One thing that stands out in yesterday's vote against same sex marriage in the New York Senate is that not only did no Republican vote for it, but they did not even say why. One of the eight Democrats (they voted 3:1 for), the father of the Bronx borough president (who opposes him on it), defended his "no" vote. The rest of the debate was fill with passionate discussion and stories stating a need for equality. Things were not too much different in the assembly, where five Republicans voted "yes." Our "indie" Republican mayor apparently wasn't much help either. It's not hard to vote Dem sometimes. [Eloquent 'aye' speech.]
The NY Daily News op-ed board gave a neutral account about how it was nice that the matter was put to a vote, some were upset/some thought traditional marriage was upheld, and heck maybe some sort of civil union benefits package would be warranted. Wonder if they would be so cavalier if racial equality was put up for a vote and failed like this. BTW, the paper reports that many don't know what to do with remainders on their Metrocards, since the bonus amounts result in tiny amounts. As in the past, you just add on to the card. Not that hard.
Jane Hamsher was on Democracy Now! today and noted that Pelosi has said, expletive deleted, that the Stupak Amendment would be necessary to pass the health insurance bill through conference. WTF? I thought Obama et. al. assured us that we would not have to deal with that shit, and a more Hyde-like rule would be in place? She noted that many Democrats feared the '10 elections and feel that something like this has to be supported to get Republican leaning votes. This apparently means anti-choice votes. Being a Democratic activist at times much feel like being a Nets fan or something.
Meanwhile, as noted, Talking Points Memo is starting to discuss the next election cycle, warning that the numbers aren't good for the Democrats. This is mighty depressing. The Democrats won the White House, additional votes in the House, and a 60th vote in the Senate. But, hey, so sorry, things are going conservative again. Maybe, contra Rachel Maddow, the Republicans are not so far in the wilderness any more? This is nauseating. The Democrats are in control, but already the meme is defeatist. Obama is facing an uphill battle on Afghanistan, health care will result in a substandard bill (the nihilists are willing to toss everyone who benefits to the wayside since it's not worth anything, you know) and now bottom feeders can't even be kept out of state dinners.
What a much of crybabies. I'm sick of all of them. I really am sick of those who are already whining that Obama is a one term president. Well, let's have him resign now, why wait? Apparently, the Republicans aren't really a f-ing mess, led by clowns, but able to beat a sitting President even after years of Bush/Cheney disaster. In 2006, after a Democratic victory in Congress, we would told that with a Republican President and a balance of Blue Dogs, nothing much could be done. But, now we have a Democratic President and more Democrats to spare, the rhetoric at times seems almost exactly the same. What a bunch of Republican enabling crybabies.
I was sick of it then -- the 20% tail wagging the 80% dog -- and even more so now. Stupak -- hitting to a core Democratic issue and having a Hyde Amendment sort compromise as an alternative (the conservative impeachment supporter is not good enough for these selfish assholes ... fu!) -- is a bridge too far. I was impressed with the forceful advocacy of Ambassador Rice on Rachel Maddow and elsewhere last night. The forces are there, if they actually worked on it, to provide something to show for having control of Congress and the White House. This includes not being so defeatist, even if things will get somewhat tighter after a year from now.
Anyways, how about a civil union bill, NY? If a marriage bill loses out in only one house of the legislature, why not join with neighbor NJ (unless they suddenly pass a marriage law before Corzine leaves office) and have the second best thing?