LOL!! One of the reasons Chris Christie doesn't worry me in 2016...he'll be eaten ALIVE by the GOP during the primaries.
Some Congress Democrats Split With Obama on Gay Marriage…
Republicans are still upset with William Seward for serving under Andrew Johnson? Man can they hold a grudge.
dan, as a prominent gay washington celebrity, what are your thoughts and feelings about this shadowy organization known as the: washington restaurant association.

should i trust these guys?
You can support marriage equality as a Republican as long as you're not presently running for office as a Republican, which rather mitigates against your being able to change the nature of a political party, the putative job of which is to elect people to office in order to carry out certain policies.

I think he has that wrong. The political PARTY is not just its elected officials currently in office. It IS the former officials, as well as the various functionaries and ordinary member and precinct chairpeople. As far as a party goes, these people do have prominence within theirs, and their actions are certainly stirring debate within it.

It would doubtless be more substantial if current leading officeholders (e.g., Boehner, McConnell, or Perry) were on board with this, as that would indicate that the GOP was ready to do the right thing right now. But their party has surrendered a lot of control to the bigots over the decades, which is why bigotry is in their platform and why no office holder is willing to risk taking this position publicly. But that doesn't mean that this amicus brief is insignificant, either to the Supreme Court or for what it says about the GOP.
But, but! Clint Eastwood signed it.

Reading the comments over at breitbart makes me want to punch so many faces. Here's one beautiful example that sums up the bigotry AND the sexism:

Commenter 1: No rational human thinks it is normal for one man to screw another man and call it marriage.

Commenter 2: But two babes making out is super hot right bro?

Commenter 3: Depends on the babes.
I made a similar comment about the Andrew posting a few days ago. Who cares when it is all out-of-power Republicans? They have almost zero influence or ability to create policy.

I'll be impressed when the people holding the GOP purse-strings sign on. Till then, same shit, different day.
There are only 2 people that I make a point of reading every day. Charlie and Dan. I am so fed up with Republican family, friends, acquaintances who claim not to be racists or homophobes, yet they continue to call themselves Repubs. Sorry, Matt (5) but organizations are what they do and what they officially stand for, not what individual members claim to believe. R's give their money and their votes to a Party that very loudly and proudly hates gays and blacks and browns. Their actions prove it every day. How does anyone of the least bit of integrity continue to call themselves a Repub while claiming not to support what the movers and shakers in the Party are doing? I call them cowards who are embarrassed to admit their true feelings. You can't belong to the Klan while protesting that you aren't a racist, you just happen to enjoy the company of racists.

Charlie got it spot on in this piece. The Republicans who signed this are trying to look better than they are and every right wing Justice on the Court knows it too. Where were these enlightened Repubs during their convention? I didn't see any of them challenging their Party's platform then.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen counts as a pretty influential Republican (in office) Congresswoman. (I have her position on the issues like Honduras, but that is another story.)
Are you fucking kidding me Dan? You post and epic rant about what am asshole I am for calling your boy Sullivan bad names but never addressed the main point of my comment, namely that this brief was signed by NO currently elected Republicans because Republicans are basically pieces of shit and they wouldn't risk anything with the electorate. And now you post this piece likes it news to us? Yeah, some of us got it a couple of days ago but thanks anyway. Too bad you didn't!
@10 - Where is this rant of which you speak of? I'm curious as I must have missed it. Link, please.
It's in the comments on original thread about Sullivan's response to this brief from Tuesday. Post title is The Right to Choose Your Next-of-Kin. Not sure how to do a link, I'm old and stupid when it comes to the internets:)
While it is true that the immediate impact of the brief (and its Republican signatures) on current policy is incredibly minimal, it is still a very significant and welcome sign that there is meaningful change around the corner. Even just 5 years ago, this would have been impossible.
@12 - Found it, thank you. Interesting read. I sometimes find the comments section more informative than the original article.
@13 Is this your first awareness of Republicans? Their support of anything is about as solid as a fart inna hot skillet, as me old granny used to say. Here today and gone tomorrow. Plus they deny they ever supported such a thing in the first place. Allies are made of stronger stuff than you can find among that group of GOPers. You give them too much credit.
I'll take hopeful signs where I can find 'em.
@13 Clearly, an amicus brief is not nothing, but the problem is that a significant portion of the press is giving the Republican Party undeserved credit on the backs of these has-beens and never-wases.

You're basically telling us to ease up on KKK apologists who think that Clayton Bigsby is some sort of sign of the strides we've made towards equality.
@6, Maybe I'm being too nice here, but commentor 2 may have been being sarcastic in order to point out the ridiculousness of 1's comment.
@19 oh, he was, but commenter 3 came in to really seal the deal.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.