Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(The Hill)   Congress members plan to introduce legislation to counteract SCOTUS ruling. This is not a repeat from yesterday   (thehill.com) divider line 96
    More: Obvious, U.S. Supreme Court, Federal Marriage Amendment, Tom McClintock, Defense of Marriage Act, constitutional amendments  
•       •       •

2446 clicks; posted to Politics » on 26 Jun 2013 at 5:53 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-26 02:41:17 PM  
Sure, right after they repeal Obamacare.
 
2013-06-26 02:46:21 PM  
I wholeheartedly support the GOP in their efforts to tilt at this particular windmill.
 
2013-06-26 02:48:32 PM  

Aarontology: I wholeheartedly support the GOP in their efforts to tilt at this particular windmill.


Please proceed...
 
2013-06-26 02:48:42 PM  
Please... proceed

/what could possibly go wrong?
 
2013-06-26 02:50:31 PM  

ginandbacon: Aarontology: I wholeheartedly support the GOP in their efforts to tilt at this particular windmill.

Please proceed...


It would be hilarious if this is what they focused on for 2014.
 
2013-06-26 02:51:02 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Please... proceed

/what could possibly go wrong?


Beat you by 10 seconds :)
 
2013-06-26 02:51:43 PM  

Aarontology: ginandbacon: Aarontology: I wholeheartedly support the GOP in their efforts to tilt at this particular windmill.

Please proceed...

It would be hilarious if this is what they focused on for 2014.


Seriously. Idiots.
 
2013-06-26 02:52:30 PM  
The GOP has become like a Disney movie villain.
 
2013-06-26 02:54:37 PM  

ginandbacon: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Please... proceed

/what could possibly go wrong?

Beat you by 10 seconds :)


Story of my life
 
2013-06-26 03:07:25 PM  
Oh, man - why could this not have happened next summer in the midst of midterm season?

// I kind of want it to drag on until then, but that's asking too much
 
2013-06-26 03:12:07 PM  
Just for reference, from Wikipedia: amendments may be proposed by the United States Congress or by a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the states. The method of proposal by national convention has been attempted twice, but never succeeded. The method of proposal by Congress requires a supermajority of two-thirds of both houses; this means two-thirds of those members voting in each house-assuming that a quorum exists when the vote is cast-and not necessarily two-thirds of the entire membership. Amendment proposals generally contain a deadline before which the ratification by states must be completed, but the legal status of such a deadline remains unsettled. To become valid, an amendment must then be ratified by three-fourths of the states, that is, by 38 states, either by their legislatures or by ratifying conventions. States choosing the convention method usually hold elections specifically for the purpose of choosing delegates to the convention. Once certified by the Archivist of the United States, the amendment takes effect according to its provisions and the other rules of the constitution.
 
2013-06-26 03:19:48 PM  

Aarontology: I wholeheartedly support the GOP in their efforts to tilt at this particular windmill.


It'll rally the troops amongst the right wing and probably raise some serious campaign cash. Midterms are tough for the Democrats, so they'd better be ready to defend any tenuous districts against an onslaught of derp.
 
2013-06-26 03:25:11 PM  

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: I wholeheartedly support the GOP in their efforts to tilt at this particular windmill.

It'll rally the troops amongst the right wing and probably raise some serious campaign cash. Midterms are tough for the Democrats, so they'd better be ready to defend any tenuous districts against an onslaught of derp.


yeah, but since the GOP simply cannot help but go full retard about everything, they'll end up motivating opposition as well and alienating even more people for the future.
 
2013-06-26 03:26:04 PM  
Too late children, that worm has already turned.

Yet another example of republicans thinking they're still in the 90s.
 
2013-06-26 03:28:25 PM  
Wait a second. This could be a blessing in disguise now. Picture this:

GOP gathers enough votes (somehow, it is a hypothetical, just run with it) to pass a ban on same sex marriages and incorporates it in to the Constitution.

Case goes before the court and is ruled against due to the ruling today on DOMA. Same sex marriages are now legal and are unconstitutionally banned in the states that issued state-wide bans.

Possible? Feasible?

/Not with this GOP...
 
2013-06-26 03:29:31 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Oh, man - why could this not have happened next summer in the midst of midterm season?

// I kind of want it to drag on until then, but that's asking too much


nah, I would wager they are salivating at the thought of running on this in 14. This, and abortion. What else will they have? Obamacare will be fully implemented, the economy will continue to improve (hopefully). They literally have nothing else.

God damn I can't wait for more white men to tell me what they think about rape. It will be glorious.
 
2013-06-26 03:33:53 PM  

Aarontology: Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: Aarontology: I wholeheartedly support the GOP in their efforts to tilt at this particular windmill.

It'll rally the troops amongst the right wing and probably raise some serious campaign cash. Midterms are tough for the Democrats, so they'd better be ready to defend any tenuous districts against an onslaught of derp.

yeah, but since the GOP simply cannot help but go full retard about everything, they'll end up motivating opposition as well and alienating even more people for the future.


