See the article here:

Ever since Obama formerly announced that he supports same sex marriage, celebrities have been coming out to voice their opinions as well. Jay-Z, Will Smith,…
See the article here:

Ever since Obama formerly announced that he supports same sex marriage, celebrities have been coming out to voice their opinions as well. Jay-Z, Will Smith,…
Posted in Celebrities, Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged Celebrities, detected, invalid, missing, opinions, remember, same-sex marriage, someone-pushed, stars, supports-same, voice-their
MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer mocked attendees of the Values Voter Summit today, directing her ire at former vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, Delaware Republican Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell, and the entire conservative movement. “So, they’re calling themselves values voters, but isn’t this election really about the economy and not so much what we think of as values?” sniveled Brewer, who put air quotes around the term “values.” Brewer’s dismissive attitude toward values voters must not extend to homosexual rights activists like herself who frequently turn their anchor chairs into liberal soapboxes. The champion of same-sex marriage revealed her disdain for Palin by noting that although the former Alaska governor was not present at the event, “her doppleganger, Christine O’Donnell is there and she is stealing the show.” Manufacturing controversy by imagining a Wild West “showdown at the Values Voter Summit,” the paladin of homosexual equality scornfully described the annual summit as the “conservative Shangri- La,” referring, apparently, to the fictional location in James Hilton’s Lost Horizon which represents a sort of heaven on earth. Setting aside the inherent hypocrisy in eschewing voters who focus on values issues like gay rights while exploiting her perch as a cable news anchor to advocate for the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the fact that, as Brewer accurately reported, the top issue for voters this election cycle is the economy should compel the media to focus more on the lagging economic numbers than on a peaceful gathering of social conservatives. A transcript of the relevant portions of the segment can be found below ( H/T News Analyst Scott Whitlock for transcript assistance ): MSNBC News Live 09/17/10 12 P.M. E.S.T. CONTESSA BREWER: It’s showdown at the Values Voter Summit. The Grand Old Party. The established, traditional candidates caught in the cross fire of conservatives who want something different. And right now both sides are under the same big tent, so to speak, today at this conservative Shangri-La, the Values Voters Summit. Let’s show it to you. The Republicans recognize the split between the factions in their own party, but their most famous faces are focusing on a common enemy. MITT ROMNEY: It’s- I guess it is welcome to the Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, President Obama farewell party. BREWER: And those in attendance are just starting to vote in a straw poll giving people a glimpse into who wants to run for president in 2012. Sarah Palin is up for the vote even though not physically present at the summit. Her doppleganger, Christine O’Donnell is there and she is stealing the show. CHRISTINE O’DONNELL: It’s no secret that there’s been a rather unflattering portrait of me painted these days. I’m not counting on the national media to vote for me on November 2nd. I’m asking all of you to vote for me. BREWER: That splinter may give Democrats an opportunity here. Alaska’s Senator Lisa Murkowski decides today whether to compete as a write-in candidate against the Tea Partier and Republican primary winner Joe Miller. That would definitely split the conservative vote and give Democrat a real chance to take away the seat. Domenico Montanaro is a political guru, a producer and off-air reporter extraordinaire for NBC News. Good to see you. When we’re talking about the value voters is that code for Tea Partiers or a whole different group of people? DOMENICO MONTANARO: Well, there’s certainly overlap. I mean, there’s a lot of folks here who certainly identify with the Tea Party as well. But, you know, Values Voters traditionally has been a summit here that’s taken place in Washington every year focuses on you know, social issues. Things like gay marriage. You know, the- abortion. Things you would normally associate with social issues. That’s bled over somewhat, though, this year with the Tea Party, and they’re focused a little bit more on fiscal issues. Fiscal responsibility. Talking about making that a moral issue. We heard Jim DeMint talk about it. We even heard Mike Huckabee talk about it who has won here the straw poll the last few years. And, you know, we saw Mitt Romney gave his speech, you know, talking about pushing carts down Walmart. You know, talking about some terrorism issues and, you know, this is more of what you’re hearing from somebody who’s potentially running for president in 2012 as opposed to somebody who’s necessarily just talking to a social issues group. BREWER: So, they’re calling themselves values voters, but isn’t this election really about the economy and not so much what we think of as values? [Makes quotes marks] MONTANARO: Right. Well, you know, the election certainly is about the economy. It’s what’s given people in the Tea Party movement, Republican, the upper hand. Now, the folks here, like I said, are also focused on that fiscal issue and want to take that and make that part of their platform. But, look, this is important for people running in 2012 because you need activists who vote on social issues. Especially in places like Iowa. Remember, Mitt Romney lost Iowa, despite the amount of money he spent, because Mike Huckabee, in a closed primary, with Christian activists liked his message and folksiness and the fact he was a Baptist preacher and delivered several one-liners, able to rally some of those folks. Someone to watch what a potential 1212 Mike Huckabee, watch Mike Pence. Stirs the crowd. Unapologetic about social issues and took that home to this audience here.

