<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Will Huntsman Defend DOMA?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:59:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Kincaid</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96721</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Kincaid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:59:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96721</guid>
		<description>My point is this: 

In your rush to disagree, you didn&#039;t see any need to research your position.  You just declared the opposite as though it had equal merit.  And when you&#039;re proven wrong (as on another thread) you point out the &quot;IF&quot; as your qualifier.

Look, you are entitled to your opinions.  And you are entitled to disagree with absolutely every comment I make.  Literally every single one, if you like.  And, Priya, sometimes it really seems to me that this is your favorite passtime.

But while it is annoying to have someone constantly just disagree, on everything, it&#039;s doubly annoying that you don&#039;t even have the courtesy to do the research before you announce that I&#039;m wrong.

You do understand why that annoys me, right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My point is this: </p>
<p>In your rush to disagree, you didn&#8217;t see any need to research your position.  You just declared the opposite as though it had equal merit.  And when you&#8217;re proven wrong (as on another thread) you point out the &#8220;IF&#8221; as your qualifier.</p>
<p>Look, you are entitled to your opinions.  And you are entitled to disagree with absolutely every comment I make.  Literally every single one, if you like.  And, Priya, sometimes it really seems to me that this is your favorite passtime.</p>
<p>But while it is annoying to have someone constantly just disagree, on everything, it&#8217;s doubly annoying that you don&#8217;t even have the courtesy to do the research before you announce that I&#8217;m wrong.</p>
<p>You do understand why that annoys me, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Priya Lynn</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96718</link>
		<dc:creator>Priya Lynn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:34:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96718</guid>
		<description>Just a figure of speech Timothy, don&#039;t get bent out of shape.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a figure of speech Timothy, don&#8217;t get bent out of shape.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Kincaid</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96716</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Kincaid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 21:18:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96716</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;It’s true that Republican judicial apointees sometimes end up voting liberally, but how often do Democrat judicial apointees end up voting conservatively? Not very often, I imagine.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Seriously?

You&#039;re going to counter-argue based on your imagination?

wow</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>It’s true that Republican judicial apointees sometimes end up voting liberally, but how often do Democrat judicial apointees end up voting conservatively? Not very often, I imagine.</p></blockquote>
<p>Seriously?</p>
<p>You&#8217;re going to counter-argue based on your imagination?</p>
<p>wow</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: customartist</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96694</link>
		<dc:creator>customartist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 14:56:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96694</guid>
		<description>Huntsman CANNOT gain the GOP nomination if he opposes DOMA, period.

He will be vague and ride the fence, feigning empathy toward gays in an effort to gain support, but he will NEVER, EVER oppose the GOP Party Line.

Remember McCain vehemently opposing Bush Tax Cuts, but then when running for the GOP nomination he flipped like a pancake?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Huntsman CANNOT gain the GOP nomination if he opposes DOMA, period.</p>
<p>He will be vague and ride the fence, feigning empathy toward gays in an effort to gain support, but he will NEVER, EVER oppose the GOP Party Line.</p>
<p>Remember McCain vehemently opposing Bush Tax Cuts, but then when running for the GOP nomination he flipped like a pancake?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96582</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96582</guid>
		<description>Huntsman isn&#039;t being pro-gay.  He&#039;s being diplomatic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Huntsman isn&#8217;t being pro-gay.  He&#8217;s being diplomatic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Priya Lynn</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96578</link>
		<dc:creator>Priya Lynn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 18:19:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96578</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s true that Republican judicial apointees sometimes end up voting liberally, but how often do Democrat judicial apointees end up voting conservatively?  Not very often, I imagine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s true that Republican judicial apointees sometimes end up voting liberally, but how often do Democrat judicial apointees end up voting conservatively?  Not very often, I imagine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timothy Kincaid</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96577</link>
		<dc:creator>Timothy Kincaid</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 18:02:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96577</guid>
		<description>Zeke,

History suggests that judicial appointments are about as predictable as next year&#039;s weather.  As I sit here thinking, to the best of my recollection most every major judicial advancement we&#039;ve had has been authored by a Republican appointee from Margaret Mitchell to Kennedy to Walker to Ware (whose decision on judicial recusal is probably much more important than we are noting).

I understand your point (Scalia, Thomas) but it just isn&#039;t as straight forward as that.  And we just don&#039;t know that Huntsman would select a Scalia instead of an O&#039;Conner.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Zeke,</p>
<p>History suggests that judicial appointments are about as predictable as next year&#8217;s weather.  As I sit here thinking, to the best of my recollection most every major judicial advancement we&#8217;ve had has been authored by a Republican appointee from Margaret Mitchell to Kennedy to Walker to Ware (whose decision on judicial recusal is probably much more important than we are noting).</p>
<p>I understand your point (Scalia, Thomas) but it just isn&#8217;t as straight forward as that.  And we just don&#8217;t know that Huntsman would select a Scalia instead of an O&#8217;Conner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben in Atlanta</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96571</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben in Atlanta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 16:42:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96571</guid>
		<description>Is he going to cook and eat Boyd Packer publicly? Or at least send him into exile?

&quot;Go sell crazy someplace else, we&#039;re all stocked up here&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is he going to cook and eat Boyd Packer publicly? Or at least send him into exile?</p>
<p>&#8220;Go sell crazy someplace else, we&#8217;re all stocked up here&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: F Young</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96569</link>
		<dc:creator>F Young</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 16:35:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96569</guid>
		<description>While Huntsman now claims to support civil unions, as Governor, he supported a constitutional amendment that not only bans same-sex marriage, but also any &quot;other domestic union, however denominated.&quot; This was designed specifically to ban same-sex civil unions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While Huntsman now claims to support civil unions, as Governor, he supported a constitutional amendment that not only bans same-sex marriage, but also any &#8220;other domestic union, however denominated.&#8221; This was designed specifically to ban same-sex civil unions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TampaZeke</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/06/22/34399/comment-page-1#comment-96567</link>
		<dc:creator>TampaZeke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 16:07:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=34399#comment-96567</guid>
		<description>More important than ANY of that is, WHO WOULD HE PUT ON THE SUPREME COURT?  That&#039;s where is Republican bonafides would really shine and where the gay community would really get the screws.

Not to mention, he outright said that gay couples should get a &quot;subordinate&quot; designation.  At least he&#039;s honest about his desire to have a second class citizen legal status for gay people.  Obama hasn&#039;t yet found the courage to admit that that is what he believes too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More important than ANY of that is, WHO WOULD HE PUT ON THE SUPREME COURT?  That&#8217;s where is Republican bonafides would really shine and where the gay community would really get the screws.</p>
<p>Not to mention, he outright said that gay couples should get a &#8220;subordinate&#8221; designation.  At least he&#8217;s honest about his desire to have a second class citizen legal status for gay people.  Obama hasn&#8217;t yet found the courage to admit that that is what he believes too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
