I am not sure what is a bigger disgrace, CNN or You-Tube. Some people found the guy singing the song to be downright charming. It was a bunch of nonsense. Nevertheless, at least he didn’t yell “wassup” like a frog or lizard.
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/11/29/digging-out-the-cnnyoutube-plants-abortion-questioner-is-edwards-supporter/
Nevertheless, Anderson Cooper only made one or two smug remarks the entire night, an improvement for CNN. The questions were fair, and not designed simply to humiliate republicans. I genuinely felt that CNN actually failed to get it wrong this time. This was an adult discussion, which is to be expected from republican voters.
Rudy was attacked as having run a sanctuary city. He disputed this, stating that he only allowed children of illegal immigrants to go to school, and to give them emergency medical care. He also stated that the Federal Government provided no help.
Romney’s video was non-descript and bland. Rudy’s video was funny, hitting Hillary.
A question from a muslim about repairing America’s image was asked. It jumped to the conclusion that our image needed repairing to begin with. Giuliani would not back down. He emphatically made it clear that the USA had to stay no offense. He also spoke of maing sure not to blame all muslims for what the bad guys did, but stated that the democrats stick their heads in the sand by refusing to even use the word “Islamofacism.”
McCain reiterated his support for the surge, and promised to fight the democrats desire to surrender. He stated he was the only one on the stage who wanted a change in strategy. Hunter eloquently spoke about all the good things America does.
One person asked how others could support waterboarding whe McCain is against it. Romney said that he is against torture, but would not state if waterboarding was torture at all. Romney reiterated his support for Gitmo. McCain stated that waterboarding absolutely is torture. Romney’s reasoning for being coy so as ot not educate our enemies was solid, but McCain’s emotional argument simply carries more gravitas on this issue, even when one disagrees with him. On this one issue, Romney is right, but McCain looked more Presidential.
A very intelligent question asked about promising to stay in Iraq, a very different approach. Thompson said stay until the job is done, that some want us to fail, and we are winning. Rupaul said…oh, who cares. Actually, I tried to ignore him until he borught up Vietnam. McCain pounced, pointing out that public opinion lost the Vietnam War, not the troops. He also said that the Vietnamese wanted to build a country, Al Queda wanted to follow us home and destroy America.
Only Rupaul could make Tancredo seem reasonable, but he disagreed with Rupaul, although way too tepidly.
A question about Rudy using 9/11 to get elected was up next. Rudy spoke about stopping Haitian illegal immigration while working in Ronald Reagan’s justice department. He also spoke about going after Sicilian Mafia members. He spoke about his reducing taxes, spending, welfare, and abortions, while promoting policies to increase adoptions, and that this was all before 9/11.
One undignified question showing Cheney about to shoot someone was used to ask about Vice Presidential power. The fact that it was done in cartoon form did not make it any less distasteful. Thompson joked that the Cheney character looked like him. He then stated that the Vice President should have substantial authority. McCain stated that President Bush had to rely more on Cheney due to his own inexperience, which would not be an issue for McCain.
Hunter’s video emphasized his solid credentials, including an endorsement form CHuck Yeager, who is a lot more than a former spokesperson for A.C. Delco Parts. Huckabee’s video reemphasized his social conservatism.
A retired Brigadier General with Special Forces experience and 43 years of service powerfully pointed out that he is openly gay, and why we cannot lift the ban on gays in the military. In this case, it was the questioner who had gravitas.
Hunter hid behind Colin Powell and the cohesion argument. Huckabee correctly separated feelings from conduct, but then confused being gay with inappropriate conduct. Perhaps he did not merely get confused, which would be a bigger issue. Romney hid behind the fact that we are at war. He also mentioned that he thought “don’t ask, don’t tell” would fail, but in his estimation, 15 years later, “it has worked.”
The questioner took the candidates to task, and said the members of the military were professional enough to handle it. He claimed that “don’t ask, don’t tell” was destructive, and that gays are being kicked out not for bad conduct, but being gay. He was forceful.
McCain stated that generals such as Petraeus and Odierno are against it, and that the current policy is working.
A good question was asked about whether they supported the Log Cabin Republicans, and of equal importance, why the Log Cabin Republicans should support them.
Huckabee joked that he needed the support of anyone who can get. He stated that he disagreed with them on gay marriage, but agreed with them on other issues such as taxes. He would respect people with different convictions.
A question about the national debt and raiding the social security trust fund was asked. Thompson joked that we need to protect the young generation from the older generation. He then gave a non-answer answer. Romney rambled, praising Reagan and condemning Hillary. It contributed nothing.
A question about pledging space exploration to Mars by 2020 was a fair question, but not vital enough to be at the end of the debate. Nevertheless, it was an intelligent question in terms of significance. Huckabee wants to expand the space program, and very smartly related it to our technological needs today. He joked that Hillary could be on the first rocket to Mars. Tancredo stated we cannot afford some things, including going to Mars.
A very good question by a young black male brought up the notion that while many black people have culturally conservative views, they vote for the democrats. This fellow asked why. Giuliani said we have not done a good enough job as a party of showing that our solutions are right, especially on education. He cited moving people off of welfare as a way of reducing crime, and helping black America.
Romney then pounced, and promised to get tough on illegal immigrants.
Rudy retaliated that Romney had a “sanctuary mansion,” since his own helpers at his home were illegal immigrants. Romney got indignant, said he hired a company, and Giuliani said Romney was holier than thou, and Romney implied Giuliani was brown bashing.
It was a fiery exchange, and the next question dealt with a promise to veto any immigration bill that included amnesty.
Fred Thompson said yes, and claimed Romney was a flip flopper on the issue, and gave a very thinly veiled reference to Bernie Kerik when he said that “we all have all made mistakes in hiring.”
McCain said yes, and said the bill he took part in “never proposed amnesty.” He cited Mel Martinez, and said the American people do not trust us because of other failures such as Katrina and spending. He referred to the illegal immigrants as “God’s children,” and that he refuses to demonize them.
Tom Tancredo was challenged by a guy who supports guest workers that are vital to his business. Tancredo acted like himself, dismissing this small business owner’s concerns.
