Matt “Jubal” Cunningham’s wife, Laura, has dug up her maiden name, Saucedo, tacked it on to her married name, and is now serving as the “Director of Latino Outreach” for the Prop. 8 campaign, according to the O.C. Weekly. How disgusting.
How can Latinos get involved in this hate-filled campaign? The same people propagating Prop. 8 want to deport Latinos! The manager of this vile campaign is none other than Jeff Flint, Cunningham’s uber-right wing pal.
Prop. 8 is nothing more than an attempt to take away civil rights from the gay community. Any Latino who backs this measure needs to remember the days when Latino youngsters were beaten for speaking in Spanish at school.
I grew up being called a Mexican, a wetback and a beaner. I blew off these attacks – but they did hurt. The same mentality that led my peers to hurl those epithets at me is now trying to take marriage away from the gay community.
I should not be surprised that Cunningham and his wife are supporting Prop. 8. Matt also has supported John Urell, the Catholic monsignore who covered up for molestor priests. Matt even published the names of some of the victims of molestation. Nice family values there Matt.
This November 4, I encourage all of you, particularly my fellow Latinos, to say no to hate – say not to Cunningham and say not Jeff Flint. Vote NO on Prop. 8!
Do I hate children if I vote no on 3?
Do I hate chickens if I vote no on 2?
SMS,
Oh I dunno, I would feel pretty threatened by any person who started a sentence with “I hate Christians who…” I also would happen to be fearful of Christians who lead with that sort of thinking.
Probably not, Tom. I’m sure you love children, and have nothing against chickens.
Many of us are voting no on 3 despite our love for children, because the state cannot afford another bond.
I’m voting yes on 2 even if it MIGHT cost us a couple more cents per dozen eggs, because I think even that is probably agribusiness propaganda, and most of us humans have evolved to the point of opposing needless cruelty even to farm animals. But still if you vote no on 2, I wouldn’t think you enjoy cruelty to chickens.
But what reason can anyone have for taking marriage rights away from same-sex couples except for, let’s just say, OPPOSITION to homosexuality? I realize nobody wants to cop to “hate,” we’ve all been brought up to think that’s a terrible thing, so we call it other things. But either:
– Prop 8 backers don’t believe 10% (or so) of us are born gay;
– They believe those people should not have been born;
– They believe they should not pursue love in their lives;
– They believe that if they do they should keep it hidden in shame;
– They believe that if they do find a committed monogamous relationship it should have second class status to what us breeders enjoy;
– or what? WHAT? And how is this dehumanization of a group of people different from or better than hate?
O Jeezuz Crist Vern……perhaps they oppose because they believe marriage is between a man and woman, perhaps they believe homosexual sex is immoral, perhaps they believe whatever they have the right to believe.
It is not up to you all to decide what others have to believe anymore then it is the othersides right to tell you how to believe. It is on the ballot AGAIN – like it has been every election for the past 10 years…and it will pass or not. Ya’ll don’t need to bully everyone to see things your way – they will or they wont…and if they dont I am sure you will try again next election.
And Art – I musta missed in prop 8 where it says that Prop 8 is against latinos…I’ll HAVE to re-read it.
Tom yes you hate chickens if you vote no on 2. LOL I voted yes – I already only purchase free range meats and pay more for that. Sorry
It is not up to you all to decide what others have to believe anymore then it is the othersides right to tell you how to believe.
Believe whatever you want to “believe,” Flowerszzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz,
but you should think long and hard before helping amend our Constitution to take rights away from people.
How ’bout I “believe” jobs in management are just for men, young lady?
Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvern, You have every right to belive that and be a chauvenist. Just like that was the way not so long ago…and it was changed when enough people agreed. My point is you dont have to make your point by shoving it down peoples throats (and ARTY, SMS too) They will either agree or disagree and you will not change their minds period. And the more vehement and ugly you are the more they push the other way – it is human nature.
