Galahad

It appears that the Yanks are aware of Kerry's little secret, but the die-hard Democrats are just allowing him to maintain his fantasy world wherein he hails from the Emerald Isle. This, from Maureen Dowd's column in the New York Times today: "Still showing his phantom Irish side , he [Kerry] pronounced Leon Uris's 'Trinity' his favorite novel, and said he once explored making it into a movie ." Maybe if he closes his eyes & clicks his heels three times, he'll have a grandfather named Padraig Kerry instead of Fritz Kohn. It worked for Dorothy.

Condi is one hell of a nice choice too. But I still say Rudy. He's popular because he actually accomplished something as mayor & is totally cool under pressure (if they have to pick him up by his belt like they did Cheney ... no sweat for Rudy). As for the lesbian Cheney progeny ... well Rudy lived with a gay couple during the 911 crises, so the truly homophobic will just have to vote for Kerry. But I doubt Bush'll dump Cheney ... he seems to really trust him. And could Rudy stay in "an undisclosed location" for very long without people hollering & chanting .. "Ruu-dy Ruu-dy Ruu-dy" for him to come out? I don't think so. The fact is that both, Rudy or Condi, would pull more votes in for the Republicans than Dick will, not that George W. needs any help in this department. So if Dick wants to see Kerry's Democrats being REALLY humiliated he'll step down for health reasons and let Rudy or Condi make these elections a slam-dunk.

You really think Cheney will bow out? Who do you see as his replacement? Rudy! Rudy! Rudy! Rudy! That's Giuliani. Rudolph W. Giuliani.

You really think Cheney will bow out? Who do you see as his replacement? Rudy! Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!

What in hell is Kerry doing now? First of all he is trying to quash all of the info about his Czech/Jewish heritage that is circulating in Europe & now he has Burke's Peerage trying to drum up British Royal connections. I'm finding this all rather disgusting & my guess is that if American Jews get wind of this (traditionally Democratic voters) they're not going to be impressed. This guy is the ultimate phony porch climber ... and I'm starting to think that he's a pretty nasty piece of work (as must his first wife upon being dropped for a wealthier model). Not only can he trace his lines back to King James, but also to the local cobbler with a yarmulke. But we won't hear about THAT side of his family .... will we? Unless Harold Brooks-Baker (below) has different motives .... in which case WATCH OUT, Hollywood is going to turn Republican in a New York minute after his findings. From today's National Post: Bluer blood means Kerry likely to dethrone Bush, British theory holds If royal genes have any influence, John Kerry looks destined to dethrone George W. Bush in November's U.S. presidential election. According to a theory its British proponents say has proved suprisingly accurate over the past century, the candidate with the bluest blood in his veins will win. 'Our research is not yet complete but my bet is that Kerry has more royal connections and that he is more noble than President Bush,' said Harold Brooks-Baker, publishing director of Burke's Peerage. Mr. Kerry can trace his roots back to the first Massachusetts governor, John Winthrop and a host of royals in Europe. 'Kerry can almost certainly be traced back to King James I and to the bloodlines straight through the Windsor and Hanover families,' he said."

Sorry, I forgot I was in the "US Politics" forum, I was thinking of Canada. So please, someone, FOR ONCE PLEASE SPELL OUT EXACTLY WHAT IS MISSING IN A CIVIL UNION CONTRACT in the USA that is in a marriage contract? In Canada, as far as I know, gays get the full enchilada.

Well Elder's definition could also work for two compatible spinster aunts living together, but should we call them "married"? Maybe the Oxford English dictionary is a better place to look for definitions's than asking Elder's "opinion"? DEFINTION: Marraige: The state in which a man and a woman are formally united for the purpose of living together. So what you are actually shilling for is not for gay folks to get "married", but for the English language to change the definition of one of it's words. Whole different argument. I never like the definition for "hassock" myself. I think it should define a large stack of paper instead of a cushion . Who do I see about getting the change done?

ROTFPIMPALMFAO ..... thanks for the laugh, Maplesyrup.

Well since nothing in the actual WORDS imply "lesser" I can only assume that the label "gay" (which gay folks themselves have co-opted) implies something faulty to YOU. Lots of things in life are different but equal. Bread & pasta. Men & women. Wood & plastic. Oaks & elms. It's only your biases that make you think one word sounds "lesser".

