Villainous Company: homosexual marriage equality is only about legally being able to choose a same-sex spouse

Cassandra, at Villainous Company, opposes marriage equality for homosexuals, but has been kind enough to visit here from time-to-time and quote me a couple of times recently. She quoted me from my post on the National Equality March a couple of days ago — the quote follows her comment that she is “not sure how much more transformative hope and change America can take” — whereupon, war broke out in her comment section. I want to point out that the war does not address the point I make in the quote about what really motivates Obama’s legislative agenda and what I now think is the real reason Obama will do little or nothing for homosexual equality ever.

Instead, the war at VC is about marriage equality for homosexuals. Since I’ve put a fair amount of time into crafting my comments there, I am posting them here and linking to Cassandra:

My first comment:

Cassie,

Did you mean to link A Conservative Lesbian in this post? The link isn’t working. [She graciously fixed it.]

I do appreciate your quoting my work and considering my point of view.

One of the things that struck me at the National Equality March was how often love of America and love of our Constitution and the equal protection clause were invoked.

The rationale for making us second-class citizens is that same-sex couples cannot directly produce children? It doesn’t strike me as a sufficient for such comprehensive destructiveness to the lives of homosexuals.

Posted by: Cynthia Yockey, A Conservative Lesbian at October 13, 2009 06:27 PM

My second comment (by this time I’ve decided that she prefers “Cassandra,” although dear Little Miss Attila calls her “Cassie”):

Cassandra,

If your commenters would just consult Wikipedia or read up a bit on marriage for even half an hour they will find that marriage is in a constant state of re-definition. And if you look at marriage in the Old Testament, it is defined as polygamy with the option of having both wives and concubines. In addition, modern Islam permits polygamy.

Frankly, if you want to watch the re-definition of marriage over the last 50 years, just watch Nick at Night from “I Love Lucy” to “The Bill Cosby Show.”

Since marriage in truth is constantly being re-defined, I don’t see why same-sex couples can’t be defined into it now.

And Cassie, conservatives in truth are great innovators and entrepreneurs — that’s why we treasure the liberty and individualism. It is liberals/Leftists/progressives who impose totalitarianism and policies that create social and economic stagnation.

I believe that religious organizations stigmatize every single behavior that doesn’t lead to producing babies because more babies translate into more followers, more money and more power for the religion. They dress up their human greed and lust for power as God’s will. But whether or not it is God’s will, religions should not be appropriating the apparatus of the state to enforce their tenets on everyone.

I also perceive that religious leaders know that if they addressed the members of their congregations directly about their own sins — fornication, adultery, and so on — that they would make their members angry and they would leave the church. But they still want to talk about sexual sins and denounce them. So they scapegoat homosexuals.

BTW, we don’t need to force various religions to marry us. Besides the fact of the separation of church and state, so it’s not legally possible, homosexuals are self-reliant and resourceful. One of the first orders of business when the gay rights movement started was the founding of the Metropolitan Community Church by Rev. Troy Perry. If we need any more churches, we’ll make them ourselves.

I should add that I believe in God and I am spiritual. My common ground with religious people is a love of God and the desire to do right.

There are two reasons that a separate-but-equal system of civil unions is not acceptable. The first is that having different terminology is a deliberate put-down — marriage will always be a superior state to a civil union.

The second is that separate types of unions/marriage require separate laws and regulations. However, most of our state legislatures meet only in the spring for a few months; some only meet a few months every other year. With that schedule, and ambitious politicians wanting to make their bones cheaply by keeping legislation providing parity for civil unions bottled up in committee, it is logistically impossible to create a situation that is “separate but equal.”

