Search
RSS Feed
You are currently browsing the CrazyDrumGuy weblog archives for May, 2008.
Archives
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
Blogs Eric Reads
Archive for May, 2008
Webb GI Bill Passes Senate
Sen. Webb’s bill to increase education benefits for Iraq War vets, which passed in the House last week, was passed by the Senate today in a vote of 75-22.
Senate Republicans have broken with President Bush to help Democrats add help for veterans and the unemployed to a bill paying for another year of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
The 75-22 vote also adds billions of dollars in other domestic funds such as heating subsidies for the poor and money for fighting wildfires to the $165 billion for the military operations overseas.
The vote is a rebuke to Bush, who has promised to veto the measure if it contains the domestic measures. However, the president still has enough GOP support to sustain a veto.
While both Senators Clinton and Obama were present to vote “yes” on the bill, John McCain decided that his time would be better spent elsewhere. (Others not voting were Sens. Coburn and Kennedy.)
UPDATED: Brain Tumor Caused Kennedy Seizure
Doctors for the Massachusetts Democrat said tests conducted after Kennedy suffered a seizure this weekend show a tumor in his left parietal-lobe. The usual course of treatment includes combinations of radiation and chemotherapy, but Kennedy’s treatment will be decided after more tests.
That’s all the news so far, although a brain tumor is never a good sign. Hopefully more updates will be forthcoming. Best wishes to the Senator for a quick recovery.
Update: The tumor is a malignant glioma.
Malignant gliomas are a type of brain cancer diagnosed in about 9,000 Americans a year — and the most common type among adults. It’s a starting diagnosis: How well patients fare depends on what specific tumor type is determined by further testing.
Average survival can range from less than a year for very advanced and aggressive types — such as glioblastomas — or to about five years for different types that are slower growing.
Georgia GOP: John McCain Is Just Like Jesus Christ
State Republican Party Chair Sue Everhart:
Georgia Republican Party chairwoman Sue Everhart said Saturday that the party’s presumed presidential nominee has a lot in common with Jesus Christ.
“John McCain is kind of like Jesus Christ on the cross,” Everhart said as she began the second day of the state GOP convention. “He never denounced God, either.”
Everhart was praising McCain for never denouncing the United States while he was being tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
“I’m not trying to compare John McCain to Jesus Christ, I’m looking at the pain that was there,” she said.
Yeah, Merriam-Webster disagrees on that last part:
1 a: having the characteristics of : similar to <his house is like a barn><it’s like when we were kids> b: typical of ><was like him to do that> c: comparable to :approximating <costs something like fifty cents>
Hillary Will Fight For the Nominee, So Why Won’t You?
There’s a lot of chatter in the blogosphere about Hillary supporters threatening to flee the Democratic Party in droves if Clinton is not declared the nominee at the convention. The argument, as I understand it, is that these supporters feel slighted by Obama, his campaigns, or his supporters, and, as a result, would refuse to support him as the nominee. If you’re one of these people, then this is for you. Here’s one simple reason why you should support Barack Obama if he is the nominee:
Hillary Clinton will support Barack Obama if he is the nominee.
“I can assure you, as I have said on many occasions, that no matter what happens, I will work for the nominee of the Democratic Party, because we must win in November,” she said.
Keep in mind, she didn’t say this in a concession speech. She declared her support at the same time she declared victory in Indiana. If Hillary Clinton loses the nomination, she’s going to stay and fight for Barack Obama, not pack her bags and go home. And do you know why? For the same reason that many of you have been supporting her for over a year.
She gets it.
She knows that this presidential race is about more than just her. She knows that this country can’t survive a McCain presidency, and she’s putting her country first by making sure that a Democrat–be it her or Obama–is elected president in November.
Are there differences between her healthcare plan and Obama’s plan? Yes, but they both want Americans to have insurance, while McCain will let the healthcare industry keep committing murder by spreadsheet.
Did she and Obama occasionally diverge on their support for Bush’s Occupation of Iraq? Yes, but they both want to withdraw our troops, while McCain will keep them in harm’s way for at least four more years, letting thousands more of your brothers, sisters, and children die.
Does she, as a woman, bring a unique and perhaps superior perspective on reproductive rights than Obama does? Yes, but they’re both pro-choice, while McCain will appoint right-wing judges who will overturn Roe, giving the government control over American women’s bodies.
Do you really think that Hillary Clinton, of all people, doesn’t know the differences between herself and Barack Obama? And yet she has already declared her support for Obama if he is the nominee. She did this because she knows that John McCain is poison for the United States. If he is elected president, he will destroy this country.
