Posted on 10/12/2007 5:44:56 AM PDT by reaganaut1
[R]ecently, [Barney] Frank has been under siege by gay rights groups.
They are angry because Mr. Frank has removed specific language about “gender identity” from the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, a bill that would protect gay men and lesbians in the workplace and that gay rights advocates say would now leave transsexuals and transgender individuals vulnerable.
There is almost no chance that President Bush would ever sign the bill. But the bitter tug of war between gay groups and one of their best friends on Capitol Hill is the latest example of how Democrats in Congress, since regaining majority control this year, have been torn between making compromises needed to pass legislation and satisfying the unrelenting demands of the party’s liberal base.
Mr. Frank, in an hourlong news conference on Thursday, defended himself and said he would press ahead with the bill knowing that by not including the transgender language he could attract enough votes to get it approved. But he also expressed frustration that the Democrats were hampering themselves.
“There is a tendency in American politics for the people who feel most passionately about an issue, particularly ones that focus on a single issue, to be unrealistic in what a democratic political system can deliver,” Mr. Frank said, “and that can be self-defeating.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Aw hell, let’s also add 3 legged dogs, 2 headed frogs and manbearpigs.
I saw a transsexual at a local crafts fair the other day.
The “guy” sported huge shoulders and arms with enormous hands(reminded me of the “Seinfeld: episode on “man hands’).
It was a sickening display of self-absorbtion.
I was sitting there with friends, trying not to be judgemental, and observing this “man” with the longish red hair, jewelry and female clothing, and long fingernails.
Ugh.
Exposed?...............
Everybody wants a piece of the metaphorical "pie." Time was, that meant money and stuff; a chance at "the good life." Now it means the power to boss their neighbors around.
Plus ça change....
That way, if the guy is about to mug me, I can look him in the eye and say — “before you do, I have to warn you, I’ve got something in my pants that will make you regret this”
“A pair of women’s underwear.”
Get it, I’m a protect class, because I’m wearing women’s clothes. Now the mugger will let me be because he is afraid of getting charged with a hate crime. And he can’t pretend not to know, because I told him.
The downside is that I’d have to start wearing women’s underwear. That and I’d get the crap beaten out of me.
:-)
BTW, I realise that wearing women’s underwear is both odd, and is “tranvestite” not “transexual”.
But I don’t see why we should make the distinction. I know that if I told a liberal I was a strong conservative, they’d probably want to beat me up or kill me, so maybe conservatives should be a protected class.
:-)
All they want is Snoop Frankie Dog to put his frank where his mouth is....
Don't forget to vote for Hillary!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.