Category: Civil Rights

DADT Injunction Stands (for now)

No Comments

In response to the government’s request that she stay her injunction against Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Federal Judge Virginia Phillips has refused a stay:

A federal judge formally refused on Tuesday to let the Pentagon reinstate its ban on openly gay men and women in the U.S. military while it appeals her decision declaring its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy unconstitutional.

A day after tentatively siding against the Obama administration, U.S. District Judge Virginia Phillips issued a written decision denying a government request to lift her own injunction barring further Pentagon enforcement of the ban.

Needless to say the Obama Administration will attempt to have the injunction stayed on appeal, taking it first to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and then to the Supreme Court, and they will do so on an expedited basis.

Because the Obama administration is desparate for the witch hunts in the military to proceed without pause.

Even if they feel that they have a constitutional duty to fight the case, this injunction will not, according to Barack Obama’s own words, he does not believe will do any damage to the military.

The only reasons to pursue this are cowardice and bigotry, and at this point, I am inclined to favor the latter as an explanation, because at this point, with two weeks to go in the election, the all the gay baiting that is going to be done has been done.

Realistically, when you look at administrations inaction on these matters, combined with Obamas public statements opposing gay marriage, I think that we have to believe that this is motivated by bigotry.

Obama Administration Requests Stay on DADT Injunction

No Comments

There’s a shocker. They want to continue the witch hunts and persecutions while they are appealing:

The Obama administration on Thursday asked a judge to allow the Pentagon to keep its ban against openly gay men and women in the military while it appeals her decision that ruled the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy was unconstitutional.

President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and military leaders have backed ending the policy, but have urged that it be done by the U.S. Congress and military so that there is no disruption to military operations, morale or recruiting.

At a town hall meeting with young voters, a woman pressed Obama on why he wasn’t ending the policy immediately.

“This is not a situation where with a stroke of a pen I can end the policy,” he said and noted that he cannot ignore laws on the books. “This policy will end and it will end on my watch.”

This is a lie. Obama, with a stroke of a pen, could end the separations, and if Congress passes something (ha!) then it is his pen that will sign the bill.

When we look at Obama, one has to wonder whether he, or those people closest to him, like Valerie “gay is a lifestyle choice” Jarrett say about gays when they are having their private moments.

I’m beginning to think that the policy here is to find a path to do the least possible without fatally alienating the party.

If Obama were a Republican, we would be talking about his homophobia right now.

They Do This Because They Believe that Minorities Should Not Vote

No Comments
I have to invoke this when discussing the travails of anyone named “Kirk”.


In any case, let’s roll tape*

That is why Republicans like Mark Kirk spend enormous amounts of time and effort trying to keep minorities from voting.

The difference is that this time, he got caught on tape:

In a private phone conversation that was secretly recorded, Mark Kirk, the Republican U.S. Senate candidate in Illinois, told state Republican leaders last week about his plan to send “voter integrity” squads to four predominately African American neighborhoods of Chicago “where the other side might be tempted to jigger the numbers somewhat.”

Kirk’s campaign confirmed the candidate was secretly taped last week as he was talking about his anti-voter fraud effort.

Someone taped this discussion, and then released it into the wild.

There are some values of the Republican party that have been present since its founding, like opposition to organized labor, and there are some that are the product of the politically expedient decision to embrace the white racist portion of the electorate with the “Southern Strategy.”

It started with Barry Goldwater, was embraced and extended by Nixon, and finally came to full fruit under Ronald Reagan, who did his best to make bigotry look cool.

In the process, the bigots subsumed the party.

Thus we are left with the Republican definition of “vote fraud”: to them, it means allowing n*gg*rs to vote.

*The “tape” is actually illegal, as Illinois, like Maryland is a 2 party consent state, but that is largely irrelevant to the fact that a rock got turned over, and the slime beneath was revealed.

Judge Enjoins Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Obama Defends DOMA

No Comments

A month ago, Judge Virginia Phillips ruled Don’t Ask Don’t Tell unconstitutional, and today, she issued a permanent injunction against the policy, forbidding the military from conducting investigations or proceeding with separations:

A federal judge in California issued a permanent ban Tuesday on the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays and lesbians in the military, ordering the Defense Department to immediately halt any efforts to remove personnel because of their sexual orientation.

The government has 60 days to appeal the ruling, which gives the administration until after the midterm election next month to make a decision. But it also presents a problem for President Obama as he tries to rally his Democratic base.

As a presidential candidate, Obama said he would work to do away with the policy. But should the Justice Department appeal the ruling, it could anger many of the president’s liberal supporters, something Obama and congressional Democrats can ill afford.

In a separate case that posed a similar problem, the administration decided Tuesday to appeal two court rulings in Massachusetts that found unconstitutional the federal definition of marriage as between a man and a woman.

The administration filed a notice of appeal to protect the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, which bars gay marriages, although Obama opposes the law. A Justice Department spokeswoman told the Associated Press that the administration was obligated to defend federal laws when challenged in court.

So we know where this is going. On November 3, when there is no immediate electoral consequence, the DoJ will file an appeal, because, to paraphrase Kanye West, Barack Obama doesn’t care about gay people,

If Congress wants to change the law, there will be no support from the White House, and we know this because there has been no support from the White House, but rest assured he’ll probably sign a repeal if it hits his desk, because it’s the easy thing to do.

Maryland Court Rules that Video Taping a Cop Waving a Gun Around Like a Lunatic is Not a Crime

No Comments
The Cop is Completely Out of Control

Mr. Graber, was riding a motorcycle had a helmet cam.

He was also speeding and popping wheelies, which attracted the attention of the police, which is unsurprising.

What is a out of the ordinary is a police officer cutting him off in an unmarked car, and jumping out waving a gun and not identifying himself as a member of the police force until he basically had the gun in the guy’s face.

It looks all the world like an attempted motorcycle-jacking.

Well, Anthony Graber had a helmet cam, and posted the footage to Youtube a few days later, which is when things got hinky.

He was arrested, jailed, and charged with violating Maryland’s wiretapping stature, which forbids recording a private conversation without the consent of both parties, and faced 16 years in jail.

Despite the Maryland Attorney General’s advisory opinion that a public arrest is not a private conversation under the statute, the Harford County DA continued to pursue the suit, but the judge, just dismissed the suit:

Judge Emory A. Pitt Jr. had to decide whether police performing their duties have an expectation of privacy in public space. Pitt ruled that police can have no such expectation in their public, on-the-job communications.

Pitt wrote: “Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public. When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation. ‘Sed quis custodiet ipsos cutodes’ (“Who watches the watchmen?”).”

Of course, that was the purpose of the charges, to intimidate people who would otherwise report on law enforcement misconduct.

The basic purpose of the arrest, and the ransacking of his house, and the felony charges, were retaliation for being a whistle blower.

Graber was also charged with possessing a “device primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of oral communications” — referring to the video camera on his helmet. The judge disagreed with the prosecutor that the helmet cam was illegal, and concluded the state’s argument would render illegal “almost every cell phone, Blackberry, and every similar device, not to mention dictation equipment and other types of recording devices.”

A good decision, and perhaps the continued employment of the States Attorney and the police officers involved in this need to end.

This sort of abuse of power is antithetical to the rule of law.

Stem Cell Funding Injunction Rescinded

No Comments

I’m kind of surprised that the court did not tell Judge Lamberth to stop smoking pot.

But they have now permanently lifted the injunction against funding the research:

An appeals court has permanently lifted an injunction imposed by a federal judge, thereby allowing federally funded embryonic stem-cell research to continue while the Obama administration appeals the judge’s original ruling against use of public funds in such research.

Considering the Obama administration’s generally weak support for reproductive rights, I would have figured that they would have slow walked this, but I was wrong.

Background here.

Obama Doubles Down on Bush Policies Again

No Comments

He is proposing mandating a back door in pretty much every form of communication on the internet:

Federal law enforcement and national security officials are preparing to seek sweeping new regulations for the Internet, arguing that their ability to wiretap criminal and terrorism suspects is “going dark” as people increasingly communicate online instead of by telephone.

Essentially, officials want Congress to require all services that enable communications — including encrypted e-mail transmitters like BlackBerry, social networking Web sites like Facebook and software that allows direct “peer to peer” messaging like Skype — to be technically capable of complying if served with a wiretap order. The mandate would include being able to intercept and unscramble encrypted messages.

The bill, which the Obama administration plans to submit to lawmakers next year, raises fresh questions about how to balance security needs with protecting privacy and fostering innovation. And because security services around the world face the same problem, it could set an example that is copied globally.

This would mean that if you had two people communicating handling their own encryption, which a little program called PGP has been doing for decades, they would have to make it illegal.

Obama, a former lecturer on constitutional law, should know better. He is operating under the assumption that because he’s a good guy,* it’s OK for him to have this power, which is, of course completely antithetical to the most basic foundation of the constitution.

Some pertinent quotes:

But as an example, one official said, an investigation into a drug cartel earlier this year was stymied because smugglers used peer-to-peer software, which is difficult to intercept because it is not routed through a central hub. Agents eventually installed surveillance equipment in a suspect’s office, but that tactic was “risky,” the official said, and the delay “prevented the interception of pertinent communications.”

