<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Reality Liberation Front &#187; Congressional Sportsmens Caucus</title>
	<atom:link href="http://realityliberationfront.com/tag/congressional-sportsmens-caucus/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://realityliberationfront.com</link>
	<description>Freeing Reality From The Chains Of Subjectivity Since 1987</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:11:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Chaos Theory Edition: Hunting Liberals, President King, and Going Rouge</title>
		<link>http://realityliberationfront.com/chaos-theory-edition-hunting-liberals-president-king-and-going-rouge/</link>
		<comments>http://realityliberationfront.com/chaos-theory-edition-hunting-liberals-president-king-and-going-rouge/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:00:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TBartine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ann Coulter]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chaos theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Congressional Sportsmens Caucus]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FOX News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frank Gaffney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gay marriage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gay rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gitmo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Glenn Beck]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Going Rogue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Going Rouge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Insurance Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lou Dobbs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Philip Spooner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Public Option]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Bachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Harper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative King]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ross Douthat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sarah Palin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://realityliberationfront.com/?p=442</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's Friday...and that means it is time for our weekly "Chaos Theory" installment of the RLF blog, where we gather together links on a variety of political topics ranging from the sublime to the sublimely absurd...]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s Friday&#8230;and that means it is time for our weekly &#8220;<em>Chaos Theory</em>&#8221;  installment of the RLF blog, where we gather together links on a variety of  political topics ranging from the sublime to the <em>sublimely absurd</em>&#8230;</p>
<p>&#8230;and there are always plenty of links, <em>so let&#8217;s get started&#8230;</em></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>POLITICIANS BEHAVING BADLY:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li>Representative Gregg Harper&#8217;s (R-MS) organization, the Congressional  	Sportsmen&#8217;s Caucus, has been recently called &#8220;<strong>bipartisan</strong>&#8221; by Senator Ben  	Nelson (D-NE).  When 	<a href="http://www.politico.com/click/stories/0910/get_to_know_a_congressman4.html"> asked by Polico&#8217;s reporter</a>, &#8220;<strong>What in the world does the Congressional  	Sportsmen&#8217;s Caucus do</strong>,&#8221; one might reasonably expect would be an answer along  	the lines of, &#8220;<em>we support the rights and interests of sportsmen, fishermen,  	and hunters, in Congress.</em>&#8220;  What one might <strong>NOT</strong> expect, was Harper&#8217;s  	response: &#8220;<strong>We hunt liberal, tree-hugging Democrats, although it does  	seem like a waste of good ammunition.</strong>&#8220;  Very nice&#8230;very  	responsible&#8230;<em>very</em> bipartisan.</li>
<li>Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN), known most for conspiracy  	theories verging on the truly bizarre, has declared that she will not run  	for the presidency in 2012.  Which makes sense&#8230;since she may not even  	be able to win re-election for the seat she currently holds, as the  	residents of her district have grown more than a bit weary of her  	embarrassing statements, and the negative attention they attract.   	However, Bachmann 	<a href="http://minnesotaindependent.com/47697/bachmann-says-no-to-white-house-run-want-rep-steve-king-instead"> did provide an interesting recommendation</a> for who she thinks <strong>SHOULD</strong> run:   	<span style="text-decoration: underline;">Representative Steve King (R-IA)</span>.  That&#8217;s right&#8230;she&#8217;s recommending  	the man who brought us such hits as being 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/08/rep-steve-king-lone-vote_n_227866.html"> the only vote</a> against a resolution stating that it was wrong to use  	slaves to build our Capitol,  sponsoring his own resolution &#8220;<strong>recognizing  	the importance of Christians and the Christian faith</strong>,&#8221; and very recently  	stating that gay rights are a &#8220;<strong>purely socialist concept</strong>.&#8221;  Way to  	really think it through, Michele&#8230;he is a <em>winner</em>.</li>
