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

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 4:21 PM

YOu are truly too damned stupid to talk to, pal.

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:23 PM

that would be fine…as long as you include individuals and businesses like the photographer in AZ who don’t want to photograph gay marriages…

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 4:18 PM

Would you say the same about individuals and businesses that refused to be involved with people on other grounds, say a photographer that refused to photograph inter-racial marriages?

DarkCurrent on February 3, 2011 at 4:25 PM

YOu are truly too damned stupid to talk to, pal.

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:23 PM

Ah, and there it is.

So, tell me, how is GOProud forcing themselves on people at CPAC?

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 4:25 PM

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 4:22 PM

GOProud

Read the name KatyLady. Read it well. Proud to be Pervs! And coming to YOUR town to make YOU accept the perversion!

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:25 PM

So, tell me, how is GOProud forcing themselves on people at CPAC?

Tell me haow they are not?

GOProud

It’s in the name, genius!

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:26 PM

Oh boy, you just got your weekly exercise with that stretch.

They will have a booth, and have an event or two.

No one is required to attend, no one is required to listen, and no one is required to agree.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 4:28 PM

Ugh, there are no trolls on this thread but there is so much Conservative in-fighting. It’s depressing.

Ok, is it so hard to understand where the RELIGIOUS Cons have their reservations? You may NOT agree with them, but at least where their issue is coming from should BE understandable.

I may not agree with them 100% but don’t the points they bring up seem valid? Even if you can’t see it, can you at least see that they have a religious base that makes them have a hardline on the topic?

At the end of the day, isn’t it more important how they treat the Gays? If they hated the lifestyle, but were respectful and kind to them in everyday life, I can live with that.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Read the name KatyLady. Read it well. Proud to be Pervs! And coming to YOUR town to make YOU accept the perversion!

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:25 PM

You mean HERE in SOUTH FLORIDA! The horror! Like Wilton Manors,where straght people pay top dollar to live in a mostly gay town. Whatever will we do! Help us!

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 4:30 PM

I have no problem with religio-cons have reservations about homo-cons. I really don’t care.

But when some so-cons climb to the moral high ground and begin their labeling of the “perverts,” it’s obnoxious and counter productive.

When some gays call people with reservations “haters” for having reservations, it’s obnoxious and counter productive.

However, in the case of CPAC, a handful of so-cons are throwing a collective hissy/sh!tfit over GOProud’s inclusion. I’ve attempted to explain how it really isn’t the end of the social conservative involvement there (as many socially conservative groups are still in attendance), and no one is forced to participate in anything with GOProud there.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 4:34 PM

At the end of the day, isn’t it more important how they treat the Gays? If they hated the lifestyle, but were respectful and kind to them in everyday life, I can live with that.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 4:30 PM

So could I,but read some of the comments.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 4:35 PM

Hell, when the gays have their gay parades, they aren’t doing themselves any favors. I’m not a huge gay community fan. I find them to be quite obnoxious. Then again, so is the anti-gay lobby.

The whole gay issue is an example of two sides, wholly opposed to one another, and each nutty and extreme in their own way.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Ok, but the moral high ground comes from their RELIGIOUS and BIBLICAL beliefs. Even if I disagree, I still have to understand where they are coming from.

So what if they think some Gays are perverts? I don’t necessarily think so. And to be fair, the good deal of promiscuity in the Gay community (and heteros are not so pure themselves…)may give them the impotice to feel so.

Ok, so we don’t always agree with their distain for the “lifestyle” but can’t we just give ‘em a mulligan? It’s not as though they have reservations for no reason at all. I wanna see how they treat ‘em in everyday life before I start buggin’ em.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 4:42 PM

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

Only when the Paulbearers are in town!!

Ron Paul rockin’ the Straw poll!!

JohnGalt23 on February 3, 2011 at 4:43 PM

Read it well. Proud to be Pervs! And coming to YOUR town to make YOU accept the perversion!

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Well, I think putting whipped cream on a steak is a perversion. But some people like it.

And we all gotta eat.

JohnGalt23 on February 3, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Hell, when the gays have their gay parades, they aren’t doing themselves any favors. I’m not a huge gay community fan. I find them to be quite obnoxious.

blatantblue on February 3, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Agreed! I remember going to a Gay Pride Parade in 1992 (when I was a Lib) and loving it…’til I saw NAMBLA there. Even as a green Lib, I knew that was wrong.

(Oh, and I never judged the Gays then because I thought of them as “victims” and “special” and “oppressed”. Now, I call them on anything I’d call ANYONE out for.)

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 4:46 PM

I had sex with my wife before marriage, and i’m not the least bit sorry about it. I’d do the same if I had my life to live all over again. Am I still allowed to vote for republicans, or do I have to switch to another party, or what?

