msnbc's david shuster, twittered this morning:

With Olson and Boies teaming up to argue due process/14th amendment, the legal argument for gay marriage is a slam dunk. Huge development.

here's what david's talking about, via marc ambinder:

Combatants in the first politico-cultural drama of the 21st century, lawyers Ted Olson and David Boies are now allies in another: today, they're filing a federal court challenge to California's Proposition 8, hoping that a federal judge will issue an injunction against the same-sex marriage ban and immediately reinstate marriage rights for gay couples. The California Supreme Court upheld the proposition yesterday. Funding for the case is provided by the Equal Rights Foundation.

Olson, who has argued Bush v. Gore and 54 other cases before SCOTUS, was solicitor general from 2001 to 2004, and Boies, a corporate law expert who served as Al Gore's lead co-counsel in 2000, famously helped the Justice Department prosecute Microsoft's anti-trust case.

but there's a bit of skepticism out there, with conspiracies looming about olson's possible ulterior motive. from hot air:

A federal court might find that a violation of the equal-protection clause and overturn Proposition 8, or at least the ruling. The danger here for Olson is that a federal court might take action that invalidates those existing marriages rather than forcing California to recognize gay marriage altogether.

some believe it's not only california marriages that would be in danger. a dailykos reader, more to the point:

The whole goal of this lawsuit is to take the marriage issue in front of the current supreme court and get a ruling AGAINST same-sex marriage. Anyone who seriously believes that this lawsuit is good for our community is completely missing the point.

from the l.a. times:

Legal scholars have observed that proponents of gay marriage have avoided taking the issue to federal court so far because of the dominance of conservative judges and justices on the federal bench after the eight-year tenure of President George W. Bush.

The U.S. Supreme Court has what usually results in a 5-4 majority against extending rights to gays by recognizing sexual orientation as a vulnerable class of citizens in need of protection.

And all but one of the 13 federal appeals circuits has a reliable conservative majority. Even the exception, the San Francisco-based U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, experienced a curtailing of its liberal orientation with Bush's seven appointments

so is olsen a savior? or a wolf in sheep's clothing? could a decision in a conservative circuit court set a federal precedent ending the battle for gay marriage for years to come? and is that exactly what olsen is hoping for?

my tendency is to trust. but i admit, i do have some reservation about this whole development. i also wonder what effect a possible march to the u.s. supreme court for gay civil rights could have on sonia sotomayor's confirmation hearings for that same court.

and what about boies? if this movement is not on the up-and-up, why would he be involved? ultimately, i'm more willing to believe that a conservative republican would come out in support of marriage equality (see steve schmidt) than a democrat would unknowingly support such sinister ulterior motives.

(from tuesdaysblog.com)

somebody somewhere is still interviewing this bowhunk and some political party still seems interested to hear what he has to say so today we tromp joyously through the field of wisdom that is joe the pseudo-plumber wurzelbacher.

first, in an in-depth discussion about the gays, gay marriage, states rights, and dictionaries, joe made a feeble attempt to prove he actually graduated from the fourth grade by encouraging everyone to become more familiar with their webster's:

"People don't understand the dictionary-it's called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It's not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that."

honky. okay? enough said.

second, joe's a-scared, i guess, that some of the gay (or worse, maybe some of the aids!) might rub off on his kids, if they get too close to "queers."

"I've had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn't have them anywhere near my children. But at the same time, they're people, and they're going to do their thing."

first of all, jo-jo, those people aren't your friends. they just wanna buy you a six-pack of mgd and make you listen to prince records in their basement.

what i find particularly sad about this, if i am to be quite honest here, is that you can take one look at hottie joe and tell he's got hot kids that would make great homos. it's gonna be really, really hard to make them gay if we can't even get close to them.

but not impossible! mmmmwooooohaaaaaaahahaha!

(by the way, joe? i looked up queer in my 1981 webster's new collegiate and it burst into flames. whaddya think that means?)

