Updated Sept. 5
The Log Cabin Republicans have now endorsed John McCain for president, having waited to see that his veep wasn't going to be a raging 'phobe (she isn't). The announcement notes that McCain broke ranks with the GOP to publically oppose and speak out against the anti-gay federal marriage amendment:
"On the most important issue that LGBT Americans faced in the last decade-the federal marriage amendment-Sen. John McCain stood with us. Now we stand with him," said Log Cabin Republicans President Patrick Sammon.
Of course, McCain does support state constitutional amendments to limit marriage to a man and a woman-that would be the Kerry/Edwards position of four years ago, for those with short memories. But in the GOP world, his opposition to the federal amendment sets him apart.
Chris Crain blogs that Log Cabin should not have endorsed McCain (just as four years ago, the group chose not to endorse Bush). Yes, we all realize that on matters of gay legal equality, Obama is better. Of course, Log Cabin could also simply turn itself into yet another beltway Democratic Party fundraising front group, but I don't see how that would advance gay issues in the GOP.
[Added: Crain, in supporting Obama and attacking McCain, also blogs of Palin's youngest that "this special-needs child is still an infant and requires far greater attention than Palin could give as vice president or president." Well, so much for nontraditional families with a working mom and stay-at-home dad-or working dad and stay-at-home dad!]
By endorsing McCain, Log Cabin has provided itself with access to McCain's White House. They won't get everything they want, but they'll be welcomed into the conversation. Snubbing McCain despite his historic (for the GOP) opposition to the federal amendment would have closed that door.
For the past four years, no gay group has had White House access. Should the worst nightmare of LGBT beltway activists come to pass and McCain actually win, what good would a marginalized Log Cabin be? LCR did the right thing.
Gays still a cheap date. Karen Ocamb blogs at The Belierico Project:
[D]id anyone notice that the bar Obama set for LGBT discrimination was hospital visitation? Was this wish for agreement the most respect our LGBT leaders could elicit from the Democratic Party's presidential nominee after all the fundraising, all the volunteering, all the hurt feelings over antigay errors, now tucked away in the name of unity? Was this a hint of what we can expect?
She goes on to note that an openly gay man, Bob Hattoy, addressed the Democrats' nominating convention in 1992, and sees a step back. (Yes, yes...Republicans are worse.)
More. On Reason magazine's website, Michael C. Moynihan takes on Andrew Sullivan's Palin bashing.
Furthermore. No mention of gay issues by McCain in his acceptance speech (though he did reference American Indians). On the plus side, the Advocate reports that at the convention "Senior McCain campaign strategist Steve Schmidt spoke to Log Cabin Republicans, calling them "an important part" of the Republican Party and sounding a personal note about his lesbian sister." This happened the day after Log Cabin's endorsement. (YouTube of the meeting is here.)
More still. It's been pointed out that no mention of gays, in a GOP context, is actually progress-the last Republican convention included Bush's call to pass the anti-gay federal marriage amendment. McCain did criticize judges who "legislate from the bench," which covers judically ordered marriage equality but has long been a conservative critique of the judiciary, pertaining to many areas of social policy and expansive goverment.
The Advocate strains mightly to give McCain horns:
His running mate had a "news flash" for the media Wednesday night, and John McCain had one for LGBT Americans on Thursday: "Education is the civil-rights issue of this century." It was the second thinly veiled dig at gays and lesbians the Arizona senator made as he accepted the GOP's nomination for president.
I guess you find what you're looking for.
100 Comments for “Log Cabin Endorses McCain (and Convention Roundup)”
posted by Phil on
This is absurd.
“Of course, McCain does support state constitutional amendments to limit marriage to a man and a woman?that would be the Kerry/Edwards position of four years ago”
Even if the above statement was true, McCain is not running against Kerry and Edwards, he’s running against Obama/Biden who are emphatically against all such state amendments. Democrats have made progress on gay marriage, even from just one election to the next.
But I do not agree with the idea that Kerry and McCain had the same position on state marriage amendments. Yes Kerry unfortunately went on record supporting them, but McCain has actually CAMPAIGNED for them and recorded a TV ad for them. That is a signifigant distinction.
N one expects that the LCRs to become Obama cheerleaders, but there are other options. Like holding out endorsement longer in the hopes that McCain/Palin might flinch and offer some token nod towards equality. Would it have worked? We’ll never know now.
And maybe I’m missing something but what is all this concern about “access”. Invitations to the best cocktail parties? What good is it to have access if he opposes you on every issue?
As for the FMA: yes it was nice of McCain to oppose, but he did so on the issues of states rights’. The FMA is dead in the water: the only way the FMA would become an issue again is if a federal judge rules against DOMA: in which case, McCain would favor such an amendment.
I understand if you want to support McCain because you agree with him on other principles, but too pretend that he is anything but a devoted for of the gay community is simply absurd.
posted by Richard J. Rosendall on
“Yes, we all realize that on matters of gay legal equality, Obama is better.”
Hey MM, do you agree with that? If not, Steve, will you retract the “all”?
As to the access argument, Steve, isn’t that the same argument that you dismissed when gay Democrats were making it?
BTW, in 1996, my friend Barrett Brick and I formed a “Clinton truth squad” in which we compiled a long list of Clinton’s anti-gay record and posted it on listservs to counter the propaganda being pushed by gay Democrats. I remember A.J. Eddy, a leader of a Log Cabin chapter in South Florida (I think it was Broward County), forwarding our list.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Well, King Richard, as Grand Arbiter of All Things Politically Correct and Gay, I thought you would have informed Stephen of what is and is not allowable in your Court of the gayDemocrats.
I do agree with you on one important point, “access” is highly overrated by political advocacy groups unless access means you’re in a position to tell them what you want… not just sip pink cosmos at the Watergate.
The LCRs are coming out of a bad period in their group’s history… when their leadership was glad and willing to do the bidding of gayDemocrat advocacy groups in the name of gayLeft solidarity and money –as I’ve pointed out to you earlier and elsewhere.
Unlike the gayDemocrat automatons (automata?), gayGOPers don’t have to march lockstep to the Masta’ orders… we use our brain. Stephen need not follow my instructions –unlike you, King Richard, I would never suppose to impose my views on him.
You, however, are a basketcase awaiting salvation, redemption and fixing. (wink)
posted by Jorge on
By endorsing McCain, Log Cabin has provided itself with access to McCain’s White House. They won’t get everything they want, but they’ll be welcomed into the conversation. Snubbing McCain despite his historic (for the GOP) opposition to the federal amendment would have closed that door.
That’s a very interesting argument that I have not thought of.
I think LCR waited a decent enough period to let the McCain campaign sweat, especially compared to… whatever organization that was that endorsed Obama immediately. I agree with the endorsement, but I would have been very unhappy if it came a moment earlier. The Log Cabin Republicans should be a gay rights organization first, and a Republican organization second.
Chris Crain writes that Sarah Palin opposes hate crimes laws. Well, that’s very typical of Republicans–gay Republicans included! His link cites her answer as, “No, as I believe all crimes are based on hate.” Nothing wrong with that. On the other hand, while she does oppose gay marriage, she vetoed a law that would have barred gay state employees from getting benefits for their partners. Okay, so to me, that’s the Log Cabin Republicans saying McCain has done some decent things. It’s an accurate statement.
posted by SteveJ on
Chris Crain is also very upset the Palin is not staying home to raise her kids. Suddenly, that’s the liberal line.
posted by jason on
I don’t understand why you think that the alternative to endorsing McCain for LCR is to become “yet another beltway Democratic Party fundraising front group.” Seems like a false choice. Why can’t the LCR withhold endorsement but remain a fundamentally Republican group? It’s not exactly a crystal clear case as to why McCain is worth endorsing but Bush wasn’t (in some ways, McCain is worse than Bush — on civil unions, for instance).
And I furthermore don’t see how the Palin pick swayed LCR. If McCain had picked, say, Joe Lieberman, it’s a different story. But Governor Palin–while seemingly not a “raging ‘phobe”–has what could be charitably described as a mixed record on gay matters.
At any rate, I agree that it’s hard to see what good a marginalized LCR would be, but it’s almost too late for that. Has McCain released a statement or in any way indicated that he accepts the endorsement? Not so far as I can tell. Which leads me to believe that the “access” that this endorsement has bought LCR won’t be worth much. So yes, a marginalized LCR is troubling. But an LCR that is content to settle is heading down the road toward exactly what we criticize groups like HRC for.
posted by Richard II on
As an Independent it is always cute to see how gay Democraats and gay Republicans are so eager and willing to bend over and get screwed by their party master.
Mcain opposes the ENDA and the HCPA. He opposes lifting the ban on gays in the armed forces. He supports federal judges who would overturn Romer and Lawrence. He oppposes giving same-sex couples the slightest meausre of equality. So what do the gay Republicans do? bend over and say, “Please master McCain, do be harder and without a condom.”
McCain’s VP also opposes giving same-sex couples any equity, and only did so — for state employees — because she was forced to.
If Mcain wins, he may very well allow a few obedient servants into the master’s house, and he may even talk kindly to them once in awhihle.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
jason asks: “I don’t understand why you think that the alternative to endorsing McCain for LCR is to become “yet another beltway Democratic Party fundraising front group.” Seems like a false choice. Why can’t the LCR withhold endorsement but remain a fundamentally Republican group?”
It’s not a false choice if you knew something about the LCRs of recent past.
For the period from the late 90’s up to 2006, the LCRs were just another gayDemocrat tool taking money from gayLeft fatcats and willingly undermining the Party in the quest for a seat (off to the side, no less) at the Washington Insiders table of gayLeft and gayDemocrat powerbrokers… hence the public non-endorsement of Bush in 04, the collapse of the LCRs and the dishonorable exit from their ranks of the BenedictArnold who brought it all about.
The gayDemocrats and gayLeft literally shoveled wheelbarrows full of cash into the LCR coffers in the 2004 race to undercut Bush and make it appear to independents and unaligned moderates he was something other than he truly was… and it worked… Bush should have gotten an extra 3% of the vote in 2004 because of the deceptive, underhanded, fraudulent activity of the gayLeft-controlled LCRs. There simply is no way that there was a 48.3% base of idiots in America that would have voted for Kerry/Edwards in 2004… 45% I can accept.
I think the LCR was right to endorse McCain and the clucking you hear from the barnyard chickens over at CitizenCrain, BlogActive, BlogAmerica and other gayLeft blogs are because the chickens now realize the roosters have come home to roost… it’s bizness time for the gayLeft hens and they don’t like the prospects of real roosters in the yard.
That’s why it is NOT a false choice to suggest that if the LCRs didn’t endorse McCain, they would have probably turned out to be another gayLeft tool of the gayDemocrat powerbroker cabal inside the Beltway of DC.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Richard2 offers this ditty str8 out of the gayDemocrats’ playbook: “Mcain (sic)opposes the ENDA and the HCPA. He opposes lifting the ban on gays in the armed forces. He supports federal judges who would overturn Romer and Lawrence. He oppposes giving same-sex couples the slightest meausre (sic) of equality. So what do the gay Republicans do? bend (sic) over and say, “Please master McCain, do be harder and without a condom.””
Now, what was that nonsense about you being an Independent, Richard2?
Your own words deny you that label.
Of all those typical gayLeft falsehoods you spin, let’s look at just one?
Richard2 writes: “He supports federal judges who would overturn Romer and Lawrence.”
BZZZZZZZZZZZZT, wrong again Richard2. You just can’t tell a fib without overstating your hand, can you? McCain has told the pro-Life community that he will appoint judges in the model of strict constructionist jurists to the federal courts. How those judges decide issues adjacent and tangential to Romer or Lawrence is subject to lots of debate and speculation… but for you to contend that YOUR gayDemocrat crystal ball allows you to know the inner thoughts of the entire pool of potential jurists available to President McCain is just silly overreaching gayDemocrat fear-mongering.
And you say you’re an Independent? Good God, man, check under those skirts… you are a solid gayDemocrat! This post and 7 others glaringly prove it.
posted by Richard II on
MM;
As some one who just made incredibly racist and anti-Semitic comments directed at me and Richard J, I find it odd that you feel that you have any sort of credibility or moral ground to walk upon.
Yes, Mcain does oppose the ENDA and the HCPA. Yes, Mcain does oppose lifting the ban on gays serving in the armed forces. Yes, Mcain does oppose giving gay couples any measure of equity. These are basic facts. They come from his statements and voting record.
What is the gay Republican response? “Oh thank you Master Mcain. Please sir, can I have another screw and without a condom?”
Obama, in contrast, supports every single gay rights issue, except gay marriage. He supports civil unions, Mcain does not. Gay Democrats are still bending over to get screwed, but it will be a safer screw them the gay Republicans.
Mcain said that he will, if selected, appoint, “strict constructionist” jurists to the federal courts. In case you are unaware this is a term that is used, almost exclusivily by the sort of justices who oppose Romer and Lawrence.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Richard2 claims: “As some one who just made incredibly racist and anti-Semitic comments directed at me and Richard J….”
Ummm, paging reality for Richard2; come in Richard2?
Take off the gayDemocrat tinfoil cap and tell me where you THINK such a thing occured, please.
As for your other nonsense from the gayLeft creed and dayDemocrat agenda… why should any self-respecting automatically adopt the gayLeft’s agenda of civil rights? I, for one, don’t think pressing for gay marriage is prudent when we could likely secure civil unions with all the benefits of hetero marriage faster than the gayLeft will ever secure gay marriage.
DADT is a military policy matter –always has been. Congress and Dem Prez Clinton followed the direction of the military command and, frankly, the gay community’s focus should be on convincing the military command of the utility in removing DADT –and REALLY get lasting change– instead of the fakery promulgated by the gayLeft on DADT.
See Richard2, you think the gayDemocrat and gayLeft agenda are the ONLY agenda for gay civil rights because you’ve been so long on the Masta’s Plantation as a gayVote slave you can’t fathom doing anything but ho’ing da rows for da Masta.
By the way, I think you were going to apologize on three other threads for your misstatements and unwarranted attacks.
Put it on your To-Do list, ok? Add to that where I’ve been racist or anti-semitic to you or King Richard… I already know it’s going to be a hoot.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Richard2 offers: “Mcain said that he will, if selected, appoint, “strict constructionist” jurists to the federal courts. In case you are unaware this is a term that is used, almost exclusivily by the sort of justices who oppose Romer and Lawrence.”
I predicted Richard2 would just pull that claim out of his butt and sure enough he did.
Again, Richard2: “How those judges decide issues adjacent and tangential to Romer or Lawrence is subject to lots of debate and speculation… but for you to contend that YOUR gayDemocrat crystal ball allows you to know the inner thoughts of the entire pool of potential jurists available to President McCain is just silly overreaching gayDemocrat fear-mongering.”
And, I’d add, ain’t working.
Find that citation yet where I used racist or anti-semitic comments? We’re waiting, my gayDemocrat friend.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Ok, Richard2, since you won’t explain, let me.
There’s a gayLeft troll in the midst of IGF readers and it is posting racist, bigoted, anti-Semitic comments in my nmae, using my moniker.
At each spot, I’ve placed disclaimers.
In one spot, Richard2 passed over one of those disclaimers –and it was in front of him before he read the fake comments and then my disclaimer– and chose to scream to the IGF editors that I’m making racist, bigoted remarks.
Of course, in the same thread Richard2 was calling me and others “serial liars” –but that’s a different story and equally incorrect for which Richard2 is set to apologize.
That’s why Richard2 can’t find those anti-semitic, bigoted, racist comments… because I didn’t make them.
And, given that I placed a disclaimer next to those fake comments (which Richard2 would have had to read to post his screaming outrage) I think Richard2 won’t be around for any ‘xplaining or ‘pologizing anytime soon.
posted by Throbert McGee on
[D]id anyone notice that the bar Obama set for LGBT discrimination was hospital visitation?
Gosh, where could Obama have picked up that rhetorical ploy?
Oh, I know — from our own LGBT spokespersons, who are quick to bring up hospital visitation rights as though this were truly the most urgent problem facing same-sex couples in the absence of legal recognition for our relationships. (When in fact it’s fairly unusual for hospital staff to be hardasses about this issue, and to the extent that visitation rights COULD be a problem, we already have legal remedies in the form of powers-of-attorney and other documents.)
posted by Ashpenaz on
I watched the Sarah Palin speech last night. I LOVE HER!!! She represents the morals and values of small town life I cherish. We share the same religious beliefs. I wish I were a drag queen because I’d dress like her for Halloween.
Here’s the point–I would bet that she’s better for gays than Obama and the homophobes he uses as advisors (McClurkin, etc.). There isn’t a great candidate for gay rights, but at least she has extended domestic partnership benefits to Alaskan workers. But I bet the gay community can’t look past her religion and conservatism to see that she and McCain are much more likely to move gay partnerships ahead. Of course, we’ll have to call them civil unions, but, hey, that’s something I’m willing to do.
(Since this was a conversation stopper in the other thread, I thought I’d try it here where I just know people are more open-minded than THOSE guys.)
posted by BobN on
McCain supported and campaigned for his state’s “marriage protection” amendment. It is the only such amendment that has gone down to defeat. Why? Because it was so draconian that even the very conservative voters of the state of Arizona thought it went too far in obliterating the rights of gay couples.
McCain thought it was peachy.
I’m not sure what the point of LCR endorsing McCain is, anyway. Their money will, of course, be returned.
posted by Jorge on
I watched the Sarah Palin speech last night. I LOVE HER!!! She represents the morals and values of small town life I cherish. We share the same religious beliefs. I wish I were a drag queen because I’d dress like her for Halloween.
Watching her speech, I couldn’t help thinking of that commercial that says “when the only thing that was bigger than your hair was your glasses.” I was eating out of her hand.
I was a little upset by her pledge that families of children with special needs would have an advocate in the White House. I wish we could have an advocate with such passion and conviction in the White House. Then again, the last time we got such an advocate (Bill Clinton) he compromised on, then betrayed the interests of gays with DA/DT and DOMA.
It looks like whatever Palin does on gay rights is going to be guided by her values, whether they be conservative or Christian. She will not be a gay rights reformer, but she will shape the Republican response to that reform. There are Christian conservatives who despise homophobia because they consider it unchristian or a violation of human rights, and I think Palin is one of them.
I am certain Sarah Palin is one of them.
posted by Doug on
Last time I checked Bill Clinton tried to allow gays and lesbians in the military it was the right wing republicans, including Colin Powel, and a few democrats who rammed DA/DT down his throat. What republican has ever introduced legislation that would benefit our community?
posted by BobN on
“I am certain Sarah Palin is one of them.”
Uh… because…???
What say we wait to find out what books she wanted to have banned before we decide she’s such a winner. Someone should ask her, sexist as that might be.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Doug tries to plead defense for the Perjurer-in-Chief, “Last time I checked Bill Clinton tried to allow gays and lesbians in the military it was the right wing republicans, including Colin Powel, and a few democrats who rammed DA/DT down his throat.”
That could be true if by “last time” you mean the last op ed piece SlickWilly wrote about being forced to agree or else… let’s see… can we get away with Hillary moment here and just make it? How’s this: “Prez Clinton had to sign DADT or the military command said they’d stage a coup and take over the civilian govt.”
Yeah, that’s the ticket. That gets the first “gay Prez” off the hotseat!
Go gayDemocratApologist, go!
posted by Priya Lynn on
Jorge said “On the other hand, while [Palin] does oppose gay marriage, she vetoed a law that would have barred gay state employees from getting benefits for their partners. Okay, so to me, that’s the Log Cabin Republicans saying McCain has done some decent things. It’s an accurate statement.”.
Not true. Palin admitted she only vetoed that law because the Supreme court had ruled that benefits must be supplied and her Attorney General advised her the law was unconstitutional. Subsequently Palin told the Anchorage Daily News that she would support a constitutional ammendment that would deny benefits to the domestic partners of public employees, which were ordered by an October 2005 decision of the Alaska Supreme Court, because, she said ?honoring the family structure is that important.?
http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/governor06/story/8049298p-7942233c.html
Palin’s also clearly stated her opposition to domestic partner benefits for Alaska state employees in a questionaire she filled out in her run for governor:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/09/from_the_horses_mouth.php#comments
“10. Do you support the Alaska Supreme Court’s ruling that spousal benefits for state employees should be given to same-sex couples? Why or why not?Why or why not?
SP: No, I believe spousal benefits are reserved for married citizens as defined in our constitution.”.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Bobn said “What say we wait to find out what books [Palin] wanted to have banned before we decide she’s such a winner. Someone should ask her, sexist as that might be.”.
How would that in any way be sexist? Are we not allowed to question Palin because she’s a female?
posted by Andy Humm on
It is simply a lie to say that John Kerry and John Edwards supported state constitutional amandments against same-sex marriage. It was rumored that Bill Clinton urged Kerry to do so, but Kerry said that he could not go there. Yes, the leading Democrats are wrong to oppose same-sex marriage even as they stand for civil unions. But major Democrats have consistently opposed these state constitutional amendments against same-sex marriage and McCain has campaigned for them. McCain only opposes the federal marriage amendment because he says it is not needed now. Despite his war record and his past politics, McCain is now a gutless former maverick who caved into the rightwing on almost every major issue during this current campaign. And Palin is truly scary with her radical fundamentalism and abuses of power in office.
