The New Hampshire state house just defeated a bill to repeal gay marriage.
Category: Civil Rights
House of Saud Takes Steps to Ensure Sunni Hegemony in Syria
There are reports that the house of Saud is arming the rebels in Syria:
Saudi Arabia is delivering military equipment to Syrian rebels in an effort to stop bloodshed by President Bashar al-Assad’s regime, a top Arab diplomat said on March 17.
“Saudi military equipment is on its way to Jordan to arm the Free Syrian Army,” the diplomat told AFP on condition of anonymity.
“This is a Saudi initiative to stop the massacres in Syria,” he added, saying that further “details will follow at a later time.”
The announcement came two days after the conservative Sunni-ruled kingdom said it had shut down its embassy in Syria and withdrawn all its staff.
It also followed a brief meeting on the Syrian crisis last week between Jordan’s King Abdullah II and the Saudi monarch King Abdullah in Riyadh.
There was no official reaction to the statement from the Saudi capital, but Jordan flatly rejected the report.
“Jordan categorically denies the report,” government spokesman and information minister Rakan Majali told AFP.
What we need to understand is that the actions of the Arab league are being driven by the House of Saud, and their goal is to take down the more secular regimes, and to ensure Sunni control of societies wherever possible.
They see this as an essential action for preserving their (completely corrupt and dysfunctional) regime.
They need to play up sectarian conflict, and they need to take down regimes like Qaddafi’s and Assad’s, because they have largely pushed religion out of the public sphere in order to distract their population.
That’s why they are continuing to support (occupy, really) Bahrain, even though the crack-down there is so bad that the US is delaying weapons sales.
While our relationship with the House of Saud is good for the defense industry they are allies much in the same sense as the Pakistanis are.
Once Again, Obama Punts on Gay Marriage
It looks like the DNC is scrambling to find a way not to deal with marriage equality:
In recent weeks, a debate has been raging between leading Dems and gay rights advocates over whether the Democratic Party will make full marriage equality a plank in the party platform at the upcoming convention. Antonio Villaraigosa, the chair of the convention, recently stoked the fires when he said having such a plank would be “basic to who we are.”
But now The Huffington Post reports that Democratic National Committee officials have been privately pleading with advocates for patience on the issue, because it’s still viewed by top party officials as “politically sensitive” and potentially alienating to culturally conservative swing state Dems. HuffPo reports the DNC worries that “sweeping platform language would put the president in an awkward bind,” since President Obama is still “evolving” on gay marriage.
If Obama wanted this, it would be in there without a fight. The DNC does wipe its ass without checking with the White House. (As should be the case with a sitting President)
The tragedy here is that public opinion on this is moving blisteringly fast, and there are very few people on the wrong side of this issue who would vote Democrat.
They are dissing the base in order to pander to an electoral lost cause.
Just When Thought that the ‘Phants Could Not Get Any More Repulsive…
The Republicans in Arizona are trying to pass a bill allowing your employer to fire women for using birth-control pills for ……… birth control:
Law Will Allow Employers to Fire Women for Using Whore Pills
A proposed new law in Arizona would give employers the power to request that women being prescribed birth control pills provide proof that they’re using it for non-sexual reasons. And because Arizona’s an at-will employment state, that means that bosses critical of their female employees’ sex lives could fire them as a result. If we could harness the power of the crappy ideas coming out of the state of Arizona, we could probably power a rocket ship to the moon, where there are no Mexicans or fertile wombs and everyone can be free to be as mean a cranky asshole as they want at all times! Arizona Heaven!
Because allowing employers to afflict their hatred of women on their employees is freedom!
Seriously, this people, and I mean people, the sponsor, is a woman, Majority Whip Debbie Lesko, R-Glendale, have an attitude towards women that makes the Taliban look like the editorial staff of Cosmopolitian.
They really hate the idea of women having any sort of freedom.
I have a suggestion for dealing these rat-f%$#s, that we go classic Greek theater on their asses.
More specifically, I suggest that their significant others go Lysistrata on their asses.
It Sucks to be Scott Walker
A federal judge has issued an injunction against Wisconsin’s voter ID law, so it’s now almost certain that his recall election will be free of his voter suppression tactics:
A Wisconsin law requiring voters to show photo identification to receive a ballot was temporarily blocked by a state judge after a civil rights group sued Governor Scott Walker over the measure.
Judge David Flanagan in Dane County yesterday ruled that the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People demonstrated a probability of success in overturning the 2011 law and that a temporary injunction was necessary to prevent “irreparable harm.”
