Thoughts on Ken Mehlman

Former Republican National Committee Chairman, and  Bush Campaign Director, Ken Mehlman  this week confirmed what had been pretty much common knowledge in Washington D.C.   That he was in fact, Gay.

A lot of folks have emailed and texted me asking what my thoughts are about all of this.   I am still framing  my reaction to Mehlman's  announcement, and will post something this weekend.

In the meantime,  as usual.  the  folks over at the Daily Show nailed it...

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Gay Old Party
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

A Question of Presidential Leadership....

Dear President Obama,

On June 11th, 1963, the man who sat at the same desk in the same office you now occupy, and said these words.

Now, nearly half a century later, our nation is once again in the middle of a great debate over Civil Rights. However this time, it is not the color of an American Citizen's skin that is the defining factor some would use as the basis for discrimination, but rather the issue today is,  sexual orientation.

The defining lines in this Civil Rights debate are just as clearly drawn as they were in the debate some 47 years ago. On both sides sits a core document. Those who would deny equal rights to millions of Americans claim that 8 verses of the Bible,  command nothing less than the codification of one a religious viewpoint into civil law. On the other side sits the Constitution of the United States which says:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now when an entire sector of American Citizens are denied that basic equal protection under the law,  officials  from your Administration,  one which would not have been possible, or even conceivable without the leadership and courage of  your predecessors, complain that victims of  discrimination, and those who support their cause,  are just  whining  members of  some nebulous "Professional Left".   

What have  seen from you  Sir,  is  great speeches.   Great words, on the need to treat  all Americans equally.   You  have said  all the right things.  Yet all the while,  your Administration continues to for all practical purposes, stand idly by while the civil rights of millions of  the  citizens  who's constitutional rights you swore to preserve, protect and defend,  are denied.

Are you really that  surprised  that  many Americans  who supported you, are now confused and disappointed?

Mr. President,  this is not just about  equal rights  for  Gay and Lesbian Americans.   This debate is not just about  the separation  of Church and State.  This is about the  role of  the President of the United States to uphold the  Constitution.  Your predecessor,    John Kennedy,  was  certainly  warned by his advisors  that  taking  leadership  to uphold  the constitutional  rights  of  people of color was politically  dangerous. But JFK  knew  that  to sit  at that desk,  the desk  you know sit behind,  meant  you  couldn't  pick and choose  who the Constitution protects based on how it might play out at the polls.

When faced with the  question  are  people who are not white,  equal to  people who are.  President Kennedy did not  hesitate,  he did not  equivocate,   he did not have to carefully craft his answer like in some rhetorical game of twister.  He did not give an answer  where  he desperately tried to not say he was for civil rights for Blacks, while at the same time  not saying he was against it either.      When you were asked  about the civil rights  debate of this generation,  your  reply  was at best, a painful attempt  to  placate everyone  while offending  no one.

What the nation saw was,  the first  African American President,  advocating   for "Separate but Equal" treatment of  millions of Americans.

Mr. President,   I understand  your Administration, and your political party are afraid.   You are facing an  energized  Republican Party.   A party that  has found out  that your desire  to build  bi-partisan consensus  can be  used  to  stall and  even stop your agenda.  As result,  you are going to have a real uphill battle  selling  your accomplishments to the American electorate  this November.    

What  was  supposed to be  "Heath Care for All Americans"  turned out to be  health insurance  reform for  some Americans,  that will greatly benefit those who had a vested interest in stopping health care reform.   What was supposed to be  holding those  responsible for the collapse of  our economy  accountable,  became mild tinkering  with  regulations,  and business as usual for those who made billions of dollars  off the misfortune of millions of Americans.

And now,  with the issue of  Civil Rights,   we find at the moment we as a nation are once again most in need of  Presidential Leadership,  the chair  behind the  Resolute Desk,  appears to be empty.


President Obama, the time as come to  show the nation you  have courage to sit at the desk.   The time has come  to uphold the Constitution for  all Americans.

The time has come  turn words into  action.

First Amendment Karma....

This past week,  conservative radio talk show host Laura Schlessinger announced  she would be  quitting her syndicated  radio program at the end of the year.  She told CNN's  Larry King this was a result of her "first amendment rights" being  usurped by groups  who were  angered at her repeated use of a racial epithet with a caller on the air  a few days earlier...





