I am the child of the '80s. During my teenage years, Ronald Reagan was President, the Soviet Union still existed, telephones were all landlines (and it was rarity for a teen to have their own line) and our broadcast news came at Noon (Monday thru Friday), 5:30 pm, 6:00 pm 10:00 pm and our print news came in the afternoon. Oh sure, Good Morning America and The Today Show were on in the mornings, but as a teenager, I rarely ever saw them.
In short, we didn't have the never ending news cycle. Unless you had cable or an expensive satellite dish that took up your backyard, you didn't have CNN and there was no such thing as MSNBC or Fox News Channel. We didn't have the internet or Twitter to provide us with constant news updates either. And I know it is going to be very cliche, but it was a simpler time.
This is not to say that we were informed when major news occurred. I remember the television being rolled into my classroom when President Reagan was shot and when the Space Shuttle Challenger blew up. The national networks of NBC, ABC and CBS each broke into the daytime programming to tell us what happened and then went back to regular programming unless there was an update. We all tuned into the nightly network news at 5:30 for any new developments and waited until the next day for any other news.
It was the way things were and worked. No one felt burnt out by the events reported because there was a lull that the technology of the time provided. Now that we are all connected by our cellphones, email, text messaging, Twitter and Facebook, we don't have that opportunity to truly "tune out". We don't have that opportunity to take the information and process in a way that doesn't harm us mentally and physically.
And we must ask ourselves, were we better served by the 24/7 news cycle this past week where rumor and innuendo were presented as fact? Where "analyst" after "analyst" was brought on to provide us with their "views"? Would we, as a society, have been harmed if those bringing us the "news" would have stepped back and provided us with nothing but facts and gave us time to process it?
Horrific events are going to occur. Earthquakes, tsunamis, tornadoes, acts of terrorism and terrible crimes. But does the 24/7 news cycle help us or harm us due to burnout?
Please let me know your thoughts in the comments below.
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Monday, April 8, 2013
Lots of Words, But No Action
I want to thank all of the U.S. Senators, Democratic Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota being the latest (at the time of writing), who have come out in support of marriage equality. The words you have spoken are very loud indeed, but as they say, actions speak louder than words. So my question to all of you have come out in support of marriage equality is this: Where is the bill to repeal the atrocious "Defense of Marriage Act" or DOMA?
I have to wonder why none of them have introduced the bill to repeal DOMA. Is it because they are scared of a political backlash in their home states? Are they waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down DOMA this summer? Is it because they are sure repeal of DOMA will fail in the House of Representatives?
No matter the reasons they may have for not filing the bill to repeal DOMA, the reasons aren't good enough. Not to me and not to the millions of gays and lesbians who will forever be treated as second class citizens as long as DOMA is law. It is passed time for each of these Senators to show some real leadership and not just offer rather empty platitudes.
REPEAL DOMA!
I have to wonder why none of them have introduced the bill to repeal DOMA. Is it because they are scared of a political backlash in their home states? Are they waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down DOMA this summer? Is it because they are sure repeal of DOMA will fail in the House of Representatives?
No matter the reasons they may have for not filing the bill to repeal DOMA, the reasons aren't good enough. Not to me and not to the millions of gays and lesbians who will forever be treated as second class citizens as long as DOMA is law. It is passed time for each of these Senators to show some real leadership and not just offer rather empty platitudes.
REPEAL DOMA!
Monday, April 1, 2013
We Are Responsible
As more and more gruesome images hit our television and computer screens of the brutal carnage in Mexico's drug war, the largest culprit is not mentioned: Us. That's right, our asinine anti-drug policies and our insatiable drug appetite is ultimately responsible for tens of thousands of deaths in Mexico at the hands of the drug cartels.
But we don't care about the blood on our hands. We only seem to care about our favorite tourist destinations, such as Acapulco, becoming increasingly dangerous. And we definitely don't think about the affect our four decade old and failed "war on drugs" has.
The sooner our nation's leaders realize that we as a nation are responsible for the drug related violence, the sooner the people of Mexico will be safer.
But we don't care about the blood on our hands. We only seem to care about our favorite tourist destinations, such as Acapulco, becoming increasingly dangerous. And we definitely don't think about the affect our four decade old and failed "war on drugs" has.
The sooner our nation's leaders realize that we as a nation are responsible for the drug related violence, the sooner the people of Mexico will be safer.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Grow a Fucking Pair
Why are the Justices of the United States Supreme Court so scared to do their fucking job? That is the impression I got from oral arguments yesterday and today in the two marriage equality cases before the Supreme Court this term. A lot of time (10 minutes for Prop 8 and 50 minutes for DOMA) was taken at the start of each oral argument to find out if the plaintiffs in each case standing. That's right, 1/6 of oral arguments in the Prop 8 case and almost 1/2 of oral arguments of the DOMA case was spent on how the Justices might be able to kick the cases and avert doing their job.
Remember, at least four Justices voted to accept to hear these cases this term and scheduled oral arguments. Two of the most important gay civil rights cases since 1996's Lawrence v. Texas and the Justices are looking for away to avoid handing down a real decision. They would rather punt. And that includes the "liberals" on the Court.
Is it too much to ask the Justices of the Supreme Court to grow a pair of fucking balls and do their job? Is it too much for these Justices to say that this issue is too important to push down the road? Is it too much for these Justices to say the time is now, not later, but now for them grant "equality under the law" to gays and lesbians in regards to marriage?
If not now, when? I am getting very tired of asking that question in regards to equal rights. So, I am going to ask this simple question of the Justices: Will you please grow a pair and find that discrimination against gays and lesbians in regards to marriage is a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment in both the Prop 8 and the DOMA cases?
Just grow a pair and do your fucking job.
Remember, at least four Justices voted to accept to hear these cases this term and scheduled oral arguments. Two of the most important gay civil rights cases since 1996's Lawrence v. Texas and the Justices are looking for away to avoid handing down a real decision. They would rather punt. And that includes the "liberals" on the Court.
Is it too much to ask the Justices of the Supreme Court to grow a pair of fucking balls and do their job? Is it too much for these Justices to say that this issue is too important to push down the road? Is it too much for these Justices to say the time is now, not later, but now for them grant "equality under the law" to gays and lesbians in regards to marriage?
If not now, when? I am getting very tired of asking that question in regards to equal rights. So, I am going to ask this simple question of the Justices: Will you please grow a pair and find that discrimination against gays and lesbians in regards to marriage is a violation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment in both the Prop 8 and the DOMA cases?
Just grow a pair and do your fucking job.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
California's Prop 8 at The Supreme Court - Updated - 2nd Update 2:49 pm
As I write this, the United States Supreme Courts is about to begin oral arguments in Hollingsworth v. Perry, better known as the California Prop 8 case. It is a scary proposition to have this particular Court with its conservative majority that seems hellbent on reversing the progress of civil rights in the past century to hear this case. No matter how oral arguments go today (an audio recording will be available later today), we probably won't know until June what the outcome will be when the decision is handed down.
Of course, we will all be trying to read the tea leaves of what is said in oral argument by the Justices via their questions (almost statements). And of course, all eyes and ears will be on Justice Kennedy, the author of Lawrence v. Texas as he is expected to be the swing vote. Will the Court follow in the steps of Loving v. Virginia by reaffirming the fundamental right of marriage and thus striking down gay marriage bans across the nation? Or will the Court deal a staggering blow to the marriage equality movement by declaring that Proposition 8 is constitutional and there isn't a fundamental right for same sex couples to get married?
Or will the Court punt? In my honest opinion, I think they will punt (especially if Chief Justice Roberts is the author) and they will do so in one of three ways:
A hat tip to SCOTUSblog for their incredible coverage of the marriage equality cases and also a hats off to Chris Hays who, in his final show as the host of MSNBC's UP, had a full hour discussion on the marriage equality cases before the Court featuring Dan Savage. I am including those videos below.
*UPDATE* Tom Goldstein, over at SCOTUSblog, doesn't have a lot of good things to say about oral arguments today. Kind of scary.
*2ND UPDATE* The audio recording of today's arguments have been released and I am including them here.
Of course, we will all be trying to read the tea leaves of what is said in oral argument by the Justices via their questions (almost statements). And of course, all eyes and ears will be on Justice Kennedy, the author of Lawrence v. Texas as he is expected to be the swing vote. Will the Court follow in the steps of Loving v. Virginia by reaffirming the fundamental right of marriage and thus striking down gay marriage bans across the nation? Or will the Court deal a staggering blow to the marriage equality movement by declaring that Proposition 8 is constitutional and there isn't a fundamental right for same sex couples to get married?
Or will the Court punt? In my honest opinion, I think they will punt (especially if Chief Justice Roberts is the author) and they will do so in one of three ways:
- They could declare that the Plaintiffs (the proponents of Proposition 8) do not have standing which would mean that the Ninth Circuit Courts narrow decision striking down Proposition 8 relying on Romer v. Evans.
- They could be California specific and ruling that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional based on Romer v. Evans while holding that the proponents of Proposition 8 do have standing.
- They could find that domestic partnerships (of which California has such a law) violates the 14th Amendment and thus those 9 states with domestic partnerships for same sex must allow for same sex marriage.
A hat tip to SCOTUSblog for their incredible coverage of the marriage equality cases and also a hats off to Chris Hays who, in his final show as the host of MSNBC's UP, had a full hour discussion on the marriage equality cases before the Court featuring Dan Savage. I am including those videos below.
*UPDATE* Tom Goldstein, over at SCOTUSblog, doesn't have a lot of good things to say about oral arguments today. Kind of scary.
*2ND UPDATE* The audio recording of today's arguments have been released and I am including them here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)