We Only Have Ourselves to Blame
- Friday, April 3, 2009, 9:51
- Krusty Konservative
- 2,280 views
- 53 comments
Conservatives across Iowa are disappointed, saddened, and angry over the Iowa Supreme Court’s unanimous decision to legalize gay marriage. My inbox is now full of statements from Republicans who are responding to the court’s decision.
For the most part they are what you would expect. But I just can’t sit here and ignore the fact that Republicans are to blame for the court’s decision, not a liberal court, or an even more liberal legislature.
Republican Party Chairman Matt Strawn sent out the following statement.
Strawn said, “The sad and simple fact is this decision could have been avoided. Once clear that Iowa’s marriage law was under attack by the courts and outside interest groups, majority Democrats had every opportunity to advance legislation removing the politics from protecting marriage and placing the decision directly in the hands of Iowa voters.”
Strawn is correct is saying the decision could have been avoided. Republicans passed the marriage amendment out of the House, twice I think. The Senate, under Sen. Iverson’s leadership, failed to pass the amendment when Republicans were in the majority. Republicans failed to pass it in the Senate by just one vote. So be angry with Iverson, or former Republican Senator Doug Shull for voting against it.
Iowa’s marriage laws have been under attack for almost a decade, this is not something that just happened when Democrats took over control over the legislature. Republican’s had their chance to pass a marriage amendment and failed to do so. To be really honest, I’m more upset with them today than I am with the Justices of the Supreme Court, Speaker Murphy, or Mike Gronstal.
Since I’m not going to make any friends today, I might as well pour a little gas on the fire. I’m upset that the legislators tucked tail and ran home to the comforts of their homes when they found out that this decision was going to be announced. Talk about pathetic! The Supreme Court shows total disrespect for a law that you passed and you flee the Capitol? K’mon!
More disappointing were the comments that legislators made yesterday that admitted that nothing would be done to counter the court’s decision this session. Again, pathetic.
If Republican leaders expect Iowa’s social conservatives to channel their anger and help them win elections in 2010, they better be ready to lead on this issue, and they needed to start leading on it this morning. Unfortunately, I don’t see many Republican leaders doing much today besides stating the obvious.
They need to realize that there is a passionate angry mod outside their door and they have two options. Either they can step up and lead us into battle, or they can continue to ignore us and watch us bust down the door and ransack the Republican Party.
About the Author
Krusty Konservative has written 284 stories on this site.
Herschel Krustofski is the pseudonym for the anonymous author of Krusty Konservative, a blog which focuses on Iowa Politics. Created in February of 2006, Krusty Konservative is the undisputed heavyweight champion of the Iowa blogosphere. Since its conception, Krusty Konservative has never shied from tackling controversial issues, and providing insight to the inner workings of Republican politics in Iowa.
53 Comments on “We Only Have Ourselves to Blame”
Write a Comment
Gravatars are small images that can show your personality. You can get your gravatar for free today!
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Krusty thank you for once again stating the obvious.
I am shocked. We Iowans don’t get to decide. The Supreme Court is full of a bunch of liberals. Congratulations Iowa! We are going to have crazies moving here. I can’t believe how dumb Stu Iverson was. When the GOP was in power, they failed. As goes Iowa, thus goes the nation. Way to go you moderate GOPers. Congrats on turning Iowa gay.
Yes. The silence of the so-called Republican leadership is deafening.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats of Sioux City said he was “extremely disappointed” by the ruling.
“The Defense of Marriage Act had strong bipartisan support when it was introduced and debated in our legislature. That bipartisan support for traditional marriage between one man and one woman reflected the will of the people then – and reflects the will of the people now,” Vander Plaats said. “On an issue of this monumental importance to the very foundation of our society, I believe a vote of the people is necessary. I hope the General Assembly will take the required steps to give Iowans a voice is this process on the most basic of issues – and that Governor Culver will take a leadership role to let all Iowans express their opinion.”
April 3, 2009 | For Immediate Release
Contact: Don McDowell (515.281.6043)
Statement on Iowa Supreme Court’s Decision to Allow Gay Marriage
Sen. McKinley: “I believe marriage should only be between one man and one woman and I am confident
the majority of Iowans want traditional marriage to be legally recognized in this state.”
DES MOINES, IA – Senate Republican Leader Paul McKinley (R-Chariton) issued the following statement this morning in response to the Iowa Supreme Court’s decision to allow gay marriage in Iowa:
“The decision made by the Iowa Supreme Court today to allow gay marriage in Iowa is disappointing on many levels. I believe marriage should only be between one man and one woman and I am confident the majority of Iowans want traditional marriage to be legally recognized in this state. Though the court has made their decision, I believe every Iowan should have a voice on this matter and that is why the Iowa Legislature should immediately act to pass a Constitutional Amendment that protects traditional marriage, keeps it as a sacred bond only between one man and one woman and gives every Iowan a chance to have their say through a vote of the people.”
“Congrats on turning Iowa gay.”
I’m officially copying and pasting all your remarks so I can save them in a scrap book. I want my grandchildren to be able to see that there was a time when true hatred existed for no real reason.
