View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Feb 19, 2020 2:54 pm



Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Same-sex marriage as "special rights"? 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Man... that election was rough... the two main choices we had were non-choices in most ways.

~€ther~

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:52 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:18 am
Posts: 407
Location: atop unknown Kadath, seeking the Ultimate Gate
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
it didn't get any better in 2004. all the Democrats could produce was Kerry? are you kidding? they might as well have nominated a banana peel. it was like they figured all they had to do was show up.
well, you know what, America chose to stick a fork up its ass for 4 more years knowing full well how bad it would hurt.

2008 - i think either candidate could have been a good president, but the problem is i think Obama would have been a better president in 2012 or 2016 and McCain would have been a better president in 2000 or 2004. neither person seemed right for the position at that point in their career in 2008, as McCain seemed to turn his back on a lot of things that made him "the maverick" and began more and more to ally himself with Bush in areas he had vehemently opposed in the past and Obama just seems a bit too idealistic and reckless at times.
they proved they had poor judgment by both picking awful vice presidential candidates and that just made it worse. i was a hell of a lot more impressed by Gonzalez than i was by either of those two.


Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:52 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
seasonfire wrote:
it didn't get any better in 2004. all the Democrats could produce was Kerry? are you kidding? they might as well have nominated a banana peel. it was like they figured all they had to do was show up.


Well, considering that, he really didn't lose by a lot. Either because Kerry was so good or, more likely, because Bush was so bad.

286 electoral votes to 251. For a war-president to win by such a small margin, especially to a candidate like Kerry who aside from having such a crappy personality was painted as the quintessential Massachusetts liberal, is quite remarkable.


Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:00 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
seasonfire wrote:
it didn't get any better in 2004. all the Democrats could produce was Kerry? are you kidding? they might as well have nominated a banana peel. it was like they figured all they had to do was show up.
well, you know what, America chose to stick a fork up its ass for 4 more years knowing full well how bad it would hurt.

2008 - i think either candidate could have been a good president, but the problem is i think Obama would have been a better president in 2012 or 2016 and McCain would have been a better president in 2000 or 2004. neither person seemed right for the position at that point in their career in 2008, as McCain seemed to turn his back on a lot of things that made him "the maverick" and began more and more to ally himself with Bush in areas he had vehemently opposed in the past and Obama just seems a bit too idealistic and reckless at times.
they proved they had poor judgment by both picking awful vice presidential candidates and that just made it worse. i was a hell of a lot more impressed by Gonzalez than i was by either of those two.


What's wrong with Biden?


Tue Mar 23, 2010 9:00 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Image

We do W, we do...

I've never seen this country so divided & afraid. If only we had a leader that spoke for the people & listened to them. *sigh*

W=winner


Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:57 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 10:54 am
Posts: 1273
Location: Minne-Hopeless
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
==tardboard===

We do W, we do...

I've never seen this country so divided & afraid. If only we had a leader that spoke for the people & listened to them. *sigh*

W=winner


... Not sure if serious....

Divided and afraid? If this is serious, where was your brain when the Patriot act was signed? The Abu Ghraib fiasco? WMD? Terror alerts? Years 2000-2009?

Divisive fearmongering was W's game. Cheney taught him. Rush, Hanity and the rest supported it. W only spoke for as many people that voted for McCain, not the nation as a whole.

_________________
I've shed the baggage of years in hell. Now, I breathe. I am home.


Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:11 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3128
Location: The center of the universe
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
I had an impending sense of doom every day during the W administration
It affected everything I did in my life
It was even worse than when we all thought the Russians were gonna bomb us
I was more afraid of my own president than the commies

_________________
I may be an asshole, but I'm not a fucking asshole
R!


Wed Mar 24, 2010 1:19 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
DaveS wrote:
Well, considering that, he really didn't lose by a lot. Either because Kerry was so good or, more likely, because Bush was so bad.



-or-

the 'choice' we were given wasn't much of a choice at all. People were divided over who the bigger douchebag was. Those two elections really showed me what is wrong with the 2 party system we're stuck in. :)

~€~

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:44 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 3:02 pm
Posts: 1893
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
seasonfire wrote:
it didn't get any better in 2004. all the Democrats could produce was Kerry? are you kidding? they might as well have nominated a banana peel. it was like they figured all they had to do was show up.
well, you know what, America chose to stick a fork up its ass for 4 more years knowing full well how bad it would hurt.

