Look- They Just Fucking Hate Gay People

Every time you listen to opponents of gay marriage, they always trot out some bullshit about how it would be one thing if the voters approved of it, but they just can’t handle the courts imposing it on all of us. Shitbird and sometimes alleged upcoming intellectual (this is how fucking empty the conservative intellectual pool is) Reihan Salam trotted that crap out last week on Bill Maher, and Al Sharpton quickly beat him down by pointing out that if civil rights were a matter to vote on, both Reihan and Al would be sitting on the back of the bus and drinking from separate fountains. And as someone who lived in Poughkeepsie during the Tawana Brawley abomination, I am not one inclined to cheer Sharpton, and would rather he would crawl in a hole and let one of the other hundreds of thousands of other qualified black leaders take center stage, but I shouted out a very pasty white “FUCK YEAH, MOTHERFUCKER” when he said it.

But fine, you say. You somewhat agree with them. The people should vote on these issues. So when they do, they should respected. Fuck no, fags:

Delivering on his promise of swift action, Gov. Chris Christie this afternoon conditionally vetoed the gay marriage bill and suggested appointing an ombudsman to address complaints of same-sex couples and strengthen New Jersey’s civil union law.

Christie conditionally vetoed the bill six hours after it reached his desk, a day after the state Assembly gave the final legislative approval that he said he would not support.

The people voted, and they sent these people to office to write legislation. They did. They passed said legislation by a wide majority. And Christie vetoed it, claiming the following:

I am adhering to what I’ve said since this bill was first introduced — an issue of this magnitude and importance, which requires a constitutional amendment, should be left to the people of New Jersey to decide,” Christie said in a statement. “I continue to encourage the Legislature to trust the people of New Jersey and seek their input by allowing our citizens to vote on a question that represents a profoundly significant societal change. This is the only path to amend our State Constitution and the best way to resolve the issue of same-sex marriage in our state.

If the NJ House and Senate passed a strict anti-abortion law by this margin, does anyone here think he would veto it because he thinks it needs a constitutional amendment?

The reason for this is simple. Christie, and those like him, are hoping for the slim majority of the hate brigade to hold the day- the same hate brigade that was patting themselves on the back about being good Christians when they were reciting bible verses telling us all that the negro was a lesser man and that miscegenation was a sin that would bring down the public. Having lost the legislative battle, he’s hoping to have the day saved with hatred and bigots and homophobes. You see- in America, it’s a Republic with elected officials making decisions when it comes to tax cuts and bombing people overseas or gutting the NJ public education system. But when it comes to human rights- well then we are a direct democracy and to hell with all those people writing legislation.

Fuck you, Chris Christie, you triple chinned bigot. And, Log Cabin Republicans, what the fuck, over?

100 replies
  1. 1
    Jebediah says:

    Antics of a last-term loser.

  2. 2
    portlander says:

    John, given your estimation of the police has changed over the years have you ever revisited the Tawana Brawley case. I’m not convinced she was telling the truth, but given what I know of the police first and second hand, I’m not convinced she was lying either. If the police want to rape you, they are going to get away with it. Talk with people who it’s happened to, or who escaped by making themselves seem like too much trouble. Scary stuff…

  3. 3
    amk says:

    Meanwhile holder decides not to

    defend a case challenging the constitutionality of a federal law preventing same-sex spouses of military personnel from receiving veterans’ benefits.

  4. 4
    Bobby Thomson says:

    Looks like Booker just fired the first shots of the next NJ gubernatorial campaign on this very issue. It was inevitable that he would run for governor eventually, and just a question of when.

    Look out, Fat Man. He’s coming to get you.

  5. 5
    amk says:

    @portlander: yup, that was a stupid gratuitous ad-hominem reference by cole.

  6. 6
    John Cole says:

    @amk: It wasn’t a stupid gratuitous anything. The guy accused was awarded a jury verdict for defamation.

    Fucking A. I thought we were reality based around here.

  7. 7

    @Bobby Thomson:

    Booker for gov? Cool! If he needs some Ohio votes, let me know.

    :-)

  8. 8
    amk says:

    @John Cole: That has got bupkiss to do with what he had to say in this matter. Look up ad-hominem.

  9. 9
    MikeJ says:

    @amk: It does address his overall trustworthiness, which isn’t ad hominem.

  10. 10
    zzyzx says:

    I was at Bard during the Brawley mess and I was equally confused/annoyed by the whole thing.

    I feel a lot better about my governor right now as she didn’t just sign the bill but she was instrumental in whipping for it. And yet this blue state is likely to elect a Republican governor this year because… well I have no idea why.

  11. 11
    amk says:

    @MikeJ: So that one incident (being decided by a “grand jury” as it were) discredits his entire life and his fight for civil rights and makes him untrustworthy how ?

    Let’s admit it, cole fucked up.

  12. 12

    It has taken me a long time to get over the Tawana thing in regard to Sharpton. If he had made as public an apology as he was public in his “stance” I’d have let it go a long time ago. I guess he has “rehabilitated” himself with me.

    It is fairly important to remember that people do sometimes tell the most outrageous lies for the stupidest reasons and that sometimes people are actually not guilty of what they are accused of.

    And that their race and occupation is fucking immaterial…

  13. 13
    Linda says:

    I don’t think he gives the furry crack of a rat’s butt one way or another. He is hoping not to incite the fury of real bigots who give a damn, in the vain hopes that he can be on the presidential ticket in 2016. He will find out, with Romney, that it doesn’t matter–your really totally with, or totally against them. Period. They will hate him attempting to split the difference this way.