Continue reading here:
MSNBC’s Brewer Scoffs at Values Voters Despite History of Gay Rights Advocacy
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged celeb news, election, Hollywood, kennedy, msnbc, party, president, same-sex marriage, Sarah Palin
Good Morning America’s George Stephanopoulos on Wednesday quizzed House Minority Leader John Boehner about his tan, dismissing, “…I have to note that if you do win and you do become Speaker, you will probably have the deepest tan of any Speaker in American history.” He also wondered if this was something the Republican would have to “overcome.” The former Democratic operative turned journalist cited PPP , a Democratic polling firm, that queried voters about Boehner’s tan: “And there’s actually been a poll out in your state of Ohio, saying 30 percent of the voters think you spend too much time on your tan. And 27 percent don’t like it. Is this something you have to overcome?” [MP3 audio here .] However, when World News’ Claire Shipman interviewed Nancy Pelosi on October 26, 2006 , just prior to the Democratic take over of the House, the reporter mused, “Do you let yourself think, for example, maybe before you go to sleep at night, ‘Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi?” Stephanopoulos on Wednesday asked the same question, but minus the flowery language: “Mr. Leader, how confident are you that you’re going to be Speaker of the House next year?” The host also pressed Boehner to condemn Terry Jones, a pastor in Florida who will be burning Korans on 9/11: “What is your message to Pastor Jones?” Boehner responded by asserting that just because someone can do something, doesn’t mean they should. That, apparently, wasn’t enough for Stephanopoulos. He challenged, “So, you’re telling him not to do it? Sir? Are you telling him not to do it?” Yet, on the August 4 GMA , Stephanopoulos declared to conservative Laura Ingraham, “This is a country founded on the notion of religious freedom. What better way to say they [the terrorists] haven’t won?” A transcript of the September 8 segment, which aired at 7:11am EDT, follows: 7:11 GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: As we said, the President will deliver what he hopes will be a tide-turning speech on the economy in Cleveland. And he is taking direct aim again at our next guest, top House Republican John Boehner. BARACK OBAMA: And the Republican who thinks he’s going to take over as Speaker- [Audience boos.] I’m just saying, that’s his opinion. He’s entitled to his opinion. But, but when he was asked about this, he dismissed those jobs, as government jobs that weren’t worth saving. STEPHANOPOULOS: And House Republican leader John Boehner, joins us now. Thank you, sir, for coming in this morning. You seem to be the President’s new punching bag. HOUSE MINORITY LEADER JOHN BOEHNER: Well, George, I think it just shows how out of touch the White House is. You know, the American people are asking the question, where are the jobs? And yet, here’s the White House worrying about what I’ve got to say instead of working together to get our economy going again and to get jobs back in America. STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, the President is outlining proposals that Republicans have supported in the past. This permanent extension of the Research and Development Tax Credit. This expensing proposal, the small business tax cut of about $100 billion. Those are proposals Republicans have supported in the past. Will you support them now? BOEHNER: George, I’m open to the President’s ideas. But I think the President’s missing the bigger point here. And that is, with all of the spending in Washington, and all the uncertainty facing small businesses, including the coming tax hikes on January the first, until this uncertainty and spending is under control, I don’t think these are going to have much impact. And, so, today, what I’d like to do is work on a bipartisan basis to do two things: First, instead of waiting until after the election to put together some big omnibus spending bill, with a bunch of wasteful spending, why wouldn’t we do this? Why don’t we pass a bill this month at 2008 spending levels. You know, before the TARP, before the bailout, before the stimulus. And let’s put some certainty in the economy. That in and of itself would save about $100 billion this year alone. And then, secondly, why wouldn’t we work together to make it clear that all current tax rates will be extended for the next two years? What that will do- STEPHANOPOULOS: So, you’re open- BOEHNER: What that will do is help small businesses who have no clue what the coming tax rates are going to be, gives them some certainty. And if we’re able to do this together, I think we’ll show the American people that we understand what’s going on in the country. And we’ll be able to get our economy moving again and get jobs growing in America. STEPHANOPOULOS: So, you’re open to the President’s ideas. You’re also making these two proposals of your own for the President. You talked about the two year extension of the Bush tax cuts. As you know, the President is against, right now, the extension for