The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

14 June 2007

Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Massachusetts Legislature Denies Gay Marriage Vote


MA Anti-Democracy Forces Perpetually Miserable

Even after their resounding victory against democracy, Hugo Chavez-esque Massachusetts gay marriage activists can't seem to let go of their anger long enough to enjoy the moment.

Case in point: an emotion- filled rant published in the Boston Phoenix more concerned with bashing Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly than making a sound case for taking away the rights of Bay State voters.

In fact, it's hard to see what Rush and Bill had to do at all with yesterday's sleazy legislative move to prevent a proposed initiative, already approved by 170,000 voters, from reaching the 2008 ballot. But here it is:

So when the right-wing nut jobs such as Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh resume raving about the Bay State’s essentially satanic lifestyle we can all safely blow them a raspberry secure in the knowledge that we’re only a little bit more broad-minded than Switzerland.

The fact of the matter is that the civilized world — defined as any place where O’Reilly and Limbaugh are recognized as loud-mouthed charlatans — appears to be slowly but surely turning what we today call marriage into something that in the future we will all recognize as civil unions.

The problem is that Rush and Bill can't be blamed for the fact that only Massachusetts allows gay marriage. Americans are overwhelmingly opposed to the idea and always have been.

What's even worse for pro- gay marriage thugs is that the initiative had a good chance of passing were it to reach the ballot, which is why the legislature pulled yesterday's anti- voter fast one.

Meanwhile, Boston talk host Howie Carr has weighed in with a great take on the behind- the- scenes hijinks that brought it about:

Solons’ decision was done deal

If there’s one thing Beacon Hill Democrats can’t stand, it’s democracy.

What happened to all their phony polls on the gay marriage question? I thought the gays were going to win, and that, as one story put it right, “political support in Massachusetts is swinging firmly behind gay marriage.”

So why did the homosexuals spend more than a million bucks making sure they wouldn’t have to win that fight at the ballot box in November 2008? A few years ago this same crowd was hissing that government had no right to say who could get hitched to whom. Now that they’re calling the shots, they love having the government push everybody else around.

So now 17,000 homosexuals won’t have their “marriages” invalidated - not that anyone was planning to do that anyway, but never mind the facts. But what about the 170,000 people who signed the petitions to give the people the right to make the decision to . . . change, shall we say, the traditional meaning of marriage?
I guess those 170,000 just aren’t Beautiful People.

What's hard for Bay State "progressives" to accept is that Massachusetts citizens are surprisingly traditional when it comes to social issues. That's why they must resort to legislative and judicial dirty tricks to get the job done.


Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately purchase, help to further this site's efforts.

Or, if you would prefer, please contribute at the Honor System box in the upper right corner. Thanks again!

Technorati tags:

Top photo: Angela Rowlings, Boston Herald


  • "Americans are overwhelmingly opposed to the idea and always have been."

    One of the most overt Maloney falsehoods ever, Brian.

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 15 June, 2007 13:19  

  • Americans are overwhelmingly opposed to the idea and always have been.


    not only are Americans in favor of gays in the military, gay marriage ( slowly becomming acceptable by the majority)

    Americans are also in favor of
    1.sensible gun control laws
    2.enviornmental laws
    3.scaling back tax cuts for the rich
    4.increasing government spending on social programs medicine

    basically every issue the CONS claim they have the majority view point on, their view is by in large the minority

    so yes when cons cry 'moonbat"
    they are projecting

    big question

    what would happen if gays got married?

    Why are you opposed to gay marriage?

    can you answer without a cookie cutter canned response about "tradition"? nothing the CONS stand for is traditional American values.
    labor unions are traditional american values, Social security, collective bargining, all things CONS are firmly against, so you can't shriek "tradition', cons despise traditional American values and favor a free market zoo.

    so Brian, why is gay maerriage so bad?

    I know he can not answer the queston.......
    "marriage is between a man and a woman", is that your answer?

    if so you are saying America is rulked by the Old Testament and the New testament, which it is NOT.

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 15 June, 2007 13:32  

  • Aren't you freaks on the right preoccupied with your hate for Muslims right now, so there is little time for obsessing about the personal lives of your neighbors?

