You are on an individual archive page

Click here to return to the main page


Wikipedia does good things. Reward them.

The Daily Links Page
Got a link to submit?
  • New Evidence Proves First Flag Made By Betsy Ross Actually Shirt For Gay Friend
  • Colbert Leads Huntsman in S.C.
  • Polish prosecutor 'shoots self after news conference'
  • Jim Rome leaving ESPN. Bonus: Footage of Jim Rome getting attacked by Jim Everett & crying like a baby
  • Broncos, Tim Tebow stun Steelers in OT, win 29-23 in NFL playoffs
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Video: Remember 2008
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Beezow Doo-Doo Zopittybop-Bop-Bop faces weapon and drug charges
  • Video: Green Bay anchorman loves lamp
  • Video: Rodgers & Raji in the new Discount Double Check ad
  • Jim Rome: out of The Jungle and onto the (horse) farm
  • New IL Law Requires Photo ID To Buy Drain Cleaner
  • Fawn Cuddles Kitten, Hearts Explode
  • The priest who changed the course of history for the worse... by rescuing four-year-old Hitler from drowning in icy river
  • Get Fit or Get Fined: Web Service Offers to Charge You for Skipping the Gym
  • Fine proposed for botching US national anthem
  • Why Best Buy is Going out of Business...Gradually
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Edina boutique takes heat for trashing $4,000-plus gowns
  • Law Student Goes 'Homeless by Choice' Touts Value of Gym Club Membership
  • VIDEO: Snoop Dogg on 'The Price Is Right'
  • Flynn and Out
       [ 3 comments ]
  • Don't put Bielema on the firing line
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Your end of the season Vikings comment thread
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Mass. budget motel fights forfeiture by feds
  • Vikings scrutinize downtown Mpls. stadium site near basilica
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Kelly Clarkson criticized on Twitter after singer endorses Ron Paul for President 
  • Political Predictions for 2012
  • We're All Doing The Best We Can
  • Video Of Little Girl Getting Pissed Off About Pink Toys Will Make Your Heart Swell
  • The 10 best sports-related Hitler Reactions of 2011
  • Happy Endings on the housing crisis
  • Why You Just Got New York Times Spam
  • There Will Be No Friday This Week In Samoa
  • The Most Hipster State In The US
  • Online Merchants Home in on Imbibing Consumers
       [ 1 comment ]
  • On islamic fashion
       [ 1 comment ]
  • Sears as Lampert's 'Mismanaged Asset' Loses Customers to Macy's
       [ 1 comment ]
  • 5 social network predictions for 2012
  • Cheetah, chimp star of classic Tarzan movies, dies at 80
  • The Hottest Things on TV in 2011
  • Beer in cans: It's not just for Bud anymore
  • Seven Packers earn Pro Bowl selections
  • The Worst Angry Christmas Tweets In the World
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Minnesota cities try to hold back on rented housing
  • Why Iowa Shouldn't Vote First Anymore
  • Some Falcons Players Upset Drew Brees Went For The Record Last Night
  • We've Identified Jilted Packergirl
  • With its 'W' initiative, ESPN tries to solve the equation of serving women sports fans
       [ 2 comments ]
  • Owner surprised to find cat regularly catches bus
  • Charles Barkley: Skip Bayless Has Surpassed Peter Vecsey As The Biggest Jackass In The History Of Journalism
  • Handicapping the 2011 NFL MVP Race, 2.0

     

  • This is What it Looks Like When Doves Cry

       November 07, 2004

    All around my neighborhood, both the leaves and the ever-present Kerry/Edwards signs are falling. The liberals are as downcast as a typical November day in Wisconsin. And I'm so happy. I love that all the "Regime Change Begins at Home" and "War Is Not The Answer" sign people lost. I love that all the clever rhetoric in the world can't change the fact that their ideas were discounted by the majority of the American people.

    But, I don't expect Madison's liberals to just throw in the towel. Oh no, I expect them to come up with new, even more clever signs! In fact, some of them already have.

    I'm not sure what this sign is supposed to mean. Bush doesn't have a mandate in their house? In their yard? I don't think even the staunchest Republicans are claiming that. Although, if he did, I'm sure he'd insist they do some raking. Also note the oh-so-clever use of a dollar sign in Bush. Oh those intellectuals...