And, of course, there is nothing to prevent these guys from using similar software, and there is already a work around, as the official have admitted.

Even worse is this argument:

Moreover, according to several other officials, after the failed Times Square bombing in May, investigators discovered that the suspect, Faisal Shahzad, had been communicating with a service that lacked prebuilt interception capacity. If he had aroused suspicion beforehand, there would have been a delay before he could have been wiretapped.

Translation:

  • We had that there was a plan afoot.
  • We had no clue that Shahzad was involved with the Taliban.
  • We had no clue that the Taliban was looking at doing anything in the US, though the fact that we are dropping missiles on men, women, and children in their country might give them some motivation.
  • Having this capability would not have allowed us to determine any of the above.
  • However, if we had somehow discovered that this guy was hooking up with terrorists, it would have been easier to wiretap him.

There is also the fact that if you create a back door, it becomes a point of vulnerability for every hacker, crook, terrorist, or despot out there:

Steven M. Bellovin, a Columbia University computer science professor, pointed to an episode in Greece: In 2005, it was discovered that hackers had taken advantage of a legally mandated wiretap function to spy on top officials’ phones, including the prime minister’s.

“I think it’s a disaster waiting to happen,” he said. “If they start building in all these back doors, they will be exploited.”

Why there is such a determination by the Obama administration to embrace and extend every wrong-headed and un-American policy thought up by Bushand His Evil Minions™ is beyond me.

Doubling down on failed and expensive polices does not help.

* To the degree that someone who feels that he can be king and order the murder of American citizens for secret reasons can be considered a “good guy”.

Cloture Fails on DADT in Senate, Thanks Barry

No Comments

So the Republicans successfully filibustered the Defense authorization bill.

It’s not surprising given the full court press that we didn’t hear coming from the White House.

When one considers the fact that the Obama Department of Justice submitted a legal brief equating homosexuality with incest, his administration defied a judges order to provide health benefits for a same sex spouse, and his campaign had an anti gay bigot front a campaign concert, one begins to wonder whether is inaction on DADT is more than cowardice, or whether he actually has a problem with “th ghay”.

To paraphrase Kanye West, I’m beginning to wonder if “Barack Obama doesn’t care about gay people,” because it’s clear that the Obama administration antipathy to being seen as pro-LGBT at this point is both bad politics, it loses votes, and bad policy.

Federal Courts Rule that Software Publishers Own You

No Comments

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court, and ruled that it’s not a sale, it’s a license, and so they can do whatever they want:

The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit today ruled (PDF) on a long-standing case involving used software on eBay, and it came to an important decision: if a company says you don’t have the right to resell a program, you don’t have that right. Could this mean the end of the resale market for all digital content? Yup. But the court says it had no choice.

The case is Vernor v. Autodesk, in which Timothy Vernor made his living from selling items (including software) on eBay. Vernor had picked up some old copies of AutoCAD from an architect’s office sale, complete with their serial numbers, and he put them up on eBay noting that they were not currently installed on any computer. Sounds legal, right?

But there’s a catch. Autodesk, the software’s developer, forced all users to accept an agreement before using AutoCAD. This agreement made clear that AutoCAD was merely licensed, never sold, and that one’s license was non-transferable. Further, a licensee could not rent, lease, or sell the software to anyone else; you couldn’t even physically transfer the discs out of the Western Hemisphere (!). Finally, if you upgraded to a new version, the old version had to be destroyed.

That sound that you hear is the stock price of Gamestop falling like the 54th floor of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

Almost every single video game out there bans resale in the license, or as Aris Technica notes, “So, to recap: EULAs are binding, they can control just about everything you might dream up, and only Congress can change the situation.”

This means that a publisher can deactivate your software wherever, and whenever they want, so long as they have it in the license, or they have a section of the license that allows them to change their license whenever they want, like credit card companies do.

Call your congresscritter, and look hard at open source software.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Ruled Unconstitutional

No Comments

One of the interesting things here is that the judge, Virginia Phillips, has ruled that, the policy has a, ” ‘direct and deleterious effect’ on the armed services, which will make the overturn at the appellate level more difficult, since appeals are typically based on matters of law, and this is a determination of fact, but note that I’m an engineer, not a lawyer, dammit!*

The judge will be issuing an injunction against separations, but will be giving the government time to appeal before doing so, so I expect another round of accelerated witch hunts in the Pentagon over the next few weeks.

This is an acid test of the Obama administration’s dedication to gay rights. If they go for a stay, i.e. keep expelling gays from the military, during appeals, they are not merely doing their duty to defend existing laws, as they have previously argued, they are actively and aggressively anti-gay rights.

