Neither Obama nor Clinton is perfect on this score. Obama campaigned last fall with a homophobic minister. Both hesitated when confronted with the remarks of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Peter Pace that DADT is justified because homosexuality is immoral. As if testing the political winds, they denounced Pace only after Sen. John Warner (R-VA) flatly declared that homosexuality is not immoral.
Nevertheless, Obama speaks movingly of gay equality, and not just before gay audiences. He has raised the issue among white farmers and in black churches, where the message is both unwelcome and needed.
Hillary Clinton, by contrast, rarely raises the issue on her own, never does so before unfriendly audiences, and seems reluctant even to say the word “gay.”
Obama “gets it” in a way that no previous candidate for president has. Part of this is generational, but it is nonetheless real.
On commitment: strong advantage to Obama.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Obama Demonstrates a Commitment to LGBT Issues
Dale Carpenter, in his article in The Bay Area Reporter articulates perfectly what makes Obama the superior candidate when it comes to LGBT issues. While Obama and Sen. Clinton are similar in their stances and legislative abilities, Obama soars over HRC when it comes to his commitment to advancing gay equality. Carpenter writes:
The Next VP?
Assuming Barack Obama ends up with the Democratic nomination, the next question to be answered is "Who will be Obama's running mate?" How about Jim Webb? He had an interesting interview with NPR this week, and among other topics, they discuss a possible VP nomination. Personally, I love the idea. Webb represents strong military experience, centrist appeal, and "blue collar" Democrats. He is also someone that is part of the new Democratic party (as opposed to old, establishment Dems that have been the party leaders for the past two decades) in that he understands the diversity of the US and the challenges the country faces in a 2008 mindset.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Get Well Teddy
Off to the side of my blog, I have always displayed a picture of former Senator and presidential nominee Robert F. Kennedy, a man whom I have always idolized and held in the highest regard. His brother, Senator Ted Kennedy, has served the country in the same spirit that he served. The news today of Sen. Ted Kennedy's malignant brain tumor has been both shocking and disheartening to all Americans. Since 1962, Sen. Kennedy and his family have fought for those in our country that have not had the voice to fight for themselves. He has advocated for children, the underserved, healthcare for all citizens, and innumerable other causes which have made the United States a better place. His undying spirit and commanding oratory have been staples in the US Senate over the past 40 plus years.
Beyond politics, Sen. Kennedy's distinguished honor has gained him the respect and love of Senators and Representives, regardless of political party. Colleagues and citizens alike have described him as a man of great courage and steadfast dedication, a man that is willing to cross party lines to compromise in order to pass legislation that would otherwise remain stuck in Congress. Sen. Kennedy has become a living institution in the Senate. His public service has been unmatched in American history. On this day I hope for Sen. Kennedy's healthy recovery and pray that we all can once again see him advocating for the people he has so diligently served in his term as a US Senator.
Get well Teddy.
Beyond politics, Sen. Kennedy's distinguished honor has gained him the respect and love of Senators and Representives, regardless of political party. Colleagues and citizens alike have described him as a man of great courage and steadfast dedication, a man that is willing to cross party lines to compromise in order to pass legislation that would otherwise remain stuck in Congress. Sen. Kennedy has become a living institution in the Senate. His public service has been unmatched in American history. On this day I hope for Sen. Kennedy's healthy recovery and pray that we all can once again see him advocating for the people he has so diligently served in his term as a US Senator.
Get well Teddy.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
The State of the Primary
In two words, it's over. And when you look at what has been said by pundits and experts over the last two months, it's really not very surprising. With a few exceptions, all of the contests that have taken place since Wisconsin and Hawaii have come down just like the experts have said they would (and, coincidentally, the Obama campaign). Following election night here in the Badger state, I said that to get back in the race HRC needed to win, and win big, in places like Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. While she did pull out victories in each of these states(well, a pseudo-victory in Texas), her margins have not been great enough. With the exception of Pennsylvania, a state that has a Democratic Party structure conducive to HRC, she has not made up any substantial ground on the lead that Obama has built. Even on primary night in Ohio and Texas, the delegate count the following morning stood with virtually the same distance between HRC and Obama.
This pattern has got to be troubling for her campaign, and as Barack inches closer and closer to reaching the magic number of 2,025 delegates, HRC's margin for error grows razor thin. While the prognostications in March have had many of the primary contests accurately laid out, the results have now validated these predictions. Seeing the elections that have taken place over the past month, a month in which Obama has been held to standards Zeus could not meet, HRC's campaign is all but over. Granted, there is no official nominee yet and Obama has not yet gotten the required delegates, but the electoral math makes HRC's task nearly insurmountable at this point.
Oh, and could we please get back to discussing the issues!!
