"And we're allowing heterosexuals to exist. We just dont have the upperhand as they do."

Why did you add "on a serious note". ;)

Hmmm, I'm thinking 2016 will be a good year. ;)

Maggie Gallagher has really lost it, and, frankly, it's a bit fun to watch her and NOM implode as the weeks go by. She's still trying to cast homophobes as an unfairly demonized group as always, but her desperate pronouncements sound less credible than ever before.

It's clear to anyone paying attention that Prejean's firing has little to do with her (ridiculous) beliefs and everything to do with her unwillingness to uphold her obligations to the pageant. Let's not forget the support that Prejean got right after her idiotic statements, especially from those who felt that Perez Hilton had gone too far in retaliation. Even the pageant organizers who disagreed with her were initially willing to work with her, but she was more interested in promoting her religious agenda than in performing her duties as Miss California.

And so it goes.

Lee

The situation was confusing enough last week (see Nate Silver's piece). NY politics need a guidebook or a "Complete Idiot's Guide to…"

Lee

NHampshire: I agree. No outside source should infiltrate local government and overwhelm the will of the people unless the will of the people is unConstitutional.

I'm willing to listen if you want to explain this, but let's clear the air. Your comment has a few red herrings to keep us off the actual issue.

Specificially:

• Polls show that a majority of the people of New Hampshire support marriage equality. Some, including me, suspect that the will of the people has been thwarted. It's not a Democrat/Republican thing, though, and that distracts us with irrelevant baggage from the last 20 years.

• I don't see the affirmative action analogy, but this issue is thorny enough without bringing in other, even thornier issues into the discussion. Let's talk about it on its own merits.

With that said, what dirty money are you talking about and who did you mean by "we don't even know who NOM is"?

Lee

Thanks, jaysays!

This should be a weekly thing. I need more suggestions for my RSS reader. :D

(Oh, and sorry for the delay. IntenseDebate tried to eat your comment, and I didn't check the spam folder! Bad Lee…)

Oh, thanks. :D "Celebrate!"

“We’ve figured out how to go over the heads of the media directly to the people on the marriage issue — even in New England. Some enterprising reporter may just ask how?”

This enterprising non-reporter may just ask how they went 'directly to the people' in such a short period. She makes it sound legally and ethically sketchy. Or is she just trying to be cute?

Incidentally, I'd also like to ask who funded this new 'method', and I'd like to ask her to be a little less coy when talking about her machinations for stripping me of my civil rights.

Nah, not worth the trouble.

Aw, dang. You're right, but Wolverine was neither the inspiration nor the intention. It's early days anyway, but that pretty much nixes this option.