GOP: The Gay Old Party?

posted at 2:15 pm on February 3, 2011 by Jazz Shaw

With CPAC 2011 almost upon us, plenty of discussion has taken place over who will or won’t be attending. CPAC is something of a litmus test in the conservative community, particularly when we are gearing up for a presidential election. Since one bone of contention – at least for some – has been the inclusion of GOProud as a sponsor, Liz Mair composed a rather thoughtful analysis of the best fit for gays and lesbians in the Republican Party and the conservative movement in general.

The entire essay is worthwhile, but it boils down to a couple of key points. The first deals with the fallacy that gay voters are some sort of homogenous group which only cares about – as Liz terms it – “the gay stuff.”

Let’s just get it out there: A lot of people think gays and lesbians are naturally and should be liberal/Democrats because—wait for it—gay people only or mainly care about what I shorthand term “gay stuff.” You know, gay marriage, gay adoption, and so on and so forth. And then, just as you have within the straight population, there are people who think marriage is nice, and want gay relationships recognized but also think hey, you know what’s equally or more important? Killing terrorists, stopping ill-conceived policy like Obamacare, and not being spent-and-taxed to death.

Yes, it’s true: A lot of gays and lesbians do have concerns about the continued existence of the estate tax; concerns about the threat and potential spread of Islamic fundamentalism; concerns about the negative effects of Obamacare; concerns about our screwed up tax system, which takes too much money out of people’s pockets. You know what you typically call people with those kinds of concerns, no matter whether they are attracted to guys or girls and have boobies or not? You call them Republicans, conservatives, center-right, right-leaning libertarians, or some variation thereof.

The second part is a bit more tricky, and raises the question of whether or not the Democrats truly are more supportive of “the gay stuff” aforementioned, and precisely how out of line the GOP is. Liz points out that the positions of Barack Obama and George W. Bush on the gay marriage question were virtually identical. She also provides some background on the voting records of some big bad conservatives – along with several prominent Democrats – where votes on “the gay stuff” are concerned and delivers more than a few facts which may come as a surprise to some readers.

For me, trying to lump any group into one party or the other seems a futile effort. I’m reminded of a woman who contacted me during our last election, and still stays in touch with me to this day. She had seen my candidate at a press conference and though she was a Democrat, being very concerned over skyrocketing unemployment and debt, was impressed. But she closed her initial note to me with a disturbing comment.

Please, please, please tell me he’s pro-choice.”

It wasn’t an unreasonable question since we have a lot of pro-choice Republicans in the Northeast, but it was not the case with my guy. Being in New York, I kept my pro-life Republican candidate from discussing abortion any more than was absolutely necessary. But I was forced to admit to her that he opposed the procedure. This led to a lengthy discussion where I explained that the vote of a single member of the House on such matters probably wouldn’t be a significant factor in the long term since any legislation proposed along those lines would probably wind up being tossed to the judicial branch anyway.

In the end, she informed me that she had indeed voted for my candidate, but noted that our discussion would prompt her to keep voting for Democratic presidents in the future so they nominate Supreme Court justices. I considered it a win, since she had previously voted a straight Democratic ticket anyway.

The point here, similar to what Liz Mair has demonstrated, is that there is certainly room in the conservative movement – and the Republican Party – for voters who agree with a broad swath of other principles even if they disagree with what we might assume are their “single voter” key issues.

Welcome to CPAC. The tent is looking a little bit bigger, and it’s hard to argue that this is a bad thing.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

UGGGH I wanna go this year
Killin me
Have fun everyone who is attending!

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:16 PM

Sarah Palin Turns Down Coveted Keynote Speaking Slot At CPAC Conference
ABC News ^ | February 3, 2011 | Michael Falcone

Posted on Thursday, February 03, 2011 1:08:26 PM by Virginia Ridgerunner

After skipping the popular Conservative Political Action Conference for the past three years, Sarah Palin has once again turned down the invitation of CPAC officials to address the conference this year.

CPAC organizers invited Palin to deliver the closing-night keynote speech on Saturday Feb. 12, immediately following the announcement of the results of CPAC’s annual presidential straw poll, but after several days of negotiations, she declined.

“We’re disappointed that she wasn’t able to make it this year,” American Conservative Union Chairman David Keene said through a spokesman on Thursday. He noted that Palin “expressed interest in wanting to come this year,” but said that it came down to “a scheduling issue.”

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2668059/posts?page=36

unseen on February 3, 2011 at 2:19 PM

The first deals with the fallacy that gay voters are some sort of homogenous group which only cares about – as Liz terms it – “the gay stuff.”

Replace gay voters by gay activists and it may no longer be a fallacy.

MeatHeadinCA on February 3, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Fine by me.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:20 PM

unseen on February 3, 2011 at 2:19 PM

Probably a smart move … especially for someone that certain Republicans keep complaining is too overexposed.

MeatHeadinCA on February 3, 2011 at 2:20 PM

The problem is the attempt to Balkinize the GOP the same way that the Democrat party is. You really don’t need your own group unless you are pushing an agenda centered around that which distinguishes the group.

Count to 10 on February 3, 2011 at 2:21 PM

The tent is looking a little bit bigger, and it’s hard to argue that this is a bad thing.

If including the infinitesimally small “gay conservatives” means losing the evangelical vote – then the tent just got a lot, lot smaller.

Some more cynical people might say, as according to plan.

Rebar on February 3, 2011 at 2:21 PM

The second part is a bit more tricky, and raises the question of whether or not the Democrats truly are more supportive of “the gay stuff” aforementioned

Since they can’t even call the war on terrer the war on terror, you’ve got your answer.

Lefties are not liberal and not progressive at all. PC will kill us all, gays in the beginning.

Schadenfreude on February 3, 2011 at 2:22 PM

So what happens when Democrats say that they want to have more laws against discrimination against gays. Does that make them more pro-”gay stuff”?

MeatHeadinCA on February 3, 2011 at 2:22 PM

You really don’t need your own group unless you are pushing an agenda centered around that which distinguishes the group.

Count to 10 on February 3, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Exactly. If you’re a gay conservative, there should be plenty of groups on the right for you to participate in.

MeatHeadinCA on February 3, 2011 at 2:23 PM

Replace gay voters by gay activists and it may no longer be a fallacy.

MeatHeadinCA on February 3, 2011 at 2:19 PM

I strongly doubt the existance of gay activist conservatives.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:24 PM

Fine by me.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:20 PM

gee what a surprise /sarc

faux conservative.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:24 PM

CPAC is something of a litmus test in the conservative community, particularly when we are gearing up for a presidential election

99.9% of the people that vote conservative have never heard of CPAC. You should avoid claiming this silly event does anything except ramp up the retail sales of liquor and condoms in DC.

David in ATL on February 3, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I strongly doubt the existance of gay activist conservatives.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:24 PM

And yet the goals of gay activists and gay conservatives are identical.

Go figure.

Rebar on February 3, 2011 at 2:25 PM

I have no problems with gay conservatives. Welcome to the party.

I have a problem with gay “conservatives” who spend almost all of their time focusing on suing over social issues and almost no time on fiscal or defense conservative principles.

amerpundit on February 3, 2011 at 2:26 PM

And yet the goals of gay activists and gay conservatives are identical.

Go figure.

Rebar on February 3, 2011 at 2:25 PM

No.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Nope, nope, nope. With social cons, you have to lockstep with every one of their issues or you are a horrible disgusting libertarian.

John the Libertarian on February 3, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Being in New York, I kept my pro-life Republican candidate from discussing abortion any more than was absolutely necessary. But I was forced to admit to her that he opposed the procedure.

It is this sort of timidity that has gotten us into the mess we’re in. Telling “your candidate” that they should refrain from discussing their pro-life principles is candy-assed and shameful. Some things are more important than winning in the short term and short term compromise nets long term disappointment. Sorry Jazz, but people like you are the problem.

And your candidate should have told you to kiss off.

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:27 PM

You really don’t need your own group unless you are pushing an agenda centered around that which distinguishes the group.