Die-hard Clinton supporters, whatever you may dislike about Barack Obama, always remember that he, like Hillary Clinton, is thousands of times better for America than John McCain will ever be. You can point to Obama’s ties to Rezko and Wright in the fall, but you should really be pointing to McCain’s ties to Hagee and Bush. Hillary Clinton will be doing the latter. What will you do?
True, the rules do say that no candidate is officially the nominee before the convention, but both candidates will go to the convention, and either Obama or Clinton will come out the nominee. Regardless of the outcome, though, I guarantee you that Hillary Clinton will leave the convention with her head held high, and she will proudly begin to do everything she can to elect the next Democratic President of the United States.
If you claim to be a liberal, progressive, or a Democrat, but you’re considering refusing to support Obama if he is the nominee, then you don’t deserve to have an incredible candidate like Hillary Clinton–a proud Democrat first and foremost.
Hillary will fight for the nominee, so why won’t you?
California High Court: Gay Marriage Ban Unconstitutional
In a historic decision, the California Supreme Court today ruled that a state law banning gay marriage was unconstitutional. Some money quotes from the decision:
After carefully evaluating the pertinent considerations in the present case, we conclude that the state interest in limiting the designation of marriage exclusively to opposite-sex couples, and in excluding same-sex couples from access to that designation, cannot properly be considered a compelling state interest for equal protection purposes.
To begin with, the limitation clearly is not necessary to preserve the rights and benefits of marriage currently enjoyed by opposite-sex couples. Extending access to the designation of marriage to same-sex couples will not deprive any opposite-sex couple or their children of any of the rights and benefits conferred by the marriage statutes, but simply will make the benefit of the marriage designation available to same-sex couples and their children. …
While retention of the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples is not needed to preserve the rights and benefits of opposite-sex couples, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the designation of marriage works a real and appreciable harm upon same-sex couples and their children. As discussed above, because of the long and celebrated history of the term “marriage” and the widespread understanding that this word describes a family relationship unreservedly sanctioned by the community, the statutory provisions that continue to limit access to this designation exclusively to opposite-sex couples — while providing only a novel, alternative institution for same-sex couples — likely will be viewed as an official statement that the family relationship of same-sex couples is not of comparable stature or equal dignity to the family relationship of opposite-sex couples.
Furthermore, because of the historic disparagement of gay persons, the retention of a distinction in nomenclature by which the term “marriage” is withheld only from the family relationship of same-sex couples is all the more likely to cause the new parallel institution that has been established for same-sex couples to be considered a mark of second-class citizenship.
Finally, in addition to the potential harm flowing from the lesser stature that is likely to be afforded to the family relationships of same-sex couples by designating them domestic partnerships, there exists a substantial risk that a judicial decision upholding the differential treatment of opposite-sex and same-sex couples would be understood as validating a more general proposition that our state by now has repudiated: that it is permissible, under the law, for society to treat gay individuals and same-sex couples differently from, and less favorably than, heterosexual individuals and opposite-sex couples.
In light of all of these circumstances we conclude that retention of the traditional definition of marriage does not constitute a state interest sufficiently compelling, under the strict scrutiny equal protection standard, to justify withholding that status from same-sex couples. Accordingly, insofar as the provisions of sections 300 and 308.5 draw a distinction between opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples and exclude the latter from access to the designation of marriage, we conclude these statutes are unconstitutional.
There is a ballot initiative circulating in California that would amend the state constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman, but Gov. Schwarzenegger has said that he will uphold the ruling and will not support the initiative to overturn it.
It’s a beautiful day in California for marriage equality!
(h/t Meteor Blades for parsing the 172-page (PDF) decision)
West Virginia
I get news alerts via email from the Washington Post. Here’s their lede after Hillary Clinton won tonight’s West Virginia primary.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) claimed an overwhelming victory over Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) in West Virginia’s presidential primary today, a win that increased the likelihood of her continued candidacy but did little to alter her position as a decided underdog in the race for the Democratic nomination.
Yep, sounds about right to me.
Obama ‘08: So Popular They Ran Out of the Real Bumper Sticker
I’m enjoying the beginning of my summer vacation, so enjoy this photo for now.
(via)
“We Now Know Who the Democratic Nominee Is Going to Be”
Barack Obama won a decisive victory in North Carolina, while Hillary Clinton barely eked out a win in Indiana. Obama also did better among women than he had in Ohio and Pennsylvania. If Russert’s claim that Clinton had canceled all of her media appearances tomorrow is true, we could be seeing the end of this thing soon.
