Case in point, and this week's winner, Louis P. Sheldon, in an op-ed in the LA Times in reference to proteges of (Republican) Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney:
In the last election cycle, Romney followed the Schwarzenegger victory formula to the letter. He helped bankroll a field of more than 120 mostly liberal Republican candidates to run as a "reform" slate against incumbent state legislators. Not one of these candidates mentioned the word "abortion" and, if you can believe this, in Massachusetts of all places, no Romney-endorsed candidate talked about homosexual marriage. That is the equivalent of running for office in Iowa and not mentioning farming. [emphasis mine]
Color me gobsmacked.
So, homosexual marriage is now the foundation of the Bay State economy? Or does it go deeper than that? Is he in fact suggesting that the very identity of Massachusetts is inextricably tied up with homosexual marriage? I dunno, Lou. Is it just barely possible that in Massachusetts, that azure preserve, these candidates got the idea that hate and intolerance were not milestones on the path to the state legislature? I also love the implication that if these losers had only had the balls to get out there and slam homosexual marriage properly, the statehouse would be theirs. Perhaps the state would then have gone for Bush, as God intended. Surely there could be no other possible reason for their defeat. Wusses!
Don't you dare comment!!! [/reverse psychology]