Ugh. My husband and I agreed that Hayworth looked like Jack Nicholson’s Joker without the make-up.  Even his smile had little horns on the edges.
He was ‘way too smooth and a bit smarmy.  Rachel got a couple of good smacks on him, though.

HayworthUnfortunately, Hayworth was correct that Rachel was not very well-served by her staff on this one. The Abramoff thing is ancient history (was that the last bust – or the one before?) and when Hayworth blew past her with his well-rehearsed response, she had no follow-up. Again on earmarks, she did not have any specific and ridiculous examples to pin on him. She did much better on the Massachusetts marriage topic, but ran out of time for the segment. She should have made mincemeat of this dork.

It’s a big tell about how these people view their own heterosexual marriagesThat the entire concept of two consenting human adults fails to register with them in the slightest.

Good pointThe horse thing is an invalid argument because a horse can’t give informed consent.  I wonder if folks like Hayworth understand the concept of informed consent or if they just ignore it to advance their agenda.

Can’t help but call himJG Wentworth.

Why?Why the hell do these social conservatives keep trying to compare a marriage between two consenting adult human beings with that of a human being and an animal? Santorum, Cornyn and now this idiot. Are they really that stupid? Or is their prejudice choking them so badly that they vomit out ludicrous nightmare scenarios without thinking?  

Quick!First word that comes to mind when you hear Hayworth speak!
Mine: Slimy.

You know what they say about those who scream loudest.Frued would have a field day on these people.

It is pretty sad thatone of their first thoughts when talking about marriage is what if someone has sex with an animal.  They need to get their minds out of the gutter like whoa.

He has gay brow.I’m not saying that all gay men have identical physical characteristics (man, would we be unlucky of we all looked like this asshat) but you see that formation between his eyes?
You see that a lot in club queens.

Men like this can equate same sex marriage with “man-on-critter” because in their minds, women are NOT and never are equal partners in a marriage- they are property.
Consent? HA. When you have a society that indoctrinates girls from childhood onward into believing that they are not complete without the big uber expensive fairytale wedding, poofy huge dress and “Daddy giving them away” to their future husband (a barbaric practice with concerning implications if ever there was one!), you’ve got the entire American female population brainwashed.
Any wonder over half of heterosexual marriages fail, when these unions meet the realities of married life?
Where does any sense of shared responsibility or partnership enter the equation?
“Man and Wife”= Man and Property. Pure and simple.

This race is the only good thing to come out of the Citizen’s United travesty
Thanks to the jduicial activism of Roberts and the other Puritan Supremes, Cindy Lou can now spend $20,000,000 out of the corporate treasury on ads to keep her husband in his $200,000 job.
This is going to be a very tight race.
This man makes Michelle Bachmann look centrist.

But he sounded like typical conservo-talking-point machine while doing it

When another of these arguments comes up, I fall out laughing…as I think back to this diary.
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/…
The “people will marry their pets and robots” line never fails to get me giggling.
I would pay someone to go to Hayworth next rally in a horse suit with and big poster saying “INFORMED CONSENT” pinned on it.  Or “I LUV HAYworth”
I think I would die laughing if at the next “marriage” rally in Raleigh, someone dressed up as a robot (esp like the robot in the Kia commercial) and asked people to marry them.  
Nothing like to some crazy to put a smile on my face.

Consent?You wonder if these guys think their wives have any right to consent or not.

“Well, we have a disagreement.”Could he have come any closer to just telling her “Shut up, bitch?”
This is just the way these people work – and it’s screwed up that they get away with it so much. They just flat out lie, and then when presented with the truth, they say it’s a disagreement.
And there are people out there cheering him on – no doubt there’s people out there thinking he smacked her down.
Idiots.

This is what got to me about the interview.Maddow had him dead to rights on a lie, a provable, empirical lie, and he brushed it off as a “disagreement.”  This is how the wingnuts insulate themselves from reality- reality itself is just an opinion, to them.

