Super: Co-sponsors of Federal Marriage Amendment are Larry Craig and David Vitter

posted at 4:30 pm on June 27, 2008 by Allahpundit

I don’t support the FMA either in principle or as a matter of federalism, but is it too much to ask that Mitch McConnell and the rest of the leadership at least try to police the sponsorship of these things so that they don’t end up as fodder for late-night talk show monologues? This is like letting Murtha sponsor an ethics bill. You’re simply begging for ridicule.

If you’re wondering why Maverick, who needs the cred with evangelicals, isn’t also a co-sponsor, here’s your answer.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Ha! You can’t make that up. Unreal.

I don’t support FMA on principle, either.

Spirit of 1776 on June 27, 2008 at 4:32 PM

I LMAO for a solid minute after reading the headline. Then the sheer stupidity that no one actually realized the problem with this to begin with hit me as depressing.

amerpundit on June 27, 2008 at 4:34 PM

I’d think this was a bad joke if there hadn’t been so many other Republican acts of extreme stupidity over the years. Although you’ve got to admit, they’ve really outdone themselves this time.

thirteen28 on June 27, 2008 at 4:35 PM

Federal Marriage Amendment

The law ends at the bathroom door.

Kini on June 27, 2008 at 4:37 PM

So I take it Criag has taken a stance on FMA. A wide stance. (rimshot)

carbon_footprint on June 27, 2008 at 4:37 PM

Republicans continue to work hard at looking like morons.

lorien1973 on June 27, 2008 at 4:37 PM

I thought it was a joke. Good grief!

OneGyT on June 27, 2008 at 4:38 PM

Republicans continue to work hard at looking like morons.

lorien1973 on June 27, 2008 at 4:37 PM

While Democrats do it with little effort.

carbon_footprint on June 27, 2008 at 4:38 PM

Are they just f*cking with us now? I mean seriously. Am I going to turn around at some point to see all of our politicians laughing and yelling “YOU’RE ON CANDID CAMERA!!!”

Its really starting to feel like someone is playing some sort of cruel joke on us right now.

Zetterson on June 27, 2008 at 4:39 PM

He was tapping in Morse code his initial plans for FMA.

Mormon Doc on June 27, 2008 at 4:41 PM

It’s almost as bad as if they sent McCain out to sponsor campaign reform legislation.

misterpeasea on June 27, 2008 at 4:42 PM

I honestly thought this was going to be an Onion story.

Slublog on June 27, 2008 at 4:42 PM

Ha! You can’t make that up. Unreal.

Spirit of 1776 on June 27, 2008 at 4:32 PM

Seriously. If only we could add Spizter to complete it.

Esthier on June 27, 2008 at 4:43 PM

Bizarro Congress.

VolMagic on June 27, 2008 at 4:44 PM

This is like having Barney Frank sponsor a bill against prostitution. Sometimes the jokes just write themselves.

Vic on June 27, 2008 at 4:45 PM

We need to just completely replace Republicans in the legislature. They’re just a lost cause.

DaveS on June 27, 2008 at 4:45 PM

thought it was a bad joke. Good grief!

OneGyT on June 27, 2008 at 4:38 PM

Indeed. (insert and emphasis mine.)

IrishEyes on June 27, 2008 at 4:47 PM

Are they signing the bill in a bathroom stall?
Do you know how hard it is for the Republicans to look this stupid, it is an art form.
Like putting Jefferson in charge of banking…or Obama running for president…

right2bright on June 27, 2008 at 4:48 PM

DaveS on June 27, 2008 at 4:45 PM

And who’d run? Apparently, this is the best the republicans can do. They can’t even get anyone to run in some states.

lorien1973 on June 27, 2008 at 4:50 PM

*facepalm*

FMA is dumb as hell and just wrong, BTW.

doubleplusundead on June 27, 2008 at 4:51 PM

If you’re wondering why Maverick, who needs the cred with evangelicals, isn’t also a co-sponsor, here’s your answer.

Yeah but he said that stuff two years ago. You can’t honestly expect his answer or the reasoning behind his answer to be the same as it was way back then. He’s a Republicrat after all.

Benaiah on June 27, 2008 at 4:52 PM

I thought the FMA was absurd enough…but with sponsors like this…

JetBoy on June 27, 2008 at 4:55 PM

With Senate sponsors like these, too bad they don’t have Mark Foley to sponsor it in the House. Where’s Eliot Spitzer when you need him? /sarc off

Steve Z on June 27, 2008 at 4:59 PM

lorien1973 on June 27, 2008 at 4:50 PM

Yes, even over 100 years ago De Tocqueville was pointing out that the people who want to run for office are usually those least qualified to do so.

So it’s nice to know that while some things change, some things stay exactly the same.

apollyonbob on June 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Maybe Craig could work on protecting the sanctity of his own marriage.

dedalus on June 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Of course Craig is against gay marriage. He doesn’t want his dates to be taken off the market when they get married.

Hollowpoint on June 27, 2008 at 5:06 PM

Maybe Craig could work on protecting the sanctity of his own marriage.

dedalus on June 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Thread ovah, you win!

doubleplusundead on June 27, 2008 at 5:07 PM

Classic, and that picture of ol larry craig is priceless.

Squid Shark on June 27, 2008 at 5:08 PM

Of course Craig is against gay marriage. He doesn’t want his dates to be taken off the market when they get married.

Hollowpoint on June 27, 2008 at 5:06 PM

heh!

Zetterson on June 27, 2008 at 5:09 PM

If you’re wondering why Maverick, who needs the cred with evangelicals, isn’t also a co-sponsor, here’s your answer.

Yeah, but after CA changed it’s law, NY’s Governor said the state is somehow obligated to recognize those marriages. That means de-facto gay marriage in NY for couples who wed in CA. With NJ on the verge, we would have gay marriage here without any change in our laws.

So McCain’s notions about federalism sound simple, but aren’t so in practice. Even if we get rid of the governor, damage is done.

JiangxiDad on June 27, 2008 at 5:12 PM

Who’s in charge over there? Are they the same mopes who are in charge of the Illinois GOP?

JAW on June 27, 2008 at 5:21 PM

It shows you just how stupid the core of the republican part has become.

paulsur on June 27, 2008 at 5:24 PM

What a brilliant strategy. Let’s let Vitter and Craig write th FMA to show they are reformed.

GROAN!

GogglesPisano on June 27, 2008 at 5:24 PM

Oy. major dad and I were at this year’s Krewe de Vieux parade (traditionally the first of the season and no motorized floats), themed “The Magical Misery Tour”. Dressed in red flipped pigtail wigs, they danced and sang “David Vitter’s Lonely Whores Club Band” in front of a hand-made “Eat at Wendy’s*/Family Values Meal” float. A vicious, VICIOUS, WELL DESERVED and utterly hilarious skewering.

*The ‘Wendy’ referred to is, of course, NOT Mrs. Wendy Vitter, but New Orleans prostitute
WENDY Cortez, who is also intimately aquainted with the senator.

Perfect guy to sponsor a marriage amendment of any sort.

tree hugging sister on June 27, 2008 at 5:25 PM

I would think Craig would stall on co-sponsoring this.

Maquis on June 27, 2008 at 5:35 PM

A Marriage should be strictly between one man, one woman, some hookers and the guy in the next stall!

Kasper Hauser on June 27, 2008 at 5:42 PM

Super: Co-sponsors of Federal Marriage Amendment are Larry Craig and David Vitter

(((( SIGH ))))

byteshredder on June 27, 2008 at 5:44 PM

Maybe the Republicans want the FMA to be a big joke so it won’t pass.

They feel they have to run it because of the base, but they don’t actually care about it, so they attach tons of baggage to it right out of the gate, making it a giant joke and even more impossible to pass.

JadeNYU on June 27, 2008 at 5:57 PM

JadeNYU on June 27, 2008 at 5:57 PM

I have 2 comments in moderation that functionally prove that point with direct quotes from McConnell from 2000, regarding the demise of the flag desecration amendment:

‘”We must curb this reflexive practice of attempting to cure each and every political and social ill of our nation by tampering with the Constitution,” said Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky).’

spmat on June 27, 2008 at 6:03 PM

There ya go. It was deliberate, and we let them off the hook too easily by assuming they’re just stupid.

