Democrats & Liberals Archives

Not Again. The Divider Part 2

What is it that Republican strategists see in the hearts and minds of the party faithful that lead them to believe that they can use “Gay Marriage” to fool Republican voters again?
They are once again dangling the small, shiney object that is “Gay Marriage” in hopes that it will distract and divide this nation.
What kind of leaders would place their agendas and need for absolute power over the solidarity of the American people?

Is the idea of two men or women looking across a room at each other and thinking that's my husband/wife/partner in legal and binding marriage, so all consuming and overwelmingly horrific that you could be distracted to the point that you could ignore the fact that our government, lead by the Republican party, is spying on Americans and lied to us about it. They have tortured prisoners and attempted to cover it up. They are seeking to collect your internet data, which this administration feels falls under the "Patriot Act", which happens to be the most unpatriotic legislation our Republican controlled government has passed. A government that has created an atmosphere in Washington that promotes corruption, waste and corporate greed(Which starts with no-bid contracts, waste and cronyism right at the very top of our government), engages in illegal attacks against other nations(Iraqi Freedom), considers secrecy a weapon to use against its own people(A matter of National Security) but has repeatledly demonstrated a complete disregard for our right to privacy. A government that has redefined the words hypocrisy and double-standard.
Corruption, failed government responses to disasters, illegal and pitifully planned war that drains the tax payers of hundreds of billions of dollars and has taken thousands of Iraqi and American lives, crushing national debt, divisive politicians who want to conquer not lead, lowest world opinion in history, promoting torture, destroying the environment for oil, chemical and energy companies, a stretched thin military doing multiple tours that may have executed Iraqi civilians, gas prices soaring through the roof because the Republican party is bought by "big oil", selling our ports to Middle East company, domestic policies that were either recognized as idiotic before they were ignored(Social Security Reform) or that have failed miserably(No Child Left Behind, tax cuts(Welfare for the wealthy) and Medicaid). Lying to the citizens of the United States to the point that most of the people in this country don't believe a word that comes out of any of their mouths is so much more important to all Americans than whether lesbian couples receive benefits from their partners or that gay guys have to go through the financial hell of a divorce just like us heterosexuals.
I am not a Republican. I'm not insulted by the Karl Rove style, insult to your intelligence. This slap in your face is a ruse that our government and elected officials you voted for or plan on voting for in the future have laid at your feet like a steaming turd they want you to believe is a pot of Conservative gold.
The Republican voters should be insulted.
It is screaming obvious that Republicans seeking election or reelection think you folks are pretty stupid.
Prove them wrong.

Posted by Andre M. Hernandez at June 5, 2006 9:37 AM
Comments
Comment #154447

Red neck racist bigots,

Please stop trying to make laws to force the government to control the way we live our lives. We don’t like you, and don’t want to live like you. If you must, make a law for your own state, and keep your nose out of mine. Thanks!

Posted by: Max at June 5, 2006 11:17 AM
Comment #154455

Let me start by saying that I am against a Constitutional Amendment (in effect) banning gay marriage. That is the sole provence of the States.

Let me also say that any debate of this Constitutional Amendment is a waste of time and the taxpayer’s money…and is a distraction from the issues which truly deserve our full, complete and focused attention.

With that being said, I am passionately against someone telling me that a man sticking his penis in another man’s anus is completely normal.

It is not. And no matter how much of my oxygen you waste trying to convince me otherwise, I will not believe you.

All said, if you are a homosexual, do what you want with your penis when it involves another man. It’s none of my…and my government’s…business and should not be regulated or prohibited.

Posted by: Jim T at June 5, 2006 11:49 AM
Comment #154457

wHATS NEXT BABS GOING TO MARRY HER GERMAN SHEPARD?mAYBE DONALD TRUMP WILL MARRY HIS DAUGHTER.

Posted by: lookingout at June 5, 2006 11:55 AM
Comment #154464

lookingout-

You make no sense.

Jim T-

I wish more conservatives thought like you.