Letting the states decide the issue of homosexual marriage equality is not really an option, either, since there are over 1,000 federal rights associated with marriage. Plus, if your marriage is legally recognized in one state, but not another, how do you handle that? Marry but also make contracts and powers-of-attorney under state law that you hope will be recognized in another state, if your marriage isn’t? You have no guarantee that documents such as a durable medical power-of-attorney will be recognized by another state. Plus, there’s the expense and hassle of trying to figure out what legal documents you will need if your civil union isn’t recognized. If you are traveling and one spouse has a medical emergency, you won’t get to ride in the ambulance, you might not be admitted to be with your spouse in the emergency room, and if your spouse dies, you will not be legally entitled to make funeral arrangements.

Meanwhile, the benefits to society of more people entering marriage so they have the legal tools to care for one another and their children have to be enormous — 20 percent of homosexuals have children and those chilren benefit from both spouses having a life-time legal commitment to them.

Posted by: Cynthia Yockey, A Conservative Lesbian at October 13, 2009 11:17 PM

My third comment:

Cassandra, regarding the following from your comment above:

“You might try reading this:

“http://www.volokh.com/posts/1133375615.shtml

“A supporter of gay marriage does what I’ve asked: actually entertains the notion that the other side might have a point without for one moment surrendering her own ardent support for gay marriage.”

The only way homosexuals truly want to “re-define” marriage is to be included in the current system as same-sex couples. The ONLY thing we really want to change is choice of spouse. That’s it.

It is the coalition of religions fighting to exclude homosexuals from traditional marriage that have brought destruction to marriage in the Netherlands and France. They didn’t want same-sex couples included in marriage, so the compromise of civil partnerships was introduced. Then it seemed unjust to make civil unions, which were deliberately defined to be a lesser state than marriage, only available to same-sex couples so heterosexuals were allowed the option and to the horror of the religious coalition — and, I suspect, the surprise of homosexuals — heterosexuals flocked to civil unions

So religious activists opposed to homosexual equality are the ones who re-defined marriage, damaged the institution and they now are getting away with blaming homosexuals for this! It is an outrage to blame homosexuals for this self-inflicted wound!

Posted by: Cynthia Yockey, A Conservative Lesbian at October 15, 2009 05:32 PM

Jon Stewart shellacks CNN's factcheck of SNL's Obama skit

I still have not forgiven Jon Stewart for his deranged rant against Gov. Sarah Palin last year. I definitely will never let him live it down. But this helps:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
CNN Leaves It There
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes		 Political Humor Ron Paul Interview

No one laughs at God in a hospital

Dad’s OK, I’m OK, Cuban Diva BFF’s OK, all the cats are OK.

But I spent the day working on a post that required me to re-live aspects of caring for Margaret while she was dying. Dear Jennie, The Bloggess, linked this song, “Laughing With,” by Regina Spektor in a tweet awhile back and it is so true and so piercingly beautiful. Today just seems like the right day to share it.

I haven’t forgotten that I promised to write about former ACORN leader Marcel Reid and how just a few minutes of conversation with her changed my view of the Left forever — I’ll get to it soon. I also want to tell the story of Margaret and Martina Navratilova at the 1993 March on Washington. And if my photos from the National Equality March are good, I’ll share some of those.

If you listen to this song, I’d like to recommend a couple of things to keep in mind. First, what you put your attention on grows stronger — so look to the good (and if you can’t see it, keep affirming it will appear until it does). And second, try this suggestion from an inspirational e-mail that I received from a dear friend today: “Stop telling God how big your storm is. Tell the storm how big your God is!”

Obama has finally found a war he is determined to win and a foe for whom he has preconditions before he will negotiate — Fox News

You know how Gov. Sarah Palin keeps pointing out that Obama is allergic to the words “victory” and “win” when it comes to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? Or any conflict where democracy and capitalism are threatened? And you remember how Obama has declared he will negotiate with terrorist and totalitarian regimes without pre-conditions? But he would not talk to anyone on Fox News when he spoke to every other Sunday news show to push Obamacare? Not even with pre-conditions?

Well, I see from Moe Lane that Obama’s finally found a war worthy of winning — his war on Fox News. Glenn Beck explains:

Along the same lines, HillBuzz links this piece from Israel on how Obama is diluting the stature and power of the office of the President:

He [Obama] announces the policy concerned and then goes on to implement it almost as a solo show. This kind of political behavior not only dilutes his authority as president, but also limits his freedom to maneuver. He is constrained by his own statements.

For instance, Obama previously announced that Israel must declare a total freeze on settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. Although Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was ready to go a long way toward achieving a common denominator on this matter, a total freeze was not going to happen.

Had the Obama administration refrained from making public statements on this issue, and proceeded to conduct a quiet dialogue with the Israeli government, the current Israeli position could hardly have been presented as an American failure.

INDEED, BY making his position publicly known, President Obama forced Mahmoud Abbas to adopt an identical stance thus rendering a move on the peace process even more difficult. The Palestinian Authority leadership negotiated with previous Israeli governments without demanding a freeze on Israeli settlements as a precondition. Once Obama declared in public that such a freeze was necessary to restart negotiations, he left Abbas no other alternative but to adopt the same position. After all, Abbas couldn’t be less demanding than Israel’s staunch ally was.

Further, the contrived tripartite meeting involving Netanyahu, Abbas and Obama in New York last month was hardly conducive to the domestic and international authority of the US president. If at all, this meeting should have been convened by a lower-ranking political figure, such as the Secretary of State or the officially appointed mediator, Senator George Mitchell. There was precious little to be gained by the president from such a meeting.

The bottom line seems to be that Obama only recognizes a person or entity as a foe if they are critical of him. OK, Obama. Duly noted.

Update, 10/13/09: Ron Radosh at Pajamas Media has a worthwhile post on Obama’s war on Fox News and poses the following questions:

Will a time come when the White House decision not to allow any administration spokesman to be on Fox News in 2009 backfire? Does Barack Obama, the great orator, really think if he appears for an interview with Chris Wallace- a seasoned and respected broadcaster- that he will not be able to handle Wallace’s questions, or that he will not be able to persuade any of Fox’s viewers that he, and not they, is right about the issues?

So far, in the White House battle with Fox News, it is Fox that has won. Their widely reported ban on Fox has been reported everywhere, and it makes the White House look fearful, weak, and ready only to talk with those who are more likely to agree with their agenda. Is this the change America wanted when it elected Barack Obama as President?

First, a quibble: Obama is NOT a great orator! Stop calling him that! He speaks in bumper sticker slogans and is not smart enough to know when he is contradicting himself (e.g., Medicare is going bankrupt and is filled with fraud and waste, so let’s save money by having our entire healthcare system be run by the same people who run Medicare). Ann Coulter nailed it in her 2008 column, “Jonathan Livingston Obama“:

There was also this inspirational nugget [from Obama]: “Each and every time, a new generation has risen up and done what’s needed to be done. Today we are called once more, and it is time for our generation to answer that call.” Is this guy running for president or trying to get people to switch to a new long-distance provider?

He said that “we learned to disagree without being disagreeable.” (There goes Howard Dean’s endorsement.) This was an improvement on the first draft, which read, “It’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”

This guy’s like the ANWR of trite political aphorisms. There’s no telling exactly how many he’s sitting on, but it could be in the billions.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming: my concern is that all the leaders of the world who want to bend America to their will now have Obama’s measure. I believe they will see his lack of preparation and the hubris that characterized his pitch to bring the Olympics to Chicago, coupled with his lack of understanding of how presidents behave and what the U.S. presidency means. That episode will tell astute observers how Obama will prepare for any other negotiation and they will be able to take advantage of his weaknesses.

Obama’s war on Fox News shows the world that praise is all to him. He will be manipulated — and disgraced — accordingly.

Update, 10/18/2009: Thank you, Prof. Jacobson, for linking this as your “Post of the Day”! And thank you for linking A Conservative Lesbian in your post marking your millionth visitor to Legal Insurrection less than a year after you started your blog — plus your other high rankings! Number 10 on TaxProf’s list of law professor’s blogs! Number 32 on Technorati’s list of top political blogs! Your success is richly deserved!