<li>I guess Republicans just <strong>LOVE</strong> Twitter.  	<a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/22/blogtalk-twitter-and-the-gop/"> It&#8217;s also being reported</a>&#8230;that they love setting up fake Twitter  	accounts and webpages, where they pretend to be particular Democratic  	legislators and candidates.  They then use these fraudulent accounts to  	misinform and offend voters.  Twitter has caught on and is trying to  	close all the accounts being used by Republicans in this way.  I think  	I may know why they like Twitter more than actual blogs:  on Twitter  	nobody expects you to actually use <em>facts</em> and defend your position&#8230;you  	can get  	away with just blurting out a few words of nonsense.</li>
<li>The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee 	<a href="http://dscc.org/gopplan">has put out an ad</a>, claiming that  	Republicans have wasted over 1,000 hours in the Senate, through exploitation  	of parliamentary rules and procedures.  The DSCC does little to show  	how they arrived at this figure&#8230;but I would guess that much of what the  	GOP has fought for in Congress also qualifies as a waste of time.  <em>Need  	examples?</em> This clip, a spoof on the iPhone commercials, has been  	making the internet rounds, and I think it nicely sums up the kinds of  	platforms and positions the GOP is using to distract our attention, delay  	progress, and otherwise hinder real issues from being addressed:</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e_IAN081P8I&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e_IAN081P8I&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_IAN081P8I">www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_IAN081P8I</a></p></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>THE MEDIA -- HACKS, PUNDITS, AND OTHER INVETERATE LIARS:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>A Telling List:</strong> Want to see clips of the &#8220;<em>Top Ten Distortions  	Perpetrated By FOX News?</em>&#8220;  Well look no further than 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/the-ten-most-egregious-fo_n_327140.html"> this link</a>.  It includes such highlights as accusing an Obama czar  	of condoning statutory rape, editing a clip of Joe Biden quoting John  	McCain&#8230;so that it appeared as if Biden said the quote, editing a clip of  	Barack Obama so it appeared that he supported a European-style health care  	system&#8230;when he was actually opposing the idea, <strong>AND</strong> directly repeating,  	<span style="text-decoration: underline;">verbatim</span>, GOP talking points as if they were news.  <em>Enjoy</em>&#8230;</li>
<li><strong>Glenn Beck, Part 1:</strong> A Hollywood charity is mounting a push to  	encourage more Americans to volunteer.  Since Obama has also supported  	volunteerism as important, Glenn Beck 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/19/glenn-beck-slams-obama-en_n_326632.html"> could only imagine one thing</a>:  That Obama is using Hollywood&#8230;<em>to  	turn us into Communist China</em>.  No, I&#8217;m serious&#8230;here&#8217;s what he said: &#8220;<strong>Celebrities  	are coming together to make it cool to volunteer. Disney gives you a free  	day at the park. This is all fine, but doesn&#8217;t it seem a little bit  	convenient that all of this comes out now at the same time the Obama  	administration is calling for it? Obama controls the message through the  	media he holds in his pocket. Or in his little hand. And soon if you  	disobey, he&#8217;ll just go [Beck slaps his hand]. Now the message will be  	embedded in television shows. Isn&#8217;t this great? Aren&#8217;t you proud of what  	we&#8217;re doing? Oh, this certainly is change.</strong>&#8220;</li>
<li><strong>Glenn Beck, Part 2:</strong> Why is it that every time I write about  	something Glenn Beck said, I feel the need to also say, &#8220;<em>No really&#8230;that&#8217;s  	what he said?</em>&#8220;  Well, Beck was busy this week providing more ammunition  	for whomever is filling out the civil commitment papers on him, 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/glenn-beck-smears-progres_n_327860.html"> claiming</a> that progressives/liberals&#8230;<em>wait for it</em>&#8230;have historically  	tried to take away everyone&#8217;s individual liberties, and could also be called  	&#8220;<strong>tyrants</strong>&#8221; or &#8220;<strong>slave holders</strong>.&#8221;  &lt;&lt;Sigh&gt;&gt;&#8230;</li>
<li>Neocon Frank Gaffney has claimed in the past that Obama was some sort of  	&#8220;s<em>ecret Muslim</em>,&#8221; that there is evidence connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11 and  	the Oklahoma City bombing (<em>there isn&#8217;t, of course, and shame on you if you  	didn&#8217;t know that</em>), that Sarah Palin learned foreign policy just by <em>living</em> in  	Alaska, that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (<em>but that the  	media hid this &#8220;fact&#8221; from us</em>), and that Democratic officials who criticized  	former President George W. Bush&#8230;should be hanged.  I tell you all  	this&#8230;so it will be of no surprise that Gaffney has no more decency than he  	has sense.  In a recent appearance on Hardball with Chris Matthews, he  	told Ron Reagan&#8230;<strong>that his father would be ashamed of him:</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rMOBQZwDMAE&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rMOBQZwDMAE&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMOBQZwDMAE">www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMOBQZwDMAE</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li>John Stossel of the FOX Business Channel recently condemned Lou Dobbs&#8217;,  	of CNN, for Dobb&#8217;s ongoing &#8220;<strong>rants about immigrants wrecking America.</strong>&#8220;   	Dobbs has now responded, and rather unkindly: &#8220;<strong>Fox Business News  	- their new hire John Stossel -- weighing in  		with his own brand of myopic idiocy and no information whatsoever sat  		down with self-described rodeo clown Glenn Beck…what a self-important  		ass</strong><strong>…He doesn’t understand basic economics…He’s just a silly  	little trick waiting to do some sort of Libertarian flip&#8230;Immigrants wrecking America  	-  I’ve never said anything close to that.  		As a matter of fact, I embrace immigrants to this country, I welcome  		them, I want more -- and as a matter of public policy, we need them. </strong> <strong>In no way am I restrictionist, and to hear this ass continue his  		act over at Fox News. I just can’t wait until he starts blowing bubbles  		in the air -- that’s about all he’s equipped to do.</strong>&#8220;   	That&#8217;s right Lou, you never said the &#8220;<em>immigrants are wrecking America</em>&#8220;&#8230;oh, 	<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/23/lou-dobbs-john-stossel/">except  	the time</a> you accused them of bringing leprosy here&#8230;oh, 	<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/23/lou-dobbs-john-stossel/">or the  	time</a> you claimed they were forming a conspiracy to take back their old  	national territory&#8230;oh, and 	<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/10/23/lou-dobbs-john-stossel/"> remember the time</a> you said they were a threat to the entire middle  	class, and working people everywhere?  Dobbs&#8230;before you start trying  	to play &#8220;<em>friend to the immigrant</em>,&#8221; and &#8220;<em>holier than thou</em>&#8221; with John Stossel&#8230;you  	might want to watch some your own clips on YouTube.</li>
<li>How better to wrap up the &#8220;<em>Media Gone Wild</em>&#8221; segment of the post, than  	with an Ann Coulter item.  During her appearance on Joy Behar&#8217;s talk  	show, she stated that all Presidential assassins have been liberals: &#8220;<strong>As  	I have not only witnessed in my own life but described in &#8216;Guilty&#8217;, every  	presidential assassination or attempted presidential assassination was  	committed by some kind of left-wing loon, communist, anarchist,  	communitarian, or they had no politics at all.</strong>&#8220;  Behar attempts to  	point out that this statement is indefensible and patently false&#8230;but Ms.  	Coulter has never been the one to stop talking so that someone else can  	point out <strong>HOW WRONG SHE IS</strong>:</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LHBR8GYwtiM&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LHBR8GYwtiM&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHBR8GYwtiM">www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHBR8GYwtiM</a></p></p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>COURTESY OF THE PENTAGON AND THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li>Apparently, there are at least 220 detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval  	Prison&#8230;which have been found to have had no ties to terrorism, 9/11, or to  	pose any other kind of threat to the United States&#8230;<span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>but we&#8217;re still keeping  	them in prison</strong></span>.  The Supreme Court 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/20/guantanamo-uighurs-rights_n_327027.html"> is preparing to look at this problem</a>&#8230;yet another in a list of how  	Bush&#8217;s use of the military prison conflicts with seemingly <strong>EVERY</strong> aspect of  	Due Process listed in our Constitution.  <em>A reminder:</em> the  	base/prison is technically &#8220;<em>American soil</em>&#8221; and the Constitution does not say  	that it applies only to &#8220;<em>citizens</em>&#8221; but rather to all &#8220;<strong>persons</strong>.&#8221;  On a  	related note, a group called <em>New Security Action</em>, with the support of a  	number of retired generals and other veterans, 	<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYN6yeRWYbI&amp;feature=player_embedded"> has released a series of ads</a> pointing out that Congress should step  	aside and allow Gitmo, which has come to represent nearly everything wrong  	about the Bush-Cheney way of thinking, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">to be closed</span>.</li>
