Wingnut Roundup - Joisey Edition
Do you suppose the wingnuts are freaking about the New Jersey Supreme Court decision directing the legislature to give gays rights that every other Garden Stater has? Count on it (and yes, one is a direct quote):
Ace of Spades - the New Jersey marriage decision is the Rove October Surprise we've been waiting for! Fags and flags baby ... we're gonna hold the House!
Althouse - oh my, do you suppose the New Jersey Supreme Court kicked the gay marriage can down the road to help Democrats? Naughty naughty court!
Blue Crab Boulevard - gays should not resort to the courts but should just shut up and wait for the legislature to give them equal rights ... that approach has always worked in the past.
Captain's Quarters - civil rights for gays? Feh! Good old-fashioned American contract law provides everything they need to form loving and lasting relationships.
GOP Bloggers - we urge gays to wait for the people to grant them equal rights instead of relying on activist judges - that way we the people can continue to keep them in the closet where they belong.
Hot Air (Allahpundit) - this decision doesn't seem to help Republicans a bit. We are well and truly fucked.
Hugh Hewitt - the New Jersey diktat is a very big deal, underscoring as it does the
left's assault on constitutional majoritarianism as well as traditional
marriage, and reminding voters that every vote for any Democratic
senator is a vote against marriage as a Democratic majority in the
Senate puts loopy Patrick Leahy back in charge of the Judiciary
Committee.
Instapundit - this decision probably won't help the GOP at all so ... wait! I'll poll my wingnut readers and click my heels together three times and - and my wish will come true! There's no place like the House! There's no place like the House!
Little Green Footballs - there was a homo-nups decision? Who knew? We're too busy freaking out about Muslim cabdrivers who won't drive drunks around.
NRO (Jonah Goldberg) - as usual I have nothing useful to add, so I'll just reprint this comment by a reader who wants to marry his Mommy.
NRO (K-Lo) - as usual I have nothing useful to add, so I'll just link to this piece of wingnuttery that concludes the New Jersey decision will kill off marriage and self government with a single stroke of the pen.
Powerline - if we wingnuts stay home on November 7th, then the world will be run by activist judges, and then do you know what will happen? Married men kissing in public, crushing taxes, and a terrorist under every mattress.
Sister Toldjah - as I have often said, this monkeying around with the definition of marriage will result in population declines and men marrying farm animals.
Townhall (K-Ham) - I'll admit I don't know what he hell I'm talking about, but I smell a big fat judicial activist rat.
graphic: Comandante Agi
My vote is on Hewitt's comment....assuming the prick bothered writing it himself...
Gee...gay "unions" (not marriage) get a boost in New Jersey and these assholes are wetting themselves like it's become mandatory...
Posted by: actor212 | October 26, 2006 at 10:57 AM
What I found particularly amusing was the plagiarism of Hot Air. Most of the post was word-for-word from the decision, but without attribution.
Posted by: SPIIDERWEB | October 26, 2006 at 03:59 PM
Nice work. How do you make it through reading all that filth without getting nauseous?
Posted by: Comandante Agi | October 26, 2006 at 04:28 PM
I agree with comandante, how the hell can you stand to do this? I would probably have to get dead drunk to do what you do without harming my computer. You don't harm your computer, do you?
Have a great weekend! :)
Posted by: pissed off patricia | October 27, 2006 at 05:17 AM
Actor, I live in Jersey and I hope it is mandatory. Imagine a Shore Chick, delivered to every blogger. No more writing time for this cowgirl - my wife's got demands! And don't get me started about what happens when straight guys get husbands and have to share the remote. It's as if Love were in the air...over the Turnpike...
Posted by: Tata | October 27, 2006 at 06:29 AM
I have yet to figure out how discriminating against gays benefits anyone, outside of distracting voters from the issues that affect them. That has to be the only reason.
Posted by: Miss Cellania | October 27, 2006 at 10:09 AM
How exactly does recognizing equal rights for all threaten traditional marriage?
The recognition of equal rights doesn't suddenly create homosexuals nor drive down the birth rate or whatever weird thing they are worrying about.
Do they think homosexuals have not always existed and will suddenly be created upon the recognition of equal rights?
Are they afraid they will somehow become homosexuals if equal rights are recognized?
What is the big threat? I'm just not seeing it.
Posted by: Dee | October 27, 2006 at 12:34 PM
Are they afraid they will somehow become homosexuals if equal rights are recognized?
Posted by: Dee
Yes. Just like we all turned black when the Jim Crow laws were abolished.
Posted by: actor212 | October 30, 2006 at 01:41 PM