Login Here
Clearly still smarting from the cancellation of the Mel Torme Show or something, our Red State Brethren are all atwitter after old straight people in Arizona defeated a ban on gay marriage because they wanted to protect their right of "shacking up" (yes those are quotation marks), which they refer to as "concubinage" (I just read 'em, folks, I don't make 'em up). Polygamists, likewise, are "bootstrapping their own cause in to the issue of same sex marriage," because...well, let's let the WalMart Ciceros mount the marble plinth once again:
For those who have ridiculed us traditionalists whenever we raise the usually disreputable “slippery slope” argument in the defense of marriage as understood by most cultures over several millennia these articles should serve as evidence that we are not exaggerating. When viewed through the mawkishly distorted prism of the arguments proffered by proponents of homosexual marriage their particular cases are compelling and if we accept the idea of marriage as some amorphous “human right” they are irrefutable.
While furiously stroking the Thesaurus for polysyllabic Latinate words, the poster simultaneously manages to wind around to "the adult movie business," "shack jobs" (again) and an admission that polygamy might be kinda neat:
In fact, other than it being illegal by fiat I really, truly have no objection to the practice whatsoever.
I'd say this rates pretty high up on the list of Unlikely GOP Fantasies. And then she parted her pretty, perfect lips and said "I just can't date another liberal ..."
There's always a quaint touch of atavism over at Red State, and it does bring back nostalgia for things you haven't heard since your grandma died. Still, I feel like maybe we should pitch in and buy them a calendar or something.
Share This 
Spotlight
FITZ!
Howard Dean!
A calender. Good idea.
A Playgirl calender.
Cliff Varnell @ 2
….and some meth.
twolf1 @
4
heeeheeeheeeheeeheee!
Readin’ them over there so we over here don’t have to! Thanks for bringing us the best of the best from the DarkSide, Jane.
oooooh, concubinage. Is that when old farts don’t wanna give up their SSI checks OR worry their heirs by remarrying just to share a room in the old folks’ home?
Guys who can’t make eye contact with the 7-11 clerkette who sells them their Cheet-os fantasizing about multiple wives, hah!
So I guess we’re all ready for Mitt Romney to “gin up the base” in 2008?
[Tasteless comment redacted]
And I thought “illegal by fiat” meant an imported unFederalized gray-market Alfa-Romeo.
TeddySanFran, the problem with the whole “multiple wives” thing is that it’s generally little girls who are forced into what is truly “concubinage” by people who proclaim themselves religious leaders. There is not a circle in Hell low enough for them.
Can I be an opponent of discrimination under their rules, or do I have to specifically be a proponent of just gay marriage???
Do I have to re-register everytime I oppose anyone being discriminated against?
TeddySanFran @
6
Damn you, Teddy. Wish I’d written that…
Marion in Savannah @ 10
Following the Warren Jeffs trial on Larry King, and engaged myself to an ex-Mormon, I am understanding more and more each day about the Taliban among us. Taylor Marsh has also been helpful in my learning.
I did not mean to joke about something deadly serious to many young women, although I thought we were already in a humorous vein. Did not mean to offend.
an admission that polygamy might be kinda neat:
In fact, other than it being illegal by fiat I really, truly have no objection to the practice whatsoever.
Why does this particular hypocrisy piss me off even more than some others?
Messin’ with the “sanctity of marriage”, which is a threat to every American’s way of life (in election years) is OK, if you do it in a hetero way?
just makin’ this shit up as they go, aren’t they?
Jane Hamsher @ 13
I may have to write it somewhere else and claim it as an original thought… classic…
Arizona must really be a thorn in the side of the conservative purists. The advance of gay’s rights moves slowly but steadily forward, no matter what kind of contorted verbage is thrown against it. I look forward to seeing TRex as the grand marshall of the Thanksgiving parade in Athens Georgia.
TeddySanFran, not offended, just wanted to make sure that we were all aware of the undercurrents… Rock on!
OT - Yesterday’s (Friday Nov 24) New Zealand Herald has an article shows that a senior diplomat tipped the Australian Wheat Board that Australia would join the US in the invasion of Iraq in February of 2002, 13 months before the invasion.
