Who wants to argue that Bush's new emphasis on passing an anti-gay marriage isn't a disgusting ploy to rally his base?

6/3/2006 8:29:47 PM

new emphasis?

6/3/2006 8:31:03 PM

Yes, it is a new emphasis. He hasn't been focusing on it lately.

6/3/2006 8:53:58 PM

i've had this haircut before

but now that i have it again

people still refer to it as my new haircut

6/3/2006 9:10:43 PM

recurring as needed emphasis?

6/3/2006 9:20:09 PM

i just laugh at the fundamentalists because they havent figured out that they keep getting played with rhetoric and very few actual results

6/3/2006 9:55:31 PM

Quote :

"they keep getting played with rhetoric and very few actual results"

This could be said about any group of supporters, democrats or republicans.

Well, except for the Federal Employee Union, they get what they want every year regardless of who is in power.

6/3/2006 10:02:48 PM

lots of groups get something though

6/3/2006 10:29:20 PM

i wish people like gary the preacher and george bush could have a debate

6/4/2006 11:39:15 PM

The Republicans have the executive office, both houses of congress and a conservative slant on the Supreme Court. If they haven't seized the oppurtunity to pass a constitutional amendment yet, they never will.

6/4/2006 11:44:22 PM

gotta keep that majority

(and i mean, they have to keep shit like this from ever actually becoming legislation - because it provides for that dual carrot on a stick, keep voting for us because we'll eventually do it, don't ever vote for them because they'll never do it blah blah blah)

[Edited on June 5, 2006 at 12:33 AM. Reason : `]

6/5/2006 12:32:18 AM

gays, just like immigrants, are being brought to the media attention to to TAKE AWAY FOCUS from REAL issues.

like the war, prisoner torture, NSA spying, etc...

as those issues actually have potential to lead to impeachment proceedings, were there a democratic majority in the legislature.

gg Karl Rove for pushing the redneck button.

6/5/2006 2:37:37 AM

Quote :

"gays, just like immigrants, are being brought to the media attention to to TAKE AWAY FOCUS from REAL issues."

i'd even say immigrantation problems to be a much greater issue regarding its effect on the economy and internal security then a the right of a bunch of fags getting married. i rly do think its rediculous, all the problems going on in just this country much less the world and the big issue is over keeping "the sanctity of marriage" stays intact. why don't we just go ahead and make an amendment outlawing divorce if this is our goal since so many marriages end in divorce anyway.

[Edited on June 5, 2006 at 11:25 AM. Reason : l]

6/5/2006 11:24:11 AM

uhm

have you paid attn to the immigration "problem"

they want to take the attention off of it because the senate and house are DOING EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEIR CONSTITUENTS WANT THEM TO DO

6/5/2006 11:30:34 AM

Quote :

"gays, just like immigrants, are being brought to the media attention to to TAKE AWAY FOCUS from REAL issues. like the war, prisoner torture, NSA spying, etc... as those issues actually have potential to lead to impeachment proceedings, were there a democratic majority in the legislature."

nah, i'd say immigration is a real issue. it's not like our entire country will go to hell in a handbasket if it doesn't get fixed yesterday, and I personally am for pretty relaxed immigration policies (although tight border control), but it is something that should be dealt with.


and where exactly have "high crimes or misdemeanors" been committed by the President (I presume he's the one you're talking about impeaching)?

6/5/2006 11:32:29 AM

Quote :

"and where exactly have "high crimes or misdemeanors" been committed"

oh, maybe to lie to the nation and the world about the decision to go to war, send thousands of US troops to their deaths, allow tens of thousands troops to be permanently disabled, hundreds of thousand civilian casualties... to manipulate intelligence to justify the invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation .... to allow grievious violations of the Geneva Conventions to occur on your command...

i think these might almost be as serious of "high crimes and misdemeanors" as lying about a blowjob.

never mind the the whole domestic spying/Fourth Amendment thing.





[Edited on June 5, 2006 at 2:58 PM. Reason : ]

6/5/2006 2:51:04 PM

Quote :

"uhm have you paid attn to the immigration "problem" they want to take the attention off of it because the senate and house are DOING EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEIR CONSTITUENTS WANT THEM TO DO"

uhm

have you paid attn to the diff btwn the Executive and the Legislative?

the President wanders by and says "immigration" and the entire Congress gets into a bloody smackdown with each other. conveniently, right at the time when Iraq War and NSA spying issues is dragging the president down into the lowest approval rating ever?

and the entire nation forgot what the issues were, because goddamit them Mexicans took ur jobs!!!1

I hate to admit it, but the White House strategists (aka Karl Rove and friends) are fucking genius. "Polls got you down? Play the race card, and watch the nation go into a frenzy."





