C I V I L    M A R R I A G E    I S    A    C I V I L    R I G H T.

A N D N O W I T ' S T H E L A W O F T H E L A N D.


Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pelosi. Show all posts

Thursday, August 22, 2024

DNC Day 3 Highlights

See Politifacts for fact-checking of statements made by Walz and others
at last night's convention.

Hope and joy are here again!  It was a great night for speaking and cheering at the Democratic convention in Chicago.  PBS provides a short recap of the evening:

 

CBS News Face the Nation provides full speeches by handsome Hakeem Jeffries (he's gay, really?!!), Bill Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Oprah Winfrey, my man Pete Buttigieg (looking and sounding very presidential), and Coach Tim Walz:


Ya know, fellas, this is the most fun we Democrats have had in years.  What a blast!  We should do this more often.

-----

Thursday, December 8, 2022

House Passes Respect for Marriage Act

The U. S. House of Representatives today passed the Senate version of the Respect for Marriage Act, by a vote of 258 to 169.  All Democrats voted for the bill, along with 39 Republicans.  After the vote, retiring Speaker of the House Nancy smiled broadly as she displayed an enrolled copy of the bill to reporters, capping her 35-year congressional career with a milestone piece of legislation.

 

Retired Senator Barney Frank (D-Mass.), was present at the enrollment ceremony and had high praise for Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.), one of the sponsors of the bill.  Both Frank and Baldwin were among the first openly gay people elected to Congress.



The bill will next be sent to President Biden, who will sign it into law - I haven't heard when, but I expect that will happen very soon.

And I have one thing to say to all the catty, ratty little creeps who are already bitching and moaning about what the law doesn't do, to wit:  STFU.

Why do I say that?  Because this bill is a) the FIRST TIME gay marriage has been ENACTED into federal law; and b), it is what could be passed right now, before the House gets a Republican majority on January 3rd.  It has a strong legal effect nationwide; and it sends a powerful message that the Supreme Court will surely pay attention to.

I vividly recall that when I came out in 1980, the idea of "gay marriage" was pure fantasy, wishful thinking, as remote from reality as any science fiction story.  At that time, there was NO protection or recognition of gay couples anywhere in this country, or in any other country in the world.  No domestic partnerships, no civil unions, no marriage equality. There still isn't, over huge swaths of the earth's surface.  But today in America, fifty years after Stonewall, democracy worked out beautifully.

So I am extremely grateful to all the legislators who walked this bill over the hurdles to get it passed.  If you aren't proud and happy - you are a stupid, selfish, short-sighted jerk, so just go away.

-----

Saturday, July 30, 2022

NANCY, STAY HOME!

 

There is no good reason for Pelosi to visit Taiwan now.  We are already in an unwinnable, half-ass war with Russia, which is a major blunder (can you say Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan?) - now she and Joe Biden want to start one with China?

HOW FUCKING STUPID IS THAT?

This is so wrong, for many reasons.  It will not make Taiwan safer.  It will not make China less militant, but more so.  It's just a stupid election ploy.

I am rapidly losing confidence in the current administration, especially in its conduct of foreign affairs.  I could say much more, but the main point is self-evident to anyone with a brain.

That's my 2c.

-----

Thursday, January 7, 2021

Pelosi and Schumer Call for Trump's Removal

Whoa.  Senate Majority Leader Schumer just called on Vice President Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office.  Pelosi did the same in a simultaneous news conference in the House.  Things are moving at warp speed in Congress - your Head Trucker applauds this development.

Meanwhile, CNN's Van Jones makes a razor-sharp point about race in America, as demonstrated by the outrageous failure to stop or even arrest the invaders of the Capitol yesterday - all or most of whom were white:

  

President-Elect Joe Biden also noted and condemned the racial disparity:

-----

Thursday, December 19, 2019

Impeached! Now What?


Last night, the House of Representatives voted along party lines to impeach Donald Trump on two counts:  abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.  But after the votes, Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters she would delay transmitting the articles of impeachment to the Senate, where Republican leaders have already said they would quickly dismiss the charges.  So who knows what will happen next.

Nevertheless, as numerous commentators have already observed, the House vote means Trump's name will forever be branded with an asterisk in the history books as the third president to be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.

