GOProud NOT invited to CPAC 2012

[JayQueer]

I found something that some people here might like

http://www.facebook.com/GOP4marriageequality

Didn't know it was around.

Thanks, White Eagle!

With all of the Republican-bashing that goes on these threads, it's nice to see that some Republicans are actually pro-gay rights.

It's difficult to be an elected Republican AND pro-gay rights at the same time. So when we do find any Republicans that are -- we should try to build bridges.

But instead of praising those Republicans & finding out how we can help change more Republicans' minds (because let's face it -- it's not the Democrats who are holding us back).........some of the regular posters here believe it's better to just give ALL the Republicans the middle finger.

 

[BostonPirate]

Thanks, White Eagle!

With all of the Republican-bashing that goes on these threads, it's nice to see that some Republicans are actually pro-gay rights.

It's difficult to be an elected Republican AND pro-gay rights at the same time. So when we do find any Republicans that are -- we should try to build bridges.

But instead of praising those Republicans & finding out how we can help change more Republicans' minds (because let's face it -- it's not the Democrats who are holding us back).........some of the regular posters here believe it's better to just give ALL the Republicans the middle finger.

Until they change their party platform and stop fighting the repeal of doma and the right to gay marriage and protection for gays from hate crimes, it is insanity for gay people to NOT fight against them and give them the finger

Please

I am not new to the game of politics. We are thrown under the bus to get them elected. THey do it to get the bigots and the right wing religious extremists to vote republican.

any party that trades in THAT kind of hate?

Let them figure theor own way out of the wilderness. Until they change their policies and their behaviors, they will get far worse than the finger from me.

It was just three years ago Bachmann praised a christian rock group for saying that christians need to do what muslims do and execute gays.

This is not a little prissy brunch we are having here.

We are fighting for the most basic of rights. Your posts seem to reveal an inability to understand what this means, and leaves me with the impression that you often say things to get attention, or you are extremely uneducated

 

[Centexfarmer]

Thanks, White Eagle!

With all of the Republican-bashing that goes on these threads, it's nice to see that some Republicans are actually pro-gay rights.

It's difficult to be an elected Republican AND pro-gay rights at the same time. So when we do find any Republicans that are -- we should try to build bridges.

But instead of praising those Republicans & finding out how we can help change more Republicans' minds (because let's face it -- it's not the Democrats who are holding us back).........some of the regular posters here believe it's better to just give ALL the Republicans the middle finger.

Yes White Eagle is a fellow Texan!

So let me support what a previous Yankee just posted, without my being Quaint, Southern, or dishonest.

JayQueer, I think that more than a few members who post in this forum have indicated a willingness to accept and appreciate "fiscal conservatives."

Or at the very least "fiscal responsibility."

I honestly think that one would be hard pressed to find an American, at this point who wouldn't agree with that.

HOWEVER, I think that the biggest fallacy that many of us fall under is our willingness to accept our two party system, and their party platforms as if they're engraved in stone.

I've been a "credentialed democrat" for most of my adult life.

If I don't like the direction that my State Democratic Party, or the Democratic National Committee is heading, I have a voice that can help to change that direction.

You DON'T HAVE THAT SAME VOICE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!

Do you want to know why?

Because they only thing that they're interested in is getting re-elected, and holding on to power.

If they can use YOU or US as a political WEDGE to to scare up some fundraising or some votes, like they do with GOD, GUNS, AND GAYS, they're not about to expand their "Big Tent" to allow you, or anyone else that might agree with them within their party, when it's so much easier to "divide and conquer" certain constituencies.

I've read here where you bemoan "Gay Culture."

You appear to be identifying with a group of fags, who by your own description wouldn't have you.

Call it love, call it indifference, call it rationally thinking things threw to their logical conclusion.

Do you want to strap on a pair?

Stay right where you are.

Come out, challenge the homophobes (including within your family) and make a difference within the "party" that you claim to support.

Until then don't come around here passing judgement on who's patriotic, or expect any sympathy (enabling support) for your inability, weakness, or desire to change anything.

I'm just saying.

 

[JayQueer]

Until they change their party platform and stop fighting the repeal of doma and the right to gay marriage and protection for gays from hate crimes, it is insanity for gay people to NOT fight against them and give them the finger.

