The Vote  

MissAnnThrope 57F
11679 posts
6/7/2006 12:34 pm

Last Read:
11/20/2007 9:58 am

The Vote

Well, the Senate voted on the Marriage Protection Amendment this morning. Here is the breakdown, by state.

Alabama: Sessions (R-AL ), Yea Shelby (R-AL ), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Nay
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO ), Yea Salazar (D-CO ), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Not Voting Lieberman (D-CT), Nay
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL ), Yea Nelson (D-FL ), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI ), Nay Inouye (D-HI ), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL ), Nay Obama (D-IL ), Nay
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Nay Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Yea Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Nay Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Nay Snowe (R-ME), Nay
Maryland: Mikulski (D-MD), Nay Sarbanes (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI ), Nay Stabenow (D-MI ), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Dayton (D-MN), Nay
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Yea
Missouri: Bond (R-MO ), Yea Talent (R-MO ), Yea
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Nay Burns (R-MT), Yea
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Not Voting Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Nay Sununu (R-NH), Nay
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Nay
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: DeWine (R-OH), Yea Voinovich (R-OH), Yea
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Nay
Pennsylvania: Santorum (R-PA), Yea Specter (R-PA), Nay
Rhode Island: Chafee (R-RI ), Nay Reed (D-RI ), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Nay Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Frist (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Jeffords (I-VT), Nay Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Virginia: Allen (R-VA), Yea Warner (R-VA), Yea
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Nay Murray (D-WA), Nay
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Not Voting
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI ), Nay Kohl (D-WI ), Nay
Wyoming: Enzi (R-WY), Yea Thomas (R-WY), Yea

The vote was 49-48, with three Senators absent. Dodd and Rockafeller were set to vote nay, Hagel was campaigning in KS with Bush by his side, but he was set to vote yea.

Take a look at your home states, folks. If you're for civil rights and someone vote yea, make sure you and your friends remember that in November.

The surprise votes were Arlen Specter of PA and Judd Gregg of NH. They both voted yea in 2004. Either they've actually started to care about civil rights and what their home voters are saying, or they're not running for reelection.

Voters from Louisiana should be especially upset over what Vitter said on the floor. This man who represents New Orleans said, "I don't believe there's any issue that's more important than this one." Yeah, the biggest city in your state is now a third world country, but gay marriage is more of an issue than all the Katrina victims who are still homeless. Idiot.

Now, if the full Senate had been present, the vote would have been 50-50. Not the 60 votes needed to continue debate and bring the measure to a vote. But the deciding vote would have been Dick Cheney. I would have loved to have seen his vote.

So civil rights are safe for another two years. When they will vote, to try to gather religious support for the 2008 Presidential elections.

TheRealThing655 49F
9558 posts
6/7/2006 12:48 pm

Well I have to admit I am happy that our two female senators from Washington State voted the way they did. All the votes seem so typical from each state, with a few exceptions...will it ever change?

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 12:41 pm:
It will never change. Although, Specter's vote was a suprising and nice change. When they stop toeing the party line and vote as their constituents ask, then it will change in some places. But don't expect ultra-religious states to change any time soon.

rm_jd29992z 55M
3888 posts
6/7/2006 1:50 pm

Yes you are right in 2 years it will rear it's ugly head again. I just can't seem to think what the big deal is like gays will take over the world or someting well if they did the world would at least be more colorful later JD.

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 12:48 pm:
But... but... They're going to replace our flag with the rainbow flag! Everyone is going to have to dance to bad techno and listen to Judy Garland! Liza Minelli's career will be over! For good this time!

I don't get the big deal either. They're going to turn their kids gay. Right. The ONLY gym teacher I ever had who didn't stare at us in the shower turned out to be a lesbian. Or I should say, an out of the closet lesbian. None of us turned gay because she was. She was the only gym teacher everyone liked, too. Did all those altar boys who were molested by priests turn gay? Nope. They act like pedophilia will be legal if gays can marry. Now, I can understand that kind of attitude coming out of areas where they marry their daughters off as soon as they start menstruating, but give me a break. The studies they use to show their side are scientifically flawed and paid for by Dobson and his crowd. They are far from scientific. Idiots.

redmustang91 58M  
8929 posts
6/7/2006 2:01 pm

I say gays should have the same right to marry, why should only heteros suffer...

