Politico finds that leading religious right groups are not happy with their lack of influence over the tea party movement:
"There's a libertarian streak in the tea party movement that concerns me as a cultural conservative," said Bryan Fischer [of the American Family Association]...
The [Contract From America], sponsored by the grass-roots Tea Party Patriots as well as Washington groups such as FreedomWorks and Americans for Tax Reform, asks supporters to choose the 10 most important issues from a menu of 21 choices that makes no mention of socially conservative priorities such as gay marriage and abortion.
"People didn't come out into the streets to protest gay marriage or abortion," said [Brendan] Steinhauser [of FreedomWorks], who said that he hoped the Republican Party would follow the contract's cue and "stop bringing up flag-burning amendments and the gay marriage thing when they're not what people are focused on."
Meanwhile, the Village Voice takes a look at gay Republicans, and doesn't dismiss their efforts outright (stop the presses!).
Finally, as if to demonstrate the point, David Weigel at the Washington Post discusses GOProud's sparring with the Family Research Council (FRC), which takes the increasingly irrelevant view that marginalizing homosexuals should be priority number one. But by attacking groups such as the National Rifle Association and Americans for Tax Reform for working with gays, it's FRC that's marginalizing itself-and even LGBT progressives could agree that this is a positive sign.
62 Comments for “Battling for the Right”
posted by Bobby on
The Tea Party movement is not a religious movement, it’s a CONSTITUTIONALIST movement that honors the founding fathers which were libertarians by the standards of today.
posted by Jorge on
A gay conservative groundswell is also evident among the general voting public. While only 17 percent of self-identified gay, lesbian, and bi voters pulled the lever for George Bush in 2004, according to Los Angeles Times exit polls, the number increased to 27 percent for John McCain in 2008.
I usually cite the CNN or Washington Post exit polls, in which the change is much more modest–about zero if you leave out 2004. I mean, hello, that was a big one. I’d like to know what the LA Times recorded in 2000 before I accept this point. Oh, heck, I’ll look it up.
Hmm, they don’t seem to have it.
Overall the Village Voice article was good, though.
posted by Lymis on
It’s been clear since the beginning that the majority of the people who make a priority out of keeping opposition to homosexuality as a major voting issue do so either because they make money off it, or they mobilize voters, not that they care one way or the other. While some voters do care passionately, most of them react because these people keep telling them what a huge issue and what a grave threat gay people are.
As soon as it’s not a moneymaker or voter mobilizer, the whole “gay issue” will evaporate as a political force. It’s getting there now. And the AFA has nothing to fall back on – of course they’re scared. The essentially private lives of 3% of the population has never been an objective threat to anyone.
posted by Tom on
I took a look at the Contract for America web site.
The web site has a June 14th article, “Allies in Waiting?”, calling on a number of Republican candidates to join the “movement”, beginning with this statement: “Below are a list of seven candidates, who we believe should join Senator Jim DeMint, Senator Tom Coburn, Congressman Steve King, Nevada Senate Candidate Sharron Angle, Utah Senate Candidate Mike Lee, and over 100 other Senate and congressional candidates around the country in listening the the people and signing the Contract from America.”
So I thought I’d test the thesis of Stephen’s post by checking the “Issues” section of the campaign websites of the folks mentioned, checking to see whether opposition to gay and lesbian issues was mentioned and what, if anything, the web sites had to say about gay and lesbian issues. I found a mixed bag:
I guess it is up to everyone to draw their own conclusions, but I don’t think gays and lesbians are likely to be seeing any support from this crowd any time soon. I would be very cautious about suggesting that the Tea Party influence in the Republican Party this year signals a sea change on “culture war” issues.
posted by Tom on
Perhaps the Politico article cited by Stephen puts it best:
posted by Jimmy on
The Religious Right just needs to make common cause with the Tea Partiers, adopt some anti-tax rhetoric, mix it in with the “sinners in the hands of an angry god” crapola, and before you know it, the Tea Partiers will start parroting more shit from Leviticus.
posted by Tom on
I don’t know about that, but I question whether the Tea Party movement will move the Republican Party in the direction of becoming gay-supportive.
The Tea Party movement, certainly, isn’t making “faggot, faggot” a priority, and that means that the Republican Party isn’t as likely to use gays and lesbians as the party’s primary cannon fodder this election cycle.
That’s welcome news, because it gives us an additional couple of years to bring the American people over to our side without having to contend with loud, vocal opposition from the Republican Party and its candidates.
The long-term question, though, is whether the Tea Party movement is going to add a significant number of folks to the Republican “base” who are gay-supportive, or, at a minimum who are turned off by “faggot, faggot”. I don’t know the answer to that question.
Every step in the right direction helps, though, and I’m glad to see that the Tea Party movement isn’t buying into “faggot, faggot”. Gay-silent sure as hell beats gay-trashing.
I look forward to the day when the Republican Party becomes gay-supportive, as we all do. I’m just not convinced that we’ll win that battle until after we’ve already won the war.
posted by Jimmy on
I’m just sayin’, I having come from the evangelical world, I know my people. They’ll simmer on the back burner, always percolating, ready for an opportunity.
Like the Taliban in rhinestones.
posted by Debrah on
“I’m just sayin’, I having come from the evangelical world, I know my people.”
*********************************************
Really?
Unbelievable.
And you survived!
“Like the Taliban in rhinestones.”
**********************************************
Ha!
Quite a good one.
Or perhaps Dolly Parton in a chador.
posted by Jimmy on
“Unbelievable.”
I came up in the Old Time Missionary Baptist way, amongst transplanted Appalachian folks whose fore-fathers ended up on the near west side of Indianapolis, ’cause they ran outta money on their way Chicago.
The thing about Dolly is, she came out of that retaining the good parts, like the music, the down home, the salt of the earth-type people. My father’s people come out of the same place, and they all have a certain hardness to them; whereas my mother’s people, still hillbillies, but from The Ozarks. I find them more mellow, even serene.
posted by Tom on
On gay/lesbian issues, I’m certain that’s true of older evangelicals, and think that older evangelicals will be a critical part of the Republican Party base for the next decade, at least. As much as I like to talk about it, I don’t think that the Republican Party can afford to throw out the hard-core anti-gay base at this point or at any time while older evangelicals are a critical voting block in the Republican primaries.
So in the short term — the next ten to twenty years — I can’t how the Republican Party can put together a gay-supportive conservative base without at least “talking the talk”.
The demographics suggest, though, that as younger evangelicals become a larger segment of the evangelical voting base and become more politically active (older Americans vote more often and more consistently than younger Americans, across the political), I think that “massive resistance” to equality will slowly change, if the polls suggesting that younger evangelicals are more willing to support equality than older evangelicals.
So in the long term — two or three decades — I think that it will be possible for the Republican Party to be at least gay-neutral and perhaps gay-supportive.
It is the transition that interests me, which is what prompted my comment, “I’m just not convinced that we’ll win that battle [for a gay-supportive Republican Party] until after we’ve already won the war.”
DADT is going down, although it may take the military a few years to fully implement “open service”. To my mind, that is the most important victory we can achieve, because Americans won’t, by and large, tolerate discrimination against men and women who are putting their lives on the line for this county. I think that “open service” will open the door to other advances toward equality, and relatively quickly.
The real question is marriage equality. Marriage is both cornerstone and keystone of equality. It is also the sticking point for Republicans, because it is the one issue that we can expect the evangelical base to hold dead-rock firm on until the demographics of the evangelical movement evolve.
Given the realities of having to deal with the evangelical base, and its demographics, I don’t see how the Republican Party can support marriage equality, except in a few states, for the next decade, and nationally, for the next two decades.
By then, the war will have been won, and the “battle for the soul of the Republican Party” won’t count any longer.
posted by Debrah on
Well, Jimmy.
You possess more facets than I realized at first blush.
Do you have a kind of accent as they do?
Although I’m not a fan of country music, I can appreciate elements of all music if there is substance.
I agree with your assessment of people like Parton with regard to raw musical talent.
Many other artists from across the musical spectrum have recorded interpretations of songs she has written and they can be transposed with amazing efficiency.
If you recall, Whitney Houston—who has now gone down the tubes—made a huge hit from the song “I Will Always Love You”.
The current stock of CM artists is most often artistically inauthentic.
posted by Tom on
Dolly Parton is one of the most musically sophisticated female county music vocalists in history. She works a simple song on so many levels that it is astounding. Musicologists will be studying her for decades.
She’s smart as hell and as funny as boys at a watermelon-spitting contest.
posted by Jimmy on
“Do you have a kind of accent as they do?”
I have a twang in my accent that most from the part of town I grew up in: Mars Hill, Decatur Township have, in which a Kentucky-ish lilt can be heard. I’ve been asked many time if I am from the deep south, and depending on my level of intake of the Jesus Juice, I can sound practically antebellum.
posted by Grant on
Stephen – thank you for this posting. Quite enlightening. I welcome the trend of fiscal conservative and constitutionalist movements breaking with social conservatives. I’m glad GOProud is not backing down.
posted by Bobby on
“I don’t think that the Republican Party can afford to throw out the hard-core anti-gay base at this point or at any time while older evangelicals are a critical voting block in the Republican primaries.”
