The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

Anti-gay boycott of conservative powwow gains steam

Now we just need a gay group to show up at the values voters conference. :lol:
 
JohannBessler said:
At this point Sanitarium is admittedly a long shot.

But let's look at the truth, Stardreamer. The three likeliest possibilities are: Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and now Rick Perry, the governor of Texas.

Mitt Romney is a Mormon. Anti-gay to the core.

Mike Huckabee is/was a Fundamentalist Minister. Anti-gay to the core.

Rick Perry is not anti-gay per se., but he is a driving force in the Texas Republican Party—a party whose platform is overtly anti-gay, and singles out a class of citizens for discrimination.

Stardreamer, good friend, on this particular issue your screen name is apt, because you're dreaming in the stars. When are you going to come down to Earth, and face reality? They don't want you.
Click to expand...

We achieve great things by dreaming and reaching for the stars. We will never achieve equality unless the Republicans change as the result of pressures from within and without.
 
Stardreamer said:
We achieve great things by dreaming and reaching for the stars. We will never achieve equality unless the Republicans change as the result of pressures from within and without.
Click to expand...

...and they're not gonna change, so long as we keep supporting their bigotry with our money and our votes.
 
T-Rexx said:
...and they're not gonna change, so long as we keep supporting their bigotry with our money and our votes.
Click to expand...

That is a formula to not vote at all. Remember Gay Conservatives disagree with Democrats on almost everything except the Gay Rights issue so why should they give their money and votes to them? The events going on at CPAC prove you wrong. Major Parties stay Major Parties by observing and adapting to the trends of the Majority. Unlike some here who sneer and dismiss news sources that disagree with their viewpoint, I at least listen to the conservative commentary and news and on the topic of Gay Rights it is changing. You no longer hear from the mainstream sources that homosexuality is 'unnatural' or 'perverted' instead the focus has moved to should homosexuals have 'special' rights. That is still wrong but it is a move in the right direction. That shift towards recognition will take longer without the internal pressures that LCR and GOPride represent.
 
Supersix said:
Could it be people trying to change something from within?
Click to expand...

They won't live long enough.

hotatlboi said:
I agree this is helpful.

It helps to further marginalize the con groups that are more open about their bigotry.
Click to expand...

Hopefully it will marginalize into a party split.

JohannBessler said:
BTW, one other (smaller) reason Reagan came to power had to do with the "notch baby" controversy, for which the Democrats got the blame, but I bet only Kulindahr and maybe Frankfrank even know about it....
Click to expand...

Dim mists of memory... something to do with Social Security?

hotatlboi said:
Now we just need a gay group to show up at the values voters conference. :lol:
Click to expand...

With signs that say "Same-sex marriage: for the sake of the children [we divorce less]". :p

Stardreamer said:
That is a formula to not vote at all.
Click to expand...

Still trapped in the divine right of two parties pit....

It's not a formula to not vote, it's a formula to vote for someone else. Not voting says you don't care, voting for someone else sends a message.
 
JohannBessler said:
Kulin, in 1972 or so, they had a meeting on SS to address cost-ol-living issues. A certain formula was contrived to deal with those issues, and new retirees were paid on the basis of this formula.

In 1977, under Carter, it was noticed that, at the current rates of rapidly rising inflation, very soon Social Security would be bankrupt. It was decided that the original 1972 formula was artificially much too high, giving the people who'd retired under it a windfall.

A new formula was contrived which was more in line with reality. The people who'd received the windfall would be allowed to keep it, and the new retirees, over a period of about six years, would receive benefits based on either a) the new formula or b) a transitional formula, which ever was higher.

Over a period of years, what actually happened was that the newest retirees, who'd paid more into the fund, received more than those transitional notch babies, while ones who'd retired earlier received more, too. In other words, people born between 1917 and 1922, I think, received less $$ than the ones before, and the ones after.

The Democrats, who were stuck with this ugly mess, got the blame for this, so it's believed that the affected seniors might have switched parties in anger, cinching Ronald Reagan's Presidency.

Now, of course, almost all of the notch babies are dead, anyway.
Click to expand...

Well, I knew it had something to do with SS!

They did COLAs wrong, anyway -- they should never have been percentages of what a person got, but a percentage of a basic "grocery basket" of what a person needed monthly. That's where the actual cost change is, not on the whole range of a person's income.

As I pointed out in some thread here a while back, when I finally got a decade-delayed COLA on my disability, thanks to the percentage system, some people got a monthly increase as large as my total monthly check -- and that's not "cost of living", it's "cost of luxury".
 
As far as I can see there are far too few gay Republicans, however well intentioned they may be, to make any difference to the shitty direction the Republican Party has been taken since 1980.

Those pulling the strings know that there are far more votes and party contributions to be had by fanning the flames of anti-gay hostility / hysteria among the religious right - and votes and dollars is all that matters. It worked before for them by demonising blacks, hispanics, Jews or communists. Now its the gays (and the liberal intellectuals) who are the whipping boys.

Who cares about truth, decency or democracy when there's profits and power at stake?
 
Kulindahr said:
Still trapped in the divine right of two parties pit....

It's not a formula to not vote, it's a formula to vote for someone else. Not voting says you don't care, voting for someone else sends a message.
Click to expand...

I agree but many are are stuck in that pit and the false logic of a 3rd party vote is a wasted vote. I tend to vote Libertarian usually depending on the situation and the candidates.
 
levenshulme31 said:
As far as I can see there are far too few gay Republicans, however well intentioned they may be, to make any difference to the shitty direction the Republican Party has been taken since 1980.

Those pulling the strings know that there are far more votes and party contributions to be had by fanning the flames of anti-gay hostility / hysteria among the religious right - and votes and dollars is all that matters. It worked before for them by demonising blacks, hispanics, Jews or communists. Now its the gays (and the liberal intellectuals) who are the whipping boys.

Who cares about truth, decency or democracy when there's profits and power at stake?
Click to expand...

Perhaps but I'm of the opinion that the religious right's influence is waning and combined with the shift in attitudes of the American people as a whole that dog is slowly losing its ability to hunt. Its not dead yet but it don't run as fast or bay as loud as it used to
 
Toriko said:
The message it sends, when it lets Republicans win, is the same as a t-shirt that reads "I'm with stupid".
Click to expand...

The message it says, when it lets Democrats win, is the same as a t-shirt that reads "I'm with stupid".




No, it says "We don't agree with you -- either of you!"

If just half the people who have neglected to vote in the last two elections voted for a 'third party', things would get shaken up. If half of the people who didn't even register did the same, the country would change.
 
BTW Kulindahr. +1 to the message in your signature.
 
MIJ-VI said:
My eyesight is poor.

--------

Back to our regular scheduled program:

Dan Savage Calls Republican Group GOProud 'A Little Gay Window Dressing'
http://www.ontopmag.com/article.aspx?id=7208&MediaType=1&Category=26
Click to expand...

They think marriage is a matter of states' rights?

I suppose they would approve if Idaho made some Calvinistic sect the official state church, and Nevada established the casino as a place of worship, with all visitors required to gamble on Thursday night.
 
If the fundie christians got control of the Republican Party, how about an effort for the homos to do the same.

If all the homos in the US became registered national repubs, and started getting their candidates elected and the gay agenda slipped into the party platform, it wouldn't take long before the party started dressing more to the centre or on the left.

And everyone knows that the homos can throw a great party.

The xians would be forced to split off and form a radical sect and thus marginalized, would effectively expire.

Except in Texas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top