Another day...another WingNutDaily article that'll make you scratch your head and wonder what, exactly, these writers had for breakfast. Rusty Humphries has honestly outdone himself with this little journalistic gem, in which he suggests that Hillary Clinton has not only forfeited the presidency for herself, but doomed the entire Democratic party to remain the minority in Congress. How did the junior Senator from New York manage to do this, you ask? Read this...
The Gay City News reported on the
evening of October 25 (mark down this date), Sen. Hillary Clinton dropped her long held opposition to gay marriage. That is to say,
Sen. Clinton will not be defending the institution of marriage.
*Insert audibly exasperated sighs here*
Anyone who knows me well knows that I have never been a fan of Hillary, and Mr. Humphries does discuss her various attempts to appear more moderate than she really is...but to assert that embracing the idea of marriage equality is basically political suicide? It's almost too ridiculous to believe. What follows his inital assertion is even more perplexing...
This is a political blunder of the highest magnitude.
Trading a bedrock principle – that marriage is between a man and a woman – for a
block of votes is not shrewd. It is deeply misguided, short-sighted and in no
way in the best interest of the country.
I'm starting to feel and sound like a broken record, I'm sure, but it is baffling to me how so many journalists are ignoring history when it comes to the issue of gay marriage. In 1954, the Supreme Court ignored what was then a bedrock principle - that blacks and whites couldn't share the same schools - and ruled in favor of integration. Amazingly, the country didn't collapse or tumble into a second civil war following that ruling. For all the pundits who ran around shouting that the sky was falling, integration was not the end of the world.
Humphries gives a bit of background on the recent changes within the Democratic party, including the naming of Howard Dean as chair and the party's connections with organizations such as Moveon.org, The Daily Kos and the like. His references and dates are quite accurate, but I'm not sure what point he's trying to make. If it's wrong for Hillary or any other politician to alter their beliefs to appeal to 'the center,' why was it wrong for the Democratic party to take a wider step to the left with the changes it made? Honestly, Mr. Humphries, you can't have it both ways. In his concluding paragraph, Humphries says...
That's what it takes in 2006 to win the support of today's
movers and shakers in the Democrat Party. Hillary's evolution is a bombshell. It
affects voter turnout for 2006, it completes the Howard Dean makeover of the
Democrat Party, it probably secured her nomination for president, and made
impossible Hillary Clinton ever winning the presidency.
I suppose that Americans should all migrate to the political center aisle in order to fit Rusty's vision for America. For the time being, however, I'm just going to pull out my badge and say to Mr. Humphries..."Ignorance Police. I'm sorry, but I'm gonna have to run you in for being stupid!"
*If you find yourself with time to kill, check out some of Rusty's other WingNut specialties:
Radio host's CD pokes fun at terrorists, 10/27/06
'Papa don't preach - I'm keepin' your baby,' 10/16/06
The NFL wouldn't stand for it, 10/9/06
Hillary flunks her history lesson, 10/2/06
A stained dress, a TV mini-series and a glimpse of narcissistic rage, 9/25/06
Tortured logic, 9/18/06
Karl Rove: The real 20th hijacker? 9/11/06
Democrats declare war...on themselves, 8/28/06
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment