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.

From Goldwater To Dubya-what A Sad, Long Fall

Our friends on the right just love to posture and bellow fire from the pulpit about how those of us on the left just can't even begin to consider anything the right says. How very sad, really very sad.

And when those of us on the left present our friends on the right with an example of someone from the "true right' with whom we can admire on some issues, what do we get?

I'll tell you what we get, shout-outs to Nazi Germany and racism. It happened when some of us embraced some of the ideas from Pat Buchanan. It happened when some of us embraced the ideas of John McCain.

Anytime any of us from the left utter the slightest kind thing about a political opponent the guys gets shipped off to Siberia and labelled a bad republican.

Well, maybe we need to embrace George W Bush, too, and see what happens.

I'll tell you straight up, guys. I've seen more instances of our friends on the left reaching out to admire people on the right than I have seen of people on the right reaching out to admire someone from the left.

The only instance, I mean the one and only instance that I've seen someone from the right reach out to admire someone on the left was for Bill Richardson - and then he was falsely brush-stroked as a conservative-moderate.

Quite illuminating, actually.

Just out of curiosity - As someone looking around at all that admiration on the left.... do you find the Hitler references, or the assurance the 95% of Republicans are racists, or the admitted hatred of fellow Americans to be the best outreach program? :D
 
The desire to hand over rights is a heritage of the Left, who have taught people that government is mommy, here to take care of them. While the Right decries that, they happily take advantage of it at every opportunity. The Democrats have taught the people to be sheep, and the Republicans appoint themselves shepherds... and set about shearing and slaughtering.
When people say they voted for the lesser of two evils, they're still getting evil. The evils of both sides feed on each other, in a downward spiral that is turning us into a strange cross between communism and national socialism, with samplings of the worst of both.
Interestingly, these trends were foretold chillingly in a number of books by Jerry Pournelle -- demonstrating once again that real science fiction is social commentary.

it must be nice to be so above it all and superior, eh? or is it that it's just easier to not have to make a choice and actually go with one of the two political parties that can win?
 
sorry if i believe that at a time when your country is taking the entire world to hell that you should stand up and make a choice...

and the only thing i have in common with limbaugh is that we both like to get high...

only i'm high on life.

rushnazi.jpg
 
it must be nice to be so above it all and superior, eh? or is it that it's just easier to not have to make a choice and actually go with one of the two political parties that can win?

So if the two major parties set out clones of Hitler and Idi Amin, you'd vote for one of them?
Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. And until enough people get that through their heads, we'll keep getting evil.
"Not have to make a choice?" That describes the people who sigh and take one of the two evils. I've made a REAL choice -- to stand against the garbage offered to us as candidates by the PTBs.
 
And how are you, you Tennessee cock-and-ball torturer? :kiss:

Oh, I'm well rested from my extended breaks of late... I see you're entertaining yourself in my absence with fond thoughts of me being -let's see, how did you put it? ...ah yes... an uptight, opinionated authoritarian. I knew you'd miss me. Come on down, when I tell you authoritarian statements, I'll use that southern drawl you like so much. :cowboy: :cowboy: :cowboy: :cowboy: :cowboy: :cowboy: :cowboy:
 
i swear the best thing in these threads, and what keeps me from losing my mind, is the interesting relationship the ico's, chance's and maltese's have with the general...
 
I don't think classic liberals, like the Founding Fathers, can exist; modern liberals are viciously against it (and by extension them) and modern conservatives feel like they are upholding the principles of the past, and would probably send the Founding Fathers to Gitmo for sedition.

Only Thomas Paine. He was a rabble rouser. :kiss:
 
Many of the "founding fathers" were were extraordinary men of their times, but the world we live in has no resemblance to their world and will have even less resemblance in the future. The conservative fetish with the past may be useful for narrow nostalgic political purposes but is not all that useful for making contemporary decisions. Maybe it is the conservative love of "heroes" and authority figures that explains this.

Oh, and for those newly returned from Jesus Camp; Welcome back!
 
I don't understand this nostalgia for Goldwater. He was true to his beliefs? Isn't that a minimal requirement? So were most of the great villains in history. So is George Bush when he reportedly said that he will stay the course in Iraq even if only his wife and dog support him. (odd equation, that) It is what they believe that is the problem.

Exactly... it *is* a minimal requirement. But it's George Bush that lowered the bar. What if Clinton had stuck to his guns way back when? Many of the idiots in the military that are screaming "Stay the course" and "Support our troops {and their 'mission'}" now are the same ones that *threatened to commit treason* against Clinton when he was ready to order the ban on gay people in the military (NOTE before I get flames -- I realize there are gay people in the military, people that oppose the war, and people that don't vote Republican; my point is that the same people who opposed lifting the ban probably are the last ones in the military to continue supporting this foolish, disastrous war).

