Disappointments
Posted in QOTD, Rants/Raves on 11/08/2006 11:59 pm by enjanerd*DISCLAIMER* Skip today if you are uninterested in my political opinions. *DISCLAIMER*
From the WaPo today:
“The message yesterday was clear: The American people want their leaders in Washington to set aside partisan differences, conduct ourselves in an ethical manner, and work together to address the challenges facing our nation,” Bush said.
“I’m obviously disappointed with the outcome of the election and, as the head of the Republican Party, I share a large part of the responsibility,” Bush said.
Right, the message was clear. He’s obviously disappointed that Americans want to set aside partisan politics and expect politicians to behave ethically and collaborate. Good one.
And another:
“I didn’t want to inject a major decision about this war in the final days of the campaign,” Bush said. He added, “Win or lose, Bob Gates was going to become the nominee.”
Oh, yeah right. Why lie about it if you were going to replace him anyway? I’m kind of glad that he did, since that might have been one of the few things that could actually have helped the Republicans. But it’s a stupid thing to deny now.
I was mostly kidding yesterday about beating Ian up, but apparently it’s actually true. It’s old news in Ohio, but something to think about since it’s new to Virginia: Domestic Violence Charges Can’t Be Filed Against The Unmarried
Domestic violence charges cannot be filed against unmarried people because of Ohio’s recently enacted definition of marriage, a judge ruled Wednesday.
…
Frederick’s public defender, David Magee, had asked the judge to throw out the domestic violence charge because of the new wording in Ohio’s constitution that prohibits any state or local law that would “create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals.”Before the amendment, courts applied the domestic violence law by defining a family as including an unmarried couple living together as would a husband and wife, the judge said.
Now courts can’t do that because of the gay marriage amendment, Friedman wrote.
Apply to insurance, medical decisions, wills… This isn’t to say that I would be for this if they actually went to the trouble of specifying same-sex individuals, but this is writing into our Bill of Rights that we are to take away rights currently upheld in the Commonwealth. If I understand this correctly, my company could be prohibited from offering health coverage to my domestic partner. They weren’t required to before, but this would be offering rights/benefits and recognizing a “relationship of unmarried individuals”. *Gasp*
People who are gay already knew that they weren’t welcome in Virginia, but now we have it in writing! Thank goodness we now have protection for people like Britney and Kevin to uphold the sanctity of marriage. Right. Thanks.
QOTD: “Did you vote today?”
“No, but I gave blood.”