grinninfoole

while i agree with your sentiment here, i think we should try to keep our yankee hatred of everything below the mason-dixon on low for the time being. we have enough partisanship and backbiting going on in the political discourse that it won't help anything, you know?

i'm just saying. if we have another civil war, we'd get screwed cause they have all the guns.

From:

You're right, of course. But this dude wants to roll back gay marriage rights! And that's what makes us the coolest state in the union! ...and something that sets us apart from the South.

From:

it does set us apart from them, except that most of the southern states haven't even approached the topic. thats like saying we're different from the southern states because we don't have piggly wiggly. its kinda specious.

From:

How is stating something that makes us different (and, in my view, better) than the South specious?

True, I don't even know what Piggly Wiggly is, but that only means that it's more of a distinction, rather than less.

And is our lack of Piggly Wiggly a moral failure?

From:

piggly wiggly is a supermarket chain based in the south.

what i'm saying is that your argument would make more sense if more of the south actually tried to tackle same sex unions. as far as i know only virgina and texas have anything on the books about it...tho i could be completely off base.

From:

OK, I can see that: we have, they haven't... it's like apples and oranges. But, we have apples, and they don't. That's a bigger difference.

(Though, as M points out, it's not like MA has actually voted on this in a statewide ballot, and I shouldn't be so sure that it would actually win if it did. Which is true. But, still, our system recognized a basic human right, and acted accordingly. I think our political system functioning properly AND doing the right thing totally = we are cool.)

From:

i will agree with your assessment. cigars for everyone!

From:

AWESOME! Time to learn how to smoke!

From:

AND A LACK OF PLACES TO BUY THINGS IS A MORAL FAILURE.

MINE.

From:

...my greedy Yankee merchant's heart agrees. YOURS, indeed.

From:

Just FYI:

Twenty-nine states have a constitutional ban restricting marriage to one man and one woman. Those states are:

* Alabama
* Alaska
* Arizona
* Arkansas
* California (with the passage of Prop 8)
* Colorado
* Florida
* Georgia
* Kansas
* Kentucky
* Idaho
* Louisiana
* Michigan
* Mississippi
* Missouri
* Montana
* Nebraska
* Nevada
* North Dakota
* Ohio
* Oklahoma
* Oregon
* South Carolina
* South Dakota
* Tennessee
* Texas
* Utah
* Virginia
* Wisconsin

Edited Date: 2010-01-17 09:45 pm (UTC)

From:

...oof. my bad :-(

From:

Well, that certainly covers The South.

From:

I CANT BELIEVE HE COULD WIN IN THIS STATE. I was having fun forgetting that "we" elected Mitt Romney. I'm not even sure if I registered to vote in Hadley, but I'm sure as hell going to call the county clerk in Northampton on Tuesday (Monday if anyone is there) and find out where to vote. I'm so upset about this.

I saw SIX Scott Brown ads while doing elliptical - it was only 20 minutes, and I saw 6 ads, on a total of 3 channels, and a Republican on CNN saying "The Massachusetts election will send a message to Democrats nationwide." It gave me an anger attack.

Edited Date: 2010-01-17 09:43 pm (UTC)

From:

its true. during one morning broadcast a WHOLE SEGMENT of ads was a backa nd forth of coakley and brown ads. the worst part was that ALL of hers were negative and ALL of his were positive.

it made me sick thinking that at that point i'd rather vote for him because at least he wasn't being a complete dick on state wide TV.

From:

Rest assured - I saw one or two of his negative ads. And some ambiguous ones. I didn't see any for Martha Coakley, so I can't say what the balance of positive to negative is.

From:

His "positive" ones are misleading, however. Not that most political ads don't put a spin on policies. If I see one more, "protect medicare, say no to socialized healthcare" ad campaign, I'm going to go homicidal. Or, "Our health care is great. Insurance companies are acting in people's best interests. Also, lobbyists are bad." Or, "I'll create new jobs AND reduce taxes...don't ask how I can do both of those, it's magic!"

From:

i'm not really saying positive like..this is good thing. i mean positive like "i'm willing to fight for YOU" vs "who is scott brown...REALLY?" and having the heil hitler rush limbaugh picture. its just insulting.

you want me to vote for you? have some nice music, and talk about how much you love massachusetts and how you'll be a voice for me in washington..not JUST how much the other guy sucks. yeesh.

From:

Oh, you mean like this post which started this conversation? I don't know much about Coakley or Brown beyond what's on their websites, but the things he openly advocates make it clear that he could do a lot of damage to the state, the country, and even the planet if we let him into office. And he's making a political position out of disapproving of our personal lives.

So, vote against him.

From:

crouchback.livejournal.com

Does Coakley's career as a prosecutor give you any pause about her (http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=24379620-18FE-70B2-A8305A0700EAC23C)? Or her prevarications on the death penalty (http://www.talkleft.com/story/2009/11/7/1465/41623)?

Edited Date: 2010-01-18 11:10 pm (UTC)

From:

Yes.

Convince me that an anti-choice, pro-death penalty bigot like Scott Brown is a better choice, and I'll vote for him.

From:

crouchback.livejournal.com

There is another choice in the race, is there not?

I'm also less than convinced that either Coakley or Brown actually believe in anything. The record of the two of them on abortion is a bit mixed (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/01/04/abortion_stances_of_brown_coakley_not_so_easily_defined?mode=PF). Like so many of our politicians, expediency and the power of their faction matters most.

From: