Kidnappers grab 56 people at once in Baghdad today

Jesus Christ. What have we done to that country... Read the rest of this post...

A very fun and funny video

It's now time to relax after a long day. Enjoy. Read the rest of this post...

Hollywood comes to real life

I only thought this kind of stuff happened in the movies.

One of the most wanted men in Greece pulled off a daring jail break Sunday, landing a helicopter in a prison yard to pick up his brother and another inmate before fleeing in a fog of smoke, police said.

Read the rest of this post...

Open thread

Well, that was a marathon day without an open thread.

Tomorrow, we continue the assault. And I think we need to hit a lot more on the divorce thing - there's no excuse for people who are divorced crowing about OUR marriages. Read the rest of this post...

"Ex"-gay group says Bush invited them to the White House

The anti-gay groups who claim they can "pray away the gay" (but always seem to have the same handful of spokesmen and no other proof of their "success") are now claiming that they attended today's White House ceremony announcing Bush's support (again) for the anti-gay constitutional amendment. Here's the press release on the group's Web site (and I am NOT going to link to these dangerous quacks):

Worldwide Network of Former Homosexuals to Take Part in White House Ceremony as Bush Endorses Marriage Protection Amendment
Ex-Gay Organization Says Protecting Marriage is Key to Preserving the Future

Dated: June 5th, 2006

Orlando, FL- Representatives from the world’s largest outreach to those affected by unwanted homosexuality will join other pro-family organizations as President Bush endorses a federal amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman in a White House ceremony today.

Then again, these guys also claim that they can cure gays with prayer and a bit of manly sports (I'm not kidding), so perhaps we should take this with a grain of salt.

Anybody wanting to know more about who these "ex-gay" groups are need to no further than a post I made a few weeks ago. CNN did a report showing some of their - uh - techniques. The techniques included beating the crap out of your furniture with a tennis racket while screaming "mommy":



Another "technique" was for the male therapist to get into a rather close hug-and-rub with his male patient:



Yes, in your White House. Read the rest of this post...

Someone recorded their "gay amendment" call to Senator Crapo's office

Oh my, you have to hear this. I gotta give credit to the staffer answering the call, he was unflappable.

For extra fun, note how the caller refers to the Senator - Senator Crap-o. Read the rest of this post...

CNN's Bill Schneider on Republicans making country debate gay marriage AGAIN

CNN's Bill Schneider, this afternoon:

"The amendment supporters are running another risk. Ask Americans what issues they care about right now, and Iraq, the economy, immigration and gas prices top the list. That's what they want the Congress to debate.... This debate is unlikely to produce a result, except to reinforce the image of a Congress that's out of touch with the people's real concerns."

Read the rest of this post...

A caller asks: "Does George Allen masturbate?"

Lest anyone forget why we're making these calls, the religious right has for years said that gay marriage is wrapped up with a whole bunch of other Biblical sins that simply must not be tolerated. They all lead to each other.

I quote a large number of religious right references in our action alert below, but let me remind you of what Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote just three years ago, warning of what other dangers were on the horizon along with gay marriage. This is Justice Scalia's dissent in the Lawrence v. Texas case that outlawed state laws making sodomy illegal (a case the religious right, and Scalia, said would lead to gay marriage):

State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding.

Did you catch that? Scalia is upset that by not throwing gays in jail simply because of why they are, he laments that this also may mean that states can no longer regulate masturbation. I link to the entire opinion, read it for yorself. These are the people we are dealing with - George Bush is dealing with - and this is their agenda.

Another AMERICAblog reader checks in, this time with Senator George Allen's office (R-VA):

Good morning, Senator Allen's office
Yes I'm calling to see if the senator supports traditional marriage.
Yes he does, he supports the bill.
Okay, and he's divorced?
Uh (uncomfortably) yes sir.
Yes, okay,
(she quickly adds) But he's remarried.
What was the cause of his divorce? Do you know the reason? Is his wife remarried?
I don't know, it was a long time ago sir.
Okay, could you tell me if the senator masturbates?
I'm sorry, I can't answer these questions.
Can you tell me, do you masturbate?
(click)

Read the rest of this post...

