Friday, October 31, 2008

Here's an endorsement that Chris Cole could probably have lived without...

From MichaelDuchemin.com:

Another case where the Republican and Democratic candidates are not even worth consideration. Dole is horrible, and Hagan will be worse. I spent a long time researching Chris Cole. I do have some serious reservations about voting for him in that he is openly homosexual and supports gay marriage. In looking at his positions, he believes that abortion is a state issue and opposes any federal involvement in the issue at all, whether it is funding, promotion, or banning at the federal level. He does not disclose what he thinks the states ought to do. As such, I think he would be far more likely to help end federally protected abortion than the “Pro-Life” Republicans in the federal government who want to keep abortion an issue forever by not stopping it. He is really solid on everything a senator might vote on. He wants to eliminate the fed, just about every federal department, and the income tax. He essentially has the same positions as congressman Paul on federal issues with the exception of gay marriage where he believes in a very limited role of the Federal government anyway. As Luther might say, I’d rather be ruled by a homosexual who rules like a Christian than by a Christian who rules like a homosexual. Vote: Christopher Cole.


Funny, I never found the parts of Martin Luther talking about homosexuals--must have been in the 95 feces he nailed to the Church door.

3 comments:

Waldo said...

A nice touch this, given that today's the anniversary of the 95 Theses in 1517.

What's really touching is the generosity of the "Aw fuck it, I tried every way I can to avoid it, but I gotta vote for the queer" sentiment. Truly a noble spirit. An ornament to the 18th century.

Steve Newton said...

You think ole Martin realized he was playing the first "hammer shit to the door and run" Halloween trick in history?

ChrisNC said...

Hmmm... I don't who this person is. However, I do find it interesting that a religious right commentator explicitly states his objection to me, yet recommends voting for me anyway. Isn't this comparable to the remarks by Eric Schansberg that you have referenced before?