Seems pretty clear. She is entitled to her beliefs and opinions, but if, as a public official, she can’t or won’t, for whatever reason, perform the duties for which she was elected, she shouldn’t be in that office. Religion isn’t the issue. That’s just her excuse. Performance of duties is. By flouting the law and the court, she got what she deserved.

A federal judge has ordered a Kentucky county clerk to jail Thursday after she repeatedly refused to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
U.S. District Judge David Bunning said Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis would remain in the custody of U.S. Marshals until she complied with court orders to issue the licenses. Bunning said fines weren’t enough to compel Davis, who has remained defiant in the face of the Supreme Court’s decision in June to legalize same-sex marriage, Ryland Barton of Kentucky Public Radio reported.

Bunning told Davis that while public officials may have their own religious beliefs, they still must respect the law, Blue Grass Politics tweeted.



  1. noname says:

    Truth is, most people, when they can’t maintain a “Performance of duties” are fired!

    So a lack of “Performance of duties” is not reason to jail her!

    You can argue like a liberal all you want; the truth is, Religion is the “elephant in the room” and is the issue and reason why she is in Jail!

    • RR1 says:

      She wasn’t jailed for a lack of “performance of duties”. She was jailed for contempt. The contempt being not following a court order plain and simple.

      • noname says:

        The order was to perform her job, plain and simple. You can argue semantics like a liberal all you want!

        It seems the courts are now saying; not performing a job can get the non-religious fired and the religious jailed until the guards find some way of finding her dead in her cell!

        Basically American courts have turned religion into a capital offence!

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          Can’t you read simple English?

          “U.S. District Judge David Bunning said Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis would remain in the custody of U.S. Marshals until she complied with court orders to issue the licenses.”

          Those orders only procede because someone injured by her failure to follow the law SUED HER thus bringing her actions to the jurisidiction/control of the Court.

          …………..just as it should be.

          • Likes2LOL says:

            Man, whenever a “pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist” talks, I listen! 😉

            Thanks always for your insights and words of wisdom, bobbo…

        • RR1 says:

          One small problem here, I’m not a liberal. I’m also not a person who believes someone else has the right to force their religious practices on others.

          The way your view comes across is the equivalent of my church suddenly telling me to go out and kill non-believers and I should not go to jail for it because it was my religion that made it OK.

          Please feel free to tell me how that is different than what she is doing? Also please expand on this and tell how this is any different that what the terrorists from the middle east are doing.

          She broke the law, she should be in jail, simple enough for even my grand daughter to understand.

          • noname says:

            Huge problem here, it’s not a small problem at all.

            Instead of firing her for not doing her job and not “issue the licenses” like every employer does …… they threaten her life and put her in jail.

            Wow, like a true liberal whose thinking is so incredibly bogus and dumb; you equate a refusal to do her job to “church suddenly telling me to go out and kill non-believers”! The only life in jeopardy is hers in jail!

            The so call “pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist” is everything but pragmatic and anti-theist!!!

            The pragmatic thing to do is fire her not jail her!!!

            The anti-theist thing to do is to just fire her and not impose your theism and jail her!!!

            Again, just another example of the courts doing everything but justice. Our courts are now declaring WAR on any conscientious objector (‘our justice system’ jail, shoot and kill at will)!!!!!

            It would be so cool to read; you’re thrown in jail, shot or killed because you refuse to do a job your boss told you to do!!!!!

            Welcome to the new America, v3.0

          • RR1 says:

            Unfortunately for you, my examples are exactly what she is doing, she is doing something in the name of religion that is illegal.

            As far as firing her, the Court has no legal authority to fire her. Only someone above her can fire her at her job. The Court can only fine her or jail her.

            Its painfully obvious her boss is choosing not to fire her for whatever reason. Perhaps they even agree with her, but never the less the Court is the one tossing her in jail for ignoring a Court order.

            Violating a court order gets anyone put in jail, you, me, anyone. Get over yourself.

          • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

            Thank you RR1==that is the key point nosense is making: The COURT is NOT an EMPLOYER. Seems a rather simple concept. Courts and Employers, like citizens and employees==all with their seperate sometimes overlapping duties and powers.

            To emphasize on a related scrambled stew of asshatery: The Court is NOT declaring war on any conscientious objector. You post as if you are too stupid to recognize that the very OBJECTIVE of objecting conscientiously IS TO GO TO JAIL. That is what the concept is all about.

            You really are too confused to be legitimate. I smell a troll.

