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.

(Politico)   Pentagon: All soldiers, including National Guard members, can get benefits for same-sex partners. OK Gov Fallin: not in my state they can't Pentagon: fine, they can just go to the nearest FEDERAL military base and apply for them there then   (politico.com) divider line 142
    More: Dumbass, Oklahoma National Guard, Gov. Fallin, same-sex couples, soldiers  
•       •       •

3696 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Sep 2013 at 12:04 PM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



142 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-09-20 11:53:49 AM
FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.
 
2013-09-20 12:07:27 PM
If I recall right, Fallin said they could go to a base herself. God I hate living here.
 
2013-09-20 12:07:35 PM
[applause.gif]

Nice!
 
2013-09-20 12:08:28 PM
Hate-filled dumbf*cks.
 
2013-09-20 12:08:31 PM
Why do Republicans hate the troops?
 
2013-09-20 12:08:43 PM

Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.


You do of course realize that same sex marriages are constitutional, per the recent Supreme Court case? So if the state passes an amendment banning interracial marriages that needs to be respected by the Federal government and those folks shouldn't get benefits?  Derp.
 
2013-09-20 12:08:56 PM
Once more we prove why the even Jefferson believed the Articles of Confederation were crap and that a stronger Federal Government was needed.
 
2013-09-20 12:09:52 PM

Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.


Which part of the Constitution is against marriage equality?  I can't find it.
 
2013-09-20 12:09:57 PM
Holy fark, that headline is a grammatical cluster bomb packed with concentrated FAIL.
 
2013-09-20 12:10:18 PM
The next thing the DoD should do is stop funding guard programs in States that don't comply with Pentagon requests.  Keep the active and reserve bases there, no problem.  If the State wants to 'opt' out of the bad things the Pentagon is making them, they can pay for it out of their own pocket.
 
2013-09-20 12:10:39 PM
I didn't vote for her, but I know ppl who did that swear they aren't homophobic.
 
2013-09-20 12:10:50 PM
Why are we even bothering to have members of our national guard make different arrangements for benefits they are entitled to have?

When the a-hole governor of Alabama stood in the way of desegregation the federal government had the national guard move him from the school door. I'm pretty sure the OK national guard can move this bigoted ho from whatever door frame she wishes to stand under.
 
2013-09-20 12:10:53 PM
We's just usin' our states rights.
 
2013-09-20 12:11:44 PM

Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.


You cannot ballot box away the rights of someone else, even by popular vote. See Proposition 8, etc. Just because she was following a ballot referendum doesn't make her right or constitutional, as recent Supreme Court findings have shown.

Also, it's just plain asshattery. If the military is offering benefits, what is it to the state government? They aren't paying for it.
 
2013-09-20 12:12:11 PM

HotWingConspiracy: We's just usin' our states rights.


This really is another great example of the GOP showing that when they argue for states' rights, they want that power to come at the expense of individual rights.
 
2013-09-20 12:13:11 PM

JolobinSmokin: I didn't vote for her, but I know ppl who did that swear they aren't homophobic.


In their defense, I am sure they thought her platform included more than just wearing-it-on-your-sleeve bigotry.
 
2013-09-20 12:13:13 PM

Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.


That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
 it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.
 
2013-09-20 12:13:53 PM
This is what, three states now that have pulled this?  What do they think they're really accomplishing?

Gay guardsman goes to his unit and gets an admin clerk to add his spouse to DEERS.  The states of Texas, Oklahoma, or Louisiana are out exactly dick, since these are federal DoD benefits the soldiers are getting.  All they're out is the clerks time, and guess what?  That's guys under salary so they don't have to pay him any more either.

They're just being dicks, biatching and moaning when an adult points out that it's only decent to share their toys with the other kids.

Congratulations Mary Fallin.  You've made your mark on history.  In another generation when textbooks add a few paragraphs on how gays got equal rights there's going to be a picture of you.  Right next to George Wallace, James Earl Ray, and the Ku Klux Klan.
 
2013-09-20 12:14:25 PM

sprawl15: Why do Republicans hate the troops?


They only care about the troops enough to send them to a bloody death in foreign lands fighting for cheap oil.
 
2013-09-20 12:14:51 PM
She is just listening to her staff and the polls. Plus she is really trying to be like TX, derp and all.

/I expect to see more of the "true 'merican" states do the same thing.
 
2013-09-20 12:15:38 PM

JollyMagistrate: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

You cannot ballot box away the rights of someone else, even by popular vote. See Proposition 8, etc. Just because she was following a ballot referendum doesn't make her right or constitutional, as recent Supreme Court findings have shown.

Also, it's just plain asshattery. If the military is offering benefits, what is it to the state government? They aren't paying for it.


Because she's the governor and she damn well wants you to know that SHE is the Commander-In-Chief of the Oklahoma Guard.  SHE is.  HER!  Not Washington, not that guy, HER!  SHE'S IN CONTROL, DAMMIT!!!!  RESPECT HER AUTHORITAH!!!
 
2013-09-20 12:16:45 PM

coeyagi: JolobinSmokin: I didn't vote for her, but I know ppl who did that swear they aren't homophobic.

In their defense, I am sure they thought her platform included more than just wearing-it-on-your-sleeve bigotry.


She ran on a platform of "What she said but with an R at the end" against our old Lt. Governor. She didn't distinguish herself then, and she hasn't distinguished herself since. She is a puppet for other, more powerful, men.
 
2013-09-20 12:17:09 PM

JolobinSmokin: I didn't vote for her, but I know ppl who did that swear they aren't homophobic.


To those people the bigotry isn't the intended effect, just a happy byproduct they don't feel the need to object to.
 
2013-09-20 12:17:41 PM

Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.


Theres only one amendment I need and I think you know which one it is.
 
2013-09-20 12:20:01 PM

Karac: Right next to George Wallace, James Earl Ray, and the Ku Klux Klan.


That's the real deliciousness here. The ultimate fark you to people that spent their lives trying to deprive people of their rights.

Your children and grandchildren will ultimately remember you as a raging hate filled bigot, lady. Great legacy you have there.
 
2013-09-20 12:21:05 PM
God hates Oklahoma.

media.heavy.com
 
2013-09-20 12:21:16 PM

Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.


It's the primary reason why these "strict constitutionalists" want to do away with the 14th amendment, they want to create any crazy law they can in order to abridge the rights of people they feel are "icky".
 
2013-09-20 12:23:05 PM

lockers: If I recall right, Fallin said they could go to a base herself. God I hate living here.