Not one to miss out on a chance to jump on to some  free publicity,  Sarah Palin, the  failed former half-term Governor of Alaska  tweeted  her sisterly  support almost  immediately.

What I find  interesting, is  the  reaction in the conservative media-sphere  to all of this.   


Both "Dr" Laura, and  Sarah Palin   are  framing this  as  a case of  the  Schlessinger's  rights  to free  expression  having been violated. 


I remember  back in the Spring  of  1990,  there was a trial  involving  the  Cincinnati Museum of Art .  The museum was hosting an exhibition of photographs by  Robert Mapplethorpe . Dennis Barrie, the  director of  the museum was charged with  violations of  the city's  obscenity code.  A Jury acquitted Barrie and  museum  but  the resulting  public relations fallout  cost the museum a number of  major donors,  who  pulled their  support.    


At time time,  there were a number of voices on the political Left,  who  decried  the efforts  by  conservative groups to boycott support for the  museum  as a form  a  censorship. 

I was the editorial editor of my college  newspaper, and remember writing that the First Amendment has to go  BOTH ways.  It is just as much a form of  free speech if  someone chooses not to donate to a museum because of  something on display there.  I remember taking  heat from some of my more  progressive friends  who felt I was condoning censorship by mob rule.   


Now  it is  interesting to see  this issue coming back to haunt conservatives.  The same people  who in 1990 championed the rights of  "pro-family" groups to boycott the Cincinnati Art Museum,  now claim that  progressives who boycotted the  sponsors  of the  "Dr. Laura" show are guilty of violating the first amendment.


Sorry, but no.  The first amendment  is  clear.  It  prohibits  the government from preventing the  exercise of  free speech.   The same First Amendment that gives the American 'Family' Association the right to boycott McDonald's restaurants  for not banning  gays eating there, also gives  Gays and Lesbians the right to boycott Dr. Laura for calling millions of Americans  a "biological error".


It was  during the height of the  constroversy  around  Schlessinger's  "error" comments that  the  brilliant writers of  NBC's   "The West Wing",  had art  imitate life,  with an exchange  between the fictional President Bartlett and a fictional  talk-radio host "Dr. Jenna Jacobs".





In an interview with USA Today,  Schlessinger said she  was pleased to see "other doors opening" for her, as she leaves her radio show.    I am actually glad to hear that.   I would miss "Dr. Laura", if for no other reason,  she and others like her  are a vivid reminder  of  how freedom of speech goes  both ways.    


This past week  has shown  once again,   how  often  the  Dr. Laura's and Sarah Palin's of the world,  claim to  love the  Bill of Rights,  but feel it should only apply to them.

Mexico and Canada are Stealing our Gays!

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
Invasion of the Country Snatchers
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election Fox News

So Are Ya' Pregnant Yet???

The  good folks over at the  Huffington Post  bring us the latest  last  gasp of insanity from  the Theocratic Republic of  Teabagistan...

California voters had sound reasons and were not motivated by anti-gay bias when they outlawed same-sex unions in 2008, sponsors of the ban said Monday while urging a federal appeals court to stop gay weddings from resuming.

In addition, the state's interest in promoting responsible procreation through heterosexual marriages would be harmed if gay marriages were permitted while the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reviews a previous ruling that overturned Proposition 8, lawyers contended in legal filings.

"The record leaves no doubt, none at all, that California, 44 other states, and the vast majority of countries throughout the world continue to draw the line at marriage because it continues to serve a vital societal interest that is equally ubiquitous – to channel potentially procreative sexual relationships into enduring, stable unions for the sake of responsibly producing and raising the next generation," the lawyers wrote.

When you have this much craziness to choose from,  it's  hard to know exactly where to begin.  So  lets  start with pointing out  the obvious;   When the  supporters of  Prop 8 say  "the record leaves no doubt..."   by  "record"  they mean whichever  one of the voices in their heads was loudest that day.    

So having failed  with the  "You can't let the Gays get married  because  Jeebus  hates 'em."  argument,  the proponents of  Prop 8 are trying  their favorite last-ditch argument  one more time.    Since  they couldn't offer any proof  of  their  claim that  Same Sex Marriage will harm children, hey have tweaked it  just a bit.  Now  letting the Gays marry will  cause  straight people  to  stop having children all together.  Because, the true  purpose of Marriage  is to  be first and foremost  a  Baby Factory.    