Posted by: David S at June 5, 2006 12:14 PM
Comment #154480

Max:

FYI:

When you start a post with “Red neck racist bigots”, you immediately show yourself to guilty of the same thought process that you are attempting to decry.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at June 5, 2006 1:55 PM
Comment #154481

Jim T,

You feel a lot like I do, except I think being gay is normal. It’s existed since the dawn of written civilization, and many animals are gay. I am not gay, but have lived in plenty of gay neighborhoods, worked with gay colleagues, had gay friends, have a cousin that is gay, etc. They are just like everyone else, except for the laws that discriminate against them.

I would never try to change your mind. I don’t even care, except that I don’t try and legislate your life, so don’t legislate anyone else’s. I agree the whole discussion is just a scare tactic to scare up votes.

Lookingout,

I knew they whole “you let gays marry, then you have to let people marry animals, where will it stop?” thing would come up. But it doesn’t make any sense. No one’s suggesting anyone marry an animal. I have not heard that there are a large, or for that matter even small, group of people demanding they be allowed to marry animals. In fact, I know of no one who has ever wanted to marry an animal. However, if someone wanted to marry into a loving, equitable, and co-consenting relationship with an animal (I don’t even see how this would be possible) then I say go for it. Why? Because I’m not out to have the government in people’s lives. People should be able to marry whatever they want without the government telling them to. Marry a rock, marry your Chia pet, what do I care?

Posted by: Max at June 5, 2006 1:57 PM
Comment #154483
When you start a post with “Red neck racist bigots”, you immediately show yourself to guilty of the same thought process that you are attempting to decry.

So how’s that feel Joe?

Posted by: Max at June 5, 2006 1:59 PM
Comment #154485

In my opinion homosexuality is a sexual preference. What they do is none of my business, nor is it the business of the government. It is not up to me to judge them on their sexual prefernce. However if it affects how my tax dollars are being spent than it is my business.

Posted by: Duane McGovern at June 5, 2006 2:12 PM
Comment #154486

Republicans need Gays. They need the unity and comradeship persecuting Queers gives them. It makes them feel better. Like the Fascists, KKK, Islamic Fundamentalists and Communists before and present, the Conservatives of today cannot survive without having to bashing a minority.

If there weren’t any gays, Republicans would just find someone else to ostracize. Maybe the Negros?

This is what it means to be a Republican today.

Posted by: Aldous at June 5, 2006 2:13 PM
Comment #154488

mAX You prove my point were do we stop?Our children are in danger of growing up with no moral value if we allow this monstrosity to continue!Think of the babies.

Posted by: lookingout at June 5, 2006 2:16 PM
Comment #154489

The republican party has fallen so low in the polls that they have to push a minority down under thier feet just to keep thier heads above water.They know it’s not going to pass.It will get Christians out to vote.If two gays want to get married how will that effect anyone but them?Im not going to loose any sleep over it.

Posted by: christian at June 5, 2006 2:30 PM
Comment #154491

Max:

I felt nothing when I read your post. I merely recognized that you were immediately guilty of that which you went on to say that you don’t like. I’ve found it helpful to know when my thinking delves into the hypocritical. I thought you’d like to know that yours had, in this instance.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at June 5, 2006 2:33 PM
Comment #154492

Mr.Hernandez

I feel your hatred. So does my computer (it nearly melted with the searing heat of your hatred). Why is it every time I read a liberal blog I sense such hatred. Maybe because you haven’t learned to be subtle. For a cause that believes itself to be so sensitive I find it somewhat amusing that it can be so self-deceptive.
Conservatives don’t need to hate anyone else, we always have you to pick on.

Posted by: keith at June 5, 2006 2:41 PM
Comment #154493

looking out (aka another flame baiter),

are you saying that gays deserve rights equal to german shepherds

or

do you think they are sub-human?

These are the only logical conclusions from your post.

Posted by: CPAdams at June 5, 2006 2:48 PM
Comment #154494

lookingout,

If you want to promote “family values”, ban divorce.

Think of the babies!

Posted by: Rocky at June 5, 2006 2:51 PM
Comment #154496

Here is my solution to this whole gay marrage thing. Kill all tax credits for being married, no special treatment from the government at all. that includes hetrosexuals and homosexuals. Take away all the free stuff that comes with being married (precieved at my tax bracket) now its not a tax issue no special treatment of anyone. No need for a ban on gay marrage.
I don’t see how letting gays marry is going to change the 50% divorse rate of hetrosexuals. This is just an issue to drum up the support of the religious right who if they actually looked in their bibles from time to time would find they are not really religious and Jr. is closer to a satanic then a christian.