Don’t know if the Cole inquiry (an Australian inquiry) is getting any play in the States or not.
Sorry about intruding on the wrong thread…just took the most current one to plunk this in. What is the best etiquette on this?
TeddySanFran and Marion in Savannah, I think we can limit consideration to how consenting adults elect to pursue happiness in a purportedly free country. I don’t know of any RATIONAL adults who want to turn kids into concubines.
I read that too, NZ Expat.
No press here that I know of other than this that I found on the internets.
http://www.informationclearing.....e15715.htm
Teddy, you know and I know the problem with these Dudes is that they’ve never been properly fucked.
I didn’t mean to suggest that ANY red staters are rational. It’s most disconcerting when they appear to agree with any facet of my own beliefs.
I have to ask, was it the “mawkishly” or the “proferred” that gave the game away?
(Also, I’m willing to bet that unbeknownst to our friend, mawkish is actually Anglo-Saxon.)
OT - Here’s a special Fox News moment:
Martha MacCallum off-camera
Professor Foland @
23
I’ll take “profered” for $300, Alex.
Hey Jane,
Please don’t diss Mel Torme. I, for one thought he was great.
As for the rest of the nonsense, those folks still live in the dark ages. If South Africa can legalize gay marriage . . . . well, years from now we will look back on all of this and wonder what the big whoop was anyway.
I just got back from seeing The Queen with Helen Mirren playing “liz II during the death of Diana. Quite the performance. The Queen was reacting to a modern situation as if she was still living in the 1950’s and was totally mystified by the emotional draw of Diana. The wingers are much like her in not being able to cope with the changing times and trying to will them away. In the long run, it will not work.
ThatSinger @ 15
TSF writings here are belong to FDL; please contact Hamsher/Smith for re-use rights. /s
I’ve got something slippery for those brain donors and it ain’t no slope.
Unless of course, I am lying down.
Let’s combine Redstate with Penthouse Forum and see if we can get us some posse comitatus.
mawkish |ˈmki sh |
adjective
sentimental in a feeble or sickly way : a mawkish poem. See note at sentimental .
• archaic or dialect having a faint sickly flavor : the mawkish smell of warm beer.
DERIVATIVES
mawkishly adverb
mawkishness noun
ORIGIN mid 17th cent.(in the sense [inclined to sickness] ): from obsolete mawk ‘maggot,’ from Old Norse mathkr, of Germanic origin.
Jane … may I just thank you for Mr. Magoo! such an apt image …
though the aroused thesaurus is pretty damn good too!
McCain, Lieberman are sick
Likes to
Shoot his friends;
They say sometimes,
With claymore land mines.
So he’s off to Iraq
To shoot any who will talk
NZ Expat @ 18
In the year that I’ve been here the “threads” have always been multiple topic, multiple conversation, breaking news, and kind of free form. Out of which a future “post” is sometimes inspired.
Damn, a year? LOL
TRex @ 28
theropod! since Jane mentioned calendars: got usps?
Umm, I try not to think of Republican sex, because they seem to really f&*k it up all the time, but what exactly is a “shack job”?
Yesterday’s Issue
Mitt Romney is wooing conservatives by opposing gay marriage. It’s a strategy that won’t get him very far.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15...../newsweek/
TeddySanFran @ 34
Indeed! It’s, er, wonderhorrible! Fabuloathesome!
Should I tell everyone what it is?
Way , Way OT ;
10 min. and 27 sec. of :
Dave Matthews Band and Warren Haynes in Central Park, New York playing ” Cortez the Killer “
http://video.google.com/videop.....6173563541
UptownNYChick @ 35
It’s similar to a “lean to”.
Cozumel @ 33
tho a link is good etiquette for exciting tidbits like yours, NZ E. in this regard, thanks angie!
We got goopers figurin out what we can do with our dicks again eh? Why don’t they work on world hunger or somethin?
Through most of history, marriage was about property and was consequently the domain of the small segment of society that actually owned anything. Everyone else just shacked up. It was about man and woman only in so far as this related to the production of a male heir through whom property could be maintained in the family.
