their best interests.

Gun Safety in Florida

We have of course become used to the abortion battles raging in state legislatures all over the country this year. Ditto for trying to pass state constitutional amendments that would ban gay marriage. This, however is a new one. From NPR’s Weekend Edition Saturday:

Florida Gov. Rick Scott is expected to sign a bill that will make the state the first in the nation to prohibit doctors from asking patients if they own guns. The bill is aimed particularly at pediatricians, who routinely ask new parents if they have guns at home and if they're stored safely.

Pediatricians say it's about preventing accidental injuries. Gun rights advocates say the doctors have a political agenda.

As parents know, pediatricians ask a lot of questions. Dr. Louis St. Petery says it's all part of what doctors call "anticipatory guidance" — teaching parents how to safeguard against accidental injuries. Pediatricians ask about bike helmets, seat belts and other concerns.

"If you have a pool, let's talk about pool safety so we don't have accidental drownings," he says. "And if you have firearms, let's talk about gun safety so that they're stored properly — you know, the gun needs to be locked up, the ammunition stored separate from the gun, etc., so that children don't have access to them."

For decades, the American Academy of Pediatrics has encouraged its members to ask questions about guns and how they're stored, as part of well-child visits.

But Marion Hammer, the National Rifle Association's lobbyist in Tallahassee, says that's not a pediatrician's job.

"We take our children to pediatricians for medical care — not moral judgment, not privacy intrusions," she says.

Not a surprise that NRA lobbyists helped write this bill. As the mother of a 7 year old, I have become accustomed to filling out a form at every well-child check with a list of questions regarding safety – pool safety, bike helmets, car seats, and fire arms. And of course, some pediatricians are better than others in their ability to discuss these things without sounding over-bearing and condescending.  Nothing new, there. But while this particular bill has an exception allowing for questioning in cases where doctors feel there is a direct implication to a patient’s care or the safety of others, it is unclear how this will all pan out.

Dr. Paul Robinson, a specialist in adolescent medicine, told a Florida Senate committee recently that that would allow doctors to counsel suicidal teens. But there are other cases, he said, where the law — and the doctor's options — are less clear.

"What if I have an adolescent who's been bullied, who's not suicidal?" he said. "I don't think, under the current bill, I'm entitled to ask him if there's a gun in the home, or if he's carried a gun to school, or if he's thinking of harming someone else with a gun."

All this coming on the heels of a big story from my own backyard, where a loaded gun was found in a first-grader’s backpack. All indications of course, are that the child had no idea the gun was there, but that rather someone other than the child was responsible for placing the gun there. 

Hello.  This is about safety, not 2nd amendment rights or political bias.  The State of Florida. Giving the word “prevention” a whole new meaning.

Following the Rules on Gay Marriage

Big news on marriage equity, from the military no less. In states where same-sex marriage is legal, base facilities can indeed be used for marriage ceremonies. From the advisory memo:

Regarding the use of base facilities for same-sex marriages, legal counsel has concluded that generally speaking, base facility use is sexual orientation neutral. If the base is located in a state where same-sex marriage is legal, then base facilities may normally be used to celebrate the marriage.

This is what happens when rule-driven institutions like the military, follow the rules – and make it very public. They can become viewed as some of the most outwardly progressive institutions in the country.

Happy Mother's Day!

All time best, Mother's Day song. Ever.



Hope everyone had a lovely day! Enjoy!

The War Against Women: The Friday Edition

The week that was. On the national level, we have H.R. 3, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act.”

Indeed, after imposing new restrictions on abortion coverage in private health insurance plans through health reform, they are now pushing H.R. 3. With that bill, they want to completely eradicate abortion insurance coverage from the new health insurance exchanges that will be set up in 2014 under the health reform law, make abortion funding restrictions government-wide and permanent, and use the tax code for the very first time to punish those who pay for abortion care or coverage. They also initially tried to redefine rape and incest exceptions out of existence.

Thanks to the number of pro-choicers in the Senate, President Obama will probably never see the bill. Nonetheless, the White House threatens a veto.

The guilt-tripping of women into viewing sonograms and listening to fetal heart beats continues. This time, in Texas:

Any woman seeking an abortion in Texas will be forced to undergo a sonogram and be asked if they want to view it or listen to the fetal heartbeat, thanks to a bill that passed today and that Governor Rick Perry says he can't wait to sign.

Pushed by Houston's state Senator Dan Patrick, the abortion-sonogram bill got final approval today in the Senate after an initial vote yesterday; the House's GOP supermajority easily passed its own version earlier and the Senate bill now goes back to the House for expected swift passage.

And did I say Texas is also trying to eliminate a program that helps low-income women get birth control, Pap smears and cancer screenings, all in an effort to get back at Planned Parenthood? Think Indiana, where the move to cut off federal funding to Planned Parenthood appears to violate the Medicaid Act.  But all is well in Texas -- lawmakers approved legislation Tuesday authorizing "choose life" license plates in order to raise money to help pregnant mothers choose adoption over abortion.