“If no injunction is issued, a clearly improper impairment of a most vital element of our society will occur,” Flanagan wrote in his order. “The duty of the court is clear. The case has been made.”
Democrats and Republicans are at odds over voting laws before the 2012 elections. Democrats say they are seeking to ensure voters’ access to the polls while Republicans such as Walker argue more needs to be done to prevent voter fraud. Similar suits claiming the Wisconsin law unconstitutionally burdens the rights of people including senior citizens and minorities are pending in state and federal court.
The ‘Phants are making noises about the primary, but what they really want to do is prevent minorities from voting in the Scott Brown recall.
It’s not gonna happen.
Well it might happen when it hits the Roberts Supreme Court, but that is at least a year away.
Eric Holder Argues that Assassination is Legal
Jeebus. It’s now OK to murder an American citizen because the President says so:
Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday explained why it’s legal to murder people — not to execute prisoners convicted of capital crimes, not to shoot someone in self-defense, not to fight on a battlefield in a war that is somehow legalized, but to target and kill an individual sitting on his sofa, with no charges, no arrest, no trial, no approval from a court, no approval from a legislature, no approval from we the people, and in fact no sharing of information with any institutions that are not the president.
…………
By “government” Holder means the president, whether President Obama or President Romney or President Santorum or any man or woman who later becomes president, and nobody else. That one person alone is to decide what is appropriate and lawful and feasible. If the Vice President thinks it is feasible to capture somene, too bad for him. He should have gotten a better job if he wanted to be a decider. If the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court thinks preaching against the United States is not a capital offense, tough tamales. He shouldn’t dress in his bathrobe if he wants to be taken seriously. If the United States Congress objects that the president’s “surgical strikes” tend to kill too many random men, women, and children, well they know what they can do: Run for president! If the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial killings has objections, well — Isn’t that SPECIAL? And the American people? They can shut up or vote for a racist buffoon from the bad party.
…………
But you see, this is all OK, because Barack Obama is a good guy, so no countervailing government structures, or for that matter any public access to information needs to be allowed:
A consensus has emerged during the presidency of Barack Obama. His administration is increasingly regarded as the worst on issues related to freedom of information and transparency.
Today, Josh Gerstein of POLITICO has a story that gives voice to this emerging consensus, which more and more open government advocates hold despite the fact that the Obama Administration maintains it is committed to “openness.”
Gerstein’s story features a quote from a Washington-based lawyer “who’s been filing” Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests since 1978. The lawyer, Katherine Mayer, says, “Obama is the sixth administration that’s been in office since I’ve been doing Freedom of Information Act work. … It’s kind of shocking to me to say this, but of the six, this administration is the worst on FOIA issues. The worst. There’s just no question about it.”
Think about this for a second: This is all predicated on the idea that the Executive is a good guy who won’t abuse power, and so there is no need for checks and balances.
This is why I call Barack Obama the worst constitutional law professor ever.
On to the November Referendum
Martin Omalley has signed Maryland’s gay marriage bill into law:
Amid cheers and camera flashes from a crush of onlookers, Gov. Martin O’Malley signed into law Thursday his bill legalizing same-sex marriage in Maryland — legislation that raises his national profile and, advocates say, gives momentum to those pushing similar measures in three states.
“The way forward is always found through greater respect for the equal rights of all,” said O’Malley, giving brief remarks before signing the legislation. “If there is a thread that unites all of our work here together, it is the thread of human dignity. … Let’s sign the bill.”
Opponents are already collecting signatures for a referendum, but I really think that they will lose the vote.
The public views on gay marriage are shifting with remarkable speed.
Score One for the Good Guys
It looks like the Obama administration has shut down an NSA proposal to continuously monitor huge portions of the internet:
The National Security Agency has pushed repeatedly over the past year to expand its role in protecting private-sector computer networks from cyberattacks but has been rebuffed by the White House, largely because of privacy concerns, according to administration officials and internal documents.
The most contentious issue was a legislative proposal last year that would have required hundreds of companies that provide such critical services as electricity generation to allow their Internet traffic to be continuously scanned using computer threat data provided by the spy agency. The companies would have been expected to turn over evidence of potential cyberattacks to the government.
The National Security Agency has pushed repeatedly over the past year to expand its role in protecting private-sector computer networks from cyberattacks but has been rebuffed by the White House, largely because of privacy concerns, according to administration officials and internal documents.
The most contentious issue was a legislative proposal last year that would have required hundreds of companies that provide such critical services as electricity generation to allow their Internet traffic to be continuously scanned using computer threat data provided by the spy agency. The companies would have been expected to turn over evidence of potential cyberattacks to the government.