[Edited on June 5, 2006 at 2:59 PM. Reason : ]

6/5/2006 2:57:30 PM

Quote :

"oh, maybe to lie to the nation and the world about the decision to go to war, send thousands of US troops to their deaths, allow tens of thousands troops to be permanently disabled, hundreds of thousand civilian casualties... to manipulate intelligence to justify the invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation .... to allow grievious violations of the Geneva Conventions to occur on your command... i think these might almost be as serious of "high crimes and misdemeanors" as lying about a blowjob. never mind the the whole domestic spying/Fourth Amendment thing."

1. I never said shit about Clinton, although for the record, he clearly committed a crime, but was spared conviction because, well, sensibility prevailed.

2. hardly anyone is arguing that the domestic spying thing was criminal. I don't like how some of that was/is conducted, but I don't think any laws were violated.

3. There might be a LITTLE more grey area with some things pertaining to the prosecution of the war in Iraq (and I'm really just offering that as a caveat that there are tons of issues to look at--I can't think of anything offhand that would fall into that category), but I don't think there is much of a case to argue that the President has done anything criminal.



If an elected official exercises poor judgement, does things that people don't like, or even does things people view as wrong--even if it's VERY poor judgement or VERY unpopular or wrong, it's dealt with via political maneuvering and/or the election process. Impeachment is a legal process for dealing with criminal behavior via putting the accused on trial.

6/5/2006 3:15:45 PM

Quote :

"hardly anyone is arguing that the domestic spying thing was criminal. I don't like how some of that was/is conducted, but I don't think any laws were violated. "

maybe because the president's political party controls the congressional committies that would launch any investigations.

the Nixon whitehouse said the same thing, about it not being a crime. unfortunately for Nixon, his party didnt control congress.

and you dont think any laws were violated? ever heard of FISA?

this is currently remaining on the back burner. if dems take congress, it will be brought to the front. if reps hold congress it will fade away.

6/5/2006 3:20:42 PM

Quote :

"I don't think there is much of a case to argue that the President has done anything criminal"

nothing is a "done deal", but there plenty of cases to argue. and i'm pretty sure they will be argued if/when the president's allies lose the ability to squelch all discussions and investigations into the various and sundry matters.

6/5/2006 3:24:00 PM

Quote :

"I never said shit about Clinton, "

i know, but when impeachment is discussed, we need to have context

Quote :

"although for the record, he clearly committed a crime"

oh sure. when the opposition party lines up a prosecutor with a political/religious agenda, gives him hundreds of millions of dollars to spend and years to investigate... he starts with an open-ended investigation into commodities/real estate fraud, finds nothing, and after 3 years comes back with a single lie covering up an extra-marital affair...

well, holy shit, i don't think anyone would be safe from that kind of witchhunt.

Quote :

"but was spared conviction because, well, sensibility prevailed."

agreed

6/5/2006 3:32:54 PM

ok, lemme rephrase

nsa wiretap etc ---> leads to debate over immigration smokescreen

senate/house fuck over their constituencies by voting for worker plans and amnesty-lite

immigration fuckup ----> leads to debate over homos smokescreen

the latest smokescreen is a product of the last smokescreen

is that more palatable for you?

6/5/2006 4:34:11 PM

gays are trying to make an absolute mockery of marriage

i mean heterosexual marriages survive, what 40% of the time?

this is an assualt on freedom

6/5/2006 5:18:42 PM

^ sounds like you support incest.

6/5/2006 5:45:26 PM

Quote :

"is that more palatable for you"

yeah thats more or less what im sayin.

*both* of these (immigration and gay marriage) are hotbutton issues that are divisive, and cause congress to trip all over itself, while BushCo winds up getting a pass on shit that really matters.

really, how do immigrants hurt you or anyone else here. they dont, any more than two homos getting married.

divide and conquer.




[Edited on June 5, 2006 at 6:47 PM. Reason : ]

6/5/2006 6:29:04 PM

Quote :

"how do immigrants hurt you or anyone else here"

Immigrants don't hurt. Illegal immigrants do.

The fags I could give two shits about. At least they pay taxes.

