Charmaine at the podium
addressing last year's
crowd of 1,700 The Family Research Council is having their annual Briefing in Your Nation's Capital.

This year will be interesting. All GOP presidential candidates will speak. Sen. Sam Brownback, Rudy Giuliani, Rep. Ron Paul, Gov. Mike Huckabee, Rep. Duncan Hunter, Sen. John McCain, Gov. Mitt Romney, Rep. Tom Tancredo, Fred Thompson.

No Democratic candidate has accepted.

Liberals: won't fight; won't debate.

From FRCAction,

The Washington Briefing 2007: Values Voter Summit is cosponsored by American Values, Focus on the Family Action, Alliance Defense Fund and High Impact Leadership Coalition.

The Briefing will be held October 19-21 at the Hilton Washington Hotel in Washington, D.C. A presidential straw poll, exhibit hall, radio row, book signings, bloggers' row, and much more will be packed into this three-day conference. Saturday evening Dr. James Dobson will be honored at a gala dinner where he will receive FRC's inaugural Vision and Leadership Award.

Members of the media must register for FRC media credentials prior to the event.

Contact J.P. Duffy at jpd@frc.org or fax, names, numbers and e-mails on company letterhead to 202.393.2134.

For more information regarding the log onto www.frcactionwashingtonbriefing.org or call the FRC Press Office at (866) FRC-NEWS.

More from FRC Action, the C(4)

In addition to the GOP presidential candidates, the speaker line-up includes Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich, Chuck Colson, Gary Bauer, Bishop Harry Jackson, Alan Sears, Mark Levin, Roger Hedgecock, Rich Lowry, Paul Weyrich, Dr. Richard Land, John Fund, Ed Meese, Ben Stein, Rabbi Daniel Lapin, Representatives Marsha Blackburn and Jean Schmidt, Star Parker, Phyllis Schlafly, Senator Rick Santorum, Michael Steele, Father Frank Pavone, Bill Bennett, and Judge Robert Bork.

Charmaine, as Vice President for Communications for FRC will be working The Political Blogosphere with Soren Dayton, Political Consultant; David All, The David All Group; Matthew Eppinette, Americans United for Life; Erick Erickson, RedState; Joe Carter, Director of Web Communications for FRC

Thank you (foot)notes:

From last year: The Real Story: The Values Voter Summit in Washington, DC

The Family Research Council, FRC Action Briefing: Family, Faith and Freedom

FRC Action Briefing September 2006

People for the American Way weighs in FRC's Perkins Suggests Romney Better Than Huckabee on Religious-Right Issues

For more info,

Attendees at the Summit will now have the chance to make their own assessments of the GOP contenders in person at the Summit. In addition, members of FRC Action (see the web site address that follows) can vote in the first-ever Values Voter Presidential Straw Poll, either online or in person on October 19 and 20.

For information or to register, go to www.thewashingtonbriefing.com or call toll-free at 1-888-372-2284.

Pam Spaudling's take at Mark your calendars for the 2007 Values Voters Summit/Washington Briefing

A Buck For Huck has Washington Briefing

Posted at 03:35 PM | Permalink
Comments (2) | TrackBacks (1)

Homosexuals at sea The Other Side of the Story

by Allan Slaff

On 13 June, the Wall Street Journal printed an op-ed piece by former congressman Bob Barr entitled “Don’t Ask, Who Cares” in which he argued that barring homosexuals from openly serving in the military was unfair, un-American and counterproductive. Mr. Barr writes that he has become deeply impressed with the growing weight of credible military opinion which concludes that allowing gays to serve openly in the military does not pose insurmountable problems for the good order and discipline of the services. With all due respect to the two authorities that he refers to, ex Senator Simpson and General Skalikeshveli, both of whom I greatly admire and respect, neither of them have any first hand idea of the sociological problems of going to sea in a man of war.

I strenuously disagree with Mr. Barr and his military authorities, and I would like very much to offer “The other side of the story”. Since I am a retired naval officer, I shall write to what I know well and that is going to sea in a man of war. I served in eleven ships of the Navy and had the unique honor of commanding four combatants including the heavy guided missile cruiser Albany all of which, by the way, were at the time considered among the finest combatants in the Fleet.

In a combatant ship our bluejackets are literally packed into berthing compartments, typically holding about 40 men. They are afforded minimum privacy even under the most enlightened habitability standards. As a nod for the need for some human privacy the modern enlisted bunks are fitted with a privacy curtain which they may close. Public nakedness is the reality of enlisted life in Navy ships and that pertains to the heads, and wash and shower rooms as well.