While the NSA does good work, their world view, and hence their policy prescriptions, are driven by the fact that they are eavesdroppers.
Basically, they want to make their jobs easier, without any sort of cumbersome review of civil rights protections. It’s the inevitable consequence of who they are and what they do.
Their organizational imperative leads them to support policies that can be described as either totalitarian or sociopathic, which is why care should be taken to ensure that they are the servant, and not the master, of security policy in the United States.
H/t Kevin Drum.
Bully For Him!
In Tunisia, Yunisian President Marzouki has requsted that the parliament pass a law banning accusations of blasphemy:
Tunisian President Moncef Marzouki on Saturday called on parliament to outlaw accusations of blasphemy as a threat to public order.
“Such practices can threaten the peace between citizens living in the same country and lead to conflict,” Marzouki warned in a statement.
He asked the president and members of the Constituent Assembly which in December approved the North African country’s new government to adopt legislation “that outlaws accusations of blasphemy.”
Violators of the new law should be prosecuted “to protect the coexistence, fraternity and solidarity among Tunisians,” he said.
I think that the right to blaspheme is among the most basic of human rights, so I am heartened by this development.
Del. Sam Arora Needs be Drummed Out of Politics
For those who are not up on Maryland politics, Sam Arora was considered to be a politico with a great future, but he campaigned on a promise to support, and co-sponsor, a bill supporting gay marriage, and then he opposed it.
The bill passed the House of Delegates by virtue of a Republican vote delivered by the lobbying of Dick Cheney.
For once, it appears that there will be consequences of his action.
I’m sure he’s feeling courageous, but he’s a coward. If he had any guts, he would not have pretended to support marriage equality when he thought that there was no chance of it passing.
He campaigned on gay marriage, and when it looked like it would pass, he voted against it.
This is why members of the Democratic establishment in both Maryland and nationwide are currently determining the best way to ensure that he won’t work in Democratic Party politics ever again.
I would note that it’s likely that he’s going to have some staffing problems in the immediate future, as his his legislative director quit once he knew that he was going to vote against HB 348.
My guess is that this is the first of many departures, because if anyone on his a staff wants to have a future in politics, having Sam Arora on your resume after January 2012 will be toxic.
Fabulous!!!!!!!
The Maryland House has just approved gay marriage in Maryland:
A bill that would legalize same-sex marriage squeaked through the House of Delegates Friday night with one more vote than the minimum needed for passage, putting Maryland on the cusp of being the eighth state to allow such unions.
Cheers erupted when the gavel dropped on the final 72-67 tally. Within minutes, Gov. Martin O’Malley, a Democrat who sponsored the bill, walked from his second-floor office to the door of the House chamber, embraced House Speaker Michael E. Busch and said, “Good job, man.”
“We are a good people. We all want the same things for our kids,” O’Malley said. Then he extended credit to delegates and activists, many of whom had been skeptical about his commitment to the issue. “These guys did it,” he said.
The measure now goes to the Senate, which passed a similar bill last year and is expected do so again. The chamber will likely take up the measure next week.
Should the bill pass in both chambers, activists on both sides believe it would be petitioned to referendum in November. If voters approve the measure, the earliest a gay couple would be able to wed is January 2013, when the law would go into effect.
The victory is significant for O’Malley, who threw the weight of his office behind the measure after a similar bill fell a few votes short in the House last year. The governor had been working the halls of the House office building at all hours to persuade wavering delegates.
In national terms, the Maryland vote caps a week in which proponents of same-sex marriage have scored significant victories with the signing of a similar law in Washington state and the Legislature’s approval of a marriage bill in New Jersey, though Gov. Chris Christie vetoed it Friday.
This is very good news, because it passed the state Senate last year, so it looks like it will make it to the Governor’s desk.
One weird bit: One of the people that we have to thank for this is Dick Cheney:
By far the biggest boost came in the morning when Republican Del. Wade Kach, who was considered a sure-fire no vote, threw his support behind O’Malley’s bill. Kach had voted against the bill two days earlier in committee.
The Baltimore County delegate said he reached his decision after mulling the testimony he’d heard during a nearly 11-hour hearing on the bill last week and watching how same-sex couples supported one another. “I thought to myself, if my constituents were here, they’d have a different perspective on the issue,” Kach said. “I’m sure of it.”
He also became the target of a last-minute lobby effort, and said his voice mail was full of messages from important people, including Mehlman, Bloomberg and an offer to talk with former Vice President Dick Cheney, whom Kach regards as a “great man.” All three are recognized for their support of gay rights issues.
But you know, I’ll take it.
That being said, there are still enough bigots in Maryland to put this on the ballot, and it’s probably gonna be close.