    But by 2016, this will all be as quaint as a debate on the horseless carriage. People trying to finesse this down the middle of the road will have tire tracks across their back, and Christie will be one of them.

    And I have never gotten over the “Brawley thing” re: Sharpton. He could have gotten innocent people killed over this. He should have been man enough to appologize and admit he was wrong.

  14. 14
    c u n d gulag says:

    @portlander,
    Brawley was full of shit.

    I’m 10 years older than her. She lived in an apartment complex down the road from me – literally less than a 1/2 a mile. Went to the same High School – again, 10 years after me.
    I knew the cop who killed himself when he was accused, and I knew other people involved in the case.

    I repeat – Tawana Brawley was full of shit!

    She suckered Sharpton, who wanted it to be true, and was looking to expand his reputation nationally. She suckered Bill Cosby, and other prominant black people/leaders, too.

    When I first heard about it, I thought there was a possibility she was telling the truth.
    But it turned out she wasn’t – she was lying. Through her teeth.

    There are plenty of real/actual/true cases of rape/abuse/injustice that happen to African-Americans, male and female.
    Every day!
    Her’s ain’t one of them.

    It took years for me to respect Al Sharpton after the shit-storm that was Tawana.
    I now like his show on MSNBC.
    But the Brawley case was the case of a scared teenager who lied to cover her own ass, and watched the lie unfold into a national story, and didn’t have the courage to correct the lie.
    She lied.
    People died.
    People’s careers were ruined.
    All because a scared teenager lied about being out late, and being drunk or high.

    Sorry if I ruined anyone’s sense of rightious indignation about the rape and abuse of black women/men.

    But pick another case.
    There’s probably one that happened right down the road from where I live that never got any publicity, and is now forgotten.

    So to everyone out there who wants to defend Tawana Brawley – find some real case out there.

    There might even be one that one that happened right down the road from you, to someone who preceeded, or followed you, to you to your High School.
    Maybe even a fellow classmate.

    But Tawana Brawley was full of shit.
    And is, if she still says what she said happened to her was real.
    She’s not the first young woman caught in a lie that kept sticking to her story to save her own ass.
    Some people pray to another one – The “Virgin” Mary, comes to mind.

  15. 15

    @Linda:
    I sure don’t know about 2016, I’ve been to this dance before. Christie is flat out stupid if he thinks the modern GOP is going to give him as much as a second look for Prez before his obesity kills him.

  16. 16
    Breezeblock says:

    There is one sure-fire way to tell when Governor CC is running for President: when he loses 100 pounds.

    People will not vote for such a morbidly obese man for President. It’s just the facts, Jack.

  17. 17

    Christie is the bully who has nerves of jello. A lot of bluster and shit talking backed by an entire lack of nerve and covered by abject stupidity. It took the brains of a fucking snail to make the comment about saving fighting by having a referendum in the South. He thought he meant it until the shit storm blew up into his face. Then he was left with nothing to try to cover that with except more stupid moving around of air.

    I knew people just like him when I was young, they mistook my size and erudition for an easy target and cried like little girls when their mistake was made clear to them. They always had to try to find a friend to help them rectify that mistake which led to more whining. Christie will whine and cry and get marks on him after his opponents toughen up and kick his ass – and like me, they’ll probably carry some marks for it also.

  18. 18
    Sargent Pepper's Spray says:

    Christie vetoed the bill because Christie wants to be on the GOP ticket. If he doesn’t look like a social conservative hater there is no way that gonna happen. He probably still won’t be on the ticket, but I confess the visual image of he and Mittens together makes me laugh. It looks like a bad 70’s cop show.

  19. 19

    @Sargent Pepper’s Spray:

    It looks like a bad 70’s cop show

    It would look more like one of those teen movies out of the 70s where the fuck head rich kid bullies get what for from the dweebs. (who then get the centerfold girl) ((that probably ain’t gonna happen))

    All you have to do to get Christie is watch him when he thinks he’s got somebody he can cow and the audience to back him up and then what he’s like when he’s got his foot in his mouth.

  20. 20
    Sad Iron says:

    I will now play the role of Andrew Sullivan: “John, you receive a Moore Award. Don’t you understand that because these people really believe what they’re saying that this is perfectly acceptable? Did you not read my feelings about Pat Buchanan? If these people really believe in their hearts that gay people cause the Ebola virus, then we need to respect that. Plus, he’s probably really nice to people close to him in his private life, so we need to respect that too. Oh, and this only applies to people on the right.”

  21. 21
    WereBear says:

    They just hate. Period.

    Most people have realize how stupid racist, sexism, and many other ism’s are, and become the better for it. But when your entire worldview is “no change,” and you’re all screwed up; well, we’ve been painting a big mural on the world stage of just how far a diseased mind will carry itself.

  22. 22
    WereBear says:

    @Sargent Pepper’s Spray: It looks like a bad 70’s cop show.

    It’s Mitt & Meat! Can these two cops take down the bad guys… without driving each other crazy?

  23. 23
    amk says:

    @Sargent Pepper’s Spray: two wallstreet fatcats ? yeah, that’s the ticket to score.

  24. 24
    RossinDetroit says:

    I can’t sleep* so let’s argue. I’ve said here before that the Brawley case really soured me on Sharpton. He hitched his wagon to the wrong horse and then flogged it some more when it wouldn’t go. He’s been on my shit list ever since. But his recent work is better than just about anyone else. He asks hard questions and presses for answers that matter. I wish that wasn’t so rare.

    *Cole’s fault.

  25. 25

    @Linda: I agree this action is only about 2016 but think you underestimate the primary motivating factor of the GOP rump: does it piss off liberals. Chris Christie pisses off liberals (or so the GOP imagines.) In their minds, he takes bold stands and speaks truth to the liberal elite power structure. (No, it makes no sense at all.) That he’s fat is central to their argument since the nanny state is trying to shove broccoli, carrots and government approved sanctioned mandated chicken nuggets down the throats of Americans who would rather eat a bag lunch.

    The rabbit hole is deep. Very, very deep.

  26. 26
    amk says:

    OT on “obamacare”.

    I’ve written before about the Obama Administration’s breakthrough efforts to fight health care fraud and abuse. Now there’s more, $4.1 billion more.

    Earlier this week, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced that the federal government recovered $4.1 billion in taxpayer dollars from individuals and corporations attempting to steal Medicare and Medicaid payments to which they were not entitled.

    What’s $4.1 billion? It is the largest amount of money ever recovered, by far, in the history of the programs since they were established in 1965.

  27. 27

    @RossinDetroit:
    I should have gone to bed some time ago, well – quite awhile ago. As an alcoholic I have to believe that people can redeem their previous selves with new behavior. I’ve watched Sharpton since his show came on and with a critical eye. He’s done well, hell better than most. In the Primaries he kept his head and made cogent points on point.

    I too blame Cole

  28. 28
    bob h says:

    Christie is still entertaining fantasies that Mitt Romney will pick him as VP, but after Mitt goes down, with or without Chris, I think the Governor may well relent. They’ve got a few years to beat him up on this.

  29. 29
    Groucho48 says:

    I posted this in my guild’s gaming forum…

    The definition of marriage has been redefined numerous time over the centuries.

    It was only 40 odd years ago that the Supreme Court redefined marriage to include mixed race couples. Is there any one in this forum who thinks Wendy and Lys marriage is an abomination? Or that it shouldn’t be allowed because the government shouldn’t be allowed to change some supposed rules?

    Two guys or two gals, intensely in love, live 5 blocks away from you. They have been living together for 10 years. Does it affect you in any way if they have gone through a marriage ceremony or not? Is your marriage diminished in any way because of their marriage? Are your rights diminished in any way because of their marriage?

    If your particular religion doesn’t approve of gay marriage, it won’t have to perform gay marriages. If you aren’t gay, well you won’t have to marry someone of the same sex.

    I can kind of understand social conservatives being against gay marriage. They are against all kinds of individual freedoms. I cannot understand a libertarian or an Ayn Rand freak or a Heinlein fan being against it.

    Mouse has a true love whom he isn’t married to. If that true love gets seriously sick, are you guys okay with the hospital saying Mouse can’t visit because he has no legal connection with his true love? If so, why?

    Individuals should be able to do whatever they want, as long as what they are doing doesn’t infringe on the rights of others. As John Locke put it…

    Quote:
    That principle is, that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil, in case he do otherwise. To justify that, the conduct from which it is desired to deter him must be calculated to produce evil to some one else. The only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute. Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.

    If you disagree with that, post your objections. If you don’t, tell Mouse you will do what you can to make sure no one interferes with his liberty of action.

  30. 30
    Brian R. says:

    @Bobby Thomson:

    If you haven’t seen Booker’s comments on this whole thing, you should absolutely check it out. Short, sweet, and about to kick the everloving shit out of Christie.

  31. 31
    ellennelle says:

    that’s not all they’re hoping for –

    in addition to hoping the bigots will get their sorry mindless asses out to vote, they’re hoping this issue will serve that wedge roll republicans have come to know and love as the only thing they have remotely resembling a ‘platform’ that might might might (here’s the point): make a big diff down ticket.

    that’s the same reason the republicans are waging this war on women that is bound to lose in the long haul. in the short haul, tho, in the only ways that matter to this pitiful excuse of a party anymore (as per grover norquist’s stunning but not surprising admission only a week ago), it will matter greatly to elect rigid, goose-stepping, stick figures into all the slots that matter.

    as long as they have ten digits to, i dunno, beat off with when they vote for anything that puts more non-wasps behind bars, and vote down everything that begins with a ‘D’.

  32. 32
    Loneoak says:

    Greetings from down under! I’m at a conference in Sydney. First time reading BJ in the southern hemisphere and the bullshit does not seem to flow counter-clockwise.

  33. 33
    RossinDetroit says:

    @ellennelle:

    That’s a good point. CC has said that marriage equality should be settled by a referendum. Of course that’s no way to decide civil rights issues. But a ballot measure on ‘gay marriage’ in November will bring out the base in his state, to the benefit of all Republicans on the ballot. It’s worked before. Canny move. Evil but canny.

  34. 34
    Sad Iron says:

    Oh, and retitle this thread, “Frankly, Mr. Christie” or “Please, Please, Please, Let Me Get What I Want.”

  35. 35
    Egg Berry says:

    @RossinDetroit: Indeed, ballot measures on SSM are little more than the Republican equivalent of a GOTV effort.

    I am now of the opinion that the name United States of America is more a wish than a statement of foundational organizing principle.

  36. 36
    252man says:

    I have a theory on Christie.

    He will not run for re-election. We’ll hear “more time with family” speech. He will drop out of public view for a bit. During this time, I believe he will have gastric bypass surgery, then resurface as the “lean, mean fighting machine” the GOP will be seeking in ’16.

  37. 37
    AxelFoley says:

    Fuck you, Chris Christie, you triple chinned bigot.

    LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

  38. 38

    Chris Christie is just your plain old garden-variety coward. All bullies are.

  39. 39
    JohnK says:

    @zzyzx: Because maybe her administration has resulted in the lost of tens of thousands of state jobs in a brutal uncaring unthinking manner and she has hired a bunch a-holes to run the state agencies? Besides, without King County, the state is red as sin.

