Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Listen to the Buck Sexton Show Live on TheBlaze Radio

Politics

Ohio GOP Senate Candidate’s Liberal Cousins Take Out Full-Page Ad Slamming Him on Gay Marriage

Nov. 4, 2012 3:03pm Sharona Schwartz

Ohio GOP Senate Candidate Josh Mandels Liberal Cousins Take Out Ad Slamming Gay Marriage Positions

Photo credit: JoshMandel.com

Among small government proponents he’s wildly popular, but Ohio Republican Senate candidate Josh Mandel is taking flak from his liberally-minded cousins who took out a full-page newspaper ad to air the family’s proverbial dirty laundry in public. The Jewish Telegraphic Agency reports:

Ohio Republican Senate hopeful Josh Mandel married into one of Ohio’s most wealthiest and most prominent Jewish families. But they’re also mostly Democrats — and some haven’t been too keen on his Senate candidacy against liberal stalwart Sen. Sherrod Brown.

Now some of Mandel’s cousins-in-law have taken out an ad in the Cleveland Jewish News rebuking him for his opposition to same-sex marriage and to gays serving openly in the military. In their open letter, the cousins note that one of their family members has a same-sex spouse and, like Mandel, has served in the military.

The cousins write in their open letter published Friday:

Dear Josh,

Four years ago you came into our family. We still remember the excitement surrounding your wedding, and how happy our family members were as they described it afterwards. So we were deeply saddened when you announced during your October 18th debate with Senator Sherrod Brown that you believe only some people should share this right to marry the person they love, while others should not.

Your cousins, Ellen Ratner and Cholene Espinoza, are among the many wonderful couples whose rights you do not recognize. They were married almost eight years ago in Massachusetts, at a time when it was the only state in the nation to allow same-sex marriage. Their wedding, like yours, was a beautiful and happy occasion for all of us in our family. It hurts us that you would embrace discrimination against them and countless other loving couples in Ohio and around the country.

We are equally distressed by your belief that gay men and women should not be allowed to serve openly in the military. Like you, Cholene spent many years in the armed forces. A graduate of the Air Force Academy and an accomplished pilot, she became the second woman in history to fly the U-2 reconnaissance plane. And yet, you have argued that she, like many gay and lesbian soldiers, should be forced to live a life of secrecy and lies.

Mandel’s cousins-in-law accuse their Republican relative of bigotry and appear to talk down to the 35-year-old Marine veteran and Ohio state treasurer, writing that his “discriminatory stance violates these core values of our family. Nevertheless we hope that over time, as you advance in years and wisdom, you will come to embrace the values of inclusiveness and equality as well.”

JTA provides more biographical information on the well-heeled relatives, some of whom are New Yorkers “including Bruce Ratner, developer of the new Brooklyn Nets arena; Michael Ratner, president emeritus of the Center for Constitutional Rights; and Elizabeth Ratner, a journalist and critic of Israel.”

Glenn Beck interviewed Mandel on his radio show Friday, where Mandel expressed his belief that the federal budget needs “aggressive cuts.” He said that unlike many other Republicans, he would also consider cuts in military spending. He told Beck, “I’m a proud full spectrum conservative. While I am a Republican, I’m a conservative first and I’m a constitutional conservative and in Washington some of the Republicans are oftentimes just as much a problem as some of the Democrats.”

Regarding those Democrats to whom he’s related, Mandel spokesman Travis Considine told the Columbus Dispatch, “Josh has never met any of those ‘cousins’ who signed that letter and has no idea who they are. He looks forward to having the opportunity to meet them someday — if they ever come to Ohio.” The spokesman further said that the signatories are not “the Ratners from Cleveland,” don’t live in Ohio and didn’t attend Mandel’s wedding in Israel.

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (67)

lovesapplepie
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 5:07pm
Meh..on the ad..no one who was already voting for you is fooled..I can’t wait to vote for you, Josh, on tuesday..I live in NW Ohio..you have massive support here..and you have done a great job for Ohio.. Good Luck!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- TAXEVERYONE
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 9:08pm
  Sherrod Brown will do anything now that he knows he is losing.
  Go Josh Go!
  
  Report this comment
- Small World
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 10:59pm
  I heard Brown was up in the polls,I pray not.
  
  Report this comment
- proantisocialist
  Posted on November 5, 2012 at 11:32am
  I am from north central ohio,and josh has my vote. sherrod brown has an office here in lorain..since Brown was elected, we have lost in jobs.the lorain ford plant, maconie,gold bond.the steel plant,the ship yards..
  and the idiots here keep voting for this guy and the democrats…(he is very good with giving the government handouts also).
  