So what would you say to a Republican who supports same-sex marriage? What would you say to those Republican senators who voted to repeal DADT? What would you say to those Republican representatives who voted in New York to legalize same-sex marriage (while taking a lot of heat from NOM & social conservatives)?

Meanwhile, what would you say to New York Democratic state congressman Ruben Diaz, an African-American who represents the Bronx -- who is very homophobic & voted against same-sex marriage in New York?

 

[BostonPirate]

So what would you say to a Republican who supports same-sex marriage? What would you say to those Republican senators who voted to repeal DADT? What would you say to those Republican representatives who voted in New York to legalize same-sex marriage (while taking a lot of heat from NOM & social conservatives)?

Meanwhile, what would you say to New York Democratic state congressman Ruben Diaz, an African-American who represents the Bronx -- who is very homophobic & voted against same-sex marriage in New York?

what would I say?

I would say I will not support or disavow a political party based upon outliers and anomalies. The very reason you bring them up is because they are unique and hard to find.

Who are you trying to fool?

The GOP has made a lot of political bank out of vilifying gay people. Until they stop, the entire group of them need to be deprived of power.

I had the honor of working on a local campaign last year, and I refused to back the candidate until he registered as a non affiliated voter, ran as independent, and voiced his opposition to the Right wing social engineering agenda the GOP is invested in. He WAS a republican. Not anymore.

He ran as an independent, and he won, because people saw a real conservative at heart, who was not interested in who is fucking who, but was interested in doing the right thing for the township he was running in.

He is now one of the swing votes and is more powerful than others on the council who have been there for years and merely vote as their party tells them to. Other republicans will catch on soon enough.

IF you want to be elected in 2012, run ... FAST... from the GOP.

 

[JayQueer]

Do you want to strap on a pair?

Stay right where you are.

Come out, challenge the homophobes (including within your family) and make a difference within the "party" that you claim to support.

Maybe I will.......time will tell.

We're all different, and what works for one person may not work for another. Just because we're gay doesn't mean that we all to have the exact same political views or beliefs. It's about being able to agree to disagree without being disagreeable. That's what diversity is all about.

Even if the majority of gays are liberals & Democrats, having some gays that are conservatives & Republicans IS a good thing. Even if the majority of gays tend to move to urban places like New York, DC, or San Fransisco..........having gay people that also live in the suburbs & in the rural areas IS a good thing too.

 

[Centexfarmer]

Maybe I will.......time will tell.

We're all different, and what works for one person may not work for another. Just because we're gay doesn't mean that we all to have the exact same political views or beliefs. It's about being able to agree to disagree without being disagreeable. That's what diversity is all about.

Even if the majority of gays are liberals & Democrats, having some gays that are conservatives & Republicans IS a good thing. Even if the majority of gays tend to move to urban places like New York, DC, or San Fransisco..........having gay people that also live in the suburbs & in the rural areas IS a good thing too.

Becky you are preaching to the choir.

I live in RURAL TEXAS.

That's like Orange County, California X 10!

Oh! And I'm also a volunteer moderator here on JUB!

Are you honestly a troll or are you for real?

Because you have no idea how much grief / extra work and explanation that some of the Mods here are taking because we're being forced to explain why you're still here.

Can I get you a tissue?

Strap on a pair of truck nuts if you have to and own own it!

 

[JayQueer]

Are you honestly a troll or are you for real?

Because you have no idea how much grief / extra work and explanation that some of the Mods here are taking because we're being forced to explain why you're still here.

Can I get you a tissue?

Strap on a pair of truck nuts if you have to and own own it!

I'm very much for real.

I'm sorry if I have ever offended anyone. I certainly don't want to hurt anyone. I certainly understand how it's like for someone who's gay & from a really conservative & traditional family -- because that's me too.

I've just grown up in an atmosphere where I've always done as I was told, and never questioned why. I don't remember ever getting into any kind of trouble growing up. For me, "coming out" was the first time that I "broke the rules" (so to speak) so it caused so much angst for me, and my relations with my family.

My views on things are evolving, if slowly. Who knows -- maybe 5 years from now -- I will be the most liberal Democrat person you've ever met, and look back on today & laugh at my naivete.

But this is who I am today.

I know I am conflicted and I still have so much to figure out about myself, but I would like to think that even a person like me as a place here at JUB. If not, I understand.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Sorry, it wasn't alcohol it was amphetamines. I had a brain fart. She was a Dexedrine and Dexamyl junkie. None the less, she died bitter, alone, and angry at the world.

