Last night State Senate candidate Neil Di Carlo overcame the efforts of the Dutchess / Putnam County Republican nominating machine which tried to deny a candidate choice to delegates assembled in a ballroom of the Poughkeepsie Grand Hotel.
In a surprising forced vote following a severe three minute speaking restriction, Di Carlo, virtually unknown to most everyone in the ballroom, carried almost 25% of the vote, an unheard of victory in the tightly controlled political machine environment.
After losing the machine effort to deny exposure of the 250 plus Republicans to Di Carlo's short speech, 32 year incumbent Saland angrily characterized Di Carlo's support of traditional marriage as belonging to an "extreme" political party. Taking a page from the Obama White House, the avowedly left-progressive Saland sought to demonize Di Carlo for referring to Saland's traitorous vote for homosexual 'marriage' and refusal to support a referendum allowing voters to choose on the issue.
5 Comments
They will lose on ssm. ssm'ers have to attack to force their views.
Mr. DiCarlo, my check is en route.
Mr. Saland, you are a disgrace.
Why is it that images of Hitler and the Third Reich come to mind whenever I read of the totaltarian tactics of the marriage corruption movement? Come to think of it; didn't all of Germany deny taken part in these same types of crimes against humanity when they were finaly defeated?
How effed up is it that one can refer to marriage as the union of a man and a woman an extreme position and not get laughed out of the building?
That's like saying that a man being denied the use of the women's room is an extreme position.
We're living in Bizarro World, and all because of a small minority of people who suffer from SSAD: Same-Sex_Attraction_Disorder, which, because of its inherent childlessness, has led them to focus on accumulating wealth and achieving positions of power in the media. I picked-up a local university's newspaper the other day and the headline was about the school's decision to provide extra money to LGBT employees who live together.
Obviously, the editor of this paper is in the BLTg camp, placing a second-page story about university employees (this is a student newspaper, mind you, not a faculty newspaper) to the headline. And this is how they drive an ignorant public's opinion.
The position in favor the marriage idea and opposed to the Specious Substitution of Marriage (S.S.M.) is an extremely good position.