Our modern American concept of marriage is an amalgam that comes from the rise of the middle class (greater distributed wealth), increased secularization of society (greater individual freedom), and the popularization of romantic love. The religious component of marriage has become mostly a veneer. You can have the wedding in a church if you want to but it’s at the courthouse where the real content of marriage resides. As with the subject of abortion, the view of today’s religious right is completely anachronistic. It takes modern ideas and treats them like they have been around in their present form forever. Because there was marriage in the Old Testament and there is marriage today, they must be the same. This is simpleminded if not dishonest.
The slippery slope argument is also specious. Society regulates where it has a compelling interest. Incest, polygamy, and child marriage, in other words the slippery slope, are outlawed because there is a strong presumption of abuse associated with them. Heterosexual marriage can also be abusive. Half of heterosexual marriages end in divorce, but society, our society, views these unions to be primarily not abusive, even if many fail. The opponents of gay marriage have, I think, an insurmountable problem. They need to show that gay marriages are inherently abusive or that society has some other compelling reason to ban them. Just because gay marriage may offend some people’s religious beliefs, especially when those beliefs are made up out of whole cloth, is neither a persuasive argument or a compelling reason. As with prohibitions against miscegenation, prejudice is not a sound basis for law.
rwcole @
41
Well, lots of the people who are hungry are brown…
rwcole @ 41
That would be entirely too Christian for that crowd.
Marion- Oh yeah- I forgot- never mind.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 36
He’s the great-grandson of a polgyamist.
Willard Mitt Romney’s got nuthin’ to say to me ’bout my impending nuptials. Nuthin.
Somewhere there’s an unstated underlyin theory that explains all this horseshit. God knows- it’s not from the Bible..somehow- sex is MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANYTHING!
Guess if yer not fuckin right- well then ya might start likin it too much- so ya wouldn’t want ta go ta work- or ta war- or anything..It’s the underlying “sex is the great crippler” thesis..
TRex @ 37
You may do as you wish. Disclosure is your option.
A Boston University student group is offering a scholarship for white students to protest financial aid programs in the United States that select by ethnic background, university officials said on Tuesday.
The group, Boston University College Republicans, told campus publications the $250 Caucasian Achievement and Recognition Scholarship was intended as a statement and they had raised funds privately for the award, which does not have the backing of the university.
Between the rooting for real war and jabbing a stick at the principals of the culture wars, it seems that all this talk has caused the two issues to morph into something else in their pea brains.
I fully expect, any day now, to hear one of them say–probably on O’Reilly’s waste of the airwaves–”Mr. President, we must not allow a mineshaft gap!”
Imagine–Ya have five wives (or husbands). Ya stop off for a couple of beers with the boys after work- and when ya get home- You’ve got FIVE angry complaining cursing people after yer ass.
Who in the hell would do such a thing? Can’t imagine!!
Trouble with gettin sex confused with war is- eventually ya might say :
“Fuck the war”.
Teddy,
Impending nuptials? When? Where?
rwcole @ 46
Cripple me, Gaia.
RevDeb @ 52
Ask The State, dear. We appear to be at its mercy for this “amorphous ‘human right.’” And I only want to marry one person! What slippery slope?
Debunking the gay-marriage slippery slope nonsense.
montag @
49
Oh, doesn’t that bring back great moments in comedic film…! Although I also wonder if General Buck Turgidson isn’t running the Pentagon…
I’d comment, but I’m too busy stroking my thesaurus.
The trouble is that if ya allow gay marriage- guys will start fuckin their dogs– heard it from a US senator.
Has anyone ever seen Santorum’s dog? Just wondering.
rwcole @ 58
EX-Senator, thank heaven…
TeddySanFran @ 54
Well hopefully with the new gov. coming in MA in Jan. we can get the absurd 1913 law taken off the books and open marriage to everyone. If that happens, consider it an invitation for a trip east.
My mom, a former “Goldwater Girl” has been shacked up for many years due to the federal govt. Until recently, she would have lost her VA benefits as a widow by remarrying after my dad’s death. I sincerely doubt that she’s the only one her age in this kind of situation, and AZ has no shortage of snowbirds.
