Too often true. But I am really straight, and -- second only to my ardent advocacy of drug policy reform -- equality for gays has been my issue for my entire adult life. But so many asshats cannot get their heads wrapped around the fact that a person can be heterosexual and still find appalling the fact that gays are denied the state-conferred benefits of marriage to those who are not, as a matter of principle.

I'm sure you've run into the equivalent assumption when arguing for drug policy reform -- that you must be a stoner or something. Never mind that mind that current policy is based on myths and sloppy reasoning ... and makes things worse rather than better!

Would that include the folks who want to get married but can't, because of Warren and his allies? Believe me, they'd love it if they didn't have to spend time fighting this battle.

No doubt the pre-written punditry about Team Obama's "lack of candor" and so forth and so on is already hitting the airwaves and intertubes.

Has-Obama-stopped-beating-his-wife style questions in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

"STFU and keep up the pro-gay marriage stuff...it works well for you."

Seems that since Glenn is gay, that is his whole identity, and he should exclusively -- without deviation -- just concern himself with GLBT issues. Nevermind that he has a law degree and his most passionate interests are fidelity to the Constitution and the best of the republic as bequeathed and articulated by the Founders. But screw that; when a person is gay, that's all they are. pfffft.

Note that it works the other way as well. It's often insinuated -- subtly or unsubtly -- that there's no such thing as an outspoken ally of GLBTs who's really straight.

The ACLU, of course, would have no problem with advertisers using the word Christmas. Nor would I, as a presumed "ACLU type" (because I've contributed to them).

In fact, the ACLU has a long history of defending Christians' freedom of religion. Yes, even in public schools, as appropriate.

Right-wing religious/political leaders and talking heads like Parsi and O'Reilly ignore this, of course, because the ACLU makes a convenient target and they're (rightfully) confident that the ACLU will continue to do the right thing anyway.

Oh, and good on Ed Morrisey for pointing out the obvious. Whatever happened to complaining about the commercialization of Christmas?

The only "measure of injustice" inflicted on Scooter was that he was the only one Fitz managed nail.

I don't what DC's laws are, but usually felons can vote.

It's unlikely that Scooter lives in DC. I understand that most of the DC political class lives in Virginia.

Virginia is one of the states that has permanent disenfranchisement for all felony offenders. (Which is stupid, but there it is.)

I understand that many of us are angry at the intolerance shown by the religious right, but black-and-white thinking is the problem, not the solution.

I guess I just have a hard time seeing shades of gray in the idea of equal treatment under the law.

Rick Warren is worried about violence from the intolerant, hate-filled, heterophobic Gay Mafia.

Or something like that.

The irony is that he is not a descendent of slaves.

Which makes such a difference in this country. I mean, with cops checking genealogy databases before pulling people over for Driving While Black and so on ...

What I thought was particularly ironic icing on the ironic cake of Lady Lynn Forester de Rothschild calling Obama elitist was that she had her spokesperson release that statement.

Wow. Just ... wow.

The significance of this I'm sure isn't lost on anyone. I mean, the first African American president is using the same bible as the guy who liberated slaves here in the US.

Well, it was obviously lost on me, but I can be remarkably obtuse sometimes.

Excuse me, I'm off to find a convenient wall to whack my head against ...

Is Obama going to wear a stovepipe hat? Grow a beard? This Lincoln thing is getting a little silly.

... Muslims (and various other foreigners, as needed) ...

Obviously, there are Muslim Americans, who aren't foreigners. I'm speaking of a particular mindset that more-or-less sees them as such.

In fact, that mindset is sometimes extended to liberals, via the "anti-American" slams ...

What do you think they fear?

[shrug] I'm sure the fears vary from person to person, but some of the possibilities are obviously the things that Fox News tells them they should be afraid of. (Excuse me: "vigilant about".) Redirecting the fear into anger is then a simple matter of giving their viewers convenient targets -- Muslims (and various other foreigners, as needed) and liberals.

"If you want to protect yourself and your family and your Way Of Life from [A] and [B], then [X] and [Y] are the people you need to fight." (And if fighting [X] involves killing (by proxy), then it's not surprising that fighting [Y] sometimes takes on violent overtones.)

It would be interesting to do a psychological profile of Fox viewers. I wonder if their anger is fueled by self-loathing. Of course, I also suspect that they are incapable of feeling empathy for others. All speculation for sure.

I don't think it's that simple. I doubt most Fox viewers have any more "self-loathing" than the usual level of frustration many of us have with ourselves. And I'm pretty sure most of them are capable of feeling empathy, it's just that they're dissuaded from doing so outside of a particular subset of people. Missing white Christian girls and their families in the US, yes, plenty of empathy. Missing Muslim men and their families in occupied Iraq, not so much.

I Am Not A Psychologist, so this is strictly pop-psychology speculation ... but I wonder how much of the anger is repackaged fear that they can't acknowledge, not even to themselves.