–Exactly, it may be a big tent, but it’s a politically incorrect tent. The Democratic Party treats pro-lifers like perverts and religious people like wackos unless they need the Christian socialist vote, the GOP doesn’t. Besides, why should the GOP reject evangelicals when the DNC doesn’t reject labor unions? Those labor unions are more dangerous, the pension system is bankrupt and those bastards are expecting the American taxpayer to bail them out. So between Andy “workers of the world, unite” Stern and Pat Robertson, I’d rather deal with Robertson, at least he’s not going to tax me to death.
posted by Jimmy on
“Those labor unions are more dangerous, the pension system is bankrupt and those bastards are expecting the American taxpayer to bail them out. So between Andy “workers of the world, unite” Stern and Pat Robertson, I’d rather deal with Robertson, at least he’s not going to tax me to death.”
That’s because you are completely unprincipled, and really have nothing to complain about given the fact that federal tax rates are historically lower, across the board, than they have been since WWII. It’s the foolishness, and phoniness, at the center of the whole tea party movement. The founders where quite OK with taxes actually (Washington did, after all, put down the Whiskey Rebellion), just not without representation.
http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3151
posted by Tom on
The Republican Party does not need to reject evangelicals. What it needs to do is “Just say No!” to the evangelicals on same-sex marriage and a number of other “culture war” issues. GOProud is doing just that, as is LCR. It is time for the rest of the party to wake up.
posted by Bobby on
“That’s because you are completely unprincipled, and really have nothing to complain about given the fact that federal tax rates are historically lower, across the board, than they have been since WWII.”
—They won’t be for long, the Bush tax cuts are set to expire. Besides, taxes are still too high, when the Progressive Income Tax was introduced, the lowest tax bracket was 1% and the highest 6%. Roosevelt raised the top bracket to 90% which was so insane that even a leftwing nut like FDR had to reduce them drastically.
“It’s the foolishness, and phoniness, at the center of the whole tea party movement. The founders where quite OK with taxes actually (Washington did, after all, put down the Whiskey Rebellion), just not without representation.”
—The founders never taxed income. When the founders needed money they sold land and had lotteries. Government was never meant to grow to the obscene size it has grown today.
“The Republican Party does not need to reject evangelicals. What it needs to do is “Just say No!” to the evangelicals on same-sex marriage and a number of other “culture war” issues”
—Well, I’m afraid that’s not going to happen. At the very least you can hope for state’s rights, that’s one of the reasons the constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage fails.
To be fair, as a homosexual without a boyfriend I don’t get to see things the way some gays do. I’m not getting married, I’m not adopting, I’m not good enough for the military nor do I want to serve (Wake up at 5am? Run 4 miles? Nope, not for me), I have always worked in gay-friendly environments, conservatives online rarely reject me, so what gay rights do I really need?
Gays like me need only one thing. Jobs and money. Who creates jobs and money? The GOP. They lower taxes, they improve the economy, and suddenly people like me find jobs and keep more of their money. Obama has nothing to offer me. I don’t care if he proclaims June as gay pride month. Why would I even bother to attend a gay pride parade? For what? To see a bunch of sexy queers walking in their underpants? Puh-leeze, for that I can watch porn.
posted by Jimmy on
The GOP creates jobs in 3rd world countries, which is why this country has been bleeding jobs since the 80’s. The GOP has so aggressively given away the reigns of government to their corporate benefactors that government of, by, and for the people has vanished from the face of the earth. What a crappy way to serve the memory of the first and greatest Republican that ever lived. It’s a blasphemy on par with what Fred Phelps has done to christianity.
posted by Jorge on
I look forward to the day when the Republican Party becomes gay-supportive, as we all do. I’m just not convinced that we’ll win that battle until after we’ve already won the war.
Well, I don’t think the war ever ends. We’ve still got a lot of racial disparities and gender violence even today.
Everyone knows that the energy to push things forward is going to come from the left instead of the right. Especially now that the Republican party is going back to its conservative roots. But fortunately for us that comes too little too late. We might actually see Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repealed soon. A disappointing cycle of Democratic control overall, but maybe our community will do better next time.
posted by Jorge on
…It’s a blasphemy on par with what Fred Phelps has done to christianity.
Oh, come on. Fred Phelps is a nobody who because of information technology and a good travel budget is able to hurt a lot of people for a small amount of time. Years from now people will remember the Inquisition, the Episcopal split, and even the sex abuse scandal. They won’t remember Fred Phelps.
posted by Jimmy on
OK then, Jorge. Substitute Phelps with everyone involved with The Family of C Street fame – the whole heavily networked, dominionist, power hungry, group of evangelical theocrat wannabees you can shake a juju at.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
The GOP creates jobs in 3rd world countries, which is why this country has been bleeding jobs since the 80’s.
