I was there.
I was on the floor of the Democratic National Convention when Barack Obama accepted the nomination in a thundering speech. I was there when the flags waved, when the fireworks exploded to the vibrant strings of movie-music, when confetti was shot from an air gun and pushed by the wind.
I was there, and what I remember most clearly are two things: the standing ovation when Obama mentioned coming to an agreement over gay rights, and the woman with the rainbow flag.
First, the applause. Applause lines are applause lines, and candidates at their own conventions have many of them.
But when Obama said, "I know there are differences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free from discrimination," everyone around me stood up.
And I was not standing by liberal California or New York, either. I was next to the Arizona delegates, across from Wisconsin, behind Iowa. They all stood. They all cheered wildly, as if he had been talking about them personally, about their own families, about their own rights.
Second, the rainbow flag. There was an African-American woman in the Ohio section, dressed in vibrant purple, and the entire time Obama was speaking, she held her right arm straight up, holding an American flag and a rainbow flag together.
She didn't wave them happily. She didn't bring her flags down during the quiet parts of the speeches, the way everyone else did.
Instead, she was her own silent protest, her own one-woman reminder, that justice needed to be done.
These things, together, are the two that most heartened me at the convention.
Yes, I have drunk the holy water. Yes, I believe we must vote for Obama, because he is our best chance at full civil rights right now, and this is a point where we must take every opportunity we can.
Yes, even so, I noted that with other examples, Obama uses the collective "we" - he'll say things like, "We run little leagues," when I'm sure he has never run a little league in his life; but gay people are always "brothers and sisters." To him, we are still the other.
But in this election, noting things like that are interesting, but trivial. This is an important election, a serious election. There is a gulf between Obama and McCain (especially with the nomination of the very socially conservative Gov. Palin) and if we are committed to fighting for our civil rights the way we say we are, then we must vote accordingly. We must keep perspective.
Nevertheless, more moving to me than being included in Obama's laundry list - although that was important - was the genuine thunder of feeling expressed by the delegates. They are in this with us. That's what it felt like. These Democrats from around the country, from large empty states and small crowded ones, these governors and senators and union workers and retirees, they feel our rights are important and vital, and a central part of "change" and "hope."
They are our allies, and most of them are straight.
And that woman, that woman with the flag. She reminded me that it is people like her, people who stand up and announce who they are before the applause when acceptance is not certain, people who stand up and say, I am gay and I deserve full rights, it is those kinds of people that draw attention to places where the government must stitch together the torn places and create justice.
Is it people like this woman who draw attention to a cause and change hearts one by one.
What truly propels us forward is the will of the people. The small, lonely, fierce voices of the oppressed and the loud call of the collective will. Government, we must remember, is rarely the center of change. In our democracy, government usually acts in response to the people, it does not lead the charge.
And the will of the people has changed in our case, is changing.
Not everyone. Not everywhere. But maybe enough to make a difference. Maybe enough to sweep away the last of the federal legal barriers to our civil rights.
We stand for ourselves and now others are standing with us. We are winning. There is no going back.
20 Comments for “What I Saw at the Convention”
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Jennifer, first congrats on attending the DNC and being present during the Temple of Barack speech… I have no doubt that for your fellow gayLeft and gayDemocrat pals, it was a moving time. Did the non-recyclable foam pillars and faux Rose Garden backdrop look as lame in person as they did on the TV? Just curious.
I submit the moment would have been stirring for you irrespective of BarryO’s empty whispered promises and failure to adequately address why he opposes the gayLeft’s #1 civil rights agenda item: gay marriage.
I say that because like many gayDemocrats here, I think you’d be pulling that lever for whomever the Democrats put on that stage in Denver –you just wouldn’t have had to rationalize why your candidate’s position on the #1 gayLeft civil rights issue is equivalent to the evil (and as many here wrongly believe, “anti-gay”) McCain.
And I note, you didn’t rationalize it here because you can’t… without admitting that on gay marriage, Obama and McCain and Bush are three pea in the same pod.
Swelling adulation and breath-taking moments abound in all conventions –even the 1968 DNC rioting and looting convention when the last group of farLeft radicals tried to run the DNC show… and BarryO’s bomb throwing buddies in the Weathermen Underground were pressing for their issues of the day to be addressed by Veep Humphrey –and he did.
What I find amazing is that gayLefties and gayDemocrats continue to promise all sorts of things to their gay brethern about a BarryO administration, but the last Democrat Administration was a failure on gay civil rights. And you still can’t even admit that fact.
Look, I understand it’s difficult to make the case to your gay brethern that BarryO is more than an EmptySuit and pretty words when your candidate’s only record he can point to is the receipt for his last styled haircut and manicure… but we’ve all been here with you gayDemocrat guys three times in the last 3 election cycles and each time it’s promises, promises, promises. Heck, the last time, Kerry couldn’t even do that and Edwards was reported to have said earlier that he couldn’t stand “those people” -meaning gays.