I’d just like to know where the line is drawn…

spinach.chin on February 3, 2011 at 4:51 PM

…the inclusion of GOProud as a sponsor

Just a nitpick: they aren’t actually a sponsor, simply a participating organization.

Rude on February 3, 2011 at 4:54 PM

I always wear a button that lists my favorite sex acts. If this makes you uncomfortable you’re a bigot. If you won’t associate with me because of my button, you’re an Akzedphobe.
To avoid being an Akzedphobe you must let me crash all your parties. You must let me teach your children about my favorite sex acts, and spend time with them to see if they think they might enjoy my favorite sex acts. If they don’t think they’d like them, that’s fine, but they must spend some time thinking about them, and maybe even pass a test about them.
You must let me wear my button as I represent your company to your customers. Yes, your customers should all know what kinds of sex acts I enjoy most. You must let me wear my button in your church. In fact, I want to preach in your church wearing my button! I want to get married in your church to someone else who wears the same button everywhere.
I want to join your clubs, even those clubs where it’s clear that no one enjoys the same sex acts as I do. And I want a special booth at your convention, a nice booth with a banner over it that describes all my favorite sex acts just like my button does, only much bigger of course. If your club is called e.g. the XYZ Club, I want to be known as the Guy Who Enjoys ABC Sex Acts in the XYZ Club.
And finally, I want to wear my button describing all my favorite sex acts on my military uniform. I know that only certain buttons called “medals” are allowed on uniforms, but I deserve an exception: I want my button describing all my favorite sex acts to be right there next to my marksmanship medal.
And after I get all these demands met, I’ll think of some more.

Akzed on February 3, 2011 at 4:54 PM

As gob has been trying to point out, it’s pointless to try to get us social cons to accept anything that goes against the Word of God. We know our lives here on earth would be easier… or would it really… dreading the day we go before GOD and account for the words of our mouths and our deeds. So yes we frustrate those who want us to side with them against our Creator but we don’t care. I rather be shunned here than shunned by GOD. As Jesus said,” wide is the path that leads to destruction and many find it, narrow is the path that leads to salvation and only a few find it” Jesus also said that in the End Days many would come up to him and say “Master Master” and His reply will be “I never knew you”. For those of you who want to sit on the fence and not take a stand for Him, you’re getting vomited out.

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 4:56 PM

(Oh, and I never judged the Gays then because I thought of them as “victims” and “special” and “oppressed”. Now, I call them on anything I’d call ANYONE out for.)

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 4:46 PM

As would I.However no “And coming to YOUR town to make YOU accept the perversion!”has happened.I have had quite a few so called evangelicals in my face demanding to know if I have found Jesus.

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 5:00 PM

Akzed on February 3, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Exquisite.

warbaby on February 3, 2011 at 5:01 PM

I had sex with my wife before marriage, and i’m not the least bit sorry about it. I’d do the same if I had my life to live all over again. Am I still allowed to vote for republicans, or do I have to switch to another party, or what?

I’d just like to know where the line is drawn…

spinach.chin on February 3, 2011 at 4:51 PM

OMG straight to hell you are going.Repent!

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 5:04 PM

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 4:56 PM

THANK YOU ccrwm.

I know that is how you feel. And I do not have a problem with it.

You have good reasons and I accept them.

I’d only get agro at such peeps IF they were hypocrites…or mistreated someone (who didn’t deserve it) unfairly.

Relgious Cons have their reasons.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 5:04 PM

Thekey word was conservative.
katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 3:25 PM

Oh, I am one, believe it or not. Just not a SOCIAL conservative.

And while I know this has been contested (here at HA, at least), one does not HAVE to be a so-con to BE a conservative. Maybe that’s a requirement to be a “TRUE conservative”, but required for a con in general? No.

Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 5:18 PM

mizflame98 on February 3, 2011 at 3:56 PM

Evangelicals outnumber libertarians 10-1 at least. As a non-evangelical libertarian, I’d like there to be more libertarian, but the cold truth is the social libs in the younger generation are, for all intents and purposes, communists, so if fiscal cons lost the backing of social cons it would be like 1932 all over again.
In the longer term the GOP could go hard (lol, not in a dirty way) for social lib causes, but it would take a long time to tear down the identity political infrastructure the Dems have built amongst African American, women, hispanic and gay voters.

Example, say the GOP goes pro-choice/fiscal con. Instead of talking about abortion, they attack the fiscal con platforms as being anti-woman (women get paid less for the same work, women are working themselves to death raising the kids of deadbeat dads, we need more pro-woman tax credits, etc.) and as the GOP being anti-woman sounds intuitive to a lot of women, by going pro-choice the GOP would alienate all of the pro-lifers who actually care about abortion without gaining any support as the pro-choicers don’t care about abortion so much as they care about being pro-woman.
The GOP tomorrow could do a complete about-face, support reparations, abortion, gay marriage, gay adoption, open borders, etc. and it still would do piss-poor with the African Americans, women, gays and hispanics. Once we alienate the social cons there will be like 6 guys at the next national convention.

You’d have a better shot making the Dems hard fiscal cons than you would making the GOP hard social libs.

galenrox on February 3, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Al-Ozarka on February 3, 2011 at 4:21 PM

Are you for Civil Unions? I’m asking because I know a lot of social conservative groups actively oppose them.

galenrox on February 3, 2011 at 5:26 PM

And finally, I want to wear my button describing all my favorite sex acts on my military uniform. I know that only certain buttons called “medals” are allowed on uniforms, but I deserve an exception: I want my button describing all my favorite sex acts to be right there next to my marksmanship medal.
And after I get all these demands met, I’ll think of some more. – Akzed on February 3, 2011 at 4:54 PM

I am sure that you have a wild love life. That’s why you and your wife have a king sized bed and that mirror on the ceiling. And, all those photos of you and her on vacation on and around your office desk. And, please, stop telling all of us where y’all are going out to eat and party. I do wish that you would tone it down a bit.

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2011 at 5:28 PM

@LizMair Is there any better conservative thread than one that combines “gay stuff” AND abortion? about 2 hours ago via TweetDeck in reply to LizMair

By Jazz Shaw.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Would you say the same about individuals and businesses that refused to be involved with people on other grounds, say a photographer that refused to photograph inter-racial marriages?

DarkCurrent on February 3, 2011 at 4:25 PM

that would be fine with me too..do you want to for the NOI to allow white people, or the KKK to allow blacks?

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM

I had sex with my wife before marriage, and i’m not the least bit sorry about it.

spinach.chin on February 3, 2011 at 4:51 PM

This thread has now jumped the shark.

Jazz Shaw’s Allahpundit training is almost complete.

Allahpundit is grooming Jazz Shaw as his replacement.

portlandon on February 3, 2011 at 5:32 PM

Ugh, there are no trolls on this thread but there is so much Conservative in-fighting. It’s depressing.
Ok, is it so hard to understand where the RELIGIOUS Cons have their reservations? You may NOT agree with them, but at least where their issue is coming from should BE understandable.
I may not agree with them 100% but don’t the points they bring up seem valid? Even if you can’t see it, can you at least see that they have a religious base that makes them have a hardline on the topic?
At the end of the day, isn’t it more important how they treat the Gays? If they hated the lifestyle, but were respectful and kind to them in everyday life, I can live with that.
Gob on February 3, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Oh man, you don’t think that Al-Ozarka or whatever he’s called, isn’t a total gimmick commenter?

And the whole issue at hand IS how the evangelicals are treating the gays, at least the so con groups who WANT YOU TO KNOW that they SHAN’T be attending that there homo infested convention (geez, I thought the gays were supposed to be the drama queens).

It’s one thing to disagree with GOProud on the social issues, but OTHER so-con groups attending are either tolerant enough or realize there is common ground shared. But if you’re a so-con or evangelical who can’t even bear to be in the same room or convention with a gay conservative who agrees with you on 90% of the issues, you’re going to be called out on your nonsense.

And I’ll go one step further. If you’re that sort of evangelical, you’re a very, VERY poor witness for Christ.

Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 5:33 PM

portlandon on February 3, 2011 at 5:32 PM

I thought Patrick was?

kingsjester on February 3, 2011 at 5:33 PM

This thread has now jumped the shark.
portlandon on February 3, 2011 at 5:32 PM

Have you read any of this thread? That happened somewhere on page 1.

spinach.chin on February 3, 2011 at 5:44 PM

Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Vyce, just because you don’t agree with Al-Ozarka does NOT mean his stance is invalid.

I think Gays who are Cons should be welcome. I like ‘em and spend lots of time with a TRUE Conservative who happens to be Gay.

Gays are welcome. Just some people have problems due to their religious beliefs. I don’t have a problem with that.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 5:49 PM

Whatever one’s sexual orientation, the above lead is disingenuous. Gays are a small, nearly inconsequential minority in the Republican Party. If you have conservative views, join in the discussion, if not, and this includes most gays, you are an aberration.

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 5:50 PM

that would be fine with me too..

right4life on February 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM

I guess we agree on something once in a while.

DarkCurrent on February 3, 2011 at 5:54 PM

@LizMair Is there any better conservative thread than one that combines “gay stuff” AND abortion? about 2 hours ago via TweetDeck in reply to LizMair

By Jazz Shaw.

Rocks on February 3, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Vain, shallow, inane, and worthless = Jazz Shaw

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 5:54 PM

I think the real question is this: Does a big tent make us look fat, or phat?

J.E. Dyer on February 3, 2011 at 5:56 PM

I had sex with my wife before marriage, and i’m not the least bit sorry about it. I’d do the same if I had my life to live all over again. Am I still allowed to vote for republicans, or do I have to switch to another party, or what?

I’d just like to know where the line is drawn…

spinach.chin on February 3, 2011 at 4:51 PM

Are you forming a “Fornicators in the GOP” club and setting up a booth at CPAC? See the difference?

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM

And I’ll go one step further. If you’re that sort of evangelical, you’re a very, VERY poor witness for Christ.
Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 5:33 PM

Well that Christ you refer to told us to tell a sinning brother to stop, if he won’t listen then you get another brother and you both tell him he needs to stop. Then if that doesn’t work, take him to the elders. If he persist were told to shun him…

Care to articulate why it is that we should disobey so as to compromise?

We get tripped up on the little things all the time so on these big issues we try harder.

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 5:59 PM

I’ve had many gay friends through the years and always sorry that they thought they had no choice but to identify with the Left and Dems. I’m so glad to see them finding a home with the Right…the Conservatives. Welcome, welcome. Join us in the fight for our country.

MainelyRight on February 3, 2011 at 6:01 PM

I don’t see a problem with having more kinds of conservatives. One good thing about a broader mix is that fiscal conservatism becomes the glue and the policy focus since that is where the broadest focus is.

I’m not sure why some of the so called Christian groups feel they can not stand with, or share a convention with, a small number of homosexual conservatives. It’s silly. I don’t hear gay conservatives saying we should chuck out religious conservatives.

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 6:05 PM

If you are gay and you want to be conservative then all I have to say is here is a beer and let us talk politics. If you wander into social engineering or religion I’m going home.

Limerick on February 3, 2011 at 6:06 PM

One good thing about a broader mix is that fiscal conservatism becomes the glue and the policy focus since that is where the broadest focus is.

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 6:05 PM

Good point.

DarkCurrent on February 3, 2011 at 6:07 PM

Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 5:18 PM

Not a socon me own self.You’re fine with me.:)

katy the mean old lady on February 3, 2011 at 6:30 PM

Mainstreaming gross immorality and perversion is the only way to secure a peaceful and prosperous future for the United States of America.

/

Inanemergencydial on February 3, 2011 at 6:31 PM

My $ 0.02;

Stop thinking we are in some sort of big tent; rather, I’d use the metaphor of a big boat.

The boat is going somewhere; generally, by picking wise Captains, who share our ideals, we are heading toward pleasant shores. When we get there, we will find smaller government, greater freedom, and the prosperity that springs from both.

All are welcome, if they are willing to row, or raise sails, or tender fuel.

When we get where we are going, we’ll have time to sort out all the concerns about governance, policy, and social order in our new home.

While we’re going? Everybody row!

massrighty on February 3, 2011 at 6:32 PM

Are you forming a “Fornicators in the GOP” club and setting up a booth at CPAC? See the difference? – pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I am sure that there are going to be a lot of them there. It appears to be accepted by everyone these days. Just go your local singles bar. My point is that they doesn’t have to be one………..but, Holy Cow if you mention that your sexual orientation happens to be homosexual, all heck breaks out. And, if I happen to be pro-military, pro-life, pro-first and second amendments, pro-business, pro-taking responsibility for your own life (anti-nanny state, etc. ….. what darn party am I supposed to support?

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Allahpundit is grooming Jazz Shaw.

portlandon on February 3, 2011 at 5:32 PM

.
That may be the dirtiest thing I have ever read on Hot Air.

LincolntheHun on February 3, 2011 at 6:44 PM

Vyce, just because you don’t agree with Al-Ozarka does NOT mean his stance is invalid.

Look, if you want to do the whole “He’s right, at least from his point of view” thing, then my stance of “gays are fine, they’re not perverts, and people who drone on endlessly about how they are, are bigots” is perfectly valid (or not INvalid) as well. Because that is MY truth, based upon MY beliefs and “faith”.

Gays are welcome. Just some people have problems due to their religious beliefs. I don’t have a problem with that.
Gob on February 3, 2011 at 5:49 PM

Perhaps you misunderstand me. I don’t expect the so-cons or evangelicals to embrace GOProud with open arms.

What I do expect them to be capable of doing, as many so-con groups who will be attending CPAC will, is to not act like CHILDREN and run away because they’re afraid of getting gay cooties or something, from being in the same room with them. Or holding the extremely fallacious opinion that attending the same conference with GOProud means that they’re condoning or endorsing that group.

Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 6:57 PM

but, Holy Cow if you mention that your sexual orientation happens to be homosexual, all heck breaks out. And, if I happen to be pro-military, pro-life, pro-first and second amendments, pro-business, pro-taking responsibility for your own life (anti-nanny state, etc. ….. what darn party am I supposed to support?

SC.Charlie on February 3, 2011 at 6:37 PM

See my post above, for my opinion. And please, despite the objections of the few, remember which party will bring you closer to the destination you’re heading toward by virtue of your positions.

massrighty on February 3, 2011 at 6:57 PM

More attendees go to CPAC looking for sex than politics.

So…did you score? :p

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 7:06 PM

Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 6:57 PM

FINE. Perfect. He has his truth, you have yours. Today, I see more Religious Cons being taken to task for their religious beliefs. I don’t think that is fair.

And yes, I hope they will join us. They are welcome, as are you.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 7:20 PM

I don’t hear gay conservatives saying we should chuck out religious conservatives.

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 6:05 PM

No, you NEVER hear anyone on Hot Air comment for Christians or SOCONs to drop their socials issues. You NEVER hear people comment that social issues are dragging the party down.

Please!

The fact is that Gay Conservatives are social conservatives. They just have different social goals.

hawkdriver on February 3, 2011 at 7:40 PM

I made a passionate but civil comment calling into question the agenda behind the abortion/gay axis and how big the tent could be before it is meaningless. It has disappeared. Odd. Never happened before. I did use the term baby killing to describe abortion solely because it is precisely accurate. Was that what did it? It is important to deny the death cult uncontested euphemisms to hide behind. If it isn’t baby killing, what is it?

Mason on February 3, 2011 at 7:43 PM

Oy.

GOProud exists to attack the left, not attack the right. They’ve demonstrated this time and time again.

Any and all comments in the vein of “Why do they have to be such a SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP AND SAY THEY’RE GAY?!”

Why? To tell the left (and other gays) “We’re not all on your plantation.”

Just like the “Mama Grizzlies” are attacking the left’s illusions of the education womyn-as-liberal feminist, GOProud is attacking the illusion that all gays must vote Democrat. They highlight that the Democrat agenda is BAD for gays and have taken a lot of crap for it from both sides.

Granted, this wooshes past the head of anyone who knows nothing of Leftist politics. Instead a lot of people are too busy clutching their pearls and fainting on velvet chaises.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Gays are welcome. Just some people have problems due to their religious beliefs. I don’t have a problem with that.
Gob on February 3, 2011 at 5:49 PM

I disagree. Most people are able to leave religious differences aside when it comes to politics and civics. Right wing Christians aren’t obliged to remind Jews, Atheists, and others that they are sinners bound for hell at every political gathering and there is no reason why they can’t leave their religious edicts (which are detailed and extensive) at home when they go to a political convention or place of work.

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 7:49 PM

+100

Nice wrap-up at the end…what a visual.

JetBoy on February 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM

Nice wrap-up at the end…what a visual.

JetBoy on February 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM

JetBoy, be a dear and fetch the smelling salts! They’re in my bureau!

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Instead a lot of people are too busy clutching their pearls and fainting on velvet chaises.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Mock away… you think we care that you aren’t happy with our convictions…hardly

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:01 PM

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 7:56 PM

Atheists, and others that they are sinners bound for hell at every political gathering

Yeah like that has ever happened …

and there is no reason why they can’t leave their religious edicts (which are detailed and extensive) at home when they go to a political convention or place of work.

exageration to make a point means you don’t have one… and our faith directs our beliefs genius…

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:05 PM

Mock away… you think we care that you aren’t happy with our convictions…hardly

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:01 PM

I didn’t say anything about anyone’s convictions. You don’t even know my positions on these issues.

I was instead explaining exactly what GOProud is doing and for whom their message is targeted. Newsflash: it isn’t conservatives.

I have an oriental fan on the dressing room desk, though, should you need it. Fine Chinese silk and all. I wouldn’t want you to catch the vapors after working yourself up in all these presumptions-of-grandeur.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 8:05 PM

Vain, shallow, inane, and worthless = Jazz Shawcommenters who get bent out of shape that they’ve taken the hook, line, and sinker

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 5:54 PM

MadisonConservative on February 3, 2011 at 8:06 PM

I could post about easy it is to get straight men to have gay sex, but I won’t. I always give folks a wide berth when it comes to everything gay.

SouthernGent on February 3, 2011 at 8:07 PM

I don’t hear gay conservatives saying we should chuck out religious conservatives.

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 6:05 PM

No, you NEVER hear anyone on Hot Air comment for Christians or SOCONs to drop their socials issues. You NEVER hear people comment that social issues are dragging the party down.

Please!

