Welcome, Franken!

Well, in a day when Republicans irritated me to a great degree (Sanford, Palin outrunning Obama? Wtf? A rehashing of the stimulus money rejection in VA with a friend, Cheney, etc.), here is some terrific news! Welcome to the Capitol, Senator Franken! It's about time! Hooray for a 60-seat, fillibuster-proof majority! Now if we can only convince all the Democrats to do stuff, it will be a glorious time. Of course, to some extent that will be tough, but certainly easier now than it was without him. What great news.

Sanford and Soulmates

Mark Sanford had an interview that came out today in which he claimed that the woman in Argentina is his soulmate, but that he's trying to fall back in love with his wife. What a dirtbag. Whether or not that's the truth - save it for behind closed doors. There's no way it's fair to his wife to have that wandering around in the press while they're supposedly trying to patch things up. If I were her... well I'd like to think, anyway, that I'd be gone. I like that he's not trashing his mistress, but you can speak respectfully of the one woman without being so incredibly disrespectful to your wife. This kind of stuff just makes me so mad.

Public Option

So, it seems that the big divide right now in the battle over health care reform is between those who want a public option and those who do not. I think I really must be missing something. It seems to me that those who oppose a public option essentially oppose it because it would drive down costs of insurance coverage, and hopefully health care itself. So I guess my question is: unless you own an insurance company, what's so bad about that? I suppose it might lead to some job loss (that could probably be atoned for by the increase in public sector jobs and revenue), but when you balance that against the absolute necessity of doing something to combat rising costs and the ever-increasing bankruptcies due to medical emergencies, I really can't understand what motive the Republicans have to oppose this, apart from wanting campaign contributions from the insurance companies...

Yay Obama!

Okay, I know this is cheesy, but I am so happy Obama is President. It may just be those eight long years under Bush, but I'm just glad. Yeah, he doesn't do everything right, and he hasn't done everything I hope he'll do yet, but that's part of life in a democracy, really.

I've just been thinking about this all week because of his supposedly "testy" press conference earlier in the week. I loved it! My favorite part was when he responded to the question about whether pressure from the Pubs had made him "toughen" his stance on Iran (gee, people, could it be that the situation has changed? Also, could you actually compare current statements to ones made a week ago before you act like it's some huge difference?), when he said something about how McCain is passionate about foreign affairs, but only he, Obama, is President. That is right, Mr. President. It's just you, and how thankful am I for that? It is just you, not McCain, not Lindsey Graham, not Mark Sanford, and most importantly: not W. Thank you, Mr. President, and keep up the (mostly!) good work!

Executive Power

First of all, let me say that I absolutely believe that homosexual marriage should be permitted and that discrimination against homosexuals in all other ways should also be prohibited. That said...

I've seen a lot of complaints recently about Obama's lack of action thus far on Don't Ask Don't Tell, particularly in response to the Center for American Progress's recommendation that he suspend it pending a legislative solution, and in response to the Justice Department's continued enforcement of the Defense of Marriage Act. Although I fervently hope that both of these laws go by the wayside very soon, I do not think it is a good idea, or even legal, for Obama or his Justice Department to unilaterally decide to stop enforcing the law. The executive branch cannot be allowed to simply pick and choose which laws it would like to follow or enforce - I admit that Constitutional Law is not my strong point, but I'm pretty sure that sort of goes against the idea of rule of law.

Take this as an example. Say there is a law against health care providers refusing to prescribe birth control for people solely on the basis of marital status. Now, say there's some Republican governor in office who decides he's just going to drop ongoing suits regarding this law, because he's morally opposed to non-married people having sex. We'd all agree that was wrong, right? But those people think that law is just as morally invalid as we think DOMA and DADT are. Like I said, I hope that we get rid of those laws/policies as quickly as possible - but I had enough of abuse of executive power under Bush, and I rather appreciate Obama's reluctance to go that route.