<li><strong>No surprise:</strong> Turns out the Pentagon was engaged in a highly  	organized program to sell the American people on the Iraq War and other Bush  	security policies.  <strong>Big surprise:</strong> Well&#8230;it wasn&#8217;t so much an &#8220;<em>ad  	campaign</em>&#8221; or a &#8220;<em>public relations program</em>&#8220;&#8230;as it was 	<a href="http://rawstory.com/2009/10/bryan-whitman-2/">a series of  	psychological experiments</a> being performed on the American citizenry.   	<strong>Bonus surprise:</strong> One of the chief architects of this program?  He  	still works at the Pentagon in the same position.  Scully&#8230;Mulder&#8230;<em>where  	are you when we need you?</em></li>
<li>Most people were a bit surprised at the unmitigated gall of the 30  	Senate Republicans who voted against Senator Franken&#8217;s (D-MN) bill, which  	would punish government contractors if they tried to keep employees from  	reporting rape.  Turns out, <em>they&#8217;ve got company</em> -- the Defense  	Department 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/19/defense-department-oppose_n_326569.html"> also doesn&#8217;t like the bill</a>&#8230;because they would hate to have to do  	without KBR, Blackwater, and other companies that threaten/coerce/bribe  	victims of rape to be silent.</li>
</ul>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>THE HEALTH CARE CARNIVAL OF DESPAIR:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li>Amidst all the talk about a &#8220;<em>public option</em>,&#8221; few are paying  	attention to a development almost as big.  	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/21/senate-dems-aim-to-strip_n_328362.html"> Democrats are very close</a> to being able to strip away the anti-trust  	exemption given long ago to the health insurance companies, which has  	allowed them to behave as a monopoly.  Want to know why this is so  	important?  We know how the free market is <strong>SUPPOSED</strong> to  	work&#8230;but when a company is allowed to monopolize an industry or a region,  	then there is no competition to force the company to have fair pricing and  	offer good service&#8230;which leads to our situation today where the health  	insurance companies have high rates, giant profits, deny service, and  	mistreat customers.  Also&#8230;<a href="http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/health_competition_map.html">check  	out this map</a>.  <strong>Yes, it&#8217;s disgusting:</strong> most states&#8217; residents, 	<strong>RIGHT NOW</strong>, only have <strong>ONE</strong> or <strong>TWO</strong> insurers that they are 	<strong>ALLOWED</strong> to choose from.  &#8220;<em>Free Market Capitalists</em>&#8220;&#8230;are  	you listening?</li>
<li>First it was &#8220;<em>fat babies</em>.&#8221;  Then it was &#8220;<em>thin babies</em>.&#8221;   	Then it was &#8220;<em>spousal abuse</em>.&#8221;  What new excuse for denying  	coverage did we find out about now?  Yup&#8230;insurance companies, almost  	all of them, 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/21/insurance-companies-rape-_n_328708.html"> will not allow you to purchase a policy</a> with them if you have been  	treated for <strong>RAPE</strong>.  To them&#8230;it&#8217;s just another &#8220;<em>pre-existing  	condition.</em>&#8220;</li>
<li>The push for the public option is in full swing, and polls show it is  	working.  More of the public supports it each day, the House is within  	about <strong>EIGHT</strong> votes of being able to pass it, and we heard the 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/23/reid-is-only-one-or-two-v_n_331652.html"> surprising news</a> today that the Senate may be within <strong>TWO</strong> votes.  	<em>Seriously</em>: <strong>TWO VOTES</strong>.  Here&#8217;s a new ad, featuring Heather  	Graham, explaining why the option is necessary:</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bvaJYYeXf70&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bvaJYYeXf70&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvaJYYeXf70">www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvaJYYeXf70</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Interesting fact courtesy of Representative Anthony Weiner (D-NY):</span> <a href="http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2009/10/23/weiner-calls-gop-opponents-public-option-give-up-their-medicare"> 55 of the Republicans</a> opposing the public option because it&#8217;s &#8220;<em>government-run</em>&#8221;  	or &#8220;<em>socialism</em>&#8220;&#8230;they&#8217;re currently <strong>ON</strong> <strong>MEDICARE</strong>.   	Weiner says, &#8220;<strong>Even in a town known for hypocrisy, this list of 55 Members  	of Congress deserve some sort of prize. They apparently think the public  	option is ok for them, but not anyone else.</strong>&#8220;  Yes, indeed.</li>