The fact is that Gay Conservatives are social conservatives. They just have different social goals.

hawkdriver on February 3, 2011 at 7:40 PM

Simple and true.

pugwriter on February 3, 2011 at 8:15 PM

Ugh! Annoying. I’m done with this thread.

The ones who can’t see where the religious Cons are coming from are acting just like Liberals in high-dudgeon.

Count me as an acceptor of gay CONSERVATIVES. You are welcome.

Religious CONSERVATIVES, I may not agree 100% but I understand where you are coming from. You’re the NEW black sheep of the Conservative movement. I don’t like that.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Yeah like that has ever happened …

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:05 PM

That was my point. They let a lot of other important matters of faith slide but they can’t help themselves when the issue is about gays. Hagee will say awful things about Catholics to his flock but that all gets left behind when he is making a speech for conservatives.

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 8:19 PM

…fainting on velvet chaises.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 7:49 PM

Oi. My fainting couch isn’t velvet. Much too fabulous for that.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 8:23 PM

The ones who can’t see where the religious Cons are coming from are acting just like Liberals in high-dudgeon.

Gob on February 3, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Wut?

I completely see and know where religious conservatives come from. I certainly don’t deride or berate them.

My point is most everyone (cons, libs, and mods alike of any stripe) doesn’t see where GOProud is coming from. Instead the reality of it gets lost in the milieu of debating “gay issues” in toto.

It denigrates into a lot of back-n-forth along nebulous ideological lines rather than discussing the group itself. And your stamping your feet screaming for relativism and “civility” isn’t quite staying on topic.

So feel free to be done with it, as you cannot discuss GOProud itself. Your contributions will not be missed.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 8:24 PM

Oi. My fainting couch isn’t velvet. Much too fabulous for that.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 8:23 PM

LOL! <3

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 8:31 PM

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:01 PM

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 8:05 PM

Take it out on the lanai…the honeysuckles are in bloom, and their odors are such the aphrodisiac this time of ye-ah…

JetBoy on February 3, 2011 at 8:33 PM

This is good– or should I say fabulous! I can’t imagine why a gay person should be more inclined to pay higher taxes, want less economic freedom, or want a weaker national defense than a straight person would.

morganfrost on February 3, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Evening, Jetboy. Did you catch Boehner on Fox News Sunday last week? I thought he was looking a bit tired…needs to spend an evening on my fainting couch, sucking bourbon from my toes.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 8:45 PM

I thought he was looking a bit tired…needs to spend an evening on my fainting couch, sucking bourbon from my toes.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 8:45 PM

So gauche and garish. You, my dear, are no lady.

Any lady worth her salt knows to accidentally spill the bourbon upon her left hand so that he may kiss and clean it, while subtlety drawing attention to the lack of a ring on your finger.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 8:54 PM

I didn’t say anything about anyone’s convictions. You don’t even know my positions on these issues.

What your too cute by half characterization there wasn’t meant to mock those who don’t conform to letting a group that self identifies to segregate itself for whatever reason? And I never said to hurt a homosexual or kick them out of a political org… I know you are homosexual and so I understand that this is a sore subject with you but, again, I won’t impose my beliefs if homosexuals do the same…there problem solved. Also, I pesonally don’t care to send a message to any homosexual about the GOP because there is no evidence that the GOP is trying to hurt homosexuals. We are just interested in not getting on that slippery slope of giving a bit here and a bit there and finding ourselves out of obedience.

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:56 PM

I could post about easy it is to get straight men to have gay sex, but I won’t. I always give folks a wide berth when it comes to everything gay.

SouthernGent on February 3, 2011 at 8:07 PM

Okay what is your point now? You can get men to do a lot of things i.e. sheep and venereal desease, rampant teen age preganancy. blow up dolls etc so what is your point?

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:59 PM

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 8:54 PM

Alas…my finishing school teachers didn’t prepare me for the finer points of seduction, they only said to get out of a car with KNEES TOGETHER, GELS!

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Hagee will say awful things about Catholics to his flock but that all gets left behind when he is making a speech for conservatives.

lexhamfox on February 3, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Hagee??? When my pastor says it I’ll confront him… but my pastor wouldn’t say things like that…

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:02 PM

My point is most everyone (cons, libs, and mods alike of any stripe) doesn’t see where GOProud is coming from. Instead the reality of it gets lost in the milieu of debating “gay issues” in toto.

Maybe I don’t understand why you care but why can’t they just be conservative republicans like us?

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:04 PM

It denigrates into a lot of back-n-forth along nebulous ideological lines rather than discussing the group itself. And your stamping your feet screaming for relativism and “civility” isn’t quite staying on topic.

Hyperbole doesn’t help you…

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:06 PM

What your too cute by half characterization there wasn’t meant to mock those who don’t conform to letting a group that self identifies to segregate itself for whatever reason?

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Why, yes, it was. But those “non-conformists” with objections are not limited to “The Social Conservatives.” It goes to liberals and moderates as well. Have you seen this second-round interview with Chris Barron (GOProud) and Cenk Uygur of MSNBC?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGU8yg7k2qI

It’s a complete dog and pony show from MSNBC, harping on “how can you be gay and Republican? How can you be gay and Republican?” on and on into infinity.

I know you’ll find the first half of the video objectionable from your perspective. Que sera sera. Yet GOProud is not interested in discussing social policy, but fiscal policy, and educating social liberals and Democrats about it.

You aren’t the target audience of either GOProud, nor my condemnation and mockery of ideological “big area” battles because they’re cheap and easy for all people.

It isn’t all about you. And GOProud isn’t talking about that; they talk policy from a fiscal perspective and work toward telling fellow conservatively-inclined gays to leave the plantation.

That said: I hope JetBoy has fetched me the smelling salts in time for your next fainting spell.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Evening, Jetboy. Did you catch Boehner on Fox News Sunday last week? I thought he was looking a bit tired…needs to spend an evening on my fainting couch, sucking bourbon from my toes.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 8:45 PM

Frankly, my dear, stay away from my mans!

JetBoy on February 3, 2011 at 9:14 PM

JetBoy on February 3, 2011 at 9:14 PM

Hah! Little do you know that I have bribed ACORN to have all his dancecards completely filled (in perpetuity) with:
Horizontal Tango with the Rt Hon. Fortunata von Krauthammer, Duchess of Bangor….
So there.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 9:19 PM

Alas…my finishing school teachers didn’t prepare me for the finer points of seduction, they only said to get out of a car with KNEES TOGETHER, GELS!

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 9:00 PM

I do hope your father did not pay too much for such a lackluster education. Please tell me they did not instruct you that opera gloves are acceptable to wear to a friendly afternoon game of Bridge?

If so, things are looking quite poorly for you, my dear.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:20 PM

Ugh! Annoying. I’m done with this thread.

The ones who can’t see where the religious Cons are coming from are acting just like Liberals in high-dudgeon.
Gob on February 3, 2011 at 8:16 PM

Oh come off it. We DO see where the religious conservatives are coming from. Some of us simply:

1. Disagree with them. Fundamentally. On the gay issue, and possibly others. Exactly how much sympathy are you expecting us to give them? Because my sympathy runs out when you get to:
2. Some of us think those religious cons who are abandoning CPAC cause of GOProud are acting like whiny, attention-seeking little BABIES about the whole thing.

No one says they have to approve of GOProud’s position on gay or social issues. But to not even show up and be one of the MANY, MANY other groups represented there, because of that? Babies. I mean, I don’t know how else to put this, but gay people EXIST, and we’re not going to be getting rid of them any time soon, so it might be time to try learning how to co-exist in the same universe as they do. Especially with a group that is actually in the same conservative community, like GOProud. If they can’t even deign to breathe the same air as the Gays, then they risk being marginalized by their own behavior.

And yes, marginalized. I’m tired of that tired “well, evangelicals will just abandon conservatives / the GOP!” No, you WON’T, not as a whole. Some of them might, but as has been pointed out many times, there actually is a lot of social conservative groups who are still attending CPAC, because even if they VEHEMENTLY disagree with groups like GOProud, they can at least co-exist with them, and find common ground with them on those issues that matter to both (i.e. fiscal conservatism).

Vyce on February 3, 2011 at 9:26 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGU8yg7k2qI

It’s a complete dog and pony show from MSNBC, harping on “how can you be gay and Republican? How can you be gay and Republican?” on and on into infinity.

Well Barron did articulate his point well and I’m glad he isn’t part of the GOP for the “group hug” but I still don’t think it’s necesary to segregate? Barron and you get that the Republican party is better for American Families and that you aren’t victims and those who don’t get that probably don’t care about that…

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:29 PM

Oh, Vyce.

Tsk tsk. Now you have caused a raucous affair just as we were positing ourselves for a mature and elegant evening. And to think that the maid worked so hard on the hors d’oeuvres that will now be left to cool and harden thanks in large part to your boorish outburst.

When we have disagreements, we must always remember that the backside of a velveted glove is far better than the brute force of a naked palm. A little poise and a graceful smile go a long way.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:32 PM

Please tell me they did not instruct you that opera gloves are acceptable to wear to a friendly afternoon game of Bridge?
lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:20 PM

Oh I know that, silly, and also to slip my little pearl-handled revolver into my cleavage when out to tea in Chicago.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Well Barron did articulate his point well and I’m glad he isn’t part of the GOP for the “group hug” but I still don’t think it’s necesary to segregate? Barron and you get that the Republican party is better for American Families and that you aren’t victims and those who don’t get that probably don’t care about that…

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:29 PM

They segregate so Democrats and Liberals focus on them. They’re essentially a lightning rod to educate people to, and extol the virtues of, conservative values. One lone gay can only do so much; a group of them? Far more interest.

