The Gay Thread - Page 68

Alex · 10-12-2010, 07:41 PM

Because you disagree with him on this issue?

But this is a view of executive obligation that he expressed before he was elected so it isn't really a surprise to me.

That said, they could certainly sell it better. "We disagree with the law and hope that by appealing it to the highest authorities it will settle the issue nationally in favor of equal rights for everybody rather than just having a hodgepodge of individual regional rulings with minimal precedential weight."

innerSpaceman · 10-12-2010, 10:11 PM

Yes, Alex, because as a progressive and as a gay man, he's thrown me and mine under the bus at every opportunity. He's weak, and spineless, and a lying rat bastard and a bigot and a hypocrite and a sorry excuse for a man.

Alex · 10-12-2010, 10:27 PM

Wasn't arguing with you're reasons to be angry, just was answering your rhetorical question about the German accent.

You disagree strongly and so, as is your wont to lash out in the most extreme way possible, you go to the Nazi ****** realm of rhetoric.

BarTopDancer · 10-12-2010, 10:34 PM

Didn't iSm just Goodwin this thread?

Kevy Baby · 10-12-2010, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

Didn't iSm just Goodwin this thread?

No; Alex did

Chernabog · 10-12-2010, 11:35 PM

Fvck Obama. Amazing how Dear Leader.. errr I mean fierce advocate drove me straight out of the Democratic Party. The DOJ is under NO obligation to defend this, and what is worse is that the DOJ defends EVERY SINGLE unconstitutional law that screws over the gays and chooses not to on other issues.

Even past presidents have chosen not to defend laws they didn't like: (posted from Americablog) George W. Bush (ACLU et al., v. Norman Y. Mineta - "The U.S. Department of Justice has notified Congress that it will not defend a law prohibiting the display of marijuana policy reform ads in public transit systems."), Bill Clinton (Dickerson v. United States - "Because the Miranda decision is of constitutional dimension, Congress may not legislate a contrary rule unless this Court were to overrule Miranda.... Section 3501 cannot constitutionally authorize the admission of a statement that would be excluded under this Court's Miranda cases."), George HW Bush (Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission), and Ronald Reagan (INS v./ Chadha - "Chadha then filed a petition for review of the deportation order in the Court of Appeals, and the INS joined him in arguing that § 244(c)(2) is unconstitutional.")

Obama threw us under the bus -multiple times now. And those stupid A-list HRC gays who throw money at him and cheer him on at cocktail parties where he asks for more money. Screw those Uncle Tom bastards. They deserve to have this country run by the brain-dead willfully-ignorant teabaggers and their bigoted bible-thumping republican cousins. Take back America? Relocate me to Canada and you can have it.

JWBear · 10-13-2010, 09:13 AM

If the tea party isn't anti-Democrat, then why are they all running as Republicans?

scaeagles · 10-13-2010, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWBear

If the tea party isn't anti-Democrat, then why are they all running as Republicans?

Because it is about getting rid of the republican establishment that they believe have moved away from fiscal conservatism. Of course in the general they will be anti democrat because they are running against democrats. The movement, however, isn't about getting rid of democrats. It's about getting rid of republicans they feel act too much like the opposition party.

JWBear · 10-13-2010, 10:11 AM

And it's not just gays. All progressives are getting kicked.

innerSpaceman · 10-13-2010, 10:28 AM

Yep, he's driven the base away from the Democratic party or - at best - left them feeling so helpless to do anything but vote against Republicans and not FOR Democrats that they are demoralized and, despite their fears of worse to come, will stay away from the polls in droves. Brilliant strategy of re-election leadership.

Now the line coming from the White House, and I can hardly contain my laughter and disgust, is that Obama's justice department must appeal decisions he personally disagrees with, such as those on DOMA and DADT, lest a future Republican president fail to appeal future decisions ruling against, for example, the constitutionality of the health care bill.

OMG.

Either he's lying through his big teeth or he's the stupidest man alive. And, I'll give him one thing, he's the most intelligent president we've had in generations.

His idea of bowing down and granting ground to the Republicans in gestures to gain acquiescence on their parts was noble the first time, and perhaps the tenth. It has never worked, and if he doesn't know by now it never will - then I take back what I just wrote about his intelligence.

Nope, the thought that some future Republican president will refrain from appealing an anti-health bill ruling simply because he pursued the vitality of unconstitutional discriminatory laws with vigor against the mutually-hated queers of America is laughable in a madman sort of way.

