GOOD MORNING ALL. I AM SHOCKED, SHOCKED I SAY, THAT THE O WOULD PRINT ANOTHER BORING NON-NEWS OP-ED ON SAM ADAMS.

THE GOATS ARE FLOCKING TO DELAWARE FROM THE WORLD OVER TO WATCH THE EVE OF O'DONNELL'S ELECTION. A MIST SLOWLY SETTLES INTO DOVER... MILK GOES SOUR... BABIES CRY OFTEN... PETS GO MISSING... LATE AT NIGHT, A HEAVINESS CAN BE FELT PRESSING ON ONE'S CHEST...

I WANT A BREAKFAST BURRITO.

GOOD MORNING, SMIRK! GOOD MORNING, CAT! GOOD MORNING, BLOGTOWN!

I LIKE THE CUT OF YOUR GIB. I THINK I'LL GO GET A BREAKFAST BURRITO NOW.

WHERE'S THE PIECE ON THE AMAZING NY GOVERNOR'S DEBATE LAST NIGHT?!? VIVA LA RENT IS TOO DAMN HIGH PARTY!!

GOOD MORNING BLOGTOWN! I DON'T THINK GOD IS A PAYING POSITION.

@CATANDBEARD: YOUR POETRY IS NICE AND NOW I WANT A BREAKFAST BURRITO AS WELL.

GOOD MORNING TK! GOOD MORNING CAT (AND BEARD SEPARATELY)! GOOD MORNING GRAHAM!

THOSE ARE THE COOLEST GOATS OF ALL TIME! FEDS DON'T HAVE A LEG TO STAND ON IN THEIR DEFENSE OF DADT - I WISH THEY'D JUST LET IT DIE AND MOVE ON. OBAMA IS LOSING MY 2012 VOTE.

GOOD MORNING EVERYONE! LIFE IS GOOD HERE!

GOOD MORNING! BLOGTOWN!

DAMN, GOATS, DAMN! SPEAKING OF, I CHECKED OUT THE GOATS AT 11TH AND BELMONT THIS WEEKEND! I NEVER REALIZED THEIR EYES LOOKED SO CREEPY!

MYTHBUSTERS SHOULD REPRISE THE BEER GOGGLES OR DRUNK DRIVING EPISODE FOR OBAMA'S APPEARANCE! THAT WOULD BE FUNNY!

GOOD MORNING! BEST GOAT PHOTO I'VE SEEN RECENTLY BY A DAM SITE! HAPPY FALL...BEWARE OF FALLING GOATS! SEND THOSE ITALIAN GOATS TO REPLACE STRIKING FRENCH GOATS! THAT IS ALL.

@FRUIT CUP: I HAD A GAY LEGAL NERD EXPLAIN THIS TO ME LAST NIGHT. IF OBAMA LETS A FEDERAL (READ: NON-SCOTUS) JUDGE WEIGH IN AND INVALIDATE WHOLE ACTS OF CONGRESS, THERE COULD BE BIGGER AND WORSE REPRUCUSSIONS LATER ON. FOR INSTANCE, SOME INBRED JUDGE IN ALABAMA DECIDING THAT THE HEALTHCARE BILL VIOLATES THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE CLAUSE AND THEREFORE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND YADDA YADDA YADDA. I DIDN'T QUITE GET THE DETAILS TOO FIGURED OUT. IF OBAMA IS ONE THING, IT'S A REALLY REALLY NERDY LEGAL POLICY WONKISH NERD.

SOMEONE GET COMMENTY COLLIN IN HERE TO ANSWER OUR LEGAL POLICY QUESTIONS.

@GRAHAM, I (TENTATIVELY) UNDERSTAND THE FEDERAL OBJECTION, AND I REALIZE (THOUGH I DON'T HAVE THE PROCEDURAL KNOWLEDGE/EDUCATION TO ARTICULATE WHY) THERE ARE BROADER ISSUES AT STAKE FOR THE JUDICIARY TO REPEAL DADT. HOWEVER, MY OBJECTION COMES FROM OBAMA NOT TAKING A LEADERSHIP ROLE ON THIS, AND FURTHER, HE'S DISTANCING HIMSELF FROM THE ARGUMENT/REASONING BY HIDING BEHIND HIS PRESS SECRETARY AND ROBERT GATES.