It's hard  not  to  wonder  if  the National Organization for  (some people's)  Marriage even knows  they have  become a sad  parody of  a Monty Python production number...

The defendants in  Perry v. Schwarzenegger  have once again  decided  to simply pull  wackiness  out of their asses and  call it  fact.    This is why  these bigots keep losing in court.  On FOX News  they  spew their  nonsense and never  have to offer any proof.  Courts of Law, however  tend to  require  that  all that  pesky stuff  called  "evidence".  

Last week  Tony Perkins, the  Grand Wizard  of the  'Family Research Council'  was on "Face the Nation".  He   tried his darnedest   to  spin opinion into fact, but  that sneaky  David Boies  kept  insisting  on  bringing  reality  into the  conversation.   (Tony hates it when  that happens...)

So the last ditch  legal  argument of  American Taliban to stop Same Sex couples  from getting married  next Wednesday is this;  Unless you are  churning out  kids every nine months  your  marriage is not  valid, and is even a  threat  to  State of  California.

Seriously,  these people  are  insane.

You Gotta love Mark Fiore....

Fear & Fundamentalism: How the GOP & FOX Made, then Lost Control of the Tea Party.

Back in the mid 1980's  there was a political cartoon that came out that depicted a map of  "The World According to Ronald Reagan".   I am not sure who the artist was, but  it was a delightful  tongue-in-cheek satire  of  the  conservative Republican world view in the late  20th Century.

Some thirty years or so later,  it  all seems  so sweetly naive in  its simplistic  humor.   The over the top nature of the joke is what made it funny.   Now in 2010,   if you were to  erase Reagan's name and put  say....  Sarah Palin, or Newt Gingrich  or  Glen Beck,  then  the cartoon is not so much funny as it  would be frighteningly accurate in how the Neo-Conservative movement of the  early 21rst Century  really does see the world .

I have often blogged  about how  the  Republican Party has lost its way.  How it  has abandoned  its core principles and  ideals  in exchange for  campaign cash from  religious social conservatives.  The GOP platform could be summed up in three words;  God, Guns and Gays.

 It was strategy that  served the GOP well in  1994,  2000 and  2004.   Yet  in  2006 and 2008  the strategy fell apart as the impact of the Republican Party's  disastrous  choices  became clear.  And in 2008  it  didn't just fail but  it  actually backfired and drove millions  of  independent voters  away from the McCain Palin ticket and straight to the  Democrats.  Creating  blue states in   Colorado,  Nevada , Iowa, Virginia  and North Carolina.. Places where once  such a thing would have been unthinkable   Like many people I was curious to see what the  Republican Party would do in the wake of  back to back  electoral wipe outs.

There was a real sense that  the GOP needed to  retool,  rethink and  adapt to a new political landscape.   And  early on, it seemed the Republicans  had figured that out too.   They appointed  Michael Steele  their new  National Chairman.  There was now, an African American at the helm of the Republican Party, the Party of Lincoln, and emancipation for the first time in its history.

Regardless of  your politics  you had to admit  that  in  principle  at least,  that was pretty amazing. Republicans talked of the need for  a "big tent". and  used words like  "inclusion" and  "diversity".   For the first time since 1994,  it looked like the GOP was going break out beyond it's  base.   But interestingly enough.   something quite different happened.   Instead of learning  from  past mistakes,  the GOP  doubled down.   They became the rabid right wing party of  "Hell No!"   But what is significant  is WHY that happened.  

The base of the GOP, which has,  for the last  15 yrs or so, dutifully sent checks to the  Republican Party, is not intellectually conservative.  It is ultra socially conservative.   These folks are not  reading  the  American Spectator  or  National Review Online.  They are older,  overwhelmingly  white  evangelicals  who in every election since  1992 have met in church basements  and were told  they needed to help fight the "Liberal attack" on America and her families.

At first social conservatives were  riled up  to show their  indignation  at  the  moral  and marital failings of  Bill Clinton.  Then in 2000 they were told told to dig deep to counter  the threat posed to our system of  free market  capitalism by  that tree-hugging  hippie Al Gore.  Who was said to be  plotting to turn our nations  very  sovereignty  over the  United Nations. (gasp!)