    By Blogger elmonica, at 15 June, 2007 15:27  

  • My GOD you people in Taxachusetts sure know how to elect politicos--choose anyone in line with the BPM (Boston Political Machine) and that candidate is in!

    By Blogger The Real Bob Anthony, at 15 June, 2007 19:01  

  • Please see the polls about gay marriage. Maloney's statement about Americans being overwhelmingly opposed to the idea is pretty well backed up by actual polls.

    I personally think the pro-gay marriage movement dealt themselves a serious blow by pushing to keep the initiative OFF the ballot. MA is one of the two states where a majority believe gay marriage is OK. Having it go through a public vote and pass would be a strong statement that the general public supports it.

    By bypassing the vote and keeping it, essentially a law by decree, they've fueled the anti-gay marriage movement immeasurably.

    By Blogger Da, at 16 June, 2007 19:24  

  • Da, You'll confuse them with facts.

    MOP, Keep dreaming that America’s becoming a socialist society

    By Blogger pf1, at 17 June, 2007 01:03  

  • What does socialism (or any "-ism") have to do with marriage equality?

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 17 June, 2007 08:57  

  • Da? You're seriously citing Rasmussen polling data on the marriage equality issue?

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 17 June, 2007 09:09  

  • Hash,

    Yep. Rasumussen tends to be quite accurate in national polls - look at the results of their polling for the last 6-8 years of national elections.

    Do you know of polls that show otherwise? From groups that don't have a dog in the hunt?

    By Blogger Da, at 17 June, 2007 11:29  

  • Uh, Rasmussen doesn't?


    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 17 June, 2007 19:51  

  • OK, do you have any polls that show otherwise? And given that Rasmussen has been quite accurate over the last 4-5 years, I think that shows a good deal of impartiality about the actual subjects.

    Say what you will, but they're a nationally known polling service that is as accurate as any other pollster. And they run counter to what MOP and you claim.

    Barring any polling data you have, I'd say Maloney's completely correct and while it may hurt your sensibilities, it's still the truth...

    By Blogger Da, at 18 June, 2007 12:00  

  • The following issues are highly approved by Americans in ALL POLLS
    oggg ye pf1, all popular Among AMERICANS, guess your a Saudi
    Americans are also in favor of
    1.sensible gun control laws
    2.enviornmental laws
    3.scaling back tax cuts for the rich
    4.increasing government spending on social programs


    do the homework

    Gay marriage has not a 39-41% acceptance approval , way up from 1994, when it was approved by less than 30% of americans, so the more you cons shriek over gays, the more people accept them

    and over 60% of Americans support gays in the military

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 18 June, 2007 15:40  

  • MOP,

    I thought we were talking about gay marriage? You bring up several unsubstantiated claims on issues other than that...

    I've posted a source - one I believe is fairly reliable - that shows a majority of the population does not support gay marriage.

    You post several unsubstantiated claims about issues not related to this thread.

    I don't quite follow your logic...

    By Blogger Da, at 18 June, 2007 17:18  

  • His source is AAR.

    ”sensible gun control laws”

    What does that mean??

    A steady hand when you shoot.

    “enviornmental laws”

    I love environmentalist I make money off the laws they get passed.
    Example: The government pays me not to do anything to my land. They gave me a fifteen year contract to do nothing. I need some new laws this one expires in eight years.

    “scaling back tax cuts for the rich”

    Equals higher unemployment. Less money into the free market. Less money going into the treasury. Lower wage increases.

    I personally don’t care who the government taxes. The consumer pays all taxes in the end.

    Think about it. The government taxes an extra one hundred dollars for every car sold. Guess who will pay for the tax.

    Price of the car goes up one hundred dollars.
    Or Lay off workers.
    Or make the car cheaper.

    The car company is not going to pay the tax. The consumer is.

    “Social programs”

    oh yes the give me generation.

    You will never be in a higher tax bracket because you can’t take care of yourself. You need the government to take care of you. What a waste. Be a man take care of yourself and your family if you have one. Stop whining and get out and work for what you need.

    Hint women like real men who can protect and take care of them.

    Now let’s pause for a response live from the basement of circle jerk radio here’s MOP.

    By Blogger pf1, at 19 June, 2007 06:35  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger