SC

Jim DeMint Disappoints Again

We’ve already expressed our disappointment in former U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint for leaving his elected post four years early. However we trusted DeMint when he said he could do more for the pro-taxpayer, pro-free market, pro-liberty cause in his new role as head of The Heritage Foundation, a “conservative” think…

We’ve already expressed our disappointment in former U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint for leaving his elected post four years early. However we trusted DeMint when he said he could do more for the pro-taxpayer, pro-free market, pro-liberty cause in his new role as head of The Heritage Foundation, a “conservative” think tank in Washington, D.C.

So far he needs to do a lot better …

While DeMint has yet to officially take the reins at Heritage (a curious three-month delay), we were incredibly disappointed to see the organization continue to shill for our nation’s corrupt military industrial complex. Seriously … what sort of “conservative” think tank defends this shameful mismanagement? Or this shameless war-mongering?

We were also incredibly disappointed to read DeMint’s piece on gay marriage in this week’s editions of USA Today.

For a guy known for telling it like it is, DeMint’s support for the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” is shifty and shady.

“The lawsuit before the Supreme Court on the Defense of Marriage Act … involves a woman in a lesbian relationship who was forced to pay more than $350,000 in federal estate taxes when her partner passed away because she didn’t qualify for a marital exemption,” DeMint writes. “This is why we have argued for eliminating the estate tax for more than 15 years.”

Wait … what?

This website has consistently argued against the death tax, too, but what does that have to do with the root issue?

Everything, according to DeMint.

“The death tax is bad tax policy, period — for all Americans,” DeMint continues. “We can remove this burden without rushing to abolish marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Everyone is free to love whom they want but no one is entitled to redefine a foundational institution of civil society that has existed for centuries.”

That’s not true, though … assuming you believe in freedom of religion (we thought DeMint did) then you have to accept that individual churches have the right to define marriage as they see fit, and either marry couples (or not marry them) according to that definition.

Government should have no role whatsoever when it comes to marriage – either sanctioning it or defending it. That is exclusively the purview of the church. Government’s only role ought to be the recognition of civil unions – which as we’ve stated on numerous prior occasions are constitutionally protected from discrimination.

DeMint also misfires when he contends that committed, same sex relationships contribute to a breakdown of the family – thus adding fuel to our increasingly costly welfare conflagration.

“Gay people making the emotional and financial commitments of marriage is not the cause of family breakdown or welfare spending,” writes David Boaz of The Cato Institute. “When DeMint says that ‘family breakdown’ is causing poverty – and thus a demand for higher government spending – he knows that he’s really talking about unwed motherhood, divorce, children growing up without fathers, and the resulting high rates of welfare usage and crime. So why raise the problems of broken families and then propose to prevent gay people from getting married?”

We agree …

DeMint’s position on this issue isn’t just tortured … it’s wrong.

“I’m remaining mum about marriage equality,” South Carolina columnist Mande Wilkes wrote recently on her Facebook page. “Guess why? Gay marriage isn’t the point – the point is that marriage isn’t the business of government.”

Exactly …

This website has praised DeMint effusively for his support of limited government over the years – often fawningly so. But a real limited government supporter ought to know an example of overreach when he sees one.

Unfortunately DeMint’s sanctimonious social conservatism – albeit well-intentioned – blinds him from seeing the inconsistency and hypocrisy of his position. It also represents another potential chink in the credibility of the Heritage Foundation – which needs to drop its social and neo-conservatism if it expects to be a legitimate limited government voice.

***

Related posts

SC

Alan Wilson Removes David Pascoe From State House Probe

FITSNews
SC

South Carolina Highway Patrol Leader Retires Amid Scandal

FITSNews
SC

Jay Lucas Gets High Marks For Handling Hot Button Issues

FITSNews

116 comments

BeaufortTiger March 28, 2013 at 10:02 am

Oh don’t act so freakin’ surprised that DeMint is against gay marriage, FITS. It’s the classic case of a hypocritical politician who will scream how much he supports individual rights and liberties, except of course in certain cases that he disagrees with. DeMint has been bad-mouthing gays for years. Remember when he proposed that teachers should not be gay? Even Ronald Reagan (DeMint’s supposed hero) 20 years before said that was asinine.

If you are truly someone who advocates freedom, personal responsibility, and personal liberty, you should be actively supporting the rights of gays to enter into marriage in the legal sense. While we libertarians may not like that the government has any role in marriage (and I don’t), the fact of the matter is that presently our tax codes, inheritance laws, and contractual matters, our government requires marriage to be defined.

