Quotes of the day
posted at 10:00 pm on February 20, 2009 by Allahpundit
“In case you have forgotten, we are a government of the People, by the People, and for the People. He was not elected serve his personal interests. I personally believe that instead of sending e-mails full of threats and hateful words you should take his example to heart and congratulate him on being a legislator who cares more about what the People of his district want than what he may want personally.”
*
“I think some of the gay activists will be upset with me for this, but sometimes I think an agenda is pushed so far and so fast that people have no alternative but to push back… And I think that sometimes you have to move slowly.”
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
Comment pages: 1 2 3 … 5 Next »
Too many mental images.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:05 PM
If only the Homosexuals were on board for Prop. 187 with activism like this, the rest of us had to go back to work ………
………. in the mean time, spend your money and waste your time.
Seven Percent Solution on February 20, 2009 at 10:07 PM
I certainly hope that he is not physically attacked by Fundamentally Active Gay terrorists based on their marriage beliefs
mindhacker on February 20, 2009 at 10:09 PM
I am tired of the gay/lesbian thing being thrown in our faces. I shouldn’t have to answer questions from my young children about this kind of thing.
TXMomof3 on February 20, 2009 at 10:10 PM
Too many mental images.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:05 PM
Ok it’s Friday night and I am obviously too fatigued, but all I could think of after this was that Pointer Sister’s tune “I want a man with a slow hand” – argh!
catlady on February 20, 2009 at 10:10 PM
Wow. Some of those comments are just brutal. Guess it is ok to be gay as long as you are a Democrat.
Believe it or not, you can be gay and not necessarily for (or even against) the gay marriage amendment. I have a couple of friends like this. They aren’t so much for calling their unions “marriage” as much as they want the rights that come with those unions (the same platform all four candidates ran on this past election season.)
XWing5 on February 20, 2009 at 10:12 PM
Your post should have come with a mental image content warning.
moxie_neanderthal on February 20, 2009 at 10:12 PM
I meant the comments on that website, not this one (just meant to throw that in there)
XWing5 on February 20, 2009 at 10:13 PM
Yes, you should. I hope that one day you are forced by peers (not by the government) to finally start treating gays as normal people (which they are) and teach your kids to do the same.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:13 PM
Now that I have that off my fur, as it were –
I like this guy’s attitude. Good for him. He is representing his constituency the way they have directed him to. That is really the point he is trying to make. Good for him to have the courage to do so, and what a sad commentary on our current state of affairs that we have to congratulate people for doing what is right.
catlady on February 20, 2009 at 10:14 PM
I think most people do treat teh gays as “normal people”. Believe me, I should know. At least this lets me know I’m not the only one who receives hate and vitriol almost on a daily basis from the Left.
SouthernGent on February 20, 2009 at 10:16 PM
Unlike a certain fellow named Specter. Not that is someone to be embarassed about.
XWing5 on February 20, 2009 at 10:17 PM
Not=Now
XWing5 on February 20, 2009 at 10:18 PM
Ha. ftw
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 10:20 PM
Yes, most people do. I’ve never tried to claim I’m somehow the only one enlightened here. But TXMomof3 clearly isn’t one of them.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:20 PM
You forgot the phrase “constructive dialog”
moxie_neanderthal on February 20, 2009 at 10:22 PM
forced huh? sounds like these ‘peers’ of yours are wearing starched brown shirts.
and no they’re not ‘normal’. what they do, their CHOICE is perverse…and unhealthy. but then people are cowards for not telling the truth about the lifestyle…aren’t they?
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:22 PM
yeah you’re a legend in your own mind…
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:23 PM
Democrats only has any use for the Gay and Lesbian community during elections. Otherwise the only Democrats that care about Gays are they Gay activists, the rest of the Democrats don’t care about them. I mean how did Prop 8 get passed again? Oh yeah by a huge majority of Black and Hispanic Democrats.
Gays need to realize that they would do better with the Libertarians or the Fiscal Conservative Republicans.
Obama doesn’t believe in Gay rights, yet they still voted for him. Ha
Zombiehero on February 20, 2009 at 10:24 PM
I think you’re the one who’s sick here. And yes, peer pressure is a bitch. You can demonize innocent people but you’ll pay the price. It’s only fair.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM
Tru dat.
It’s hard enough being a gay Republican…a lot of gays can’t understand how I can be a Republican, and a lot of Republicans, especially the Evangelicals, don’t understand or accept the gay aspect.
Not quite welcome fully on either side.
Frustrating.
JetBoy on February 20, 2009 at 10:30 PM
I’m with TXMomof3 all the way on this one. And radiofreevillage, you should be ashamed of yourself for your hateful response to a responsible mother. Leave the Village People act at home.
