Three Crooked Squirrels: Lando Lincoln: How many Republican Senators are still against it?

As of last week, only Portman and Kirk are on board.  I guess that leaves 45 or so still against it.


And those 45 will be ignored while the "liberal" media fixates on how democrats are "deeply divided" over the issue.

NewportBarGuy: Joe Manchin couldn't support the gays if they an AK-47 and a bottle of Oxycontin in their hands. West Virginia is a proper f*cked sort of place. He's not so much a Democrat as some guy who wanted to keep a D seat.

Remember how Byrd was KKK, yeah same kinda aura needs to be around the guy who gets votes there.

He don't be hatin' them queers, he gonna be fixin' to find work on K Street making 5X his salary. Decisions. Decisions.

I work with WV state pols every damn day, and that's the case with all of them--I actually have more respect for WV republicans, because they, unlike the democrats, actually have the guts to admit they're republicans.

The "Byrd was in the KKK hurhurrhurr" thing is getting tired, though.  That man apologized more times and with more sincerity for that transgression than every other damn politican in the history of this country have apologized for their transgressions, combined.

I grew up in WV.  My junior year of high school (1998), the school band had planned a trip to go to Myrtle Beach for some sort of competition.  A few weeks before the trip, someone apparently found out that there was a gay pride celebration in the town, and there was going to be a gay pride parade while we were there.  This, of course, had nothing to do with the competition we were attending.  However, parents were up in arms and made numerous complaints to the board of education.  The result was that our trip was canceled.  Because apparently people were afraid the gay was going to rub off on us or something.

tl;dr:  attitudes in the state probably haven't changed much in the past 15 years, so don't expect Manchin to change his position.

MogKupo: don't expect Manchin to change his position.

that. just. sounds... well. gay, somehow.

MaxxLarge: I dunno who's going to be next...But I  do know it ain't gonna be Landrieu.

If she ever even does at all.

Not if she wants to be re-elected.

MaxxLarge: I dunno who's going to be next...But I  do know it ain't gonna be Landrieu.

Festival!  Festival!

/Too obscure?

I'm seriously farking stunned. I never thought he'd flip.

If my democrat senator was up for reelection and wasn't a shoe-in for reelection, I wouldn't want them to come out for gay rights

Let me guess, he's saying his viewpoints on the issue "evolved."

*checks article*

Yep.

Jesus Christ they're droppin' like flies.

Anyone have a count on how many have flipped in the past month or so?

Supes: Let me guess, he's saying his viewpoints on the issue "evolved."

*checks article*

Yep.

In their defense, how else is it supposed to change?  If you're against a big issue like SSM I don't think it's possible to have your views change  without evolving.

Three! Three non-gay-marriage-supporting Democrats!

[count.jpg]

/ah ah ah

NewportBarGuy: CalvinMorallis: The "Byrd was in the KKK hurhurrhurr" thing is getting tired, though. That man apologized more times and with more sincerity for that transgression than every other damn politican in the history of this country have apologized for their transgressions, combined.

I promise, I was not even trying to bring that up as an issue. I only meant it to solidify why Manchin is the way he is. He is NOT someone who can "float" to the middle and keep his seat. Byrd brought home billions in cash, that kept him his seat. Joe has to pretend he's a Republican, and you already know that.

Sorry.  It's just a touchy subject for me, being one of only 19 West Virginians who aren't pissed slavery is outlawed.

The Manchin thing fascinates the hell out of me, though.  He's the slimiest son of a biatch I've ever known, but damned if he doesn't have the charisma to be a major national figure some day.  So on the one hand, he undoubtedly doesn't want to be one of 3 people in his party to not support gay marriage--the longer he holds out, the more likely it is that the dem leadership essentially draws a line in the sand and says, "say goodbye to anything bigger than the Pepperidge Farm Goldfish Flavor Enhancement Subcommittee, Joe."  But on the other hand, the second he changes his stance (hardy har har) on gay marriage, that will literally be the same second his republican opposition in WV has the entirety of their--no doubt ultimately successful--campaign against him mapped out.

Either way, his political career seems to be doomed, and there's not a damn thing he can do about it.  Which is cool 'cause he's a jackass.

wingnut396: MaxxLarge: I dunno who's going to be next...But I  do know it ain't gonna be Landrieu.

If she ever even does at all.

Not if she wants to be re-elected.

She said she personally supports marriage equality has evolved,but will vote the way her constituents will want her to vote.

Almost Everybody Poops: In their defense, how else is it supposed to change?  If you're against a big issue like SSM I don't think it's possible to have your views change  without evolving.

Learned more about the issue? Read scientific literature about healthy homosexual home environments? Changing my opinion to reflect the changing views of society? Saying different things cause I know my constituents want to hear something else, and it'll help me in getting re-elected?

