Secrets of the City

Woo-hoo! This is great news. Constitutional amendments shouldn’t be up for popular vote.

Well that’s good news. I wonder what KK will have to say about this tomorrow, probably something about our hatred towards the sanctity of family and marriage.

I could give much of a hoot one way or the other about gays getting married, but equal rights is equal rights and don’t fuck with the constitution. Thinking about it though in the long run, it would likely contribute to the flow of capital to the rich. Gays get married, I venture to guess, like heteros 50% will have to hire lawyers to get divorced. Thus adding ipetus to the flow of capitol and we all know everytime a dollar turns over someone takes a little slice of it and it ain’t the po’ folks. I am supprised the Republicans have not forseen this? But then they are wrapped up in oil I suppose and can’t think of everything…

Not to mention all the straight people who, threatened by the thought of gay marriage, will suddenly TURN gay, and lose their marriages as well. I swear if you talk to some of the crazies who protest daily up at the capitol, they are convinced they are one gay marriage away from catching a nasty case of the gay.

Also, I love how Michelle Bachman earlier championed legislation fighting the imagined threat of activist professors teaching from a liberal bias, and yet, nearly all of the people who testified for her today were activist professors who seemed have a certain opposing tilt.

I love that she has a gay step-sister. Sort of like Mary Cheney, the VP’s daughter, who is also a lesbian.

What is it with the wingnuts and the gay relative/skeleton in the closet?

Hey, would that be a skelative?

I know that I’m going out tonight and doing some ass fucking to celebrate.

(Sorry for the Wonkette moment.)

I’m right there with you, buddy.

i plan on creating shirts that say “BAN MICHELE BACHMANN” with a picture of her on it. perhaps the one where she is hiding in the bushes. i have a friend who will screen print it, i just have to make an attempt to design it.

putting a ban on something that is already illegal twice over makes no sense. it’s like putting a constitutional ban on marijuana (except people still do it), poor comparison, but you know what i mean. i don’t think gay marriage is going to be allowed in the state of mn for quite some time due to these existing laws.

i just wish she’d give up though. honestly. i want my tax money spent more wisely than debating how we can put something unnecessary in place that effects many peoples lives. can’t they use the money for important things like, i don’t know, education? environment? stuff like that?

Does this mean that daddy doesn’t love me?

C’mon, if you’re going to make t-shirts, don’t mess around. Don’t accessorize — slanderize!

I FUCKED MICHELE BACHMANN IN THE ASS

(I really have to stop coming to this site after getting home from the bar.)

oh, there were much worse things in mind for michele bachmann that will remain as ideas and not follow throughs (non-violent or non-life threatening of course)

If same-sex marriage were allowed, straight people would lose absolutely nothing. It wouldn’t take anything away from people like Bachmann except their sense of superiority. It seems to me that this must come down to some deep-rooted insecurities. Why else would people work so hard to validate their lives by way of invalidating people who aren’t like them? “I’m doing everything right and you’re going to rot in hell because you’re not like me.” What is wrong with these people? Were they not loved enough as children? Is that why they’re so obsessed with the idea of strong, perfect families?

I wonder how many people who are in favor of amending the constitution to prohibit gay marriage are simulatenously opposed to the cigarette ban?

There was a Strib human-interest piece on Bachmann which ran within the last year or so which struck me as bizarre. Along with the story, there was a photo, among other family shots, of her children performing a “wedding” between two stuffed animals. Normal kid make-up games with toys, sure, but the irony was a baffling insult, as if the rest of Bachmann’s publicity stunts weren’t insulting enough. I wonder if stuffed animals in her household are able to visit each other in the hospital, or to file taxes jointly, or to be covered on each other’s health insurance?
Michele Bachmann is just plain mean, and useless.

If you’re not a Bachmann fan, remember she’ll be running for the U.S. House this fall, probably against Patty Wetterling. If you can’t vote in that district, you can help by donating to Patty.

You’re all going to hell.

Just sayin.

Bachmann is a disgusting human being.

Michele is a nice person. If you can’t admit that an insist on calling her disgusting and all sorts of other names then you really aren’t that much better than the person you’re criticizing. You don’t have to agree with her (or anyone) but you can at least acknowledge that they are all mostly nice people with different opinions than you. It’s personal insults like the ones leveled on this page that are largely responsible for degrading our public debate.

She’s nice? Would you say the same thing if the constitutional amendment she was proposing made marriage between a black person and a white person illegal? It used to be.

