1 Comment Sagesse
Amazing Shift In Party Attitudes On Marriage Equality
July 24, 2011
Please welcome P8TT friend Scott Wooledge, who blogs as clarknt67 over at DailyKos and Pam’s House Blend, for a guest post today -Adam
By Scott Wooledge
National Journal regularly publishes surveys on issues it calls “Insider Surveys.” This month’s survey is on the issue of “gay marriage” (the term they use, we prefer the term marriage equality).
The results show an absolutely astonishing shift in attitudes on the issue, for both the Democratic and Republican party “insiders” surveyed.
It is 207 people, and to be clear it is not a scientific survey that is in any way representative of the population at large. To the contrary, it is heavily weighted by committed politicos. They explain the respondents:
The National Journal Political Insiders Poll is a regular survey of political operatives, strategists, campaign consultants and lobbyists in both parties.
In some ways this may be more indicative of the future of the marriage equality fight than mere popular polling. To earn the title of being deemed an “insider” by the National Journal it is probably fair to say one must be an opinion leader and have some sway in not insignificant spheres of power and/or thought.
The article contrasts changes in responses between April 2009, the last time they asked, and the most recent one, July 2011. This is a mere 27 months.
Of course, it is also a 27 month period that saw Federal Court repudiations of Prop 8, several of the Defense Marriage Act, a 180-degree turnaround in the Justice Department’s stance on DOMA, legislative vote to allow repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” a Federal Court strike down of DADT, and Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo’s resounding victory on this issue in New York (made possible by Republicans acquiescing to give it to him). And of course, now a Presidential endorsement of the Respect For Marriage Act.
Also, national polling turned a corner and now shows opponents are indisputably in the minority, and the polling is only going one way.
The changes from the “Insiders” are remarkable, for not only the Democratic responses (102 people) but also for the Republicans (105). The respondents to the survery are actually named at the source, which include some marquee names (Dana Perino, Janet Napolitano, Alex Castellanos, Peter Daou, Mike Murphy, Harold Ickes) and many more that are less familiar. Their specific responses are not provided, and the quotes are anonymous.
First, a look at the respondents who identify themselves as Democrats:
Look at that swing: a 25 point uptick in Democrats expressing their support, in just 27 months. From a super-majority to realistically about as close to party unanimity as one might hope to see on any issue in politics.
The GOP has not swung significantly toward support, but respondents do seem to be indicating a desire to retreat—rather than double down—on the fight:
Republicans are showing a 20 point shift in the hardline opposition. Where’d they go? Mostly not to support (which did uptick 6%), but rather, to “Avoid the issue.” One Republican who is himself described as opposed to “gay marriage” is quoting as saying,
“State the position and move on. Do not make it the focal point.”
“Avoid the issue?”
“Do not make it a focal point?”
WTF?!
But? But? Hasn’t the right wing been telling us gay marriage will lead to “anarchy,” “gulags“, “the tyranny of the majority“, “the end of the world,” and as Catholic leaders have warned, will make the United States exactly like “China and North Korea?”
How can they abandon a fight with consequences that dire?
Perhaps it’s that a look at the cross-tabs of the polls shows that 15+ years into the debate, most swing voters and independents have rejected the most deranged, hysterical, hyperbole coming out of the far right on the subject. In fact, more and more and more they are siding with those awful, radical, activist homosexuals, as multiple majority opinion polls are showing.
In fact, even the craziest of the crazy can read the writing on the wall. Jim Daly, president of the far-right social issues group Focus on the Family discussed marriage equality in May saying:
“We’re losing on that one, especially among the 20- and 30-somethings: 65 to 70 percent of them favor same-sex marriage. I don’t know if that’s going to change with a little more age — demographers would say probably not. We’ve probably lost that. I don’t want to be extremist here, but I think we need to start calculating where we are in the culture.”
When a group who’s made their entire business model out of manufacturing homophobia starts talking about coming up with a Plan B, you know a sea change is occurring.
All this points to a bit of a puzzle I myself have been trying to solve.
There is a conventional wisdom not infrequently expressed that “Democrats don’t want elections to be all about the gays, for heavens sake!” Everyone knows gay issues are electoral kryptonite, right?
But how to square the conventional wisdom with what’s actually going on?
The President, of course, recently made a strong stand in support of Repealing the Defense of Marriage Act.
And many influential Democrats in the Senate seem OK with heading straight into 2012 armed with a high-profile push for repeal the Defense of Marriage Act as a front burner cause. They are clearly using the power of their offices to make this issue a focal point, enthusiastically talking to the press, and placing the issue in the public consciousness via the awesome Senate DOMA Repeal hearings.
They appear to be seizing public interest ignited by the Prop 8 verdict, the Justice Department’s remarkable shift on DOMA, and New York’s marriage equality victory.
The clue to what is really going on is apparently some Democrats see an electoral opportunity here, from the National Journal:
Democrats also felt that support for gay marriage would solidify the party’s grip on younger voters. “It’s this generation’s civil rights movement,” exclaimed one Democratic Insider.”It’s a huge demographic opportunity for Democrats because almost every voter under 30 supports it,” said another.”
This is not conjecture or wishful thinking on the part of the speakers, but can be observed in the crosstabs of every credible poll taken on the issue. This is also the reason so many, like the Vice President, have concluded marriage equality is “inevitable.”
Where Democrats see gain, the Republicans see only their own vulnerability:
“Huge issue with young voters we need,” asserted one GOP Insider who said the party should support gay marriage. “Only idiots fight demography.”
It may take a while for these insiders in the GOP to influence their party. Republican “idiots” continue to mount quixotic grandstanding stunts on the issue. They are doing what the GOP does best, tossing red meat to the base. GOP Presidential candidates, too, have been gleefully feeding the Religious Right base what they want to hear in pursuit of the 2012 nomination. (Although Michele Bachmann, never before the least shy about her hatred of the gays, appears now, uncharacteristically unwilling to talk.)
But, none of the gay-hating politicians are likely impressing anyone who wouldn’t be already inclined to vote against that darn “Kenyan” and his Democratically-enabled “socialist agenda!”
Cheers to the Democratic leaders that are increasingly really rising, not shying from this fight. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo found championing the issue of marriage equality was a pretty effective way to prompt the press to pair the number “2016″ with his name. Many suspect that was his aim all along. Well, mission accomplished, guv’nor.
Maryland Governor Mike O’Malley looked north, saw some of the love Cuomo’s been getting and apparently now wants a piece of the action. Good for him. Good politics and good policy need not be exclusive.
In championing this issue Democrats, of course, are serving up a slice of red meat to their own progressive base. But, unlike the Republicans, exploiting their base’s instincts for equality and justice now offers little risk of alienating the middle and voters who might otherwise consider leaning left. This is a trend that shows no danger of reversing in any of our lifetimes.
It’s clear this issue is fast heading for a reckoning. It’s also clear which party is fast scrambling to be on the right side of history, and which party is finding they’ve painted themselves into an electoral corner. As Franklin Delano Roosevelt implored supporters, the time has come to welcome their hatred.
This post is an update of a post that first ran on Daily Kos. The author, Scott Wooledge, writes regularly there under the handle Clarknt67. He is a Brooklyn based writer and activist.
Filed under: Marriage equality
58 Comments Leave a Comment
1.
Ann S. | July 24, 2011 at 9:40 am
§
2.
LCH | July 24, 2011 at 10:16 am
♀♀=♂♂=♀♂=∑♡
3.
Jim | July 24, 2011 at 12:17 pm
One thing to look at in the Republican poll: 30% oppose it, and 56% say the Republicans should avoid it. That is still 86% of Republicans that do NOT support same sex marriage. No one can deny that the Republican Party is a shrewd party, and by stating let's avoid the issue, they are just saying yes we oppose it, but if we oppose it too loud we may turn off some voters, so let's just avoid the issue, and when we get in power we will do everything possible to oppose any gay rights issue.
4.
Mackenzie | July 24, 2011 at 1:16 pm
I just keep in mind that these are the republican leadership, a bunch of old people stuck in their ways. The fact that they are running away from their firm opposition in itself is good news. They know they will loose. They have a fine line to run between turning off young voters and pissing off the old folk. It is a lovely spot to see them squirm in….we just got keep on and force them to state their position.
5.
justjoel59 | July 24, 2011 at 1:28 pm
We need to show America the type of people who oppose equality and oppose love. There were some extraordinary photos taken today of the anti-equality protest in NY. The PUBLIC needs to see them, not the choir to whom we always seem to be preaching! These hatemongers are against everything that is American, and if the average citizen sees their behavior and vitriol, NO ONE will want to align themselves with these groups!
