I'm getting all sorts of Emails now

[mitchtv]

the latest was from John Burton lamenting prop8. Well where the fuck was he in Novemeber ? FUCK HIM and the rest of the cowardly Dems who hid.

[bluedawg12]

1. Money, time and votes will go selectively to those who support gay rights.

Remember well this day. What goes around comes around.

Karma is a bitch. :grr:

[joeybee12]

2. Where are DiFi and Boxer on this?

Oh that's right, taking our support for granted.

[mitchtv]

3. Dianne , at least did a good tv commercial

Barbara was hiding

[joeybee12]

5. Did she?

Then good for her...and Barbara with a gay son should be better about this.

[ronnykmarshall]

15. Barbara Boxer's son is gay?

[joeybee12]

17. Oh yeah...I worked on her first campaign for Senate...everyone knew...

...so one would think.

[ronnykmarshall]

18. He's HOT !!

I remember election night 1992 swooning over him.

[joeybee12]

34. That was 17 years ago!

I wonder if he's still hot???

[unhappycamper30]

8. Re:

Not 1 more politician will get my vote without supporting full LGBT rights.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[ronnykmarshall]

4. No SHIT!

and all of the fuckers want money!

[CreekDog]

6. John Burton is the problem now?

whatever.

Burton has been consistently progressive on this and other issues for ages.

if he's not good enough for you, nobody is.

besides, he's not even an elected official anymore. the guy would have to get arrested to get tv coverage.

can we please figure out who the enemy REALLY is? sheesh.

[mitchtv]

7. where was he when we needed him?

We need someone with a pair" Now he writes to me? a bit late

[CreekDog]

9. You were expecting him to do commercials?

I remember when he helped knock off our Republican state senator in Walnut Creek, Richard Rainey.

Let me tell you, the only people willing to say Burton's name were the Republicans. When Torlakson won, Burton was at the party, and perfectly quiet.

But let me reiterate, if you are jumping on Burton, then you are absolutely wasting your time. First you are wasting your time in that he's going to be right on this issue and Second, wasting your time because if Burton is the problem --well let's put it this way: you'd be lucky if even 25% of voters thought like Burton, much less 50% and if that's not good enough, then there's no way to win this.

[mitchtv]

11. he was quiet this long

who needs him now?

[CreekDog]

13. fine.

[Creideiki]

23. Well, obviously, the REAL enemy is the Republican Majority in Congress

It's their fault, after all, that Hate Crimes can't advance in the Senate.

It's their fault, after all, that ENDA has disappeared.

It's their fault, after all, that DADT repeal is lying around the bottom of the bin in committee.

So, yeah. Right now, I'm looking at a really nice dinner party on Nov 3, 2010. You're invited if you want to come.

[CreekDog]

24. yes!

:fistbump:

although i'll lump folks like Ben Nelson in with them at least to some extent.

[Chovexani]

28. LMAO

*whoosh*

[CreekDog]

29. LMAO

*:eyes:*

[Chovexani]

31. While your eyes are rolling up in your head

Maybe you might glance at the point sailing above it.

[CreekDog]

32. I'm too stupid

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

10. I must have been purged from the the Courage Campaign

and from HRC because I've gotten nada except from the Greens in Los Angeles and from Tom Ammiano.

[Iggo]

12. Yeah. Kors just hit me up for money, too.

I want to see a plan. So far, the plan seems to be how much money they can raise and how soon. But I didn't see anywhere where they said what the plan is.

My money goes to the first organization with a clear plan (other than just raising money).

[ronnykmarshall]

16. He needs another trip to Spain?

[EFerrari]

14. My friend in Los Angeles sent this about what her UCLA prof said today:

The court upheld the STRICTEST protection for homosexuals in the Constitution. I'm cc'ing Hasmik and Rex as I'm sure they'll know about this...
while they did uphold Prop 8 the Court was careful to say that gays have strong protected rights in California. In fact giving gay rights "strict scrutiny" in anti-discrimination cases is akin to making gay the same as black when it comes to lawsuits of discrimination. Most people won't know what they're reading when they read this but our civil rights professor took a lot of time to explain to us that this isn't even used for women. It means the burden of proof rests with the defendant and they have to prove a compelling state interest in order to discriminate. It's nearly impossible for a racist statute or decision to be upheld under that kind of scrutiny.

I believe it is only a matter of time before gay marriage is legal. California is the only state in the United States to put gays on par with blacks in discrimination cases.

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

20. Actually, I know at least NJ puts gays on par with blacks in discrimination cases

And, no, they didn't uphold the "STRICTEST protection" for "homosexuals."

The decision is full of holes. I'm amazed a UCLA professor couldn't see through it. What are they a professor of? Chemistry?

[EFerrari]

25. LOL! I have n idea. Denise is in grad school / Poli Sci.

[EFerrari]

26. A lawyer at Andrew Sullivan's blog agrees but I honestly don't understand

most of what he's saying:



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5727094

[bluedawg12]

30. H- it's called strict scrutiny and does not mean strict protection.

It's a legal term, there are various degrees of scrutiny for Courts and civil rights matters usually fall under strict scrutiny, rather than intermediate scrutiny or rational basis (scrutiny).

[bluedawg12]

19. Strict scrutiny by the Courts.

Gays being a "suspect" classification means that when laws are passed singaling out a minority the,"law that categorizes on that basis (is) suspect, and therefore deserving of greater judicial scrutiny."

Groups that are entitled to strict scrutiny, the Court has suggested, are

“discrete and insular minorities” who have historically faced extensive unjustifiable discrimination,

who are unable to remove themselves from the category,

and who have been the subject of such prejudice that they are unable to protect their interests in the legislative process.

[RetiredTrotskyite]

21. I Will

support only those who are supportive of our rights. The rest can go straight to hell!

[bluedawg12]

27. Money, time and votes

to those who support gay rights.

[David Zephyr]

22. I'm with you. Where were our "friends' then?

Logo's "News" has something about Madonna's life nearly every week and yet, where was she during the entire Prop 8 run-up. Absent.

I was at Hunters in Palm Springs last night. A Madonna video was playing there between the American flags draped on the wall. I turned my head.

Even here at the DU, there sure were a lot of silent voices, huh?

You learn who your friends are when people are killing you.

Fuck Burton.

[ronnykmarshall]

33. Oh she mentioned prop 8 ........

AFTER IT PASSED!

She was too busy fucking a guy young enough to be her son to give a shit.

[David Zephyr]

35. And yet Logo "News" has a feature about Madonna once a week.

How in the hell did Madonna get crowned as a friend and advocate of the GLBT community. She's sucked our money away for over twenty years and when our asses are on the firing line, she's not there.

I'd say "fuck Madonna" but then half the planet already has been "there".

She's no friend to the GLBT community.