Much nonsense has been flowing from left wing blogs about Sarah Palin, making it hard to distinguish her real strengths and weaknesses on social issues from paranoid caricature. Clearly, she is pro-life, supports 2nd amendment rights to gun ownership and is against same-sex marriage. Aside from that, there are a few worthy reports and commentaries online that shed some insight on her views and values, and they suggest that Palin represents a shift forward for the GOP. (This, in turn, has rattled Democrats and resurfaced some of the misogynistic tactics deployed against Hillary.)
The Los Angeles Times reports that "The Republican vice presidential candidate says students should be taught about condoms. Her running mate-and the party platform-disagree," revealing that Palin is more progressive on sexual matters than McCain:
In a widely quoted 2006 survey she answered during her gubernatorial campaign, Palin said she supported abstinence-until-marriage programs. But weeks later, she proclaimed herself "pro-contraception" and said condoms ought to be discussed in schools alongside abstinence.
"I'm pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues," she said during a debate in Juneau.
Some LGBT Obama supporters are making much of a report that Palin's church, as activist Wayne Besen puts it, "appears to support so-called 'ex-gay' ministries." The source is Time magazine, which reported:
Churches proliferate in Wasilla today, and among the largest and most influential is the Wasilla Bible Church, where the Palins worship.
At the 11:15 a.m. Sunday service, hundreds sit in folding chairs, listening to a 20-minute sermon about the Book of Malachi and singing along to alt-rock praise songs. The only sign of culture warring in the whole production is an insert in the day's program advertising an upcoming Focus on the Family conference on homosexuality in Anchorage called Love Won Out. The group promises to teach attendees how to "respond to misinformation in our culture" and help them "overcome" homosexuality.
These programs are benighted and deeply damaging, but having an ad for Focus on the Family's conference in the worship program does not make your church worse than most any other evangelical house of worship. And Palin has apparently no record on the subject. In fact, Jim Lindgren at The Volokh Conspiracy shares that:
"[Palin] has basically ignored social issues, period," said Gregg Erickson, an economist and columnist for the Alaska Budget Report.
[Added: On one gay issue in which Palin did weigh in, her first veto as governor was against a bill that would have barred benefits to the domestic partners of gay state employees. Her rationale: she said that she was advised the bill violated Alaska's constitution, but Palin would not have been the first governor to sign a constitutionally suspect bill and left it to the state courts to adjudicate. Palin supsequently did support a successful bill to put these benefits up to a non-binding vote of the people, but passions seem to have cooled and the matter appears moot, leaving the benefits in place.]
Over at Slate, Chistopher Hitchens advises "Don't Patronize Sarah Palin" and notes:
Was she in the Alaska Independence Party? Not really. Did she campaign for Pat Buchanan in 2000? The AP report from 1999 appears to be contradicted by her endorsement of Steve Forbes.
He also takes note of "the attempt to paint the Palin family as if it were Arkansas on ice or Tobacco Road with igloos and Inuit." It's a sentiment echoed by iconoclastic commentator Tammy Bruce, who describes herself on her website as "an openly gay, pro-choice, gun owning, pro-death penalty, voted-for-President Bush progressive feminist." In her San Francisco Chronicle op-ed, A feminist's argument for McCain's VP, Bruce argues that "The [Democratic] party has moved from taking the female vote for granted to outright contempt for women." She adds:
There is a point where all of our issues, including abortion rights, are made safer not only if the people we vote for agree with us-but when those people and our society embrace a respect for women and promote policies that increase our personal wealth, power and political influence.
Make no mistake-the Democratic Party and its nominee have created the powerhouse that is Sarah Palin, and the party's increased attacks on her (and even on her daughter) reflect that panic.
And finally (for now), blogger Ann Althouse wonders:
Did the "belief that women can balance family life with ambitious careers" just become right wing? If so, wow! That is perhaps the most amazing political flip I've seen in my life.
(Hat tip to Instapundit for many of the above links.)
More. IGF contributing author James Kirchick has a fine piece in the Sept. 9 Wall Street Journal, The GOP Should Kiss Gay-Bashing Goodbye. In the print edition, it dominates the top half of the opinion page.
Back to Palin. Camille Paglia, another iconoclast lesbian (albeit an Obama-supporting Democrat), weighs in:
Now that's the Sarah Palin brand of can-do, no-excuses, moose-hunting feminism-a world away from the whining, sniping, wearily ironic mode of the establishment feminism represented by Gloria Steinem, a Hillary Clinton supporter whose shameless Democratic partisanship over the past four decades has severely limited American feminism and not allowed it to become the big tent it can and should be. Sarah Palin, if her reputation survives the punishing next two months, may be breaking down those barriers. Feminism, which should be about equal rights and equal opportunity, should not be a closed club requiring an ideological litmus test for membership.
Sound like any other social movement for equal legal rights that's prone to partisan servitude?
94 Comments for “Palin’s GOP Culture Shift”
posted by Jorge on
I respect people who sincerely believe otherwise, but I see nothing inconsistent about a feminist who kills moose with her own two hands, believes women should protect their unborn children rather than destroy them, and yes, who thinks she can juggle five kids and the vice presidency of the United States. Sarah Palin embodies women’s empowerment.
I don’t know about Palin at all anymore. I thought the story was she was against sex education on contraception. And it’s not just the current “nonsense from the left wing blogs” that makes things confusing. It’s the left-wing’s whole sordid record and the mainstream media’s current insanity over Palin.
Bah. I’ll have to tune into the debate.
posted by BobN on
Wow… Jim Lindgren and Tammy Bruce. Wow.
I guess we can just take this thread as evidence that right-wing blogs are just as adept at nonsense.
Surely in the time it took to write this apologia, one might have been able to look more closely into Palin’s real record.
posted by marie on
Sorry, what does this sentence mean “the attempt to paint the Palin family as if it were Arkansas on ice or Tobacco Road with igloos and Inuit”? I’m a French reader and cannot quite catch the meaning.
marie
posted by avee on
marie, "Arkansas on ice" means to compare the Palins of Alaska to the Clintons of Arkansas (or perhpas rural folks generally, as urbane Americans see them) in terms of sexual escapades (that is, Palin’s pregnant 17-year-old daugher). "Tobacco Road" is John Steinbeck’s classic comic novel about colorful but not too smart rural people.
posted by marie on
Dear Avee,
thank you very much. I am tryong to translate Hitchens’ article. Could you please help me understand also this expression “Troopergate and even trailer-park moments”? Thank you,
marie
posted by Avee on
“Trailer-part moments” is meant to imply that rural working-class people such as Gov. Palin’s family engage in sexual escapdes in parked motor homes, where many low-income, working-class Americans live. “Troopergate” is used by Gov. Palin’s critics to refer to a political controversy regarding Gov. Palin described here.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Stephen, sharpen your pencil a bit and look beyond WayneBensen’s foam and spittle in trying to tar Gov Sarah Palin as some type of reactionary, anti-gay religious zealot because of the church she attends.
Bensen’s got the same kind of anti-religion, anti-GOP screed that makes MikeyMoore look reasonable by comparison. He’s intellectually dishonest, rumor-mongering gayLeftie who will stop at nothing in order to gain political chits for his Party. He’s exactly the kind of gayDemocrat who hoes ‘da the rows for the Democrat Masta and keeps the gayVote slave to the VictimHood Industry in the DNC.
I’m surprised, even it is to discount his ranting unsubstaniated allegations, that you would reference him in anyway other than as a gayLeft apologist for BarryO’Biden and the NetRootNuts.
Wayne Bensen is exactly the kind of insularly anti-social gayVoice that has continued to hurt the advance of gay civil rights in America. He routinely blocks and bans anyone who doesn’t cater to the gayLeft screed.
As you rightly point out, the only sign of culture warring on gays at the church Palin attended was an insert in the church bulletin –but for the foaming and spittle generator known as Wayne Bensen– that was enough to link her to radical ex-gay ministry supporting fundamentalists who are bitter and still clinging to their guns and religion…. opps, I was channeling BarryO’Biden there for a second, sorry.
Does anyone wonder if the BarryO’Biden and their gayLeft apologists here catch the double standard and duplicity of their attacks on Palin and the church she attended? Sort of reminds me of the linkage between racist, bigot and anti-gay Rev Wright and his spiritually mentored, married and family-centered relationship with BarryO… til BarryO drove the ObamaBus over his all-too-truthful black rump.
Can’t these guys come up with their own playbooks?
posted by marie on
thank you avee. I’ve got one last doubt. Does the passage about Sarah Palin coming from Minchuria refers to the “Minchrian candidate” issue. Is Hitchens referring to the film and saying “by the way, anchorage is not far from M.”?
I haope i can help you with french.
marie
posted by ETJB on
(1) I fail to see how some one who is a true ‘progressive’, ‘pro-choice’ ‘feminist’ could vote for President Bush. Sort of like a Libertarian I once knew who worshiped Patrick Buchanan or a Socialist I once knew who hated the government telling her what to do.
(2) Palin’s record is perfectly clear on LGBT issues that are likely to come up in the next four – eight years. She, like Mcain, opposes giving same-sex couples any measure of equity.
(3) Also I do not recall many gay conservatives getting too upset at ‘media sexism’ (or allegations) when it was actually directed at Hillary. In fact most were pretty damn silent or thought it did not exist.
So when these same people start coming around to defend Palin who is strong enough to be the VP — a heartbeat away — but — whoa is her — needs to be protected from the big, bad media…Well it just does not pass the smell test.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ETJB all three of your “points” have been roundly discredited this week.
But let’s say you’ve been living under a rock and you’re honestly “reality-challenged”. Time for a little schooling, eh?
Answer 1: a true progressive, feminist, pro-choice GOP leader like Christy Todd Whitman did vote for GeoW and his Dad, too. While in St Paul, I had the pleasure of visiting with about 1,300 of exactly those kind of women & men you think can’t exist outside the rarified and elite world of radical Democrats… they do, ETJB. I watched those pro-choice women and men cheer on Sarah Palin at a special GOP-Future rally the day after Palin’s historic Pit Bull with Lipstick speech.
http://www.gopchoice.org/
Come out from under that rock, ETJB.
Answer 2: professional LOCAL political observers in Alaska have been saying that what’s really unique about Gov Palin is that she’s generally stayed away from social issues, including gay civil rights issues. You seem to have a special sense on discovering the true Sarah Palin… my only question is: Which are you using, Ouija Board or Shake-the-8-Ball?
Even if we jump over reason’s good graces and accept that the gayLeft agenda is the ONLY agenda for gay civil rights, then you’d have to amend your misleading statement by saying, “On the only major gay civil rights issue to come before Gov Palin, her decision and actions appear to support the notion that she followed the advice of Alaska’s constitutionally elected chief legal eagle and had to veto, per the AG’s legal opinion, an unconsitutional provision to provide a minor program of domestic benefits for state employees.” Of course you won’t because to characterize her decision correctly is to denude you of a disingenuous talking point.
I always love how gayLefties like to ask that everyone act unconstitutionally when it’s to their personal benefit or political point –but scream bloody murder when their “implied” constitutional rights are infringed. And what I really like is how gayDemocrats parrot the BarryO’Biden talking point as did ETJB in #s 2 & 3 above… it doesn’t take long.
By the way, ETJB, McCain and BarryO are identical on gay marriage –both think it is a sacred union between 1 man, 1 woman; both think it best left a state level decision; both know that the gayDemocrats have marked this issue as the #1 item on their activist agenda and BarryO doesn’t give a rip.
ETJB, come out from under that rock.
Answer #3: I think you should listen to the high praise of EMILY’s List organizer Ellen Malcolm of HillaryClinton and her testimony that gender stereotyping (sexism) had an adverse impact on Clinton’s presidential bid.
http://fora.tv/2008/06/09/Did_Hillary_Clinton_Lose_the_Race_Due_to_Sexism
But listen closely, ETJB, because you’ll hear her say that Hillary proved that women can be a force in natl elections as candidates –as well as for governor, senator, etc. Women like… oh, I don’t know… Sarah Palin?
