D'Amato pushes knife further into the gut of the NYGOP

[WalterMitty]

I just read on the MSNBC ticker that former Senator Al D'Amato(R) is "poised" to endorse Eliot Spitzer for governor.

he should be flogged.

[WalterMitty]

Do you really think they actually were opposed to gay marrriage and weren't just taking pragmatic electable positions?

Hell, Kerry voted against DOMA.

that is even more pathetic.  if i were a gay, why the hell would i support someone who really favors gay marriage, but runs around the country saying he is opposed to it.

that is kind of like someone in the 6th grade saying he will be your friend but doesnt want to be seen with you when the cool kids are around.

and by the way, im sure statesrights will claim that george wallace wasnt really a segregationist, but rather, a pragmatist.

[WalterMitty]

Do you really think they actually were opposed to gay marrriage and weren't just taking pragmatic electable positions?

Hell, Kerry voted against DOMA.

that is even more pathetic.  if i were a gay, why the hell would i support someone who really favors gay marriage, but runs around the country saying he is opposed to it.

that is kind of like someone in the 6th grade saying he will be your friend but doesnt want to be seen with you when the cool kids are around.

and by the way, im sure statesrights will claim that george wallace wasnt really a segregationist, but rather, a pragmatist.

Because he's still better on gay rights overall even with that position than the alternative.

What you're saying is gays should prefer someone who wants to amend the Constistution to ban gay marriage and opposes civil union and almost ever other gay rights issue over someone who supports almost every gay right issue, opposes the Constitutional ban, supports civil unions, because they claim to oppose gay marriage when they probably don't. That makes no sense.

As for the analogies, I'm sure most kids would prefer a kid like you mentioned over a bully, and if Kerry is George Wallace, well, what does that make Bush?

john kerry voiced his support for states amending their constitutions to ban gay marriage (remember the missouri vote?)

one candidate wanted to ban gay marriage at the state level.  the other candidate wanted to ban it at the federal level.  how is one better?  if you ask me, they are both wrong.

[WalterMitty]

Do you really think they actually were opposed to gay marrriage and weren't just taking pragmatic electable positions?

Hell, Kerry voted against DOMA.

that is even more pathetic.  if i were a gay, why the hell would i support someone who really favors gay marriage, but runs around the country saying he is opposed to it.

that is kind of like someone in the 6th grade saying he will be your friend but doesnt want to be seen with you when the cool kids are around.

and by the way, im sure statesrights will claim that george wallace wasnt really a segregationist, but rather, a pragmatist.

Because he's still better on gay rights overall even with that position than the alternative.

What you're saying is gays should prefer someone who wants to amend the Constistution to ban gay marriage and opposes civil union and almost ever other gay rights issue over someone who supports almost every gay right issue, opposes the Constitutional ban, supports civil unions, because they claim to oppose gay marriage when they probably don't. That makes no sense.

As for the analogies, I'm sure most kids would prefer a kid like you mentioned over a bully, and if Kerry is George Wallace, well, what does that make Bush?

john kerry voiced his support for states amending their constitutions to ban gay marriage (remember the missouri vote?)

one candidate wanted to ban gay marriage at the state level.  the other candidate wanted to ban it at the federal level.  how is one better?  if you ask me, they are both wrong.

Because the state level doesn't affect other states. They would still be able to have gay marriage in Massachusetts, and California which will once Arnold is gone, and New York which probably will once Spitzer's in office and the Democrats control the Senate. I doubt a President Kerry would be condemning those. Not to mention he was infinitely superior on all other gay rights issues.

if kerry endorsed the missouri amendment, you would have to assume he is opposed to gay marriage in massachusetts also.