fun2bfree's Comments (41)

“so basically you confirm that a DIFFERENT word applies for the same sex spouse than it does for the opposite sex spouse. So I can see how some might insist on a different word for same sex unions than the word marriage. I can see how. I don't care. I think I know why they really care and it has nothing to do with reason or logic as we are discussing here...it has to do with the mistaken notion that a marriage license from the state equals APPROVAL of the relationship or the lifestyle. It does not and this mistaken notion of approval is wherein both sides make the argument.
Civil unions/marriages should be framed strictly as an issue of freedom- freedom to organize your life as you see fit. Don't look to the state to approve or disapprove of lifestyles or partner choices.”

“what dictionary did God write? In which language? What font does God prefer?”

“I have not read everyone's comments, so forgive me if the point has already been made.
While I agree gays should have the right to get hitched and I could not care less if they call it marriage or not, the argument about the word has logic to it. I don't doubt for a miniute this is not about logic., though. I don't doubt that the opposition to gay marriage has everything to do with using the power of the state to "disapprove" of lifestyle choices that gays make. But given the logic it would be better to just fight for the rights, not the word.

Consider, a man marries a woman= Husband and wife.
A man marries a man or a woman marries a woman- = husband and husband? wife and wife? We use a different word for a man in a marriage than we use for the woman in the marriage. THe words are different depending on the genders..S­o Same gender unions could be considered something other than the word marriage.
Again- they should be equal in the eyes of hte law, but let the haters ahve their word, for now...it will all fall apart eventually as all oppression eventually does. They are on the wrong side of history.”

“I am not sure he IS saying it is okay, so much as asking the audience to think about it. I don't think he is definitely comig down in favor of evil in service to a good cause, just pointing out that whatever side you are on- you think it is okay to do whatever you do to win.”

“Eitehr I am very imaginative or most everyone seems to have missed what to me is Tarantino's main point: It is asking the question which should resonate deeply in a world of Dick Cheney justified torture, which is essentially- it is okay to be brutal and cruel if in service to some "good" cause?
That this author and so many others seem to have missed the point speaks to Tarantino having bungled his message, but to say he has nothing to say, is not fair.
It cannot be a coincidence that the most brutal, violent acts are committed by "our heroes"- the Americans, baseball bats, summary executions, scalping, finger probes of bullet wounds even in those on "our side."
It cannot be a coincidence that the film within the film features "their hero" gunning down our guys. I thin he means for us to wince as their audience cheers their hero's shooting down of our boys. all within a movie in we cheer on the butchering and battering of "them."
To me, the film was too long, badly acted in spots and not entirely satisfying­....but it seemed most definitely to be trying to say something.”

“60 minutes' medical reports were often really ill informed and ill informing.­..the puff piece they did on Shark Caritlege probably sent thousands if not millions on a wild goose chase of false hope built on snake oil and quackery..­..it makes you wonder how good the other reporting was about stuff I don't know enough about to see the mistakes”

“Why do you care what consenting adults do to organize their lives as they see fit? How is that the state's business?”

“I fully support total equality for gays to join in legal unions- this battle to call it marriage plays right in the hands of the haters.
When a man marries a woman-he is the husband, she is the wife. Nothing unequal about it legally even though they have separate terms...se­parate different words to define them - but legally they are equal. Two men marry- neither of them will be a wife. Two women marry, neither of them will be a husband. Therefore it is "reasonable" to say that a marriage is the word for that union of a man and a woman and that unions of other sorts can have a different name.

I don't like this...I don't believe for a second the haters object to gay marriage on semantic grounds, but they will cling to any and every argument they can and this one has some merit, unfortunately.

The other problem inherent in this article is that people think that the government is part of this support system approving of your marriage. Governments cannot "approve" of your choice to marry--I am sure there are many heterosexual marriages which are legal that few would approve (gold-diggers, abusive relationships, immature people, etc.)--but the government can't get in the business of sorting out who should or should not marry --it should "allow" anyone to organize their life in whatever way they see fit. It should strictly be framed as an issue of liberty.”

“Who cares to see a clip of the previous Oscar winners accepting their awards? Here's an idea:
Before bringing out some prior Oscar winner to present an award--Show a clip from the performance for which they won that award and then introduce that actor to present this year's trophy. Or if they have not won an Oscar show a clip of some representative scene from his/her finest FILM work....th­en bring him/her out to present...
It's all about celebrating the MOVIES --not celebrating past awards shows...”

“Maher does not "leap" into atheism...­He has been critical of atheism- he is closer to agnostic as far as you would define it....but your comments are a distortion of the atheist position, anyway...

As an theist, I would not so much say flat out "there is not god" but more precisely- flat out- there is no good evidence for a god of the sort that most people claim to believe in....call that what you will...”

“Hillary does not want a Senate seat for life--that seat was supposed to be a stepping stone to the White House only...thi­s is her ticket out of an obligation she had no intention of fulfilling­....”

“Electoral: OBAMA 291, MCCain-247
Popular VOte-51 Obama, 49 McCain
house 266- Repub 169
Senate Dems 56, Repubs44
MN- Franken 47, Coleman 45, Barkely 8”

“To be fair- co-sponsoring is often criticized as just attaching your name to someone else's work..stil­l I think there is ample evidence of Barack's leadership on many of these legislative issues.