  40. 40
    WyldPirate says:

    Chuck Butcher:

    Christie is the bully who has nerves of jello. A lot of bluster and shit talking backed by an entire lack of nerve and covered by abject stupidity. It took the brains of a fucking snail to make the comment about saving fighting by having a referendum in the South

    Or maybe he’s simply a cynical motherfucker tossing red meat out to the masses of stupid motherfuckers among the Republican ranks who can’t separate democracy and how it works from the necessity to guarantee rights in order to protect them from the “tyranny of the masses”.

  41. 41
    WereBear says:

    @252man: During this time, I believe he will have gastric bypass surgery, then resurface as the “lean, mean fighting machine” the GOP will be seeking in ‘16.

    I believe this is the route Huckabee took. Though he won’t admit it.

  42. 42
    jrg says:

    Sometime between the 2016 GOP primaries and the general, I predict a “praise Jesus! I was lost but now I’m found” moment from Chris Christie. Either that, or he’s gathering cred with the socon mooks for a VP run this year.

    …And Republicans will fall for it. Why? Because they a bunch of dumb-ass rednecks.

  43. 43
    Villago Delenda Est says:

    @WereBear:

    Yeah, well Huckabee has a couple of albatrosses around his neck that the Chuck Norris diet cannot make go away.

  44. 44
    harlana says:

    OH, THE BOLD CHRIS CHRISTIE! We just love his brashness and determination to not be the stereotypical republican these days! So brave, so courageous, so unapologetic in his roguishness, so . . . oh, never mind.

  45. 45
    Lawnguylander says:

    @MikeJ:

    It does address his overall trustworthiness, which isn’t ad hominem.

    His trustworthiness doesn’t have any bearing on whether his argument on civil rights for gay people is sound, does it? Only its effectiveness is in question because some people can’t tolerate him.

    ,,,and would rather he would crawl in a hole and let one of the other hundreds of thousands of other qualified black leaders take center stage,,,

    “Let”? I don’t think he has much to say on who would replace him if he were to exit the stage. Who’s even his understudy? And as someone who was growing up in Queens when he first came to prominence, let me tell you, his bombastic, borderline ludicrous persona was the key qualification that landed him the position of Spokesperson for all Black People on the pages of the NY Post and Daily News. That’s where he got his audition in the mid-80s. Occasionally popping up on the inside and then eventually getting promoted to the front pages. Then the local TV stations, then the national networks, as I recall it. There were plenty of black academic types and less flamboyant preachers not dressed up in track suits and gold chains who could have made better spokespeople against racism, police brutality, exclusion of black people from trade unions, etc. But they wouldn’t have sold papers by riling up the white people in NY and then the nation so most of us never heard of them. The Brawley case was where he fucked up, no doubt. But if he weren’t the kind of egomaniac who couldn’t admit he fucked up, you’d never have heard of him up in Poughkeepsie in the first place. Ya dig?

    So, it’s fascinating to me that he’s now probably the pundit of any prominence who’s got the strongest, most lucid and most reasonable voice for civil rights and similar issues on the scene today. Way less ego in evidence than even Maddow. Maybe it was the Brawley case that set him on a different path. He did seem to make a gradual transformation through the 90s. It makes me think that there might even be hope for someone like Cenk.

  46. 46
    RossInDetroit says:

    @jrg:

    Either that, or he’s gathering cred with the socon mooks for a VP run this year.

    Well, barring unforeseen events that drastically change BHO’s reelection chances I see the GOP VP spot as being a loser this year. It’s debatable whether campaigning and losing in ’12 would help or hurt him in ’16.
    He definitely has national ambitions but he could fight now or keep his powder dry for a better opportunity.

    And personally I’d like to hear the last of the weight issue. OK, he’s a big dude, but isn’t bringing that up all the time to disparage him kind of bigoted? (ETA: not referring to jrg here)

  47. 47
    jurassicpork says:

    Oh no, if you ask GOProud, it’s we liberals who hate teh gays. For years, I’ve been feeling the effects of outrage fatigue. Seven years in the political trenches reporting on right wingnuttery will take its toll, which is why many bloggers don’t last as long as I have. But tonight I saw a tweet from GOProud that made my blood boil and I was forced to write quite possibly the filthiest, nastiest, angriest post I’ve ever written in seven plus years. Absolutely not kid or work safe.

  48. 48
    BGK says:

    Posting from my tablet, on which I’ve yet to master cut and paste, so…
    Regarding Christie losing weight as a signal he would be starting a national campaign, I’ve always said that would be the case for Jeb! ™ Bush as well. He porked up quite a bit after the end of his last term. He’s been on local teevee all week for attending a pro-am golf tournament and a Literacy event, and he’s down easily 40-50 pounds. That SOB either thinks, or has been told, he’s got some plum coming his way.

  49. 49
    jrg says:

    @RossInDetroit:

    It’s debatable whether campaigning and losing in ‘12 would help or hurt him in ‘16.

    Don’t his poll numbers in NJ suck, though? If he’s not going to get re-elected anyway, he might be looking to follow the Palin model of using a VP run to give his wingnut gravy train some inertia.

  50. 50
    Lawnguylander says:

    @Comrade Javamanphil:

    I agree this action is only about 2016 but think you underestimate the primary motivating factor of the GOP rump: does it piss off liberals.

    I see this argument all the time about Republicans and their evil actions and stupid arguments all the time and I don’t buy it. The title of this post explains what Christie’s pandering to here. It’s got nothing to do with the feelings of liberals. It’s not about us except when we fall into one of those categories they’re screwing with. And most of us who comment at place like this usually don’t Republicans genuinely do want to fuck over various people. Hearing us scream about it is just gravy.

