"...the California Supreme Court issues the most sweeping liberal, activist, pro-gay marriage ruling in the nation."

________

MoFo oughta take the trouble to read the 172 page opinion.

Either the link's not working or it's blocked -- all I get is a blue square (but at least it's blue :-> )

Or is this one of the Mac vs. PC issues that you San Francisco peopel are into :->

That "party" looks like fun!!! You San Francisco Liberals sure know how to have a good time!

Why is it a bad thing for a DEMOCRATIC candidate to be in California while the REPUBLICAN Supreme Court passes a ruling that gay marriage is legal?

The Republicans appointed the bench that approved gay marriage in California, and this idiot is trying to blame that on the Democrats.

Wow, that looks like some party that multiracial trio is having. Nothing says "San Francisco Values" like that! Funny that even a lame GOP attack ad can't run whole hog with gay-bashing these days.

OK, I've only been there as a tourist, to ship out overseas and to fly back, and to attend a couple of conferences. But here's what I saw in the way of "San Francisco values:" a neat city with lots of history, active outdoorsy people who shop at corner markets and walk a great deal (because parking is such a bitch), who care about things other than American Idol, who patronize businesses other than just big-box stores. Across the bay in Marin County my niece and nephew are growing up in a town where you can walk downtown to the bookstore, movie theatre or non-franchise supermarket, and participate in Scouting or in school activities.

Gee, congressman, sounds absolutely dreadful, doesn't it?

Maybe they're all bisexual? I dunno.

"The same week Kay Barnes was in San Francisco for a fundraiser, the California Supreme Court issues the most sweeping liberal, activist, pro-gay marriage ruling in the nation."

This is a post hoc, ergo proctor hoc argument of breathtakingly stupid proportions.

Of course, I'd be disappointed with anything less from the people who OK'd that ad.

Speaking of which, how much do you want to bet that, defensiveness aside, the sad sack of shit who's responsible for the ad has already been fired?

As for the Barnes camp response - ouch. But they handed her the loaded pistol.

Pathetic, indeed.

Damned latin.

First of all, what's with the lame-o dancing trio who are supposed to represent the gay-friendly, decadent SF queen and dyke culture? What's the matter, Graves, couldn't find the producer of a local used car commercial to give you some solid production values?

But beyond the cheeseball-ness of the whole thing, it's great to see Barnes' campaign striking back against this type of garbage in the way I wish Dems had had the brains and balls to do years ago: to point out that this kind of ad is an act of desperation and an insult to the intelligence of voters. Brava.

Republicans will once again claim to represent the values of good Americans.

The Katrina fiasco? A war of choice in Iraq? Saying the US needs another Pearl Harbor BEFORE 9/11? Record gas and energy prices? Detainment without hearings? Secret prisons? Torture?

Perhaps the Democrats should highlight some of the things the GOP did while it had total control and ask "Are these your values?".

I love it Alex! A hot Black(?) guy with two chicks, one with a Mohawk cut, with hips gyrating!

GO KAY BARNES!!! LOVE YOU!

This is the type of ad that would make me WANT to vote for Kay Barnes. She's a party animal...

But hey, I'm one of those evil lefties with San Francisco-type values.

This is so mind-numbingly stupid and vapid, it blows me away that a Republican couldn't even come up with an ad concerning the issues.

Wait a minute ...

Why is it a bad thing for a DEMOCRATIC candidate to be in California while the REPUBLICAN Supreme Court passes a ruling that gay marriage is legal?

The Republicans appointed the bench that approved gay marriage in California, and this idiot is trying to blame that on the Democrats.

Either Graves' campaign didn't know that the CA State Supreme Court is overwhelming Republican, or they figured they could get away with BS because most people will assume otherwise.

Or possibly they think supporting equal rights means the Justices are "closet liberals".

Below are my San Francisco values. I can see why christian clerocrats and the pols who pander to them disagree with me.

The Prayer of St. Francis of Assisi

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;

where there is injury, pardon;

where there is doubt, faith;

where there is despair, hope;

where there is darkness, light;

where there is sadness, joy;

O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;

to be understood as to understand;

to be loved as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive;

it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;

and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.

What exactly is so controversial about this ad? Is it any surprise that candidates try to paint their opponents in the most unflattering light possible?

Anybody care to think about the idea that a good representative should be concentrating on forcing the oil producing nations to supply cheap oil, instead of distracting the voters with puritan lifestyle backlash nonsense?

I mean, who said that (a) cheap oil was good, or (b) that those wicked countries out there - as opposed to the oil companies - were over-charging?

Because, if you're honest with yourselves, you will admit that that is the default assumption.

I am thrilled, absolutely, with the responses of Obama to these sorts of attacks, and I'm delighted to see them mirrored on the Congressional level. The only way to win in an ad hominem is to stay on your topic. After all, the real purpose of an insult is not to make you cry or run away, but to change the argument from the issues to the person.

This particular attack is old. Again and again, I see tactics that seem to have come first from Jesse Helms's cauldron. In 1990, North Carolinians were treated to discourses about "North Carolina values" vs. the opponent who "got donations from San Fransisco" and had "libral" values. In South Carolina, the same language was used. In Georgia, Max Cleland was defeated not only by the hideous "Cleland/bin Laden" morph ad, but, much, much, much more effectively by a chorus of "Georgia values" vs. "Washington values." Cleland's effectiveness in Congress and his centrality to the Democratic Party's message was used to say that he was not a Georgian.

No one can win an argument along those lines. It is impossible. The choices have been to either not answer or to try to "out local" the other guy" or, in the old days, to show how the other guy has corporate values. The new tactic, not of shaming the Republicans, but of pointing at their very ads with a sense of disgust and ridicule, may work. It gives the viewer the message that "sane people think this is stupid," and in that way it compliments them.

Now, where did I put my pink bowler hat and my plastic chaps?