Duncan Hunter stated that he built the fence in San Diego, and it did work.
Huckabee was challenged about illegal immigrants getting college tuition breaks, and that children of military members should get those same privileges. He stated that it was a proposal that failed, as if that makes it better. He did say that it had to be students that had been in the schools their whole life, not just one year.
Romney compared Huckabee to a Massachusetts liberal, saying that Huckabee’s proposal took money from taxpayers. Huckabee said we do not punish children for what their parents do. Romney stated it was not punishment to enforce the law.
Ron Paul was asked if he was a wack job, more specifically if the USA would merge with Canada and Mexico. He spoke in a reasonable manner, but said nothing of value.
A question about reducing the national debt finally shifted the debate from immigration after over 30 minutes. McCain cited his credentials on fighting pork and corruption.
Romney echoed McCain, but seemed less passionate about the issue. Giuliani spoke of not replacing retiring government workers.
One person asked what 3 programs or entities would be killed. Thompson mentioned social security and medicare but then backtracked if they were the top 3. He mentioned the OMB list of 100. Rupaul mentioned the department of education, energy, and homeland security. He may be nuts, but he at least answered the question. Huckabee pandered by mentioning the IRS.
Another person asked about replacing the income tax with the fair tax. Huckabee does, McCain cited the Wall Street Journal and said no. He also stated that Rupaul’s isolationism is what caused World War II and brought Hitler to power. He further added that he just had Thanksgiving with the troops, and their message is “let us win.” Rupaul stated that McCain did not understand his military position. It was a ludicrous assertion.
The Grover Norquist pledge of vetoing tax increases was brought up. Thompson said he only made pledges with the American people. McCain echoed the sentiment. Hunter refused to take the pledge. The other said yes, and Rupaul actually correctly pointed out that cutting spending was vital as well.
A great question was asked about the gutlessness of free market conservatives when it comes to farm subsidies. Romney, desperate to win Iowa, supports the subsidies, and blamed our competitors for having subsidies we are forced to match to compete. Giuliani echoed Romney. He then answered a question about his security detail. Tancredo’s video was useless.
A question about toys with lead from China was asked. It allowed Tancredo to rail, and Hunter jumped into the China bashing. He implored people to “buy American.” I will when we make better products.
Thompson’s video hit Romney on abortion and Huckabee on taxes. Thompson jokingly replied that he wanted to “give his buddy a little extra air time.” Romney simply said that on abortion, that he “was wrong.” Huckabee actually sounded like Hillary in saying he was being attacked because he was doing well. Yes, he did it ina folksy manner, but perhaps something in Arkansas in the water does not allow the excuses to stay dead.
An NRA supporter asked about gun control. Hunter supports the second amendment. Giuliani was asked why he in 2000 said a written exam was required. He did say that government can impose “reasonable regulations” on guns. He cited background checks and banning mentally ill people from having guns, but other restrictions would not be ok. He said he would accept the Supreme Court ruling. Thompson contradicted Rudy, but Rudy said the DC law did not make things safer, while the New York laws made his city safer. He again said he believed the second amendment was an individual right.
When asked about their gun collections, Anderson Cooper smugly paraphrased the question to ask if the candidates had machine guns or silencers. Fred said he owned guns, but would not “tell where or what they are.” The crowd laughed. McCain said he used guns, does not own one now. Hunter was very specific. Giuliani does not own a gun, Romney has two guns in his home, owned by his son. I am not sure why that last part was thrown in, it was possibly a straddle.
A question about black on black crime was asked. Romney stated that the best thing was having a mother and father, and cited the out of wedlock birth rate among blacks. He cited Bill Cosby, and then mentioned education and policing.
Giuliani said that Romeny had a “mixed record” on crime, while he reduced murder in Harlem by 80%. He mentioned the “broken windows theory.”
A fabulous spin on the abortion question was asked. A woman wanted to know how we should punish the woman who has an abortion anyway if it becomes illegal, and how the doctor would be charged.
Rupaul, normally loud, seemed to want to run away from this question as much as the others. He said he was an OB doctor, and refused to specify precise punishments. Thompson said our # 1 focus should be to overturn Roe vs Wade, but did not specify exact punishments. Giuliani said he would not sign a law banning all abortion. He said Roe vs Wade was flawed because it took power from the states. Romney said he would sign the bill, but that the consensus does not exist to bring that bill anyway, which was not even asked at all.
Somebody asked what Jesus would do about enforcing the capital punishment. Huckabee supports the death penalty, but struggles with it as a human being. He contrasted the death penalty with abortion very ably, with aborted babies being guilty of nothing. Tancredo would pray to Jesus, and shockingly enough, did not accuse him of being an illegal immigration.
Somebody asked if they believe every word of the bible. Huckabee jokingly but arrogantly asked Giuliani if he needed help answering the question. Giuliani said he does not take everypart of the bible literally, with some parts being allegorical. Romney said he believes the bible is the word of God, but stumbled on the aspect of literalism. Huckabee tried to put a moderate face on a question designed to invoke accusations of zealotry, speaking of loving one’s neighbor.
While Giuliani got the better of Romney in their exchange on illegal immigration, he seemed to be given less opportunities to speak later on as Romney sparred with Huckabee. Thompson and Huckabee are folksy and funny, but did not offer much more, although Huckabee was eloquent at times, and again, arrogant when trying to needle Rudy about the bible. Romney seemed to be thrown off of his game by Giulinai on illegal immigration, and by McCain on torture. Again, even though Romney may be right on the issue, he still lost the battle on stage. McCain shined.
The candidates were all gutless on gays in the military and ethanol subsidies, but those are not the defining issues. The War on Terror was not brought up because the major candidates all agree, and their positions are well established.
This debate was more confrontational, and was specifically designed to see who could win debating points. After all, how can one lead a nation if they cannot defend their own beliefs on stage? George W. Bush is a good man, but his lack of articulation hurts him from a public relations standpoint. He is right, but he is not a salesman. Reagan was right, and sold himself well.
Also, since any candidate that attacks Rupaul does well, they should just compete to see who can verbally smack him the most.