The genius Karl Rove forgot that senior citizens always vote.
The drug plan that gave a warm wet one to the drug companies and left seniors out in the cold, Terry Schiavo, and memories of the GOP and actual conservatism before the religious right swaggered into town swung a whole lot of senior votes into the D column.
My mom now describes herself as “pushed out of the Republican party.”
And the religious right just keeps pushing.
Why would a senator name their dog “sugar britches”?
Seriously, republicans/conservatives/evangelicals need to not even mention sex or marriage after the recent revelations. They apparently can’t deal with their own sexualities (Mr. Foley, Mr. Haggard and Mr. Mehlman, please step out of the closet and back into the light), so they shouldn’t get a say about anyone else’s either.
Someone should calculate how many more catholics there would be in the world if the church allowed divorce..best estimate–bout a billion- at $50 per week each- holy shit. Can’t Pope Bennie do math?
rwcole @ 46
I think one of the more interesting models of life on earth is to view the DNA molecule as a virus and all resulting life forms as an attempt by that virus to rupture the vessel containing it and spill out into the solar system and, potentially, the surrounding galaxy. It’s a project of billions and billions of years but life, itself, need not do anything other than to reproduce in the meantime.
Ultimately, there would have to be a cataclysmic event, such as piece of the blue marble blowing out of the inertial reference system of Sol, proper; but, other than that, the recombinant ability of DNA is what’s important, not so much the life form, only that continued procreation is necessary. As Asimov said, “Intelligence appears to be an accidental concomitant of life, and perhaps not a particularly useful one.”
But, really, dull to think procreation is nothing other than a cosmic waiting game; and, even impossible to image that a fundamentalist would comprehend a recombinant structure.
rwcole @ 66
But, see, if you let ‘em get divorced and all, what they do is start going downtown and watching moving pictures at the picture palace, and they might drink beer, and POOF… there goes your $50.
Marion in Savannah @ 60
And possible UN Ambassador, now that Gates got SecDef.
btw, why does BeltwayMed treat Gates’ nomination as a done deal? Do they not recall Iran/Contra? On 11/8, at her frontyard victory presser, DiFi mentioned that the nomination raised questions, but I’ve heard nothing since then from her. Her website is silent on it. CA constituents may wish to ask her about Gates’ nomination.
Also, LadyDiFi got Rules!
PBS doing Native American music concert by three well known women now.
Walela:Live in Concert
Rita Coolidge, Laura Satterfield, Priscilla Coolidge
No doubt Gates is an asshole- but hell- what’re ya gonna get from Clusterfuck but assholes- stop this one an he’ll send down another….it’s a perpetual motion device.
TeddySanFran @ 68
I feel like there was a deal done to get it finished before the changeover. Immediately after he got elected, Webb was making noise about how he wanted a vote on Gates. They have some history. Suddenly, he’s not said much. We haven’t heard anything. I think they are gonna let it slide.
sadly
There’ll be HEARINGS on Gates– should be fun- great time for dems ta get their rocks off- it’s been a long time!
…until she saw the size of my electoral college margin.
“Mmmm. I’m going to need two hands for a mandate this size…” she said.
Re Gates et all, does anyone know when they are planning to gavel out the 109th congress?
DiFi will run point on ethics (lobbying) and elections (voting machines) at Rules. Still seems amazing that we’ll have Democrats in charge.
{*pinches self*}
rev
12/08
rwcole @ 76
Counting down the minutes for the nightmare to end.
Marion- not a problem- the church just needs ta buy some taverns and movie houses.
RevDeb @ 74
I’m not sure they’re actually working now. And thanks for your kind invite! I’ve always wanted to marry in Harwich.
Rev—The goopers keep lookin at agenda items and decidin that they aren’t that important after all- including- I think- EVERY ONE of Clusterfuck’s emergency items.
How doya say “fuck you” in congress speak?
“Give it to Grandma.”
Teddy–Hold yer tounge—Oh wait- I see what ya mean.
rwcole @ 81
“This will be a top priority. We’ll assign the investigation to a committee and have a report back within a few weeks.”
rwcole @ 80
I still don’t trust any of them. They have been known to do all sorts of damage in the dark of night. I will only feel good when the gooper
moving vansshredding trucks are pulling away from the capitol and the donkeys have taken their place.Wait- maybe that’s “tongue”!
rwcole @ 80
I believe, with a two thirds majority vote!
