Biffster’s World

“No sex. That’s part of a sentence imposed on a 17-year-old girl by Texas state district judge Lauri Blake.

She’s ordered the young drug offender not have sex as long as she is living with her parents and attending school, as a condition of her probation.”

Hooray! Another win for the good guys: Connecticut now officially recognize Civil Unions!

[The] new law allowing same-sex civil unions took effect. City halls in Hartford, Stamford, New Haven and a half-dozen small towns held special weekend hours to issue certificates to couples who said they waited for years to be legally recognized.

Connecticut became the first state to legalize civil unions without being forced by the courts after lawmakers passed a law endorsing the unions in April. Massachusetts allows gay marriages and Vermont recognizes civil unions because of lawsuits.

Civil unions are definitely a step in the right direction.

Hmmm… I have no idea how to take the news that Harriet Miers has been nominated for the open Supreme Court position. On the negative side, do we really want one of Bush’s buddies assigned to yet another important role in government? Didn’t we learn just how bad that was with Michael Brown and FEMA? And is it possible to trust anyone in Bush’s inner circle?

On the other hand, there’s this:

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid was complimentary, issuing a statement that said he likes Miers and adding “the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer.”

At the same time, he said he looked forward to the “process which will help the American people learn more about Harriet Miers, and help the Senate determine whether she deserves a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.”

Reid had personally recommended that Bush consider Miers for nomination, according to several sources familiar with the president’s consultations with individual senators. Of equal importance as the White House maps its confirmation campaign is that the Nevada Democrat had warned Bush that the selection of any of several other contenders could trigger a bruising partisan struggle.

An endorsement by Harry Reid? I can’t imagine Reid endorsing someone who’d try to lean the court to the right. But I can’t imagine Bush nominating someone who wouldn’t lean the court to the right. So just what the fuck is going on here?