Count to 10 on February 3, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Bingo. “Gay Conservatives” or “Gay Any Other Damned Thing” need to recognize that the only reason anybody cares about what they do with their genitalia is that The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name has long since become The Love That Just Won’t Shut Up About It.

warbaby on February 3, 2011 at 2:28 PM

I would love to have more & more homosexuals voting conservative & joining conservative groups.
BTW, part of the definition of conservative IMHO is opposing homosexual marriage & homosexuals in the military.

itsnotaboutme on February 3, 2011 at 2:28 PM

If you are gay and reading this and you care about restoring fiscal sanity, adherence to our Constitution and protecting this great country of ours, I say WELCOME!

We need you and we want you! We can argue over the social issues some other time, right now our nation is in crisis. We are broke! As I see it, most of the social issues we argue about aren’t supposed to be any business of our Federal government anyway.

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Sorry for threadjacking but looks like the GOP cocktail party backstabbers are at it again, behind our backs:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/this-should-make-you-nervous/

flawedskull on February 3, 2011 at 2:30 PM

You know what you typically call people with those kinds of concerns, no matter whether they are attracted to guys or girls and have boobies or not? You call them Republicans, conservatives, center-right, right-leaning libertarians, or some variation thereof.

And do you know what we typically call those same people when they will sell out the right on any of those things to get their pet issues passed?

RINOS.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:30 PM

“For me, trying to lump any group into one party or the other seems a futile effort. ”

LOL!! – It’s not hard at all AP, you just don’t want to.

abobo on February 3, 2011 at 2:31 PM

You really don’t need your own group unless you are pushing an agenda centered around that which distinguishes the group.

Count to 10 on February 3, 2011 at 2:21 PM

Bingo. “Gay Conservatives” or “Gay Any Other Damned Thing” need to recognize that the only reason anybody cares about what they do with their genitalia is that The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name has long since become The Love That Just Won’t Shut Up About It.

warbaby on February 3, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Exactly!

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:31 PM

I strongly doubt the existance of gay activist conservatives.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:24 PM

I do too. That’s one reason I’m a little suspicious of GOProud.

MeatHeadinCA on February 3, 2011 at 2:31 PM

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:29 PM

Thank you! A voice of sanity.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:31 PM

New York is probably one of the most pro-choice states in the country. Abortion is a negative for the GOP in the Northeast, minus PA/NH, and the Pacific states, plus NV. Otherwise it’s either neutral or a net benefit for Republicans. This just goes to show Roe should be overturned and leave it to the states; the country is so far apart on this issue. As to gay issues, even blue states haven’t moved all that far left yet.

TimTebowSavesAmerica on February 3, 2011 at 2:32 PM

The so-cons flipping their lids about Homo-Cons being at CPAC this year are being very silly. Plenty of socially conservative groups are in attendance this year, as per the usual.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:33 PM

faux conservative.

Hey r4l!

Aren’t you supposed to be publishing your Earth-shattering thesis refuting once and for all the theory of Darwinian evolution in Nature and the Quarterly Review of Biology this month?

Let me know when it’s out.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:35 PM

It would be more encouraging to see gay conservatives and libertarians pushing to get the gov’t out of marriage altogether; that is, altogether out of the “gay stuff.”

To be fair, I’m sure there are a great number of them that already do push for this. We just don’t hear about them as much as we do from the “pro-gay-stuff” conservatives.

MeatHeadinCA on February 3, 2011 at 2:35 PM

CPAC has outlived its usefulness. It meant something before the internet. It was a place for Conservatives to get together and exchange ideas. But we do that every day online with blogs & podcasts.

CPAC is dead.

portlandon on February 3, 2011 at 2:35 PM

If you are gay and reading this and you care about restoring fiscal sanity, adherence to our Constitution and protecting this great country of ours, I say WELCOME!

We need you and we want you! We can argue over the social issues some other time, right now our nation is in crisis. We are broke! As I see it, most of the social issues we argue about aren’t supposed to be any business of our Federal government anyway.

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:29 PM

FAUX CONSERVATIVE!#@#!

:-)

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:36 PM

We need you and we want you! We can argue over the social issues some other time, right now our nation is in crisis. We are broke! As I see it, most of the social issues we argue about aren’t supposed to be any business of our Federal government anyway.