You differentiate between civil unions by calling one a "civil union" and the other a "gay civil union" and that's wrong! The word "civil union" is like the word "flower". For ease of communication, we gave different names to different looking flowers. So don't you think that we ought to, for that same reason, give a different name to civil unions between same sex couples? You wouldn't call a daisy a pansy, so why do you insist on calling these two different civil unions by the same name?

Well you may not want to talk about it, but semantics is the subject. Gay citizens get all of the same rights with different names. And any person can set up a set of rights & rules to parallel marraige. So I have no idea what services & benefits that can only be obtained by "married couples" that you are talking about. I keep not getting that answer from anyone & it's the key to this arguement. The rest is touchy feely BS.

Of couse it's a foolish idea. And no they don't have any actual stats on whether or not it is successful, this is the type of answer we always get: From the Vancouver Sun today: Larry Campbell (our Mayor whose only platform WAS this drug injection site) says " There is certainly value in harm reduction. We know anecdotally from the people who work down there and live down there that they have seen a difference and it's positive". But my FAVORITE quote in this article by Campbell is his answer to the UN criticism: "I don't think they have credibility. From my point of view, they're simply an arm of the US drug policy, which I don't agree with. It's almost impossible to take them seriously". Oh lord... I laughed until I cried. From his stunning left wing stance on every issue, I'm POSITIVE he took the UN VERY seriously when they were against the war in Iraq & saying there were no WMD. I guess that as long as you throw barbs at the US at every opportunity, on every issue, on every side...you gain points with the left wing. PS - Whenever Larry Campbell rants about how "the reality is that people out there have drugs and they do inject" and that his objective is for them to shoot up in a safe manner, I can't help thinking of other realities, like for instance ..... the reality that people out there have illegal guns and they do use them, and I wonder when he'll open up shooting ranges for this gun toting group so they don't kill innocent bystanders when attempting to hit their target individual. Soon I hope.

- RUDYARD THE INSANE ... You are, as always, misinformed. - The NDP has historically been strongest in Saskatchewan, Ontario and your province BC, to the point of electing several federal MPs in these provinces in most elections and even forming the provincial governments there on occasion. The NDP has been weakest in Alberta, Quebec and Atlantic Canada (only the ignorant now call it The Maritmes). So it has taken the NDP many decades to even elect MPs in Atlantic Canada with the exception of a couple of long standing seats in Cape Breton. Therefore, the NDP is NOT known for making inroads in Atlantic Canada. Do you get your political information from talking to yourself or from contemplating the bottom of a beer bottle? - As to Toronto and the GTA in general, the NDP is strongest not in the so-called gentrified or tony or affluent areas but in the poorest areas. Even the seat Layton is seeking includes mainly below average incomes, housing, and retail trade plus above average unemployment and immigrant densities. Do you work at being such a jackass or does it come naturally? Hmm...apologies to the people previously known as Maritimers. I thought it was rather a polite term for the area...as opposed to what everyone actually calls it...the armpit of Canada. Talk to the poster above who says that the NDP is making inroads in "tony" & "gentrified" areas in the GTA. Sounds suspicious to me too, in case you didn't catch my drift. PS: Those "few seats" in Cape Breton & Alexa etc...tend to be a rather high proportion in relation to the number of seats the ATLANTIC CANADIANS hold. PPS: In Sydney are a significant number of people now called "ATLANTIC AFRICAN CANADIANS" or "AFRICAN ATLANTIC CANADIANS"? Don't want to appear ignorant. PPPS: I'm working very hard on my jackass status. I'm glad to receive your appreciation for my efforts.

Why should they have to? I don't know...maybe because "words" are our communication tools. We call a pencil a "pencil" & an eyeball an "eyeball" because they are different. Should we just call them both "plinkons" or something & hope we can figure it out by the context in a sentence?

Interesting place that Toronto. In Canada the NDP is known for making inroads into our poorest provinces...the Maritimes. Out here in Vancouver the only shoo-in ( !!!) for an NDP candidate is in the down & out areas of DaVinci's Inquest fame...the lower East side ridings. But in Toronto the NDP areas are "tony" & "gentrified". Go figure.

