Skip to main content

View Diary: Elections have consequences: Virginia won't defend its own gay marriage ban in court (125 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Was just about to diary this (24+ / 0-)

    Thanks for posting it Laura.

    Two suits were filed a few months back challenging Virginia's constitutional ban on gay marriage; one of the most onerous in the nation because it could be interpreted to go well beyond marriage, but any contract of any type between two people of the same sex. Those suits have major backing from national organizations (ACLU, NGLTF, etc).

    Now that we have a Democratic Governor and AG (by a razor thin margin), this is the outcome gay activists hoped for and expected in Virginia. With VA Senate control leaning towards Democrats (a recount scheduled for Monday in one race which will decide control), the only Republican institution remaining capable of defending these suits is the Republican House of Delegates. I'm sure heads are exploding in that chamber today.

    This is why Democrats matter. I would tend to describe McAuliffe (Gov-VA) and Herring (AG-VA) as the "more" type of Democrat as opposed to the "better" type of Democrat. And this is why those who say there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans are simply wrong.

    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

    by fcvaguy on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 06:55:39 AM PST

    •  Herring did acknowledge he was wrong (18+ / 0-)

      According to Politico:

      “I had voted against marriage equality eight years ago back in 2006 even though at the time I was speaking out against discrimination and ways to end discrimination and I was wrong for not applying it to marriage,” Herring told NPR’s “Morning Edition” on Thursday. “I saw very soon after that how that hurt a lot of people and it was very painful for a lot of people.”

      Herring said he spoke with constituents, co-workers and his family and has “come to see the issue very differently now.” His children played a role in his changing views, he said.

      Now that's how you defend a shift in position. I didn't know much about Herring before the election (VA was always about ensuring the crazies didn't win), but I like this.

      Now, as the ranks of the defenders decrease, the Commonwealth is also facing the super lawyers Olson and Boies, who joined the case specifically because of the broad nature of the VA amendment. I think this is likely to be the case to topple marriage discrimination once and for all.

      A government that denies gay men the right to bridal registry is a fascist state - Margaret Cho

      by CPT Doom on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 07:25:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Amen. (5+ / 0-)

      I am a huge non-fan of McAuliffe too, but when you look at the increasing contrast between ANY Democrat and today's Republicans, there is simply no option not to support the Democrat (probably the choice i would make if — ugh — Hillary is our candidate in 2016, about the worst choice we could make this side of Andrew (yuck) Cuomo). The "no difference" crowd really needs to wake up.

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it.

      by anastasia p on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:10:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  agree on McAuliffe (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        HeyMikey, lyvwyr101, mconvente

        But, in the next few weeks we may see Medicaid expansion under Obamacare happen in Virginia. He seems confident that he can make that happen despite the House of Delegates.

        I'm not as convinced as others here that Hillary is a done deal for 2016. 2008 isn't that long ago, and we seemed to have forgotten the lesson learned in inevitability from that election. Obama came out of nowhere. Same can happen in 2016. We shall see.

        KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

        by fcvaguy on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 08:20:15 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Medicaid expansion is another topic. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Given the fact that the commission charged with making the decision on it has persistently failed to make up its mind, he has proposed a budget amendment which would give him the power to expand Medicaid. Control of the state Senate (hinging on a recount) will go a long way in determining how much leverage he gets, and even then he might have to go hardball on the legislators, like Jan Brewer in AZ.

    •  This is why Democrats matter. (6+ / 0-)

      This is very true for Social Justice.  Even Right Wing Corporatist Democrats like McA&Co are vastly better than Right Wing Republicans on Social Justice.  By the very fact that we are here, commenting, we examine more closely the differences.

      When it comes to Economic Justice looked at by, how to put this, the less politically involved majority, D's & R's become a distinction without a difference, and your 'more and better' delineation is spot-on.

      Getting non-voters to vote to bring about more Social & Economic Justice means restoring that difference (more 'Better' Dems), not in the eyes of wonks, but to that huge non-voting pool out there.

      That's my 2cents.

      •  Understood (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        GreatLakeSailor, bananapouch1

        I'd consider Medicare expansion an economic justice issue and McAuliff is working to make it happen in the next few weeks. I'm not pimping for McAuliff, but the facts are there. And, the alternative, Kookinelli, was stark, especially for us Virginians.

        KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

        by fcvaguy on Thu Jan 23, 2014 at 09:19:59 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Agreed (0+ / 0-)

          I'd just point out that Health Care is both a Social and Economic Issue and that Right Wing Corporate Dems passed a Right Wing Corporate Republican Solution.  Better than nothing, way, way, way better than nothing.  But Dems could have at least given Single-Payer a genuine try...but they didn't.  They got their marching orders from their Insurance Industry Graft Masters.

          Even Killary is better than Republicans.  Non-wonk average Jess & Joe will likely answer 'yes' when a phone pollster asks if they are going to vote for her, but they just ain't going to get involved in actively supporting and voting for her.

          •  Single-payer never had a chance. (0+ / 0-)

            It would require blowing up the very popular employer-based HI market, and that was not going to happen, even with the biggest Democrat majorities in a generation. It was difficult enough to justify altering the idiosyncratic individual market.

            •  Sometimes you gotta fight the good fight (0+ / 0-)

              Talking seriously about it introduces the idea and starts debate, but requires a backbone to stand up and defend it, so not in the Dems' playbook.  It also strengthens the opening negotiating position; again, not something the Dems do well.

              With a decent negotiating position, SP could have morphed into Medicare buy-in option.  (I see New York is contemplating some version of that now.)  Adding new people to Medicare would have been easier to manage than a gajillion different insurance companies each with many different plans x 50 states.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site