 

[BostonPirate]

Sorry, it wasn't alcohol it was amphetamines. I had a brain fart. She was a Dexedrine and Dexamyl junkie. None the less, she died bitter, alone, and angry at the world.

she definitely has those crazy jumpy crack head eyes...lol

 

[MoltenRock III]

she definitely has those crazy jumpy crack head eyes...lol

Yup. If you've ever known someone with a "speed" addiction, you know what that does to the brain, and behavior of that person. It's night and day difference, just as meth causes.

 

[White Eagle]

Originally Posted by rareboy
^
I think they're calling bull on your "American dream."
And then some.


Not only is this image of white suburbia entirely phoney, it is predicated on the absurd notion that it is possible in a conservative society that opposes abortion, glorifies guns and is predicated on exploitation of fear.

It is just so annoying and frustrating to have someone who is constantly extolling the virtues of the political right, exhibit, apparently without any sense of irony, a total lack of awareness or appreciation that it has only been through the persistent efforts of the liberal thinkers, media, government and religions, that it is now possible to be an out, proud homo in American society...albeit within limits in most states. If this were still the dark era of post-war conservativism, homos would still be harassed, hated and likely have an FBI file.

This dystopian view of American society also is based on some bizarre notion that marriage is based on one wage earner when we know that most families couldn't function on a single income; that there is automatically happiness and satisfaction in being a Stepford wife (there isn't), and that life is nothing more than housekeeping and making your man happy. (barfs).

It represents an incredibly sheltered and jejune worldview that seems to be increasingly common among manchildren....those who have had mummy and daddy provide for them into their adulthood and who lack ambition and actual skills that would creatively challenge them in a profession.

JayQueer,
If you do nothing else, I want you to print rareboy's post and read it every day or more often. I have seen nothing more related to your "problem" than the above.
You are so unaware, (I can't think of any words that fits this space) that you need someone to tell you what you need to hear.
You will go nowhere with your thinking as a republican and it has been the gays of your past that have made it possible for you to have these dreams.

 

[White Eagle]

Originally Posted by SuprSonic

Jay, nobody is forcing anyone to move to the city. If you want to live in the suburbs that's fine, but you don't have to justify your choices by insulting others. The reason you catch so much flack here is that you come off as downright hateful and judgmental. Take a step back and realize that when people make choices that are different than yours, it is not an implicit criticism of the choices you've made. Think before you say or write something judgmental and ask yourself why you feel that way. Ask yourself why you should even care.

Seriously, if you just mellow out and stop being so judgmental, I think that would be a big step in improving the way you're perceived by others and your overall happiness. If you're still seeing your counselor, try bringing this up and see what he/she says.

OK JayQueer,
Another homework assignment
Another JUBBER has decided to HELP you. You do not pay any attention to what we are trying to get across to you.
Print out the above post and read it right after you read the other assignment.
This man is very smart. Pay attention.

 

[White Eagle]

Originally Posted by chrisrobin
I think you should take your own advice.
The world, according to JQ:

You are so gay. Thanks that's ..........gay.

 

[White Eagle]

Originally Posted by JayQueer

Thanks, White Eagle!

With all of the Republican-bashing that goes on these threads, it's nice to see that some Republicans are actually pro-gay rights.

It's difficult to be an elected Republican AND pro-gay rights at the same time. So when we do find any Republicans that are -- we should try to build bridges.

But instead of praising those Republicans & finding out how we can help change more Republicans' minds (because let's face it -- it's not the Democrats who are holding us back).........some of the regular posters here believe it's better to just give ALL the Republicans the middle finger.

Be assured that I posted this link for the topic. It in no way proves that the Republican party accepts gays into their groups. There are 2 or 3 around.
So in my response to your posts, you get what you troll for.

 

[White Eagle]

Originally Posted by centexfarmer View Post
Are you honestly a troll or are you for real?

Because you have no idea how much grief / extra work and explanation that some of the Mods here are taking because we're being forced to explain why you're still here.

Can I get you a tissue?



Strap on a pair of truck nuts if you have to and own own it!

Dayum, them's a big pair of nuts. Are they yours?
JQ, again if you believe anyone here, you HAVE to believe Centexfarmer. He will not steer you wrong, but he WILL tell you when YOU are wrong.

 

[laikaNYC]

Rareboy, you forgot to finish reading the end of that sentence.

