Utterly Meaningless

Wanna bet there’s no way “Kennedy” is giving up that note to the school? 😉

Is the note on Ebay yet?

too cute
now maybe he has time for the gay equality and health care reform I seem to remember him talking about a very few months ago

Health care reform will happen this summer. DADT after that, no doubt.

>>DADT after that, no doubt.

Or not.

DOMA’s not DADT. Though both should be repealed.

>>>>DOMA’s not DADT. Though both should be repealed

Yeah, I know. But the whole picture is kinda getting sour for me. LIke the lovely personal note O. penned for the most recent DADT Iraqui translator victim, right before he discharged the guy. Couldn’t O have penned a stop-loss order regarding DADT victims instead?

I guess I’m getting kinda impatient, and the DOMA thing doesn’t reassure me.

I think there are smart strategies and multiple levels to most everything happening right now and we don’t see it all spelled out all at once or it wouldn’t work, like during the negotiating with the Somali pirates or with No Korea for the journalists’ freedom.

My first thought reading the DOMA links was to wonder whether the administration is explicitly making those arguments (and purposely not too well!) to get a weak argument before the courts in a fashion likely to be ruled against? Oh please don’t throw me in that briar patch!

Or as we used to call it when I was lobbying — loving it to death.

JJ, that occured to me too. I’m hoping you’ve got it right. Sigh. So sad that this stuff is even an issue.

Agreed!
Did you mark yesterday as Loving Day btw? Good cause for hope:

Hard as it may be to believe now, interracial marriage — miscegenation is the pejorative — was once a severely odious concept. In 1912, Congressman Seaborn Roddenbery of Georgia tried to introduce an amendment to the Constitution banning such unions. To his colleagues in Congress he lectured:

“It is contrary and averse to every sentiment of pure American spirit. It is contrary and averse to the very principles of a pure Saxon government. It is subversive of social peace. … No more voracious parasite ever sucked at the heart of pure society and moral status than the one which welcomes or recognizes everywhere the sacred ties of wedlock between Africa and America.”

. . .The Lovings spent time in jail for the high crime of being married to each other and were forced to move from Virginia. Then, on June 12 of 1967, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the Lovings’ criminal convictions and struck down all laws against interracial marriage.

Now there’s something like 4.3 million mixed-marriage couples in the United States. And the son of one such union is our president.

It’s easy to get discouraged — if not downright fearful — when the race baiters dial their spew up to “11,” and their reactionary puppets respond with violence. But take a moment on this June 12th to look at where our nation once was and where we are now, and take solace in knowing that we are headed in a better direction.

I don’t understand how this sort of case works when a new administration comes into office.

Is the new admin forced to continue arguing the stupid arguments from the previous one because the case is already in the court system? Or are they allowed to start over and put forth their own (stupid) arguments?

Nance

From what I understand, the DOJ is bound to (attempt to) defend existing law, even if the current admin disagrees with it. That doesn’t mean, of course, that they have to employ the same (stupid) arguments as the previous admin.

Well, that makes some kind of sense. The law hasn’t been changed and the DOJ has to defend it. But they can pull a Br’er Rabbit. OK, crystal clear. 🙂

Nance