Reply
Right March 28, 2013 at 10:40 am

“While we libertarians may not like that the government has any role in
marriage (and I don’t), the fact of the matter is that presently our tax
codes, inheritance laws, and contractual matters, our government
requires marriage to be defined.”

You’re absolutely right. It’s about more than an “institution” – it’s about the laws that are attendant to that institution, laws that must be equally applied to all American citizens as long as they are in effect.

Also, why are you (FITS, not Beaufort Tiger) quoting Mande Wilkes on anything? No one takes that mess of a person seriously. And no, having a column in a Myrtle Beach paper does not entitle a moron to be taken seriously.

Reply
kc March 28, 2013 at 11:49 am

She probably pays the Sun News to run it.

Reply
James Fleming Jr March 29, 2013 at 3:50 pm

The rights of pedophiles,many wives or husbands and even a little beastiality! right?

Reply
BeaufortTiger March 30, 2013 at 6:53 pm

Pedophilia is a crime, because you are causing injury to someone who does not have the ability to defend themselves and because it is not consensual. Polygamy and beastiality is conduct and can therefore be outlawed effectively.

Reply
BeaufortTiger March 28, 2013 at 10:02 am

Oh don’t act so freakin’ surprised that DeMint is against gay marriage, FITS. It’s the classic case of a hypocritical politician who will scream how much he supports individual rights and liberties, except of course in certain cases that he disagrees with. DeMint has been bad-mouthing gays for years. Remember when he proposed that teachers should not be gay? Even Ronald Reagan (DeMint’s supposed hero) 20 years before said that was asinine.

If you are truly someone who advocates freedom, personal responsibility, and personal liberty, you should be actively supporting the rights of gays to enter into marriage in the legal sense. While we libertarians may not like that the government has any role in marriage (and I don’t), the fact of the matter is that presently our tax codes, inheritance laws, and contractual matters, our government requires marriage to be defined.

Reply
Right March 28, 2013 at 10:40 am

“While we libertarians may not like that the government has any role in
marriage (and I don’t), the fact of the matter is that presently our tax
codes, inheritance laws, and contractual matters, our government
requires marriage to be defined.”

You’re absolutely right. It’s about more than an “institution” – it’s about the laws that are attendant to that institution, laws that must be equally applied to all American citizens as long as they are in effect.

Also, why are you (FITS, not Beaufort Tiger) quoting Mande Wilkes on anything? No one takes that mess of a person seriously. And no, having a column in a Myrtle Beach paper does not entitle a moron to be taken seriously.

Reply
kc March 28, 2013 at 11:49 am

She probably pays the Sun News to run it.

Reply
James Fleming Jr March 29, 2013 at 3:50 pm

The rights of pedophiles,many wives or husbands and even a little beastiality! right?

Reply
BeaufortTiger March 30, 2013 at 6:53 pm

Pedophilia is a crime, because you are causing injury to someone who does not have the ability to defend themselves and because it is not consensual. Polygamy and beastiality is conduct and can therefore be outlawed effectively.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 10:41 am

The drums continue to beat a message. That message is that Jim DeMint was not the good Senator we had thought him to be. He voted (along with Lindsey-The-Traitor) for NDAA-2012 and other freedom-killing bills. The message is that we are better off without him in Congress. Good riddance, Jim.

Reply
Tonto March 28, 2013 at 11:33 am

“That message is that Jim DeMint was not the good Senator we had thought him to be.”

What do you mean “we” Kemo Sabe?

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 12:17 pm

Ahhh… good point, Tonto!

Reply
Jan March 28, 2013 at 2:34 pm

Agreed, don’t lump me in that group, I never thought him to be a good Senator.

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:46 pm

Jim DeMint did not vote for NDAA in 2012. Unless I am mistaken, he was one of the 13 senators who voted no.

Edit: Well, I’m not sure if they just did multiple votes or what, because I’m reading sites that say he did vote no, but then there’s this:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2011/s218

Oh well, my bad.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:08 pm

Hi Smirks! No problem. Everything I have read up until now, has indicated that Jim voted yea on that issue. Ditto the law which makes protest too close to certain sanctified venues where politicos are gathered, a Federal crime with up to ten years in jail.

He has shown his true colors as a neo-con enemy of freedom.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 10:41 am

The drums continue to beat a message. That message is that Jim DeMint was not the good Senator we had thought him to be. He voted (along with Lindsey-The-Traitor) for NDAA-2012 and other freedom-killing bills. The message is that we are better off without him in Congress. Good riddance, Jim.