And,  truth be told, in 2000 it worked. but just barely.   It took  the U.S. Supreme Court to actually decide who won the Presidency.  But starting in  2000,  that same  GOP Base  started  asking what  were they going to get in return for their time, effort and money?   The holy grail to  the social conservatives  was and still remains,  the  overturn of  Roe v. Wade.    The GOP,  knowing that this  was really not "doable"  at least in a first  GW Bush Term, struggled in early 2001 with  how to  placate a now very active and  riled up GOP base.

Then of course,  in  September of 2001,   everything changed.   Like the  Germans  and Japanese  in  the  1940's ,  like the communist in the 1950's  through the 1980's.   Fundamentalist  Islam provided  a new  enemy  to  fight, and  (more importantly for  the GOP),  911 gave America something  to fear.   In 2004, the Republican Party  went into  full -throttle "be afraid" mode.

In 2004 the GOP successfully waged  a campaign based almost entirely on fear of  the Middle East.  A campaign that was able to convince a  majority of  Americans that  a  former college cheerleader who went AWOL from the Texas National Guard  loved America more than a  decorated  war hero. But, also that they needed vote  against  their own economic self interest and give massive tax breaks to the top 2% of  Americans, and massive deregulation to  Wall Street and the Energy Sector.

And it worked,  for the most part.   But  the base,  while sufficiently  afraid  of  "Islamo-facists".  Was still restless and cranky, and the economy was starting  to  tank.    As it became clear that  even a giving Bush a second term wasn't going  to deliver on  eliminating  a woman's right to choose,  GOP needed a bone to throw to this now very  scared, very angry, and increasingly unemployed  group of Americans  it had worked so hard  to rile up.    The answer?   Give them  the Gays.

Then in 2008  the Democrats  nominated  Barack Hussein Obama.   and  the  GOP base  went  berserk . The  McCain-Palin Campaign  played  the  fear card  as hard as they could.  with catch phrases like; "He Pals around with terrorists",  he  has  "suspicious  associations".  "He  doesn't  love America!".   The results were as disturbing as they were  predictable.    

Towards the end of the 2008 Presidential Campaign even John McCain had to step in and correct his own supporters in the GOP base.   People who were now convinced. that the Democratic Nominee for President was nothing less than a Muslim Manchurian Candidate. Planted here over 40 years ago to eventually bring about the total destruction of America and our way of life.

On election night 2008 the GOP Base was pretty much all The Republicans had left. People who in themiddle of Senator McCain's graceful and eloquent concession couldn't hold back jeering at mention of the President Elects' name. The Republican Party entered 2009 with an angry, and impatient base, convinced they had been victims of a global conspiracy to "steal their country from them". 

As a diminished opposition party the GOP could do little more than just try to obstruct the new Administration at every turn, It was just a matter of time before this group of voters went looking for something new. Something that spoke to their world view, and affirmed their fears.

This was a job for FOX News.

Like all good Media organizations. FOX News knows who their viewers are. And where political parties have a goal of getting voters to the polls every two years, a T.V. network's goal is to get people to tune in every day. Rupert Murdoch and Company saw the door and ran through it. They would "Give the people what they want." They would throw the angry GOP base a party, and not just any party...

They would throw a Tea Party.

One of the first  rules in marketing is  not just that endorsements  create sales,  but also that sales  create endorsements.   Soon a whole flock of  "B" and "C" list  Conservatives like  Sarah Palin,  Representatives  Joe Wilson, Michelle Bachman, and Tom Tancredo.  Talk show hosts like   Glen Beck and  Michael Reagan  were  all hitching  their wagons to the  Tea Party Express.   Soon even  "A" Lister's like  Rush Limbaugh,  Sean Hanity,  and Bill O'Reilly  hopped on not daring to risk being left behind.

In 2010 we had a midterm election  where the  Republican Party was desperate to harness the anger, energy and fear of the Tea Party  in hopes of  turning that into  numbers at the polls that  November.  The GOP Created  the  Tea Party out of it's own scared  angry  social conservative base.  But  it  quickly discovered this monster  has a mind of it's own,  and can turn just as quickly on Republicans  as  it does on Democrats.  In a number of states,   incumbent  Republicans  have found them selves the target of  Tea Party  primary challengers.  Claiming the Republicans are  not  conservative enough.

The Tea Party  says  they "want their country back".   The  vision of  America  they hold  as  "their country" is one where  an  ultra-conservative religious based social agenda  is enacted into Civil Law.  Abortion, Affirmative Action,  Gay and Lesbian Rights,  Separation of (their) Church and State, the social safety nets of  Medicare/ Social Security  and Public Education   are all  abolished.