  Report this comment
towerguy
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:35pm
Most amazing to me is how these Jewish folks who have targeted Mr. Mandel CHOOSE to disobey the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in favor of those who would champion sin. This American nation is one of the very few which did not turn Jews away, and helped significantly in efforts to reestablish the nation of Israel. Mr. Mandel CHOOSES to align himself with the party which keeps God in its’ platform and didn’t vote God down three times. He’s by no means perfect, but he has chosen good company.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- BIGWUN
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:50pm
  They are charter members of Jews for Jihad.
  
  Report this comment
- Anonymous T. Irrelevant
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:58pm
  I was happening to be looking up Carl Reiner, on Wikipedia, and it said in there that he considered himself to be an atheist Jew. Then it hit me why the NY and Hollyweird Jews were for
  Obama. They are all atheists.
  
  Report this comment
- QuincySmith
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:58pm
  Methinks the ad will backfire on unhappy, twisted cousins.
  
  Report this comment
- colt1860
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 6:40pm
  I was about to say the same thing. It is better to obey God than man.
  
  “From the beginning of the creation God made them MALE AND FEMALE. For THIS CAUSE shall a MAN leave his father and mother, and cleave to HIS WIFE; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together , let not man put asunder .”
  
  It looks like his cousin-in-laws are discriminating against God’s holy, perfect Word.
  
  Report this comment
- bonesiii
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 7:39pm
  Exactly. Are they also disappointed in God’s stance? God is the one that is all-knowing, not us.
  
  And where do you draw the line if you compromise with sin? If we say this is okay, you know the ungodly will not stop there. They’ll push for some other sin to be accepted “or else.” And then again, and again, until it all falls apart into the mad violence of the pre-Flood age. The godly have to take a stand.
  
  Report this comment
lovesapplepie
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:30pm
Wow..so I can call any campaign..say I’m related 3 times removed on the spouse’s side, have never met them or have heard of them..and I can do that.. Disgusting

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- mrspeedwagon
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 5:16pm
  What these idiots don’t realize is that Americans don’t WANT gay marriage. It has been voted on in 37 states and gone down all 37 times. Does any remember Chic Filet?
  
  Report this comment
jungle J
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:11pm
Homosexuals are loyal only to themselves…homosexuals are the most selfish humans on earth.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- sWampy
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 5:12pm
  Homosexuals are the result of abuse, they are broken people, who do great damage to society. That and not discrimination why every civilized society on the planet has outlawed there disgusting activity.
  
  Report this comment
- MatrixRedPill
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 9:26pm
  Weeellllll, that is way too generalizing. Believe me, I am no fan of homosexuals, but a lot of them are good gentle people too. This is a hard topic.
  
  Report this comment
- DOra Glasberg
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 10:18pm
  Josh is a sad putz – who will lose.
  Putzes always lose.
  
  Report this comment
The Gooch
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:58pm
Whether marriage is a “right” is moot. I assert, per review of historical precedent across time, cultures & religions, marriage is most assuredly not a “right.” Whether we as a nation get to question marriage as a “right” apparently ended with a1967 SCOTUS ruling on interracial marriage. And, according to most progressives, that’s all that need be considered in a ruling on same-sex marriage (even thought that ruling STILL doesn’t negate marriage is, per precedent, OVERWHELMINGLY a construct betwixt male & female).
People SHOULD be allowed to have an opinion on this matter & SHOULD be allowed to voice said opinion. A nation state can decide to rule by fiat or by will of the people (READ: Majority). I’m sick to death of this damn argument. It seems what this argument REALLY exposes each time it comes up is that BOTH sides have the same stance on the extreme: I’m right, your wrong, same ol’ story.
I don’t believe marriage is a right, & I don’t believe same-sex marriage is a logical progression in society. I believe such a move is an embrace of nihilism. I also believe I’m just one person with an opinion who believes people who disagree with me have a right to be heard. I recognize I don’t always get my way & can tolerate when that happens. I don’t want my beliefs criminalized for simply having an opinion others disagree with. If gay marriage ever becomes universally legal, the sun will still rise in the east & set in the west…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Gooch
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:05pm
  … and I’ll still assert I do not agree marriage should be redefined to please those who engage in anomalous behavior or who wish to assert their power over me by pursuing what I believe to be nothing more than nihilism dressed up as high-minded idealism. All I ask is that I not THEN be targeted as a criminal for asserting a belief that dares challenge the state or elites. What are the chances of that of two-way street of tolerance?
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:33pm
  do you think the government should allow people to be gay?
  
  Report this comment
- OhioRifleman
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:42pm
  @ Gooch
  
  Tolerance? The chance of that is pretty close to zero. If you do not fall into lockstep with their ideology, you are an enemy of humanity and need to be slain ‘to promote the greater good’ and similar reasons.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 5:09pm
  soybomb315_II
  Ooh, I get the feeling you want to lead me into some semantic trap based on a logic argument. Let me answer you with this: Homosexuality is like death, taxes, disease and abortion: Whether or not I agree with a behavior or want to face any particular perceived “woe” doesn’t negate the fact that all of the aforementioned concerns are part of the human reality as long as we walk this planet in numbers. Can a govt. ATTEMPT to control and limit behavior? Sure. Look at the idiotic statements regarding homosexuality that originate from the likes of Iran. Whether or not a govt. “allows” homosexuality isn’t going to end it.
  Since marriage is a human construct that has been defined and limited across time, races, religions and cultures as OVERWHELMINGLY betwixt male and female, I am quite comfortable with my stance on what marriage is and is not. Confusing private behavior with social mores is comparable to asking whehter on not I believe people should be allowed to relieve themselves. If you need to take a whiz or a crap, do so; however, that doesn’t mean suddenly people should be laying logs or giving golden showers in the town square. At least that’s my opinion. You may hold a different stance on the matter.
  There is a profound difference between tolerance and nihilism… in my opinion.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 5:20pm
  marriage is not a government construct – it is God’s construct. And if someone is not a believer – then it is a construct based on our humanity. Either way, it has nothing to do with anybody else (society and government) and therefore should remain so.
  
  You almost nailed it. It is historical fact that only tyrannical governments try to control the morals and behavior of their people. You could argue the church should be actively involved in this arena – but certainly NOT GOVERNMENT. If you say ‘there are certain things that government has a role in” then you are taking the side of the progressives – the Woodrow Wilson progressives to be exact
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 6:08pm
  Soy,
  In my opinion:
  1. The purpose of ALL governments and religions is to define limits to behavior. This would include marriage. What is the point of government if it is powerless to control human behavior. Seems to me an impotent government would be like having a safety switch painted onto a firearm; sure, it conveys good intentionis, but it’s worthless in the end… and maybe a bit funny.
  2. Christendom and Judaism do not hold a monopoly on marriage. Marriage is a HUMAN construct that exists across time, cultures, races and religions. It is, arguably, the basis for civilization.
  3. Considering matters of incest, polygamy, bestiality and pedophilia, yeah, I’m pretty sure there is a point when marriage MIGHT become the business of the collective and the governing body.
  4. I’m not a progressive… and sure as hell not an anarchist. I’m one voice with an opinion who doesn’t want government in my home, but would also like some assurance I won’t have to fend off rape gangs coming for my daughter.by my lonesome.
  
  What’s your beef? Are you asserting you are for or against same-sex marriage or does your general political stance disallow you from even having an opinion?
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 6:34pm
  do you think the american government was doing the right things in 1780? How about 1820? How about 1890? How about 1940?
  
  Our country does best when government is smallest. You may not think yourself a progressive but if you think there are things the federal government should be doing that are not mentioned in the Constitution – you hold progressive ideas. I am perfectly happy going back to the small government of years past – that will mean morality is just one of many areas the government gives up control. We cannot pick and choose what the government should be doing – the Constitution is clears
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 6:56pm
  Soy,
  While I generally agree with you (I like to know who I’m tangling with and some of your other posts indicate you may lean libertarian… as do I on some issues), the problem is context. The issue of (gay) marriage was about as relevant to the authors of the U.S. Constitution as would have been a discussion of putting a man on the moon.
  Can we find some middle ground? Can this not be an issue handled at the state level? That SHOULD satisfy a strict constitutionalist while allowing the people in a representative democracy to define what is and isn’t acceptable in their neck of the woods. At some point, marriage HAS to be addressed by the collective. Fine. Leave the feds out of it and let each state deal with it.
  Let me ask you this, does your stance on marriage as a private matter not subject to the state then negate divorce laws? Seems to me that could be the only logical conclusion with your stance on marriage being a private matter subject to no limits or government interference. “I divorce you, I divorce, I divorce you. Now get out; I’m keepin’ all the stuff.” Hell, I like that idea. Let’s settle divorce with a fist fight or duel. Not only are matters simplified, but it hearkens back to simpler times (and favors me).
  Thanks for your time. This type of back and forth is always appreciated. No offense is intended… I just want to be challenged.
  
  Report this comment
- colt1860
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 7:01pm
  Our government was established “to secure the BLESSINGS of Liberty for ourselves and our posterity”. All state constitutions say that our blessings of liberty come from God. My state’s constitution, Maryland, reads:
  
  “We, the People of the State of Maryland, grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty, and taking into our serious consideration the best means of establishing a good Constitution in this State for the sure foundation and more permanent security thereof, declare:”
  
  Government is accountable to God, for they are ministers of God, and their power is ordained of God, that they may, with permission from above, and with good intentions, reward good and punish evil. For this reason our forefathers appealed to the Grand Legislature of the Universe for the rectitude of their intentions. We cannot rely on our own wisdom, as do communist nations. We must have a firm reliance on God, and in his wisdom and provision. God is the Supreme Judge of the World, and one day we will all answer to him.
  
  Our Creator never granted to any man the Liberty to marry another man. Nor is such a right found in the Laws of Nature; it’s a perversion.
  
  “From the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For This cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 7:16pm
  yes, if anything – the issue of gay marriage could be a state issue. I would support that. By the way, that was the position of Ron Paul. However, that is not the position of the evangelical and social conservative wing of the party – they want the federal government to do it an anyone who disagrees is a ‘gay supporter’. That is the way the battlefield is currently set up. Otherwise, they would have supported someone like Ron Paul who says it could be done at the local and state level….That is why we say that the republican party is run by progressives
  
  All of this talk doesnt really matter because at the end of the day, the republicans just use this as a political issue. If they wanted to fix gay marriage situation – they would have done it in every state level – instead of keeping it a federal issue that goes nowhere every 4 years. They do this so that you will come out and vote for them – without them having to fix it. Same thing with abortion – they will never fix it because half of the republicans would stop voting if they fixed it. Gooch, you are being used by an evil machine
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 7:21pm
  soybomb315_II
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 6:34pm
  do you think the american government was doing the right things in 1780? How about 1820? How about 1890? How about 1940?
  
  I like to read history, but wouldn’t consider myself an expert. I do believe the one event that firmly established the federal government as a self-professed, all-powerful entity was the U.S. Civil War. Arguments about cause aside, President Lincoln was the first ‘big government’ president who readily wiped his **** on the U.S. Constitution to assert the final authority of the federal government. Lincoln did what he wanted he, when he wanted and how he wanted. After Lincoln, influence peddling and regulation became standard operating procedure. An argument can be made that in saving the union, Lincoln poisoned it. From my perspective, that’s when we jumped the shark.
  At best, Lincoln is a tragic figure. It takes A LOT of polishing and ignorance to sell him as a hero.
  
  Report this comment
- The Gooch
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 7:42pm
  Soy,
  I’m not a partisan, so I really don’t care what the R stance is on gay marriage; I know what MY stance is and believe I can readily defend it. Also, you can’t dismiss the fact that the Ds (or, more correctly, progs and lefties) want to legislate this matter from the courts. Both sides politicize the contentious matter of same-sex marriage (which is, in my opinion, an oxymoron). I’m not sure if it’s shameful or understandable that the matter of same-sex marriage is unsettled. Seems to me civil unions might suffice, but apparenty this is an all or nothing gambit for some proponents. Is this what I go to bed and wake up worrying about? Nope.
  And don’t you know the “right to choose” (a.k.a. the right to terminate a human pregnancy, a.k.a. abortion) was squirreled away in the 14th Amendment? Who knew (besides a select group of activists and cowards too fearful to allow a stand alone amendment)!?! Problem solved! FYI, back when the story about intrusive probes came out of VA (for those considering abortion), I made it very clear I believed that nonsense was partisan-fueled idiocy. I’m pretty sure if you’re getting an abortion, you PROBABLY know what is you’re aborting. Hey! Maybe before someone joins the military we can bombard them with photos of maimed and dead soldiers!
  I disagree with your assertion I’m being used by anyone. Hell, I’m too much of a contrarian. But who’s to say that trait can’t be played on?
  
  Report this comment
Gregory_Adams
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:52pm
“…don’t live in Ohio and didn’t attend Mandel’s wedding in Israel.”

Good catch, PWNED

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Rawlins
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:51pm
This is absolute filth….. these “people” should feel lucky there even allowed to LIVE here….. when our country was still God’s country they would have been run out of town and WORSE……I fear Satan has taken over for good…………

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
AllAmericanGirl22
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:51pm
Disgusting, this is not how families should act. I have a few liberal family members and friends and it doesn’t mean you can’t be civil.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
DadRocked
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:39pm
So when did ‘cousins’ through marriage matter? Yep, if one is strong minded in one’s beliefs to tick off the in-laws, then this is one who will stand for their convictions and not be swayed. Fellow Buckeyes – are you listening? I know how you folks think in my home state. I know that you won’t stand for the B.S. I know that even in inclement weather that we will sit in the OSU Horseshoe, Paul Brown Stadium, Browns Stadium and every high school throughout the state. Don’t stay home this Tueday and vote the way we were raised in supporting OUR country. God Bless

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
JQCitizen
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:38pm
Me-thinks and wonders: Did the Sherrod Brown campaign ask for this?