2008 - i think either candidate could have been a good president, but the problem is i think Obama would have been a better president in 2012 or 2016 and McCain would have been a better president in 2000 or 2004. neither person seemed right for the position at that point in their career in 2008, as McCain seemed to turn his back on a lot of things that made him "the maverick" and began more and more to ally himself with Bush in areas he had vehemently opposed in the past and Obama just seems a bit too idealistic and reckless at times.
they proved they had poor judgment by both picking awful vice presidential candidates and that just made it worse. i was a hell of a lot more impressed by Gonzalez than i was by either of those two.



You have some very good points in this post. One good sign is I think Obama is learning on the job very quickly. A few months ago I thought he looked very ineffective and more interested in bi-particenship, even when it was very clear the Reps weren't going to play that game, then being a good leader.

The fact that he got the health care bill through was very impressive.

_________________
DJ Nitrogen

Playlists


Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:15 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 3:02 pm
Posts: 1893
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
If only we had a leader that spoke for the people & listened to them. *sigh*


This point about "not listening to the people" (I'm surprised you didn't say ram it down our throats) is very interesting and it seems to be the main talking point for Reps the last few weeks/months when it comes to the health care bill.

I have a question for you, the entire basis of this point is based on polling. Now that the bill has passed the public opinion really seems to be shifting. More and more people are starting to like the bill (now that they learn what's actually in it.)

So the question is: If the polls show that most people like the bill in a few weeks will you, and republican leaders, admit they were wrong about the whole thing and it turns out people really do want it.

_________________
DJ Nitrogen

Playlists


Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:20 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 5056
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Actually, when polled about "The Health Care bill" the results are pretty evenly split. But when people are asked questions specifically pertaining to the elements within the bill, the results are overwhelmingly positive.


Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:39 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:18 am
Posts: 407
Location: atop unknown Kadath, seeking the Ultimate Gate
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
dj_craig wrote:
seasonfire wrote:
it didn't get any better in 2004. all the Democrats could produce was Kerry? are you kidding? they might as well have nominated a banana peel. it was like they figured all they had to do was show up.
well, you know what, America chose to stick a fork up its ass for 4 more years knowing full well how bad it would hurt.

2008 - i think either candidate could have been a good president, but the problem is i think Obama would have been a better president in 2012 or 2016 and McCain would have been a better president in 2000 or 2004. neither person seemed right for the position at that point in their career in 2008, as McCain seemed to turn his back on a lot of things that made him "the maverick" and began more and more to ally himself with Bush in areas he had vehemently opposed in the past and Obama just seems a bit too idealistic and reckless at times.
they proved they had poor judgment by both picking awful vice presidential candidates and that just made it worse. i was a hell of a lot more impressed by Gonzalez than i was by either of those two.



You have some very good points in this post. One good sign is I think Obama is learning on the job very quickly. A few months ago I thought he looked very ineffective and more interested in bi-particenship, even when it was very clear the Reps weren't going to play that game, then being a good leader.

The fact that he got the health care bill through was very impressive.


yeah, i was and still am very impressed by that. i have a feeling it is way watered-down from what it should be, but to push for that kind of an overhaul and somehow get enough people on board was damned impressive. that kind of reform doesn't happen easily.
i guess i am just kind of unsure about the man. i still think he is inexperienced, but the good thing is that he seems willing to assess the situation and think before he acts. not that someone can really prepare to be president, but i think you are right when you say that he seems to be learning on the job quickly.


Wed Mar 24, 2010 9:01 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:18 am
Posts: 407
Location: atop unknown Kadath, seeking the Ultimate Gate
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
DaveS wrote:
seasonfire wrote:
it didn't get any better in 2004. all the Democrats could produce was Kerry? are you kidding? they might as well have nominated a banana peel. it was like they figured all they had to do was show up.
well, you know what, America chose to stick a fork up its ass for 4 more years knowing full well how bad it would hurt.

2008 - i think either candidate could have been a good president, but the problem is i think Obama would have been a better president in 2012 or 2016 and McCain would have been a better president in 2000 or 2004. neither person seemed right for the position at that point in their career in 2008, as McCain seemed to turn his back on a lot of things that made him "the maverick" and began more and more to ally himself with Bush in areas he had vehemently opposed in the past and Obama just seems a bit too idealistic and reckless at times.
they proved they had poor judgment by both picking awful vice presidential candidates and that just made it worse. i was a hell of a lot more impressed by Gonzalez than i was by either of those two.


What's wrong with Biden?


i don't mean to equate the man with Palin if that's what you suggest, but the guy just seems to embody everything that's wrong with the Democratic party whereas Palin just seems to embody much of what's wrong in general.
Biden seems very much akin to Kerry to me, only smarmier.


Wed Mar 24, 2010 9:07 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
People have a pretty good understanding of what this HC bill is all about, the voters in Mass understood.
It's pretty obvious that the Democrats have only 1 chance at saving themselves, a massive new entitlement program that cant be paid for. So they forced it down our throats(yo dj!) :wink: with Bribes, kickbacks, reconciliation & deem & pass. Next up: get lost independant votes by legalizing illeagal imigrants.

I don't see the big shift except in 1 left leaning poll, I see the States up in arms, buisnesses folding shop, violence sweeping the country, taxes going up, continued broken promises by the "Hope & Change" joke.

How's that "Laser like focus on jobs" going?


Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:09 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
People have a pretty good understanding of what this HC bill is all about, the voters in Mass understood.
It's pretty obvious that the Democrats have only 1 chance at saving themselves, a massive new entitlement program that cant be paid for. So they forced it down our throats(yo dj!) :wink: with Bribes, kickbacks, reconciliation & deem & pass. Next up: get lost independant votes by legalizing illeagal imigrants.

I don't see the big shift except in 1 left leaning poll, I see the States up in arms, buisnesses folding shop, violence sweeping the country, taxes going up, continued broken promises by the "Hope & Change" joke.

How's that "Laser like focus on jobs" going?


Oh yeah, we'll have chaos in the streets because of the health care bill.

What are ya gonna do, throw tea on me?

"You know what really aggravazes me? It's them immigants. They
wants all the benefits of living in Springfield, but they ain't
even bother to learn themselves the language."

--Moe Sislack


Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:19 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
I might throw a used bag of Twinings "English Breakfast" at you. :P


Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:14 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
I might throw a used bag of Twinings "English Breakfast" at you. :P


Yeah, if it's recently used it might hurt a little.

Maybe I'll retaliate with a used French press.


Thu Mar 25, 2010 2:29 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
seasonfire wrote:
yeah, i was and still am very impressed by that. i have a feeling it is way watered-down from what it should be, but to push for that kind of an overhaul and somehow get enough people on board was damned impressive.



I'm not that impressed that they got it passed- they have a majority and are in total control. All they had to do was unify themselves, and that proved harder than they expected. I am glad that Obama reached across the aisle the way he said he would, but nobody reached back so that whole negotiation thing dropped like a turd pretty quick. Do you realize they didn't get a single vote from the other side?

That's why when the reach across (or reacharound, however you look at it) didn't work they had to resort to forcefully passing the thing with their power. I am ok with that, but I am not quite ready to pat the Dems on the back for bringing people together or anything. (and the Republican party is just a plain old mess right now so there isn't a lot of good things to say there either)

~€ther~

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Thu Mar 25, 2010 4:01 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
There was bipartisan unity... against it. 8)


Quote:
Maybe I'll retaliate with a used French press.


Don't you mean a freedom press? :evil:


Thu Mar 25, 2010 4:26 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:18 am
Posts: 407
Location: atop unknown Kadath, seeking the Ultimate Gate
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Ether wrote:
seasonfire wrote:
yeah, i was and still am very impressed by that. i have a feeling it is way watered-down from what it should be, but to push for that kind of an overhaul and somehow get enough people on board was damned impressive.



I'm not that impressed that they got it passed- they have a majority and are in total control. All they had to do was unify themselves, and that proved harder than they expected. I am glad that Obama reached across the aisle the way he said he would, but nobody reached back so that whole negotiation thing dropped like a turd pretty quick. Do you realize they didn't get a single vote from the other side?

