Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  this guy again

The Irony of Richard Socarides’ Disbelief Over Team Obama Defending DOMA

This has got to be a nightmare for the White House political office, especially as Organizing for America ramps up efforts to rebuild a coalition for the midterms which includes gays. I want the Democrats to keep both houses of Congress more than most. It’s very important that we do that if gay rights are important to you. So I can’t understand why the president’s senior advisers permit the Justice Department to defend this case. … It’s incomprehensible.

—Richard Socarides, former, uh, senior adviser to President Clinton who, uh, “permit” President Clinton to sign both the Defense of Marriage Act and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell into law. It’s like, dude, you freakin’ wrote the Clinton administration’s talking points on these laws, like where you suggested Clinton officials, when asked about DOMA, respond, “[S]ince the President does not believe that the federal government should recognize gay marriage, he does not believe it is appropriate for scarce federal resources to be devoted to providing spousal benefits to partners in gay and lesbian relationships.” Obama doesn’t get to use the same line?

[via]

By:           editor editor
On:           Jul 11, 2010
Tagged: , , ,

  • 31 Comments
    • EdWoody
      EdWoody

      It is possible for people to change their minds in the span of 20 years, you know.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 1:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • slobone
      slobone

      That was 14 years ago, for Christ’s sake. A lot of people (including a lot of gay people) have changed their minds about same sex marriage since then. But I guess Queerty never forgets or forgives… how nice for you…

      Jul 11, 2010 at 2:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Black Pegasus
      Black Pegasus

      In September of 1996 BILL CLINTON signed the DOMA into LAW….

      ^^^ That’s all that needs to be said!!!
      I’ll let you Obama hating queens defend the
      indefensible.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 3:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Devon
      Devon

      @slobone:

      When gays finally have full, nationwide equality we can start talking about forgiving the people who opposed it.

      Until then people like Clinton and his minions are S.O.L.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 3:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      @Devon: So we can’t forgive people who have changed their minds until we have all of our rights?? You actually think we’re going to make any progress that way?? By turning away anyone that comes to our side?

      No wonder the gay rights movement is stalling, the people running it are just like the editors of queerty, bitter bitchy retards.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 4:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • William
      William

      I’m way too traumatized by the now missing Clay Aiken story to make a meaningful comment.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Devonasa
      Devonasa

      @Devon: With that attitude I guess that includes Obama, Biden, and Hilary Clinton (Whom I personally adore). Bill Clinton may have signed it into law, but it’s not like any of the 3 mentioned above came out in favor of same-sex marriage themselves (and saying leave it up to the States does not count).

      Jul 11, 2010 at 4:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gert
      Gert

      Let me be the She-Devil’s Advocate: In 1996 they were talking about a US CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT forbidding gay marriage, and since many states passed their own constitutional amendments, it might have worked. DOMA was the compromise of the day that allows us now to have a law that can be repealed more easily than requiring the consent of 37 state legislatures.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 5:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dan
      Dan

      You’re right that an amendment would have been worse, but there really wasn’t a chance in hell they’d have gotten one passed, everyone knew that. Clinton signed DOMA and spent the run up to the 96 election all over evangelical radio bragging about how he had “protected marriage.” He used it as a vote getter just like Bush.

      Listen, I voted for the guy, but let’s not rewrite history here. His entire reelection campaign was based on “triangulating” (fuck you Dick Morris) awful Republican ideas, the legacy of which is a deregulated financial sector and a ban on gay marriage. Obama may not have it in him to fix things, but he sure doesn’t need criticism from those that fucked it all up in the first place.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 8:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatever
      whatever

      I never heard the compromise/heading off the Constitutional amendment argument in favor of DOMA until Hillz started running for prez and needed gay votes.

      Like Dan said above, it was highly unlikely a cons amend would have been ratified. The constitution’s only been amended a couple dozen times times since the Republic was founded and is an extremely onerous process.

      It’s more Klintonian revision and rehabilitation of their not-so-perfect record on anything.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 9:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 9 · Dan wrote, “You’re right that an amendment would have been worse, but there really wasn’t a chance in hell they’d have gotten one passed, everyone knew that. Clinton signed DOMA and spent the run up to the 96 election all over evangelical radio bragging about how he had ‘protected marriage.’ He used it as a vote getter just like Bush.”

      Not exactly like Bush – DOMA was introduced by Clinton’s opponent Bob Dole and Clinton diffused the issue by saying he was in favor of it. He didn’t (as far as I know) actively push it but he did brag about signing it to keep Dole from getting an advantage by using it as an issue.