Victory for  the Tea Party means  turning the  United States of America  into  Teabagistan.

The Tea Party is the American Taliban.   Granted, their methods are not same.  The American Taliban does not use  violence like  their Afghan equivalent.  (Though the family of  Dr. George Tiller might disagree with me on that.)  Yet the American Taliban with their  "don't tread on me" and  "watering the tree of liberty  with the blood of tyrants" rhetoric,   all while brandishing side arms at  rallies, certainly carries  the implied  threat of  violence.   The American and Afghan Talibans are alike in terms of their aims. Which is to take a narrow extremely conservative, even fundamentalist ideology, codify it into law and force it on everyone else.

The GOP is completely dependent upon and beholden to a bunch of lunatics, who hate the U.S. Constitution. To win the Tea Party back, the GOP has to promise things the Tea Party wants. Things like the overturning of Roe v. Wade. A constitutional Amendment banning same sex marriage. Repeal of the 14th and 17th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

That's just for starters, we haven't even scratched the surface in terms of the every man for himself- screw the poor - to pay the rich, economic ideas the Tea Party likes to toss around. Stuff like, completely deregulate Wall Street , THEN turn Social Security into Goldman-Sachs' personal stack of casino chips.

The Republicans and the Tea bagging monsters they have spawned are nothing less than completely and utterly anti-American. The Tea Party likes to wave around copies of the U.S, Constitution, but aside from a few selected lines from the 2nd Amendment, they don't actually believe in it. I know President Obama, as a former professor of Constitutional Law, has actually read the rest of it.

Then in 2012 we saw something really interesting. The GOP's conservative base, along with the Tea Party wrote the narrative that Republicans chose to believe. They collectively decided to believe that facts were wrong, that facts clearly had a liberal bias. All the polling data that clearly indicated re-election for President Obama simply HAD to be wrong.   Anyone who said different was a liberal plant who was trying to make conservatives "feel bad" and consequently suppress GOP/Conservative voter turnout. It made the morning after the 2012 election must- see viewing on cable news.

Now as we head in to the the 2014 midterms and the half way point in Barack Obama's second term, we see the GOP desperate to tame the monster it, along with FOX news has created. Tea Party primary challenges to well known establishment Republicans are becoming the norm, not the exception. The GOP is now faced with the reality of demographics, and the fact that gerrymandered districts, and blatently racist voting restrictions enacted in ultra-conservative states will only help so much, and won't help at all when the insurgent political threat comes from the Right, instead of the Left.

We see a Congress where Republicans will literally allow the governing of the nation to grind to halt, lest any actions they take in any way help the President to do his job, and thus enrage the Tea Party faithful to label them all "RHINOS" (Republicans In Name Only).   I was never a big fan of Aaron Sorkin's "The Newsroom", his follow up series to the brilliant "The West Wing", but in one episode he captures perfectly the cul-de-sac of hate fulled ignorance the GOP has been painted into by its own creation.

What started as a gimmick on FOX News now may very well  be the death knell of the  Republican Party. Transforming the  Party of  Lincoln, Eisenhower and Reagan into a  splintered, fragmented mob of ageing  paranoids.  With the only thing holding them together is the fact their hatred of  other Americans, (be they Liberals or  "not true"  Conservatives), outweighs  their love of their own country.

Slaggie Gillamonster's attack on families...

Rob Tisinai's brilliant posting on Maggie Gallagher's jhiad against American Families...

My 'Anthem' for Today....

This past week, I finished all the documentation and bio-metrics (fingerprints ect.) for my immigration visa application to get married, and move to the United Kingdom.

As the debate over basic civil rights for millions of Americans' right to Marriage Equality rages here in the United States, it's been hard not to feel more than a little bit like Anatoly, the Russian character from the musical "Chess".

So this morning as I finsihed putting all the documents together with my Passport and FedEx'd it the British Consulate in Los Angeles to be processed, this song seemed appropriate to have on the iPod...



My land's only borders lie around my heart...

Stephen Colbert On the Prop 8 Decision

Brilliant... of course

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
How to Ruin Same-Sex Marriages
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes 2010 Election Fox News

When Same Sex Marriage is Finally Legal in all 50 States..

