Friday, September 5, 2008

McCain v Sleaster

McCain v Sleaster

William Sleaster, a student at Concord High School rose to ask McCain a question about gay rights and, ultimately dissatisfied by the answer he received from McCain, told the Republican presidential contender that he'd come looking to see a leader and didn't.

[The Rest of the Story]

I wish I had this kid's phone number - I'd text him a big fat ^5 for being unafraid to speak his mind, and for asking the hard questions, and EXPECTING AN ANSWER, without being intimidated by McCain.

Of course, McCain didn't give him any real answers, but we know his position on Gay Marriage and gay rights in general.

I just don't understand why we should value his opinion on any kind of marriage when he cheated on his crippled wife, then left and divorced her to marry his mistress.


  1. Boy, the comments over there are getting pretty heated!

    While I truly believe in equal rights for all people, I wonder if it might be more productive to approach this particular issue first from a purely constitutional position. Churches and states should not govern each other; we will get further faster if we take care of LGBT people's rights as a matter of constitutional law. We can pick and choose our churches, or disregard them completely, but all citizens are protected by and accountable to the constitution.

    I hope Obama will begin to look at this matter from a constitutional perspective, rather than passing the buck to individual states. He's the best we have, and I can guarantee that while he may not always agree with his supporters, he does ask us questions and he does listen!

  2. McCain sucks ass.

    That is all.

  3. She was crippled, even!?!

    (Slapping my face.)

    I'm with Sir James.

  4. Anonymous2:29 PM

    Gays don't have rights

  5. No, no CONSTITUTIONAL rights regarding marriage... yet.

    And you're a coward for not putting your name and face behind your small-minded beliefs :)

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. Oh and by the way... the same argument was used to defend slavery. And to fight women's suffrage.