6.
Clarknt67 | July 24, 2011 at 1:29 pm
I don't disagree. But it also means if Democrats push it, it will put the GOP in a difficult spot.
A lot of factors played into the GOP votes needed to pass marriage equality in NY. But one key factor was some GOP Senators had strongly Demoncratic constituencies. And they knew their constituencies wanted a yes, more than a no.
They feared backlash if they voted no.
7.
Sheryl_Carver | July 24, 2011 at 1:42 pm
Do you have a link to those photos?
8.
Kate | July 24, 2011 at 1:59 pm
Ditto! Where's all the coverage? And the signs??? (Ours, too; they are always SO clever, unlike those of the NOMbies. When their god passed out brains, I guess we were first in line.)
9.
Steve | July 24, 2011 at 2:17 pm
Not making gay rights a wedge issue or a main point in election campaigns is still a huge progress from a couple of years ago. Compare it with Bush's campaigns. It means the population isn't whipped up as much
10.
DaveP | July 24, 2011 at 2:20 pm
I agree completely! The general public has grown weary and fed up with the hate that has been spewing from the anti-equality crowd. Things have changed and we no longer have any reason to try to keep their message away from the public. We need to really put effort into 'giving them enough rope' by getting their bigotry in front of the general public. Most people now view the right wing's rhetoric as vulgar and inconsiderate, the political equivalent of a fart in an elevator.
11.
Seth from Maryland | July 24, 2011 at 2:24 pm
http://youtu.be/Oic8mA_KeWw
this video made me cry tears of joy
12.
LCH | July 24, 2011 at 2:27 pm
goodasyou has a few pictures. But other than that it looks like the media would rather cover the happy couples and not the Nombies.
13.
Sheryl_Carver | July 24, 2011 at 2:31 pm
Here's the couple that was first to marry in New York City. Phyllis is 76 & Connie is 84 (& in a wheelchair).
http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2011/07/same-sex_wed…
Clearly NOMers are cowards if think allowing these 2 women to marry is so scary.
14.
Sheryl_Carver | July 24, 2011 at 2:46 pm
Here are some stories about the protests, with a few pictures:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=14148168
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Opponents-of…
http://www.newser.com/article/d9om91rg1/opponents…
15.
LCH | July 24, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Thanks for the link. Interestingly, it's the same article published under different banners.
Can anyone out there weigh in on whether Diaz's threat to nullify today's marriages has any merit? The reason he gave was that it was illegal to waive the 24hr waiting period.
16.
Sagesse | July 24, 2011 at 2:59 pm
The man has a screw or two loose. Go ahead and annul the marriages… if that's even possible. The couples will just go out the next day, get a new licence and get married again. What a maroon.
17.
Bob | July 24, 2011 at 3:02 pm
let them protest,,,, change has come to America,,,, The Rainbow People have claimed their space,,, and the power of that is reflected by the protests of those who have to make some adjustments in their minds to acknowledge our existence,,, what a wave of opportunity,,,, angry protests,,, balanced by celebrations of joy.. the upheaval is a natural part of the movement towards EQUALITY
18.
Seth from Maryland | July 24, 2011 at 3:11 pm
within the hour on cnn there will be a live wedding, officated by mayor bloomberg
19.
Rich | July 24, 2011 at 3:53 pm
Just finished watching the National News (NBC/ABC) lots of coverage of the marriages in NY today…and, the coverage was wonderful, upbeat, colorful, and so positive. A followup on NBC shared that the joy in NY is not available nationwide; the message seemed to say: Why not? Pretty much Zip on NOM et al. Yea!!
20.
Jim | July 24, 2011 at 4:28 pm
My husband and I (one of the 18,000 legally married in CA) just watched the live coverage on CNN of the marriage performed by Mayor Bloomberg. I think we all just witnessed a first, a live same sex marriage on a major TV network (CNN). Props to CNN, and of course their joyful, gay anchor. I wonder if Maggie (NOM) enjoyed it as much as us?
21.
justjoel59 | July 24, 2011 at 5:34 pm
What's everybody's problem with maroons? I LOVE maroons!
Oh wait, that's "macaroons."
Never mind!
22.
Straight Ally #3008 | July 24, 2011 at 5:49 pm
"I don’t want to be extremist here, but I think we need to start calculating where we are in the culture.”
Dude, you're the president of Focus on the Family. You're already an extremist.
(Point taken, however, that's a major admission on their part)
23.
AnonyGrl | July 24, 2011 at 5:57 pm
"State Sen. Ruben Diaz, a minister who was the sole Democrat to vote against gay marriage, told the crowd that he and other opponents would try to get Sunday's marriages annulled, saying judges broke the law by waiving the 24-hour waiting period without a good reason."
But he doesn't hate them.
24.
AnonyGrl | July 24, 2011 at 6:31 pm
Honestly, he is just blowing smoke for his constituents. The main reason to nullify a marriage is if one partner intentionally misled the other and got them to marry fraudulently. Diaz is going to find it a long, uphill battle to get any of the couples who married today to say that is the case.
I don't believe a third party can seek to nullify a marriage if the married couple is not interested in doing so. I am not 100% sure of that, but I would think that it would be an insanely difficult case to make.
My understanding is that the 24 hour waiting period is just a protection against a couple rushing into a marriage without thinking about it (see Las Vegas and Brittney Spears 54 hour marriage). None of the marriages in question had that particular issue, I would bet. I can't imagine anyone woke up today and said "Hey, lets get married" without some forethought.
I think any judge who waived the 24 hour waiting period could well have done so on the grounds that the couple in question had damn well waited long enough already, and I don't see that being an issue either!
25.
AnonyGrl | July 24, 2011 at 6:33 pm
Perhaps he meant to say "I don't want to be an extremist here, AND I think we need to start…." meaning he knows he HAS been one, but wants to reform his ways?
OK… unlikely… but…
26.
Clarknt67 | July 24, 2011 at 9:17 pm
NOM is threatening "repeal" just to fundraise off ignorant boobs who don't understand.
I know after CA & ME, it's hard to believe, but NY is safe. The only route to repeal is for NOM, et al, to elect enough ant-equality foes to both the State House & the Senate to pass a repeal bill. (No such thing as a ballot initiative in NY.)
That just ain't gonna happen in NY. There just isn't the grassroots opposition to carry a movement that huge. Especially not with strong Dems like Obama & Gillibrand at the top of the ticket in 2012.
And of course, it's protected by Cuomo's veto pen until 2014.
Their talk if walking it back is snake oil.
27.
Carpool Cookie | July 24, 2011 at 10:12 pm
We're really lucky to be living in this time, as we see change. I didn't think I would see Marriage Equality in my lifetime.
28.
Tom | July 24, 2011 at 11:49 pm
You Sodomites will never be normal no matter how much you try & push it through the law.
29.
Johnny Z | July 25, 2011 at 3:17 am
Spoken like a true bigot.
30.
James Sweet | July 25, 2011 at 4:45 am
It's even worse than that for the GOP. It is not merely a matter of when they are going to decide to follow the demographics; they are truly stuck between a rock and a hard place. Here's why:
When support for same-sex marriage was a fringe position, the number of Democrata voters who would not ever vote for a candidate who refused to support marriage equality was dwindlingly small. Even and now, it is only just becoming a make-or-break issue — a Democrat candidate who somehow made it through the primary while opposing marriage equality could probably still count on the support of the vast majority of the base.
This does not appear to be happening regards to the Republican base's opposition to marriage equality. It's a dealbreaker for many Religious Right voters if a candidate is unwilling to project their bigotry via legislation and constitutional shenanigans. GOP candidate are very soon going to be faced with a reality where opposing marriage equality will cost them scads of swing and young voters, while supporting it — even nominally — will erode deeply into their base. That reality is not quite here yet, but it's coming, and sooner than some short-sighted Republican candidates seem to acknowledge.
Rest assured, though, I'm sure the Democrats will figure out a way to squander this advantage somehow. Seems like they always do…
31.
James Sweet | July 25, 2011 at 4:57 am
Of course. This story isn't about Republicans suddenly, you know, having a reasonable policy platform and stuff. HAH! That'll be the day… no, it's about how one of their bread-and-butter whip-up-the-base issues is about to turn into political kryptonite, and the less mentally challenged member of the party know it.
32.
AnonyGrl | July 25, 2011 at 5:18 am
Err… Americans, actually. Well, mostly, actually we are from many different countries. And from many different towns and cities and states… none of them being Sodom, which is a town that according to conflicting reports was either hit in a meteor strike, or was built over a natural gas field and exploded.
