Dump McCain.

Since when did she decide to be gay?
-The Talibaptists

That is not a shock. Candidate McCain wasn't all he made himself out to be.

Candidate McCain wasn't all he made himself out to be.

As in a rabid fundamentalist who gets a hard on whenever an opportunity for homophobia presents itself? Gee, thats good to hear.

Good for her.

Good for her but I suspect she is angry with John in that she is doing this as he is in a primary battle against right wing lunatics at the moment. This won't help him. What next, is she going to come out pro-choice, become a Democrat???

Her daughter had to get her liberal republican ideology from someone... and we sure know it wasn't the old guy.

Cindy McCain sed wot now?

No H8?

Sew Waht?

And that's why McCain did not have rabid support---nobody can understand who he is and what he ultimately stands for---a politician par excellence--in today's environment a dinosaur, a dying breed.

no real politician believes in anything other than what gets them more power.

And that's why McCain did not have rabid support---nobody can understand who he is and what he ultimately stands for---a politician par excellence--in today's environment a dinosaur, a dying breed.

#10 | Posted by matsop at 2010-01-21 09:39 AM | Reply | Flag:

He does have a habit of shuffling across the aisle to the other side depending on (insert issue of the day here). But alas, modern politics is divide and conquer.

a politician par excellence--in today's environment a dinosaur, a dying breed.

After 2000 he saw what kind of complete sell out he would have to be to win the Republic nomination and did so willingly.

nobody can understand who he is and what he ultimately stands for---

That is because on a day to day basis he changes what he stands for.

Good for her.

#5 | Posted by BetelG at 2010-01-21 12:17 AM | Reply | Flag

Second that.

Is this the beginning of her post-McCain plans?

Cindy McCain is more progressive on gay rights than Barack Obama.

Time for Mr. Family Values to arrange another car accident so he can trade her in on a younger, prettier wife.

Time for Mr. Family Values to arrange another car accident so he can trade her in on a younger, prettier wife.

He is campaigning with SARAH!!, so anything is possible, ow that SARAH!! got tha book deal. John may go younger, but he won't go poorer. Then again, Scott Brown's daughters are on the market.

It is not very compassionate to advocate homosexual marriage, when you consider the fact that there may be a hereditary aspect to homosexuality. A life commitment to a homosexual relationship is a commitment to voluntary sterilization. If the concept of homosexual marriage were a sinister plot, it's goal would be genocide, the systematic destruction of a culture group, our homosexual community! If you are a homosexual you should ask yourself, how did you get here, and will there be more of you in the future world. I heartfully hope that homosexuals don't make the same mistake that the abortion advocates of the late sixties made. They fought tooth and nail for the right to abort their own offspring, they fought so hard that we finally gave in and let them have their way. Where is their fervor now? Abortion itself is dying out along with those who had the greatest need and tendency to use it. Give them enough rope.

Shawn. Think you are talking about liberals

Surely the guy who wanted to inflict Sarah! on the nation (and world) cannot suddenly be held up as the model of humane, rational thought. But there's hope for his wife and daughter. herm

It is not very compassionate to advocate homosexual marriage, when you consider the fact that there may be a hereditary aspect to homosexuality.

There will always be turkey basters and surrogates. Or are you saying its better for people to marry for the sake of breeding and then ruin a family when they come out? As for the abortion advocates, wtf are you babbling about? There are still way more Americans supporting some form of abortion than opposing all abortion, so maybe the anti-abortionists are the ones heading for extinction.

I can see being an activist in your own state, Arizona has many independents. But to come here, where the people voted that subject down, is reprehensible. Her support means nothing, except undermining the law. Cali is in debt and these people - NOON8'ers the "voter haters" want to stall legislation with increased litigation.

Elitism is dead.
Let's see how this maverick rides her RINO.

taken from a campaign ad:

John McCain supports Bush's tax cuts for millionaires, but nothing for a hundred million households.

He's for billions in new oil company giveaways, while gas prices soar.

And for tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas.

The original maverick?

Or just more of the same?

I'm Barack Obama and I approve this message.

What the hell is that c*** thinking!?

-John McCain

"...It is not very compassionate to advocate homosexual marriage... If you are a homosexual you should ask yourself, how did you get here, and will there be more of you in the future world.... Give them enough rope.#19 | Posted by Salverda...

You, sir, Are a Moron.

signed the 7-years 'Gay' Married Dumpling, father of 2.

Cookfish turned Pro to star in his new reality series, "Trangendered and Pregnant".

Should have taken acting lessons instead.

If you are a homosexual you should ask yourself, how did you get here, and will there be more of you in the future world.

#19 | Posted by Salverda at 2010-01-21 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you honestly think that Homosexuals haven't asked themselves these questions many times before?

My neighors are gay and they pretend to be married.
It is rather funny but upon further reflection kind of sad.

It is not very compassionate to advocate homosexual marriage, when you consider the fact that there may be a hereditary aspect to homosexuality.