For the record, here are some videos concerning the impeachment vote as well as the raging, decidedly unpresidential letter Trump sent Pelosi on Tuesday, accusing Democrats of "declaring open war on American Democracy" by "an illegal, partisan attempted coup" that is a "colossal injustice."




The historical significance of this impeachment:




Former presidential advisers John Dean and David Axelrod on the impreachment:




Republican lawmakers compare impeachment of Trump to Jesus and Pearl Harbor:




CNN's Anderson Cooper on what the Trump letter didn't mention:




Also worth reading:  Paul Bergala's comments on the Trump letter.  Excerpt:
Trump's letter to Pelosi has been described in clinical terms. It has been called "deranged" or just plain "sick." But while I appreciate the need to understand Trump, I do not believe that understanding will be found in psychology. . . .

But most important, excusing Trump as merely ill lets him off the hook too easily. So, rather than leaning on psychiatry, I think we ought to dig deeper for a more meaningful, powerful, and accurate nomenclature. His letter is not sick; it is evil. His conduct is not deranged; it's tyrannical. I hope every member of Congress reads it.

In my multiple readings, one sentence, however, struck me more than the others. Perhaps because it's one of the few that I think is 100 percent honest: "I write this letter to you," Mr. Trump says in the penultimate paragraph, "for the purpose of history and to put my thoughts on a permanent and indelible record." This is Trump speaking to history. This is his manifesto.

And his manifesto, of course, is shot through with lies, mendacity being Trump's native tongue. Like many people, Trump lies when it suits his purpose, but his assault on the truth, particularly in this letter, is essential to his mode of governing. Killing truth is not merely a means to an end for Trump; it is a vital end in itself. . . .

The letter is Trump's governing philosophy distilled. He is a wannabe autocrat, who has made his goal clear: to remake America as he has remade the Republican Party -- turning a once-proud, strong party into a gaggle of sycophantic lickspittles. His rage for Speaker Pelosi is boundless because she stands up to him. His letter is a window not into a troubled psyche, but something much worse.

And whether Trump is removed from office or not, his impeachment matters profoundly, says constitutional law professor Frank O. Bowman. Excerpt:
Whatever the short-term consequences, this impeachment is the right thing to do.

It is right, first, because the truth matters. The United States is an inheritor of the Enlightenment conviction that the world is comprehensible, reality is discoverable and social arrangements should be built on clear-eyed assessments of fact. American democracy depends on a special elaboration of the Enlightenment ideal, which insists that truth is not the private property of priesthoods or aristocracies, but is the public province of every citizen, the necessary predicate to informed communal choice.

Our president is a liar. He sits at the center of a web of falsehood, constantly spinning grotesque new entanglements, constantly abetted by his hired sycophants and, more consequentially, by a dark element of the media which finds in Trump the perfect champion of its own impulse to transform the press from arbiter of truth to purveyor of profitable propaganda. Trump’s dishonesty is so integral to his personality and to all his works that to support him requires that one become a liar oneself, or at least to become willfully indifferent to mendacity.

The House impeachment process was essential to the cause of recovering truth as a public value. Without it, Trump’s misconduct in relation to Ukraine would have remained a mere scandalous rumor, blithely denied by Trump and generally ignored by the public. More fundamentally, the hearings in the House Intelligence Committee recaptured, for a blessed moment at least, the world we are in danger of losing: a world in which it is natural for honest public servants to serve their country impartially and speak the truth when they witness a betrayal of its values. This impeachment calls us to renew our mutual obligation of public candor. . . .

Finally, the value of any public act cannot necessarily be measured in its immediate success of failure. By voting to impeach Donald Trump, Democrats express their faith in, to adapt a phrase from Charles de Gaulle, a certain idea of America. An America that is commonly truthful, unusually generous, customarily trustworthy, instinctively democratic, committed to human freedoms and individual rights, self-protective without being selfish, always imperfect but perennially challenging itself to do better. An America that, to borrow a favorite image from a man Republicans used to revere, at least aspired to be the world’s shining city on a hill.

It is not hyperbole to suggest that our republic is in peril. In impeaching Trump for his betrayal of American values, we reassert to each other our commitment to a resurgent democracy. And we speak not just to each other but to a watching world. We demonstrate that, although for the moment America is in the grip of madness, there remains a sturdy contingent of Americans willing to fight for the hopeful America upon which so many of the world's highest aspirations depend.


Thursday, June 28, 2012

Healthcare Ruling: Reax

The President, on the most important Supreme Court ruling in a generation:



Full text here.


House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), with a sweet remembrance of Senator Ted Kennedy, who until his death in 2009 worked tirelessly for many years for a national healthcare act:




Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, promising to repeal the Affordable Care Act on his first day in the White House, if elected:



House Republicans have already scheduled a repeal vote for July 11. But in a delicious irony, Justice Ginsburg in her concurring opinion cited Mitt's great legacy as Governor of Massacusetts - what pundits call "Romneycare," which Mitt two-facedly disowns now - as a great success that Congress used as a model for the national law.


Some rich-bitch soccer mom in Alaska:
@SarahPalinUSA: Obama lied to the American people. Again. He said it wasn't a tax. Obama lies; freedom dies.


BONUS: Today's funniest headline:

Republicans say they're moving to Canada due to health care decision


Funniest photo of the day, from Reddit via Andrew Sullivan:


Thursday, March 18, 2010

Lt. Dan Choi Arrested at White House Protest

Kathy Griffin: A Call To Action In D.C.


Catch the video posts at Joe.My.God.

Also:  GetEQUAL activists have staged a sit-in at House Speaker Pelosi's offices in Washington and San Francisco, saying they will not leave till ENDA is passed.  Story and videos at Towleroad.

Thursday, May 7, 2009

Where Is Our New Deal?

Obama Signs The Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act
Richard Socarides, former White House staffer who advised President Bill Clinton on gay issues, wrote this the other day in the Washington Post:
I understand that the president has his hands full saving the economy. But across a broad spectrum of issues -- including women's rights, stem cell research and relations with Cuba -- the Obama administration has shown a willingness to exploit this change moment to bring about dramatic reform.

So why not on gay rights? Where is our New Deal?

It is the memory of 1993's gays-in-the-military debacle (and a desire never to repeat it) that has both the president's advisers and policy advocates holding back, waiting for some magical "right time" to move boldly.

This is a bad strategy. President Obama will never have more political capital than he has now, and there will never be a better political environment to capitalize on. People are distracted by the economy and war, and they are unlikely to get stirred up by the right-wing rhetoric that has doomed efforts in the past. . . .

Obama should champion comprehensive, omnibus federal gay civil rights legislation, similar to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, outlawing discrimination based on sexual orientation and granting a basic umbrella of protections in employment, education, housing and the like (rather than the existing piecemeal approach to legislation). Such a bill should also provide for federal recognition of both civil unions and marriages as they are authorized by specific states.

Obama is in a good position, and the time is ripe for a new approach. Taking these steps might spare the country the trauma of devolving into a pervasive and divisive debate over gay marriage, which, after all, is not the only issue of concern to gay and lesbian Americans.

Gay voters who supported Barack Obama remain positive about him, and most are prepared to be patient. It's still early on gay rights for the Obama administration -- but now is the time to act boldly.

Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes today in the New York Times:

The White House, aware of the discontent, invited leaders of some prominent gay rights organizations to meet Monday with top officials, including Jim Messina, Mr. Obama’s deputy chief of staff, to plot legislative strategy on the hate crimes bill as well as “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Among those attending was Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, who said afterward that while the gay rights agenda might not be “unfolding exactly as we thought,” he was pleased.

“They have a vision,” Mr. Solmonese said. “They have a plan.”

While Mr. Obama has said he is “open to the possibility” that his views on same-sex marriage are misguided, he has offered no signal that he intends to change his position. And as he confronts that and other issues important to gay rights advocates, he faces an array of pressures and risks.

Anything substantive he might say on same-sex marriage — after the Iowa ruling, the White House put out a statement saying the president “respects the decision” — would be endlessly parsed. If Mr. Obama were to embrace same-sex marriage, he would be seen as reversing a campaign position and alienating some moderate and religious voters he has courted. . . .

“We’ve elected probably the most pro-gay president in history; he’s very good on the issues but he is not good on gay marriage,” said Steven Elmendorf, a gay Democratic lobbyist. “From the gay community’s perspective, he and a lot of other elected officials are wrong on this. My view is that over time, they’re going to realize they’re wrong and they’re going to change.”

Mr. Obama has chosen a number of openly gay people for prominent jobs, including Fred P. Hochberg as chairman of the Export-Import Bank and John Berry to run the Office of Personnel Management. And he is the first president to set aside tickets for gay families to attend the White House Easter Egg Roll.

Tobias Wolff, a law professor at the
University of Pennsylvania who was Mr. Obama’s top campaign adviser on gay rights, said the president needed time to build political consensus.

“I think he has a genuine sense,” Mr. Wolff said, “that in order to move these issues forward you need broader buy-in than you are going to get if you poke a stick in too many people’s eyes.”


What I Say: Egg rolls are nice - but just a symbol. There are other things that have a vast, profound effect on people's lives - money, taxes, property, inheritance, health insurance, careers, and all the 1, 138 federal laws that confer rights and privileges on married people. These are the things that deserve to be squarely and fairly addressed - sooner, not later.

I understand there is a time and season for everything; and in the big, messy political world, timing is extra important. Obama, as I suspect, is a pragmatist, not a great crusader: he's interested in what works, in pulling different sides together, avoiding heated confrontations, waiting for consensus to emerge, doing things step by step, neat and nice, no muss, no fuss.

All well and good. If you aren't the one waiting on justice to be done - if you aren't the one suffering and burdened because you don't have the equal protection of the laws, that equal respect and dignity that is due to every single American.

Come on, Big Man - I've been waiting not just a few months, but a whole lifetime for equality and justice.

You got my vote; now do what you promised me, and all of us. We're counting on you.

Update - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi today said Congress won't block the District of Columbia's decision to recognize same-sex marriages from other states; but she also said she won't push Congress to take action on DOMA and DADT:

“Members will make a priority of issues like gays in the military. And where we have prospects of success, we always want to expand to a place of more opportunity and more freedom for all — for all Americans,” she said. “But right now, our agenda is jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs. And as we move on that front, concurrently, we have to make some decisions about what is possible and our values-based initiatives as well.”

Another update - Queerty reports that the President has written a personal note to a lesbian Army officer, now about to be discharged under DADT, affirming that he is "committed to changing" the policy - but is that the same as repealing it?

Monday, September 29, 2008

Republican Betrayal

The news that the House of Representatives failed to pass the so-called bailout bill today came as a real shock to me and, I don't doubt, to many other Americans. It just took my breath away.

It was sunk by those Republicans to whom "the free market" is for all practical purposes synonomous with "the will of God." No socialism in America, oh no! We'll watch the whole country crash and burn first, before we betray our oh-so-sacred principles!

In fact, they have betrayed the country, exactly as their Republican grandfathers did in 1929 and the years following: standing firm on their free-market faith while all around them the country sank deeper and deeper into economic misery. And when Roosevelt finally got into office in 1933, they fought his every move tooth and nail, crying socialism all the way.

But as my little grandmother used to say, a sweet, humble soul to whom economics would have been as mysterious as astrophysics, "If it hadn't been for Roosevelt, we'd have all perished to death."

Which gets right to the heart of the matter: pure, unrestrained greed is lethal to the economy and the nation; Roosevelt saved the people from the excesses of the free market, and for that he was beloved by many millions who suffered economic cruelty at the hands of the self-righteous, and highly self-interested, Republican capitalists.

I'm no economist, but I know enough to say that you can't have a completely free or a completely regulated market; a happy medium must be found for the greatest good of the greatest number. The New Deal, it seems to me, was by and large that happy medium until the jackbooted Republicans of the Reagan-Bush-Bush era trampled it underfoot and made the world safe for avarice.

It was chilling to watch the televised press conferences today in the aftermath of the House debacle, with an inset displaying the Dow sinking lower and lower by the minute: down 777 points by close of business. I watched it sink a hundred points with my own eyes, in only 15 minutes of viewing.

