If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Buzzfeed)   Marcus Bachmann can finally find happiness   (buzzfeed.com) divider line 374
    More: News, Marcus Bachmann, Minnesota Senate, Minnesota, Central Time, DFL, same-sex marriages, interracial marriages, same-sex couples  
•       •       •

31355 clicks; posted to Politics » on 13 May 2013 at 7:54 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



374 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-13 08:20:21 PM

FormlessOne: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

Maybe I'm misreading that statement, but that statement implies to me that this asshole felt that businesses were hurt and children confused when Minnesota voted against slavery? Seriously?


Seriously. And I too, chortled resplendently at that.
 
2013-05-13 08:21:33 PM

FormlessOne: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

Maybe I'm misreading that statement, but that statement implies to me that this asshole felt that businesses were hurt and children confused when Minnesota voted against slavery? Seriously?


Well, certain businesses were hurt when we outlawed slavery. And the meatpacking industry was hurt when we started requiring them to make sure workers didn't fall into the meat grinders. Even if it was true that letting gays marry would hurt businesses (and it's laughably false), it's utterly irrelevant.
 
2013-05-13 08:21:43 PM

Bender The Offender: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

What the hell is that passage suppose to mean? What the fark is up with the civil war and business? I think the derp train might have derailed.


I'm enjoying the assertion that the boundaries of civil rights should be set at what doesn't confuse children. That's pretty good.
 
2013-05-13 08:22:11 PM

radarlove: Bender The Offender: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

What the hell is that passage suppose to mean? What the fark is up with the civil war and business? I think the derp train might have derailed.

It's really simple- when you allow two men or two women to marry each other, it destroys the cotton industry and makes the blacks all uppity and when there's no cotton and uppity blacks the economy collapses.

This confuses the fark out of children because it makes absolutely no sense and they haven't yet learned to turn that part of their brain off.

So please, kill all the gays.  It's to only way to stop the poor kiddies from getting flustered when they learn that everything we tell them is bullshiat.


FINALLY! Someone explained the gay-marriage thing in a way that makes total nonsense!
 
2013-05-13 08:22:14 PM

Jesterling: [www.charlock.org image 850x680]


What the fark?  We have two male cats that are that color of tabby and black, that make the same pose, and we have the same bedsheets.  Our cats have different facial structures and we don't have that brown pillow, but I did a second take because I'm tired.  Wow.
 
2013-05-13 08:22:16 PM

real_headhoncho: Now that it is okay for members of the same sex to marry each other, how about fixing your economy, or sending a manned mission to Mars, or doing something that is actually important?


Uh oh.  I have a feeling this is going to bring the Internet Social Justice "Warriors" out.
 
2013-05-13 08:22:34 PM

xria: With all the crap that Bachmann actually says and does, imputing homosexuality onto her husband seems fairly lame and juvenile. In fact by bringing down the discussion to potentially homophobic ad hominem it seems like it is designed to protect her from more meaningful attacks on her actual politics and record.


I believe it's because he behaves in a manner seen as somewhat effeminate. Plus his wife seems to be the boss while he's the spouse trailing after her. Glenn Beck is crying frequently in public, many see that as girly. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is not girly. Perhaps even a robot. People often get the idea a man is gay if he's openly emotional or kind of theatrical. This is a bit silly because they forget macho hairy bear men exist.
 
2013-05-13 08:23:14 PM
I thought Bachmann had come out when I read this headline. Regardless, gg Minny.
 
2013-05-13 08:23:16 PM

skinink: I agree it's a big deal that gays can marry should they choose, I just don't think it's a big deal to have the right to an institution like marriage that has a 50% failure rate.

/Glass half empty guy


And every divorce lawyer in Minnesota will be buying a new house, new car, or a boat in the next year.
Why do conservatives hate legislation that stimulates the economy and creates jobs.
 
2013-05-13 08:23:19 PM

cptjeff: FormlessOne: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

Maybe I'm misreading that statement, but that statement implies to me that this asshole felt that businesses were hurt and children confused when Minnesota voted against slavery? Seriously?

Well, certain businesses were hurt when we outlawed slavery. And the meatpacking industry was hurt when we started requiring them to make sure workers didn't fall into the meat grinders. Even if it was true that letting gays marry would hurt businesses (and it's laughably false), it's utterly irrelevant.


I would think gay marriage will help the meatpacking industry.
 
2013-05-13 08:23:46 PM
The anti-gay movement is populated by two kinds of people - women who fear abandonment and resentful closeted gay men. Michele's worst fear may finally come true.
 
2013-05-13 08:23:59 PM
I don't think he's that excited about this.  I'm guessing that he prefers the danger and excitement of giving blow jobs in the public restrooms at Como park a lot more then the idea of a stable, monogamous, relationship.
 
2013-05-13 08:24:05 PM

morlinge: I just want to know when I'll be able to marry my turtle. I have a really nice turtle.


Sad to say it looks like both you and I will be living in sin with our turtles for a while longer.  If you believe some people it's only a matter of weeks before turtle love is allowed officially.
 
2013-05-13 08:24:12 PM

MFAWG: radarlove: So that means people in MN can marry 5-year-olds and horses and trees now, right?

And more than one person at a time.


Does that mean just multiple humans specifically, or can I mix it up with animal, vegetable, and mineral?

/had my eye on a really sexy piece of bismuth lately
 
2013-05-13 08:24:34 PM

God-is-a-Taco: antidisestablishmentarianism:
Put party politics aside and imagine all the good that can be done. This man is a hero.

I wouldn't say he's a hero. The people that have worked hard their entire lives( the activists, writers, and so on) for gays to be treated as equals are heroes, not a politician seeing the tide and saying "yes". This goes for the Democratic ones as well.

They listened to their constituents, which is good but not heroic. It's sad that it's the nature of politics for it to be that way.


You make a good point. The sad thing is he will probably be challenged in the primaries by a hard right candidate. The time has come for equal marriage among many other things but there are still people clinging to religion to dictate their lives.
 
2013-05-13 08:24:48 PM
It's like I'm invisible.
 
2013-05-13 08:25:01 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: [thatsusanburke.com image 400x480]


...is that Paul Krugman?
 
2013-05-13 08:25:06 PM

real_headhoncho: Now that it is okay for members of the same sex to marry each other, how about fixing your economy, or sending a manned mission to Mars, or doing something that is actually important?


This.

You hurtin' anybody?  You hurtin' yourself?  No?  Then who the fark cares.
 
2013-05-13 08:25:10 PM

TheSelphie: Jesterling: [www.charlock.org image 850x680]

What the fark?  We have two male cats that are that color of tabby and black, that make the same pose, and we have the same bedsheets.  Our cats have different facial structures and we don't have that brown pillow, but I did a second take because I'm tired.  Wow.


Everybody has those sheets. They were on sale for a long time. And all cats do that.
 
2013-05-13 08:26:00 PM
Still impatiently waiting for Crazy-eyes' statement.  It has the potential of being truly glorious in its derp purity and the intensity of its impotent rage.
 
2013-05-13 08:26:27 PM

flux: Bender The Offender: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

What the hell is that passage suppose to mean? What the fark is up with the civil war and business? I think the derp train might have derailed.

I'm enjoying the assertion that the boundaries of civil rights should be set at what doesn't confuse children. That's pretty good.


Next up:  Banning putting your hands over your face.
 
2013-05-13 08:26:56 PM
I don't get it - I thought Marcus was already married to a man.

/so confused
 
2013-05-13 08:27:21 PM

FunkOut: xria: With all the crap that Bachmann actually says and does, imputing homosexuality onto her husband seems fairly lame and juvenile. In fact by bringing down the discussion to potentially homophobic ad hominem it seems like it is designed to protect her from more meaningful attacks on her actual politics and record.

I believe it's because he behaves in a manner seen as somewhat effeminate. Plus his wife seems to be the boss while he's the spouse trailing after her. Glenn Beck is crying frequently in public, many see that as girly. Mitt Romney, on the other hand, is not girly. Perhaps even a robot. People often get the idea a man is gay if he's openly emotional or kind of theatrical. This is a bit silly because they forget macho hairy bear men exist.


He also runs a pray the gay away therapy thing, and we all know how well that works. It's a bunch of men in a small, rented room, with no windows, in folding chairs that are easily brushed aside in favor of a lush, carpeted floor, desperately pretending and brainwashing themselves into thinking that the force of prayer can chase away their lust for other men... Seriously, the odds of Marcus Bachmann being anything other than gay are infinitesimal. If not for the jesusderp, he'd be wearing a feather boa and heels.
 
2013-05-13 08:27:31 PM

flux: Bender The Offender: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

What the hell is that passage suppose to mean? What the fark is up with the civil war and business? I think the derp train might have derailed.

I'm enjoying the assertion that the boundaries of civil rights should be set at what doesn't confuse children. That's pretty good.


So we get to ban long division?
 
2013-05-13 08:28:47 PM
So, when is Michelle resigning and leaving forever?

a. cold day in hell
b. when God reveals it unto her
c. never
d. reply hazy, ask again later
 
2013-05-13 08:29:08 PM

mpirooz: "I stand here, quite honestly, more uncertain of my future in this place than I ever have, but when I walk out of this chamber today ... I will be on the side of liberty," Petersen said.

Petersen is a Republican. Let that sink in for a while.


Because all Republicans mindless robots who are only programmed to obey directives from their party leaders and have no will of their own, amirite?
 
2013-05-13 08:29:56 PM

Amidala: cptjeff: FormlessOne: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

Maybe I'm misreading that statement, but that statement implies to me that this asshole felt that businesses were hurt and children confused when Minnesota voted against slavery? Seriously?

Well, certain businesses were hurt when we outlawed slavery. And the meatpacking industry was hurt when we started requiring them to make sure workers didn't fall into the meat grinders. Even if it was true that letting gays marry would hurt businesses (and it's laughably false), it's utterly irrelevant.

I would think gay marriage will help the fudgemeatpacking industry.

 
2013-05-13 08:30:07 PM

real_headhoncho: Now that it is okay for members of the same sex to marry each other, how about fixing your economy, or sending a manned mission to Mars, or doing something that is actually important?


Most if not all the money poured into this was fighting it. If you Republicans cared so much, maybe you could have just let the inevitable happen and go create some jobs instead. Nope, had to pour millions into sticking your nose in other people's business and legislating the bedroom.
 
2013-05-13 08:30:19 PM
So when's the first episode of gay divorce court?
 
2013-05-13 08:30:21 PM

aerojockey: mpirooz: "I stand here, quite honestly, more uncertain of my future in this place than I ever have, but when I walk out of this chamber today ... I will be on the side of liberty," Petersen said.

Petersen is a Republican. Let that sink in for a while.

Because all Republicans mindless robots who are only programmed to obey directives from their party leaders and have no will of their own, amirite?


Well, not 'all' Republicans.

just most.
 
2013-05-13 08:30:31 PM

ramblinwreck: real_headhoncho: Now that it is okay for members of the same sex to marry each other, how about fixing your economy, or sending a manned mission to Mars, or doing something that is actually important?

Uh oh.  I have a feeling this is going to bring the Internet Social Justice "Warriors" out.


Why?

I mean, yes, awesome.  Truly is.  The sad is that such a big deal was made over it in the first place.  We truly have better things to worry about than stopping adults from getting married.  The gay marriage issue SHOULD be a non-issue and IMO was only herped and derped up as a form of filibustering - waste time with trying to ban it rather than worrying about real issues.

The funny is that, as pointed out above, the vocal minority got everyone else to say "You know what?  Fine.  We'll have a vote, and oh look, we're offically allowing it.  Can we please move on now?"
 
2013-05-13 08:31:14 PM
This is my senator's reason behind voting against the measure.

If you want limited government, Hann explains, you need "moral virtue" and "discipline" and other verities that "reinforce the idea of individuals being accountable."
It's Hann's view that marriage is fundamental to these verities.

The cognitive dissonance makes my head spin
 
jvl
2013-05-13 08:31:22 PM

Dimensio: What rational justification exists to prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriage?


In your world? None. But that's okay: inability to sympathize with the positions of others is common in homo sapiens. Normal side effects include demonizing your opponents and being extremely self-justified.
 
2013-05-13 08:31:41 PM

Gyrfalcon: radarlove: Bender The Offender: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

What the hell is that passage suppose to mean? What the fark is up with the civil war and business? I think the derp train might have derailed.

It's really simple- when you allow two men or two women to marry each other, it destroys the cotton industry and makes the blacks all uppity and when there's no cotton and uppity blacks the economy collapses.

This confuses the fark out of children because it makes absolutely no sense and they haven't yet learned to turn that part of their brain off.

So please, kill all the gays.  It's to only way to stop the poor kiddies from getting flustered when they learn that everything we tell them is bullshiat.

FINALLY! Someone explained the gay-marriage thing in a way that makes total nonsense!


Actually, there's a nugget of truth in there re: confusing children.  I think that statement actually reflects that they're afraid that if kids see what bullshiat all of their anti-gay rhetoric is, they'll begins asking themselves what else they've been lied to about.

Pot?
The merits of social welfare?
Unions and regulation?
Unquestionably obeying authority?
9/11?
God?
 
2013-05-13 08:32:49 PM

aerojockey: mpirooz: "I stand here, quite honestly, more uncertain of my future in this place than I ever have, but when I walk out of this chamber today ... I will be on the side of liberty," Petersen said.

Petersen is a Republican. Let that sink in for a while.

Because all Republicans mindless robots who are only programmed to obey directives from their party leaders and have no will of their own, amirite?


No, but there's a reason why it seems shocking nowadays.
 
2013-05-13 08:33:07 PM

flux: Bender The Offender: "It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.

What the hell is that passage suppose to mean? What the fark is up with the civil war and business? I think the derp train might have derailed.

I'm enjoying the assertion that the boundaries of civil rights should be set at what doesn't confuse children. That's pretty good.


Actually, if my kids are representative, this would lead to a pretty cool place to live.

My 8-year-old has a friend with two mommies. You know what his question was? His great confusion on that issue? "Who grills?"

Kids get it a lot easier than adults.

Rock on, Minnesota. Hope Kluwe's proud to have been a Viking.
 
2013-05-13 08:33:54 PM

aerojockey: mpirooz: "I stand here, quite honestly, more uncertain of my future in this place than I ever have, but when I walk out of this chamber today ... I will be on the side of liberty," Petersen said.

Petersen is a Republican. Let that sink in for a while.

Because all Republicans mindless robots who are only programmed to obey directives from their party leaders and have no will of their own, amirite?


www.charlock.org
 
2013-05-13 08:34:15 PM
aerojockey:
Because all Republicans mindless robots who are only programmed to obey directives from their party leaders and have no will of their own, amirite?

I took that remark as meaning that he's worried about the RINO label and the kiss of death that goes along with it.
Needless to say, there is precedent for any Republican doing something rational and getting replaced by a batshiat insane Tea Party-approved ape.
 
2013-05-13 08:34:52 PM

jvl: Dimensio: What rational justification exists to prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriage?

In your world? None. But that's okay: inability to sympathize with the positions of others is common in homo sapiens. Normal side effects include demonizing your opponents and being extremely self-justified.


Care to enlighten us?
 
jvl
2013-05-13 08:34:53 PM

Jekylman: jvl: Some people just want to yell at their opponents and don't give a flying fark about actually getting things done.

whynotboth.jpg


The goal here is to legalize what we believe is right. If you want to do something about it, you need to convince about 5% more people that it is the right thing. When convincing people of a position, it is best to avoid prefacing your rhetoric with "as any moron can see, X is right" because you are calling the listener who disagrees with you a moron. Even assuming they are, in fact, morons, you are not helping.

So not both. You can either scream at your opponents or you can choose to try to convince them and actually get the thing done.
 
2013-05-13 08:35:16 PM

jvl: Dimensio: What rational justification exists to prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriage?

In your world? None. But that's okay: inability to sympathize with the positions of others is common in homo sapiens. Normal side effects include demonizing your opponents and being extremely self-justified.


I have frequently observed that individuals who are unable to present any rational justification for their position will, rather than admit their inability, instead attempt to justify their refusal to present any rational argument by claiming that no reasoned argument will be accepted by their opponents. In addition to same-sex marriage opponents, such a rhetorical tactic has been employed by creationists and by opponents of concealed weapons permit systems.

Rather than actually serve as a convincing response, however, such an attempt to justify refusing to provide an answer is intellectually dishonest.
 
2013-05-13 08:35:37 PM

Voiceofreason01: headline of the year material right here



Came to say that.

Agreed x 1000.
 