    ETA: the gravy reference at the end there is not some veiled fat joke, for real.

  51. 51
    harlana says:

    @jurassicpork: wow, i’m straight and i want a cigarette after that. are these people plants, i mean, i’m serious. to be fair, i don’t know anything about them. regardless, they deserve our scorn as well as filthy, nasty, angry blogposts.

  52. 52
    harlana says:

    @BGK: awful to say, but imo, they look so much worse after they lose all that weight, they certainly aren’t more attractive, imo (health issues aside, of course!) the skin is all stretched out

  53. 53
    RossInDetroit says:

    @jurassicpork:

    Yikes. The Riot Act; let me read you it.

    And it’s not as mad and sweary as you warn. Pierce and ABL top you daily on the outrage scale.

  54. 54
    R Johnston says:

    And, Log Cabin Republicans, what the fuck, over?

    So long as they get to pay lower taxes and be told that their raging hate for brown people is a good thing, a surprisingly large number of people are willing to submit to third class citizenship under a regime that would kill them without remorse if it had the opportunity.

  55. 55
    Chris says:

    The reason for this is simple. Christie, and those like him, are hoping for the slim majority of the hate brigade to hold the day

    Funny, but when I heard about this for the first time: my first thought was “okay, if I had any doubts that he wants to run for President, this would’ve cured them.” And when he does, he’ll have this veto under his belt – in a godless liberal Northeastern state no less – to prove to the social conservatives that he’s One Of Them.

    And then, of course, there’s what one of my friends on facebook had to say about it: “I think Governor Christie should veto his next cheeseburger. And yes, I’m resorting to ad hominem attacks.”

  56. 56
    harlana says:

    @R Johnston: i’ve been trying to figure it out, just like black republicans, but you summed it up right there because there is no other explanation.

  57. 57
    WereBear says:

    @Villago Delenda Est: Such as his mean little pig eyes.

    I was not fooled.

  58. 58
    WereBear says:

    @Lawnguylander: So, it’s fascinating to me that he’s now probably the pundit of any prominence who’s got the strongest, most lucid and most reasonable voice for civil rights and similar issues on the scene today. Way less ego in evidence than even Maddow. Maybe it was the Brawley case that set him on a different path. He did seem to make a gradual transformation through the 90s. It makes me think that there might even be hope for someone like Cenk.

    Many people are not aware that not only did Reverend Al lose weight in a sensible, healthy, way, he’s out in his community helping others do the same.

    He’s also got one of the best shows around, I agree.

    The way I saw the Brawley case, (and I lived on Long Island at the time, worked in the city; I was IN IT too, so to speak,) was What did he do? Did he believe a young woman who claimed something had happened to her that everyone knew had happened in the past? Did he go to bat for her in a way we all wished someone would, and in fact clamored for, as feminists and victim advocates? When did he know she was lying, and what was he supposed to do that wouldn’t undercut other victims of rape, or even this troubled teen with a terrible home life? She concocted the lie to dodge a beating from her stepfather, after all. It’s a sticky moral wicket, truly.

    He was a little shaky on TV, early on, reaching for his voice, but now that he’s got it, that combo of sharp producers, intelligent explanatory graphics, catchy phrases and great guests showcases his awesome deadpan humor that I have always loved. Nobody does sarcasm like Reverend Al!

    The man grew in maturity and wisdom. Is that not what we are all supposed to do?

  59. 59
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    @252man: Sounds just right. And since a Presidential run costs so much these days, and being a governor has so many problems (and potential pitfalls) he decides to just serve this term only. Doing this means he leaves undefeated with plenty of time to enhance his national profile. He could fundraise without limits, schmooze with potential SuperPac Sugar daddies, become a Fox pundit. All of it can go for a run in 16 or simply make him richer than Jersey can make him.

    I don’t think this would really help him as much as he thinks: unless the nominee for 16 is a Southerner, Christie probably wouldn’t be on the ticket. Of course if a Republican wins this fall, 2020 just might be his year. Everybody running this year would be out, and a lot of the potential 2016 field would have retired as well.

    But it’s still a win even if he doesn’t run. Wingnut welfare is a life time lucrative gig that doesn’t involve a lot of campaigning and stress. He’ll take it and still be a winner.

  60. 60
    RossInDetroit says:

    @WereBear:

    Did he believe a young woman who claimed something had happened to her that everyone knew had happened in the past? Did he go to bat for her in a way we all wished someone would, and in fact clamored for, as feminists and victim advocates?

    Yes to all this. But when her story was thoroughly discredited he stood by it. And he had a $65K judgement levied against him for 8 counts of defamation against an officer. He went too far and didn’t back down when he was obviously wrong.

    That was a long time ago and people do change. I’m willing to give him credit for the good work he’s doing now and I’ve said so before. But the Brawley case was plenty of reason to dislike him at the time.

  61. 61
    Buck says:

    My meager $0.02 …

    Yes, of course, CC is an asshole. That’s a given. But when I see people like John Cole and all the good people commenting here on Balloon-Juice fighting the good fight, it does my heart good.

    I’ll be turning 50 this November. And in my lifetime I have seen such a turnaround on how gays are treated and thought of. It is not a choice – it is who I am. You people believe me. Assholes like CC doesn’t (or flat out doesn’t care).

    Maybe I didn’t get to spend the bulk of my life being treated as an equal, but I now know future generations will – thanks to people like you all.

    Thank you.

