Sarah Who Again?

Mama Bear is back after a relatively long and (happily) quiet stretch where we didn't have to pretend that Sarah Palin was an actual person with ideas that we should listen to and stuff.

By now we all know that Shah Walker of Wisconsistan has not been unseated and will be renaming the governor's mansion to "Scott's Pleasure Casbah" where he will be executing one civil right a day just because he can.

Sarah is taking this opportunity to get her Bumpit on national television, as she is relating Walker's victory to Barry O's inevitable defeat. Also, something about his goose being cooked. Or something.

As she denounced Obama’s “hopey changey stuff”, the former Alaska governor continued: “More and more Americans realize that what Wisconsin has just manifested via this vote … is the complete opposite of what president Obama and the White House represents today.” 

Palin predicted that the Obama administration will try to downplay Walker’s victory and distance itself from the GOP’s win in Wisconsin.

“Jay Carney — can’t wait to see how he spins all this and ignores it, and President Obama himself,” she said. “They’re going to really try to distance themselves from this despite the fact that they, leading their lapdogs in the leftist media, made this a front page story for how many months? Months and months.”

Mama Bear-- or is it Bulldog with Lipstick?-- is going to cook a goose for some lapdogs. Or something. You heard it here first.

OneAngryCultist: Voting for God

Hold on to your horses, kids, the current GOP-led Congress is finally voting on something that is nothing short of Biblical and will bring about the second-coming; cure cancer, AIDS, hemorrhoids, and result in the liberation of all humanity accomplish absolutely nothing except reaffirm, "In God We Trust" as the national motto of the United States. The proposed bill would also encourage public buildings to include the motto in their architecture because, you know, architectural redecoration is some kind of job-creation, right?!

Congressman J. Randy Forbes (VA-04), Co-Chairman of the Congressional Prayer Caucus and author of H.CON.RES.13 cites the following reasons why this bill is necessary:

"President Obama inaccurately proclaimed "E Pluribus Unum' as our national motto. Last November before a worldwide audience, in a much-anticipated and much-publicized speech focusing on the United States' relationship with the Muslim world, President Obama falsely proclaimed that our national motto was E pluribus unum. The President failed to respond to congressional entreaties to issue a correction; the uncorrected transcript remains on the White House website.

Misunderstanding of the phrase "Separation of Church and State". The Supreme Court has held, “The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of Church and State. . . We find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion.” The words ‘separation of church and state’ do not appear in the U.S. Constitution. Rather, the phrase originates from a letter penned by Thomas Jefferson on January 1, 1802, to the Danbury Baptist Association.

Inaccuracies and omissions in the half-billion-dollar Capitol Visitor Center. In 2008, the over half-billion dollar Capitol Visitor Center opened for the purpose of educating over 15,000 Capitol visitors daily on the “legislative process as well as the history and development of the architecture and art of the U.S. Capitol.” Yet, Capitol Visitor Center historians had sanitized the public building of any references to our national motto, including replacing the inscription of ‘In God We Trust,’ inscribed above the Speaker’s Rostrum with stars in a replica of the House Chamber and cropping an actual picture of the chamber so you could not see the words ‘In God We Trust.’ Only until Members of Congress intervened publically [sic.] and legislatively were these omissions and inaccuracies corrected."

So, essentially, what I'm reading is that Congressman Forbes took one of President Obama's gaffes a little too close to heart and is using Congress to make sure this doesn't happen again lest we all fall into godless heathenry.

Now, "Why is your OneAngryCultist chiming in on this particular issue?" you might ask. Well, because religion is important to me - not just mine, but all religions and spiritual perspectives atheism inclusive. As much as I like a little ceremonial deism here and there, H.CON.RES.13 is decidedly sectarian in nature and is part of a growing trend of denying the religious pluralism upon which this country was founded. While the issue of "separation of church and state" does not exist in the Constitution in word, the kind of religion that politicians like Forbes, Perry and others want to enshrine into law is not the kind of religion that would be recognizable by the founding fathers, let alone the 25% of non-Christians in the United States.