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:29 PM

no we can’t. how come its never the business of the federal government only when it pushes the liberal agenda?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:36 PM

CPAC is something of a litmus test in the conservative community, particularly when we are gearing up for a presidential election.

CPAC 2010 Straw Poll RESULTS: Ron Paul Wins Big

CPAC officially jumped the shark last year. The only thing it’s a litmus test for is to see how much cash it can rake in.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:36 PM

Bingo. “Gay Conservatives” or “Gay Any Other Damned Thing” need to recognize that the only reason anybody cares about what they do with their genitalia is that The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name has long since become The Love That Just Won’t Shut Up About It.

warbaby on February 3, 2011 at 2:28 PM

Jesus Skateboarding Christ, the people who won’t shut about about their pet issues are the NoCon SoCons! Give me a break. I’m not going to mention the word that one of you religious righteous can’t help but to inject no matter what the topic, to name just one example. For one of you to accuse others of having an obnoxious, persistent one track mind is about as hypocritical as Billy Jeff lecturing the nation on marital fidelity!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Bingo. “Gay Conservatives” or “Gay Any Other Damned Thing” need to recognize that the only reason anybody cares about what they do with their genitalia is that The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name has long since become The Love That Just Won’t Shut Up About It.

warbaby on February 3, 2011 at 2:28 PM

+1

search4truth on February 3, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Aren’t you supposed to be publishing your Earth-shattering thesis refuting once and for all the theory of Darwinian evolution in Nature and the Quarterly Review of Biology this month?

Let me know when it’s out.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:35 PM

there are already so many out there….if you could read, you’d know that…but then you didn’t even know what the synthesis was until I told you!! LOL

loser

ps: you just prove that darwiniacs are liberals

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Jesus Skateboarding Christ, the people who won’t shut about about their pet issues are the NoCon SoCons!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:37 PM

go win your elections without us. how many you fiscal-only con jobs won in the last election?? oh yeah none.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Aren’t you supposed to be publishing your Earth-shattering thesis refuting once and for all the theory of Darwinian evolution in Nature and the Quarterly Review of Biology this month?

Let me know when it’s out.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:35 PM

there are already so many out there….if you could read, you’d know that…but then you didn’t even know what the synthesis was until I told you!! LOL

loser

ps: you just prove that darwiniacs are liberals

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Why you both haven’t been banned yet I have no clue. You crap all over these threads like you are at home in the john.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:40 PM

It is this sort of timidity that has gotten us into the mess we’re in. Telling “your candidate” that they should refrain from discussing their pro-life principles is candy-assed and shameful. Some things are more important than winning in the short term and short term compromise nets long term disappointment. Sorry Jazz, but people like you are the problem.

And your candidate should have told you to kiss off.

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Yeah, Jazz, don’t be a pansy ass campaign manager. Winning elections is for fags. In a real campaign, you teach your candidate how to point out how the stupid the voters are for not agreeing with his point of view.

thuja on February 3, 2011 at 2:41 PM

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:37 PM

Nice projection.

warbaby on February 3, 2011 at 2:41 PM

CPAC is irrelevant to me and every conservative I know. It’s a shmoozers paradise, but we aren’t shmoozers, we get work done. Like many of you. I am very involved in local politics. Almost to a person, the shmoozer types are the ones we do not trust. They are trouble and I can recognize their kind before the first handshake is over.

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Why you both haven’t been banned yet I have no clue. You crap all over these threads like you are at home in the john.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:40 PM

but of course your posts are full of wisdom…LOL

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:43 PM

go win your elections without us. how many you fiscal-only con jobs won in the last election?? oh yeah none.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:39 PM

Hey Slick, just what do you suppose the Tea Party is about? It sure as hell wasn’t about gay marriage! It’s about fiscal sanity, limited government. So yeah, take your bible and take a hike!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Hey Slick, just what do you suppose the Tea Party is about? It sure as hell wasn’t about gay marriage! It’s about fiscal sanity, limited government. So yeah, take your bible and take a hike!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:43 PM

thats why you libertarians…ie LIBERALS…never win.

take your mein kampf and take a hike.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Simply untrue. Yea, there are a lot of kiss asses and resume-vomiting youngsters, but it has a worthwhile purpose.