We don’t have to play friendly politics with someone who is trying to force her petty prejudices into state’s law. There’s nothing nice about that.

Nice?! That’s why the general public shouldn’t be revolted? There are plenty of KKK members that are “nice” when you sit down with them over a cup of coffee, but they’re still disgusting at their core… I mean, really. And no, I’m not saying she’s a KKK member – I’m saying that anyone who fights to deny the basic rights of others is seriously flawed, and should be called out as such. Prejudice and hatred should not be taken lightly – history has clearly shown what damage they do when left unchallenged.

Here’s a little 30-second video on YouTube or iFilm that some friends and I whipped together last week about the idocy of the amendment (especially when gay marriage is already illegal in MN by way of the “Defense of Marriage Act” put into place several years ago).

Sentiment still stands. Spelling is corrected: idiocy. Feh.

If she is so nice why hasn’t she even talked to her lesbian half sister in “years”?

Maybe she doesn’t want her half sister to have the same rights as she does because of some childish sibling rivalry that took place years ago. Like her half sister got a larger scoop of ice cream than she did and it warped her fragile little mind!

Well, Kersten gets enough knocking around here, but she’s one of the few righties that understands the flipside of the same-sex marriage issue.

The urban moonbats who hang out around here may not realize this, but marriage is the cornerstone of the family unit, and as such:

• There is simply no better way to enshrine one’s love than with a binding legal contract.
• Families have children, children are created through sex. If gays marry, you’re endorsing the choice to have deviant gay sex.
• Marriage is most important for children, because they depend on that contract for their very existence.
• By extension, every time a parent leaves the unit, via death or divorce, those children simply cease to exist.

Once gay marriage, that massive impediment to the American family way of life, is abolished, I very much hope we can legislate away the less important threats to the family, including adultery, so-called “no fault” divorces, and death itself.

I agree with Kevin. I know, I know, it’s hard to admit, but I do.

Even though Bachmann is clearly a political hack and a blatant opportunist, she’s nonetheless entitled to engage in the political process. And if folks want to call her disgusting for hackery and opportunism, then okay, yes, she’s disgusting. And yes, if she thrusts herself into the public spotlight for no other reason than to be a political celebrity, Rex can surely thrust himself into her ass. Fair enough.

BUT, just because she’s against gay marriage doesn’t mean that she’s disgusting.

It would be nice if Minnesota had less liberal indignation and knee jerk name calling and more progressive crusaders who work as hard as Bachmann.

Less gay marriage, more cupcakes!

Name calling contributes nothing to the public debate. I don’t have a whole lot of respect for any side of this issue right now because no one seems to get past petty name calling and thick headed righteousness.

OK, so we know that attacking SSM is really just a ploy, appealing to the social conservative. They’re the ones redefining marriage to make it synonymous with family, even if they are two very distinct things. You don’t need a marriage to have children, and you don’t need children to have a family.

Wouldn’t a REAL defense of the family look more like deeper tax cuts for the lower and middle classes, and some sort of insurance to families with dependent children who lose a critical wage earner?

If thick-headed righteousness means fighting for equal rights on behalf of others, then YES, I am proudly thick-headed and righteous. It pains me, Kevin, that you’re too hung up on a sensitivity to name-calling to actually give credence to the issue at hand. Please step aside while you’re moping in your corner – the rest of us are busy supporting friends, family, and strangers whose rights are being attacked.

I also agree with champs, who should run for office.

champs, I can’t figure out if you are being serious or making a joke.

And yes, taylor, kevin is probably right. But there are two main problems that make it hard not to make it personal: one, the issue itself is very personal — her very legislation is a ‘personal insult’ to many people, and it intrudes into personal relationships and marriage, which are personal, private matters — right where the government doesn’t belong.

The second problem, it seems, is that Bachmann makes it so damn easy to poke fun at her.

Kevin/Taylor

sorry, i’ve met w/ this woman a few times in the past 3 years for my work in Stillwater, her level of bigotry is what makes her disgusting, i don’t see that as name calling really.

oh, and champs… wow… i don’jt even know what to say to you

I heard Bachmann debating someone on MPR over the lunch hour a week or two ago. One of Bachmann’s arguments was that in California, children are taught in sex-ed that homosexuality is normal, even if it goes against the morality of their parents! [insert pearl-clutching here] What she didn’t seem to grasp is that there’s a flip side to that–heteros like me may feel that it’s part of our morality to think of homosexuality as normal, and calling it abnormal or pretending it doesn’t exist goes against our morality.

Which is why we don’t legislate morality.

Elizabeth, what is ‘pearl-clutching’? Sounds vaguely sexual — does it have to do with deviant gay sex?

Picture a woman wearing a long pearl necklace (no, not that kind!) and clutching it with her fingers every time she gets emotional or upset.

Michelle Bachmann is a hero.

She is standing up to the decline of our once great civilization.

Witness the vitriol, the hatred, of those that would celebrate homosexual union, and oppose Michelle’s heroic efforts.

Study your history and your bibles. It has been the downfall of many societies before ours.

Keep on it, Michelle!

(PS – Her step sister doesn’t look too happy does she?)

phwew! okay, at first I thought you were trying to brainwash us with your pro-gay-love-terrorist agenda!

yeah, bud, and the mallards and monkeys too — their animal societies have all crumbled into oblivion.

best quote ever_

My friend to his rich in-laws, on gay marriage_

“Do you realize, in forty years, you’re gonna be the people who sent the blacks to the back of the bus?”

Being polite doesn’t mean you’re a good person. It sure helps, but it doesn’t mean you’re not a racist, homophobe, bad speller, pervert, or anything else. Just means you’re polite.

spaceman, don’t embarrass yourself .

you know what I am talking about.

Free advice, don’t go around saying this if you support gay marriage: You don’t need a marriage to have children, and you don’t need children to have a family. That will not win you a lot of converts.

I also find it highly offensive to compare this to the plight of minorities in the civil rights movement. Until gay people have been subject to centuries of slavery and are forced to use inferior schools,drink from separate water fountains, are unable to vote, are unable to own land, and are the victims of all the other injustices imposed upon blacks or other minorities I will have a very hard time viewing this as a struggle for civil rights rather than a request for privileges.

spaceman: it is true that Kersten understands both sides of the SSM issue, but she clings to the wrong side of the argument, feeling she has some sort of trump card with the logic that marriage is for families, to have children, as if children can’t exist without wedlock, or that married people have to have children to be a family.

I hoped that the followup post would clear up any confusion about whether the original was serious, if that wasn’t completely evidenced by my call for the abolition of death.

Bud -

Although I’m not a an expert on every civilization ever, I can’t think of one that fell because of gay marriage. In general, they overexpanded and their armies could not guard the amount of land they had conquered.

I think we should turn to Margaret Cho to settle this: “Any state that would deny a gay man bridal registry is an evil, fascist one.”

Bud, your ignorance is staggering. Truly. I pray for people like you… you need all the prayers you can get.

actually, I have no idea what you are talking about.

and embarrass myself? talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Until gay people have been subject to centuries of slavery and are forced to use inferior schools,drink from separate water fountains, are unable to vote, are unable to own land, and are the victims of all the other injustices imposed upon blacks or other minorities I will have a very hard time viewing this as a struggle for civil rights rather than a request for privileges.

Let’s not forget that the great majority of gay people are still in the closet and therefore hard to abuse.

Lets see what happens to people when they come out and see if it sounds like a civl rights problem:

They are denied the right to marry who they want and by extension are denied government services available to others.

They face discrimination at our schools

They are fired from thier jobs

They are denied housing

They get killed like Matthew Shepard

Anyway you get the point. It is not slavery, but it is pretty bad.

Oh – and here is an interesting link about a guy from MN who is organizing a group of gay Christians to tour concervative colleges. His name is Jacob Reitan and he “said he wanted to start conversations on the issue at places where there are few, if any, gay and lesbian voices.”

Kevin, you might try Googling homophobia to get a sense of the experience of homosexuals in the past few hundred — or thousand — years. It hasn’t been pretty. You might start with Wikipedia. Are you really claiming that blacks are the only people in America that have been denied civil rights? Without slavery and Jim Crowe laws, an oppressive system is just not even worth discussing, because blacks had it so much worse? Please. And yet Bud thinks that Spaceman is worthy of being called ignorant.

And, pray tell, what “privileges” are gays and lesbians looking for that is denied straight couples?

And Kevin, coming from someone who doesn’t have to request the privilege because he has it automatically, your opinion doesn’t mean much. This shouldn’t be up to straight people to decide. It has nothing to do with you. Nothing. Zero. So your opinion shouldn’t decide this.

Who was that weird lookin’ guy who warned us about a future of “gay paligomy?” What planet does he represent?

Kevin from Minneapolis: opponents of SSM hide behind their bigotry by arguing that children, sex, and families are completely dependent on the legal institution of marriage, when they’re clearly not. Many would like to think so, but they’re distinct entities. I’m personally opposed to opposite sex marriage, too — it’s a deeply personal commitment, what’s the point in logging it to state and county records? That said, I’m taking the plunge in about five months…

hey, champs, the call for an abolition of death would normally be a cue, but on this post and with references to KK, it seems right at home.

Who was that weird lookin’ guy who warned us about a future of “gay paligomy?” What planet does he represent?

I am surprised you didn’t recognize Yoda. Of course, his English has gotten somewhat better.

Mel, thanks for taking away my right to have an opinion. Real inclusive of you. This now means that I have been discriminated against now my opinion carries legitimacy. Thanks!

Kevin, I agree with you on the name calling, but you lost me when you started calling marriage a privilege. If that was the case, we’d be limiting marriage to people “qualified” to get married, or have a written test — something to prevent the vast majority of idiots from getting hitched. As it stands, you can saunter down to Vegas and get legally bound to someone within 20 minutes.

Of course, then you can leave the Vagas city limits and get legally bound at a reasonable price too.

Regardless, this is a particularly frustrating debate to me since I don’t believe the government has any business legislating marriage. Marriage is traditionally a religious definition. If the arch conservatives don’t want same sex marriage, fine, their churches don’t have to provide weddings for gays and lesbians. Hell, I don’t even think tax forms should have “married filing jointly” status. I’d much rather see a “household” checkbox, where anyone living under a roof and forming a household can file jointly and leave the religious definitions at home. It’s patently ridiculous that people are voicing the downfall of civilization if gays can marry. Just a few years back, society was going to dissolve if single parents continued to flourish and were supported. Speaking as a single parent, I haven’t noticed the Four Horsemen rolling up on my doorstep. And I don’t see the ability of gay men to file taxes jointly as much cause for them to saddle up. Can’t we spend more time debating the greenhouse effect?

Or maybe tasty cupcakes? Vote no to constitutional amendments, yes to devil’s food!

…I will have a very hard time viewing this as a struggle for civil rights rather than a request for privileges.

So equal rights under the law is a privilege?

Speaking of the Bible, Matthew 25:41-45…

Then he will say to those at his left hand, “You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels;

Then he will answer them, “Truly I tell you, just as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’

I wonder what this has to do with folks who live lives described by GE?

I think marriage itself is a misguided concept — a historical vestige that we’ll eventually shed — so I think you’re all crazy. Oh, and I hate babies.

I’ve never so much a dipped a toe into on of these types of MNSpeak convos but…

If marriage is about the ability to produce offspring (thus creating a family unit), what happens to barren women and infertile men? Then they’re not allowed to get married either, right?

Just a thought…

Rex, babies are great — tender, juicy, low in fat and cholesterol, and perfect with white or red wine.

I remember working on a best of issue of a local newsweekly some years back and when the topic of “Bets Restaurant to Take Your Kids To” came up, someone suggested “Anywhere I’m not.”

If we have an amendment bannin SSM, can we also ban stupid people from having children?

That’s hilarious! I’d go there, too! A restaurant with no smoking and no kids is a restaurant I would frequent.

Now this:
If that [marriage being a privilege] was the case, we’d be limiting marriage to people “qualified” to get married…

Um, we already do that, that’s what this whole thread is about.

If you’re not a Bachmann fan, remember she’ll be running for the U.S. House this fall, probably against Patty Wetterling. If you can’t vote in that district, you can help by donating to Patty.

Actually (and Minneapolis DFLers probably won’t like this), Elwyn Tinklenberg probably has a much better chance of defeating Bachmann. Wetterling is too liberal for Anoka County, and Elwyn has a lot of political capital to burn in this race. And also, how can you argue with that name?

worst quote ever_

while discussing my brother’s opposition to SSM_

“I don’t want to give my kids, or other kids, the idea that being gay is acceptable.”

I think, my friends, that this is the heart of the matter.

But since it’s pretty well established science now that being gay is not a choice–you’re either gay or not–doesn’t it make just about as much sense to discriminate against gays as it does to discriminate against, say, people with dark skin?

Oh, wait…

One more thing, those radical Christians don’t believe in science either, so there goes that argument.

