Rick Sincere reports that a virtual "usual suspects" list of "prominent" [read: "those with whom I agree on this issue"] Republicans are opposing Amendment 1, the Marshall-Newman marriage amendment.
That this type of "Republican," i.e., neither reliable nor much of a Republican, would parrot the far Left lies about the "dangers" of Amendment 1 is pathetic.
Even more's to pity if they actually believe them.
5 comments:
I think by anyone's estimation, a former Congressman, two former members of the General Assembly, and one former congressional district chairman qualify as "prominent." And those are just the people who participated in the news conference.
Those who signed the Republican pledge to oppose the amendment include at least two other former Members of Congress, a former Governor of Virginia, a former GOP candidate for governor and attorney general, former members of the General Assembly, and former Cabinet members.
Prominent? I think that case is closed.
But I'm not one to appeal to authority. What's important is the merit of their arguments: the proposed amendment is poorly drafted and therefore bad law. It should be rejected by the voters.
From the outset of the vote NO campaign, many of our strongest volunteers and key supporters have been Republicans who identify with the traditional Republican values of limited government and individual liberty. That you would demean them and yourself by dismissing them as "useful idiots" says all we need to know about the proponents of Ballot Question #1.
You choose to use tactics of fear, intimidation and incivility to goad your supporters and supress your opponents.
Congratulations, you've just energized more Virginians to send a message to proponents of Ballot Question #1 ... we're mad a h--- and we're not going to take it anymore.
Vote NO on NOvember 7th and send a message to all who would seek to marginalize unmarried Virginians by writing them out of our constitution and invite the government to intrude further into our private lives (see, e.g., the Hugh Finn case).
P.S. Read today's profile in the Washington Post of Bob Marshall, a leading author/advocate of the Marshall/Newman amendment if you want a true vision of the future if this amendment passes. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/03/AR2006110301580.html?nav=rss_metro
"Fear and intimidation"? Bold words from someone advocating the campaign of lies and distortion that opponents of the Marriage Amendment have launched. Sadly, the useful idiots (i.e., "Republicans who identify with the traditional Republican values of limited government and individual liberty") are those who fail or refuse to recognize the continuing war on civilization that the far Left and/or proponents of the radical homosexual agenda are waging. I, too, used to laugh at those who suggested that the campaign for homosexual rights was an attack on the family, but have come to realize/recognize the merits of their arguments by the absurd demands that they have made to --- now --- redefine the fundamental language and institution of human civilization. They don't want tolerance of their perversion, or even the equal protection afforded by the Fourth Amendment to practice their perversions behind closed doors; they want acceptance by mainstream society, something to which they are not entitled.
P.S. If I want to read a caricature, I'll simply read the website of the "Vote No" proponents.
You read it here: James Young thinks that Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan are "idiots" for identifying "with the traditional Republican values of limited government of limited government and individual liberty."
Also on his list of "idiots" would be Dick Armey, Bob Barr, Bill Buckley, Dr. Tom Coburn, Jeff Flake, Gerald Ford, Phil Gramm, Dr. Ron Paul, Mark Sanford, Robert Taft, ... shall I go on? The list is far longer than this.
I'm proud to be an idiot in that company!
Those who reject "limited government and individual liberty" have no place in the conservative movement or the Republican Party.
Even more humorous are the democrats in our General Assembly who voted to put the marriage amendment on the ballot but have now realized that they didn't know what they were doing and now must vote against the marriage amendment. Or so they say.
They voted FOR the amendment, before they voted AGAINST the amendment.
Pathetic. If they don't know what they're doing in Richmond, why are we sending them there to represent us?
Post a Comment