So, yeah, I'm pretty mad.

10-12-2010, 07:41 PM	#1
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Because you disagree with him on this issue? But this is a view of executive obligation that he expressed before he was elected so it isn't really a surprise to me. That said, they could certainly sell it better. "We disagree with the law and hope that by appealing it to the highest authorities it will settle the issue nationally in favor of equal rights for everybody rather than just having a hodgepodge of individual regional rulings with minimal precedential weight."
	Submit to Quotes

10-12-2010, 10:11 PM	#2
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Yes, Alex, because as a progressive and as a gay man, he's thrown me and mine under the bus at every opportunity. He's weak, and spineless, and a lying rat bastard and a bigot and a hypocrite and a sorry excuse for a man.
	Submit to Quotes

10-12-2010, 10:27 PM	#3
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Wasn't arguing with you're reasons to be angry, just was answering your rhetorical question about the German accent. You disagree strongly and so, as is your wont to lash out in the most extreme way possible, you go to the Nazi ****** realm of rhetoric.
	Submit to Quotes

10-12-2010, 10:34 PM	#4
BarTopDancer Prepping... Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Here, there, everywhere Posts: 11,405	Didn't iSm just Goodwin this thread? __________________ Spork is the new MacGyver Postcards From My Edge
	Submit to Quotes

10-12-2010, 11:35 PM	#6
Chernabog Biophage Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: The Moon Posts: 2,679	Fvck Obama. Amazing how Dear Leader.. errr I mean fierce advocate drove me straight out of the Democratic Party. The DOJ is under NO obligation to defend this, and what is worse is that the DOJ defends EVERY SINGLE unconstitutional law that screws over the gays and chooses not to on other issues. Even past presidents have chosen not to defend laws they didn't like: (posted from Americablog) George W. Bush (ACLU et al., v. Norman Y. Mineta - "The U.S. Department of Justice has notified Congress that it will not defend a law prohibiting the display of marijuana policy reform ads in public transit systems."), Bill Clinton (Dickerson v. United States - "Because the Miranda decision is of constitutional dimension, Congress may not legislate a contrary rule unless this Court were to overrule Miranda.... Section 3501 cannot constitutionally authorize the admission of a statement that would be excluded under this Court's Miranda cases."), George HW Bush (Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission), and Ronald Reagan (INS v./ Chadha - "Chadha then filed a petition for review of the deportation order in the Court of Appeals, and the INS joined him in arguing that § 244(c)(2) is unconstitutional.") Obama threw us under the bus -multiple times now. And those stupid A-list HRC gays who throw money at him and cheer him on at cocktail parties where he asks for more money. Screw those Uncle Tom bastards. They deserve to have this country run by the brain-dead willfully-ignorant teabaggers and their bigoted bible-thumping republican cousins. Take back America? Relocate me to Canada and you can have it. __________________ And they say back then our universe Was a coal black egg Until the god inside Burst out and from its shattered shell He made what became the world we know ~ Bjork (Cosmogony)
	Submit to Quotes

10-13-2010, 09:13 AM	#7
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	If the tea party isn't anti-Democrat, then why are they all running as Republicans? __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes

10-13-2010, 10:11 AM	#9
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	And it's not just gays. All progressives are getting kicked. __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes

10-13-2010, 10:28 AM	#10
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Yep, he's driven the base away from the Democratic party or - at best - left them feeling so helpless to do anything but vote against Republicans and not FOR Democrats that they are demoralized and, despite their fears of worse to come, will stay away from the polls in droves. Brilliant strategy of re-election leadership. Now the line coming from the White House, and I can hardly contain my laughter and disgust, is that Obama's justice department must appeal decisions he personally disagrees with, such as those on DOMA and DADT, lest a future Republican president fail to appeal future decisions ruling against, for example, the constitutionality of the health care bill. OMG. Either he's lying through his big teeth or he's the stupidest man alive. And, I'll give him one thing, he's the most intelligent president we've had in generations. His idea of bowing down and granting ground to the Republicans in gestures to gain acquiescence on their parts was noble the first time, and perhaps the tenth. It has never worked, and if he doesn't know by now it never will - then I take back what I just wrote about his intelligence. Nope, the thought that some future Republican president will refrain from appealing an anti-health bill ruling simply because he pursued the vitality of unconstitutional discriminatory laws with vigor against the mutually-hated queers of America is laughable in a madman sort of way. So, yeah, I'm pretty mad.
	Submit to Quotes