  62. 62
    harlana says:

    i really like this one:

    Relative to men, women have a naturally privileged relationship with the process of creating and recreating human life. If you think this claim is an act of patriarchal essentialism, consider that this claim helps justify the right of a woman to freely choose an abortion without regard to the interests or opinions of the inseminating male.

    emphasis mine

  63. 63
    WereBear says:

    @RossInDetroit: But the Brawley case was plenty of reason to dislike him at the time.

    Oh, yes, I agree. I felt the same way: but I did leave the door open. Because I did, and I do, like him as a person.

  64. 64
    Garbo says:

    @R Johnston: Excuse the reference, but I have watched this dynamic play out over many seasons of Survivor. People ally with someone they perceive as strong and convince themselves they will be the one brought along to the final. But they are one of several sharing that fantasy. They all get voted off and are shocked and dismayed to find they were simply being used for votes all along. Every season I look for the also-rans to realize they are their own powerful coalition, but they never do break away, just blindly follow the charismatic leader. It is demoralizing.

  65. 65
    Lawnguylander says:

    @WereBear:

    I believe he believed her at first and was motivated by both conviction and ambition. Same with Michael Griffith and Yusef Hawkins but with Brawley that ambition combined with his pride made it impossible for him to come clean and do the right thing. I don’t think concern for her well being entered into it that much once he realized the situation he got himself into. He should have come clean in a way that asked for understanding for Brawley and taken the hit for her.

    I don’t watch MSNBC and only catch the occasional clip of him but prominently taking on alleged or actual victims of injustice is no longer what he does. The Brawley case is not relevant to me when he’s arguing with bigots like Reihan Salam because I’m over it. Also, because it’s not relevant.

  66. 66
    CarolDuhart2 says:

    @CarolDuhart2: Compared to all of that, it comes easy to a greedhead like him to throw gay people under the bus. He probably also assumes that another governor will sign that bill anyway, and take him off the hook

    He probably doesn’t hate gays personally, but isn’t going to sacrifice his wingnut welfare for justice anytime soon. Which makes it worse than just plain bigotry.

  67. 67
    Jay C says:

    Re Chris Christie: I may be voicing a minority view here, but even with his SSM veto, I don’t think the issue is one of the Governor “just fucking hat[ing] gay people“: my own opinion is that Christie probably doesn’t give a damn about gays (or anyone else, for that matter) except as a matter of political calculation. Not that it makes a difference; I still think his veto ploy was sleazy weasel-politics at its worst – I get the feeling he would only be too pleased if his veto were overridden, since he could then waddle dance around on both sides of the issue to try to milk it for PR and votes. Not that an override is likely, sadly enough, but I just don’t get the vibe of gut wingnut hate here from Christie, just hackish exploitation of it.

  68. 68
    Lawnguylander says:

    You know what? If no one else is going to do so, I have to call myself out for suggesting there’s hope for Cenk one day being of any real use. He’s got the ambition but not the conviction of Sharpton and luckily, not the ability either.

  69. 69
    WereBear says:

    @Lawnguylander: Very compelling case for your point of view; can’t argue with any of it.

    We have not even seen the bottom of how the cable news distorts the bringers of messages; their appetite for sensationalism is reflected in who they choose, and why. I get exasperated when people say “why aren’t progressives featured more prominently on the news?” Because they don’t want them on, that’s why!

    Someone like Markos banished from MSNBC is a case in point. Politicos are “safe,” because they know how to dance around the truth. Coming right out and saying the truth? Hard to come by.

    As for Cenk; he needs to understand how reality works. Yelling into the wind worked for him; it’s not going to work for a President.

  70. 70
    quannlace says:

    Christie is flat out stupid if he thinks the modern GOP is going to give him as much as a second look for Prez before his obesity kills him.

    But if he suddenly offered himself as the lastest ‘Not Romney’, the GOP would weep with gratitude.
    **********************
    But you’re all right about him being the cliche of a bully who crumbles when confronted. But not before more ridiuculous blustering.
    When he made that nonsense comment about how a voter’s referendum might have brought civil rights faster to the South in the ’60’s. Mayor Booker called him on that bullshit. Christie responded by calling him ‘numbnuts’ and whining that people were equating him with notorious white bigots.

  71. 71
    boss bitch says:

    I am not one inclined to cheer Sharpton, and would rather he would crawl in a hole and let one of the other hundreds of thousands of other qualified black leaders take center stage,

    LOL…like who? Tavis Smiley? Cornel West? Louis Farrakhan? No thanks, we’re good. We don’t need another leader.

    I think its time to forgive Al Sharpton. Its time to start seeing him as a strong ally in the Liberal/Progressive community rather than as a “black leader”. But if liberals just want to see him as a black leader then they should consult with him on how to talk and work with the Black community rather than at or about us in their near lily white bubble.

  72. 72
    Bruce S says:

    Chris Christie is making the same cynical calculation George Wallace did when he became an advocate for segregation to advance his political fortunes. Wallace, despite the reputation he forged for himself, was actually not the worst of racists, in the true believer sense. He was the worst of cynics and opportunists, willing to sell his soul to the devils of his time for political advantage. Frankly, I “respect” – for what little it’s worth as a comparative exercise – a crazed homophobe like Rick Santorum more than a cynical shit like Christie. Christie knows better. Santorum is such a deluded clown he doesn’t have the intellectual or moral capacity to do other than what he’s doing. He’s pathetic. Christie deserves total contempt.

  73. 73
    Robert says:

    I find the fact that MSNBC is willing to have Rev. Sharpton as a host comparably offensive to having Buchanan as a guest commentator. Sharpton has never been an able expositor of progressive values, which he has repeatedly demonstrated he would be willing to jettison for the right price. He is a shill and a hack.