Posted by: timesend at June 5, 2006 2:51 PM
Comment #154498

cristian Let me enlighten you 30 odd years ago abortion was not the norm.Liberal democrats pushed laws to give women the right to abort under certain conditions.Well today abortion is the norm and we allow babies to be murdered every single day of the week.The younger generation thinks its moraly right to abort today.We all know its not but the left has rammed it down our throat and if they had their way 30 years from now you will have brothers marrying sisters moms wedding sons brothers wedding brothers were does this immoral behavier stop?If as americans we let this continue there will be no such thing as moral values.

Posted by: lookingout at June 5, 2006 3:05 PM
Comment #154502

On average, homosexual couples have much higher disposable incomes and significantly higher net worth than their heterosexual counterparts. So what gives? I thought that Repubs honored money above all.

I guess Jon Stewart was right when he said that “Republicans can’t get the sounf of but fu**ing out of their ears long enough to think straight.”

Posted by: scoreggi at June 5, 2006 3:10 PM
Comment #154503

I’m a heterosexual female, who has been married twice, and borne 3 girls.

Frankly I don’t give a hoot about what’s going on in someone else’s bedroom. And frankly I doubt anyone cares what goes on in mine.

I have had the opportunity to meet several homosexuals and lesbians over the past years, and frankly I didn’t even know they were “Gay” until they told me. It not as if they wave a flag saying “Hey there,I’m Gay”

I believe that their relationships deserves the same rights as a man and woman. Marriage, benefits, adoption, etc.

In our world, families are made up of extremely different types of relationships.

I worked and now volunteer with families who have had their children removed. I’ve been involved in one way or the other with family relationships for years. It has been my experience that a loving home is aways better for a child, even if it has developed from an odd situation.

Is there any reason an older couple in their 70’s shouldn’t care for a small child? Of course there are. Concerns about health issues is a major concern.
What about the Mom who has not, and does not plan to marry anyone?
Or a single parent. Can he\she adopt a child?
Or an aunt and an uncle who un-married but have proven stability in the number of years they’ve been together?

I’ve even seen families where the ex-wife still lived with the ex-husband, and their children, under the roof of her ex-in-laws, and also with the new wife and her children, as well as children from her marriage. I don’t know how, but this family loved each other, and worked well to together…

Why not people in same-sex, long term relationships - can they care for a child? Certainly they can.

They are creations of biology, not immoral decisions. In other words, our HIGHER POWERS created them. They are not a freak of nature, they certainly don’t enjoy being seen as “different”. No one can convince me that anyone would honestly choose to be gay.

However if someone is gay (and I understand it’s not “catching”)they are humans just as you and I are. Our Higher Powers choose to create them, and so I can choose to honor my beliefs and love them like I would anyone else, without condemning them.

It should be painfully obvious that I support same-sex marriages, or unions, or whatever one wants to call it. This just one way I honor my Higher Power, by accepting her\his creations,for who they are, instead of putting myself ahead of of my creater.

Posted by: Linda H. at June 5, 2006 3:14 PM
Comment #154507

As for marying a relative my wife’s Aunt married her Uncle. She did this in the red state of Lousiana. So don’t give me this crap about marying family members. Hell in the bible first cousins married. So what is the new arguement. You are straying from the point. This is all just a political stunt and is ment to inflame a minority of people and distract them from the HUGE failures of the Bush/Rep Congress failures.

Posted by: timesend at June 5, 2006 3:22 PM
Comment #154513
This is all just a political stunt and is ment to inflame a minority of people and distract them from the HUGE failures of the Bush/Rep Congress failures.

timesend,

the distraction seems to be working.

We are spending an absurd amount of time on an amendment that has no chance of passing the senate and only a slight chance of comming out of the house with enough votes.

Let us give the marriage amendment exactly the attention it deserves.

[SILENCE]

Posted by: CPAdams at June 5, 2006 3:40 PM
Comment #154514

Thirty years ago (maybe 35 is better) it was common to not allow any black skinned man or woman any job in management or into medical schools, teachers at predominately white schools, etc. “All in the Family” was shocking to Americans, mainly because it revealed that the majority of men Archie’s age agreed with him. Times change, not always for the better, but in many cases there is great improvement. I simply do not see how this issue on gay marriage really even matters except as one poster stated, if it costs taxpayers money. I am not sharp enough right now to think how this would be the case (are we to pay for gay marriages? the price of the open bar may be simply too much). Otherwise is this once again the use of FEAR to get out the vote of the Saved and true Americans? It is raising the alert code at least to orange. When I read some of the things conservatives say like Ann Coulter and Pat Robertson, I simply can not understand it. I am not the brightest but I think I know when something is just too much of nothing. I don’t want to legalize everything and have MJ bars where we can get tax income off those who wish to get stoned, but to have someone to love in this world, with everything else we all must deal with, I am all for it. I am straight, married, the whole traditional works by the way.

Posted by: NP1983 at June 5, 2006 3:41 PM
Comment #154522

Comparing the plight of African Americans to that of homosexuals is repugnant.

Posted by: Craig at June 5, 2006 3:52 PM
Comment #154523

I think one of the most telling signs of the character of Bush was who was and was not invited to his little show. No Log Cabin Republicans were invited but yet a group known as Exodus was. Exodus is a group that claims to “cure” homosexuals. What is Bush’s real agenda??????

Posted by: shelly at June 5, 2006 3:54 PM
Comment #154536

Andre,
Clearly the GOP is so-o-o-o desperate! The fact that they’ve felt compelled by their low poll numbers to return to this issue is the proof of just how bad it’s gotten for them. We must keep in mind that they had already had to drop this issue previously due to a lack of votes. This only underscores how low the president and this Republican Congress has sunk in the public’s estimation — especially among people in their own party.

Posted by: Adrienne at June 5, 2006 4:34 PM
Comment #154542

Jim,
It’t NOT normal for you, or other heteros.
It IS normal for gays. Your opinion on it means little.
BUT, as the article points out, anyone who is taking this issue seriously RIGHT NOW, is an easily distracted moron, and bushco is counting on your gullibility.
IT’S NOT IMPORTANT GIVEN TODAYS SERIOUS ISSUES.

Posted by: norby at June 5, 2006 4:51 PM
Comment #154544

“wHATS NEXT BABS GOING TO MARRY HER GERMAN SHEPARD?”

SO, apparently, the only thing that can keep lookingout from marrying his chihuahua is a constitutional ammendment??
It never even OCCURRED to me. Shows where his mind is.

“Comparing the plight of African Americans to that of homosexuals is repugnant.”

Craig,
Your the type of person bush is counting on. Is this REALLY what we and congress should be discussing given:
Iraq
Defecits
Terrorism
Hurricanes
Global Warming
Corporate/government corruption
Illegal Immigration
Crumbling Infrastructure
US soldiers massacring children
Gas Prices
Wiretapping and other civil rights intrusions
Osamabeenforgotten
Bankrupt State and City governments
Education Crisis
Doctor Shortages
Medical Insurance Crisis
Social Security Crisis
ETC,ETC,ETC
ANYONE WORRIED ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE IS A STONE COLD IDIOT.

Posted by: norby at June 5, 2006 5:00 PM
Comment #154545

“If as americans we let this continue there will be no such thing as moral values.”

Legislating morality doesn’t make people moral.
I guess some people need to be forced to behave. I never did.

Posted by: norby at June 5, 2006 5:02 PM
Comment #154556

I find it more than cofusing when Republican Conservatives express so much concern for aborted babies but totally ignore over 2400 of our kids killed in a war that is based on lies? Can one you conservatives expain your indifference?

Posted by: Gary Hankin at June 5, 2006 5:34 PM
Comment #154559

Norby declared:
“BUT, as the article points out, anyone who is taking this issue seriously RIGHT NOW, is an easily distracted moron.”

Anyone want to guess who has the highest point count in this thread? For someone who’s not taking the issues seriously, Norby, you sure have a lot to say.

“ANYONE WORRIED ABOUT GAY MARRIAGE IS A STONE COLD IDIOT.”

And what do they call people who don’t know how to use the Shift key?

