regard

This is a huge story and one that could make or break the Obama presidency:

As promised, a federal judge has issued an injunction blocking the military from enforcing Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Judge Virginia Philips last month found the policy unconstitutional in her ruling on a lawsuit brought by the Log Cabin Republicans and said she would issue an injunction blocking the Defense Department from enforcing the policy and discharging openly gay servicemembers.

The Justice Department objected.

"A court should not compel the executive to implement an immediate cessation of the 17-year-old policy without regard for any effect such an abrupt change might have on the military's operations, particularly at a time when the military is engaged in combat operations and other demanding military activities around the globe," attorneys said in their objection, filed in U.S. District Court in California.

The big question now is rather President Obama will abide by the decision or if he will try some legal maneuvering around it.

Barack Obama in 2007:

“The growth in the cost of drugs has slowed in recent years, in part because of greater use of generic drugs. But given the price tag, and the financial challenges of our health care system, we can – and must – take additional steps to curb how much we are spending on drugs.”

“Allowing the federal government to negotiate for lower drug prices in the Medicare program would have been an important step forward in this regard. When you look at the prices the federal government has negotiated for our veterans and military men and women, it is clear that the government can – and should – use its leverage to lower prices for our seniors as well.”

“Drug negotiation is the smart thing to do and the right thing to do, and it is unconscionable that we were not take up this bill today.”

A great way to negotiate better prices would have been to allow reimpotation of drugs, but now we have President Obama instead of Candidate Obama and that means we have an entirely different beast.

Just breaking on CNN that Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have blocked the confirmation of Eric Holder for Attorney General for one week. Apparently the big show stopped was rather or not he would prosecute people involved with torture (imagine that).

This leads me to a couple of points:

What do the Republicans have against a black man becoming AG? Isn’t that the same thing they said with the Burris Senate appointment when Democrats weren’t going to seat him?

Also – how can we survive without an AG during this time of terrorism? We heard that repeatedly from Republicans when it came to the confirmation of Michael Mukasey.

UPDATE

Think Progress points out the following from John Cornyn:

“It could well be there will be a request to delay the markup for a week so those questions can be asked and answered,” Cornyn said. “Part of my concern relates to his statements at the hearing with regard to torture and what his intentions are toward our intelligence personnel who were operating in good faith based on their understanding of what the law was.”

You know, I decided to rob a bank because I thought the law said it was ok if I needed to eat. I guess I shouldn’t be prosecuted either. And isn’t it funny how the same one holding up this confirmation is the same person that held up Clinton’s. Keep obstructing and 2010 will be a year of a super-majority for Democrats in the Senate.