If you mean we are, as the bible describes the residents of Sodom, inhospitable, you should take a look around. If you come in without attacking, and sit and talk with us, you will find us quite hospitable.
33.
James Sweet | July 25, 2011 at 5:27 am
I think he was talking about lumberjacks?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom,_Ontario
34.
James Sweet | July 25, 2011 at 5:34 am
In the parlance of FoF, acknowledging that cultural norms can change over time is an extremist position. (Not that it was ever right to deny same-sex marriage, regardless of cultural norms, of course) Hell, for that matter, by FoF standards it is an extremist position to say that maybe gays shouldn't be taken out in the street and shot…
35.
Ronnie | July 25, 2011 at 5:55 am
Subscribing & sharing….. <3…Ronnie:
Sen. Dianne Feinstein On Respect For Marriage Act
[youtube xy3OBSS_krI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy3OBSS_krI youtube]
36.
Ronnie | July 25, 2011 at 5:58 am
ROTFLMGAO…….really, I think I lost 5lbs on that laugh…. XP …..Ronnie
37.
Rich | July 25, 2011 at 6:05 am
Woke up to our Portland Press Herald (largest circulation in Maine) and a wonderful article (with picture of the two older women married first in NYC) that detailed all the joy, tears of happiness and excitement of the day. It offered only a slight mention of the protests which really did nothing to detract from the larger message of celebration. Hope this was the case for other news outlets across the country.
38.
loaferguy | July 25, 2011 at 6:31 am
Any thoughts on this one?
‘Civil marriage’ lacking for California's same-sex advocates:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/07/civil-mar…
39.
AnonyGrl | July 25, 2011 at 7:36 am
I think it only muddies the waters. If there ends up being two propositions on marriage equality, doesn't that just confuse voters?
I also think the distinction is unnecessary. Whenever "marriage" is referred to in the law, it means civil marriage. There is no need for the law to make that sort of a clarification, because it is already there. In fact, if religious organizations are so concerned about the issue, they can take to calling their institution "religious marriage" with much more ease than that required to make a change in the law.
And the change is the hard part. The word marriage appears all throughout the law, in property law, tax law, criminal law… to change every instance of "marriage" to "civil marriage" would be onerous and expensive. Additionally, there might be complications between state and federal law at that point, if federal laws were not similarly updated.
All in all, it is not a bad idea, just poorly conceived and difficult to execute.
40.
AnonyGrl | July 25, 2011 at 7:38 am
It seems to be! The stories I am seeing all focus on the joy of the day, and footnote NOM and WBC in a paragraph that basically says "Oh, and these guys were protesting", and which seem to quote WBC rather than NOM, which must piss NOM off somewhat.
Nice to wake up to such good news, isn't it?
41.
AnonyGrl | July 25, 2011 at 7:41 am
We are lumberjacks, and we're ok?
42.
DaveP | July 25, 2011 at 7:58 am
Aww, whats the matter mister cranky pants? Are you having a bad day? Why don't you stick around and tell us all about it.
43.
DaveP | July 25, 2011 at 8:12 am
Yup, There was a LOT of news coverage of the N.Y. marraiges on all of the news channels here in northern California over the weekend, all of it overwhelmingly positive. Similar to what Anongrl reported, a few of the segments included a brief 'oh yeah, those guys were there' reference to the protesters, but there were no quotes from them and they were not portrayed favorably. And several of the reports ended by pushing the story to the next chapter – pointing out that all of these happy couples they have been showing us still face discrimination at the federal level due to DOMA, and explaining the current situation with that issue. Well done!
BTW, I noticed that it also got some pretty extensive coverage on the major spanish speaking channels too, which is very important in California. My spanish is far too rusty to follow what they were saying but it seemed positive… maybe someone here can check it out and report back?
44.
loaferguy | July 25, 2011 at 8:46 am
My feeling as well.
45.
Ronnie | July 25, 2011 at 9:29 am
46 Gay Couples Marry in Mass Wedding at Niagara Falls: VIDEO http://www.towleroad.com/2011/07/niagarawedding.h…
<3…Ronnie
46.
Ronnie | July 25, 2011 at 9:46 am
Justin and Mila: More Than Just Friends http://www.advocate.com/Arts_and_Entertainment/Fi…
On page 3 of the interview:
Mila, you’ve been an outspoken proponent for equality and previously expressed to The Advocate how upset you were by the passing of California’s Proposition 8. You must be excited about New York legalizing same-sex marriage.