BuckeyeSam on February 20, 2009 at 10:31 PM
This is, of course, true. DMA also wasn’t signed by a Republican. However, the Republican Party as a whole certainly wouldn’t help gays anymore than they are “helped” by the Democrats.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:32 PM
and no they’re not ‘normal’. what they do, their CHOICE is perverse…and unhealthy. but then people are cowards for not telling the truth about the lifestyle…aren’t they?
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:22 PM
Uh, time out right there. It is NOT my duty to run out and tell whomever that their lifestyle is “wrong”. We cannot change a person’s heart or convictions. Won’t happen in this lifetime. The ONLY way someone will change their ideas is if the Holy Spirit convicts them of it. GOD is the only one who truly can bring about real change in a person. (My belief – I understand not all share this)
I have also seen WAY TOO MANY times some religious holy rollers try to pressure people into giving up lifestyle choices through some pretty scary tactics, and it make me sick!! If I truly care about a friend and they are engaging in something that is against my convictions I need to be praying for them. Doesn’t mean I condone their actions, but it God’s place to tell them to change, not mine. They will have to reap the consequences of their life just like I will, just like everyone will.
PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY – what a concept.
catlady on February 20, 2009 at 10:32 PM
When you get a minute would you pop over to the headline archives to the Noonan thread?
Cindy Munford on February 20, 2009 at 10:33 PM
So you like to do people with the same plumbing as you. Good for you.
You also have per capita incomes 50% higher than everyone else in the United States. You make up a disproportionate percentage of positions of responsibility in companies around the country. You have more power, more money and more privileges than anyone else in the nation.
And yet you cannot “marry.”
Right. That’s discrimination. How I weep for the future.
spmat on February 20, 2009 at 10:33 PM
and why should the republicans, or anyone who loves freedom, help the gays impose their agenda of ‘hate crimes’ ie thought crimes..and silencing any who dare disagree with them??
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:33 PM
Help them what?
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 10:35 PM
Here’s an idea:
Let’s re-activate the US Army’s Rainbow Division. Fill it up with didn’t ask/didn’t tell soldiers, and then train them like no other unit ever before. Once they’re ready and running like a well-lubricated
condommachine, let’s use them to invade Iran.Just imagine the headlines:
Mullahs get reamed by Gay Squad
Fields of Jihadi’s flooded by Dykes
BobMbx on February 20, 2009 at 10:35 PM
No, she teaches her kids hate. There’s only so much a society can do. After all it’s her kids, and I certainly wouldn’t condone any kind of forced intrusion. However, she should be treated as a racist or someone similar. Freedom from government, which I support, doesn’t mean freedom from other people. She thinks she has a right to make other people second-class citizens. I don’t think gays and other people sympathizing with them should be first to be asked for constraint.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:35 PM
Advance their status to the full equality with straight people.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:36 PM
I am confused here… So is being gay kind of like being black, or being jewish? I mean, is this a protected element of our society now? The fact of the matter is that whether you are gay or a straight, I don’t want to know what goes on in your bedroom!
fumpbump on February 20, 2009 at 10:36 PM
uh did you miss the context? this person wants that mother to teach their children about the gay lifestyle…so lets have them tell the truth…the whole truth….you don’t have a problem with that now do ya??
oh yeah christians are out there trying to pass laws forcing gays to accept christianity, or face criminal and civil sanctions…
give me a break….
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:37 PM
You kind of missed the point, and that is why so few gains have been made for the gay and lesbian community. Early on, President Bush was ready and willing to sign for domestic partnerships, which would have lead to legalization of gay marriage. America seemed okay with this (we loved Will and Grace) until Rosie O’Donnell and other nut jobs started screaming like idiots, sucking face for the news cameras, and protesting in assless chaps.
It is usually the nuts from any group that hurt a cause. It wasn’t the mormons or extreme evangelicals that shot down these measures. There are a lot of so-called progressive mommies out there that don’t want to have to explain to their small children why two guys walking through the mall in hot pants are kissing have their hands in each others pockets.
I don’t have a problem with domestic partnerships, and maybe gay marriage will fly one day, but don’t blame TXMom. Blame the wackadoodles that give the gay community an unfortunate image.
Laura in Maryland on February 20, 2009 at 10:39 PM
how the hell do you know?
you really are a piece of work..way too many ASSumptions on your part…
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:39 PM
Hate crimes is a complicated issue. Motives are always important. It’s what separates an accident from a premeditated murder, or a premeditated murder from an act of terrorism. So to say, hey let’s not look at the intent is ridiculous. We always look at the intent.
On the other hand, I don’t support institutionalizing victimhood. In particular, I’m opposed to Affirmative Action be it on the basis of race or sexual orientation or anything else.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:39 PM
OMFG!!111 ASSumption!!1 It’s like Ass… and then umptions. Right? Right?
I bet you’re the coolest guy in the 5th grade.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:40 PM
What does that mean? Presumably you mean the use the power of the federal government to do something.
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 10:41 PM
bet you were wearing starched brown shirts in 5th grade…
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:42 PM
This is no trial and you are no judge
Tav on February 20, 2009 at 10:42 PM
I have a great idea here… Let’s keep the federal government out of this issue! Let each state decide how they want to handle this. Then, if you are gay and want to marry your partner, and Idaho or wherever doesn’t allow it, move to Massachusetts or California or wherever! Keep the FEDS out of it.
fumpbump on February 20, 2009 at 10:42 PM
Just checked.
Thank you, that was very nice. Good to be understood sometimes. Much respect to ya, even when we’re disagreeing.
JetBoy on February 20, 2009 at 10:42 PM
Funny, coming from someone who thought spiking AIDS meds (on Michelle’s site) was a terrific idea.
SnarkVader on February 20, 2009 at 10:43 PM
Just the fact that there’s a gay state senator from Brainerd MN is amazing to me.
From the way my peeps talk, you’d think that any queer living outside a major city is forced to shave her pits and wear a dress.
Hang in there, senator.
The Ugly American on February 20, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Hate crimes are crap. Crime is crime. Intent is not the same as motive. Hate crimes are based on motive. Intent is specific to the crime, not why the crime. Ie a murder of passion is about the situation of the crime, not whether they were fighting over a mistress or a remote.
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 10:44 PM
Then maybe the gay faction in CA should have made their case to the people of California more effectively. It was a free and fair vote, so their loss is their own responsibility.
NorthernCross on February 20, 2009 at 10:44 PM
no its rather obvious what separates an accident from a premeditated murder…was the person planning the murder…no matter the motive…compared to defending yourself, or accidentally killing someone…
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:45 PM
I’m happy that you’re a Republican.
I’m not happy that you’re homosexual, but you’re not my enemy.
I’m not happy Allah is an atheist, & I’m not happy that MB$ is an evolutionist, but they’re not enemies, either.
Big tent!
jgapinoy on February 20, 2009 at 10:45 PM
Uhm, whatever it does to straight people, it should do to gays. I’m not opposed to it not doing anything for either group, if this is what you’re hinting at.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:45 PM
what are you talking about?? why don’t you post your ‘proof’ of whatever you are talking about.
this should be good.
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:46 PM
No, I want the FEDS in. They can rule that everyone must treat me like I am a 19 year old hottie with a ton of money. Anyone who mentions my backfat or crow’s feet gets sent to GITMO.
Laura in Maryland on February 20, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Indeed they failed to explain their case to ignorant people. They should take some responsibility for it. The people are still ignorant though.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Get a grip. You have no idea what she thinks and believes. Start acting like an adult rather than having every single aspect of your personhood driven by your sexual preferences. You’re gay? Fine. Now, stop screaming in my ear.
BuckeyeSam on February 20, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Do you post as right4life on Michelle’s site?
SnarkVader on February 20, 2009 at 10:47 PM
frankly my dear, I don’t give a damn what you do or who you do it with. Just stop trying to cram it down the throats of those of us who do not find it to be an acceptable lifestyle. The last time I checked we to are entitled to our opinions. Personally, I am sick and tired of hearing about it, but hey, as I said, its a free country. Well, on second thought, with the election of the “Messiah” I don’t know how much longer that is going to be the case. What a disaster!
devere252 on February 20, 2009 at 10:47 PM
How about it stays as far out of my bedroom as possible! I don’t care whether you are gay or straight, keep the FEDS the hell out of the bedroom!!!
fumpbump on February 20, 2009 at 10:47 PM
Not complicated at all. It is to criminalize what otherwise would not be a crime or to increase the penalty over what it would otherwise be. Otherwise there would be no purpose in the whole thing.
Tav on February 20, 2009 at 10:48 PM
MB$MB4jgapinoy on February 20, 2009 at 10:48 PM
yeah sure do…put up or shut up.
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:48 PM
I’m not hinting at anything. And that’s the ambiguity that makes the issue befuddling.
I don’t see abridgment of rights evidenced anywhere. If anything the power of marriage should be taken out of the hand of the federal government, but that’s the only issue I hear ever raised. Consequently, I don’t under the “inequality”.