6/5/2006 7:39:09 PM

it is disgusting

i fucking hate this political fear mongering

it's beneath all of us

6/5/2006 8:00:52 PM

Quote :

"WAIT WAIT WAIT CAN SOMEONE REMIND ME WHAT PRESSING BUSINESS THE SENATE UNDERTOOK IN 2005 THAT PREVENTED THEM FROM LOOKING AT THIS SERIOUS COUNTRY-THREATENING ISSUE??"

6/5/2006 9:03:03 PM

I'll bite.

WHAT PRESSING BUSINESS DID THE SENATE UNDERTAKE IN 2005 THAT PREVENTED THEM FROM LOOKING AT THIS SERIOUS COUNTRY-THREATENING ISSUE??

6/5/2006 9:25:55 PM

Quote :

"Immigrants don't hurt. Illegal immigrants do"

]

o rly? pls to tell, how that the illegal immigrants have hurt you. you personally. like, as in how, exactly, have you been denied some of your god-given amurrican rights because some illegal immigrant scored some points in your zero-sum game?

did they steal your job while you weren't looking? did they beat you up and take your lunch money? did they stick their little wetback peckers in your sister's bunghole?

do you really think that your pitiful taxes that you pay actually mean anything? do you think that they are sneaking off with something better than you because they "dont pay any taxes"? i got fucking news for you. they pay taxes. they pay sales tax, which is exactly as much tax as any other poor person, or family living at or below the poverty level pays.

OMF POOR PEOPLE DONT PAY TAX!!!!!1 WTF THEY Get FREE MEDical sERVIces and scHOOL luNCHes foR noTHING!!!!! oh NOOO OUR coUNTry iS GOIng To hELL!!!!!!1

i dont know why the fuck you people think being an illegal immigrant is some sort of gravy train. jesus christ already. they sneak over here to pick lettuce, dig ditches, wash hotel laundry, live like monks, and send their cash back to their grandma in mexico. so the fuck what.

having worked several years in electrical construction, I knew a lot of mexican drywall hangers, and they worked circles around any crew of fatass redneck inbred nascar fucknuts from bumfuck Peckerwood County. Some of my best electrical helpers were mexicans who spoke very little english.



[Edited on June 5, 2006 at 11:56 PM. Reason : ]

6/5/2006 11:51:32 PM

Quote :

"i dont know why the fuck you people think being an illegal immigrant is some sort of gravy train. jesus christ already. they sneak over here to pick lettuce, dig ditches, wash hotel laundry, live like monks, and send their cash back to their grandma in mexico. so the fuck what."

There are American prostitution rings that serve them specifically. Not saying that's super common or significant...just saying...

6/6/2006 3:31:46 AM

^ um. i mean in the monetary sense, you know, all piled up in one building... i didnt mean they were celibate.

but i guess it wasnt really clear.

maybe i shoulda said that they live like mexicans. o wait. i mean, they live like vietnamese... er... hm. shit.

hey, whats a good metaphor for "you and 20 cousins crammed into a 3 bedroom apartment" ?

6/6/2006 3:44:27 AM

^I understood what you meant. And while these illegal workers do often share small apartments with lots of people, comparing all of them to monks is silly because typically monks don't have money for prostitutes.

[Edited on June 6, 2006 at 3:50 AM. Reason : sss]

6/6/2006 3:48:51 AM

Quote :

"because typically monks don't have money for prostitutes"

a lotta fuck you know. what do you think they do when they go into town once a month? buy bread and cheese???

6/6/2006 3:54:12 AM

Uninsured drivers affect the insurance rates of everyone else.

Those without health insurance affect the insurance rates of everyone else.

The coyotes and other crime that come with the illegal immigrant business requires law enforcement, which costs money and reduces the services available to everyone else.

The very fact that they are illegal means that they are stuck outside of our society, and will likely stay there.

You're right, one illegal immigrant doesn't really cost much to anyone. But at some point, being nickeled and dimed by millions begins to add up.

6/6/2006 7:11:16 AM

Quote :

"lying about a blowjob...under oath"

People always forget that. When you lie under oath, that's where the crime comes in. No one (sensible) cares that he was getting blown by a fattie (look at Hillary, who can blame him). What we care about is that he didn't just own up to it when he was put under oath. That's when you tell the truth or else its against the law.

Now, if you want to argue that Bush broke the law, then fine. If he lied under oath, then fine, but getting us involved in a war you disagree with is not necessarily, in and of itself, illegal.

