Media silence on constitutional challenge to Prop 8
I am not surprised that there is not extensive MSM coverage of the Olsen/Boies court challenge currently underway seeking to find Proposition 8 unconsitutional in federal court. The flaws of the MSM on LGBT issues are so numerous, that I have long since ceased to expect reasonable coverage. What interests me is the extent to which the self-described "progressive" media exhibits these self-same flaws. Move a few steps away the LGBT identified sections of the internet, and one is hard pressed to find any mention of the case, much less the issues surrounding it. One would think that even the peripheral issues: whether or not the trial could be televised or live-streamed and the repeated motions by Prop 8 supporters to have their identities "shielded" by the courts, should merit some by "progressives" concerned about media. I guess I think wrong.
Be it capital punishment in Uganda, death squads targeting gays in Iraq, the ravings of the DUP leadership in Northern Ireland, the constitutional challenge in the United States, they all leave me thinking of that quote from John Lennon: "A conspiracy of silence speaks louder than words".
Useful link for following developments on the Uganda story.
bagkitty, I understand your frustration.
One bright spot: a major U.S. blog, firedoglake, has two of its regulars, Marcy Wheeler and Teddy Partridge, liveblogging the proceedings. Marcy's own blog, emptywheel, is an associate blog at FDL, and that's where you can follow her and Teddy. Scroll down the column to the right to "Latest Posts," and you'll see a whole succession of their posts.
Just last night, Marcy's co-blogger bmaz, who is a lawyer, wrote in a thread about another topic:
"This is a modern-day equivalent of the Scopes trial." I believe that is spot-on.
It's exceptional that a guy like Ted Olsen would have committed himself to this fight. He is an ultra-con, Dubya's solicitor general for a time, highly respected as a constitutional lawyer but a Federalist Society type none the less. I guess his decision to join with Boies in this fight explains why so many people who don't agree with him respect him.
Rachel Maddow had the two of them on her show last week -- there's a YouTube of that interview, fairly easy to find.
Thanks skdadl, fortunately I am pretty familiar with LGBT identified sections of the internet (which might explain a lot of the spam I receive and why so much of it is NSFW) and am personally able to follow what is going on. Placing a bet with myself on if, and if so how long it takes, there will be any commentary on some of the "progressive" sites I can think of.
Boies: "You are saying here that after same-sex marriage was legalized, the Netherlands legalized incest and polygamy?"
Tam: "Yeah, look at the date, Polygamy happened afterward."
"Who told you that? Where did you get that idea," Boies asked incredulously.
"It's the Internet," he said. "Another person in the organization found it and he showed me it. ... I looked at the document and I thought it was true."
So that's what's going on - they believe everything they read on the net.
Doug, I think we could make a killing selling them bogus stock... given their inability to research things even with the internet to assist them. So what do you think, condo developments in the afterlife? Or maybe magic prayer clothes. Damn, if we play this properly, we could rake in enough to keep rabble floating for years... maybe they could even afford to pay writers to expand the scope of their commentary.
The trial is resuming.