…because it doesn’t “mirror” Obama’s. Media bias? What media bias? Here is the text of McCain’s column that was rejected, courtesy of The Drudge Report:

In January 2007, when General David Petraeus took command in Iraq, he called the situation “hard” but not “hopeless.” Today, 18 months later, violence has fallen by up to 80% to the lowest levels in four years, and Sunni and Shiite terrorists are reeling from a string of defeats. The situation now is full of hope, but considerable hard work remains to consolidate our fragile gains.

Progress has been due primarily to an increase in the number of troops and a change in their strategy. I was an early advocate of the surge at a time when it had few supporters in Washington. Senator Barack Obama was an equally vocal opponent. “I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there,” he said on January 10, 2007. “In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”

Now Senator Obama has been forced to acknowledge that “our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence.” But he still denies that any political progress has resulted.

Perhaps he is unaware that the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad has recently certified that, as one news article put it, “Iraq has met all but three of 18 original benchmarks set by Congress last year to measure security, political and economic progress.” Even more heartening has been progress that’s not measured by the benchmarks. More than 90,000 Iraqis, many of them Sunnis who once fought against the government, have signed up as Sons of Iraq to fight against the terrorists. Nor do they measure Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki’s new-found willingness to crack down on Shiite extremists in Basra and Sadr City—actions that have done much to dispel suspicions of sectarianism.

The success of the surge has not changed Senator Obama’s determination to pull out all of our combat troops. All that has changed is his rationale. In a New York Times op-ed and a speech this week, he offered his “plan for Iraq” in advance of his first “fact finding” trip to that country in more than three years. It consisted of the same old proposal to pull all of our troops out within 16 months. In 2007 he wanted to withdraw because he thought the war was lost. If we had taken his advice, it would have been. Now he wants to withdraw because he thinks Iraqis no longer need our assistance.

To make this point, he mangles the evidence. He makes it sound as if Prime Minister Maliki has endorsed the Obama timetable, when all he has said is that he would like a plan for the eventual withdrawal of U.S. troops at some unspecified point in the future.

Senator Obama is also misleading on the Iraqi military’s readiness. The Iraqi Army will be equipped and trained by the middle of next year, but this does not, as Senator Obama suggests, mean that they will then be ready to secure their country without a good deal of help. The Iraqi Air Force, for one, still lags behind, and no modern army can operate without air cover. The Iraqis are also still learning how to conduct planning, logistics, command and control, communications, and other complicated functions needed to support frontline troops.

No one favors a permanent U.S. presence, as Senator Obama charges. A partial withdrawal has already occurred with the departure of five “surge” brigades, and more withdrawals can take place as the security situation improves. As we draw down in Iraq, we can beef up our presence on other battlefields, such as Afghanistan, without fear of leaving a failed state behind. I have said that I expect to welcome home most of our troops from Iraq by the end of my first term in office, in 2013.

But I have also said that any draw-downs must be based on a realistic assessment of conditions on the ground, not on an artificial timetable crafted for domestic political reasons. This is the crux of my disagreement with Senator Obama.

Senator Obama has said that he would consult our commanders on the ground and Iraqi leaders, but he did no such thing before releasing his “plan for Iraq.” Perhaps that’s because he doesn’t want to hear what they have to say. During the course of eight visits to Iraq, I have heard many times from our troops what Major General Jeffrey Hammond, commander of coalition forces in Baghdad, recently said: that leaving based on a timetable would be “very dangerous.”

The danger is that extremists supported by Al Qaeda and Iran could stage a comeback, as they have in the past when we’ve had too few troops in Iraq. Senator Obama seems to have learned nothing from recent history. I find it ironic that he is emulating the worst mistake of the Bush administration by waving the “Mission Accomplished” banner prematurely.

I am also dismayed that he never talks about winning the war—only of ending it. But if we don’t win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president. Instead I will continue implementing a proven counterinsurgency strategy not only in Iraq but also in Afghanistan with the goal of creating stable, secure, self-sustaining democratic allies.