            The rotting corpse of a troll too lazy to keep it hidden, but a troll none the less.

            Ha, ha. Troll. Should be easier to hid what with 20% of the Republican Party Religious Base all of the same “mind.”

            RR==aren’t labels fun? We have the same opinion/analysis on this issue yet I label myself a liberal. I guess ” I’m an XXX on this issue” is too much for a bumpber sticker.

          • RR1 says:

            I get labeled a liberal on certain issues, a red neck conservative on others. Some even toss in that I’m middle of the road on other issues.

            Makes it interesting to say the least.

            None of these labels really fit me as I think all laws should be tossed except for state and federal constitutions. I’m really of the belief, if it isn’t hurting anyone else in some way or another it should be legal for you.

          • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

            The point you are just missing is that YOU labeled YOUR SELF a conservative.

            ……….and just like “having all the facts” I think you may or may not be conservative on a majority of issues, or conservative on only a few issues but they are no 1-2-3 on your list….. and so forth.

            You state you are libertarian on victimless crimes…… another label.

            Not much of an issue, unless you default to straight party voting….. which is also not as confining (party platforms and issues) as it was a few years ago……..ha, ha…. the system breaking down…. everyone pandering to any voter they can grab.

            Hmmmm, checking my own label, I see liberal isn’t there. ….. but what else could an existential pragmatist be?

          • noname says:

            What a laugh!

            You say: “Unfortunately for you, my examples are exactly what she is doing,”
            Your very bogus example: “the equivalent of my church suddenly telling me to go out and kill non-believers”

            Ok RR1 aka, “Mr. brilliant you’re not” and Bobbo “the non-practical theist” please demonstrate some credibility and intelligence and name one life, any life she has remotely endangered by not performing her duties?

            She has not endangered the life of any one and this is not a national security issue; she has only not performed the duties her government job requires.

            She should be removed from her job, not imprisoned.

            Bobbo “ever the hypocritical theist” can’t understand if she didn’t have the government job the courts would NOT have sentenced her to a virtual death. A virtual death because the only option the courts allow is for her to deny her religion or rot in jail!

            The court is very much stepping in as her employer and setting employment conditions and terms adding those working conditions now include imprisonment!

            How hypocritical the courts are when proven cases of occupational deaths occur, courts feign jail time in the press but only collect Fines and financial Restitution for themselves.

            Bobbo can argue semantic all he wants; she is in jail for not performing her job, plain and simple.

            What Bobbo “ever the hypocritical theist” can’t understand is she is in jail because she offended a same sex couple!

            What Bobbo “ever the hypocritical theist” can’t understand, instead of removing her from her job, as any NORMAL, SANE, LOGICAL, RATIONAL person would do, the court have given her a sentence harsher than people who cause occupational deaths!

            WHY, BECAUSE SHE OFFENDED A SAME SEX COUPLE!

            COURTS TODAY HAVE DECLARED IT IS OK TO CAUSE OCCUPATIONAL DEATHS; IT IS NOT OK TO OFFEND A SAME SEX COUPLE!

            AMERICAN JUSTICE V3.0

        • Cephus says:

          In this case, she was elected, she cannot be fired, she must either be removed from office by the legislature (which won’t do it), or punished until she either begins to do her job or resigns. Because there are so many religious idiots waiting to pay any fine levied against her, she was put in jail, where she will remain until she does one of the above.

          She’s getting what she deserves.

          • noname says:

            You’re such a hypocrite, why the double standard?

            Why didn’t Nixon go to Jail or a dozen politicians and judges like him for far worse crimes?

            Why are criminal penalties so weak if not existent with just fines and no jail time when Employers fail to do their job and protect employees from job fatalities?

            So it’s ok our courts only fine when life is lost but it’s jail time when a same sex couple is offended?

            You must believe same sex couples are so frail and delicate, that heaven forbid they should remotely encounter something they don’t like.

            Where is your outrage for loss of human life?

            Obviously you don’t care about human life, instead; you’re outraged because a same sex couple is offended!

            She should be removed from her job; it’s that simple.

            She is in Jail because she offended a same sex couple, plain and simple.

            You can argue like a liberal all you want; she is in jail because she offended a same sex couple and didn’t perform her government job!

    • Judge Jewdy says:

      I’d hit it!

    • MikeN says:

      So what law is she flouting?

  2. Tom says:

    Impeach her and replace here with someone who WILL do their job! And let her simply rot in jail until then!

