Popular Support for Gay Marriage

While the setbacks in Maine and California may be disheartening, and the conservatives believe that the 37 popular referenda that have all banned gay marriage are proof that people don't really want gay marriage, or that the trend is moving away from further gay rights in the United States. I feel confident, however, that there's really no reason to panic. If you look at the demographics of who votes for and against gay marriage, it's clear that the people pushing against it are old, decrepit and will all be dead soon. I would go so far as to say that there will be a popular referendum ratifying gay marriage in one or more states within the next ten years, perhaps even the next five.

Here's a chart outlining support for gay marriage broken down by state and age demographic:



Is it possible that all these misguided youngsters could grow up to hate fags just like their grandparents do? Sure, but how many people who grew up favoring civil rights for blacks in a climate that was largely against it eventually grew up to be bigots?

Fact Checkers

Some conservatives are all butt-hurt because the AP sent 11 people to fact check Sarah Palin's new book. Apparently a potential presidential candidate is not worthy being scrutinized. 'Cause it's not like conservative journalists went after everything that came out of Obama's mouth from the moment people started speculating that he would run for president, amirite?

Eric Holder's "Conflict of Interest"

Michelle Malkin says that Eric Holder is an example of the "culture of corruption" due to the fact that he's "senior partner with Covington & Burling — the prestigious Washington, D.C. law firm, which represents 17 Yemenis currently held at Gitmo," and is therefore in a conflict of interest.

First of all, the very first sentence of her blog entry is a lie. He's not a partner C&B. He hasn't been since he became Attorney General. And if the fact that he used to work for C&B makes it a conflict of interest, than the fact that Dick Cheney used to work for Halliburton makes his appointment of that company to run Iraq's oil industry is also a conflict of interest.

Clinton in Afghanistan

When there was suspicion of widespread corruption and fraud in the last Afghani election, the consensus seemed to be that, if Karzai does not acknowledge that the election was obviously fraudlent, the Obama administration should withdraw its support. In a sense we got what we wanted; Karzai agreed to a run off election. However, the guy running against him in that election made a few (very reasonable) demands about reforming the election process and throwing out some of the guys who oversaw the elections. When his demands were not met, he withdrew from the race and Karzai was declared the winner.

So while Karzai did, technically, agree to a run off, he set it up in such a way as to prevent anyone running against him from winning, and his opponent, recognizing that, withdrew, and now he's somehow considered a legitimately elected leader. Legitimate enough, at least, to deserve a visit from the Secretary of State at his inauguration.

Now, while I think, at this stage, trying to set up a functioning democracy in Afghanistan is a futile effort, the Obama administration should not be pretending that this is what their goal is, when their goal is obviously just a reasonable degree of stability. Afghanistan is not a democracy, and will not be until they develop a working civil society. They won't develop that until they have a reasonable amount of physical and economic security. So let's drop the pretense, not bother with continued fraudlunet elections for now, and do what needs to be done to lift the people of Afghanistan up to a decent standard of living.

When people have comfort, stability and security, they are more likely to demand and practice democracy.

Heh

Stephen Colbert just reminded me of how conservatives didn't complain when Bush was holding hands and walking through the rose garden with the Saudi prince. Apparently bowing to Al Saud is groveling, but having a quasi-homoerotic experience with him is just fine.

Bowgate

A few months ago, some people pointed out the hypocrisy of conservatives who criticized Obama for bowing to the Saudi prince, while, around the same time, also criticizing Michelle Obama for breaching protocol by hugging Queen Elizabeth. They can't seem to make up their mind about whether the POTUS is supposed to show respect for all the silly little formalities that people commonly go through when they meet with a monarch or not.

The reason for this seems obvious to me. They don't really care about proper protocol. They just want a reason to find fault with Obama.

The people who really hate him, and think that he hates America, see this as further evidence of his contempt for his own country. They see the bowing as an expression of how he sees non-western governments as superior to western ones.

I personally don't think he should have bowed to anyone. I also don't think people should be so upset about Michelle Obama hugging the Queen. Why? Not because I think it shows disrespect for the US, but rather because it looks like pandering to these foreign leaders. He comes off to me as someone who is not trying to show respect, but as someone who is patronizing them. Now, I don't really think that Obama intends to patronize these leaders, but when he tries to behave according to customs he doesn't really seem to understand, he is embarrassing himself AND the leaders to whom he is trying to show respect.

KSM

Could it be more appropriate to KSM in a military tribunal rather than a civilian court? Perhaps. It is very possible that some of the intelligence that was gathered is sensitive information from sensitive sources that should probably be kept under wraps.

Still, one way or another, this guy has to be tried. The US afforded even the Nazis a fair trial. If the US wants anybody to believe they are carrying out the war on terror in a way even remotely resembling justice, they need to try the people they capture.

As for the fact that he's being tried in New York, what's the problem? Are they worried that he's going to escape and tear down the Empire State Building with his bare hands? Some people are concerned about other Guantanamo detainees being brought to the US because they will attract supporters who will try to break them out of prison, but Zacarias Moussaoui has been in a prison in Colorado for years, and nobody's tried to break him out. He hasn't put the community around the prison in any greater danger than any of the other inmates of that prison.