Steve Right— I don’t you think you should be offended by “turning iowa gay.” If you are gay that should be a complement. That statement implies that Iowa is now a homosexual state because it allows homosexual marriage, Right? What else can you say. Iowa went from being for traditional marriage to being for gay marriage so why are you offended. You should be celebrating.
Yeah, Steve – that’s what the Romans and the Greeks said after they normailized gay marriage. That worked out pretty well for their society, didn’t it?
I’ll say it again — I couldn’t be more proud to call myself an Iowan than I am right now. Justice prevails over intolerance. Step one, complete.
Now, on to “homo-fying” all of your children, and the gay agenda will be complete (insert evil laughter).
Take back Iowa! Vote them ALL out at the next election. Show the government that WE THE PEOPLE run the show, not them.
Jim50 — you are in the minority, so I wouldn’t be so quick to scream for elections.
Krusty dont expect strawn to know what happened a couple years ago in the legislature. not like he lived here or anything.
On Laura Schlesinger’s radio show recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination, according to Leviticus 18:22, and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following response is an open letter to Dr.Laura, penned by a US resident, which was posted on the Internet. **************************************************** Dear Dr. Laura: Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination… End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God’s Laws and how to follow them. 1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians? 2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? 3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness – Lev.15: 19-24. The problem is how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. 4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is, my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? 5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2. clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it? 6. A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this? Are there ‘degrees’ of abomination? 7. Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here? 8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die? 9. I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? 10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? Lev.24:10-16. Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.
God’s word is make believe, the most expansive fairy tale in history. Our laws should not have anything to do with that book.
OK, Steve Wrong, then how about me killing you? What would be wrong with that?
Remember God’s word, “Thou shalt not kill.” It protects you as well as the rest of us.
While we’re talking about “Thou shalt not kill”, whenever an AIDS infected person has sex with another person, they’re putting that person at risk for contacting AIDS–that’s killing.
A great example of the ignorance that has caused the downfall of the Republican party. Someday we’ll look back on essays like this and laugh. I know I’m not alone in saying that I will do everything in my power to see this ruling upheld.
Todd: You’re blaming the wrong people. Iverson voted for the amendment. It was Lundby, Tinsman and Redfern who voted against it. http://www.radioiowa.com/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=0C00130D-7292-4946-AF7D5CAE48DA2E08
We don’t kill each other because we are pack animals, and our survival depends on us working together. Those who were violent and killed their fellow pack members were abandoned by the pack, and thus died off.
Basically, what I’m saying is, the idea of “Thou Shalt Not Kill” is a product of Natural Selection. Evolution saves the day again.
Iowa Supreme Court to bigots: Suck IT!
And if you’re implying that all gay people have AIDS you’re a bigger idiot than I first guessed.
Before you assume that posters here are in the minority, you may want to take a look at the data. Traditional Marriage is overwhelmingly supported in Iowa. You’re the one in the minority both in Iowa and nationally. Hell, even California voted to uphold traditional marriage. There is a reason why Culver and the Legislative Democrats dont want to touch this issue … They know heads are going to roll as a result of this and they want to be sure their heads dont end up in the same bucket with the Supreme Court’s.
Iowa voters in 2010 to the Iowa Supreme Court: The scaffolding is being erected on a political guillotine … You’re all about to become 5 inches shorter. Watch your heads…
What a banner day for the liberals. Now we shall see how the right responds.
statement just out from mckinley: Will Governor Culver Keep His Promise
to Protect Traditional Marriage?
Governor Culver promised to protect traditional marriage just last year during a statewide television broadcast but now that court has decided, will he keep his promise to Iowans?
DES MOINES, IA – Senate Republican Leader Paul McKinley (R-Chariton) today called on Governor Culver to keep the promise he made during the taping Iowa Public Television’s Iowa Press on January 18, 2008 to “do whatever it takes to protect marriage between a man and a woman”:
“Governor Culver told a statewide television audience just last year that ‘we’ll do whatever it takes to protect marriage between a man and a woman,’ so I hope the governor is ready to join with the Republicans in the Iowa Legislature by endorsing a Constitutional Amendment that protects traditional marriage and gives the people of Iowa a chance to have their say. Republicans know that protecting traditional marriage is important to Iowans and it is time for Governor Culver to show some leadership and make good on his word.”
-30-
look at the mckinley statement. at least mckinley has guts. paulsen? hello?
Steve,
According to the DM Register today, they cited a poll that showed that 62% of Iowans are against homosexual marriage and only 32% are in favor and 6% undecided. WHO IS IN THE MINORITY?
Krusty, whatever the merits of your arguments, and you do have some, please note that when talking about nouns in the plural, i.e.: “My in box is now full of statements from Republican’s….” an apostrophe is NOT necessary. “Republicans” will suffice. Do all of us conservatives (and the memory of Bill Buckley, for that matter) a favor and proofread – don’t give them anything to attack but your ideas.
Put it to a public vote where statistics and historic examples show opponents to gay marriage turnout in higher numbers than supporters do, youre probably looking at a marriage amendment passing with around 70% of the vote in Iowa. Sorry Steve, the last thing you want is for the people of Iowa to decide.