So, in other words she admits that her action is merely a symbolic gesture to add another level or harrasment and symbolic dispproval to gays, not anything that will have any actual, practical effect?   Support the troops indeed.  Particularly disgraceful since she's technically thier commander
 
2013-09-20 12:23:13 PM
Given the old "at least one guard unit per state" idea is soon to die, you'd think they want to make a better effort to ingratiate themselves with the Pentagon.


Benevolent Misanthrope: Because she's the governor and she damn well wants you to know that SHE is the Commander-In-Chief of the Oklahoma Guard.


I say let her buy her own tanks and fighter planes then.
 
2013-09-20 12:24:29 PM

sprawl15: Why do Republicans hate the troops?


They don't hate the troops. They just hate gay people more than they love America.
 
2013-09-20 12:25:14 PM
Fallin spokesman Alex Weintz said the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples. "Because of that prohibition, Gov. Fallin's general counsel has advised the National Guard not to process requests for benefits of same-sex couples," Weintz said. "Gay couples that have been legally married in other states will be advised they can apply for those benefits on federal facilities, such as Tinker Air Force Base, rather than state run facilities."

So, what's the story, Farklibs? The Gov. is following the letter of the law and advising same-sex couples how to get benefits.
 
2013-09-20 12:26:44 PM
So yea, shes a dumb coont, but...wasn't this just on Fark? Old news is best news?
 
2013-09-20 12:28:21 PM

DarkSoulNoHope: Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.

It's the primary reason why these "strict constitutionalists" want to do away with the 14th amendment, they want to create any crazy law they can in order to abridge the rights of people they feel are "icky".


I thought we rather settled that particular State's rights vs federal power arguement with some finality a few years back everyone seemed quite cordial but definite on that point:
graphics8.nytimes.com:
 
2013-09-20 12:28:31 PM

DarkSoulNoHope: Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.

It's the primary reason why these "strict constitutionalists" want to do away with the 14th amendment, they want to create any crazy law they can in order to abridge the rights of people they feel are "icky".


They are cool with the 14th Amd when it is applied to corporate persons. Human persons - not so much.

Also originalism and strict constructionalism have nothing to do with secular law and everything to do with treating the Constitution like a sacred document (see Biblical Fundamentalism)
 
2013-09-20 12:30:54 PM

lockers: coeyagi: JolobinSmokin: I didn't vote for her, but I know ppl who did that swear they aren't homophobic.

In their defense, I am sure they thought her platform included more than just wearing-it-on-your-sleeve bigotry.

She ran on a platform of "What she said but with an R at the end" against our old Lt. Governor. She didn't distinguish herself then, and she hasn't distinguished herself since. She is a puppet for other, more powerful, men.


Ok.  But when Republicans think racist, they don't consciously think Republican (though, they should).  They are just reminded that there are maybe 10-20% of the population getting some sort of hand out and that must be stopped at all costs even if they fall into that percentage.
 
2013-09-20 12:31:26 PM
I wish the southern states would either do it or get off the pot.  Roll back female suffrage, make it legal for a man to beat his wife with a rod no thicker than one inch, hang people for horse theft, behead them for sodomy, rape is not a crime if it's a man raping his wife, burn women accused of witchcraft, and most important, reinstitute slavery.  Go all the way or else go home.
 
2013-09-20 12:31:39 PM

Magorn: lockers: If I recall right, Fallin said they could go to a base herself. God I hate living here.

So, in other words she admits that her action is merely a symbolic gesture to add another level or harrasment and symbolic dispproval to gays, not anything that will have any actual, practical effect?   Support the troops indeed.  Particularly disgraceful since she's technically thier commander


Yep. It's politically popular here. Just like all our ballot initiatives (except cock fighting) they are all symbolic bullshiat. This really is the land of the bigoted derp.
 
2013-09-20 12:35:36 PM

LarryDan43: Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.

Theres only one amendment I need and I think you know which one it is.


The twenty-first?
 
2013-09-20 12:36:16 PM
State's Rights? What about City's Rights? I don't need some bigshot up in the statehouse in Boston sticking his nose in my local community
 
2013-09-20 12:37:21 PM
This is not a difficult problem to solve. Issue an order to the governors of any non-cooperating states saying that every time someone applies for any kind of benefits based on a SSM, the officers responsible are immediately federalized.The authority to federalize the National Guard isn't limited to executing judicial decrees or enforcing statutes, and in any event, I can't imagine courts would permit review of a President's decision to federalize. Problem solved.
 
2013-09-20 12:37:42 PM

Dimensio: LarryDan43: Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.

Theres only one amendment I need and I think you know which one it is.

The twenty-first?


It's all about those 3rd Amendment solutions!
 
2013-09-20 12:40:22 PM

LarryDan43: Theres only one amendment I need and I think you know which one it is.


The 20th?
 
2013-09-20 12:41:41 PM

Clutch2013: Holy fark, that headline is a grammatical cluster bomb packed with concentrated FAIL.


You sound sober
 
2013-09-20 12:43:02 PM

Dimensio: LarryDan43: Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.

Theres only one amendment I need and I think you know which one it is.

The twenty-first?



I'll drink to that!
 
2013-09-20 12:43:11 PM

Karac: This is what, three states now that have pulled this? What do they think they're really accomplishing?

Gay guardsman goes to his unit and gets an admin clerk to add his spouse to DEERS. The states of Texas, Oklahoma, or Louisiana are out exactly dick, since these are federal DoD benefits the soldiers are getting. All they're out is the clerks time, and guess what?  That's guys under salary so they don't have to pay him any more either.

They're just being dicks, biatching and moaning when an adult points out that it's only decent to share their toys with the other kids.

Congratulations Mary Fallin. You've made your mark on history. In another generation when textbooks add a few paragraphs on how gays got equal rights there's going to be a picture of you. Right next to George Wallace, James Earl Ray, and the Ku Klux Klan.


The Texas case is particularly interesting, since Major General John Nichols claimed to be going by what the Texas State Constitution (as amended by Texas voters via Proposition 2 on November 8, 2005) states.

But if so, he really should deny marriage benefits to all Texas Guardsman. Here's what the amended §32 of the Texas State Constitution actually says:
Sec. 32.  MARRIAGE.   (a)  Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b)  This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.
(Added Nov. 8, 2005.)

It is, of course, a fundamental law of logic, math, law, and, well, pretty much everything in every field of human endeavor, that anything is always "identical to" itself! A is A. X = X. The Identity Property.

§32(a) was just what the fundie bigot ordered, but §32(b) explicitly states that neither Texas nor any political subdivision thereof may create nor recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage as just defined in §32(a)!!

That's right: All Texas marriages were annulled on November 8, 2005. For the past nearly eight years, there is not and has not been any such thing as a legally married couple in Texas! Since this includes recognition as well as creation of such legal status, that includes people who married elsewhere then moved to Texas, people from other States visiting friends or families in Texas or just there on business, or even people just passing through!

The insertion of one simple two-syllable five-letter very common word into §32(b), namely, "other," between "any" and "legal status," would've prevented this and done precisely what the fundie bigots intended. But, they refused to insert it, even after having been warned of this problem well before the Amendment was ratified by the voters!

In the immortal words of Homer J. Simpson: "D'oh!!!"

Bonus: Depending on how "similar to" is interpreted, while they could not be called "marriage" due to §32(a), it may well be that §32(b) does permit civil unions for same-sex and polygamous unions only, but not for monogamous heterosexual couples!

Cue Mr. Simpson again, even louder.
 
2013-09-20 12:45:19 PM
I'm shocked a Republican doesn't understand how the Constitution works.
 
2013-09-20 12:46:05 PM
You could conceivably crush the GOP on this point.

Just point out to voters how they aren't supporting the armed forces, and soldier's families. Do a 30 second spot of a little boy at the park with his mom. Cut to some shots of a humvee rolling through the desert with a marine poking out of the top manning a 50-cal. Then back to the playground with some text that says something about how hard it is to be at home, when your loved one is half the world away. And how governor Schmuck-for-brains isn't willing to support the American military, and doesn't want to provide benefits to eligible families.

Even if people don't vote against him, the moderate Republicans will be confused their heads will explode from the derp.
 
2013-09-20 12:46:12 PM
FTFA:
"We want our soldiers to have all the benefits to which they're entitled to."

Two "to"s? Too many!
 
2013-09-20 12:48:58 PM
Republicans are scum.

That is all.
 
2013-09-20 12:50:17 PM

edmo: Given the old "at least one guard unit per state" idea is soon to die, you'd think they want to make a better effort to ingratiate themselves with the Pentagon.


Benevolent Misanthrope: Because she's the governor and she damn well wants you to know that SHE is the Commander-In-Chief of the Oklahoma Guard.

I say let her buy her own tanks and fighter planes then.


Oh, wouldn't that be jolly.  There are several states I can think of (lookin' at you, Texas) that would cut all non-football funding to schools for a year in order to form up their own army.
 
2013-09-20 12:51:17 PM

Karac: This is what, three states now that have pulled this?  What do they think they're really accomplishing?

Gay guardsman goes to his unit and gets an admin clerk to add his spouse to DEERS.  The states of Texas, Oklahoma, or Louisiana are out exactly dick, since these are federal DoD benefits the soldiers are getting.  All they're out is the clerks time, and guess what?  That's guys under salary so they don't have to pay him any more either.

They're just being dicks, biatching and moaning when an adult points out that it's only decent to share their toys with the other kids.

Congratulations Mary Fallin.  You've made your mark on history.  In another generation when textbooks add a few paragraphs on how gays got equal rights there's going to be a picture of you.  Right next to George Wallace, James Earl Ray, and the Ku Klux Klan.


No, she won't. Those guys had a way bigger impact on history than her. She'd barely merit a single line.

It's more along the lines of "you'll be that family member no one talks about because they're too embarrassed to admit their relation." You know, like those people who had high-ranking members of the KKK in their families, but not high-ranking enough for anyone else to remember.
 
2013-09-20 12:51:28 PM
Today's Republican Party: What A Bunch Of C*nts™
 
2013-09-20 12:54:08 PM

COMALite J: Karac: This is what, three states now that have pulled this? What do they think they're really accomplishing?

Gay guardsman goes to his unit and gets an admin clerk to add his spouse to DEERS. The states of Texas, Oklahoma, or Louisiana are out exactly dick, since these are federal DoD benefits the soldiers are getting. All they're out is the clerks time, and guess what?  That's guys under salary so they don't have to pay him any more either.

They're just being dicks, biatching and moaning when an adult points out that it's only decent to share their toys with the other kids.

Congratulations Mary Fallin. You've made your mark on history. In another generation when textbooks add a few paragraphs on how gays got equal rights there's going to be a picture of you. Right next to George Wallace, James Earl Ray, and the Ku Klux Klan.

The Texas case is particularly interesting, since Major General John Nichols claimed to be going by what the Texas State Constitution (as amended by Texas voters via Proposition 2 on November 8, 2005) states.

But if so, he really should deny marriage benefits to all Texas Guardsman. Here's what the amended §32 of the Texas State Constitution actually says:Sec. 32.  MARRIAGE.   (a)  Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b)  This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.(Added Nov. 8, 2005.)

It is, of course, a fundamental law of logic, math, law, and, well, pretty much everything in every field of human endeavor, that anything is always "identical to" itself! A is A. X = X. The Identity Property.

§32(a) was just what the fundie bigot ordered, but §32(b) explicitly states that neither Texas nor any political subdivision thereof may create nor recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage as just defined in §32(a)!!

That's right: All Texas marriages were annulled on November 8, 2005. For the past n ...


That...that's beautiful. Your newsletter, sir. I wants.
 
2013-09-20 12:54:42 PM

Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.


Considering you didn't know the US Constitution trumps the states' you are not in a place to talk.
 
2013-09-20 12:55:36 PM

Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.


That meant STATE benefits not FEDERAL benefits. Amazing as it may seem states don't have control over FEDERAL benefits.
 
2013-09-20 12:56:54 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: JollyMagistrate: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

You cannot ballot box away the rights of someone else, even by popular vote. See Proposition 8, etc. Just because she was following a ballot referendum doesn't make her right or constitutional, as recent Supreme Court findings have shown.

Also, it's just plain asshattery. If the military is offering benefits, what is it to the state government? They aren't paying for it.

Because she's the governor and she damn well wants you to know that SHE is the Commander-In-Chief of the Oklahoma Guard.  SHE is.  HER!  Not Washington, not that guy, HER!  SHE'S IN CONTROL, DAMMIT!!!!  RESPECT HER AUTHORITAH!!!


Except when it comes to FEMA funding for tornado-related damage.  Then it's all 'WE NEEDZ GUBMINT MONEAH~!"
 
2013-09-20 12:59:45 PM

COMALite J: Here's what the amended §32 of the Texas State Constitution actually says:

Sec. 32. MARRIAGE. (a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

(Added Nov. 8, 2005.)

It is, of course, a fundamental law of logic, math, law, and, well, pretty much everything in every field of human endeavor, that anything is always "identical to" itself! A is A. X = X. The Identity Property.

§32(a) was just what the fundie bigot ordered, but §32(b) explicitly states that neither Texas nor any political subdivision thereof may create nor recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage as just defined in §32(a)!!

That's right: All Texas marriages were annulled on November 8, 2005. For the past nearly eight years, there is not and has not been any such thing as a legally married couple in Texas! Since this includes recognition as well as creation of such legal status, that includes people who married elsewhere then moved to Texas, people from other States visiting friends or families in Texas or just there on business, or even people just passing through!

The insertion of one simple two-syllable five-letter very common word into §32(b), namely, "other," between "any" and "legal status," would've prevented this and done precisely what the fundie bigots intended. But, they refused to insert it, even after having been warned of this problem well before the Amendment was ratified by the voters!

In the immortal words of Homer J. Simpson: "D'oh!!!"

Bonus: Depending on how "similar to" is interpreted, while they could not be called "marriage" due to §32(a), it may well be that §32(b) does permit civil unions for same-sex and polygamous unions only, but not for monogamous heterosexual couples!


img.pandawhale.com
 
2013-09-20 01:00:25 PM

Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.


The US Constitution supercedes anything that might contradict it in state constitutions, and civil rights are not doled out via referendum. That's part of the whole point of the US (at least originally).

Yet another Teabagger Philosopher who slept through high school civics...
 
2013-09-20 01:00:47 PM
HA HA! Suck it, rightards!
 
2013-09-20 01:03:49 PM
www.zuguide.com

Man, that's just mean.
 
2013-09-20 01:05:56 PM
This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.
 
2013-09-20 01:06:19 PM

sprawl15: Why do Republicans hate the troops?


These are the same assclowns that booed a soldier that asked about DADT during an RNC debate.  I think their contempt for the troops is pretty clear.
 
2013-09-20 01:06:34 PM

Karac: Congratulations Mary Fallin.  You've made your mark on history.


Not even a footnote.  When all is said and done, she will be only one of the faceless millions whose ignorance and arrogance stood in the way of their humanity.  No one will remember her name.
 
2013-09-20 01:07:15 PM
No self respecting drag queen would want to look like that.

images.politico.com
 
2013-09-20 01:09:04 PM
Well, the military is drawing down. I guess now we know which states to target for base closures.
 
2013-09-20 01:10:12 PM

Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.


You may wish to inform the US Supreme Court of your brilliant legal deduction because they've never issued a ruling that invalidated a state's prohibition on same-sex marriage.
 
2013-09-20 01:12:17 PM

Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.


She isn't going to sleep with you
 
2013-09-20 01:12:51 PM

Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.


Look at how stupid you are.
 
2013-09-20 01:13:29 PM
Pete and Repeat were in a boat. Pete fell out. Who's left?

That being said, this was really the best move for the governor to make politically. She gets to appeal to the derpers by being tough on the homoqueers without actually blocking anything, not to mention the fact that she is legally obligated to uphold the state constitution. She herself acknowledged that they could just go to a federal installation and apply for the benefits. It's do-nothing appearance politics. It's the one thing that our "leaders" are really good at.

Crotchrocket Slim: The US Constitution supercedes anything that might contradict it in state constitutions, and civil rights are not doled out via referendum. That's part of the whole point of the US (at least originally).

Yet another Teabagger Philosopher who slept through high school civics...


Unless/until the state amendment fails a court challenge, it has the weight of law. It's not the governor's place to just decide what is constitutional and what isn't. That's why we have the judicial branch. Maybe that Teabagger Philosopher wasn't the only one who slept through high school civics....
 
2013-09-20 01:19:31 PM

Cataholic: Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.

You may wish to inform the US Supreme Court of your brilliant legal deduction because they've never issued a ruling that invalidated a state's prohibition on same-sex marriage.


That's because they haven't had to as of yet inasmuch as a properly formed complaint brought by someone with proper standing hasn't reached them yet and they do have an "actual case and controvery" requirement.   However the Line of Cases from  Skinner v. Oklahoma,  through  Loving v. VA and Zablocki v. Redhail  and  Turner v. Safely make it perfectly clear what result follows such a properly formatted challenge fairly decided
 
2013-09-20 01:20:43 PM
Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin

More like Mary Failin.amiright?!?!?
 
2013-09-20 01:24:18 PM

Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.


The Governor is breaking national law re: the constitution, which (as mentioned many times in this thread) specifically bars such actions from occurring in several ways. If the Oklahoma State Legislature legalized murder and required the Governor to kill 20 people a day she still would be immediately arrested because state law does not. and cannot, override federal law.

Blind hate/unfounded contempt is only involved here with legislation concerning banning a specific population from rights for the sole reason of hate. If you have a reason why LGBT couples should not have the same rights of others that is not based on hate or contempt I think much of the country, the Supreme Court included, would love to hear it. Because so far, the bigoted masses such as yourselves have not been able to come up with any legal justification for their self loathing and impotent rage.
 
2013-09-20 01:32:07 PM

JollyMagistrate: Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.

The Governor is breaking national law re: the constitution, which (as mentioned many times in this thread) specifically bars such actions from occurring in several ways. If the Oklahoma State Legislature legalized murder and required the Governor to kill 20 people a day she still would be immediately arrested because state law does not. and cannot, override federal law.

Blind hate/unfounded contempt is only involved here with legislation concerning banning a specific population from rights for the sole reason of hate. If you have a reason why LGBT couples should not have the same rights of others that is not based on hate or contempt I think much of the country, the Supreme Court included, would love to hear it. Because so far, the bigoted masses such as yourselves have not been able to come up with any legal justification for their self loathing and impotent rage.


So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane? And, according to you, the Federal government should punish states that don't comply with Obamacare?
 
2013-09-20 01:32:50 PM
Oh look another thread where Aristocles is making himself look like a total idiot, and troll.

Must be a day ending is Y
 
2013-09-20 01:39:43 PM
Another day, another example of how Republicans are hateful, hypocritical shiatbags. Fark y'all. Right in the eye.
 
2013-09-20 01:41:05 PM

JollyMagistrate: If you have a reason why LGBT couples should not have the same rights of others that is not based on hate or contempt I think much of the country, the Supreme Court included, would love to hear it.


Point of order: "Because the Bible" isn't based on hate or contempt.

However, SCOTUS also doesn't care about the Bible as a justification for the law (except Scalia because he helped write it; and Thomas, because...um...Coke?).
 
2013-09-20 01:41:38 PM

Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane? And, according to you, the Federal government should punish states that don't comply with Obamacare?