This partisan hack of an editor is dreaming if he seriously thinks the Times has the influence and control it once held. Thanks to new outlets like Drudge and blogs, what used to be buried by a deliberate news blackout still gets out.

For more see Gateway Pundit & Hot Air.

– John (Average Gay Joe)

On behalf of the millions of regular airline business travelers, this is a memo to all of you “sometimes travelers” in the airports lately:

Now hear this!    First and most important, the airport terminals are not shopping malls.  Casually strolling in the middle of the walkway areas is not welcome by those of us trying to get somewhere.  Move your ass!

Second (and related) – to those of you traveling together:  Airport terminals are not for line-dancing tryouts.  STOP walking shoulder-to-shoulder.  You are blocking everyone else from getting past you.  Get a clue.

To you parents with kids:  Keep them by your sides and under control so they don’t make the airport terminals an ever-changing obstacle course.

Finally, since the airlines are charging a lot for this, that and the other thing now — why don’t y’all just stay home until fuel prices go down a bit.  Do us all a favor and help reduce your personal carbon footprint.

Thank you.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Haven’t we given Maine to Canada yet?

MANCHESTER, NH — U.S. Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign today announced the McCain 2008 Maine leadership team. These statewide and county leaders, representing all sixteen Maine counties, will work to bolster John McCain’s support within Maine. John McCain arrives in the state today and will campaign in South Portland on Monday at the Maine Military Museum.

Yawwwwwwwwwwn.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Americans for Prosperity were there and confronted the liberal hypocrisy.  Or is it the Hypocrite Liberals?

We’re back from Al Gore’s big global warming speech, and boy did we have a great time! We had a dedicated band of taxpayer advocates out in force, pointing out the high economic cost of global warming alarmism – starting with $8 a gallon gasoline.

Of course, we saw plenty of hypocrisy — especially the fact that Gore didn’t ride his bike or take public transporation to the event.  He didn’t even take his Prius! Instead, he brought a fleet of two Lincoln Town Cars and a Chevy Suburban SUV!  Even worse, the driver of the Town Car that eventually whisked away Gore’s wife and daughter left the engine idling and the AC cranking for 20 minutes before they finally left!

Hey, if you think the car-idling is the best part of the video — WRONG!   The AFP folks peacefully confront Gore supporters and his limo driver and — well, you HAVE to watch it! I LOVE the woman who thinks a taxi cab is “public transportation”! ROFLMAO!!!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Sorry, I just read these movie reviews of Mamma Mia! …

The script, which is about a young bride-to-be on a Greek island who invites three men (Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth, Stellan Skarsgaard) who might be her father to the nuptials without telling her mother (Meryl Streep), is quick to clarify what is on its mind. Firth and Brosnan are stranded while waiting for a, er, ferry. Colin turns to Pierce to say, “Bugger!” but instead of replying, “No, thank you,” Pierce says, “My sentiments exactly.” Firth, upping the ante, says, “Bollocks!” Brosnan: “My sentiments exactly.” This kind of saucy flirtation hasn’t been seen at the movies since C-3PO first met R2-D2.

The ABBA songs of Mamma Mia are perhaps not the favored anthems of your local rugby squad or Navy SEAL unit to begin with; few are the countries that have been invaded while Voulez-Vous blasts out of the Hummvee, though if ever we have cause to invade Belgium, Waterloo would seem the obvious choice. Nevertheless, the realization of the songs is beyond camp. This is a musical comedy with terrible jokes (“I grew up.” “Then grow back down again”) that is nevertheless hilarious.

A scene in which the groom’s shirtless beach blanket buddies, who are throwing him a bachelor party, peel him away from his bride in order to force him to join their merry band as they goose-step along the dock, while wearing flippers, with maximal flapping of arms, suggests a re-enactment of the invasion of the Sudetenland conducted by the Village People during a weekend on Fire Island. (Stay through the closing credits for more. I am talking about Brosnan in a royal blue skin-tight chest-baring jumpsuit that Liberace would have described as a bit much.)

