House Repukes Authorize $3 Million of Taxpayer Money to Defend DOMA

Screw hurricane relief, theyz got to keep teh gays from marryin'.

House Republican leaders have signed on to spend up to $3 million to keep defending the Defense of Marriage Act in court, according to a copy of their newly revised legal contract obtained by The Huffington Post.

House Republican leaders took over the legal defense of DOMA in the spring of 2011, when Attorney General Eric Holder announced the Obama administration would no longer defend it on the grounds that they found it unconstitutional.

The revised contract comes on the heels of House Republican leaders inserting language into the rules package for the 113th Congress that authorizes the House legal team to keep paying outside counsel to defend DOMA. The rules package also states that the House legal team continues to “speak for” all House members in its defense of DOMA — language that infuriated Democrats opposed to the matter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/15/doma-republicans_n_2479666.html

Republicans must believe strongly in the sanctity of marriage, as evidenced by their fidelity to their wives...oh, wait...

The only way R's held the House in the last election was through gerrymandering. The DOMA matter is settled...at least for the next 4 years. So much for "fiscal responsibility".

Republicans must believe strongly in the sanctity of marriage, as evidenced by their fidelity to their wives...oh, wait...

*********************************************************

LOL

Floridatexan wrote:
Republicans must believe strongly in the sanctity of marriage, as evidenced by their fidelity to their wives...oh, wait...

The only way R's held the House in the last election was through gerrymandering. The DOMA matter is settled...at least for the next 4 years. So much for "fiscal responsibility".

Bill Clinton former POTUS and a (D) surely was not a sterling example of fidelity in marriage....

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Floridatexan wrote:

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Whats sick about it, isn't that what liberals want?

Floridatexan wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:
Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Why don't you grow up?

What gives you the right to determine which relationships of are right or wrong if all involved are mature willing companions?

If two or more mature willing companions wish to form a marriage group of love and trust between each other it really isn't anyone's business except their own.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ljy6PTbX9I

Floridatexan wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Ain't he though? I don't get anything he posts. Really weird.

Dreamsglore wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Ain't he though? I don't get anything he posts. Really weird.

Yes you do. How's that Freudian complex you got comin' along?...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVRzk3VWOKY



...Isn't his name Barry?

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Ain't he though? I don't get anything he posts. Really weird.

Yes you do. How's that Freudian complex you got comin' along?...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVRzk3VWOKY



...Isn't his name Barry?

What's freudian complex? Did you mean Oedipus?

Dreamsglore wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Ain't he though? I don't get anything he posts. Really weird.

Yes you do. How's that Freudian complex you got comin' along?...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVRzk3VWOKY



...Isn't his name Barry?

What's freudian complex? Did you mean Oedipus?

See!!!!! You do understand what I'm suggesting...

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

[quote="Damaged Eagle"]

Dreamsglore wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Ain't he though? I don't get anything he posts. Really weird.[/quote]


Yes you do. How's that Freudian complex you got comin' along?...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVRzk3VWOKY



...Isn't his name Barry?

What's freudian complex? Did you mean Oedipus?

See!!!!! You do understand what I'm suggesting...

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

No, I don't see what you're suggesting. I only know there is no such thing as a freudian complex.

Dreamsglore wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Damaged Eagle wrote:

Our supposedly enlightened progressive liberal friends are right in that marriage rights belong to all mature willing companions no matter; how many, whoever, and/or whatever; choose to form a marriage group so long as all involved are mature willing companions.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

You're a sick puppy...really sick. Try being a grownup.

Ain't he though? I don't get anything he posts. Really weird.

Yes you do. How's that Freudian complex you got comin' along?...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVRzk3VWOKY



...Isn't his name Barry?

What's freudian complex? Did you mean Oedipus?

See!!!!! You do understand what I'm suggesting...

*****ROFLMAO*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc

No, I don't see what you're suggesting. I only know there is no such thing as a freudian complex.

Don't lie about your parental sexual fixation for your male parent. It's obvious that you're real motive for denying it is that you've had this urge since puberty. As the supposedly enlightened progressive liberal that you are you need to examine these feelings and realize that they are a natural process of your psyche.

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMbGgnCWfuc