Deny Them Your Essence...

California high court upholds gay marriage ban

The face of 'tolerance' and 'diversity'....



So now the 'we shall overcome' moaning begins. The California Supreme court realized that when the People speak twice in two separate ballot initiatives,(Prop 22 in 2000and now Prop 8) the People are to be heard and their voice recognized. Many California voters were confused by Prop 8 and thought that Prop 8 actually promoted gay marriage. Analysts predict that 8 actually passed by ten percentage points.

The validation of Proposition 8, the ballot measure that effectively bans gay marriage (but has no effect on civil unions) is precisely why gay activists went judge-shopping in Massachusetts years ago. They knew the only way they could crow-bar their way into the law was to find gay-friendly, activist judges. That way, if the voters later got a measure on the ballot where everyone could vote, and if that vote would invalidate gay marriage, the activists could claim their rights were being stripped away. It's the classic case of the thief claiming his ill-gotten gains have been stolen by another thief.

Tolerance in action....peaceful gays spit on and threaten to attack maniacal conservative on bicycle....


I'm really quite weary of the 'equal rights for all' canard. There is no right to marry, gay or otherwise. Marriage is a quasi-religious ceremony later folded into legal and civic proceedings for purposes of property claims, family law, etc. Gays have no more right to marry each other than I do my goldfish, and the industry of manufactured victim status needs to be bankrupted. Gays in America in 2009 are in no way an oppressed class and we all should reject this claim at every opportunity. Some gays liken themselves to Holocaust victims, claiming they're no different, a grotesque inversion of reality, where gays are not only tolerated (at one time, their only stated goal) but widely accepted into American society, with television shows, (Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Ellen, Boy meets Boy, etc. etc.)


In the Prop 8 ruling, nothing was 'taken away' that was already in existence. In fact, 18,000 gay marriages were left intact, as the court did not want to cause further disruption.

Maybe someday, gay marriage will be a reality. I don't know why it's so important, since gays have a higher divorce/ annulment rate than straight couples do, and they cannot have children unless they adopt or create them through artificial means. To me as a straight, married male, gay marriage is just another case of a minority group imposing their will on an unwilling majority that rejects intimidation and slander. We will not accept the label of 'haters' . We don't hate anyone, but we do not want to be forced, Massachusetts style, to accept something as polarizing as gay marriage at the hands of a few selected judges with their own agendas.

That is not democracy, only judicial tyranny at its worst.

"The FBI said the Muslim suspects were angry and full of hate for America."

"Four New York men were arrested Wednesday in connection with an alleged plot to blow up area Jewish centers and military targets. The plot, however, was foiled by undercover agents."


"According to the criminal complaint, Cromitie said "I hate those f-ing Jewish bastards." He bragged that it would be a "piece of cake" to bomb a Jewish Center in Riverdale, according to the complaint."

Looks like the local ROPER's (Religion Of Peace) were planning a little demolition party.

Meanwhile, B.O. is running around the Muslim world, apologizing for Abu Ghraib (dastardly frat pranks) and Guantanamo (muslim diet, free Koran). Who will he apologize to when one of these terror attacks succeeds? It better be Dick Cheney and John Ashcroft, whose names he dragged through the mud for eight years.

When, do you think, we will get it that while we may "not be at war with Islam", Islam is at war with us?

Barry's U-turn on Gitmo

We suspect Dick Cheney had a private 'come to Jesus' phone call with HippityHope
informing him of the reason it's called GITMO is because our techniques actually work to git' mo' information out of Hajji.

President Barack Obama said Friday he would reform and restart the military tribunals he once reviled for Guantanamo Bay detainees, jeopardizing his timetable for closing the prison by January and dismaying many supporters who suggested he was going back on campaign promises.

Now, after the detainees are given stronger legal protections — a ban on evidence obtained under cruel duress, for example — the trials of 13 defendants in nine cases will be restarted no sooner than September. Five of the of the 13 are charged with helping orchestrate the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Hey Barry, welcome to the real world. We know you're so magnetic, but believe it or not, some people aren't interested in negotiating. They're interested in murdering us.

This week's Dr.Strangelove clip:

A Mutiny of Preverts....

Newt on Pelosi (audio)

http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=7595688

Newt Gingrich, regardless of how much the MSM insists on assassinating his character, sounds the alarm here, both about the danger of diminishing our posture against terrorists and about the utter disgrace that Nancy Pelosi is. She has lied about her knowledge of CIA briefings, spent 8 years comparing Bush to Hitler, bashing her own country, insulting those in uniform, and thoroughly debasing the office she so unfortunately occupies.

Don't Stand So Close To Me

Check out President Tennis Match as he trys to get out of frame with the Sea Hag.

She tried to throw the CIA under the bus, when she said she 'was never told about waterboarding'. Oops. Turns out the CIA spooks keep really good meeting minutes. The Old Lying Democrat was not only told about waterboarding, she attended the meetings.

But ultimately, why should we care? Waterboarding does no permanent damage, and is therefore not torture. Beyond that, so what?..they're terrorists, not soldiers in an army and deserve no such quarter anyway. Read the Geneva convention language on treatment of captured soldiers, it clearly defines rules as being applicable to soldiers in uniform.

Barry ought to know this, since we were told by Oprah' he is brilliant'.

Grain.

"By KARL ROVE
Someone important appears not to be telling the truth about her knowledge of the CIA's use of enhanced interrogation techniques (EITs). That someone is Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. The political persecution of Bush administration officials she has been pushing may now ensnare her.
Here's what we know. On Sept. 4, 2002, less than a year after 9/11, the CIA briefed Rep. Porter Goss, then House Intelligence Committee chairman, and Mrs. Pelosi, then the committee's ranking Democrat, on EITs including waterboarding. They were the first members of Congress to be informed.

In December 2007, Mrs. Pelosi admitted that she attended the briefing, but she wouldn't comment for the record about precisely what she was told. At the time the Washington Post spoke with a "congressional source familiar with Pelosi's position on the matter" and summarized that person's comments this way: "The source said Pelosi recalls that techniques described by the CIA were still in the planning stage -- they had been designed and cleared with agency lawyers but not yet put in practice -- and acknowledged that Pelosi did not raise objections at the time."

When questions were raised last month about these statements, Mrs. Pelosi insisted at a news conference that "We were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used." Mrs. Pelosi also claimed that the CIA "did not tell us they were using that, flat out. And any, any contention to the contrary is simply not true." She had earlier said on TV, "I can say flat-out, they never told us that these enhanced interrogations were being used."
The Obama administration's CIA director, Leon Panetta, and Mr. Goss have both disputed Mrs. Pelosi's account.

In a report to Congress on May 5, Mr. Panetta described the CIA's 2002 meeting with Mrs. Pelosi as "Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on [legal] authorities, and a description of the particular EITs that had been employed." Note the past tense -- "had been employed."

Mr. Goss says he and Mrs. Pelosi were told at the 2002 briefing about the use of the EITs and "on a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission." He is backed by CIA sources who say Mr. Goss and Mrs. Pelosi "questioned whether we were doing enough" to extract information.

We also know that Michael Sheehy, then Mrs. Pelosi's top aide on the Intelligence Committee and later her national security adviser, not only attended the September 2002 meeting but was also briefed by the CIA on EITs on Feb. 5, 2003, and told about a videotape of Zubaydah being waterboarded. Mr. Sheehy was almost certain to have told Mrs. Pelosi. He has not commented publicly about the 2002 or the 2003 meetings.
So is the speaker of the House lying about what she knew and when? And, if so, what will Democrats do about it?

If Mrs. Pelosi considers the enhanced interrogation techniques to be torture, didn't she have a responsibility to complain at the time, introduce legislation to end the practices, or attempt to deny funding for the CIA's use of them? If she knew what was going on and did nothing, does that make her an accessory to a crime of torture, as many Democrats are calling enhanced interrogation?

Senate Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy wants an independent investigation of Bush administration officials. House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers feels the Justice Department should investigate and prosecute anyone who violated laws against committing torture. Are these and other similarly minded Democrats willing to have Mrs. Pelosi thrown into their stew of torture conspirators as an accomplice?

It is clear that after the 9/11 attacks Mrs. Pelosi was briefed on enhanced interrogation techniques and the valuable information they produced. She not only agreed with what was being done, she apparently pressed the CIA to do more.
But when political winds shifted, Mrs. Pelosi seems to have decided to use enhanced interrogation as an issue to attack Republicans. It is disgraceful that Democrats who discovered their outrage years after the fact are now braying for disbarment of the government lawyers who justified EITs and the prosecution of Bush administration officials who authorized them. Mrs. Pelosi is hip-deep in dangerous waters, and they are rapidly rising"

You're no Jackie Onassis, Mike.

Don't kid yourself, Mitch . You walk like a bow-legged wide receiver with bad knees and size 13's.

Michelle Hopenchange, we all know you're the media darling, fawned over for the slightest morsel of insight to what your favorite color is, whether or not you like tiger or zebra stripes for the new upholstery, and if you prefer Fiddy Cent over Puff Daddy. Yeah. Thanks. We get that. But no matter how much of our tax dollars you spend on garish clothing and bling , you still paint the picture of a malcontented oaf out of place in a setting that requires understated confidence and social decorum (at least until the President Dress-Stainer showed up in '92).

Frankly Mike, I'm embarrassed to even acknowledge that you're residing in the seat of power of the free world. It's not that you're Black (who cares?) ..it's just that you represent the Sista Souljah element of the Black community. You exude a latent pissed-offedness through every pore, especially the ones around your witch-like eyebrows. I'll bet Barry spends a lot of time on the couch when your pork skins don't show up on time. You like snappin' those clawed fingers for maid service, do you? Payback time, ain' it?

As a little reminder of what class used to look like before you came clomping down the red carpet, take a look at what real grace, real beauty is. And no matter how much you try, you will never get there.

Classic Beauty:


An a**-load of Booty:


See Mitch, Jackie Kennedy actually looks like a woman:



And then there's you:


Probably the ugliest legs we've ever seen: ....ugh...try shaving those stumps.


Even this old man looks better than you:



But you will never have the grace this woman had. So spare us all with the comparisons.



The nightmare never ends---June 9, 2009