    It's nice to see that even local businesses are interested in alienating any customers that don't share their political beliefs. I'll remember this next time I'm looking for bike equipment. Note the use of "Allah". That shows that they are tolerant, you know.


    And look, some folks are already getting a head start on the 2008 campaign. They gotta make sure we stop Jeb and the evil Bush empire.


    This last one is my favorite. It's like they followed some lefty checklist: let's see, use of peace symbol-check, defacing the flag-check, use of irony in flying flag at half staff-check.

    So there you have it, mourning in Madison. Isn't it beautiful?


    Posted by at November 7, 2004 01:03 PM

        The trackback entry for this page is : http://www.inthehat.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/520

     

    Trackback Entries
      InTheBullpen.com linked with We’re Not Sorry

     


    Comments

    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Joe R. the Unabrewer at November 7, 2004 01:42 PM

    If Bush doesn't have a mandate there, does that mean they don't get a tax cut?

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: james at November 7, 2004 02:16 PM

    a coffee shop near me, foster bros, used to prominently display a kerry sign.

    because of the sign, i don't shop there anymore - i walk the extra block or two to starbucks.

    it's not because they supported kerry - im well aware that about half of the population did (and 90% of the DC population.) however, it is incredibly stupid to hang political signs on your business. it's like saying "f-you, customer with a different viewpoint!"

    the foster bros coffee people made the decision to put their political leanings before business, just like revolution cycles did in madison. for that reason, they've both lost my business.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: james at November 7, 2004 02:19 PM

    and while we're on the topic, i also STILL don't shop at Casey's General Store, (hq'd in iowa, i believe) b/c on 9/11 they made an orgainzation-wode decision to jack gas prices up to something like $8 a gallon. f-them, they'll never get money from me. i could run out of gas in front of a Casey's and I'd walk miles to another store and fill a gas can there.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Mike d at November 7, 2004 05:08 PM

    James,

    I hadn't heard about the Casey's General Store incident before. Could you please describe the incident in more detail? Why did they jack up the prices? Cashing in on disaster panic? How long did it last? What was the public reaction like?

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: james at November 7, 2004 05:24 PM

    Mike, on September 11th all Casey's jacked up their prices. Many smaller gas stations did the same thing, and it caused huge gas panicks. They did it capitalize on people's fears - people were afraid that this would be their last time to buy gas for a long time. People picketed the offending gas stations for a while, i remember one guy out in front of an Amoco by my house in Monona for more than a month afterwards, holding up a sign that said "this gas station raised prices on sept 11." it was effective, people stopped buying gas there and biz dropped at those stations. some store owners took out ads apologizing, or blaming employees for the action. as far as caseys, i dont remember the specifics, but i remember sending them an email telling them that in response i would never shop there again. and i won't. too bad people have such short memories.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: DougP at November 7, 2004 05:40 PM

    Casey's and a couple of other stations raised prices in Hays, KS on 9/11. I had to drive to Ellis, about 12 mi., and wait in line at a one pump station to get gas. I was almost on empty so I didn't really have a choice. It was a nice wait though, everyone knew what was up and kept a smile on their face. A few days later all the other stations were pointing fingers at each other claiming they were only matching so and so's price. Needless to say, I continued to buy gas in Ellis at the one pump station.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: democrat at November 7, 2004 05:51 PM

    The funniest is that a farmer down the street from my school hung out a Bush/Cheney sign before the election. A couple of weeks ago he went bankrupt because everyone in town boycotted his store.

    We are putting together a lefty cooperative to buy his farm and make it a community venture.

    That is the greatest outcome of this election!!!

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Zeke at November 7, 2004 06:11 PM

    You know those liberals scare me. I hope those that want to immigrate to Canada can do so.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Johnny at November 7, 2004 07:32 PM

    Ha ha democrat, that's really funny, was he a farmer or a shopkeeper? No problem if the store went bankrupt then, he'll still be able to work the farm, right?

    Next time you make something up try to make all the details consistent.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: PJ/Maryland at November 7, 2004 08:59 PM

    "This last one is my favorite. It's like they followed some lefty checklist: let's see, use of peace symbol-check, defacing the flag-check, use of irony in flying flag at half staff-check."

    Kris, you missed an item on your checklist: the flag is supposed to be upside-down!

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Bithead at November 7, 2004 09:39 PM

    "Revolution Cycles" is an outfit in far-leftist Madison, and is run by a guy by the name of Ali....

    Get the picture?

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: John Rogers at November 8, 2004 11:58 AM

    that was pretty funny.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: at November 8, 2004 12:44 PM

    yeah, the upside down flag (S.O.S.) should be there. If you're going to go lib, you gotta go for gold.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: dick at November 8, 2004 04:04 PM

    When I lived in Riverdale section of NYC, a restaurant in the neighborhood refused service to Rudy Giuliani because of his policies when he stopped after holding a neighborhood meeting. Some of the residents went out of their way to eat there. I did just the opposite. If it ain't good enough for Rudy, it ain't good enough for me. I don't know if they are still not serving him or not. They even put it in their advertising in the local throwaway paper. A@@holes!!

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Your Kerry-Votin' Big Sis at November 8, 2004 06:46 PM

    Obviously, many decisions are made for non-financial reasons. I wouldn't shop at Burlington Coat Factory if they were GIVING coats away. I would think, Kris, you'd admire Revolution Cycles' political commitment. It may also be a wise marketing decision - RC is competing in a local market in which the sentiments expressed are widely popular.

    This doesn't really fit with the topic, but I have a challenge for you. I was examining the numbers from Wisconsin, and find that approximately 143,627 people voted for Russ Feingold for Senator and then turned around and voted for Bush. That's right - they supported a senator who voted AGAINST the war in Iraq and AGAINST the Patriot Act, and then voted to keep Bush in office. So my question to you is -- WHY? I'd really to see some analysis.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at November 8, 2004 07:05 PM

    Margie,

    I'll answer you here in the comments.

    First: I can't believe you voted for Kerry. I thought you were supposed to vote your beliefs, not your fears?

    Second: Why in the world would I admire Revolution Cycles for their political commitment? Would I admire a business in 1930s Germany that pandered to anti-Jewish sentiment? Would I admire a business that pandered to anti-gay sentiment? Like James said, in this case, I don't object to their right to their political beliefs, I object to the big F-U to their customers who don't agree with them. And, when someone gives me the finger, I'm not inclined to find them courageous or whatever.

    Third: As for Feingold, I think I've read numerous times before that he always gets tons of crossover votes from Republicans. Hell, I voted for him before. Wisconsinites go for that "maverick" personality.

    In less shallow terms, the comparison between Feingold and Bush isn't perfect. They are, in essence, applying for two different jobs. Bush is applying to be the leader of the free world, and that position requires different qualities than being a US Senator does. Michels campaign was rather foolish to keep bringing up foreign policy. The Senate doesn't determine foreign policy. It's not in their job description.

    Also, I think some people who agree with Bush's foreign policy positions are not pro life, for example, so a vote for Feingold is a way to balance it out. The Wisconsin vote is actually a nice way to illustrate the media lie about this election being decided by "moral values". The Wisconsin vote is an example of the voters moderating the more extreme sides of each party by splitting their vote.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Your Bush-Votin' Little Bro at November 8, 2004 07:17 PM

    I too live in a district that voted for Bush and then turned around returned a Democrat to the house. One whose sole legislative claim is have changed the official names of two post offices. Oh, that and he plays guitar. All politics is local I think. This same house democrat has faced a series of lame republican candidates. It's sort of like Obey vs. Kevin "I was an Iranian hostage" Hermening again and again. I think its a good thing and it shows that voters are fully aware of what and who they are voting for and will reject bad candidates regardless of their label. You might note that voters in Oregon voted for Kerry and also for the gay marriage ban.

    As for the business and politics part, mixing the two publicly is stupid. You're unlikely to gain business and quite likely to lose some. I'm certain my bike shop owner voted for Kerry, but he keeps his politics quiet. I've also worked for a business that got involved politically, it alienated employees as well as potential cutomers.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at November 8, 2004 07:19 PM

    But I don't *have* a little brother...

