MetaChat REGISTER   ||   LOGIN   ||   IMAGES ARE OFF   ||   RECENT COMMENTS




artphoto by splunge
artphoto by TheophileEscargot
artphoto by Kronos_to_Earth
artphoto by ethylene

Home

About

Search

Archives

Mecha Wiki

Metachat Eye

Emcee

IRC Channels

IRC FAQ


 RSS


Comment Feed:

RSS

13 February 2006

Hmm, must be an election year.... Bill Frist told a conservative conference this weekend that he's penciled in June 5th as a good day to start attacking gay people again.
Anything special about June 5th? Wedding month?
posted by matildaben 13 February | 16:47
Frist says that's the day he'll bring an anti-gay marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution up for a vote in the Senate.

Crap like this scares me to death.
posted by BoringPostcards 13 February | 16:50
Hmm, did he send the gays a meeting announcement on Outlook? Sometimes I just click "accept" on those things without really looking at it - then I'm surprised when something shows up on my calendar that I never knew about! This may be a good way to coordinate with the gays for the attack.
posted by mullacc 13 February | 16:51
I'm for an anti-marriage ammendment. Not just prohibiting future marriages, but dissolving all extant ones, at least in the eyes of the state. Why? Because fuck 'em, that's why.
posted by Eideteker 13 February | 17:33
Interestingly, I got a survey from Frist's office in the snail mail just now. Sent to me, and I quote, "with careful consideration of those who are most active in their support of President Bush and the Republican Party"

I'm not a Republican.
I have never actively supported President Bush.
I may have once supported the Republican party, but it was a long time ago, and I never did it actively.
\/\/hateva, Bill! \/\/hateva!

Question number 4: "Should Congress continue to pursue a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman?"

I'm gonna fuck this survey UP. Righteous!
posted by WolfDaddy 13 February | 17:44
"Should Congress continue to pursue a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman?"

This wording is so fucking infuriating. Shouldn't it be difficult to sleep at night when you can't even put the goal of your Amendment in writing?
posted by mullacc 13 February | 17:58
I realize that it is usually written as "protect marriage as the ONLY the union of one and one woman", but even that seems to come at the issue from oblique angle.
posted by mullacc 13 February | 18:00
"protect marriage as ONLY the union of one man and one woman"

Christ, maybe there should be an amendment to deny my right to make typos on the internet.
posted by mullacc 13 February | 18:02
Question number 5: "Should Congress continue to pursue films about traditional cowboy relationships? And shouldn't Anne Hathaway be required by law to show her boobs in every movie she stars in--even if it has the word 'Princess' in the title?"
posted by ColdChef 13 February | 19:30
for them every day is a good day to bash us...i wish people were smart enough to realize they're focusing on us instead of all the million real issues needing attention.
posted by amberglow 13 February | 19:32
Who can blame us? You're all so fucking adorable!
posted by ColdChef 13 February | 19:37
Anne Hathaway is perfection.
posted by weretable and the undead chairs 13 February | 20:05
amberglow: sadly, I don't think they're actually focused on the gay community.

I think they make a public spectacle of that to get the hate vote, the "morals" vote, and to distract from their real plans.

This deficit isn't accidental, nor are the continuing tax cuts. I truly believe that they're implementing the long-discussed small government idea, where you purposefully overspend, and undertax, for such a long time that the only way to recover is to slash government services to nothing.
posted by mosch 13 February | 22:35
I know that, and you do, but why does 40% of the voting pop not? Why are they so easily swayed by nonsense like this, when their lives are never improved by the GOP, unless they're already rich and connected?
posted by amberglow 13 February | 23:37
I get stupid email from Newsmax and it's usually about how Hillary's evil and a lesbian and a murderer, with tips on how to get rich. (it's very 90s retro)
posted by amberglow 13 February | 23:40
amberglow: I wish I knew how to let all those people know that:

a) republicans don't actually care about their issues (if they thought they could permanently end abortion and homosexuality, they wouldn't bother with the fight. They're good political fodder simply because they'll never, ever end.)

b) voting republican won't make you rich. socialist policies won't make you rich either, but they'll make sure that you don't die terribly poor.

c) you won't care about these tax cuts if you get rich anyway. If you're taking home $300k/yr, your life won't be drastically improved (or changed in any noticeable fashion whatsoever) if you suddenly have $310 or $320 instead. I'd venture to say that even a bump to $400 would have only minor effects, unless you're very, very bad with money.
posted by mosch 14 February | 00:52
I found out what happened to MeeF || Who here likes pancakes?

HOME  ||   REGISTER  ||   LOGIN