and Batman: The Dark Knight (gayer than Mamma Mia??!!) …

Not that “gay Batman” isn’t redundant. We’ve had our suspicions about the Dark Knight’s proclivities since the heyday of Fredric Wertham. The latest iteration keeps Robin locked away in Batman’s closet (who do you think is, ahem, redecorating Wayne Manor?) and Katie Holmes isn’t around doing beard duty this time. But you’d have be in pretty deep denial not to pick up on the homoerotic hints. “You complete me,” the Joker coos to the Dark Knight, a moment that even Kyle dubs “Brokeback Batman.” Meanwhile, Bruce Wayne does a lot of eyelash batting at his gushing new BFF Harvey (“you sure know how to throw a party!”) Dent, even teasing Harvey about his after-hours activities: “ballet?” (Somewhere, Adam West is smiling). Why is the mayor of Gotham City wearing so much eyeliner? And who are we kidding, aren’t Alfred and Lucius clearly a pair of old queens fussing over dressing up their leather-clad protege? Holy Aunt Harriet! “Mamma Mia!” is no less gay, but at least it’s more or less out and proud.

…and got a hearty chuckle.

I have to wonder if Kyle Smith ever saw the ABBA show on Broadway?  The script sounds pretty consistent with the sold-out stage show’s to me.  I am proud to say I’m a multiple-Mamma Mia! stage fan (NYC, DC, Toronto & London — twice!).

So for all of you oppressed American gays out there, just know that the #1 and #2 movies this weekend are all about you!

PS — Both of these movies are on GP & PatriotPartner’s list.  Of course I can’t remember the last movie we saw in the theater….

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.   Well, how about comparing these two graphs… is that like 2,000 words?

Check out how the Democrat Congress’ (lack of) action has resulted in a significant spike in USA gas prices since they came to power.  Michelle Malkin did all the work on this one.

 

Now let’s observe how President Bush’s lifting of the Presidential Executive Order on offshore drilling has impacted the price of crude oil.  (Chart created at GasBuddy.com)

One goes up, the other goes down.

July 17 (Bloomberg) — Crude oil fell more than $5 a barrel, dropping below $130 for the first time in six weeks, as natural gas futures tumbled and global economic growth slows.

But (not my) Speaker Pelosi’s reaction to Bush’s announcement?

“Once again, the oilman in the White House is echoing the demands of Big Oil.”

“The Bush plan is a hoax. It will neither reduce gas prices nor increase energy independence.”

She is shameless.

I think most Americans know that we need to drill now, drill here, save money.  Well, the Americans that aren’t beholden to Environmental Wackos, Inc.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Now, my friends… when the liberals violate the law as they are so wont to do (illegal immigration, sanctuary cities, election fraud, ROTC in schools, etc., etc., etc., etc.)… why the hell doesn’t the Executive Branch (the one that ENFORCES the law) step in and do something about it.

In this case, the DC city government is telling the US Supreme Court to stick it.  (h/t – The Corner)

District residents can start registering their guns today. But at least one very high profile application was already rejected.

Dick Heller is the man who brought the lawsuit against the District’s 32-year-old ban on handguns. He was among the first in line Thursday morning to apply for a handgun permit.

But when he tried to register his semi-automatic weapon, he says he was rejected. He says his gun has seven bullet clip. Heller says the City Council legislation allows weapons with fewer than eleven bullets in the clip. A spokesman for the DC Police says the gun was a bottom-loading weapon, and according to their interpretation, all bottom-loading guns are outlawed because they are grouped with machine guns.

I’m not really sure it was Obama’s genitals that Jesse Jackson was aiming for.   In fact, it is precisely Jackson’s brand of liberalism has effectively neutered all sense of right-vs-wrong, lawfulness-vs-lawlessness in the past 30 years.  Every thing is morally and legally equivalent in the Libs’ World View.

C’mon Justice Department….. stand up for MY rights for once.  You know, the rights actually WRITTEN IN THE U.S. CONSTITUTION and not the ones made up by the ACLU.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Lesbian Named U.S. Poet Laureate.

I really can’t add much to this….