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Your Bush-Votin' BIG Bro at November 8, 2004 07:23 PM

    Not directed at you, but to our Kerry-Votin' Big Sis, who we know would gladly trade her Kerry vote for one vote in the coaches poll.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at November 8, 2004 07:26 PM

    Ah...so true. But I'll happily settle for Bush in the White House and 4 Rose Bowls in 11 years ;-)

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: at November 8, 2004 10:11 PM

    Personally, I've gone out of my way to patronise businesses with pro- Dem signs. I remember a gallery with a Dean sign even 2 years ago that I stopped at in Savannah, GA ( a red state). Since we elite Liberals have all the cash, the businesses doing this picked the most profitable course of action.
    DavidR

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at November 8, 2004 10:27 PM

    Wait, I thought Republican oil barons had all the cash?

    You know, we're all entitled to patronize the businesses of our choice. And the commenter above and my sister can do so, but I'm not really interested in mixing politics with my bike shop, or dry cleaner or grocery store or anywhere else.

    I love politics, but politics do have a proper time and place.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Miguel at November 8, 2004 10:39 PM

    Amazing, really. I'm a Mexican in Mexico, and the divide is so big now, that the biggest sellers of matresses here, Dormimundo (Sleepworld) has a radio spot saying: Atenttion! George was reelected as President of the US! Mexicans won't be able to sleep well for the next four years!. That is REALLY stupid. It's already bickfiring on those idiots. This shows you that the fight is world-wide. We are living a very definitive time in history. May God bless us all.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: at November 8, 2004 10:59 PM

    I ride bike and race with a Mexican, a Uruguayan also. I hope all is well south of the border. I do construction, and work with a lot of Mexican nationals, and I can say you have nothing to worry about. Construction in a large part of this country would stop without you.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Kevin at November 8, 2004 11:09 PM

    If I lived near revolution cycles I'd go in and pick out a bunch of really expensive stuff, size it it, test ride it, accessorize it, get the sales guy(s) all excited about a big commission, and then "remember" the sign outside and walk away.

    But that's because I'm a heartless Republican bastard.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: JorgXMcKie at November 8, 2004 11:34 PM

    Let me get this straight. If 4 judges in MA say gay
    marriages are legal, the entire country is expected
    to go along. But if almost 60,000,000 Americans
    elect a president, large parts of Madison and other
    liberal redoubts can ignore it if they want?

    Come to think of it, I can't imagine a better
    explanation of why to vote against Democrats. They
    only expect other people to obey laws. The very
    definition of tyranny.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Your Kerry-Votin' Big Sis at November 9, 2004 08:35 AM

    "First: I can't believe you voted for Kerry. I thought you were supposed to vote your beliefs, not your fears?"

    I believe that it's wrong for American soldiers to die in the pursuit of non-existent weapons of mass destruction. I believe it's wrong for the president of the United States to lie about why he is sending this country to war. Those beliefs made it impossible for me to vote for George Bush. I believe in protecting the environment. I believe in gay rights. I believe this country HAS to do a better job for its least fortunate citizens. Now, granted, the imbecilic Democratic presidential campaign ignored those issues, but I'm confident that my vote for Kerry reflected my beliefs more closely than a vote for Bush would have.

    "Second: Why in the world would I admire Revolution Cycles for their political commitment? Would I admire a business in 1930s Germany that pandered to anti-Jewish sentiment?"

    I can't believe you wrote this. RC's marquee attacked no one but Bush/Cheney, and it was on the basis of their political actions. I don't want to hear you bitch the next time some idiot is carrying a "Bush = Hitler" sign.

    "The Wisconsin vote is an example of the voters moderating the more extreme sides of each party by splitting their vote."

    Hmmmm, I've never heard you admit before that Bush is an extremist.


     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: james at November 9, 2004 10:34 AM

    american soldiers are "dying," big sis, in pursuit of bringing freedom and democracy to the middle east. they are "dying" because sadaam the tyrant killed millions of his own people, and it's America's responsibility to stop that. Saddam is at threat to the stability of the entire world. remember, he invaded, raped, and pillaged kuwait in 1990. tyrants are nothing if not recidivist.

    no one "lied" about why people were being sent to war - if you believe that, then i have some ocean front property in arizona to sell you. the cia, the best intelligence gathering organization in the history of the world, believed that iraq had wmd. if that information was wrong, then it was wrong. personally, i dont think that it was. in either event, no one "lied."

    you seem to forget that our brave fighting men and women voluntarily joined the armed forces. it's not like they're being forced to fight for freedom around the world - they took an oath to protect the oppressed and to promote the American way of life.

    so you don't think that american soldiers should die for the freedom and liberation of others? fine, don't join the army. if you're drafted by the navy, move to canada or france, or any other french speaking nation that you may think is a better place. but remember, this nation was not built by people sticking their heads in the sand and pretending that freedom isnt worth fighting for. funny thing is that those people are the ones that end up benefiting, though.

    you bandy terms like "gay rights" around in your argument. what do you mean by "gay rights?" tell me, what "rights" don't gays have? can they not vote? can they not own property? you're using buzzwords designed by the democratic party to get people to equate "civil rights" with "gay rights." What does it even mean? was george bush trying to make it illegal to be gay or something? no? please, explain.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: M. Simon at November 9, 2004 11:57 AM

    When they say that Bush has no mandate there what they are saying is that there are no gay or bi males in the house.

    Now why you would want to advertise those facts is beyond me. Unless you were an anti-gay Bush supporter.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: M. Simon at November 9, 2004 12:03 PM

    Hope for a Suffering World

    Norm quotes some reports about Iran:

    Millions of Iranians expressed their satisfaction on the outcome of the US Presidential elections and George W. Bush's victory by calling and congratulating each other. Many were seen walking in the streets and shaking each others hands or showing a discre[e]t V sign.

    Then he goes on to ask the question of the century:

    One of the questions, then, that might usefully be asked on the liberal-left is why people struggling for democracy in their country, and others who were the victims of a genocidal assault in theirs, should hope for and be happy about the victory of a man who is so reviled by all 'right-thinking' - i.e. most left-thinking - folk. Just ponder this a little. Try and digest it fully. The victims of a terrible, murderous oppression in the Kurdish area of Iraq, and those now yearning for a democratic breakthrough against theocratic tyranny in Iran, do not look for solidarity and support to the massed ranks of the marching left, the 'peace' movement, as it flatters itself to be; no, they look to a right-wing Republican president.

    By your own lights, friends and comrades, is that not a truly extraordinary state of affairs? If it doesn't cause you some troubling doubts, will anything ever?

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: M. Simon at November 9, 2004 12:04 PM

    Here is the url since html doesn't work.

    http://powerandcontrol.blogspot.com/2004/11/hope-for-suffering-world.html

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Kerry-Votin' Big Sis at November 9, 2004 02:27 PM

    "american soldiers are "dying," big sis, in pursuit of bringing freedom and democracy to the middle east. they are "dying" because sadaam the tyrant killed millions of his own people, and it's America's responsibility to stop that."

    So when do we invade Burundi? Uganda? How about the Sudan, where it's estimated 70,000 people have been killed in the last year and a half? I don't argue that no good has come to Iraq because of the invasion, but that is NOT the reason the American people were given for this war.

    George Washington once said "There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard." I believe those words. We weren't persuaded to go to war to save Iraq. We were told it was in our own self-interest because Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction.

    "cia, the best intelligence gathering organization in the history of the world, believed that iraq had wmd. if that information was wrong, then it was wrong. personally, i dont think that it was. in either event, no one "lied."

    I agree - maybe the CIA was just wrong, and if I could vote against the director of the CIA, I would. However, that's not an option. The buck has to stop SOMEWHERE. If not at the President's desk - where?

    "so you don't think that american soldiers should die for the freedom and liberation of others? fine, don't join the army. if you're drafted by the navy, move to canada or france, or any other french speaking nation that you may think is a better place"

    Merci, James, pour votre conseil. I think the American people have the right to decide, through their elected representatives, when circumstances necessitate war. I think we have the right to make an INFORMED decision, and the propogation of falsehoods, whether due to intention or incompetence, denied us of that right.