Besides the entire purpose of this post was not really about Prop 8 – it was to upset Jubal now wasnt it? Very slimey and not surprising at all consindering the source. Yeah OC weekly wrote the article but made no mention of whose spouse belonged to whom – that was all Gustavo and Arty boy. And even Gustavo did not go all slimey with it….just a mention. Only Art took it to the “how can I antagonize Jubal” level by attacking his wife….total jerk.
‘…perhaps they oppose because they believe marriage is between a man and woman…‘
There’s that word again: belief. And that should really be the final word in this argument since I think most of us would agree that belief-based legislation is unconstitutional, and if you don’t, well then, that’s OK; Matt, his wife, and Jeff Flint do and they have no problem lying to you to get their own way… much like spoiled children. As I said before: lying is a pretty big sin, but they think it’s OK. After all, God is on their side, right? They’re doing ‘his’ bidding.
SMS
‘That’s simply a hate directed at another imperfect person based on beliefs/tactics/ideology/their extremism.‘
Tell that to the 9/11 hijackers. ‘It’s OK; I understand Mr. Bin Laden. I don’t hate you.’
‘Adolph, I know killed tens of millions due to out of control hate and a massive superiority complex, but it’s OK, I love you.’
Like I said, only Jesus could have said anything resembling these statements, and none of us are Jesus. And even still I think I’d have to question his forgiveness.
SMS
SMS,
“Like I said, only Jesus could have said anything resembling these statements, and none of us are Jesus.”
The good news is none of us HAVE to be Jesus to show that kind of love and forgiveness. You simply have to choose to do so.
It’s also perplexing how you’ve professed to know what Jesus is REALLY about, yet you question one of his most fundamental, and maybe most important attributes…his ability to forgive.
You’ve seen the rare occurrence of a family member of a murder victim get up on the witness stand during the sentencing phase of a trial and forgive the murderer for killing his or her loved one. It doesn’t happen often, but it’s one of the most moving things I’ve ever seen. None of us are Jesus, that is self-evident. But we can aspire to be LIKE him.
‘None of us are Jesus, that is self-evident. But we can aspire to be LIKE him.‘
Sure, ok, but WWJD if he had the ability to stop the ‘murder’ before it happened
That’s what’s happening here. Jesus, in his tolerance and love, would have been against Prop 8 in my opinion. Jesus would never go out of his way to demand that people live their lives a certain way.
Let’s get off the subject of love and forgiveness and talk about tolerance, shall we? They are not the same. As for murder victims’ families and their forgiveness, I apologize. I guess that wasn’t the greatest analogy since you’ve now meandered into a debate on relativism.
SMS
Flowerszzz:
Actually, Gustavo joined Art on the low road in his OCW comment (which he repeated here):
“The family that hates homos together, stays together.”
Class acts, both of these guys — at least in their own minds.
SMS – I have a question….please dont take it the wrong way just curious really, and you can tell me to F off, but I have never known someone who had a sex change. And let me preface by saying I really don’t care if someone is gay or straight. And while I voted YES on 8, for my own reasons, if 8 fails it wont effect my day.
If you were a male before – now female and you are a lesbian – then why did you change sex? For me, a total hetero it makes no sense. (again not a criticism – just can not put my head around it) Logically to me it would seem if you were a woman trapped in a mans body you would before sex change be gay (attracted to men and a male), and after sex change be hetero (a woman now, still attracted to men).
No, actually I will answer because it’s very simple: gender identity (mental gender as opposed to physical sex) is not at all related to sexual preference. They are determined by completely separate parts of the brain according to scientific research. There are many other women like me out there, but they tend to keep a lower profile because they’d rather not get questions like yours.
Me on the other hand, I’m not afraid of much. The way I see it, most people find me attractive and I have an IQ in the 98th percentile, so if someone wants to discriminate against me because nature messed up, not I, then it’s their loss.
I don’t normally discuss trans issues though because I’m not a one-issue voter or commentator and don’t care to be pigeonholed as such.