the wealthy. But his former budget director, Peter Orszag, made a similar proposal about the two year extension. But he said, but they have to expire in two years so we can reduce the deficit. Are you open to that part of it as well? BOEHNER: George, we can’t deal with the deficit until we’re willing to get our arms around spending and have a strong economy. And you can’t have a strong economy if you’re raising taxes on the very people you expect to invest in our economy to begin hiring people again. STEPHANOPOULOS: Mr. Leader, how confident are you that you’re going to be Speaker of the House next year? BOEHNER: Well, certainly, George, it’s possible. We’ve got a steep hill to climb. We have got a lot of work to do. But when I travel the country and I travel my district, I’ve never seen the American people more engaged in this election and any election in my lifetime. And, so, we’ve got a lot of work to do. That’s our goal, though. To earn back the majority so we can renew our efforts to drive for a smaller, lest-costly and more accountable government in Washington, D.C. STEPHANOPOULOS: If you win, you will be third in line for the White House. Obviously, the eyes of the world will be on you. I wanted you to weigh in on an issue of national security implications, as well. We’ve seen this Pastor Terry Jones down in Florida, threatening to burn the Koran this weekend. This weekend, General Petraeus has spoken out against it. Secretary of State Clinton has spoken out against it. What is your message to Pastor Jones? BOEHNER: To Pastor Jones and those who want to build a mosque, just because you have a right to do something in America, does not mean it is the right thing to do. We’re a nation of religious freedom. We’re also a nation of tolerance. And I think, in the name of tolerance, people ought to really think about the kind of actions they’re taking. STEPHANOPOULOS: So, you’re telling him not to do it? Sir? Are you telling him not to do it? BOEHNER: Well, listen. I just think that it’s not wise to do this in the face of what our country really represents. And over some, you know, 234 years. STEPHANOPOULOS: Okay. Before you go, I have to note that if you do win and you do become Speaker, you will probably have the deepest tan of any Speaker in American history. And there’s actually been a poll out in your state of Ohio, saying 30 percent of the voters think you spend too much time on your tan. And 27 percent don’t like it. Is this something you have to overcome? BOEHNER: Well, hey probably weren’t there yesterday, when I was out cutting my grass or when I was out riding my mountain bike. All right? STEPHANOPOULOS: So, no worries there? BOEHNER: Thanks, George. STEPHANOPOULOS: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Leader. No comment at all.

Read more here:
George Stephanopoulos Derides John Boehner’s ‘Deep Tan,’ Wonders If He Will ‘Overcome’ It
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged america, Breaking News, democratic, development, florida, Obama, pastor, same-sex marriage, speaker
Former Republican National Committee chairman Ken Mehlman’s declaration that he is homosexual caused gay-left Washington Post editorialist Jonathan Capehart to embrace Mehlman…and compare him to the most hardline segregationist. Once again, in Sunday’s newspaper, racism and opposition to the sin of homosexuality were shamelessly equated on Mehlman’s “road to redemption” — but the Sunday edit left out Capehart’s praise for ex-conservative David Brock: Now that Mehlman has made his journey, I am happy that he has already started down the road of redemption. As Ambinder reports, Mehlman has been a de facto strategist for the American Foundation for Equal Rights . That’s the group behind the landmark lawsuit against California’s Proposition 8 banning same-sex marriage. He must keep at it if he is to overcome the deep resentment and distrust that now greets his coming out. It’s possible. Just look at George Wallace and David Brock. Wallace, the legendary Alabama politician, was a progressive who became a rabid segregationist in the 1960s. The dude was way on the wrong side of the civil rights movement at many of its pivotal moments. But when he ran for a final term as governor in 1982 he won with 90 percent of the African American vote . Wallace garnered that vote by spending years making amends — real and symbolic — and asking forgiveness. Brock also reconciled his antagonistic past. After being a significant cog in the “vast right wing conspiracy,” he wrote a 2002 biography that exposed his hidden homosexuality and his role in said conspiracy to take down the Clintons. Part of his redemption was creating in 2004 Media Matters the indispensable progressive website that now monitors the right wing misinformation machine he helped create. Mehlman is the highest-ranking Republican to come out of the closet. (Move over, Mary Cheney.) If he maintains his high-powered efforts to bring his party to the fight for marriage equality, gay men and lesbians will thank Mehlman for his help when same-sex marriage is legal in the United States. It’s not going to happen with Democrats alone, folks.