    "you bandy terms like "gay rights" around in your argument. what do you mean by "gay rights?" tell me, what "rights" don't gays have? can they not vote? can they not own property? you're using buzzwords designed by the democratic party to get people to equate "civil rights" with "gay rights." What does it even mean? was george bush trying to make it illegal to be gay or something? no? please, explain."

    I'm happy to. The most basic right which gay and lesbian couples are fighting for, is, of course, the right to marry. Without that right, a gay couple cannot file a joint income tax return. They're not eligible for survivor Social Security benefits. In many locations they cannot be covered under each other's health insurance. Yes, they can hold property, but in this state, at least, not as survivorship marital property, which is by far the most tax-advantageous. They are not covered by marital property laws, so a "stay-at-home" member of a gay couple is denied the same protection that a "stay-at-home" husband or wife takes for granted. In some states they are not allowed to adopt children as a couple. This can lead to a situation in which someone who as acted as the primary caregiver for a child ends up with no legal right to even VISIT that child when the couple breaks up.


     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: james at November 9, 2004 03:43 PM

    Gays do have the right to marry. They have the exact same right as the rest of us - the right to marry someone of the opposite sex. No one is denying anyone that right, gay or otherwise. You're trying to create a right that doesn't exist, and has never existed - there is no such thing as a "right" to marry someone of the same sex. Homosexuals don't have that "right," and neither do heterosexuals.

    What you are really talking about is the creation of an entirely new right, not the recognition or legal preservation of an existing right. For that reason, it's inaccurate to term this "the most basic right." It surely isn't.

    Law may provide benefits for married couples, but to the extent that it denies those benefits to single or unmarried people, it does so not on the basis of sexuality but instead on the basis of situation. I'm similarly prevented from filing a joint return with my roommate. Sexuality has nothing to do with it.

    I just don't think that the issues that you listed above are anything close to being "civil rights" issues.

    You'll note, also, that GWB and John Kerry had the exact same position on gay marriage - neither supported same-sex marriage, but both supported civil unions, if instituted at a state or local level. (bush: http://tinyurl.com/62zks ) Kerry said that he would support a Mass. state ban on same-sex marriage. (kerry: http://tinyurl.com/3gcaj ) Bush says that he would support a federal constitutional amendment, while Kerry was non-committal on that, saying only that he thought that "it was a matter for the states." Wow, john kerry as a "states-rights" champion. Who would have thought? (yes, that was sarcastic)

    Given the absolute identity between the candidates positions on the issue, I don't understand why you think that a vote for kerry sends a message on the issue.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Your Bush-Votin' Big Bro at November 9, 2004 06:11 PM

    Thanks all for keeping the debate civil. Well Big Sis, I have to say I agree and disagree. I too am disappointed in the lack of environmental talk, budget deficit talk, and the less fortunate never became part of presidential campaign. Neither party has a leg to stand on regarding these issues IMHO.

    As for the gay rights issue, I think your wrong. Most if not all of the benefits bestowed upon the married are there to encourage child rearing and to address the then, and still today, norm of a man as bread winner with a wife taking care of a family and home full time. The rationale for surviors benefits is that the survivor would be otherwise occupied and in need of assistance. Exactly what would a gay person's spouse be doing that would necessitate assistance? Personally, I don't think gay couples should be allowed to adopt. I also don't think single people should be allowed to adopt. That is not say they could not provide a good environment. It is to say I think the odds of that environment occuring are significantly lessened.

    As to Iraq, I am I the only living human who remembers the debate swirling around the relevance of the UN and allowing its resolutions to be flaunted? I was in favor of the Iraq war precisely because I wanted to see the UN remain relevant. I think it is a flawed but necessary organization. It is worth pointing out that it is the fear of Iraq possessing WMD's that has led Iran to seek a nuclear weapon. The overthrow of Saddam and the reelection of Bush have have made a diplomatic solution in Iran possible, as witnessed by Iran's sudden willingness over the weekend to give up enriching nuclear fuel to develop a bomb. The election results have made it clear to them that US is in Iraq for the long haul, and that the administration will not be replaced by one that would give Iran more favorable terms.

    As to Washington's quote, I think it is more applicable to to those who seek more from our "allies" in Western Europe. Don't expect much. You should also note that the quote was made without the benefit of 200 years of hindsight. Would Washington make that quote today? Probably, but he would temper his remarks; and he would do so based on this history of this nation.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: 02hawk796 at November 10, 2004 05:52 AM

    Kris, did you change your name to try to hide from this big sis of yours?
    Is Margie really your big sis? I thought you were from WI originally - did your big sis move off to looneyland? It sounds like she's stuck in some large city/media market. Her CNN talking points need some revision. And her comment about "Bush = Hitler" contradicts the poorly formed point she was trying to make.
    Now I finally understand it. The "gay RIGHTS" they're always whining about is.... TAX ADVANTAGES!! Golly, near as I could tell, they're always lobbying towards increasing taxes - or maybe they just meant increase everybody elses's taxes to fund their victimhood.
    And sorry, but I don't agree that the purpose of adoption is to have a tug-o-war object when you "breakup". Marriage is meant to form a Union, not "more bennies when we breakup".

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at November 10, 2004 07:08 AM

    Yes, it really is my sister and, as such, I kinda feel like only the rest of the family (and possibly James) can rip on her.

    I think, 02hawk, that you're misrepresenting what she said. I don't agree with her on everything, but I think she presents a fairly rational argument for her positions.

    We Repubs have been whining for a week now about how the Dems are calling us stupid or racist or worse. And we've all read (and seen) so much of the looniness of the left. However, there are good, rational people who, after examining the issues, disagree with Repubs. I think we need to listen to these people and consider their points without resorting to name calling. If we can't do that then we're really no better than the DU folks.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Your Bush-Votin' Big Bro at November 10, 2004 08:08 AM

    Not trying to rip her. We agree on a great deal. Unfortunately, much of what we agree on has yet to be addressed by any party. Bush has an opportunity to do so, but it remains to be seen if he will. MAdison is hardly looney land. You can find anything you want there and could depict the city in just about any light you wish.

    To end my comments on the gay rights thing, are large part of the opposition to gay marriage IS based precisely on the realization that a gay marriage would potentially be extending financial benefits where they do not currently exist; establishing yet another entitlement. People want government out of their pockets.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at November 10, 2004 08:19 AM

    Doug,

    You misunderstand, of course *YOU* can rip on her ;-)

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Kerry-Votin' Big Sis at November 10, 2004 09:15 AM

    Thanks for the defense, Kris, but I really don't need it. I don't mind if hawk02 or anyone else "rips" on me - I think it's interesting. And for what it's worth, I thought hawk's comments were way more insulting to YOU than they were to me. As for other posters disagreeing with me - that's cool. How else do you get a good discussion?

    I know much of my perspective in regard to gay rights comes from working closely with an adoption agency that does not discriminate against gay and lesbian couples, and also with a Surrogacy Center that has gay men as a large client base. Gay and lesbian couples all over the country are trying to do the same thing heterosexual couples are doing - building a family and becoming full members of their communities. I just don't see what is so frightening about that.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: kris at November 10, 2004 10:00 AM

    I have absolutely no problem with gay couples adopting or getting surrogates. I actually have no problem with gay couples getting married, either. I think, as a society, we WANT people to get married, own property and have kids because it gives them a real stake in the future of the country. So, the more people who do that, the better - gay or straight.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: Frank at January 3, 2005 02:08 PM

    I voted for Kerry but I would never boycott a business just because it had a Bush-Cheney sticker on display. A bumper sticker does not mean "F-you" to people who feel differently. It means, "This is who I am supporting. If you know me and are undecided, maybe this can influence your decision or mabye you can ask me about the sticker and find out why I support this candidate." I can understand boycotting a business if their materials "cross the line" of simple political discussion and get over personal or nasty. But Kerry-Edwards or Bush-Cheney is just a polite form of political speech.

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: at January 5, 2005 12:47 PM

    "Farm, store, Indian casino, whatever! These dumb-ass Republican country clubbers won't know the difference!"

     
     
    #  March 7th, 2005 6:48 PM      Converted_Comment
    Converted comment: Posted by: rej at January 5, 2005 12:48 PM

    "Farm, store, Indian casino, whatever! These dumb-ass Republican country clubbers won't know the difference!"

     
     

     

     


      page rendered in 0.1311 seconds | ©2004, 2005 Dummocrats.com