Oh, for Pete’s sake. You can always tell that Obama Party members never darkened the door of an economics classroom.
Jobs don’t leave the United States because political parties make them. They leave the United States because someone somewhere can do the job with the same quality for less money.
Want a great example? Here’s an Obama Party approved one.
Mr. Mellon, 55, joined GM in 1972, following his grandfather and his father. Through the 1980s and 1990s, Mr. Mellon held jobs designing electronic systems for vehicle prototypes. In 2000, GM merged two engineering divisions, and he wasn’t needed anymore.
Since then, except for a period in 2001 when he worked on a military-truck project, GM has paid him his full salary for not working. That is currently $31 an hour, or about $64,500 a year, plus health care and other benefits.
About 7,500 GM workers are now in the Jobs Bank, more than double the figure a year ago. Each person costs GM around $100,000 to $130,000 in wages and benefits, according to internal union and company figures, meaning GM’s total cost this year is likely to be around $750 million to $900 million.
Now Jimmy, tell us. Why does the Obama Party support that? Why does the Obama Party believe that companies should be forced to pay people who aren’t working? Why does the Obama Party believe that people should continue to be paid even when their jobs are unnecessary or their skills are no longer needed?
Do you think that creates an advantage for GM? Do you honestly believe that GM should pay nearly a billion dollars a year and get nothing, zero, zip, zilch in the way of work, product, or service for it?
posted by Bobby on
“The GOP creates jobs in 3rd world countries, which is why this country has been bleeding jobs since the 80’s”
—No, republicans support free trade which creates jobs in America and in other country. Democrats like Obama destroy business in America while lending third world countries money.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203863204574346610120524166.html
Democrats also support labor unions which makes hiring American workers expensive which either ships jobs overseas or the the anti-union south of the USA. Why else do you think Nissan builds plants in Mississippi and not Michigan?
“Oh, come on. Fred Phelps is a nobody who because of information technology and a good travel budget is able to hurt a lot of people for a small amount of time.”
—I agree with that, Jorge. In fact, people like Falwell and Robertson joke that Phelps actually help the gay community by displaying a message that even people who oppose gay rights don’t like to see.
In fact, Phelps no longer makes me angry, I like how he attacks everyone, he has signs that say “God hates Jews” and “God hates America” other signs with slogans against the military. I like how he spreads the hate around. In fact, I feel sorry for him, he’s campaign against gays has failed so miserable that now he has to target other groups.
The only negative thing about Phelps is that some people may take his message to mean that God and religion are hateful and it’s better to be the kind of secular nazi that gets offended if the President says “God hates America.” Of course, since Obama gave a speech at Georgetown and demanded that the cross be covered with a curtain, I guess Obama thinks public proclamations of religions are shameful, unless he’s speaking of how wonderful Islam is of course.
posted by Tom on
I hope that their laughter is uneasy, because folks like Falwell and Robertson are Fred Phelps dressed up in thousand dollar suits with hundred thousand dollar media consultants spreading the Phelps filth over million dollar cable networks.
We gain every time the ugly, irrational core values of social conservatives are self-exposed, because the disconnect between their polemic and what more and more Americans are learning as they come to know gays and lesbians as neighbors and friends grows every time they open their mouths.
posted by Tom on
Think about that, Bobby.
If you give irrationality and hate-speech a powered-up megaphone and then draw in the crowd for them, what do you think most people are going to hear?
Between Falwell and Robertson and Dobson and Perkins and the FRC and the AFA and the rest of the crowd, a lot of Christians are finding themselves having to say “We are not all like that …” with increasing frequency.
posted by Jimmy on
“If you give irrationality and hate-speech a powered-up megaphone and then draw in the crowd for them, what do you think most people are going to hear?”
You can’t expect a completely unprincipled person to care, Tom.
PF, why does GM think it’s OK to cast out a valued and loyal employee whose given service for multiple decades? Corporations used to display at least a modicum of appreciation to the loyal workers, who are also loyal customers, too. So yeah, put a guy past his prime out on the street because management is too short sighted to know how to utilize talent. Where’s this guy going to go, since we don’t make anything anymore. Is everybody supposed to work at Walmart?
GM, of all companies, should have payed attention to something else, along with its sucky bottom line – its image. No other company exemplifies the great turning of the back on the American people more than GM. Yet, who do they come running to when their tit is in a wringer? The same place where Wall Street ran, the American people.
We decided it was better that people stay employed rather than on the dole, right or wrong, that was the decision. Then the boys think it’s OK to go back to business as usual, because they never took anything other than an economics class. Myopia at its finest.
posted by Debrah on
Geraldo Rivera Likens Rolling Stones’ Michael Hastings to Al Qaeda
As everyone knows, Geraldo often over-dramatizes; however, in this video he makes some very good points.
