get these things wrong. i don t think civil rights question shoes go to voters partly because you get into the thing of the whim of the voters and where the political whims are. we don t vote in this country on fundamental rights. freedom of speech will always be there for us. and these sort of questions like marriage and family fall within that. i mean, how would we like it if this four years people say, well, you can be married to jonathan, i can be married to rita and then the next four year, we don t like it. although i m sure he would make a wonderful spouse, i don t want to hopefully we ll find out one day. moving right along. but one point i want to make here is a lot of times the court reflects kints of where we are as a society and i think what s so interesting about this time right now is we re right on the cusp. you can really see the supreme court going either way where five years ago, you know, their decision would have been obvious coming down against same-sex
administration, they vote for amendments and they do things that actually kills any hopes of immigration reform. i think it s time that we actually took a positive step. i realize this is not everything we have to do on immigration, but it s a really positive first step for us to fix this broken system. i was an immigration lawyer for 15 years. i realize there s a lot of things we have to fix in the immigration system. but this is one of the easiest things to fix and i think we should do it thousand. i would push back a little bit defense your characterization of the democrats on this issue, but that s for another time. what i want to talk about is the importance for your party to do something to reverse the thumping that you got in 2012 among latinos and this concept that the latinos may soon become attached to the democratic party the way blacks have become. and i agree with you. i think if we don t reach out to the what tee know community to the african-american community, to th
change to the senate rules. basically for all intents and purposes, it will say the senate has to go old school, has to go like it used to be, where senators like strong thurman got up on the senate floor and read cookbooks and phone books to protest civil rights legislation back in the 1960s. and back then, you actually had to do that. you had to stand up on the floor and talk. and you couldn t sit down. the rules of state, once you sit down, you lose the floor. so that s one of the things he ll move and he probably should move it. one of the things that steve talked about, though, is this issue of the motion to proceed. in america, they re like what the hell is that. noor do nor does it matter to most americans. but something to understand quickly, the motion to proceed is already not filibusterable. that s not a word, i just made that up. i like it, though. a good word. you can t spell it, nor can i. but the bottom line is in
big development expected from the high court. the justices are in private conference deciding whether or not to review any of the ten separate gay marriage appeals before them. pete williams joins us on the phone from inside the court. pete, what can you tell us? reporter: we re getting the order right now. i ll ask the court official if she can hand me an extra copy. but here it is. just this second here. and, well, we ve been waiting all afternoon to see if the supreme court would take any of the gay marriage cases and we ve just gotten aporders list here. and none of tgay marriage cases are on here. so it appears we won t hear today. i can t imagine that they would give us two orders list. i think this is it. so now the question is what does that mean. and it could mean one of several things. it could mean that the court wants more time to talk with
of the challenge comes in. and so i think that s partly where the women aren t funny things comes from. and i think it also comes from a la lack of awareness from female audiences. so if you re a female comic and you re getting up on stage and talking about something that s important to you or about the female experience, it s not considered universal. even though 50% of the population clearly experiences, you know, a lot of those things that some female comics talk about. so is there a fundamentally different way that women tend to approach comedy, are there common amities we can say about female comedians? not really. i mean, i think there are what they consider more masculine forms of humor and more feminine forms of humor. but men do some of the feminine stuff and women do some of the masculine stuff. so because joke telling is considered masculine, there are clearly a lot of women who get up there and tell jokes like a set up and punch line. and then story telling i think