Originally posted here:
WaPo’s Capehart Lauds Ken Mehlman By Comparing Him to a Recovered Segregationist
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged book, clintons-part, equal-rights, events, george-wallace, Hollywood, News, party, same-sex marriage, work
Mark Levin highlighted some news from Sweden on his national radio show about a man who sewed up his own gash in his leg. Levin said “get ready for it,” joking about how efficient ObamaCare was going to be. This human-interest story will probably not make the liberal media. From The Local : A 32-year-old took the needle into his hands when he tired of the wait at Sundsvall hospital in northern Sweden and sewed up the cut in his leg himself. The man was later reported to the police for his impromptu handiwork. “It took such a long time,” the man told the local Sundsvall Tidning daily. The man incurred the deep cut when he sliced his leg on the sharp edge of a kitchen stove while he was renovating at home. “I first went to the health clinic, but it was closed. So I rang the medical help line and they told me that it shouldn’t be closed, so I went to emergency and sat there,” the man named only as Jonas told the newspaper. After an hour-long wait in a treatment room, he lost patience and proceeded to sew up his own wound. “They had set out a needle and thread and so I decided to take the matter into my hands,” he said. But hospital staff were not as impressed by his initiative and have reported the man on suspicion of criminal dispossession (egenmäktigt förfarande) for having used hospital equipment without authorization. While Jonas admitted to the newspaper that he has no prior experience of sewing up himself he sought to play down the fuss that his handiwork has caused, arguing that “through the ages people have always sewn themselves up”.
Here is the original post:
Socialist Paradise News: Man In Sweden Sews Up Own Leg, Gets Reported to Police
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged bennyhollywood, hands, health, initiative, mark levin, medical, Obama, People, politics, same-sex marriage, told-the-local
Rosie O’Donnell was in the news this week when she signed to do another TV talk show on the forthcoming Oprah cable network. But she’s still serving up leftist political goodies on her satellite radio show. Brian Maloney at Radio Equalizer found her declaring her “wedding” ceremony in San Francisco to former girlfriend Kelli Carpenter was a political protest stunt: George Bush, in the middle of a war, had an all-station news conference to announce how horrible it was for the safety of America that gay people were getting married in San Francisco, which pissed me off enough to get on a plane and go get married. Okay, first of all, on February 24, 2004 , President Bush didn’t call “an all-station news conference.” He made a rather routine statement (not a press conference) in the Roosevelt Room of the White House. And he didn’t say it was “horribly for the safety of America” that gays would marry. He did say the people had voted to endorse the traditional definition of marriage, and some activist judges in Massachusetts and city officials in San Francisco were overturning the will of the people of California. But to Rosie, everything she hears is exaggerated into hate, even as Bush called for civility and calm. She was making it sound like the Nazis were rounding people up: It was like an act of… defiance … If you’re gonna count up everybody who you think is not of value and round ’em all up and slap a pink triangle on ’em… I just felt like I wanted to be counted amongst the people who [some] were saying were unworthy and not allowed to have the same rights as everyone else. …If you’re a straight person and [same-sex marriage] offends you, call me and tell me why, [but] don’t say because marriage is traditionally between a man and woman, because, frankly, that’s such an old and tired line. Now, for a dose of reality, here’s how Bush began his statement : Eight years ago, Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage for purposes of federal law as the legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife. The act passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 342-67 and the Senate by a vote of 85-14. Those congressional votes, and the passage of similar defense of marriage laws in 38 states, express an overwhelming consensus in our country for protecting the institution of marriage. In recent months, however, some activist judges and local officials have made an aggressive attempt to redefine marriage. In Massachusetts, four judges on the highest court have indicated they will order the issuance of marriage licenses to applicants of the same gender in May of this year. In San Francisco, city officials have issued thousands of marriage licenses to people of the same gender, contrary to the California Family Code. That code, which clearly defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman, was approved overwhelmingly by the voters of California. And here’s how he ended: The union of a man and woman is the most enduring human institution, honored and encouraged in all cultures and by every religious faith. Ages of experience have taught humanity that the commitment of a husband and wife to love and to serve one another promotes the welfare of children and the stability of society. Marriage cannot be severed from its cultural, religious and natural roots without weakening the good influence of society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all. Today, I call upon the Congress to promptly pass and to send to the states for ratification an amendment to our Constitution defining and protecting marriage as a union of a man and woman as husband and wife. The amendment should fully protect marriage, while leaving the state legislatures free to make their own choices in defining legal arrangements other than marriage. America’s a free society which limits the role of government in the lives of our citizens. This commitment of freedom, however, does not require the redefinition of one of our most basic social institutions. Our government should respect every person and protect the institution of marriage. There is no contradiction between these responsibilities. We should also conduct this difficult debate in a matter worthy of our country, without bitterness or anger. In all that lies ahead, let us match strong convictions with kindness and good will and decency. Thank you very much. Kindness and good will and decency — not to mention accuracy — aren’t qualities Rosie O’Donnell demonstrates once she starts talking about conservatives on the radio.
See the rest here:
Rosie O’Donnell Admits She Got Married in S.F. Merely As Act of ‘Defiance’ Against Bush
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged america, bennyhollywood, california, francisco, House, judiciary, People, same-sex marriage, TMZ, voters
While Thursday reports on both ABC’s Good Morning America and NBC’s Today featured Proposition 8 supporters questioning the impartiality of California Federal Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision to strike down the state’s referendum defending traditional marriage, CBS’s Early Show failed to provide any such arguments. On Good Morning America, correspondent Terry Moran explained: “Opponents of same-sex marriage vowed to fight on and blasted the judge for, they said, letting personal interests trump his legal duty.” A clip was played of one Proposition 8 supporter: “The judge has imposed his own agenda upon the voters and the children and the parents of California.” On Today, legal correspondent Pete Williams noted: “But opponents of gay marriage, who supported Proposition 8, denounced the ruling and began preparing to fight back.” Supporter Randy Thomasson explained: “The judge has shut the Constitution, imposed his own agenda. He’s made a lot of people happy in the gay community in San Francisco, but he is the most dangerous type of judge in America.” The Early Show report by correspondent Priya David-Clemens only featured a couple brief sound bites of gay marriage opponents in “outright disbelief” of the ruling, but no specific criticisms of the judge being biased. In contrast, three sound bites in favor of the ruling were featured. Of the three network morning shows, only Good Morning America noted that Judge Walker was himself openly gay. Introducing the segment, co-host George Stephanopoulos mentioned: “The judge, Vaughn R. Walker, a Republican first nominated for the bench by Ronald Reagan, he is also openly gay.” Both the Early Show and Today skipped over that detail. Following David-Clemens’s Early Show report, co-host Harry Smith discussed Judge Walker’s decision with legal correspondent Jan Crawford, who proclaimed: …this is a devastating opinion for opponents of same-sex marriage. 136 pages, he has 80 findings of fact that basically amount not only to a defense of same-sex marriage but to a defense of gay people. He says same-sex couples are identical to straight couples and that religious beliefs that homosexually is a sin harms gays and lesbians. On point after point after point he knocks down all of the arguments that were put forth by opponents of same-sex marriage and says gays and lesbians have a fundamental right to marriage under the constitution, just like straight people do. Smith then wondered if Walker’s ruling amounted to settled law: “…there are plenty of people still opposed who want to mount lawsuits against it. What kind of a chance do they have with – is this enough to set a precedent?” Crawford responded: “If this ruling stands and is affirmed by higher courts, it could affect the laws in 45 states, forcing them to redefine how they look at marriage…this is really the first federal court test and it could definitely, as it goes forward, set a precedent that will affect every person across the country.” Raising the possibility of the case going to the U.S. Supreme Court, Smith asked: “[if] the Supreme Court stays on the same side, based on the legal issues that you just outlined, will same-sex marriage become the law of the land?” Only then did Crawford acknowledge the temporary nature of the ruling: “Now, if the court agrees with that, absolutely. But that is a huge gamble that – the people who brought this case are making a huge gamble the Supreme Court is ready to do that. You know, it’s pretty closely divided, Harry, as you well know, up there.”
See the rest here:
CBS ‘Early Show’ Ignores Accusations of Bias Against Judge Behind Prop 8 Ruling
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged celeb news, constitution, huge, judge, judge-walker, legal, ruling, same-sex marriage, terry moran
On Wednesday, CNN’s daytime coverage of a federal judge’s decision on California’s Proposition 8 leaned mostly towards those who opposed the voter-approved amendment to the state’s constitution, which banned same-sex marriage. When the judge’s ruling was released, which found Prop 8 to be unconstitutional, the network went so far to get immediate reaction to the ruling at a “gay” bar in West Hollywood . Don Lemon was the first CNN anchor to bring on guests on the issue 15 minutes into the 12 noon Eastern hour, none other than Gary Spino and Tony Brown, the two subjects of their pro-homosexual parenting documentary ” Gary and Tony Have a Baby .” Minutes before the two appeared, the network replayed a glowing report by senior political analyst Gloria Borger , which originally aired on June 16, profiling Ted Olson and David Boies who are fighting to overturn Prop 8. Lemon began his interview of the same-sex couple with a softball question: “So listen, Gary, I want to get you in here. Are you- h ow are you guys feeling? Are you anxiously awaiting this judge’s decision, or what- is it just something that’s in the back of your minds now? ” He asked a similar question of Brown: ” Are you feeling anxiety about this? ” Later in the interview, the CNN anchor did propose some tougher questions: “Well, Tony, the opposition says seven million people in California- seven million citizens, voters- voted for Proposition 8, which was against gay marriage. So why go against the wishes of the voters? ” Lemon even closed the interview by bringing up one of the motivating factors of those who are against same-sex marriage. Spino actually answered this question very candidly: LEMON: Gary, with anything, there is compromise- with anything. Do you see the other side? Do you see the fear? Do you understand that some people have been brought up a certain way and have certain religious beliefs, and may necessarily- may not necessarily go along with your lifestyle and the lifestyle of millions of Americans around the country, and believe that gay marriage should not be legal? SPINO: Well, here’s my thought on the subject- religion is learned. I was born this way, so I don’t have a lot of patience for that, because you’re basically taught what your parents or your grandparents- it’s a learned thing. But- you know, I was born this way. You’re not born with religion . Eight minutes later, the CNN anchor brought on Tony Perkins of the social conservative organization the Family Research Council. By contrast, Lemon didn’t wait long to become confrontational with his guest, starting with his second question: LEMON: So, I’ll ask you the other side. The people who are for same-sex marriage, who don’t want Proposition 8, would say, what’s wrong with that, if it is what the- if it is upholding the Constitution? What’s wrong with that? PERKINS: Well, first off, there is nothing in the Constitution under civil rights. Civil rights was put into the Constitution based upon racial equality, which, by the way, was adopted by the states. It was done the right way. Now, you- there’s no way you can convince anyone that 100 years ago, when that amendment was adopted, that that pertained to someone’s sexual behavior. There’s no way to make that case. I think this is- LEMON: All men are created equal, endowed by the rights of their creator? PERKINS: …[I]f you look at the 10th Amendment, unless the Constitution speaks specifically to an issue, it’s reserved to the states, and that’s exactly what California did, and that’s exactly what California’s court upheld, that the right- that the people had the right to, in fact, defend the definition of marriage. That’s what they did. This is another approach. LEMON: Okay. The reason I said all men are created equal- and we can go on. We can talk about the 14th Amendment. That’s been debated. Some people want to change it now when it- talking about it when it comes to immigration. But if two people who want to be together think- feel that they should have the same rights as the people next door who are heterosexual- under the American Constitution, regardless of what you believe about religion or about sex, or what have you, what is wrong with those two people abiding by the Constitution- paying taxes- having the same rights under our Constitution as everyone else? What is wrong with that? What is the argument against that? PERKINS: Well, Don, that’s a good question, because, actually- you know, two people do not have those rights. Under the Constitution- LEMON: Well, heterosexual or straight people do have those rights. PERKINS: No, they don’t. You don’t have- two people don’t have the right to marry whoever they want. There are restrictions. The states- this is an issue reserved to the states. Lemon spent the rest of the interview pressing his guest with this pro-same-sex “marriage” argument. Just under four hours later, 10 minutes into the 4 pm Eastern hour of CNN’s Rick’s List, correspondent Dan Simon, reporting live from outside the federal courthouse in San Francisco where the Prop 8 ruling was decided, interviewed Shelly Bailes and Ellen Pontac, a “married” lesbian couple who were opposed to Proposition 8. Simon led his interview by repeating the argument of the pro-Prop 8 side that “will of the majority has the right to decide this issue” and asked them for their take on this, but followed up with two softball questions: ” When you got married a couple of years ago, explain how