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

In a bipartisan move yesterday, the U.S. Senate “approve[d] a global AIDS relief bill that includes language calling for the repeal of a law that bans foreign visitors and immigrants with HIV from entering the U.S.”, reports The Washington Blade. The House is expected to likewise pass this bill shortly, which President Bush has promised to sign into law. This in itself is newsworthy, but I was most intrigued by the closing paragraph of the Blade’s article:

Congress enacted the HIV visitor and immigrant ban into law in 1993 at a time when supporters of the ban argued that foreign visitors and immigrants with HIV would flock to the U.S. to seek treatment for AIDS, overloading U.S. health facilities. President Bill Clinton expressed opposition to the ban but chose to sign the bill enacting the ban, which was approved by the then Democratic-controlled Congress, drawing criticism from gay and AIDS activists.

A “Democratic-controlled Congress” passed this ban while a Democrat president signed it into law. For all the talk I hear from the Left about how gay-friendly Bill Clinton was as president, with George W. Bush being the epitome of all that is evil, we once again see that the rhetoric just doesn’t add up. This is not to say that Clinton wasn’t gay-friendly at times or that Bush hasn’t been anti-gay at times as well, and vice versa, but this does put things a bit more into perspective. Let’s see, Clinton signed into law DADT, DOMA, and this HIV travel ban that activists have decried. Given the complete lack of spine and principles the man demonstrated while in office, why exactly should gays consider the former president to be a hero? Seems to me that he was all talk and very little action, well, except for all the wrong actions I guess you could say.

– John (Average Gay Joe)

On Monday, left-wing blogger Joe.My.God labeled it “wingnuttery” when the Campaign for Children and Families urged its supports to boycott McDonald’s because of the corporation’s “support of homosexual ‘marriages’.”

Let’s see a group with a political agenda urges its supporters to boycott a corporation which supports a cause it opposes. Is that wingnuttery or the free market at work?   In our economy, consumers weigh a number of factors before choosing to purchase a product from a particular supplier. These social conservatives are just exercising their freedom.

But, to Joe, it’s wingnuttery when people reject a corporation for the political stands it takes. So, I assume he’ll be taking Fred Karger of Californians Against Hate to task given his group’s call:

for a boycott of two prominent San Diego hotels because their owner, Doug Manchester, contributed more than $100,000 to the campaign for Proposition 8, the ballot measure that would amend the state Constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

Here, we have the same pattern at work, a group with a political agenda urging its supporters to boycott a corporation whose owner supports a cause it opposes.

They’re both right. If a corporation (or its owner) takes a stand on a controversial political issue, then consumers remain free to consider that support when they choose whether to buy the corporation’s product. That’s called freedom. And ain’t it grand?

But, alas, some liberals call it wingnuttery when conservatives exercise theirs.

Me, I’ll make sure to double my order of Chicken McNuggets next time I’m in McDonald’s.

Not that it is a major surprise, but noteworth nonetheless.   I’m hoping John (AvgGayJoe) may have some thoughts on this letter, released earlier today.

As retired military officers, we share a natural hesitancy to engage actively in politics. There is a healthy discomfort in our profession with any political involvement because the country rightly depends on our military to support any commander in chief with our best military advice and our actions. But two factors compel us to speak out now and openly support John McCain for President: first, the surprising and inaccurate questioning of his record by some of Senator Obama’s leading supporters; and second, the importance to our national security of winning the war we are fighting.

The United States is confronted by many threats to its security and prosperity. Most significantly, we are engaged in a broad conflict with Islamic extremism against enemies espousing the same radical and violent ideology whose full dimensions the American people first glimpsed on September 11, 2001. Success in this war will require not only victory in the “hot” conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but as well a balanced and integrated application of all elements of America’s national power as we work with our allies around the world to marginalize radicals and build a shared vision for peace with moderate Islam.

We are privileged to have had the opportunity to serve this country in uniform for most of our adult lives. We have had the honor of commanding young Americans of the same caliber and tenacity as those who today remain on the front lines, willingly sacrificing their own well-being and security and offering their lives in order to preserve our freedom. They deserve, and the American people demand, leadership of proven character — leadership that will always put America’s interests ahead of personal gain and political party.