A true journalist knows that when people are laid-back and goofing off inside a social atmosphere that the things said are not really for “on the record” reporting—verbalized or not.
Hastings was within his rights, but why do this kind of harm…..really?
And if Hastings were a proponent of this war would he have felt compelled to publish the infantile dialogue?
Lastly, I didn’t know that McChrystal is a Liberal.
posted by Jimmy on
As you are an intriguer, Debrah, you would try to make it about something other than what it is. You even need to call the messenger on the carpet, the same messenger who assured all the players that, unless specified, everything was on the record. Really bad losers try to reinterpret the most simplest of game rules, applying so many unnecessary permutations, just so they can end up being the victim.
Sorry no, the “there” is quite clearly there.
posted by Bobby on
“You can’t expect a completely unprincipled person to care, Tom.”
—Shut up. I have plenty of principles. I believe in freedom and individualism, you don’t. You’re a statist. I’m pretty sure that the ends justify the means for you. You certainly have no qualms with forced volunteering of innocent high school students, and I’m sure you wouldn’t mind if Canadian-style hate speech laws where passed and people like Rush Limbaugh and others had to defend their politically incorrect opinions in court. I know progressives, if they can’t convince you, they censor you. The nazis at advocate.com did it to me, no matter how many times I try to publish I keep getting “your comments cannot be posted at this time.” This is strange because I used to comment quite frequently. So frankly, Jimmy, you have some nerve saying I have no principles. I have LIBERTARIAN principles!
“PF, why does GM think it’s OK to cast out a valued and loyal employee whose given service for multiple decades?”
—Because it’s all about money. If you can’t afford valued and loyal employees, you get rid of them. Tell me, Jimmy. What do you do for a living? Sounds to me you’re a college professor, just like Obama.
“Where’s this guy going to go, since we don’t make anything anymore. Is everybody supposed to work at Walmart?”
—Hey, life sucks. I used to be a copywriter, but now my industry is obsessed with Internet Marketing and they’re happy hiring 20+ years old to do my job. So yes, perhaps I’m gonna have to work at Walmart, Target, become a car salesman, etc.
“GM, of all companies, should have payed attention to something else, along with its sucky bottom line – its image. No other company exemplifies the great turning of the back on the American people more than GM. Yet, who do they come running to when their tit is in a wringer? The same place where Wall Street ran, the American people.”
—GM has made crappy cars for a long time, with the exception of SUV’s that became irrelevant thanks to high gas prices. GM is also broke before of their unions, the average union worker makes $50 an hour (counting benefits) versus the average Nissan worker that makes $30. Paying your employees a 401k without healthcare is cheaper than giving them a life pension that can be inherited by their husband or wife, plus health care!
“We decided it was better that people stay employed rather than on the dole, right or wrong, that was the decision. Then the boys think it’s OK to go back to business as usual, because they never took anything other than an economics class.”
—Republicans never wanted to bail out GM, but the Democrats did it and eventually they fired plenty of GM workers. Now GM runs commercials about them having paying the government loan, when in reality they simply moved money from one account to the other, but never really made any money.
It’s just like the banks, it was never a good ideas to bail them out, but the government did and now they’re not making loans except to one another. But hey, progressives know better, right?
“If you give irrationality and hate-speech a powered-up megaphone and then draw in the crowd for them, what do you think most people are going to hear?”
—Hopefully they’ll realize most people believe God is love.
“Between Falwell and Robertson and Dobson and Perkins and the FRC and the AFA and the rest of the crowd, a lot of Christians are finding themselves having to say “We are not all like that …” with increasing frequency.”
—I wouldn’t compare those men to Phelps. Phelps is never right, those men are sometimes right, specially when they don’t talk about gays, although sometimes when they do talk about gays they simply cherry pick bad examples from our own community.
posted by Debrah on
“As you are an intriguer, Debrah, you would try to make it about something other than what it is.”
*********************************************
Provocative, yes. By design as well as by nature.
An “intriguer” appellation lends itself to schemes and secrets of which someone as naturally blunt as I would not readily take part.
I’m merely illuminating points made by someone else…….which cannot be dismissed, totally.
“You even need to call the messenger on the carpet, the same messenger who assured all the players that, unless specified, everything was on the record.”
**********************************************
I really don’t have a huge investment in this topic.
Hastings is perhaps joined at the hip with people like David Weigel in terms of testosterone levels (or lack of, as is the case, IMO) and ethical behavior………however……..
…….as I said, Hastings was certainly within his rights.