    • noname says:

      Nice sense of justice you have, jail her until you find a replacement!

      I hope that is how how they replace you, when you get some balls and decide you’ve brown noised your boss enough and dare object to doing a job.

      This is just the court telling American’s, you best shut up and ignore you convenience because we’ve killed better people for less!

      • Cephus says:

        She’s violating her oath of office and a direct court order. She is in jail for contempt of court. Get over yourself.

        • MikeN says:

          Her oath of office is to follow the law, which in Kentucky says marriage is between a man and a woman.

      • Tom says:

        Noname: She is in violation of the law and the courts. So, damn right; she should stay in jail until she is either replaced or decides to perform her required duties!

        • noname says:

          Yes, do get over yourself you’re such a hypocrite!

          Why didn’t Nixon go to Jail or a dozen politicians and judges like him?

          Why are criminal penalties so weak if not existent with just fines and no jail time when Employers fail to do their job and protect employees from job fatalities?

          So it’s ok our courts only fine when life is lost but it’s jail time when a same sex couple is offended?

          You must believe same sex couples are so frail and delicate, that heaven forbid they should remotely encounter something they don’t like.

          Where is your outrage for loss of human life?

          She should be removed from her job; it’s that simple.

          She is in Jail because she offended a same sex couple, plain and simple.

          You can argue like a liberal all you want; she is in jail because she offended a same sex couple and didn’t perform her government job!

          • Charliej says:

            noname, people are being too polite to tell you the truth. You are a fucking idiot. Your arguments make no sense, and your ideas are ludacris. Every time you type something, you are embarrassing yourself. All of your ideas boil down to “you are a liberal” if someone disagrees with you. Your knowledge of US law is abysmal, and you express yourself poorly. You need to give up while you are behind. Of course, if you continue, I will be happy to point out your failures in logic and thinking.

          • noname says:

            Like you, I don’t care to be polite.

            Being the obvious hypocrite you are, when someone not PC (like me) dares to disagrees with you, you call them a “fucking idiot”.

            Wow I am just so hurt a douchebag liberal called me a name, boo-hoo!

            You’re just another typical uber judgmental liberal bully who is so baby fragile and frail you just can’t tolerate basic justice for all.

            Everything has to be slanted to favor your judgmental liberal politics; else you can’t survive, sad!

            All you can offer is uber judgmental liberal Bull Shit as reason!

            Nothing you say makes any sense!
            Instead of being SMART, NORMAL, SANE, LOGICAL, RATIONAL and just removed her from the job, you want the court to polarize the local voters and do the stupid and extreme act of incarcerating her.

            How dumb, judgmental and hypocritical can you be?

    • Der Kommissar says:

      States are so broke they are releasing rapists early. We created a democracy in Iraq and Libya and they all want to leave the place. Bankrupt DC is calling the shots! 4th amendment is gone and police state is in place and on a global scale. Bushes wonder why nobody wants them around. Trump is in cahoots with Great Satan! Expect more jobs to disappear, crappier roads and rotted bridges. Jeb! the dud will fix everything.

  3. Likes2LOL says:

    If a devout Muslim was the county clerk and said, “I refuse to issue a business license to any store that sells alcohol” — well, that person wouldn’t stay in that job. We repealed Prohibition.

    Sorry, Ms. Davis, but we don’t stone aldulters to death or force rapists to marry their victims in this country, either.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      There are dry counties where that is exactly what happens.

      • Likes2LOL says:

        Maybe the dry counties are the only place devout Muslim county clerk wannabees are attracted to? Just sayin’…

      • Egon Ruuda says:

        You can still get a state liqor license in those said dry counties, but you may not sell alcohol for drinking purposes.
        Example: Rubbing alcohol, cleaning alcohol and fuel grade ethanol.

        • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

          A fair dither…. but is that actually true? Does K-Mart in a dry county need a “liquor license” to sell rubbing alcohol? I’ve never lived in a dry county, so I don’t know.

          No doubt, a full discussion could draw this point out. Rereading…. I see you aren’t actually dithering that much as LOL posts about anti-alcohol not anti-Liquor…… but I’d still wager he “meant” liquor. But maybe not.

          • Likes2LOL says:

            And bobbo *wins* his wager! Seriously, I meant liquor, hadn’t even crossed my mind about those other items. Dither on, you Mensa member shoo-ins!

            HOWEVER, now that Egon mentioned it, isn’t the better automotive DryGas made from ethanol instead of methanol? And, how do you stop the hardcore alcoholics from re-distilling motor fuels to extract the federally mandated 10% ethanol? Less than $3/gallon (less the petroleum), better than any liquor store. Just sayin… 😉

  4. raintrees says:

    It is pretty clear and simple: She broke her employment contract: She’s fired. Does not matter what reason she cites, she chose to break her contract. She was told by her employer to cure and correct. She did not. The legal system told her to cure and correct. She did not. Bye-bye. End of story.

  5. Der Kommissar says:

    Great Satan is locking up all the clerks and Mad Mullah is locking up all the reporters. Pope and the UN are launching New World Order to convert Muslims. Southern Baptist Arabs are taking over churches. Skynet is taking over parks.

    [Ed. Note: SKYNET is the military industrial complex’s wet dream, the Pentagon and its corporate partners are working on it night and day. It will soon be here.]
    http://sgtreport.com/2014/03/skynet-as-seen-in-terminator-2-will-soon-be-here/

    Germans are luring Syrians to be turned over to Amazon as wage slaves.

  6. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    I think Huckleberry had a good argument: that she has religious rights too that should be accommodated under the law AND that Kentucky Law still makes it illegal to marry gays. Problem is: Kentucky is not making any accommodations which would have avoided the issue.

    Lots of issues……if anyone really wants to focus on the facts and the law.

    • MikeN says:

      Kentucky has a Religious Freedom Act that should accommodate her, but she doesn’t appear to have made that argument.

  7. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    I see now the question before us is: “What Should Be Done About Kim Davis?”

    I don’t know but “assume” the Court could have focused on Kentucky or whatever BumF*cked Country is involved and simply FINED them per day until performance was gained. After all…. it is a “system” issue rather than just one person. Then Kentucky/County could secured compliance system wide rather than let individuals game the Federal Review. The Feds would have gained revenue for the period of noncompliance instead of an expense…. AND Kentucky would be forced to take a position….that being hire additional clerks to follow the law for those who’s religion is too high falluting. It could have been a compromise position rather than the exercise of Fed Power against an individual.

    What caught my attention was that she has been divorced 3-4 times herself. Like ALL RELIGIOUS TYPES: picks and chooses what she follows and ignores. THAT and that she is paid 80K per year to “keep records.” But then, I further assume to keep that job and employ her close relatives, she also is a great team builder.

  8. Dumb Cunt says:

    This has NOTHING to do with religion. IT’S ABOUT THE LAW! (“Man’s Law” to you fucktards who can’t understand other simple “concepts” — like GRAVITY!!!)

    Here’s the thing. I don’t like homosexuality any more than this Kentucky cunt does. But the LAW is the LAW!!! This moronic GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL is in jail because SHE DISOBEYED the very same LAW that she CHOOSE to take take an OATH to uphold. Plain and simple.

    Don’t like the law? Then CHANGE it. Or here’s an idea, MOVE! I hear Russia is a pretty good choice.

    Remember: No one can ever have religious freedom unless it’s in a State free OF religion. This BITCH stepped over that boundary and now deserves to be DEPORTED! I say, fuck her!

    • aslightlycrankygeek says:

      Wow, you hate both religious people and gays. I know there are many out there like you, but you rarely show your faces. If I were a UFO enthusiast such as yourself I would say you are like Bigfoot. If you had only thrown in something against Jews you could have had a trifecta.

    • MikeN says:

      What law did she disobey?

  9. Peppeddu says:

    We have a separation between church and state for a reason.

    She wants to be paid by the state while performing God’s duties?

    And what if my religion says that it’s a sin to pay taxes, should I refuse to pay them or go against my religion?

    She’s just a nuts who took her concept of religion too far.
    She should be fined, disciplined or fired, not jailed.

  10. Uncle Dave says:

    One point. She is an elected official and can’t be fired, only be removed by recall election or impeached by the state legislature. They don’t meet again until January, and as one article said, many in there support her.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

      That is a superseding point trumping all others. Still….I think it is good to keep in mind that I don’t think courts can order a person fired even if they are just a lowly hourly employee. I suppose that might depend on who is in front of them (ie-including the employer, and what law is applicable) but its rare if it is done at all.

      As the facts become known, its also interesting she is not acting for herself but has also ordered other clerks in the office not to take gay wedding applications. So…. she is imposing her religious views on her employees as well as the public.

      I think the court can still fine elected officials to gain compliance… or jail… or both and do the same for any individual who conspires with her to violate the law.

      Religion…………. what ya gonna do? At least its not beheading rape victims in a soccer stadium for having sex. Religion…….. what ya gonna do?

    • Tom says:

      Well, I hope she enjoys her long stay in jail then!

  11. Sigh says:

    All these smart folks talking here about law and religion should first google “Why can’t Kim Davis be fired”. It is always helpful to understand all the facts, not just the ones that fit your world view.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

      You never have all the facts.

      All you can ever do is argue on the facts you have.

      • kerpow says:

        “All you can ever do is argue on the facts you have.”

        Except, when the facts are easily available and not too hard to decipher. Then you’re arguing from a place of willful ignorance.

        • Sigh says:

          Thank you for the clarification on ‘all the facts’. That was indeed what I meant. And it’s very easy to go from there to cherry picking the facts for your arguments.

        • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

          Kerpow—read and think until you agree with me and sigh: “You NEVER have all the facts.”

          Its a ministep towards understanding the world better. Next step is to recognize facts in conflict….and on and on.

          Thats why learning to ARGUE BY HYPOTHETICAL is so important. You assume all the facts necessary to reach either/or conclusion and then try to match those facts to what is available. AKA: analysis as opposed to regurgitated non-think of talking points.

          Try it.

  12. Hmeyers says:

    The government shouldn’t issue marriage certificates, just change them all to “civil contracts”.

    They are arguing about a word.

    Humans figure out the most difficult course of action, and then spend 100 years arguing over something because of the word.

    The other part is that humans love to argue. Especially about petty things, it’s like a past time. This is why humans suck.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

      Almost.

      The word is however defined. IN CONTEXT: with your word change the Clerk in Kentucky would be refusing to issue civil contracts to gay couples.

      ……….but I agree given the stupidity/love of labels, we hoomans demonstrate…if years ago the state only issued certificates and religions married people, there would be a degree of seperation between the issues of which right now there is none.

      Rights. Its a terrible thing for hoomans to think they have. Causes disagreements!!–and science can’t prove anything one way or the other.

      Ha, ha.

    • spsffan says:

      Indeed. I’m all for the separation of marriage and state. In fact, as far as marriage is concerned, we don’t need no stinking licenses.

      My great grandparents didn’t need a license to get married. All they needed was a Rabbi or a Pastor, depending on which side of the family we’re talking about. Oh, and they stayed married until death did them part.

      Although I don’t agree with the state being involved in marriage, and I don’t intend to ever marry, there is a circumstance under which I might. It involves me the other party having a terminal illness. In that case, being married makes things so much easier for both the dying and the survivor when dealing with things like health care and estate matters that it outweighs my objections.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        You don’t need marriage for that. Power of attorney for Healthcare Decisions works just fine.

        All states are involved in marriages, civil partnerships, and creating the next generation==even if they aren’t involved at all.

        The reasons are obvious with any reflection…..

        My labels are more accurate than yours!

      • MikeN says:

        The purpose of the state’s involvement is for the protection of children. There is no need for the state to be involved in recognizing gay marriages.

  13. Tim says:

    What Should Be Done About Kim Davis?

    I think we should put on airs and fuck her ‘right’ in the pussy.

  14. TeaPartyDude says:

    The New Totalitarians created this problem, and SCOTUS joined them against the natural order.

    She should be impeached as per the rules she operates by, or re-elected to serve, by the political process.

    Not some perverts in dressed in black, attorneys who, if they were road kill, wouldn’t appear much different than flattened snakes.

    • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

      What makes them perverts Alfie?

      ……..and seems to me if they were road kill they wouldn’t look at all like snakes but rather lost laundry?

      You Know!===like a butt shaved dog’s ass.

      Oh Alfie…… you are a caution.

      • Tim says:

        ^^ Reminds me of the country county coroner/forensics examiner which just also happens to run a bait shop/funeral parlor.

        seargent: Open and shut case, sir.. This man was run over by a steam-roller.

        Bubbaducky: Hold on there, trooper {holding up the well-pressed husk of flatted flesh}; You see how you can see light through that? This man was shot first. I’m afraid it is murder.

        • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

          Good work Bubba!

  15. aslightlycrankygeek says:

    If you sincerely believe government employees should be jailed for not doing their job, can we start jailing Obama appointees who refuse to enforce immigration laws or drug laws? And while we are at it, if the Obama administration had not refused to do its job and uphold the Defense of Marriage Act, we would probably not even be in this situation to begin with.