One would hope, but I am consistently disappointed when it comes to the ability of the Democrats to turn out votes during midterms. PA's had the sh*t gerrymandered out of it, so it becomes even harder to swing a district the other way.
 
2013-06-26 03:40:10 PM  

jeffspec: GOP gathers enough votes (somehow, it is a hypothetical, just run with it) to pass a ban on same sex marriages and incorporates it in to the Constitution.

Case goes before the court and is ruled against due to the ruling today on DOMA. Same sex marriages are now legal and are unconstitutionally banned in the states that issued state-wide bans.


If there's a Constitutional amendment, SCOTUS can't touch it. Amendments are automatically Constitutional by virtue of their passage, that's why we needed the 21st.

Ambivalence: nah, I would wager they are salivating at the thought of running on this in 14.


Oh, I have no doubt they WANT to run with it, I just don't think they correctly estimate the size of the ensuing shiatstorm. 30% of Americans now live in states where marriage equality is the law of the land, and probably close to 20% (if not more) of people in those other states support making it so. Public opinion may be louder against it, but over half of Americans currently support equality, the numbers get ever-higher as time goes on, and in another year we may have half the states or more (I'd bet on having over 50% of the population in states that support equality) on board.
 
2013-06-26 03:44:00 PM  
Lemme see here....
Number of states in the US = 50
Number of states in the US required to pass a constitutional amendment = 38
Number of states in the US that have legalized same-sex marriage in some form or other = 19

Oops
 
2013-06-26 03:47:27 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Oh, I have no doubt they WANT to run with it, I just don't think they correctly estimate the size of the ensuing shiatstorm. 30% of Americans now live in states where marriage equality is the law of the land, and probably close to 20% (if not more) of people in those other states support making it so. Public opinion may be louder against it, but over half of Americans currently support equality, the numbers get ever-higher as time goes on, and in another year we may have half the states or more (I'd bet on having over 50% of the population in states that support equality) on board.


After god gets done with his smite-fest, opinions will change. Every clogged toilet will get blamed on this ruling. Nobody likes a clogged toilet.
 
2013-06-26 03:52:38 PM  

Ambivalence: Yet another example of republicans thinking they're still in the 90s.


the 1890s.
 
2013-06-26 03:57:32 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Lemme see here....
Number of states in the US = 50
Number of states in the US required to pass a constitutional amendment = 38
Number of states in the US that have legalized same-sex marriage in some form or other = 19

Oops


38 + 19 = 57 states

// OHMYGOD OMABA WAS RIGHT
 
2013-06-26 04:16:21 PM  

Dr Dreidel: jeffspec: GOP gathers enough votes (somehow, it is a hypothetical, just run with it) to pass a ban on same sex marriages and incorporates it in to the Constitution.

Case goes before the court and is ruled against due to the ruling today on DOMA. Same sex marriages are now legal and are unconstitutionally banned in the states that issued state-wide bans.

If there's a Constitutional amendment, SCOTUS can't touch it. Amendments are automatically Constitutional by virtue of their passage, that's why we needed the 21st.

Ambivalence: nah, I would wager they are salivating at the thought of running on this in 14.

Oh, I have no doubt they WANT to run with it, I just don't think they correctly estimate the size of the ensuing shiatstorm. 30% of Americans now live in states where marriage equality is the law of the land, and probably close to 20% (if not more) of people in those other states support making it so. Public opinion may be louder against it, but over half of Americans currently support equality, the numbers get ever-higher as time goes on, and in another year we may have half the states or more (I'd bet on having over 50% of the population in states that support equality) on board.


Thanks for clarifying my incoherent ramblings. I guess what I really meant was that if a nationwide ban was brought before the court, the court has precedent to rule against said ban based on the equality clause, and equal protection. If the GOP keeps pushing for a nationwide ban, that will be the final nail in the coffin for that issue.
 
2013-06-26 04:38:28 PM  

Dr Dreidel: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Lemme see here....
Number of states in the US = 50
Number of states in the US required to pass a constitutional amendment = 38
Number of states in the US that have legalized same-sex marriage in some form or other = 19

Oops

38 + 19 = 57 states

// OHMYGOD OMABA WAS RIGHT


We have to go derper:

57 states
57 variety of Heinz
John Kerry married Theresa Heinz Kerry
Kerry is the Secretary of State
The Department of State already provides same sex benefits
The former Secretary of State was Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton botched the Benghazi operation.

IT'S IN THE BOOK OF REVELATIONS PEOPLE!
 
2013-06-26 05:03:45 PM  
I'm not sure what kind of bill could be constitutional now and accomplish the same effect. You can't just re-pass the same thing.
 
2013-06-26 05:05:32 PM  
The GOP tent is now the size of a cocktail umbrella.
 
