Maybe they think it’ll help the whole marriage fight thing

If you’re gay and Democrat (or sympathetic/empathetic to either), you can go to this fundraiser for Jim Martin, organized by the Stonewall Democrats.

The gay rights groups are agitating hard for a 60 seat Democrat majority, no doubt hoping to reverse some set backs on gay marriage, etc.

LGBT Georgians for Jim Martin
6:30 – 8 p.m.
Amsterdam Atlanta
502 Amsterdam Ave. NE
[email protected]


  1. Common Sense says:

    How would 60 reverse gay marrige? You’d need 66 votes in the Senate even to get a federal amendment. And at least 1/3 of the Dems in the Senate wouldn’t pass it. So what’s you’re logic?

  2. John Konop says:

    The truth is Erick cannot tell conservatives why to vote for Saxby other than gut issues. And with gut level politics facts do not matter.

    I am no Martin fan can you please tell us why to vote for Saxby other than using the gay issue as a scare tactic?

  3. SavannahDem says:

    This weekend I started seeing signs around Savannah that say “Saxby Won’t Tax Me.” Let’s address a few of the errors in logic presented here:

    1. Martin has promised to help implement the Obama agenda. Thus, he’s on the hook for the plan to tax those families making more than $250k per year. That’s not that many people in Chatham Co., but maybe the individual paying for the signs is one of them. Who knows?

    2. The statement is plain flat wrong. Saxby has voted for every bit of the Bush tax and spending agenda. This has led to massive deficits and record breaking increases in the national debt. This is a deferral of taxes. We’ll pay this money later, plus interest. Saxby’s votes will lead to higher taxes for all of us (or our children/grandchildren).

    3. The bailout falls into category 2 above.

    4. The Ag. approps bill falls into category 2 above.

    If the “me” in the signs is a business with a lobbyist (esp. Bo), then the sign is accurate.

  4. Three Jack says:

    konop, there is no positive message out there in support of saxby despite the many groups spending buckoo bucks here in ga. all they have is ‘vote for saxby’ or else liberals will have a filibuster proof senate.

    saxby as the last line of defense for the gop is a joke.

  5. jsm says:

    SavDem, part of O’s plan is to end the Bush tax cuts. That consists of tax increases on the lower 80% of earners (Check the facts–the “tax cuts for the rich” moniker was a lie. – table 4, “share of tax liability”) as a base line. I also feel sure that the capital gains taxes will be going back up to at least pre-Bush levels, which will affect millions who make much less than $250k.

    Tax increases on the $250k segment will result in fewer private sector jobs to boot. The “change” we need, right?

  6. jsm says:

    SD, what I’m saying is that for O’s promised numbers to be true, he would have to roll back the Bush tax cuts to Clinton-era levels as his baseline. Furthermore, I’m not impressed by your so-called “facts” from the Obama spin machine with footnotes from the liberal Tax Policy Center, which houses a bunch of former Clinton staffers.

    And don’t forget the indirect effects of all this. Obama’s higher taxes on corporations will be paid by the consumer, no matter his income. Since those corporations won’t have the money to hire anyone due to an increase in the 2nd highest corporate tax rate in the world, the consumer will be buying less to boot. That should work wonders for the economy and really help out the middle class. They’ll pay no income tax on their unemployment checks while the economy continues to slide.

  7. Goldwater Conservative says:

    Jsm…are we paying less with Bush’s tax cuts?

    No. Supply side economics, for the most part, is garbage. If it actually worked the way you believe it does…then oil companies, for example, would reinvest their windfall profits to create new economies of scale.

    What you fail to understand and that the low tax rate we currently have encourages shareholders to dump stock…it encourages corporate officers to distribute profits to shareholders rather than reinvest the profits back into the company.

    When are you going to let go? …or are you just too embarrassed to.

  8. IndyInjun says:


    Just read to ’em “I am a Republican, Because” and these folks start looking like a carp sucking for air……..or more appropriately, gays in a San Francisco bathhouse.

    They have no position based upon Conservatism or Republicanism to support Saxby Chambliss.

    Boy, oh boy, am I gonna have fun here when they succeed in reelecting this jerk.

    They are throwing their principles in the crapper just like Saxby did and they are on the record as doing it.

    Life on Peachpundit with Indy is going to be such FUN!

  9. IndyInjun says:

    Emulating Vlad the Impaler using the GOP principles is more effective.

    Opponents are left gasping for breath, for they have prostrated themselves for the full treatment by claiming to be Republicans then pledging allegiance to an anti-Republican.

    Hey, y’all don’t have an Indy or Konop problem, it is a self flagellation problem, easily solved. Just put forth a platform that stands for Saxby – national debt to infinity, inflation taxes of 100% because No GOPer wants to PAY for the government he votes himself, wars against the wrong enemy while the real enemy goes unpunished, and for the social conservatives a promise to TRY to keep the GOP’s Foley’s, Craigs, Guckarts, and Haggard’s hidden.


    Pillorying impostors and fakes with their own standards…….just too much fun to pass up!

  10. John Konop says:


    The Truth is not always easy to hear. Indy and I say what we believe in not what is politically correct or blind support to a party.

    How come so called conservatives say nothing about the blown money in Iraq? Can anyone tell me what we won? And at the end we put the containment policy back in place with a multi trillion dollar bill put on our children!

    Nobel Prize-winning economist: Iraq war ’caused slowdown in the US’
    This tell-us-something-we-don’t-already-know story from The Australian:

    THE Iraq war has cost the US 50-60 times more than the Bush administration predicted and was a central cause of the sub-prime banking crisis threatening the world economy, according to Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz. The former World Bank vice-president yesterday said the war had, so far, cost the US something like $US3trillion ($3.3 trillion) compared with the $US50-$US60-billion predicted in 2003.

    Australia also faced a real bill much greater than the $2.2billion in military spending reported last week by Australian Defence Force chief Angus Houston, Professor Stiglitz said, pointing to higher oil prices and other indirect costs of the wars.

    Professor Stiglitz told the Chatham House think tank in London that the Bush White House was currently estimating the cost of the war at about $US500 billion, but that figure massively understated things such as the medical and welfare costs of US military servicemen. The war was now the second-most expensive in US history after World War II and the second-longest after Vietnam, he said.

    The spending on Iraq was a hidden cause of the current credit crunch because the US central bank responded to the massive financial drain of the war by flooding the American economy with cheap credit. “The regulators were looking the other way and money was being lent to anybody this side of a life-support system,” he said.

    That led to a housing bubble and a consumption boom, and the fallout was plunging the US economy into recession and saddling the next US president with the biggest budget deficit in history, he said.

  11. joe says:

    “THE Iraq war has cost the US 50-60 times more than the Bush administration predicted and was a central cause of the sub-prime banking crisis threatening the world economy…”

    I bet that was Bush’s plan all along to make the whole world pay for the war. He is just too smart for us to every know his real agenda.

Comments are closed.