A group like Log Cabin that supports anti-gay candidates is an anti-gay group. They should reorganize as Rightwing Homosexuals for Low Taxes, because I don’t see anything else they are getting from the candidates like Bush that they endorse. A stable economy? Controlling the budget deficit? A wise use of the military? The current crop of Republicans are bad on all those issues. So what exactly are the Rightwing Homosexuals for Low Taxes getting out of this?
posted by Pat on
It is simply a lie to say that John Kerry and John Edwards supported state constitutional amandments against same-sex marriage. It was rumored that Bill Clinton urged Kerry to do so, but Kerry said that he could not go there.
My recollection is Kerry “did go there” in his own state of Massachusetts. He publicly stated that same sex marriage rights should be taken away.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya offers: “Bobn said “What say we wait to find out what books [Palin] wanted to have banned before we decide she’s such a winner. Someone should ask her, sexist as that might be.” How would that in any way be sexist? Are we not allowed to question Palin because she’s a female?”
You are so cute, PrincessPriya; playing dumb like b4 when an IGF reader used the term “BarryO” to ‘scribe your dreamboat political hero, Barack Obama.
Nawh, BobN was taking a dig at critics of the media and gayLeft blogs who were correctly labeled as sexist pigs once they raised the question of “Can Sarah be Veep and take care of her kids?” Please see Sally Quinn, the liberal harpie. Or ChrisMatthews, the liberal apologist for BarryO.
Of course, no one asked that of Edwards when he was a’running… and I don’t mean “running around with women”. He had kids. He had a long suffering wife working as a “Mr Mom”.
Sexism is alive and well and practiced with great passion in the Temple of Barack… just go ask any Clinton campaign staffer who saw their candidate get swiftboated by BarryO for being a gal.
Book banning ain’t all bad, either. Except to those who succor at the liberal statist teet of the Left.
But then, Gov Sarah Palin nor Mayor Sarah Palin nor “community organizer” Sarah Palin banned a single book in here life.
So BobN’s little jab was as impotent as BarryO’s pretty words and whispered promises to the gayDemocrats.
OH-Baam-AH, OH-Baan-AH.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
AndyHumm writes: “It is simply a lie to say that John Kerry and John Edwards supported state constitutional amandments against same-sex marriage”
Umm, paging credibility and truthiness… big clean up needed on the AndyHumm aisle.
Andy, for such a legendary gay reporter, I’d think you would have fact-checked your assertion. Oh wait, you’re a journalist; fact checking isn’t required.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Michigan matt, you are unmatched in terms of being able to say so little with so many words. Its also a valid question as to whether or not Palin can be VP and take care of a young downs syndrome child. Nothing sexist about it. Of course to you to question anything about Palin is sexist. She’s a republican woman, no one dare question her.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya, I gather you’d be upset if you got called on the carpet for your insincere, patently partisan mini-dig pile-on with BobN… you don’t ever disappoint in being knee-jerk.
But here’s the problem… for liberals so intent on protecting and validating all -especially women and minorities- it does seem like a double standard to ask women but not men, are your kids being taken care of… and think that’s a serious concern when it’s nothing but an attempt to discredit her and, yes Princess, it is sexist.
Just go speak with the senior staff in Clinton’s campaign and they’ll share chapter and verse with you on BarryO’s sexist inclinations and ready willingness to demean women in order to discredit an opponent.
Surely you’ve heard of Sen Hillary Clinton?
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya declares from the pink porcelain throne in the Temple of Barack: “Michigan matt (sic), you are unmatched in terms of being able to say so little with so many words”.
Wow, you think so?
You must simply admire BarryO and JoeyBiden then? They go on and on and never amount to anything but a pair of EmptySuits and lots of whispered pretty words and promises.
I know, you like it when they do it, though. Have a great weekend, Princess!
posted by Priya Lynn on
Michigan matt, the idea that there’s something wrong with asking whether or not a woman can contribute to raising her children suggests that you think women have no role in raising children – that is truly sexist.
The fact remains to you any questioning of a republican woman is sexist. You think republican women have a god given right to say whatever they want and do whatever they want with no repercussions – you truly are sexist.
posted by Priya Lynn on
And to pre-empt any lies by northdallas, the burden of child rearing should be shared. Its my understanding that Palin’s husband is a stay at home dad, he’s doing his share of childcare, the whole burden shouldn’t rest with him. The suggestion that its sexist to expect Sarah Palin to share that burden is preposterous spin by republican-facists desperate to use rhetorical ploys to unjustly shield her from criticism
posted by avi on
As a Jew who had relatives perish in fascist death camps, I am deeply offended by those such as Priya Lynn who use the word "fascist" to describe conservatives whose policies they don’t like. It’s not only intellectually sloppy, but deeply hurtful to those who understand the true evil of political fascism.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Just for you Avi I’ll avoid calling republicans facists in the future.
posted by Bobby on
“the burden of child rearing should be shared. Its my understanding that Palin’s husband is a stay at home dad, he’s doing his share of childcare, the whole burden shouldn’t rest with hi”
—-Why not? That’s the way it is for most stay at home wifes. The husband brings the money, the woman runs the house. In this case, women should be celebrating Palin and her husband. Her husband is obviously not afraid of a woman making more money than he is, and Palin isn’t afraid of going against traditional gender norms.
The attacks against Palin are sexist,
even the National Organization for Women is admitting it
http://www.now.org/news/note/090508.html
Pelosi has 5 kids, yet I don’t see any conservatives accusing her of not caring for her family.
Nobody ever asked Bill Clinton if running for president would affect his abilities to be a father.
But now, the left-wing media is revealing their own sexism and hypocrisy. And rather than going after her for her political views, they attack her as a woman, as a mother, and even her pregnant daughter is used as an example of why she can’t ran the country.
I think Palin is a great person. A typical politician would have gotten her daughter an abortion and avoided the scandal. John Edwards paid for his mistress to move to California and buy a house.
It’s funny how the world turns. The “sexist” conservatives are embracing a woman while the feminists democrats tell her to shut up and go back to the kitchen. And anyone who can’t see that is either blind or in denial.
posted by Jorge on
Pyria Lynn: Fine, I’m more skeptical than I was before. It’s obvious that Sarah Palin is very conservative on gay issues, too.
“I am certain Sarah Palin is one of them.”
Uh… because…???
You mean aside from the “she has gay friends” thing, and the fact that she seems to be more of a law-and-order nut than a conservative (if Pyria Lynn’s explanation of the veto is correct)?
I don’t know. I just know how to call them. I just think of Ashcroft when I see her.
I want to comment on McCain’s statement that education is the a civil rights issue of this century. I AGREE! It’s a big reason I voted for Bush in 2004, and Mike Bloomburg in NYC when he ran for office. See, that’s a black-white issue, and it’s just the way a Republican would approach racial inequality: in non-racial terms.
Now you get a Republican saying something like “school bullying is a civil rights issue”, which quite a few do on the local level, well, that’s our issue.
posted by BobN on
And rather than going after her for her political views, they attack her as a woman, as a mother, and even her pregnant daughter is used as an example of why she can’t ran the country.
If you want to take on the VP candidacy of the party which has spent the last eight years blaming gay people and same-sex marriage for the “decline of traditional moral values and the family”, then, by God, yes, you do have to address: your “elopement”, teenage pregnancy, unmarried motherhood, shot-gun weddings, sex education, abstinence (non)education, etc. Surely the religious base wants to know her policy positions on those hot-button, culture-war issues, no?
I have yet to hear Palin use any word to describe the situation besides “wonderful”. Now, I doubt the party platform uses that word in its discussion of social issues.
posted by Richard II on
Attacks on Palin may or may not be sexist, depending on the specific accusations.
Frankly, I think that both gay Democrats and gay Republicans are doing a bit of ‘straining’ when it comes to their own partisan blinders.
posted by Richard II on
If Mcain wins, then we can pretty much expect the gay rights movement to federally stall or go back. If Obama wins we can expect it to federally stall or go foward.
Mcain himself probably does not personally believe in what the religious right wants — with the possible exception of abortion — Palin certain does. Either way both of them will follow the party line because they want to get elected and relected.
posted by Richard II on
Frankly I was kinda rooting for a strong Independent like Bloomberg to either run or be on either major party’s ticket.
Mcain or Obama could have gone a long way to appealing to indepenents, such as myself, by going for Bloomberg or heck even Jesse Ventura.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Just to circle back around… Richard2 has indicated in other threads that, despite the fact he was fully aware that I have not called him racist names nor uttered bigoted comments about him or other IGF readers and it was the highkinks of an IGF troll (angry that he got booted and blocked at IGF), Richard2 will ignore the truth and facts and continue to spread falsehoods.
I expected Richard2 to admit his mistake, retract his fraud and we could have moved on.
He hasn’t and is unwilling to listen to reason or accept responsibility for his intentional misrepresentations. Additionally, against IGF editorial policy –which were actually invoked by Richard2 in defending his right to call people liars, call people bigots, call people anti-Semitic even though he knows his accusations are boldface mistruths– IGF editors continue to warn people like Richard2 to stop. It worked for a while with CharlesWilson, until he switched IPs and became “DUMP”.
The IGF editors are aware of Richard2’s conduct. They know the facts in this matter support me and the truth.
I’m sorry to say Richard2 will likely continue his unreasonable claims. On this, he’s as deceitful as his claim of being an independent.
My apologies to IGF readers for having to dwell on this matter but Richard2 gave truth and the defense of truth and honor no other course.
Richard2, you should be ashamed of your conduct.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya offers: “Just for you Avi I’ll avoid calling republicans facists in the future.”
And here: “The fact remains to you any questioning of a republican woman is sexist.”
Ahhh, famous words from another real gay Independent… wow, you gayDemocrats hiding under the sheepskin ought to hold a convention or something… come out of the closet and really tell us what you think… like we can’t guess.
Nawh, the truth is the attack by gayDemocrats and the MSM on Sarah Palin’s capacity to work and be a good parent is sexism at its worst and Hillary Clinton knows all about it –especially when it came from the Temple of Barack and his HighPriests of the MSM.
You can say “it’s just a question”. You can say “it’s fair game”. You can even try to spin it unsuccessfully onto its head like PrincessPriya did above and claim Sarah Palin is a victim of the GOP.
But what you really mean is that Sarah Palin’s strength of character and courage of conviction frightens you and you think it and here connection with voters threatens the gayLeft agenda. Hell, even with all that slime tossed by the leftwing nuts this week, Sarah Palin has higher favorables than BarryO… and JoeyBiden is stuck in lala land trying to xerox off another person’s speech.
How could that be, you ask! “We had fireworks. We had Temples. The DreamieGod of the GayDemocrats mentioned us by name!!”
Because, let’s be brutally honest among ourselves, that’s how you gayDemocrats preceive her –as a threat catching the BigMo. Whether or not that’s just fear of losing the race that over rides your better judgment… for some here, sexist or bigoted or racist or homophobic questions are ok when THE OTHER SIDE is the target.
It’s a gut quanity and fact known to the HillaryClinton women and it’s why they’ll be voting for McCain to suit their corrosive venegence for the sexism practiced from the Temple of Barack.
PrincessPriya can try to say that aint so… even AndieSullivan can raise the sleazebag level for gayDemocrats by suggesting it would all go away if Sarah Palin just released her medical records to prove she is Trig’s Mom.
But in the end, we all know it’s an unfounded fear that drives you to civil excess… and the fact that, as a group, it’s well known you view having self-restraint and an active conscience as character flaws.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Richard2, the cowardly lion of gayDemocrats is back!
Richard2, you’ve been labeled as either an unwitting dupe of the troll who posted that or an intellectually dishonest person for continuing to spread that lie.
I don’t expect you to believe me. The editors at IGF do and know of your shameful, fluidly dishonest conduct.
That’s why, when I briefed the IGF editors on your conduct, I specifically asked them NOT to remove the post where you call me a liar –against IGF policies, which you well know. And, I asked them to keep your viciously dishonest spin machine in place so we can all see what caliber of character you fail to achieve –even when given the chance to do the right thing.
You failed miserably. The troll who posted those comments under my name didn’t know that my partner for life and co-father of our two children (soon to be three) is of mixed racial background and was raised in a Jewish household… which is a cultural part of our and my lives.
Additionally, a disclaimer was placed directly below those fake trollish comments you think were mine after IGF editors were alerted… they know it’s a troll. You saw the disclaimer.
Yet, you continue with your deceptions.
No Richard2, the cowardly lion, you’ve been punked by a troll. You stayed off IGF when you learned of it. It took you about two days to get your act together and come back, dragging your tail between your legs.
It’s time to be a man. Step up to the plate and admit your irresponsible deceptions to the community.
Of course, to do that, you’d need to borrow some character and maturity from somewhere.
Shameful conduct, Richard2. About as low as the days of CharlesWilson and DUMP around here.
posted by Bobby on
Hey BobN,
“you do have to address: your “elopement”, teenage pregnancy, unmarried motherhood, shot-gun weddings, sex education, abstinence (non)education, etc.”
—But those aren’t the questions being asked. The questions being asked are very personal, “can you be a vice-president and raise your kids,” “how do you feel about your daughter being pregnant.” This is paparazzi bullshit, not real journalism.
How come people don’t ask Obama if he has time to be president and raise his daughters?
They tried to play the same game with Chenney, use his lesbian daughter against him. And it didn’t work, it completely backfired.
“Surely the religious base wants to know her policy positions on those hot-button, culture-war issues, no?”
—They already know it! She has a public record, she has already spoken many times on those issues.
“I have yet to hear Palin use any word to describe the situation besides “wonderful”.”
—That’s because her daughter could have chosen to have an abortion, but she didn’t, and that’s why Palin says it’s “wonderful.” In fact, most pro-lifers know they can’t stop you from having an abortion, it’s still a legal choice to make, all they can do is tell you to “choose life.” That’s what it is.
And for the record, I would have preferred if Palin’s little whore had gotten an abortion. I would have been happier if that stupid boyfriend had done her up the ass, or if they had had oral sex. And since he’s 18 and she’s 17, I’m thinking he’s very lucky not to live in Texas, or any state without a romeo and juliet law.
However, those people are not my family, and it’s not my right to tell them what to do. And I’m also smart enough to know that most kids do whatever they want. You can’t force people to make good choices, you can only tell them what those good choices are and hope they take them.
People are judging Palin because of her children. And I can’t believe gays are doing it as well. There are wonderful gays that came from extremely homophobic homes. There are horrible gays that came from extremely gay friendly homes. The assumption that you’re a bad parent if your kids screw up is an idiotic assumption.
And by the way, how come nobody’s praising Palin for having a child that joined the army is and is going to Iraq? Liberals always bitch that politicians don’t send their own sons to war. They always bitch that Bush “hid” in the national guard. So fine, where’s the praise? How come the media isn’t making a big deal about that?
You know what else they’re not telling you? The ex-brother in law Palin tried to get fired used a taser on his own 10 year old son. The liberal media will tell you that the man was despicable, but they won’t tell you why.
Frankly, the more I know Palin, the more terrific she seems.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Bobby said “The ex-brother in law Palin tried to get fired used a taser on his own 10 year old son”.
That’s a favourite excuse of the right wingers to excuse Palin’s abuse of power. However the situation is not quite as it appears. The 10 year old son ASKED to be tasered to prove to his cousin (none other than Bristol Palin) that he was tough.
Bobby, Michigan matt, and Northdallas made a big deal out of how the bullying of Lawrence King didn’t justify King’s subsequent bad behavior yet in this situation they try to claim the cop’s bad behavior justifies Palins. How hypocritical.
posted by avee on
Andy Humm is 100% wrong, or so ideologically bespoted he needs to rewrite history (note: unlike him, I won’t lobby the “liar” charge so beloved by the lefties who comment here):
Here’s the Washington Blade article (took about 15 seconds to google, Mr. Humm; try it sometimes):
Kerry backs Mo. marriage ban
http://www.washblade.com/2004/8-13/news/national/kerryback.cfm
“One day after Missourians overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, Democratic presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry made a campaign swing through the state and lauded voters for approving the measure.”
posted by Priya Lynn on
Michigan Matt never fails to amaze by how little he says with so many words. I guess its just mental masturbation for him, as long as he’s blathering he’s happy. The funny thing about people like him and Northdallas is that if their lips are flapping that’s all the evidence they need to believe what they’re saying is the truth.
Here’s some truth for you Michigan matt, women are turned off by Palin. A survey of women voters after the palin selection shows her choice backfired on Mcsame:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hp7GUc9zHATnBsvfct5Uuh7t8D-A
52% of women surveyed said they’d vote Democrat versus 41% who said they’d vote Republican. Mcsame thought he’d capture disgruntled Hillary supporters but Palin opposes everything Hillary and decent freedom loving women stand for. They’re not going to vote for an extemist who’d force rape and incest victims to have their victimizer’s babies.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Avee, are you the same person as Avi?
posted by avee on
fyi, I’m not “avi.” Is there an epidemic of people posting using other people’s names on this board?
posted by Jorge on
However the situation is not quite as it appears. The 10 year old son ASKED to be tasered to prove to his cousin (none other than Bristol Palin) that he was tough.
You cannot be serious!
Firing a cop for child abuse is NOT an abuse of power. The correct response was to ship the kid off to see a child psychiatrist.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Jorge, its an abuse of power when the cop already went throught the disciplinary process, was dealt with it according to that and Palin fires his superviser because she isn’t happy with the results.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Hey Princess Priya, nice try at spin and a headache but that’s about all you get when you avoid the truth…
Rasmussen daily tracking polls has Palin tied with 57% favorables with your Savior-of-the-Free-World and-HighPriest-of-the-Liberal-Elites.
Gheez, BarryO has had 2 years of nonstop public exposure to cinch his deal with the electorate… Sarah Palin has had less than 2 WEEKS and 10 of those days have been ceaseless negative spewfests from the MSM and farLeft NetRootNuts. 2/3rds of that favorable rating by voters for Sarah Palin have her rated “Very Favorable”, the highest rating.
The BEST part? Independent women voters give her a favorable-to-very favorable rating at 60%. Ouch! Ouch! Ouch, it hurts so baaaaaaaad when you are so wrong, eh?
Whoops. Gotta go check your meds Princess… the Titanic’s captian is on Line 1 calling for you and he’s saying BarryO’s ship is going down… and not in the way you’d like.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya writes: “Avee, are you the same person as Avi?”
You are a crack up, grrl! You have the same comprehension and reading problems that your fellow gayDemocrat Richard2 shows repeatedly on this site.
Avee is an “A” and a “v”, with two “e”s that follow the “v”. It looks like this> Avee.
avi, now that’s the reader you demeaned when you were informed that he/she lost family members in the DeathCamps and your free-basing use (see Richard Pryor) of the word “fascist” to describe GOPers met with reservation.
avi is, catch this now if you can, an “a” but it’s a small “a” (see yourself for that reference; small a) followed by a “v” and then, pay attention now, an “i” for the name “avi”… not “Avee”.
How’s that reading comprehension skill set doing, PrincessSmallA? Maybe Richard2 can mentor you when he’s done coloring?
posted by Priya Lynn on
Ohhh, Matt your delusions are always good for a laugh. While you search desperately for hope in the minutia of polling results the fact remains that Obama continues to lead Mccain in the polling as he has consistently done since the begging. Mccain picked Palin out of desperation because he knows the odds are against him and in all likelihood Obama’s going to win. You’ll have to wait until 2012 before you have another chance to bring your dreams of crushing gays true.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Oh, and just in case anyone here cares about the “truthiness” of PrincessPriya’s claim about 52% of women voting for the HighPriest of Liberals in the Temple of Barack… the poll was done by
Gallup? No
Rasmussen? No
CBS? No
NYTimes? No
Roper? No
Harris? No
RealClearPolitics? No
Zogby? No
PewResearch maybe? No
Was it a professional pollster? No
PrincessPriyaLynn’s little polling tool was done by a Democrat Party fundraising group called EMILY’S List. Who put the survey together? None other than a longtime political hack of Peter Hart’s, the Democrat Party’s pollster for years.
Hmmmmm, Princess, the Captian of the Titanic would like your help rearranging some deck chairs on the BarryO Ship.
Next time you want to use your mouth to jack-off, maybe you’ll want to be sure where it’s been first… or at least what’s coming out of it?
Yeah, that’s the ticket Princess.
posted by brian on
Bobby says: “[a]nd for the record, I would have preferred if Palin’s little whore had gotten an abortion. I would have been happier if that stupid boyfriend had done her up the ass, or if they had had oral sex. And since he’s 18 and she’s 17, I’m thinking he’s very lucky not to live in Texas, or any state without a romeo and juliet law.”
Okay let’s vote. Is Bobby a satirist (not a good one) or not. But this isn’t meant to be serious commentary, correct?
posted by Jorge on
The way you’re framing it, Pyria Lynn I wouldn’t blame her one bit.
posted by Priya Lynn on
That’s where you and I differ Jorge, I figure she’s obligated to follow the rules of the government as they are laid out. Fortunately the justice system agrees.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Michigan matt, the sinking ship is the one that’s consistently losing in the polls – that’s your dictator Mccain. Right wing fundamentalists like you like Palin but middle of the road voters aren’t going to vote for an extemist who’d force rape and incest victims to have their victimizer’s babies.
posted by Priya Lynn on
More bad news for your consistent loser Michigan matt:
ABC News Poll: Extreme Abortion Position Hurts Palin Among Independents
Partisanship is strongest on Palins’ opposition to legal abortion; 57 percent of Republicans say these views make them see her more favorably, while just 29 percent of independents and 19 percent of Democrats agree. Positive responses to her position on abortion peak, at 66 percent, among evangelical white Protestants.
VOTE IMPACT — As noted, predisposed partisans on each side are more apt to react favorably to Palin and Biden. On Palin, conservatives by a 34-point margin say her addition to the ticket makes them more likely rather than less likely to support McCain; among Republicans it’s a 37-point positive margin, and among white evangelicals, 32 points. These are all heavily pro-McCain groups in the first place, but these numbers may reflect an enthusiasm — somewhat lacking in his campaign — that could impact their turnout.
At the same time, the story in the ideological center is different: Among moderates, Biden registers as a net 15-point positive for Obama. In the same group, Palin shows no effect on support for McCain.
posted by Bobby on
“The 10 year old son ASKED to be tasered to prove to his cousin (none other than Bristol Palin) that he was tough.”
—Just because some parents are really bad, including recent examples of parents buying their children booze, getting them drugs, and even trying to sleep with their friends, doesn’t mean we excuse a father who shoots his step-son with a taser. What a 13 year old boy wants is of no concern. He’s a dumb kid, someone has to be the ADULT.
“Okay let’s vote. Is Bobby a satirist (not a good one) or not. But this isn’t meant to be serious commentary, correct?”
—Brian, my point is that I don’t let my personal views cloud my judgment when it comes to judging Palin. Of course I support abortion! If I wasn’t into freedom, I would even make it mandatory. And of course I HATE stupid teenagers that get pregnant (the boy as much as the girl). I don’t see the satire.
But I’m not gonna blame Palin for her daughter’s mistakes. That’s like blaming straight parents when their kids come out of the closet.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya, well, good for you. When it was pointed out that you were being grossly dishonest and misleading with your last bit of partisan fluff, just like your alter-ego Richard2, you stepped up to the plate and admitted the Democrat-manufactured poll for the Democrat-fundraising group wasn’t representative of reality.
Oh wait, you didn’t do that. How cheeky of you.
Maybe you can have Richard2, our cowardly lion looking for courage, loan you a cup of resolve and character? You’ll have to wait til HIS loan comes through, though. He’s in need of a barrelful after this week of misstatements, missteps, mistruths and misprisions.
I agree, partisan true-believers on BOTH sides of the aisle think their Party’s pick will skyrocket their ticket to stardom (whoops, sorry about the “celebrity” metaphor; BarryO thinks that’s an unfair smear on his metrosexual charisma). OH-Baam-AH, OH-Baam-AH.
But that’s about all your quote proves. It doesn’t explain why MikeyDukakis in 1988 got a 17-fold better bounce than did BarryO –and this is supposed to be THE Democrat Party election year of years. You remember MikeyDukakis… the guy with the helmet and tank looking all presidential?
Meanwhile, Palin now has a better favorable rating among independents than BarryO –and nearly 2/3rds of her 60+ point favorable rating comes at the “very favorable” or highest rating– and her announcement of candidacy squashed, crushed, obliterated and torched BarryO’biden’s expected post-convention bounce. This morning, blogs are reporting a meltdown over at BarryO’biden’s camp because that post-convention bounce didn’t materialize for the worshipful Masta in the Temple of Barack.
The only team going down is the titanic BarryO’biden ticket. (By the way, Princess, you underline how shallow your arguments are when you can’t even come up with a metaphor on your own and you have to re-invent another’s… oh wait, that’s what HillaryClinton calls “change you can Xerox”?
The election is far from over and I’m sure the gayLefties here will be able to come up with some more whopper stories like “Palin eats babies” or “McCain fathered Trig”… but at the end of cycle, McCain is going to be standing tall, successful and elected –even if all the Democrat lawyers at MoveOn.org litigate the election to Thanskgiving Day.
Motly because Palin connects with America. She resonantes with women and older women and younger women and middle-aged women and independent women and soccer moms and security moms and hockey moms… just about every kind of women except the gays who dress as women.
Which brings us to another issue, Princess…
posted by VoteLibertarian on
Gay Democrats and gay Republicans are just slaves living on their masters plantation.
posted by Pat on
That’s because her daughter could have chosen to have an abortion, but she didn’t, and that’s why Palin says it’s “wonderful.” In fact, most pro-lifers know they can’t stop you from having an abortion, it’s still a legal choice to make, all they can do is tell you to “choose life.” That’s what it is.
Bobby, I found that statement from Palin curious. It sounds as if she may really be pro-choice. Her daughter is still underage, and if Palin is pro-life, there isn’t any other choice her daughter could have made. Yes, her daughter could have snuck off and got an abortion. But as a pro-lifer Palin would have done everything in her power as a parent to prevent that from happening. It sounds that she may really be pro-choice who personally opposes abortion and would encourage others to not have an abortion, but leaves it up to the persons themselves to decide what is best.
The election is far from over and I’m sure the gayLefties here will be able to come up with some more whopper stories like “Palin eats babies” or “McCain fathered Trig”… but at the end of cycle, McCain is going to be standing tall, successful and elected
Matt, I’m sure there will be plenty of whoppers, from both sides, before this election is over, at which time both sides act human temporarily, before the next race gets underway. As for the winner, it still looks like it’s up in the air. It appears that McCain’s bounce was no bigger than Obama’s following their respective conventions.
posted by VoteLibertarian on
Palin is a Statist tool, as is Mcain, Obama and Biden. They all believe that they are the most qualified peson in the entire universe to run your life, control your money and property.
Vote Libertarian in 2008!
posted by Liberal Gay Patriot on
Sarah IS a homophobe and the LRC either knew it or vetted her as well as McCain did.
-Palin Opposed Supreme Court Ruling Giving Same-Sex Couples Benefits: Asked if she would support the Alaska Supreme Court?s ruling that spousal benefits for state employees should be given to same-sex couples, Palin responded, ?No, I believe spousal benefits are reserved for married citizens as defined in our constitution.? [Eagle Forum questionnaire]
-Palin Opposed Expanding Hate Crimes Laws: Asked if she would support an effort to expand hate crime laws, Palin responded, ?No, as I believe all heinous crime is based on hate.? [Eagle Forum questionnaire]
-Palin Said She Supported Ban on Gay Marriage and Denying Benefits to Gay Couples: ?Palin said she?s not out to judge anyone and has good friends who are gay, but that she supported the 1998 constitutional amendment [to ban gay marriage]. Elected officials can?t defy the court when it comes to how rights are applied, she said, but she would support a ballot question that would deny benefits to homosexual couples. ?I believe that honoring the family structure is that important,? Palin said. She said she doesn?t know if people choose to be gay.? [Anchorage Daily News (Alaska), 8/6/06]
-Palin Said She Supported a Constitutional Amendment Overturning Supreme Court Mandate of Benefits for Same-Sex Couples: Asked if she would support a Constitutional amendment to overturn the Alaska Supreme Court decision mandating public employers to provide benefits equivalent to same-sex couples, Sarah Palin responded ?yes.? [Alaska Family Council Voter Guide, 8/22/06]
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM106_palin_doc.html
posted by Brian on
pat, i think you are incorrect in judging mccain’s bounce after the convention as it is too soon even for a superman pollster to get the job done well
you need wait at least until the 1st or 2nd workday of this week for the polling to be completed and crosstabbed and for the convention’s effect to show up in the polls
michigan-matt is wrong in saying that senator obama did not get a bounce because the key date for determing the beginning of senator obama’s bounce polling was the 2nd day of the republicans’ convention
on that day, the cumulative polling (take the 7 top professional polls and average them) had senator obama down below mccain by 3 points and that’s within the margin of error for most poll instruments
senator obama got a negative bounce and i think that’s the first since nixon-agnew in 1968
today, the cumulative polls at realclear have senator obama down by 6 points -a significant slide and not a good trend unless you are speaking about gas prices or your bathroom scale
by the way, i think michigan-matt is correct in wildly bitch slapping richard II as it appears michigan-matt did make a disclaimer before richard II posted his claims
but like you say, staying out of these contested squabbles is probably a good idea
posted by Bobby on
Hey Pat,
“Her daughter is still underage, and if Palin is pro-life, there isn’t any other choice her daughter could have made.”
—To be fair, she could have sought out a judge and gotten his permission to have an abortion.
“But as a pro-lifer Palin would have done everything in her power as a parent to prevent that from happening.”
—I’m sure Palin made her daughter get the information she needed. There is a dark side of abortion, there are women who have abortions and later regret it, there are rare cases of complications after the abortion. I still support abortion, but I respect the pro-life position. It’s not as black and white as people think.
Yesterday, I saw the Bill Maher show, he says Palin and McCain appeal to most people because we’re a nation of C-students, and we want people like us. We don’t want a “brilliant” former editor of the Harvard Review and community organizer Barrack Obama.
That’s the kind of elitism people associate with Obama and his supporters.
posted by Rob on
Yesterday, I saw the Bill Maher show, he says Palin and McCain appeal to most people because we’re a nation of C-students, and we want people like us. We don’t want a “brilliant” former editor of the Harvard Review and community organizer Barrack Obama.
That’s the kind of elitism people associate with Obama and his supporters.
Maher makes a good defence of the elite though.
posted by Pat on
pat, i think you are incorrect in judging mccain’s bounce after the convention as it is too soon even for a superman pollster to get the job done well
you need wait at least until the 1st or 2nd workday of this week for the polling to be completed and crosstabbed and for the convention’s effect to show up in the polls
Fair enough, Brian. Maybe we will see McCain get a bounce in a day or two. But I still maintain that the influence of the conventions has waned. People see these more and more as the circuses they’ve become. And people are becoming less impressed with speeches that are usually written by someone else.
The election is going to be won or lost by what happens in the next two months. The soundbites, new revelations (even the irrelevant ones), the debates (or actually how the debates are spun).
To be fair, she could have sought out a judge and gotten his permission to have an abortion.
Bobby, that’s true, if she was not permitted by Alaska law to simply get an abortion without her parents’ knowledge.
I’m sure Palin made her daughter get the information she needed. There is a dark side of abortion, there are women who have abortions and later regret it, there are rare cases of complications after the abortion. I still support abortion, but I respect the pro-life position. It’s not as black and white as people think.
I agree with what you say about the dark side of abortions, about respecting the positions, and it not being a black and white issue. What I’m not sure is about what info Palin and her husband gave their daughter before and after she became pregnant. Besides the fact that many parents get squeamish discussing such issues with their children, maybe her personal position is different than her public position. So that could explain what I thought was an inconsistency. It just seemed like saying “I’m proud that my daughter chose to have the baby” from someone who is pro-life was like saying, “I’m proud that my daughter didn’t go out and punch the face of the first person she saw” from someone who opposes arbitrary violence.
I recall years ago Dan Quayle being questioned by Sam Donaldson who asked what Quayle would do if his teen daughter (at the time) got pregnant. He said that he would do his best to convince her to have the baby, but that it would be her decision. So even though it became clear to me that Quayle was at least, personally, pro-choice, he maintained that he was pro-life.
Yesterday, I saw the Bill Maher show, he says Palin and McCain appeal to most people because we’re a nation of C-students, and we want people like us. We don’t want a “brilliant” former editor of the Harvard Review and community organizer Barrack Obama.
That’s the kind of elitism people associate with Obama and his supporters.
I hope to catch the show tonight. I don’t necessarily agree with Maher’s characterization of what most people want. Actually, I really don’t know what most people want.
posted by Vote Libertarian on
Both the Democrats and Republicans are elitist who believe that they are most qualified to tell you how to live your life, spend your money and use your property. Enough is Enough!
Vote Libertarian!
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Brian, I agree with you -we ought to wait a day or two days here to determine if McCain got a bigger bounce than BarryO –which shouldn’t be hard given that BarryO LOST ground in the polls after his convention staging and the debut of the Temple of Barack worshipful hour on TV. I doubt McCain-Palin will lose 3-4 points in polling like BarryO’Biden.
I also think you’re right that BarryO lost ground immediately after his convention (where gays were mostly kept in the closet), BarryO may be the only Democrat prez candidate to have done so badly, so poorly that even his convention attention couldn’t re-ignite his campaign. Didn’t you say that even MikeyDukakis got a 9% point bounce? And why hasn’t BarryO been able to establish that 17-19-21 point lead that generic Democrat candidates are getting against GOP candidates in this Year of the Democrats is MIA for BarryO’Biden “still fightin” team.
I disagree with Pat on the point that people are sort-of seeing through the conventions for the hype that they truly are… if that were the case, special interest groups, companies and lobbyists wouldn’t have contributed the $47.9 million that they did to stage the Temple of Barack Worship Hour… nor would Sarah Palin’s acceptance speech gotten 40+ million viewers… and we’re not talking about all those liberal airport terminal TVs permanently tuned to MSNBC.
Overseas, the viewership for Sarah Palin’s night reached 11.7 million –nearly twice what the Temple of Barack drew. What’s also interesting is that the Temple of Barack Worship Hour was carried on 10 (ten) networks and Palin’s was carried on only 6 (six) networks.
I’m guessing that reduction is like Oprah denying Sarah Palin access to her show and viewers –where other McCain supporters and entertainers are open to BarryO’Biden coming on their shows. Of course, Oprah is a fickle, fair-weather friend for BarryO… she was positively hiding from BarryO during the Rev Wright controversy. And she’s his strongest ally? Good gosh.
The other thing I found interesting about the Democrat convention in Denver is that originally the convention was supposed to Go Green –but only a handful of state delegations signed on to the convention policies and program requirements, so that aspect was cancelled 2 weeks out. The DNC was also forcing Denver caterers to agree that any food was organic only, each plate contained at least 50% fruits or veggies, no original paper content in anything, etc.
Caterers in Denver told the DNC to stick it. The DNC withdrew the organic, recycled paper and 50% vegan plate requirements.
I guess it’s more of the old “do as we tell you, don’t do as we do” from the food police at the DNC.
Hey, and thanks for tossing in your 2cents on the petty, wrongheaded and vindictive games that Richard2 is playing on IGF.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Bobby, BillMaher is as much as elitist and sexist as BarryO.
BillMaher was the guy who called Gov Sarah Palin a “stewardess” and leftwing gals gave BillMaher-the-bigot a pass on that sexist characterization.
In fact, IGF readers like our own Rob here, continue to promote the discredited anti-Christian bigot BillMaher as if he’s another HighPriest of Liberalism inside the Temple of Barack.
Trying to understand how liberals can be such vicious sexists is hard to fathom. Unless it’s because of the elitist impulse that runs through liberal thought.
I like the very first effort to tag BarryO for what he really is –an elitist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuB_M6m3TRo&feature=related
I wish someone would do that to BarryO for being a sexist –not just a sexist and stupid and a serial liar.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8a1sCRJgQQI
Oh wait, Gerrie Ferraro already has and the Democrats turned their collective back to her as quickly as they did HillaryClinton.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW5GaldpDjg
You know the gayLeft is really, really worried when they start trotting out BillMaher… who’s next? HugoChavez?
We already know that bin Laden wants Barack. Hamas & Iran want Barack. The French want Barack. Our trading opponents want him to be President. The former leaders of the radical, bombing throwing Weatherman Underground want him elected, too.
Ooops, I forgot! And Code Pink wants him elected President. Now there’s a group who can galvanize Americans to vote!
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Brian, it appears you were right.
The latest, most recent polling results which include telephone interviews conducted AFTER the GOP convention closed, now has McCain grabbing a 10 (ten) point lead over BarryO’Biden.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
Rasmussen’s and CNN will have their results posted late tomorrow.
McCain and Palin are kicking Obama’s butt!
Maybe the LCRs knew something the gayLeft tried to avoid at all costs? The power of a compelling team and not just EmptySuited whispers of a promise.
posted by Pat on
Matt, I heard that too about the latest polls. And pending the other polls when they come out, it looks like McCain/Palin got a boost from the convention. So this could bode well for the GOP ticket. I still believe things will even out soon again, and that it will be close up to election. I guess we’ll find out in two months if I’m wrong again. Oh, and I guess we also disagree about whether McCain/Palin is a compelling team.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Sure we can debate whether or not McCain-Palin is proving to be a compelling team to the majority of voters… the answer will come on election day… and I think pollsters and pundits have been wise to point out the Bradley Effect– that Obama’s polling is higher because whites & women are reticent to declare they won’t vote for a black but will enter the booth knowing they won’t pull the lever, no matter what they told a probing, inquistive poll taker… and the same holds true for exit pollsters, too.
posted by TJR on
MM…you would just love the Bradley effect to happen wouldnt you. And it may just happen because not only does this country have a lot of racists it also has a lot of closetted racists and self hating homophobes like yourself. What do we get 4 more years of the same which is exactly what will happen. The Republican party is the main reason why America is in decline.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
TJR tries flaming with “MM…you would just love the Bradley effect to happen wouldnt (sic) you”
No, TJR. I wouldn’t “just love” that to happen. All I pointed out was the rush-2-Obama fallacy of the gayDemocrats here is that Obama’s past polls numbers evinced America’s “universal hope” and need to embrace the Temple of Barack. It was just wispy, fleeting celebrity– as fleeting as Britney’s haircut or Kato Kaelin’s career or Bill Maher’s credibility and Al Franken’s electability.
Universal rush-2-Obama?
Nothing of the sort was happening then; it was spin and skating on thin ice by the gayDemocrats here echoing their MSM pals. And a whole lot of wishful thinking that “We are the hope we’ve been waiting for” pretty words would make reality crystalize for the ObamAcolytes.
TJR says: “And it may just happen because not only does this country have a lot of racists it also has a lot of closetted (sic) racists and self hating homophobes like yourself”
TJR, I’m not a self-hating or self-loathing homophobe. I don’t do the Jew-Nazi metaphor either so don’t go there; it ain’t happening, sister.
You need to remember, TJR, that those voters you’re calling racists are actually Democrats who are purportedly telling pollsters they’ll pull the lever for BarryO’Biden… when they know, in their hearts of hope, they won’t.
The racists you put in the closet are “your people” and fellow-Democrat voters, TJR. Ouch, that has got to hurt! And, frankly, that I just love to contemplate… gayDemocrats hoisted high on their own petard. Laying in the sack with sexists, pleading with closeted racists and begging young voters not to think but just feel.
Maybe you’d like to rethink that line a bit, eh? It doesn’t make today’s BarryO gayDemocrat voter look too good in your light. Care to switch to mood lighting? It’s less harsh and even makes Joy Behar look likable… in an obnoxious, New Jersey trailer park way.
TJR posits: “What do we get 4 more years of the same which is exactly what will happen. The Republican party is the main reason why America is in decline.”
Well, let’s look at the continuing refrain from gayDemocrats that McCain-the-Maverick can be reduced to a 3rd Bush term… more of the same as you put it.
That’s the line that BarryO has been using for the last 19 months… even before he willfully engaged in heated sexist diatribes against fellow-Democrat HillaryClinton.
Given McCain’s SURGE of 10 points since the convention, given this is the Year of the Democrat and BarryO’Biden should be up by 17-19-21 points at this time, given McCain is now leading BarryO in democrat-leading states like Michigan and Ohio, it would seem that the two lynch-pins of BarryO’Biden’s strategy (namely: 1) paint McCain as W-3rd and 2) press the economic message of change) have failed to ignite Americans… it would seem TJR is the last gayDemocrat to have gotten the memo-from-da-Masta… it’s time to change strategies… once again.
Today, MM-partner, my two sons and I went to Flint to worship at the Masta’s table and try to touch the flesh of the Savior of the Free World (but mostly the elites in France and Germany first)… MM-partner got to touch the Flesh of History… but he’s dreamy chocolate like the Savior, so it was a slamdunk handshake for BarryO… who’s supporters used to wear the t-shirt “Bros before hoes” in refering to Hillary.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bros+before+hoes
We sensed something different in the air in Flint –and, no, I don’t mean the decay left from a generation of BigLabor porking it to ‘da Man at Chevrolet or Buick plants… or Democrat elites running the city beyond the pits of despair… something different. Like fear. If we still had telephone booths, I would have thought the Savior and Caped Crusader would have jumped at the chance to change inside one to something other than he is rightly perceived by all.
Pretty soon, BarryO’Biden will come out against tax increases –flip flop.
Pretty soon, BarryO’Biden will attest the surge is working– flip flop.
Pretty soon, BarryO’Biden will fire up the ObamaBus and run over some more issues in the hopes of running down whatever is causing all this post-convention blood loss –flip flop.
In fact, in Flint, we heard him nearly voice the Kerry epithet when trying to smear Gov Sarah Palin with “She was in favor of the bridge before she was against it”… but he just couldn’t get his brain around the phrase or, that little devil of conscience on his big chip political shoulder screamed “No! No! Don’t go there! We’re not JohnKerry!”
In any event, TJR, we sensed fear in Flint. Just like I do with your attempt to explain the change in the polls as “racists” and bigots… except, in this case, they are DEMOCRAT racists and bigots.
You should heed the advice of a very famous Democrat beltway gal of a 1000 years, Katharine Graham: “Dear, never show too much leg and never, ever show fear”.
Ahhh, the good old days, eh TJR?
posted by Michigan-Matt on
BTW, on that flip-flop claimed by the Savior of the Free World and History in the Flesh… Alaskan DEMOCRATS attribute the effort to stop the bridge to Gov Sarah Palin…
http://senateconservatives.com/2008/09/08/alaska-democrats-pull-web-page-crediting-palin-for-killing-bridge-to-nowhere/
I guess BarryO’Biden didn’t get the memo?
posted by TJR on
LOL…MM, I see you live on this site. All the arguments you spew are straight out of the right-wing nutty, rovian playbook. I’m sure you voted for Bush twice…thats bad enough, and now your talking about Palin/McSame ticket who wants to send us back to the stoneage with their regressive policies???