Reply
Tonto March 28, 2013 at 11:33 am

“That message is that Jim DeMint was not the good Senator we had thought him to be.”

What do you mean “we” Kemo Sabe?

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 12:17 pm

Ahhh… good point, Tonto!

Reply
Jan March 28, 2013 at 2:34 pm

Agreed, don’t lump me in that group, I never thought him to be a good Senator.

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:46 pm

Jim DeMint did not vote for NDAA in 2012. Unless I am mistaken, he was one of the 13 senators who voted no.

Edit: Well, I’m not sure if they just did multiple votes or what, because I’m reading sites that say he did vote no, but then there’s this:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2011/s218

Oh well, my bad.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:08 pm

Hi Smirks! No problem. Everything I have read up until now, has indicated that Jim voted yea on that issue. Ditto the law which makes protest too close to certain sanctified venues where politicos are gathered, a Federal crime with up to ten years in jail.

He has shown his true colors as a neo-con enemy of freedom.

Reply
yes sir no sir March 28, 2013 at 10:44 am

Don’t blame DeMint,C-Street tells him what to say and do and he hates getting his leash jerked.

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Don’t blame the puppet, blame the person who has his hand up the puppet’s ass.

Reply
yes sir no sir March 28, 2013 at 10:44 am

Don’t blame DeMint,C-Street tells him what to say and do and he hates getting his leash jerked.

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 1:20 pm

Don’t blame the puppet, blame the person who has his hand up the puppet’s ass.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 11:16 am

It’s called ‘COURAGE’ FITS.
While Libertarians and Liberals abide by the Ignorant credo of “If it feels good, do it”…Sometimes somebody, even the government, needs to stand up and tell you idiots to: STFU…
Libertarians are cowards to pop culture and the damaging Bull-S#!* liberals push on society..Yet you claim to be a FISCAL Conservative…
When the Gay Community is ravaged with AIDS, you lame punks DEMAND the government buy your life back because you squandered it…
Women w/ all kinds of problems from the Abortions the government makes us pay for…become drains on society…and you Squeal like the Dumb@$$ B!*ch you and Ron Paul are, because you’re too stupid to fix the problems you caused.
Elect Sanford, and all you get is more irresponible Childishness. They Run out on their families, because it feels good…and the kids become broken, maybe even homosexual, because of selfish fools like FITS and Sanford…

Reply
Slapping The Stupid® March 28, 2013 at 11:44 am

It’s called ‘IGNORANCE’ BigT! It really must be sad being a superstitious bigot.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:57 pm

Trying to Force your sexual preference on the rest of us…is IGNORACE…I don’t give a D@*n what you do in your bath-house…Quit trying to MAKE me notice your behavior, and don’t make the church to accept your practices..

Reply
Liberal=Science=Equality March 28, 2013 at 1:10 pm

It must have been really hard for you to watch a black man and white woman together years ago…Speaking of which: It wasn’t until 1998 that South Carolina finally removed its constitutional ban on interracial marriage, which was added to the state constitution in 1895.

It’s blissful day…in South Carolina!

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:16 pm

The usual cliché leftwing IDIOT…So Stupid all you can do is Play the RACE Card..
Again: Sexual Preference is NOT a Civil Right…

Smirks March 28, 2013 at 5:16 pm

You can get the accented “e” in there but can’t capitalize correctly. How absolutely bewildering.

BigT March 28, 2013 at 11:16 am

It’s called ‘COURAGE’ FITS.
While Libertarians and Liberals abide by the Ignorant credo of “If it feels good, do it”…Sometimes somebody, even the government, needs to stand up and tell you idiots to: STFU…
Libertarians are cowards to pop culture and the damaging Bull-S#!* liberals push on society..Yet you claim to be a FISCAL Conservative…
When the Gay Community is ravaged with AIDS, you lame punks DEMAND the government buy your life back because you squandered it…
Women w/ all kinds of problems from the Abortions the government makes us pay for…become drains on society…and you Squeal like the Dumb@$$ B!*ch you and Ron Paul are, because you’re too stupid to fix the problems you caused.
Elect Sanford, and all you get is more irresponible Childishness. They Run out on their families, because it feels good…and the kids become broken, maybe even homosexual, because of selfish fools like FITS and Sanford…

Reply
Slapping The Stupid® March 28, 2013 at 11:44 am

It’s called ‘IGNORANCE’ BigT! It really must be sad being a superstitious bigot.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:57 pm

Trying to Force your sexual preference on the rest of us…is IGNORACE…I don’t give a D@*n what you do in your bath-house…Quit trying to MAKE me notice your behavior, and don’t make the church to accept your practices..

Reply
Hot Air Balloon March 28, 2013 at 1:10 pm

It must have been really hard for you to watch a black man and white woman together years ago…Speaking of which: It wasn’t until 1998 that South Carolina finally removed its constitutional ban on interracial marriage, which was added to the state constitution in 1895.

It’s blissful day…in South Carolina!

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:16 pm

The usual cliché leftwing IDIOT…So Stupid all you can do is Play the RACE Card..
Again: Sexual Preference is NOT a Civil Right…

Smirks March 28, 2013 at 5:16 pm

You can get the accented “e” in there but can’t capitalize correctly. How absolutely bewildering.

kc March 28, 2013 at 11:48 am

I don’t understand this “marriage isn’t the business of government” horseshit. Are you and MandE saying the government shouldn’t recognize marriages, period?

How do you propose to handle divorces without involving the courts?

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:43 pm

Fight to the death?

Reply
katlaurenscounty March 28, 2013 at 2:25 pm

excellently tongue in cheek! hilarious, because it’s too true, for those that have been through or witnessed close hand, ugly divorce inflated by lawyers angling for billable hours!

Reply
kc March 28, 2013 at 11:48 am

I don’t understand this “marriage isn’t the business of government” horseshit. Are you and MandE saying the government shouldn’t recognize marriages, period?

How do you propose to handle divorces without involving the courts?

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:43 pm

Fight to the death?

Reply
katlaurenscounty March 28, 2013 at 2:25 pm

excellently tongue in cheek! hilarious, because it’s too true, for those that have been through or witnessed close hand, ugly divorce inflated by lawyers angling for billable hours!

Reply
Liberal=Science=Equality March 28, 2013 at 11:59 am

Why should the church define marriage? I’m married and it had nothing to do with with any religion. Christians need to pay some adherence to the Constitution.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:36 pm

Why should the Gay Lobby DEFINE marriage? Like you say: you got married, probably Atheist, Pagan or Occultist, and the church had nothing to do w/ it…why are you DEMANDING that gays are given special recognition because of your sexual preference???…Dumb@$$….

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:42 pm

The individual should define marriage, the government should just recognize when people have entered into a marriage with each other and want the legal benefits of being married, and should do so as fairly as possible.

Define marriage however you want, just stop forcing the definition on everyone else.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:54 pm

Believe what you want…you Ignorant M@*#*rF*#r…Just let me believe what I want. What you put in your mouth, or stuff up your @$$, is none of my business. You just want to FORCE Churches to practice your hedonistic beliefs…
Otherwise, it sounds like you are trying to get more Government benefits for homosexual, leftwing Idiots…
The Government is BROKE…We cannot Afford to add more free-loaders, gay or not, to the trough….Obama has consequences, and denying freebies to lazy-@$$ gays is one of those…

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:58 pm

Does not compute.

Liberal=Science=Equality March 28, 2013 at 12:59 pm

He’s off the rails…

SeneseLikeChaps March 28, 2013 at 4:23 pm

No he has been listening in on our evil plan with the lizard men to guarantee forced, nude lizard man on lizard man marriage in each and every church in America. Now I need to regroup with the other pro-gay lizard agendists in the Earth’s hollow center for mission updates.

CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:20 pm

If a man dies and his wife (woman) claims her Social Security benefits as computed off of his (larger) earnings over his life, is she “free-loading”? I would say that she is getting the benefit of the monies he was forced to pay into SS while he was alive, as he likely would have wanted it to be. Heck, if I’m not mistaken, I believe it might even be possible for one or more of my ex-wives to collect SS bennies off of what I earned, even though we are long divorced. Seems that I know a person or few who have done just that. The times this has occurred that I am aware of was when the male spouse or ex-spouse (who usually earns more, statistically speaking) died sometime before the widow or ex began collecting.

All of that being said, if you have a gay couple who are living as a married heterosexual couple would, HOW in the wide world of sports is it “free-loading” if they earned those benefits, with one or both of them working and again, being FORCED to pay into the system???? It sounds to me more like they will get what is owed them for their Investment, albeit a forced investment.

BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:25 pm

SS will pretty much be a welfare check soon. Those who actually pay for it, won’t get it, because they are the ones who likely have made other investments for retirement…and the gov’t will take their SS from them…
But you do PROVE what I said: Your sorry, check-sucking @$$ just wants John and Tommy to be able to claim marriage, so one can get a hand-out from the gov’t.
Face it: the idea of faithful gays is a myth. The marriage would be in name only. Gays, males anyway, are gays because they can get it anytime and all the time from any other gay….
You pervert the institution of marriage by claiming you could sustain what a true marriage is…

CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:38 pm

Having been married more than a once, I will say that us heteros may have placed too much stock in the idea of monotony, being “faithful”, or whatever one calls it. So, you are married, and a couple of gay guys or lesbians down the street also get married. Is your marriage really so weak that their declaration of love for each-other will destroy it? Especially when the numerous traditional marriages where one or both parties are screwing around on the other have been going on for many decades? What about the damage THOSE do to the institution of marriage?

The best relationship I ever had was with a woman who was separated from her husband at the time. It was for all practical purposes, an “open” relationship. If I had been in Wal-Mart with another woman and run into her, there would have been no animosity and no hurt feelings. Same if I had run into her and she was with another man. It was really relaxing to have someone like her that I could go out with and have a good time, dinner, a movie, a hayride; when our schedules allowed. When they didn’t, I could see another woman and not have guilt or worries about it.

I kick myself frequently because I blew that relationship and dropped her for the woman who became my last wife. Big mistake I hope that I never repeat.

nitrat March 28, 2013 at 3:06 pm

Did you have a Freudian slip? Monotony, as opposed to monogamous?

CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 4:26 pm

You caught that one, eh? That was intentional. I confess to having borrowed it from someone else’s post I saw some years ago.

Liberal=Science=Equality March 28, 2013 at 12:43 pm

I’m demanding gays get the same rights hetrosexuals get…such as pensions and estate rights. I could care less what churches decide.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:14 pm

Companies can give you pension rights or insurance to gays. Many do…you don’t need the gov’t for that. Same with property rights. A homosexual can leave property to their partner, if they want…

You people are just LIARS…perpetuating myths.

You have all the rights anyone else has. You’re just trying to MAKE churches perform the ceremony, or the Gov’t will punish them..

You’re on an intolerant HATE campaign to MAKE everyone accept your sexual practices..when we really don’t care what you do (and that’s what pi$$#$ you off)….

Reply
Liberal=Science=Equality March 28, 2013 at 3:30 pm

You’re so stupid! I’m can’t believe you can remember to breath.

Smirks March 28, 2013 at 5:14 pm

I’m sure he has written instructions taped to his monitor, don’t worry.

Jan March 28, 2013 at 6:38 pm

Pagan? You mean like Mitt Romney? .

Reply
Hot Air Balloon March 28, 2013 at 11:59 am

Why should the church define marriage? I’m married and it had nothing to do with with any religion. Christians need to pay some adherence to the Constitution.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:36 pm

Why should the Gay Lobby DEFINE marriage? Like you say: you got married, probably Atheist, Pagan or Occultist, and the church had nothing to do w/ it…why are you DEMANDING that gays are given special recognition because of your sexual preference???…Dumb@$$….

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:42 pm

The individual should define marriage, the government should just recognize when people have entered into a marriage with each other and want the legal benefits of being married, and should do so as fairly as possible.

Define marriage however you want, just stop forcing the definition on everyone else.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:54 pm

Believe what you want…you Ignorant M@*#*rF*#r…Just let me believe what I want. What you put in your mouth, or stuff up your @$$, is none of my business. You just want to FORCE Churches to practice your hedonistic beliefs…
Otherwise, it sounds like you are trying to get more Government benefits for homosexual, leftwing Idiots…
The Government is BROKE…We cannot Afford to add more free-loaders, gay or not, to the trough….Obama has consequences, and denying freebies to lazy-@$$ gays is one of those…

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:58 pm

Does not compute.

Hot Air Balloon March 28, 2013 at 12:59 pm

He’s off the rails…

SeneseLikeChaps March 28, 2013 at 4:23 pm

No he has been listening in on our evil plan with the lizard men to guarantee forced, nude lizard man on lizard man marriage in each and every church in America. Now I need to regroup with the other pro-gay lizard agendists in the Earth’s hollow center for mission updates.

CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:20 pm

If a man dies and his wife (woman) claims her Social Security benefits as computed off of his (larger) earnings over his life, is she “free-loading”? I would say that she is getting the benefit of the monies he was forced to pay into SS while he was alive, as he likely would have wanted it to be. Heck, if I’m not mistaken, I believe it might even be possible for one or more of my ex-wives to collect SS bennies off of what I earned, even though we are long divorced. Seems that I know a person or few who have done just that. The times this has occurred that I am aware of was when the male spouse or ex-spouse (who usually earns more, statistically speaking) died sometime before the widow or ex began collecting.

All of that being said, if you have a gay couple who are living as a married heterosexual couple would, HOW in the wide world of sports is it “free-loading” if they earned those benefits, with one or both of them working and again, being FORCED to pay into the system???? It sounds to me more like they will get what is owed them for their Investment, albeit a forced investment.

BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:25 pm

SS will pretty much be a welfare check soon. Those who actually pay for it, won’t get it, because they are the ones who likely have made other investments for retirement…and the gov’t will take their SS from them…
But you do PROVE what I said: Your sorry, check-sucking @$$ just wants John and Tommy to be able to claim marriage, so one can get a hand-out from the gov’t.
Face it: the idea of faithful gays is a myth. The marriage would be in name only. Gays, males anyway, are gays because they can get it anytime and all the time from any other gay….
You pervert the institution of marriage by claiming you could sustain what a true marriage is…

CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:38 pm

Having been married more than a once, I will say that us heteros may have placed too much stock in the idea of monotony, being “faithful”, or whatever one calls it. So, you are married, and a couple of gay guys or lesbians down the street also get married. Is your marriage really so weak that their declaration of love for each-other will destroy it? Especially when the numerous traditional marriages where one or both parties are screwing around on the other have been going on for many decades? What about the damage THOSE do to the institution of marriage?

The best relationship I ever had was with a woman who was separated from her husband at the time. It was for all practical purposes, an “open” relationship. If I had been in Wal-Mart with another woman and run into her, there would have been no animosity and no hurt feelings. Same if I had run into her and she was with another man. It was really relaxing to have someone like her that I could go out with and have a good time, dinner, a movie, a hayride; when our schedules allowed. When they didn’t, I could see another woman and not have guilt or worries about it.

I kick myself frequently because I blew that relationship and dropped her for the woman who became my last wife. Big mistake I hope that I never repeat.

nitrat March 28, 2013 at 3:06 pm

Did you have a Freudian slip? Monotony, as opposed to monogamous?

CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 4:26 pm

You caught that one, eh? That was intentional. I confess to having borrowed it from someone else’s post I saw some years ago.

Hot Air Balloon March 28, 2013 at 12:43 pm

I’m demanding gays get the same rights hetrosexuals get…such as pensions and estate rights. I could care less what churches decide.

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:14 pm

Companies can give you pension rights or insurance to gays. Many do…you don’t need the gov’t for that. Same with property rights. A homosexual can leave property to their partner, if they want…

You people are just LIARS…perpetuating myths.

You have all the rights anyone else has. You’re just trying to MAKE churches perform the ceremony, or the Gov’t will punish them..

You’re on an intolerant HATE campaign to MAKE everyone accept your sexual practices..when we really don’t care what you do (and that’s what pi$$#$ you off)….

Reply
Hot Air Balloon March 28, 2013 at 3:30 pm

You’re so stupid! I’m can’t believe you can remember to breath.

Smirks March 28, 2013 at 5:14 pm

I’m sure he has written instructions taped to his monitor, don’t worry.

Jan March 28, 2013 at 6:38 pm

Pagan? You mean like Mitt Romney? .

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:39 pm

Hey FITS: Sexual Preference is NOT a CIVIL Right,,,you F*#kin Idiot!!!!…
You can marry whoever you want…but I don’t have to celebrate it…
So STFU…and let me live, w/o forcing your Sexual preference on me. I don’t care what your disgusting @$$ does (except when I was paying your salary via Sanford)….
As long as you don’t come near my children (if you do you may find out when you leftwing pieces of $#!* have finally gone too far)….Do what the H#!! you want…

Reply
BeaufortTiger March 28, 2013 at 12:44 pm

Wow… Dad of the year candidate, it appears. You talk like that to your kids?

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:20 pm

None of your F*#kin Business, pervert…Unless you want to get near me and try to make my kids your business…they’ll we’ll see how immediate the government or the corrupt courts protect sickos and creeps from a traditional parent….(I would not put my money on the pervert, if I were you)….

Reply
love sweet love March 28, 2013 at 4:14 pm

I’m thinking someone needs a hug.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:26 pm

Big T, do you have fever with those fits, or do they just kind of happen all of a sudden?

