Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘liberal agenda’

So I have a few bones to pick with the state of Arkansas.  What in the world are they doing with this ban on adoptions for unmarried individuals?  See the link below:

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080825/ap_on_re_us/gay_foster_ban

 

There are a few levels here that need to be discussed.  First, this is supposedly going to be on the ballot in November, meaning there is still a chance to overrule this proposal.  Secondly, I can understand the hesitation to allow unmarried individuals to adopt, but on the flip side doesn’t a state agency look into this sort of thing?  I believe there are requirements that have to be fulfilled if an adoption between two people should occur.  Thirdly, since Arkansas doesn’t allow for gay marriage gay men and women are, for all intensive purposes, unable to adopt.  Take this into consideration.  Let’s say we have a straight unmarried couple who wants to adopt.  The only thing that this couple has to do, other than pass state clearance for adoption, is get married.  They can literally walk down to the courthouse on a lunch break and have a Justice of the Peace marry them, whereas gay men and women can’t. 

 

As mentioned in article it was the Arkansas Family Council that brought this to fruition.

“Arkansas needs to affirm the importance of married mothers and fathers,” Family Council President Jerry Cox said. “We need to publicly affirm the gold standard of rearing children whenever we can. The state standard should be as close to that gold standard of married mom and dad homes as possible.” 

Gold standard my ass, this infuriates me because these people hide behind marriage jargon when all it really is rhetoric that says that adoption is only good for straight people because churches define marriage as being between a man and a woman.  As if marriage determines the ability for people to raise a child.

 

But, I think the most important aspect of this whole thing is the children that are involved.  It kills me to think that there are people out there, like Jerry Cox, that would rather a child stay in a state system than let gay couples adopt him or her.  That is what it really comes down to.  Their moral standard doesn’t help the children that are waiting to be adopted…in fact I will even go as far as to say that their (Arkansas Family Council) moral righteousness is keeping children in the state system.  What is good about that?  What is good about denying a child a good home because the couple just happens to be gay?  The mean, cynical gay part of me says screw them and their proposal let them do what they want; I’m fed up with dimwitted idiots like Jerry Cox trying to be a straight martyr.  Then I think of those kids in the system who deserve a good home and I know that we have to stop blatant discrimination like this.  This is messed up.

 

On the upside though Arkansas’s Families First is campaigning against the measure!  “”We’re going to work very hard to defeat this because it is just bad policy for children,” Willhite said.  Debbie Willhite is a consultant for Families First.

 

 

I do have one more tiny little rant to cover.  Madonna during her Sticky and Sweet tour made a tiny reference to McCain…a reference that compared him to Robert Mugabe….and Hitler. 

 

See the link below:

 

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1593432/20080825/madonna.jhtml 

 

Now let me reiterate that in a past post I bashed McCain’s camp for making ludicrous comparisons between Brittney Spears, Parish Hilton, and Obama.  I have to say that Madonna’s comparison is absurd as well.  Don’t get me wrong the liberal part of me is cheering for her!  And, I also have to suspect that this piece political “discourse” didn’t hurt her in ticket sales either if you get what I’m saying.  Political uproar is always edgy, controversial…and a great money maker.

 

And rightly so McCain’s camp has done damage control denounced the negatively charged comments saying, “”The comparisons are outrageous, unacceptable and crudely divisive all at the same time,” said Tucker Bounds, A McCain campaign spokesman.  “It clearly shows that when it comes to supporting Barack Obama, his fellow worldwide celebrities refuse to consider any smear or attack off limits.”

 

You know what I have to say about that:

 

HYPOCRITES

 

The whole McCain camp is full of hypocrites.  So it is okay for McCain’s camp to put out a PAID (yes paid as in campaign funds donated by McCain supporters used to shoot a video) video comparing Obama to Spears and Hilton.  Then when a private citizen chooses to make a big statement in the same manner against McCain, the camp is shocked and sickened by it.  How could McCain’s people not see this one coming?  I think the best part of this whole thing is that McCain paid to have his video against Obama done and Madonna just hauled off and put it into her tour for no money.

 

No I lied I think the best part of the whole debacle is that Obama’s camp came out and denounced Madonna’s political jabs while still sticking to McCain supporters.  Tommy Vetor, a spokesperson for Obama’s camp, also spoke out about Madonna’s controversial move. “These comparisons are outrageous and offensive and have no place in the political process,” he said in a statement to CNN. “We hope that John McCain will offer a similar condemnation as his allies increasingly practice sleazy swift-boat politics.”

Booyah!!!!!!

I just want you to remember that it was McCain’s camp that opened Pandora’s Box here, and that they paid for a celebutack (see below).  Where as Obama is playing with clean political campaigning.

(celebutack- c-leb-you-tac- n. meaning the use of one’s celebrity, whether it be of paid or personal use, to attack ones opponent.)

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

You know I was going to discuss my weekend in OH then I saw this article on cnn.com and it made me sick. (See the link below)

 

 

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/28/church.shooting/index.html

 

 

This man in Tennessee goes into a liberal church, which he targeted for being liberal and killed two and wounded seven of the church goers.  Then thinking he would be killed by the police he left a note discussing how liberals and Democrats were causing America to fall into decline, and then he discussed how he did not like “hated” gay people. 

 

You know what make me so angry about this whole situation is that he believes that liberals are the cause for the decline of America.  This is coming from the person who brought a shot gun to a children’s performance at a church.  His reasoning is skewed and I find it ironic that he blames people like myself for America’s troubles when in actuality it is people like him that are to blame for the problems in America.  Instead of being tolerant of others and allowing for liberal and conservative ideas to co-exist he goes and tries to eliminate the “liberal movement.”

 

I mean in actuality if one would look at the entire picture they would see the ironic natures of this incident.  The shooting took place at a church, a place of worship and community.  A place where people find solace in times of need, a place where people are TAUGHT TO LOVE THY NEIGHBOR etc!  It funny because this guy, I can’t even bare to type his name in this blog because he doesn’t deserve the notoriety of being blogged about, is upset about the decline of American (which I suspect he is thinking about the morality of America) and he is the one that halls off shoots a bunch of people in a church.  It’s ironic that he thinks the liberal agenda is the decline of America; it wasn’t the liberal that brought the gun to church. 

 

On two final notes, in the article the police say that the man was upset because “the liberal movement was getting more jobs… And he felt like he was being kept out of the loop because of his age.”  I would just like to say that perhaps it wasn’t his age or the liberals keeping him from getting a job, perhaps it was because he was FUCKING NUTS.

 

Lastly, three of the seven victims that had been shot had come to the church for the first time.  Again, it’s ironic that the shooter touted in his letter that “because he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement … he would then target those that had voted them into office.” That’s funny because I find it hard to believe that he would be able to deduce the liberals in that church when voting for governmental positions are done by secret ballot (just because someone goes to a liberal church does not mean they are liberal) and three of his victims were at the church for the first time.

 

This is sad and upsetting.

 

 

Read Full Post »