Obama Slams Republicans (Sorta) Over Booing Of Gay Soldier

The President took the Republican party to task for its actions this weekend in a stern denunciation (well, stern for him anyway) at a San Jose fundraiser, the first of his campaign.  His remarks (via AMERICAblog Gay):

At his first fundraiser in San Jose, President Obama took aim at Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry, without naming the Texas governor by name, and was critical of the recent GOP debates. He said the 2012 election will be "a contest of values." 

"Some of you here may be folks who actually used to be Republicans but are puzzled by what's happened to that party, are puzzled by what's happening to that party. I mean, has anybody been watching the debates lately? You've got a governor whose state is on fire denying climate change," he said, to applause. "It's true. You've got audiences cheering at the prospect of somebody dying because they don't have health care and booing a service member in Iraq because they're gay. 

"That's not reflective of who we are," Mr. Obama said. "This is a choice about the fundamental direction of our country. 2008 was an important direction. 2012 is a more important election."

While eloquently put and extremely accurate, I worry that Barack Obama's rhetoric on the intractability and intrinsic insanity of the GOP's recent stances (and tacit approval of the rabidity of their supporters) is too little, too late.  Of course these remarks were made at his first fundraiser.  Campaigning has officially begun for the White House, and that's when he needs to be seen as a strong opponent to the ridiculous politics of the right.  However, remarks like this would perhaps have been more useful (and better for his campaign) if he had made them, oh, when policy was being decided.

Calling for an end to Republican craziness is great!  How about we do so when, for example, they're holding the country's economy hostage and threatening shutdowns in order to avoid generating revenue with which to repay our debt?  Strong rhetoric isn't just needed on the campaign trail, but also in the day-to-day operations of our nation.  It's something that's needed, and it isn't necessarily something we've seen.

SLDN Celebrates Repeal Without Radical Activists

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network created a short video celebrating the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell by recounting key discussions, landmark court cases, and the efforts of advocates to end DADT on Capitol Hill.



While this video is nice and all, to me it sort of highlights the divides between the gay advocacy and activism movements.  While we both have the same goals, radical activists (the ones who choose to express outrage through civil disobedience) tend to be snubbed by advocates who regard their stunts as childish while activists lean towards viewing Capitol Hill advocates as milquetoast fundraisers who avoid rocking the boat.

Why is Dan Choi-- the most recent and arguably most powerful face of DADT-- absent from this video? While GetEQUAL is thanked at the end of the video, why are they not pictured?  Many may think I'm being whiny, but I believe that DADT was repealed because of efforts both from paid advocates and volunteer activists.  Aubrey Sarvis certainly helped pass repeal, but in order to present a complete picture of the story of repeal these other elements are necessary.  


Whatever.  It's a fine video.  I hope as the movement progresses further in order to afford the same freedoms LGBs are achieving in the military for our transgender comrades in arms, the divide between advocates and activists can be bridged.  I'm not particularly holding my breath, though.

Petition: Appoint An LGBT Youth Advisor

Caleb Laieski, a courageous young man who left school at the age of 16 in order to become a youth advocate for LGBT teens, has taken his crusade against bullying all the way to Congress.  When I first met Caleb, he was getting ready for the day to lobby Congresspeople for anti-bullying measures.

Now he's handing around an online petition urging the President to appoint an LGBT Youth Advisor at the White House in order to work on issues that specifically affect high-school age LGBTs:

Urge the Obama Administration to appoint a youth advisor to work with the administration on the everyday emotional and complex issues that LGBT youth face. 

In the past couple of years, our country has seen a tremendous swing in regards to the acceptance of minority groups, but research and statistics still show that LGBT youth are going through personal struggles both at school and at home. Some of these struggles consist of bullying, drug abuse, homelessness, isolation and even suicide. 