Read more »

in an attempt to re-brand coca-cola their party, some old white guys got together over the weekend to launch a forum to discuss new ways for the republicans to say no.

okay, they weren't all old.

they call themselves the national council for a new america, and aside from the fact that most of the country voted for a new america last november and got it on january 20, 2009, these guys deserve at least some credit: outside of picking a name that sounds like they should be wearing long, flowy capes and bright red tights, at least they're trying something new.

or not.

on sunday, team america super friends national council members mitt romney and lil' eric cantor talked to cnn's john king about kryptonite gay marriage and proved that when it comes to those new things, it's the same old-same old.

lil' eric:

"I believe in traditional marriage between a man and a woman. It's been that way thousands of years. And I believe that most of the American people, by far, apply or adhere to that principle. So I would continue to support the ability for us to say that's what a marriage means in America."

so eric. when it comes to "most of the american people" adhering to that "principle"...well, an april 30th abc news/washington post poll says guess again einstein:

"49 percent (of respondents) support (gay marriage), vs. 46 percent oppose - the first time in ABC/Post polls that supporters have outnumbered opponents.

More than half, moreover - 53 percent - say a gay marriage held legally in another state should be recognized as legal in their own state.

The surprise is that the shift has occurred across ideological groups. While conservatives are least apt to favor gay marriage, they've gone from 10 percent support in 2004 to 19 percent in 2006 and 30 percent now - overall a 20-point, threefold increase, alongside a 13-point gain among liberals and 14 points among moderates."

if you follow polls - and you know lil' eric does - 30 percent of the folks he's talking about do not agree with him. yet, he seems to have no interest in reaching out to them, or even admitting they exist.

surprisingly, it was mitt romney who seemed to throw out a new idea for the republicans:

"You really can't have different marriage provisions in different states and then expect people to be able to move around the nation and have different rights in different states. Marriage is a matter of national consequence. It's a -- it's a status. It's not an activity. And as a result, there should be a national standard."

lest we think anyone on the right has had a come-to-jesus moment about the gays, romney then added:

"And my own view is that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman."

yeah. new coke didn't taste very good either.

"Mr. Obama, by the clarity of his program and the energy of his program, is going to help the republicans redefine themselves. they are going to be in opposition to this, they are going to be again a party of more limited government, and if Mr. Obama's program works he wins. if not, the Republican revival is assured."

"The most beautiful five words in the English language are the first five words of the first amendment: 'Congress shall make no law.' Period."

he's young, he's vibrant, he's incredibly well-spoken, and he's what washington insiders are calling "a new republican."

he has what some would call fairly liberal social views, to a point, but he's a fiscal conservative to his core. above all, his offbeat demeanor and surprising sense of humor make him terrifically appealing to young and old alike. and if the republicans can remake their party in his image, they may not win huge majorities in congress or take back the white house - right away - but they will finally have the beginning of what could be a very healthy, successful return to power.

his name is:

wouldn't every republican like to see a name right here?

there isn't one. the politician described above does not exist.

or does he?

as the grand old party struggles to regain it's footing, it's interesting to see them flail about against the juggernaut that is obama. as they flop around and wave their arms, they keep trying to be obama, or at least appeal to voters the way he does. young - bobby jindal. black - michael steele. appealing -eric cantor. female - sarah palin. hip - hip? zip. republican's are just not hip.

they're not. but they so want to be. they so want some of obama's swagger, and basketball cool. which is their biggest problem. they need to embrace their unhipness and be honest. they need to stop pretending to be all those things they are not, and embrace who they are:

they are nerds.

michael steele and bobby jindal are perfect examples. steele has been running around using urban-suburban hip-hop lingo since he was chosen to chair the rnc, except that's not who he is. you can take one look at the guy and see he's not "street" in any way, shape, or form - he is a giant nerd. so why is he trying to be puff-michael?

bobby jindal is incredibly appealing. really, he is - he's smart, he's well spoken, and in virtually every other speech he's given, he's much, much less of a goober. but last tuesday night he turned on the romper room style, and showed his true nerd colors. pass the pocket protectors and call lady elaine fairchilde.

with obama in the white house, the republicans can't look to a nerd for leadership.