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 12:39 pm

Hey FITS: Sexual Preference is NOT a CIVIL Right,,,you F*#kin Idiot!!!!…
You can marry whoever you want…but I don’t have to celebrate it…
So STFU…and let me live, w/o forcing your Sexual preference on me. I don’t care what your disgusting @$$ does (except when I was paying your salary via Sanford)….
As long as you don’t come near my children (if you do you may find out when you leftwing pieces of $#!* have finally gone too far)….Do what the H#!! you want…

Reply
BeaufortTiger March 28, 2013 at 12:44 pm

Wow… Dad of the year candidate, it appears. You talk like that to your kids?

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 2:20 pm

None of your F*#kin Business, pervert…Unless you want to get near me and try to make my kids your business…they’ll we’ll see how immediate the government or the corrupt courts protect sickos and creeps from a traditional parent….(I would not put my money on the pervert, if I were you)….

Reply
love sweet love March 28, 2013 at 4:14 pm

I’m thinking someone needs a hug.

Reply
CorruptionInColumbia March 28, 2013 at 2:26 pm

Big T, do you have fever with those fits, or do they just kind of happen all of a sudden?

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:40 pm

“We’ll fix this one inconvenience of denying you your right to be legally married to someone you love, no need to stop oppressing you! It’s all good!”

lol…

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 12:40 pm

“We’ll fix this one inconvenience of denying you your right to be legally married to someone you love, no need to stop oppressing you! It’s all good!”

lol…

Reply
Ken E. March 28, 2013 at 1:41 pm

This quote from FITS is always infuriating: “That is exclusively the purview of the church”. As if people only get married in a church. And the words “the church”… Sounds like a state-sponsored religion.

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 5:15 pm

I guess FITS believes atheists and agnostics can’t get married?

Reply
Ken E. March 29, 2013 at 8:43 am

Or Jews, Muslims, etc.

Reply
Ken E. March 28, 2013 at 1:41 pm

This quote from FITS is always infuriating: “That is exclusively the purview of the church”. As if people only get married in a church. And the words “the church”… Sounds like a state-sponsored religion.

Reply
Smirks March 28, 2013 at 5:15 pm

I guess FITS believes atheists and agnostics can’t get married?

Reply
Ken E. March 29, 2013 at 8:43 am

Or Jews, Muslims, etc.

Reply
katlaurenscounty March 28, 2013 at 2:32 pm

Here’s a clue FITS – politicians follow their political masters, the party. You constantly review these politicians on empty promises, and then get all indignant and self righteous when they – shockingly to the dull mind – don’t live up to their empty promises. How dumb. Political parties follow their masters, special interest funders. I’m not a member of any because I don’t support sheeple group crap. Repub party caters to dogmatic bible thumpers. Don’t make the logic error and construe the opposite. I’m not saying all members of the party are bible thumpers (BTW, i don’t thump mine).

Follow the money trail. You appear to be the only lamebrain (well, there’s the Big T personna. Which seems to be a FITS avatar created just to get more postings) that thinks politicians do anything but politics. Of course Demint follows the party. If he didn’t, he’d be a public servant, not a politician.

Reply
katlaurenscounty March 28, 2013 at 2:32 pm

Here’s a clue FITS – politicians follow their political masters, the party. You constantly review these politicians on empty promises, and then get all indignant and self righteous when they – shockingly to the dull mind – don’t live up to their empty promises. How dumb. Political parties follow their masters, special interest funders. I’m not a member of any because I don’t support sheeple group crap. Repub party caters to dogmatic bible thumpers. Don’t make the logic error and construe the opposite. I’m not saying all members of the party are bible thumpers (BTW, i don’t thump mine).

Follow the money trail. You appear to be the only lamebrain (well, there’s the Big T personna. Which seems to be a FITS avatar created just to get more postings) that thinks politicians do anything but politics. Of course Demint follows the party. If he didn’t, he’d be a public servant, not a politician.