According to PFLAG, approximately 30% of gay and lesbian youth drop out of school due to hardships from physical and verbal abuse. This statistic is caused by the lack of support and intervention for LGBT students by teachers and school administrators. Additionally, the few teachers that would like to intervene often do not have the proper training on how to intervene in anti-LGBT bullying.

So click here and sign it!

The White House Loses Its Freaking Mind, Trashes Environmentalists

Barack Obama's administration doesn't appear to care whether it stays or goes, as they've now chosen to attack one of the longest-held bastions of liberalism and the Democratic Party: environmentalism. 

The right has been very busily attempting to deconstruct the image of green business, with candidates like Rick Perry painting environmental protections as harmful to job creation.  Then, Barack Obama appeared to have caved to demands from conservatives on the EPA, ordering a halt to tighter smog restrictions which would have improved the air quality of millions of Americans (and saved who knows how much in health care costs). 

Nobel prizewinning economist Paul Krugman has lambasted the decision, stating that stricter EPA regulations would actually have stimulated the economy and driven job creation:

And now you can see why tighter ozone regulation would actually have created jobs: it would have forced firms to spend on upgrading or replacing equipment, helping to boost demand. Yes, it would have cost money — but that’s the point! And with corporations sitting on lots of idle cash, the money spent would not, to any significant extent, come at the expense of other investment.

More broadly, if you’re going to do environmental investments — things that are worth doing even in flush times — it’s hard to think of a better time to do them than when the resources needed to make those investments would otherwise have been idle.

 But now, finally, the White House has completely lost its mind, with one spokesperson comparing environmental movement's claims to GOP insanity and calling its point of view "silly":

Finding a middle ground is difficult, especially in the midst of heated political wrangling over how to cope with the sputtering economy. Businesses are focusing almost entirely on the costs. Environmental groups, meanwhile, tally up the benefits without paying much heed to the costs.

“My view is that the Republican claim that ‘job-killing regulation’ is a redundancy is as ridiculous as the left-wing view that ‘job-killing regulation’ is an oxymoron,” said Cass Sunstein, head of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. “Both are silly political claims that have no place in a serious discussion.”

This is, to be quite frank, shocking.  At this point, who does Barack Obama think is going to campaign for him?  He's drawn the ire of the LGBTs, infuriated economists and social program advocates, and is now foolishly alienating the enviro movement.   2012 is looking bleaker than ever.

Lesbian Binational Couple Gets A Break

In a step that could mean reprieve for hundreds of binational same-sex couples across the nation, a judge has halted the deportation process for Sujey Pando, a Mexican national who was brought to the US at the age of 16 and then disowned by her family because she is a lesbian.  She is married to her longtime partner Violeta, having taken advantage of marriage equality in the state of Iowa.

She was due to be deported back to Mexico, an issue her siblings avoided because her parents obtained citizenship for them.  Due to her sexuality, the same steps were not taken to keep Sujey in the US.

The judge was acting on a directive published by the Obama administration last week in an attempt to prioritize deportations to keep non-threatening nationals from being kicked out of their adopted country.  Immigration has pledged to review the 300,000 deportation cases currently pending to ensure that the individuals being deported are a threat to the security and well-being of Americans.

In a letter sent to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) today, DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano explains that the case-by-case approach was first detailed in March 2010 and recently reiterated in a memorandum from June, 2011. She argues that the process will enhance public safety and allow immigration judges “to more swiftly adjudicate high priority cases, such as those involving convicted felons.” “This process will also allow additional federal enforcement resources to be focused on border security and the removal of public safety threats,” she argues. 

The new process is a result of a long-standing administration policy to ensure that the nation is “not clogging the system with folks who are not maximum priorities,” a senior administration official explained. Lower-priority deportation cases “are being set aside so we can focus more on our more serious cases of convicted criminals and other high priority categories.”