so there's a void. there's a void of clear, honest leadership in the republican party, and when opportunists see a void, they jump in. now we have people like ann coulter, joe the plumber, and - worst of all - rush limbaughstepping up to fill that void. these people, especially limbaugh, are now the voice of the republican party, much to the dismay of many people in the republican party.

wouldn't we all have much more respect for a smart, charismatic young nerd who, instead of going on the attack for the next four years, simply provided honest, steadfast opposition? someone who didn't use the arts, or fountains inmiami, or field mice, or moose in montana (was that a paternity issue?) to make their case, but instead stood up and said "here are the things i disagree with, and here is why."

better yet, wouldn't we prefer that nerd to stand up and say "here are the things i am for"?

i'm gonna tell you, that nerd is out there.

Read more »

a few simple thoughts on our new president...

we've become accustomed to watching political candidates make big promises during a campaign while at the same time thinking to ourselves "yeah, that'll never happen." there is an inherent filter, not so much of automatic distrust (many have that as well) but of hearing politi-speak and understanding, somewhere deep down, that "it just won't be that easy once you get there."

but this week, in his budget and in his video address to the nation, barack obama lays down the gauntlet. this is the sweeping change the country voted for, he says. c'mon! what did you think i was gonna do? i told you about all this stuff during the campaign...and now? what, you thought i wasn't gonna change the country?

remember when we thought this guy didn't have enough "fight" to him?

my favorite economist has some pretty nifty thingsto say about obama's budget proposal. in the clatter of all the cable and internet sniping, it's nice to find a clear, trustworthy voice.

it seems as though obama's been in office much longer than a month and a week. every other day there's some major piece of legislation being signed, or another important speech. this week alone, there wasthe non-state-of-the-union speech, the release of the budget, and the beginning of the end of the war in iraq. obama began the week with his approval numbers dipping, for the first time ever, below 60% (the sky is falling! the sky is falling!) he's ended the week at a comfortable 67%, two points off his high.

like andrew sullivan, i've learned to stop second guessing obama. because every time i do, he surprises me. i'm not always adept at it, but it's best, i think, to sit back and watch the action from a distance - with some perspective. today might be a little rough and tumble, but just wait until tomorrow.

(from tuesdaysblog.com)

11:44 a.m.

the clintons were just introduced over the public address system, and they're making their way through the crowd. the most interesting thing so far is that the announcer didn't introduce hillary as "the next president of the united states" as terry mcauliff did on tuesday night, when it was painfully clear she was not going to be.

she looks fantastic. she's wearing black. symbolic? the death of her campaign? the entire clinton family, bill, hillary, chelsea, and hillary's mother. they won't let her start. the crowd is cheering and cheering her. she's tried five, six times now, in earnest, to begin her speech. she's gonna cry. if she isn't already.

"this isn't exactly the party i planned but i sure like the company."

"thanks for the homemade signs. thanks for knocking on doors. thanks for arguing with your friends and neighbors."

one has to think, if this was the hillary clinton we'd all seen six months ago, we might not be having this event today. she seems proud, but sincere. the smile is genuine. she looks like a seasoned, albeit somewhat weathered, strong leader.

cnn reporter candy crowely has said several times, when you talk to people coming out of a barack obama campaign event, they say "he's inspired me, he gives me hope." people coming out of a hillary clinton campaign event say "she is just so, so smart."

she just said "gay and straight" in a list of groups who stood with her throughout the campaign. every time a politician says includes gays and lesbians in a speech (in a positive way) it gives me hope. you can think that's silly, but it's true. imagine if she said "thank you to all the middle age, white men who voted for me." wait...she did say that at one point, didn't she?

"the way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals...is to take all our energy and elect barack obama the next president of the united states."

she is very, very strong here.

"today as i suspend my campaign, i congratulate him, and endorse him, and throw my full support behind him."

she is now, seemingly, trying to control the small part of the crowd booing obama's name, as a few of them seemed to be doing. and it's working. each time she comes around to the line "and that is why we must elect barack obama," there is less booing and more cheering.

she is much better at this than she used to be. she's more comfortable, more passionate.

gay rights. she said it again. hope.

she smiles when she talks about herself.