I met a lot of tea partying sons of guns at last year’s CPAC.

In ’08, Geert Wilders had an amazing event with Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.

You meet people from around the country who are involved.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM

but of course your posts are full of wisdom…LOL

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:43 PM

At least they don’t consist of a personal insult in every one.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM

go win your elections without us. how many you fiscal-only con jobs won in the last election?? oh yeah none.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:39 PM

So do give us a liist of what we should believe,who we should like and who we should shun.
Fascinate us.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM

At least they don’t consist of a personal insult in every one.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM

mine don’t either, guess you haven’t read them.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM

So do give us a liist of what we should believe,who we should like and who we should shun.
Fascinate us.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM

why cast pearls before swine?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM

take your mein kampf and take a hike.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Godwin’s Rule already?

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:47 PM

mine don’t either, guess you haven’t read them.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM

Yes, I have. I have been watching you and Good Lt. go back and forth for days now.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:47 PM

Godwin’s Rule already?

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:47 PM

truth hurts, doesn’t it?

why don’t you go ahead and post all your talking points in one post..then you’ll be out of things to say.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Yes, I have. I have been watching you and Good Lt. go back and forth for days now.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:47 PM

you really must be bored.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Oh boy, this thread is in the sh!tter.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Liberace voted Republican consistently throughout his life.

ScottMcC on February 3, 2011 at 2:49 PM

you really must be bored.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:48 PM

Thanks to you two, yes. It’s very boring having to skip over so much useless crap.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:49 PM

take your mein kampf and take a hike.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM

http://tiny.cc/frpk2

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:50 PM

Thanks to you two, yes. It’s very boring having to skip over so much useless crap.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:49 PM

apparently you didn’t skip it over…

. I have been watching you and Good Lt. go back and forth for days now.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:47 PM

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:50 PM

At least they don’t consist of a personal insult in every one.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM
mine don’t either, guess you haven’t read them.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM
why cast pearls before swine?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:46 PM

I rest my case.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:51 PM

Oh boy, this thread is in the sh!tter.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:49 PM

Yep. That’s because right4life likes to turn every contest in to a home game :-)

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:51 PM

I rest my case.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 2:51 PM

oh but its OK for you to insult people.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Frankly I suspect that some of us are just tired of hearing about where you put your peni$ and with whom you engage in sexual malfeasance. Why, in heaven’s name, is any of that appropriate in the public sphere? Every time some straight guy gets caught doing some other guy’s wife, it’s a terrific scandal, but if we don’t know who Ms. Gay USA is doing the nasty with, we are out of touch.

Enough, already. Just vote.

tcn on February 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Yep. That’s because right4life likes to turn every contest in to a home game :-)

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 2:51 PM

its especially fun when its all over you…

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM

The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name has long since become The Love That Just Won’t Shut Up About It.

warbaby on February 3, 2011 at 2:28 PM

I really want that on a t-shirt.

myrenovations on February 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM

apparently you didn’t skip it over…

.
right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:50 PM

That’s what prolific crappers you two are. You can only avoid so much and still be able to try to keep track of a thread you are interested in.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM

A few weeks ago there was a sidebar item at Ace about the Log Cabin Republicans’ lawsuit to force the military to pull the plug on DADT immediately, irrespective of the ongoing efforts the military is working through to roll out the new policy. The gist of it was the military wasn’t going fast enough, even after the DADT repeal vote.

I think in all honesty when you see a special interest group putting its social agenda ahead of letting the military do its job in a thoughtful and controlled manner, you have to conclude that they are single-minded about “the gay stuff.”

Y-not on February 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM

this is par for the course for the libertarians and country club republicans…they hate social conservatives with a passion…and just want us to shut up and vote for them.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM

ANYWAY – back to the thread topic –

What is the issue here with not wanting gays to join the big tent in greater numbers?

Why do you care if they have an identity group?

There are plenty of different groups on the right.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM

That’s what prolific crappers you two are. You can only avoid so much and still be able to try to keep track of a thread you are interested in.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM

did you notice all of the articles from scientific publications that I referenced and the buck private did not? hmmm?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:54 PM

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:43 PM

Simply untrue. Yea, there are a lot of kiss asses and resume-vomiting youngsters, but it has a worthwhile purpose.