Pando's attorney, Levi Soloway, explains from his blog Stop the Deportations:

"Today Denver Immigration Judge Mimi Tsankov halted the deportation of Sujey Pando and scheduled a new hearing to consider an application based on her marriage to her U.S. citizen wife, Violeta Pando. Because today's hearing was intended to be a final decision day on Sujey's deportation, the judge's action was unusual; she spent 45 minutes methodically considering the procedural posture of the case. In the end, the Judge set aside the intended purpose of the hearing, citing developments including the Attorney General's intervention in a similar case in May (Matter of Dorman) and noted that the issues involved in this case existed in a context that was "fluid" and "in a state of flux." The Judge referred to events that occurred as recent as yesterday as having an impact on how to proceed. Yesterday, the DHS Secretary Napolitano ordered a review of all pending deportation cases for possible closure, including those involving LGBT families."

 So basically, the administration has set a precedent that confuses the issue enough that it is no longer crystal-clear that these undocumented immigrants require deportation.  Whatever the reason, Sujey and Violeta have much to celebrate.  Congratulations to them.

Barry O To Anti-Gay Bigots: "Haterz, Stay Out!"

The Obama administration has taken a firm stance against human rights abusers seeking entry to the United States today, proclaiming that verified bigots who work to oppress LGBTs are not allowed.

"The proclamation bars entry of immigrant and non-immigrant aliens who organize or participate in war crimes or serious violations of human rights — which could include those seeking to pass legislation in Uganda that would institute the death penalty for homosexual acts.

"'The United States’ enduring commitment to respect for human rights and humanitarian law requires that its Government be able to ensure that the United States does not become a safe haven for serious violators of human rights and humanitarian law and those who engage in other related abuses,' Obama states."

The benefits of this proclamation are twofold:  Not only are we protecting our citizenry from assholism from overseas, we pressure foreign legislators (like those jerks trying to execute gays in Uganda) to lighten up on their LGBT citizens.

Today In Disrespectful Schlock

Yesterday the President celebrated his 50th birthday, marking the occasion with a private party attended by a host of celebrities such as Stevie Wonder, Chris Rock, Charles Barkeley, Jay-Z, Tom Hanks, and Rita Wilson.  Fox Nation reported on the event, slamming the President for taking a couple hours out of his schedule to celebrate the big 5-0.

Right.  Neither does the cookie I ate this morning.  Neither does this freaking blog.  Neither does Fox Fucking Nation.  There's lots of shit that doesn't create jobs.  

They might as well have made the headline "A Bunch Of Rich Black People Got Together And That Scares Us."

Fox and Friends Blast Obama As Anti-Christian Over Ramadan Proclamation

Monday was the beginning of Ramadan, and Barack Obama recognized Muslim Americans with a simple statement as follows:

"Times like this remind us of the lesson of all great faiths, including Islam — that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. In that spirit, I wish Muslims around the world a blessed month, and I look forward to again hosting an iftar dinner here at the White House. Ramadan Kareem."

This, of course, is in continuing with traditions begun with the last President, George W. Bush, who notably held iftar dinners all eight years of his presidency (iftar being the meal breaking the Ramadan fast).  This didn't stop the asshats over on Fox News from once again raising questions about the President's religious background, to include Barry O's supposed War on Easter.  From ThinkProgress:

CARLSON: Some people said that they might have an issue with the fact that he didn’t issue a proclamation for Easter. So some people are saying is this an outreach to the Muslim world and why isn’t there an outreach to the Christian world.” 

DOOCY: Of course the White House does historically have White House Easter Egg Roll, but they didn’t issue a proclamation they did for Ramadan just now…I think he did mention briefly in his weekend address that weekend Easter — in passing — but still, nothing big. It is Christianity’s holiest, most sacred holiday. 

JOHNSON: I think the coming Easter you’ll see a statement coming out of the White House. 

DOOCY: Oh during the election year? 

JOHNSON: Clearly, it was a terrible terrible error.

So was it a terrible, terrible error when George W. didn't issue a proclamation on Easter?  Or H.W. Bush?  Or Ronald Reagan?  

Dudes, nobody has ever issued a proclamation on Easter.  Why?  Because the President already reaches out to Christians-- in the White House Easter Egg Roll, in the annual Christmas Address, in the Presidential Christmas tree, and in the Easter prayer breakfast.  What you're asking for isn't to reach out to Christians, but to place Christianity in a place of primacy in our President's actions.  That's not only inappropriate, it violates the already tenuous grasp our nation has on the separation of church and state.

Obama Supports Repeal Of DOMA, Hearings Begin Today

During my time off yesterday, the President made big news by stating his support for the Respect for Marriage Act, a proposed piece of legislation that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act entirely.  The Congressional hearings are ongoing at the time of this writing (click here to go to ThinkProgress and watch the statements).

From Pam's House Blend:

"This would repeal ALL of DOMA:

* The federal definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman;
* The section that allows states not to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states;
* The federal government prohibition from recognizing legally performed same-sex marriages."

The author of the bill, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) had this to say:

"I am thrilled by President Obama's endorsement today of the Respect for Marriage Act, legislation which I introduced in order to repeal the discriminatory and cruel Defense of Marriage Act once and for all. "The President's unprecedented decision to support this timely legislation sends a powerful message to Members of Congress and to the American people that now is the moment to dispense with DOMA and remove this ugly blight from our legal code. The President has consistently supported repeal of DOMA and, with today's announcement, in advance of tomorrow's landmark Senate hearing, he has taken yet another step to make this a reality. On the heels of New York's advancement of marriage equality last month, the Respect for Marriage Act is more necessary than ever to ensure that all legally married couples are treated the same - and granted the same recognition - by the federal government."

Many, like Nadler, are lauding the President's support for the Act as historic, as the White House rarely comments on bills before they hit the floor for debate and voting.  

Some aren't so happy, however, criticizing the President's support as poor timing and bemoaning the chances of the bill actually passing, with famed activist Robin McGehee taking to Twitter to sarcastically thank Obama:

In related news, my online action with Dan Choi criticizing HRC for taking up space in the hearings that would better be given to people of color or bi-national couples got coverage on the Washington Blade and Towleroad, with Christopher Edwards of Immigration Equality responding to the petition I created:

"Christopher Edwards, spokesperson for Immigration Equality, said Leahy is a 'huge champion' of UAFA and bi-national families and maintained Immigration Equality has 'a very positive relationship with him and his office.'

"'There are a large number of issues related to DOMA that not all of them could be or should be represented,' Edwards said. 'We at Immigration Equality are fully supportive of the witness list for the hearing, and we know our couples and families will benefit from the hearing and the testimony of the witnesses chosen.'"

I would say your "positive relationship" isn't taking your cause very far if you can't even arrange to have a single black person testify for marriage equality.  I don't care about your positive relationship, I care about making an effective impact and getting this bill passed.

DOJ's Balls Quietly Got A Little Bigger This Weekend

Amid the celebration that our nation's third-most populous state now has gay marriage, advocates and activists are quick to caution that this does not apply at the federal level. Just because New York has marriage equality does not mean the United States government recognizes that relationship in any way.

However, something curious has happened in a key court case in the fight to secure health benefits for the partners of federal employees. Karen Golinksi is one such federal employee who is suing the government in order to obtain benefits for her wife, and instead of facing an uphill battle with the Department of Justice, a brief was filed this weekend not just supporting her claim but stating that the court should find DOMA unconstitutional.

This qualifies as holy shizballs amazing, folks.

"Unlike in other cases where DOJ has stopped defending DOMA in accordance with President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder's decision that Section 3 of DOMA -- the federal definition of marriage -- is unconstitutional, DOJ lawyers today made an expansive case in a 31-page filing that DOMA is unconstitutional. Previously, the government had attached the Feb. 23 letter from Holder to House Speaker John Boehner (R) that announced the DOJ position to filings to courts about the decision to stop defending the law, but it had not laid out any more expansive reasoning.

"But, for Golinski's case, DOJ did so. In describing why heightened scrutiny applies to classifications based on sexual orientation, for example, the DOJ's lawyers -- in describing how 'gays and lesbians have been subject to a history of discrimination -- write, 'The federal government has played a significant and regrettable role in the history of discrimination against gay and lesbian individuals.'"

