Month: April 2009

The View From Your Recession

A reader writes:

I'm the first-ever web editor for my company, which is in trade publishing and currently converting all print items to digital. I haven't been laid off (yet) and my company hasn't gone bankrupt (yet), but my fiancee works in bankruptcy and restructuring for an international law firm and gets daily reports on companies that are "on and off the ladder," meaning they could go under at any time – my company is on that list.

The VP of HR "left to pursue other career interests" last Friday, and they just laid off people in our New York, Boston, Cleveland, Duluth, MN and Encino, CA offices today. Fortunately, I made the cut today. But I feel like I'm on a reality show, were every week someone else gets eliminated. I feel as if today I received a rose to move on to the next round as the head of the company said "will you stay here with me and continue to Web my world?" If alliances had any influence, I'd be making them right now.

The Cannabis Closet: The Attorneys

A reader writes:

I work as an attorney and have my own successful practice in San Francisco. I also do a bit of family law and have represented many educated, successful professional parents whose use of marijuana has often been used by the other party to the case as a means to have my clients ordered into some kind of rehab if they want to see their kids.

Once this almost happened in a case where the opposing counsel was someone with whom I had gotten high at a conference. I politely offered to her that I would admit in open court that I had gotten high with her unless she withdrew her request. She did, and probably had a hell of a time explaining that to her client.

Another writes:

I'm a prosecutor, which puts me on the front lines of this battle but also in a tough spot, so I'm not going to give out too many personal details for obvious reasons.

Nonetheless, let's just say my life is in order. My other pot-closet buddy and I have been slowly edging our way out for about a year on our own little public awareness campaign. I've been due for a drug test now for a while, so it's been about a month for me. While I'm doing just fine without, the best way to describe the feeling is that I'm just a little bored. I like to smoke, I did it about 4-5 times a week on nights and weekends.

The thing that upsets me most isn't the illegality, but the ignorance and consequent societal stigma. People who do not and have not ever smoked or know anyone who does somehow feel entitled to an opinion they know nothing about. Every time I tell someone I know that I smoke and see them come to an understanding that pot smokers can be intelligent, motivated, responsible people, I can't help but think of the Old-South racist or small town midwesterner who meets his/her first black or gay friend and suddenly realize they had no idea what they were so upset about. I hate the stereotype, and every time I disassociate someone from it, it's my own little political victory.

Another:

I'm a 30 year old government attorney (on the civil side). I went to a top 5 law school, and i'm quite well regarded within my agency, but I know I would be fired immediately if my marijuana use became known to my agency (or if I was arrested – even if the charges were ultimately dismissed). Prohibition has also halted my career path, as numerous government jobs are foreclosed to me because of my marijuana use.

While I could always go into private practice and makes lots of money, I've never had much interest in that, and always wanted to work for "the good guys" (at least the people I consider "the good guys"). Many attorneys from my division go to the U.S. Attorney's Office, and while I'm fairly confident that they would offer me a job, I also know that I could never take it, because I would be required to undergo a background check where I will be asked about marijuana use. While I probably could lie and not get caught, if there's one thing the Martha Stewart prosecution taught me, it's never lie to a federal agent in the course of an official investigation. I mean, no job is worth going to jail for - not to mention being a serious violation of my ethical obligations.

It's actually gotten quite hard responding to questions from colleagues as to why I don't leave to go to the U.S. Attorney's Office. I often think of lame excuses, but wish I could tell them the truth.

Marriage In DC!

When it rains, it pours:

The D.C. Council voted today to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states, on the same day that Vermont became the fourth state to legalize same-sex unions.

Dale Carpenter throws some cold water:

There are a couple of important things to keep in mind, however. First, D.C. council law is subject to override by Congress, which could place the Democrats in an awkward position. Second, recognition of gay marriages in D.C. would be subject to a ballot override.

Yes and yes. But for now, I have a chance to be legally married in the place I live for eight months of the year. Now: just think for a minute how many heterosexuals have ever asked themselves this question – even immigrating to foreign countries, let alone moving from one state to another.  This is enough for me right now, enough reason to celebrate.

It has been such a long journey, but we can see the mountaintop now.

Vermont Reax

RINGJustinSullivan:Getty

James Joyner:

Regardless of one’s views on the merits of people of the same sex being allowed to marry, this is how drastic changes in social norms — and this is surely that — are supposed to take place.  Vermont is perhaps the most liberal state in the union and has every right to make this call for itself.  And the fact that this was done through an overwhelming vote of representatives accountable to the people rather than by judicial fiat makes the outcome much easier for opponents to swallow.

John Culhane:

Vermont becomes the first state to grant basic equality to gay and lesbian couples; again, without judicial compulsion of any kind. What might it mean? I’m hesitant to say too much so soon, but let me try this: The Vermont move could well energize other somewhat progressive state legislatures to follow suit: the other New England states (especially New Hampshire and Maine); New Jersey; and New York are the likeliest. Once that happens, I think the push for marriage equality in California becomes even stronger; Prop 8 could be repealed as soon as next year, even if, as expected, the California Supreme Court allows it to stand.

Dale Carpenter:

Getting two-thirds of each house of the state legislature to approve gay marriage is a much more impressive feat, in my view, than getting even a unanimous vote from a state supreme court, as occurred in Iowa just four days ago. Congratulations to the Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force and everyone in the state who spent the lest nine years organizing, raising money, and lobbying legislators first to defend the state's civil unions and then to push for full marriage.

Rod Dreher:

It is increasingly obvious that the US Supreme Court is going to have to rule on this matter soon. It is an untenable situation for a same-sex couple to be married in Vermont and Massachusetts and Iowa, but not in Texas, Nevada and Montana. I believe SCOTUS will constitutionalize gay marriage, and that being the case, it might be better for my side if it gets done sooner rather than later. If done sooner, there might still be enough backlash left in the American people to get a constitutional amendment passed erecting a high barrier or protection around religious institutions.

Alas, A Blog:

Let the marriage segregationists push their hate. Let them rail against the concept of two loving people committing to one another for life. Let them insist that people who don’t follow the dictates of their chosen faith should be second-class citizens. Let them argue against love.

The fact is, they have already lost.

John Aravosis:

This is huge. On many levels. First, Iowa and Vermont both making marriage legal within days of each other, that creates the sense of a trend. Second, in Vermont, the legislature made marriage legal. Not the courts, the legislature. Why does this matter? Because Republicans have been arguing for years that the problem with gay marriage is that THE COURTS are making these decisions, rather than the people via their elected representatives. Well, today the people made the decision to legalize same-gender marriages through their elected representatives. What will Republicans say now? We've met their test, and passed. Either the GOP simply hates gays, or they need to admit that we won, fair and square, even by the rules they set down.

Sonja Starr:

What lessons will historians draw concerning the ability of courts to promote social change? As readers no doubt remember, Vermont's supreme court issued a landmark decision nearly ten years ago requiring reform of the marriage law, but holding that civil unions were a constitutionally permissible alternative to marriage. The legislature at that time chose civil unions, but over the course of the past decade, apparently, social norms in Vermont have shifted. Can the judicial decision be credited with triggering that shift, by starting a statewide (indeed, nationwide) conversation?

Average Gay Joe:

Expect social conservatives to bemoan this apparent sign of the Apocalypse in 5…4…3…

Mind The Gap

Clive Crook studies the long-term fiscal picture:

I have previously argued that the US will need a VAT. Even before Mr Obama unveiled his ambitions for healthcare reform, wage subsidies to help the working poor, better education and the rest, the US middle class was seriously undertaxed. The government's promises, on present plans, will be unaffordable. If they are honoured regardless, the only question is which comes first: broadly based tax increases or fiscal collapse.

A War Budget, Ctd.

Fallows approves. So does Yglesias:

This is the move that justifies the decision to keep Robert Gates on at the Pentagon. Any new Defense Secretary, no matter how brilliant, would have had to have spent his first three months in office building relationships with the top military commanders and focusing on filling out the DOD civilian staff. Only a Secretary who’s already been in office could have the ability to propose sweeping change. But only a president who’s brand new could have the popularity and honeymoon effect necessary to have any hope of driving the changes through congress. Hence the appeal of the odd alignment of new president and old defense secretary.

The Lies Of Rick Warren

Pam Spaulding fisks away. By far the most egregious lie:

During the whole Proposition 8 thing, I never once went to a meeting, never once issued a statement, never—never once even gave an endorsement in the two years Prop 8 was going.

Here is his televised statement of support for Prop 8. Who are you going to believe: Rick Warren on Larry King or your lying eyes?

Then this:

Not a single criticism came from any gay leader who knows me and knows that for years, we’ve been working together on AIDS issues and all these other things.

Some of us who don't know you defended your right to give the inaugural invocation. But how can we get to know you when you refuse to meet us in public or private? Pastor Rick, at some point, the vast gap between your words and your actions needs to be filled. The invitation to a public debate on Christianity and homosexuality remains open.