The chants of OH-Baam-AH, OH-Baam-AH were silenced in America about as quickly as Cha-vez, Cha-vez were silenced in Venezula. Less than a single news cycle. Celebrity and misty eyed moments are great for the heart strings, but gay America doesn’t need another round of whispered promises without results. We’ve had enough of that for a lifetime in the Democrat-controlled Congress.
There’s a great deal more for gays to gain by voting for McCain-the-Maverick and helping the moderate and progressive gays like me move the GOP back to a centrist, moderate point. This is a seachange moment for our Country and tossing away the gayVote on a team that has no record except the empty promise of pretty words and, maybe -just maybe- a seat at the table of power… I don’t think that’s worth any gay vote… except people like you who would have voted for BarryO or anyone else the Democrats put up on the altar for worship.
posted by Rob on
There’s a great deal more for gays to gain by voting for McCain-the-Maverick and helping the moderate and progressive gays like me move the GOP back to a centrist, moderate point.
How will voting for McCain, and Palin help move the GOP back to a centrist, and moderate point? Sure McCain may place a few gay token members into administration, but will he sign the repeal of DADT and DOMA? I’m pretty sure Obama will, because first of all he’s no Clinton, and second independents and moderates are in favour of gays serving openly in the military, meaning no political risk. I don’t care if Obama doesn’t officially support same-sex marriage, since he won’t have control over this state issue.
Even better, why would gays even bother with the GOP? Look how the GOP has rewarded their efforts in 2000, by officially supporting the FMA and sex education that marginalizes gays. Nay, it won’t be gays that come to the federal GOP, it will be the federal GOP that will come to them after successive losses, just like how the Tories in the UK learned their lesson after 16 miserable years. When has appeasement ever worked? Churchill Matt, not Chamberlain.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Rob, I appreciate that those gayDemocrat blinders block your view of reality, but try pulling them off and see the world for what it is, not what you’ve been promised it is. The rainbow brickroads don’t extend much outside of Massachusetts or California… and you can’t get to Hawaii from here.
McCain and Palin are both anti-establishment, Party-bucking mavericks who have as a shared goal not just a career talking about change, but a career and record dedicated to real reform, real change and no empty promises.
It is exactly that Party-bucking, anti-establishment, maverick mindset that is reshaping the GOP, could reshape Washington and will reshape this campaign’s focus.
You think you know McCain, but I have to tell you, if your opinion of him is shaped by the hardcore, radicalized, victim-hood industry gayDemocrat mindset as it is for many here and over at BlogAmerica and BlogActive, you don’t have a clue.
On DADT, if we are able to put down our banners of “We Want Validation” and work cooperatively to convince military commanders that DADT is a failed policy –and gays adopt the attitude that military service is a honor and not a right– McCain will support the commanders’ collective sense to disband the policy and seek inclusion. McCain’s two sons know it’s a failed policy –whether in the Marine Corp or at the Naval Academy… failed policy.
The gayLeft’s agenda to adversarially push military commanders and hawkish politicians on this issue hasn’t worked. Like it hasn’t worked on gay marriage, full civil rights, economic benefits, insurance benefits or gay adoption.
McCain is more likely to listen and trust the advice of military commanders on this issue than BarryO –heck, BarryO wouldn’t even meet with military commanders before forming his wrongheaded and misguided opinions about the Surge… like SlickWilly, the military know what motivates BarryO and it isn’t his shared regard of their important work –it’s somewhere to the Left of Kerry… disdain, contempt, ill will and a dismissive attitude that took him to a celebrity rally over seeing our military wounded in-country.
Nawh, BarryO has no credibility on the issue and the do-nothing Democrat Congress has less. If DADT gets repealed, it’ll be by a GOP President who listens to his military commanders… and it rests with us to convince those brave patriots that inclusion is a policy worthy of the men & women who serve.
On DOMA, I think you misunderstand McCain’s position if you think repeal is the right answer. The correct answer is the one BarryO has adopted and gayDemocrats have been unable or unwilling to hold him to account… the individual state, who have always regulated marriage, is the correct venue for these changes… at the ballot box, not at the pen stroke of an activist judge over-ruling all.
BarryO is far more Clinton and Carter than he is anyone else. The worst part is that BarryO is wrong on the #1 gayLeft issue and our gayDemocrat friends here have been unwilling or unable to make him see the light… because full support of gay marriage should be a slamdunk for a liberal, elitist candidate who ought to know better given his ties to the Nation’s civil rights movement.
You say the GOP adversely “rewarded” gays in 2000 for supporting W and the GOP. I’d ask, when did you come to that conclusion? You didn’t say the LCRs… you said “gays”. Nearly 80% of gay voters supported AlGore and then, when he ditched the litigation efforts many gayLefties wanted to continue, the radicalized elements in the gayDemocrat community savaged Bush and Cheney… to a point where our more partisan fellow gays made fun of those two great patriots by projecting images in public of them acting like gays. Our own people used a demeaning mainstream image to harm their political enemies… all because the DNC and gayLeft leadership told them to… after they tried unsuccessfully to take over the White House Easter Roll event. How many anti-war rallies did CodePink show up with posters of Cheney kissing Rove, or Bush kissing the Saudi king and making lewd suggestions which, frankly, were anti-gay and hate speech in themselves.
And you wonder why we have public relations problems with W and the WH and the GOP? It’s all about them attacking us, eh? No. And you know better.
McCain has a real chance to change the construction and composition of the GOP over the next 4-8 years. Gays have the opportunity to move the radical, anti-gay farRight whackjobs out of the GOP rank&file once and for all… but to do that, McCain needs to win and more gays need to drop the allegiance to liberal, statist progrmas and promises and bank on the future of all.
Unlike the insincere, self-serving and tongue-in-cheek gayDemocrats here at IGF, the answer to the past problems of anti-gay GOP values-driven Party isn’t to break off all gays inside the GOP and let the Party sink like a rock –which wouldn’t happen anyway.
The real answer, the boldly reforming answer, the seachange answer is for gays to break ranks with the EmptySuit whispered promises of BarryO and secure our future by electing a reforming maverick, Party-bucking, out-of-the-box thinker in McCain.
I can tell you, Rob, from reading history and living the last few years toiling inside the GOP and getting to know McCain, this is a seachange moment for the GOP. The convention delegates here in St Paul are fudnamentally different from the ones who came before… nearly 53% of think McCain is a liberal or moderate. Almost 60% agree with his positions on social issues.
As gays, we’ve got a once-in-a-lifetime chance to change the game AND the playing field to advantage REAL change on gay civil rights. But it won’t happen with the same old, same old Washington 2 step of EmptySuits and whispered promises from BarryO.
McCain took a huge gamble in selecting a reforming, Party-bucking, independent thinking experienced maverick with a record as Veep. BarryO took the road more traveled and picked a saftey who can’t keep his mouth shut, who thinks he should be King Biden and plays to BarryO’s worst elitist liberal tendencies.
We don’t need anymore “safe choices”. We had that in Kerry, Gore, Edwards and others. We’ve got an entire Congress made up of “safe choices”.
Gays need to change the game and playing field. McCain can help us do that.
posted by sky cat on
Matt, that was the worst astroturf evar. I award you no McCain action points.
Seriously, weak man.
posted by Rob on
Rob, I appreciate that those gayDemocrat blinders block your view of reality, but try pulling them off and see the world for what it is, not what you’ve been promised it is. The rainbow brickroads don’t extend much outside of Massachusetts or California… and you can’t get to Hawaii from here.
My view of reality is quite clear, thank you. BTW I’m not a Democrat.
McCain and Palin are both anti-establishment, Party-bucking mavericks who have as a shared goal not just a career talking about change, but a career and record dedicated to real reform, real change and no empty promises.
It is exactly that Party-bucking, anti-establishment, maverick mindset that is reshaping the GOP, could reshape Washington and will reshape this campaign’s focus.
That would have been believable in 2000, but McCain pretty much tarnished his so-called Marverick reputation when he ran for presidential nominee of his campaign.
You think you know McCain, but I have to tell you, if your opinion of him is shaped by the hardcore, radicalized, victim-hood industry gayDemocrat mindset as it is for many here and over at BlogAmerica and BlogActive, you don’t have a clue.
*yawn*
On DADT, if we are able to put down our banners of “We Want Validation” and work cooperatively to convince military commanders that DADT is a failed policy –and gays adopt the attitude that military service is a honor and not a right– McCain will support the commanders’ collective sense to disband the policy and seek inclusion. McCain’s two sons know it’s a failed policy –whether in the Marine Corp or at the Naval Academy… failed policy.
I don’t recall the military commanders changing their minds before Truman signed an executive order to desegregate the armed forces. Should Truman have refrained from signing that executive order because his military commanders dissaproved of military desegregation? You’re right that military service is an honour, but it’s an honour that should be given to those that are capable to serve their country, such as the many gay and lesbian veterans of America.
Skipping your fluff…
On DOMA, I think you misunderstand McCain’s position if you think repeal is the right answer. The correct answer is the one BarryO has adopted and gayDemocrats have been unable or unwilling to hold him to account… the individual state, who have always regulated marriage, is the correct venue for these changes… at the ballot box, not at the pen stroke of an activist judge over-ruling all.
Look he used the ‘activist judge’ buzzword. Calling Obama BarryO, gayDemocrats etc. Spoken like a true immature partisan.
If you had paid attention to my previous posts, you would have noticed that I said that same-sex marriage is a state issue. You don’t even seem to know what DOMA entirely consists of either.