All in all, Romney was flustered, Thompson contributed little, Huckabee was uneven, and Giuliani started strong enough to finish second.
John McCain won this debate.
eric
LOL!! “Confusion to being gay and inapproriate conduct”??
Obviously, the General and you have never shared the experience of combat with or without an openly gay soldier.
They can stay here and continue seeking the judicial and legislative activism that has produced the persecution of Boy Scouts and instructed 2nd graders on self-satisfying sexual deviance….very impressive to see 1% of the population attempt to force the majority to accept the unacceptable, especially with the so-called Hate Crimes Act which is nothing more than special rights which dictate law enforcment must discern a subjective view which is all far beyond the establishment of intent…How completely insane.
eric – thanks for the mention. Damn good article too!
Got a problem with gays, Chip? You must’ve been the uncoothe dude who booed general Kerr during his second inquiry. Not very classy, man.
Well eric, I thought Huckabee won the debate, but I do think McCain did well. McCain kept his tone and demeanor more sublime. I think it worked. GOPer’s like a smooth performance. They don’t like it when the debaters’ blood gets up. I’d say McCain came in second. Giuliani and Romney literally ate each other alive up there. It was not pleasant to watch.
And hey, what’s with that whole “adult” thing again? Do you really think the GOP debates are any more or less “adult” than Democratic debates? I don’t.
I thought that the questions were rigged to be sort of moot and inflamatory. We have serious problems in America. Granted, there’s no point debating the GWOT – all the GOPers are on the same page with that, except Paul. But what about the real estate and mortgage crises? What about the per capita negative savings rate? What about the collapsing dollar? What about dealing with a Democrat congress in the future? This debate was not only not “adult,” but it was rather pointless. As I said on my blog, though, I was pleasantly surprised to see that the questioners weren’t a loony as I expected. The Dem YouTube debate was kinda silly. I exxpected the GOP denate to be loony – you know, gun nuts, religious fanatics, and so forth. Overall, it wasn’t all that bad. But as I said, it was rather oblivious to the serious issues of our day. If the debate served a purpose well, however, it was boosting McCain and Huckabee, and shrinking Romney and Giuliani. I believe the former two would be far better presidents than the latter two. One thing though, that really, really bothered me, was the booing of general Kerr. I thought that was appalling and disgusting. Had I been sitting in there during that, I think I’d have walked out. That was about the most unadult thing I’ve ever seen. Otherwise, the debate was so-so.
JMJ
My daughter would like it if gay. LOL! She is 17 and determined to be gay (not sure really knows yet :-) and fight for gay rights.
I wrote the following in my column, and I owe everyone an apology.
“The questions were fair, and not designed simply to humiliate republicans. I genuinely felt that CNN actually failed to get it wrong this time.”
I was not aware that several questions were planted by left wing activists.
However, the fact that the blogosphere lit up immediately says to me that no damage was done. So while they failed to humiliate the republicans, I was wrong to say they did not try. They remain the Chirac/Clinton/Communist News Network, and will continue to rot in the ratings for it.
Republicans showed up, which is more than democrats do with Fox News.
I will say it again…let me ask the questions, and an intelligent discussion will follow with useful answers.
eric
I’m not mixing a anything. These are all part of a much larger agenda which
slowly marches on.
They have a list of demands from us which merely adds to their delusion that
their deviance will be accepted through force and outright brainwashing.
Few of the alleged three million have the consitution to join and measure up
to military standards where they can keep their mouths, eyes and behavior
shut down until they’re out…or don’t join, it’s just as simple as that. To
question it further is a complete denial of what is inherently unreasonable
and directly risks all soldiers lives. AND for a General to offer it in
questioning it instructs us he was a drain on our taxpaying dollars for far,
far too long.
Now, if you had done your homework on McCain his only claim to fame is his
service to our nation which is highly respectable but, it does not remotely
qualify him for the highest office of our land.
His temper is world reknown and his erring judgement on critical issues is
only outdone by his stubborness.
For decades he has not tried to enforce the laws of illegal immigration yet,
he stubbornly maintained we risk our sovereignty for a second time in
accepting 20+ Million more immigrants who openly defy our society in
numerous ways and refuse to assimilate. He demonstrates he can not learn
from past mistakes.
As the senior senator he also handed us McCain-Feingold which he
acknowledges and accepts any infringements to our first amendment rights in
saying “that’s just fine with me because the law works”…somebody hasn’t
informed him about George Soros and similar ilk. Additionally, the entire
country is fully aware and very angry we were saddled with this while McCain
trudges on in blissful denial.
Where the attachment which protects incumbents by restricting publicly
offered information by organized citizens has nothing to do with the limits
of soft money, which was all the bill was originally designed to do, yet
liberal’s made the attachment part of the deal to see the bill passed the
Senate. Once it was shown to be the infringement that it was it should have
been repealed…It wasn’t, McCain didn’t speak out about it and we still
suffer from it.
These soft money limits which were historically set by ethical men were not
just exceeded, they were broken open by Bill Clinton and Dick Morris who
should be languishing in jail to this day for that crime against the
American people.
There is much more but, I’m not your instructor and I’ve done this merely
out of a sense of civic duty. Please, do your own homework as a responsible
voter by not attaching yourself to candidates who clearly have no business
on The Hill, let alone, in the Oval office.
“Children who are not Liberal need a heart but, adults who are not
Conservative need a brain.” – Anon.
Chip,
You said, “They have a list of demands from us which merely adds to their delusion that their deviance will be accepted through force and outright brainwashing.”
Really? Do you believe that there is some gay conspiracy or cabal out to “brainwash” America? And what are their “demands” exactly?
“Few of the alleged three million have the consitution to join and measure up
to military standards where they can keep their mouths, eyes and behavior
shut down until they’re out…or don’t join, it’s just as simple as that.”
Really? Do you really mean that? I mean, I’ve known lots of gays, having spent most of my life in the NY/NJ area and a couple years in L.A.. They are tough people. They have to be. After all, there are people like you out there! They are just as patriotic as anyone else, I would presume. If anything, gay men are among the wealthiest classes in America, so if they aren’t serving it may be because they are too busy getting rich.