Kay Bailey Hutchison's office says "no Christian" believes everything they read in the Bible, and agrees that the amendment is a distraction

Tsk, tsk, tsk. I just got the following email from an AMERICAblog reader who just called Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison's office - she's a Republican Senator from Texas who is divorced.

John, I live in Dallas and just got off the phone with Kay Bailey Hutchison's staff. The person who took my question said that even though the Bible might say that a woman who is divorced and then remarries is an adulterer, no Christian really believes that. So, the Bible is really just a quaint notion, sorta like the Geneva Conventions. I will swear under oath that KBH rep said that. When I asked about why this marriage amendment is even being considered amidst the other enormous crises we're dealing with, she said she agreed with me. So, KBH is divorced but doesn't believe what the Bible says about it.

Read the rest of this post...

Senator Martinez (R-FL) isn't interested in protecting marriage, only the DEFINITION of marriage

More feedback from a reader:

So help me God, I called Martinez's office. I said that, given the Senator's interest in protecting marriage combined with Florida's high divorce rate, would he be willing to introduce an amendment to outlaw divorce.

I was told I'd have to submit that question in writing since that had not been previously considered.

I put on my indignantly surprised voice and said, "You mean to tell me that given all the discussion in the Senate about protecting marriage, I'm the first person to bring up this ideas?"

So help me God, her answer was to say, "The Senator is not interested in protecting marriage but in protecting the definition of marriage."

Finally, at least...an honest Senate staffer.

Read the rest of this post...

A caller asks: "Has Senator Burns ever had sex with a transvestite prostitute?"

And the calls keep coming in...

"Hello, Senator Burns office..."

I'm calling to see if the senator supports traditional marriage.
-Yes he does.

Can you tell me if he masturbates?
-I do not know sir, that's not my business.

Can you tell me, do you masturbate?
-That's none of your business.

Well what about sodomy, analingus, cunnilingus or fellatio? Does he engage in those?
-Uhm, I don't... sir I don't know. uhmm.. (uncomfortable pause)

Do you need explanations for what they mean?
-Sir, I don't want definitions and really I don't know.

Has the senator had sex before or outside of marriage?
-Sir I do not know.

Have you ever had sex before or outside of marriage?
-No I have not.

Has the senator ever engaged in adultery or relations with a prostitute?
-You know sir, I don't know and I don't really wanna go through with the following questions.

Would the senator make a pledge to never be engaged in relations with a prostitute?
-I don't know sir.

You don't know if the senator would pledge to not have sex with a prostitute?
-I don't believe he would. Sir I don't know. Why are you putting me on the spot like this?

Divorce is the leading threat to marriage, so will he pledge to never divorce?
- Well, the senator has cosponsored the marriage amendment and is in support of it.

All these things that threaten marriage are important,
- I understand sir, and he is happily married to his wife. They have two children.

Has he ever had sex with someone outside of his marriage.
- Sir, I don't know, that's really none of my business.

Well, it's America's business today. I mean, obviously someone who has sex with a transvestite prostitute would not be in support of traditional marriage. Has he ever had sex with a transvestite prostitute?
- I don't know sir, I really don't think so but I don't know.

Have you ever had sex with a transvestite prostitute?
- I told you that I never had sex outside of marriage and I'm not married.

Why are you not married?
-Why am I not married? Cause I'm 19 years old.

Marriage is very important,
- I understand that

You need to get married right away, do you have a plan for that?
-You know what sir, I 've gotta go, you have a great day.

Read the rest of this post...