You say the GOP adversely “rewarded” gays in 2000 for supporting W and the GOP. I’d ask, when did you come to that conclusion? You didn’t say the LCRs… you said “gays”. Nearly 80% of gay voters supported AlGore and then, when he ditched the litigation efforts many gayLefties wanted to continue, the radicalized elements in the gayDemocrat community savaged Bush and Cheney… to a point where our more partisan fellow gays made fun of those two great patriots by projecting images in public of them acting like gays. Our own people used a demeaning mainstream image to harm their political enemies… all because the DNC and gayLeft leadership told them to… after they tried unsuccessfully to take over the White House Easter Roll event. How many anti-war rallies did CodePink show up with posters of Cheney kissing Rove, or Bush kissing the Saudi king and making lewd suggestions which, frankly, were anti-gay and hate speech in themselves.
And you wonder why we have public relations problems with W and the WH and the GOP? It’s all about them attacking us, eh? No. And you know better.
First, I meant the LCR, and the Austin 8 endorsement, as well as the 20% of gays who voted for W. Second, even if W received 80% of the gay vote, he would’ve still supported FMA because it was in line with Karl Rove’s strategy in energizing the evangelical base, which is a far bigger base than the gay one. Third, what the hell do anti-war, or pro-choice groups for that matter, have to do with gays in general? This is just incoherent ranting of your part. You done now?
McCain has a real chance to change the construction and composition of the GOP over the next 4-8 years. Gays have the opportunity to move the radical, anti-gay farRight whackjobs out of the GOP rank&file once and for all… but to do that, McCain needs to win and more gays need to drop the allegiance to liberal, statist progrmas and promises and bank on the future of all.
Yet McCain isn’t campaigning to gays. If he were to address them, then he would gain gay votes. Do you think he or Palin will meet up with LCR to discuss gay issues publicly instead of private chit-chat?
Unlike the insincere, self-serving and tongue-in-cheek gayDemocrats here at IGF, the answer to the past problems of anti-gay GOP values-driven Party isn’t to break off all gays inside the GOP and let the Party sink like a rock –which wouldn’t happen anyway.
Most commentators and publishers here at IGF seem to care more about pro-gay candidates, be they Democrat or Republican, rather than party affiliations. As for the GOP, well they said the Titanic was unsinkable… Demographics show a downward trend in GOP affiliation among 18-30 year olds, lowering since the late 80s, and maintaining as they age.
The real answer, the boldly reforming answer, the seachange answer is for gays to break ranks with the EmptySuit whispered promises of BarryO and secure our future by electing a reforming maverick, Party-bucking, out-of-the-box thinker in McCain.
I can tell you, Rob, from reading history and living the last few years toiling inside the GOP and getting to know McCain, this is a seachange moment for the GOP. The convention delegates here in St Paul are fudnamentally different from the ones who came before… nearly 53% of think McCain is a liberal or moderate. Almost 60% agree with his positions on social issues.
That’s nice, but you’re pretty talking about partisans here. I’m pretty sure he isn’t personally anti-gay (neither is W for that matter) but his positions on social issues are quite far from being gay friendly.
As gays, we’ve got a once-in-a-lifetime chance to change the game AND the playing field to advantage REAL change on gay civil rights. But it won’t happen with the same old, same old Washington 2 step of EmptySuits and whispered promises from BarryO.
McCain took a huge gamble in selecting a reforming, Party-bucking, independent thinking experienced maverick with a record as Veep. BarryO took the road more traveled and picked a saftey who can’t keep his mouth shut, who thinks he should be King Biden and plays to BarryO’s worst elitist liberal tendencies.
We don’t need anymore “safe choices”. We had that in Kerry, Gore, Edwards and others. We’ve got an entire Congress made up of “safe choices”.
Gays need to change the game and playing field. McCain can help us do that.
I do think there’s a chance that McCain can give some fresh air into the GOP, but not until he reverts back to his year 2000 self. ‘s gotten too comfortable with the social conservatives in the past few years, calling himself a baptist, rescinding his comments about Jerry Falwell being an agent of intolerance. Plus, what happened to that outrage about campaign finance reform? What about support for amnesty, or that silly gas tax holiday that only Obama opposed?
Sorry Matt, you’ll need more than just empty rhetoric and partisan bickering to convince others here on IGF. Try trimming inflammatory rhetoric, refrain from using silly names like BarryO or King Biden, and beef up your arguments. Civility is at an all time low here.
posted by WhiteNoise on
Sorry Matt, you’ll need more than just empty rhetoric and partisan bickering to convince others here on IGF. Try trimming inflammatory rhetoric, refrain from using silly names like BarryO or King Biden, and beef up your arguments. Civility is at an all time low here.
Precisely what I was thinking. The shrill partisanship and puerile vituperation on this site is lamentable.
This should be a civil forum for passionate political discussion not a hissing match between hysterical partisans.
MM ? you provide interesting insights and prevent the site from becoming an echo chamber. However you do yourself and your views a great disservice by your inability to express yourself without a constant barrage of childish name-calling and a general snideness and contemptuousness.
Denouncing posters who disagree with you as left-wing/liberal/Democrat does not constitute a persuasive counterargument. (Nor, for that matter, do counter-accusations of being right-wing/Republican.)
I think most visitors to this site are genuinely interested in determining which of the parties is most likely to extend liberties to gays and lesbians. I am open to persuasion (or at least dialogue) by people of good will but I instinctively resile from pointless and corrosive partisan slanging matches.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Rob, you seem to be under the impression that I think you to be a gayDemocrat? Read my response and your quote –I said you had on the fashionable but unecessary accessory: gayDemocrat blinders.
You’re probably laboring under the same kind of illusory fiction that another famously non-Democrat IGF commenter here, Richard2, maintains his own independent or unaligned status… heck Rob, for all we know, you could be just another liberal Canucker who wants to impose his vision of a great white wasteland devoid of culture on America.
You asked me “How will voting for McCain, and Palin help move the GOP back to a centrist, and moderate point?” I told you; we’re in the midst of a seachange moment within the GOP and ALL gays have the incredible opportunity to rid the GOP of it’s anti-gay farRight whackjobs by supporting McCain-the-Maverick, McCain the Real Change Agent. In fact, if the words of the gayLeft and gayDemocrats are to be trusted, it is the moral duty of all gays to support McCain and help push the biggest obstacle in the culture war toward full gay civil rights into the sea of 3rd Party inconsequence… like the Greens or the CPUSA.
You asked, Robbie-boi. I answered and pointed out you probably wouldn’t be swayed by anything any moderate or progressive gayGOPer said because you’re going to pull that Dem lever no matter who is in the Temple of Barack, no matter how seductive the whispered promises of the gayLeft in your ample and attentive ears, no matter that the GOP does or doesn’t do to placate the special interests of the gayVictimHood advocates.
You wrongly accuse me of being partisan without exception, but that is exactly what JenniferVanasco and KingRichardRosendall and others here on IGF are –if it was Hillary (great choice)on the Temple’s stage, they’d be for her; if it was Gov Richardson (an excellent choice), they’d be for him. Because the secret is they are first and foremost liberals and are using their gayness for the Democrat Party’s benefit… because, to most of them, being gay and voting Democrat are the same things. Can’t you still hear the strains of “We Are Family” during the OH-Baam-AH rally? It was BarryO’s proof of a rapture-like endorsement of the gay subculture within the DNC –at least that’s what some gayLefties are struggling to convince us. Unfortunately, that’s all they have to convince us… and some whispered promises intent on seduction.
Now, I have summary concern about your recent pitch toward reason in arguing that a standard of “pretty words” isn’t good enough to compel you to reconsider your political options but it is perfectly OK and adequate to lock-in your preference for BarryO, the ultimate EmptySuited, pretty word, no record, no accomplishments other than writing 2 autobiographies about himself.
Maybe that’s why gayLefties like him so much, beyond the celebrity metro-sexual thing he’s got going… he’s equally self-absorbed as they are –as proof in his lack of legislative accomplishments but he’s written 2 books about… ta da, himself! Compare that to McCain’s urgent call to do something bigger than self, to give back to America and our great people… not constantly take, as gayLefties would have us believe is THE American dream.
OK, Rob, I get it. You’ll be ho’ing da rows on ElectionDay. No surprise there.
You asked; I explained my answer. The very least you could have done was say “Thank you for answering my question”… but, instead, you took it as an opportunity to demean a fellow gay who doesn’t toe your line or hoe your row.
As for the posts from our 2 newest entries into the sockpuppet IGF sweepstakes, welcome sky cat and white noise! What’s the usual name you guys go under here at IGF? Is “richard” part of the name, by chance?
posted by Rob on
Rob, you seem to be under the impression that I think you to be a gayDemocrat? Read my response and your quote –I said you had on the fashionable but unecessary accessory: gayDemocrat blinders.
Never heard of them, so how can I be wearing them?
You’re probably laboring under the same kind of illusory fiction that another famously non-Democrat IGF commenter here, Richard2, maintains his own independent or unaligned status… heck Rob, for all we know, you could be just another liberal Canucker who wants to impose his vision of a great white wasteland devoid of culture on America.
Not really, I do differ from liberals on serveral critical issues, such as gun issues, unions, immigration, multiculturalism, and trade. But I don’t need to defend myself over my views. Take it or leave it.
You asked me “How will voting for McCain, and Palin help move the GOP back to a centrist, and moderate point?” I told you; we’re in the midst of a seachange moment within the GOP and ALL gays have the incredible opportunity to rid the GOP of it’s anti-gay farRight whackjobs by supporting McCain-the-Maverick, McCain the Real Change Agent. In fact, if the words of the gayLeft and gayDemocrats are to be trusted, it is the moral duty of all gays to support McCain and help push the biggest obstacle in the culture war toward full gay civil rights into the sea of 3rd Party inconsequence… like the Greens or the CPUSA.