It is our experience as former senior military officers that also gives us great concern about certain foreign policy positions staked out by Senator Obama. We are acutely aware that ill-conceived policies will have serious, if not tragic, consequences for military commanders, the troops they lead, and the nation. We are particularly concerned about his public statements, including his call for a withdrawal from Iraq, unconditional talks with the leaders of rogue states, and the return to a law-enforcement approach to protecting our country from terrorists.

This country has learned the peril of treating terrorists and their state sponsors as little more than a law enforcement problem. We are unanimous in our view that the failures of the past should not be repeated, and we believe that John McCain’s long record of national service, and his demonstrated judgment on matters of national security, make clear who can best defend this country abroad, and assure peace and prosperity at home.

Through a lifetime of service in uniform and in Congress, John McCain has consistently displayed the wisdom and courage to do the right thing for America regardless of the cost to him personally. It is for this reason, above all others, that we endorse John McCain for President, and it is for this reason that we stand with him now as he continues his long history of service to this country.

James B. Davis, General, USAF (RET.)
Ronald J. Hays, Admiral, USN (RET)
James L. Holloway, Admiral, USN (RET)
Jerome L. Johnson, Admiral, USN, (RET)
P.X. Kelley, General, USMC, (RET)
James J. Lindsay, General, USA (RET)
John Michael Loh, General, USAF, (RET)
Leighton W. Smith, Admiral, USN (RET)
Carl Stiner, General, USA (RET)
Donald C. “Deese” Thompson, Vice Admiral, USCG, (RET)
Howard B. Thorsen, Vice Admiral, USCG, (RET)

Balance this list with Obama’s key military supporter:  Douglas MacArthur Wesley Clark.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Amazing how desperate the Democrats are to find a Bush Administration scandal. While trying to get caught up on my e-mail and checking the news, I chanced on this story, Bush claims privilege to withhold CIA leak records, leading the headlines on Yahoo! My Congressman, Henry Waxman, chairman of House Oversight Committee, is still investigating something already investigated by a zealous and exacting fellow prosecutor.

Yup, ol’ Henry is probing the leak of Valerie Plame’s name, even though Patrick Fitzgerald, the aforementioned prosecutor, after a thorough investigation, did not indict anyone for the underlying offense (i.e., that which he was hired to investigate). In other words, there was no crime.

What is interesting here is not just the Democrats endless probing of this story, but the disingenuous coverage in the MSM. In the first version I read, the Associated Press’s Laurie Kellman reported:

They also include notes about the 2003 State of the Union address, during which President Bush made the case for invading Iraq in part by saying Saddam Hussein was pursuing uranium ore to make a nuclear weapon. That information turned out to be wrong.

(I have saved that version as a .pdf.)

Well, in that version, it wasn’t the information that turned out to be wrong, but Ms. Kellman’s reporting. While the White House may have retracted those remarks, the evidence shows that Bush was not lying. Here’s the president said in that 2003 address: “The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” And the evidence, including a British intelligence review of their government’s claim, backs him up.

So, AP changed the paragraph:

Other records sought by the House committee include notes about Bush’s 2003 State of the Union address, during which he made the case for invading Iraq in part by saying Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was pursuing uranium ore in Africa to make a nuclear weapon. In the spring of 2003, [Joe] Wilson claimed publicly that he had gone to Africa for the CIA to investigate the report and advised the administration it was false months before Bush cited it in the State of the Union speech.

That paragraph is true, but incomplete. Wilson did indeed make such public claims. And he had indeed gone to Africa. But, the CIA found his findings (which he delivered orally) lent credence to claims that Saddam was trying to get yellowcake from Iraq. Not just that, Mr. Wilson could produce no evidence that the Administration had even been aware of his report.

Of course if the White House had been aware of Joe’s mission, it would have gotten the CIA’s interpretation–which would have helped confirm the words the president spoke in the SOTU.

I wonder why Ms. Kellman and her editors at the AP chose to leave that out?