Unfortunately, that argument doesn’t hold water with the religious right because, while some agree sexual preference isn’t a choice, they think it’s still a sin, another test from an apparently sadistic God to make us want to do things, randomly decide that their evil, and condemn if we give into the desires He saddled us with.

However, we don’t make law based on religious beliefs, so they should shut up about the subject when it comes to legislation. If they think gay marriage is a sing, they are free to refuse to perform them.

I think the root of all this is the confusion between morality and the law. As things become illegal in this country, like, say, pot, slavery, or prosititution, there grows to be a sense that they must be also be immoral, even if the Bible is silent on the subject (or, in the case of slavery, actually allows is). Similarly, if something becomes legal, like pornography, abortion, or eating ham, a segment of the population is going to assume that there’s nothing wrong with it (even if, in the case of ham, the Bible explicitly forbids it). The religious right does not want homosexuality seen as being moral, so they are going to fight tooth and nail to keep it illegal in whatever way they can.

But their God is not mine, and I won’t have Him telling me what to do.

How about this…

We make SSM illegal and as a trade off start taxing churches.
I’m guessing alot more GLBT’er would go for this than church folk.
We could probably eliminate the National Debt with this plan.

And if your taxing churches, you would eliminate the tax write off for donations to churches, because everyone knows you don’t get to write off donations to the liquor store or any other corporation of you choose to give money to.

The income generated from a property tax on churches would astound you. It’s in the billions (I’m talking just Minnesota). My argument any time the clergy get political (for ANY cause) is to say, “Fine, you can have a seat at the table…right after we get that property tax check from you.” If you’re a church and you want to play in the Capitol, you’d better pay up just the same as everyone else. It’s pay to play.

Ahhh, traditional marriage and various threats thereto. I’ve always voiced the thought in these conversations that marriage in the way the western world sees it is a fairly recent occurance and that polygamy is actually a more common pratice than monogomy worldwide. So this thread inspired me to undertake some serious research (4 seconds on Wikipedia) and came up with this fun stat:

Polygamy worldwide
According to the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook derived from George P. Murdocks Ethnographic Atlas recorded the marital composition of 1231 societies, from 1960-1980. Of these societies, 186 societies were monogamous. 453 had occasional polygyny, 588 had more frequent polygyny, and 4 had polyandry.

Fun. I bring polygamy into this only cause it’s used as a threat along with “people will marry their pets!” whenever gay marriage is debated.

Personally, I am very worried about catching the gay.

I’d like polyandry. Gives me a husband to do the laundry while I’m having sex with the one I actually like.

I should clarify my pay to play comment. I don’t mean we’re going to start charging admission to the Capitol, but most everyone I know of except churches have one common interest: they pay taxes.

My mom said being a single parent is so much preferable because you don’t have someone else undermining your authority.

California? If I remember correctly I was told by my health teacher as a junior in high school at White Bear that homosexuality was normal and that abstinence was ‘the stupidest solution ever.’ That might send Bachmann off the edge though, if she knew it was 1 school district over.

Since when has fairness had anything to do with government?

“It would be nice if Minnesota had less liberal indignation and knee jerk name calling and more progressive crusaders who work as hard as Bachmann. “

WTF? Bachmann is the laziest member of the Minnesota Senate, and that’s a fact. She has a well-deserved reputation of missing committee meetings, or showing up just in time to be counted as present and then ducking out. A couple years ago she got on committees that met at the same time–and had fewer committee assignments than anyone else. She’s notorious even among her GOP colleagues for authoring legislation and taking credit for it but doing nothing to advance it.

As for treating Bachmann “nice,” get a grip. This is a politician who has repeatedly abused her office in order to denigrate an entire class of people and ram her theocratic vision down our throats. She’s a dangerous demagogue who needs to be stopped at any cost.

Someone posted about Ban Michele Bachmann teeshirts. If you make them, I’d be interested in ordering some. Do let me know when they are for sale – and I’d like to let readers of Dump Bachmann know about these teeshirts. They are great for walking up and down the St Croix in downtown Stillwater, or great for downtown St Cloud – and other places in her district.

We have regular Dump Bachmann meetups. I’d like to encourage people who want to defeat Michele Bachmann to come to one of the meetups.

Dump Michele Bachmann Meetup

The next meetup is April 13 at 7 or 7:30 – location to be announced. We’ve talked about meeting at the Scandia Townhall (the location of Bathroomgate)…. then go to a local restaurant afterwards.