Well Galahad is because I'm exceedingly chivalrous. But the reason I asked about your handle was that it is such an odd one. Most folks take on one that more resembles a name, not a date. So it perked my curiosity. And its swords at dawn.

Look, it was a previous popster to indicated SSM was some sort of scheme by gay people to get the same financial benefits as hetero married couple. if you want to know what they are, ask him. To me, though, it's irrelevant: the only thing that does is that we have, in our so-called egalitarian society, a segment of the population that is being denied the same rights as others by virtue of something hat's beyond thei control (sexual orientation). That must be corrected, period. But they are not being denied a damned thing. They can throw a big party, have a minister officiate & have contracts drawn up legitimizing their shared assets etc etc... The only thing that seems to be missing is their ability to use the same word "marraige" as straight people. Well...hell...no straight person will say they're "gay" today like they did in the "gay nineties". What's wrong with different words? Can't they come up with some word themselves for their commitment ceremony in order not to confuse the issue for everyone else? A rose by any other name still smells as sweet.

Reading the article by Graham Thomson in my daily this morning , The Edmonton Journal, titled "Scandal anger may kill Liberal chances" I came upon this little jewel: "The sad truth is the Liberals' establishment dreads the prospect of Kilgour as Alberta's only MP and therefore a shoe-in for cabinet." Note the jewel, the misspelled word "shoe-in". Don Martin spelled that same word the same wrong way in one of his columns about a month back. After doing some reaserch I found out that it's on the Baron's insistence that they spell it this way. Why, you ask? Beats me. I have ALSO found out that it was on the Baron's insistence that Don Martin gave Paul Martin the nickname "The Anti -Chretien" in several of his pieces awhile back. Do you still hope that Greg bans this man of great national influence.....The Baron of Banality? I hope not.

And why would Gorbachev's demise strike such a chord in you that you still commemorate it 13 years later? ( If I'm coresponding with a 13 year old & not noticing it may God punish me by smiting me immediately & I think Get Smart went into reruns some time in the bloody 70's).

Well there you go. It looks as if you've seen more information on this little proposal than I have...you're implying that it's just some sort of trade agreement. Snore. No wonder the Canadian public can't get excited about this...better access to the Turks great products like...um...sand? Coconuts?

We could ask you the same thing. After all, YOU never told us if you feel that Harper deserves a shot at at the brass ring either. Unless we missed it. So if you did and we have missed it, would you be kind enough to repeat it? Thanx!

I don't know August...the personal touch is always appreciated by everyone, any time. BTW...if I may be so bold...what happened in August 1991 that you are commemorating? ( No comment on the Via Rail guy...I just can't get into the minutae of federal civil servant larceny. The big picture is enough for me).

Those bastards! Where do they get the idea that all men are created equal? Oh, wait... So I guess we're not going to get the answer...where exactly ARE these inequalities that they want eliminated by being able to get married?

Unka- Actually I'm not banned from ANY forum to my knowledge...ok...maybe the Leper one. Which even YOU have too much diginity to visit anymore. If you feel that this forum is too boring for your tremendous wit & knowledge...please advise us ALL of a better one. We'd be THRILLED to bask in the light of your superior posts. Are you getting a touch of Alzheimers in your waning years? My "off to Hawaii" was hypethetical based in my hope of a grand migration North/South, a la India /Pakistan. I haven't heard of it actually being implemented in law today, although I did only skim the dailies. How's it going out there these days in the grand metropolis of Mississauga ? Your best friend, Rudyard the Insane

- HEY, NUTTER ... Did you talk with Jim McNulty THROUGH your TV set the same as you used to claim you ''talked'' with Barbara Yaffe and Don Martin? Or perhaps you talk with McNulty THROUGH the pages of your newspaper as you claimed to talk with several other political columnists. Do you still edit the columns of the New York Times' Mark Steyn and advise him what to write? How about that french poet who has been dead some 250 years whom you claim telephones you regularly? GO AWAY, NUT CASE RUDYARD. Oh oh. Now I think you're going to have to write "I will not call other boys names" 100 times after school.