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 12:48 pm:
Heh. So many heterosexual men tell their gay friends how sorry they're going to be if they do get married.

haversack_smith 41M
6192 posts
6/7/2006 2:13 pm

Yeah, the biggest city in your state is now a third world country, but gay marriage is more of an issue than all the Katrina victims who are still homeless. Idiot.

It wouldn't surprise me if some of these idiots really believe that if only they'd been tougher on the gays, God wouldn't have sent Katrina to ravage their states.

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 12:50 pm:
They do believe that. Trust me. It was God's punishment for homosexuality. Of course, that wouldn't explain why Galveston, TX was nearly destroyed by the same storm.

8337 posts
6/7/2006 2:28 pm

It will never pass, regardless.

The next president will most likely be John McCain (R) or Joseph Biden (D) and neither of them even have that issue on their radar.

When Bush leaves, alot of the bullshit social conservative pet issues he likes to harp on will leave with him.

McCain does not vote partisan and in fact is more issue-based than any Republican senator today.

If he had been in office the last six years, you can believe the war and other issues would have been handled differently.

McCain is a decorated war vet.

Bush's military service consists of a half-ass attendance record with the Texas Air National Guard.

I believe that sums it up.


"My every move is a calculated step, to bring me closer to embrace an early death." -Tupac Shakur

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:04 pm:
Now, I wouldn't be sure about McCain. He made it clear last month he was not a moderate, but a hardline conservative. Last month he actually said, "I haven't changed. My record is the same on all issues, which is that of a conservative Republican. Not a liberal Republican, not a moderate Republican."

His voting record tends to tell another story, but that was straight from him own mouth. He also said getting the nomination for President isn't all that important to him. On the Democratic side, I don't think it's going to be Biden. I really do think it's going to be Hillary Clinton. People are predicting Clinton and Giulliani for 2008, but I don't think he's going to play well in the heartland. After all, a NY Republican is further to the left than a Texas Democrat.

OboesHonedIambs 63F

6/7/2006 3:54 pm

and once again Santorum justifies why his name is now connected with the bits of fecal matter that are the residue of anal sex!

Instant Human -- Just Add Coffee

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:07 pm:
You know, I actually had to look that up. I never knew that a Santorum was a sexual term. It's so fitting too.

NickRules999 40M
9464 posts
6/7/2006 4:29 pm

It's no shock to me the Utah senators voted for it. These guys are backed by the LDS church, and in Salt Lake City, the LDS church has a lot of fingers in a lot of pies. What shocks me is that Salt Lake's mayor, Rocky Anderson, is not LDS. I'm surprised he got elected to a second term, and that he's even in office at all.

This state is still in the dark ages, even though it's 2006. The only really good thing I can say about Utah is it's a nice place to live. If you can avoid the Mormons and stay far away from the temple, you've got it made.

Come into my realm! You aren't afraid...are you?

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:10 pm:
You guys need to vote out Orrin Hatch. The man is a raving lunatic. I will never expect Utah to ever lean towards the Democrats, though.

flagg134 37M
1582 posts
6/7/2006 4:58 pm

Arlen Specter truly does Surprise me. Its good to see the tri-state area saying nay all the way. Who is this democrat from Nebraska Nelson voting Yea though?

Also like you stated would have loved to have seen the irony of Cheney voting on this given his Mary's sexual orientation. Heh


MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:10 pm:
It's Nebraska. Need I say more?

RevJoseyWales 70M/67F
14393 posts
6/7/2006 5:01 pm

Not many surprises. Thank the Gods, the Goddess, and whoever else. Will it rear it's ugly head again. Unless this country wakes up you'd better believe it. It's hard to believe that in the 21st century, an industrialized nation would even still be trying to write discrimnination into it's laws. Half our senators would have voted IN FAVOR of this disgrace. Once again, Bush & Co have embarrassed us through out the world. Natalie Maines was SO right. November can't come soon enough.

side note: Ann, did you notice how the senators from Missouri voted?