Not only were the most minimal requirements something that foolishly earned Bush 'respect' (at least for most of his first term), but they are total hypocrites on top of that, as well...
 
Just out of curiosity - As someone looking around at all that admiration on the left.... do you find the Hitler references, or the assurance the 95% of Republicans are racists, or the admitted hatred of fellow Americans to be the best outreach program? :D

Hey, Maltese... here's the problem... I'm sure people tried nicely w/you before. Are you saying that no one's reached out to you before? No one tried talking nice? Nobody gave you a nice speech about voting Democrat in 2004?

If you say 'no', I'm sorry, but there's no doubt to me, personally, that you're lying. Sorry if that offends you, but I'm not going to live in a deluded form of 'reality' in the spirit of 'outreach'.

Also, those statements you referred to (at least the ones made by me) aren't directed at you... just general statements, and pretty true, at that. (Skip two paragraphs below, and watch me elaborate).

What state are you in, BTW? (Feel free to respond via comment again, to that question.)

Also... no need to take offense if someone says 95% of Republicans are racist. We can include you in the other 5%; if it's you we're talking about that gets offended when being called a racist, then why take it personally, when you're not being singled out? When's the last time you were with a guy of color, FYI?

Aside from that, again, sorry, but I stand by my statement. You want me to 'reach out' to you? As I said to ICO -- drop everything you're doing, go to Mississippi and/or Virginia (perhaps even both) and prevent the reelection of either Trent Lott, George Allen, or even (preferrably) both.

If 95% of Republicans aren't racist, I'm sure it won't take much effort to do so...

Anyone who declines their American obligation, let alone *Republican* obligation to make sure of the outcomes in both of their cases, frankly isn't worth nicey-nicey 'outreach'.

Enough is enough.
 
Many of the "founding fathers" were were extraordinary men of their times, but the world we live in has no resemblance to their world and will have even less resemblance in the future. The conservative fetish with the past may be useful for narrow nostalgic political purposes but is not all that useful for making contemporary decisions. Maybe it is the conservative love of "heroes" and authority figures that explains this.

Oh, and for those newly returned from Jesus Camp; Welcome back!

The problem with that reasoning is twofold.

What the Founding Fathers did, in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and esdpecially the Bill of Rights, wasn't based on a particular situation in their times, but on a broad understanding of human nature looked at over history. So to easily cast off their insights based on accumulated wisdom by saying "the world we live in has no resemblance to their world and will have even less resemblance in the future" is shortsighted.

Besides being shortsighted, it is also dangerous. The Left introduced this concept of a "living constitution", which is to say a document that means what they want it to mean -- a very non-conservative (properly speaking) view. But now we are getting a SCOTUS which is very much a creature of the Right (conservative in an improper sense of the term), who are taking up this "living document" nonsense and using it to, well, mean what they want it to mean. If this goes on, we will have a theocracy, all thanks to people abandoning what the Founding Fathers told us, and re-interpreting the Constitution "for our times".

Liberals (in the classic sense of the term) are conservative, because that is the only way to uphold human liberty and dignity against the tyranny of the moment or of the current fashion. It is why the Constitution deliberately tried to avoid making this a "one man, one vote" democracy, but made it a Republic designed to keep both the government and the majority in check.
 
love how conservatives ignore something called an Amendment...the founding fathers wanted to make it difficult to change the constitution but they knew it might be necessary...therefore they gave us the ability to amend it. so you are dead wrong...the founding fathers were the ones who thought it shouldn't stand still.

and oh...i know this doesn't affect you but since i'm half black, i'm glad the constitution didn't stand still at leaving me at being 3/5ths of a person. just saying.
 
Hey, Maltese... here's the problem... I'm sure people tried nicely w/you before. Are you saying that no one's reached out to you before? No one tried talking nice? Nobody gave you a nice speech about voting Democrat in 2004?

If you say 'no', I'm sorry, but there's no doubt to me, personally, that you're lying. Sorry if that offends you, but I'm not going to live in a deluded form of 'reality' in the spirit of 'outreach'.

Certainly I have spoken quite civilly with fellow Americans of a wide variety of political bents...have found many to be thoughtful people with good things to say, even when I disagreed with them. I wish our politicians could manage the same thing, our country would be a better place.

And I've managed to survive those conversations without hating any of them, much less then overlay my dislike onto another 160 million people.

Also, those statements you referred to (at least the ones made by me) aren't directed at you... just general statements, and pretty true, at that. (Skip two paragraphs below, and watch me elaborate).

What state are you in, BTW? (Feel free to respond via comment again, to that question.)

No, that's ok. Currently Tennessee. Have also lived several other places in the southeast and eastern seaboard.