Had trouble falling asleep last night and have been falling behind on other things. Not just that a number of little things have been going wrong in the past few hours. As I was hungry for lunch, I suddenly realized I hadn’t made it to Trader Joe’s yesterday as I had planned. And I was already behind schedule for the day.

So, I rush out, get my groceries and am leaving the store. As is my wont, I take my bags out of the cart to schlep them to my car. At that moment, one bag bursts with groceries scattering. Before I have time to see this as yet another thing going wrong, a middle-aged woman taking note of my troubles, says, “You need help.”

She hurries into the store, gets me a fresh bag and brings it out to me

She didn’t do very much. I mean, she didn’t even offer to help me pick up my groceries (well, I had gathered them all by the time she returned outside). But, just her recognizing that I needed help, saying as much, then doing something on my behalf made all the difference.

Things are going to work out today.

Gotta remember her small gesture the next time I see someone in need of assistance, however small.

UPDATE: Just shared this post with a friend who wrote back sharing an experience of her own which I reprint with her permission:

I love those kind of moments and I always try to pay it forward. I had that in the 99 cent store last week where a soda can I bought started spraying on me. I must have looked like a deer caught in the headlights! This man just took it from me and ran it outside. I, of course, thanked him. But I still remember the gesture. It reminded me that there is goodness and kindness. When strangers help me, I always try to send them a silent blessing.

It sure seems so.  Especially since Google has a history of active censorship.

Some bloggers opposed to Barack Obama say they suspect Obama’s supporters — with the assistance of Google — may have tried to censor them when the Internet giant froze their Web sites for five days last month.

Seven blogs run by Democrats who oppose Obama’s nomination for the presidency were incorrectly flagged as spam sites by Blogger, the hosting service Google has owned since 2003. Google says it was an automated response from a spam filter.

But the bloggers believe that Web surfers who support Obama took advantage of a loophole in Blogger’s system that allows readers to report spam blogs, the artificial Web sites that abound on the Internet and are used to promote other sites.

“It appears that [Blogger's] policy can be manipulated by people determined to shut down the free exchange of ideas,” said Carissa Snedeker, whose blog, BlueLyon, was among those that were frozen.

“It’s unusual — I’ve never heard of similar blogs of the same nature being shut down like that,” said Danny Sullivan, editor-in-chief of the tech site SearchEngineLand.com.

<….>

“The conclusion that many of us came to was that we were specifically targeted by some over-enthusiastic Obama supporters,” Snedeker said.

The bloggers believe it’s part of a larger campaign to evict them from left-wing sites like the Huffington Post and DailyKos.

(For you younger folk that aren’t allowed to be taught these things in your public schools, here’s a refresher on the Gestapo so you can follow the allusion.)

And can someone remind me again…. what side of the political spectrum will you find the roots of fascism?  Let me help you out — read this book:  Liberal Fascism.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Shortly after learning last night how advocates of gay marriage intend to contest California’s Proposition 8 (focusing on how the number of the initiative rhymes with “hate”) I learned that some of those supporting the initiative, particularly those behind the website, ProtectMarriage.Com represent the most extreme Christian conservatives.

On the one hand, you have those who refuse to understand some people’s legitimate opposition to gay marriage (see e.g., this post). On the other, you have those who refuse to consider the legitimate religious beliefs of those who do not accept Jesus Christ as their personal savior.

Doesn’t look like we’re going to get a very substantive debate on one of the most serious issues of our time (indeed of any time).

I had intended to blog on that, noting that similarity on both sides of the issues–a refusal to understand the arguments of their adversaries. David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch seem to be two of the noble exceptions in this debate.

Not just that. There seems to be a dichotomy between the leaders of each movement and the people they claim to represent. While sensible people offer serious objections to gay marriage, the leaders of the movement seem to have a problem with any who do not accept Jesus as their personal savior. When most gay people who seek to have their relationships recognized as marriage understand the meaning of the institution, the leaders of the movement for gay marriage do not.

Anyway, I have already said more than I had thought I would be able to write today.

Since getting back from Cincinnati, while my mind has been aswirl with thoughts, ideas and images, I’ve really not been in much of a mood to do any more than scribble them down on a piece of paper as a reference for a future e-mail, post or other writing.  That is, I haven’t really felt up to organizing them into a post.

