by executive order of the president... wtf?

over the past year, i've been told over and over again by Very. Important. People that the president didn't want to use an executive order to stop military discharges under "don't ask, don't tell" because, good heavens, don't you know, that's not a permanent fix and the next president can just as easily reverse that with the swipe of a pen. these Very.Important.People have been quite condescending about my and others' ignorance of how the Real.World works.

[note to Very. Important. People: stopping military discharges pending permanent repeal through an executive order is not, i repeat not, intended as a permanent fix but rather a measure of decency and a show of commitment to repeal.]

[ps, i am not stupid.]

well, lo and behold, now some Very.Important.People over at the Center for American Progress are all "hey look, Obama can use his executive powers to get some things done."

Through his own executive powers, Obama can work to reduce oil imports, stave off home foreclosures, and delay military discharges to blunt the effects of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy barring gays from serving openly, the report said. A White House official said the report would get a close look. [http://lat.ms/aDEwIq]

 oh.  my.  fucking.  god.

we're two years into a four year term, and folks have just discovered executive powers!? it's almost enough to turn me to prayer...

let's review: has a law degree so i assume took at least one conlaw class, taught conlaw at university of chicago so i again assume has a passing acquaintance with the different powers given to the three branches of government, was a junior senator from a midwest state for almost a whole term while bush was president so i also assume has at least a vague recollection of the use of executive orders, elected to presidency in 2008, inaugurated in january 2009, lives in the white house so i assume someone has mentioned who can issue executive orders by now, has the ability to effect changes in policy and practice if not law without anyone else's say-so through the use of the multiply-aforementioned executive orders, and is now going to take "a close look" at a report about using executive orders....

yep, it's sunday and i'd better start looking around for a church. sheesh

connect the dots - being american

and the stories just keep coming. i hate to use the time-worn statement but "what she said" -

This TSA issue does crystallize for many the encroaching police state in a way that people who care about such things should pay attention to. It’s not abstract and it affects Real Americans rather than some faceless foreigner. It’s one of those proverbial “teachable moments” if anyone cares to connect the dots.

if we can't make this a teachable moment, if this matter which has clearly gripped regular everyday americans without regard to politics can't be used to force a much-needed very public discussion about civil liberties and rights, then the terrorists and Republican'ts have really won.

right now, every statement coming out of tsa is just making it worse. And what Obama said today? oh boy, did he miss that mark by about a mile and a half.  Obama does not do "I feel your pain" well at all.

connect the dots - do you like being publicly exposed, humiliated? did you know you gave up all your rights by buying a plane ticket to gramma's? and don't get me started on warrantless and/or secret searches or wire-tapping, data-mining by the feds, ... how'm I doing so far?  this should be front page outrage by progressives, not the other folks.

do victims of rape or abuse deserve to be aggressively groped in public by strangers? do people with disabilities have less rights to dignity than Congresspeople or blond haired blue eyed 24 year olds (male or female)?

just what are we gaining by taking the most invasive and expensive approach in an intentionally crowded security crushes when others are doing as good or better using well-trained well-paid humans beginning from the minute someone walks in the door?

connect the dots - this "teachable" moment will slip away soon, another shiny object will appear, the crowds will move on, and we will lose another bit of what makes us Americans.

on the day after

it's the day after midterm elections: lots of democrats lost in the house, some democrats lost in the senate, maryland stayed on course with democrats in charge and a few more in the state senate. the president today said he'd be more open to compromise, which seems strange to me since he's been doing that all along.

am i more or less bitter than after other elections? i think a bit more. after gaining majorities in the house and senate in 2006 and 2008, with the white house in 2008, even with a depressed economy, this was really the democrats' election to lose. the media drove the opposite message by giving whackos and nutjobs massive unearned free media coverage, making whack-a-doodle o'donnell almost a household name.

for two years, instead of acting on a clear mandate for transformative change voters gave obama and congress in 2008, we saw moderation and incrementalism. yes, health care reform passed but it was really health insurance company protection dressed up. we did get the abolition of pre-existing conditions bans but i don't trust insurers or employers to do this correctly or well. and my distrust is indicative of the white house's main failing: communication. they failed miserably on health care, financial melt-down, and just about everything else. obama didn't rev up for the midterm elections until about two weeks out, too late to make a significant difference with more vague "yes we can" promises. [warning: i'm not a big fan of our president, folks. deal with it.]

so now what? hell if i know. by the accounts i'm seeing, democrats continue to learn the wrong lessons from these defeats. instead of going with the "let's get back to standing up for and by our fundamental principles and values," they're all "ooo, someone's mad at me. i better be even more milquetoasty." yuk! when i look at the democrats i'd follow--even without agreeing with everything they've said or done, i think of Alan Grayson (D-FL08) and Russ Feingold (D-WI). and both lost. i love Bernie Sanders (D-VT) but as an independent, his chances at leadership are low. Reid will likely continue as senate leader, and with obama's words ringing in his ears, we're bound to have even weaker leadership from him. lovely...

women's rights and especially our right to determine our reproductive future are definitely on the chopping block - what a wasted opportunity the past two years have been on this. chances of eliminating the hyde amendment seem at an all-time low, greater restrictions to access are likely to proliferate, and democrats seem to care not a whit.

and what about issues affecting civil and human rights over the next two years? well, don't bet on dadt passing congress. so will obama finally figure out he has the power to block further discharges? will holder's doj continue defending the unspoken war on "terror" that translates into the war on american civil rights? will the white house continue entrenching and extending the bush/cheney secrecy and "right" to wage an executive war? and will the media ever focus on how this administration has done nothing to undo the worst legacy of the previous one? (hint: not likely)

while i love ted kennedy's words ("the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die."), our current leaders are not the ones who will ensure that the dream of an america for all lives on.