Gays Vote GOP in Record Numbers

[Amused]

There you go

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2010/results/polls/#val=USH00p2

 

[Amused]

Who is on this forum? All the neocons on this forum LOVE their social programs (war machines and shit) They just hate Laquanda from the east sides social programs.

Me, for one. I do believe that I was just ridiculed for it in the healthcare debate thread.

I was also ridiculed for it in the Phelps thread a while back when I sided for free speech.

I also believe that the more government covers people's expenses, the less socially liberal it will be. The US taxpayer will NOT allow people to be free if they are paying their bills. Socialism is anathema to freedom.

I also batteled Classy's bigotry (after years of him calling me racist) in the gay marriage thread.

 

[PJABBER]

Who is on this forum? All the neocons on this forum LOVE their social programs (war machines and shit) They just hate Laquanda from the east sides social programs.

Are you serious? Link: Laquanda from the eastside.

:awe:

Video says it all.

I'll stick to my social programs and you stick to yours. Though I will admit, yours probably should be a priority.

 

[JD50]

Who is on this forum? All the neocons on this forum LOVE their social programs (war machines and shit) They just hate Laquanda from the east sides social programs.

There's plenty of us, but like Amused said you're too busy making fun of us and calling us racists to see it.

 

[JSt0rm]

yes you guys are the victims.

 

[Amused]

yes you guys are the victims.

Victims of what?

 

[thepd7]

it's kinda like choosing between someone who's going to stab you in the back while hugging you versus someone who's just going to run up and kick you in the balls.

lol hilarious. The rest of this thread is garbage.

 

[werepossum]

In other news, Republicans make hilarious and impossible to implement promises that would eliminate legislative deal making and render the US Congress effectively unable to function.

Early reports indicate that the Republicans have done this as part of a series of rhetorical arguments they put forth that will have zero effect on any significant legislation that they wish to pass. Sources close to the Republicans state that they will continue to attempt to do this for all legislation they oppose, while conveniently ignoring it on legislation they support.

Thereby earning the eternal gratitude of a grateful populace.

 

[theeedude]

You really gotta enjoy taking it up the behind to vote for GOP.

 

[sportage]

Ok I'll bite...
Sounds like gays voted not so much for republicans but against Obama. Obama feeding more and more excuses as to why Obama has not ended DADT or DOMA.
Its one thing to have a president like GW look into the camera with evil eyes and talk of gays as if there were all Bin Laden Terrorist. Like GW did during his 2004 state of the union.
Then its another thing to have someone claim they side with you, but in reality does just the opposite. Was it not the Obama justice dept that said in court gays were perverts and deranged? Was that not the Obama justice dept?
Republicans leaders would really probably rather play up to gays, but there are more votes paying up to the religious right wingers.
Actually. I have no doubt that in all reality republicans in congress could really not care one yahoo about whether someone is gay, or who someone sleeps with, or about marriage being some holy grail that needs protecting.
You can see it in the face of most all republican congress persons when they blast gays or claim the need to protect "traditional" marriage, that they don't even believe themselves what they are trying to sell. That do it just for the votes. Lip service. It is sooo obvious.

And with gays... Most of them are college educated higher than average wage earners, in a two income household. It is more in their interest to be conservative financially. And relate more to republican beliefs when it comes to the economy and finance, national security and personal responsibility.

So it would be natural for republicans and gays to develop an holy alliance, so to speak. But there is more payoff at the polls with republicans playing up to the religious right wing side of the fence. It breaks down to simple politics.

I have always felt Sarah Plain is the mama or all i love you hag mamas at heart.
She knows she wants it. Buff, tan, shirtless hunky men standing behind her at every rally.
But she has to play up the anti-gay, protect marriage thing.
Maybe some day republicans will set themselves free... And embrace the gay community.
Possibly in an airport bathroom stall...

 

[werepossum]

Ok I'll bite...
Sounds like gays voted not so much for republicans but against Obama. Obama feeding more and more excuses as to why Obama has not ended DADT or DOMA.
Its one thing to have a president like GW look into the camera with evil eyes and talk of gays as if there were all Bin Laden Terrorist. Like GW did during his 2004 state of the union.
Then its another thing to have someone claim they side with you, but in reality does just the opposite. Was it not the Obama justice dept that said in court gays were perverts and deranged? Was that not the Obama justice dept?
Republicans leaders would really probably rather play up to gays, but there are more votes paying up to the religious right wingers.
Actually. I have no doubt that in all reality republicans in congress could really not care one yahoo about whether someone is gay, or who someone sleeps with, or about marriage being some holy grail that needs protecting.
You can see it in the face of most all republican congress persons when they blast gays or claim the need to protect "traditional" marriage, that they don't even believe themselves what they are trying to sell. That do it just for the votes. Lip service. It is sooo obvious.

And with gays... Most of them are college educated higher than average wage earners, in a two income household. It is more in their interest to be conservative financially. And relate more to republican beliefs when it comes to the economy and finance, national security and personal responsibility.

So it would be natural for republicans and gays to develop an holy alliance, so to speak. But there is more payoff at the polls with republicans playing up to the religious right wing side of the fence. It breaks down to simple politics.