This pattern has got to be troubling for her campaign, and as Barack inches closer and closer to reaching the magic number of 2,025 delegates, HRC's margin for error grows razor thin. While the prognostications in March have had many of the primary contests accurately laid out, the results have now validated these predictions. Seeing the elections that have taken place over the past month, a month in which Obama has been held to standards Zeus could not meet, HRC's campaign is all but over. Granted, there is no official nominee yet and Obama has not yet gotten the required delegates, but the electoral math makes HRC's task nearly insurmountable at this point.
Oh, and could we please get back to discussing the issues!!
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Second Amendment Case Before the Supreme Court
Sitting before the US Supreme Court currently is a case that will redefine how gun control laws are enacted and enforced in this country. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the High Court is reconsidering its interpretation of the 2nd Amendment for the first time in 68 years. Regardless of your stance on the issue, I urge you to read more about the case and understand the issues being addressed. Here is one link (of the many that are available) with information about the case: http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/court-agrees-to-rule-on-gun-case/
The case has been argued, and there will likely be a ruling sometime in the near future. So what should happen? Without turning this into my senior thesis paper, I'll share a few thoughts. As much as I usually carry the banner for curtailing the prevailance and use of firearms, the DC gun ban is simply too broad. The law does not provide any exceptions for off-duty law enforcement officers. It also does not allow for any provisions by which citizens can protect their homes. While a similar law with such provisions (or close to) would be useful and much more reasonable, the case before SCOTUS presents a law that is not narrowly tailored enough to pass its constitutional requirements. I applaud the District of Columbia for its intentions, and indeed I agree with their motives, but they must provide a more through law. After the case is ruled upon (most likely coming down against the District), they should reexamine the law and draft one that provides the necessary exceptions and provisions, thereby eliminating the claims that the law is too broad-sweeping.
I am guessing the Court's decision will end up somewhere around 5-4 (Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy), and hopefully their opinion is not a blanket rejection of DC's attempt at decreasing gun violence within the city. If that happens, my hope is that the city revises the law to take into account the situations in which an all-out ban on firearms (unless unloaded and disassembled) is unreasonable. A law such as that could pave the way for other cities to follow, eventually changing cultural attitudes in the US and lowering the number of guns in society.
The case has been argued, and there will likely be a ruling sometime in the near future. So what should happen? Without turning this into my senior thesis paper, I'll share a few thoughts. As much as I usually carry the banner for curtailing the prevailance and use of firearms, the DC gun ban is simply too broad. The law does not provide any exceptions for off-duty law enforcement officers. It also does not allow for any provisions by which citizens can protect their homes. While a similar law with such provisions (or close to) would be useful and much more reasonable, the case before SCOTUS presents a law that is not narrowly tailored enough to pass its constitutional requirements. I applaud the District of Columbia for its intentions, and indeed I agree with their motives, but they must provide a more through law. After the case is ruled upon (most likely coming down against the District), they should reexamine the law and draft one that provides the necessary exceptions and provisions, thereby eliminating the claims that the law is too broad-sweeping.
I am guessing the Court's decision will end up somewhere around 5-4 (Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Kennedy), and hopefully their opinion is not a blanket rejection of DC's attempt at decreasing gun violence within the city. If that happens, my hope is that the city revises the law to take into account the situations in which an all-out ban on firearms (unless unloaded and disassembled) is unreasonable. A law such as that could pave the way for other cities to follow, eventually changing cultural attitudes in the US and lowering the number of guns in society.
Pennsylvania Primary
In the past month of Primary season in what is becoming the Batton Death March to the White House, the Democratic Primary has descended into a spiral of ridiculousness, rivaled only by the writing on CSI. Upon completion of this post, I will follow up shortly with one of substance, dealing with an issue of real significance (unlike the bickering that has been going on in the Keystone state). However, I feel it is necessary to point out the absurdity that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama (although to a lesser degree) have brought to the campaign for the presidency. It has gotten to the point where I have simply lost interest. When I hear of the latest "scandal" or "attack," the story registers no emotional value and I sort-of nod my head at the TV, my eyes a bit glazed over and a blank stare crossing my face. Is this a bit cynical of me? Perhaps. But in reality, this campaign has strayed so far from anything resembling a substantive debate that it doesn't deserve my attention (or anyone elses for that matter) at this point. The fact of the matter is that Obama remains clearly ahead, and barring an apocalyptic collapse, he will be the next nominee for President from the Democratic Party. If HRC wants to contest this, fine. But until the two candidates start talking about the things that matter, like the issues involved in small town poverty or health care or the country's direction, I will choose to occupy my time with something of greater value (watching old reruns of Crossfire perhaps?).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