"McVeigh had the right idea, wrong address."

"This ain't Dodge City, and you ain't Bill Hickok."

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:16 pm:
Hey, the four Republicans running for the Alamaba Supreme Court want to do away with any rulings of the US Supreme Court. Some people miss the poll tax and segregation.

Yes, I did notice how the Senators from MO voted. I wasn't at all surprised.

cuteNEway 42F

6/7/2006 6:18 pm

YAY to the NAY!!!

I can always count on my state's senators to do the right thing!!

tee hee

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:18 pm:
Yes, but there are those upstate who are staunch conservatives who will remember this in November.

real36CgirlPA 39F

6/7/2006 7:29 pm

I actually think Santorum ia a bigger jackass than Specter anymore. I used to hate ol' Arlen, but he seems to finally be gaining a wee bit of wisdom in his old age. Santorum votes from the pulpit just about every time, and it's just bizarre that he is working in government at all when he should just do what he obviously really wants to do and start his own church camp.

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:22 pm:
Santorum is a complete nutjob and he doesn't even live in PA anymore! When the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette sent out questionaires to the candidates, the one addressed to Santorum came back, "Return to sender. Unable to forward." When a couple from that area decided to see if anyone was home, they knocked on the door and then peered in windows of the Santorum Penn Hills home. Empty. Totally devoid of furniture. Just a physical address. He doesn't live in PA anymore. He is a Virginia resident, bilking the PA taxpayers for charter school education for his own kids!

I'm thrilled to learn he's 23 points behind his opponent in the polls, too.

rm_1hotwahine 64F
21091 posts
6/7/2006 8:36 pm

I'm encouraged to see at least a few willing to not vote the party line. Maybe that can be a sort of twisted legacy of this administration - to go so far to the right that sane and rational conservatives will need to at least sometimes cross the party line.

Specter...I can't think of any examples off the top of my head, but there have been a number of times he's pleasantly surprised me.

Thanks for posting this, Ann. I should be ashamed of myself for not having the motivation to track it down myself. But so be it.

Yeah, I'm still [blog 1hotwahine]

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 1:26 pm:
Yes, it was nice to see a few who wouldn't vote for it. But the divorced and remarried ones are hypocrites, if you ask me.

Specter has to be getting ready to retire, or he would have voted yea again. Either that or one of his grandkids came out of the closet.

rm_jd29992z 55M
3888 posts
6/8/2006 10:37 pm

yes I know there is no prof that gay people raise gay kids. If history has anything to do with it the kids would want to e as far removed from the parents as possible later JD

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 10:51 pm:
Heh. Yet no kids become gay to piss off their straight parents. Science has pretty much proven it's genetic. So if you're gay, it's your biological parents' fault, be they straight, gay or bi.

An old friend of mine has two sisters. He's gay, his younger sister is a lesbian, his older sister, who looks like a flannel shirt lesbian is actually straight. You hear his younger sister, who is feminine looking speak and she sounds like a trucker. Once she was past puberty, when she answered the phone, I always thought it was a man. But if you listen to the religious right, oh, their older sister is straight, so why aren't they? It must be a lifestyle choice.

No, it is NOT a choice. You are born that way, plan and simple. I still haven't heard one molested altar boy accuse a priest of turning him gay. Why these gay priests don't just take adult lovers, like my old parish priest did, is beyond me. They met in seminary and were together for 50 years. He never once accosted an altar boy and most of the congregation had no idea. I've also never seen anything like the turnout for that man when he died.

rm_pleasuresex3 53M
520 posts
6/9/2006 3:20 am

In my view this is just another example of the sad state of american domestic politics and the ridiculous amount of weight such issues carry in a presidential election.

I do understand that the way to get elected to office in USA is to concentrate on domestic issues and ignore questions on foreign policy. This of course goes for most countries, but the US is not "most countries". The office of President of the United States is a PRETTY IMPORTANT job in a GLOBAL perspective.

So why in the hell is such a mediocrity as George W. Bush holding office for a second term? Yes, I don't think he is stupid, but mediocre doesen't cut it for this kind of job. To me, this presidency smacks of dad's old gang coming together for a second (and third) term that Bill Clinton, against heavy odds, stole from them.