    All of you arguing that this was the correct course of action for a government employee refusing to do her job are hypocrites.

    • Tom says:

      Oh Joy! Another lunatic fringe Tea Party member is heard from…

    • Ah_Yea says:

      Unlike the lunatic Tom, you are exactly right. Look at all the things this administration has done against the law!

      http://nationalreview.com/article/370446/obamas-immigration-non-enforcement-actions-andrew-stiles

      If Obama, the CHIEF EXECUTIVE, can selectively follow what laws he likes and ignore the laws he doesn’t like, why not her?

      Is Obama above the law?? Liberals think so.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        Teaparty/Conservative: Dumb as shit covered rocks.

        Its been said FIVE TIMES above that she is in jail for VIOLATING A COURT ORDER.

        ………not for violating the law.

        Dumbshits can’t read……or remember any new information for the two seconds it takes to post.

        Which is it Oh No?

        • aslightlycrankygeek says:

          bobbo, your reasoning skills are lacking, to put it mildly.

          I simply stated the hypocrisy of people like yourself of supporting jail time for dereliction of duties of someone whom you disagree with while being perfectly content of the same actions by an entire administration.

          You proceed to refute this point with a sentence describing the last step in the sequence of events that led to Kim Davis receiving jail time. Well no shit, Dr bobbo, but you missed the part where you were supposed to be trying to refute the original premise.

          The fact is we have many high-ranking officials who refuse to perform their duties for various reasons. Rarely are the reasons based on a deep personal or religions conviction, but rather to set up a situation in hopes of gaining political power in the future, or “punish political enemies” as Obama would say. They know they can get away with it because they will never see time in court in the first place. More to my point, we have legions of intellectually and morally bankrupt individuals (like yourself but also many in positions of power) who enable this because they support their agenda, while cheering jail time for exact same actions of political opponents.

  16. Jason says:

    The only issue here is: NONFEASANCE

    Legal definition is: The failure to act when a duty to act existed.

    Therefore, if it is the scope of her duties as clerk, she must do it. Also, her failure is resulting in the loss of fee revenue to the county. Thus, removal via the laws in Kentucky should suffice.

  17. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    http://isidewith.com/political-quiz?utm_source=outbrain&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=q_us_h3

    Speaking of labels, the above is a 3 minute test to match you with the Presnedent Candidates. I came in with Saunders, Clinton, then…………………….. Marco Rubio. …….. then Raun Paul. They must overweigh some immigration issues??

    • Hmeyers says:

      That’s a shitty quiz.

      I don’t have opinions on hardly any of those topics.

      What I want are politicians that are interested and engaged into effective and proven solutions to the issues of the day, backed by real-world proven results.

      The problem with that survey — and politics in general — is we don’t have to have politicians who agree with us.

      An engaged and interested leader can come up with solutions we don’t like if they are effective. That’s the definition of leader.

      Do I want the average voter crafting foreign policy? Environment policy? Policing strategies?

    • Hmeyers says:

      “Should National Parks continue to be preserved and protected by the federal government?”

      How the fuck should I know?

      “Would you support increasing taxes on the rich in order to reduce interest rates for student loans?”

      What sense does this question make? Where is the connection between rich people and student loans?

      Why isn’t the question “Should rich people be taxed to buy poor people hamburgers?” Or “Should rich people be taxed more to help pave roads?

      “Do you support the legalization of same sex marriage? ”

      How is this important?

      “Where do you side on social issues?”

      That I think “social issues” have no business in politics and it is used to divide people.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        You crack me up HM. Over the years, you have become, or maybe just revealed, a very crusty nature.

        OTOH–its been a few years since I took my last political survey …. so may be I was seduced by the attention?

        If you have no idea, no opinion, or think certain questions are BS===I’m sure that you were matched with Ted Cruz or Rick Perry.

        This is an instrument to “match opinions or personality types”–not provide substantive answers.

        Let’s take a looky loo:

        Hmeyers says:
        9/4/2015 at 7:14 pm

        “Should National Parks continue to be preserved and protected by the federal government?”

        How the fuck should I know? /// Well—do you think Yosemite or Yellowstone should be openned up for fracking or drilling? or sold off to the highest bidder to raise money? I bet you do have an opinion.

        “Would you support increasing taxes on the rich in order to reduce interest rates for student loans?” /// Yes, a defective question at best…but it fits with the type of survey this is. Better: do you think the Already Too Rich Bastards being taxed on their Million dollar incomes should pay more than 6% and be put in jail when they are caught in criminal activities? You are quite right that most tax revenue goes to the general fund for general obligations….. the targeted/linked revenue is fraudulently spent as the pols are directed to do so.

        What sense does this question make? Where is the connection between rich people and student loans? /// The Already Too Rich Bastards being taxed on their Million dollar incomes at 6% and not even investigated for their criminal activities stand in opposition to the poorest among us trying to dig themselves out of poverty. Its a CONTRAST.

        Why isn’t the question “Should rich people be taxed to buy poor people hamburgers?” Or “Should rich people be taxed more to help pave roads? //// These are all the same question. Not a fan of ambiguity are we.

        “Do you support the legalization of same sex marriage? ”

        How is this important? /// Again, its a question that does seperate people along social/political lines. Most appropriate–the importance doesn’t even matter when it comes to predictability.

        “Where do you side on social issues?”

        That I think “social issues” have no business in politics and it is used to divide people. /// Ha, ha===you state the very importance of it. Weird how often you do that.

  18. flatwombat says:

    Here’s the Oath Of Office she took:
    “I do solemnly swear (or affirm, as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth, and be faithful and true to the Commonwealth of Kentucky so long as I continue a citizen thereof, and that I will faithfully execute, to the best of my ability, the office of ——————— according to law; ”
    Notice the “according to law” which she has obviously disobeyed. She disobeyed the rulings of the Supreme Court and the order of the Court that jailed her. She has violated her Oath, failed to do her duty, yet continued to accept her paycheck without a problem.

    I could give a rat’s butt about her personal religious beliefs, however she is not the person officiating the marriage, she is simply granting the license AS REQUIRED BY LAW. She does belong in jail until she complies and should, in any case, be impeached and removed from office for dereliction of duty.

    No matter how you feel about God & Country, the facts are plain and this person is not above the law.

    • McCullough says:

      Obama has violated the oath of office constantly, as have most if not all of our office holders, where is your outrage? What about immigration laws that are being ignored, and sanctuary cities that defy those laws and let criminals out on the streets? Oh that’s right liberals don’t like those laws so we don’t have to enforce them. Give me a break.

      Oath of office is a fucking joke. Laws are for the other guys.

      • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

        The oath of office is an interesting read……but totally irrelevant to the issues of the OP.

        Why do you follow that Red Herring?

        Again, for the 10th time: the issue here is violation of a court order.

        NONE of our elected leaders or any one else has ever violated one of those with impunity.

        Try to keep up.

  19. Clancys_Daddy says:

    I want to take the time to thank all of you, particularly noname, bobbo, and alfie for reminding me what a shit hole this “tech” blog has become and why I left. It would be in Johns best interest to remove his name and any association he still has with it.

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      I also miss the greater variety and more technically oriented posters from years ago………… back when 3-4-5-6 posts per day was put up allowing the forum to pick interests closer to their hearts.

      ………but what ya gonna do?

    • The Wrong Guy says:

      This never was a “tech” blog, and the world has moved on from blogs, like the editors.

  20. Likes2LOL says:

    BTW, Ms. Davis’s hair is long enough to wrap around her own neck, tie to the prison bars and hang herself.

    I heard she’s being held in isolation with nothing other than her orange jump suit and a Bible. For her own safety, in case she has a psychotic break over the weekend, shouldn’t some of that hair be sheared off?

    • bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

      Every devout Xian of Davis’s certainty knows that hair is made into shirts, not rope. Still……….there is that risk….that will make a nice google. I’ll post if anything interesting turns up.

      • Tim says:

        “…but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering.” — 1st Corinthians 11:15

        Although, I’m not kosher with the idea of long armpit hair serving the same purpose for spit-crotch panties.

  21. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    Just read she is a democrat. Article went off on a partisan tangent from there but I would have guessed she was an R….. while the main point is that she is an F as in Fundie. …… and it is the R Huckleberry who visited her to provide support.

    Underscoring a common analytic failure: thinking of issues in monolithic terms without the shadings and conflicts that are always present.

    and t he beat goes on.

    • TeaPartyDude says:

      Fundie is a dog whistle to you. I’d love to tweet one, stick it in a bag of burning doo doo, and ring your door bell.

      It should be hilarious!

      Once the image of a fundie rears itself, your otherwise incoherent babblings go even further off the rails.

      But it is entertaining, so thanks.

      • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

        Alfie==you’ve got the language all twisted around.

        I used the term Fundie so there was no dog whistle I was responding to. It was an ASSESSMENT I made and I hanged a label on her.

