mccotter for president !! i'm serious.

wow... whether or not this is a good album (and i have followed marc almond's solo career as a fan), i am so impressed with this reviewer ! when i saw it was about almond, i thought "oh oh.. here comes the usual 'big hollywood' snark about what an effete homosexual almond is.." what a suprise to read a thoughtful, well-informed appreciation for a unique artist instead ! thanks, mr. kalder... i look forward to reading more of your critiques.

does anybody really care what this guy thinks about anything....besides himself, that is ? his ego is as big as barack's.
his blog is a bore.

for me, it's 'father' jonathan who always brings the show to a screeching halt ... i don't need lessons from fulton j. sheen at 3am ... i want rude snark and hilarious commentary. i usually disagree with his take, but at least m.l. hill has a sense of humor.

steven, either you:

(1) didn't check the source of this fake quote (borowitz.. it's called satire, look into it.)

(2) used this fake quote as an opportunity to make ANOTHER snarky anti-gay crack.("no judgment" from a "real man", steven...really ?)

you're a cute guy and you've got a sense of humor in there somewhere... but your act is tired.

we now have over five years of experience in massachusetts with equal marriage rights and none of the apocalyptic consequenses that were predicted, and are still being expounded here, have come to pass. all we have are happy gay couples and happy straight couples who equally share in the rights and responsibilities of having a legal spouse, plus, any children being raised by those couples enjoy the stability afforded by the legal recognition of their family. how does this scenario, in any way, conflict with conservative societal values ?

what other group has, repeatedly, had their civil rights put up for a public vote ? our government is designed to protect the rights of minorities from the 'tyranny of the majority' .. why is there suddenly an exception when it comes to gay folks ?

umm.. maxine...we do NOT have 'civil unions' for same-sex couples in california. we have 'domestic partners' which is something quite different and is available to others as well. while the legislature has included some protections for couples in 'domestic partnerships', they pale in comparison to being able to claim your loved one as your 'spouse' and all the privileges and responsibilities that come with that designation.
as for your rather tired 'slippery slope' argument, we have over five years of experience with equal marriage rights in massachusetts and none of the horrors predicted about 'slippery slopes' have come to pass. all we have there are happy gay couples and happy straight couples and life has gone on.

oh good grief .. so a few people have objected to someone being appointed to a do-nothing board. this is somehow proof that all gay folks who seek equal protection under the law are as 'mean-spirited' as the initiative that stripped them of their civil rights ?? isn't this just a weeeeeeee bit of a stretch ?

umm... john... so-called "hate crime" laws regarding religion have been on the books for ages. it wasn't until sexual orientation was added to the list of affected groups that some people went into a tizzy about 'thought crimes' and such.