Posted by: Craig at June 5, 2006 5:38 PM
Comment #154560

Harry Reid on the Senate floor: Cutting right through this crap political ploy, to talk about the real issues the country needs to address.

Posted by: Adrienne at June 5, 2006 5:41 PM
Comment #154570

Aside from the, I admit nauseating, political opportunism of this subject being raised at this time there may be a real subject to debate here. [again I admit probably abour #57 in overall importance - see some lists above]. Superficially I rather like the libertarian view that one could kill the tax benefits and other financial benefits and let any church marry anyone they liked, even the consenting german shepherd or shepherds of their choice, including neutered ones. Would mormons get to revert to polygamy? Who does decide on next of kin issues, what happens if a mormon converts to catholicism, can the neutered shepherd be annulled? There are probably a lot more serious legal questions to do with inheritance and custody issues. I join the let one of anything marry something else, probably only one though, crowd. Although I am heterosexual let me assure everyone that despite the legal availability of their pooch I not only have no interest but feel quite confident such interest will not develop with a change of law. Likewise those who have an interest in their sisters probably arent really inhibited that much by whether they can legally marry.

Posted by: edmund west at June 5, 2006 6:13 PM
Comment #154572

lookingout:

You and the rest of your ultra-conservative friends always make the argument that since you are anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage that you are moral people. I think you want to do the right thing but you have been brainwashed from youth to believe that following the talking points of your religious and political leaders will lead you to the path of morality. I hope that one day you will wake up and realize that you are being used.

You and others like you believe homosexuality is a sin as stated in the Old Testmanent, but there are many other sins listed in that book that you seem to ignore. Isn’t working on the sabbath, or a woman who is found out to not be a virgin prior to getting married sins worthy of being stoned to death? Why focus on such a narrow view of the bible, isn’t a sin a sin? I’m a liberal, and I find the idea of two guys getting it on gross, but two girls is really hot unless they’re both butch, however I don’t think we should be legislating taste. How are two people of the same sex getting married going to destroy your world? If you aren’t gay it shouldn’t matter, unless your worried you might have gay children and they would want to get married to someone of the same sex. But then would you want your gay child to grow up living an unhappy, lie of a life as a heterosexual all to make you feel better?

When it comes to abortion all of you ultra-conservatives seem to think that liberals are pro-abortion, most aren’t that is why we use the term pro-choice. I, and many liberals like me don’t like the idea of abortion, which is why it should be a method of last resort, and a decision made by the woman. If the religious right would stay out of sex education and allow a program of abstinence and birth control to be taught you wouldn’t have so many abortions.

The reality is you are being used by the wealthy ruling class in conjuction with organized religion, which threw out the real Jesus ages ago, all so they can maintain power over the rest of us. The reason religion is so opposed to homosexuality, abortion, and birth control is because it reduces the number of possible converts and the amount of future cheap labor.

Posted by: bushflipflops at June 5, 2006 6:15 PM
Comment #154591

By the middle of this month, there will be four aircraft carrier battlegroups in the Persian Gulf area.

An infantry brigade has been moved from Kuwait to the Iron Triangle in western Iraq.

Iran is opening an oil bourse that will be trading in Euros (not dollars) this month. (When Saddam started trading Iraqi oil in Euros in 2003, we attacked him.) Venezuela is strongly considering trading oil in Euros as well.(We have tried twice to overthrow Chavez, a legitimately elected head of state. What if he directly threatens the supremacy of the dollar?)

China has made a deal with Iran for oil.

If major players start moving oil in Euros, the need to have dollars will drop precipitously, the value of the dollar will drop like a rock, and an economic crisis will insue.

The Neocons are staring at disasterous poll numbers—there is a real possibility that one or both houses of Congress may be in play this fall, opening up the possibility of a Congress looking into failed policies, cronyism, malfeasance and law breaking with subpoena power. What have the Republicans always counted on in elections in the past? Strong on national defense. Would they believe that an attack on Iran would make them look strong on defense, with an election coming up? Wouldn’t an attack on Iran pretty much short-circuit any Congressional investigations into administration corruption? Is the administration desperate enough to contemplate this?

Iran has threatened to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, where the large majority of oil for Europe and other countries pass each day. The Pentagon and the Navy pooh-pooh this threat, assuring the administration that they can prevent any attempts by Iran to do this. Maybe they can. (By the way, there are some that believe the port deal in January with the U.A.E. was an attempted pay-off so that the Pentagon could use the country to stage military forces to prevent just such a scenario. Looking at a map makes one wonder.)

One thing is for certain. If the military buildup in the Persian Gulf going on right now ends in war, American interests world-wide will be targeted. Three-dollar a gallon gas we have now will be a fond memory, and real honest-to-god suffering and sacrifice will be the norm for the American people and others.

Will Russia and China stand by and do nothing if we attack Iran? Will the Shia militias in Iraq stand by and do nothing? Will the militants in Pakistan, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and elsewhere stand by and do nothing?

How long can we count on the millions of cargo containers that enter the United States uninspected to carry just clothing from China and not dirty bombs that can kill thousands?

What if there is another major terrorist incident on our soil before the elections? Where will our civil liberties be then, with an administration that has already defied the Constitution at its pleasure?

Just some thoughts. Now, back to our regularly scheduled program.

Posted by: Tim Crow at June 5, 2006 8:20 PM
Comment #154596

Why are Republicans so concerned about other peoples’ sex lives?

Posted by: mark at June 5, 2006 8:59 PM
Comment #154605

” For someone who’s not taking the issues seriously, Norby, you sure have a lot to say.”

I’m not commenting on the gay marriage issue, craig. I’m commenting on the real reason for raising it. Is that hard for you to grasp.


“And what do they call people who don’t know how to use the Shift key?”

One sentence in caps for emphasis. I was raising my voice to get the attention of right wingers on rants.
I notice you had NOTHING to say about my message,just lame attempts at insults.
Tell me, do you really think this is a issue of top importance that should be occupying our congress, senate and presidents time right now?

Posted by: norby at June 5, 2006 9:31 PM
Comment #154609

“Harry Reid on the Senate floor: Cutting right through this crap political ploy, to talk about the real issues the country needs to address.”

Give em Hell Harry!
Proud he represents my state.
I think this one, this time, is going to backfire on our befuddled majority party.

Posted by: norby at June 5, 2006 9:32 PM
Comment #154617

Tim Crow,

I had no idea the gays had messed up so many things. Maybe Bush is right.

KansasDem

Posted by: KansasDem at June 5, 2006 9:44 PM
Comment #154618

Tim Crow,
good point. what I say next doesn’t apply to you
Tim, but to the post. I personally don’t approve of gay marriage, I believe the bible teaches this is wrong. But to use this issue as a selling point to get votes is even more wrong. Let’s focus on the real issues, the out of control budget, the miserable attempt to “free Iraq, the invasion of privacy on the American citizen, just to name a few. I’ve never been one to vote along a political party line, but I can honestly say I wouldn’t vote for a republican if my life depended on it. We just held primary elections in my county. Out of 4000 voters, 161 voted the republican ticket for state rep. No other offices were challenged by the republicans. I hope the rest of the country feels the same way. We need a change, the democrats may not be any better, but I can’t see them being any worse. If we get much more time with the Bushco’s running the country we will be the new republic of China. That’s a sad thing to think of. I personally am not a republican basher, or hater, but they don’t have the answers for the American people. The saying goes if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Well this is broke, badly. Let’s fix it.

Posted by: kenray04 at June 5, 2006 9:50 PM
Comment #154622

President Bush says he supports (although he has not proposed) civil unions. However, because he does not want to call gay unions marriage, the Democrats label him as anti-gay. This makes no sense, until you realize the Democrats are arguing the issue out of politics (just like Bush) and not for the rights they say they are supporting (again, just like Bush).

It’s true that marriage would give gay people all sorts of rights that they don’t have now. But “marriage” the word and the actual rights are different things.

In Congress, neither party is proposing laws to give rights to gay people or take rights away from them, because that does not fit either political agenda.
Instead, they are arguing over a word and a meaningless amendment that has no chance of passing anyway. Both parties are pandering to their bases, without having to support laws that would take the issue off the table one way or the other.

Homosexuals will not gain or lose rights in this debate. They will just be used as pawns in the political game. That’s how they’re really being discriminated against.

Senator Reid said:
In spite of the many serious problems we have just discussed… we will spend most of the week on is a constitutional amendment that will fail by a large margin, a constitutional amendment on Same Sex Marriage—an effort that failed to pick up a simple majority, when we recently voted on it.

I was about to say I agreed with Reid for once. Then I realized that the parties are doing the exact same thing with all the other issues he listed. Make it look like you’re doing something to please your base, but in reality do nothing so as not to lose the issue.

President Truman was wrong about his congress being the “do-nothing congress.” It’s really this one.

I’m going to post this again on the thread above this one, since it’s the same topic.

Posted by: TheTraveler at June 5, 2006 10:14 PM
Comment #154648

lookihgout
This is not to insult although you will take it badly. Your posts shows myself and others very clearly that you suffer from unresolved homosexual tendencies. This is not to say you are gay neccessarily,just that you are very conflicted. There are professionals that can help and you should see someone. Hate for part of yourself leads to hate for others and a life filled with hate is no life at all.

Posted by: BillS at June 6, 2006 12:17 AM
Comment #154680

I’m a lesbian and I just want to say that Bush can try a hand at backwoods morality all he wants, his kids are still getting female to female action when they go out clubbing, or on a booze cruise someplace…makes me sick.

Posted by: Theresa at June 6, 2006 3:23 AM
Comment #154684

————-norby—-I believe you did a nobly good job on your last post.You have summed up all the talking points which really need discussed.

Posted by: DAVID at June 6, 2006 5:14 AM
Comment #154801

Don’t have to read beyond your first paragraph to notice the obvious. It is pretty clear that your comments and kind of thinking are precisely what cause the dividing of this nation. Traditional conservative thinkers are standing up for protecting the traditional definition of marriage. Gay Marriage advocates like you are trying to FORCE a redefinition of marriage against the will of overwhelming citizen majorities. Gay Marriage advocates in the persons of judicial authority have undermined States Rights legislation and voter initiatives intended to protect marriage. Because of what Gay Marriage advocates and you are doing you become the definition of reprobate.

Posted by: Will at June 6, 2006 2:14 PM
Comment #154823

Bills-Thank you for your observation as to my mental state and sexual preferance if i ever feel the need to commit the ultemate sin i will consult a large caliber pistol and leave the coach to you.

Posted by: lookingout at June 6, 2006 3:08 PM
Comment #154865

>>the ultemate sin i will consult a large caliber pistol and leave the coach to you.

The ultimate sin? That one did not even make the top ten.
And really i think suicide rates higher up there plus you will not be able to ask for forgiveness
First time i have responded to a post but frankly think you might be a waste of a good bullet

Posted by: the Savage at June 6, 2006 5:31 PM
Comment #154959

Keith,

“I feel your hatred. So does my computer (it nearly melted with the searing heat of your hatred). Why is it every time I read a liberal blog I sense such hatred. Maybe because you haven’t learned to be subtle.”

Are you for real? Do you actually hear yourself? Subtle? You make me laugh.

Posted by: chris2x at June 6, 2006 9:51 PM
Comment #154966

Here, here Savage.

lookingout,

Do you hear yourself? “Ultimate Sin”? Apparently you need to consult your bible. Homosexuality doesn’t even make the ten commandments. How about Murder? Murdering yourself? Child rape?

Child abuse, spousal abuse, divorce. Aren’t these all more serious threats to the sanctity of marriage than two people looking for an equal partnership and protection under the law?

Posted by: Chris2x at June 6, 2006 10:09 PM
Comment #155054

To all,

The states that have the highest rate of divorce, have all voted to make gay marriage illegal LA, Miss, Tex.
Mass, NY and Vt have not made gay marriage illegal and have the lowest rate of divorce.
So preserving the American family by banning gay marriage is a crock too.
Look at all the Republican controlled government has done wrong and stick to those issues in 06 and 08.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at June 7, 2006 7:41 AM
Comment #155118

>>> The states that have the highest rate of divorce, have all voted to make gay marriage illegal LA, Miss, Tex.

Sounds like the classic — clean up your own house before worrying about mine case?

Posted by: The Savage at June 7, 2006 11:17 AM
Post a comment