  74. 74
    Bruce S says:

    boss bitch at #69 – I agree. Sharpton used to make me crazy. I think he’s grown a lot and is a very sharp and engaged presence. I value both Sharpton and Ed Schultz in that they both can make connections to audiences that might be put off by some of the other folks with liberal news-talk shows and bring perspectives that help broaden discussion and make it less of a “talk down” from a perceived media elite. Sharpton can go into a church – any church, frankly, that isn’t exclusively white – and feel at home before any connection to political issues is made. Schultz could go into a bar in Des Moines and spend an hour talking about hunting and fishing before a word of politics is spoken and be completely at home. Without voices that have roots and experiences closer to working class folks than at least the perception of a lot of the liberal commentators and analysts, we’re a cloistered club. Sharpton has more than made up for past mistakes. And he’s a hell of a lot more reflective in his expressions and connections to an essential bloc of Democratic voters than the other names you mentioned who are more about themselves IMHO.

  75. 75
    John S. says:

    The problem with Al Sharpton is how the mere mention of his name sucks all the oxygen out of a discussion.

    In a righteous screed about CHRIS CHRISTIE, the slightest mention of Sharpton in passing is enough to derail the thread and turn into an Al Sharpton/Tawanna Brawley bitchfest. He’s like the Betelgeuse of politics, except apparently you only need to say his name once.

  76. 76
    Lawnguylander says:

    @WereBear:

    Thanks. I didn’t wake up today expecting to analyze the career arc of Al Sharpton today. But it is more interesting to me than any other pundit’s. He grew up in Brownsville and he’s shouted about the state of life in the USA from that perspective ever since. Is there any one else on or approaching his level of prominence that’s doing that? Representing for black people with some fire like that? He doesn’t do that exclusively or exactly anymore. Which is probably a good explanation of why he’s got a spot at MSNBC at all. I can see a path to empathy for a guy like that that would lead to his sincerely adding civil rights for gay people to his advocacy list. Asking Reihan Salam to put himself in the shoes of gay people shows that he at least knows what the meaning of empathy is. But, Wharton School grad, former Republican now trying to pass for a progressive political analyst, Cenk? There’s no hope there.

  77. 77
    WereBear says:

    @John S.: Then people need to get over it.

    Criminy, I loathe Ralph Nader, now. It doesn’t change what he did for auto safety; or the path he forged about consumer protections, of all kinds. The fact that he has devolved into the left wing Ron Paul is sad: but I’m not going to let his past blind me to his present.

  78. 78
    WereBear says:

    @Lawnguylander: But, Wharton School grad, former Republican now trying to pass for a progressive political analyst, Cenk? There’s no hope there.

    Holy bull byproducts, Wharton School!?!? No wonder he thinks yelling at a problem solves it.

    But sometimes there’s a salvageable part of a former Republican, isn’t there? (cough-John Cole-cough!)

  79. 79
    Lawnguylander says:

    @John S.:

    This is a place where just about everybody agrees that Christie is a dick for vetoing the bill. Nobody’s debating that, just trying to come up with new ways to call him a dick or figure out why he’s such a dick. There ain’t no oxygen in such a room in the first place. The Sharpton “crawl in a hole” stuff is more interesting.

  80. 80
    Nick says:

    @Jay C: If you “don’t give a damn about gays” to the extent that you will exploit anti-gay prejudice for your own political gain, then you hate gays. There is no fence-sitting here, no happy medium. Gay rights are human rights — and if you are willing to deny a group human rights for whatever reason, then you must think that they are not worthy of being treated as fully human. You must hold them in contempt if you allow their fates to be exploited that way. It’s a different kind of prejudice but it’s no less harmful.

    It’s the same reason why I don’t buy the whole “Oh, George Wallace was just using the whole anti-black thing to get support in Alabama, he wasn’t really a racist” idea. Even if George Wallace didn’t hate blacks to such a venom-spewing degree as his public persona, he still held them in contempt and considered them subhuman enough to be perfectly content with oppressing them to satisfy his own personal ambitions.

  81. 81
    Lawnguylander says:

    @WereBear:

    But sometimes there’s a salvageable part of a former Republican, isn’t there? (cough-John Cole-cough!)

    Sure. But sometimes there’s also residual Republicanism parts that spill out into view unintentionally. Like with Sharpton, maybe, recovery and return to respectability can be gradual and sincere and interesting. Just not with someone so obviously full of shit as Cenk, or “Robert” as he’s calling himself at #73 up there.

    Edited somewhat.

  82. 82
    Bruce S says:

    “If you ‘don’t give a damn about gays’ to the extent that you will exploit anti-gay prejudice for your own political gain, then you hate gays.”

    I actually think it’s even deeper than that. You have shown yourself as holding everyone else in contempt – including in this case his own political base, with no regard for anything other than your own ambition. It’s about as soulless as one can get.

  83. 83
    Henry Bayer says:

    Ummmm! ….you said fag. I’m telling. I dare you to say tranny.

    But seriously. Thanks John. I don’t have to look at the author tag to know which posts are yours. There’s emotion in your writing. And while we intellectually endorse the viewpoints of your blog writers, it doesn’t get traction to action without feeling it too. And you had better delete this.

  84. 84
    OzoneR says:

    It really doesn’t help our situation that 27 Democrats in the Maryland House of Delegates voted no yesterday.

  85. 85
    OzoneR says:

    @John S.:

    The problem with Al Sharpton is how the mere mention of his name sucks all the oxygen out of a discussion.

    the last standing opposition to equal marriage from inside the Democratic Party is in the black religious community. Most of the larger opposition among whites are among people who regularly vote Republican and thus aren’t a problem for Democrats.