So tantalizing… the idea that one could get sued by both Michele Bachmann and Garrison Keillor.

I also find it highly offensive to compare this to the plight of minorities in the civil rights movement. Until gay people have been subject to centuries of slavery and are forced to use inferior schools,drink from separate water fountains, are unable to vote, are unable to own land, and are the victims of all the other injustices imposed upon blacks or other minorities I will have a very hard time viewing this as a struggle for civil rights rather than a request for privileges.

This was posted a while ago, and the conversation has moved on. But I only have so much MNSpeak time a day, and only one other person really addressed this comment, so I’m-a step in.

Kevin’s comment employs a neat and utterly ridiculous rhetorical trick I’ve seen all over the place. The argument is that unless a quest for civil rights has followed the exact progression of the African-American Civil Rights Movement, it doesn’t count as a true quest for civil rights.

The logical conclusion of this argument is that the tooth-and-nail struggles against discrimination undertaken by women, Jewish Americans, Irish Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, the disabled, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender individuals over the last century just don’t count. The argument suggests that although, for example, the quest by blacks to be able to marry individuals of any color exactly mirrors the quest by queers to be able to marry individuals of any gender, the latter struggle is not part of the Civil Rights Movement™, but the former is.

In case it wasn’t understood the way GE laid it out above, let me put it this way:

Today, I am more likely to be lynched for whom I sleep with because I am gay than because I am black. I am more likely to be denied housing because I am gay than because I am black. I am more likely to lose a job because I am gay than because I am black. I have suffered much more discrimination in my life from being gay than from being black.

Because I’m black, I understand that any freedom from discrimination I enjoy today is because of the hard-won struggles of my predecessors over centuries. Because I’m gay, I understand discrimination is very much alive, and those struggles aren’t over.

So was the quest for Mildred Jeter to marry Peter Loving part of the quest for civil rights, Kevin? Because if so, so was the quest for Hillary Goodridge to marry her partner Julie. That’s the only comparison anyone is making here.

How about “I fuched Michele in the bach side.”

STOP IT OMG UR OFFENDING KEVIN.

I’m sorry it had to come to this, but I’ve gotta come clean: Bud and Kevin are gay lovers. Their overblown opposition to homos marryin’ is just a cover for their sweet, sweet (and sometimes syrupy) ass-lovin’.

I don’t like outing people, but… well, this time I do.

Busted!

Actually, I’m opposed to the Bachmann amendment. I’m also opposed to the way it’s opposed, whatever that means. I can’t even make sense of it myself. If you look back, I’ve never actually said I support or oppose gay marriage.

Yeah, nice recovery. I’m not a bigot, but I play one on the blogosphere.

Kevin, you’re all right.

Have a cupcake!

This is such an awesome thread.

hipmn, I’m so glad you’re here – you regularly crack my shit UP. Too funny!

And Kevin, even though I almost always disagree with every single thing you write, I still look forward to your comments because every now and then you surprise me with some sweet or funny or snarky comment that can’t be denied. This thread yielded none of those (except maybe the single word, “Busted”), but I’ve come to think of you as dietary fiber – it’s good for the system as part of a well-balanced diet.

I’m hungry now. Is that wrong?

Hungry for cupcake?

Could it be anything else? No, no it could not.

mmmmmm, cuuuuuupcake….

You liberals! I can’t stand it! You’re so wishy-washy you can’t even dislike someone properly!

[insert smiley face.]

No, no Rex – I highly dislike you. No wait, that’s not true. I think you’re awesome.

Must…stop…wishy…washing…

I just can’t help myself. My wishies get so gosh darn dirty, they need frequent washy.

Did someone say they wanted to find Ban Bachmann apparel?

You should probably check

As I tried to say earlier before my drunkeness cut me off, anyone seeking Ban Bachman (and other variations) shirts would be well served to CHECK THIS OUT

Two words: Awwwe-sommme.

Oh my god! Hysterical! I totally need that thong.

I SOOO just bought the I fucked Michele Bachman in the ass shirt.

My family tilts pretty far conservative. I can’t wait to wear it to Christmas dinner.

The Bible lies! Don’t listen to it! Michele Bachmann is a fucking moron who should die or something. God I hate that woman.

I hate people who say I should go read a bible when it comes to politics. DON’t MIX RELIGION WITH POLITICS! I’m not a christian (thank God) and I’m not a Jew. I’m a free thinker who doesn’t need religion to tell me what to do.