"democrats have won three out of the last ten presidential elections. and the man who won two of those elections is with us today. " she smiles, and applauds him. it's a genuine, dear moment.

"...stretch the boundaries of the possible."

YES WE CAN. she uses obama's phrase. she's said this at least three, maybe four times: "we need to elect barack obama our next president." and she's said it strongly. forcefully.

again: "we must help elect barack obama our president." she's turning it into a catch phrase. hoping, i think, that the crowd joins with her. do they? they haven't yet. but the booing has stopped and now, when she mentions obama, there is nothing but cheers.

she now almost seems to be chastising the crowd. will we go forward together? or will we stall and slip backward?

if she's auditioning for the vice presidency, she's good. i can't imagine it, though. she would better serve this country elsewhere. back in the senate. governor of new york.

women. she's leading the women's cause. she's fucking tough. look at her. she's not smiling anymore. this is the woman who could have been president. sitting across from world leaders.

she just pulled out the phrase "my friends." i love her for co opting john mccain AND barack obama (one in a sly way, one in a smart way.)

always aim high, work hard, and care deeply about what you believe in.

"don't go there."

if she hasn't brought along her supporters to elect obama through this speech, i'm not sure what else she could do.

she has not once mentioned bush or mccain. not once. pundit after pundit said she would bask in the glory of her campaign and take potshots at bush and mccain. and she's stayed completely positive and above board and on message. for that, for her amazing campaign, and for this great exit, she deserves a heap of credit. i'm proud of her, and again, proud to be a democrat.

msnbc's david schuster (who also voices the muppet bert from sesame street) is using his time on air this afternoon tolecture hillary clinton on how to give an apology. (perhaps clinton should look to schuster's own example from earlier this year, when -- after he suggested thatclinton's campaign was pimping out daughter chelsea -- he needed 192 otherwords before he got to "i'm sorry.")

while most of the country (including theobama campaign) has moved past this unfortunate clinton remark from lastfriday (where she inadvisedly used the assination of rfk as an example of campaigns that have run well into june) schuster and msnbc are still embroiled in an effort to twist clinton's words to mean something much more ominous than she intended.

yes, clinton misspoke. terribly. i don't disagree with that. neither did she. she came out almost immediately and admitted as much. she expressed regret, especially to the kennedy family.

even randell beck, the executive editor of the argus leader -- the person in the room, the person conducting the interview with clinton -- did not read any ulterior motive into clinton's comments. still, the media (mainlymsnbc's keith olbermann and others, like schuster) turned her comment into something completely ridiculous and frightening.

the problem now becomes not that clinton made an egregious error, but that people like schuster continue to not only remind us of it, but remind us of their own sickening interpretation of it.

joe watkins (pastor of the christ evangelical lutheran church in philadelphia; a key non-lawyer member of the government relations practice at buchanan ingersoll, a major national law firm; former associate director in the office of public liaison at the white house under president george h. w. bush; former assistant state director for u.s. senator dan quayle) is on msnbc blathering on and on about rev. jeremiah wright, and how wright shouldn't be giving news conferences -- this is hurting barack obama -- wright is at the least divisive and at the worst offensive -- if i'm a white working class voter and i see this guy on t.v. i will never...

woah, hold on.

first of all, joe, you're NOT a white, working class voter. you don't really know what it's like to be one, just like i will never know what it's like to be at the same time pastor of an african american church AND a republican strategist. i'm not sure how you have time to be a pastor, joe, since you're constantly on television in your republican strategist role. you criticize jeremiah wright for his politics, saying a pastor's job is to preach the gospel of jesus christ, but that's not what are you doing on television. what do your parishioners think about that? maybe we should ask them. all 85 of them.
...continue reading JOE WATKINS CAN BLOW ME.

...when asked about obama's bitter comment, dream ballet hillary said, "barack is a good person and we all know what he meant. he's already said he chose his words poorly so why don't we let it go and let's talk about the issues." after she said that, dream ballet tony ran down to his local polling place, banged on the door until they let him in, and voted for dream ballet hillary on the spot.  

read the entire post here.