Unspun Logo

Double-talk: a.k.a. Lyin’ *wink*

Posted by RickH · October 20th, 2008 · 3 Comments

Sarah Palin, explaining how she favors a federal constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, says,

I’m not going to be out there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment telling what they can and can’t do, should and should not do… (Scott Conroy, “Palin Breaks With McCain On Gay Marriage Ban” (October 20, 2008) CBS News From The Road.)

If that’s not double-talk, I don’t know what is.  “I’m not going to be out there…telling them what they can’t do…but I’ll be fightin’ fer a constitutional amendment tellin’ ’em what they can’t do!”

Actually, this isn’t double-talk.  It’s lyin’; it’s hypocrisy.  And it’s apparently thinkin’ yer too stupid to realize that she actually did it all in one sentence.  Plain and simple.

No big surprise, actually.  Isn’t that what the Republican candidates for President and Vice-President have so far shown they can do best?

You betcha.

Categories: 2008 Presidential Election

Tags: · , , , , , , , , , ,

3 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Jackie Styles // Oct 21, 2008 at 12:34 pm

    Gay marriage aint. Not for the normal people anyway.

    We object.

    By a margin of 70 % last time, and we’ll see this vote.

    These fools want to corrupt the whole institution by perverting it to their own agenda.

    They want to be treated as normal when they aren’t.

    Yes on 8.

  • 2 RickH // Oct 23, 2008 at 6:51 am

    They must be normal. At least on this planet. Things which exist naturally are normal.

    Oh, wait, you mean you don’t want them exist? Or just that you don’t want them to have the rights that other people have?

    That’s different.

    And marriage isn’t an institution just because you should be institutionalized. It’s a contract. Plain and simple.

    If it were anything special, why haven’t heterosexuals taken better care to pay respect to it themselves?

  • 3 Christina in OK // Oct 30, 2008 at 2:12 am

    The agenda of having the rights and freedoms as everyone else? The bastards!!

    Sorry I’m a bit late to the party but here’s my 2 cents.

    I don’t understand how gay marriage is an attack on traditional marriage. I don’t feel under attack. I don’t give a crap who is doing what next door to me as long as it isn’t too loud or injuring someone (unwillingly anyway, some folks like that. lol) That would be my only objection. It has nothing to do with my somewhat “traditional” marriage.

    The only difference that I’ve noticed since I’ve gotten married rather than happily living “in sin” together is that I feel we are more stable and committed. There isn’t a magical glow around us or anything. It seems to me more of an emotional and legal change. Maybe I missed something but if someone wants to spend the rest of their life caring for another human being, that should be the only requirement, not their genetic components.

Leave a Comment