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 10:48 PM
Burkean change. How novel.
Same sex couples should have all the same legal rights as different sex couples.
Complete acceptance will come in time.
VolMagic on February 20, 2009 at 10:49 PM
No, it’s not that. Please educate yourself.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:49 PM
Yeah! I agree! Just like when the state puts people in jail because of their lifestyle and trying “rehabilitate” them using scary tactics…being a bank robber is not a CHOICE! PEOPLE! Bank Robbers are normal people, they just get their money in a different way.
BobMbx on February 20, 2009 at 10:49 PM
why limit it to just couples? how bigoted of you…
and no ‘complete acceptance’ will NEVER come..no matter how much you force it upon us.
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:50 PM
radio…
the problem is that homosexuals have crowned themselves a “minority”. that is the biggest bunch of crap i have ever heard. it is wrong because God says so. end of story.
txmom, keep speaking your truth. you have every bit as much right to say how you and how you are choosing to rear your children as these “minorities” do.
sandlin71 on February 20, 2009 at 10:51 PM
I said it there, and I’ll say it here:
cthulhu on February 20, 2009 at 10:51 PM
What legal rights are being withheld?
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 10:52 PM
So basically it is a sexual and lifestyle choice.
I get it. So next we should condone the actions of NAMBLA since sex with little boys is a lifestyle choice!
fumpbump on February 20, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Remember when gay meant to be happy?
Teh gey are so visious, teh hit you wit my flower
How about Ravishing Ronald the gay nature boy?
Kini on February 20, 2009 at 10:52 PM
heh, thanks too, JGA. Political party I chose. The other thing, chose me.
But I guess we all have some cross to bear…makes life interesting.
JetBoy on February 20, 2009 at 10:54 PM
Sorry about the mixed construction metaphors — I’ve been doing work around the house during this period of unemployment.
cthulhu on February 20, 2009 at 10:54 PM
I can assure you that I am no longer an evolutionist.
In the light of new evidence I have reevaluated my position and can say with conviction that I am now firmly in the devolutionist camp.
MB4 on February 20, 2009 at 10:54 PM
C’mon, Spirit…civil unions aren’t even close to the same legal rights as marriage affords.
JetBoy on February 20, 2009 at 10:55 PM
HELP IS ON THE WAY!!!
Sorry, not making fun of you, just venting my frustration on Porkapalooza!
fumpbump on February 20, 2009 at 10:55 PM
You know what? You’re absolutely right. I had you confused with another…um…charming soul. I apologize.
SnarkVader on February 20, 2009 at 10:56 PM
Well, if you did something crazy, like… I don’t know… read this thread, you would know we’re not talking about marriage. We’re talking about gays supposedly being in the face of a righteous Texas mom with kids. Which I assume means they hold their hands or perhaps kiss or do equally outrageous things, which no straight person would ever do in public.
My point is a horrific one. Gays should do what straight people do, no more, no less. And those who think that they shouldn’t must feel peer pressure. It’s not ok to think that gay people are second-class. It’s not the government’s role to enforce that, but a free society is structured through peer pressure. This is what I said.
Consequently, those who decided to pretend like I’d ever said anything about government, basically chose to lie. It must be somewhere in the Bible that it’s ok to lie. Or something.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:56 PM
I’m not trying to force anything on anybody.
I mean federally. The DOMA nixes rights for same sex couples that different sex couples enjoy. I don’t think that is right. Our federal govt. should treat all law abiding citizens equally. State and local ordinances are a different matter.
VolMagic on February 20, 2009 at 10:56 PM
its consistent with the 2nd law…
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:56 PM
Fixed that for ya.
Not that what you’re saying isn’t 100% true, merely that what you said applies to all the other, “classifications” we’ll call them, that liberals come up with to distinguish and segregate the country in a state of Balkanism that makes it much easier to govern or build power blocks in…or at least, so they think for now.
Thing about Balkanization though, always ends in the same results.
SuperCool on February 20, 2009 at 10:56 PM
BobMbx on February 20, 2009 at 10:49 PM
WRONG!!
Bank robbers have violated the law of this country that we live under. Gay people in the privacy of their bedroom have Not. You missed my point. Live with the consequences of your actions – if you are a drug user, you will reap what you sow. If you kill someone you deserve to be punished according to the law of the land.
catlady on February 20, 2009 at 10:57 PM
I’d say your story sucks. Mine is much better. Probably because it involves no God.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 10:57 PM
Heh, don’t c’mon me. :) Have I ever been disingenuous with you? Okay, aside from McCain.
I don’t know the answer, hence the question. What is being withheld, save the title?