      Read http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leonardlink/2009/03/the-legal-challenge-to-doma-the-defense-of-marriage-act-is-filed.html (which BTW was written by New York Law School professor Author Leonard, who thinks the recent DOMA decision should be appealed so that an appellate court can set a nationwide precedent, not because he doesn’t like the outcome).

      Jul 11, 2010 at 9:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @B: ‘B’ is wrong.

      Clinton didn’t jsut support DOMA he championed it and then went on redneck radio to boast about it.

      From Time Magazine, “By the time Clinton arrived in Chicago for his party’s convention in August, nothing that hinted at liberalism was left hanging on him. When the President, who had begun his term advocating the rights of gays in the military, came around to supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, which barred federal recognition for gay and lesbian unions, Dole was wide-eyed. “Is there anything we’re for that he won’t jump on?” Dole asked. The answer, essentially, was nothing… http://www-cgi.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/time/9611/23/kramer/

      Bob Barr wrote DOMA, not Bob Dole.

      Socraides, Clinton, Obama and Biden (who voted for DOMA. are defined by their role in a right centriost party of bigots no worse than the Republicans. The vote on DOMA was 85-14 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House.

      Obama was lyng when he said he’d fight to get rid of DOMA. He’s done nothing but pass out a few easter eggs. Bigots in politics and many religious bigots prefer working with Democrats like Obama and the Clintons – they’re greedier, they fool more people and they’re able to get away with a lot more than Republicans.

      @whatever: For the first, last and only time in his life ‘whatever’ is right. The original Federal Marriage Amendment was first introduced in 2002, six years after DOMA passed in 1996 by Ronnie Shows, another rancid bigoted Democrat. There was no threat of a constitutional amendment at the time and Clinton was ahead in the polls when he championed DOMA in 1996. It was an act of pure bigotry as harmful as Obama’s sabotage of same sex marriage in California.

      Later, in 2004, another foul bigot, GW Bush called for a constitutional amendment to take away our right to protect marriage. Bush concentrated his bigotry in using same sex marriage as a wedge issue and promoted the passage of anti-LGBT marriage laws in some 40 states.

      Both parties are run by bigots and bigot panderers.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 10:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatever
      whatever

      @Bill Perdue: lol piss off, you nasty little communist troll, you.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 11:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @whatever: Awwwwww. Poor little Obot.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 11:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • whatever
      whatever

      @Bill Perdue: hey, write another blathering 10,000 word screed on class consciousness and gay rights. it’s been a while.

      Jul 11, 2010 at 11:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      Do I think Clinton basically acted as our enemy for political expediency, and am I angry about what he, aided by this fellow did?

      YES,

      HOWEVER, am I going to look a gift horse in the mouth, when there is a high ranking DNC type, who is countering the White House advisors attitudes of basically “Screw the Gays”?

      No,

      Sure, this guy was out there helping his boss defend DADT because it was good for them politically. NOW he is telling the current people in the White House that continuing to defend the law is bad for them politically. If I was Obama, I would take notice that a person who’s only concern is the vote is telling me I need to court the gays more, especially if he is telling me to stop defending a law that he himself used to defend.

      Jul 12, 2010 at 10:08 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"
      Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"

      What is it with all this nonsense about “changing minds” and “forgiveness”?

      Socarides has not changed his mind: he was always for gay civil rights, its just that when he was working in the White House, he served his master, Clinton, at the expense of his fellow gays/lesbians. He is, really, no different today. He says whatever white-washed version of the Clinton DADT and DOMA story so that he can make $$$ dissing the current administration.

      As for forgiving Socarides; forgive what, exactly. He isn’t apologizing for his earlier conduct of sacrificing gays/lesbians with his support of Clinton’s gay/lesbian policies, he is simply ignoring his vile self-serving conduct while focusing contempt for the current Administration’s weak attempts to undo the harm he and Clinton inflicted.

      Certainly Mr. Obama has failed to create the “Hope” and “Change” he championed during the election. And due criticism is fair. But not at the hands of the very man who sacrificed our rights for his political gain (and keeping a senior White House job is a personal political gain, as is the ability to then sell your whoreass to Faux News/Murrock).

      I’ve argued with David Erhenstein on other Queerty thread about the inappropriate use of the word KAPO. Socarides proves that my absolute position against calling a fellow gay a KAPO is wrong; Socarides was and is a KAPO. He needs to make amends and seek forgiveness BEFORE receiving any forgiveness for his vile anti-gay rights activities. Then we might, just might, accept his voice concerning repealing the very measures, DADT and DOMA that he personally participated in enacting and publicly supporting.

      Jul 12, 2010 at 10:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      In Comment No. 12 · Bill Perdue put out more of his misinformation. Contrary to his claims I was not “wrong” but rather Bill Perdue is wrong regarding the facts.

      First Bill Perdue claims, “Clinton didn’t jsut support DOMA he championed it and then went on redneck radio to boast about it.” Not true at all – Clinton “announced his support of it” after it was introduced (see below) merely to neutralize it as an issue. Read http://prideagenda.blogspot.com/2008/03/our-two-cents-on-bill-clintons-doma.html for a more balanced opinion – Clinton had a Republican-controlled congress that was trying to use gay rights as a campaign issue. Clinton didn’t “champion” it – the Republicans were the ones pushing it. DOMA passed by an 84 to 15 vote in the Senate and a 342-67 vote in the House ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act ). Vetoing the bill would have helped Dole in his presidential campaign and would not have prevented DOMA from being enacted – the vote in favor was well over the amount needed to override a veto. Clinton’s interests (getting re-elected) were such that he would have been better off without DOMA being passed (Clinton knew that signing it wouldn’t be popular with gays and lesbians, but that not signing it would have been worse given public attitudes at the time). So, the optimal campaign strategy was to announce his support and then ignore it in the hope that it would get buried – voters would not blame Clinton for congress not getting around to passing it.

      Second, Bill Perdue claims, “Bob Barr wrote DOMA, not Bob Dole” but what I had actually said was the Bob Dole introduced it, quoting a law professor’s article. According to http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leonardlink/2009/03/the-legal-challenge-to-doma-the-defense-of-marriage-act-is-filed.html “The leading Republican presidential candidate, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, introduced the so-called ‘Defense of Marriage Act’ in Congress, and President Clinton, seeking to neutralize the issue, promptly announced his support for it.” According to http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/dt/V129/N12/02-defense.12v.html states, “DOMA was sponsored in May by a very important senator at the moment, one Bob Dole of Kansas.” According to http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/25/opinion/journal-i-got-you-babe.html?pagewanted=1?pagewanted=1 “Bob Dole is a lead co-sponsor of the bill. President Clinton this week announced that he’d sign it the moment it reached his desk.” I’ll note that http://www.pensitoreview.com/2009/01/05/author-of-doma-says-it-should-be-repealed/ lists Bob Barr as the author, which is not the same as the person who introduced it or sponsored it (and there can be multiple sponsors, but in this case Bob Dole, being a presidential candidate at the time, is the most prominent one).

      Third, Bill Perdue is still blaming Obama, even though his term of office is not yet finished and he can only sign a bill repealing DOMA, not pass one. Apparently Perdue wants Obama to be as obnoxious as Perdue is rather than working quietly to actually get something done (and letting key members of the legislature get plenty of credit, which helps in getting their cooperation).

      Jul 12, 2010 at 5:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Regarding No 18, Bill Perdue got the facts wrong again. Clinton did not “champion” DOMA (it came out of a Republican-controlled congress). Bob Barr authored it, but Bob Dole was a sponsor (and as a presidential candidate the most noteworthy one), and I never claimed that Dole was the author.

      Citations:

      http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leonardlink/2009/03/the-legal-challenge-to-doma-the-defense-of-marriage-act-is-filed.html , http://www.usc.edu/student-affairs/dt/V129/N12/02-defense.12v.html states, and http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/25/opinion/journal-i-got-you-babe.html?pagewanted=1?pagewanted=1 .

      All give Dole as a sponsor.

      Jul 12, 2010 at 6:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jason_Activist
      Jason_Activist

      Richard Socarides = Weasel

      The only good thing he did was make sure GetEQUAL “activists” are paid $90,000 a year. That’s why I have made Activism my new career. Does PETA pay? I like animals, too. Well, except weasels.

      Jul 12, 2010 at 6:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 19 · Jason_Activist wrote, “Richard Socarides = Weasel”

      Then what would you make of Bob Dole, who was one of the sponsors of DOMA, helped get it through the Senate, and had a personal incentive to get it passed: if Clinton vetoed it, that would be unpopular with quite a few voters at the time and if he signed it (which he did), that would annoy his gay supporters.

      Basically, the Republicans were gay-bashing legislatively in the hope of getting an advantage in the upcoming presidential election.

      Some people will of course object to hearing this – they don’t want to hear the truth.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 1:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 13 · whatever wrote, “@Bill Perdue: lol piss off, you nasty little communist troll, you.”

      Hey, I know one person who is philosophically a communist, and he’s a lot more reasonable and civil than Bill Perdue! Don’t insult the communists by calling Bill Perdue a communist. A more accurate term might be “Stalinist” – Stalin would not accept any difference in opinion, whereas the one communist I know would.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 2:36 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      When B loses an arguement he always gets personal. What else can he do?

      Jul 13, 2010 at 8:12 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      “B” just can’t help lying. It comes with the territory when you spend all your time defending rightwing scum like Rekers, McCain, Ratzinger the Nazi, Obama’s fake DADT compromise, and everything bigoted that comes down the pike like Bill Clinton’s championing of DOMA and then boasting about it on redneck radio.

      Unfortunately for ‘B’ there are plenty of honest pro-GLBT people at Queerty who call him on his lies and question his motives. Here’s how they responded to one of his many pro-Rekers posts:

      Posted: May 14, 2010 at 6:50 pm • @Reply • [Flag?] No. 2 • WalkderDC
      The point is, Rekers is claiming Jovani advertised as a travel companion. Yet not only has he not produced any other ad, nor the website where he found him. But Jovanni has said that he only advertised on Rentboy. B you have now been on 4 threads defending Rekers. What is your agenda?

      Posted: May 15, 2010 at 10:03 am • @Reply • [Flag?] No. 3 • romeo
      Yeah, B, I’m for freedom of speech and all, but you really need to stfu. Rekers is indefensible.

      Posted: May 15, 2010 at 11:44 am • @Reply • [Flag?] No. 4 • schlukitz
      @WalkderDC: “B you have now been on 4 threads defending Rekers. What is your agenda?”

      @romeo: Yeah, B, I’m for freedom of speech and all, but you really need to stfu.
      Gentlemen, B sees himself as a self-appointed moderator whose agenda is to make everyone who posts on these threads, including Queerty.com look dumb, while attempting but failing to make himself look smart, flag posters he disagrees with and trying to get folks like 1EqualityUSA and myself banned from this site.I have no doubt that B is the person responsible for every post that 1EqualityUSA and I make being moderated for the past several months now.
      B apparently believes that he alone is entitled to freedom of speech but that is all other posters on this site that should stfu. For that reason both 1EqualityUSA and I rarely post on Queerty anymore.

      Posted: May 15, 2010 at 11:49 pm • @Reply • [Flag?] No. 6 • Bill Perdue
      If it’s rightwing, if it defends bigotry and religion, if it denigrates the LGBT communities – then B is for it.
      There are dozens of us who say the same thing and we’re pleased not to have your respect. If you liked us it’d be very damaging to our reputations.

      Posted: May 16, 2010 at 3:05 am • @Reply • [Flag?] No. 14 • WalkderDCNo B You aren’t Just trying for accuracy. What you are doing is inventing scenarios to pretend that he isn’t lying. First you attack the reporters for not contacting him, then when it was pointed out to you in another post that he was contacted you immediately scramble and say “But maybe he didn’t understand what they were talking about!”b>So you are desperately trying to find any reason as to why he is somehow the victim here, and I am curious as to why.

      Posted: Jun 15, 2010 at 7:00 am • @Reply • [Flag?] No. 19 • schlukitz
      @Bill Perdue: Truth be known, I never got the impression that ‘B’had any special love for me (or anyone else on these threads, for that matter), from day one. And that’s what I get for having the unmitigated gall to disagree with “B’. Who do I think I am? ;P What I find particularly noteworthy, Bill, is the fact that ‘B’ has never once denied that he might have had anything to do with getting OneEquality1 and my comments moderated on this forum”.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 8:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      @B: Glad you’re backing down ‘B’. At first you lied, as usual, and said Dole introduced DOMA but now you’re getting closer to the truth. He, like Clinton, championed it.

      Clinton has a nasty habit of marching in lockstep with the Republicans on a lot of bills. Using state terrorism in the form of an embagro to murder half a million Iraqi children. Deregulation. NAFTA. Cutting welfare but adding 100,000 cops and hundreds of new prisons to hold African Americans jailed under draconian Jim Crow drug laws. DOMA. DADT. The list goes on and on. That’s why Time Magazine said “By the time Clinton arrived in Chicago for his party’s convention in August, nothing that hinted at liberalism was left hanging on him. When the President, who had begun his term advocating the rights of gays in the military, came around to supporting the Defense of Marriage Act, which barred federal recognition for gay and lesbian unions, Dole was wide-eyed. “Is there anything we’re for that he won’t jump on?” Dole asked. The answer, essentially, was nothing… http://www-cgi.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1996/analysis/time/9611/23/kramer/

      Jul 13, 2010 at 8:24 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 24 · Bill Perdue put out more spin by saying, “@B: Glad you’re backing down ‘B’. At first you lied, as usual, and said Dole introduced DOMA but now you’re getting closer to the truth. He, like Clinton, championed it.”

      Perdue, you are a bald-faced liar – I didn’t “back down” at all. Dole introduced DOMA according to a web site I cited (written by a law professor) and other web sites agreed including the New York Times. Clinton didn’t “champion” it – he simply tried to neutralize it as an issue by preventing the Republicans from being able to state that he opposed it (which was their goal in introducing it in the first place). Announcing “support” and then doing nothing to help the thing along is not “championing” it – what Clinton was doing was very simple: he was trying to get re-elected and getting re-elected was his number one priority.

      The fact is that I said Dole introduced it, as explicitly stated in the URL I cited http://newyorklawschool.typepad.com/leonardlink/2009/03/the-legal-challenge-to-doma-the-defense-of-marriage-act-is-filed.html : “The leading Republican presidential candidate, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, introduced the so-called ‘Defense of Marriage Act’ in Congress, and President Clinton, seeking to neutralize the issue, promptly announced his support for it.”

      Furthermore, Clinton had every reason not to “champion” it – it was in Clinton’s interest for Congress to not get it passed that session because the Republican strategy was to give Clinton a choice between pissing off gay voters versus pissing off homophobic straight voters (who outnumbered gay voters). Clinton signed it, but even if he had vetoed it, the veto would have been overridden as DOMA passed by a very high margin. He may have bragged about it after the fact (to a select audience), but that wouldn’t be the first time a politician had taken credit for something he had next to nothing to do with.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 1:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      Regarding the propaganda in No. 23, Bill Perdue is up to his old tricks trying to turn this thread into one more of his personal vendettas, showing a level of obsession that is really pathological.

      I’ll refer readers to http://www.queerty.com/did-olson-boies-just-secure-the-death-of-prop-8-20100617/comment-page-2/#comment-323398 where Perdue repeated basically the same baseless personal attack a large number of times – at least 30 messages in all, a significant fraction of which consist of the same list of “claims” printed over and over. See that thread for a response to them.

      He’s been trying to give readers a false impression (using innuendo) about an alleged attempt to have him banned from QUEERTY. Given how obnoxious Perdue is, and how many people detest him, it would take an incredible level of paranoia to blame it on me. The first time he made this claim, I pointed out that people don’t “deny” something they had never heard of. He’s been repeating his garbage ever since. He’s sick.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 2:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • marriage equality now
      marriage equality now

      How much money do you want to bet that Richard Socarides was one of those pathetic “PUMA” freaks who supported Hillary in the 08 primaries till the bitter end and then haplessly supported McCain in the general election?

      Jul 13, 2010 at 3:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      In No. 22 · Bill Perdue sets a new level of hypocrisy.

      Jul 13, 2010 at 10:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bill Perdue
      Bill Perdue

      ‘B’, who pimps for everything and everyone who’s anti-LGBT can’t help lying. Claiming that Im “trying to give readers a false impression (using innuendo) about an alleged attempt to have him banned from QUEERTY” might work in divorce court but not here.

      Heres the relevant message, not from me, but from shulkitz to me: “Posted: Jun 15, 2010 at 7:00 am • @Reply • [Flag?] No. 19 • schlukitz
      @Bill Perdue: Truth be known, I never got the impression that ‘B’had any special love for me (or anyone else on these threads, for that matter), from day one. And that’s what I get for having the unmitigated gall to disagree with “B’. Who do I think I am? ;P What I find particularly noteworthy, Bill, is the fact that ‘B’ has never once denied that he might have had anything to do with getting OneEquality1 and my comments moderated on this forum”.

      Reading is fundamental, little ‘B’. Your daily dunderhead homework assignment is to look up the difference between ‘from’ and ‘to’.

      When ‘B’loses he always gets underhanded and dirty. What else can he do.

      Jul 14, 2010 at 3:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      In No. 29 · Bill Perdue lies through his teeth, even denying what he himself said – the claim about getting him(?) (whoever doesn’t matter) banned/moderated/whatever is simply unsubstantiated innuendo. As I said the first time, people don’t deny things they never heard of.

      Perdue, being a dishonest piece of trash, has been repeating this “when did you stop beating your wife” claim ever since. He does it because of what he is – a pathological liar.

      BTW, If there is any confusion about who is saying what, I suggest Bill Perdue follow standard English conventions regarding quotations – I’m simply not going to spend a lot of time reading his rantings in detail as that is a complete waste of time.

      Jul 14, 2010 at 5:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.