that changed the dynamic of your relationship .” He then asked, ” We know this is just one stop- that, ultimately, it’s going to go to the appeals court, and then to the Supreme Court. But today- how important is today to you? What’s going through your mind? ” Later that hour, anchor Rick Sanchez read Tweets from four opponents of Prop 8, including lesbian TV host Ellen DeGeneres and Democratic Congressman Mike Quigley, with none from the opposing side [see right]. The decision from federal judge Vaughn Walker came down that hour, and CNN saw it fit to send correspondent Ted Rowlands to “The Abbey,” a “gay” bar in West Hollywood, California, whose slogan is ” 20 years and still raising the gay bar ,” as he noted during his live reporting. After Judge Walker’s ruling came out, Rowlands interviewed some of the bar’s clientele, who, as he earlier admitted, have “a vested interest” with the issue. As you might expect, all of those interviewed by the CNN correspondent applauded the ruling [see video of the report from Real Clear Politics ]. ROWLANDS: We’re at The Abbey, which is an institution- a gay bar that’s been around for 20 years , and people here are just starting to get the word. Your initial reaction? We were talking earlier about this whole thing, and now that it’s come down, what do you think? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it’s excellent. It’s an overruling of an overruling. It’s back to where the law should be. I think it’s a gay issue, and I think- I know everywhere in the world- everyone in this country can vote, but I think it’s a gay issue, and I think that heterosexual people should defer to the homosexual population, and say, what do you guys want to do? And that’s what we want to do, so- ROWLANDS: All right. Well, I don’t know that that will ever happen, but everybody will have a vote. These folks have just found out the news as well. You’re from San Francisco. Your thoughts? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think it’s great- you know, the more we can do to get marriage recognized legally- equality, the more we can do for equality on a legal level- on a federal level, is great. So, as this goes forward, I hope it just gets better. ROWLANDS: A lot of same-sex couples, obviously, in this area of Los Angeles, Rick, and so there’s a lot of interest in this area. Your thoughts? A lot of people have been talking- a lot of people were very pessimistic, Rick, before we got this decision. But- boy, at this time, it looks like the federal courts, at least, agree with the idea of same-sex marriage, or, at least, agree that it should not be banned by the state of California . UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Right. No, it’s huge. I’m super-excited. It’s a step in the right direction- like, we just need to keep moving forward with it. I mean, it shouldn’t even be an issue, and the fact we have to have these conversations are sad, but this is really great news. ROWLANDS: All right- initial reaction, Rick- it’s a bit tempered, as we talked about before. Everybody is well aware of the fact that this is the first step in a long process, likely going to the Supreme Court. But you can bet there will be a lot of celebrating here, right in this area, at least tonight as word travels . During The Situation Room, CNN went live to speeches during the 5 pm Eastern hour by Chad Griffin of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, one of the plaintiffs in the case arguing against Proposition 8, and Ted Olsen himself, both of whom praised Judge Walker’s decision. Perkins returned for a second interview, this time by anchor Wolf Blitzer, during the 6 pm Eastern hour. Blitzer was far less confrontational with the FRC president during the segment than his colleague Lemon. A transcript of his questions on the issue: BLITZER: Let’s get some reaction now from Tony Perkins- he’s president of the Family Research Council. He’s joining us on the phone- not a good day for what you stand for, Tony. Tell us your immediate reaction- what happens now? … BLITZER: So, obviously, you are going to see what happens in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. That’s considered, as you well know, a pretty liberal court of appeals. So eventually, though, it will get up to the Supreme Court. I guess you agree with that? PERKINS: Yeah, I don’t think there’s any question that it’s going to end up in the Supreme Court. Look, Ted Olson is a very smart guy- probably one of the best constitutional lawyers in the country- BLITZER: And he is a conservative Republican?… BLITZER: But you assume [that] the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will uphold the district court’s decision today?… BLITZER: We’re just getting in, Tony, a statement from the White House . The spokesman there issuing this statement on behalf of the White House- I’ll read it to you and to our viewers: ‘ The President has spoken out in opposition to Proposition 8, because it is divisive and discriminatory. He will continue to promote equality for LGBT Americans’- lesbians, gays, bisexuals, trans-gender Americans. You got a problem with that White House reaction? … Throughout the day, CNN’s on-screen graphics also indicated the network’s slant towards same-sex “marriage.” The homosexual activist movement’s rainbow flag was featured prominently throughout the day (see screen cap above). Also, prior to the ruling, CNN.com’s article on the judge’s decision featured a photo of an anti-Prop 8 sign (see right). Overall, CNN’s Wednesday coverage of the court decision is a continuation of their pro-homosexual agenda segments from earlier in June when they were promoting their “Gary and Tony Have a Baby” documentary.

