So you have to be gay to be pissed off about this?

I'm straight. I'm pretty pissed off about the huge (and loud) number of people that think that making a group of people second class through law is a good thing. It's not just about gays, either.

...and like a typical member of today's Right, freedom is right there for the buying. As for everyone else.. you're all right, eh Jack?

I hate this strawman, and it's coming up time and time again.

This isn't a "personal belief" or "opinion." This isn't someone who like brunettes over blondes. This isn't someone who doesn't like chocolate or who even doesn't like smokers. This is the belief that a group of people should be second class to another group of people.

If someone stands up and says "I don't like gays" it is one thing. When someone stands up and says "we should take rights away because I don't like these people" it's quite another thing. I am pissed off about the latter. It's the difference between thinking the person is a jerk and thinking the person is detrimental.

If you are required to not be a fascist or a communist to have a job, is that a political litmus test?

Theorize: if the guy was suddenly found on record of being in support of pedophilia would this thread be happening?

Can "cannot lead" equate out to "is not fit to do his job" or "cannot do his job due to distraction."

Mozilla did a piss poor job by choosing a bigot to run an organization like this, anyway.

This is reality for many in corporate surfdom today.

Only if you are affluent.

If you are a nobody, H.R. would make up something or wait until a minor infraction and can you.

And you'd have no recourse... because the company said it was for cause and there is no proof otherwise.

However, if you are affluent and a public person you can fight back.

If he was a mid-level to low-level employee then there would be no debate. The company would make something up and that would be the end of it.

I guess there is yet ANOTHER advantage of affluence.

Scalia should be impeached for prejudging cases.

Thomas should be impeached for open and obvious conflict of interests.

Roberts is an idiot, but I am not sure he's technically done anything wrong. And I read today that Kennedy had roots in the lobbyist industry.

They just need more time for their corporate puppetmasters to tell them what to do.. that's all.

Not only are they a court purchased by corporate interests, they are intellectually weak and the lack any courage to do the right thing.

Don't listen to anyone that assumes this is a party-based phenomenon.

We have the worst of worst in ALL positions of leadership.

Understatement... it's what's for dinner!

I'd listen if you didn't have to take a hard right line and make a strawman out of every "liberal" position.

Liberal in quotes since you obviously mean it as a pejorative here. Search/replace liberal for "asshole" and your meaning stays the same.

I think you're maybe half right.

We have a little less than half of the people that throw up their hands and give up because it is just so dumb.

We have another group at a little less than half that are so worn out with work, the 3 kids society said they should have, the junk they spend their money on, etc.. etc.. that they don't have the time to pay attention.

So you have 2% that are pissed off that our leadership is dumb as hell and are willing to fight the idiocy. And that's not enough.