2013-06-26 05:10:56 PM  

DamnYankees: I'm not sure what kind of bill could be constitutional now and accomplish the same effect. You can't just re-pass the same thing.


They want to amend the Constitution, thus making it (by definition) Constitutional.
 
2013-06-26 05:55:48 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: ginandbacon: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Please... proceed

/what could possibly go wrong?

Beat you by 10 seconds :)

Story of my life


Feels your pain...
www.razorcake.org
 
2013-06-26 05:56:55 PM  
Goddamn I hate Huelskamp. Not my representative, but from my state.
 
2013-06-26 05:58:19 PM  
That poor chicken.
 
2013-06-26 05:58:36 PM  
Idiots
 
2013-06-26 06:00:23 PM  
austinisafecker.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-06-26 06:00:45 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Oh, man - why could this not have happened next summer in the midst of midterm season?

// I kind of want it to drag on until then, but that's asking too much


Oh, I expect that this will be at the forefront of many Republican lawmakers political ads for the 2014 midterms.  Mainly due to that there are still quite a few of them that think it's a sure win.
 
2013-06-26 06:02:34 PM  
Good luck with that. Keep that outreach up...
 
2013-06-26 06:02:38 PM  
Oh, by all means, GOP, go ahead and head down that road. Your potential voter base probably won't get much smaller, but these kinds of acts almost certainly guarantees it never will get any larger.
 
2013-06-26 06:02:49 PM  
Also, please proceed, dumbasses.
 
2013-06-26 06:03:55 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: That poor chicken.


They have out of chickens and are now using guinea hens...

/smaller but louder
 
2013-06-26 06:04:20 PM  
This is a great idea.
 
2013-06-26 06:04:43 PM  
sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk
 
2013-06-26 06:04:55 PM  
Oh sure! Nothing to bring back Miranda Rights or to restore the Voting Rights act, but to keep two gay guys from being married? WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP! GENERAL QUARTERS! GENERAL QUARTERS! THIS IS NOT A DRILL! WHOOP WHOOP WHOOP!
 
2013-06-26 06:05:49 PM  
DO IT.
 
2013-06-26 06:06:16 PM  
Please keep it up! Your bigoted butthurt is delicious. Now tell me about rape babies on which you have on good authority a vast knowledge. Also, don't forget to hate on immigrants and minorities. Your all consuming rage at anything not rich and white is adorable.
 
2013-06-26 06:06:22 PM  
Good.  I hope they tie this anchor around their necks and let it drag them to the bottom and die.
 
2013-06-26 06:08:00 PM  
I wonder if there is any appetite in the GOP for a grand bargain on social issues: gays for fetuses. Liberals support a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and conservatives support a constitutional amendment on choice.
 
2013-06-26 06:08:14 PM  
House conservatives will seek to reintroduce a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage following the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act on Wednesday.
Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) said he and other lawmakers would begin efforts to revive the Federal Marriage Amendment in the coming days.


These people are truly disgusting human beings.
 
2013-06-26 06:09:27 PM  
I have no problem with this.  They're using the system as intended and not particularly trying to cheat or force people into their bullshiat illegally.

Though, that said, a large part of the reason I'm not bothered by this is that it won't go anywhere.  Not "has little chance of going anywhere", just flat-out won't.  The situations where an amendment that's even mildly controversial could get ratified usually involve someone nuking about 90% of the country in a very specific pattern.  Getting 3/4 of the states to not only hold special ratification conventions, but actually approve amendments, is a farker of a barrier to entry, no one's been able to get anything but minor procedural/paperwork tweaks through since the dramatic failure of prohibition.
 
2013-06-26 06:17:16 PM  
yeah this won't happen.
 
2013-06-26 06:19:06 PM  
I was hoping it was going to be the gerrymandering and prohibition on voting if you're poor/minority, but I should have guessed. "Die quickly" is looking more and more like a viable alternative to living here than just a description of the GOP health plan. Sick.
 
2013-06-26 06:21:03 PM  

whidbey: House conservatives will seek to reintroduce a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage following the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act on Wednesday.
Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.) said he and other lawmakers would begin efforts to revive the Federal Marriage Amendment in the coming days.

These people are truly disgusting human beings.


Meh, they're just touting their social conservative bonafides for the locals. Outside House leadership, and maybe not even that, they hardly care what anyone thinks about them outside their district, but rattling this sabre resonates in places like the rural 1st congressional district in Kansas (so sparsely populated it encompasses over half the state).  I'm sure he knows damned well it won't go anywhere, but he can tell his constituents that he tried and that the RINOs in the house didn't back him up, but he's fighting the good fight by jeebus, so donate to my campaign and vote me another term!
 
2013-06-26 06:22:45 PM  
Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kan.)

Just the name suggests you never want to be in the next stall. Really needs an amendment criminalizing lactose intolerance.
 
Displayed 50 of 96 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report