        Alfie–if you get back here: is this witless beanbag a Fundie or not?

  22. Likes2LOL says:

    Holy Shiite, Batman, the religious freedom vs. homosexuality war is heating up fast. According to the Westboro Baptist Church, “KIM DAVIS CAUSED FAG MARRIAGE”.

    Westboro Baptist Church To Protest Kim Davis For Causing ‘F*g Marriage’ Because Of Her Divorces | FreakOutNation
    http://freakoutnation.com/2015/09/westboro-baptist-church-to-protest-kim-davis-for-causing-fg-marriage-because-of-her-divorces/

    (Lots of photos and tweets there to explain it…)

    Westboro Baptist on Twitter: “It’s time to pack this sign and visit Kentucky — land of the phony divorced/remarried traitors to God. #NotChristian http://t.co/ztt0A26dbB
    https://twitter.com/WBCSaysRepent/status/640172938595962881

    According to FreakOutNation,

    “Kim Davis has been divorced three times, first in 1994, then 2006 and again in 2008.

    “Ms. Davis gave birth to twins five months after divorcing her first husband – the twins were fathered by her third husband but adopted by her second.

    “During each divorce, Davis worked at the clerk’s office.”

    ~~~~~~
    Get your popcorn ready, folks — Mike Huckabee’s headed to Kentucky to straighten this all out! 😉

    Poor Kim, I don’t think she was expecting this…

    • Likes2LOL says:

      Oh, what a tangled web she wove! According to US Patch:

      “4. She has been married four times

      “Davis has been married four times to three different men and had twins out of wedlock.

      “It’s all a bit complicated. Here’s the breakdown:

      * After divorcing her first husband of 10 years, she had twins five months later; the twins were fathered by the man who would become her third husband, according to NBC News.
      * When she married her second husband, he adopted the twins.
      * Davis and her second husband divorced 10 years later.
      * She then married the father of her children, a union that lasted “less than a year,” according to NBC.
      * She remarried her second husband in 2009, and they are still together.

      ““I am not perfect. No one is,” she said in her statement. “But I am forgiven, and I love my Lord and must be obedient to Him and to the Word of God.””

      1 God, 2 Kids, 3 Husbands, 4 Marriages: 5 Facts About Clerk Jailed Over Gay Marriage | Across America, US Patch
      http://patch.com/us/across-america/5-facts-clerk-sent-jail-gay-marriage-dispute-0

      I bet the Davis family reunions require a BIG tent and a lot of security! 😉

      • bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

        “I’m not perfect.” /// Psychotic break from taking responsibility.

  23. Likes2LOL says:

    But wait, there’s more: Now Ms. Davis and/or the rally organizers may be facing legal action about their choice of music:

    Survivor Furious That “Eye Of The Tiger” Was Used In Kim Davis Video, Considers Suing To Protect Integrity / Queerty
    http://queerty.com/survivor-furious-that-eye-of-the-tiger-was-used-in-kim-davis-video-considers-suing-to-protect-integrity-20150908

    Survivor Frontman — How Dare Kim Davis and Huckabee Use ‘Eye of the Tiger’ | TMZ.com
    http://tmz.com/2015/09/08/kim-davis-eye-of-the-tiger-survivor-mike-huckabee-rally/

  24. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    On O’Reilly just now, he reports Ms Davis has issued multiple marriage licenses to people for polygamous marriages because she believes in that too.

    Seems weird…. maybe not true…. but certainly could be when public officials force their own agenda.

    Why is it so easy to see when the religious and gun nut balls do it but accepted when the Already Too Rich do it?

    Its a puzzler

  25. TeaPartyDude says:

    She got what she deserved. Didn’t she remember all those white shoe boys, politicians and bankers being locked up for the collapse of 2008, thousands of orange jumpy suited men being rounded up into paddy wagons?

    Didn’t she remember all those at Planned Parenthood keeping babies alive so their viable body parts and brains could be sold, all the jail time they got?

    A public servant refusing to obey the law! What does she think she is, a sanctuary city? Obama sworn to uphold the constitution?

    How about SCOTUS finding homosexual marriage in a document that doesn’t discuss marriage at all, and overturning states rights to decide the matter for themselves?

  26. ± says:

    My eyes glaze over. Did anyone tell ‘noname’ (and many others here) yet that she is an elected official and can NOT be fired? To remove her from office requires an impeachment.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 13666 access attempts in the last 7 days.