6/6/2006 7:47:15 AM

^ Or he could have just refused to go under oath.

Or he could just say "I refuse to answer such base and demeaning questions."

What was the judge going to do? "Mr President, answer his demeaning question or I'll find you in contempt!"

"I'm the damn President! No matter what you do I'm walking out of here and back to the White House."

6/6/2006 9:06:07 AM

You'd be surprised how fast they would hold him in contempt if he refuses to answer it more than twice. Judges would love to go down in history as being the one that jailed the president to not following the law of the land.

6/6/2006 11:06:23 AM

Yes, I suppose I would be surprised if that is the case.

In Reality, you cannot jail the President for anything until after he has been impeached. Exceptions can be made, but not so some judge can feel good about his place in history.

Nevertheless, I still prefer the "not going under oath" solution. You cannot compel a President to testify until after he is out of office. He was there voluntarily, he could just as easily said "I'm busy for the next few years. Get me then."

6/6/2006 1:46:01 PM

Quote :

"Who wants to argue that Bush's new emphasis on passing an anti-gay marriage isn't a disgusting ploy to rally his base?"

I'll argue that its instead the first sign of his transition to "lets start trying to do shit since we only have another year or two in office"

6/6/2006 2:06:07 PM

6/6/2006 2:47:46 PM

Quote :

"i know, but when impeachment is discussed, we need to have context"

Or Andrew Johnson?


btw, the vote comes up today in the Senate for an Amendment. The Pubs know that they do not have enough to for it to pass now, but they are doing it to say "Well, we need more seats in November so we can make it pass". Is there somewhere that has the definition of marriage spelled out explicitly?

Total smokescreen. gg on trying to use the Constitution to curb freedoms....

6/7/2006 7:36:15 AM

Quote :

"gg on trying to use the Constitution to curb freedoms"

Hey, it's a democracy, curbing freedom is what they do.

6/7/2006 7:49:44 AM

Quote :

"joe_schmoe: a lotta fuck you know. what do you think they do when they go into town once a month? buy bread and cheese???"

I used the word "typically" for a reason.

[Edited on June 7, 2006 at 1:06 PM. Reason : ddd]

6/7/2006 1:06:29 PM

Bush is pulling out Immigration and Gays for one reason: all indicators at this time point to large gains by Dems in the congressional races this November.

As the most visible leader of the republican party, he's got about the lowest approval rating as president ever in history.

combine this with a plethora of recent republican ethical and criminal scandals, an increase in the percentage of likely voters who identify as democrats, and the likelihood of large numbers of Republican voters staying home.

the public is largely united in their disapproval of Bush and the Republican-led congress.

so he needs somethign to fire up the Republican base and get the public divided again.

what better than:

"Mexicans Took Ur Jobs!!!"

and

"OMG, Faggots are Destroying the Sanctity of Marriage"

on the one issue, bush supports a position on immigrants that pisses off large numbers of traditionally anti-immigrant, xenophobic republicans. But since the legislation is written and approved by congress, that's where these republicans are going to take their anger out.

on the other issue, he rallies the fundamentalist christians to his side, by supporting a constitional amendment that is doomed to failure, so he can in essence say "look fellas, i tried, but the gay-loving liberals in congress defeated it." So again, the bigoted republicans will focus their anger on congress.

not to mention all this has the added benefit of taking the focus off Bush's multiple failures.

Its a brilliant strategy: The Politics of Hate. For bringing out the worst in people, and using it to their political advantage, the Republicans just can't be beat. This has Karl Rove's signature all over it. He's a fucking genius.




[Edited on June 7, 2006 at 11:54 PM. Reason : ]

6/7/2006 11:51:10 PM

I wonder how many democrats would have won if they said that they agreed with their opponents on these two issues.

6/8/2006 12:06:05 AM

The only thing missing from this ploy is a law to ban flag burning

6/8/2006 3:38:12 PM

But children raised by a man and a women are more likely to suceed than those that are not.

6/8/2006 9:27:27 PM

you know what?

we need more gay people

especially more gay dudes

because, personally, i want the world to be more fabulous

6/8/2006 9:39:37 PM

Quote :

"The only thing missing from this ploy is a law to ban flag burning :rolly-eyes: "

see, your rolly eyes underscores the cunning that is Karl Rove. And half the fuckers in this country are still like, "Karl who?"

6/9/2006 3:15:30 AM