I hope that answers your question. Oh, and thank you for admitting that gay (civil) marriage is not the end of the world.
SMS
Well I have more questions but if you like I will stop – or I can email them to you. I just have never been able to ask anyone this so I am extremely curious.
You have to understand that while I am a Rep, I am consevative fically, and more in the middle on some other issues. There are many issues we may not agree on, as is the case with many people I associate with – we do not always agree. However I am not a zealot nor am I into judging. I like to know things, I like or dislike people based on their personalities and ethics – not on life styles or political party. I have many people on both sides of the aisle that I consider friends.
Flowerszzz –
While I would like to make clear here that my choice was a ‘life choice,’ meaning one made out of psychological necessity, not a ‘lifestyle choice,’ such as deciding to be a hippie, yuppie, goth, academic, etc, I can chat with you in email if you like. I don’t have a problem taking about it, just not in public. I’m at purplepagansarah@yahoo.com.
SMS
I was deeply conflicted as to whether or not to post anything at all. Instead of just acting, I let it sit the weekend to see how I felt about it. If I was still feeling disturbed I would comment if not I’d just let it go. Well it was still there sooooo…..
I can really understand your voting no on 8. I get everyones reasoning behind the way they feel about this prop. either yes or no.
I will state that as a Santa Ana voter, it is slightly distressing to see that a candidate running in my ward would throw around so much hate. It does matter how you conduct yourself on a blog especially when you are looking for voters to trust that you can lead them. You have voters from every realm and different political parties looking at you for a positive change, and hate isn’t the way to start that. But it sure seems like a good way for it all to unravel.
GOTTA PASTE THIS HERE, as comments on the Bustamante-gag post are wisely closed! But it fits here just as well. Hello, Jubal, F&E???
This little exchange (on the Bustamante-gag thread) got me curious:
F&E Fan: But is it any different from a blurb about Erwin Chemirinsky last week over on OCBlog. The headline in news roundup was something like “Professor speaks out against gay marriage” when the full headline for the story read “Professor speaks out against gay marriage ban.”
He was making a statement AGAINST Prop. 8 (the BAN on gay marriage), but the link made it seem that he was FOR the proposition.
Jubal: Good grief. You’re going to equate a typo on my part with a deliberate deception by Art?
So I put on my latex gloves and headed over to Jubal’s place, where sure enough, from Oct. 13 – A WEEK AGO – still uncorrected – in Matt’s daily “Roundup” Post http://www.redcounty.com/orange-county/2008/10/oc-blog-news-roundup—october-8/
UCI Law Dean Speaks Against Gay-Marriage (OCR)
Erwin Chemerinsky talks at Irvine church whose members are waging fight against Prop. 8. Surprise! Man, talk about a dog-bites-man story.
Right, a “Typo.” You guys all go to freaking Disingenuous School together or what? That SUBTITLE makes it even more sneaky than F&E Fan described! I wonder how many hundreds of readers-in-a-hurry glanced at that without clicking and said, “Hm. Chemerinsky is against gay marriage, and saying so to his own liberal crowd? Maybe I should rethink this” Yeah that WOULD be a dog-bites-man story.
I’m quite sure a lot more readers got the wrong impression from that, OVER THE PAST WEEK, than got the wrong impression from Art’s Bustamante gag. (And I’ve met a few of the latter already) Nice job Matt! Well-aimed ten-word typo in support of an initiative you passionately support.
Well, to frame all this positively… I humbly submit that new blood like myself and Carl bring a new level of integrity to the OC blogosphere.
Vern,
Paranoid, much?
Yes, a typo. They happen. Especially in the morning with my wireless keyboard. And when I see them — or they are brought to my attention — I correct them. As I have done with that part of the Round Up.
So let’s see: I goofed one headline, and now that it has been pointed out to me, I corrected it. Art purposely wrote the headline on his point in order to mislead readers into thinking Carlos Bustamante hit a police car while driving drunk.
