New york times demise of dating
A Harvard constitutional law professor writing in the New York Times predicts the U. Supreme Court will strike down DOMA, the federal Defense of Marriage Act, if the court takes the case this term. Klarman, who is also a legal historian, offers several scenarios that might lead even conservative justices on the court to declare — as several federal courts have already — that DOMA is unconstitutional.“Conservative justices who value federalism and liberal justices who sympathize with gay marriage will probably combine to invalidate the act,” Klarman writes, in his Times op-ed, “Gay Rights May Get Its Brown v.The barrage of patriotic propaganda could not paper over for long the immense social fissures that divide the interests of Wall Street from those of America’s working class majority.Bigger and more sinister myths were to follow, all of them assiduously promoted by the , which uncritically parroted the administration’s claims to be waging a “war on terrorism” even as it abandoned the hunt for Osama bin Laden and began transferring military resources from Afghanistan to the Persian Gulf in preparation for the long-planned war to conquer Iraq and its oilfields.
This is the meaning of the newspaper’s disapproving assertion, “We have spent the last few years fighting each other with more avidity than we fight the enemy.” Millions of Americans have concluded that their government is run by a gang of criminals who launched an illegal war based upon lies, not to fight some ubiquitous terrorist “enemy” but to pursue profit interests.
That the generally pro-Democratic is broaching a renewal of the draft underscores the fact that such a move will become, if anything, more likely should the Democrats regain control of Congress in the coming elections.
Five years on, the myths of September 11 have become ever more threadbare.
Instead, the result was “tax cuts we didn’t need and an invasion that never would have occurred if every voter’s sons and daughters were eligible for the draft.” The editorial continues: “With no call to work together on some effort greater than ourselves, we were free to relapse into a self-centeredness that became a second national tragedy.
We have spent the last few years fighting each other with more avidity than we fight the enemy.” To put it bluntly, this entire line of argumentation is a load of self-serving rubbish that only exposes how far to the right this erstwhile voice of the American establishment’s liberal wing has swung.