Comments on: Fox’s foolish reporting of non-news http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Sun, 19 May 2013 14:07:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Cole http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58278 Cole Tue, 29 Dec 2009 05:02:47 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58278 Contact Iowa congressmen NOW and encourage them block any vote of gay couples' marriages. Keep sending email, letters, faxes, and phone calls. Contact Iowa congressmen NOW and encourage them block any vote of gay couples’ marriages. Keep sending email, letters, faxes, and phone calls.

]]> By: Richard Rush http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58198 Richard Rush Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:27:52 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58198 Bearchewtow75 wrote, "So, the next time NOM’s Maggie Srivistav [sic], or whatever her married name is that she refuses to use, whines about not letting Iowa vote about marriage . . ." Isn't Maggie redefining traditional marriage by not using her husband's surname, Srivastav? Shouldn't people have the right to vote on that practice? Bearchewtow75 wrote, “So, the next time NOM’s Maggie Srivistav [sic], or whatever her married name is that she refuses to use, whines about not letting Iowa vote about marriage . . .”

Isn’t Maggie redefining traditional marriage by not using her husband’s surname, Srivastav? Shouldn’t people have the right to vote on that practice?

]]> By: Bearchewtoy75 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58191 Bearchewtoy75 Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:20:08 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58191 Sol Invictus, Did you not read the article? No one is saying that the people of Iowa do not have the right to vote on their constitution. However, in that state, it is not as simple as just putting it up to a popular vote. Sol Invictus,

Did you not read the article?

No one is saying that the people of Iowa do not have the right to vote on their constitution. However, in that state, it is not as simple as just putting it up to a popular vote.

]]> By: Bearchewtoy75 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58190 Bearchewtoy75 Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:15:33 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58190 So, the next time NOM's Maggie Srivistav, or whatever her married name is that she refuses to use, whines about not letting Iowa vote about marriage, we can tell her that in order for that to happen, I Iowa has to remove most of the democrats, they have to vote on it twice, and THEN the people can vote on it! Yeah.... I'm thinking not gonna happen. So, the next time NOM’s Maggie Srivistav, or whatever her married name is that she refuses to use, whines about not letting Iowa vote about marriage, we can tell her that in order for that to happen, I Iowa has to remove most of the democrats, they have to vote on it twice, and THEN the people can vote on it!

Yeah…. I’m thinking not gonna happen.

]]> By: andrew http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58184 andrew Mon, 28 Dec 2009 11:13:19 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58184 Tim, I can appreciate wanting to have somewhere to hear in news media what is actually being said in conservative circles, but I'd like to point a few things out: 1) conservatives dominate the airwaves -- i'm not sure how much more "balance" our culture can handle. 2) while liberals like msnbc cast information in a light they favor, they still dabble in fact. fox news often doesn't find this altogether necessary. 3) we should be chastising our news media to get out of the business of conflating fact and editorials in the first place. that's not to say that we should accept a vapid, irresponsible "all sides deserve equal merit" argument (where every issue - like 'should gays be killed' (umm... thanks, BBC!) - deserve time devoted to pro and con arguments), but rather that we have far too much of the fox news ilk, and far too little of the old fashioned journalism that a free society needs. now *that* is something to advocate ! Tim, I can appreciate wanting to have somewhere to hear in news media what is actually being said in conservative circles, but I’d like to point a few things out:
1) conservatives dominate the airwaves — i’m not sure how much more “balance” our culture can handle.
2) while liberals like msnbc cast information in a light they favor, they still dabble in fact. fox news often doesn’t find this altogether necessary.
3) we should be chastising our news media to get out of the business of conflating fact and editorials in the first place. that’s not to say that we should accept a vapid, irresponsible “all sides deserve equal merit” argument (where every issue – like ‘should gays be killed’ (umm… thanks, BBC!) – deserve time devoted to pro and con arguments), but rather that we have far too much of the fox news ilk, and far too little of the old fashioned journalism that a free society needs. now *that* is something to advocate !

]]> By: Dan http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58176 Dan Mon, 28 Dec 2009 08:02:58 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58176 @ Tim Kincaid: "Both House Speaker Pat Murphy and Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal have stated that they will not be entertaining such a debate." - I believe they said that with respect to the 2009 legislative session. As far as I know, they haven't promised to bottle this up in 2010. You may recall that even in MA, there was a vote on a constitutional amendment. So I think this is more of a story than you are allowing. Also, Iowans will vote this year (as they do every 10 years) on whether to require a constitutional convention. While a convention need not deal with marriage and while it would be up to the delegates to decide that, I would bet that the right wing will use the convention vote as a vehicle to promote their campaign. @ Sol: Thanks for opposing fascism! I expect to see you up in Albany, NY demanding that marriage equality be sent to a popular vote. Don't let a few senators take the issue away from the people! That's what Mussolini did! @ Tim Kincaid:

“Both House Speaker Pat Murphy and Senate Majority Leader Michael Gronstal have stated that they will not be entertaining such a debate.”

- I believe they said that with respect to the 2009 legislative session. As far as I know, they haven’t promised to bottle this up in 2010. You may recall that even in MA, there was a vote on a constitutional amendment. So I think this is more of a story than you are allowing. Also, Iowans will vote this year (as they do every 10 years) on whether to require a constitutional convention. While a convention need not deal with marriage and while it would be up to the delegates to decide that, I would bet that the right wing will use the convention vote as a vehicle to promote their campaign.

@ Sol:

Thanks for opposing fascism! I expect to see you up in Albany, NY demanding that marriage equality be sent to a popular vote. Don’t let a few senators take the issue away from the people! That’s what Mussolini did!

]]> By: Robert in San Diego http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58164 Robert in San Diego Mon, 28 Dec 2009 02:09:06 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58164 1. I'm sorry Sol but I too must disagree with you. Equal fundamental rights is not something that the vast majority who hate you should vote on. 2. "Even supposing that the 2010 election could be argued to be a referendum of the people calling for discrimination, a constitutional amendment requires that two back to back legislatures vote affirmatively before presenting the issue to the voters (oh, wise Iowa).".... Wow and to think that states use to look up to California. For a state to pass a constitutional amendment with only 52% of the vote (majority) yet we can't pass a budget or anything else without 2/3 of the legislator. My science is my state stupid. 1. I’m sorry Sol but I too must disagree with you. Equal fundamental rights is not something that the vast majority who hate you should vote on.

2. “Even supposing that the 2010 election could be argued to be a referendum of the people calling for discrimination, a constitutional amendment requires that two back to back legislatures vote affirmatively before presenting the issue to the voters (oh, wise Iowa).”….
Wow and to think that states use to look up to California. For a state to pass a constitutional amendment with only 52% of the vote (majority) yet we can’t pass a budget or anything else without 2/3 of the legislator. My science is my state stupid.

]]> By: Priya Lynn http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58160 Priya Lynn Mon, 28 Dec 2009 01:17:27 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58160 Right John, LOL. Right John, LOL.

]]> By: John http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58158 John Mon, 28 Dec 2009 01:05:17 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58158 Priya, I suppose you could always find of way of having something precariously teatering on it's Right side and call that balanced. Priya,

I suppose you could always find of way of having something precariously teatering on it’s Right side and call that balanced.

]]> By: Priya Lynn http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/12/26/18850/comment-page-1#comment-58156 Priya Lynn Mon, 28 Dec 2009 01:01:08 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=18850#comment-58156 Trig, I thought it was really outrageous. Whenever someone says Fox is a balanced news organization I think about this and just shake my head. Trig, I thought it was really outrageous. Whenever someone says Fox is a balanced news organization I think about this and just shake my head.

]]>