If thousands of years of persecution and stigmatization did not eliminate the gay gene, what makes you think active promotion of stable gay couples would eliminate it? Your theory makes no sense.

It is rather funny but upon further reflection kind of sad.

Sad they have to live next to someone like you?

#31 | Posted by rcade at 2010-01-21 02:08 PM | Reply | Flag: Ouch! Flag

It is rather funny but upon further reflection kind of sad.

Sad they have to live next to someone like you?

They are free to move anytime they wish. Perhaps they will turn vilent like most gay rights groups

Wot? Cindy McCain made a pack with the devil too?

Stand by for earthquakes!

Its takes a Massive load of Arrogance to think One Has the ability to define What Constitutes Love Between Two "other" People! It's a level of arrogance that can only survive in an environment that nurtures self absorption (narcissist).

Pride goes before destruction, And a haughty spirit before stumbling.

Your theory makes no sense.

#30 | Posted by rcade

you were actually expecting the Timbci to make sense? That makes no sense!

#29 | POSTED BY TIMBCI
"My neighors are gay and they pretend to be married.
It is rather funny but upon further reflection kind of sad."

Not sure what's funny about it, but you're right, it is sad.
They shouldn't have to pretend.

#37 | Posted by The Tom

I had a gay couple that lived two houses down. They used to let my dog in their house and give him a bath. They owned a deli together and one guy embezzled all the money and took off to Florida. Now that's sad.

#23 | POSTED BY PHYS_ILL
"I can see being an activist in your own state, Arizona has many independents. But to come here, where the people voted that subject down, is reprehensible."

Are you suggesting that we should only get involved with issues in our own state? Does that go for candidates as well? Should Palin not get involved with McCain's re-election campaign? After all, she's not from Arizona...would it be reprehensible for her to campaign for him?

Prop 8 passed very narrowly, with help in the form of $25 million dollars from UTAH. And California has many independents, too. Every state does. By your argument, it was reprehensible for out-of-staters to fund Prop 8, although without that outside financial support, it may very well not have passed. "The people" didn't vote for Prop 8, just more than voted against it, and that outside financial support played a major role.

Besides, it's standard procedure for people from all parts of the country to get involved with both issues and candidates in other states. Because it DOES have a national effect.

"Her support means nothing, except undermining the law."

There's a big difference between undermining the law, and working to change the law. One hundred fifty-four years ago, some abolitionists formed the Republican Party. Were they "undermining" the law? No, they were working to change the law.

Eight decades earlier, some guys named Madison, Jefferson, Payne, Franklin, Hamilton and company decided it was time to undermine the law....aren't you glad they did?

"Cali is in debt and these people - NOON8'ers the "voter haters" want to stall legislation with increased litigation. "

Are you suggesting that gay marriage should be illegal for FINANCIAL reasons? Cali was also in debt when Prop 8 first hit the scene, bringing with it a lot of litigation. What was so wrong about the court decision that necessitated all that money and litigation?

And you can call them "voter haters" if you like, or whatever else, but you know very well that's not what they're about.

This is obviously a personal issue for you, and that's fine, I respect that, but I have to ask: What personal stake could you possibly have in this issue? Worried that some people may be legally allowed to do something you don't agree with? Oh dear!

Relax, Phys, the sky is NOT going to fall.

The issue about homosexuals from the "right" has nothing to do about a concern for gays enjoying the same benefits as hetros.

The issue about homosexuals from the "right" has nothing to do with the "Sanctity of Marriage" or any of the other garbage they recite on queue.

The Issue they have is that they are Hung Up on What "others" may or may not "freely" do with their Genitalia.

They are fixated by it (see timbci). And this fixation most likely stems from some inadequacy of their own.

"It is rather funny but upon further reflection kind of sad."

The "funny" part is that you even noticed --- the sad part is the fact you expended effort documenting it on an anonymous website, not once, but twice.

I would bet money you spy on them!

Are you suggesting that we should only get involved with issues in our own state?

With a name like McCain, yes (look what happened last time they hit the trail). If voters, by a majority, vote in favor of the issue - yes again. Why not promote the same premise in Arizona? Because they already have voted, like us, in 2006. Also, I think hubby's future reelection might have a bit to do with that. Why not lead a national fight for gay-marriage? Why waste all that time, energy, and duct tape on California?

By your argument, it was reprehensible for out-of-staters to fund Prop 8

Yes, if said Prop. was voted against in a prior election... It wasn't. I've seen the will of the people struck down by these elitists before. And she is promoting another judicial overide.

Are you suggesting that gay marriage should be illegal for FINANCIAL reasons?

No, but suing the Governor (post popular vote) in this economic climate is bullshit. Move somewhere where the people or government legally enacted a change in social rule-sets.

And you can call them "voter haters" if you like, or whatever else, but you know very well that's not what they're about.

Then they should come up with another Gay Marriage Prop. and not rely on activist judges to make the rules. The CA Constitution is, for the most part, where my argument is tethered. But I do have a personal stake in this (apart from my brother coming out a couple years ago)... I live here, someday my kids will too. They've already taken out the "traditional family" in public schools and I want to reverse that.

#42 | POSTED BY PHYS_ILL
"With a name like McCain, yes"

Sorry, but Cindy McCain has just as much right to publicly oppose Prop 8 as you do to publicly support it, regardless of which state. As it happens, this fight is occurring in California, not Arizona.

I understand your point regarding the election, and the state constitution, but what people are attempting to do is to undo the results of the election, and do so legally. There's nothing sinister about it.

"I've seen the will of the people struck down by these elitists before."

What on earth is "elitist" about supporting gay marriage?
The "traditional marriage" stance seems to be "our way is not only the best way, it's the only way." What could be more elitist than that?

"I live here, someday my kids will too."

I live here too, but I have to ask, what's your concern?
What exactly is the danger of gay marriage?

"They've already taken out the "traditional family" in public schools and I want to reverse that."

You want public schools to teach traditional marriage?
But the traditional marriage argument is religion-based, is it not?
Why should public schools "teach" marriage at all?

"brother coming out a couple years ago"

Okay, fair enough. I'd imagine that's difficult for you.
But what's the problem with him having a legally recognized marriage?
I understand you may have a religious argument against it, but I feel that has no place in a state law, especially a discriminatory law.

You make valid points regarding the PROCESS that took place, but I feel like your issue with this isn't process-related at all. I'm not a big fan of "the end justifies the means", as I feel the means are important, and relevant. Yet, it seems you're concerned with the result of the process, not the process itself.

And let's not forget that, for a time, gay marriage was a legal right in this state. A right that was taken away. Bizarrely, that right was taken away on the same day more rights were given to chickens.

Only in California.

The fight isn't occurring this November, is it? Why not? Because progressives would rather duke it out in court instead. Put it on the ballot again, please. What's the anti-voter NOH8 argument based on? I see it as an attack on religion.

Say the people vote yes on legalizing pot this November and then some out-of-state Senator's husband/wife is poliTRICKing against that "yes" vote (after the tally). I will be pissed and I'd call him/her out right here on this open blog. I may be conservative but I believe in personal liberty. And yes, the smoking/extracting of plant material has just as much to do with liberty as getting married. But, I believe by being a patient of medical marijuana, I get ALMOST all the benefits of a legal smoker. Just like being a gay couple in a civil union -- ALMOST all the same rights.

Also, I don't want gay illegal nationals "marrying" gay US citizens precisely to become citizens. It happens, all while our society promotes promiscuity.

Why do you put your faith in the lawyers and judges but not that of the people? And I call NoH8rs elitists because they needed the cash to put up the lawsuit in the first place. This wasn't some grassroots campaign - hiring McCain is evident that the movement has money.

And I'm not advocating the infusion of traditional marriage into public academia; just bring back the themes of the traditional family. Leave out the ideas of alternative families. Don't give kids the impression that it's wrong to talk about their Mommy and Daddy in public. I knew a kindergarten teacher (laid off due to budget cuts) that couldn't even use terms like father and mother.

it's obamster's fault, and john mccain came out of the closet to show America he was a RINO, so, does this mean he is coming out of the closet again? Is he.........? Is he..........? What did those gooks do to him in that hotel?

"They've already taken out the "traditional family" in public schools and I want to reverse that.

#41 | Posted by phys_ill"

Then I doubt you live in California. Individual school boards have a lot of autonomy, to the point where one put a "creationist" book in the science classes. We recalled the freaking lunatics, of course, but it's not "California" that have "already taken out the 'traditional family'", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. You're a right-wing crackpot.

" And I call NoH8rs elitists because they needed the cash to put up the lawsuit in the first place."

It took cash to get Prop 8 on the ballot in the first place - lots of Mormon cash.

It took cash to get Prop 8 on the ballot in the first place

and it passed
What is your point?

It's when the cash starts to flood in to create a lawsuit repealing an up or down vote (on a Proposition voted by the people) that scares me.

If you want to put another measure on the ballot to change the CA Constitution, I'm all for it. But going through the courts claiming that a Prop. was unconstitutional after the fact is like saying that that CA electorate (over 8 million in favor of BHO) is worthless and the people did not know what they were voting for.

I might be a crack-pot but a good majority in America stands with me. Had Cali voted a No on 8, I would STFU about gay marriage in California. A federal ban would be my next fight. It bums me out that my fellow Californians (and celebs that don't even live/vote here) cannot make that move.

It's when the cash starts to flood in to create a lawsuit repealing an up or down vote (on a Proposition voted by the people) that scares me.

So then why weren't you worried when the cash flowed in from out of state to finance Prop 8 in the first place?

Off politics for a minute.

The first thing I thought when I read this story was . . .

Uh Oh . . . there's trouble in paradise. And I wasn't thinking about Arizona or California.

All of the luxuries McCain enjoys in life are owned by Cindy McCain. If money is power, then she obviousloy wears the pants in the McCain household(s).

My crystal ball tells me that John McCain will be looking for some new digs in D.C. before long.