That's why when the reach across (or reacharound, however you look at it) didn't work they had to resort to forcefully passing the thing with their power. I am ok with that, but I am not quite ready to pat the Dems on the back for bringing people together or anything. (and the Republican party is just a plain old mess right now so there isn't a lot of good things to say there either)

~€ther~


i'm not patting the Dems on the back. hell no! this is more for Obama. he somehow got a dishevelled party (that has been that way for years now by the way) to focus on something for a brief amount of time. i'm impressed because, considering the festering pile of ineffectivity the Democratic Party has become, somehow he made that happen. this also speaks volumes about what the Republicans have become (as you mentioned), given the fact that they mounted such a weak counteroffensive.
i'm glad he made an attempt to reach across the aisle, at least it showed he was willing to work with the Republicans even if they weren't willing to break ranks and work with him.
so, yes, i'm well aware of where the votes came from. after thinking about it a little more though, i've decided i'm less impressed because there is the significant likelihood that the Dems got this passed just because they could. Obama still deserves a ton of credit here, but I get the feeling that in a strange way the Republican's refusal to reach back across the aisle actually helped galvanize a unity in the Democratic Party more than Obama did - like it made them more resolute in the cause.


Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:41 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:18 am
Posts: 407
Location: atop unknown Kadath, seeking the Ultimate Gate
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
There was bipartisan unity... against it. 8)


this is very true, but as i mentioned in the above post, i think it kind of helped it pass in a way.
ever notice how it is much harder to pass something when you have people from both sides supporting something. it's like kindergarten in Congress, like you have people who say "well i'm not going to vote for such-and-such if so-and-so does". maybe not, but it certainly seems that way sometimes.
part of me thinks this might not have passed if there had been more involvement from the Republicans. there would have been more bickering and it may have actually derailed it.



and talk about derailed...wasn't this thread supposed to be about same-sex marriage?


Thu Mar 25, 2010 7:49 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
seasonfire wrote:
this is very true, but as i mentioned in the above post, i think it kind of helped it pass in a way.
ever notice how it is much harder to pass something when you have people from both sides supporting something. it's like kindergarten in Congress, like you have people who say "well i'm not going to vote for such-and-such if so-and-so does".



Hmmm, that's an interesting observation and you could very well be right about that. I bet if more Republicans were behind it there would be Democrats that would wonder why they are agreeing with Republicans (shocking!) and take another close look at it... possibly change their stance.

It's amazing how juvenille these crusty old ivy league lawyers can be.

~€~

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:06 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Ether wrote:
seasonfire wrote:
this is very true, but as i mentioned in the above post, i think it kind of helped it pass in a way.
ever notice how it is much harder to pass something when you have people from both sides supporting something. it's like kindergarten in Congress, like you have people who say "well i'm not going to vote for such-and-such if so-and-so does".



Hmmm, that's an interesting observation and you could very well be right about that. I bet if more Republicans were behind it there would be Democrats that would wonder why they are agreeing with Republicans (shocking!) and take another close look at it... possibly change their stance.

It's amazing how juvenille these crusty old ivy league lawyers can be.

~€~


Yes, but I think it's largely a reflection of the juvenility of the people who vote for them. Or that of the lobbyists that get people to vote for them.


Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:56 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
[quote="DaveS]Yes, but I think it's largely a reflection of the juvenility of the people who vote for them. Or that of the lobbyists that get people to vote for them.[/quote]


Hmm... I once thought that way, although lately I'm beginning to ponder it in a different light. I think the reason so many of these seemingly no-brainer problems like gay marriage are even issues at all is because our political system as morphed into one that no longer attracts the right kind of people to public service. What motivation would a truly honorable man (or woman) have to run for high office? The game is rigged, and you are more likely to have your good name drug through the mud than anything. If they can't get you, they focus on your friends and family- people you care about.

There have been a few folks who were just 'good' people trying to do the right thing, and I'm sure there still are some of them somewhere. Generally speaking those folks aren't invited to the dance. If you are without motives, then you are seen as someone who has no strings to pull and no leverage to be used. In other words, you're useless to those politicians with agendas.

Who is really going to champion gay marriage? Is there someone so noble that they will do it just because it's right? I doubt it. More likely there will be someone that does it because they get something in return for sticking their neck out. That's what we're stuck with- these people that dip their toe in the water and give the issue lip service but accomplish very little.

I hope I'm wrong

~€~

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:33 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:18 am
Posts: 407
Location: atop unknown Kadath, seeking the Ultimate Gate
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
you may hope you are wrong, but i have a feeling you are right on the money with that.
well said sir.


Fri Mar 26, 2010 7:48 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
You have a point, but I think it's the same one I was making. The reason such people get elected is because we vote for them, and the reason we vote for them is partially because they're the ones that get the campaign funds.

I'm not sure about the "morphing" though. You really think this is different from the way politicians have always been?