Reply
nitrat March 28, 2013 at 2:54 pm

You don’t understand. DeMint pledges his allegiance to the fundamentalists at The Family/The Fellowship/C Street first and above all.
That’s the bunch that keeps telling its members like Jim, Sanford, Petraeus, Ensign, Inhofe, Coburn, Grassley, et al, that they have been anointed by God to be in power. And, they believe it

Reply
nitrat March 28, 2013 at 2:54 pm

You don’t understand. DeMint pledges his allegiance to the fundamentalists at The Family/The Fellowship/C Street first and above all.
That’s the bunch that keeps telling its members like Jim, Sanford, Petraeus, Ensign, Inhofe, Coburn, Grassley, et al, that they have been anointed by God to be in power. And, they believe it

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 3:02 pm

I want to claim my deceased brother’s Social Security. He paid it, and had no wife and no kids…If the government won’t let me have the Soc. Sec. it is intolerant, hateful and disciminates…Taht’s how stupid the gays are…
You are ridiculous. Let’s play the game by the rules we set it up under. Just because we have a dumb@$$ in the White House, we can’t just open up the treasury and give any leftwing bunch of Nutjobs anything they want, just because they made some Ignorant claim about being Entitled to it….

Reply
Liberal=Science=Equality March 28, 2013 at 3:38 pm

Geez! First you tell everyone SS is welfare, and now YOU want to claim your brother’s SS? Get a check up…

Reply
BigT March 28, 2013 at 3:02 pm

I want to claim my deceased brother’s Social Security. He paid it, and had no wife and no kids…If the government won’t let me have the Soc. Sec. it is intolerant, hateful and disciminates…Taht’s how stupid the gays are…
You are ridiculous. Let’s play the game by the rules we set it up under. Just because we have a dumb@$$ in the White House, we can’t just open up the treasury and give any leftwing bunch of Nutjobs anything they want, just because they made some Ignorant claim about being Entitled to it….

Reply
Hot Air Balloon March 28, 2013 at 3:38 pm

Geez! First you tell everyone SS is welfare, and now YOU want to claim your brother’s SS? Get a check up…

Reply
Moman50 March 28, 2013 at 3:04 pm

A million bucks can make a man say all sorts of things.They pay.Demint utters the lines hes given!

Reply
Moman50 March 28, 2013 at 3:04 pm

A million bucks can make a man say all sorts of things.They pay.Demint utters the lines hes given!

Reply
RDS March 28, 2013 at 4:03 pm

Marriage is the domain of gov’t. Marriage is only legally recognized when the proper license is obtained from a local gov’t. It’s only religiously symbolic if one chooses it to be.

Reply
RDS March 28, 2013 at 4:03 pm

Marriage is the domain of gov’t. Marriage is only legally recognized when the proper license is obtained from a local gov’t. It’s only religiously symbolic if one chooses it to be.

Reply
Fred March 28, 2013 at 5:14 pm

This only re-affirms that duhmint is a COMPLETE AND TOTAL DISAPPOINTMENT. What else do you expect from this COMPLETE AND TOTAL LIGHT WEIGHT???

Reply
Fred March 28, 2013 at 5:14 pm

This only re-affirms that duhmint is a COMPLETE AND TOTAL DISAPPOINTMENT. What else do you expect from this COMPLETE AND TOTAL LIGHT WEIGHT???

Reply
9" March 28, 2013 at 7:43 pm

“First they ignore you,then they laugh at you,then they fight you,then you win”

civil unions= marriage

Maybe you’re having trouble envisioning two queers at the altar,kissing,but you’re getting there.

Bottom line,this is about the dignity all humans should be afforded…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyA1C13r6mg

Reply
9" March 28, 2013 at 7:43 pm

“First they ignore you,then they laugh at you,then they fight you,then you win”

civil unions= marriage

Maybe you’re having trouble envisioning two queers at the altar,kissing,but you’re getting there.

Bottom line,this is about the dignity all humans should be afforded…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyA1C13r6mg

Reply
Forrest March 29, 2013 at 9:19 am

Lawd, its hilariously ironic how opposed our state and federal pols

are to gay rights in any form when, ……. if you believe long standing gossip, the majority are closeted gay men themselves. BWAHAHAHAHA

Reply
Forrest March 29, 2013 at 9:19 am

Lawd, its hilariously ironic how opposed our state and federal pols

are to gay rights in any form when, ……. if you believe long standing gossip, the majority are closeted gay men themselves. BWAHAHAHAHA

Reply
James Fleming Jr March 29, 2013 at 9:47 am

All of you folks that are upset over folks leaving their elected positions early need to try running for the office and experiencing what is going on and how to deal with it. A person that does not go along is kicked to the side and those he represents get nothing. The system is rigged to make you fall in line.

Reply
James Fleming Jr March 29, 2013 at 9:47 am

All of you folks that are upset over folks leaving their elected positions early need to try running for the office and experiencing what is going on and how to deal with it. A person that does not go along is kicked to the side and those he represents get nothing. The system is rigged to make you fall in line.

Reply

Leave a Comment