Excerpt from:
CNN Sides Heavily With Opponents of Proposition 8
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged Cnn, cnn newsroom, culture/society, Hollywood, interview, ncis, network, same-sex marriage, thoughts, tweets
Tom Friedman stepped into a journalistic controversy in his Sunday New York Times column, ” Can We Talk? ” protesting CNN’s firing of senior editor of Middle East affairs Octavia Nasr for posting this message on Twitter upon the death of Hezbollah founder Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah: Sad to hear of the passing of Sayyed Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah… One of Hezbollah’s giants I respect a lot. According to Western intelligence, Fadlallah blessed the drivers of the vehicles behind the 1983 attacks on Marine barracks in Beirut which killed 241 Marines. President Clinton froze his assets in 1995 because of his suspected involvement with terrorists. Yet Friedman was dismayed by Nasr’s dismissal by CNN: I find Nasr’s firing troubling. Yes, she made a mistake. Reporters covering a beat should not be issuing condolences for any of the actors they cover. It undermines their credibility. But we also gain a great deal by having an Arabic-speaking, Lebanese-Christian female journalist covering the Middle East for CNN, and if her only sin in 20 years is a 140-character message about a complex figure like Fadlallah , she deserved some slack. She should have been suspended for a month, but not fired. It’s wrong on several counts. Friedman’s omission of the killing of the Marines is especially odd considering he used the massacre to insult Ronald Reagan in an exchange with then-GOP presidential candidate Lamar Alexander in a March 5, 1995 appearance on CBS’s Face the Nation. Friedman downplayed Fadlallah’s hatred of Israel, never mentioning the phrase “suicide bombers” and saying only that he “had some dark side.” I’ve never met Octavia Nasr or Fadlallah. Fadlallah clearly hated Israel, supported attacks on Israelis and opposed the U.S. troops in Lebanon and Iraq. But he also opposed Hezbollah’s choking dogmatism and obedience to Iran; he wanted Lebanon’s Shiites to be independent and modern, and he built a regional following through his social commentaries. …. Of course, Fadlallah was not just a social worker. He had some dark side. People at CNN tell me Nasr knew both. But here’s what I know: The Middle East has to change in order to thrive, and that change has to come from within, from change agents who are seen as legitimate and rooted in their own cultures. They may not be America’s cup of tea. But we need to know about them, and understand where our interests converge — not just demonize them all. Dan Abrams, founder of Mediaite, responded at length to Friedman in the comments section of a related Mediaite article. ….when a journalist who covers the middle east expresses admiration for the leader of a group that is at least partially a terror organization, its not just a small matter. He may have done other amazing things including being more progressive than others of his ilk, but can you imagine what would happen to an American journalist expressing admiration for an Al Quaeda leader who had other, better, attributes? When you work at a media entity like CNN (or the New York Times) and you don’t get that words matter — all of them — then that in and of itself, should be a fireable offense. One would think, from the wailing of Friedman and Nasr’s other apologists, that Fadlallah was defined by his support of women’s rights. But the Times’s July 5 obituary for Fadlallah , which appeared before the Nasr controversy broke, devoted a single paragraph to his “comparatively progressive positions on women’s rights and family law,” while emphasizing his justification for suicide bombings and hatred for Israel. “Comparatively” is the operative word, as the opinions of this Alan Alda of the Middle East aren’t exactly bold by civilized standards: “…he argued that women had the right to defend themselves from domestic violence.” Friedman’s interest in Fadlallah’s feminism is pretty new. His only previous mention of Fadlallah, according to a Nexis search, was a single citation in the last paragraph of a 1984 news story, back when Friedman was a New York Times reporter.

More:
NYT’s Friedman Defends CNN’s Nasr and Hezbollah Founder Fadlallah, the Alan Alda of the Middle East
Posted in Hollywood, Hot Stuff, News
Tagged america, Cnn, culture/society, friedman, gospel, islam, middle, middle-east, same-sex marriage, times