</ul>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>GAY RIGHTS&#8230;OR THE LACK THEREOF:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Wow</strong>:  It&#8217;s rare that someone actually <strong>ADMITS</strong> that their argument  	against gay rights and/or gay marriage is hollow and baseless.  Ross Douthat,  	conservative columnist for the New York Times, was asked while sitting on a  	panel for &#8220;<em>young, bright, neo-cons</em>&#8221; what he thought about gay marriage.  	<a href="http://www.observer.com/2009/media/n1-panel-cat-got-douthats-tongue-topic-gay-marriage"> His response</a>:  &#8220;<strong>I am someone opposed to gay marriage who is  	deeply uncomfortable arguing the issue in public.</strong>&#8220;  He explained  	that his reason for feeling &#8220;<strong>uncomfortable</strong>&#8221; discussing the subject,  	was because his argument against it is purely religious, and that it  	therefore represents &#8220;<strong>a losing argument.</strong>&#8220;  He even went so far  	as to recognize that because he is embarrassed that he has no real, factual  	objection to gay marriage&#8230;and because he is embarrassed to say what his  	objection really is&#8230;perhaps that means he needs to change his position and  	support gay marriage.  <em>Wow.  Again&#8230;wow.</em></li>
<li>Related to the previous item, a mailing sent out in Maine is attempting  	to persuade residents of the state to vote &#8220;<em>Yes</em>&#8221; in the upcoming ballot item  	to prohibit gay marriage.  The reasons that it proposes? I happen to  	have FiveThirtyEight.com&#8217;s 	<a href="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/arguments-against-gay-marriage.html"> summations of the reasons</a>&#8230;first, the mailing claims that the new law  	permitting gay marriage &#8220;<strong>won&#8217;t make gay marriage equal to straight  	marriage. Instead, it will create a new kind of marriage in which gay people  	and straight people are equal.</strong>&#8220;  Well, besides not making much  	sense&#8230;that&#8217;s certainly not going to &#8220;<em>stir up</em>&#8221; too many people.   	The second reason it offers: &#8220;<strong>&#8230;we may not have proven any connection  	between gay marriage and public education, our opponents haven&#8217;t disproven  	the connection, and it&#8217;s their fault that the subject came up.</strong>&#8220;   	Impressive&#8230;that doesn&#8217;t really say anything, does it.  I mean, it  	sounds like it&#8217;s saying something&#8230;but then it just&#8230;doesn&#8217;t.  And  	third, the mailing offers that, &#8220;<strong>if gay marriage is upheld, then marriage  	will exist solely to make people happy.</strong>&#8220;  Well,  	it&#8217;s hard to see how that&#8217;s true&#8230;would gay people marrying suddenly make  	heterosexual marriages &#8220;<em>meaningless</em>&#8221; and about nothing more than &#8220;<em>happiness</em>?&#8221;   	And hell, I know some people who will tell you that marriage has nothing to  	do with happiness at all&#8230;I&#8217;m sure they were just kidding&#8230;</li>
<li><em>Meet Philip Spooner:</em> Want to hear a86-year-old  	man&#8230;lifelong Republican&#8230;and WWII veteran who fought on D-Day&#8230;defend  	gay marriage with all his heart?  <em>Yeah, me too:</em></li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GrEbJBFWIPk&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GrEbJBFWIPk&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrEbJBFWIPk">www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrEbJBFWIPk</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li>Despite the calls from Republicans that protecting gay Americans was the  	equivalent of protecting practitioners of  <em>pedophilia, bestiality,  	and necrophilia</em>&#8230;<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/22/hate-crimes-bill-approved_n_330702.html">the  	new Hate Crimes Bill has passed</a>.</li>
</ul>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>MISCELLANY:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li>The Nation, a well-known progressive magazine, 	<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28609.html">is publishing</a> a &#8220;<em>companion piece</em>&#8221; to Sarah Palin&#8217;s new book, &#8220;<em>Going Rogue</em>.&#8221;  It&#8217;s  	titled &#8220;<em>Going Rouge</em>&#8221; and features an almost identical cover, to match the  	almost identical title.  Some conservatives have complained that this  	might lead to some people purchasing The Nation&#8217;s book by mistake.   	Perhaps they&#8217;re right&#8230;seeing as both books will likely be placed next to  	each other on a shelve in the &#8220;<em>Humor</em>&#8221; section&#8230;and due to the fact that  	many of the people seeking Palin&#8217;s book might not know how &#8220;<em>rogue</em>&#8221; is  	properly spelled.</li>
</ul>
<p>That about wraps it up for this week in Reality Liberation.  Have a  wonderful weekend, and we&#8217;ll see you on Monday&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://realityliberationfront.com/chaos-theory-edition-hunting-liberals-president-king-and-going-rouge/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