Our ships get underway for months at a time. The typical deployment when I was in the Fleet was for nine months and I understand that that is still typical. Thus, those compartments become the bluejackets’ home for very long periods of time. There is no such thing as going home ashore after your watch or if you are in a liberty section so that you may enjoy the company of your homosexual partner. There are of course occasional liberty ports but liberty for enlisted personnel usually expires in the late evening. The Fleet doesn’t even enter port for replenishment. All of that is done underway.

Now assign a few homosexuals into that living compartment when all of them including the homosexual are very young and when their hormones are at their most powerful and you have an invitation to disaster. It would be akin to inserting a few heterosexual males into an all female compartment where nakedness is a way of life and sending them off for months at a time. Impossible! And thus it would be exactly the same for the homosexual in a heterosexual male compartment.

As Mr. Barr correctly points out, the homosexual has as fine an intellect as the heterosexual. They thus eventually and inevitably they will be advanced in rating. As petty officers they will be in a position of powerful authority over men of lesser rating and thus in a position to exert exquisite sexual pressure on their subordinates.

For these very apparent sociological reasons it would be a disaster to change the present policy. It would reap havoc on the fighting efficiency of the Fleet and good order and discipline so necessary in a man of war. It just cannot happen.

Allan Slaff

Thank you (foot)notes:

Allan Slaff submitted this letter to the editors of The Wall Street Journal.

Credit to John Howland at USNA At Large.

Continue Reading »

Posted at 10:19 AM | Permalink
Comments (3)

HRC attacks FRC:

Posted at 08:21 PM | Permalink
Comments (2)

Rolling Stone
always provocative Rolling Stone has an excellent analysis on the God-fearing voter effect on presidential politics.

Evangelicals in Exile; The Christian right is reeling from its biggest electoral defeat in a quarter century - and now they're talking about abandoning the GOP byline ROBERT DREYFUSS,

"To ensure that Republicans get the message in 2008, the religious right is redoubling its efforts to mobilize its political machine -- including tens of thousands of churches, hundreds of radio stations and two national television networks."

The liberal thinking is that the Jesus-God-fearing voter votes as one. One candidate; one block.

O that we would. 30% of Evangelicals voted for Clinton. Gary Bauer at one time encouraged John McCain. Liberal democratTIC candidates still get some Catholics.

Robert Dreyfuss continues,

The Family Research Council, a leading lobby for the Christian right, is planning a huge expansion on the Internet, including videos and podcasts, to reach millions in next year's election. "We want to be sure that the lessons of the last election have been learned, and that the Republicans understand that we are not a lock for the GOP," says Charmaine Yoest, the council's vice president of communications. "When you're looking at razor-thin margins, you better pay attention to your base."

New Media is key. A percentage point or less, will win. Jim Ceaser, who sat on Charmaine's dissertation committee, made this clear in his book The Perfect Tie (list price: $69.00).

The other James, Carville, agrees,

"It's not like you have to win 'em," says James Carville, the Democratic strategist who engineered Bill Clinton's rise to power. "You just have to do better. Even if you go up five points, it's a big deal."

Dreyfuss quotes Charmaine, who gets it right (of course...)

The swing certainly got the attention of the Christian right. "Man, a couple of points difference -- that's what the political consultants get paid the big bucks to deliver," says Yoest of the Family Research Council. "In a divided electorate, that's significant."

Dreyfuss warns,


Rolling Stone

The group fired an early shot across the GOP's bow in January, when it delivered a videotaped response to President Bush's State of the Union speech. "The president failed to draw a line in the sand on behalf of life," charged Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council.

Dreyfuss quotes Perkins,

"What will become of the culture of life, of the defense of marriage?" The council displayed a chart [above] on which it noted the number of times the president mentioned the Christian right's core issues: marriage, 0; abortion, 0; stem cells, 0; cloning, 0; abstinence, 0; and values, 0.

Be sure to bookmark and track Family Research Council's New Media advances at the FRCBlog. (Unpaid link.)

Thank you (foot)notes:

See Charmaine's work at The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life: Religious Voters and the Midterm Elections

Also mentioned in the Rolling Stone article were,

Communications expert Genevieve Wood from Heritage, Dick Armey, James Dobson, David Kuo, Ted Haggard, Phill Kline, Curtis Gans, Don Wildmon.

Get (warring) religion on Rein's Religion Blog.

Posted at 08:01 AM | Permalink
Comments (7)

L to R: Your Business Blogger,
Charmaine
Senator Guy Barnett
Our liberal homosexual activist friends will always cite foreign law as a precedence for new law here in the US of A.

But there is one country that the activists and mainstream media will never mention in this debate:

Australia.

Your Business Blogger and Charmaine joined Guy Barnett, a Senator from the Land Down Under for dinner the other night at the Occidental in DC. (Do try the crab cakes.)

Same sex marriage was one of our topics and our concerns.

But it is not a concern in Australia. It has been tested by their courts and is "settled law."

The Australian law states that,

Marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.

Certain unions are not marriages.

A union solemnised in a foreign country between:

(a) a man and another man; or
(b) a woman and another woman; must not be recognised as a marriage in Australia.

We should also look to the Aussies for homosexual adoption:

They don't allow it.

We should also look to the Aussies for Civil Unions.

They don't allow it.

Australia might also be ahead of us on the thought-control/mind-control/hate-crime nonsense. The Australian Supreme Court recently stood up to the Muslim victim-lobby when the courts permitted two pastors to quote from the Quran. WorldNetDaily reports,

Quran did tell men they could beat their wives [and]

Yes, it did have verses calling on Muslims to fight infidels until they submitted

Infidels. They would be non-Muslims in America: Republicans. (The Democrats have already submitted.)

WND continues,

Many of the "hate crimes" proposals in the United States are based on a similar concept: designating as "crimes" the statements people make about their own beliefs or convictions.

The Aussies are ahead of us on marriage, homosexuals and thought crimes.

Now if they could only get 'gays in the military' right...

Thank you (foot)notes:

Guy Barnett is the (classical) liberal senator for Tasmania. He was recently at the UN working with Bill Clinton on support for diabetes education.

Jihadists and homosexuals: please log you death threats here.

Posted at 10:43 AM | Permalink
Comments (4)

MSNBCThe homosexual lobby group PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) is pushing legislation to dissolve any family that does not produce children.

This is not a joke.

PFLAG also supports the transgender surgical removal of body parts.

That is not a joke.

Charmaine will be debating against the homosexual position.

Tune in on MSNBC today, Wednesday, February 7. UPDATE: Charmaine will be on twice -- Hit time is 1pm EST; and again at 3:30pm EST.

Continue Reading »

Posted at 12:25 PM | Permalink
Comments (10)

Your Business Blogger
and CharmaineThe gay marriage scorecard shows that the nation prefers marriage to be between one man and one woman.

Heterosexuals, 28; vs.
Homosexuals, Transgender, Bi-Sexual, Bigamists,
National Man-Boy Love Association, 1

Yes, that's 28 to 1.

27 of 28 public debates on marriage were decisively won by traditional marriage proponents.

Only voters in Arizona voted wrong.

Protecting Marriage as Between One Man & One Woman

Prior to 2004
Alaska (1998) 68%
Hawaii (1998) 69%
Nebraska (2000) 70%
California (2000) 91%*

*California’s statewide ballot measure, Prop. 22, enacted a new state law protecting marriage, rather than a constitutional amendment.

2004
Arkansas 75%
Georgia 77%
Kentucky 75%
Louisiana 78%
Michigan 59%
Mississippi 86%
Missouri 71%
Montana 66%
N. Dakota 73%
Ohio 62%
Oklahoma 76%
Oregon 58%
Utah 66%

2005
Kansas 75%
Texas 75%
Alabama 81%

2006
Tennessee 81%
Colorado 56%
Idaho 63%
S. Carolina 78%
S. Dakota 52%
Virginia 57%
Wisconsin 59%

Pending
Legislation:
Minnesota (’07)
Indiana (’08)
Massachusetts (’08)
Pennsylvania (’09)

Initiatives:
California (’08)
Florida (’08)

(Bolded states went for Kerry in 2004. Proving that voters may be confused about liberals, but not about marriage.)

Thank you (foot)notes:

The Cumulative Chart is the work of David E. Smith, Executive Director of the Illinois Family Institute. A family policy council that counts.

Human Resource Management Tip: Hire the homosexual? Maybe, but be slow to award "partner" benefits. The public and, I dare say, stockholders, prefer traditional marriage.

Posted at 07:47 AM | Permalink

Causation or Correlation? Homosexuals are taking over the leadership of the Episcopal Church. And the main stream church is losing membership.