JMJ
Chip is 100% correct about gays and McCain. Some of us are heartily tired of people who should be content with being able to live and let live trying to stuff their agenda down the throats of the rest of us. I think witch hunting of gays is wrong, but that doesn’t mean I think they should be on overnight camping trips with young boys or troops in combat. As for gay “marriage,” the institution designed since antiquity to protect women and children is in enough trouble without cheapening and demeaning it beyond recognition. By all means, bring your partner to the office picnic, or any other social setting that doesn’t involve children having to understand fisting or whatever.
Jersey,
I’ll tell you what I have against gays. You can see it at any gay pride parade. Other than that, nothing.
Eric, I can’t decide either. (Between CNN and You Tube) Thanks to your synopsis I didn’t have to endure either of them.
Charly,
“Chip is 100% correct about gays and McCain.”
McCain is gay??? LOL!
“I’ll tell you what I have against gays. You can see it at any gay pride parade.”
You hate their pride???
Look, you guys are the reason gays have to fight for their rights, and then you hate them for fighting for their rights.
Amazing.
JMJ
Jersey, I didnt choose to be an a**hole.
So maybe I should run around asking the world to make exceptions for my lifestyle ?
When I go to apply for a job I dont flaunt my a**holeness and say you “HAVE”to take me. I conform to the establishments stantard of conduct and appearance or I look far a place that is more accepting of my lifestyle.
No one person has the right to impose their individuality on society an establisment or one person.
They do not reserve the right to “NOT” be offended.
JMJ asked;
‘And what are their “demands” exactly?”
To have Christian churches marry them.
To have the same benefits as those who actually procreate and make life.
To have the same right to adopt with no discretion applied to the childs background.
To be hired solely on appropriation instead of merit.
Lets look to the most recent move in the gay rights direction
It is no longer appropriate to refer to them as “homosexuals” because now the appropriate nomenclature is “GLBTQ”
Would a “fire and brimstone” Christian bookstore be considered a “hostile environment” to a homosexual? By constitutional standards, no, but by ENDA it would be.
Are there really that many people who cant adjust to the slightest variation in life ?
If anything it should be a lot easier today than it was when I was in school (60s 70s). If some guy wore makeup to work or school life would of been very difficult for him.
Does anyone know what its like for a straight guy whos been in the rest. business his whole life ?
I have been surrounded and hit on by gays my whole life. I’ve been called everything from “little race horse” to “bitch” “honey”, you name it.
I laugh at it and thats that.
This kinda crap just makes me cross eyed. Who are these hypersensative people that want these completly sterile work places ? No language, no percieved hostility, no sense or sign of discrimination what so ever, no smoking, no perfume. And everybody gets there own label but they dont want to be discriminated against. But the discrimination can be positive and preferential to their benefit , right ?
Jersey , its all BS, its just a law giving preferential treatment depending on who or what you like to screw.
You want to be equal ?, get in line with me.
And by the way Jersey, this remark shows just how much of a disengenuous and dishonest guy you can be.
McCain is gay??? LOL!
“Micky,
You said, “Jersey, I didnt choose to be an a**hole.
So maybe I should run around asking the world to make exceptions for my lifestyle ?”
Okay, I get you here. I know you don’t mean gays are a-holes. But your little self-depricating analogy does make a good point – just because you are one way or anther, you shouldn’t be abused for, it as long you don’t hurt anyone else. Right? Gay people are routinely abused at least much more than you, I’m sure. All they ask is respect.
“When I go to apply for a job I dont flaunt my a**holeness and say you “HAVE”to take me. I conform to the establishments stantard of conduct and appearance or I look far a place that is more accepting of my lifestyle.”
Now, here you make me wonder. Are gays “a**hole(s)” to you? I find them, as anyone else, decent, kind, affable people. Do you have a problem with gays?
“No one person has the right to impose their individuality on society an establisment or one person.”
So, individuality is bad? Are you saying that we all should conform to what you want of us?
“They do not reserve the right to “NOT” be offended.”
We all get offended, Micky – some of us more than others. Of course, it is the “defensive” who ironically enough get offended more than most.
You said,
“JMJ asked;
‘And what are their “demands” exactly?”
To have Christian churches marry them.
To have the same benefits as those who actually procreate and make life.
To have the same right to adopt with no discretion applied to the childs background.
To be hired solely on appropriation instead of merit.”
They can demand whatever they want of the churches. It is up to the churches to accept those demands or not. The government can do nothing about that.
All people deserve the same “benefits” – and sanctions – of all people. Is there something about gays that you find sanctionable?
Gay parents raise kids just fine.
There is no gay “affirmative action” movement of any sort whatsoever.
You said, “It is no longer appropriate to refer to them as “homosexuals” because now the appropriate nomenclature is “GLBTQ””
Most gay people would laugh at you for saying that. They really don’t care what you call them. In fact, they’d rather you just call them “people.”
You said, “Would a “fire and brimstone” Christian bookstore be considered a “hostile environment” to a homosexual? By constitutional standards, no, but by ENDA it would be. Are there really that many people who cant adjust to the slightest variation in life ?”
I have no idea what you’re saying here.
“If anything it should be a lot easier today than it was when I was in school (60s 70s). If some guy wore makeup to work or school life would of been very difficult for him.
Does anyone know what its like for a straight guy whos been in the rest. business his whole life ?”
What???
“I have been surrounded and hit on by gays my whole life. I’ve been called everything from “little race horse” to “bitch” “honey”, you name it.
I laugh at it and thats that.”
Dude…
“This kinda crap just makes me cross eyed. Who are these hypersensative people that want these completly sterile work places ? No language, no percieved hostility, no sense or sign of discrimination what so ever, no smoking, no perfume. And everybody gets there own label but they dont want to be discriminated against. But the discrimination can be positive and preferential to their benefit , right ?”
Okay. Now I get it. You know gays from the rest. biz. I do too. I actually think I know where youre coming from now. But don’t place your perspective so anecdotally. There’s broader political and societal dynamics here. I know a lot of gays from music and the old rock club scene. I wouldn’t base my entire perspective of the subject on them. Music people are screwballs – not that rest. people are. LOL!
“Jersey , its all BS, its just a law giving preferential treatment depending on who or what you like to screw.
You want to be equal ?, get in line with me.”
If gay people weren’t abused and specifically targetted for abuse then this wouldn’t be an issue, Micky. They ain’t just makin’ it up.
And I can’t believe you said this! – “And by the way Jersey, this remark shows just how much of a disengenuous and dishonest guy you can be.
McCain is gay??? LOL!”
Jesus H, dude! It was a joke!!!
JMJ
JMJ said;
“Okay, I get you here. I know you don’t mean gays are a-holes. But your little self-depricating analogy does make a good point – just because you are one way or anther, you shouldn’t be abused for, it as long you don’t hurt anyone else. Right? Gay people are routinely abused at least much more than you, I’m sure. All they ask is respect.”
Are you sure ? And if so it doesnt change a point you didnt address.
These people dont want to be treated specially, as you say.
Then why do they want to be treated specially ?
JMJ said;
“They can demand whatever they want of the churches. It is up to the churches to accept those demands or not. The government can do nothing about that.”
They want to be ordained as priests themselves so they can perform marriages in the eyes of God. And have them reckognized by the state as any other marriage.
“One local Episcopal priest, a prominent feminist theologian at Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, has notified the bishop of Massachusetts that she plans to disobey him by officiating at the marriages of two lesbian couples this month; one Lutheran minister has similarly informed the bishop of New England of an intention to disobey. In both denominations, performing same-sex weddings despite instructions from bishops not to do so could lead to serious discipline, such as ouster from the ministry.”
JMJ said;
“All people deserve the same “benefits” – and sanctions – of all people. Is there something about gays that you find sanctionable?”
What benefits are they missing out on ?
JMJ said;
“Gay parents raise kids just fine.”
According to you, but gays cannot supply the female and male role models necessary. And nothing can beat natures design, nothing, look around you.
The ideal situation for any child is to have a mother and father and that should always be taken into consideration first. Two single males or females do not construct the essentials that a hetero family does, period.
You questioned this ?
“If anything it should be a lot easier today than it was when I was in school (60s 70s). If some guy wore makeup to work or school life would of been very difficult for him.
Does anyone know what its like for a straight guy whos been in the rest. business his whole life ?”
What???
Lets put it this way. If gays pulled half the crap they do today 30 years ago , they all would of been beat up and hasseled, it was way worse in the 60s DUDE !
Gays today have alot to be grateful for . The tolerence and exception in our society now is astrnomical compared to what it was 30 years ago.
I never asked for special treatement because I was being bombarded by “gay requests” if you know what I mean.
JMJ said;
“Okay. Now I get it. You know gays from the rest. biz. I do too. I actually think I know where youre coming from now. But don’t place your perspective so anecdotally. There’s broader political and societal dynamics here. I know a lot of gays from music and the old rock club scene. I wouldn’t base my entire perspective of the subject on them. Music people are screwballs – not that rest. people are. LOL!
OH ! So know you yourself are making acceptions to your rules ? You say most people are screwballs, well ? Why should any of them be treated any differently ?
JMJ said;
“If gay people weren’t abused and specifically targetted for abuse then this wouldn’t be an issue, Micky. They ain’t just makin’ it up. ”
They make themselves a target by asking for special recognitions and making spectacles and flaunting their sexuality.
Get in line with everyone else and stop expecting everyone to cater to and understand you.
Its much easier for one man to understand the world around him, than to get the whole world to understand him.
JMJ said;
“There is no gay “affirmative action” movement of any sort whatsoever.
You said, “It is no longer appropriate to refer to them as “homosexuals” because now the appropriate nomenclature is “GLBTQ””
“Most gay people would laugh at you for saying that. They really don’t care what you call them. In fact, they’d rather you just call them “people.”
Once again , you are downplaying to your convenience, or playing stupid.
http://arclightzero.wordpress.com/2007/11/16/a-pig-named-enda/#more-383
You can dress a pig in drag, but in the end it’s still a pig. And now you have a pig dressed in drag that’s really tough to get rid of because nobody is brave enough to touch it. I call it ENDA.
Yes, this is ENDA, the pig in drag that’s roaming through congress that sensible people are too afraid to touch despite the fact that deep down it’s still nothing more than a pig. Yet like so many other “nondiscrimination” laws, this pig is protected by political correctness and cultural opinion – even though it’s a bad piece of legislation.
I touched on ENDA before, but this time I’m going to assail it from a different perspective. The misuse and abuse of such legislation.
Much as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act requires employers to limit employee speech or conduct that creates a “hostile environment,” ENDA stands to do the same thing in the name of sexual orientation. While this may not sound like a bad thing on the surface, one has to ask if this is really necessary or if it will simply heap more fuel onto the trial lawyers’ evil fire. While I don’t agree with harassment at work, I agree even less with vague and loosely interpreted laws regarding just what a “hostile environment” is, and in today’s litigious society it’s just going to open the floor up to more lawsuits.
But just what is a “hostile environment,” and just who is it that should be protected from hostile behavior? According to Title VII, women, blacks and religious minorities are protected and if you add ENDA in there, you can include homosexuals. So does that mean that others aren’t protected? But before we go there, let’s try to at least define a “hostile environment.”
According to this CEI article on ENDA vs. Free Speech, “a detractor of the New York Post, who dislikes its coverage of gay celebrities and public figures, hopes that the Post’s gay employees will sue the newspaper if ENDA passes, under the theory that its content creates a hostile work environment for gay employees.” Is that a legitimate “hostile environment?” By ENDA it would be. Or what about this one, where “a city human rights commission official suggested that complainant John Dill might have had a valid sexual-orientation harassment claim based on allegations that a co-worker listened to conservative talk radio shows and posted a letter from a Congresswoman skeptical of repealing the military’s ban on gays.” Is this a hostile work environment?