What on Earth will  Slaggie Gillamonster  (Maggie Gallagher) of the  National Organization for  (some people's) Marriage (NOM)  do  to  pass the time?  

Watching the latest  BBC Proms concert  has perhaps provided  one suggestion for Maggie's next  career move  when being a professional bigot no longer pays the bills...

Take it away boys...

Why Prop 8 Was Completely Anti-American

The celebrations  here in San Francisco  are  still going on at this hour.   The rally which began in  the Castro District soon turned in to a  celebratory march that  shut down half  of  Market Street  as it made its way to Civic Center Plaza in front of   SF City Hall.

There  were  speeches,  (lots of speeches), music, flags, banners and lots of  joy. Even though  the decision  in  Perry v. Schwarzenegger,  won't go into effect  today.  (There is a two day  time frame for the court to consider  a motion by opponents of  Marriage Equality to stay the the resumption  of  same sex marriages  in California  while  they appeal this case  to the  U.S. Supreme Court.)  Yet the sense of vindication and  victory in  the California  LGBT community  is  clear  for everyone to see.

So what does this all mean?    Does this mean  Same Sex  Marriage  will soon be  sweeping the nation?  Well,  not so much.    The ruling  simply says the State of California  can't  ban  gay marriage  here in  CA.   Which is  largely symbolic.   There still is no Federal  recognition of  same sex marriages.  Same sex  spouses  still can't  file joint  Federal  Income Tax forms,   pass on  Social Security Survivor  benefits  or  sponsor their  husband or wife  for  immigration to the  U.S.

All of those  key benefits  associated with marriage  are  regulated on  Federal level  by the  ridiculously   mis-named  "Defense of Marriage Act".  (DOMA) and  at least for now,  that law  is unchanged.    Should  the Perry case  make it to the  U.S. Supreme Court,(which it is pretty safe to say it  most likely will),   that  law could  very well change.   Should the  nine SCOTUS  Justices  uphold  the  ruling made today,  it would  in effect  nullify  all  laws  banning Marriage  Equality  in the  United States.

So why did the  pro- Prop 8 forces  lose?   I will  talk about  the  legal  issues  in  a minute.  but  what  was  amazing about this  court  case  was  how  the  supporters of  Prop 8  were  completely  unable to  provide any real  evidence  backing up  their  positions.    I could  go on  and on about  how hollow and   empty  the  Yes On 8 arguments  were, but  Rachel Maddow does it so much better than  I could:



We''ll set the spectacle  of  the  Prop 8 trial,  and  the inherent silliness of  the attempt to use "Gay is Bad  because God Says So" as a legal  argument,  aside for the moment.   the biggest reason why the plaintiffs in this case won,  and  why Prop 8 is completely unconstitutional  is very simple.    So  allow me to  lay it out for you .

1)  Same Sex Marriage doesn't threaten or impact ANYONE ELSE'S  marriage  or family  in any way.
2) You cannot  put  the civil rights of  a minority  up  to  popular vote. Rights  are not subject to the whims of  the electorate  that is why they are  RIGHTS.
3)  Just because you don't like a particular minority,  doesn't mean you get to make them 2nd Class Citizens

Judge Walker,  puts it  even more clearly on page  116 of  his ruling where he writes that;

 "fundamental rights may not be submitted to a vote, they depend on the outcome of no elections"

This  is why Proposition 8 is fundamentally un-American, and  un-constitutional.

Prop 8 took  the whole idea  of   fundamental rights laid out  in  the Declaration of  Independence and  the U.S. Constitution and said  that  they were not inalienable.  But rather subject to the mood  of  at least 51% of  whoever shows up to vote in a given election.  That is not democracy, that is electorally sanctioned discrimination,   and it was an affront to everything  our country stands for, and  everything our nation's  founding fathers stood for.

Proposition 8,  denied  basic, fundamental  civil rights  to  an entire group of  Californians,  based  solely on a desire by  groups like the Mormon Church and  Conservative Evangelicals, to put into civil law their belief that  God hates Gay people.  So therefore  the law should treat them as less than everybody else.

If the  U.S.  Supreme Court fails to uphold  today's ruling,  they will have said that  the United States of America is no better than the Taliban.

WOW PROP 8 STRUCK DOWN!!

Prop 8 Ruling

Decision in the Prop 8 Federal Lawsuit will be Announced Today

The Young Turks  put things in perspective  for us...