Also... no need to take offense if someone says 95% of Republicans are racist. We can include you in the other 5%; if it's you we're talking about that gets offended when being called a racist, then why take it personally, when you're not being singled out? When's the last time you were with a guy of color, FYI?

Tell you what, you tell me that you know personally 100 Republicans, and what they think about race, and that you KNOW (not assume based on your own prejudices) that 95 of those 100 are racists. Convince me of that, and maybe I'll grant you that your effort to malign tens of millions of people you've never met is justified.

Otherwise, I shall continue to take intellectual offense, if not personal offense, at someone standing on a public soapbox preaching that millions of fellow Americans are biased hatemongers based on nothing more than your own bias.

Aside from that, again, sorry, but I stand by my statement. You want me to 'reach out' to you? As I said to ICO -- drop everything you're doing, go to Mississippi and/or Virginia (perhaps even both) and prevent the reelection of either Trent Lott, George Allen, or even (preferrably) both.

If 95% of Republicans aren't racist, I'm sure it won't take much effort to do so...

Anyone who declines their American obligation, let alone *Republican* obligation to make sure of the outcomes in both of their cases, frankly isn't worth nicey-nicey 'outreach'.

Enough is enough.

I've lived in Mississippi. Have you? I don't want you to go to Mississippi and affect the outcome of an election. I just want you to go there, period, before you become an expert.

Ask Snaps if the world is that simple...he's lived there, too. The world is far more complex that some red/blue map, nor can you summarize race relations in an area of the country thats 50/50 by some binary "racist/non-racist" classification based on your perceived statistics.

The South is guilty of history of tremendous hatred and evil. Some people there still are. Others never were, and still others have learned and changed. And look at the changing demographics...do you think it's one of the fastest growing economic areas of the country w/o a few people from elsewhere moving in? And given the history, do you think modern day dislike of people of a different color, regardless of who they are, is limited to the white segment of the population? And yet, given all of that, I see more hope, more interaction between black and white in Mississippi than I have seen when I have been living and working anywhere else. It's a very different place than it was in 1964 - and while I have no clue how old you are, it's all too obvious that's when your perception of the South originated.

Regardless, my hope in this board and in life is that Americans will believe the best about those whom they have never met and who they do not know, and not reduce them to some characature based on the last media article they read. That song ought to be sung to Mississippi Baptists about New England liberal gays.... and to New England liberal gays about Mississippi Baptists. They'd both be horrified to hear how similar they sound.
 
well...i actually learned something from you ico...i'm stunned. nevertheless, i can't believe an intelligent human being is going to expect a document that was written over 200 years ago to be interpreted without modern day biases getting in there...that's sometimes progress sometimes not...but i'd rather err on the side of progress. the world they lived in back then thankfully doesn't exist...if the constitution doesn't evolve along with the times, it's going to be irrelevant...
 
Certainly I have spoken quite civilly with fellow Americans of a wide variety of political bents...have found many to be thoughtful people with good things to say, even when I disagreed with them.

Then there you go. You got what you wanted. After that, it was your choice to continue doing what you're doing. Don't try to blame me and anything I say for the fact that you're still a registered Republican, and vote that way (and probably voted for Bush in 2004). Sorry, I don't fall for that kind of manipulation. Better luck next time...
 
Then there you go. You got what you wanted. After that, it was your choice to continue doing what you're doing. Don't try to blame me and anything I say for the fact that you're still a registered Republican, and vote that way (and probably voted for Bush in 2004). Sorry, I don't fall for that kind of manipulation. Better luck next time...

Oh, you undercredit yourself, my friend. The types of arguments that I've heard from you are indeed exactly the kinds of reasons that I tend to vote towards the right.
 
Oh, you undercredit yourself, my friend. The types of arguments that I've heard from you are indeed exactly the kinds of reasons that I tend to vote towards the right.

Bullshit, my 'friend'. You voted for the right long before you ever met me, and probably long before anyone who made the 'type of arguments' you claim I make came into your life...

I know, because I've been following your posts for a long time before I recently dived in and started posting.

If you can use your vote to make people say only the things that you will *allow* them to say, that's only a bonus for you. But even were we to kiss your ass (figuratively or literally), you would still vote Republican.

Again, better luck next time. Maybe someone else will fall for your little tricks
 
Oh, you undercredit yourself, my friend. The types of arguments that I've heard from you are indeed exactly the kinds of reasons that I tend to vote towards the right.

But hypothetically, going with your completely fallacious argument, it seems you like to give people power over you.

Got your voting habits down, now I got to figure out what I got to do to make you...


hehehehe.

:p

All a hypothetical, of course. In response to your fellatio -- eh, fallacious argument. Hehehehe.
 
Back
Top