Obama, Sotomayor, and California

Busy day today. New Obama pick for the Supreme Court and California keeping the ban on gay marriage.

First, Obama picked Sonia Sotomayor, an appeals court judge for the Second Circuit. Sotomayor is famous for ending the baseball strike in 1995 as a District Court Judge. She is considered a centrist by many. However, it's too early to tell.

The other big story is that the California Supreme Court affirmed the will of the people last November in upholding the ban on gay marriage. In a 6-1 decision, the California High Court ruled that the constitutional amendment was valid. However, they allowed the 18,000 gay couples that were married before the ban to remain legal. At least the California High Court got this decision mostly right.

California
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98E2DO00&show_article=1
Sotomayor
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090526/ap_on_go_su_co/us_obama_supreme_court

My Response to Blanchard's op-ed

In reading Dr. Blanchard's most recent op-ed in the American News, I am a little bit surprised that people actually believed Obama's rhetoric of "hope and change." Maybe since I voted for the other guy in the last election because I did not like Obama, does not allow me to be stuck in the mindset of an Obama voter who wanted to rid the United States of anything that resembled George W Bush's work.
Nevertheless, anybody expecting to see radical changes within the first year of the Obama Administration would most definitely be disappointed by how this presidency has shaped up. Most of Obama's appointments have been either part of the Clinton White House (especially Hillary) and/or tax cheats. The Secretary of the Treasury owed tens of thousands of dollars to the IRS even though he was part of the Federal Reserve and now responsible for the $350 billion part of the Bail-Out approved last fall.

Dr. Blanchard stated that the Obama presidency is looking like a third Bush term. Isn't that what Obama tried to pin to McCain during the election? Besides, I don't see Obama as a mythical third Bush term. I see Obama as a second term that Jimmy Carter never got. America is going back on the defensive, trying to refocus our efforts on reclaiming our moral authority. By releasing the "torture" memos and other actions, Obama is trying to distance himself from the past and trying to reboot our relations with the rest of the world.

However, those on the far left want Bush hung upside down for his "crimes" that occurred during his presidency. Those are the people Dr. Blanchard refers to that expected a different Obama presidency. They will get what they want in time, just not as fast as they wanted.

The problem with any changes Obama makes is that the massive executive bureaucracy in place follows Newton's first law of motion: An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless an external force changes the motion. The bureaucracy is huge and slow-moving. Any changes Obama makes have to be massive and fast paced to have any effect on the bureaucracy.

As we get deeper into his presidency, Obama will make decisions that in time will reverse the Bush policies in matters of foreign policy and we will see the distinction between the two. For now, the decisions of the previous president are in effect until Obama has time to reverse it.


Dr. Blanchard's Opinion-Editorial in the American News:
http://www.aberdeennews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090520/OPINION02/905200316/-1/opinion

Star Trek review

I just recovered from watching the JJ Abrams' version of Star Trek. This movie, although a good movie, destroys the continuity that was built over the years by the Star Trek series. Abrams, as typically, did his trademark of writing a new timeline where the old one was sufficient. A planet disappears into a black hole, certain people that are seen in the original series are killed, and the storyline redone to make it more "mainstream." Also, since when do the Romulans look like Nero (right)?

Despite these objections, it was an enjoyable movie. I understand that they needed to change the story to redo the series after Star Trek: Enterprise and the last two movies (Insurrection and Nemesis). The special effects were good, the plot was good, and the acting was superb. The movie, despite its flaws, was a good way to "reboot" the series.

Although the Star Trek universe that Gene Roddenberry created was killed and buried in this film, the demise of Roddenberry's vision hopefully will be replaced by a new generation of Star Trek, boldly going where no one has gone before.

For a better review of the movie, read Dr. Schaff's review of the movie:
http://southdakotapolitics.blogs.com/south_dakota_politics/2009/05/star-trek-a-review.html

NBA Playoffs

Stepping away from politics, the NBA playoffs are getting interesting as it moves into the 2nd Round.

The Orlando Magic battle the Boston Celtics in the first main matchup. The Magic, with defensive player of the year Dwight Howard, face off against the defending champion Celtics, who have Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, but no Garnett yet (if ever). I predict Magic in 6.

The next matchup is Denver v. Dallas. The Nuggets, with Carmelo Anthony, face off against the Mavericks led by Kidd. The Nuggets will win in 6.

The interesting matchup will be the Lakers and the Rockets. The Lakers, led by Kobe Bryant, want to get back to the Finals. The Rockets, led by the communist Yao Ming, the gangster Ron Artest, and the injured, overrated Tracy McGrady, will not make it to the Conference Finals. Lakers in 5.

The last matchup, as yet to be determined, will be the Cleveland Cavaliers against the winner of Atlanta-Miami. Either way, Cavaliers in 5.

*Moving on with my predictions, Cavaliers-Magic should be an interesting match-up featuring

LeBron James, the irrestible force, versus Dwight Howard, the immovable object. Cavaliers in 7.

*The other Conference Finals will be the Lakers and Nuggets. Lakers in 6.

*The NBA Finals will be LeBron v. Kobe. LeBron gets his first ring, Cavaliers in 6.

*Those are my predictions sure to go wrong.