tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33855769.post403584189922292617..comments2024-03-28T08:03:32.297-07:00Comments on Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Who cares if the National Organization for Marriage may have broken the law?BlackTsunamihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02349560427762283170noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33855769.post-41438778923096725092012-06-11T21:12:27.631-07:002012-06-11T21:12:27.631-07:00This Casey character in RI. I have to do a profile...This Casey character in RI. I have to do a profile on him. From what I recall he made his money in a way very similar to how Romney made his.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33855769.post-36652171719177130142012-06-11T12:48:15.909-07:002012-06-11T12:48:15.909-07:00apparently we're so vile that when it comes to...apparently we're so vile that when it comes to stopping us from having rights anything goes.Erica Cooknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33855769.post-28616986549993431942012-06-11T09:23:41.599-07:002012-06-11T09:23:41.599-07:00That's the Religious Right for you. The gays ...That's the Religious Right for you. The gays are proof that our country is headed for the moral sewer. But organizations like NOM flouting the law is a-okay. To paraphrase Ron Weasley in the first Harry Potter book, "Their priorities are a bit messed up, aren't they?"The Colorful Onehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03481587761162537184noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33855769.post-91788178007012996372012-06-11T08:43:59.002-07:002012-06-11T08:43:59.002-07:00"Let's say for the sake of argument that ...<i>"Let's say for the sake of argument that Mitt Romney's super PAC contributed to Prop. 8. What's wrong with it?" asks Celeste Greig, president of the California Republican Assembly (CRA). "It was a valid proposition that the people overwhelmingly supported."</i><br />In addition to the criminal failure to report...<br />Both of your two things are lies. It was not a <i>valid</i> proposition at all, what with the whole obviously being un-Constitutional thing. And it wasn't overwhelmingly supported, either--or, if you're going to call the support overwhelming than you're going to have to call the opposition overwhelming, too.<br /><br />And then, even if there was nothing criminal, un-Constitutional, or untruthful going on there... we have a presidential candidate spending money for the whole purpose of <i>harming American citizens</i>--that is not a negligible point!<br /><br />So that's what's wrong with it. At least four things.<br />Give me five minutes; I'm sure I can come up with more.EvilIhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12640387767205137660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33855769.post-18933609805065462972012-06-11T08:30:11.845-07:002012-06-11T08:30:11.845-07:00Considering the California GOP has been one of NOM...Considering the California GOP has been one of NOM best customers, they have a lot of spinning to do.Marconoreply@blogger.com