Does the Supreme Court matter on same-sex marriage?

This week, there is a lot of focus on, and exposure for, the Supreme Court on same-sex marriage, but will it really matter?

Both sides in this debate want an affirmation from the court, but let’s face it folks, the train has not only left the station on same-sex marriage and gay and lesbian rights, it is roaring down the tracks.

Those who believe that we can turn the clock back 50 years to the era of homo-phobic speech and people in the closet to hide their sexuality are smoking something awfully strong. Public attitudes have changed so dramatically and so completely over less than a decade that we have entered a whole new era.

When my cousin, Nancy Garden, wrote her book Annie on My Mind in 1982, things were quite different. It was burned. And some in the Olathe School District in Kansas tried to remove it from their shelves. They lost in court, after spending $160,000 of taxpayer’s money. Let’s face it, a book about two teenage girls falling in love wasn’t the “Wizard of Oz.” But we aren’t in Kansas any more; heck, Kansas isn’t in Kansas any more!The book has never been out of print and gets five stars on Amazon. The School Library Journal included it in its list of the 100 most influential books of the 20th century. The American Library Association listed it as “The Best of the Best Books for Young Adults.”

We have seen a remarkable transformation of attitudes in America since Nancy wrote her book. Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) has come around on gay marriage because of his son. Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) just changed her position this week. And Dick Cheney has voiced support, for heaven’s sake.

In 1996, when the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)was passed overwhelmingly in both Houses of Congress (85-14 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House) and signed in the middle of the night by Bill Clinton, only 25 percent of Americans supported gay marriage.

The latest Washington Post poll in mid-March showed that by 58 percent to 36 percent American now support same-sex marriage. A CNN poll this week indicated that 57 percent has a family member or close friend who is gay or lesbian.

Young people between 18-29 support same sex marriage by an astounding 81 percent. The only demographic age group to oppose it are those over 65, and they still are 44 percent in favor.

And, as the Court hears arguments on California’s Proposition 8, we can watch the attitudes shift. In 2008, polls showed the opponents winning in California 50 percent to 44 percent. By 2012 that number had moved to 54 percent to 40 percent for the proponents, a 20-point switch.

The train has, indeed, left the station. Few fundamental social issues have seen such a rapid turnaround. Think how long it took women to get the right to vote or blacks to even begin to achieve a semblance of civil rights.

So whatever happens with the Supreme Court — and hopefully, they will at least overturn DOMA — there is no refuting that the decision on who you are and whom you love is settled. What a victory for the human spirit.

By PETER FENN

I have always loved the story of the ad makers and dog food manufacturers arguing around the conference table. The actual makers of the dog food were convinced their product was full of all the right nutrients, pretty food coloring, right combinations of everything possible. The ad makers were really impressed with their ad campaign, the logos, colors, not to mention the exciting TV ads. The sales force was everywhere, all over the marketplace.

So, the head of the company screamed out—”why is our dog food not selling.” A wise lone voice: “the dogs don’t like it, sir, they won’t eat it.”

[See a collection of political cartoons on the Republican Party.]

What the RNC has just done with their “what went wrong in 2012” report is to ignore the fact that the public isn’t buying what they’re selling. They could point to advertising, they could point to their ground game and metrics, they could cry over changing demographics, they could condemn their polling samples, and they could criticize their process of debates and summer financial problems. They could even critique their candidate.

All that might be true—to a point. But the bottom line is this: the public didn’t like the dog food, they didn’t like what they were selling, they didn’t like the message. The Republican Party became captive to the extremists, and if you followed CPAC this weekend, it was all there in full force. From Donald Trump to Sarah Palin to Ann Coulter, this is not the path to a majority.

How can a party that is perceived as anti-Black, anti-Hispanic, anti-women, anti-gay, anti-middle class, ever hope to change the basic electoral dynamic by tinkering with process and techniques? The RNC has to deal with the fundamental problem: The Message. And they are ignoring that debate within the party. They have to fight it out. They have to decide who they are. They have to confront the divergent views and decide whether the Tea Party is dominant or a more reasoned, moderate view will take hold.

[Read the U.S. News Debate: Is the GOP’s Problem in its Strategies or its Policies?]

Can they moderate on gay marriage and issues like abortion and women’s health? Can they hold views that are pro-environment and truly confront climate change? Can they embrace real reform on immigration and stop focusing on bigger fences? Can they support a tax system that is fairer to the middle class and isn’t stacked toward the wealthy? Can they balance their approach to taxing and spending? Fundamentally, can they stop the incessant ranting against government and demonizing people?

As long as they are the “anti-party” they will be increasingly out of touch and represent the old, angry, white males—and there are fewer and fewer of them. It is all well and good that they try and get their tactics right but, like a turtle, they won’t make progress until they stick their necks out and have that battle for the soul of their party.

 http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/Peter-Fenn/2013/03/19/republicans-are-the-anti-party

By PETER FENN

I am an optimist, maybe a bit of a Pollyanna to tell you the truth. I am a glass-half-full kind of guy. Sure, I have my cynical side—who wouldn’t after spending so much time around this town!

But one thing I have learned is that political people can surprise you, they can end up doing what is right and pragmatic a lot of the time. When we expect impending doom, as we did in December with the fiscal cliff, we can see agreement result.

Hopefully, we will experience a similar development when it comes to a “grand bargain.”

[See a collection of political cartoons on the budget and deficit.]

The latest moves by President Obama and Congress to enter into a dialogue on what is needed to provide stability and common sense to our economy may just work.

 see the whole post at:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/Peter-Fenn/2013/03/08/a-grand-bargain-on-deficit-reduction-is-still-possible-

‘The Donald’ to address CPAC

Heaven help us! Donald Trump has just confirmed that he will join a distinguished group of deep thinkers at the Conservative Political Action Conference next week.

We can’t wait — maybe he will re-ask for the President Obama’s birth certificate, or how about demanding his grades from primary school? Or, better yet, maybe Trump will conduct a seminar on how to avoid paying your taxes and enjoy flying around in taxpayer-sponsored corporate jets?

Really, this is the face of the Republican Party? This is the future of conservatism in the country? William F. Buckley and Ronald Reagan would be turning over in their respective graves.In their press release, CPAC describes Trump as “an American patriot and success story with a massive following among small government conservatives.”

What a group — Sarah Palin is back on stage, so is defeated “fix your bayonets” congressman Alan West, the NRAs low-key Wayne LaPierre, The Heritage Foundation’s Jim DeMint, and, of course, Michele Bachmann.

This will be quite a year for CPAC, after one of the worst elections for Republicans in memory, caused in no small part by the extremism of their candidates and primary season.

Chris Christie, and any other reasonable-thinking Republican, is wise to be as far away from CPAC as jet travel will allow.

Steve Schmidt, McCain’s campaign manager, aptly compared this crowd to the “bar scene from ‘Star Wars.’ ” That would be a kind comparison.

By PETER FENN

The Republicans, now led from behind by House Speaker John Boehner, are painting themselves into a tiny corner. Boehner may have secured his job as speaker but he has categorically rejected any hope of a grand bargain, thereby leading his party in a rejection of America’s middle class. Unless he can be persuaded by Republican senators and a few dozen of his House colleagues to accept a balanced deal with the president and the Democrats he will severely harm his party by appealing only to the Tea Party.

Leaving the White House after the meeting with the president, Speaker Boehner dug in his heels against the closing of any tax loopholes or raising any revenue. Hasn’t he learned anything since the election?

Look at what has happened to the Republicans. Democrats have a 22 point advantage (according to the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll) on who would look out for the middle class, the largest margin in 20 years. The same poll found that 36 percent of the public viewed the Republicans favorably in October of 2012, only 29 percent view them favorably today—a remarkable drop in just four months.

TO CONTINUE READING THE POST GO TO:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/Peter-Fenn/2013/03/01/on-sequestration-the-gop-is-choosing-the-tea-party-over-the-middle-class

The Republican suicide caucus

The good news is that the House has finally passed the Violence Against Women Act. The reauthorization of the 20-year-old law is now headed to the president’s desk after previous defeats by House Republicans.

The truly bad news is that 138 Republicans voted no and 164 voted to eviscerate it with a senseless amendment.

Make no mistake, these are big numbers.  The fringe of the Republican Party in the House is no longer the “fringe.”  They are the majority.

The political pressure was so great that at least it came to a vote in the House.  Yet, a large majority of the 232 Republicans still opposed the legislation.  Is this really the message that Republicans want to send, that they are against a law that is two decades old and has worked remarkably well?What is scary for the Republicans is that they are setting a precedent for coming across as extreme, defiant, unreasonable and harsh.

Let’s look at the math on the two other pieces of legislation that were given a vote on the House floor without a majority of Republican support. (Contrary to the so-called “Hastert rule,” named after former Speaker Denny Hastert (R-Ill.), who held that you should have a majority of your caucus to bring legislation before the full House.)

The legislation to help the victims of Hurricane Sandy was rejected by 179 Republicans. Efforts to avert the disastrous “fiscal cliff” in December were rejected by 151 Republicans.

If you begin to examine the “Tea Party problem” you soon discover that the Republican caucus is full of members who pride themselves in their extremism.  There are currently 49 members of the official Michele Bachmann Tea Party Caucus.

That is over 20 percent, with many more supporting the rigid ideology.  Really, you want to follow Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.)?

Despite the last election, where they were beaten so decisively by female voters, Republicans remain adamant in their opposition to legislation to help women.

They also insist on opposing policies that have strong support among a majority of all voters:  helping Sandy victims, a balanced approach of revenue increases and spending cuts to reduce the deficit, preventing a sequester that will harm large numbers of Americans.

To the vast majority of the Republican caucus, compromise is a four-letter word.  They will oppose even reasonable legislation if it is not to their total liking.

As Rep. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) put it in the upcoming New Yorker article on House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (Va.):  “If this were football, some of these guys would know only one play, and that’s to throw deep every time.”

It is policy suicide and it is political suicide.

To stay with the Coburn analogy, it does not move the ball down the field. It is very easy for the other side to play against, and it shows no imagination or creativity. Sadly, for the Republicans, the voters get that. And sadly for the country, in most instances it prevents us from solving our most difficult problems.

Unfortunately, I am afraid that House Republicans may be hard-pressed to shed that image.