I just found this post. Yes, Adam, it has its perks.... ;)

"The Salem Statesman Journal reports. Multnomah county will begin issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples today: Multnomah County, the most populous and liberal county in Oregon, will begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, according to a statement..." [Burnt Orange Report]

One more thing about gay marriage and the constitution. It's not a simple Left/Right issue. In addition to the "equal protection" argument supporting gay marriage, there's a good "states' rights" argument against a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Traditional conservatives are hard-pressed to change the constitution and impose the will of the federal government on the states. One conservative commentator whose blog deserves to be read every day on a variety of issues (as I do), Andrew Sullivan, is both a gay Republican and a conservative opposed to a constitutional amendment against gay marriage.

The time zone can be changed in the "settings" section of blogger.
"p.s. has anyone noticed that the times for the blog are on west coast time....wierd...."
[touch me in the private spot]

COMM 101 Assignment Due Friday:
I have now met with representatives from all groups. By Friday before class I would like to see a detailed account of your group's proposed legislation posted on your group blog. If you haven't yet posted your audience analysis, I would like for you to complete and post that too.

When I posted a link to that satirical story about Bush proposing a constitutional amendment to ban gay sex on the moon I didn't expect that anyone (regardless of his or her position on the issue of gay marriage) would get more than a chuckle out of it. Boy was I mistaken! My critics respond below:

Is discussing a possibly false article banning gay sex on the moon really necessary? This may not be a valid article and it seems to be another ridiculous attempt to make Bush look bad. I can't ever imagine discussing an article on a web blog or in class that depicts Bush in a positive light. Everyone else can continue to slam Bush, but he will always have my support even though I disagree with some of his views. This whole issue gets me so fired up because the majority of people place all of the blame for poor decisions made in this country on Bush alone. There are many others who impact the decisions of our country so why must everyone point the finger at Bush? Don't believe all of the bullshit you read even if it is introduced to you by a professor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[FRED'S FUNNIES]

Okay, maybe I'm just being picky, but I found Dr. Gilbert's posting bothersome. First of all, the only thing that preceeds the "news" excerpt is "interesting proposal from the Bush White House". After reading the entire article using the link, I was pretty sure it was satirical and made up. However, the article is referenced as being from the reliable news source, Reuters. Well being the investigative little junior detective that I am, I checked with Reuters. It is in fact NOT a Reuters article. It's a load of crap - which is, like I said, pretty clear anyway, but the way it is referenced makes it seem otherwise. My biggest problem is that Dr. Gilbert made no attempt to point out that this was a made-up article that had no factual value whatsoever. Whatever your political stance is, Dr. G., as a professor, it is irresponsible of you to post something like this without some sort of disclaimer. Not everyone would bother digging like I did, and some would blindly believe you simply because of your position. Please be more responsible with the way you do your "political agenda" postings.

[Musiciananigans]