« MN GOP: THEY SAID IT: DFL 5TH CD CANDIDATE EMBER REICHGOTT JUNGE ON THE DFL PARTY’S “STRIDENT” TONE | Home | MARK RITCHIE CONSIDERED “THOUGHT LEADER” OF WTO PROTEST IN SEATTLE »
MN GOP: INDEPENDENT LEADER TIM WALZ SUPPORTS GAY MARRIAGE
By Michael B. Brodkorb | July 28, 2006
"With his support of gay marriage, the myth of the moderate Tim Walz is destroyed. Walz may talk a lot about being an 'independent leader' but the true hard-left nature of his candidacy is bound to kill his chances with the common sense residents of the First Congressional District." – Ron Carey, Chairman of the Republican Party of Minnesota
"Independent Leader" Tim Walz Doesn't "See A Reason To Deny" Gay Marriage. "And the best thing that ever happened to me was to get married and I don’t see a reason to deny that to anyone. So I'm pretty consistent on that, of where government should not be in our lives." (Tim Walz Interview on "Lambert and Janacek," KTLK-FM, July 27, 2006)
Topics: Uncategorized | 16 Comments »
16 Responses to “MN GOP: INDEPENDENT LEADER TIM WALZ SUPPORTS GAY MARRIAGE”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 28th, 2006 at 4:21 pm
Walz really screwed up.
July 28th, 2006 at 4:30 pm
“So I’m pretty consistent on that, of where government should not be in our lives.”
And the Big Gummint GOP is pretty consistent on that too, of where they want gummint prying into the most private part of our lives. How sad that you people feel so threatened by gay marriage. And what is your reason to deny gays marriage, Michael?
July 28th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
Holy shit, did Walz really say this?
Usually Dem’s just say the are against gay marriage and current law prohibits this.
But support gay marriage?
Nice knowing you Mr. Walz. At least it
was a short campaign.
July 28th, 2006 at 6:47 pm
There is no reason in the world gays and lesbians should not have the right to be married.
The government has no business in the bedroom or deciding who can and who cannot get married.
July 28th, 2006 at 7:38 pm
Oh SNAP!
The xenophobe republican fringe who never would have voted for him still won’t. Whatever will he do?
I am pretty sure he wasn’t counting on Bachmann republicans to carry the district. The other 98 percent of Minnesotans will suffice.
July 28th, 2006 at 9:13 pm
Roving, if 98% of the state is in favor of gay marriage, then why was Dean Johnson scared Shitless to put the issue on the ballot this November? If you have your finger on the pulse of Minnesota, then isn’t DOMA a losing issue for Republicans and putting it on the ballot will drive people friendly to the DFL to the polls?
The answer, alas, is that Roving is full of shit.
July 28th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
Oh gee, Carey is trying to run with the Michele Bachmann playbook. Good for Tim Walz for having some courage of his conviction. That’s refreshing for a democrat.
July 28th, 2006 at 10:28 pm
Hey Chris. What is Dean Johnson supposed to do? Ignore the committee that voted it down, and bring it to the floor, where it would lose again, and then magically will it onto the ballot?
Your hatemongers got their vote. They lost.
Isn’t it time to move on?
July 29th, 2006 at 12:59 pm
RR and Dwight,
How are republicans hatemongerers?
How is voting on a Defense of Marriage constitutional ammendment which the House approved and the Senate didn’t this year (thanks to supposedly socially conservative Dean Johnson and his democrats who constitute the majority in the senate) intrusive or prying? Can’t we vote on it? Don’t states have the right to put items on the ballot and pass laws?
RR – we got a vote of a small committee not the senate floor. Why? Because Dean Johnson is majority leader that’s why.
If we want to be a socially conservative state can’t we be?
Walz’s position contradicts current MN law, the 1998 DOMA
Regards,
Jamie
July 29th, 2006 at 4:23 pm
Roving, I think you doth protest too much. If the issue is a winner for the Democrats, then they should put it on the ballot. But, alas, it is not so don’t pretend it is.
July 29th, 2006 at 8:35 pm
Most Minnesotans oppose putting this discrimination into the constitution.
And they said 2-1 that we already have such a law, and 3-1 that it could be a divisive issue, detracting us from other, more important issues.
http://www.mngopwatch.com/archives/2006/03/403/
But then, it isn’t what Minnesotans want that’s important to the Republicans. It’s what’ll win elections.
And a divisive issue is just what Karl Rove ordered.
July 29th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
Brian,
How is it that 3 in 1 Minnesotans are against the marriage amendment but at the same time it’s a winning issue? Perhaps 3 in 1 Minnesotans aren’t against the marriage amendment at all.
July 30th, 2006 at 12:11 am
Brian,
Despite your sarcasm Rove did say people are less transigent than they make themselves out to be once they’re inside the poll booth. That may mean the same voters who passed the 1998 DOMA may clarify our constitution on this issue if given the chance to vote on a ballot.
It’s an issue now simply because moderates on both sides realize a stable budget is best and there is less to argue about in general which allows time for social issues.
Regards,
Jamie
July 30th, 2006 at 2:57 am
OK, Chris, I’m going to crack open my secret copy of the Karl Rove playbook, to Chapter 1, page 1. Just because I like you.
On that page, in a spidery handwriting in what looks like brownish-red ink, embellished by candlewax drippings, is written:
Super-secret Formulae for Electioneering
Divisive = Motivating = Votes = Winning
July 30th, 2006 at 10:18 am
If that’s true Brian, then don’t say it’s a losing issue for Republicans (which is what you and Roving Reporter have both said). You cannot have it both ways.
July 30th, 2006 at 4:32 pm
Chris: // losing issue //
No, Chris, I said it was a divisive issue, which could possibly translate into a winning issue for Republicans.
I also said most Minnesotan’s didn’t want it in the constitution, said we already had a law for it, and said it would be divisive.