commented on US Senate Passes ENDA By a Wide Margin
Also, Dan: The Supreme Court didn't "de-federalize" the marriage issue; it specifically hasn't ruled, yet, on whether a state may constitutionally ban same-sex marriage. Two questions are being litigated which will eventually come before the court (or at least, one side or the other will ask the court to consider them). The first is whether the remaining half of DOMA is constitutional - the part which says states may refuse to recognize each others' same-sex marriages. The second is the big enchilada - whether states can in fact ban same-sex marriage under the US constitution.
Given that the court prefers, generally, to take incremental steps on controversial issues, I am fairly confident that the court will first agree to hear a case involving the first question - and it will strike down the second part of DOMA. With that action, a couple who legally marries anywhere they can would be considered married anywhere in the United States. And that, in turn, would take the pressure off, for a while, to hear a case on the second issue - because, practically speaking, most (though certainly not all) same-sex couples could travel to a state which allows same-sex marriage for nonresidents and then return and have that marriage recognized. It preserves the fig leaf of a state being allowed to determine marriage eligibility within the state but not being allowed to pick and choose which outside marriages it will recognize.
commented on SL Letter of the Day: Mystery Bulk
It doesn't matter whether the LW is being judgmental or not. It doesn't matter that sometimes s/he's able to tell the coworker is wearing something under his pants and sometimes s/he can't. It doesn't matter if s/he plans to say anything or not to the coworker.
It's not any of his/her GD business and if she has that much free time at work to spend staring at some coworker's pants, figuring out whether he's wearing diapers or not, then she's either not doing her work, needs more work to do, or perhaps should be moved to part-time so she's not wasting company time.
I don't care if she's just kink-curious, or grossed out, or intrigued, or anything in between; we're reaching a point in this country where nobody can keep his nose out of anything that catches his attention.
Nov 23, 2012
commented on $500,000,000,000
$500 billion? Dan - come on, that's one-eighth of the federal budget or thereabouts. Surely you mean $500 million? Or less?
Jul 6, 2012
commented on Confidential to Louisiana's Clueless Christian Bigots
Sheryl - with regard to @10, it should come as no surprise to most of these people that Valerie Hodges' district is the one (with some reapportionment-inspired adjustments) that Tony Perkins, now head of the Family Research Council, used to represent. Yes, that Tony Perkins, the one who was found guilty by the Louisiana Board of Ethics (imagine what THAT must take) of campaign finance disclosure violations when he managed the US Senate campaign for Woody Jenkins. The violation: concealing the use of campaign funds to purchase David Duke's white supremacy mailing list by routing the purchase through a third party.
Granted, that was Perkins' violation, not Hodges'. But it shows the kind of people who live in that district and why they'd elect such an idiot. This past session, even some of the most conservative Republicans (of the traditional, non-bat-shit-crazy variety) turned on her for one of her insanely stupid bills.
May 8, 2012
commented on What He Said
Malcolmxy: I would agree that Romney, if elected, would be desperate to be elected to a second term. However, I think his reaction would be the opposite of yours: his most significant challenge would not be a resurgent Democratic Party, but a candidate to his right who rallies the fundie base to deny Romney renomination. And if he fails to toe the conservative line - if he moderates even slightly on gay rights, if he fails to push through a repeal of the Health Care Affordability Act, if he fails to further cut taxes on the rich - they will turn on him in a heartbeat, because they know they have other candidates in the wings who could beat him for the nomination if he's wounded by his own party.
And if Romney wins this fall - who's the next Democratic challenger to take him on, in 2016? There's no heir apparent and nobody with enough national exposure and appeal to start doing the work to get there - certainly not anyone who's to Obama's left.
Feb 7, 2012
commented on It's Not Over Until We Say It's Over
FYI: it's not just Santorum who can envision making gay sex a felony again. It's in the Montana Republican Party Official Platform:
We support the clear will of the people of Montana expressed by legislation to keep homosexual acts illegal."
I don't know that they're the only state with such a platform. And of course, most states where it was illegal have NOT repealed their laws against it; so should a conservative supreme court reverse itself (which it could do), those laws would be right back in effect.
Dec 10, 2011
commented on No. No. No.
As someone who sat through exactly this in another state (Louisiana), you should pay careful attention to the article. For decades there was discussion of bringing an NBA team back to New Orleans after the Jazz fled to Utah. The state finally built a (then-) top-knotch arena facility adjoining the Superdome and lured away the Hornets, which began playing in New Orleans in 2002.
Here we are, 9 years later, and they're one of the teams Seattle's considering trying to lure away. Seattle may have a much larger audience for NBA, and higher demand for tickets, but there will always be someone with even more demand.
We're about to get stuck with an empty arena that's got decades of debt to pay off. Hope and pray it doesn't happen to you up there.