Best phone call EVER

AMERICAblog reader Bill writes in about his phone call to Senator Crapo's office (R-ID) this afternoon:

Is Senator Crapo in favor of traditional marriage?
Yes he is, he's a cosponsor of the bill.
He is? Can you tell me if he masturbates?
I could not tell you that.
Can you tell me, do you masturbate?
I cannot tell you that either.
Can you tell me, does he commit sodomy, analingus, cunnilingus or fellatio?
What is the purpose of this questioning?
It's regarding his views on traditional marriage.
Okay, he supports the bill.
Yes, but could you tell me does he commit sodomy?
I could not give you an answer on that.
Is he willing to pledge that he has not or will not commit sodomy?
I could not answer that.
Has he ever had sex before or outside of marriage?
Again, sir, what is the point of this questioning?
It's regarding traditional marriage and how far his support goes.
Any one of those questions I could not answer.
Have you ever had sex outside of marriage?
Again, I will not answer that.
It's nobody's business, right?
That's right.
Okay, thank you.

Have you called Congress yet to find out if they're doing all they can to protect traditional morality? Use our action alert, and call them now. Read the rest of this post...

White House hid religious right leaders during Bush's TV address

Not a single religious right leader was visible on camera during George Bush's entire address this afternoon.

No one.

I TiVo'd the entire address, watched it twice, froze the frames, and there were plenty of audience shots of the crowd assembled at the White House to cheer on Bush's address supporting an anti-gay constitutional amendment. And not a single shot showed a leader of the religious right sitting in the audience.

Now, we know this White House. Not a single event happens in this White House that isn't fully scripted. The camera in the room swung out numerous times to show the audience, but interestingly enough, the people in the line of sight of the camera were NEVER the religious right leaders. It's almost as if, by sheer coincidence, the entire religious right leadership just happened to be placed in the obstructed view seats, so to speak. And trust me, this White House knows exactly which seats are on camera and which are not.

Who did we NOT see sitting in the audience?

Pat Robertson
Jerry Falwell
James Dobson, Focus on the Family
Janet Parshall, radio host (formerly FRC)
Bob Knight, Concerned Women for America
Tony Perkins, Family Research Council
Peter LaBarbera, former CWFA and FRC
Lou Sheldon and Andrea Sheldon, Traditional Values Coalition

Who DID we see? A number of black people, and of course the required Catholic guy. I.e., we saw "mainstream" people, the kind of people who don't embarrass George Bush. But we most certainly didn't see a single seated leader of the religious right. (Note, you did see at the very beginning Matt Daniels being pointed in the direction of his obstructed view seat - but again, the camera just happened to catch him expressly walking in front of it.)

What should have happened? The religious right leaders who are the ones behind this entire effort should have been front row. They should have been up there right next to Alberto Gonzales. But they weren't. And spare us the "it was first come first serve" crap. Again, in this White House there's no such thing - they choose who sits where, and had they wanted to, they could have reserved seats up front for the top religious right leaders, and Bush chose not to.

I guess the crazy aunt in the attic got hidden away yet again. Read the rest of this post...

The President Speaks...Open Thread

Bush is starting his speech....don't see Dick and Lynn Cheney in the audience.

Will Bush discuss the details of his marriage? And what about his daughters? And the rest of his family? Do they all practice what he preaches?

He just said some argue that defining marriage should be left to the states. Um, that would include Dick Cheney.

And he says "Massachusetts" and "San Francisco" like they are swear words. Do you think he knows that he's President of Massachusetts and San Francisco, too?

Did Bush just tell this gathering of theocrats that he supports civil unions? Read the rest of this post...

They're getting your calls...

Feedback from our readers who have called the Hill:

SDS reports: Just called Lindsay Graham's office and asked if he was celibate. The girl who answered the phone got nasty and asked me if I was. I said no and then said I'm not a hypocrite. Also called Dole's office and asked for her views on adultery. No response from the secretary.

Bill writes: Just called Lamar Alexander, the staffer continually answered "that's not relevant" "these questions are not relevant, I won't answer."

Lily writes: I called the Senators office in Utah, and asked being that the Congress feels it it their duty to get into bedrooms and use the US Constitution to do it, the I would like to know if he and others are prepared to set an example and let the American people know about their indescretions ?

The secratary sho answered his phone said "You know what ma'am we do not take questions like that"

I said, "well if they are ready to get into legistate our personal sex lives, shouldn't they be prepared to answer"?

hehe.. She got all pissy and asked my zip, which I was happy to give to her.