Fri Mar 26, 2010 8:06 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 10:54 am
Posts: 1273
Location: Minne-Hopeless
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
People have a pretty good understanding of what this HC bill is all about, the voters in Mass understood.
It's pretty obvious that the Democrats have only 1 chance at saving themselves, a massive new entitlement program that cant be paid for. So they forced it down our throats(yo dj!) :wink: with Bribes, kickbacks, reconciliation & deem & pass. Next up: get lost independant votes by legalizing illeagal imigrants.

I don't see the big shift except in 1 left leaning poll, I see the States up in arms, buisnesses folding shop, violence sweeping the country, taxes going up, continued broken promises by the "Hope & Change" joke.

How's that "Laser like focus on jobs" going?


Are you really W in disguise?

Here's the divisive fearmongering again. To respond to "legalizing illegal immigrants", you should know that ICE and other agencies have escalated deportations. I even know somone that was looked over during W's admin, but is up for deportation (waiting out the appealate process in Ramsey County Jail) because of Obama's push to remove non-citizen aggravated felons (and this one has been living with his RESIDENT/DOCUMENTED ALIEN parents in Roseville for over 20 years).

Businesses folded shop during this minor depression because of deregulation of banks and the financial industry by Reagan, GHW, Clinton and W. Period.

During this minor depression, crime FELL IN EVERY CATEGORY EXCEPT BLACK-ON-BLACK CRIME.

Promises kept by Obama so far: bipartisan cabinet, healthcare reform, lowered taxes for 95% of working Americans.

_________________
I've shed the baggage of years in hell. Now, I breathe. I am home.


Sat Mar 27, 2010 6:43 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
DaveS wrote:
I'm not sure about the "morphing" though. You really think this is different from the way politicians have always been?



Hmmm... I think politics has always been a tough, dirty biz... but what I mean is that there was a time in America when political office was more about public service than party service... or special interests service.... or self service. There were many early politicians who would be farmers or bankers or what have you, they'd get elected and do their public service for a while and then step aside and resume their farming or banking or whatever. That's a cool concept.

~€~

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:45 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Ether wrote:
DaveS wrote:
I'm not sure about the "morphing" though. You really think this is different from the way politicians have always been?



Hmmm... I think politics has always been a tough, dirty biz... but what I mean is that there was a time in America when political office was more about public service than party service... or special interests service.... or self service. There were many early politicians who would be farmers or bankers or what have you, they'd get elected and do their public service for a while and then step aside and resume their farming or banking or whatever. That's a cool concept.

~€~


True, there are more career politicans now than there were then, although there were always some...

But if the politician was a farmer or a banker, planning to go back to that after office, wouldn't that be just as much reason to suspect them of catering to special interests as if they're career politicans who are lobbied by farmers and bankers?


Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:50 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 10:54 am
Posts: 1273
Location: Minne-Hopeless
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Good points, Ether and Dave.

How many of those politicians of old actually left office like some do today to make more money as lobbyists? I'm sure it wasn't anywhere near as high as what happens today, but lobbying leaders is right up there with prostitution in age.

Hell, European exploration of the West began with some sailor lobbying a Queen for ships and crew with the promise of bringing back any valuables he found. Puritans lobbied for passage to the West for the purpose of colonization of lands that would get them out of the hair of the rest of Britain.
[/digress]

It's not a stretch to imagine corrupt governors early in our nation's history enticing friends in DC to "retire to the farm" only to be employed suggesting legislation to their former colleagues.

_________________
I've shed the baggage of years in hell. Now, I breathe. I am home.


Tue Mar 30, 2010 2:57 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Long Pig wrote:
Hell, European exploration of the West began with some sailor lobbying a Queen for ships and crew with the promise of bringing back any valuables he found. Puritans lobbied for passage to the West for the purpose of colonization of lands that would get them out of the hair of the rest of Britain.



Um... hmmm.. having a hard time disagreeing with that even though I really want to. You're essentially right and definitely making a good point. I guess the only place I could split hairs is with the idea of lobbying a monarchy. Monarchs aren't elected, so I'm not sure how much reprocussions there could be if she said no. Maybe it was less like lobbying and more like begging. I dunno. I got nothin'.

~€~

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:17 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Ether wrote:
Long Pig wrote:
Hell, European exploration of the West began with some sailor lobbying a Queen for ships and crew with the promise of bringing back any valuables he found. Puritans lobbied for passage to the West for the purpose of colonization of lands that would get them out of the hair of the rest of Britain.



Um... hmmm.. having a hard time disagreeing with that even though I really want to. You're essentially right and definitely making a good point. I guess the only place I could split hairs is with the idea of lobbying a monarchy. Monarchs aren't elected, so I'm not sure how much reprocussions there could be if she said no. Maybe it was less like lobbying and more like begging. I dunno. I got nothin'.

~€~


Maybe the cotton growers lobbying the government to keep slavery is a better example.


Tue Mar 30, 2010 9:13 pm
Profile

Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 10:54 am
Posts: 1273
Location: Minne-Hopeless
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Flipped a coin... this one goes here instead of healthcare... fits both.
Tim Pawlenty: queers ain't like the rest of us, and are incapable of loving someone, so f*ck 'em.

I'm sure we're all familiar with this one. It was obviously of no surprise that King Timmy vetoed the bill. The reason for the link: the comments at the end of the article.

Quote:
Part-time Pawlenty was too busy going fishing this weekend to meet with State legislators trying to beat a Sunday 12:00 a.m. deadline.

Other weekends, he’s too busy speaking at teatard rallies to do the State’s business.

Pawlenty respects others’ rights to the degree he supports the Democratic party. He’s a cheap shot artist who makes snide comments from a distance, but is too chickenshit to face them.

8 years of his governance has MN facing a $7 billion deficit.

If this is fiscal conservatism, give me liberal spending any day.


Quote:
This dork claims to be a “moderate?”

I smell a run for president in 2012 — which will fail…in the primaries.


Many more to be found.

_________________
I've shed the baggage of years in hell. Now, I breathe. I am home.


Tue May 18, 2010 9:42 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
People have a pretty good understanding of what this HC bill is all about, the voters in Mass understood.
How's that "Laser like focus on jobs" going?


Whoa Bump! Looks like the Obamacare rage lives on! Even the Democrat that won was anti Obamacare & pro gun! krazy


Wed May 19, 2010 10:41 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
*moved out of Occupy thread*

Quote:
DaveS wrote:
2fisted's incapable of commenting on social issues, probably because he agrees with the liberals on those, but that's not in character for his trolly trolly internet persona.


Sry I couldn't get back asap! Polishing up my coffee table.
"social issues" just arent as paramount importance to me. I obviously have my opinions but due to the poor communication quality of the internet those are things best left to be discussed personaly or verbaly (same goes for religion, & faith).
I'm more worried about how shitty our economy has been thx to this Presidents terrible job preformence, I think most Homosexuals are worried about that too dispite Obamas WEAK tortured support of Gay Marrige.

“at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.”
Still trying to have his cake & eat it too. Pathetic. even Dick Cheney supported it stronger than him. So on that note, yes zom I am with some conservitives on that issue. I've always believed no one should get "special rights", to think otherwise is a form of bigotry.
Now please answer my question.


Thu May 10, 2012 4:04 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
*moved out of Occupy thread*

Quote:
DaveS wrote:
2fisted's incapable of commenting on social issues, probably because he agrees with the liberals on those, but that's not in character for his trolly trolly internet persona.


Sry I couldn't get back asap! Polishing up my coffee table.
"social issues" just arent as paramount importance to me. I obviously have my opinions but due to the poor communication quality of the internet those are things best left to be discussed personaly or verbaly (same goes for religion, & faith).
I'm more worried about how shitty our economy has been thx to this Presidents terrible job preformence, I think most Homosexuals are worried about that too dispite Obamas WEAK tortured support of Gay Marrige.

“at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.”
Still trying to have his cake & eat it too. Pathetic. even Dick Cheney supported it stronger than him. So on that note, yes zom I am with some conservitives on that issue. I've always believed no one should get "special rights", to think otherwise is a form of bigotry.
Now please answer my question.


Well, the internet is certainly adequate for communicating "yes" or "no", and you won't even give that level of answers to these questions.

How the fuck can you say that that is having his cake and eating it too? He thinks same-sex couples should be able to get married! The cake is gone!

You're the one who can't commit; you're still not answering the question. Which conservatives are you with? Which position constitutes "special rights", allowing same-sex marriage or disallowing it? Which one is bigotry? (It's obvious to me which one it is, but who knows what you think, since you say you're "with some conservatives" on it.)

Which question are you referring to?

Oh, and if you think large amounts of gay people are going to vote for Romney over Obama after their respective recent statements, you're fuckin' nuts!


Thu May 10, 2012 4:35 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 4917
Location: S St Paul
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
“at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.”
Still trying to have his cake & eat it too. Pathetic.
That doesn't really seem like a "have his cake & eat it too" thing at all. More like the opposite of that.

He's already wildly unpopular with the neo-cons behind these stupid marriage-amendment bills, so he's got nothing to lose by "offending" them further. But his own party is bound to think more highly of him for expressing an opinion, even though it doesn't amount to anything more than expressing an opinion.


Thu May 10, 2012 6:35 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 5:52 pm
Posts: 3442
Location: minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
yeah, with my neo-con family, i could have even said something along the lines of "what, you're voting for the MORMON?" and they'd balk, but no more - this kicks the maybes into the nos. it is not a wise move politically.

_________________
thosquanta: the band!
http://www.thosquanta.com


Thu May 10, 2012 7:01 pm
Profile YIM WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 4917
Location: S St Paul
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
OMG, this morning on ... CNN I think? (I was just passing by the TV at Hardee's) ... they were broadcasting random people's pro/anti blog responses to Obama's "opinion".

One of them had a lot of blathering about Obama
"... making a mockery of our Founding Fathers and the Christian values they fought for"
(I'm paraphrasing from memory, but that was the gist of it).

Wow.

Gotta admire the bravery of someone who knows absolutely nothing about American history OR the New Testament, making themselves look like a complete idiot on national television.


Thu May 10, 2012 7:08 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
thosquanta wrote:
yeah, with my neo-con family, i could have even said something along the lines of "what, you're voting for the MORMON?" and they'd balk, but no more - this kicks the maybes into the nos. it is not a wise move politically.


You mean they would've preferred a Muslim to a Mormon?

How big exactly is that Venn Diagram intersection between people who think Mormons aren't Christian (enough) and people who admit Obama is a (mainstream) Christian?


Thu May 10, 2012 7:54 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
DaveS wrote:
Oh, and if you think large amounts of gay people are going to vote for Romney over Obama after their respective recent statements, you're fuckin' nuts!

Never said that, they prolly wont vote at all. It's pretty obvious that he said some words to loosen up some big campaign doner cash. But his clumsy confused message will prolly do as much harm. Blatant flip flop w/ a little divisiveness poured on top.

I'm waiting to see what his preacher of 20 years has to say?


Thu May 10, 2012 9:47 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
Never said that, they prolly wont vote at all. It's pretty obvious that he said some words to loosen up some big campaign doner cash. But his clumsy confused message will prolly do as much harm. Blatant flip flop w/ a little divisiveness poured on top.

I'm waiting to see what his preacher of 20 years has to say?


So Obama's going to lose to Romney on account of a) views on LGBT rights, and b) flip-flopping. Right.


Thu May 10, 2012 9:48 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
rskm1 wrote:
He's already wildly unpopular with the neo-cons behind these stupid marriage-amendment bills, so he's got nothing to lose by "offending" them further. But his own party is bound to think more highly of him for expressing an opinion, even though it doesn't amount to anything more than expressing an opinion.


I think it's fine that he's flip flopping an opinion, weather he believes it or not. He's got nothing to lose is correct, as a matter of fact he thinks anyone that disagrees with him is stupid! Even those that think marrige is supposed to mean 1 man + 1 woman.
Ho hum. His economy sucks, best change the subject, try to fire up his base.


Thu May 10, 2012 10:10 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
DaveS wrote:
So Obama's going to lose to Romney on account of a) views on LGBT rights, and b) flip-flopping. Right.

I think he will lose because he has proven to be a wet finger in the air Jimmy Carter. Chicago style.


Thu May 10, 2012 10:13 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
I think he will lose because he has proven to be a wet finger in the air Jimmy Carter. Chicago style.


You're entitled to think that. Don't bet too much money on it though.


Thu May 10, 2012 10:21 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3128
Location: The center of the universe
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
2fisted wrote:
Never said that, they prolly wont vote at all.