Your Good News of the Day
Both houses of the Washington State legislature have passed gay marriage legislation, and the Governor will sign it.
Appeals Court Rules that Prop 8 Is Unconstitutional
It was a 2-1 decision, and the opinion is a pretty strong:
“Although the Constitution permits communities to enact most laws they believe to be desirable, it requires that there be at least a legitimate reason for the passage of a law that treats different classes of people differently,” Judge Stephen R. Reinhardt wrote in the decision. “There was no such reason that Proposition 8 could have been enacted.”
“All that Proposition 8 accomplished was to take away from same-sex couples the right to be granted marriage licenses and thus legally to use the designation ‘marriage,’ ” the judge wrote, adding, “Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gay men and lesbians in California.”
BTW, all three judges agreed that the defendants request that the judge Vaughn Walker recuse himself was pretty much a crock of sh%$.
The precedent on this case is fairly straightforward, the Supreme Court ruling on Colorado’s Amendment 2 about 15 years ago, where they said that voters can’t strip rights from a group just because they make them feel squicky, the so-called “rational basis” test.
The question now is whether or not this case goes to the full appeals court (en banc), or to the Supreme Court.
And while we are on recusals. Seeing as how Scalia has publicly, and repeatedly, made comments explicitly stating that he has pre-judged the matter, how about he recuse his flabby ass from the case?
If SCOTUS takes it, it will be closer though, as O’Connor has been replaced by Alito, who is an almost certain vote against gay civil rights.
Facepalm
Just when you thought that New Jersey could not get any more pathetic, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie said that civil rights leaders in the 1950s and 1960s would have been cool with a referendum to give civil rights without regard to race:
The verbal feud over gay marriage in New Jersey got more personal Monday with Gov. Chris Christie firing a slang term [numb nuts] at a lawmaker, and a hero of the Civil Rights movement chastising the governor for a separate remark.
………The issue also brought U.S. Rep. John Lewis of Georgia to Trenton on Monday to take Christie to task for comments linking gay marriage to the civil rights struggle of the 1960s.Christie last week vowed to veto any gay marriage bill that reaches his desk. He instead called for the question to be put to voters in November.“I think people would have been happy to have a referendum on civil rights, rather than fighting and dying in the streets in the South,” Christie said after an event in Central Jersey.Black leaders pounced. Newark Mayor Cory Booker said baseball great Jackie Robinson would not have had the opportunity to break the sport’s color barrier had the matter been put to a vote, and the mayor himself would not have had the opportunity, years later, to be elected to lead New Jersey’s largest city. Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver said many felt the sting of Christie’s comment.Gusciora, who is white, said Christie would have found allies in late Alabama Gov. George Wallace and late Georgia Gov. Lester Maddox, both segregationists.
This is what qualifies as a deep thought by the ‘Phants.
God, what a repulsive person.
Twitter Goes Evil
So now Twitter has decided to do the dirty-work of every despotic regime on the face of the planet earth:
Twitter, a tool of choice for dissidents and activists around the world, found itself the target of global outrage Friday after unveiling plans to allow country-specific censorship of tweets that might break local laws.
It was a stunning role reversal for a youthful company that prides itself in promoting unfettered expression, 140 characters at a time. Twitter insisted its commitment to free speech remains firm, and sought to explain the nuances of its policy, while critics — in a barrage of tweets — proposed a Twitter boycott and demanded that the censorship initiative be scrapped.
“This is very bad news,” tweeted Egyptian activist Mahmoud Salem. Later, he wrote, “Is it safe to say that #Twitter is selling us out?”
Yes.
This has been another episode of simple answers to simple questions.
They are claiming that this has nothing to do with China, but is has everything to do with China.
Roberts Court Gets One Right
They have ruled by 9-0 that a warrant is required to plant a GPS tracker on someone’s car.
The the majority opinion was that the physical installation of a tracker was a trespass, and hence required a warrant, while 4 justices, Alito, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kagan argued more broadly that it “impinged on the expectation of privacy.”
This is not a distinction without a difference. The former position leaves issues like, for example, tracking a cell phone, unclear, and you can be sure that lazy members of the law enforcement community will exploit this ambiguity.
