In the veep debate I was disappointed to say the least (okay, nauseated) by the discussion of gay marriage. The whole touchy-feely act between Cheney and Edwards was a smokescreen to conceal the fact that they both support a discriminatory policy. Edwards repeated at least twice that both he and Kerry believe that "marriage is bewteen a man and a woman", and his only argument against a constitutional ban on gay marriage is that it is "unnecessary". In other words, since each state is free to discriminate against gays, there's no reason for the federal government to intervene.
I don't see this as a complicated issue. Take any debate about gay marriage, substitute the word "black" for the word "gay", and you'll see what I mean. It's a civil rights issue, plain and simple.
"Before I go on, I'd like to say that I admire Senator Thurmond for sending money to his black daughter. I know that he loves his black daughter, and you have to admire him for embracing her and schtupping her mother. I love black people, I just happen to think they should have their own schools. It’s nothing but a political tool. And it’s being used in an effort to divide this country on an issue that we should not be dividing America on".
By the way, that last sentence was a direct quotation from Mr. Edwards. He dismissed the entire issue as a "political tool", and then he ended his sentence with a preposition!
In the middle of a debate season that had thus far made me feel more comfortable about my vote, Edwards reminded me that, yes, I am still voting for the lesser of two evils.
exactly. that and the comments about israel gave me pause. i'm voting dem, but only because we'll be living in handmaid's tale (or parable of the talents or he she and it...) if we don't.
Posted by: z. at 08.10.04 09:52Yeah, I had a problem with the Israel thing too. It was a repeition of the old "We had to blow up the nine-year-old kid, he was throwing rocks at our tanks" rationalization.
Posted by: monk at 08.10.04 10:21