Personally, I worked in a “hostile environment” for a while, where I worked with an individual who hated the military and veterans and every day called me “baby killer” and much worse, often times asking me how I liked being told what to do when it came to killing innocent people. And while I did file a complaint, I was not protected. But why? Oh, because I’m just a plain old white guy. And if ENDA passes, I can add “straight” to that. Thank you “nondiscrimination” laws.
But that’s not even the real point. The point is that “nondiscrimination” laws that vaguely define “hostile environments” also violate the First Amendment in every way – yet due to the fact that we are dealing with “protected” groups it is somehow deemed acceptable. This means that “nondiscrimination” laws tell us where and when free speech can or can’t be used and to whom it applies. A woman calling me a baby killer is considered acceptable by the law, yet if I were to crack a sexual joke that was deemed “offensive” by a woman, I have just created a hostile work environment and opened the door to lawsuits. Or as ENDA is concerned, I could get nailed for referring to somebody as a “homosexual” because (as I was told by a gay individual) it is no longer appropriate to refer to them as “homosexuals” because now the appropriate nomenclature is “GLBTQ” (if anybody knows what Q is, please let me know).
The CEI article brings up a good question too, and one that creates something of a paradox. Would a “fire and brimstone” Christian bookstore be considered a “hostile environment” to a homosexual? By constitutional standards, no, but by ENDA it would be. So where is the line drawn? Do you allow the lawsuit against the book store or do you protect the constitution and tell the complainant that he’s S.O.L.?
The problems with ENDA are numerous, but the fact that it creates yet another class of “protected” people is its worst offense. Do we really need to continue with this dividing and protecting of the people? Other than lining the wallets of the trial lawyers, what is truly accomplished by passing ENDA? We get to add to the already vague and confusing concept of a “hostile environment” and instill even more fear of discrimination lawsuits in employers. We get to further separate people from one another while breeding anger and contempt in the people who aren’t considered to be “protected.” And for what?
This pig is already on a roll through congress, and if people don’t wisen up and look past the dress and see what this really is, we’re going to be stuck with yet another set of laws that discriminate in the name of “nondiscrimination.” If the constitution and First Amendment rights mean anything any longer, this pig needs to go away once and for all.
JMJ said;
“Jesus H, dude! It was a joke!!!
Dont quit your day job, not funny. :-(
Micky, I completely disagree with all your points here. Gay people, as a group, do get abused more than most other groups. Because they get extra abuse they should get extra protection. To me this is an issue of basic human dignity and plain common sense.
What I want to know is this: Why the heck do you cons get so worked up over these sorts of non-issues? All this b.s. about gays and minorities and flags and big stupid 10 commandment monuments and embryos – all a waste of time and effort. There are real and serious issues out there, but all you guys seem to worry about are these trivial, silly non-issues. What a waste.
JMJ
Trivial ? Silly ?
Look Jersey, If I have a genetic imbalance that makes me want to screw monkeys or men I’m not going to run around and flaunt it and then complain when I get attacked.
Its a big issue when the left wants to make special exemptions for every little nuance in someone’s life.
I already shut you down on the ACLU wanting to give equal and fair treatment to child molesters (nambla)
You said this;
“JMJ said;
“There is no gay “affirmative action” movement of any sort whatsoever.”
And I proved you wrong with the name of one form of affirmative action (EDNA} being pushed through as we speak.
Also, I will repeat myself once again with my statement below.
“Its much easier for one man to understand the world around him, than to get the whole world to understand him.”
This is what real people with real concern for those around them do.
If every person who had a deviation from the norm in our society wanted special recognition for every taste in their life we would have complete anarchy.
Non issues? You said; ” There are real and serious issues out there,”
The ten commandments are a foundation of basic ethics, religious or not they are an excellent foundation for moral conduct.
Embryos? Maybe we should of done an experiment with yours ?
Our country’s flag is trivial and a non issue? What if I took your family portrait and wiped myself with it ? ( I wouldn’t do that because of of a little thing called respect)
Minorities ? Hell at this point or the near future we’re all minorities.
JMJ said; ” What a waste.”
As opposed to billions of dollars being diverted to gerbil warming fiasco that no one can even prove is happening or will. We have real and relevant problems at home right now. We have real and relevant problems abroad.
But you morons would rather run around like chicken little and divert money from much needed areas to a theory instead of actually helping the people you claim to care so much about..
Take all that fricking corn you shoved down our throats in the form of ethanol and feed some people with it. !
What’s Al Gore doing with the money he’s making off of carbon credits ?
You guys wont even talk about the nuclear factor, there’s no money in it for you.
Recycling is a big farce, except for aluminum and plastic.
Ethanol pollutes just as much, gives crappy mileage.
CFL’s are full of mercury.
So don’t talk to me about waste !
And I find it very discriminating for you to say my beliefs are trivial and silly non issues. Maybe I should bring up and try to pass legislation against you for hate speech.
Or at least a bill that would allow my lifestyle to be deemed needy of special terms so I wouldn’t have to listen to your crap ?
Micky, I’m not going to dignify the homophobic rant part of your last comment with a further response other than this – people like you are the reason I believe we need anti-discrimination laws for gay people.
“I already shut you down on the ACLU wanting to give equal and fair treatment to child molesters (nambla)”
No, Mick, you didn’t. You just came off as ignorant of the particular case in question. NAMBLA had nothing to do with what that molester did. Why don’t you try reading about the case so you don’t look foolish in the future.
ENDA (not EDNA, Micky) is far from full Affirmative Action for gay people. It is just an addition to the EO laws for employment. The Miller admendment protects religious book stores and the like. If it passes, that’s fine with me.
“The ten commandments are a foundation of basic ethics, religious or not they are an excellent foundation for moral conduct.”
The Ten Commandments are an ancient set of stupid laws. They are not the foundation of anything except backwardness and stupidity. Our nation of founded mainly by Grecophiliac neo-Republicans, not Bible thumping idiots. There is no ethics to the commandments at all. There is a time to murder, there is a time to lie, there is a time to disobey your parents, there is a time to steal, whether we like these realities or not. There is nothing codified in our constitution that forces us to worship one God, or to obey abusive parents, or to tolerate intolerable abuse without redress. The Ten Commandents are dead. Passe. Useless. A testament to the cruel and tragic folly of Western Monotheism.