Question two: Do these family members air ALL of their dirty laundry and arguing about politics in public? Why couldn’t they save it for around the Thanksgiving table like all of the rest of us? LOL!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DadRocked
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:50pm
  Family keeps things in family. Doesn’t always apply when they’re from the in-law side of family.
  
  Report this comment
barber2
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:36pm
This is just another one of the many issues that the Obama , Chicago Marxist Democrats have used to divide America. They want to use ” change” to destroy traditional values and American capitalism. NOBAMA 2012

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
toomuchgovt
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:35pm
Shouldn’t his liberal homosexuals cousins be as tolerate of his beliefs as they want him to be of theirs?And as respectful? Love will stand through all adversity, why do they need the approval of government?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Gooch
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 4:27pm
  Progressivism depends upon intolerant authoritarianism. Funny how secular zealotry is just as unpalatable as any religious zealotry.
  
  Report this comment
honor007
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:34pm
We NEED Josh Mandel as our Senator in Ohio.
Sherrod Brown was the final vote on Obamacare.
Josh has increased our bond rating and upped our credit here in Ohio as the Country’s was downgraded.
Sherrod Brown is a Union loving, Socialist nightmare and he PROMISED only two terms and he has been there 3, it is time to force him to keep his promise.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- justangry
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 6:24pm
  I’m voting for Mandel. Something in my gut tells me I’ll regret it, but Brown is a police statist. See it isn’t just “my way or the highway”.
  
  Report this comment
neverending
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:34pm
Just shows the lengths these lowest of the low will go, A real sad reality of this whole mess is that it is tearing families apart just as barry has torn America apart.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
kalli
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:28pm
So, what ya’ gona do, kick him out of the family? Stay strong in your beliefs, Josh. G-d knows who you are and who you serve, and He knows who your relatives bow down to. If you can, send donations to this man’s campaign. We need strong conservatives in the senate.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
VoteJoel
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:27pm
Oy, we really need Josh in the Senate. He’s a great guy and the real conservative deal. Come on Buckeyes! Vote GOP Tuesday and bring some friends.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
toomuchgovt
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:26pm
Ah the liberals and we conservative always seem to meet them “halfway”. Next thing we know, we are selling our souls.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
mcnak90
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:26pm
regardless on your stance, its illegal to force a religion into doing something. and i dont understand…in the dark ages someone didnt agree with the church so he made his own branch. why dosent this happen here? why are they so consumed with getting married in a place that views them as an abomination? why do they NEED it to be called a “marriage”? sounds to me like there’s a plague of pride going around.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
oldduffer
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:26pm
Won’t have to worry about anything Jewish with Obama and his buddies. You don’t worry about past people. Just enough will be left to mourn while their former “friends” and “allies” laugh at the lemmings.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
The-Monk
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:22pm
I guess they are saying it’s OK for his cousins to marry…. right?

I mean…. if they are in love why not?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- kalli
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:30pm
  Good question, Monk! Thanks be to G-d they cannot breed.
  
  Report this comment
- BlackCrow
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:31pm
  Because sodomy is not equivalent to marriage.
  
  Report this comment
BlackCrow
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:19pm
Sounds like a good reason to vote FOR the young man! Libs better be careful things like this are known to backfire.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Wool-Free Vision
  Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:42pm
  The fools on the left are victims of their own propaganda. They think that supporting gay marriage is a popular position because Hollywood and mainstream media (all hugely left-biased) pretend it’s true. Meanwhile, vote after vote after vote, it is shot down by actual American voters.
  
  This is justice. Victims of their own lies. Same is true for the journalists in this country. They have been lying to each other so long that they all believe each other’s lies.
  
  Report this comment
Ghandi was a Republican
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:17pm
Simply put- Gays can do whatever they want, EXCEPT corrupt an Institution as old as the beginning of time. This is a “community organizing” tactic allah alinsky, designed to pit Americans into voting blocs to then be exploited.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Small World
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:14pm
Say no to gay marriage.It’s immoral. Trying to destroy the family & faith.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
HKS
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:08pm
Really, has he been hiding his thoughts on gay marriage? Sounds like a personal item to me.

“Remember Benghazi”

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
conman404
Posted on November 4, 2012 at 3:08pm
You would think they would want someone in their family as Senator, no?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.