[www.latimes.com]
"The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston said the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, discriminates against married same-sex couples by denying them federal benefits."

- - --
Blech. We'll have more dumb polarizing political maneuvering, successfully distracting my party from being successful in 2012.

All I can hope is that the Congress doesn't become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party. It's never good when two branches belong to one party.

>>All I can hope is that the Congress doesn't become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party. It's never good when two branches belong to one party.

I tend to vote for them yet I wouldn't expect them to get anything done even in that situation.

---

Uh oh. I'm suddenly feeling less heterosexual.


Someone stop me before I start downloading Cher albums from iTunes!

Quote
cbelt3
It's never good when two branches belong to one party.

fully agree, that is how we got in this mess. Having just one party deciding stuff from 200-2008.

That isn't to say there wasn't a mess before 2000, but things went completely stupid once the only power check became the courts (and then those became politicized as well).

Politicos need to relearn the art of compromise.

---

You can tell a lot about a woman by her hands...
- For example, if they are wrapped around your throat she's probably slightly upset.

Quote
Ombligo
Politicos need to relearn the art of compromise.

Amen to that!

---

"You can believe me because I never lie and I'm always right."

An important aspect of the decision is that it was made by two republican appointees and one democratic appointee. How is Boehner going to spin that one?

---

"So be proud to be a decent American instead of just a w'anker whipping up fear!" - Michael D. Higgins, President of Ireland

>>How is Boehner going to spin that one?

I'm not sure but...

hm, its too easy but i might as well finish it.

it will probably involve crying.

---

It's a pretty narrow ruling. The appeals court questions whether it is constitutional for the United States to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. It does not address whether gays have a constitutional right to marry, or whether states without a gay marriage provision should be required to honor a gay marriage made in another state.

Faaaaabulous!

Quote
beagledave
Uh oh. I'm suddenly feeling less heterosexual.


Someone stop me before I start downloading Cher albums from iTunes!

Quote
Bill in NC
Faaaaabulous!

Quote
beagledave
Uh oh. I'm suddenly feeling less heterosexual.


Someone stop me before I start downloading Cher albums from iTunes!

What part of the country, or what time period do I need to have lived in to know gay people that listen to Cher or say "fabulous?"

---

MR/F Guestmap: [www.mapservices.org]

Quote
Black

Quote
Bill in NC
Faaaaabulous!

Quote
beagledave
Uh oh. I'm suddenly feeling less heterosexual.


Someone stop me before I start downloading Cher albums from iTunes!

What part of the country, or what time period do I need to have lived in to know gay people that listen to Cher or say "fabulous?"

DC in the 90s would have worked.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
davester
An important aspect of the decision is that it was made by two republican appointees and one democratic appointee. How is Boehner going to spin that one?

He'd have prefer it come from the 9th district. The right wing segment of SCOTUS would have as well.

(two edits for one missing " ' "; I should be writing copy for the Romney campaign.)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/01/2012 01:13AM by RgrF.

I stole it from NPH's "It's not just for gays anymore!" routine.

Sorry, thought most would get the reference.

Quote
rjmacs

Quote
Black

Quote
Bill in NC
Faaaaabulous!

Quote
beagledave
Uh oh. I'm suddenly feeling less heterosexual.


Someone stop me before I start downloading Cher albums from iTunes!

What part of the country, or what time period do I need to have lived in to know gay people that listen to Cher or say "fabulous?"

DC in the 90s would have worked.

Quote
cbelt3
All I can hope is that the Congress doesn't become a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party. It's never good when two branches belong to one party.

'Happened when Obama took office.

They deadlocked on almost every issue because a strong minority tried to cater to the extreme and the leadership was too busy fundraising to pay attention to lawmaking.

'Same as it ever was.

The GOP is becoming monolithic, the other party will never be monolithic.

Quote
RgrF
The GOP is becoming monolithic, the other party will never be monolithic.

How many pro-life Democrats do you know? I know a bunch of pro-choice Republicans. Monoliths are hard to come by in reality, but are easy pickings in ideology-land.

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

A lot. Pro choice isn't anti choice. As to monolithic, ask Dick Lugar.

Quote
RgrF
A lot. Pro choice isn't anti choice. As to monolithic, ask Dick Lugar.

Okay. How many anti-choice Democrats do you know? I know lots of pro-choice Republicans.

Dick Lugar won almost 40% of the primary vote this year. Which part of the monolith was voting for him?

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
rjmacs

Quote
RgrF
The GOP is becoming monolithic, the other party will never be monolithic.

How many pro-life Democrats do you know?

I'm a pro-life Democrat. (I'm also pro-choice.)

I hate that term"pro-life". Thank you Dennis for pointing out its blatant dishonesty.

---

"You can believe me because I never lie and I'm always right."

Quote
Dennis S

Quote
rjmacs

Quote
RgrF
The GOP is becoming monolithic, the other party will never be monolithic.

How many pro-life Democrats do you know?

I'm a pro-life Democrat. (I'm also pro-choice.)

See above for correction and reframing. No answers to the question yet....

---

rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future

Quote
rjmacs

Quote
RgrF
A lot. Pro choice isn't anti choice. As to monolithic, ask Dick Lugar.

Okay. How many anti-choice Democrats do you know? I know lots of pro-choice Republicans.

Dick Lugar won almost 40% of the primary vote this year. Which part of the monolith was voting for him?

As to monolithic, Dick Lugar is was a (I think six term or so Senator) who failed to garner enough votes from his own party to prevent a right wing ideologue from capturing the nomination, thus driving that party even further right. Where will those Lugar supporters go if they don't leave the party?

I don't personally know enough Dems to identify any of them as anti-choice, who are the pro-choice Repubs you know?

Maybe he'll take a page from the Senator from Connecticut and run as an Indy.