For fuck's sake, there must be some real political talent within the Republican party to push forward as a presidential candidate? Let's look at former presidents from the Republican party, since WWII:

George Bush - funnily enough, I think he was half decent, he had some real credentials to put on his cv; director of CIA, vice precidency.

Ronald Reagan - a mediocre Hollywood actor, say no more; does this mean that I can look forward to seeing Arnold Schwarzenegger in the white house?

Gerald Ford - anyone remeber him? Poor sod, his stumbling efforts on the red carpet is the only thing I can come up with. And I think he was on the Warren comission.

Richard Nixon - a flawed character indeed. Guilt ridden, communist hating cold warrior; a man of his times.

Dwight Eisenhower - before my time, but he had an impressive resumé: Commander in Chief of the Allied Forces. Not bad.

In my view, the man in the White House at the moment, is by far the worst of this bunch.

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/9/2006 4:59 pm:
But the foreign policy most want to hear seems to be, "build a wall! Keep them damned foreigners out!"

Let's look at both elections. 2000 a bunch of ballots fell off the truck even after the county had been fully reported. In steps Katherine Harris and the next thing we know the courts are proclaiming Bush President. 2004? Read up on what was done in Ohio with the black box voting. Election officials there have admitted to fixing the election. It's really easy to do with the electronic machines. Fair elections are about to be a thing of the past in this country.

As far as presidents since WWII, there are still a few Eisenhower Republicans around. Or those who shared his ideals. The Neo-Cons tend to call them RINOs. Republicans In Name Only. Nixon? The guy was a fucking prince compared to Bush. He might have been insane and paranoid, but he never would have done the shit Bush has been doing.

Reagan? Bush is putting forth Reagan's ideals. Especially about the end times and Presidents having divine rights given to them by God. Gerald Ford was barely there. I don't think he ever expected to be President in the first place.

Right now, people are saying Bush is the worst President since Hoover. That is quite an accomplishment.

rm_jd29992z 55M
3888 posts
6/10/2006 12:53 am

You are so right I old just about imagine when you are first coming out of the closet as they say I bet that most of them would rather be normal but they can't stop something that is natural. Like me I do masturbate quite often (actually a lot) and I always felt I was a weirdo but the more I read others blogs and talk to people I am not alone. I do feel for others and hope everyone can find what it takes to be free and happy.

Well your priest he was gay and just because you are gay dose not mean that you want to have sex with kids that is a whole different thing. I know that pedophiles are who they are but they really need help I know it is not always their fault but once you cross the line with a child it is putting the child's life in turmoil and that is unforgivable to ruin a child's childhood for a sexual fling it is wrong but in a way I understand I guess.

To blame the church totally is wrong too where were the prosecutors? Just because he was a priest that means the law could not arrest him? There is something missing there also I just don't get it. If a doctor, bus driver, teacher would do that they would be prosecuted why not the priest? Shouldn't the government be some what responsible too? Food for thought.

I am straight but I have gay and lesbian friends hell of of my lesbian friends calls me big brother I love them for the cool people that they are and they love me back for who I am.

Well later JD

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/10/2006 2:20 am:
You're right about coming out. So many of my friends were so nervous about it and amazed (and in some cases disappointed) that most of the people they knew already figured it out. In one case, the disappointment came because he worked himself up so much, agonized for so long then his big announcement was nothing to any of his friends, but on the other hand, a big relief, as it meant none of us judged him for it.

OboesHonedIambs 63F

6/10/2006 10:01 pm

You said "MissAnnThrope replies on 6/8/2006 2:07 pm:
You know, I actually had to look that up. I never knew that a Santorum was a sexual term. It's so fitting too. "

Sorry to make you work for that lil' nugget, but it IS very fitting! Hope it gave ya a good laugh!

Instant Human -- Just Add Coffee

MissAnnThrope replies on 6/11/2006 2:03 pm:
It did and I somehow find it fitting it's an act that involves sodomy. Hey, I also learned what a Schiavo is, which amused me to no end.

Become a member to create a blog