The feds can bust up head shops in states where mary jane is decriminalized at a state level.  In fact, they do.
The states which don't comply with Obamacare don't need the federal government to punish them - they're doing a damn fine job on that score themselves.
 
2013-09-20 01:48:44 PM

trotsky: Once more we prove why the even Jefferson believed the Articles of Confederation were crap and that a stronger Federal Government was needed.


The odd Jefferson, on the other hand...
 
2013-09-20 01:49:05 PM
I never thought the next Supremacy clause battle was going to be fought this way.
 
2013-09-20 01:52:37 PM
Karac: [T]there's going to be a picture of you.  Right next to George Wallace, James Earl Ray, and the Ku Klux Klan.

Now that's not fair. George Wallace was smart and honest enough to realize he was wrong and publicly renounce his past support for segregation.
 
2013-09-20 01:54:04 PM

Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane?


Can you explain why you dislike freedom so much? It seems pretty un-American to oppose people seeking more freedom, and it also seems quite anti-conservative to want more interference with our lives, or to support the existing encroachments on our freedom- whether that be freedom to marry or to use marijuana.

Do you have a good reason why you oppose MORE freedom, and in fact support the encroachment of state and Federal law on our rights?
 
2013-09-20 01:54:20 PM

jigger: trotsky: Once more we prove why the even Jefferson believed the Articles of Confederation were crap and that a stronger Federal Government was needed.

The odd Jefferson, on the other hand...


Don't you mean...bizarro Jefferson?
 
2013-09-20 01:55:36 PM

Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane?


Christ, I know you're nothing but a bottom of the barrel troll, but "Mary Jane"? You try way too hard to be hep and with it.
 
2013-09-20 01:56:28 PM
9,500 guardsmen, eh? How dare this Governor disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands, of same-sex married couples.

Oh, wait....9,500?

She's probably just picking on a few dozen.
 
2013-09-20 02:02:27 PM

thismomentinblackhistory: 9,500 guardsmen, eh? How dare this Governor disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands, of same-sex married couples.

Oh, wait....9,500?

She's probably just picking on a few dozen.


And Rosa Park's bus driver was only picking on one woman.
 
2013-09-20 02:05:14 PM

Ed Grubermann: Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane?

Christ, I know you're nothing but a bottom of the barrel troll, but "Mary Jane"? You try way too hard to be hep and with it.


I've seriously gone back to calling it reefer.  I love the old school terminology.
 
2013-09-20 02:06:07 PM

kbronsito: Why are we even bothering to have members of our national guard make different arrangements for benefits they are entitled to have?

When the a-hole governor of Alabama stood in the way of desegregation the federal government had the national guard move him from the school door. I'm pretty sure the OK national guard can move this bigoted ho from whatever door frame she wishes to stand under.


There's probably some strapping gay men who would be happy to take out the trash on the way to getting their benefits.
 
2013-09-20 02:07:07 PM

Rapmaster2000: Ed Grubermann: Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane?

Christ, I know you're nothing but a bottom of the barrel troll, but "Mary Jane"? You try way too hard to be hep and with it.

I've seriously gone back to calling it reefer.  I love the old school terminology.


Jazz Cigarettes has been my preferred terminology since college.
 
2013-09-20 02:07:19 PM

Aristocles: Fallin spokesman Alex Weintz said the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples. "Because of that prohibition, Gov. Fallin's general counsel has advised the National Guard not to process requests for benefits of same-sex couples," Weintz said. "Gay couples that have been legally married in other states will be advised they can apply for those benefits on federal facilities, such as Tinker Air Force Base, rather than state run facilities."

So, what's the story, Farklibs? The Gov. is following the letter of the law and advising same-sex couples how to get benefits.


2004 is an eternity ago on this issue. Even in Oklahoma. Would voters approve that amendment today? This is an example of panic legislation, old conservatives trying to lock down the laws they like because society is moving fast away from their position.
 
2013-09-20 02:07:32 PM

thismomentinblackhistory: 9,500 guardsmen, eh? How dare this Governor disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands, of same-sex married couples.

Oh, wait....9,500?

She's probably just picking on a few dozen.


Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

// who said that?
// Iunno, probably some commie
 
2013-09-20 02:09:13 PM
Christ, what an asshole a biatch.
 
2013-09-20 02:10:44 PM

kbronsito: Why are we even bothering to have members of our national guard make different arrangements for benefits they are entitled to have?

When the a-hole governor of Alabama stood in the way of desegregation the federal government had the national guard move him from the school door. I'm pretty sure the OK national guard can move this bigoted ho from whatever door frame she wishes to stand under.


Your jib, I like the cut of it.
 
2013-09-20 02:13:11 PM
 She is a puppet for other, more powerful, men.


Isn't that how the GOP prefers their women?
 
2013-09-20 02:14:16 PM

Ed Grubermann: Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane?

Christ, I know you're nothing but a bottom of the barrel troll, but "Mary Jane"? You try way too hard to be hep and with it.


Yet it's so tantalizing we must comment. I have him suffiently dark grey so I don't have to see his derp, but for some reason I can't bring myself to ignore him.
 
2013-09-20 02:15:24 PM

hiker9999: She is a puppet for other, more powerful, men.


Isn't that how the GOP prefers their women?


Now I has a sad.
 
2013-09-20 02:17:52 PM
It really is amazing how one single relatively new gimmick account can run every single thread on the entire politics tab.
 
2013-09-20 02:19:38 PM

Karac: thismomentinblackhistory: 9,500 guardsmen, eh? How dare this Governor disenfranchise hundreds, if not thousands, of same-sex married couples.

Oh, wait....9,500?

She's probably just picking on a few dozen.

And Rosa Park's bus driver was only picking on one woman.


Oh I wasn't defending the Governor at all. I just think it's absurd she's going to such great lengths to disenfranchise a (few?) handfuls of people. The fact that we are dealing with dozens makes this all the more evil, although yeah, numbers don't really matter. She's the one taking a shotgun to a fruit fly.
 
2013-09-20 02:20:56 PM

MFAWG: sprawl15: Why do Republicans hate the troops?

They don't hate the troops. They just hate gay people more than they love America.


Completely concur with your comments about Republicans.
 
2013-09-20 02:31:07 PM
Oklahoma governor passionate defender of what she imagines Constitution to be.
 
2013-09-20 02:37:45 PM
yo libtards it's the USA not the USGAY!
 
2013-09-20 02:37:54 PM
Shut down all military bases in states that do not conform to the law granting benefits to same-sex couples.  Only states that can follow the law should get federal spending for these institutions.
 