Keep the feedback coming! Read the rest of this post...

Bush spokesman Tony Snow reportedly calls gay-bashing constitutional amendment "civil rights legislation"

How dare they.

I'm waiting for a transcript. Read the rest of this post...

UPDATE to our action alert

In response to our Masturbation Monday action alert (below), a number of the Hill offices are asking for your zip code to prove that you reside in their district or their state.

For Senators, simply find a zip code from this page (type in City and State, and it gives you zip codes).

For House members, you need to find a city in their district. One easy way is to go to their Web site, then find the "contact" link. It will give you contact information, including a postal address, for their local offices in their home state. Use the zip code they provide.

And don't worry about mixing things up a bit. Perhaps call one office and ask about cunnilingus, then call another and ask about masturbation. I know I, for example, really want to know if the unmarried Lindsey Graham (R-SC) masturbates (he's not supposed to according to the Bible and the religious right), and he'd better be practicing abstinence.

I'd also like to know why Kay Bailey Hutchison is divorced. She's making Jesus cry.

And finally, does Rick Santorum practice cunnilingus and has he ever had a blow job?

Marriage is on the line folks, we simply must ensure that icky sex is not being practiced in the halls of Congress. Read the rest of this post...

PoliticsTV joins AMERICAblog in urging you to contact Congress to preserve marriage and stamp out icky sex

As part of our ongoing campaign here at AMERICAblog to protect marriage, PoliticsTV has joined us in our call for every anti-gay member of Congress to come out against sodomy, adultery, fornication, masturbation, and divorce.

See our video for more information, and then use our action alert below to contact Congress and make sure they're not having the wrong kind of sex. Read the rest of this post...

ACTION ALERT: Call Congress, ask if THEY'RE defending THEIR marriages

UPDATE: Here how one call went to Senator Crapo's office (R-ID) - it's hysterical - and a few other offices. And you can now watch Bush's bigoted White House announcement about the amendment today.
--------------

Today I'd like you to call the offices of the members of Congress who support the gay-bashing "Marriage Protection Amendment" and demand to know if THEY and THEIR STAFF are protecting marriage in their own lives.

In a nutshell, the religious right and far-right Republicans have said repeatedly that the "gay marriage" battle is really about outlawing:

• sodomy
• masturbation
• adultery
• prostitution
• out-of-wedlock sex
• marriages that cannot procreate

We here at AMERICAblog couldn't agree more. That's why we are asking our readers to contact members of Congress who support the anti-gay constitutional amendment, and to ask them if they're defending marriage in their own lives.

MESSAGE:
Specifically, we'd like you to ask them to vow that in the past, now, and in the future they will abstain from sodomy (including same-sex and/or male-female analingus, cunnilingus, and fellatio), masturbation, adultery, prostitution, out-of-wedlock sex, and marriages that cannot procreate. We will also ask them about divorce, as there is no greater threat to marriage today than divorce (in addition, the Bible makes clear that divorce is a no-no).

BACKGROUND
President Bush is hosting a number of America's top anti-gay bigots at the White House at 1:45PM Eastern today in order to "celebrate" the House and Senate's upcoming vote on the "Marriage Protection Amendment" - an amendment to the United States Constitution that would ban gay marriage, repeal civil unions, and deny gay couples most of the rights that male-female couples take for granted (insurance, hospital visitation, inheritance, and more).

What the far-right says the anti-gay marriage amendment is about:

1. Opposing Sodomy

US Rep. John Hostettler argues that the Supreme Court has found a "right" to sodomy in the US Consitution, and this is part of the reason that gay marriage will be legalized some day if the amendment is not passed.

The Christian Coalition also bemoans the loss of laws making sodomy illegal, a loss they say has lead to gay same-gender marriage becoming legal in Massachusetts:

...a radical 5-4 Supreme Court majority [struck] down America's sodomy laws in the infamous Lawrence vs. Texas case in 2003, which the 4 judicial tyrants on the Massachusetts Supreme Court then cited in their infamous 4-3 decision legalizing homosexual "marriage" in Massachusetts.

