snuffbox

Read what I wrote. At no point did I say he should drop everything else and singlehandedly force through a law mandating gay marriage. First, that isn't possible. He's president elect, not Senate Majority Leader. What I said is that he could come out and say, in ONE SIMPLE SENTENCE that he would not, ever, under any circumstance, SIGN a passed bill that outlaws rights to certain individuals based on thier differences to others. In doing so, he will have spent all of about 8 seconds and could give the message that, 'try all you want to drive the wedge through America and deny more rights to more people, but that bill will stand ZERO chance of being signed into law as long as I am president of the United States.' If his administration will collapse under the weight of one pro-active sentence, he should still be at the state legislature level.

With this news, I feel I must apologize to Invader. A one sentence answer to a proposed law of oppression just could not conceivably fit into that kind of schedule.

The Russian has been saying this for awhile. He says that his fellow Russians are only now taking it seriously in light of the American economy (the economy will not effect China, Europe, Canada, Mexico, or maybe Japan apparently). Does Glenn Beck normally count on Russian professors such as this gentleman for his information?

Did the state legislature just not have enough time to get a special election going?

It's worth complaining because he's WRONG. Should Strom Thurmond be given a free pass in history because he was never going to do anything about civil rights in the first place? You show your ignorance when saying it's just about a piece of paper. Not only have the reasons why they want to be married been listed repeatedly before, I've also enumerated them here. You're either deaf, blind, can't read, or are just plain dumb if you haven't caught any of them yet. And, not enough time? "I will never sign a bill that allows the federal govt to deny rights to anybody based on their differences to others. Period." Was that too long? I guess I just don't know how busy the president-elect is.

Um, the fact that he won't fight for human rights for gay people, along with the Warren thing, is why I've made my complaints about him. Not wanting to do anything in thefirst place doesn't really help him on the rights front.

Remember when Lyndon Johnson didn't get re-elected in 1964? Served him right for those Civil Rights bills he just had to get passed.

But they didn't fight hard enough to ensure themselves of Hawaii.

That's easy to say from the distance of the internet. But facts are awfully stubborn. You don't have to be homophobic to be wrong, you just have to be wrong. Laziness and apathy are not reasons to deny rights, either. People will fight for human rights whether it scares the shit out of others or not. The delicacy of people is not nearly as big a concern as the freedom that we ALL deserve. Abolitionists were not in the majority, either. Not even up to emancipation in 1863, nor after. This is not a game of popularity, this is not high school. It is real life and is the denial of certain aspects of life to certain people. It is easy as punch and pie to avoid issues like these. They frighten us. They make us feel uncomfortable. We easily talk ourselves into fear and beligerence and inaction. But that does not mean that those who will fight for rights for ALL humans will stop and say, "you know what? those gay people are just too different and its just not cool. im gonna stop now!" When one cares about freedom and rights for all mankind, stopping is not ever an option no matter what direction the zyphyrs of public opinion blow.

Yes, absolutely. It is a manufactured right but, then, so are almost all others. Our rights as people, our inalienable rights, did not sprout up from the ground. They have been conceived in the minds of people and have grown up from that conception. Marriage has become one of those rights. Married people find themselves qualified for unique tax structures, the ability to visit each other in hospitals beyond closing time, make joined business decisions, adopt children, etc. Homosexuals, SOLELY because they are different than the majority (and those in power) are denied the right to marry one another and, therefore, are denied all of the attributive rights and benefits.

Yeah, supposed to be 'for.' It is a big deal. To borrow (and alter) a bit from our old friend, George Wallace: Human rights now, human rights tomorrow, human rights forever. As a country and as people, one of the worst things we can do is deny rights to certain individuals solely because they are different. There can be no exceptions for this, from any political party. In allowing Warren to pray at his inauguration, it allows the rhetoric of hate and oppression to shine brightly. It deserves no place in this country or anywhere else in the world. Period. Obama hasn't had 8 years to fuck everything up, yet. It will take a considerable amount of effort to top Bush Junior's level of pathetic. Obama, more than likely, won't come close to that. But saying that gay people can't marry (let alone Warren's comparisons to pedophilia and farm-sex) is the exact same thing as not allowing black-white marriages in the past. We are denying rights based on a difference. Human rights is an incredibly important issue and I have no problem saying somebody has violated this tenet, whether I voted for them or not. Even worse is how "conservatives" (the ones who think the biggest gov't in history is conservative) want a federal law to outlaw this right for these people, and want tax money spent on enforcing this new law.

Yep. We'll all be under the Canadian influence of cheaper Oxys very soon.

It looks like the Carolinas were able to fight off the Mexican Army. Too bad about Texas and the rest of the South, though. First, one of their congressman, Ron Paul, couldn't remember 9-11, and next the whole state forgot about the Alamo.

I agree that the road teams will probably sweep the weekend. It's the NFL, though, so I wont be putting any money down on this. Maybe the Chargers will use that Football Momentum, or whatever, and finally live up to the last several years' hype.

He used to be Mel Clark.

Yeah, it is clearly a TSM-wide conspiracy against its owner. It can't possibly be about your ridiculous and lengthy sailor's tantrum you directed at Texans fans because their team didn't fold so the Bears might go to the playoffs.

Czech went from Football Retarded to Football Comatose. They're professional ballplayers. They like to win games. When they're on the field they're going to care more about themselves and their reputations rather than some couch-bound idiot's hope for a fucking draft pick. Christ.

I'm not at all surprised that that many Americans value the letter R (or, in other cases, a D) over reason, logic, or facts staring them down in the very souls of their eyes. Bush is a Republican, therefor, he "united the country," despite the fact that the opposite was the acknowledged politcal and policy strategy for the entire length of the administration. On the flip-side, some die-hards think that Barack Obama will actually stand up to the human rights of gay people.

Being the holidays and all, I would like to apologize to my friend bob_barron for my earlier post.

Bob doesn't care to put a whole lot of thought into his political statements.

randy, arod, giambi...Oh, Shit.

Good luck with that, Slayer. The Lions would have a better chance to beat the Bears tomorrow night than GB does.

...isn't that what he's been doing his whole career, though? 23-7 Atlanta. This will keep the Bears alive for tomorrow, but it would be just like them to get the help they need and blow the game themselves. I don't think you need to worry about the JV squad up north.

To be fair, I don't think Holyfield was quite 40 during the Ruiz trilogy, and wasn't far removed from having twice gone the distance with Lewis. Of course, drunken recall isn't always reliable. While he may not have been 40 by the time he started putting people to sleep with an assist from Ruiz, he was as shopworn as a 50 year old clubber. Holyfield, from his debut until he really fell off at the end of the 90s was in more wars than any heavyweight, ever. He was the top cruiser in the world by his 10th fight and just about every title fight he had at that weight is a brutal classic. The trend continued as a heavyweight. Outside his demolition of Buster Douglas, he took a beating everytime he went out there (Foreman, Cooper, Bowe, Moorer) whether he won or lost. 12 rounds with Foreman, twice with Bowe and then ko-by, and the first fight with Tyson was a war. The guy should've retired already, but he went 12 rounds with Lewis in 1999, twice. By then he was done. He wasn't particularly "old" but his body and his brain already were. All the steroids have just made it worse for him, and will continue to do so.

Did you start watching Holyfield in 1998, Agent?