It would just be refreshing to see someone in the media treat reports that affect the national security of a country with a bit more care than they do a sex scandal or whether Obama takes a visiting head of state to a “healthy” restaurant or to a “greasy spoon”.
posted by Jimmy on
A dilution of war policy by a top warrior, who is way off the reservation, in public disagreement, before the tribe, with the chief IS something that can drastically affect national security. And with incredible candor and zero duplicity, an unexpected member of the fourth estate, though still quite legitably a member, managed to shine a light on the situation. Good for us.
We owe him a debt of gratitude.
posted by BobN on
Jobs don’t leave the United States because political parties make them.
They leave because political parties write laws to allow/entice/encourage/discourage/penalize/forbid them, as the case may be. There is no “free market” in international commerce. It’s all about molding the system to, in theory, maximize national interest.
Not working out so well for us these days…
posted by Jorge on
OK then, Jorge. Substitute Phelps with everyone involved with The Family of C Street fame – the whole heavily networked, dominionist, power hungry, group of evangelical theocrat wannabees you can shake a juju at.
I appreciate it.
But what’s a juju?
…The only negative thing about Phelps is that some people may take his message to mean that God and religion are hateful and it’s better to be the kind of secular nazi that gets offended if the President says “God hates America.”…
You mean God bless America, don’t you?
It’s an interesting train of thought.
But I blame the jujus for that. As much as I think some people’s visceral hatred of anything religious + right of center borders on mental illness and shows such people to be trapped in the past and overall of shoddy intellectualism, I do think that for many years the history of the religious right was a very un-humanitarian one and not enough people acknowledge it.
posted by Jorge on
–I wouldn’t compare those men to Phelps. Phelps is never right, those men are sometimes right, specially when they don’t talk about gays, although sometimes when they do talk about gays they simply cherry pick bad examples from our own community.
Dobson in particular is frighteningly intelligent on almost every other subject. He has a very interesting column, but his ideas on homosexuality are so blind that I seriously distrust him.
posted by BobN on
Dobson in particular is frighteningly intelligent on almost every other subject.
Uh… you’re not including pet training and/or how to raise a boy to “be a man”, are you?
posted by Carl on
This is the third party that Tea Party-backed Sharron Angle was involved with in the ’90s:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/06/sharron-angles-independent-american-party-anti-gay-flier.php
posted by jimmy on
“Republicans never wanted to bail out GM, but the Democrats did it and eventually they fired plenty of GM workers.”
They certainly had no answers as far as what to do with the millions of unemployed, semi-skilled workers that would have flooded the welfare lines had those industries gone under. And by the way, W , with his Goldman Sachs flunky, Hank Paulson made that bank bailout happen. Progressives? Not hardly. They should have taken that money and made direct loans to small businesses, bypassing Wall Street altogether. That’s progressivism.
The American people have rejected a national economic policy of totally unregulated markets, and they, in their sovereignty, and wisdom, are justified in doing so. You want something else? Move to Nigeria – Sudan, perfect examples of total laissez faire.
posted by Bobby on
“Dobson in particular is frighteningly intelligent on almost every other subject. He has a very interesting column, but his ideas on homosexuality are so blind that I seriously distrust him.”
—I’m kinda like a cafeteria catholic when it comes to him, I pick and choose.
“They certainly had no answers as far as what to do with the millions of unemployed, semi-skilled workers that would have flooded the welfare lines had those industries gone under.”
—Who’s they? Not every republican voted for the bailout.
“And by the way, W , with his Goldman Sachs flunky, Hank Paulson made that bank bailout happen. Progressives? Not hardly. They should have taken that money and made direct loans to small businesses, bypassing Wall Street altogether. That’s progressivism.”
—What a lie, I saw Nancy Pelosi celebrating the bailouts and using it as an opportunity to attack GWB. Besides, after Obama was elected there were further bailouts and more spending. Have you heard of the finance bill? Don’t bitch about republicans, your democratic friends have been controlling the government for the past two years with dismal results. How long do you think the American people will put up with “it’s all Bush’s fault.”?
“The American people have rejected a national economic policy of totally unregulated markets, and they, in their sovereignty, and wisdom, are justified in doing so. You want something else? Move to Nigeria – Sudan, perfect examples of total laissez faire.”
—No they haven’t, Obama never ran as a socialist, he pretended to be a centrist, he didn’t even speak in specifics. Of course, the right knew who he was from the very beginning, he did not fool us.
Besides, you don’t defend a democrat by pointing out the mistakes of a republican. If George W. Bush had a bad idea, Obama is hte last person who would be following in his footsteps. I mean, the hypocrysy of this Kenyan-American is amazing, why did he replace McChrystal with Petraeus? Wasn’t Petraeus the devil a few years ago? Didn’t all the demoncrats hate Petraeus? Didn’t Move On called him “Betray-Us?”