Come out from under that rock, ETJB.
I think you should also stop and think for a moment because the train has left the station on most of your points… Hillary Clinton has been very strong in making sure her supporters and the natl media –including BarryO’Biden’s advisors– know that she isn’t keen on beating up Sarah Palin as a woman or as a Mom. That’s sexism and she knows all about it having dealt with it firsthand at BarryO’s whipping post.
Moreover, Clinton backers are making the same point.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13129.html
Rachel Alexander, someone who also knows firsthand of the abuses of men who directly and indirectly use sexism to demean, undercut and dismiss the rightful place of women in American politics has this to say on the subject:
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/09/03/the-democrats%E2%80%99-hypocritical-sexism-towards-vp-pick-palin/
You’d do well, ETJB, to come out from under that rock and learn a little before opening your mouth and proving you’re an uninformed fool.
posted by Avee on
marie asks: Does the passage about Sarah Palin coming from Manchuria refers to the “Manchrian candidate” issue. Is Hitchens referring to the film and saying “by the way, anchorage is not far from M.”?
That may be it. Or perhaps more generally that a tough minded, pro-gun, pro-life, church-going woman executive is seen by liberals as strange and foreign.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
I wrote this: “Stephen, sharpen your pencil a bit and look beyond WayneBensen’s foam and spittle in trying to tar Gov Sarah Palin as some type of reactionary, anti-gay religious zealot because of the church she attends.”
Well, it didn’t take long but the intolerant gayLeft activist Wayne Bensen replied with this email:
“MM, I will delete all of your f*cking comments at my blog whenever I decide that they are contrary to the views I care to discuss. I don’t realy give a sh*t if you think they are factual or fair. I get to decide. Me. It’s my blog and I don’t care what facist rightwing idiots like you think or your president. Stay off my blog. You aren’t wanted there and no one would dare defend you or your views. I am sick of Judas-type gays like you. Go f*ck off with your republican facists.”
Ahhh, didn’t we just have a thread at IGF about the intolerance of the gayLeft?
What a great civic-minded activist that WayneBensen has turned out to be.
posted by BobN on
I’m curious. Does eliminating the space between words in a name or phrase referring to a group of people, e.g. MichiganMatt or gayLefties, conjure up some sort of bad juju against them?
posted by Gary on
Okay, let me get this straight. Barry O goes to racist church by anyone’s standards for 20 frickin years and the MSM totally ignores it till they are forced to play catch up by blogs, talk radio and Mr Hannity. Ms Palin goes to a church that has sponsored some controversial speakers and it is all over the air ways within days of her candidacy announcement. What ever happened to journalism? Oh never mind, I just finished watching MSNBC and I just answered my own question…I believe it’s called “bias”.
posted by ohmemercylard on
wow. speaking of intolerance.
why do the people posting on this site suffer SO MUCH self-loathing? it’s really sad that in 2008 there are still so many self-hating homosexuals.
keep fighting this good fight to keep yourselves less-than.
posted by BobN on
I believe it’s called “bias”.
No, no. There’s a scientific explanation. You see, it’s time compression. Obama has been running for president for many, many months — some would say his whole life. Palin is squeezing her candidacy into a mere 60 days. This means you have to look at events proportionately. By my reckoning, she’s just about due to renounce her pastor and move on to a less bigoted congregation. She better hurry, though, cuz she’s WAY behind on public appearances.
Seriously, the GOP learned that pouring through the videos of a politician’s church is a great way to smear a him. You aren’t blaming some on the other side for learning a lesson, are you?
You guys canonized Rove… now we all live with the consequences.
posted by Jorge on
why do the people posting on this site suffer SO MUCH self-loathing? it’s really sad that in 2008 there are still so many self-hating homosexuals
Speak for yourself. I’m just certifiably bonkers. Being gay has nothing to do with it.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
BobN asks: “I’m curious. Does eliminating the space between words in a name or phrase referring to a group of people, e.g. MichiganMatt or gayLefties, conjure up some sort of bad juju against them?”
Nope BobN. But right now, I think your team needs some major juju because the gay Hope of the Free World is sinking in the polls. Not even France will save him.
Since you guys have tried just about everything else… sexism, the raceCard, trying to revoke moderate gays’ gayCard, the VictimHoodUnited ploy –it seems like time and swing votes are running out. Oh, “quick quick, over here… McCain wants to invade Iran!!!”
Get ready to wear a flag pin again, stand up for patriotism, lend a hand to the SilentSurge and address Gov Palin as Mr Vice President Palin. And get ready, ’cause in 8 years it’ll be Mrs President Palin.
You might want to learn what happened to MikeyDukakis, AlGore, JohnKerry and all the Democrats sitting on history’s junk pile… cause BarryO’Biden is going to be joining them soon.
maybe the Log Cabin Republican’s endorsement of McCain-Palin doesn’t look so stupid now… they may be the only gay group at the table of real power and change in DC.
posted by tristram on
Selecting Palin was a masterstroke by McCain. He was already almost even with Obama and is now a virtual certainty to win with over 50% of the popular vote and a strong electoral vote majority.
And when he does, he’s going to be well aware that he didn’t win because the gay Republican masses voted for him in droves out of delight that the LCR’s got a booth at the convention (down Aisle Z a ways, just past the recycling center, from what I hear), a pat on the ass from his chief spinmeister, and an invite to sample the kool-aid with the grown-ups at a couple of cocktail parties.
He’s going to know that he won because virtually the entire gay-bashing leadership of the Christianist right – James Dobson, Gary Bauer, Pat Buchanan, Laura Ingraham, Bill O’Reilly, and on and on and on – went bonkers for Sarah Palin, whipped their followers into a frenzy, drove them to the polls (in the process passing two, and quite likely all three, anti-ssm constitutional amendments) and elected an administration that they fully expect will lead the charge from the culture-war barricades to save them from the ‘gay agenda’ and drive the queers and infidels into the sea.
When McCain needs to buck that frothing base and ‘reach across the aisle’ to get some of the things he really wants (and they don’t) – like immigration reform, he’s going to need some red meat to toss out to keep them occupied. I don’t think McCain shares the rabid homophobia of a large segment of his base, but nothing he has said or done indicates that his respect for gays (remember, this is the guy who heard “lgbt” or “glbt” for the first time a couple of months ago, so let’s stick with a term he might know) as human beings or as American citizens goes an inch beyond a platitudinous nod to equal rights – so long as these people don’t want to serve honestly in the military, marry in California, enter into domestic partnerships or receive quasi-spousal benefits in Arizona, or, for all we know, engage in (well, ahem, you know what it is they do) in the privacy of their homes in any state (let’s say maybe Texas) that agrees with their President that there’s no Constitutional right to privacy and no right to personal privacy at all unless a God-fearing, preacher-endorsed legislature creates it. So when red-meat-for-the-base time comes along, as it will, we’re going to have more serious things to worry about than ending DADT or making ENDA inclusive.
posted by ETJB on
First off all, if Palin is tough enough to be a heartbeat away from being President, then she should be tough enough to handle the typical — for better and for worse — 24/7 info-tainment media dragon. Suggesting, as some people seem to be doing, that that media should go easy on Palin and just, “leave her alone” is prety sexist bs.
Second off all, as some one who has disabled people in my family and has been invoved in the special Olympics I find it simply immoral for Michican Matt to toss around such crude jabs at, or make light of, people who are disabled. Or perhaps, in looking at the previous posts, he will try and argue that he did not make these comments but an insideious, masked one-armed man did.
I do not know MM from Adam and frankly feel kinda glad that he and I do not live in the same neighborhood. I really do not know if he really made all the hateful and malicious comments that are attributed to him by Richard2. I would certainly hope not, but given the type of comments he has made to me, I would not put anything past him.
It makes zero sense for someone who is progressive, feminist and pro-choice to vote for a candidate who is conservative, anti-feminist, anti-choice. When some one boasts about voting in a way that contracdicts their stated values, I have to question if they really believe in what they claim to.
Notice I DID NOT say that such people do not exist. I did not claim that they did not exist outside of the ‘elite’ realm of ‘radical Democrats’. Call me crazy, but when someone claims to like kittens, but hooks up with some one who eats kittens I have to wonder if they really like kittens to begin with.
Yes, their are pro-choice Republicans but they are typically centrist or quasi libertarian, and not progressive. They also have little power within the GOP at the Federal level.
Palin, who at one point was probably a member of a third political party, has a pretty clear record on LGBT rights. Let us take an honest look at this record based on the cold, hard facts.
Palin does not feel that same-sex couples should have any measure of legal equity. No domestic parntership benifits. No civil unions. Nada. Zip. Her views on several LGBT issues are a matter of public record. No magic is needed.
Mcain also seems to oppose any measure of legal equity for gay couples. He supported the AZ ballot measure that would have stripped away at the modest domestic partnership benifits. Obama supports civil unions and opposes a key provision of the Federal DOMA.
Mcain opposses civil unions and supports the Federal DOMA and has offered support for the possiblity of a federal amendment.
Well, we do not have ‘national’ electios in the United States. Women have already proven — in both parties — that they can be serious candidates in federal elections — House and Senate. The number of women in State and Federal office is not s high as in some other nations, but is certainly an improvement.
The problem is that you cannot simply stand up as a candidate and say, “I am a woman so you need to vote for me.” It is good because it is another sign that the glass ceiling in the two major parties and in the broader society has weakened.
Yet, Hillary and Palin have many different policy opinions and it will be difficult for Palin to appeal to female Hillary supporters.
posted by Pat on
Selecting Palin was a masterstroke by McCain. He was already almost even with Obama and is now a virtual certainty to win with over 50% of the popular vote and a strong electoral vote majority.
Tristram, so far, it does seem like Palin was a great political move by McCain. She may help shore up the conservative base, as many conservatives didn’t find McCain palatable. But the biggest masterstroke was having Pres. Bush as a virtual unknown at the convention. This has made McCain more palatable to moderates and independents.
But time will tell how well if Palin really is a good choice. Once we get beyond the smears and the feigned disdain (as if both sides don’t resort to dirty tricks and Obama wasn’t smeared as well), we’ll get to know more about her, and focus on the relevant things. For now, gay persons that support her can point to her veto of an anti-gay bill, while the religious right can point to the veto and say that she had to veto it. Yes, the fact that some really immoral people support Palin is disconcerting. But again, we’ll see more and more what Palin is really all about, and cut through the different shade of glasses that many are wearing right now.
As for the election, it’s far from over.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ETJB writes: “Suggesting, as some people seem to be doing, that that media should go easy on Palin and just, “leave her alone” is prety sexist bs.”
ET? Phone home; they’ve got reality waiting for you on line 2.
Nobody was suggesting, as you and your Daily-Kos cronies posit, that Gov Palin supporters are asking the media to leave her alone. Just drop the fake stories Lefites have been making up and leave her kids alone… as BarryO’Biden has told you.
http://www.johnmccain.com/McCainReport/Read.aspx?guid=5f9faddd-4d87-4b78-a1e9-ef2826498d31
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2008/09/01/trashing-sarah-palin-moving-news-food-chain
http://explorations.chasrmartin.com/2008/09/06/palin-rumors/
“Leave here alone”, you think? Far from it; we’d like all independents and female Democrats to get to know Gov Palin –that’s why she’s picking up nearly 41% of the undecided vote, picking up 37% of the female Democrat vote (who, by the way, 62% of all Democrat female voters think the BarryO’Biden team’s treatment of Hillary WAS SEXIST) and McCain is surging about 11-12 points ahead of BarryO’Biden in a year that was supposed to be The Year of Democrats.
Phone home, ET; they have reality holding for you on line #2.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Pat writes: “But the biggest masterstroke was having Pres. Bush as a virtual unknown at the convention. This has made McCain more palatable to moderates and independents.”
More of a masterstroke than picking Palin?
Come on, Pat, your usually not this blindered. This isn’t about Bush 43… or anyone venting out their Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Besides, weren’t you the one who, just a couple of threds ago, opined that voters are sort-of seeing through all the hype of conventions these days… in order to blunt the criticism of “Where’s the BarryO’Biden Bounce?”
