July 28, 2006
Gay Republicans
I was reading over at GayPatriot, and commenting here and there. Then my comments started being flagged as spam for some reason.
Then the few comments that did post, disappeared. Odd.
One of the commenters there, made this claim:
I posted a summary of this page from the national archives, which list the great number of openly gay people Clinton appointed.
That disappeared too.
Update: They're looking into it.
Comments:Greg said (at July 31, 2006 05:30 PM):
I saw your original comment, you weren't insulting or vulgar. The only reason they deleted your comment was that you defended Clinton.
What I find hysterical is that gaypatriot, gaypatriotwest and their commentators constantly whine about "intolerant gay liberals!" also it's pointless to leave a comment on the gaypatiot blog, anyone who has a dissenting point of view gets called names by the regulars.
Henry said (at July 31, 2006 07:22 PM):
Well, right now, it appears to be a problem with the spam filter. I’m told they’re working on it – so we’ll see.
I know the commenters are stacked against the ‘liberals’, which is part of the reason why I want to comment. Especially on claims that are easy to disprove (like Bush appointed more gays than Clinton).
Good News
If you’re making 5.15 and hour, the GOP has tied your $2 an hour increase to tax breaks for the wealthy.
Who says the GOP aren’t worried about the poor?
July 27, 2006
Reason is my middle name
Paul, at Right Rainbow, calls Kofi Annan anti-semitic. Why?
(Note: For some reason, Paul has stuffed two unrelated ‘updates’ into the post, so you have to read through them to get to the actual post.)
Well, turns out, that Annan might have had a little bit of evidence on which to make the suggestion. (Via Kevin)
....The UN report says each time the UN contacted Israeli forces, they were assured the firing would stop.
A senior Irish soldier working for the UN forces had warned the Israelis six times that their bombardment was endangering the lives of UN staff, Ireland's foreign ministry said.
Update:
There’s been some talk of a Canadian report, saying that Hezbollah was using the UN observation area as a shield.
Still, I’m not sure that changes my thinking at all.
Must be a slow day at Volokh
I’m not sure which is weirder. That someone would spend the time to track this down, or that they would then spend time emailing people who relied on the official White House transcripts, to point out it is wrong. (Yes, I recognize the irony of me commenting on somthing, that I find odd that someone commented on. So, you don't need to comment on it.)
Here’s what slate reported (Cut down to the pertinent part):
Here’s what Eugene wants it corrected to:
I understand the need for some, to show Bush isn’t an idiot. But, come one, this is like a drop in the bucket (And, as a Bushism, this is a pretty weak example). And, to my eyes, the fact that he started a word (which Eugene seems sure was ‘conditions’) and switched thoughts before finishing it isn’t any better or worse than if he merely switched thoughts before starting it.
Here, Here
Sometimes having a public famous gay person is not a good thing.
Army discharges terror suspect bent on destruction of the US
No, actually, he was an Arab linguist accused of being gay.
July 26, 2006
Funny
An Australian host interviews Fred Phelps. And makes a pass at him….
Coulter
Using Ann’s logic, I have proof positive that President George W. Bush is a latent homosexual.
- He’s a fan of American Idol
- He has a small breed of dog, that he’s very attached to and spoils.
- He’s wear cowboy boots, even when not wrangling cows.
- He’s into bestiality
- He likes to hold hands with other guys.
Protecting the Children
While I’m not thrilled with the Washington outcome, from a legal standpoint, I understand it. Gays have not been, as of yet, identified as a suspect group. That means courts will, with a few exceptions, use rational basis as the measure of constitutionality of a law.
In other words, as long as the state can come up with any justification, the law will stand. Here, the states are saying they want to limit marriage to 1 man 1 woman, to promote stability and procreation, blah,blah,blah. Under Rational Basis, the court doesn’t need to agree with the reasoning, to find it passes rational basis.
This is especially true in the current political climate. And, indeed, the court’s majority opinion acknowledges this, by saying that gay marriage may be the future, but will not become the future by judicial action.
dolphin said (at July 26, 2006 05:00 PM):
But as Kip Esquire notes on his blog (if you're not reading it, you should be ;-)), hieghten scrutiny also applies in cases of fundamental rights regardless if the discriminated group is a suspect class.
My argument is though is that a woman should have equal rights to marry a woman as a man and vica versa, and gender is (usually) a suspect class.
Of course the majority opinion notes both of those viewpoints and dismisses them, however, I think they write them off too hastily and inadequately.
Henry said (at July 27, 2006 10:08 AM):
No, no. I understand the argument for the other side. And, I agree with it. The court could have given higher scrutiny.
But, while I wish they had, I understand why they didn’t.
We’ve nabbed another one
Won’t someone please think of the children?
Comments:July 25, 2006
Snowjob
Tony says that the ABA criticism of Bush and his ‘signing statements’ isn’t accurate. By misrepresenting the question, of course.
Of course they don’t say they’re not going to enact the law. What they say is that the president is not bound by the law.
Another republican compares being gay to being a criminal
But, really it’s all about protecting marriage.
Disappointing
I read this headline, and thought maybe someone pointed out the Catholic Church that gay marriage would not actually impact who the church marries.
Instead, the Church filed their brief way too late, and the court said “Too Bad” (as they should have).
July 24, 2006
The list keeps growing
Add Slovenia to the list of countries that give more rights to gay couples than the US.
ABA Chides Bush
Says he’s over-stepping his constitutional authority.