As the incomparable Daniel Villarreal from Queerty points out, this is indeed a very big deal.

"Basically instead of just saying that section 3 of DOMA is unconstitutional, Obama’s administration said its part of a larger system of nationwide institutional abuses against gay Americans throughout history and THUS the court should find DOMA unconstitutional as well. It sounds curiously like the historical testimony Olson and Boies offered in the Prop 8 trial.

"Basically, it’s a huge boon for the gay community that really shakes up the remaining DOMA lawsuits with an implicit government admission that it has had a direct role in unconstitutional anti-gay discrimination, a history that must stop today—amazing!"

I'm not a legal expert, but it seems very unusual to me for the DOJ to ask a court to rule a previously defended policy unconstitutional. It's kinda ballsy, and it's kinda smart, and it's kinda under the radar, meaning that Obama and Co. are going to get away with it. Neat!

Update: In LGBT Pride Reception, President Believes He's Fulfilled His Commitments

Supposedly the cut feed was due to some technical problems and a lack of ability on the White House's part to stream live (right.  The leader of the free world lives here and you can't fucking Skype?).  Whatever, they've now released video and a transcript, in which Barry O. states (after listing his accomplishments in office)

"So bottom line is, I’ve met my commitments to the LGBT community. I have delivered on what I promised. Now, that doesn’t mean our work is done. There are going to be times where you’re still frustrated with me. (Laughter.) I know there are going to be times where you’re still frustrated at the pace of change. I understand that. I know I can count on you to let me know. (Laughter and applause.) This is not a shy group. (Laughter.)"

He's entirely correct on a couple things: We're still frustrated and we are by no means shy about telling him so.

Video:

Barry O More Popular Than Mama Bear In Her Own State

Evidently Alaska doesn't like quitters.

You know your bid to be President is a failure when you can't even win the approval ratings in the state that you were Governor.

GetEQUAL To Host Pride Cocktail Party Of Their Very Own

Tomorrow President Barack Obama will be hosting a Pride Party at the White House, undoubtedly to hit up the HRC and other big gay orgs for some much-needed campaign funds.  Who better to go to for some quick cash than the GayTM?

GetEQUAL, ever the ones to pressure Democratic leaders to fulfill their promises, will be holding their own cocktail party, starting out with a rally at 4pm at the White House, after which the festivities will move to the Green Lantern for some drankin' and whatnot.

"First we will gather at the White House at 4 PM.

"There we greet invitees to the White House Pride reception with a simple request -- to help lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans become fully equal under the law. We will distribute 'GetBOLD to GetEQUAL Scavenger Hunt' game cards to provide them an opportunity to communicate the needs of the LGBT community to the power players inside.

"The scavenger hunt will ask attendees of the reception to 'GetBOLD' by urging President Obama to be the fierce advocate he promised the community during his campaign. The game is meant to be a fun but meaningful opportunity for attendees to step up the pressure on the Obama administration for full LGBT equality.

"After we distribute the cards, we will adjourn to The Green Lantern where our reception begins at 7 PM."

So if you're in the DC area tomorrow, stop on by and chat with the GetEQUAL folks about opportunities to get involved.  Link below is to the Facebook event page.  

[Click Here!]

Jared Polis Expecting Baby

Rep. Jared Polis, one of the few out and open legislators in American politics, is now expecting a baby with his partner, Marlon Reis.

They didn't comment further than that, and refused to divulge whether the baby was coming to them via a surrogate mother or through adoption. All they have been willing to tell is that it will be in September.

Congratulations to Polis and his longtime Boulder-based partner. I have to ask, though: will having a baby light a fire underneath the politician, causing him to taking a harder stance on the President's do-nothing attitude towards marriage equality? Or will he continue to be an apologist for our "fierce advocate?" Only time will tell, but I suggest that having an LGBT-led family would be a good reason for Polis to "evolve" beyond the party line.