You can’t do a flipflop and say on one hand the voters discredit the conventions as political hype and then claim your sense of Bush’s non-presence there a was bigger masterstroke than picking Palin.
Like they say in Alaska, “Honey, that dawg don’t hunt”.
ETJB writes: ” do not know MM from Adam and frankly feel kinda glad that he and I do not live in the same neighborhood. I really do not know if he really made all the hateful and malicious comments that are attributed to him by Richard2. I would certainly hope not, but given the type of comments he has made to me, I would not put anything past him.”
Well, there we have it IGF readers and editors.
The link between ETJB –the newest handle in town besides Bucky– and the illegit postings of a gayLeft troll under my name.
I’m thinking the smoking gun in ETJB’s hand is a little too hot even for ETJB to handle with discretion.
You should have waiting a bit longer ETJB before you were seemingly able to pull out of a long list of threads a random comment by Richard2.
What is it about gayLeft Trolls that they hate the truth so much, they’ll debase the public market square of ideas with their antics and troll-postings, piss all over the free exchange of intelligent dialogue by faking names, and then try to sound like they’re above the fray in yet another voice?
ETJB, you’ve been outed.
Like Charles Wilson, DUMP, wet willy, willysnout1 and willysnout2 (yeah, he once thought just changing the number was a good enough fiction).
Keep it up trolls. Even the dirty tricks campaigns of gayLefites won’t work this time. “Truth is on the march; Hope is on the way; real Change is within our grasp.”
Yeah, I’m channeling BarryO’Biden.
posted by Pat on
More of a masterstroke than picking Palin?
Yes. The good, bad, and ugly surrounding the Palin pick will subside, and it will come down more to the presidential candidates, and what they support.
Come on, Pat, your usually not this blindered. This isn’t about Bush 43… or anyone venting out their Bush Derangement Syndrome.
It’s a good deal about Bush 43. The independents that McCain is trying to woo don’t want more of a Bush presidency.
You can’t do a flipflop and say on one hand the voters discredit the conventions as political hype and then claim your sense of Bush’s non-presence there a was bigger masterstroke than picking Palin.
I’m afraid I do indeed have to flipflop. You were right about the convention (at least, this Republican convention) being watched and given a bounce to McCain. As such, keeping Bush out of the convention, for the good part of it, was a masterstroke. In fact, we see McCain doing a good job of keeping Bush out of the whole campaign, even sort of criticizing the last eight years in one of his (I’m John McCain and I approve this ad) ads.
posted by Patrick on
MM wites-“blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah” *spittle drool drool*” blah blah blah blah blah blahblah” *venom splttle drool* “blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah”
MM why don’t you start your own blog if you like to read your self so much? Oh yeah, you wouldn’t have an audience.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ETJB now writes: “It makes zero sense for someone who is progressive, feminist and pro-choice to vote for… (Palin)”.
Wrong-o ET. Phone home.
It’s called the Hillary effect. 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 qeustioning that earlier preference and now deciding for 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.
ET, Phone Home.
And finally, if you even need a “finally, ET, 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. Ouch, ET, it’s gotta hurt when you are so wrong even with all the troll-like little dirty tricks you’ve been punking IGF readers with this week.
ET, please Phone Home.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Hey “Patrick”, glad to see you back! We haven’t had you posting since DUMP got bashed into the trash bin.
I see you’re still holding up the party line for the gayDemocrats here.
Diversity matters, Patrick… even if BarryO, your elitist candidate, thinks you’re unfit for marriage. You stick with him… he needs all the loyal lapdogs he can whistle to heel.
posted by Patrick on
Seachangemoments matter, MM… even if PopeBenny&McSame think you’re unfit for marriage. You stick with them… they need all the loyal meat puppets and lapdogs they can whistle to heel.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Hey “Patrick”, I was serious, dude.
I’m glad you’ve come back and added your own slightly bent perspective here to the usual gayDemocrats and gayLefties trying to enforce the 1PartyRules rule to dissenting gays.
Like you point out, sea change moments matter in politics, in culture. I’m thinking that maybe the gay community is about ready to toss the gayDemocrats –parading as the only legit voices of gay activism and promoting themselves as having just our gay interests at heart– and maybe opting for a new paradigm to advance gay civil rights.
Paradigm is a big word, Patrick… you can find the definition here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/paradigm
posted by ETJB on
Michigan Matt;
It is sexist to say that we should, “leave alone” female candidates for public office, while we allow the same media empire and spin machines to attack male candidates for federal office. If, as I believe, a woman is just as capable of being a good and bad candidate as a man, then the notion that somehow they are just to gentle and fragile to take the political heat is sexist bs.
I do not read the “Daily Kos”. Aside from reading Times, Newsweek and my local and regional newspapers I read ‘Mother Jones’, ‘The Progressive’, ‘Reason’, ‘Liberty Unbound’ and some conservative rags. I make an effort to read from the left, right and center, yet I still resist getting my news from bloggers.
BTW, the statement that Palin use to be affiliated with a third political party actually comes from someone who is not a Democrat or a Lefist. It is a rather nice man named Richard who been writing about independents/third political parties and ballot access laws since the 1980s.
posted by ETJB on
Michican Matt;
You (or someone who knows and hates you well enough to waste the time posing as you on a message board) made some incredible hateful — racist and anti-Semitic comments. I have seen them on this message board and I have gotten a few emails about it.
You claim that you did not make these comments, at least not all of them. I do not know you, or this ‘Richard2’ or anyone else here to know if what you are saying is the truth.
I would hope that the IGF would not allow someone with such racist and anti-Semitic views to contributing to this forum.
I am not ‘new’ to the IGF. I posted back when this webpage had a full message board and have made previus comments here under this more limited message board format. I have always used by real name (albeit sometimes in shorthand) – ETJB. I would consider myself to be a liberal, although more in the old-school, classical tradition.
I am certainly not ‘Richard2”, but I have been getting e-mails about allegations concerning racist and anti-Semtitic comments being posted by gay right-wingers at the IGF. Apparently this squabble between ‘Richard2” and ”Michigan Matt” has gotten wider, online notice.
posted by ETJB on
It makes zero sense for someone who is progressive, feminist and pro-choice to vote for someone who is conservative, anti-femininst and anti-choice.
Your reply: To deny it and make personal insults. Ah, your ability to have a mature, civil and intellectual conversation is simply amazing. Yeah, the posts I read of yours, the more convinced I am that you are more then capable of letting all sorts of uglyness come out of your lips.
Why does it make sense? Well, (you argue) it HAS TO make sense, because YOU say so, and you get to define yourself and everyone else. BS and you know it. Call ET you say? Heck, you probably insist on telling ET that the phone booth you have stuck up your behind makes perfect sense.
American women polled may or may not be ‘flocking’ to one major party campaign or the other. Yet, I was not talking about that was I? No, I was talking about progressive, pro-choice, feminst women voting for someone who is conservative, anti-choice, anti-feminist.
MM, if that is your real name, you remind me of a Communuist associate I once made the mistake of being set up with on a blind date. Over dinner he tried to assure me that that their was no media censorship in Cuba, that the Cuban government was not homophobic or oppressive and that it was a worker’s paradise.
Well, the food was good and, beyond the fact that he was a total lunatic, he was a pretty decent and attractive man. You have your own illogical partisn spin to try and sell and perhaps underneath it all, and your channeling of Mel Gibson, you might just be a decent and attractive human being.
posted by Patrick on
MM- I usually skip past your obnoxious posts so you can “blah blah blah ” to me all you want. I don’t have the same concerns you do, you see I am married and not living in sin as you and your partner michigancakemaker are, In my State the party that I supported have kept their promises and even Republican’t fullofMitt and your buddies at the Catholic Hate Group MassResistance couldn’t take away our rights. I bid you
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ETJB, I thnk it’s kind of uncanny how your syntax, grammar, choice of words and phrase patterning matches KingRichadJ’s traits at an incredible 87.4% on the SyntaxModel at U-Microfilms Intl here in Ann Arbor… which is used to uncover plagerism in doctoral papers and master theses.
Leaving that aside, let’s remember that YOU reduced the media criticism of Palin to “Suggesting, as some people seem to be doing, that that media should go easy on Palin and just, “leave her alone” is prety sexist bs”. That’s not what is happening, but you’re stuck in PARK right now and no amount of pushing will get the tires to roll.
I was unable to get you to appreciate that it isn’t that people are asking for the media to leave Plain alone… the criticism, ETJB or RichardJ or whomever you are, is that the farLeft hatemongering blogs (including gayLeft hate spewing blogs) and the mainstream media are chewing on “entertainment” issues that have nothing to do with Plain’s stand on policy, her service, on her executive experience, on her resolute connection with voters, etc.
Instead, it’s all about rumor mongering and smears that should have no place in American politics –but do, ever since the SlickWilly team copyrighted the PoliticsofPersonalDestruction and a standard operating method in dealing with opponents.
Heck, GOPers love the fact that the MSM assisted us in bouncing BarryO’Biden off the polling scales with their attention and attraction to Sarah Palin.
But the fake stories about her trying to drown her Downs Syndrome baby in a hotel tub, the one about her being a member of a secessionist fringe group (by the way, KingRichard used that one too, ETJB… you might want to be more careful in keeping alive this fiction that you guys are different posters… or is that impostors?
http://sniggle.net/impostors.php
Turn the lights on Sarah Palin. But that doesn’t include going through her trash. Or, as you guys did with former jurist Robert Bork, going to the local Blockbuster Video store and stealing his rental records. Or, as you guys did, breaking into Sen Santorum’s home and just stealing his laptop, his cellphone and his childhood goofy-pictures which showed up on gayLeft blogs during the Senate campaign.
And frankly, RichardJ or ETJB or whomever you are today, it doesn’t include mean-spirited, gutter like references by BarryO that implied Sarah Palin is just a “pig with lipstick”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg
I know you don’t get your daily talking points from the Daily-Kos (wink, wink, sure you don’t, uh-huh, you bet) but even they knew of the toss-up awaiting the Palin = pig in lipstick line of BarryO yesterday.
Here’s what one BarryO’Biden team member at the Daily-Kos had to say:
“The original saying is, of course, “you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig.” The GOP’s put lipstick on a monster hog – the past 8 year Republican disaster (tax schemes that soak the poor and reward the rich, corrupt cronyism that puts political connections above the law, criminal governmental negligence and incompetence, reckless debt that leaves our children at the mercy of foreign creditors, bankrupt energy and housing policies that threaten millions of Americans’ basic economic security, a disastrous foreign policy that’s isolated us from most of the world, a strategically catastrophic war, brute torture that’s horrified decent people everywhere, ecologically suicidal policies, Big Brother intrusions in our personal lives, endless coverups and outright lies) – and named it “Maverick McCain & Pitbull Palin” for change.” That’s the pig they’re trying to get you to buy for another 4 years. It’s hard to imagine they could sell you such a beast. But according to most polls they’re pretty good salesmen. Then again, most cons are. They’ve actually got a lot of Americans looking at the lipstick and not the sow wallowing in the Republican muck. It’s time Democrats remind everyone that this is not a porcine beauty pageant. It’s time we remind voters that under all the layers of lipstick the GOP has so skillfully painted on, there’s still the same old ravenous pig. Do you really want to give this beast 4 more years at the trough, devouring ever more of our precious resources, our people’s well being, our sacred national honor? I know, of course, that some folks will think we’re sexist when we use this analogy. They’ll say we’re attacking Sarah Palin. But the pig-in-lipstick is definitely NOT Palin. In a very real sense, Sarah Palin is herself the “lipstick” the GOP frauds are cynically applying to their repulsively ugly pig. Democrats can’t let them get away with it. We’ve got to wipe the lipstick off the pig!”
Now that is sexist and no spinning by you will remove the bitterness that kind of comment by BarryO and his Daily-Kos team members engender in women.
It’s why women are flocking to the McCain/Palin ticket –as are undecided voters.
