Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Party Rooster, May 2, 2012.
Props to Romney for hiring him in the first place I guess...
So you have a rare case of a homosexual working for the republicans and they force him out. Good move:clap::clap:
Fucking Jeeezoos people win again.
Pretty lousy timing to lose your foreign affairs expert when Obama is in the middle of his World Osama-Killing-Grandstanding Tour 2012
Don't think it's so much "timing." Sounds like he felt like he was hired as just a political stunt when they never bothered letting the guy do his job and weigh in on that whole thing.
Ban guns and support carbon taxes but don't you have any of those queers working for you. Continue a failed foreign policy that creates enemies for the US and puts us further into debt but I better not see any moes walking around. I hope this causes Romney to lose some votes.
What does his sexual orientation have to do with his foreign policy skills? Enough with your OBSESSION with cock, Republicans. Enough.
Romney hired him and wanted him to stay. There goes the theocrat argument from the left. Mission accomplished.
I'm still annoyed that they are so bothered by this. I mean, look - if we were talking about something like Romney's adviser on family affairs being gay I still wouldn't mind, but I could at least see why an uber conservative would have a problem with that. But foreign policy? Are these people seriously suggesting that nobody who is gay should be associated with Romney's campaign and/or presidency in any way? That's just unrealistic, not to mention straight retarded. What decade is this?
That's why a part of me is pretty happy with Romney as the nominee. With all of Mayr and partycock's snide remarks about him being similar to Obama, I don't think a far right candidate would be a good thing right now. We gotta stop the pendulum swing, not increase it (get out of MYYY way).
See what I wrote before. It looks like to me he wasn't all too happy they were trying to keep him under the radar instead of telling the theocrats to go fuck themselves.
I find it totally baffling that the Republicans couldn't come up with a better alternative. I think a lot of Democrats and independents are going to stay home on election day because they don't really see Romney as that much different than Obama. They see all his flip-flopping and realize there's really no bark to his bite.
This feels stopgap-y to me. The farm system looks pretty good with its Rubios and Ryans and shit, but the vast majority of them are still too young. I'm not sure who they could come up with that would be able to a) somehow satisfy the more conservative religious elements and b) appeal to middle-of-the-road voters that were disappointed by Obama.
I have a gay Republican friend. I think the main reason most of them don't come out is not so much pressure from other Republicans. Most people my age and under really don't care. It's the unwanted attention from the left; being called out as a traitor and a hypocrite and being used for their political gain.
I've heard this too. Log Cabin Republicans don't get any heat from the religious right wing. All their grief comes from the likes of GLAAD. They aren't banned from CPAC or the RNC, but they are banned from Gay Pride parades.
Hey, what if this guy is talking politics and suddenly starts suckin' cocks. We can't have that.
Awww shit. Hadn't thought of that.
Don't be silly. That fact would make this whole thread worthless! Must misrepresent Republicans!
Except if it wasn't exactly a "fact." The Heritage Foundation and a few other conservative groups boycotted last year's CPAC in protest of gay groups being invited to CPAC.
In other words, they did the morally appropriate thing - not attending themselves as opposed to just banning the people they don't agree with.
Exactly, and the fact that gay groups were invited is showing a change in the Republican party. It's not happening nearly fast enough, but most of the Republicans I know don't have anything against gays, and the strongest argument is that they should have every right heterosexual couples have, but the definition of marriage should not be changed (I realize there's the separate-but-equal counter-argument... just stating an example).
There are 3 or 4 people I know who are adamantly anti-gay, and all of them are pretty liberal. I really think the left just gives much more attention than deserved to the groups on the right that are adamantly against homosexuality.
Misrepresenters gonna misrepresent.
Yup. Apparently this slow shift is being noticed elsewhere as well. I read an interesting piece on it recently. You can check it out here: "GOP Shift On Gay Marriage Opposition."
I honestly think that many conservatives feel like a) There are more important issues right now and b) They are slowly giving less of a fuck about what other people do privately. At least that is what I see a lot in my life.
Well, it was also not only about Log Cabin. Heritage were mad because of various disagreements with CPAC. Just read their comment in the article partycock posted.
Gay issues are a generational thing. Old people don't like the gays, younger people do. Party affiliation has little to do with it.
I think Republicans see that more government intervention is never a good thing, and it has such a massive impact on their fiscal values that they're willing to take another look at their morality and how much they want to force on others. Many more Republicans I know are shifting more and more libertarian, and really the only thing holding the party back from making the shift are the 45 year old & up Republicans.
They have no control over who gets invited to CPAC, so they thought they would strong arm those that are in charge into it. Props to the organizers for telling them to go screw.
Besides, don't say gay Republicans don't get any heat from the religious right wing. It was Heritage, the Family Research Council, and the American Family Association that boycotted. Couple of pretty big religious right wingers there.
I didn't misrepresent shit.
Well, maybe not the smartest phrasing, but if you are upset about that, you should be doubly upset with the gay community at large for scorning them in an even more active an heinous fashion (as they do to the Israeli gay community, despite homosexuality being illegal in the Palestinian territories, for example). Just sayin'.