Perhaps, it’s that I’ve been blogging so intensely since March that as per this post, I need to take a break to focus on other things and recharge my batteries (so to speak).

(more…)

Tis a slow news day and Bruce & Dan are off doing, well whatever they do when they’re not online, so I figured this would be a good time for an open thread question.  Besides, I’m having a bit of a bad day anyways…

Just a wee bit of advice for the future: never, ever drive over a recently filled trench on a construction site right after a torrential rain. Not good. Car’s fine but my pride is still in trauma.

So anyways, how about it?  What if the guy you don’t want to be president actually wins this year? What are you most concerned about them doing if they end up in the Oval Office come 2009? Is there anything good you think they might do that your candidate won’t do himself?

Ok, I’m off to the car wash…

– John (Average Gay Joe)

Ooops…. did I say love?   Sorry I meant money.  You know, cold hard cash.  Benefits!  Shared inheritance! 

I wish this emailed press release was a satire, but unfortunately it is not. 

The Legalization of Gay Marriage in California Offers New Opportunity for the Jewelry Industry

NEW YORK, July 14 /PRNewswire/ — There are many reasons for the wedding industry to celebrate California state Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn a ban on gay marriage.

The Williams Institute on Sexual Orientation Law and Public Policy at the UCLA School of Law estimates that same-sex weddings could generate up to $683.6 million in additional revenue for the industry over the next three years.

With the current state of the economy, the ruling is particularly good news for jewelers as same-sex couples look to purchase wedding rings and wedding jewelry. Many traditional jewelers have already started to cater to same-sex couples, including Erica Courtney, Catherine Angiel, Furrer Jacot and Neil Lane, who designed Portia de Rossi’s Platinum engagement ring.

Platinum rings are not only the highest quality, but express the importance of a couple’s commitment to each other with the metal that will stand the test of time beyond all other metals.

“As with heterosexual couples, gay couples see their wedding bands as a tangible symbol of their love and commitment to one another,” reports Gay Family Support, a gay-rights organization.

One of the main problems that I have had with the arguments in favor of gay marriage is that the Gay Left has under-stressed love and commitment, and uber-stressed the financial benefits.  Bad idea.

Perhaps if I thought gay activists took the covenant of marriage seriously, I’d be more supportive. 

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

…maybe I’d consider the LDS Church!

PatriotPartner alerted me to this steamy item.  It was actually in the online version of the Charlotte Observer newspaper.  Mormons Exposed – the calendar!

The 2008 Men on a Mission calendar features twelve handsome returned Mormon missionaries from across the United States who, for the first time ever, have dared to pose bare-chested in a steamy national calendar.

Usually seen riding their bicycles and preaching door-to-door, these hunky young men of faith explode with sexuality on each calendar page. Hand-selected for their striking appearances and powerful spiritual commitment, the “devout dozen” are stepping away from the Mormon traditions of modest dress, and “baring their testimony” to demonstrate that they can have strong faith and be proud of who they are, both with a sense of individualism and a sense of humor.

I’m not quite sure what to think of this — real, satire, little bit of both?

Anyway…. a little-bit of eye candy for you today.  Pass the offering plate!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Hmmm, it took reading on Instapundit that it was US Senator Charles Schumer (DEMOCRAT-NY) whose latest reckless behavior two weeks ago (added to zillions of other examples before), caused the bank run at IndyMac which resulted in the Federal Government taking it over.   Funny how the MSM isn’t mentioning it at all in their saturated IndyMac coverage over the weekend.

So in addition to sparking fear among IndyMac customers, Senator Schumer has cost you and me (taxpayers) potentially billions of dollars from our pockets.

Way to go, jackass!  (Hey, it IS the Democrat Party mascot; Schumer is just representing it well.)

If the IndyMac panic sparks other bank runs, perhaps Schumer will be responsible for millions of other Americans panicking and sparking the return of Hoovervilles SchumerVilles.

(Photo courtesy of BusinessWeek.com)

-Bruce (GayPatriot)