The the men at the Concerned Women for America are also very upset about the legalization of sodomy, and tie it directly to the gay marriage debate.

And finally, the Southern Baptists are equally upset about sodomy being legal, and say that such legalization will lead to gay marriage:

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v. Texas overturned a law that classified sodomy as illegal and opened a floodgate that many feel can never be closed again. The decision in effect legalizes homosexuality. The natural progression from that decision is to redefine the biblical model of marriage: one man to one woman.

2. Only sanctioning marriages that can procreate.

From the Republican Party of Texas:

Marriage is the union of the only type of couple capable of natural reproduction of the human race—a man and a woman. Children need both mothers and fathers, and marriage is society’s way of obtaining them.

3. Outlawing prostitution, adultery, masturbation and fornication (i.e., sex out of wedlock).

I'm not kidding. This is Justice Scalia's dissent written three years ago in the Lawrence v. Texas case that outlawed state laws making sodomy illegal:

State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding.

TAKE ACTION:

1. Call the members of Congress, House and Senate, in the lists below. Then report back to AMERICAblog, either via the comments or by email, and tell us what the office told you.

Congressional Switchboard: 1-888-355-3588 (then ask for the specific Senate Office). Or use this page to direct phone numbers for the Senators listed below.

2. MESSAGE: Hello, I'm calling to find out if the member of Congress supports traditional marriage? Can you tell me if he or she masturbates? Do you? What about sodomy, including analingus, cunnilingus and fellatio? Is the member willing to pledge that he/she has never, is not, and will never commit those acts? Has the member ever had sex before marriage? Have you? What about adultery and prostitution? Will they swear never to have been involved, and never to be involved, in either? Will the member promise never to divorce? And finally, if the member is married, do they have children, and if not, why not?

3. VOTE COUNT - Here is who to call

Senators who support the Amendment (bad guys):
Alexander, Lamar (R-TN)
Allard, Wayne (R-CO)
Allen, George (R-VA) - Divorced
Bennett, Robert F. (R-UT)
Bond, Christopher S. (R-MO) - Divorced
Brownback, Sam (R-KS)
Bunning, Jim (R-KY)
Burns, Conrad (R-MT)
Burr, Richard (R-NC)
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA)
Coburn, Thomas (R-OK
Cochran, Thad (R-MS)
Cornyn, John (R-TX)
Craig, Larry E. (R-ID)
Crapo, Mike (R-ID)
DeMint, Jim (R-SC)
DeWine, Mike (R-OH)
Dole, Elizabeth (R-NC) - Barren
Domenici, Pete V. (R-NM)
Ensign, John (R-NV)
Enzi, Mike (R-WY)
Frist, William H. (R-TN)
Graham, Lindsay (R-S) - Unmarried... celibate?
Grassley, Charles E. (R-IA)
Hatch, Orrin G. (R-UT)
Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX) - Divorced
Inhofe, James M. (R-OK)
Isakson, Johnny (R-GA)
Kyl, John (R-AZ)
Lott, Trent (R-MS)
Lugar, Richard G. (R-IN)
Martinez, Mel (R-FL)
McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) - Divorced
Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK)
Nelson, Ben (D-NE)
Roberts, Pat (R-KS)
Santorum, Rick (R-PA)
Sessions, Jeff (R-AL)
Shelby, Richard C. (R-AL)
Smith, Gordon (R-OR)
Stevens, Ted (R-AK)
Talent, James M. (R-MO)
Thomas, Craig (R-WY)
Thune, John (R-SD)
Vitter, David (R-LA)
Voinovich, George (R-OH)

Unclear on the Amendment
Coleman, Norm (R-MN)
Gregg, Judd (R-NH)
Warner, John W. (R-VA)

The rest are NO votes (good guys)