As for how oftne one goes aganist one's party -it is a false metric-there is no reason it should be even steven

-why should he go against the dems as often as someone else goes against the repubs if the Repubs are wrong so much more often (as i believe they have been)...

The question I would have loved to seen someone ask Sarah P after her "wonderful" convention speech knocking Barack is, " So since you are so critical of Senator O's record, I am sure you can tell us the things he has or has not worked on...pklea­se elaborate on what knowledge base you made those critical remarks." I would say she would have no doubt had a "deer in the headlights" look, but she pretty much has that look of ignorance all the time anyway...”

“Soo,,,just to be a little "I told you so." Erica was highly critical of those of us who supported Obama throughout the primary's against her preferred choice. Now she is singing his praises and apparently has seen what those of us who were right from the beginning saw--THAT ONE is an extraordinary candidate.”

“I am so tired of people repeating the McC distortion about town halls--
Town halls were proposed..­.-BO team countered that they needed to negotiate hwo this would be- how to keep the audience from being stacked...­how to pick where so one side wa not being moved around strategically in a way that undermined their own plans/strategy---10 meetings are time consuming and the logistics of getting there are disruptive­....so this was not in my view an unreasonable counter offer--it was rejected-- the McC side said--no- no negotiaations-
and then they have not stopped whining about not having town halls since...ba­sically trying to make political hay out of this non-issue.­..
and it is there fundamental dishonesty about this and their current stunt that convinces me that a govt run by these people will be nothing but more of the same horrible administration we have suffered these last 7 years”

“HE IS BETTER THAN THE AVERAGE WORKING PERSON!!!! I WANT SOMEONE BETTER THAN AVERAGE AS OUR LEADER! Why would anyone want an average person when you can have an extraordinary, exceptional, talented person?????

We have had 8 years of what comes from letting Average people do their thing--they are doing a heckuva job, aren't they?”

“If Obama delivers on what I find his most appealing attribute- his dedication to open government, transparent government, then I will be satisfied.­.. I don't agree with Senator Obama on many issues...I am much more of a liberatarian--but the one thing that libertarians and big government types should be able to agree on is that whatever the government is doing should be agreed upon openly--that the process should be transparent so the special interests at work are visible. This may not eliminate big governments shoddy ways--but it has the best chance of any approach.”

“The Repubicans were so worried that Hillary would be the nominee??? Are you kidding me? WHy was Fox News always attacking Obama and talking up CLinton's campaign? That is not my impression--the CLinton campaign itself was very pleased with the coverage they got from Fox claiming it was the only fair coverage..­.even if true--why would FOX be fair to her this time? Why was Rush Limbaugh pushing for her? Why did McCain NEVER once attack her--only Obama? The Republicans CLEARLY wanted Clinton to run against...­now maybe they were foolhardy wishing for that (though the 48% of people who will never vote for her might disagree)”

“The ideal place for Bill Clinton is as OBAMA's vice president- inspired, out of the box yet perfect choice. All talk of lack of experience-gone. The rift with the Clinton's -gone. Politics of the past would be gone as well because it is so unprecedented as to be UNCONVENTI­ONAL...a former Prez serving as Vice-Presi­dent....an­d lest anyone think it is not Constitutional--it is---the only thing Bill can never do again is be ELECTED PRESIDENT. He can be anything else--well not a lawyer- because I think he was disbarred for lying under oath or something like that....”

“Please do yourself a favor and look up a few laws:
Obama-Coburn
Obama-Luger
Obama-Kerry

Then do me a favor and post even one- ONE- law that is called "Clinton-anything" that Hillary has passed in her longer time in the Senate.

The empty suit-is a pantsuit.”

“I, too, am an Obama supporter---and I will admit it--a Clinton Hater--I find her repeated shameless lying an insult to my intelligence and a deal breaker with regard to my support.

That said...I agree her original comment is being blown out of proportion­....I really don't think she was using the Assassination as anything other than a clumsy shorthanded reference to the California Primary being in June....IF ONLY she had apologized well-

but her non-apology explanation was further proof of what a foolish, horrible person she is...she could have said--I was clumsy in using this shorthand to refer to the timetable-­--distanci­ng herself as quickly and as tactfully as possible from any notion entertaining the assassination of any candidate.­..she did not have to mention Obama by name-just acknowledge what she "stumbled" into...but she did not--because she is a foolish, awful person.”

“"Why would you want the super delegates to speak up before the situation is clear?"

The REST OF US (PR, SD and MT excluded) have had to "speak up" and cast our votes already--they can cast theirs.”

“I can understand the SUPERDELEGATES in MONTANA and SOUTH DAKOTA not feeling the need to take a stand but since the VOTERS of every other state have had to "put our nickel down" on a candidate there is NO EXCUSE for those SUPERDELEGATES from the states which have already voted. Which is to say most of them. The rest of us voted--time for you to do so as well. PERIOD.”

“Clinton?
Is she still in the race?”

“Is Clinton still in the race?

--from now on-- anytime anyone says anything at all about Hillary--this is the simple reply:

Is she still in the race?”