Like I say in my MBA class on “Politics in the Marketplace”, let the marketplace decide. Voters are smart enough to discern truth and decode self-interest.
Voters are deciding and they’re on the March to McCain-Palin. They didn’t buy the “more of the same” rhetoric and that not buying your claim you aren’t being sexist. Just ask HillaryClinton.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Patrick writes “MM- I usually skip past your obnoxious posts”
Ok, I’m sorry. You’re mad I suggested you might need to look up the word “paradigm”.
For someone who claims to skip over posts, you sure do respond to mine pretty quickly Patrick.
“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
posted by Patrick on
Ignorant MM is at it again, I said i USUALLY skip past your posts, You are just trying to suck me back in to your upside down world where SarahStalin makes sense. I never said I didn’t read the posts and
SOMETIMES
I even the ones with lipstick.
posted by Patrick on
should have read:
“I even read the ones with lipstick.”
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Patrick, it’s ok; calm down. You’re stressing out, dude. Thanks for all the responses, even though you don’t read the posts.
posted by MMMM on
Hi Everyone,
I am the strawman to which Michigan-Matt refers! If you have any questions about my existence, I’m here to put them to rest. I thought it was important to confirm the existence of his bogeyman so that everyone can understand that his worst nightmare has come to life and his gayRhetoric is entirely valid. I also want to assure everyone that I will ruin his life, just as surely as I have ruined his personality, and I will bring this country to ruins, mostly by restoring the Constitution, especially amendments 1 and 4. I also want to restore Habeus Corpus and re-illegalize torture. All the names Michigan-Matt uses to refer to me are true. I am also an easy-going, gayEmployee,gaySonBrotherFriend,gayUrbanmale,gayHippie,gayLiberal,gayAmerican-gayDemocraticprocess-freedom-loving-gayCommunity-organizing-gayChurch-going-gaySecular-space-making-freedom-singing-gayTennisfan-sports-loving-progayRights-preaching, gayParade-going guy. And I eat arugala! You can see how easily I can destroy the fabric of this country.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Hey ETJB, over at FactCheck.org, they’ve nailed your little lie into a coffin and buried it soundly… you know, the one you were spreading about Sarah Palin belonging to a 3rd Party… I think in another thread you said it as “secessionist” party.
FactCheck says you’re flat out wrong.
“She was never a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, a group that wants Alaskans to vote on whether they wish to secede from the United States. She?s been registered as a Republican since May 1982.”
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_palin.html
Kind of interesting, the article is titled “Sliming Palin” –how accurate of them to pick up on your intentions? Uncanny really.
I am simply amazed at how far afield our gayDemocrats will go to hoe the row for da’Masta.
posted by MMMM on
Hi again, guys! It’s true. I’m the one Michigan-Matt has so deftly described. I’m way out in the fields, howing the rows for “da’Masta”. I’m the one dressed in a smart bonnet with paper flowers to keep the sun out of my eyes. I’m waving. Can you see me?!
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Right on cue, MMMM just keeps proving the insincerity and dishonest temper of the gayLeft. I wonder if we’ll see a decrease in postings of the other sockpuppets now that MMMM has climbed up from the bowels of blog.
Stephen, I hear the McCain-Palin campaign have a new ad out to address the dual problems of Obama’s fast slide from grace in the polls and his smearfest of Sarah Palin.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LK4oWay1VbE&e
It’s amazing that some people discounted McCain a few months ago and washed-up and spent the first 72 hours of Palin’s entry onto the natl stage whining about his pick and vetting. It’s going to be a great 2 months of payback and karma-revisited for the gayDemocrats here and the ObamAcolytes.
posted by ETJB on
Michigan Matt, if that is in fact your real name;
I have no reason or incentive to invent a fake name or handle. I do not know any of the people here and I sincerely doubt that any of them are my current employer.
I have written and published numerous articles, several of which are online, so it would not be difficult for someone to match my speech. I also used to post fairly regularly on other LGBT message boards.
Anyone who want to match my syntax, grammar,choice of words and so forth could easily do so.
Leaving that aside, I did not reject the existence of sexism or racism in any particular electoral campaigns.
Some people, often conservatives, have argued that the media is being unfairly harsh against Palin, and that they should just, “leave her alone”.
The notion that we should give a candidate a pass because of their sex, is obviously sexist. Of coarse, I would not expect a Mcain (who felt it is acceptable to call women ‘bitches’) supporter to accept that.
Maybe, we should change how, ‘the media’ covers campaigns — irrespective of the candidate’s race or sex –. That is a legit point to argue. Maybe, we should change a lot of things when it comes to elections.
Um, according to Richard (the Ballot Access News editor) (who happens to be a LP member), Palin was a member of a third political party.
If you have the time, you are more then welcome to visit my personal web page and see that I have links to a wide range of viewpoints — groups, parties, issues and media.
I do not read them all, (or agree with all of what they may argue) but you are welcomed to visit it.
I am being sexist? Well, care to back that up with some hard evidence of something that I have said or endorsed? Or do notions of civility and honesty only apply to other people?
It does not make sense for a progressive, feminist, pro-choice woman to be voting for a conservative, anti-feminist, anti-choice candidate.
posted by AnotherSteve on
ETJB, I think his real name is Indiana Matt (you heard it here first).
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ETJB writes: “I have no reason or incentive to invent a fake name or handle. I do not know any of the people here and I sincerely doubt that any of them are my current employer.”
Ummm, ok… just seems strange that your syntax and other key grammar indicators rank you as having an 87% postive match with King Richard’s. But, ok, let’s suspend logic and facts and go with your story for now.
ET further erodes his claim: “I have written and published numerous articles, several of which are online, so it would not be difficult for someone to match my speech.” Yeow, now that does sound like KingRichard’s last line here… “I have written a 4,000 word article on….”
Ok, ok, you’re really not someone else just faking your syntax… that they magically co-opted from unidentified blogs as you say. Ok, yeah… that works.
ET continues: “Some people, often conservatives, have argued that the media is being unfairly harsh against Palin, and that they should just, “leave her alone”.”
OK, let’s do a little Bill O’Reilly meets BarryO’Bama and let me ask you –name five conservative commentators who have said “leave Palin alone because she’s a woman”. Go ahead, ET.
Guess what, I’m betting you can’t. Because just like your Equivocater-in-Chief and BloviatorExtraordinare, BarryO, you’re just making this stuff up as you go along.
Name five conservative commentators who have said: “Leave Sarah Palin alone because she’s a woman”. And let’s get this on the table now, my ET friend, it’s not about her kids… it’s not about her baby… it’s not about whether she’s a competent, hardworking Mom who’s also juggling successfully a career as Alaska’s chief executive.
Your standard: Leave her alone because she’s a woman.
Afterall, you’ve seen it plenty as you claim. And let’s put it into context –HillaryClinton and her supporters also charged the BarryO team of playing a sexist endgame –making allegations against her fitness because she’s a female.
Five, my alien friend. Five conservatives who implored: Leave Palin alone because she’s a woman.
Carrying on with you post, ET phones home with: “Um, according to Richard (the Ballot Access News editor) (who happens to be a LP member), Palin was a member of a third political party.”
Well, my alien friend, your “people” are deceiving you and others then because Palin is not a member of the AIP. And I noticed that you’ve gone for the more ambiguous “third party” characterization… is that to give you some waffle room?
Ok, I gotta admit it now… you are so sounding and thinking and acting like KingRichard it is freaky weird. Freaky.
If we can return to the thread’s theme?
On your claim, ET, that “(no one) who is a true ‘progressive’, ‘pro-choice’ ‘feminist’ could vote for President Bush.”
Well, that’s not hard to believe if you know TammyBruce and hundreds of other women who aren’t slaves to the NOW mindset. That’s who Stephen referenced and her defense of that choice is made in the attached article:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/06/INB312NP3M.DTL
Now, given the Hillary Effect we’ve discussed elsewhere, ET, you can continue to be artifically befuddled and confused how good “progressives”, “pro-choice” and “feminists” still vote for Bush –or even more quickly pull the lever for McCain-Palin– it’s a free country and you’re entitled to hold wrongly-framed opinions that are void of fact or truth.
Here’s one for you: I think of myself as a progressive. I think of myself as pro-choice and pro-death penalty and pro-assisted suicide. And I have long fought for my female peers to secure equal pay and equal rights in our male dominated society.
But I’m in the GOP. And gay. And married to a biracial partner. And a father of two boys, with one more on the way. BOOM, there goes your version of reality.
When your pick-up the parts of your exploded head, take a second out and realize that just because you can’t fathom something in politics because of your deeply held, highly biased views, it still can happen outside your little reality.
Honest. Who would have thought last June that it would be the GOP who would be responsible for the 1st female Veep elected in the US?
See, reality is changing. There’s Hope on the way and McCain-Plain are leading us to a better place. You just gotta quit straining to hear those hushed whispers of promised salvation from the Temple of Barack.
Omnia mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis.
posted by Patrick on
I heard McMillanMatt likes to use the B-word too, when he and his partner MichiganCakeMaker met McSame and McSame grudgingly half acknowledged his partner and kids, MM hollered ?Beyoch, get us some of that FABULOUS cake with the sour cr
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Patrick, you need to slow down and think. You’re starting to look like one of those hand-flapping, hysterical, all alone twinks at the bar when she discovers the batender gave her a Shirley Temple and not a Pink Cosmo.
I know you’re mad at me, I know your pissed that BarryO’Biden ain’t getting it on for you and the gayLefties, I know it looks like the gayLeft is going to be tagged for supporting the most liberal Democrat prez candidate in the last 2 centuries and, consequently, losing by a landslide in a year the Democrats were supposed to “take back” the White House and all.
I know, dearie, it’s a tough row to hoe.
I’m glad you’re no longer skipping the posts, Patrick. It’s important for you to learn and be exposed to something other than… other than… well, let’s leave that one alone.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Oh and Patrick, the phrase
Omnia mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
is Latin, sweetie, no, I wasn’t starting a new chant in OH-Baam-AH. You won’t find it on YouTube. It isn’t a dance mix.
It means, loosely, all things are changing and we are changing with them. Sort of, “change is a constant” kind of saying.
posted by Patrick on
MM- Was that a chortle or a snort? Sorry I wasn’t able to read your post, I tried but it put me to sleep so quickly! thanks man, I’ve had insomnia for the last week and nothing else seemed to work! I did manage to read the word “hoe”, was that something to do with the Palin family? I bet you and your “live-in” could teach them something ’bout hoes
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Patrick, I’m happy you’ve learned to contain your unfocused anger and laugh it off because that’s a skill you’re goign to need in the next 2 months as BarryO’Biden continue their slide downhill (which started with their attack dogs nipping at Sarah Palin’s feet).
The hoe I mentioned wasn’t the type you are probably familiar with… this one is the farm tool used to weed plants, mound dirt around plants, dig up feeder irrigation trenchs, etc. It involves labor and that’s probably not something you’re acquainted with.
The phrase hoeing the row refers to menial labor done when all other farm work is complete for the day… it’s kind of boring, tedious work for farm hands… but vital if the crops are to be productive.
That’s why, when we all say the gayDemocrats around here –despite all the protests– are really just hoeing the rows for da Masta, we mean they’re doing the menial mindless work of their Democrat controllers and that it ain’t rocket science. Like keeping the gay vote solidly Democrat.
Now, the ho’ you are referring to is something that your candidate knows something about… in his glorification of the rap subculture, he knows young black men are supposed to hang together as a unit and not listen to their girlfriends, wives or partners if the women want their man to do something with them… that’s why BarryO’Biden’s boys had t-shirts made that said “Bro’s before da’ ho’s”.
The coloring book version, Patrick, is “I choose to hang with my black brothers before I care to listen to what my wife needs me to do.”
It’s endemic of the black culture’s estranged image of real men are poor fathers, poor husbands… not responsible to anyone.
It’s why BillCosby ran into so much grief from while liberal elites when he took on this image of black men outside the family unit.
posted by Patrick on
Read about Republicans here.