2013-09-20 02:39:57 PM

Jackson Herring: It really is amazing how one single relatively new gimmick account can run every single thread on the entire politics tab.

 
2013-09-20 02:42:10 PM

Nem Wan: Aristocles: Fallin spokesman Alex Weintz said the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples. "Because of that prohibition, Gov. Fallin's general counsel has advised the National Guard not to process requests for benefits of same-sex couples," Weintz said. "Gay couples that have been legally married in other states will be advised they can apply for those benefits on federal facilities, such as Tinker Air Force Base, rather than state run facilities."

So, what's the story, Farklibs? The Gov. is following the letter of the law and advising same-sex couples how to get benefits.

2004 is an eternity ago on this issue. Even in Oklahoma. Would voters approve that amendment today? This is an example of panic legislation, old conservatives trying to lock down the laws they like because society is moving fast away from their position.


Oklahoma would.  Even now I would say there are only a few states that don't currently have gay marriage that would.  Especially if there's no President on the ballot.
 
2013-09-20 02:43:46 PM

Jackson Herring: It really is amazing how one single relatively new gimmick account can run every single thread on the entire politics tab.


I only currently have 1 person on ignore and that spammer is it, nothing wrong with a little trollin but when you start spamming every single thread it gets annoying quick.
 
2013-09-20 02:45:47 PM

grumpfuff: Jackson Herring: It really is amazing how one single relatively new gimmick account can run every single thread on the entire politics tab.


Come on. We need to have a gimmick accounts in this place. If it weren't for the trolls most threads would be 1 comment with 20 this' and maybe 3 more correcting grammar.
 
2013-09-20 02:52:21 PM
this is so easy to fix
ban any and all federal DOD payments to these states until they uphold federal law.

TADA
problem gets fixed in 1 day
 
2013-09-20 02:54:00 PM

lockers: grumpfuff: Jackson Herring: It really is amazing how one single relatively new gimmick account can run every single thread on the entire politics tab.

Come on.Wwe need to have a gimmick accounts in this place. If it weren't for the trolls most threads would be 1 comment with 20 this' and maybe 3 more correcting grammar.


FTFY
 
2013-09-20 03:27:00 PM

Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.


Or maybe the Farklibs and centrists understand that an immoral and unjust law should be ignored or fought, and grant her the disgust due her for not standing up for the rights of her minority citizens.
 
2013-09-20 03:27:03 PM

Headso: Jackson Herring: It really is amazing how one single relatively new gimmick account can run every single thread on the entire politics tab.

I only currently have 1 person on ignore and that spammer is it, nothing wrong with a little trollin but when you start spamming every single thread it gets annoying quick.


Who is it this time?

My ignore list is up to a billion people by now, so I must have already blocked ours truly.
 
2013-09-20 03:31:15 PM

lockers: grumpfuff: Jackson Herring: It really is amazing how one single relatively new gimmick account can run every single thread on the entire politics tab.

Come on. We need to have a gimmick accounts in this place. If it weren't for the trolls most threads would be 1 comment with 20 this' and maybe 3 more correcting grammar.


I can appreciate trolls. Just not sad, lazy, repetitive, tired trolls.

Coming to every thread and going "HERP DERP LIBRULS EVIL 0BUMMER IS A FACIST SOCIALIST EMPTY SUIT DICTATOR DERP HERP!" is not trolling. It's a plea for attention.
 
2013-09-20 03:32:47 PM

rwhamann: Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.

Or maybe the Farklibs and centrists understand that an immoral and unjust law should be ignored or fought, and grant her the disgust due her for not standing up for the rights of her minority citizens.


EXACTLY!

That's why the Great COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA! will be opposing the Stalinistic Obamacare~!!
 
2013-09-20 03:40:41 PM

Aristocles: rwhamann: Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.

Or maybe the Farklibs and centrists understand that an immoral and unjust law should be ignored or fought, and grant her the disgust due her for not standing up for the rights of her minority citizens.

EXACTLY!

That's why the Great COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA! will be opposing the Stalinistic Obamacare~!!


Because if there's one person who really wanted to make sure everyone had healthcare, it was Stalin.
 
2013-09-20 03:52:29 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Shut down all military bases in states that do not conform to the law granting benefits to same-sex couples.  Only states that can follow the law should get federal spending for these institutions.


And the states that respect our constitution should refuse any help to those states who fark around with our soldiers benefits.  You know, for the next time God takes her shiatty aim at all the gays living near OKC, misses, and destroys and kills schools and kids.
 
2013-09-20 04:03:26 PM
So, Ahmadinijad is having a nice chuckle
 
2013-09-20 04:14:04 PM
Pentagon: fine, they can just go to the nearest FEDERAL military base and apply for them there then

Followup: OK Legislature passes complex laws to BRAC all the military bases in OK. "Hey, that's how they closed down Planned Parenthood in TX!"
 
2013-09-20 04:18:02 PM
Testiclaw

THIS. I was going through my list and saw some oldies there, and wondered for half a second if they were still around, but thought better of checking them out. Not worth it.....
 
2013-09-20 04:38:09 PM
Saint Reagan must be spinning in his grave as today's republicans fight so hard to be just like Russia.
 
2013-09-20 04:58:59 PM
Why do Republicans hate a well regulated militia?
 
2013-09-20 05:50:12 PM

edmo: Given the old "at least one guard unit per state" idea is soon to die, you'd think they want to make a better effort to ingratiate themselves with the Pentagon.


Exactly how does a state benefit by providing the Pentagon with a national guard unit?  Couldn't a state just say to heck with it, let the federal government pay for its own army, we won't do the national guard thing anymore?  They could beef up the state police a bit and have a state-run corps of firefighters, EMT's, and "support volunteers" to do disaster response, without having to worry about the Pentagon sending those people away overseas.
 
2013-09-20 05:58:38 PM

Dimensio: Theres only one amendment I need and I think you know which one it is.

The twenty-first?


Seen in Crestone, Colorado:

farm1.staticflickr.com
 
2013-09-20 06:02:18 PM

COMALite J: It is, of course, a fundamental law of logic, math, law, and, well, pretty much everything in every field of human endeavor, that anything is always "identical to" itself! A is A. X = X. The Identity Property.


I could see a lawyer making an argument that the laws are not based on logic, if it would benefit his case.  And there would be no shortage of examples to back up such a claim.
 
2013-09-20 06:02:24 PM

Magorn: lockers: If I recall right, Fallin said they could go to a base herself. God I hate living here.