A midst of a seachange movement… one you think isn’t occuring in other parties as well? Like I’ve stated, it’s not the party itself that really matters, what does matter is winning the hearts and minds of the moderates across America. Conservatives are always the last ones to move or change, like with the issue of segregation for example, usually when things aren’t going their way.
You wrongly accuse me of being partisan without exception, but that is exactly what JenniferVanasco and KingRichardRosendall and others here on IGF are –if it was Hillary (great choice)on the Temple’s stage, they’d be for her; if it was Gov Richardson (an excellent choice), they’d be for him. Because the secret is they are first and foremost liberals and are using their gayness for the Democrat Party’s benefit… because, to most of them, being gay and voting Democrat are the same things. Can’t you still hear the strains of “We Are Family” during the OH-Baam-AH rally? It was BarryO’s proof of a rapture-like endorsement of the gay subculture within the DNC –at least that’s what some gayLefties are struggling to convince us. Unfortunately, that’s all they have to convince us… and some whispered promises intent on seduction.
Tu quote Matt. BTW Vanasco and Rosendall have already supported pro-gay Republicans, so it hardly makes them partisan. Also they don’t seem to call McCain or Palin any silly names like you do.
As for the rest of your post, what I understood is “rant, rant, rant, BarryO, rant, rant, rant, gayLeft, rant, rant, gayDemocrats, rant, rant, whine, whine, whine.” You think a debate without resorting to name calling is ‘pretty words’? How lowbrow can you get? If you can’t handle attacks on your arguments, then hit the road Jack, otherwise write your arguments properly and intelligently.
Now you still haven’t given any good arguments about why DOMA isn’t important to repeal, concerning the recognition of same-sex couples with the federal government that you forgot about, or why we should wait for a bunch of military commanders to give the thumbs up before the repeal of DADT when they had to be pushed, kicking and screaming into desegregating the military. Are you gonna stop ranting and whining about the others on this board, and stick to your guns now?
posted by Rob on
crap, force of habit. I mean tu quoque.
posted by JJ on
That homophobe Rev. Leah Daughtry was the one running the whole DNC this year anyway.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Rob, I love how gayLefties can point to conservatives as racial segregationists and use that as code to smear GOPers, but the truth of the matter is that for more than 70 yrs in our country, the primary racial bigots and segregationists were Democrats, Rob; Democrats. Not conservatives. Democrats in the South. And, to underscore your silly implied smear of GOPers and racial segregation, the GOP in control of northern states at the time had already moved past segregation, implemented policies that made good on their singular promise to free blacks from slavery.
Nice try at race baiting there, Rob, but once again history proves you wrong– but don’t let that stop you from arguing mistruths and distortions… because that’s probably your best shot.
As for debate tactics, I always appreciate it when fake independents and gayApologists try to teach about the “evils” of unscruplous people switching the topic and turning to personal attacks because, the fake argument goes, they have nothing else with which to advance their case.
Sort of like the way the MSM liberal elites have treated Sarah Palin this week –even to the point of gaybloggers at BlogActive and BlogAmerica or rabid Democrats at MyDD or the DailyKos trying to spin-up whoppers like Sarah Palin was so distressed by the birth of an imperfect child, she tried to drown the child in a hotel bathtub.
Right, personal attacks aren’t cool. The truth: sometimes they are used to undercut the credibility of the opponent and that, if the characterization rings true for the audience, does work. Just like BarryO’s negative campaign commercials… which, I thought the high worshipful Masta in the Temple of Barack wasn’t going to do because it was the same, old tired Washington politics? Yeah, right… another hollow promise from the High Priest of Liberalism.
OH-Baam-AH, Oh-bamm-AH.
Getting back to the heart of the discussion, and moving away from your personal attack on me to discredit my arguments (wink) -which you were just lecturing the crowd whilst upon your gayLiberal soapbox- the simple, unavoidable political calculation I’m offering is that the single best way for real gays to support a seachange moment within the body politic and rid ourselves of what we’ve been told is the biggest, most powerful evil opponent on the political landscape (the farRight whackjobs) is to support moderate and progressive GOPers trying to take back their Party and return it to the traditions of Ripon Republicanism. For that, they’d have to cross over and vote for McCain.
McCain represents that movement. His selection by both moderate Republicans and independents who voted in countless GOP open primaries proves his credentials even if hardcore gayApologists can’t.
What I saw watching the Democrat convention on CSPAN was a Party and candidate desperately trying to stay away from gays and gay civil rights… and firmly holding his ground on the #1 gayLeft’s civil right issue of gay marriage -which is in opposition to all that our gayLefties and gayDemocrats have been telling us here.
Whether you believe writers here have supported pro-gay GOP candidates or not (I don’t), the truth of the matter is that no matter who the Democrats put up for Prez in Denver, the gayLeft and gayDemocrats here would have endorsed them and looked low and high for something to glumm onto to defend their Party’s choice. Because, first and last, those gays are liberals and Democrats… not gay as they often say if the defining aspect in their activist lives. And they’ve sold our gaybrethern into voteSlavery and bondage on the Democrat Plantation.
I wouldn’t suppose to think that you were even a smidgen of potential to accept that argument. Your words here indicate you are pretty solid inside the unmovable, unshakable gayVote monolith.
But you, nor King Richard nor Jennifer not John Corvino are the targets… the targets are the real gay independents in our community… and not the fake ones who claim to be so as to gain some gravitas and credibility (see Richard2).
posted by Michigan-Matt on
JJ writes: “That homophobe Rev. Leah Daughtry was the one running the whole DNC this year anyway.”
Ummm, no, she’s a sell out. She’s as bad as they get within the gayDemocrat, gayLeft community. She’s proven to ScreaminHowieDean that she’ll toast her gaybrethern Democrats and still smile about it while doing it.
Dean, the anti-gay bigot, was the one running the show at the DNC. You know, the guy who axed the gay outreach office at the DNC… the guy who fired gay staffers at the DNC because they acted like their allegiance was to gays, not the Party FatCats and bigots.
Oh yeah, the Democrat Natl Committee is a virtual font of pro-gayness these days. Kind of reminds me of the 700 Club, no?
posted by Rob on
Rob, I love how gayLefties can point to conservatives as racial segregationists and use that as code to smear GOPers, but the truth of the matter is that for more than 70 yrs in our country, the primary racial bigots and segregationists were Democrats, Rob; Democrats. Not conservatives. Democrats in the South. And, to underscore your silly implied smear of GOPers and racial segregation, the GOP in control of northern states at the time had already moved past segregation, implemented policies that made good on their singular promise to free blacks from slavery.
Nice try at race baiting there, Rob, but once again history proves you wrong– but don’t let that stop you from arguing mistruths and distortions… because that’s probably your best shot.
Nice dodging of the issue there Matt. You mean conservative Dixiecrats like Jesse Helms, or Strom Thurmond? Most social conservatives switched their party affiliation to the GOP after the Civil Rights Act of 1967, which was passed by Democrats. The Democrats of today aren’t the same of yesteryears. Nah, that fine bunch made themselves home with the Republican party. So much for your history and distortions.
And then you keep on repeating your rants…
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ROb, not a rant at all. You asked a question of why a gay should vote for McCain-the-Maverick and I told you.
The fact that you aren’t open to debating the real issues fairly and honestly seems apparent to all but you.
Those DixieCrats were less than 1% of the southern Democrats… southerners who, for decades and through 2 centuries of GOP opposition, stood solidly in favor of segregation.
Sort of like today’s supposed liberals like you. You preach a good line about equal pay, gay marriage and other issues but then, when the GOP comes forward with a stellar FEMALE veep, it’s time for you guys to turn on a dime and become the patent sexists that HillaryClinton supporters always knew you were.
No rants. Usually the guys here who use your line, like above, are looking for a exit because they know they’ve lost the discussion to reason and rationality.
Thanks for the compliment.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
And to put a finer point on Rob’s nonsense: “The Democrats of today aren’t the same of yesteryears.”
Sure they are… in fact, the bombthrowers and anarchists of the 1968 Chicago Democrat Convention are now the leaders INSIDE the halls at Denver. Whoops.
The Democrat forebearers of those bombthrowing radicals, like the Weatherman Underground, helped launch BarryO’s entry into politics. Paging BillAyers, paging SaulAlinsky, paging ACRON
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/02/opinion/main4145761.shtml
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=303605575673142
Now, what was that about how impressive it is the Democrats of today are nothing like the Democrats of yesteryears?
Put the partisanship aside and think first, ok? It’ll get you to a better grade of argument.
posted by FL SHP on
I wrote the following in email to Mr. Steve Hildebrand:
I am writing to address Senator Obama’s single mention of my community, and one of my major concerns because of his opinion, in his most-inspiring acceptance speech.
My partner and I celebrated our twenty-seventh year of partnership last week. “Partnership” doesn’t approach the true, real definition of our relationship but it is as close as one can currently get in Florida, a state which does not recognize same-sex marriage nor civil unions. Come November, we have a fight on our hands to say no to Question 2 on our ballot which would effectively end any chances of our working towards Marriage Equality and would have long range effects on relationships between any sex.
I watched the Logo television debates and I read all of the news regarding Saddleback. And to Senator Obama’s belief system and opinion that marriage is between one male and one female I say, “Enough!” It is not simply his belief in what “marriage” is for him based on the tenets of his religion because it translates into his stating that the GLBT citizens are not “marriageable,” are not worthy of it. This logically places us in a second class citizen status supposedly worthy of civil unions, something other than marriage but with the same rights — separate but equal. I am fifty-one years old and I know that separate but equal is merely separate and never equal. If civil unions are to carry 100% of the rights, protections, and privileges of marriage, then why call it something else at all?
What is the answer? Travel to Massachusetts or California to get married and live? We both come from Massachusetts and have traveled to California in the past but our house and jobs are in Florida, which does not recognize same-sex marriages performed out of state as does New York.
On this issue we have no recourse but to register our distaste, discomfort, and disgust with politicians saying that they support us GLBT citizens in our struggle for 100% of our civil rights and yet stating personal religious views which are opposed to our civil rights. Has not anyone caught this illogical fact?
No single politician or political party has the GBLT vote by default, and we will not become accustomed to our position under nor at the back of the bus.
posted by Rob on
ROb, not a rant at all. You asked a question of why a gay should vote for McCain-the-Maverick and I told you.
If it weren’t you sure didn’t give much evidence that change for better is occuring within’ the GOP.
The fact that you aren’t open to debating the real issues fairly and honestly seems apparent to all but you.
That’s fairly rich coming from you, since all you do is rant and throw ad hominems to your opponents like there’s no tomorrow.
Those DixieCrats were less than 1% of the southern Democrats… southerners who, for decades and through 2 centuries of GOP opposition, stood solidly in favor of segregation.
LOL It takes a heck of lot more than 1% for the entire southern states to realign themselves from sold blue to solid red, which is ironic due to the disdain their predecessors had for the Lincoln’s GOP, yet their contempt for the Civil Rights Act pretty much allowed them to bury that past. Barry Goldwater, whom I admire, certainly didn’t care for these folks, and didn’t care for the direction the GOP was heading for.
Sort of like today’s supposed liberals like you. You preach a good line about equal pay, gay marriage and other issues but then, when the GOP comes forward with a stellar FEMALE veep, it’s time for you guys to turn on a dime and become the patent sexists that HillaryClinton supporters always knew you were.
There you go again, ranting and throwing an ad hominem, the last refuge of the losing debater.
No rants. Usually the guys here who use your line, like above, are looking for a exit because they know they’ve lost the discussion to reason and rationality.
Thanks for the compliment.
Keep deluding yourself Matt.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Rob engages with “MM: Rob, not a rant at all. You asked a question of why a gay should vote for McCain-the-Maverick and I told you. Rob: If it weren’t you sure didn’t give much evidence that change for better is occuring within’ the GOP.”
I presumed you could read and carry a thought from thread to thread, Rob.
Sorry, I was wrong to have given you at least that much credit; I’ll provide crayons and coloring book instructions next time. Look to the discussion KingRichardJ and I had about the composition of GOP convention delegates above –as well as what it means when over 53% of GOP convention delegates opine that McCain is either a political Liberal or Moderate and 60% of the delegates agree with his positions.
Seachange, Rob. Independents elected McCain in several key GOP primary states –as was mentioned and outlined in other threads (again, it’s the “can Rob carry a thought from one thread to another” question that plagues you)… independents who crossed over to the GOP open primary to pick McCain as “their” candidate and wrestle back control from the farRight… you know, the farRight inside the GOP that YOU’VE been arguing it the #1 threat to gay civil rights??
There’s nothing deluding about the truth, Rob. And your attempt to avoid the harsh reality of politics moving against your preferences –which is to elect a Democrat no matter what the cost to gay civil rights– is a clear sign the only being deluded is you, Rob. I know, I know; 30 seconds to your pronounced denial of being a gayDemocrat-supporting leftie.
And all those other gayDemocrats here who have pushed and trumpeted BarryO over the real pro-gay Democrat contender, HillaryClinton. Just like the HRC, gayDemocrats looked every which way but toward success in endorsing a candidate who is, at best, gay-neutral on gay civil rights… at worst, a pandering promise whisperer who will run us over with the ObamaBus if he needs to… just like he did with his bigoted spiritual mentor Rev Wright and homophobic political advisor Rev Meeks.
There’s no need, Rob, to continue to try to defend the lackluster positions of BaryO’Biden on gay civil rights… or try to spin and blunt the pain of political reality with lines like “There you go again, ranting and throwing an ad hominem, the last refuge of the losing debater”.
As you well prove by your pained responses, there’s never a “last refuge” available for guys like you who refuse to accept political reality. It was your first refuge and only refuge from the seachange movement swirling around you like a whirlpool near a riptide.
posted by Drew on
Yet, no comment will be made about the lack of anti-gay rhetoric at the RNC convention.
posted by MiMatt38@yahoo.com on
Not only that Drew, but also no comment by the GayLeft here about McCain’s tribute to Mark Bingham, this century’s best known gay hero, on the 7th anniversary of 9/11.
No comment about Sarah Palin’s “I make no judgment” comments about gays on the CharlieGibson sexist hour interview.
It’s the same old game for some here… slander, shoot from the bushes, try employing the politics of personal destruction while moving onto the next item.
And PRAY (if there weren’t unabashed secularists) that no one holds them accountable.