Your lovely vice-president nominee attends a church that provides “conversion therapy” for self-hating homophobes like yourself…maybe you should pay them a visit.
McSame promises “strict constructionist judges” code word for right-wing nuts to further treat you as a second-class citizen but then again you’re accustom to being screwed and seem to love it so why not have some more.
MM the republicans would just love to have your vote come November and pretend you dont exist for the next 4years, but you do exist, thats not good… so they will right legislation to further degrade your very existence. You’re accustom to being used as red meat for the religious right every election cycle but you and the Log Cabin crew still kiss their asses, how sweet.
So you want to use the same ole flip flop argument right? McSame flipped on tax-cuts for the rich, global-warming policies, drilling for oil, the “agents of intolerance” are now his bed buddies, he supports California’s Prop 8 and campaigned for the same failed nonsense in his own home state. He doesnt even support adoption rights for same-sex couples…maveric, pleeeeaaaassse!!! Just another opportunistic Republican in sheeps clothing.
Palin/McSame will continue the cowboy diplomacy of the last 8years, continue bedding BIG OIL lobbyists, continue going to the middle east and hold hands with the sheiks while begging for more oil and getting screwed over and continue promoting “family values” while they fornicate in the dark.
Your lovely vice president nominee seems to be very good at reading speeches from the old boys. She has quite a bit of foreign policy experience since Alaska is neighbors with Russia. Quite a bit of excutive experience running a town with a population less than that of a city block in LA, Chicago or Houston. Your lovely vice nominee supported the “Bridge to nowhere” before seeing its unpopularity flipping against it…typical republican. MM fact is Palin is an “old boy” that happens to be female and thinks you’re a walking sin, but would still love your vote! I’m guessing you expect to have “a voice at the table” like the dilluded Log Cabin crew if Palin/McSame is elected. Chances are you wouldnt even be within a mile of that table…your existence is a cancer to the republicans and they will quickly hide you away in the closet, but hey…they still would like your vote!
BTW I’m a male generation Y product and the republican party is a dying entity!
Dont forget to VOTE!!!
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
BTW I’m a male generation Y product and the republican party is a dying entity!
Not as long as there are leftist hatemongering gays like yourself saying that anyone who doesn’t vote for Obama is a racist.
No wonder you try so hard to smear Republicans. You have an inferior product, and the only way in which you can make it look good is to try to make them look bad.
posted by Pat on
Sure we can debate whether or not McCain-Palin is proving to be a compelling team to the majority of voters… the answer will come on election day
Matt, the only thing that we’ll be able to prove on election day is which candidate gets the most electoral votes. It may or may not prove that McCain/Palin is a compelling team.
No wonder you try so hard to smear Republicans. You have an inferior product, and the only way in which you can make it look good is to try to make them look bad.
NDT, it’s looking more and more that the winner of this election will be the one who can make the other side look worse. In my view, that’s the only thing that these candidates have going for them, since both sides have an inferior product.
BTW I’m a male generation Y product and the republican party is a dying entity!
TJR, if the Republican party is dying, it isn’t taking a straight path to its death, as evidenced by the latest polls.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
TJR offers: “All the arguments you spew are straight out of the right-wing nutty, rovian playbook.”
Not at all, TJR. In fact, if you’ve had the opportunity to switch from watching ChrisMatthews and KeithOlbermann over to the more independent Foxnews, you’d see that KarlRove has predicted several things that the McCain-Palin team haven’t done as he thought… and given advice that’s been unheeded by both McCain, Palin, their respective campaign teams and the RNC.
The election isn’t about KarlRove, TJR. Or whether or not his advice is being dismissed by the increasingly successful McCain-Palin team.
The election, in the gay community, ought to be about our own leadership’s poor judgment in hitching the gayVote wagon to the BarryO’Biden bus –which on gay civil rights, seems to only be locked in the REVERSE gear.
But you go ahead and cling desperately to your guys and creed (not “guns & religion”); while the rest of gays and women and hispanics and men are moving toward McCain-Palin on Election Day.
I know you got into this race hoping to gain some vicarious “validation” in watching America pick a metrosexual candidate who looks great riding a pink-tailed unicorn through a rainbow… but sometimes, politics is a harsh taskmaster and it turns out the election isn’t all about you and your validation.
http://sendables.jibjab.com/
posted by Michigan-Matt on
NDXXX rightly posits: “Not as long as there are leftist hatemongering gays like yourself saying that anyone who doesn’t vote for Obama is a racist. No wonder you try so hard to smear Republicans. You have an inferior product, and the only way in which you can make it look good is to try to make them look bad.”
I’d add to that truth, NDXXX, not only will they play the RaceCard… they engaged in wanton sexism against Clinton and now, against Palin.
No wonder GerrieFerraro was so pissed off at the sexist intrigues of the DNC and BarryO’Biden that she took the unprecedented step of withholding her endorsement of BarryO’Biden until she is assured they’ve recanted their sexist, elitist ways. I can just imagine BarryO’Biden saying “Now, hold on a minute there sweetie” to the women who helped the Democrats break the glass ceiling 20+ yrs ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9g5-vkc23NM&feature=pyv
posted by ETJB on
Well I been away for a while and what did I miss;
MM has been unmasked as some one who is a racist and an anti-Semite.
Gay Republicans want us to vote for Mcain-Palin or else we must be bigoted against women.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ETJB sockpuppets for Richard II by restating the discredited lie of “MM has been unmasked as some one who is a racist and an anti-Semite”… sorry, ETJB, only if you’re Richard2 and disconnected from reality.
IGF readers saw through his hand-in-glove work with the IGF trolls… it didn’t work then; it ain’t working now.
Only question is, who are you ETJB? Charles Wilson aka DUMP aka wetwilly aka willysnout2 aka… oh well, you get the point of the question.
Seems strange you should be digging deep into the threads to find a short, singular post and remember it… I’m thinking we’ve found a sixth name for our IGF troll.
You gotta get a better strategy or gameplan, ETJB… it’s time for you and your sockpuppets and trolls to get out of the shallow end of the pool.
posted by TJR on
Northdallas apparently you and MM are drinking the same toxic Kool Aid…I dont have to try hard to smear the GOP, they are a mess by themselves. The fact that the Dems are out registering the GOP by wide margins speaks for itself. THE GOP’s policies just make it so out of step with the reality of the world today the party is in decline because of it. Not a word was mentioned on pressing issues like education, healthcare, or energy independence during the convention. Just more of the same ole rhetoric. If Palin/McSame wins in November I would see this as a blessing in disguise because it would seal the image of who is bedding the lobbyist, increasing taxes on the middle class, a ballooning out of control federal deficit, more American jobs going overseas, and the US dollar sinking to the Euro…Ouch I know how you conservatives hate Europe!
Talk about sound conservatism!!
MM I’m not hooked on Obama/Biden as you would like to think but they are a lot more palatable than this nutty ticket by the GOP(Grand Old Pervs)
MM I dont know where you get your polling data from (most likely from Fox) but you seem to be living under a rock. The only crowd moving in Palin/McSame direction is the same ole white male and female crowd mostly over 50 years old. Hispanics favor the dems ticket 3-1. You just have to look at your Repugnant convention to see the evidence. The news networks were working overtime trying to find a single minority face in the crowd…this is not good given the majority of the country’s population would be minorities in 40 years time. The Repugnants are running away from the issues or they will lose otherwise. A senior McSame aide said it himself…this election is not about the issues.
BTW MM I never said whoever does not support Obama is a racist…typical right-winger aren’t you, twisting the facts. You can support whoever you please however dilluded it may seem. As for you calling me “hatemonger” I really couldn’t care less, you still love Bush.
And you should really consider that conversion therapy Ms Caribou’s church is offering, I’m sure they would just love to save your soul.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
TJR whines: “MM I dont know where you get your polling data from… The only crowd moving in Palin/McSame direction is the same ole white male and female crowd mostly over 50 years old.” Let’s try legit polling groups and natl newsmedia with a decided leftwing-bias, eh TJR?
TJR, I’m sorry to burst that bubble of wishful thinking YOU’ve been living under but it’s called the Hillary Effect and it isn’t about old, racist white men like you’d prefer to ignorantly claim.
It’s all about women who are politically active and informed voting for strong politically active resolute women.
Before the DNC Convention, women were flocking to the Temple of Barack 50-42% After McCain-Palin convention was over, women were questioning that earlier preference and are now deciding for the reformers in McCain/Palin-the-Mavericks 53-41%… a whopping 20 point reversal!
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN097920080909
Unprecendented in American politics.
The only difference bewteen the pre BarryO’Biden convention and the post McCain-Palin convention?
Sarah Palin. The biggest trend: female voters supporting McCain-Palin.
And finally, pollsters have noted that the spread the McCain/Palin-the-Mavericks team is now getting is exactly the same spread pollsters got when they asked “Do you think there will be a female prez in the nect 10 yrs?”
Same spread. Hillary Effect.
Now what was that nonsense you were spreading in a vain effort to discredit polling sources?
TJR, you’re out of your own league. Like my Dad liked to say: “Son, your mouth is writing checks your brain can’t cash”.
Get a clue TJR, the world changed when McCain brilliantly selected Sarah Palin. The star of BarryO’Biden’s celebrity fizzled in the light of voter scrutiny.
I understand you’re pissed off your team is losing in the Year of the Democrats.
But look, maybe they’ll keep the House, expand their base in the Senate and then all the good loyal lapdog gayDemocrats here can ask: “NancyP, HarrygReid, when do we get action on gay civil rights?”
My hunch is they’ll stall you yet another 2 years with the line, we can’t pass anything with McCain/Palin threatening a veto.
Hey, it’s worked for 2 years in our DoNothingDemocrat Congress… why wouldn’t they try it again?
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
The fact that the Dems are out registering the GOP by wide margins speaks for itself.
Or for the willingness of the Democrat Party to commit fraud.
Not a word was mentioned on pressing issues like education, healthcare, or energy independence during the convention.
Wrong.
Palin emphasized her call to expand domestic drilling, and called for more nuclear, “clean coal,” and renewables.
“Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America’s energy problems — as if we all didn’t know that already. But the fact that drilling won’t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all,” she said. “Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we’re going to lay more pipelines and build more nuclear plants and create jobs with clean coal and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources. We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers.”
Meanwhile, as for “lobbyists”, perhaps you ought to explain how, when both the Obamamessiah and yourself claim that he has never accepted any money from lobbyists, that he has never employed lobbyists, and that lobbyists are in no way associated with his campaign….. he has accepted money from them, employed them, and associated them with his campaign.
Add to that the fact that you also support Obama’s endorsement of people that you scream are “theocrats” and “antigay”, and what we figure out very quickly is why gay Democrats like yourself have to push the meme that anyone who doesn’t vote for Obama is a racist.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
NDXXX writes: “TJR: The fact that the Dems are out registering the GOP by wide margins speaks for itself. NDXXX: Or for the willingness of the Democrat Party to commit fraud.”
The news article NDXXX points to is one which reports on the tactics, crimes and felonies of the ACORN group –one of those “great community organizing” groups that BarryO believes in and used to be their Attorney of Record.
Yeah, gotta love those Chicago pols and voter fraud. Problem is, ACORN is a weed-like agency that has spread to countless other states and engages in the exact same kind of voter registration fraud noted in Milwaukee.
They are especially corrupt here in Detroit, Flint, Saginaw and Benton Harbor… oh wait, those are cities with large black populations who vote Democrat.
Go figure?
posted by ETJB on
Getting back to the central issue in this thread; I have to ask a question; why should we take the LCR seriously?
Of the Republican candidates they have endorsed for President, how many of them have responded with some positive LGBT- policy advances?
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Yup — one of the groups that the Obama campaign is paying illegally.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Seriously, ET, you’re way beyond your shallow end of the intellectual pool where you are better suited to splash and be safe. Stick to a single thread and try to answer the questions already before you.
The question of why you should take the LCRs endorsement of McCain-Palin seriously has been addressed here, in this thread.
http://independentgayforum.com/blog/show/31599.html#18812
Seems kind of strange that you were able to find a short, clipped 2 sentence reference of Richard2’s false rant buried in hundreds of other comments but you can’t seem to find anything about why the LCRs would endorse McCain-Palin.
Oh ET, you gotta go back in the shallow end of the pool. Only the big kids get to play at this end.
posted by ETJB on
Michigan-Matt;
Um, no I still fail to see why the Log Cabin Republican’s presidential endorsements should be taken seriously.
I fully support the notion that LGBT people come from the full spectrum of cultural, socio-economic and political backgrounds as do straight people. I understand the value in advancing LGBT rights through both major parties. I have friends who are Republicans, Independents and members of several of the more active minor political parties.
I am not suggesting that it is bad or even a waste of time for LGBT Republicans to work within the GOP to change its policy views on LGBT issues. I understand and have written rather extensivily about the electoral system, the roles of parties, interest groups, media, etc.
Again, while I would consider myself to be a liberal Democrat, I have a strong Independent streak in me and both parties have their high and low ponts; in terms of office holders and ideas.
However, the LCR has been around — officially — since, what the 1980s? If they endorsed Reagan (who I think gets way too much divine praise and hellish lashing), getting that place at the table did not seem to do much for gay rights in America circa 1980 – 1988. Likewise for Bush, asuming they endoresed Bush sr. (Who I found myself agreeing with on several occashions).
At the Federal level, the GOP just does not want risk alienating the religious right voting base, which means that few Republican Presidents and Congressmen/women are going to endorse gay rights legislation.
When that base gets really upset it (1) does not show up to vote, (2) votes for Democrats or (3) votes for a third party like the Constitution Party or the American Independent Party.
I am often equally critical of the HRC. It has been around since the 1980s and what has it got to show for it? Its got some people at the federal level who are pretty competent, but has demonstrated a utter lack of knowledge and expertise in dealing with gay rights at the state and or local level.
I really think that we need to have a serious conversation about what LGBT interest groups do right, what they do wrong and why we should keep giving money to the LCR or the HRC, when they produce limited results.
posted by jake on
i agree, there are a lot of sock hand puppets and etjb does write and lecture like richard rosendall
good call peeps
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Well, I guess the gayDemocrat apologists working for BarryO’Biden team can’t quite rush past reality and redirect her fast enough to suit them.
The LCRs may have perceived in Sen McCain a ready-willingess to put aside the divisive culture wars –spawned by the gayLeft’s near radical fever to grab societal validation at any cost– and endorse a candidate who is approachable on gay civil rights issues, is willing to think outside the narrow box imposed by social conservatives on the current President… and may do more for advancing a positive, inclusive loving message for gays –despite the spittle and foam and hatred from the gayLeft.
Did the LCRs know that McCain, the strongest patriot in the presidential sweepstakes in 20 years, would stand in the midst of mourning victims of 9/11 and fellow patriots and take that opportunity to applaud and pay tribute to Mark Bingham, the most notable and visible gay patriot and hero of 9/11?
By the way, the LCRs who endorsed McCain know that McCain went to Mark Bingham’s funeral and said the following:
“I never knew Mark Bingham. But I wish I had. I know he was a good son and friend, a good rugby player, a good American, and an extraordinary human being. He supported me, and his support now ranks among the greatest honors of my life. I wish I had known before September 11th just how great an honor his trust in me was. I wish I could have thanked him for it more profusely than time and circumstances allowed. But I know it now. And I thank him with the only means I possess, by being as good an American as he was.”
Right, we can all believe the farLeft and gayDemocrats here who contend McCain is anti-gay and Palin is his evil, lipstick weilding ex-gay ministering vulture…
Right.
Gay voters would be stupid to turn their back on the McCain-Palin team –a team that isn’t content to follow BarryO’Biden’s track of whispering empty promises– but a team that speaks in positive terms to the public about gays.
I’m glad to witness another seachange moment in the GOP, in our Nation and in the public testimony of McCain for a true gay hero.
posted by ETJB on
Well, I guess the gay Republican apologists working for Mcain-Lets-Call-Women-Bitches and Palin-The-Commercial
team cannot quite rush past reality.
The Log Cabin Republicans have totally failed to advance federal gay rights legislation, failed to give more power within the party to social liberals or libertarians and failed to find any allies within the party, except for people who were already socially liberal or libertarian.
They chose to endorse Mcain – a candidate who opposes, just about, every gay rights bill that has come his way. Why? Will this hold the party accountable?
No, but the Log Cabin Republicans want, “a place at the GOP table” not to advance gay rights but to make money and get invited to fancy parties, get hit on by closeted gay Republicans in public places and sexually harass barely legal boys.
Mcain did not, “put aside” the cultural war. He picked a commercial for a VP that is the pre-packaged culture war. Neither of them think, “Outside the box” from the socially conservative religious right on abortion, or gay rights.
Did the LCR know that Mcain is a war hero? Everyone knows about his war record and personal sacrifice. To his credit, he did not cut and run, like the chicken hawks in the current White House.
Did Mcain mention in his speech that Mark was gay? Did he demonstrate his thanks to Mark, by support any gay rights legislation? No. Did he use this opportunity to talk about evils of anti-gay prejudice? No.
To the man, who saved his life by giving up his own, Mcain — the maverick — the –straight shooter — can only make, assuming he actually wrote it, nice little speeches.
Yup, he thanks Mark for saving his life, but he still thinks that Mark should remain a second class citizen.
He still thinks that Mark’s longtime companion should not legally be his husband (or even a CU or a DP) but a stranger, or a friendly roommate.
He still thinks that Mark and his “roommate” should be violating the law every time they have sex.
Given up trying to assert that it is rational for progressive, pro-choice, pro-feminist, pro-gay rights voters to vote for someone who is anti all these things?
Yeah, Mcain speaks positivily of gay Americans, without a pulse. Who most people — not gay — probably do not know he is gay.
Gays who are content to be second class citizens. Content to have the law treat their longtime companion as a friendly roommate or stranger. Content to be treated as criminals when they have sex.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET, you continue to amaze all here with three things: 1) your singular ability to prove you’re nothing less than cheerleader #1 and a waterpail carrier for the gayDemocrats… 2) demean one of our community’s biggest hero in this century by slandering the memory of Mark Bingham (why would ET, a self-professed “progressive” do that? because Mark dared break from the gayLeft creed and support McCain)… and 3) no fact, no reason, no amount of rationality will convince you to drop da’Masta’s waterpail and think for yourself.
Oh, and there’s a 4th item… you’re not very creative when you have to steal lines from others… “team cannot quite rush past reality.” You gotta at least get your own lines, ET. Maybe you should phone home for some, eh?
ET strains reality with this whopper: “The Log Cabin Republicans have totally failed to advance federal gay rights legislation, failed to give more power within the party to social liberals or libertarians and failed to find any allies within the party….”
As has been repeatedly demonstrated by others on IGF and elsewhere in blogland, the LCRs went through a nearly 8 year period when the LCR leadership sold the group’s voice to a collection of funders from the gayLeft. They sought to use the LCRs to flame the GOP; and they did it repeatedly.
Opposing the Party’s incumbent Prez was the pinnacle… those gayLeft-funded leaders exited the LCRs leaving the group in debt, with no phones, no paid staff and a horrible reputation of being the grit of dirt in the eye of the GOP.
It’s slowly turning around… and repairing that failure of leadership by people ET would claim were “progressives” will take time and good will.
That’s why many moderate and liberal GOPers –gay and str8– applauded when the current LCRs did what ought to be a no-brainer, endorse McCain-Palin. Progress comes in small, certain steps first. The ghosts of those gayLeft funders continues to stalk the LCRs. Small certain steps, ET.
Which is far better than pretty words and EmptySuit whispered promises from BarryO’Biden.
posted by ETJB on
M&M/S&M/Richard II;
Time and Time again you have demonstrated not only your malicious and hateful manner, but your eagerness to be — politically — nothing more then what you critics Democrats for being a slave on the master’s plantation.
You also love to lie. For example, you accused me — without proof — of, “slandering the memory of Mark Bingham”.
I did not do this at all.
I pointed that lack of moral or ethical values in a man — McCain — who can publicly praise and thank a man for saving his life, while still believing that he should remain a second class citizen.
Yes sir, McCain has proven himself to be a friend and admirer of homosexuals who do not have a pulse. This is your great proof that we should vote for him?!
Or, another example. I pointed out that the LCR has failed to advance federal gay rights legislation or to give more power to socially liberal or libertarian minded Republicans.
Your reply: Duh, Well, Dude I think that recently the LCR had been under a secret conspiracy plot by the ‘gay left’. Um huh. Of coarse, you will not be able to prove this.
The LCR is older then eight years and the bottom line is that most gay Republicans are going at complaining, and being bottoms, but when some one suggests running for office or holding their party accountable, they are too scared.
You are so out of touch with reality, that is is really funny, and sad at the same time.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ETJB, prove this one with a citation: “Duh, Well, Dude I think that recently the LCR had been under a secret conspiracy plot by the ‘gay left’. Um huh. Of coarse, you will not be able to prove this.”
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Of course, if it’s anything like the last few times you’ve been held to account for your statements, it’ll be like the “Sarah Palin belongs to a secesionist group” that got morphed into “Some people have written that they think that Palin once belonged to a 3rd party”.
Yeah, gotta love those gayLefties and their sense of truthiness… when held to account, waffle like the Belgians, twist like ChubbieCheckers, flipflop like Kerry.
Anything, just get off the hook and back in the stream.
Yeah, Palin is a secessionist. Hardy, har har.