Round Two of Supreme Court Action on Wednesday

Sometimes people may be "playing to a certain audience".  There were a lot of gay people in the courtroom today who have waited years for this day.  It was an emotional thing for them actually.  Many say that partial rights are like being called a "citizen" meaning perhaps there is ID you can show for work, or not to be thrown out of the country, but you can't Vote and if you travel to another foreign country you can't contact the US Embassy should you get into trouble with the local authorities.  Lest you think this is hypothetical., Rush Limbaugh even said on his show a few weeks ago "I have no problem with all the illegals being able to stay in this country- - if they can't Vote for 25 years".  Some of these immigration "paths" would seem to do just that.  At least Pat Buchannon is consistent.  He's against illegals because they drive the wage base down and take away jobs from Americans, but also talks about "The English culture being undermined".  Some tea party people are the worst of posers and hypocrites on both the immigration and gay issues.  They aren't personally against either.  In fact they rather like the idea of all that cheap immigrent labor with their "guest worker' permit, because it drives the wage base down and increases corporate profits.  Rush Limbaugh came out and attacked the President's position on gay marriage, not because he was against it himself but he says "What Obama said was Political because it does nothing for the gay community".  Mitt Romney was all for the gays and abortions- - before he was against them.  Today much of the time was spent in determining whether the parties even had legal standing.  Justices wondered why private citizens rather than the State of California was bringing the suit.  I guess it was Scelia who asked the pointed question that never got answered as to "At just what Point did banning gay marriage become unconstitutional".  Justice Ginsburg statred that citing a case from 1971 would not be allowed even though it fit perfectly because 'At this time the court had not even - - Legeslated-  on gender neutral principles", which would be a valid line of argument if the court were in the business of making new laws instead of ajuticating old ones.  This 1971 case stated that there is no possible constitutional principle that could be raised in Marriage laws (presumably because the subject is never even mentioned in the United States Constitution).  Tomorrow they do the whole thing over on the defense of Marriage act signed by President Clinton in1996.  The key thing here- - is whether the government has the authority to pass a law in an area where "The US Congress has no jurisdiction" because once again, Marriage is an issue for the States, and arguably improper for the US congress to even weigh in on this issue.  But I understand why Clinton had to allow it because his back was up against the wall as we discussed a few weeks ago.  Personally I think the whole Defense of Marriage statute is on weaker legal ground than is Proposition Eight passed here in California in 2008.

David Cruise talked about what animals or zoo monkeys the students in the Santa Ana school system are.  They are really out of control.  They know they will not be hit or manhandled by the teachers, and they seldom use corporal punishment now.  Instead the students openly taunt and threaten the teachers "You know I have the ability to get you Fired" no doubt alluding to all this sexual stuff out now.  If it were me I'd declare a "restraint holiday" for teachers meaning they could use whatever physical force they regarded as necessary to enforce order in the classroom.  They would be just like the Cops these students will be destined to meet on the street if they are expelled.  And I'd highly suggest these trouble students be expelled because they aren't good for anybody in the classroom.  Try and give a police officer the same sort of Crap you give teachers at school and see how far you get.  My guess is that if they called such a ban on prohibitions against teachers using sumary physical force, you'd see the most amazing drop in crime and disruption in the classrooms and grades would go up because the other students would at last have an oppertunity to learn.  That's my view on this matter, anyhow.

There is a counter intuitive bit of medical care news tonight.  A few years ago there was a major movement to shorten up the shifts of hospital orderlies and the like- - care givers for hospital patients.  But now though shifts are much shorter the quality of care has gone down because of the "information hand off" problem or that game of "telephone' gone wrong where the information goes through twice as many hand offs now and in more hands- and any one of them might get it wrong.  They featured a seventeen year old computer genious, who got his first C Programming for Dummies book when he was Twelve.  I've read that one, but I never became famous.  In terms of the expanding Universe, the reason why "gravity won't eventually pull it all back together" is because now it's not just an expanding vacuum - - but that vacuum actually has an energy of its own, which accelerates the already rapid expanding rate of the Universe.  They now have some device for cleaning a dog's tongue where all of the bad breath germs reside.  There is this bristle brush thing with some flavoring on it that the dog licks and thus it cleans its tongue.   Gay couples in California already have the right to adopt children, so the legislature obviously didn't listen to Dennis Prager on this issue.  I suppose that if they should discover that children of gay couples are actually better adjusted than the control group, this would be Another of those counter intuitive things.  Tough break for Amanda Knox being put in Double Jeopardy by the Italian government.  That's what happens when you don't have a constitution that safeguards rights.  Just don't ever go back there.

Just in case you were wondering, we haven't forgotten about astrologically indicated possible "Rapture of the faithful" date, which will be Thursday April 11, or two days before Stephanie's sexy liberal tour in Chicago on Saturday the thirteenth.  So far there is no indication of any "economic misstep" that some were predicting.  I'd be just as happy if none of these dire predictions came to pass.