And you are honestly going to compare the two matters, Vern? Do you honestly think I manipulated the headline in that News Roundup? Is that in character with how I blog? No.
Is what Art did in character with how he blogs? Yes.
I was going to amend my earlier comment to include you as one of the sane — although liberal — blogger here, but I’ll have to re-think that one.
I appreciate that you at least go as far as far toexpress disagreement with Art making that post.
Carl doesn’t have a problem with his man Art deliberately trying to mislead readers into thinking Carlos committed a felony. I had responded to Carl’s response to on that post, but the great defender of free speech, Art Pedroza, deleted it, as well as two other comments I made.
Oh yes — a new level of integrity to the OC blogosphere, indeed
NOW you add the word “ban” to your title, one minute ago! And – voila! – your commentary “Surprise! Dog-bites-man story” is transformed to snarky sarcasm from wide-eyed amused admiration. It’s hard to believe, you’re a professional consultant and a very clever guy (even if you misspell pronouns and contractions) and there’s not a moment you’re unaware of the impression you’re giving. I see the same thing at all the three big OC blogs, sneaky little misimpressions that are the reader’s fault if they’re misinterpreted. Well, thanks for responding anc correcting that anyway.
I was going to amend my earlier comment to include you as one of the sane — although liberal — blogger here, but I’ll have to re-think that one.
LOL, and I see in LOC comments today that Prevatt was “just about to endorse Pedroza over Busty” until this last kerfluffle.
To Chris Prevatt –
Go ahead Chris, endorse the pro-Prop 8 Busty. Or you could endorse Steve Rockhead or Ana Who, but doing so is just a round-about way of endorsing Busty anyway.
… this should be good.
SMS
Vern:
Do I need to speak slowly? I corrected the omission when it was brought to my attention. It’s not the first typo I’ve made on OC Blog, Vern. I do the Roundup, publish it and rarely look at it again. It’s not unusual for me to attribute a DP or LAT story to the OCR, for example. And I almost always hear from the DP or LAT when i do that, and i make the correction — as i do with any other post when someone brings a typo or error to my attention.
however, they don’t make paranoid accusations that i am doing it on purpose. You’re starting to really fit in hear at OJ.
Believe me or not, I don’t care. What’s beyond dispute is your man deliberately tried to deceive readers.
Thanks to Vern for finding the error and bringing it up here.
And thanks Jubal for correcting it.
I had made a mental note to comment over at OCBlog on the day it appeared, but got busy with other things. I thought someone else might see it and ask for a correction, but with readership down over there, I guess no one caught it.
At least Jubal will make the effort to correct things that are misleading (even if I find it hard to believe it wasn’t intentional).
Maybe Art P will do the same and include a first name on the Bustamante headline.
At least Jubal will make the effort to correct things that are misleading (even if I find it hard to believe it wasn’t intentional).
Why is that hard to believe?
1) I don’t have a pattern of doing that sort of thing, and 2) I’m not stupid enough to think anyone would fall for something like that, even if it occurred to me to do it.
Vern is making a desperate reach.
…but with readership down over there…
Readership down? Au contraire – it’s been skyrocketing. Why do you think we never see the “Real Rankings” posts here any more?
Matt/Jubal,
I wonder how many readers you will retain after your boy McCain gets crushed on Nov. 4? Maybe you can drop the “Red” from your blog name thereafter? There won’t be much “Red” left anywhere after the election. I think Obama may even outpoll McCain here in the O.C.
‘Readership down? Au contraire – it’s been skyrocketing. Why do you think we never see the “Real Rankings” posts here any more?‘
Is it November 5th yet?
SMS
Another classic non-response response from Pedroza.
Art-
Seriously? Really? Do you just have verbal diarrhea? or Do you really not care what people think of you? This is election time its time to try and get all the parties in your community together and vote FOR YOU. Even though clearly you could care less what I think, I think you should know that voters care what you say and how you say it.
I know this particular topic doesn’t have much to do with your race but it matters to the people voting for you.