Update: Ah, crap. Maybe not:
This is what Harold Ickes, a longtime advisory to both Bill and Hillary Clinton, told Mark Halperin of Time’s The Page tonight:
“We don’t know enough about Senator Obama yet. We don’t need an October Surprise. And (the chance of) an October Surprise with Hillary is remote.”
This remark is dismaying on several levels, partly because Ickes is virtually channeling Karl Rove, who implied something similar in a recent interview with GQ — not backed up by any information of course. Just planting this vague idea in Joe Average Voter’s head that there’s something about Barry — pick your vice, political or personal — that all the kool kidz inside the Beltway know about, and it’s going to pop one week before the election, is the only strategy here.
Paul Likes Obama Better than McCain
I missed this the other day because it got bumped off the page by CNN’s up-to-the-minute coverage of the all-important Guam primary.
Apparently, Ron Paul, who is technically still running for president and hasn’t endorsed John McCain, actually likes Obama more than McCain.
Having a Republican win the upcoming presidential election is “secondary” for Paul who is more interested in defending the Constitution, having the country go in what he considers the right direction, having a sound currency, and achieving balanced budgets. Paul parts ways with McCain over McCain’s support for the Iraq war, his approach to U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and his willingness to spend federal dollars to support military operations in Iraq.
Instead, Paul favors Sen. Barack Obama because of positions on foreign policy. “But that’s doesn’t mean that’s an endorsement,” Paul quickly added.
This could get really interesting if it turns into an endorsement. Obviously, Paul is in a very, very distant second place in the Republican nomination race, but he still has a lot of committed voters who hang on his every word and, like Paul himself, aren’t terribly satisfied by McSame. And, all things considered, Paul didn’t do too terribly earlier this year. He placed second in Nevada, beating everyone but Mitt Romney, and more people caucused for him in Maine than Huckabee, Thompson, Giuliani, and Hunter combined. I mean, 128,000 Pennsylvanians turned out to vote for him (and, more importantly, against McCain) after McCain had already clinched the nomination.
If Obama is the nominee–okay, let’s get real, he is the nominee–an endorsement from Rep. Paul could swing a few ex-Republicans over to check the (D) box.
The Problem With Honoring Phyllis Schlafly
At this year’s commencement ceremony, my school will be honoring Phyllis Schlafly with an honorary doctorate. Schlafly earned two degrees–a BA and a JD–from Washington University before devoting herself to a life-long career of telling women to stay in the kitchen. Now, she’ll be back at WashU for her third degree.
Chancellor Mark Wrighton defended the decision to reward the “graduate and donor” (donor? Hmm… As it turns out, her family is fairly well-off) by claiming that “her contributions have inspired women.” Really? To do what? Inspired women to stay at home? Giving this woman an honorary degree at the same time as the first female surgeon at the med school (Dr. Jessie Ternberg) is like slapping the latter across the face.
Let’s take a look at some of the positions that Washington University will be endorsing and honoring:
“By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don’t think you can call it rape.” — He wants to have sex but you don’t? Sorry ladies, if you wanted to say “No” you should have done it when he proposed. (Sun Journal, March 29, 2007)
“Sex education classes are like in-home sales parties for abortions.” — How many times do we have to tell her that abstinence-only sex ed doesn’t work? (Huffington Post, July 20, 2006)
“Many professors are Marxists or other varieties of radicals who hate America.” — Does that include former chemistry professors who go on to be university chancellors? Does fellow honoree Dr. Ternberg hate America? (Phyllis Schlafly Report, April 2005)
“The atomic bomb is a marvelous gift that was given to our country by a wise God.” — Thank God for making the world a safer place though nuclear proliferation. (New York Times, Sept. 9, 1982; R. Balmer, Thy Kingdom Come: How the Religious Right Distorts the Faith and Threatens America, p. 193)
“I suspect that the picture of the woman soldier with a noose around the Iraqi man’s neck will soon show up on the bulletin boards of women’s studies centers and feminist college professors. That picture is the radical feminists’ ultimate fantasy of how they dream of treating men.” — Yes, since a woman tortured a man, feminists be just gushing with joy over the Abu Grahib prison scandal. That’s just the sort of rational thinking that this university encourages. (Human Events, May 18, 2004)
I don’t know about you, but I get sick every time I read just the first quote. I hope that she’s donating a lot of money to the school–I mean a lot of money, like enough to build a campus on the moon–because rewarding a woman who defends men who rape their wives will permanently tarnish this school’s reputation.
Update: Ah, and how could I forget that Schlafly blamed the Virginia Tech killings on the school’s English Department. And we’re supposed to honor her leadership and articulation on political issues?