Archive for August, 2010

…so explains the liberal view by Jonah Goldberg:

Let’s start with the left, which certainly has different motives than Klinghoffer’s. The urge to lament how far today’s conservatives have fallen from the “golden age” of Buckley & Co. is a now-familiar gambit. You see, this is what critics on the left always say: “If only today’s conservatives were as decent or intellectual or patriotic as those of yesteryear.”

The best conservatives are always dead; the worst are always alive and influential. When Buckley and Kristol, not to mention Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, were alive, they were hated and vilified by the same sorts of people who now claim to miss the old gang. The gold standard of the dead is always a cudgel, used to beat back the living.

What hath Bainbridge wrought?

Via Glenn who really isn’t interested in the topic, honestly!

Generally I think it takes two generations

Posted: August 5, 2010 by datechguy in opinion/news
Tags: ,

For ideas bad or good to have their consequences.

For example the reason why affirmative action was necessary at the time it was introduced was Black America was held back for generations. But by the second generation 30 years or so, you not only had employers in the habit of not looking at race but you now had families that were in a better position to advance.

On the other side you had the removal of prayer from schools and with 30 years you had the divorce and drug rates skyrocket and more and more people seem to have less and less meaning in life.

There are many other examples of the same.

So when people say Gay Marriage has no harm to society, take it with a grain of salt.

Now I have one thing final thing to say, people have the right to be wrong, If Gay Marriage can actually WIN a vote in a state then that state can have gay marriage and the consequences thereof. Until that changes I have very little respect for the arguments of the other side on this issue.

Update: No you didn’t

The following spam comment was blocked by my filter today:

I’m currently being held prisoner by the Russian mafia and being forced to post spam comments on blogs and forum! If you don’t approve this they will kill me. They’re coming back now. Please send help!

I’ve actually seen some “topical” spam (on Afghanistan), where an argument is made on an issue in the hopes that people will see the argument and assume the spam was an actual answer to a post.

They try, how they try.

…that is if Drudge is correct. Update: he is

Remember when civil unions came up and the claim was nobody was talking about gay marriage? I do.

Remember when the defense of marriage act was passed and people were claiming that a constitutional amendment was not necessary? I do.

The argument for gay marriage has been a study in prevarication during its pursuit. From the initial rulings in Vt. to the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s 4-3 ruling to apparently today, the courts have created and imposed upon the people non-existent rights among a populace that has strongly objected.

The advocates of Gay Marriage continue their fear of the people. When they can they have kept them from voting (re Massachusetts) and when they can’t get have used to courts to legislate what they can’t win at the ballot box all with the loving support of a media completely out of touch with the public.

So once again we will go to the higher courts until we reach the supreme court.

Again we have done this to ourselves, by voting in people who ignore our will, by electing people who appoint judges who legislate from the bench.

From healthcare to illegal immigration to this, our elected officials have continually ignored the people will. As long as the people allow them to get away with it, they will continue to do so.

memeorandum thread here.

Update: from the hotair post

the EP ruling is that there’s no rational basis for limiting marriage to straights.

If that is true I await the rational basis to deny polygamy from the court.

Update 2: Brian Brown on the ruling at the corner:

Q: What’s next for marriage in California?

A: This will go to the Supreme Court, where we expect to win. Remember that originally, the gay legal establishment opposed this case, because they fear what we anticipate: that they don’t yet have five votes for a constitutional right to gay marriage. Two lawyers with very big egos (Olson and Boies) pushed this case over more sober heads, and I think in the end gay-marriage advocates will regret that they did.

Time will tell.