Honestly, I'm really all for politicians changing their opinions on things. The idea of a politician remaining steadfast no matter what (see Dubya) scares me a whole lot more than so-called a flip-flopper. We need to encourage politicians to have different viewpoints as the facts change. But the idea that views "evolved" is just an annoying and increasingly popular buzzword with no substance.

Supes: Almost Everybody Poops: In their defense, how else is it supposed to change?  If you're against a big issue like SSM I don't think it's possible to have your views change  without evolving.

Learned more about the issue? Read scientific literature about healthy homosexual home environments? Changing my opinion to reflect the changing views of society? Saying different things cause I know my constituents want to hear something else, and it'll help me in getting re-elected?

Honestly, I'm really all for politicians changing their opinions on things. The idea of a politician remaining steadfast no matter what (see Dubya) scares me a whole lot more than so-called a flip-flopper. We need to encourage politicians to have different viewpoints as the facts change. But the idea that views "evolved" is just an annoying and increasingly popular buzzword with no substance.

That's a good point I did not consider, however I don't see South Dakota as a left leaning state, although I don't know what the state's stance on SSM is as a whole.

I think the word "evolved" became popular due to Obama's use of it when asked about his position on SSM in the past 4 years.  SSM is still (albeit decreasing) a divisive issue so I would have a hard time thinking a Senator would come out in support of it unless he/she actually believed they did.  I think Obama didn't really want to address the issue at the time since it was an election year, but Biden basically forced him into it.

Supes:  But the idea that views "evolved" is just an annoying and increasingly popular buzzword with no substance.

Eh, purely from a dictionary perspective, "evolve" isn't really an incorrect verb to use for views that have changed or developed. It's got a connotation, may inspire technically imprecise allusions to biological evolution, and is absolutely a buzzword, but there's nothing about the usage that actually wrong.

Almost Everybody Poops: Supes: Almost Everybody Poops: In their defense, how else is it supposed to change?  If you're against a big issue like SSM I don't think it's possible to have your views change  without evolving.

Learned more about the issue? Read scientific literature about healthy homosexual home environments? Changing my opinion to reflect the changing views of society? Saying different things cause I know my constituents want to hear something else, and it'll help me in getting re-elected?

Honestly, I'm really all for politicians changing their opinions on things. The idea of a politician remaining steadfast no matter what (see Dubya) scares me a whole lot more than so-called a flip-flopper. We need to encourage politicians to have different viewpoints as the facts change. But the idea that views "evolved" is just an annoying and increasingly popular buzzword with no substance.

That's a good point I did not consider, however I don't see South Dakota as a left leaning state, although I don't know what the state's stance on SSM is as a whole.


.

State Constitutional ban.

NewportBarGuy: I promise, I was not even trying to bring that up as an issue. I only meant it to solidify why Manchin is the way he is. He is NOT someone who can "float" to the middle and keep his seat. Byrd brought home billions in cash, that kept him his seat. Joe has to pretend he's not a Republican, and you already know that.

FTFY

Have you noticed how Manchin manages to worm his way into every group shot?  Democratic leadership press announcement - check! State of the Union address - right up front.  Even back when he was governor and attended the National Governors Association, he always managed to be close to the podium when group photos were taken.

Almost Everybody Poops: Supes: Almost Everybody Poops: In their defense, how else is it supposed to change?  If you're against a big issue like SSM I don't think it's possible to have your views change  without evolving.

Learned more about the issue? Read scientific literature about healthy homosexual home environments? Changing my opinion to reflect the changing views of society? Saying different things cause I know my constituents want to hear something else, and it'll help me in getting re-elected?

Honestly, I'm really all for politicians changing their opinions on things. The idea of a politician remaining steadfast no matter what (see Dubya) scares me a whole lot more than so-called a flip-flopper. We need to encourage politicians to have different viewpoints as the facts change. But the idea that views "evolved" is just an annoying and increasingly popular buzzword with no substance.

That's a good point I did not consider, however I don't see South Dakota as a left leaning state, although I don't know what the state's stance on SSM is as a whole.

I think the word "evolved" became popular due to Obama's use of it when asked about his position on SSM in the past 4 years.  SSM is still (albeit decreasing) a divisive issue so I would have a hard time thinking a Senator would come out in support of it unless he/she actually believed they did.  I think Obama didn't really want to address the issue at the time since it was an election year, but Biden basically forced him into it.

South Dakota hasn't voted for a Democrat for president since FDRs second term. Not even their own Senator. McGovern. They have had several moderate Democrats in office like Johnson. At one point Johnson and daschle were both Democrat senators and so was the loan congressman Herseth but Johnson will be the last of that purge as he has retired and the former governor Mike Rounds will become Senator

Who the fark cares?