And as SOPA/PIPA Goes Down, the Supreme Court Decides to F%$# the Concept of Public Domain
The Supreme Court just ruled that the public domain can be taken away whenever Congress wants to:
We’ve been talking about the Golan case, and its possible impact on culture, for years. If you’re unfamiliar with it, it’s the third in a line of cases, starting with the Eldred case, to challenge aspects of copyright law as violating the First Amendment. The key point in the case was questioning whether or not the US could take works out of the public domain and put them under copyright. The US had argued it needed to do this under a trade agreement to make other countries respect our copyrights. Of course, for those who were making use of those public domain works, it sure seemed like a way to unfairly lock up works that belonged to the public. It was difficult to see how retroactively taking works out of the public domain could fit into the traditional contours of copyright law… but today, on the day of the big SOPA/PIPA protests… that’s exactly what happened (pdf).
The ruling is ridiculously depressing. The Justices basically just keep repeating the mantra they first set forth in Eldred, that as long as Congress says it’s okay — and that the “fair use” and the “idea/expression” dichotomy remain — all is just dandy. They also claim that since the very first copyright law took works from the public domain and gave them copyright protection, clearly there’s nothing wrong with removing works from the public domain. This decision reinforces why the Eldred decision was a complete disaster, and just keeps getting worse. The Eldred ruling basically ignored the fact that copyright had changed entirely in a way that went against the First Amendment… by retroactively granting copyright extension. Now that ruling is being used to take works out of the public domain as well.
First, as with Eldred (and the second case in the trilogy, the Kahle case), I believe that the Court is greatly mistaken in its analysis of copyright law. First it claims that there’s little fight between copyright and the First Amendment because the two things were put in place at about the same time. That’s a specious argument for a variety of reasons. First, the original copyright law was significantly limited in a way that it was unlikely to really come into conflict with the First Amendment. It was limited to just a few specific areas, and for a very short period of time. It’s only now that (1) copyright law has been totally flipped to make just about everything you create covered by copyright, (2) the law has been massively expanded in time and (3) changes in technology make us all create tons of “copyrighted” material all the time — things have changed an entirely. It’s hard to see how the Court can reasonably argue that the traditional contours of copyright law have not changed… but that’s exactly what it does. Stunningly, the majority decision here, written by Justice Ginsburg, seems to suggest that there’s no First Amendment issue here, because if people want to make use of the works that were previously, but are no longer, in the public domain, they can just buy those rights:
This ruling sucks wet farts from dead pigeons.
IP increasingly resembles the Enclosure Acts in England, with a similar outcome. The ordinary people get f%$#ed, and the nobility makes out like raped apes.
Needless to say, this does not serve, “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,” as the constitution states.
OWS Update
Good news everyone!
I invented a device that makes you read this in your head using my voice!
Civil rights group have gotten the police to take the barricades around Zuccoti (Freedom) Park.
H/t MP at the Stellar Parthenon BBS, who is probably at the park as we speak.
Honestly, I expect Mike Bloomberg’s bully boys will find a way to ignore the law in just a couple of days.
Videos of some cop beating up a crippled child at a protest to follow in a few days.
Full statement after the break.
City Removes Illegal Barriers at Zuccotti Park One Day After Rights Groups Send Threatening Letter
January 10, 2012 — NYPD officers removed barriers tonight at Zuccotti Park, just one day after the New York Civil Liberties Union, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and the New York City chapter of the National Lawyers Guild put New York City on notice that its arbitrary and inconsistently applied rules and security measures restricting the public’s access to the park violated city zoning laws.
“We’re pleased the city is finally giving the park back to the people,” said NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman. “We hope Zuccotti Park can now resume its rightful place as a center for meeting and protest in New York City.”
On Monday, the groups sent a letter New York City Department of Buildings Commissioner Robert LiMandri urging him to promptly address the violations and ensure that Zuccotti Park is open and accessible to all members of the public on an equal basis. Metal barricades had encircled the park since the NYPD cleared the Occupy Wall Street encampment there on Nov. 16. Until tonight, the public could only enter the park through two gaps where security personnel selectively subjected people to searches.
The groups said that these security measures and the constantly changing, selectively enforced and unwritten park rules violated zoning laws, longstanding city policies, and park-owner Brookfield Properties’ legal obligations under a 1968 special zoning permit that established the park as a “permanently open park” for “the public benefit.”
Deep Thought
H/t JR at the Stellar Parthenon BBS.
John Stewart Goes Postal on Barack Obama
Brutal!
John Stewart gives Barack Obama a righteous, and justly deserved, beat-down over the President’s signing of the “f%$# the Bill of Rights” indefinite detention defense authorization bill.
It’s remarkable how much eloquence he (and to be fair, his writers) gives to the absolute outrage through humor than the outrage expressed by other commentators.
If you want to show someone who doesn’t get why what happened is so wrong, this conveys it more succinctly than anything I’ve read from Greenwald, or Taibbi, or the Rude Pundit.
Stewart is a national treasure.