Obama chooses negotiating with raging wildfires instead of raging queens

Obama enraged homosexuals on Saturday when he failed to set a deadline, or state any kind of timetable, to keep his campaign promises of enacting legislation that would bring homosexuals closer to first-class citizenship: repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and enacting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

When presented with the choice between negotiating with raging queens furious at his temporizing and a raging wildfire, Obama chose the wildfire:


Obama To Enter Diplomatic Talks With Raging Wildfire

H/T: The Anchoress and Hot Air.

UPDATEDx2 — Genius Artist DC and I marched in the National Equality March on Oct. 11

Updated, 10/12/09: I just added part 2 of Julian Bond’s speech. There’s still no posting on YouTube of Michelle Clunie’s speech. Also, welcome dear PUMAs from Stray Dogs that Amble In: Part IV — the dismissal of the hundreds of thousands of participants in yesterday’s National Equality March as the “Internet left fringe” by a White House official has angered the PUMAsphere, as well. See my comment on that below. And welcome dear readers from The Other McCain; Stacy observes — without gloating or rancor — “White House pimp-slaps gay-rights movement? That’s gonna leave a mark!” And read his wedding post, too [update, 10/13/09: the post has been deleted — it’s a shame because it had so many lovely photos of the bride]  — Stacy is really just a big old girl when it comes to weddings and with his love of weddings and match-making, I do believe he may come around to supporting homosexual marriage equality just so he can make more matches and attend more weddings!

Updated, 10/12/09: I have added Michelle Clunie’s speech. And welcome, readers of dear Little Miss Attila — I share her love of the Jefferson Airplane.

Cynthia Nixon (actress, “Sex and the City”):

Julian Bond, part one:

Julian Bond, part two:

Lt. Dan Choi:

Lady GaGa — she totally won my heart with this speech:

Michelle Clunie (actress, “Queer as Folk”):

The cast of “Hair” singing “Let the Sunshine In”:

It was really a perfect October day — clear blue skies, temperature around 70 — to get together with my friend, Genius Artist DC, and a couple hundred thousand of, well, mostly strangers, to yell at the White House/President Obama and Capitol Building/Congress that the time to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and “don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT) and pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is right this instant.

I have embedded above the speakers I enjoyed the most: Julian Bond, Cynthia Nixon (“Sex in the City”), Lt. Dan Choi, Lady GaGa and the cast of “Hair” singing “Let the Sunshine In.” I’ll update this or post the video of Michelle Clunie (“Queer as Folk”) when it’s available.

I’m so glad I attended both the Tea Party march on 9/12 and the National Equality March on 10/11. What I know from living in both those worlds is that I need to figure out how to explain why the speakers at both events only make sense to people who already agree with them, which is not very helpful when your goal is to persuade. And I must learn how to fill in the gaps and be able to translate between Right-ese and Left-ese. Gays are one of the groups that is self-reliant enough and embraces goals that are idealistic enough — marriage, military service and working for a living instead of figuring out how to poach the fruits of someone else’s labor — to make them the natural constituency of conservatism. I covet them for the Right and I am trying to figure out how to attract them in droves. (The other two groups that would prosper more on the Right than the Left are women and Jews.)

Several of the speakers at the National Equality Rally, which followed the march, called Obama on his refusal to set deadlines for the repeal of DOMA and DADT and the passage of ENDA, but then they all completely blew their opportunity to empower their listeners by telling them to go back to their home districts and work there. Work is the LAST thing we should be doing! What the speakers should have done is told everyone there to go on strike immediately and completely stop working for the Democrats and donating to them until the legislation gays need for equality has been signed into law by Obama before the break for the Thanksgiving holiday.

Because I’m thinking that will help Obama shift his priorities.

Until today I thought that the obstacle to Obama’s delivering on his promises of equality for the lesbian and gay community was the strength of his allegiance to groups on the Left that hate gays: black preachers and their church members, illegal immigrants and Muslims.

Now I think that’s just a part of it. That’s because today I realized that the real reason Obama does not support any of the initiatives for homosexual equality must be that homosexual equality will not contribute to the destruction of the U.S. as a capitalist democratic republic. If it did, rest assured Obama would defy his gay-hating constituencies.

Genius Artist DC hadn’t planned on marching until we spoke yesterday because he is recovering from a leg infection and needed a wheelchair to participate. Well, I have a wheelchair and hadn’t wanted to go alone, so we attended together! After we arrived at the Capitol Building, I was able to wheel him to a fence where we had a clear view of the stage. When I turned around to look at the others there with us in the National Equality March, the marchers appeared to me to be mostly in their 20’s. The last big gay rights march in D.C. was in 2000, so this march introduced a new generation of lesbians and gays to political activism. (Margaret and I marched in the 1987 and 1993 Gay Pride marches in D.C., but missed the one in 2000; I didn’t have the strength then  because my sleep apnea was so advanced and a trip like that would have involved lifting her at least 18 times.)

In contrast to the crowd at the National Equality March, the Tea Party marchers seemed to me to be mostly aged 40 to 70’s and included far more people who needed electric three-wheel scooters or some kind of wheelchair for their mobility. Don’t get me wrong — it’s impressive how many people with jobs ‘n’ stuff came to the Tea Party in D.C.

For both marches, the real benefit that the marchers take away is that they were among tens of thousands of like-minded people with the result that they will never feel alone again — a great brain and nervous system has formed, and a heart, and in today’s Internet age, with the capacity to communicate in so many ways — e-mail, blogs, videos, text messages, Facebook — their connections to one another will flourish mightily.

Update, 10/12/2009: John Aravosis reports that a White House official called us an “Internet Left fringe.” Yo, Obama! Way to piss off your base, dude! (H/T Memeorandum.) Here’s the video:

Update, 10/12/2009: Dear SYD from Stray Dogs that Amble In: Part IV links this post in her survey of PUMA bloggers who support the cause of homosexual equality and are angered that we were all dismissed yesterday by an official in the Obama White House as an “Internet left fringe.” Nobody knows how dirty Obama plays better than the PUMAsphere. I thought of them a few minutes ago when I was serving my father his lunch and saw the crawl on CNN announce the Hillary Clinton says she will not run for president again. Hah! thought I — Obama your god is a jealous god and thou shalt have no other gods before him! What a weakling! Why do you suppose Secretary Clinton would even bring this up? I figure Obama wants to keep the field clear of all the worthier Democratic contenders for the election in 2012, since right now is when prospective rivals should be examining precinct maps and brushing their hats to prepare them to be tossed into the ring.

Where was I? Oh, yes, do read SYD’s post — here is a delicious sample:

Yesterday, Not Your Sweetie covered the schadenfreude over at the Sullivan and Aravosis blogs. Cry us a river, boiz. Wah-wah. And next time you decide to choose a candie date, do a little research into his/her voting (and marching) history.

Many PUMAs reported on the Nobel Peace Prize farce over the weekend. As did the Log Cabin Republicans. Who can blame them? I have a few more things to say about that, myself. Probably tomorrow.

For today tho… I want to recognize the millions of Americans that are being discriminated against because of who they love. I think they deserve our support…. even if some of them did lose our respect during the 2008 Democratic Primaries.

Update, 10/13/2009: Welcome, readers from Villainous Company, you have quite the spirited discussion going on over there.

Obama awarded Nobel prize in economics

Stockholm, October 12 — Nobel Committee spokesman, Torvald Helmer, announced this morning that U.S. President Barack Obama has been awarded the 2009 Nobel prize in Economics.