IF HE'D STEP UP AND SAY TAKE OWNERSHIP OF BLOCKING IT IN THE JUDICIARY, GIVE A LOGICAL REASON, AND THEN PROPOSE A TIMELINE FOR PUSHING THIS THROUGH CONGRESS - I'D TOTALLY BE OKAY. BUT HE'S NOT, HE'S BLOCKING IT WITHOUT OFFERING ANY ALTERNATIVE - AND THAT'S NOT WHAT I VIEW AS FUNCTIONAL LEADERSHIP.

@ GRAHAM: YOUR GAY LEGAL NERD FRIEND IS CORRECT. THE EXECUTIVE IS BOUND TO PROTECT THE LAWS CONGRESS PASSES. I'M NOT FRANKLY SURE OF THE AUTHORITY OF THAT POSITION, BUT IT MAKES GREAT PRACTICAL SENSE ANYWAY, FOR THE REASON YOUR FRIEND POINTED OUT.

IT ALSO HELPS TO HAVE THE FINALITY THAT HIGHER COURT DECISIONS ARE ABLE TO BRING TO THESE ISSUES.

FROM A JUDICIAL POLICY STANDPOINT, THIS IS EXACTLY WHY WE HAVE SEVERAL LAYERS OF APPELLATE COURTS: TO MAKE SURE THE BIG CASES GET CALLED CORRECTLY.

FROM A PERSONAL STANDPOINT (AND AS I'VE SAID BEFORE), IT'S INDEED FRUSTRATING TO SEE A JUDGE HAVE TO SAY "I'VE DECIDED GOVERNMENT ACTIVITY X IS A VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION. NEVERTHELESS, THE GOVERNMENT GETS TO KEEP DOING IT FOR A WHILE (LIKELY YEARS) UNTIL THIS WORKS ITS WAY UP TO THE STATE OR FEDERAL SUPREME COURT."

@ FRUIT CUP, I'M ALSO REALLY, REALLY DISAPPOINTED AND FRUSTRATED THAT OBAMA ISN'T WAY OUT IN FRONT OF THIS. MY HOPE IS THAT AN OBAMA WHO DOESN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT RE-ELECTION WILL BE THE REAL LEADER HE'S AFRAID OF BEING RIGHT NOW BECAUSE OF PARTY POLITICS.

THAT SAID, I NEVER THOUGHT HE'D BE A TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADER LIKE A LOT OF OTHER LIBERALS DID - HE'S BEEN SUPER CAUTIOUS ALL HIS LIFE, HE'S A LAW PROFESSOR FOR CRYING OUT LOUD, NOT A BOMB THROWER.

LETTING LOWER LEVEL COURTS INVALIDATE MAJOR ACTS OF CONGRESS WITHOUT A FIGHT SIMPLY SETS A BAD PRECEDENT THOUGH, FOR BOTH OTHER BRANCHES, NOT TO MENTION THE SIGNAL IT WOULD SEND TO OTHER LOWER COURTS: THAT THEY NOW HAVE POTENTIALLY FINAL AUTHORITY TO DO LIKEWISE REGARDING POLICY THEY MIGHT NOT PERSONALLY LIKE (IE. THE HILLBILLY FEDERAL JUDGE HYPOTHETICAL).

FROM JUST A POLITICAL STANDPOINT UNFORTUNATELY, LETTING EVERY INDEPENDENT AND REPUBLICAN IN THE LAND TIE DEMOCRATS TO JUDICIAL POLICY SETTING (REGARDLESS OF THE FAIRNESS OF THAT LABEL) A MONTH BEFORE THE MIDTERMS IS A VERY BAD IDEA.

(IT WAS EXHAUSTING SCREAMING ALL OF THAT.)

GOOD MORNING BLOOGYTOOGIES! I ENJOY LISTENING TO CC EXPLAIN LAW STUFF. IT IS SOOTHING MUCH IN THE SAME WAY GOATS CLIMBING A DAM ARE SOOTHING.

@KIALA, SERIOUSLY AGREE. CC HAS SOOTHED MY FROWN ON THIS MATTER - AT LEAST TO A "DISAPPOINTED" STATUS. MUCH BETTER THAN PREVIOUS EMOTION, IMO.

GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.

COMMENTY COLIN IS THE CARL SAGAN OF LAW.

* BLUSHES VIOLENTLY *

I DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO LISTEN TO THE CALL, BUT THIS MAY ANSWER THE "WHAT IS DOJ'S OBLIGATION WHEN IT COMES TO RULINGS REGARDING DADT & DOMA?"

http://www.acslaw.org/node/17311

I HAVE FAILED IN MY COMMENTER DUTIES AND HAVE DUCKED OUT OF COMMENTING FOR ROUGHLY 6 WEEKS. I AM SORRY. MEA CULPA.