----------

210 House members firmly in favor of the anti-gay amendment (bad guys):

Aderholt, Robert (R-4-AL)
Akin, Rodney P. (R-2-MO)
Alexander, Rodney (R-5-LA)
Bachus, Spencer (R-6-AL)
Baker, Richard (R-6-LA)
Barrett, Gresham (R-3-SC)
Barrow, John (D-12-GA)
Bartlett, Roscoe (R-6-MD)
Barton, Joe (R-6-TX)
Beauprez, Bob (R-7-CO)
Berry, Marion (D-1-AR)
Bilirakis, Michael (R-9-FL)
Bishop, Rob (R-1-UT)
Bishop, Sanford D. (D-2-GA)
Blackburn, Marsha (R-7-TN)
Blunt, Roy (R-7-MO)
Boehner, John (R-8-OH)
Bonilla, Henry (R-23-TX)
Bonner, Jo (R-1-AL)
Boozman, John (R-3-AR)
Boucher, Rick (D-9-VA)
Boyd, Allen (D-2-FL)
Bradley, Jeb (R-1-NH)
Brady, Kevin (R-8-TX)
Brown, Henry (R-1-SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny (R-5-FL)
Burgess, Michael (R-26-TX)
Burton, Dan (R-5-IN)
Buyer, Steve (R-4-IN)
Calvert, Ken (R-44-CA)
Camp, Dave (R-4-MI)
Cantor, Eric (R-7-VA)
Capito, Shelley Moore (R-2-WV)
Carter, John (R-31-TX)
Chabot, Steve (R-1-OH)
Chandler, Ben (D-6-KY)
Chocola, Chris (R-2-IN)
Coble, Howard (R-6-NC)
Cole, Tom (R-4-OK)
Cooper, Jim (D-5-TN)
Costello, Jerry F. (D-12-IL)
Cramer, Bud (D-5-AL)
Crenshaw, Ander (R-4-FL)
Cubin, Barbara (R-AL-WY)
Culberson, John (R-7-TX)
Davis, Artur (D-7-AL)
Davis, Geoff (R-4-KY)
Davis, Jo Ann H. (R-1-VA)
Davis, Lincoln (D-4-TN)
Davis, Tom (R-11-VA)
Deal, Nathan (R-10-GA)
DeLay, Tom (R-22-TX)
Doolittle, John T. (R-4-CA)
Duncan, John J. (R-2-TN)
Edwards, Charles W. (D-17-TX)
Ehlers, Vernon (R-3-MI)
Emerson, Jo Ann H. (R-8-MO)
English, Phil (R-3-PA)
Etheridge, Bob (D-2-NC)
Everett, Terry (R-2-AL)
Feeney, Tom (R-24-FL)
Ferguson, Mike (R-7-NJ)
Flake, Jeff (R-6-AZ)
Forbes, Randy (R-4-VA)
Ford, Harold (D-9-TN)
Fortenberry, Jeff (R-1-NE)
Fossella, Vito (R-13-NY)
Franks, Trent (R-2-AZ)
Gallegly, Elton (R-24-CA)
Garrett, Scott (R-5-NJ)
Gillmor, Paul (R-5-OH)
Gingrey, Phil (R-11-GA)
Goode, Virgil H. (R-5-VA)
Goodlatte, Bob (R-6-VA)
Gordon, Bart (D-6-TN)
Granger, Kay (R-12-TX)
Graves, Sam (R-6-MO)
Green, Mark (R-8-WI)
Gutknecht, Gil (R-1-MN)
Hall, Ralph M. (R-4-TX)
Harris, Katherine (R-13-FL)
Hart, Melissa (R-4-PA)
Hastert, Dennis (R-14-IL)
Hastings, Doc (R-4-WA)
Hayes, Robin (R-8-NC)
Hayworth, J. D. (R-5-AZ)
Hefley, Joel (R-5-CO)
Hensarling, Jeb (R-5-TX)
Herger, Wally (R-2-CA)
Herseth, Stephanie (D-AL-SD)
Hoekstra, Peter (R-2-MI)
Holden, Tim (D-17-PA)
Hulshof, Kenny (R-9-MO)
Hunter, Duncan (R-52-CA)
Hyde, Henry J. (R-6-IL)
Issa, Darrell (R-49-CA)
Istook, Ernest J. (R-5-OK)
Jefferson, William L. (D-2-LA)
Jenkins, William (R-1-TN)
Johnson, Sam (R-3-TX)
Johnson, Timothy (R-15-IL)
Jones, Walter B. (R-3-NC)
Keller, Ric (R-8-FL)
Kelly, Sue W. (R-19-NY)