    Al Sharpton is a reverend who is respected by many in the black community that is most opposed to marriage equality. That’s where he helps here.

  86. 86
    sloan says:

    @Sargent Pepper’s Spray:

    He probably still won’t be on the ticket, but I confess the visual image of he and Mittens together makes me laugh. It looks like a bad 70’s cop show.

    I can’t be the only one who thought of this.

  87. 87
    WaterGirl says:

    @WereBear:

    Someone like Markos banished from MSNBC is a case in point.

    How did I miss that? What happened?

  88. 88
    Billy Beane says:

    Can someone please explain log cabin Republicans to me? Not just what the fuck in general but what the fuck is with that name.

  89. 89
    gex says:

    @Groucho48: The Ayn Rand freak has no problem with SSM. It’s just that tax cuts are the most important thing and if gays need to be chemically castrated to get that tax cut or deregulation, it’s worth it to them. It’s not their fucking problem and they don’t give a fuck. They firmly believe acting as bug-fuck selfishly as possible is the best possible good they can do in the world. Thus, the world fucking sucks.

  90. 90
    gex says:

    @Billy Beane: Sometimes being a white male trumps all else.

    @RossinDetroit: Not canny. It’s the template. He’s not clever or anything, coach called this play.

  91. 91
    OzoneR says:

    @Billy Beane:

    Can someone please explain log cabin Republicans to me?

    I’m far more interested in sticking it to the poor, black, Latino, Muslim and immigrant and my party will eventually come around to my rights.

    Yesterday I saw somebody say “The Republicans delivered on marriage equality in Maryland because if not for the two GOP yes votes in the House of Delegates, it would have failed”

    which isn’t true, would have passed 70-69, but I digress.

  92. 92
    nellcote says:

    Speaking of Rev. Al, he has a new feature on his show/blog with job postings. if you know anyone looking for a job:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46.....icsnation/

  93. 93
    Chrisd says:

    Well, OF COURSE they just fucking hate gay people! Back in the day it was all because of how promiscuous and dirty gays were. Remember the “Gay Agenda” video? Then when gays started demanding marriage rights, it was all about protecting the family. When judges ruled for gay civil rights, it was judicial activism flouting the elected legislature. When the legislatures came around, it was all about respecting the will of the people, except when local referendoms grant municipal rights–those get overturned by state legislatures. As long as there’s enough useful hate to be pandered to, this game has no end.

  94. 94

    Sharpton has a good show on MSNBC. Better and more even handed than Ed Schults’ who I find a bit strident. True, he fucked up in the Brawley case but lets remember (or better yet, forget) that it was 25 fuckin’ years ago and his “sin” was believing the lies of a teenage girl who accused cops of raping her. Why does it have to be brought up everytime Sharpton makes a good point about something? Give it a rest. Its almost as bad as the “Robert Byrd was in the KKK” (In the 1940’s dipshit) verbal tick.

  95. 95
    b-psycho says:

    @quannlace: Christie disqualified himself from the not-Romney bag when he endorsed Romney.

  96. 96
    Cap'n Swag says:

    Just once I would like these motherhumping bigots to explain how saying employers have to provide contraception as a part of insurance plans is a violation of “religious freedom” but denying people the right to marry one another is not unconstitutional.

    ETA: This is not remotely eloquent. I just can’t properly gather my thoughts when this issue comes up because of how royally pissed I get.

  97. 97
    elmertfudd says:

    @Sad Iron: This comment has so much WIN!

  98. 98

    @gocart mozart:

    that it was 25 fuckin’ years ago

    People who knew me as a drunk that long ago in my life will always keep a wary eye on me. I taught them something about me and it will stick. I get to hope that I’ll be seen in light of 24 yrs of sobriety, but I don’t get to expect that the past is somehow undone.

    Those things are done. What can be done is change behavior and apologize for past behaviors – and you don’t get to expect those apologies to be accepted.

    I’m going to take Sharpton as he is, if he shows himself to be something else – then I adjust.

  99. 99
    Another Halocene Human says:

    @boss bitch: Thank you for saying this.

    I, too, have forgiven Sharpton. He’s written some stuff where he essentially admitted he made an error with the Brawley case but won’t ever apologize to “those people”. I have heard such sentiments before, but ultimately I believe they are self-limiting.

    I also agree with a poster upthread who attributed Sharpton’s media appeal to the “scary Black activist/preacher” meme that got page hits newspaper sales/advertiser eyes for dead tree media and tv back in the ’80’s. Being afraid of the Black other was big business back then.

    But Sharpton has changed and grown as a person (which makes him far more interesting than those who are stuck in amber, like Tweety or Coulter). I remember his Haiti activism. Sharpton is not the demagogue you’re looking for.

    And yes, I find him sincere (and progressive as hell), unlike shameless self-promoters like Smiley (ugh). Bless you for drawing attention to the hypocrisy of labeling a political activist who happens to be black a “leader of the black community” as if Blacks are a mysterious Other who need to be parsed with the help of a loudmouth Rosetta stone. Perhaps that was true in the 1960’s when it came as a great shock to White America that Black nationalists, as personified by Malcolm X, wished to be treated as human.

  100. 100
    Jado says:

    He’s a REPUBLICAN!!!

    This is what they do. EVERYONE knew (or should have known) this when we elected him. This is not a surprise. What IS a constant surprise is that people are shocked.

    Republicans are Terminators. They can’t be reasoned with, they can’t be argued with, and they absolutely positively WILL NOT STOP until they have made the world into their image.

    Coincidentally, their image also involves a lot of tanks rolling over human skulls.

Comments are closed.