By the way, where’s the anti-war movement now? Where are the crazies shouting “no blood for oil?” Poor Cindy Sheehan, I guess when the DNC’s in charge, she becomes a bitch once again. Maybe now the anti-war liberals will appreciate Fox News, where else can they get coverage during Obama’s regime?
posted by Jimmy on
“What a lie, I saw Nancy Pelosi celebrating the bailouts and using it as an opportunity to attack GWB. Besides, after Obama was elected there were further bailouts and more spending.”
And the American people were reminded of the members of congress who were vehemently against the stimulus, and then cravenly stood by smiling and taking credit when the checks arrived. We’ve seen this movie.
You guys can’t continue to have it both ways with Obama, either he is a raving liberal fascist or a politician who pulled the wool over the eyes of the left, who aren’t real happy with his rightist forays. What does this super-socialist have to show for his efforts at razing this country to the ground?
posted by Jorge on
Uh… you’re not including pet training and/or how to raise a boy to “be a man”, are you?
No.
posted by Jorge on
You guys can’t continue to have it both ways with Obama, either he is a raving liberal fascist or a politician who pulled the wool over the eyes of the left, who aren’t real happy with his rightist forays. What does this super-socialist have to show for his efforts at razing this country to the ground?
Yes, much like people tried to alternately paint Bush as both an idiot and a calculating tyrant.
The difference between President Obama and your typical screaming hissy fit far-left hippie is pragmatism. Our president is charged with actually getting things done, and he wants to play to win. He is intellectual enough to avoid ideas that are instant disasters–like pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan yesterday. Obama’s long-term game is impressive. His Attorney General reads Miranda to arrested terrorists and puts them on trial. He apologizes for the United States and renames the War on Terror. He is suing the Arizona over its immigration law. His Secretary of Labor advocates for underpaid illegal immigrants, while a new appointee to ICE who has previously refused to turn arrested illegals to the feds. We already know his diabolical plots to use the economic and health care crises to redistribute income. Unlike *most* people, Obama has a vision that aims to get just about every single progressive idea done at the same time with long-term effects, and he’s made some progress toward this undertaking.
posted by Bobby on
“And the American people were reminded of the members of congress who were vehemently against the stimulus, and then cravenly stood by smiling and taking credit when the checks arrived. We’ve seen this movie.”
—A tax rebate is not the same as a corporate bailout. I pay taxes, you pay taxes, we are entitled to our money. However, the best idea would be a flat tax. That would means both the corporate and income tax are replaced with a national sales tax.
“You guys can’t continue to have it both ways with Obama, either he is a raving liberal fascist or a politician who pulled the wool over the eyes of the left, who aren’t real happy with his rightist forays. What does this super-socialist have to show for his efforts at razing this country to the ground?”
—We’re not having it both ways, he is a socialist. If the left isn’t happy with him is because the typical leftwinger doesn’t understand what real leftism is all about- power and control. Did you think for example that the left hates war? The left LOVES war, neither LBJ nor JFK stopped Vietnam, LBJ in particular increased the war and left Nixon a mess to deal with. The left also loves torture, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Stalin, they were all masterful torturers. Why do you think Obama hasn’t closed Guantanamo like he promised? Why do you think Obama still practices rendition? In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama decides to bring back the draft. Your peace-loving friends believe in collective sacrifice, just like you believe in collective volunteering or “national service” as Obama calls it. In fact, maybe he wants to end DADT so draft-dodgers don’t start coming out of the closet to avoid serving. I know military history, during Vietnam you had to be a queen like RuPaul to beat the draft, it wasn’t enough to declare yourself gay, sometimes the recruiting officer would say “the army will make a man out of you.” Enjoy your fuhrer, Jimmy.
posted by Jimmy on
“The left LOVES war, neither LBJ nor JFK stopped Vietnam, LBJ in particular increased the war and left Nixon a mess to deal with. The left also loves torture, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Stalin, they were all masterful torturers. Why do you think Obama hasn’t closed Guantanamo like he promised? Why do you think Obama still practices rendition? In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if Obama decides to bring back the draft. Your peace-loving friends believe in collective sacrifice, just like you believe in collective volunteering or “national service” as Obama calls it. In fact, maybe he wants to end DADT so draft-dodgers don’t start coming out of the closet to avoid serving.”