My money is on Obama making the wrong decision both morally and politically, and going full bore against this decision, because I think that, much like Bill Clinton, there is a level of political, if not personal revulsion, against “te ghay” that drives them to do truly stupid and hateful things.

*I LOVE IT when I get to go all Doctor McCoy!!!

Matt Taibbi has a Point

No Comments

I would have invoked Der Stürmer, and encouraged invocations of Godwin’s law, but Matt Taibbi is right, Fox News, and their fellow travellers are much closer to Radio Rwanda than they are to Julius Streicher’s oervre:

A lot of Tea Party anger is driven by real local issues — where I live in central Jersey, for instance, there are a lot of pissed-off white people crowing over a nutty state supreme court case in which a Central American drunk driver got off because cops didn’t explain the consequences of refusing a breathalyzer in his native Spanish. But without the constant reinforcement of national 24-hour media, which has taken these isolated cases and presented them as a coast-to-coast massive conspiracy, the rage over stories like this would never reach the levels we’re seeing.

In fact if you follow Fox News and the Limbaugh/Hannity afternoon radio crew, this summer’s blowout has almost seemed like an intentional echo of the notorious Radio Rwanda broadcasts “warning” Hutus that they were about to be attacked and killed by conspiring Tutsis, broadcasts that led to massacres of Tutsis by Hutus acting in “self-defense.” A sample of some of the stuff we’ve seen and heard on the air this year:

  • On July 12, Glenn Beck implied that the Obama government was going to aid the New Black Panther Party in starting a race war, with the ultimate aim of killing white babies. “They want a race war. We must be peaceful people. They are going to poke, and poke, and poke, and our government is going to stand by and let them do it.” He also said that “we must take the role of Martin Luther King, because I do not believe that Martin Luther King believed in, ‘Kill all white babies.'”
  • CNN contributor and Redstate.com writer Erick Erickson, on the Panther mess: “Republican candidates nationwide should seize on this issue. The Democrats are giving a pass to radicals who advocate killing white kids in the name of racial justice and who try to block voters from the polls.”
  • On July 6, the Washington Times columnist J. Christian Adams wrote an editorial insisting that “top [Obama] appointees have allowed and even encouraged race-based enforcement as either tacit or open policy,” marking one of what would become many assertions by commentators that the Obama administration was no longer interested in protecting the rights of white people. “The Bush Civil Rights Division was willing to protect all Americans from racial discrimination,” Adams wrote. “During the Obama years, the Holder years, only some Americans will be protected.”
  • July 12: Rush Limbaugh says Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder “protect and represent” the New Black Panther party.
  • July 28: Rush says Supreme Court decision on 1070 strips Arizonans of their rights to defend themselves against an “invasion”: “I guess the judge is saying it’s not in the public interest for Arizona to try to defend itself from an invasion. I don’t know how you look at this with any sort of common sense and come to the ruling this woman came to.” That same day, Rush says this: “Muslim terrorists are going to have a field day in Arizona. You cannot ask them where they’re from. You cannot even act like we know where they’re from. You cannot ask them for their papers. We can ask you for yours. Not them.”
  • July 29: The Washington Times asks “Should Arizona Secede?” and says the Supreme Court “is unilaterally disarming the people of Arizona in the face of a dangerous enemy” with the aim of creating a “socialist superstate.” The paper writes: “The choice is becoming starkly apparent: devolution or dissolution.”
  • July 29, Fox and Friends host Steve Doocy continues the Radio Rwanda theme, saying, “If the feds won’t protect the people and Governor Brewer can’t protect her citizens, what are the people of Arizona supposed to do?”
There’s nothing in the world more tired than a progressive blogger like me flipping out over the latest idiocies emanating from the Fox News crowd. But this summer’s media hate-fest is different than anything we’ve seen before. What we’re watching is a calculated campaign to demonize blacks, Mexicans, and gays and convince a plurality of economically-depressed white voters that they are under imminent legal and perhaps even physical attack by a conspiracy of leftist nonwhites. They’re telling these people that their government is illegitimate and criminal and unironically urging secession and revolution.

(emphasis mine)

There are some deeply evil people out there who are looking to leverage bigotry, racism, and fear for their own profit and power.

Taibbi calls for a boycott, saying that he’d, “Like to see at least one firm get blown out of business as a consequence of financially supporting the network that is telling America that its black president wants to kill white babies,” but he misses a part of the dynamic with his call to action: It isn’t that Fox News, and probably the rest of the media outlets, are driven by cynical economic or political goals, it’s that many of them, are bed wetting cowards like Roger Ailes, and they truly live their lives in terror.

As to the politicians stoking this matter, it’s pretty clear that they (Newt) are looking at this through the prism of political advantage though.

I won’t muse on the mental processes of Sarah Palin, that way lies me huddled on the floor, covered in mayonnaise, and gibbering, “Tekeli-li! Tekeli-li!”

Well F%$# Me.

No Comments

Pat Buchanan taking the moral high ground
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?


Ted Olson says that Obama is Right


Howard Dean calls for the Islamic center to move

First, Pat Buchanan seizes the moral high ground, 7 words I never expected to say, when he takes Newt Gingrich to task for inappropriate Nazi references:

How do you get more attention than Sarah Palin, who’s very good at this, is to go two steps further. I mean, I think bringing the Nazis into the argument is always absurd in American politics because there is no valid comparison there. And secondly, you know, you bring that in and that’s all we start talking about.

Meanwhile, Ted Olson, Republican hatchet man, and survivor of a 911 victim, his 1st wife was on one of the planes, has said that Barack Obama was right to say that this is a matter of fundamental rights and values.

And while we are on the the matter of people taking counter-intuitive positions on this, we have Howard Dean calling for the Islamic center to move.

I’m not sure what brought on this uncharacteristic outburst of cowardice, but Dr. Dean is the individual here to whom the “wanker” tag implies.

We live in a world that resembles what The Onion would write, if they were on Bizarro World, and they dropped acid.

What Lindsay “Majikthise” Said

No Comments

She writes on the impending retirement of Cathy Guiswite and notes that while Ms. Guiswite might be a bit of a feminist trailblazer, the character, a desperate woman obsessing about a husband and her thighs is not:

If “Cathy” has any feminist value, it can be subsumed under the maxim: “If you can’t be a good example, you can at least be a horrible warning.”

I would further note that Ms. Guiswite’s actual “feminist trailblazer” cred is pretty thin.

She is not the first female syndicated mass market cartoonist, that would have been Dale Messick, the creator of Brenda Starr.

Though to give Ms. Guiswite her due, she certainly was a trailblazer in coffee mugs, t-shirts, and other commercial knock-offs.

And Here Comes the Walk Back

No Comments

Remember when I said that, “I expect to see him [Obama] walking this back in some manner or another over the next few days, because, after all, that’s how he rolls?”

Well, he just walked it back (that was quick):

Speaking to reporters today, President Obama drew a sharp line under his comments last night, insisting that his defense of the right to build a mosque does not mean he supports the project.

“I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding,” he said.

So, to quote Chris Hayes on Maddow this evening, this is “Supporting the 1st amendment in principal, but not in practice.”

So long as Democrats, and Obama is the head of the Democratic Party in all the ways that matter, are willing to flee in terror of this kind of crap, this poo will continue to be flung.

H/t Digby.

Big Surprise, Harry Reid Chooses Cowardice Over American Values

2 Comments

He’s called for the Lower Manhattan Islamic center to move:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has now spoken out on the Muslim community center in New York — saying that while the organizers are free to construct the project, it should be moved somewhere else.

“The First Amendment protects freedom of religion. Senator Reid respects that but thinks that the mosque should be built some place else,” said a statement from Reid spokesman Jim Manley. “If the Republicans are being sincere, they would help us pass this long overdue bill to help the first responders whose health and livelihoods have been devastated because of their bravery on 911, rather than continuing to block this much-needed legislation.”

If he weren’t running against Sharron Angle, I’d be rooting for the Republican.

Of course, he is running against Sharron Angle, so I am merely ambivalent.

Of course, it’s so transparently craven that it probably hurt him more, but cowardice when it is both self-destructive and stupid appears to be a basic Democratic Party value.

I Take a Few Days Off, and This Happens……

No Comments

He goes and supports the right of an Islamic center to be built a few blocks away from the former World Trade Center (aka Ground Zero):

President Obama delivered a strong defense on Friday night of a proposed Muslim community center and mosque near ground zero in Manhattan, using a White House dinner celebrating Ramadan to proclaim that “as a citizen, and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”

After weeks of avoiding the high-profile battle over the center — his press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said last week that the president did not want to “get involved in local decision-making” — Mr. Obama stepped squarely into the thorny debate.

“I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. Ground zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” the president said in remarks prepared for the annual White House iftar, the sunset meal breaking the day’s fast.

But, he continued: “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are.”

I am stunned. I did not figure that he has the guts to do this.

I am pleasantly surprised, but I expect to see him walking this back in some manner or another over the next few days, because, after all, that’s how he rolls.

Hopefully, I am wrong about this.