Rodney Stark in The Victory of Reason reminds us that the Episcopal Church lost 55% of its membership from 1960 to 2000.

Gary Bauer emails,

For the Episcopal Church, the breaking point was the 2003 ordination of an open homosexual as a bishop and the willingness of other church leaders to embrace same-sex “marriage.” For those who believe in the church’s historical teachings on human sexuality, teachings firmly rooted in the Scriptures, this was a bridge too far, and it set in motion what appears to be a major schism within the church.

The Reverend John Yates, rector of the 275-year-old Falls Church, told his congregation, “This whole situation isn’t about us. It’s about the next generation and the next and the next. … For the sake of the children, we must be faithful to Christ.”

The Yoest's visiting Truro Episcopal Church December 2005

Mainstream churches, like Mainstream media are declining and dying. But not conservative churches such as the Presbyterian Church of America. Of which we are members, of course.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Karl Rove mentioned in off the record remarks heard by Your Business Blogger, that he read and recommends Rodney Stark's book. Which would be another reason liberals will hate it. And normal people will love it.

See the Washington Post.

More on Rodney Stark at the jump -- he's proof that something good can come out of the University of California, Berkeley.

Continue Reading »

Posted at 08:45 AM | Permalink
Comments (7) | TrackBacks (1)

Tucker Carlson Charmaine will be on Tucker Carlson today, Wednesday to talk about sex. The out-of-wed-lock kind.

The AP reports, Wait Until Marriage? 'Extremely Challenging'

A 2002 survey of about 12,500 men and women found that 97 percent of people who were no longer virgins at age 44 had sexual intercourse for the first time before they married.

By age 20, only 12 percent of people interviewed had married, but 77 percent had sex, and 75 percent had sex before marriage. By age 44, 99 percent of people were no longer virgins, 95 percent reported having had premarital intercourse, and 85 percent had married at some point.

MSNBC Charmaine has another take on the topic. Tune in today and let us know what you think. Hit time is 4:20 Eastern.

Posted at 02:42 PM | Permalink
Comments (2)

Marshall Manson
from the Edelman
public relations firmWal*Mart gets smart; adapts to the market.

In a recent statement, just in time for the Thanksgiving, W*M backed away from supporting the homosexual, bi-sexual, transsexual agenda. Wal*Mart stopped its cross dressing where Wal-Mart will not make corporate contributions to support or oppose highly controversial issues unless they directly relate to our ability to serve our customers.

Wal*Mart FactsWal-Mart does not have a position on same sex marriage and we do not give preference to gay or lesbian suppliers. Wal-Mart does have a strong commitment to diversity among our associates and against discrimination everywhere.

This homosexualist activism was a concern for traditional families because of the report, Wal-Mart Contributes $60,000 to Pro-Homosexual Employee Advocacy Group. The $60K supported a fringe homosexual -bi sexual- transsexual-transvestite-other gender denomination, Out & Equal summit in Chicago.

Marshall Manson, the blogosphere's Wal*Mart source, has been silent on this news release. Which means that the PR pro from Edelman is probably responsible.

And the Yoest family wants to publicly thank him. Alert Readers will recall that Your Business Blogger was an enthusiastic cheerleader for the Bentonville World Dominator. The Penta-Posse et. al. consumed $4,328.37 in consumable goods in the 12 trailing months at Sam's Club. And we miss shopping at the retail giant. And we missed the Everyday Low Prices.

Well Done Marshall. Breeders everywhere thank you.

But it would have been helpful if Wal*Mart released this statement before the Out and Equal homosexual summit, instead of after.

Queercents reports on an interview with Selisse Berry, who,

...[H]as been the queer voice of corporate America. Selisse is the founding Executive Director of Out & Equal Workplace Advocates, a nonprofit organization focused on creating safe and equitable workplaces for LGBT employees. [Selisse says] There are so many great ideas generated at the Summit... the big topics centered around the rapidly expanding number of companies who are embracing LGBT equality, how to embrace LGBT equality on an international level, and the specific challenges of policy and training needed for transgender equality.

Out and Equal also demands that homosexuals serve openly in the armed services. Give the Gays Guns. Next, they will be eating meat and shopping at Wal*Mart.

Thank you (foot)notes:

But skepticism is still in order. Wal*Mart's Board of Directors is populated with leftist such as Aida M. Alvarez. Who was a member of the diversity advisory board for Deloitte & Touche LLP. (Emphasis mine) Also a former Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration and a member of President Clinton’s Cabinet from 1997 to 2001. Alvarez was hip deep in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac mess as a financial regulator from 1993 to 1997.

Wal*Mart can still screw up yet. Pray that capitalism prevails.

Alaska Pride has rationale on the boycott.

More at the jump

Continue Reading »

Posted at 09:31 AM | Permalink

Let us remember
the Transgender veterans
on Veteran's Day Charmaine will be jousting with the Gay/Lesbian/Bi-Sexual/Transgendered spokes person(?) from The Transgendered Educational Fund, a third way gendering group on 'FOX News Live' Weekend Edition.

Hit time is 1:20 Eastern Time on Fox News, Sunday, 12 November.

They will be debating values.

Yes, values. Opposite from Charmaine.

Transgender genders will sometimes, but not necessarily, amputate a perfectly normal (ahem, edited by the prudish spouse).

I believe it is in bad form to actually ask a Transgender if this elective surgery is part of his/her/its medical history.

You are right: Your Business Blogger should not be poking fun at anyone who would take a meat cleaver to his manhood. You see, these creatures are crazy, I believe.

There is a related grouping of homosexual-like -- let's not call them nut jobs -- unfortunates, who suffer from Body Integrity Identify Disorder (BIID).

From BIID.org,

Body Integrity Identity Disorder, or BIID, is a psychological condition in which the individual requests an elective amputation. Individuals with this condition experience the persistent desire to have their body physically match the idealized image they have of themselves. This desire forces individuals to deal with the paradox of losing one or more major limbs (i.e. arm[s] or leg[s]) to become whole. In their minds, "Less is more".

The psychiatric and psychologic communities suggest medication to deal with the non-disorder.

(I know you think I am making this all up. Like, What normal male would part with that particular body part?)

Suggestions for Mental Health Professionals Treating Clients/Patients suffering from Body Integrity Identity Disorder,

Understand that BIID is a distinct condition, and that while clients may have co-morbid conditions, BIID is not a sign of psychosis, nor of an Axis II disorder.

The condition is not listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; it is not considered a disease. "Nevertheless, some doctors are trying to add BIID to the official list of mental disorders in the manual's next edition," reports Whitney Archer in Salvo Magazine.

So this is what liberals have made our world into: A happily married normal mother of five children is forced into debating a trany of some stripe on...

Values.

Thank you (foot)notes:
This would normally be funny. But the debate is serious: The gay/lesbian/bi-sexual/transgendered advocacy groups are demanding that homosexuals and transgendered be permitted to serve openly in the military. Right next to your son serving in combat. This would be a challenge to unit cohesion.

Although a Roberta, who was once Bob, probably has the upper body strength to man-handle an 80 back pack in combat.

More (than you really want to know) at the jump.

Continue Reading »

Posted at 09:36 PM | Permalink
Comments (7)

The network was going to send a car. But the guest declined. It was only a few minutes and a few miles from the hotel to the MSNBC studios in LA. And Charmaine thought it'd be a bit easier to have her own rental as she worked out the logistics. With The Diva and Dude in tow, she drives out on the LA hyway.

A Same Sex Couple
Exchanging Rings
Screen Shot Credit: Peter Shinn But LA has even worse traffic and traffic patterns than in Your Nation's Capital, and Charmaine did not quite make it to the studio on time. She phoned it in.

Alert Reader Andrew at Mere Orthodoxy had graciously requested a link to the interview.

Charmaine, as you will see hear, proved Woody Allen wrong: sometimes you can be successful with only your voice to beat the other side's presence in a debate.

Watch the segment here and well, listen to Charmaine.

Thank you (foot)notes: WARNING: Lots of men kissing men. Lots of women kissing women. It is not pretty or suitable for children.

Management Training Tip: When your big show biz break comes and the booker offers a car, take it.

Posted at 02:03 PM | Permalink
Comments (5)

Credit: The Dude Charmaine is in LA at the GodBlogCon. So it is fitting that she will be debating the New Jersey ruling on homosexual unions that no man can cast asunder.

She will be debating Lambda Legal.

And not the Human Rights Campaign. Seems this homosexual activist axxociation outed Mark Foley.

Gary Bauer emails today,

"Outing" Hypocrisy

Human Rights Campaign:
Not Your Stand-up Kind of Guys

Internet "bloggers” this week uncovered the source responsible for exposing former Rep. Mark Foley’s behavior, and it may surprise you. The source was an employee of the Human Rights Campaign, America’s largest homosexual rights group, who once worked on Capitol Hill for a Senate Democrat. How many of you have heard this story?

This is extremely embarrassing for the Left, because it highlights the underhanded tactic some in the homosexual rights movement have been employing for almost two decades: Using homosexuality for political purposes. The hypocrisy is blatant. The entire homosexual agenda is founded on the effort to normalize homosexuality and to push for more liberal laws, including lowering the age of consent.

But why would they “out” one of their own? The question can be answered with one letter: R. They felt justified in exposing Foley’s behavior because he was a member of the Republican House majority that opposed most of their issues. They knew that the vast majority of Americans would consider Foley’s behavior immoral and highly inappropriate, and that he would be forced to resign. Of course, pro-family advocates know that Foley was never a conservative, and often voted for the “gay rights” agenda.

Charmaine, The Diva, The Dude
on air with Hugh Hewitt (not shown) But with Foley gone, there would be one fewer Republican in Congress, thus getting the radical homosexual movement one step closer to having the Speaker from San Francisco implementing their extreme agenda.

The Human Rights Campaign will lay low for a while; media savvy as they are.

Hit time (no, no, not gay bashing -- please) tomorrow Saturday at 1:45 Eastern on MSNBC.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Brutal Hugger has Lambda letter to New York Times.

See Gay News Blog for citation.

More from the Washington Post.

Full Disclosure: Charmaine and Your Business Blogger have done work for Gary Bauer.

Posted at 10:50 PM | Permalink
Comments (3)

Gerry Studds

The AP, reporting today on the death of former Congressman, Gerry Studds quotes "his husband," Dean Hara:

He gave people of his generation, of my generation, of future generations, the courage to do whatever they wanted to do.

Whatever they wanted to do?

In the context of eulogizing a man who had a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old boy while serving as a United States Congressman, this is a very troubling thing to celebrate.

Posted at 04:10 PM | Permalink
Comments (1)

One of the most persistent questions about gay marriage is what's the big deal? How does it harm heterosexual marriage to let gay couples make marriage commitments?

Stanley Kurtz answers the question at NRO today. He says the importance of marriage revolves around providing a stable place for children to be raised. . . and non-marital relationships -- "gay" or otherwise -- or just not as stable. His key point:

So instead of highlighting marriage's privileged status as a site for parenthood, partnership legislation is communicating the message that marriage is no different from cohabitation. . .In both a literal-legal and a metaphorical sense, the first gay partnership law was tied to a radically skeptical attitude toward marriage as the preferred site for parenthood.

Posted at 05:07 PM | Permalink

Governor Schwarzenegger just announced that he will veto the gay marriage bill that the California legislature passed yesterday.

I'm surprised. And impressed.

He gave precisely the right reason: the California people passed a Defense of Marriage bill defining marriage as one man and one woman just five years ago in a ballot initiative. Here's the statement from his press secretary:

We cannot have a system where the people vote and the Legislature derails that vote. Out of respect for the will of the people, the governor will veto (the bill).

Even though some people were saying the pressure from his base would force him in this direction, I thought Schwarzenegger would cave in to pressure from his friends in Hollywood to be politically correct.

Nice to be wrong on that.

Blue Mass Group has more on homosexual marriage amendments.

Posted at 10:53 PM | Permalink
Comments (7) | TrackBacks (2)

Mitt Romney
Kathleen Parker writes today in her columnn,"Parent A and Parent B - and baby makes C" that Mitt Romney, Governor of Massachusetts, is coming under attack from gay groups because he refuses to allow them to replace "mother" and "father" on birth certificates with "Parent A" and "Parent B."

Wow.

If I used this example as a hypothetical result of establishing gay marriage, I would be accused of exaggerating the possible consequences -- of making up a ridiculous "what if."

But no. Wer'e already there. It's real.

And good for Mitt Romney.

(Lucky for him, yesterday the Republican presidential sweepstakes for 2008 opened up significantly, due to the political self-immolation of presidental aspirant Senator Bill Frist . . . the GOP base appreciates politicians who take principled stands on tough issues.)

Thank you to Mudville Gazette for the Open Post. And be sure to see Toe In The Water and learn a bit of the history of my husband's old cavalry unit: Ready and Forward.

Posted at 11:02 PM | Permalink
Comments (2)