2013-05-13 08:36:05 PM

Girl From The North Country: This is my senator's reason behind voting against the measure.

If you want limited government, Hann explains, you need "moral virtue" and "discipline" and other verities that "reinforce the idea of individuals being accountable."
It's Hann's view that marriage is fundamental to these verities.

The cognitive dissonance makes my head spin


The only way to keep government out of your life is government certification of your role to keep them out of your life. Or something.
 
2013-05-13 08:36:29 PM
Sen. Dan Hall, later speaking against the bill, expressed his fears about the legislation, saying, "Next, I believe we will be forced to believe what we don't."

Providing some of the most heated rhetoric of the debate, Hall said, "People say, 'Don't you want to be on the right side of history?' The truth is I'm more concerned about being on the right side of eternity."

It will hurt businesses and confuse children ... more than any issue since the Civil War. We must not pass this bill," Hall said.


Uh... wut?

So he's saying that passing a bill to ensure equality, something that should be guaranteed in our country, is going to hurt businesses and confuse children more than things like the emancipation of slaves, women's suffrage, prohibition...?

Way to elect an idiot Lakeville et. al.
 
2013-05-13 08:37:11 PM
this gopher is proud!
 
2013-05-13 08:38:30 PM

Dimensio: jvl: Dimensio: What rational justification exists to prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriage?

In your world? None. But that's okay: inability to sympathize with the positions of others is common in homo sapiens. Normal side effects include demonizing your opponents and being extremely self-justified.

I have frequently observed that individuals who are unable to present any rational justification for their position will, rather than admit their inability, instead attempt to justify their refusal to present any rational argument by claiming that no reasoned argument will be accepted by their opponents. In addition to same-sex marriage opponents, such a rhetorical tactic has been employed by creationists and by opponents of concealed weapons permit systems.

Rather than actually serve as a convincing response, however, such an attempt to justify refusing to provide an answer is intellectually dishonest.


There's just no talking to you about this stuff, you're not listening because you're too heavily invested in your own opinion.
 
2013-05-13 08:38:40 PM

Jesterling: jvl: Dimensio: What rational justification exists to prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriage?

In your world? None. But that's okay: inability to sympathize with the positions of others is common in homo sapiens. Normal side effects include demonizing your opponents and being extremely self-justified.

Care to enlighten us?


Not even gonna put up with the "why won't you tolerate my intolerance?" bullshiat. Go back to listening to Rush if that's how you feel. Some positions are flat out wrong. I'm sure your logical and philosophical consistency helps you sleep at night, but if you cant take issues on a case by case basis than either you are lazy or willfully perpetuating hatred.
 
jvl
2013-05-13 08:38:41 PM

Jesterling: jvl: In your world? None. But that's okay: inability to sympathize with the positions of others is common in homo sapiens. Normal side effects include demonizing your opponents and being extremely self-justified.

Care to enlighten us?


Find someone older than you who your respect.  Your mother perhaps.  Up until the 70s, homosexuals were universally reviled. Ask that person who lived through that period if they thought homosexuality is wrong, and if so why?

Then ask what changed their mind, and use that logic to change the mind of others.

// I'm not old enough. As a kid I merely though it weird.
/// I got better
 
2013-05-13 08:41:06 PM
Nothing on her website about this. Today's news is thanking the pro-life crowd for that abortion doctor found guilty of murder.

Also interesting to note that her campaign headquarters is five miles from my house and outside of her district.
 
2013-05-13 08:41:12 PM

jvl: Dimensio: What rational justification exists to prohibit legal recognition of same-sex marriage?

In your world? None. But that's okay: inability to sympathize with the positions of others is common in homo sapiens. Normal side effects include demonizing your opponents and being extremely self-justified.


What opinions? Opponents have hidden behind the Bible to justify trying to tell a certain group of the population that they are inferior and shouldn't get the option to do the same things they can. (Usually, quoting the same section of the Old Testament that says eating shrimp and shaving your facial hair are hell-worthy offenses.)


It's about telling other people how they are allowed to live. Always has been. People are entitled to their opinions, but when your opinion is used to try to shove your beliefs into someone else's face, fark you and the horse you rode in on.

Consenting adults can figure out how to live their own lives without any help.
 
Displayed 50 of 374 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report