“First we want to beg journalists to remember the time difference between Stockholm and Washington, D.C. Please embargo this story in the U.S. until 7 am Eastern Time,” Mr. Helmer said. “We will not be responsible for the consequences if Mr. Obama gets a phone call at 3 am. However, we do know that King Faud has already hinted to Mr. Obama that buying him the Nobel Peace Prize cost so much less than King Fahd thought, getting Mr. Obama the Nobel Prize for Economics, too, was really more like getting two for the price of one. But don’t call anyway, just to be on the safe side.

“We saw Obama’s unremitting negativity toward the U.S. economy and U.S. workers during the 2008 campaign, ” Mr. Helmer continued, “He was able to make people in the land of opportunity give up their hope and self-reliance and throw themselves on the mercy of a pitiless government to save them. Never before in U.S. history has a would-be leader worked so hard to destroy the confidence of his workers in themselves. As committed socialists, we liked what we saw.

“Then, within days of Obama’s nomination,” Mr. Helmer went on, “he was able to rush through Congress a spending bill that posed as stimulus for the economy even though its real purpose was to give people false hope while lighting the fuse on a debt bomb that can destroy the U.S. economy in a matter of months. We think the impetus of this prestigious award is just what Mr. Obama needs to ram Obamacare and cap-and-trade through Congress. Let’s see where your precious liberty goes when your effective tax debt is 80 percent of your income, BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Believe me, if we’d known we could use debt bombs to destroy the U.S. economy, we’d have done it long ago.”

Obama tells gays at HRC dinner he will get DOMA and DADT repealed and ENDA passed when hell freezes over

Obama told homosexuals to go to hell right to their faces tonight at the Human Rights Campaign banquet, and they gave him standing ovations (H/T Memeorandum).

Andrew Sullivan stopped trying to find Trig Palin’s real mother long enough to sum up Obama’s flimflammery in his HRC speech:

But the sad truth is: he [Obama] is refusing to take any responsibility for his clear refusal to fulfill clear campaign pledges on the core matter of civil rights and has given no substantive, verifiable pledges or deadlines by which he can be held accountable. What that means, I’m afraid, is that this speech was highfalutin bullshit. There were no meaningful commitments within a time certain, not even a commitment to fulfilling them in his first term; just meaningless, feel-good commitments that we have no way of holding him to. Once the dust settles, ask yourself. What did he promise to achieve in the next year? Or two years? Or four years? The answer is: nothing.

Sullivan also calls on the leaders of the Human Rights Campaign to stop acting like battered wives in relation to Obama and his lyin’, cheatin’, beatin’ ways — although my perception is that the entire Democratic homosexual community is acting like battered wives with Obama:

Essentially, Solmonese is asking for patience and silence until the last day of Barack Obama’s second term for any sort of movement on gay equality. Now I can understand how, say, Brian Bond, who is paid to defend the administration on these issues, might say that to mollify activists. I can understand Rahm Emanuel saying that behind closed doors. But what on earth is the head of the biggest gay lobby doing saying that? Can you imagine AIPAC’s head or La Raza’s head pre-emptively telling the administration that we won’t mind very much if you do nothing for us until the end of your second term? They would be forced to resign, pronto.

What HRC have now done is give away any leverage or bargaining power the gay community has with the Obama administration. They are doing what they did with the Clintons: essentially apologize for being a burden and prostrate ourselves to the Democratic party in the hope that they will be kind to us in the very, very long run. And since at a federal level, almost everything is a Congressional act, there’s absolutely no guarantee that Obama will even be able to fulfill any pledges past 2010, let alone 2017. And there’s no guarantee that he will be re-elected in 2012.

From your mouth to God’s ears, Andrew.

The members of the Human Rights Campaign need to realize that homosexuals should stop working and donating to the Democrats RIGHT NOW until Congress repeals DOMA and DADT and passes ENDA. And if those three things do not happen before Thanksgiving 2009, they need to realize this means that no matter how glowingly Obama described the pea that is under those shells he’s moving around so fast, THERE’S NO PEA UNDER THE SHELLS!

The C-SPAN video of Obama’s 38-minute speech at the Human Rights Campaign banquet tonight is not embeddable, but you can see it by clicking the link.

Homosexuals, you are going to get equality from Republicans, not Democrats:

Gay Patriot points out that the largest change in support for gay marriage has come from Republicans.

Moe Lane reminds his readers that he is a supporter of gay marriage, as is Instapundit — which I heard Prof. Reynolds, aka Instapundit, say at CPAC. Moe also highlights the group on the Left that is the real obstacle to gay marriage.

Roger Simon, publisher of Pajamas Media and PJTV, has a gay son and supports gay marriage.

Colin Powell calls for the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

The strongest voice in American politics for homosexual equality, including gay marriage, is DICK FREAKING CHENEY!!!

But Obama opposes gay marriage. He has NEVER marched in a Gay Pride march. Don’t pay any attention to what he says — just watch what he does! He has Attorney General Eric Holder file briefs in support of DOMA. He is doing nothing to stop gays from getting kicked out of the military for being gay. HE. IS. NOT. OUR. FRIEND!

Seriously, gay people — tell the Democrats at the march in D.C. tomorrow that they will get no more support from homosexuals of any kind until they set a timetable for repealing DOMA and DADT and passing ENDA before the 2009 Thanksgiving recess of Congress.

P.S.

If you are wondering, my nephew will come look after his grandpa so I can go to the march. My dear friend, Genius Artist DC, is 70 and recovering from a serious leg muscle infection, so we will attend the march together and I will push him in the only wheelchair of Margaret’s that I kept in case my parents would need it.

A beautiful day with my father

Somehow I didn’t hear about Obama’s being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize yesterday until almost 11 am, right before we had to leave for my father’s check-up at the cardiologist. I didn’t believe it at first and we were 15 minutes late to the doctor because I had to go online to check my newsfeed (at your right). One of most satifying posts I’ve read so far is from Reclusive Leftist, who I gather is a Hillary PUMA who couldn’t make the leap I did to McCain/Palin (and from there to conservatism and the Republican party), but who also cannot gag down enough of the Kool-Aid to embrace Obama uncritically. So the left-on-left snark there is smart and funny, but with something of the quality of a battered wives shelter that only accepts college professors — they are smart enough to know they are being abused, but frightened of making the leap to the world of the Right their abusers have demonized in order to keep them in the fold:

Violet [the Reclusive Leftist] says:

Mark it now: I’m predicting that Obama will win every award there is. MVP. Cy Young. The Heisman Trophy.

alwaysfiredup says:

Meanwhile, Obama’s adviser on Muslim affairs thinks Sharia law is liberating for Muslim women

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..stood.html

Awesome. Aren’t there any more awards we can bestow on this prince of men?

# monchichipox says:

I’m getting some cold comfort in the fact that all the blogs and newsites I read have comment sections pretty much filled with humorous jabs at the award. Especially politico.

# monchichipox says:

OK OK I think I’ve finally got something. Though it’s not up to my usual:

Is Kanye West pissed that Beyonce didn’t get the award?

# cgeye says:

You mean… the Nobel Committee thought he couldn’t handle the phone call at 3 AM?

I’m sorry, but even for good news? That’s just sad.

At least waking him up would have allowed his team to fum-fuh some new initiative that would at least make him look Presidential, in response.

When the N.C. also have to handle him delicately, at the expense of making him look awkward, we know something’s wrong with the Presidency as we accept it.

http://www.openleft.com/diary/…..presidents

My favorite post for explaining, “Why?,” is by Claudia Rosett at Pajamas Media (H/T Phyllis Chesler at Pajamas Media):

But the Nobel Norwegians express not only their hope that he will play out their fantasies, but their confidence that he is “now the world’s leading spokesman” for their preferred “international policy and attitudes.”

Who are these folks issuing Obama a prize on credit to steer America along their preferred course? The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by a committee of five Norwegians, whose members are appointed by the parliament of Norway. Ever heard of Thorbjorn Jagland? Active for decades in the Socialist International, a collectivist who navigated a long series of embarrassing moments in Norwegian politics to become current Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, Jagland now heads the Norwegian Nobel Committee. His fellow members who have just issued this Nobel IOU to a sitting American president are — are we ready for global policy guided by this crowd? – Kaci Kullman Five, Sissel Marie Ronbeck, Inger-Marie Ytterhorn and Agot Valle.

What, more specifically, might they be expecting of Obama? For starters, Norway, along with neighboring Sweden and Denmark, has been banging the drum for America to hand over to the United Nations enormous control over and constraints upon the U.S. economy, in the name of (warming/cooling/take-your-pick) climate change. Thus did Norway’s Nobel committee bestow its favors in 2007 on Al Gore and the UN’s Self-Interested Panel of Politically Corrupted Science — excuse me, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. And this December the UN is convening a big climate conference in Copenhagen, with which the U.N. hopes to “seal” its growth-stunting UN-enriching climate “deal.”

Anyway, there I was, neck-deep in comedy gold, but a day full of errands to do. The cardiologist forgave us for being late. My father’s longevity has amazed him, based on the condition Dad was in when he first sat in Dr. R’s office in December 1997. Dad was not 30 seconds into his speech about his wilderness paddling adventures and how he was just there to shut me up when Dr. R abruptly left the office and Dad heard the admin arranging for him to be admitted to the hospital immediately. Dr. R let him go home, have lunch and get his things before reporting to the hospital. Dad sent me an e-mail to let me know. I wanted to be with Dad that day but had to take Margaret to the neurologist instead.

The diagnosis was idiopathic congestive heart failure. “Idiopathic” means “we know what illness you have, but we don’t know why you have it.” The cause of Dad’s particular form of congestive heart failure actually was discovered in 1996, when obstructive sleep apnea was first connected as a cause of idiopathic congestive heart failure. But the cardiology profession has been rather slow to incorporate the implications of sleep research into the fundamental causes and treatment of some forms of heart disease — intractable high blood pressure, atrial fibrillation and idiopathic congestive heart failure — so I was the one who figured out in 2003 that Dad needed to get the sleep study that confirmed he had very severe obstructive sleep apnea.

Why, yes, now that you mention it, the angel of death DOES have to work very hard to get past me and take someone I love.

After seeing the doctor, we had to go to my favorite pet store for kitty and wild bird provisions, PetValu. They aren’t everywhere, but I hardly spend a penny anywhere else on pet supplies in order to keep them in business and supplying me with cat litter that is, well, dirt cheap. If it weren’t for PetValu, I would never have been able to afford the number of pusses I’ve had over the last 18 years. (The ones who have died passed from respectable causes and all but one were well past middle age, thanks for asking.)

The route I took to PetValu is a winding country road for a good deal of the journey and passes my favorite farm stand, which is across the street from my favorite nursery. First we pulled into the farm stand, where we bought apples, Concord grapes (for their divine fragrance as well as their flavor), patty pans squashes and carrots of such majestic length and girth that it is probably illegal to grow them in Alabama, Georgia and Texas. The apples were four Ida Reds in perfect condition, and a half bushel of seconds that were a mix of Ida Reds, Stayman and some others I don’t know as well. Then we went to the nursery to check for flats of pansies and see how the heirloom tomato plants I gave to one of the workers fared. C’s Galina’s Yellow Cherry did well, Berkeley Tie-Dye, not so much, although it was productive for me last year and is one of my “must grow” plants both for the unusual red-green appearance of the tomatoes and their delicious, rich flavor.

After getting our kitty and wild bird supplies, we headed home through a route that passes several farms. It was a clear October day — blue sky with just a few clouds, temperature around 70, only a few trees with leaves turned to gold and everything with a thriving look to it — a beautiful day with my father.