Bob Vander Plaats will win in 2010. This ruling just gave him a shoe-in.
The American Gothic painting depicts a father and daughter, not a husband and wife.
No TJ, the ruling just gauranteed BVP several primary opponents because they know Culver can be beaten now. Bob is totally irrelevant.
Spot on Krusty – I am also angry with Iverson. I place it squarely on his shoulders. His current wife’s ex-husband is probably cheering though. He was a criminal homosexual pedophile who used to own the summer camp which many of us in central Iowa attended as innocent children. His particular partners of choice were teenage boys. Justice Ginsburg feels that the age of sexual consent should be as low as 12 years old. In her world, the criminal pedophile perp desiring to mate with the 14 year old adolescent is simply an alternative lifestyle and should be able to be ratified legally. It’s disgusting.
I am so very saddened by the reaction of our political leaders who chose to run and hide rather than be leaders. They are afraid. It’s pathetic.
It’s a great big huge experiment on children. First, killing human babies to experiment on them via stem cell research. Now, indulging homosexuals vanity and selfishness at the expense of the children who had no choice over this experiment and end up with Rosie O’Donnell as a father. Gross.
You are not being fair to Iverson. He voted for the amendment to protect marriage. Only three Repulicans voted against it. They were Lundby, Tinsman and Redfern. Direct your anger at the people who deserve it.
Anon- 14:46 So basically, some GOP leaders don’t run on convictions; they just run on “however the political landscape looks and if they have a chance of wining.” At least Bob is running on principles and not the politcal outlook.
TJ, he’s running alright. And running and running and running and running and running…… RUN FORREST!!! He ought to take a look at his poltical win/loss record to forcast his own political outlook. To use a basetball analogy, he would be a high seed in the NIT, but no trip to the big dance. Serendipity BABY!
Since you have all so clearly forgotten, not everyone in this nation OR Iowa is Christian, so why are you trying to make them all follow your “rules”? I’m sure you’d love it if you had to start doing things or were banned from doing certain things because someone else’s religion says so.
Hey Krust, found an interesting statistic that seems to dovetail into your thesis.
Also, as an old guy I am beginning to believe this is inevitable, the youngsters don’t see it as the big deal we do.
———————-
Found somewhere on-line today “Washington Monthly has a nice piece with an interesting point.
So much for their argument about left wing liberal judges.
WHAT THE ‘JUDICIAL ACTIVISTS’ HAVE IN COMMON…. In recent years, four state Supreme Courts have ruled in support of same sex-marriage.
In Massachusetts, the ruling was written by Justice Margaret Marshall.
In California, the ruling was written by Justice Ronald George.
In Connecticut, the ruling was written by Justice Richard Palmer.
And in Iowa, the ruling was written by Justice Mark Cady.
And what do all four have in common? Each was appointed to their respective state Supreme Court by a Republican governor.”
———————-
Bob Vander Plaats will win. He just needs to keep running.
If gay marriage couldn’t win in California in an Obama year, then it can’t win on the ballot in Iowa and the Dems know this and that is why is was ruled by the sumpreme court.
I’m incredibly excited about the decision. It means so much for the families and the future of Iowa, and just imagine the increased revenue and exposure from families coming here to host their weddings or to make the permanent move to this great state. We should all be proud Iowans today!
We should all be proud Iowans today! It means so much for the families and the future of Iowa, and just imagine the increased revenue and exposure from families coming here to host their weddings or to make the permanent move to this great state.
We should quickly quadruple the cost of a marriage license. Some of our budget issues could be solved by out of state marriage license seekers.
Boy + boy or girl + girl = no baby.
Just think, abortions ought to go down too.
I’ve been out of the loop most of the day. Any word from Gronstal and Murphy on this? Links, please
grontsal and murphy both praised the ruling. no word on any action. none.
Sure. Blame it on the republicans. You left wing Democrats never own up to anything that isn’t poular. It’s all about politics. Sure there are some republicans who have no right calling themselves one, but behind closed doors, there is some corrupt Democrat who preys on those very people and together you have ruined America. Never thought I’d be ashamed of my country because of it’s leaders. It is breaking my patriotic heart!
Nick said:
“…and just imagine the increased revenue and exposure from families coming here to host their weddings or to make the permanent move to this great state.”
Um, Nick? Does this sappy theory still apply when the folks moving back are HIV+ and on disability?
Have you read Gary Stewart’s letter on the Bleeding Heartland blog? Factor in the decreased life expectancy of men who have sex with men, throw in a couple adopted kids whose parents are sick and/or dying, and we’ve got utter chaos on our hands.
Way to go, Iowa Supreme Court and Legislative Democrats!
http://www.bleedingheartland.com/diary/2640/the-real-threat-to-iowa-marriages-letter-to-a-gop-senator
Peggy,
So?
love,
Steve
We need the return of blood tests to apply for a marriage license.
TJT saiz.
“Never thought I’d be ashamed of my country because of it’s leaders. It is breaking my patriotic heart!”
Whoee, ya’d better hope yer spouse never runs for President, cuz them words’ll be thrown right back in campaign commercials.