It’s no Urban Myth they are as dry as a bone!
posted by Patrick on
Someone put lipstick on this Republican!
posted by jake on
someone wrote that patrick needs to stay in the shallow end of the swimming pool
learn to take advice patrick
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Jake, that was me and I was telling RichardJ’s sockpuppet ETJB to get back into the shallow end before he’s overwhelmed by the monster waves.
I’m not sure Patrick even should be in the kiddie’s wading pool.
posted by ETJB on
Michigan Matt;
It makes no sense for a progressive, pro-choice, pro-feminist voter to vote for a conservative who is anti-choice, anti-feminist.
You keep trying to squirm around this basic fact, with personal attacks, outrageous accusations and sloppy arguments.
When you finally get around to making a, vain, attempt to argue why progressive, pro-choice, pro-feminist voters should support someone who is opposed to all three values, you cite a laughably bad article written by a person (TB) who is not progressive and makes several incorrect or misleading statements.
posted by ETJB on
A correction; the Palin who was involved with the Alaska third political party was the VP husband.
She herself was on friendly terms with the third party, and, obviously, was involved with a ‘third party’
posted by ETJB on
Palin does not represent a ‘Culture Shift’ for the GOP. She is pro-life, pro-gun, and has the media background to craft an image of being just like the, ‘common man’.
She opposes giving same-sex couples any legal equity. It is unclear what she may think about other LGBT issues, their is nothing to suggest that she is some how really different from the GOP’s religious right base.
小さい陰茎および頭脳がない
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET, hey gald you’re back… I see RichardJ posted an article about the time you showed up again.
Do we need to carry this fiction out anymore or are you ready to come out of the sockpuppet drawer?
As for your claim that it is illogical for a pro-choice, pro-feminist, progressive to vote for McCain-Palin, you’ve been toasted. No sloppy argument. No mistakes. It’s called the Hillary Effect and it’s real, ET.
Aside from that, GOP Women for Choice is doing it. Oppps, you’re wrong again RichardJ… I mean ET.
There’s an entire legion of angry, pissed off Clinton supporters who have said they’ll pull the lever for McCain-Palin… like 38% in the last poll. Ooops, you’re wrong again ET
Independent and undecided female voters have done it and the movement to McCain-Palin was literally a perceptible force felt by pollsters all last week. Ooops, you’re wrong again, ET.
You just can’t handle the truth… so you’ll resort to characterizing any dissent view to the KingRichard-approved perspective.
By the way, we’re still waiting for you to complete your homework assignment in finding 5 conservatives who said “Leave Palin alone, she’s a woman”.
That was the last whopper you told here… and it had less credibility than your defense that pro-choice, pro-feminism, progressive women couldn’t ever, never, no-no-no vote for McCain-Palin.
You’re big mistake, ET? You think the democrat description of feminism is the only one… you think progressives can’t vote for a strong, resolute woman… you think pro-choice means anti-GOP.
And you’re wrong on all three –as the polling continue to prove and you hazard distractions.
posted by ETJB on
The fact that something is real, does not make it logical. The fact that women may or may not be more sympathic to Palin (and upset about how Hillary was treated) does not mean that they are the type of voters I am talking about; pro-choice, pro-feminist, progressive.
Tammy Bruce, your major example, is not really a progresive at all. Her politics are more libertarian in nature. Even if she was, her article makes incredible sloppy, even deceptive, arguments. This does not suprise me too much, given that she is a notable FOX News employee.
Pro-choice Republicans do exist, but they are overally more libertarian or center-right in their politics. Again, not progressive. They also, generaly, do not care about abortion politics too much, if they are going to vote for some one who, if electe, will work to overturn reproductive rights. In political science (or in mass media communications) it is called this saliency
Michigan Matt, I do not take ‘homework assignments’ from people who are not my superiors. I certainly do not take them from people with the emotional maturity of a mentally deficient child and the moral compass of something unmentionable.
You said: You’re big mistake
Thinking that you had a soul.
You said: You think the democrat description of feminism is the only one.
Wow, you can read people’s minds? No, wait that is not what I think at all. Oh, so you are pretending to have mental powers like some sort of comic book super freak? Or are you just lying?
You said: you think progressives can’t vote for a strong, resolute woman.
Um, no. I never said tha anyone can or cannot vote for a strong resolute woman. Of coarse, being a strong resolute woman or man has zero to do with whether or not they are a Democrat or a Republican or an Independent or a liberal or a conservative or a moderate or a radical or a reactionary.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Well, ET, you win the award for the all hat, no cattle.
http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/all+hat,+no+cattle.html
You shot off your mouth saying that you knew “… conservatives, have argued that the media is being unfairly harsh against Palin, and that they should just, “leave her alone””.
I asked you to prove it.
You slid, slimed and wiggled like a tellytubby on crisco to avoid having to back up another one of your silly gayDemocrat claims.
It’s a pattern ET… or RichardJ… or whatever disingenuous handle you’ll be going by tomorrow.
All hat, no cattle. How appropos.
posted by ETJB on
Well M&M, you win the award for being the sweet, little candy that melts in your mouth and in your hand.
You enjoy manipulating and being misleading about what other people think, feel or believe. For example…
I clearly said that people, mostly (but not all) conservatives have complained about sexism in how Hillary and Palin have been treated and have said, about Palin, leave her alone.
I see no reason to help you do your own homework. It is very easy to find — on the Internet — people who accuse the media of being sexist with regards to Hillary and or Palin.
Heck, you own TB said as much in the traffic wreck of an article she recently wrote.
How about you explain how Palin — who belong(ed/s) to a fundamentalist Church, that likes the ex-gay movement, who opposes giving same-sex couples any measure of legal equity, is a ‘cultural shift’ for the GOP?
posted by Michigan-Matt on
tristam offered “… I don’t think McCain shares the rabid homophobia of a large segment of his base, but nothing he has said or done indicates that his respect for gays… ”
Gee, tristam, on the 7th anniversary of the Islamic radicals’ attack on the US, John McCain stood in the middle of a sunny field with fellow-patriots and victims of that horrible day and, guess what McCain did?
Guess, tristam.
He took the moment to pay tribute to most recognizable gay hero of the day –Mark Bingham.
While BarryO was kneeling at the feet of SlickWilly and begging for deliverance –no, not the kind found in the movie of the same title– McCain was out in public praising one of the Country’s most famous gay heroes in the last 20 years.
Sometimes, tristam, even the GayLeft here can’t redirect reality fast enough.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET or RichardJ, nice try again but you get another “F” –this time for substance, not for your failure to turn in the assignment.
All hat, no cattle.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
And the other winner is ET’s recent channeling of Star Trek’s Lt Spock with this gem:
“The fact that something is real, does not make it logical.”
Do you guys even think before you write? And someone pays YOU to write? They need to get a refund.
posted by ETJB on
M&M, S&M, Richard II or whatever you are calling yourself this week0;
Well, it would seem that you new plan to avoid dealing with the substantive issues addressed here — as a civil and mature adult — is to simply ignore and distort and name call.
I doubt that many straight people are aware that Mark Bingham was gay. Heck, the film about his — and others — bravery noticeable omitted just about any reference to his sexual orientation.
OK, maybe it was a comment directed at LGBT Republicans or LGBT people who are still undecided. Let us look at what was said and in what context. Shall we?
Mark had been a Rugby Player and a gay Republican supported supported Mcain’s unsuccessful primary bid in 2000. Mcain gave a nice little eulogy in 2001.
It is nice, but somewhat ironic given that he notes how he owns this man — and the other heroes on the flight — his life, but still continues to oppose equal rights.
While in 2000, Mcain managed to offer a verbal attack on the religious right (something he abandoned this time around) he cannot bring himself to support a single gay rights bill.
Not ENDA, not HCPA, not Civil Unions or DP, not lifting the ban on gays in the military. Mark was good enough, in Mcain’s eyes to die for his country, as long as he was not in the armed forces and as long as he accepted being treated like a second class citizen.
Gee, what a nice way to repay some one for saving your life.
Yeah, the fact that “X” number of people think or behave in a certain way does not make what they think or behave right, wrong or rational.
This is basic philosophy/political theory 101. A person with a decent high school, certainly college, education should know that.
They should also be able to have a serious, civil and intelligent discussion
Since you seem unable to have such a discussion,
I can assume something about the level of education you obtained and or your mental health.
posted by ETJB on
M&M seems to be of the belief that if a poll says something it must be truthful, good and rationally (“Well, surely if ‘x’ number of women are voting for Mcain it must be rational).
Well, let me illustrate how intellectually sloppy and immoral such an argument is.
In 1993, 22% of Americans agreed with the statement that it was possible that the Nazi extermination of Jewish people (genocide) never happened.
Obviously these people are factually-objectively wrong. The fact that ‘x’ number of people believe something DOES not mean that what they believe is rational.
I contend that it is not rational for some one — i.e. a woman — who is progressive, pro-choice, pro-feminist, pro-gay rights to vote for someone, i.e. a candidate, who is anti-progressive, anti-choice, anti-feminist, anti-gay.
You seem to believe that it is rational, and try to prove it with polling data on women, in general, and comments made by two commentators who are not really progressive.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET phones in: “M&M seems to be of the belief that if a poll says something it must be truthful, good and rationally (“Well, surely if ‘x’ number of women are voting for Mcain it must be rational). Well, let me illustrate how intellectually sloppy and immoral such an argument is.”
We’re still waiting, ET/RichardJ.
Oh, wait, you tried to explain it??? That’s another “F” on substance; you gotta get a better skill set, dude.
posted by ETJB on
M&M/S&M/Richard II;
Your attempts to sqiurm and dodge the issue will not work. People see through your manipulation of the facts, your malicious and hateful comments, your addiction to partisan spin and that certain “personal excitment” that “comes” whenever you think of Women-Are-Bitches-McCain
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET pleads: “Your attempts to sqiurm and dodge the issue will not work”.
You gotta think before you write, dude!
You’re the only one squirming and dodging. When I asked you to prove your claim that conservatives were raising the issue of Palin’s fitness to serve as Veep because she was a woman.
Remember, ET, I asked for you to name just 5 (five) conseravtive commenters who did that… since it was mostly farLeft types, Democrat apologists and biased MSM pundits who were really doing it.
You said: Can’t do it. But you thoughtfully suggested if someone wanted to back you up by looking on Google for some references, you’d appreciate the assist.
Squirming, is it?
When you were able to conveniently pull out of thousands of comments Richard2’s silly and baseless taunt about racist and anti-semitic comments, I asked how someone who “just got here” on IGF could have done that… you squirmed to avoid facing ready proof your sockpuppet artistry.
Honest, ET, there’s no squirming at my end of the pool… that all goes on in the kiddie’s wading pool end you’ve been stuck in for a while. Say hello to your buddy Richard2 while you’re down there.
posted by ETJB on
M&M/S&M/Richard;
You continue to repeat lies again and again, perhaps hoping that they will be true. You continue to dodge issues with lies, hateful comments and personal attacks.
That fact that you talk (“dude) like many of the incoming freshmen that I teach, suggests that you are still a little boy — on the outside and the inside.
Many people — in public and private — have argued that Palin was the poor, innocent victim of a sexist driven media conspiracy.
Conservatives and or Republicans pushed the idea because they want to project a certain multipersonality image of Palin, that avoids the fact that she is to the right of President Bush on many issues and thus is out of step, policy wise, with most women and most Independent and moderate voters.
Personally, I doubt some of the accusations of media sexism and racism, and believe others.
Yet, the argument — no matter who it comes from — that a candidate should get a free ride because of their sex or that people should vote for a candidate based on their sex is incredibly sexist.
Your reply: Duh, I do not watch TV, don’t have Cable or the Internet or friends (or apparently a sex life) and thus am totally unaware of what you are saying.
I suspect that you are Richard II are one and the same person. That you wrote yourself racist and anti-Semitic comments to generate sympathy or attention or as cry for help.
I did not, “just get here”. I posted on the IGF message board, but had to take a break — posting — due to other family and work duties.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET writes: “You continue to repeat lies again and again, perhaps hoping that they will be true.”
Point out a single lie, ET.
Time to hold your silliness to account. A single lie, ET. I’m betting you’ll try to spin something into a lie –a lie against the OneTrueGayCreed.
But we asked you once before to put up or shut up on your claim that “conservatives” had called for Palin to be left alone because she was a woman… and you didn’t, couldn’t do it.
Instead, you tried this squirming, spinning Dervish: “I don’t do homework assignments from people who are intellectually inferior to me”… that little spin got you the KingRichardOfTheWeek award.
And now, without shame or personal honor, you bring it back out –hoping that readers forgot your challenging homework assignment.
And then, strangely you claim I said “Your reply: Duh, I do not watch TV, don’t have Cable or the Internet or friends (or apparently a sex life) and thus am totally unaware of what you are saying.”
I didn’t write that, EJTB. But we’ve got one lie now documented on YOUR part if you want to keep going. Richard2 had to put his tail between his legs and run for the hills, hiding in shame… wanna join him?
Nawh, ETJB, the simple truths are the ones you’d like to be lies. It’s easier for you to dismiss.
Dude, you still are all hat, no cattle.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Michigan matt said “Point out a single lie, ET.”.
That couldn’t be easier. You said “The Republican party is just as good as the Democrat party on gay rights”.
Lies don’t get much more blatant than that.
Obama favours repealling DOMA, Mccain wants to keep it. Obama favours repealling DADT, Mccain favours keeping it. Obama opposes the FMA, Mccain wants to pass it if DOMA is repealled. Obama opposes the California amendment against equal marriage, Mccain favours it. The vast majority of Democrats voted in favour of ENDA, the vast majority of Republicans voted against it. The vast majority of Democrats voted in favour of the Mathew Shepard act, the vast majority of Republicans voted against it. The vast majority of Democrats voted against the FMA, the vast majority of Republicans voted for it.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriyaLynn tells a fib all on her ownsomeness: “Michigan matt said “Point out a single lie, ET.”. That couldn’t be easier.”
Actually Princess, I said that on the #1 issue of gayDemocrats here –namely validtion of gay marriage– the Democrat candidates are no different than the Republicans in three substanital ways.
First, both BarryO and McCain believe marriage is a sacred union between 1 man and 1 woman… (are you following?)
Second, both BarryO and McCain believe that marriage is best regulated by the states… (still got the focus, Princess?)
And third, BarryO and McCain both know the issue is the #1 item on the GayLeft agenda and BarryO doesn’t give a squat what you think… (ok, we lost you on that one).
Now Princess, quit trying to make me look bad… I also said that Patrick is your intellectual superior and you go disprove that with your feeble attempt above.
Remember, the key is identifying a lie… of mine… not of yours.
All hat, no cattle and the cinch is still untied.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Now, let’s examine the other lies of PrincessPriya… she writes: “Obama favours repealling (sic) DOMA, Mccain (sic) wants to keep it.”
Umm, no Princess; McCain voted AGAINST it.
Lie #1 in the can.
Princess writes: “Obama favours repealling (sic) DADT, Mccain (sic) favours keeping it.” Umm, no, Princess; McCain has said he will support the Joint Chiefs if they want it repealed. It’s a military conduct matter, not a chance to engage in social engineering on behalf of a protected victim class who rarely serves.
Lie #2 in the can.
Do we reallly have to keep going? Two lies here; a lie above.
Honest, Priya, you gotta bring some floaties if you’re going to try swimming in the deep end with the big boys. But I appreciate your spunkiness and thinking on your “owny-nous”. You got ETJB beat because you’re faster than a mule chewing on bumblebees.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
By the way, PrincessPriya, maybe you could help ETJB (or RichardJ) to find a simple, easy reference to 5 conservatives who claimed that the media should leave Gov Sarah Palin alone because she’s a woman… ETJB was having a bit of problem backing up that last whopper of a lie of his… if you really want to help, there’s a task that remains unfinished.
By the way, I think you’re the one who was last promoting a poll “proving” that women weren’t buying the SarahPalin merchandise? No? Wasn’t that the poll that turned out to be an EMILY’S LIST poll done by an oldtime Democrat Party pollster stooge of current Democrat Party pollster hack Petie Hart? No?
BarryO’Biden have a sale on credibility going in case you need a dose. FYI. (wink)
posted by Priya Lynn on
Michigan matt said “Now, let’s examine the other lies of PrincessPriya… she writes: “Obama favours repealling (sic) DOMA, Mccain (sic) wants to keep it.”
Umm, no Princess; McCain voted AGAINST it.”.
LOL, another lie by Michigan matt and one that couldn’t be easier to expose. Mccain voted FOR DOMA. Read the link, about 1/3 of the way down the page under the heading “same sex marriage”:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24785
“McCain voted for the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA)”
Michigan matt said ” Princess writes: “Obama favours repealling (sic) DADT, Mccain (sic) favours keeping it.” Umm, no, Princess; McCain has said he will support the Joint Chiefs if they want [DADT] repealed.”.
This is like shooting fish in a barrel – lie #3 by Michigan matt. He might support them if they want it repealled (you’ve provided no evidence of that), but he FAVOURS keeping it:
http://www.lcrga.com/news/199912180929.shtml
“McCain said he would keep the policy ? which forbids military personnel from revealing their homosexuality and their superiors from asking them about it ? if he were elected president.
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2006/06/shhh-mccain-says-dont-ask-dont-tell.html
“When asked directly if he would vote for Massachusetts Congressman Marty Meehan’s bill (H.R. 1059) to repeal the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, McCain said, “No.””.
Michigan matt said “I said that on the #1 issue of gayDemocrats here –namely validtion (sic) of gay marriage– the Democrat candidates are no different than the Republicans”.
Yes. And you also made the unqualified statement that “The Republican party is just as good as the Democrat party on gay issues” – that was a whopper.
As you can see when Michigan matt is caught in a whopper of a lie he tries to cover it up by…telling more lies”
Michigan matt said “Now Princess, quit trying to make me look bad.”.
Oh, I can’t take credit for that, you acomplished that all on your own by being your typical lying self.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Further Mccain on DADT:
http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2007/05/03/4
“Gay troops pose “an intolerable risk” to national security, U.S. senator and Republican presidential hopeful John McCain wrote last month to a gay rights group seeking to move his position on “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
In an April 16 letter to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, McCain said, “I believe polarization of personnel and breakdown of unit effectiveness is too high a price to pay for well-intentioned but misguided efforts to elevate the interests of a minority of homosexual service members above those of their units.”.
LOL Michigan matt, yeah, that really sounds like someone who isn’t in favour of DADT. Keep spinning those lies matt, that’s all you’ve got.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Here’s an example of how women “support” Palin like Michigan matt claimed:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/14/103042/902
Republican liars like to claim Palin has an 80% approval rating in Alaska. The reality is starkly different.
Despite sleazy attempts by Republicans to convince people it had been cancelled 1500 people (mostly women) showed up at a rally in Alaska to say Sarah Palin does not speak for them versus 96 Mccain/Palin supporters.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya, come on girl. Now you’re worse than a mule chewing on bumblebees.
How can we trust you?
You’ve been proven to be misleading when it came to the supposed “poll” indicating that women were sticking by BarryO and not exiting the Dem Party for McCain-Palin… remember, the poll you provided turned out to be an EMILY’s List hack poll for the Democrats done by a Democrat pollster? The day “your poll” came out, a collection of natl polls proved McCain-Palin got a 20 point bounce in the polls? Mostly from women! Ouch. I can see why you’d try to avoid going back there. I notice, no correction from you.
And then you misled IGF readers when you offered that Palin was anti-gay because her church was a breeding ground for “reparative therapy” voodoo? And it turned out she wasn’t even a member, the church simply ran an ad and wasn’t involved in with FOF, and the pastor came off sounding more concerned and empathetic to gays than you do. I notice, no correction from you.
And then you tried to put words into my mouth by offering I said the GOP and Democrats are equal on the treatment of the gayLeft agenda, when you knew I said nothing of the sort. Called out on the lie, you failed to provide any proof of where that “quote” of yours came from… so, PrincessPriya, did you make it up? Like BarryO’s 57 states, BarryO’s conception on the eve of the civil rights marches in Selma or was it like the Hillary “snipers in Bosnia” kind of made up stuff or she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary? Made up stuff is never good in politics or political debate, PrincessPriya. I guess for you, it’s a mixed bag. And I notice, no correction from you.
And now you want us to believe your nonsense here about DADT?
Ok… I guess if we can believe the EmptySuited pretty words and promised whispers of BarryO’Biden, we can believe your latest stuff.
Let’s see, first up: did Senator McCain vote for or against DOMA. You’re absolutely correct, McCain voted for DOMA. I was thinking of FMA redeux times two, not DOMA. My bad; you’re correct.
Of course, so did HarryReid, Harkin, Ford, BIDEN, Byrd, Kohl, Levin, leahy and lots of other progressive Democrat voices. But this isn’t about them: it’s about McCain.
My guess is that if Obama had been out of diapers, he’d have voted for DOMA too given his antipathy toward gay marriage. But this isn’t about him, it’s about correcting my mistake on McCain’s DOMA vote in 1996 –not the two subsequent FMA votes. Digging 10+ years into the past usually isn’t this much fun, is it?
But then, almost answering it, you link comments McCain made almost 10 years ago (1999) about DADT –as proof of his anti-gay attitudes? 10 years ago? You gotta be kidding us, PrincessPriya. What next? A quote from the DailyKos?
Ooops. And there you go, that’s exactly the last refuge –a website rountinely slammed by moderates and independents as the “Factory of Hate” from the farLeft. And that fits, doesn’t it? You quoting from the Factory of Hate?
Got any lines about Prez Bush from George Soros?
McCain has said that he would listen to the Joint Chiefs since this policy is a military matter. He has said repeatedly that he knew gay officers and soldiers in the Navy and other branches who served honorably, with distinction and are great patriots and heroes. He stands strongly against discrimination and unfair treatment of gays in the military –as he did a long time ago when he fought for the rights of fellow-Arizonan Steve May who was being kicked out of the Reserves… the same Steve May who was a JFKerry supporter and Democrat fundraiser in 2004.
Now, really PrincessPriya, you gotta stop trying to mislead IGF readers on DADT now that we cleared up DOMA, ok? But then you quote SDLN –a highly biased, mostly partisan PX of disgruntled gay activists.
McCain said, in that famous 2 yr old letter to SDLN Democrats, “I believe polarization of personnel and breakdown of unit effectiveness is too high a price to pay for well-intentioned but misguided efforts to elevate the interests of a minority of homosexual service members above those of their units. Most importantly, the national security of the United States, not to mention the lives of our men and women in uniform, are put at grave risk by policies detrimental to the good order and discipline which so distinguish America?s Armed Services.”
Did you catch the line “well-intentioned” efforts to repeal DADT?
Now, I know, for gayDemocrats who mostly have no sense of service to Country first, it seems strange that McCain would place the interests of commanders above those of gay activists… but the truth is that McCain thinks this is a military matter and best resolved by military commanders advancing a change in policy when needed –not by gayLeft activists looking for more validation.
What IGF readers might find interesting is that one of the leading candidates for Secy of Defense in a McCain-Palin Administration is GOPer Chris Shays… the leading gay voice in Congress.
GOP Rep. Shays thinks that DADT’s time is over and would work with the Joint Chiefs to advance a repeal of the policy that Democrat President Bill Clinton signed into place.
So, maybe under the McCain-Palin administration in January we’ll actually see some progress on DADT… instead of the whispered promises from the Temple of Barack?
And who knows, as long as we don’t get any activist liberal federal judges legislating from the bench, DOMA will remain a mechanism to insure state voter primacy on marriage laws –as it has been for 200+ years.
DOMA doesn’t stop gay activists from securing gay marriage. FMA does and that’s what McCain has stood against on 2 occasions now… without a lot of credit from our gayDemocrats here.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Miohigan matt said “You’ve been proven to be misleading when it came to the supposed “poll” indicating that women were sticking by BarryO and not exiting the Dem Party for McCain-Palin… remember, the poll you provided turned out to be an EMILY’s List hack poll for the Democrats done by a Democrat pollster?”.
LOL, matt, only in your dreams have you “proven” me to be misleading. Polls by Democrats don’t force anyone to make statements against their wishes – the poll was accurate and you hate reality. You’re the one attempting to mislead people by pretending there is something wrong with the poll when you’ve failed to pinpoint any such thing.
Michigan matt said “The day “your poll” came out, a collection of natl polls proved McCain-Palin got a 20 point bounce in the polls?”.
Sure it did matt, dream on. Check reality now in the latest Gallup poll:
http://voices.kansascity.com/node/2072
“The resurgence continues: Barack Obama pulled almost even with John McCain in Tuesday’s Gallup Poll. The numbers: 47-46 percent, in McCain’s favor.
But that’s down from a 5-point lead barely a week ago.
And commentators — including Gallup’s pollsters — say Obama’s gains could continue this week. That’s because voters have said the Democratic nominee generally has better economic plans than McCain.”
Michigan matt said “And then you tried to put words into my mouth by offering I said the GOP and Democrats are equal on the treatment of the gayLeft agenda, when you knew I said nothing of the sort.”.
I never claimed you said that. What you said was “The republican party is just as good on gay issues as the Democrat party”. You want to claim you’ve changed your mind then state so publicly – say clearly here on this forum in your next post “The Democrat party is better than the Republican party on gay issues” or fail to and demonstrate your intention to continue with your lie that they are equal.
Michigan matt said “Let’s see, first up: did Senator McCain vote for or against DOMA. You’re absolutely correct, McCain voted for DOMA. I was thinking of FMA redeux times two, not DOMA. My bad; you’re correct.”.
Thanks for admitting you’re a liar.
Michigan matt said “McCain has said that he would listen to the Joint Chiefs since this policy is a military matter.”.
You keep claiming that – back it up with a link or quit lying.
Michigan matt said “He has said repeatedly that he knew gay officers and soldiers in the Navy and other branches who served honorably, with distinction and are great patriots and heroes. He stands strongly against discrimination and unfair treatment of gays in the military”.
LOL, yeah sure he did, that’s why he said gay troops pose “an intolerable risk” to national security:
http://www.gay.com/news/article.html?2007/05/03/4
Thanks for trying to put lipstick on that pig – I needed a good laugh.
Michigan matt said “DOMA doesn’t stop gay activists from securing gay marriage.”
Another lie. DOMA prevents gays from receiving the federal benefits of equal marriage.
Michigan matt said “FMA does and that’s what McCain has stood against on 2 occasions now…without a lot of credit from our gayDemocrats here”.
And, AND – you left out the critical part (naturally) – he said he’d support the FMA if DOMA was repealled as Obama plans on doing. Obama said he supports civil unions with all the rights of marriage (including the benefits that come from federal recognition), Mccain opposes that saying gay couples should have the right to “make contracts” – a trivial right they’ve always had.
I was in danger of falling asleep reading your rambling response so I skipped the middle part.
posted by Priya Lynn on
I missed this lie by Michigan matt, he said “you misled IGF readers when you offered that Palin was anti-gay because her church was a breeding ground for “reparative therapy” voodoo?”.
I never said any such thing. You lie.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriya, you’re a big big girl and you keep proving it here endlessly with “liar” barbs that I fully expect you to continue with “pants on fire”.
You couldn’t even take a moment and say, Matt, thanks for acknowledging your mistake on the DOMA vote? What a little mind you have caught up in some skirts.
Honest, even you lower the debate a notch or two over Patrick’s antics. But that’s ok, your goal is to reduce anything by half your intelligence –so let’s try the first few distortions just in the last thread?
Princess says: “The day “your poll” came out, a collection of natl polls proved McCain-Palin got a 20 point bounce in the polls?”. Psst, Princess dearie, your poll was the one that was done for fundraising purposes by Democrat party pollsters for EMILY’s List. You projected that it was a professional poll and one IGF readers could rely upon in rebutting other claims about women coming over to McCain-Palin.
The 20 point bounce, Princess, was of women crossing over to McCain-Palin from BarryO’Biden. What Gallup says today or tomorrow is immaterial to most mature political watchers because Gallup picked Kerry to win 2004, 1 day out; Gallup picked Gore to win by 3 points; 1 day out; Gallup picked Romney to stay in the GOP primaries and win 2 days before he dropped out.
Yeah, Gallup is noteworthy for what it misses, not what it gets right.
The truth is unavoidable except in your little tiny frame of reality. Guess what Princess, independents and women are still in McCain-Palin’s camp… at it’s at that pesky 20 point spread…
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/08/huge-20-point-shift-towards-mccain-among-white-women-since-last-month-in-new-abc-poll/
The McCain team, in a year that overwhelmingly should favor Democrats, has pulled ahead of the great EmptySuit in 7 of the key battleground states and his lead nationally continues to expand. He’s competitive in New York and New Jersey at this point! Those should be landslide Democrat states and not even in contention.
With women and independents, his lead expands at a clip that will start cutting into BarryO’Biden’s ability to stay competitive even in their safe, Blue states like Michigan and Minnesota. Dude-ess, you got to get a better game if you expect to stay in the debate.
On DADT, McCain has been far clearer than BarryO was, say, on troop reductions in Iraq or lots of other topics. McCain has continually said DADT is a military matter for command to policy… and he knows as a command officer, a military hero and honored veteran.
Contrast that to BarryO who was hopping around Iraq on his first visit in 3+ years asking Iraqi leaders to postpone agreeing to troop reductions with the Bush Admin until after the November US General Elections. Talk about running that ObamaBus over all those gayLeft Code Pink loons and the anti-war DemLeft.
Hey Princess, be sure those ObamaBus headlights aren’t trained on your butt next week because as BarryO slides in state after state, he’s going to need to hype his anti-gay marriage position to cut into McCain’s religious vote/values vote base.
I’m going to accept that you agree McCain isn’t the evil monster you’ve made him out to be on DADT since you don’t seem to be able to muster even a rational defense to his statements. Which shouldn’t surprise anyone. And, as you know, picking up quotes from 1999 –nearly 10 years ago– is about as disingenuous as your earlier claim that Democrat polling for EMILY’s List is reliable.
You seem to think linking McCain with “intolerable risk” quote is adverse? Actually, all you demonstrate is a fundamental inability to comprehend basic military order.
McCain said “Most importantly, the national security of the United States, not to mention the lives of our men and women in uniform, are put at grave risk by policies detrimental to the good order and discipline which so distinguish America’s armed services.”
Good order and discipline, Princess. Not your kind involving leather, humiliation and watersports.
But like usual, gayLefties and gayDemocrats can’t comprehend military issues because you guys a) don’t believe in serving in the military, b) see the military as an evil instituion of male-centered power and c) would like to emasculate the military brass in order to gain that special quality of “validation” you blithely seek at everyone else’s expense.
Sorry, on DADT, McCain will be more inclined to repeal it than any long-shot Democrat Administration… even if it is headed by another non-military, inexperienced, bumbling appeaser like BarryO (SlickWilly was the 1st, no?).
As for the balance of your comments, it’s simply more of the same from you.
You claim you I wrote the following: “The republican party is just as good on gay issues as the Democrat party” and you’ve changed that from the earlier claim of “Wake up Matt – you’re never going to fool any rational LGBT with your insane claims that Republicans are just as good on gay rights as Democrats” where at least you didn’t attirbute your own words to me. That was a step forward even for you.
Getting more than a little pissy these days, aren’t you Princess?
I understand you’re getting worried and scared that McCain-Palin are eating up that great EmptySuit lead BarryO had before people got to see his true depth.
I understand that you’ve put a lot into keeping the gayVote solid for the gayLeft and gayDemocrat Masta… but it’s time to accept reality.
Your own man, the Masta himself, ScreaminHowieDean, said that BarryO would be up on the polls by 30-35 points over any GOPer –McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Thompson at this time.
It just isn’t happening for him and it’s got you worried.
Fear is something best kept to your self, Princess. It has the effect of scaring the children and driving weak votes quickly toward the perceived victor.
It’ll be a fast slide down for you these next 50 days and i’d recommend, respectfully, you resist the lashing out like rabid, foaming Mr Humpty. Even the legions of Democrat Party litigators won’t be able to put your cracked eggs back together again on Election Day.
It’s tough to be wrong so often, Princess; you’re not handling it very well.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Princess flings: “I was in danger of falling asleep reading your rambling response so I skipped the middle part.”
Sure you did, Princess. Nice job of providing lots of details even tho’ you skipped it.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Princess claims: “Michigan matt (sic)said “McCain has said that he would listen to the Joint Chiefs since this policy is a military matter.”
You go on to underscore how myopic your world really is by demanding, “back it up with a link or quit lying”.
I’m sorry Princess, Senator McCain shared that perspective with me in conversation at the last fundraiser I attended with MM partner and our boys on Aug 18th. We were getting our picture taken with the Senator while we had the 3rd opportunity this year to chat at length. He had asked at the prior fundraiser to meet the boys.
That’s what he told me personally, first hand. But I must say the false notion you present that it’s either a link or lying seems a bit strained even for you.
Sounds a bit unhinged really; like much of your blather of late.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Speaking of the Palin pick potentially causing a cultural shift in the fortunes of the GOP, it now appears that Democrat leaders and fundraisers are quietly telling Obama his choice of Biden was flawed… and… drum roll for the PUMAs… Obama needs to get Hillary onto the ticket -NOW.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-ostroy/why-replacing-biden-with_b_126234.html
First it was Susan Estrich raising questions about Biden’s judgment and fitness to be Veep. Then we learned that the “press” section on the Biden campaign jet is vacant –except for a few gayLeft bloggers trolling Palin’s past for another “gotcha” moment. (Hey it’s a free ride & sandwiches for the press and no one want’s to ride with da’Joe.) Then we learned the liberal Senator gave less to charity than a homeless person. On top of that, Biden’s been in the Senate since Nixon and few know him.
Here’s how the UPI stacks up JoeBiden… caution: Obama supporters, it’s brutally honest and you might want to continue to avoid reality by not reading it.
http://www.upi.com/news/issueoftheday/2008/09/16/Joe_Biden_The_incredible_shrinking_candidate/UPI-23931221585608/
The money quote from the HuffPo/ObamaWest writer: “Because I’m starting to think that if Team-Obama doesn’t do something dramatic fast, it’s gonna lose this election. There’s a worrisome shift in momentum and in the polls. The Palin phenomenon, while truly unfathomable to Democrats, has energized McCain’s campaign and allowed him like Houdini to snatch Obama’s “change” theme right out from under him.”
Maybe the shift is so strong that Obama will be forced by reason and desperation to boot da’Joe, give in to the PUMAs and beg, plead, cajole Hillary into taking her rightful position as the Dem Veep nominee.
Afterall, she is the only true pro-gay Democrat that could salvage the Obama campaign –at least SHE believes in gay marriage. She’s been stumping for Democrat congressional candidates all last week –rebuilding her base for the 2012 run. BarryO, after his historic “hat-in-my-hands” meeting on 9/11 with SlickWilly, was unable to convince the popular Prez to come out of hiding and help.
Yep, maybe it’s time to dump Biden. Of course, someone would have to convince Biden that he needed to go… but he was already set to retire.
posted by Priya Lynn on
Matt has nothing but lies and spin to tell so he resorts to repeated personal insults in a desperate attempt to regain some of his composure. Unfortunately for him it only highlights the lack of truth and substance in his posts.
Michigan matt said “You couldn’t even take a moment and say, Matt, thanks for acknowledging your mistake on the DOMA vote?”.
Oh, now lies are “mistakes”. You knew you were lying and if I hadn’t taken the time to dig up the truth you’d have ran with that.
