“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.

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.

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

dedalus on June 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM

Fair enough?

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.

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

Unbelievable.

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).

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?

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.

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?

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?

…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.

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?

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

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

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).’