UptownNYChick @ 72
I think it’s smart politically. OK, Rumsfeld’s gone, your new guy is in. Your guy, your war. Now what?
Clusterfuck decided to stay out of the country for a while- must be getting anonymous threatening notes from the gooper congresscritters.
Mods–
In Pach’s post War on Xmas there is a run of italics from # 59 thru to the end.
Thank u!
OH! {lets go of tounge}
You meant tongue!
TeddySanFran @
27
Duly noted!!!
Egregious - some mods are on holiday so there may be delays when it’s not an emergency. I fixed the italics just now.
Siun @ 93
.. and I was returning with a snippy, “No, there’s not, eg!!” Thanks for the heads-up, eg and siun.
rwcole @
81
The phrase “fuck you” in Congressionese is translated as Congressional Subpeona.
Fini FiniTOOBZ! @ 96
Clearly, there are GOP and Democratic idioms in this Congressionese. I’m particularly pleased by the statements from Leahy and Rockefeller. Such enormous improvement over Spectre and Roberts.
Reid’s certainly not pushing the Senate Dems; more like an anchor, he won’t seem to go beyond his more conservative caucus members. I remind myself that he’s from Nevada, and therefore conservative himself. But, then! I’ve thought of Nevada, and my disappointment in Jack Carter’s result re-emerges — and I’m mad at Harry Reid again!
TeddySanFran @
40
I want to know why the Australian Wheat Board, of all things, was told this a year before the war. I can come up with several scenarios but have no idea if any of them are right.
whenever people start with the polygamy argument, i always have to point out that “gay” unions don’t alter the fundimentals of marraige which is a contract between two individuals. allowing that the individuals in question may both be of the same gender, does not alter the fact that you CAN ONLY BE MARRIED TO ONE PERSON AT A TIME, whatever sex they may be.
You got to keep in mind, the Dem leadership outside of good folks like Nancy Pelosi gets rather scumbaggish. I prefer to think of them as the difference between damage to society from the Republicans acting like teenage boys with whiskey and car keys versus Democrats acting like college aged young men with cocaine and credit cards. Both situations are ugly and hold different sets of disastrous consequences but can be recovered from by putting citizen pressure on leadership to hold them accountable.
good article on My DD about the coverage of Pelosi:
linky
e.c. @ 98
CAN ONLY BE MARRIED TO ONE PERSON AT A TIME
And why is multiple marriage discrimination okay with you?
Just curious, I don’t have a horse in this race : )
Good article OC, I tend to agree with Stoller and Greenwald, I think Pelosi is busy picking the right folks to run the entire House and just wants to get the Intel Committee chair pick right. I cannot believe our two best choices are Harman and Hastings for that gig.
I have every confidence that Nancy Pelosi is gonna do right by the American people and pick someone who is strong enough to get to the bottom of the last 6 years worth of crap pulled by the CIA, NSA and other alphabet soup intelligence agencies.
Fini FiniTOOBZ! @ 100
oh my Fini that’s Analogy Prime. Well said.
Coz … good question. I have a polyamorous relative and - while not my style - it can be an approach based on pretty amazing honesty and openess. There’s a great book called The Ethical Slut which my relation sent for me to read and it had some of the best advice on relationships I’ve read anywhere. Important to note that the forced rape of the Jeffers, etc cases are very different from consenting adults chosing a web of relationships and lovers.
should note - they are not interested in marriage but I don’t understand why the government should be involved in what anyone does in consensual adult relationships.
OldCoastie @ 100
Y’know, after reading that, I wonder if my Congresswoman might have the House well-organized enough by January to take back her seat on the House Intelligence Committee and chair the fuck out of it her own damn self.
Siun @ 104
For me, there’s a distinction between polygamous and polyamorous. They also sound apposite.
I love that paragraph.
Canada has had S.S. Marriage for over a year now and the sky hasnt fallen up here.
TeddySanFran @ 106