Michigan matt said “You projected that it was a professional poll”
That’s, what, lie number 6 in this exchange alone, – I’ve lost count. I never said any such thing.
First Michigan matt said “a collection of natl polls proved McCain-Palin got a 20 point bounce in the polls”.
Then he tries to back that up with an ABC only poll that shows a 20 point shift only amongst white women. Nice shifting of the goalposts matt, a lie a by any standard.
Michigan matt said “The McCain team, in a year that overwhelmingly should favor Democrats, has pulled ahead of the great EmptySuit in 7 of the key battleground states and his lead nationally continues to expand. “.
LOl, not quite you silly little dreamer. Didn’t like the Gallup poll, try Reuters/zogby:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/deadlineusa/2008/sep/17/uselections2008.wallstreet
“Obama has gathered support among female and independent voters who, following the tumultuous nature of the US financial markets over the past few days, have seen him as the candidate best able to manage the current dire state of the economy. He now leads McCain among likely voters by 47% to 45%.”.
You’ve got a funny definition of a Mccain lead expanding matt, when he loses on election day you’ll be bragging about what a victory it was for Mccain.
Michigan matt said “On DADT, McCain has been far clearer than BarryO was, say, on troop reductions in Iraq or lots of other topics.”.
LOL, nice attempt to change the subject. Mccain favours DADT which is proven by his recorded statements that the policy is “working”, that gays present “an intolerable risk”, that he wouldn’t vote for a bill to repeal it, and that he’d keep the policy as president. You lied and laughably tried to claim Mccain doesn’t favour DADT. That’s quite a streak of lies for someone who foolishly insisted we couldn’t point out a single lie he’s told.
Michigan matt said “Good order and discipline, Princess. Not your kind involving leather, humiliation and watersports.”.
I was going to say you’re an improvement over northdallas, but now you’ve stooped to his level. Congratulations on emulating the lowest of the low when it conmes to lies, distortion, and spin.
Michigan matt said “Senator McCain shared that perspective with me in conversation at the last fundraiser I attended”.
LOL, yeah right, sure he did. Your lies are awfully convenient – you can’t back up that claim that he said he’d repeal it if the joint chiefs of staff wanted to so you make up a story about how he “told you that personally”. Gee, I wonder why he didn’t share that statement with anyone else? Hmmm? Because it was a lie.
And now Matt has backed off from his lie that he didn’t say the Republican party is as good as the Democrat party on gay issues. When given the opportunity to state the truth and clearly say on this thread that “The Democrat party is better than the Republican party on gay issues” he refused to tell the truth because he intends to continue tolie as he’s done repeatedly in this exchange with me.
You’ve been thoroughly and irrefutably exposed as a liar Matt, I’ll leave you alone to continue with your long-winded rants, personal insults, and transparent lies, you’re only digging the hole you’re in deaper.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
PrincessPriyaLynn, I have to give you some credit… at least you’ve stop using 10+ year old quotes to back up your ranting fist-poundings.
Let’s see if you can take a breather and learn a little this afternoon, instead of just continuing to rant?
First off, you did try to present and project that the EMILY’s List poll had a legitimate credibility when trying to counter my claim that McCain-Palin made a 20 point bounce into a reality. You said it by citing “a poll” and by coying not telling IGF readers it was biased, for the Democrats, by the Democrats, about the Democrats trying to blunt the Sarah Palin effect in the wake of all the PUMA.
No amount of squirming or twisting by you will reverse that deliberate attempt by you to mislead IGF readers. Of course, it won’t stop you as the last four posts prove.
Second, on the notion that my apology and act of contrition on mistaking DOMA and McCain’s two votes against FMA, you can only sneer like a juvenile monkey in its cage tossing excrement at the zoo keeper bringing the banana.
Somehow, that is a perfectly apt image for your Princess. You’ve rally become unhinged lately.
Please remember that the IGF editors have had to warn you in the past the continued namecalling will get your posts deleted.
Could it be that, despite your misdirections above, your BarryO team is flailing in the polls and the downward slide continues? Michigan is now 2 points up for McCain… Minnesota local polling indicates McCain up by 2 points… the PUMA people are making sure that Pennslyvania isn’t going Obama on Election Day.
You can cite national polling stats of general voters, Princess, til the bumblebees come home to your mule mouth. But as each of us know, it’s a state by state election and the Electoral College is what determines the outcome.
That’s why McCain-Palin nibbling away at state after state should have you concerned; it does BarryO. So much so that he’s being counseled to dump Biden and beg Hillary to come onto the ticket.
You gotta admit, even as a rabid, red meat gayDemocrat, Princess, you guy is losing all the momentum, all the advantage… and it all started when the farLeft and Democrats started bashing away at Sarah Palin.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
Princess “And now Matt has backed off from his lie that he didn’t say the Republican party is as good as the Democrat party on gay issues.”
Not at all, Princess. I’ve asked 4 times now to point out the spot where you believe I said that… you’ve noted as a quote by me.
You haven’t yet because you can’t. It’s nice to know your ranting and fist pounding bears no relation to the truth.
Again, note the spot where I said it, Princess.
You won’t because you can’t.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
And if it wasn’t bad enough that the gayDemocrats are losing anti-Palin story after anti-Palin story to the truth… Dan Blatt over at GayPatriot puts the nails in the coffin of the “book-banning, book-burning Nazi witch” rumor that’s been floating around the NetRootNuts.
http://www.gaypatriot.net/2008/09/17/palin-banning-books-rookie-mistakes-the-msm/
Turns out the gayDemocrats here who said Palin fired the librarian? Pure fabrication; the city employee stayed on in her spot until after Palin’s 2nd election as mayor.
And when that 2d election occured, did Mayor Palin ban those books?
Nope.
Did she try to ban books at her kids’ school libraries?
Nope.
Did she try to ban books as Governor and working through the dept of education?
Nope.
Can the gayDemocrats here be trusted with anything? Well, not the truth for sure.
posted by ETJB on
* Did she oppose legal recognition of same-sex marriage?
YUP!
* Did she make send a non-binding resolution to the voters calling for a ban on domestic partnership benifits a priority?
YUP!
Does this make her anti-gay? Yup. But do not expect the gay Republicans to know this because they are still too busy on their GOP master’s plantation.
posted by MIchigan-Matt on
Seems that ET is still phoning home, looking for help from that alien spacecraft. I see they only sent down kool-aid. And you drank it all.
You’ve been discredited so often, ET, I’d think at some point that your personal sense of shame should cause you to think before acting… oh wait, that would require a conscience and character to be present. I think RichardII was sent looking for some character a short while ago, too.
Does Sarah Palin oppose the legal recognition of same-sex marriage? You say Yup.
Correct answer: Just like the gayDemocrat’s “GaySavior” candidate BarryO, Palin thinks that it is a state decision –in her case, a decision best made by voters; in his case, activist judges over-reaching the law or by the voters, if they want. No difference between McCain, Palin, BarryO or Joey “I aint helping charities” Biden. Gay marriage is a state decision.
Who DOES think differently and support gay marriage?
GOP Veep Dick Cheney. Ouch.
Alaska, thanks to the agitation of militant GayLefties, passed a FMA law in 1998… long before Palin was Governor. It’s the law in Alaska, but to ET and his militant gayLefties, the law doesn’t matter. “Screw the law, screw the voters, we want VALIDATION!!” is their chant when it isn’t “OH-Baam-AH, OH-Baam-AH”; that may work in SanFrancisco, but Thank Almighty God in Her Infinite Wisdom, there’s only one SF allowed in any universe.
ET asks: “Did she make send (sic) a non-binding resolution to the voters calling for a ban on domestic partnership benifits (sic) a priority?”
OK, we have the answer now… ET did make it back to the alien spacecraft and drank all the Kool Aid left over from Denver.
No, ET, my longfingered sockpuppet pal, Sarah Palin was trying to uphold the Alaska Supreme Ct order mandating domestic partner benefits for state employees. Unlike the “do it at any cost” gay militants in Hawaii, Palin’s Administration sought the legal advice of the Alaska Atty Gen before approving a hap-hazardly drafted and unconstitutional legislative bill on domestic partner benefits.
Gov Palin actually said of her veto: “I disagree with the recent court decision because I feel as though Alaskans spoke on this issue with its overwhelming support for a Constitutional Amendment in 1998 which defined marriage as between a man and woman. But the Supreme Court has spoken and the state will abide.”
The proper venue for that administrative requirement was through the state’s personnel board, not by legislative fiat.
Now what was that about Sarah Palin doesn’t support domestic partner benefits for state employees? Right, you lose again… just like the myths about mandating teachers teach Creationism (her Dad was a frickin’ science teacher, for cryin out loud), her banning and burning books, her belonging to a secessionist party, her eating babies, her killing wolves, being an anti-feminist… gosh, you guys never stop even when truth hits you square in the face.
More half-truths from the gayDemocrats still drinking the Denver KoolAid handed out while in worship at the Temple of Barack.
ET, you gotta do a whole lot better or bring a better game to the action… you’re just looking lame. So lame, you have to steal others’ soundbites “still too busy on their GOP master’s plantation.” But let’s bite on your lack of creativity, ET.
Tell me, is that the GOP plantation that our gayDemocrats have been telling us is really run by the DarthVader Dick Cheney? The pro-gay marriage Dick Cheney?
Yeah, I thought so.
posted by ETJB on
S&M, M&M, Richard II, Gives Head To Block, Sex With Sockspuppets;
You said: You’ve been discredited…
Only by you and your GOP-FOX-McCain-Call-Women-Bitches-Hate-America-Demean-Gay-Heroes plantation that you are so eager to live on.
McCain-Palin does not believe that same-sex couples should have any legal rights. None. Obama-Biden think that they should have civil unions.
Dick Cheney does not support legal recognition of same-sex marriage. Who does? Well, a few left-wing Democrats and some left-wing third parties.
Palin supported the 1998 law that banned legal recognition of same-sex marriage. She likewise supported and made it a priority to strip state employees of their limited DP benefits.
Yet, you will continue to deny, lie, mislead and spit out your malicious and hateful comments so that you can carry the water for your master.
You just cannot seem to get this through your head; McCain and Palin do not support giving same-sex couples any sort of legal recognition.
The current VP does not support same-sex marriage, despite your lies to the contrary. The GOP platform clearly opposes gay rights at every single turn.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET tells another whopper while boarding the alien spacecraft for a trip home: “Dick Cheney does not support legal recognition of same-sex marriage”
FactChecked: Dick Cheney said on August 24, 2004 at a townhall-styled meeting to the question should gays be able to marry… “Lynne and I have a gay daughter, so it’s an issue that our family is very familiar with. . . . With respect to the question of relationships, my general view is that freedom means freedom for everyone. People . . . ought to be free to enter into any kind of relationship they want to.”
I guess the truth keeps escaping your feeble grasp, ET. Maybe it’s those extra long fingers? “Alien botanist, heal thyself” seems fitting for your problem with truthiness.
posted by Michigan-Matt on
ET phones in yet one more whopper: “She (Sarah Palin) likewise supported and made it a priority to strip state employees of their limited DP benefits.”
FactChecked: Ummm, no she didn’t ET and all your baseless accusations can’t change her simple words that, as Governor of Alaska, she would follow the order of the State Supr Ct and implement their order to provide domestic partner benefits to state workers.
She said: “I disagree with the recent court decision because I feel as though Alaskans spoke on this issue with its overwhelming support for a Constitutional Amendment in 1998 which defined marriage as between a man and woman. But the Supreme Court has spoken and the state will abide.”
Still having problems with those long fingers grasping onto even a slender bit of truth?
First it was GOP Veep Cheney doesn’t support gay marriage.
Then, Palin bans books
Then, Palin is anti-gay
Then, Palin is a secessionist kook
Then, Palin is an anti-feminist parading as a feminist
Then, Palin is unfit as a Mom, so she shouldn’t be running for Veep.
Then, bi-partisan means non-partisan; no one knows there’s a difference.
Is the space craft spinning faster than you are, ET? Maybe you got rattled when you were last beamed up?