“Embryos? Maybe we should of done an experiment with yours ?”
My embryos? I don’t even know what that means.
“Our country’s flag is trivial and a non issue?”
It’s a symbol, Micky. A piece of cloth. Besides, I thought you were a Ten Commandments man – shouldn’t you disdain false idols?
“Minorities ? Hell at this point or the near future we’re all minorities.”
Does this bother you? You call yourself “Micky,” right? Are you Irish? Do you know what people used to say about the Irish? Do you know what they used to do to them? Ever hear of “Irish need not apply”? Not big on history, huh?
“As opposed to billions of dollars being diverted to gerbil warming fiasco that no one can even prove is happening or will.”
What “billions of dollars”? Look, on one hand there are conservatives, who live in an imaginary past and who have failed at every single thing they’ve done for generations, and on the other hand there’s thousands of scientists warning us of impending climate change. I’ll take the work of the latter, thank you. Besides, we have nothing to lose if we act, and everything to lose if we don’t. (Conservatives muct make lousy gamblers)
Anyone who think Ethanol is a “liberal” issue is about as informed as a deaf, dumb, blind, comatose, retarded, braindead, illiterate hermit.
“You guys wont even talk about the nuclear factor,…”
That’s not true. Many liberals, myself included, talk about it plenty. The trouble with nuclear is threefold: security, waste management, cost to build reactors. Answer those three questions, and the rest of the liberals will get on board. France, as allegedly liberal as a state gets, is 80% nuclear for their power now. And if you think Libs are against it because there is no money in it for them, then you, as usual, are completely ignorant of the liberal position.
“Recycling is a big farce, except for aluminum and plastic.”
Another ignorant statement. Paper recycling is a huge and profitable industry, as is glass, copper, wastewater and all sorts of other things. Again (and it’s getting a little old) you are apparently just ignorant of the subject.
The CFL/Mercury issue could easily be addressed by recycling, by the way.
The only anti-discrimination assistance you would need, Micky, is protection from people who abuse people who are uninformed.
JMJ
JMJ said;
“No, Mick, you didn’t. You just came off as ignorant of the particular case in question. NAMBLA had nothing to do with what that molester did. Why don’t you try reading about the case so you don’t look foolish in the future.”
As a matter of fact “I did”
The ACLU made an attempt to defend the defendant but soon realized that it was not in “their” best interest.
I read it and cut and pasted the case for you ! Wize up and stop saying things that hurt when you pull them out.
i rammed that one down your throat. And you never replied.
JMJ said;
“My embryos? I don’t even know what that means.”
The one that you came from ? Duh ?
JMJ said;
“It’s a symbol, Micky. A piece of cloth. Besides, I thought you were a Ten Commandments man – shouldn’t you disdain false idols?”
I do not worship the flag any more than I do a picture of your family, they both have a significance that should be respected.
JMJ said;
“Does this bother you? You call yourself “Micky,” right? Are you Irish? Do you know what people used to say about the Irish? Do you know what they used to do to them? Ever hear of “Irish need not apply”? Not big on history, huh?”
Not big on history ? You are a bigot because you assume “Micky is only relevant to the Irish ? Its a nickname for Michael, wise up. I am Danish, German, and Mahican or ( Muhhekunneuw). I got a nickname for you, does that mean you deserve special recognition ? With a name like “McJones” I wouldnt be surprised you’re crying about that one. Would you like some legislation to help you along in life ?
JMJ said;
“Besides, we have nothing to lose if we act, and everything to lose if we don’t. (Conservatives muct make lousy gamblers)”
Nothing to loose ? Thats just stupid, seen my grocery bill ? Its costing me to find another way to put my son through college.
I dont gamble. And you do ? Are libs are better ganblers ? That makes me feel better about libs.
The lib enviromentalists are the ones stopping nuclear in this country with fear mongering rumors.
But still during the last heat wave in France hundreds of poor people died because it was upon them to conserve energy and not the rich.
JMJ said;
“Anyone who think Ethanol is a “liberal” issue is about as informed as a deaf, dumb, blind, comatose, retarded, braindead, illiterate hermit.”
Jimmy Carter started it all when he told the world we would be out of fossil fuels in 10 to 20 years and pushed grain fuels forward to the likes of no administration previous.
Since then it has spread to both parties using it as foundation for self serving subsidies to farmers.
We had this debate a while back and we presented you and Greg with an overwhelming amount of evidence to the contrary and you still act as a deaf, dumb, blind, comatose, retarded, braindead, illiterate hermit.”
You are like an unruly child.
I said;
“Recycling is a big farce, except for aluminum and plastic.”
You said;
“Another ignorant statement. Paper recycling is a huge and profitable industry, as is glass, copper, wastewater and all sorts of other things. Again (and it’s getting a little old) you are apparently just ignorant of the subject.”
I’m not !
I have a ton of facts on the issue right here at my thumbnail, let me refresh your memeory, if you have one.
Mandatory recycling, moreover, as its very name implies, ignores the law of supply and demand. That is why so much recycled paper is ultimately landfilled. When, for instance, New Jersey “passed legislation that required every community in the state to recycle, the recycling rate for newspapers jumped from 50 percent to 62 percent. This, in turn, created such a glut that the price of newsprint fell $45 per ton to minus $25 per ton!” (Facts not Fear.) You read that correctly: recyclers had to pay $25 per ton for someone to haul the newspapers away.
In Europe, where the recycling craze has really run amok, the German government (e.g.) required businesses to take back from customers and recycle all forms of packaging, including bottles, cans, containers, cartons, and sacks. In no time, the (nonprofit) company that collects and sorts the items was $412 million in debt, and the government admitted that tons and tons of the material would be landfilled anyway, because there wasn’t enough demand for that kind of supply.
JMJ said;
“The CFL/Mercury issue could easily be addressed by recycling, by the way.”
If it was so easy why has it not been done ? True, there are a couple of places to drop off your CFLs but not enough to be attractive.
I recycle cans and dig through the trash every morning for them, I gross a hundred a week and feed the homeless with the money (minorities and gays) and find CFLs constantly.
JMJ said;
“The only anti-discrimination assistance you would need, Micky, is protection from people who abuse people who are uninformed.’
Do mean the uninformed Gays and minorities who think they have a right to make the whole world bend over for their choices ?
The bottom line is this.
You can come up with all the anti discrimination laws and movements you want.
But you cant and never ever will legislate morals or ethics.
Their will still be racism, bigotry and discrimination no matter what you do.
these are the choice people make due to upbringing or events in their life.
We as parents can only teach our young that its wrong.
But To have the government try to tell me how I should act or treat others is wrong.
You claim free speech when you want to accuse the President of the United States a murderer and a liar.
But you want to silence those who have feelings towards gays for whatever reason.
You cant have it both ways.
Alright – too much to write and there’s a big Hillary story going on that I want to write about. So here’s a quick response…
* The ACLU was right to defend NAMBLA against that charge. As for NAMBLA, I hope they all die slow deaths.
* I came from an embryo, Micky, not embryos. Otherwise there’d be more me’s running around out there.
* I respect my family. I don’t give a rat’s @$$ about the flag.
* Again, learn your history. I am Irish, Italian, and Portuguese. In America today, I’m as “white” and undiscriminated against as you.
* Your point about recycling and your point about recycling CFLs argues against itself.
* No one is asking you to bend over, Micky. That’s why I call this a non-issue. It just shouldn’t matter to you. It doesn’t apply to you in any way.
* No one is trying to silence you. You’re just paranoid.
JMJ
JMJ said;
“Alright – too much to write and there’s a big Hillary story going on that I want to write about. So here’s a quick response…
I got a quick response, CHICKEN!
You said;
“* I respect my family. I don’t give a rat’s @$$ about the flag.”
I respect my flag the way that you respect your family, dont piss on my flag.
JMJ said;
“* The ACLU was right to defend NAMBLA”
Then why did they back out ? They DID NOT IN THE END !
JMJ said;
“I came from an embryo, Micky, not embryos. Otherwise there’d be more me’s running around out there.”
This about as dumb as you’ve gotten… so far
JMJ said;
” Again, learn your history. I am Irish, Italian, and Portuguese. In America today, I’m as “white” and undiscriminated against as you.
How the hell would you know ? I am a minority where I live ! And I dont go running to the ACLU everytime someone looks at me crosseyed.
JMJ said;
“Your point about recycling and your point about recycling CFLs argues against itself.”
How ? I beg you , how? Explain , elaborate. You cant just always be Gods word Jersey.
It doesnt work just because you say so.
JMJ said;
“No one is asking you to bend over, Micky. That’s why I call this a non-issue. It just shouldn’t matter to you. It doesn’t apply to you in any way.”
OH! Now you are allowed to decide what does and doesnt apply and matter to me ? What an A**hole.
JMJ said;
” No one is trying to silence you. You’re just paranoid.”
What an absolute line of crap !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You and your PC crap is the biggest silencing mechanism this country has ever seen.
JMJ exclaimed;
“Alright – too much to write and there’s a big Hillary story going on that I want to write about. So here’s a quick response…”
ROTFLMAO ! HA ! HA!
Some nut low on his meds with flares strapped to his ass storms the Hillary campaign headquarters and Jersey gets all lit up and excited , LOL!
Oo, Oo, gotta go ! Oo, Oo.
Probably was thinking it was some desperate right winger and couldnt wait to start slinging mud and write a big ole post about the crazy nazis and how they know they’re gonna lose.
Sorry, I cant help it. :-)
[…] reaction on the Republican You-Tube Debate December 1, 2007 — thoughtfulconservative Eric at THE TYGRRRR EXPRESS had a good summary, I thought. This is but one small example, One person asked what 3 programs or […]
I pretty much watch no TV new or any other MSM for that matter. There are so many writers from MSM and independents to read now a days on the internet. So I don’t know how this debate played with Main Stream America and the USAtoday crowd. I do know that it continues to be a subject today Dec 5 on the conservative blogs and articles. Which is a good thing I guess.
Until very recently I haven’t been able to see any of these debate other than the one that was on PBS because I don’t have cable. But I recently got Broadband and YouTube has been very kind to me as has C-Span .
I actually liked the way YouTube had each question isolated for your viewing. Sure it was bad but frankly no worse than others I have seen, they are all bad. I think the Republican bloggers went way overboard with their criticism. We all would like to see a better format but then again we get something. I like to think Republicans have a longer attention span personally I think 90 seconds is way to little time to properly answer a question. I would like to see more challenges between the candidates, those are the interesting parts, this is where one candidate can distinguish himself from the others.
Winners and losers. This is the first time I have actually thought Thompson showed well, he looked awake and answered the questions rather Presidential. Romney seemed uncomfortable to me very much out of his element (a pure waste of his $17 million). McCain didn’t look to bad, needs a stronger stand on immigration, he has made some stupid statements in the past about what American workers won’t do. Show me where those fields are for people to pick lettuce for $50K a year. Although I do like McCain and think he would make a pretty reasonable president. A lot of people saw Huckabee as a winner, I didn’t see that, he seems weak to me. I like Hunter but he doesn’t have a snowballs chance in a pizza oven. BTW Eric, the problem with American goods is not that they are inferior but they are non existent. Personally I try whenever possible to buy not just American but local, it is a challenge. I am 62 and have never owned anything but the big 3 American car manufacturers. At the moment I have 3 all with over 100K and going strong with little more than regular maintenance. Try it, you might like it. Buying American is a whole blog by itself, maybe I will write one. Guilani is ok and I can live with him, but I must say he does strike me as rather slippery but a good manager and I think he would be strong on Defense which is one of my key issues the other being borders and he is not as strong as Hunter or Tancredo but hopefully he would make the right decisions. Ron Paul is a nut job with followers that are even more nutty. This isn’t very complete but it is cold and I am going back to bed. OH, BTW, I am a very non committed Republican and have no idea who I will vote for but I do believe that all but Ron Paul are better than any of the Dems.
If anyone would like you can email me [email protected] or check out my blog http://barrym.townhall.com/