I met a lot of tea partying sons of guns at last year’s CPAC.

In ’08, Geert Wilders had an amazing event with Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.

You meet people from around the country who are involved.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:45 PM

Okay, I phrased my comment as an absolute and shouldn’t have done so. It is more accurate to say that I am in no way interested in going. Even a minority of sales geek types gives me the hives.

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:55 PM

Did you know gay couples like to lure children into their homes, only to turn them into meat stews?

Shocking, I know. I almost fainted when I found out. And to think; they’ll be at CPAC!

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Did you know gay couples like to lure children into their homes, only to turn them into meat stews?

Shocking, I know. I almost fainted when I found out. And to think; they’ll be at CPAC!

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Nice. Sarcasm always wins friends and influences people.

tcn on February 3, 2011 at 2:58 PM

That’s what prolific crappers you two are. You can only avoid so much and still be able to try to keep track of a thread you are interested in.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM

I’d appreciate if you’d stop referring me in the same manner as a poster who can’t type a comment here without a 3-year old’s insult and/or namecall and/or reference to Hitler.

Knowing my style here, it is pretty hard to claim I’m doing that, or have done it.

I gave r4l a jab at the beginning of the thread responding to his first comment – an namecall/insult aimed at another poster of course – and you’ve spent the next ten comments whining about the fact that somebody responds to r4l in a more civil manner than he treats everyone else is somehow completely out of bounds and grounds for banning.

With all due respect, Rocks, quit yer whining, and let’s get back to the discussion.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:58 PM

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 2:55 PM

You should go though, at least once. I met a LOT of good people there. Really good, average Americans who want to get involved.

The ass-kissers really suck hard, though.

Shoulda’ seen Tucker Carlson — he had ten 20-something year olds puckered and ready.

And you know, everyone’s got a card or resume. I had some guy give me his business card. He had some “anti-jihad” business. LOTS of weirdos there, but many great folks.

I think my favorite were the people I met at the Wilders/Spencer/Geller event. There were a bunch of average people who had just gotten out of work, and were attending. It was really powerful.

They provided an open bar, and we all had drinks and listened to the speakers and everyone conversed after.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:58 PM

tcn on February 3, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Well, by golly, with the hysteria over GOProud’s attendance over CPAC boiling up, you’d think they DID eat children!

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 2:59 PM

oh but its OK for you to insult people.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:52 PM

Asking you to define your beliefs is insultng?? Well maybe they are creepier than thought.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 3:00 PM

I’d appreciate if you’d stop referring me in the same manner as a poster who can’t type a comment here without a 3-year old’s insult and/or namecall and/or reference to Hitler.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:58 PM

how do you think I feel being compared to a brainless moron who doesn’t even understand the subjects they defend so poorly?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:01 PM

And that’s a fact, Jack!

mmnowakjr85 on February 3, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Oh gosh
the food fight continues

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 3:02 PM

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 3:00 PM

uh huh…

So do give us a list of what we should believe,who we should like and who we should shun.
Fascinate us.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:02 PM

I’m still trying to figure out what the big deal is.

It’s entirely in line with the broader Tea Party movement that aims at fundamental principles we all share.

So what if they disagree with you on a social issue. You’re not going to grow the tent with 100% purity.

That’s a great way to narrow the party and thin its ranks, though, and if that’s your goal, then carry on.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 3:03 PM

did you notice all of the articles from scientific publications that I referenced and the buck private did not? hmmm?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 2:54 PM

Yes, I did. And when he crapped all over them, which is basically his only mode of communication, you went tit for tat for pages.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 3:03 PM

how do you think I feel being compared to a brainless moron who doesn’t even understand the subjects they defend so poorly?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:01 PM

QED

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 3:04 PM

So Rocks, what do you think of GOProud joining the big tent?

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 3:04 PM

Nice. Sarcasm always wins friends and influences people.

tcn on February 3, 2011 at 2:58 PM

I enjoy sarcasm, when it is funny. Anyway, most of this tread has been pretty dumb. You can’t claim blatantblue is hurting the conversation even if you hate sarcasm.

thuja on February 3, 2011 at 3:05 PM

Yes, I did. And when he crapped all over them, which is basically his only mode of communication, you went tit for tat for pages.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 3:03 PM

I was bored…snow day….

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:05 PM

So do give us a list of what we should believe,who we should like and who we should shun.
Fascinate us.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Copy/paste others requests?
Sorry,done with your pseudo-Christan bull.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 3:07 PM

I’d appreciate if you’d stop referring me in the same manner as a poster who can’t type a comment here without a 3-year old’s insult and/or namecall and/or reference to Hitler.

Knowing my style here, it is pretty hard to claim I’m doing that, or have done it.

I gave r4l a jab at the beginning of the thread responding to his first comment – an namecall/insult aimed at another poster of course – and you’ve spent the next ten comments whining about the fact that somebody responds to r4l in a more civil manner than he treats everyone else is somehow completely out of bounds and grounds for banning.

With all due respect, Rocks, quit yer whining, and let’s get back to the discussion.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 2:58 PM

Oh please. I’m just surprised you have FINALLY stop posting the link to that stupid interview with Christine O’Donnell 400 times in every thread. I know you’re style. It’s useless, unfunny, 3 to 5 word snark with and insult thrown in every other comment.

With all due respect.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 3:07 PM

The first deals with the fallacy that gay voters are some sort of homogenous group which only cares about – as Liz terms it – “the gay stuff.”

Ha. One issue voters. All of them.

BowHuntingTexas on February 3, 2011 at 3:07 PM

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 3:03 PM

Exactly right, which is why it makes both good sense and good politics. If we could exclude the social issues from national politics then there is no reason why we can’t get overwhelming majorities to come together on the issues that are threatening our very survival as a nation. But you alienate 40% of the voters and you’re lucky if you can muster up enough Congressmen to prevent a super majority of socialists.

Enough of this dividing and being conquered sh_t, let’s unite and win!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

OH GOSH WHAT IS GOING ON HERE.

YOU’D THINK TTHEO WAS BACK!!!

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Copy/paste others requests?
Sorry,done with your pseudo-Christan bull.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 3:07 PM

oh so you were insulted by your own words…LOL

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Oh PUH-LEEZE. I adore gay peeps…it’s the Gay Agenda I hate with a passion. More gay Conservatives would make a better America. They are more than welcome. Gay peeps can have standards and values too.

And just as with anyone who is different, they must understand some people (especially religious) are not going to embrace them 100%. I understand that may be hurtful to them, but what is more important is that even if those peeps DON’T agree with their “lifestyle”, they should NOT mistreat them (the gays) or treat them terribly.

Me, I like a great Conservative…gay or straight. Just don’t like to be told certain things are THE SAME when they are not. Plus, even though they may be different, a unique person always adds spice to a concept. So I embrace them (as long as they are not hypocritical…as I hope ANY Conservative will NOT be) but they also must understand some people will struggle with their “lifestyle”. I don’t mind that, but just treat them (the gays) as you would any other when it comes to being kind and respectful.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

Enough of this dividing and being conquered sh_t, let’s unite and win!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

uh huh while you tell christians to take their bible and take a hike. right.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

That’s right. Those who are splitting us apart need to leave.

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 3:10 PM

uh huh while you tell christians to take their bible and take a hike. right.

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

No,just you.And clean up after your hgh horse on the way out.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 3:11 PM

Enough of this dividing and being conquered sh_t, let’s unite and win!

MJBrutus on February 3, 2011 at 3:08 PM

THIS. IS. SPARTA! CPAC!

I’m with ya.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 3:11 PM

I’m fine with gay people voting Republican. I am still against gay marriage, but there’s always going to be some differing opinions within the party and we’ve got bigger problems that we can agree on.

But I do want them to stop hijacking the rainbow as their symbol. The rainbow symbolizes a covenant from God. It’s not gay, it has nothing to do with being gay, and considering God flooded the earth because of the immorality of its inhabitants at that time, it’s pretty audacious to now try to use it as a symbol of homosexuality.

Polynath on February 3, 2011 at 3:12 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4