So, in other words she admits that her action is merely a symbolic gesture to add another level or harrasment and symbolic dispproval to gays, not anything that will have any actual, practical effect?   Support the troops indeed.  Particularly disgraceful since she's technically thier commander


no, it seems more a "ride the derp wave" move...  OK amendment happened before DADT and DOMA got thrown out.  so, federal ruling DIDN'T throw out any state law...  the threads here have been talking about the GOP imploding for MONTHS now.  and here it is in blatant form.  unless she can get OK to overturn THEIR amendment, the only way she CAN comply with DoD is by sending folks to the feds...

rock vs. hard place.  she's in a lose/lose situation.  deservedly so, but still...
 
2013-09-20 06:06:42 PM

Magorn: DarkSoulNoHope: Magorn: Sofa_king_kewl: FTFA "the governor was following the wish of Oklahoma voters, who approved a constitutional amendment in 2004 that prohibits giving benefits of marriage to gay couples."

I guess since libs don't give a damn about the US Constitution, not following a single states is a given.

That US constitution you speak of? It has something in it called "The federal Supremacy CLause" which state, to wit: "

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. it ALSO has something called the Due Process clause of the 14th Amendment which says:


 No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this last bit is super-important since the cited provision of the OK state Constitution is in clear violation of it.

It's the primary reason why these "strict constitutionalists" want to do away with the 14th amendment, they want to create any crazy law they can in order to abridge the rights of people they feel are "icky".

I thought we rather settled that particular State's rights vs federal power arguement with some finality a few years back everyone seemed quite cordial but definite on that point:
[graphics8.nytimes.com image 600x470]:


wow.  painter's bias...  lee gets gethsemane lighting?
 
2013-09-20 06:11:15 PM

flondrix: edmo: Given the old "at least one guard unit per state" idea is soon to die, you'd think they want to make a better effort to ingratiate themselves with the Pentagon.

Exactly how does a state benefit by providing the Pentagon with a national guard unit?  Couldn't a state just say to heck with it, let the federal government pay for its own army, we won't do the national guard thing anymore?  They could beef up the state police a bit and have a state-run corps of firefighters, EMT's, and "support volunteers" to do disaster response, without having to worry about the Pentagon sending those people away overseas.


It benefits by getting a lot of sweet, sweet federal dollars.  The National Guard is primarily funded by the federal government.
 
2013-09-20 06:15:55 PM
COMALite J:  That's right: All Texas marriages were annulled on November 8, 2005. For the past n ...

point of order there...  any pre-existing marriage in TX would not have been annulled.  TX would just no longer be able to recognize them.  they'd still be recognized in other states...
 
2013-09-20 06:21:34 PM

Marquis de Sod: Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.

She isn't going to sleep with you


isn't that a GOOD thing?
 
2013-09-20 06:27:56 PM

mod3072: Pete and Repeat were in a boat. Pete fell out. Who's left?

That being said, this was really the best move for the governor to make politically. She gets to appeal to the derpers by being tough on the homoqueers without actually blocking anything, not to mention the fact that she is legally obligated to uphold the state constitution. She herself acknowledged that they could just go to a federal installation and apply for the benefits. It's do-nothing appearance politics. It's the one thing that our "leaders" are really good at.

Crotchrocket Slim: The US Constitution supercedes anything that might contradict it in state constitutions, and civil rights are not doled out via referendum. That's part of the whole point of the US (at least originally).

Yet another Teabagger Philosopher who slept through high school civics...

Unless/until the state amendment fails a court challenge, it has the weight of law. It's not the governor's place to just decide what is constitutional and what isn't. That's why we have the judicial branch. Maybe that Teabagger Philosopher wasn't the only one who slept through high school civics....


wtf is "high school civics?"  that's what happened two decades before i went through "social studies" and now it's not even HS anymore it's a "PoliSci Major"

/OTOH, start implementing "high school civets"... leads to better coffee
 
2013-09-20 06:43:07 PM

JollyMagistrate: Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.

The Governor is breaking national law re: the constitution, which (as mentioned many times in this thread) specifically bars such actions from occurring in several ways. If the Oklahoma State Legislature legalized murder and required the Governor to kill 20 people a day she still would be immediately arrested because state law does not. and cannot, override federal law.

Blind hate/unfounded contempt is only involved here with legislation concerning banning a specific population from rights for the sole reason of hate. If you have a reason why LGBT couples should not have the same rights of others that is not based on hate or contempt I think much of the country, the Supreme Court included, would love to hear it. Because so far, the bigoted masses such as yourselves have not been able to come up with any legal justification for their self loathing and impotent rage.


cue "young frankenstein":

PUT ZE GOALPOSHTSH BECK!

your kneejerk wharrgarbl does more damage to any lgbtqwtfbbq equality than the impotent (and it worked if you're looking for attention) rage.

the longer "gay marriage" is an issue, the longer "#OMFGdiscrimination" will be a "#thing"...  it is GOING AWAY.  there's no real FIGHT anymore, unless it self-perpetuates...

so i'll paraphrase a political cartoon because i forget the artist, but it was BEAUTIFUL...  said essentially, "guess what, the newest generation of voters don't care what race/gender/orientation/identifier/etc. someone uses... so stop using those as talking points if you want votes.  the only reason we watch election debates is to mock you..."
 
2013-09-20 06:47:57 PM

Ed Grubermann: Karac: [T]there's going to be a picture of you.  Right next to George Wallace, James Earl Ray, and the Ku Klux Klan.

Now that's not fair. George Wallace was smart and honest enough to realize he was wrong and publicly renounce his past support for segregation.


"does george wallace LOOK like a biatch?"
 
2013-09-20 06:48:56 PM

Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane?


The Feds were busting medical dispensaries and grow operations until recently; we libs are all too aware that the current reprieve (if real--Obama promised something similar when he took office, but enforcement actually stepped up) is entirely a matter of policy, not law, and will end if the next president is a Republican.

"Head shops", on the other hand, can't be busted for selling glass pipes and groovy posters, only for selling actual illegal drugs.  The better run ones try to avoid that.

And, according to you, the Federal government should punish states that don't comply with Obamacare?

Yep.
 
2013-09-20 06:52:36 PM

BeesNuts: Rapmaster2000: Ed Grubermann: Aristocles: So I guess you think the Feds should start busting up the head shops popping up in states that have decriminalized mary jane?

Christ, I know you're nothing but a bottom of the barrel troll, but "Mary Jane"? You try way too hard to be hep and with it.

I've seriously gone back to calling it reefer.  I love the old school terminology.