Kennedy, Mark (R-6-MN)
King, Peter (R-3-NY)
King, Steve (R-5-IA)
Kingston, Jack (R-1-GA)
Kline, John (R-2-MN)
LaHood, Ray (R-18-IL)
Latham, Tom (R-4-IA)
LaTourette, Steven (R-14-OH)
Lewis, Jerry (R-41-CA)
Lewis, Ron (R-2-KY)
Linder, John (R-7-GA)
LoBiondo, Frank (R-2-NJ)
Lucas, Frank D. (R-3-OK)
Manzullo, Donald A. (R-16-IL)
Marshall, Jim (D-3-GA)
Matheson, Jim (D-2-UT)
McCotter, Thaddeus (R-11-MI)
McCrery, Jim (R-4-LA)
McHugh, John (R-23-NY)
McIntyre, Mike (D-7-NC)
McKeon, Howard "Buck" (R-25-CA)
Melancon, Charlie (D-3-LA)
Mica, John (R-7-FL)
Miller, Candice (R-10-MI)
Miller, Gary (R-42-CA)
Miller, Jeff (R-1-FL)
Moran, Jerry (R-1-KS)
Murphy, Timothy (R-18-PA)
Musgrave, Marilyn (R-4-CO)
Myrick, Sue (R-9-NC)
Neugebauer, Randy (R-19-TX)
Ney, Bob (R-18-OH)
Northup, Anne (R-3-KY)
Norwood, Charlie (R-9-GA)
Nunes, Devin (R-21-CA)
Nussle, Jim (R-1-IA)
Ortiz, Solomon P. (D-27-TX)
Osborne, Tom (R-3-NE)
Otter, Butch (R-1-ID)
Oxley, Michael (R-4-OH)
Pearce, Stevan (R-2-NM)
Pence, Mike (R-6-IN)
Peterson, Collin C. (D-7-MN)
Peterson, John E. (R-5-PA)
Petri, Thomas (R-6-WI)
Pickering, Chip (R-3-MS)
Pitts, Joseph R. (R-16-PA)
Platts, Todd (R-19-PA)
Pombo, Richard W. (R-11-CA)
Porter, Jon (R-3-NV)
Portman, Rob (R-2-OH)
Putman, Adam (R-12-FL)
Radanovich, George (R-19-CA)
Rahall, Nick (D-3-WV)
Ramstad, Jim (R-3-MN)
Regula, Ralph (R-16-OH)
Rehberg, Dennis (R-AL-MT)
Renzi, Rick (R-1-AZ)
Reynolds, Thomas (R-26-NY)
Rogers, Harold (R-5-KY)
Rogers, Michael (R-3-AL)
Rogers, Mike (R-8-MI)
Rohrabacher, Dana (R-46-CA)
Ross, Mike (D-4-AR)
Royce, Ed (R-40-CA)
Ryan, Paul E. (R-1-WI)
Ryun, Jim R. (R-2-KS)
Saxton, Jim (R-3-NJ)
Scott, David (D-13-GA)
Sensenbrenner, F. James (R-5-WI)
Sessions, Pete (R-32-TX)
Shadegg, John (R-3-AZ)
Shaw, Clay (R-22-FL)
Sherwood, Don (R-10-PA)
Shimkus, John (R-19-IL)
Shuster, Bill (R-9-PA)
Simpson, Mike (R-2-ID)
Skelton, Ike (D-4-MO)
Smith, Christopher (R-4-NJ)
Smith, Lamar S. (R-21-TX)
Souder, Mark Edward (R-3-IN)
Spratt, John M. (D-5-SC)
Stearns, Cliff (R-6-FL)
Sullivan, John (R-1-OK)
Tancredo, Tom (R-6-CO)
Tanner, John (D-8-TN)
Taylor, Charles (R-11-NC)
Taylor, Gene (D-4-MS)
Terry, Lee (R-2-NE)
Thomas, Bill (R-22-CA)
Thompson, Bennie G. (D-2-MS)
Thornberry, Mac (R-13-TX)
Tiahrt, Todd (R-4-KS)
Tiberi, Patrick (R-12-OH)
Turner, Michael (R-3-OH)
Upton, Fred (R-6-MI)
Walden, Greg (R-2-OR)
Walsh, James (R-25-NY)
Wamp, Zach (R-3-TN)
Weldon, Curt (R-7-PA)
Weldon, Dave (R-15-FL)
Weller, Jerry (R-11-IL)
Whitfield, Edward (R-1-KY)
Wicker, Roger (R-1-MS)
Wilson, Heather (R-1-NM)
Wilson, Joe (R-2-SC)
Wolf, Frank R. (R-10-VA)
Young, CW Bill (R-10-FL)
Young, Don (R-AL-AK) Read the rest of this post...