Of course, the renegade Republicans who 86'd today's bill are the same who have gone along so blithely with Bush's imperial decrees and power grabs in the past; today they suddenly found the testicular fortitude to defy the President, not to mention the leaders of their own party. But stupidly, they have taken the wrong stand at the wrong time.

Of course, they tried to blame it on the Democrats, and Nancy Pelosi's "partisan" speech before the vote; but good ol' Barney Frank had a brilliant riposte to that.

McCain is also claiming that he charged up to Washington last week and rewrote the first version of the bill and protected the taxpayers, yada yada yada; or at least that's the slick impression his statements and those of his supporters make: rewriting history so soon. The fact is, House Dems and Repubs had a compromise bill already agreed on, and the votes lined up, before he got to Washington; his presence at the White House conference last Thursday emboldened the renegades to drop a bomb on the compromise.

So here we are. I realize that all may yet be well, though with the Jewish holidays, no bill will be passed before next weekend in the best case. But if this country really has slipped off a precipice today, I do hope history records that McCain and the pure-T-free-market Republicans are the ones who gave it the last shove into the darkness.

Bush is the new Hoover. The New York Times editorializes on today's events:

After nearly eight years of voting in virtual lock step with President Bush on everything from tax cuts to torture, House Republicans decided on Monday to break ranks on the survival of the nation’s financial system.

The rejected bailout bill that was on the floor after a weekend of hard negotiating was objectionable in many ways, but it was a Republican-generated bill and was improved from the administration’s original version. Sixty percent of House Democrats voted for the bill, enough to easily pass the measure if the Republicans had not decided to put on their display of pique and disarray.

The question now is whether the stock-market plunge that followed the House’s failure to lead — and a renewed credit freeze — will be enough to get the 133 Republicans who voted against the measure to change their minds. And, more important, whether the damage that the no vote has inflicted is readily reversible.

Republican no votes were rooted less in analysis or principle than in political posturing and ideological rigidity. The House minority leader, John Boehner, conceded as much: “While we were able to move the bill drastically to the right, it wasn’t good enough for our members.”

It’s not clear what would be good enough for the Republicans since there was very little talk of substance on Monday after the bill died on the floor of the House. Instead, the Republicans tried to blame a speech before the vote by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who connected the current crisis to the fiscal and economic mismanagement of the Bush years. It may not have been the perfect moment to say that, but it was true.

Republicans were also upset that serial bailouts represent a rejection of free-market principles. They do. That’s because the free market in finance, unregulated and unsupervised, has failed. And, in its failure, it is inflicting greater damage on an already weak economy.

No amount of amendments to the bailout package will change the administration’s disastrous economic record or erase the manifest failure of the Republicans’ free-markets-above-all ideology.

Fasten your seat belt. I've a feeling it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Thursday, September 25, 2008

On bended knee

Historic scenes are being played out in Washington as things go from the ridiculous to the incredible, the San Francisco Chronicle reports, "Atmosphere borders on panic as bailout falters," emphasis mine:


In a panicked atmosphere and amid flaring tempers, Democrats and some Republicans announced before the White House meeting that they had the outline of an agreement, but GOP leaders refused to sign off on it. Liberal and conservative interest groups railed against the bailout, while business groups insisted that Congress pass the plan with all speed, warning that tight credit already is sharply slowing business activity.

At the White House, Republican leader John Boehner expressed misgivings about the plan, and McCain would not commit to supporting it, people from both parties who were briefed on the exchange told the Associated Press. In the Roosevelt Room after the session, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson literally bent down on one knee as he pleaded with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi not to withdraw her party's support for the package over what Pelosi derided as a Republican betrayal, according to the New York Times.

The NYT itself, reporting on the same scene, adds this tidbit of very revealing dialogue:


“I didn’t know you were Catholic,” Ms. Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr. Paulson’s kneeling, according to someone who observed the exchange. She went on: “It’s not me blowing this up, it’s the Republicans.”

Mr. Paulson sighed. “I know. I know.”

Paulson is scared shitless. But scared for the country? Or for himself? Or for his political masters? Stay tuned. Tomorrow's episode should be ripe.
Related Posts with Thumbnails