Jazz Cigarettes has been my preferred terminology since college.


would those be like "press-on blunts?"  keeps 'em from accidentally activating....
 
2013-09-20 06:53:37 PM

Ed Grubermann: Now that's not fair. George Wallace was smart and honest enough to realize he was wrong

that he needed the black vote to get re-elected and publicly renounce his past support for segregation.

FTFY.
 
2013-09-20 07:01:32 PM

Karac: It benefits by getting a lot of sweet, sweet federal dollars. The National Guard is primarily funded by the federal government.


Well, then, that suggests a simple way to deal with the current issue.  It worked for most universities.  (Bob Jones required the additional threat of taking away their tax-exempt status, IIUC.)
 
2013-09-20 07:03:19 PM

cynicalminion: point of order there... any pre-existing marriage in TX would not have been annulled. TX would just no longer be able to recognize them. they'd still be recognized in other states...


For that matter, wouldn't other states be able to recognize recent marriages recognized in TX?  Just because Texas went full bore stupid doesn't mean other states have to follow.
 
2013-09-20 07:10:29 PM

OtherLittleGuy: Followup: OK Legislature passes complex laws to BRAC all the military bases in OK. "Hey, that's how they closed down Planned Parenthood in TX!"


Huh?  Base Realignment and Closure is something the federal government does to the states, not the other way around.

I don't know if a state could shut down a federal military base it didn't like, or if any has ever tried since 1865.
 
2013-09-20 07:13:32 PM

cynicalminion: I thought we rather settled that particular State's rights vs federal power arguement with some finality a few years back everyone seemed quite cordial but definite on that point:
[graphics8.nytimes.com image 600x470]:

wow. painter's bias... lee gets gethsemane lighting?


Nice catch, the painting makes it look like the Union is surrendering to Lee!
 
2013-09-20 08:34:09 PM

grumpfuff: That...that's beautiful. Your newsletter, sir. I wants.


Karac: [JokerAsCitizenKaneSlowClap.animgif]


Thanks, guys. It's not my own insights, though. Save Texas Marriage was pointing this out well before the November 8, 2005 election (link goes to Internet Wayback Machine ― do not attempt to go to that domain directly, as it's been bought out by Chinese, apparently for hacking purposes!)

Consider some of the other ramifications of this: every child born in Texas on or after November 8, 2005 is illegitimate, and since "recognize" is stated, this retroactively includes everyone in Texas all the way back to its Statehood, etc.!


flondrix: COMALite J: It is, of course, a fundamental law of logic, math, law, and, well, pretty much everything in every field of human endeavor, that anything is always "identical to" itself! A is A. x = x. The Identity Property.

I could see a lawyer making an argument that the laws are not based on logic, if it would benefit his case.  And there would be no shortage of examples to back up such a claim.

Certainly this one isn't.


cynicalminion: COMALite J:  That's right: All Texas marriages were annulled on November 8, 2005. For the past n ...

point of order there...  any pre-existing marriage in TX would not have been annulled.  TX would just no longer be able to recognize them.  they'd still be recognized in other states...

The whole thing was concerning how Texas law would see things, not other states. "Annulled" in Texas, as in Texas cannot recognized that any marriages (its own or any other States') ever existed, as far as its own law and Constitution are concerned.

Of course, the US Constitution might have something to say about all this, what with the States being explicitly forbidden from doing Ex Post Facto, not to mention the Full Faith and Credit clause and the oft-mentioned-in-this-thread Supremacy Clause. I was talking solely about Texas Constitutional law.
 
2013-09-20 08:37:11 PM

MFAWG: sprawl15: Why do Republicans hate the troops?

They don't hate the troops. They just hate gay people more than they love America.


Given how often they try and get them killed unnecessarily for corporate profit and political power, and how they refuse to support them when they come home, I think it's fair to say that they most certainly DO hate the troops.

But they sure do like to CLAIM they support the troops, just like they claim they support the Constitution, support the American Dream, believe in fiscal responsibility, follow the Bible, and countless other moral positions short enough to fit on bumper stickers and crappy political comic strips.
 
2013-09-20 10:03:25 PM
The anti gay rights movement is going to become increasingly petty and stupid as time continues to inevitably march forward.
 
2013-09-21 03:36:43 AM

cynicalminion: the longer "gay marriage" is an issue, the longer "#OMFGdiscrimination" will be a "#thing"...  it is GOING AWAY.  there's no real FIGHT anymore, unless it self-perpetuates...

so i'll paraphrase a political cartoon because i forget the artist, but it was BEAUTIFUL...  said essentially, "guess what, the newest generation of voters don't care what race/gender/orientation/identifier/etc. someone uses... so stop using those as talking points if you want votes.  the only reason we watch election debates is to mock you..."


Let's not even try to change the laws because we can just call them changed even though they aren't.  Nobody in history has ever reformed anything by drawing attention to the problem.  It has always been the heroes who have bravely looked the other way and ignored injustice until it just sort of fixed itself.
 
2013-09-21 08:12:20 AM
Eh I used to live in OK as a wee tyke when my parents were stationed at Tinker. I attended a "Christian" school there where, in hindsight, the staff seemed damn near rabid in their fundamentalist derpiness. This was back when corporal punishment was all the rage, and I remember trips to the principals office for ass whoopings for such egregious offenses as: bringing a HeMan action figure for show and tell, not remembering my prayers correctly, and using too much glue during a craft project.

The fact that this kind of news is coming out of OK does not surprise me in the least. fark that place.
 
2013-09-21 10:00:49 AM

Aristocles: rwhamann: Aristocles: This thread is amazing.

I used to think Farklibs were just misguided ideologues but, it seems, they're intentionally ignoring the fact that this Gov. is merely following state law. Additionally, she's instructed same-sex couples on how to obtain benefits directly from the Federal Gov't.

Yet, the Farklibs here have nothing but blind hatred and unfounded contempt.

Or maybe the Farklibs and centrists understand that an immoral and unjust law should be ignored or fought, and grant her the disgust due her for not standing up for the rights of her minority citizens.

EXACTLY!

That's why the Great COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA! will be opposing the Stalinistic Obamacare~!!


See, here's the thing.

As absurd as it sounds, there are respected trolls on fark.

To be one, you must be smart - above all, entertaining.

It makes me kind of sad for you because you seem to want it so bad, but your efforts so far just aren't good enough.

I hope you can up your game. Otherwise it's just going to be the same tired, pathetic, regurgitation that we keep seeing.

And that will make sad. Like seeing a not so witty waiter trying to interject at the Algonquin round table.
 
Displayed 142 of 142 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report