Gay people won't be voting in this election?
And you still don't understand how completely out of touch you are with reality
Gay people are at a point in history where they can feel their turn is next
It doesn't even matter if the president follows through or not
There's no erasing the fact that our president endorsed gay marriage
That is the proverbial peton hammered into the side of the mountain
It means that the rope is anchored here and we won't be going back down that way anymore

I'm not saying that homophobia will be banished forever when Obama wins (yes, I said when)
I'm saying that we have reached a point where most people view homophobia in the same light as racism
Sexism, on the other hand, will never go away

_________________
I may be an asshole, but I'm not a fucking asshole
R!


Sun May 13, 2012 10:44 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Misguided or not, when policy makers make decisions rooted in love and acceptance it is wonderful to see.

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Mon May 14, 2012 3:20 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:41 pm
Posts: 557
Location: Minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Rockula wrote:
I'm saying that we have reached a point where most people view homophobia in the same light as racism
Sexism, on the other hand, will never go away


You really think homophobia will go away before sexism? I'm not so sure. Women have gotten a lot closer to being President than openly gay people, although we'll see which actually gets there first.


Mon May 14, 2012 5:20 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 21, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 1768
Location: Twin Cities
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
I don't see homophobia going away any time soon. I know TONS of people who will NEVER accept gay people and are set in their ways. Many people view homosexuality as a mental illness... and because that makes sense of the issue to them they accept that mindset. They believe it is unnatural to be attracted to someone of the same gender and can not accept it because of that.

In contrast, everyone seems to agree that women exist naturally, and that people of different races exist naturally. They may not all agree that people of different genders and races are equal to one another, but they at least agree that it is normal/natural for that diversity to exist in the human race.

Women have been at the bottom end of the totem pole in terms of American history. Our society granted equality to black males before white females, after all. It will be interesting to see what the sexual preference dynamic does... A lot of people don't equate the struggle of GLBT people to the civil rights struggle or womens lib movements, so I'm not sure how this will shake out.

_________________
regards,

~€ᵀᴴᴲᴿ~



_______________________________________________________
____________________
[color=#FFFF00]________
€₸╠╣≡Ɽ
commercial graphic artist, singer, songwriter, multi-instrumentalist


BACK ALLEY: https://www.facebook.com/backalleysocial
CRUSH COLLECTIVE: http://www.facebook.com/crushmydesign


Tue May 15, 2012 12:51 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3269
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Why are conservatives so interested in what people do in the privacy of their own homes?
Again and again with the "moral" crap.

Less government... sure.



Quote:

In an unusual move, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R), his party’s nominee for governor, launched a new campaign website Wednesday highlighting his efforts to reinstate Virginia’s unconstitutional Crimes Against Nature law. The rule, which makes felons out of even consenting married couples who engage in oral or anal sex in the privacy of their own homes, was struck down by federal courts after Cuccinelli blocked efforts to bring it in line with the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas ruling.


Wed Jul 17, 2013 11:39 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2003 5:52 pm
Posts: 3442
Location: minneapolis
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
i like the dan savage quote "the right want government small enough that they can shove it up vaginas"

(i am paraphrasing.)

_________________
thosquanta: the band!
http://www.thosquanta.com


Wed Jul 17, 2013 11:51 am
Profile YIM WWW
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3269
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
No comment from the conservatives here?


Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:16 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3375
Location: ATBOG
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
never heard of him, link?

Any thoughts on Trayvons homophobia zom? Do you think Trayvon attacked google eyed, plump boyish Zimmerman cuz he thought he was gay?
I remember lots of guys following me around and staring at me at Shinders book store DT when I was a kid, often soon after I checked out Rifle Sport Games.
I never gave into their advances when I was 15 but I never was afraid of them either, & I certainly was not about to wait in the bushes and surprise attack any of them. Mby he got it from his parents? I bet they are for prop 8? :-?


Wed Jul 17, 2013 5:49 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 07, 2002 7:00 pm
Posts: 3269
Post Re: Same-sex marriage as "special rights"?
Hey dummy, address the issue.

zom-zom wrote:
Why are conservatives so interested in what people do in the privacy of their own homes?
Again and again with the "moral" crap.

Less government... sure.



Quote:

In an unusual move, Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R), his party’s nominee for governor, launched a new campaign website Wednesday highlighting his efforts to reinstate Virginia’s unconstitutional Crimes Against Nature law. The rule, which makes felons out of even consenting married couples who engage in oral or anal sex in the privacy of their own homes, was struck down by federal courts after Cuccinelli blocked efforts to bring it in line with the Supreme Court’s 2003 Lawrence v. Texas ruling.


Wed Jul 17, 2013 5:57 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.