You and your boyfriend and your johnson(tm)

These politicians coming out in favor of same sex marriage would have been newsworthy, and commendable, as late as 2008. Now it's just obvious, typical, spineless pandering.

Martian_Astronomer: Supes:  But the idea that views "evolved" is just an annoying and increasingly popular buzzword with no substance.

Eh, purely from a dictionary perspective, "evolve" isn't really an incorrect verb to use for views that have changed or developed. It's got a connotation, may inspire technically imprecise allusions to biological evolution, and is absolutely a buzzword, but there's nothing about the usage that actually wrong.

Evolve:  To know which way the wind blows.  To follow the pack.

CalvinMorallis: Sorry. It's just a touchy subject for me, being one of only 19 West Virginians who aren't pissed slavery is outlawed.

Hi, I'm #7, small world, isn't it....

When a politician says their position "evolved" it just means they were lying about how they really felt before because they lying coonts willing to sell out civil rights to win elections. No respect for these people.

/one of my least favorite euphemisms

I am here to say that I've changed my position on the Kama Sutra many times.

3 Democrat Senators haven't figured out there's money and power in 'supporting' homosexual marriage.

"Evolved" or not we can now count on his support.

How many Republicans "evolve?" Or are they all creationists?

whidbey: How many Republicans "evolve?" Or are they all creationists?

They'll evolve as soon as it is advantageous in winning an election. Like when coastal Republicans "evolve" on social issues. Of course the conservative party will evolve less, so I get your point but why couldn't the GOP go back to their old model of being pro-business and socially moderate (ie the party of Lincoln to Eisenhower)? Or maybe back to the old populist model of being socially conservative and anti-business (though I guess that's what the Democratic Party was before FDR, Kennedy, and LBJ)? The GOP is actually a party of constant evolving in order to get votes.

Hell they went from being isolationist to "spreading democracy" pretty quickly.

Make that 3 dems that haven't gotten the email yet telling them that if they don't get on board, the DNC will find another rep for that district.

A state can be described as a district, senators represent these districts, and I know how congress works.

Asshat's like you that try to correct every detail of a persons post are what is wrong with the internet.  Go fark yourself.

Almost Everybody Poops: I think Obama didn't really want to address the issue at the time since it was an election year, but Biden basically forced him into it.

Cause Biden is awesome like that.

I don't even *know* when my Senators came out in favor.  Doesn't matter, just happy the tide is not only turning, it's a monster wave.  Damn.  That was the lamest metaphor ever.

Long time overdue.

cptjeff: Alphakronik: A state can be described as a district

I work in politics, and I've never heard anybody do that. Apart from people who get the Senate and the House confused, and those are usually pretty poorly informed.

Oh, and I don't correct every detail of every wrong post in the politics tab. That would take quite a while, I usually only go after the glaring stuff. And not knowing what a Senator is is pretty glaring an error.

Yep.

Alphakronik: Asshat's Asshats like you that try to correct every detail of a persons post are what is wrong with the internet.  Go fark yourself.

LectertheChef: Now it's just obvious, typical, spineless pandering.

I know that, and it's ok by me. I'll take Democrats scrambling to pander to me* over Republicans calling me an abomination in Christ's eyes and actively working to deny me rights any day of the week.

* because I guess gays suddenly have all this amazing political clout to hear Conservatives tell it

The Why Not Guy: Alphakronik: Asshat's Asshats like you that try to correct every detail of a persons post are what is wrong with the internet.  Go fark yourself.

ohsnap.jpg

The Why Not Guy: LectertheChef: Now it's just obvious, typical, spineless pandering.

I know that, and it's ok by me. I'll take Democrats scrambling to pander to me* over Republicans calling me an abomination in Christ's eyes and actively working to deny me rights any day of the week.

* because I guess gays suddenly have all this amazing political clout to hear Conservatives tell it

to be fair, if it *is* pandering, it's not just pandering to the gays, but also that ever increasing % of Americans who think it's stupid that it's taken this long already.  Which I am okay with.

cptjeff: Alphakronik: A state can be described as a district

I work in politics, and I've never heard anybody do that. Apart from people who get the Senate and the House confused, and those are usually pretty poorly informed.

Oh, and I don't correct every detail of every wrong post in the politics tab. That would take quite a while, I usually only go after the glaring stuff. And not knowing what a Senator is is pretty glaring an error.

You're arguing with a Farker whose claim to smartness is based on scoring in the 98th percentile of the ASVAB. That's right. No fancy college admittin' testin' for him, but boy, he showed the Army he was a genius.