"During these speeches and Q&A sessions, she often took controversial stances on political and social issues of the day. These included supporting abortion rights,[68] opposing the Vietnam War and the military draft (but condemning many draft dodgers as "bums"),[69] supporting Israel in the Arab-Israeli War of 1973 as "civilized men fighting savages",[70] saying European colonists had the right to take land from American Indians,[71] and calling homosexuality "immoral" and "disgusting", while also advocating the repeal of all laws against it."

Leave it to rareboy to only tell half the story

 

[rareboy]

No. Jqueer.

I can read. And I was scrupulously fair in quoting the piece about how this erratic and bizarre woman spent her later years.

And I didn't tell half the story. Unlike Laika, who would have just excised the end of the sentence to dishonestly make a point, I included it.

Duh.

It just points out that the darling of the soulless and morally bereft psychopaths who raised an inability to feel or willingness to express altruism or compassion, to a quasi-religious movement, actually thought and said out loud that homosexuals were 'immoral' and disgusting.

In 1971, Rand published The New Left, a collection of essays that attacked feminism and the sexual liberation movements, including the gay rights movement. Rand called them "hideous" for their demand for what she considered "special privileges" from the government. She addressed homosexuality in the course of an attack on feminism, stating that "[T]o proclaim spiritual sisterhood with lesbians... is so repulsive a set of premises from so loathsome a sense of life that an accurate commentary would require the kind of language I do not like to see in print."[1]

In response to questions from the audience at the two Ford Hall Forum lectures she gave at Northeastern University, Rand explained her views in more detail. In her 1968 lecture, she said, "I do not approve of such practices or regard them as necessarily moral, but it is improper for the law to interfere with a relationship between consenting adults."[2] In 1971, Rand reiterated this position, then added that homosexuality "involves psychological flaws, corruptions, errors, or unfortunate premises", concluding that homosexuality "is immoral, and more than that; if you want my really sincere opinion, it's disgusting."[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_and_homosexuality

And that she therefore would have found her GOProud accolytes, like la Saliva, Laika and jqueer repugnant, even while fighting for decriminalization of sexual behaviour, because it fit with her larger agenda of no government regulation at all. She was smart and cynical enough, though, to know that in order to 'legitmize' her own amoral Objectivist movement, she needed to have intellectuals on-side....many of whom were homos, or were supportive of getting sodomy laws off the books, many of which laws , by the way, also applied to heterosexual practises.

 

[laikaNYC]

And that she therefore would have found her GOProud accolytes, like la Saliva, Laika and jqueer repugnant, even while fighting for decriminalization of sexual behaviour, because it fit with her larger agenda of no government regulation at all. She was smart and cynical enough, though, to know that in order to 'legitmize' her own amoral Objectivist movement, she needed to have intellectuals on-side....many of whom were homos, or were supportive of getting sodomy laws off the books, many of which laws , by the way, also applied to heterosexual practises.

Wow, this is some spin. If she were "smart and cynical enough" wouldn't she have found some way to exclude gays from her movement?

Who gives a damn what she thought personally. The fact of the matter is she continually advocated LGBT rights.

 

[rareboy]

^ I guess she's just like the most recent GOProud poster cunt, Andy Coulter, eh?

Also savvy. Also cynical.

But as usual, you're wrong. Rand was trapped by her own 'philosophy', because it would have destroyed her entire house of cards if she had been seen to exclude any group based on her own repugnance for pillow biters and carpet munchers. But by expressing her own opinion on homosexuality, she actually subjectified homosexuality in a negative light and in fact, probably helped give legislators and jurists the 'moral' arguments they felt they needed to drag their heels on removing the statutes.

Typically though, you don't care what the personal views were, without understanding the influence that these personal views had and have on the weak witted intellectual simpletons who buy into her drivel.

By the way?

How else but through collective will and effort did the laws and will the laws get changed?

She didn't advocate for LGBT rights. She said she supported decriminalizing homosexuality but railed against the gay rights movement. Christ. When will you learn to read?

But we see time and time again that your approach is not to care what the personal views of the Republican and T-Bag extremists are. As long as they keep spinning their fairy tale about voodoo economics, it is clear you don't care that they hate you, except to gin up their base by campaigning against the gay agenda.

Oh.

And please don't complain again about me calling Dan Coulter, GOPoud's fag hag, a cunt.