Photo
New haircut. New glasses. Same shitty call-dropping phone.

New haircut. New glasses. Same shitty call-dropping phone.

Quote
"Judge Walker has not ever confirmed to anyone in the media what sexual orientation he may be. And yet most major media organizations, from the New York Times and ABC News to the Washington Post and National Public Radio, have reported on him as gay or had commentators saying it."

Michelangelo Signorile: Judge Vaughn Walker Gets Smeared By the Media

The first time I heard Walker’s name was as a “Reagan-nominated” judge. Then I heard he was “possibly gay”. Next thing I knew, it was just “gay”.

Walker has never confirmed his sexuality. And it doesn’t matter. As Signorile says:

What will they say next? That Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg can’t rule on abortion because they have uteruses?

(via incorrigiblerobot)

Using the right wing’s logic on this one, even a hetero judge couldn’t make a ruling because his heteroness would interfere with his ruling. So we would need a unsexed jude. And then they’d say “how could anybody who doesn’t want to stick his wiener in anything be able to rule on this?” and we’d say back “YOU FUCKING LOST GET OVER IT” as we dramatically drop the printout of the 100some page ruling on the table and walk away.

Photo
weselec:

everythinginthesky:

There is nothing I can say that would make this movie’s tagline, in conjunction with this poster, any less appropriate. And I just have to accept that.via 

I don’t get it.

And this is a kid’s movie?

weselec:

everythinginthesky:

There is nothing I can say that would make this movie’s tagline, in conjunction with this poster, any less appropriate. And I just have to accept that.

via 

I don’t get it.

And this is a kid’s movie?

Chat
  • Me: Ugh, what are you watching?
  • Lady: 30 Rock.
  • Me: I know, but...do you notice anything weird about it?
  • Her: No.
  • Me: You see that big, black border around the whole thing, and how it looks and sounds all cruddy?
  • Her: No. I don't.
  • Me: Really? You don't see how the picture is all shrunk down in the screen and everything's a little chunky and blurry?
  • Her: No. I don't care.
  • Me: Okay, watch this. [Goes through the guide up to the 400s where the HD is.] Okay, are you watching?
  • Her: [Not watching. Playing with the dog and laughing because he did something cute.]
  • Me: Okay, are you watching? [Swaps channels, engulfed in a glorious wave of fidelitous sound and image.]
  • Her: ...
  • Me: You see that?
  • Her: No. I don't care.
  • Me: ...
  • Her: ...
  • Me: I love you.
  • Her: [Laughs at the stupid dog.]
Text

The Proposition 8 Ruling (in simple language)

squashed:

On August 4, 2010, Federal Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled that California’s Proposition 8, which prohibits California from recognizing same-sex marriage, is unconstitutional. The ruling was stayed pending appeal—which means that nothing will happen until a Federal Appeals court reviews it. As you might imagine, it will be appealed. The ruling itself is 138 pages long. I’ll summarize.

The previous lawsuit challenged Proposition 8 on procedural grounds. My post on that case is here. The California Supreme Court disagreed with me. Since the California Supreme Court gets the final say on the California Constitution, it got the last word.

The new suit was brought by two same-sex couples on different grounds. And, since it was brought in Federal court, the California Supreme Court doesn’t get a say at all. Something strange happened. California’s government was sued. The Attorney General said, essentially, “I agree that this thing is unconstitutional.” The other government groups said, “I’m not going to bother defending this.” So did a number of other people, including “ProtectMarriage.com - Yes on 8.”

The people who brought the lawsuit (“the Plaintiffs”) claimed two things. First, they claimed that marriage is a fundamental right under the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. (There is some decent precedent on this—the only question is whether the protected marriage is the one man/one woman kind of marriage). If the 14th Amendment protects same-sex marriage, the court reviews the case using “strict scrutiny” which I’ll discuss below.

Read More

Photo
Marceaux said.. “Also I’m going to remove all gold-fringe flags.”
—-
Umm…like the one you’re wearing?

Marceaux said.. “Also I’m going to remove all gold-fringe flags.”

—-

Umm…like the one you’re wearing?

Link
Video

onemansjunk:

ladies and gentleman, the next president of the united states: basil marceaux.

There’s more

Photo
internerd:

amandavackrinos:

theduty:

moneyries:

Tumblr: Help Report Sarah Palin’s Ground Zero mosque note to Facebook for being “Racist/Hate Speech.” Click-through to do it.

DO IT.


Done

DO IT!

internerd:

amandavackrinos:

theduty:

moneyries:

Tumblr: Help Report Sarah Palin’s Ground Zero mosque note to Facebook for being “Racist/Hate Speech.” Click-through to do it.

DO IT.

Done

DO IT!

Photo
The New York Times is really going after that Digg linkbait, aren’t they?
And then you read the story.
And it’s nothing like what you were promised.

The New York Times is really going after that Digg linkbait, aren’t they?

And then you read the story.

And it’s nothing like what you were promised.