I don’t want marriage in the hand of the federal government, so the meeting point of our minds would be subtraction of power, not addition.
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 10:58 PM
I’m surprised….thank you.
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Ding! Ding! Ding!…….we have a winner!
The Ugly American on February 20, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Motives have nothing to do with ordinary speech. They might be relevant in trying to make a distinction between 1st and 2nd degree murder but not in everyday matters of conscience.
Homosexuals do not deserve a special protection against criticism of their lifestyle. Also I don’t care whether or not critics of homosexuality are “hateful” or not.
Yes hatred is a bad thing but not living in a Communist society I don’t think one should be legally answerable for their thoughts and emotions.
aengus on February 20, 2009 at 10:58 PM
Please name one right homosexuals are denied.
spmat on February 20, 2009 at 10:59 PM
VolMagic, such as? What effect is there aside from tax code?
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 11:00 PM
I’m not sure about that anymore…fascist for sure…
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 11:00 PM
Criticizing gays isn’t a hate crime. Quit making stuff up.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 11:01 PM
Really? Well, thank God you agree now with what I have said now… what? 5 times?
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 11:02 PM
really?
link
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 11:03 PM
All things should be seen exactly as they are without sentiment nor Wikipedia.
Tav on February 20, 2009 at 11:04 PM
You’ll “c’mon” when I say “c’mon”…haha….j/k
Anyway, here’s some of the bigger differences, taken from a gay rights website:
Number of Legal Benefits:
Marriage:
Over 1,049 federal and state level benefits.
Civil Unions: Over 300 state level benefits. *No federal protection
Tax Relief:
Marriage: Couples can file both federal and state tax returns jointly.
Civil Unions: Couples can only file jointly in the state of civil registration.
Medical Decisions:
Marriage: Partners can make emergency medical decisions.
Civil Unions: Partners can only make medical decisions in the registered state. Partners may not be able to make decisions out of state.
Gifts:
Marriage: Partners can transfer gifts to each other without tax penalty.
Civil Unions: Partners do not pay state taxes, but are required to report federal taxes.
Death Benefits:
Marriage: In the case of a partner’s death, the spouse receives any earned Social Security or veteran benefits.
Civil Unions: Partners do not receive Social Security or any other government benefits in case of death. In the case of the death of former Congressman Gerry Studds, his partner of 15 years was denied the government pension that would have gone to a legally recognized spouse.
Child/Spousal Support:
Marriage: In case of divorce, individuals may have a legally-binding financial obligation to spouses and children.
Civil Unions: In the case of dissolution , no such spousal or child benefits are guaranteed or required out of state.
Immigration Rights:
Marriage: U.S. citizens and legal residents can sponsor their spouses and family members for immigration.
Civil Unions: U.S. citizens and legal residents cannot sponsor non-legal spouses or family members.
JetBoy on February 20, 2009 at 11:04 PM
Criticizing gays isn’t a hate crime. Quit making stuff up.
radiofreevillage on February 20, 2009 at 11:01 PM
Just like be skeptical of the “one” is not a crime… yet.
catlady on February 20, 2009 at 11:05 PM
you see marriage isn’t a right, its a privilege..for the purpose of procreating and continuing the human race…
gays cannot get married…only destroy the institution of marriage, by making it meaningless, to the great detriment of children and society…as we have seen in the netherlands…
right4life on February 20, 2009 at 11:06 PM
No offense taken…but I should point out that my normal gig is along the lines of Corporate Controller, with an accounting department looking to me for leadership and responsibilities throughout the organization — from properly computed and authorized paychecks to sales and margin reports for manufacturing — meant to help the company prosper.
….and I’m currently doing home renovations while the US economy is being dismembered.
cthulhu on February 20, 2009 at 11:08 PM
You have one life, let it be gay
Shouldn’t one do as one’s told to?
No, let the moment enfold you
Grab up every golden chance
Life is such romance
Give this world a sweeping glance
Let it set your soul a-dancing night and day
Vivez!
Live, here’s to life, let us be gay
Let go of each inhibition
No one need give you permission
What are you waiting for?
Vivez!
PercyB on February 20, 2009 at 11:08 PM
Hey, thanks for a specific answer!
So the civil unions are state-specific. And there are two federal issues: SS and Immigration.
Spirit of 1776 on February 20, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Wait! Now I remember! You’re the one who thinks gays want marriage so that there will be more kids without a mother and a father, thereby making them easier for gays to recruit into their lifestyle!
SnarkVader on February 20, 2009 at 11:10 PM
“That was when we were young, and gay, and innocent” – quote from Peter Pan
catlady on February 20, 2009 at 11:10 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 … 5 Next »