In Iowa, a stalled measure that would ban most abortions after 20 weeks made it out of a Senate committee. But, the jury is still out, there.

In Maine, three proposals would add restrictions to abortion:

L.D. 116, sponsored by state Rep. Tyler Clark, R-Easton, would impose a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion, except in the case of a medical emergency. L.D. 924, sponsored by state Rep. Eleanor Espling, R-New Gloucester, would require that government-approved information, yet to be developed, must be read and handed over in writing to women seeking an abortion at least 24 hours before the abortion is performed. And L.D. 1457, sponsored by state Rep. Dale Crafts, R-Lisbon, would require written, notarized parental consent for abortions performed on women under 21 years old, with some exceptions.

And lucky for Minnesota, that they didn't put a Republican in the Governor’s Mansion. DFL Gov. Mark Dayton is not expected to sign bills that would prevent taxpayer funding for abortion, and prohibit abortions after 20 weeks of gestation.

I am sure there is plenty more, but enough already for today.

Gay Marriage: The NY-State-of-Mind Edition

Wow. Heartened by all the positive gay marriage news out of New York today, where Gov. Cuomo thinks he may finally have the votes for a bill that has been long-stalled in the State Senate.

From former President Bill Clinton the man who signed the Defense of Marriage Act into law as president.

“Our nation’s permanent mission is to form a ‘more perfect union’ — deepening the meaning of freedom, broadening the reach of opportunity, strengthening the bonds of community,” Clinton said. “That mission has inspired and empowered us to extend rights to people previously denied them. Every time we have done that, it has strengthened our nation. Now we should do it again, in New York, with marriage equality. For more than a century, our Statue of Liberty has welcomed all kinds of people from all over the world yearning to be free. In the 21st century, I believe New York’s welcome must include marriage equality.”

From the editorial pages of El Diaro La Prensa, New York’s largest Spanish-language daily. Not surprised that an emphasis of the piece is on supporting friends and family. A nod to our culture.

La homosexualidad es una realidad humana. La mayoría de los neoyorquinos tienen un amigo, colega o pariente gay. Es hora de darles a estas personas la oportunidad de desarrollar familia y construir comunidades. Nuestro gobierno no debe estar en el negocio de decirle a la gente de quien enamorarse o con quien casarse.

And finally, kudos to Unitarian-Universalist Minister Sam Trumbore, for reminding us what this is really all about. The emphasis is mine:

ALBANY -- More than 700 religious leaders throughout New York have pledged to support the passage of a same-sex marriage bill.

Whether the petition signatures of 727 clergymen and lay leaders will help sway the state Senate -- which has historically rejected the legislation -- remains to be seen as advocates work to pass the bill by the end of the legislative session.

Ross Levi, executive director of the Empire State Pride Agenda, said Tuesday the petition reinforces the message that the public embraces same-sex marriage.

The Rev. Samuel Trumbore, a minister at the First Unitarian Universalist Society of Albany and a Times Union blogger, said same-sex marriage should be viewed as a civil rights issue, not a religious issue.


"If fundamentalists don't want to do same-sex marriages, they don't have to," he said.

As proud as I am to be Unitarian-Universalist, I completely agree that this is fundamentally a civil rights issues, not a religious one. For liberal religious clergy to argue otherwise, is a mistake. So, amen, to that one, Rev. Trumbore!

Happy Cinco de Mayo!

Trying to decide how to celebrate Cinco de Mayo, in a food-related way, of course. By tweaking my Cuban recipes and seeing if I can pretend to make them Mexican.

Perhaps I could take out the sofrito from my frijoles negros, and substitute some chiles? They do eat black beans in Mexico, after all.

Or, change the stuffing in my empanadas. Instead of picadillo, perhaps some mixture of sweet and savory squashes, or pumpkin.

And then there is yuca frita, which is indeed eaten on the Caribbean coast of Mexico.

Drinking tequila instead of a Cuba Libre should be no problem.

Enjoy the holiday!

Immigration vs. Immigration vs. Immigration

Three meetings in three weeks, for President Obama on the issue of immigration.

First there was an April 19th meeting of business, religious and political leaders designed to brainstorm how to revive immigration-related legislation, which is stalled in Congress.

“At the end of the day, the president cannot fix administratively what is broken in the immigration system,” said a senior White House official, who was not authorized to speak publicly on the issue. The official said the White House had made a strategic decision to focus all its efforts on passing the overhaul rather than acting unilaterally to make smaller changes.

Mr. Obama first rejected executive action to suspend deportations during a town-hall-style meeting broadcast in late March on Univision, the Spanish-language television network.

But calls for him to change his mind have only multiplied since then. In a letter on April 13, the top two Democrats in the Senate, Harry Reid of Nevada and Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, and 20 other Democrats sent a letter asking the president to defer deportations of illegal immigrant students. The Dream Act bill passed the House but failed in the Senate last year.

And then there was the “celebrity brigade” which included such great immigration experts as Eva Longoria, Don Francisco, Gloria Estefan, Rosario Dawson and America Ferrera. Not to take anything away from them of course. The meeting can be summarized with this:

However, actress Eva Longoria, who attended Thursday's meeting, told reporters afterwards that it wasn't a matter of Obama being able to act on his own.

"We like to blame Obama for the inaction, but he can't just disobey the law that's written," Longoria said. She urged Latinos to register to vote and make their voices heard about immigration and other issues.

Which led to finally, a meeting with members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, many of whom would politely disagree with Eva Longoria. No breakthroughs.

"How is the president going to proceed? You guys are going to have to ask him," Gutierrez told reporters on the White House grounds. He said last month that he was uncertain whether he could support the Obama in 2012 if the president didn't step up immigration changes.

Rep. Charlie Gonzalez of Texas said the caucus would like to see consistent policies on how young illegal immigrants are treated. In some but not all cases, students' deportations are delayed, he said.

Earlier in the day, White House advisers Melody Barnes and Cecilia Munoz told reporters in a briefing that the White House would not agree to proposals suggesting executive action to declare categorically that certain segments of the immigrant community would be exempted from deportation.

But when asked whether the administration was asking the Homeland Security Department to consider taking different approaches on deportation or other issues, Barnes and Munoz said the department was considering a range of actions.

"The president stressed absolutely that the real fix is going to have to be legislative," Gonzalez said.

This isn’t about endless meetings, trying to assess what the “community” wants and then helping us come to some sort of compromise around implementation. This is about leadership, pure and simple. Having a vision, articulating it well, and executing it. And of course, along the way helping Americans understand why tackling this issue is important for ALL OF US.

No one is happy about what is going on, and the President is looking increasing like he cannot provide leadership on moving his ideas – whatever they may be – forward.  And in the meantime, Arizona-like anti-immigrant bills on the state level continue to go viral.  Florida.  Georgia.  Utah.  To name a few.

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly: The Gay Rights Edition

Basically good, but not without a lot of ugly back-drop to it:

PROVIDENCE — With protesters gathering outside the State House, Rep. Peter J. Petrarca added a new layer to the debate over same-sex marriage Tuesday by introducing a bill that would make civil unions legal in Rhode Island.

Calling his bill an important first step, the Lincoln Democrat said the legislation — while falling short of legalized same-sex marriage — would give same-sex couples the same rights that married couples now have under Rhode Island law.

“Some sort of progress is better than nothing,” he said just minutes before the House session got under way.

But outside, more than 200 same-sex marriage supporters made it clear that the push for passage of a same-sex marriage bill this year is not over.

The Rhode Island State House Speaker, Gordon Fox (who is gay) originally supported a same-sex marriage bill, but withdrew his support while insisting the measure would die in the Senate. Now there are some serious legislative machinations going on, with talk of some sort of counter strategy in the wings – a yet unwritten amendment that would in the end, force a vote on gay marriage. Rhode Island has indeed been on the forefront of the civil unions vs. marriage debate, at least in terms of political implication.

Very bad. From The Washington Post.  The emphasis is mine:

Shortly after he retired, the federal judge who struck down California’s voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage acknowledged publicly what had been rumored for months: He is gay and in a long-term relationship with another man.

Opponents of same-sex marriage seized on Vaughn Walker’s revelation and filed a motion last week to have his ruling on Proposition 8 vacated, arguing that he could benefit personally from his decision if he wanted to marry his partner.

Although unusual, the effort could have legal merit, some experts say. If successful, it could mark the first time a judge has been disqualified or rebuked for issues related to his sexual orientation. And it would be a setback for gay rights groups, which view his opinion on Proposition 8 as one of their most significant victories in the quest for equal rights for same-sex couples.

But, The New York Times, on its editorial page counters:

The claim is bogus. It is well established that personal characteristics, like race, sex, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation, do not by themselves invoke the rule that judges must step aside if their “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Our justice system relies on trusting members of the nation’s diverse bench to put aside their personal characteristics and abide by their duty of even-handedness. Any other approach would invite foolish and unacceptable results — female judges being kept from hearing rape or sexual discrimination cases, or black judges from hearing cases involving racial bias or civil rights.

Gotta love it when The New York Times takes on The Washington Post...

And now for the very, very, very good:

Legislation that would bar adoption discrimination against LGBT people is set for introduction in the U.S. House on Tuesday, according to the Family Equality Council.

Steve Majors, a spokesperson for Family Equality Council, confirmed in a statement to the Washington Blade that Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) would on Tuesday introduce the bill, which is known as the Every Child Deserves a Family Act.

“The bill will drop on Tuesday in the House,” Majors said. “[Stark] wanted to do so in conjunction with National Foster Care Awareness Month.”

As it was previously written, the Every Child Deserves a Family Act would restrict federal funds for states if they have laws or practices that discriminate in adoption on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The 111th Congress was the first time the legislation had been introduced in the House.

No matter obstacles, we must continue to do the right thing. Particularly proud today of Rep. Pete Stark, who represents a congressional district next door to mine.