Administration Eases Up On DREAM Eligible Students

The White House quietly issued a memo from Barack Obama's immigration chief instructing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials to prioritize deportations of undocumented immigrants to make it easier for students to stay in the country to complete their educations.

From Mother Jones:

"Has President Barack Obama found a way to enact the principles of the DREAM Act—the bill that would prevent the deportation of young undocumented immigrants who are students or military veterans—without passing the measure itself? Unable to move this legislation through the Republican-controlled Congress, the Obama administration has used its executive authority to shape immigration policy in line with the DREAM Act. This month, in a little-noticed move, Obama's immigration chief advised Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to use discretion when considering whether to deport certain undocumented immigrants who are particularly vulnerable or have strong community ties to the country. That is, go easy on the sort of undocumented immigrants that the DREAM Act could benefit, among others."

Hmmm.  This reminds me, a bit, of his refusal to defend DOMA.  Instead of making bold decisions, issuing executive orders, and actively pushing for legislation to right social wrongs in our country, he seems to be attempting to make things better for marginalized populations through quieter, hard-to-notice means.  Is this going to benefit him in the long run?

There are some who are certainly not that happy about the memo, with some ICE officials calling it a "law enforcement nightmare" and the Daily Caller saying, "President Barack Obama’s administration is quietly offering a quasi-amnesty for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants."

Either way, I hope this does indeed make the struggle to stay in America easier for immigrant students.

Because Stories Are Always Better When Told By The Taiwanese

I would say that yes, activists WILL breathe rainbow colored fire on Barack Obama if he doesn't evolve already.  Plus!  Where can I get these rainbow spewing Super Soakers?

Obama Addresses NY Marriage Issue

Obama steered clear of stating outright support for marriage equality in the Empire State tonight, instead stating that marriage is a subject best left to the states.

Via ThinkProgress:

"Part of the reason that DOMA doesn’t make sense is that traditionally marriage has been decided by the states and right now, I understand there is a little debate going on here in New York about whether to join five other states and DC in allowing civil marriage for gay couples. And I want to say that under the leadership of Governor Cuomo, with the support of Democrats and Republicans, New York is doing exactly what democracies are supposed to to do. There is a debate, there is a deliberation about what it means here in New York to treat people fairly in the eyes of the law and that is — look, that’s the power of our democratic system."

Gore Slams Obama On Climate Change

The Obama Administration is taking yet another hit from a prominent progressive, with Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore indicating that the public's general ignorance on climate change is partly due to inaction on the part of the President.

After listing some of the successes of the presidency, Gore goes on to say (from Rolling Stone):

"But in spite of these and other achievements, President Obama has thus far failed to use the bully pulpit to make the case for bold action on climate change. After successfully passing his green stimulus package, he did nothing to defend it when Congress decimated its funding. After the House passed cap and trade, he did little to make passage in the Senate a priority. Senate advocates — including one Republican — felt abandoned when the president made concessions to oil and coal companies without asking for anything in return. He has also called for a massive expansion of oil drilling in the United States, apparently in an effort to defuse criticism from those who argue speciously that "drill, baby, drill" is the answer to our growing dependence on foreign oil.

"The failure to pass legislation to limit global-warming pollution ensured that the much-anticipated Copenhagen summit on a global treaty in 2009 would also end in failure. The president showed courage in attending the summit and securing a rhetorical agreement to prevent a complete collapse of the international process, but that's all it was — a rhetorical agreement. During the final years of the Bush-Cheney administration, the rest of the world was waiting for a new president who would aggressively tackle the climate crisis — and when it became clear that there would be no real change from the Bush era, the agenda at Copenhagen changed from 'How do we complete this historic breakthrough?' to 'How can we paper over this embarrassing disappointment?'"

After the near disastrous PR generated by Netroots Nation for the President, more and more Obama appears to need to make tougher stances on issues important to the people that vote for him.  While bipartisanship is important, can we continue to sacrifice our progressive ideals in the quest for moderate politics?