I’ve never seen a gay man with a brow like thatReconstructions of Neanderthal and even less evolved hominids, on the other hand….

Rachel v J.DI watched Rachel talking to Mr. Hayworth last night.
I could say that Mr. Hayworth makes politicians look bad.
But I won’t.  
I could say that Mr. Hayworth makes humans look bad.  
But I won’t.
I could say that Mr. Hayworth makes sentient beings look bad.
But I wouldn’t stop there.
Mollusks, horseshoe crabs, sea urchins all have more pride than Mr. J.D. “Oh-I’m-Not-Smarmy” Hayworth.

Former PorkerDoes anyone remember this guy when he was in the House of Representatives? He was about 380 or 400 until he had his gastric by-pass. Now he looks like a deaths head. Personally, I think he’s a sociopath in need of psychiatric care, or perhaps confinement, as he is clearly a danger to himself and others.

Conservatives of his stripe…practice what I call ‘faith-based’ reality. Faith based religion is one thing when the faith is in the basis of the religion (ie.belief in God), it fails when you rule out giving any thoughts to context, translation, contradiction, or historical context. Even then, the “truth” of a religion boils down to faith because the basis cannot be empirically proved. Faith-based reality on the other hand is simply deciding what you would like the word to look like, then insisting it is that way, ignoring any and all facts, unless by chance they support what you believe should be true.
When the facts show you are wrong, well, faith can move mountains, so changing a fact to suit the circumstance is fine. Even had the definition of marriage been as he claimed, a horse is incapable of forming an intimate relationship. Affection, yes…note he said his affection for his horse, not their horse’s desire for intimacy. Fact-affection/= intimacy. Faith- affection must mean intimacy because I said so. Fact-my children have two mommies and we are a family. Faith-the folks who have told me my family isn’t a family.
I think that somewhere in their unhappy childhoods these heterocentrists held deeper affection for either a sibling or their dog than the parent whose gender theoretically forms your taste in a future spouse. This is why their minds leap intuitively to equating gay marriage to bestiality or incest. I know MY mind never went there, but then, I loved my daddy much more than my dog or my brother.

Yes, but they keep repeating it – and no matter how fact-free their “opinion” isthe fake-balance media gives them airtime to snowball an illiterate public with it.  Maddow is probably the first and likely will be the only person in the corporate media to call him on it to his face (I’m sure Olbermann would devote a minute or two to it, but his dad died so he’ll be gone for a while; of course, Hayworth won’t actually let Olbermann cross-examine him.)

It’s either him or McNightmareNot much of a choice for Arizona.

TypicalJD Hayworth has a scandal-ridden past: Remember Jack Abramoff? Then his wife taking money from his own PAC and his earmarks while in office, hardly a paragon of virtue (although no Rick Renzi, but close). He can easily be hammered on this alone. Then we go to the vomitus he spews as a talk-radio loon on KFYI…any decent opponent could make mincemeat out of him. The final blow, though, should come from his very deliberate misreading of MA law. It makes NO sense…any opponent, again, could own him early by pointing out that legal unions require consent, which, legally, cannot be given by animals and children. JD Hayworth is gunning for the Teabaggers and the Zonie far-right wingnuts in this primary. It will be interesting to see how he shifts his positions (if he gets past beloved son, John McCain) in a general election. Arizona is not quite the same 2-dimensional red state it once was (like many states we have a directional split: Flagstaff in the North, Tucson in the South and Alabama in the middle – although, I think, not so much anymore)…

That’s the Maggie Gallagher strategy at work……”…well, we just disagree on the definition of marriage…”  BULLSHIT. These people want us dead or back in the closet.

douchebag!

Hateful racist with a simp on his face

Knuckledragger!Gawd, I loathe this SOB!

IndeedIt’s MY homophobic bullshit, and I want it NOW!!!

I hate to say it…But yeah, my first thought when I saw him was “Wait til they get a load of me.”