Kunis: Listen, my roommate's gay. You're talking to somebody who grew up in Hollywood, so I don't know otherwise. So my stance on it is I think people are scared of what they don't know. A lot of times people don't understand something because they're not around it. The second that you show them, they become a little more accepting, and they're more open to evolving and moving forward. And I think it's great that there are people in this world who are willing to do something that should have been done, 40, 50, 60 years ago. I also think it's great that “don't ask, don't tell” is over with. I think that a lot of things are moving in the right direction. And truly believe that in my lifetime gay marriage will be legalized [everywhere in this country]. I do. Like, federally legal. I do believe in that. I don't think it's going to be tomorrow. It's unfortunate that it's not, but if things keep moving in the direction that they are now, in 10, 20 years, yeah, I do believe it will be federally legal.
Timberlake: I was stoked. I mean, I was stoked that that happened. I think it's just … we're people and we're different, all of us. And we should be using our differences to bring ourselves closer together. You know? Not be afraid of something that we don't know. Like Mila said, and you know, I have a lot of guy friends who are gay. Two of my best friends are a couple, and my conversation with them is, like, it's unfortunate that things take a while to progress like this, but it was a great, great victory for equality. I’m proud that New York has balls to stand up for what’s right.
(me) I love them….STRAIGHT ALLIES ARE AWESOME!!!! …. <3…Ronnie
47.
Reformed | July 25, 2011 at 10:04 am
I wonder how many times NOM and Westboro Baptist Church got mentioned in the same sentence. Well, assuming these comments get indexed(?) here in one more.
48.
Franck | July 25, 2011 at 10:04 am
Ah, I was about to feed the troll, but it seems like some other members of this site have already been hospitable enough to do in my stead
– Franck P. Rabeson
Days spent apart from my fiancé because of DOMA: 1494 days, as of today.
49.
fiona64 | July 25, 2011 at 10:42 am
Hmm. Does anyone here live in Sodom? Raise your hands! (Oh, wait. It was destroyed by an asteroid a gazillion years ago.)
I guess "Tom" is just so pitiful that he has to complain about other peoples' happiness. How very sad. Just another one to file under "obvious troll is obvious," I guess.
50.
Gregory in SLC | July 25, 2011 at 12:18 pm
even made UT news! Many very nice photos : D , along with detractors too BOO!
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/52252881-68/ne…
51.
JefferyK | July 25, 2011 at 2:16 pm
Republicans have figured out that culture wars are box-office poison. That's why they want to avoid the gay marriage issue. However, don't believe for a second that the cultures wars are over: This has been the worst year for abortion rights in recent memory. So, they are still waging war — covertly. Takeaway? Don't vote Republican.
52.
AnonyGrl | July 25, 2011 at 3:59 pm
Hey! I am in picture number 59! I am standing to the right of the guy in the purple shirt, with my hands on my hips. And my sister in law has the blue jersey with the 10 on it, and is standing next to my brother, in the hat.
And I noticed that all the HAPPY people were us, celebrating, getting married, loving each other… NOMbies had nothing but sad, angry faces.
53.
DaveP | July 25, 2011 at 5:05 pm
My goodness, all of you are so tiny!! : ) I vote that we don't let this one count toward your fifteen minutes. The clock doesn't start until we see your smilin' face all over the internet.
54.
AnonyGrl | July 25, 2011 at 5:23 pm
55.
Tom | July 25, 2011 at 8:58 pm
yes anyone who opposes your devious lifestyle is a "bigot"
56.
Ronnie | July 25, 2011 at 9:25 pm
ROFLMGAO… My "lifestyle" is an amalgam of fashionista, artsy, A&F, & intellectual with a touch of fierceness. (snaps fingers as glitter shoots out of the tips)… oh the horror… THE HORROR!!!… (runs out of the house screaming)… AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!
What's your "lifestyle" Johnny Z?
; ) …Ronnie
57.
Gregory in SLC | July 26, 2011 at 5:24 am
How fun! Glad you pointed ya'll out! : D !
I KNOW! about the NOMbies….you think you would be happier "doing the Lord's work"….thanks for all your coverage over the weekend Anony!
58.
Gregory in SLC | July 26, 2011 at 5:24 am
x 2 : D funny comment DaveP!
Leave a Comment
XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
TrackBack URL | RSS feed for comments on this post.