All of this points to the cognitive dissonance present in the hysteria that Obama is such a lefty. LBJ was a fair-minded dixiecrat and JFK was a militarist, and a centrist. None of these folks are nearly as radical and way left of center as you bullshitters would have us believe. I’ve been saying all along. It’s why you guys look to clownish and end up, time and time again, to be shown that you’re wrong in your red baiting paranoia.
posted by Tom on
Fair comment. I’ll amend my earlier statement: “I hope that their laughter is uneasy, because [when it comes to gays and lesbians] folks like Falwell and Robertson are Fred Phelps dressed up in thousand dollar suits with hundred thousand dollar media consultants spreading
the Phelps[indistinguishably virulent] filth over million dollar cable networks.”posted by Tom on
When it comes to gays an lesbians, Dobson has a history of bald-faced lying, pawning off discredited research as legitimate, making unsupported statements of “fact”, and misrepresenting and falsifying legitimate research. That, to my mind, is more than enough reason to take a skeptical look at anything he has to say about anything. In his case, the rule of thumb should be “Don’t trust until verified …”
posted by Debrah on
Even with Petraeus in charge, Afghanistan remains a conundrum from The Hammer
The Unengaged President from Mark Steyn
posted by BobN on
When it comes to gays an lesbians, Dobson has a history of bald-faced lying, pawning off discredited research as legitimate, making unsupported statements of “fact”, and misrepresenting and falsifying legitimate research.
It’s no great consolation, but he does pretty much the same thing in regard to heterosexuals and their relationships, too.
posted by Jorge on
When it comes to gays an lesbians, Dobson has a history of bald-faced lying, pawning off discredited research as legitimate, making unsupported statements of “fact”, and misrepresenting and falsifying legitimate research. That, to my mind, is more than enough reason to take a skeptical look at anything he has to say about anything. In his case, the rule of thumb should be “Don’t trust until verified …”
Those are all very important things to avoid. It is always good for opinion leaders to have a strong dose of humility.
posted by Jimmy on
Debrah –
That Steyn piece is putrid; Krauthammer writes with dignity, at least.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
Here’s my Monday greeting and salutation.
I’m the big Kitty.
You’re the little one wearing the hat.
LOL!!!
LOL!!!
LOL!!!
posted by Jimmy on
Which makes the question in the description, “Why does that WOMAN have such hairy ARMS?!??,” so apropos.
Might want to reduce the testosterone dosage in your HRT.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
You’ll have to send your opinion to the woman who made the video.
I’m guessing that the person whose arm is visible and who came to the assistance of the little kitty was a male friend of the woman. Look at the hand. It looks quite masculine.
You hear her voice only. She’s perhaps holding the camera.
Or whatever………..
posted by Bobby on
Hey Jimmy, you remind me of this guy.
http://www.news.com.au/world/joe-biden-calls-shop-manager-a-smarta-after-being-asked-to-lower-taxes/story-e6frfkyi-1225885040649
posted by Jimmy on
The truth, in heaping tablespoons full.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/28/opinion/28krugman.html?hp
posted by Bobby on
Krugman, Jimmy? You might as well be quoting from Marx. I hate Krugman, he’s a liar, a progressive Bush-hater and Obama-lover. He’s also the #1 enemy of Bill O’Reilly which I’m sure you despise as well.
posted by Debrah on
Jimmy–
Back to the subject of McChrystal for a moment……
This should be of concern to anyone.
It will be the inevitable residue from the loose-lipped-shoot-from-the-hip sensationalized reporting.
Once again, I’m not saying that Hastings was not within his rights, just that Geraldo made some good points and now circumspection will be a part of the scenario for a long time.
But, hey. Everyone got to read all the superfluous chit-chat…….as our national security is undermined.
posted by bobby on
Hey Debrah, I was watching the O’ Factor and there’s a rumor that McChrystal is actually a liberal that turned off Fox News in his office (the #1 network among servicemen) and allowed that Rolling Stone guy to get close to him because they share political leanings.
posted by Jimmy on
“It’s unclear why Rolling Stone decided to reproduce these and other remarks, but the damage is done.”
What a disingenuous hack Max Fisher betrays himself to be in a piece so full of green-eyed envy, and malice, toward a competitor as to be hardly taken seriously. Like The Atlantic, or Fisher, would sit on such a mega-scoop?
In the immortal words of Ralph Kramden, “Hardy Har Har!”
posted by Debrah on
Bobby–
You’re exactly right.
When I heard that I couldn’t believe it.
McChrystal is just so regimented and “conservative looking”—LOL!!!—that I found it a total disconnect to discover that he’s a Liberal.
Think about this for a moment: Prior to the latest fiasco, he had dissed and stepped on Obama’s toes TWICE BEFORE IN A VERY PUBLIC WAY…….
…….yet Obama allowed him to save face and he didn’t make a big deal of it.
Now, it’s clear why.
I have no doubt if McChrystal were a conservative, Obama would have made a big deal of his penchant for “insubordination” long ago.
Jimmy–
Uh-huh.
posted by Veteran on
Women got there equal rights, the african Americans got theres, so its just a matter of time before the Gay community gets theres too!
Click on my name to find out how to help a veteran today.