NellE on June 27, 2008 at 6:07 PM

I know your limited intellect would not understand why homosexuals would support only heterosexual marriage, but its quite common. Even homosexuals know that their lifestyle is not good for society. But your jackassery at mocking these people explains a lot about your morals. You stay classy AP.

Andy in Agoura Hills on June 27, 2008 at 6:09 PM

The gang that can’t shoot straight.

a capella on June 27, 2008 at 6:14 PM

Oh good lord. Can’t the GOP do anything right?

CP on June 27, 2008 at 6:17 PM

“The gang that can’t shoot straight.

a capella on June 27, 2008 at 6:14 PM”

Vitter shoots straight, but Craig apparently doesn’t…..

jim m on June 27, 2008 at 6:33 PM

All I know is Larry Craig has forced me to turn my iPod off before I head in to the bathroom.

Okay, I don’t actually own an iPod, and I totally ripped that joke off (I think from someone on Red Eye, I’m not sure).

Regardless, it’s good advice for anyone. A lot of travelers like to fly with their iPods, but when you step in to the airport bathroom. Especially if you’re listening to something like Charlie Daniels’ “Devil Went Down to Georgia”. Who knows what you might get in return for that much rapid foot tapping. Would it appear as desperation to people who are a little “Craigish” or would it possibly signal an invite to a stall orgy?

RightWinged on June 27, 2008 at 6:43 PM

…is it too much to ask that Mitch McConnell and the rest of the leadership at least try to police the sponsorship of these things…?

Palomino!

My collie says:

**shrug** I guess if it works for Pelosi in the House, it’s worth a try.

CyberCipher on June 27, 2008 at 7:11 PM

Are they just f*cking with us now? I mean seriously. It’s really starting to feel like someone is playing some sort of cruel joke on us right now.

Zetterson on June 27, 2008 at 4:39 PM

You read this and you want to put a Bob Barr sign in your front yard, or Ralph Nader or something. Is it really this difficult to avoid looking like a retarded a$$hole when you’re a Senator?

Jaibones on June 27, 2008 at 7:19 PM

I would think Craig would stall on co-sponsoring this.

Maquis on June 27, 2008 at 5:35 PM

You would also think Larry Craig would not walk into an airport bathroom, looking for an anonymous man to suck his schwanz. Wouldn’t you?

Jaibones on June 27, 2008 at 7:20 PM

What strikes me here is that I’m in complete agreement with McCain. I didn’t think he could do it, but he may have, with his speech on the senate floor about this, won my vote.

If there is an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the most it should say is that no state should be required to recognize any particular marriage, from another state, it doesn’t, itself, offer.

Jens on June 27, 2008 at 7:20 PM

I would think Craig would stall on co-sponsoring this.

Maquis on June 27, 2008 at 5:35 PM

You would also think Larry Craig would not walk into an airport bathroom, looking for an anonymous man to suck his schwanz. Wouldn’t you?

I think he was making a play on the word “stall.” Just a guess.

Jim Treacher on June 27, 2008 at 7:44 PM

This is what happens when you have no leaders.

Wade on June 27, 2008 at 7:47 PM

What in the hell is wrong with these jackass republican leaders that they would allow that JOKE who picks up dudes in bathroom stalls to co-sponsor this bill.

Larry Craig should be SHUNNED by the republicans. They should refuse to even talk to him in the hallways so maybe the embarrassment will leave on his own.

Are these people ALL brain dead?

Roger Waters on June 27, 2008 at 7:58 PM

I don’t support the FMA either

Then you support at least 50 different definitions of marriage, from homosexual marriage (CA & Mass.) to polygamy (Utah) to allowing child brides where there are high Muslim populations (per the MEMRI video on HA a few days ago).

jgapinoy on June 27, 2008 at 9:28 PM

That story…well, it’s–
It’s like Bill C. & Ted K. speaking for women’s rights.
It’s like Robert B., Jesse J., & Al S. speaking against racism.
It’s like anti-war psychos saying they support the troops.
It’s like Obama saying he’s always been a big Second Amendment guy.

jgapinoy on June 27, 2008 at 9:33 PM

Four years ago, I was so proud to be a Republican and defend the party on every issue.

But the bozos who we’ve put into office prove time and time again how completely incompetent, and frankly, stupid, they are.

Unbelievable.

bigred on June 27, 2008 at 9:59 PM

I would think Craig would stall on co-sponsoring this.

Maquis on June 27, 2008 at 5:35 PM

You would also think Larry Craig would not walk into an airport bathroom, looking for an anonymous man to suck his schwanz. Wouldn’t you?

I think he was making a play on the word “stall.” Just a guess.

Jim Treacher on June 27, 2008 at 7:44 PM

Returning a bit late to clarify my lame joke, but yes, this was a “stall” joke, as were so many others here, but looks like mine got taken wrong.

Maquis on June 27, 2008 at 11:32 PM

I got the joke a little late. Good one.

Maybe Craig could work on protecting the sanctity of his own marriage stall.

dedalus on June 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Fair enough?

Jaibones on June 27, 2008 at 11:41 PM

I like McCain’s faux federalist position. “State-level bigotry over federal-level bigotry, until state-level bigotry is ruled to be unconstitutional on the state level — and then to hell with federalism, let’s shoehorn bigotry into the U.S. Constitution.”

Mark Jaquith on June 28, 2008 at 2:01 AM

Holy crap, check out this circular pandering:

Mr. President, I believe that the institution of marriage can serve its public purposes only when it is understood as being a union between one man and one woman. It is this understanding that offers public reinforcement to the vital and unique roles played by mothers and fathers in the raising of their children. It is this understanding that offers a foundation for principled objections to those who would pursue the imprudent agenda of dismantling an institution that has served us well, and replacing it with newer and more flexible understandings that are of questionable public value.

So, the belief that marriage is just for heterosexuals offers a foundation for objecting to the belief that marriage is not just for heterosexuals. Just like my belief that McCain is a flip-flopping big-government tool offers a foundation for objecting to the belief that McCain is not a flip-flopping big-government tool. Strong stuff.

Second, “the institution of marriage can serve its public purposes” ? How f-ing creepy is this? “I promise to be true to you, until death do us part, or until our marriage stops serving its public purpose.” Apparently marriage isn’t just between a man and a woman, it’s between a man, a woman, and the government. McCain seems to be arguing that one reason for objecting to gay marriage is that it doesn’t serve any “public value.” Sounds like a “liberal” with that lefty “state over the individual” B.S.

Mark Jaquith on June 28, 2008 at 2:19 AM

Nice job Republican party! Keep it up! Gas at $5 dollars, the stock market is in the tank and you guys keep making fools out of yourselves! Don’t take it to the Democrats on important issues…

sabbott on June 28, 2008 at 7:33 AM

Love those “family values” these guys represent! The essence of the hypochristian: Do like I say, not as I do. And how did the (hypo)Christian Coalition rate Larry? A+

DanKenton on June 28, 2008 at 11:25 AM

“I don’t support the FMA either”

Then you support at least 50 different definitions of marriage, from homosexual marriage (CA & Mass.) to polygamy (Utah) to allowing child brides where there are high Muslim populations (per the MEMRI video on HA a few days ago).

If only it were that clean! Instead, we’ll have 50 different state supreme court oligarchies deciding what’s good for the citenzry.

I thought that an amendment was a bad idea until the California supremes decided to interfere recently. Now I think an amendment might be the only way to rein such justices in.

Kensington on June 28, 2008 at 12:31 PM

larry craig should have dismissed himself..and since he did not have the smarts to do it, the rnc should have. Dumbasses. Only the die hard republicans stand up for this sicko. After hearing and viewing this poor police man that caught this peckerhead, he’s guilty as sin. I don’t need a jury to tell me.

diaphanous on June 29, 2008 at 5:35 AM