They aren’t here to “stand out and stand up” to conservatives. They are to liberals, since identity politics is all they know.

Once you crack that gorgeous facade of liberal identity politics, then it can reveal the broke-as-hell cinder block base that is their policy platform underneath it. GOProud has a chisel now; I’m sure they want to eventually become a wrecking ball.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:37 PM

Oh I know that, silly, and also to slip my little pearl-handled revolver into my cleavage when out to tea in Chicago.

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Why, I believe I have underestimated you! Whilst I prefer a blade disguised as a letter opener (ivory handle, of course) within my garter, I truly am awed by this revelation.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:39 PM

They segregate so Democrats and Liberals focus on them. They’re essentially a lightning rod to educate people to, and extol the virtues of, conservative values. One lone gay can only do so much; a group of them? Far more interest.

They aren’t here to “stand out and stand up” to conservatives. They are to liberals, since identity politics is all they know.

Once you crack that gorgeous facade of liberal identity politics, then it can reveal the broke-as-hell cinder block base that is their policy platform underneath it. GOProud has a chisel now; I’m sure they want to eventually become a wrecking ball.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:37 PM

^^ This.

Good Lt on February 3, 2011 at 9:48 PM

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:39 PM

Well, we nouveaux rednex here in Texas prefer slipping a Bowie knife into our Luccheses, the size of one’s knife being a …delicate matter, but I understand about Yankee understatement and their letter-openers. *fnerk*

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 9:49 PM

Well, we nouveaux rednex here in Texas

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 9:49 PM

I thought you were having an afternoon tea in Chicago just moments ago? What train do you take for such quick (and, no doubt, luxurious) trips? I must ticket with them, since my trains to the East Coast are sometimes far too slow.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:53 PM

They segregate so Democrats and Liberals focus on them. They’re essentially a lightning rod to educate people to, and extol the virtues of, conservative values. One lone gay can only do so much; a group of them? Far more interest.

They aren’t here to “stand out and stand up” to conservatives. They are to liberals, since identity politics is all they know.

Once you crack that gorgeous facade of liberal identity politics, then it can reveal the broke-as-hell cinder block base that is their policy platform underneath it. GOProud has a chisel now; I’m sure they want to eventually become a wrecking ball.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 9:37 PM

Okay so this is all in an effort to bring homosexuals into the consevativer fold and not to bring conservatives into the homosexual fold vis a vie, “we’ll be loud and proud but you have to give us this that or the other”. Becuase that is why I think they segregate themselves too. To as a voting block per se, get something. I would like to see what that something is… we’ll see I guess.

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Sorry for the mispellings but I’m trying to get dinner done, go over homework with my daughter and watch Selling New York at the same time…

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:57 PM

What train do you take for such quick (and, no doubt, luxurious) trips?

Jetblue or Southwest (home of the “Whoa, Nelly! pilot). Why do y’all have to be such a long way from Texas?

Fortunata on February 3, 2011 at 10:05 PM

Okay so this is all in an effort to bring homosexuals into the consevativer fold and not to bring conservatives into the homosexual fold vis a vie, “we’ll be loud and proud but you have to give us this that or the other”. Becuase that is why I think they segregate themselves too. To as a voting block per se, get something. I would like to see what that something is… we’ll see I guess.

CCRWM on February 3, 2011 at 9:55 PM

Basically, yes. And I get your reservations, considering the political stereotypes of gays are all most people know, from gays themselves to straight social conservatives.

GOProud is essentially telling the Left “We’re here, we’re queer, we’re conservative — get used to it!” and it enrages them, as I’m sure you saw vis-a-vis MSNBC host Cenk Uygur’s invective in that interview.

Liberals don’t much like it when you break rank. A lot of people are ready to vote with their pocketbooks and are tired of the Democrats using single-issues as political footballs.

lansing quaker on February 3, 2011 at 10:06 PM

What I have learned on these GOProud threads has been truly enlightening.

Conservatives don’t engage in identity politics, unless the identity happens to be homosexual. And if you are Christian and you object to having the gay agenda represented at a conservative conference, then you just have to shut up.

I am appalled that there are so many people who just ignore the radical gay agenda of GOProud and insist on embracing them as “fiscal conservatives.” All you have to do to find out what their agenda is, is to go to their website. It’s all there. They are not conservatives. They are gay activists pretending to be conservatives. Some of you are really blind.

JannyMae on February 3, 2011 at 10:09 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4