"Gay bashing, plain and simple"

Flashback to the Senate debate on July 13, 2004. One of the great moments came when Frank Lautenberg defined what the debate was really all about:

I've come to an unfortunate conclusion about why we're doing this amendment. Gay-bashing, plain and simple. That's what this is about.

Lautenberg was right. The gay bashing GOP Senators ran to the Senate floor to say it wasn't true. That, of course, confirmed it. Take for example, the whining words of Little Ricky:

You can say I'm a hater. But I would argue I'm a lover. I'm a lover of traditional families and children who deserve the right to have a mother and a father.

We do say you're a hater. still.

John will be posting the Action Alert for today shortly. It's going to be fun. The supporters of the "marriage protection" amendment better be prepared to defend their own marriages...and those of their staffs. Read the rest of this post...

We're making sooo much progress in Iraq, Bush and the GOP can focus on gay bashing

Can't worry about Iraq. Have to bash gays. Plus, we're making progress in Iraq. Bush-style progress:

In other news, masked gunmen stopped two minivans carrying students north of Baghdad, ordered the passengers off, separated Shiites from Sunni Arabs, and killed the 21 Shiites "in the name of Islam," a witness said.

In predominantly Shiite southern Basra, police hunting for militants stormed a Sunni Arab mosque early Sunday, just hours after a car bombing. The ensuing fire fight killed nine.

The two attacks Sunday dealt a blow to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's pledge to curb sectarian violence. He again failed to reach consensus Sunday among Iraq's ethnic and sectarian parties on candidates for interior and defense minister - posts he must fill to implement his ambitious plan to take control of Iraq's security from U.S.-led forces within 18 months.

Good thing the President and Bill Frist have nothing else to worry about. Good thing they can focus the attention of the government of the United States on gay-bashing this week. Just wondering how many people have died because of gay marriage compared to Iraq or even Katrina. Read the rest of this post...

Monday Morning Open Thread

Today, we all have to do our part to insure that Senators are protecting their own marriages. Be ready.

The right wingers get their photo op today with a cynical President who "doesn't give a shit" about their issue, just wants their votes.

The Senators who support the right wing gay bashers will be getting phone calls to make sure their marriages are being protected from divorce, adultery and sodomy.

They want this debate. They'll have it. Read the rest of this post...

Military problems are all about out-of-control individuals

They have nothing to do with leadership at all so let's keep targeting the low ranking individuals. The rule of law is for wimps and America-haters.

The Pentagon has decided to omit from new detainee policies a key tenet of the Geneva Conventions that explicitly bans "humiliating and degrading treatment," according to knowledgeable military officials, a step that would mark a further shift away from strict adherence to international human rights standards.

Read the rest of this post...

Oil climbing again

Iran, hostages in Nigeria...same, same. $73.23 Read the rest of this post...