I have always felt Sarah Plain is the mama or all i love you hag mamas at heart.
She knows she wants it. Buff, tan, shirtless hunky men standing behind her at every rally.
But she has to play up the anti-gay, protect marriage thing.
Maybe some day republicans will set themselves free... And embrace the gay community.
Possibly in an airport bathroom stall...

Ask not for whom the foot taps . . .

 

[Patranus]

The fact of the matter is that homosexuals have more in common in terms of the role of government with Constitutional Conservatives than they do with "progressives".

 

[JD50]

Victims of what?

Yea, not sure what he's talking about there.

 

[zsdersw]

Bullshit. It is, for the most part, impotent.

Gay marriage bans span parties, and beliefs. Hell, the vast majority of the black community support the bans and they vote democrat.

And, finally, gay marriage bans are meaningless. Gays can't lose a right they didn't have in the first place. All the bans do is send a silly message that will, eventually, be over turned in the courts.

So my point stands, the religious right is impotent. They can't get any of their agenda through on a national level, and the things they do is states are either pointless, or quickly over turned.

I have no doubt that Wisconsin's domestic partnership registry will not survive the Republican controlled Assembly, Senate, and Governor's office.

Wisconsin Family Action filed a lawsuit to remove it because they view it in conflict with the state's constitutional amendment on defining marriage, and is pushing for legislative action to do the same.

 

[zsdersw]

The fact of the matter is that homosexuals have more in common in terms of the role of government with Constitutional Conservatives than they do with "progressives".

Too bad the Republican party has little in common with Constitutional Conservatives.

 

[zsdersw]

Ok I'll bite...
Sounds like gays voted not so much for republicans but against Obama. Obama feeding more and more excuses as to why Obama has not ended DADT or DOMA.
Its one thing to have a president like GW look into the camera with evil eyes and talk of gays as if there were all Bin Laden Terrorist. Like GW did during his 2004 state of the union.
Then its another thing to have someone claim they side with you, but in reality does just the opposite. Was it not the Obama justice dept that said in court gays were perverts and deranged? Was that not the Obama justice dept?
Republicans leaders would really probably rather play up to gays, but there are more votes paying up to the religious right wingers.
Actually. I have no doubt that in all reality republicans in congress could really not care one yahoo about whether someone is gay, or who someone sleeps with, or about marriage being some holy grail that needs protecting.
You can see it in the face of most all republican congress persons when they blast gays or claim the need to protect "traditional" marriage, that they don't even believe themselves what they are trying to sell. That do it just for the votes. Lip service. It is sooo obvious.

And with gays... Most of them are college educated higher than average wage earners, in a two income household. It is more in their interest to be conservative financially. And relate more to republican beliefs when it comes to the economy and finance, national security and personal responsibility.

So it would be natural for republicans and gays to develop an holy alliance, so to speak. But there is more payoff at the polls with republicans playing up to the religious right wing side of the fence. It breaks down to simple politics.

I have always felt Sarah Plain is the mama or all i love you hag mamas at heart.
She knows she wants it. Buff, tan, shirtless hunky men standing behind her at every rally.
But she has to play up the anti-gay, protect marriage thing.
Maybe some day republicans will set themselves free... And embrace the gay community.
Possibly in an airport bathroom stall...

Until the day comes that a Republican candidate for national office (president, US senator or representative) does not need to pander to the Religious Right to win in the primaries, I will never vote Republican at the national level.

 

[Red Dawn]

Just think about what would happen if the GOP was for gay marriage and a repeal of DADT. Retarded social issue stances like this often submarine the party.

Let people do what they want with their bodies and their sex lives, and focus on the economy and the Constitution. Win Win.

If they were to do that they'd lose a large percentage of their base, the Fund A Mental Cases.

 

[zsdersw]

If they were to do that they'd lose a large percentage of their base, the Fund A Mental Cases.

Yup.. they sure do put the "fun" in "fundamentalist Christian dogma".

 

[werepossum]

Until the day comes that a Republican candidate for national office (president, US senator or representative) does not need to pander to the Religious Right to win in the primaries, I will never vote Republican at the national level.

I feel the same about the Democrats. If a particular Democrat candidate scares me badly enough, I'll vote Republican. Otherwise screw 'em both, I'll vote Libertarian even though I have big problems with their agenda too.

 

[Amused]

I have no doubt that Wisconsin's domestic partnership registry will not survive the Republican controlled Assembly, Senate, and Governor's office.

Wisconsin Family Action filed a lawsuit to remove it because they view it in conflict with the state's constitutional amendment on defining marriage, and is pushing for legislative action to do the same.

So at best, all the RR is doing is keeping the status quo?

Like I said, the RR is, for the most part, impotent.

 

[zsdersw]

So at best, all the RR is doing is keeping the status quo?

Like I said, the RR is, for the most part, impotent.

No, they're trying to change the status quo by having the registry eliminated.

 

[Amused]

No, they're trying to change the status quo by having the registry eliminated.

If it happens, that would be a rare setback caused by them. Like I said, they rarely get much done. Even less so on a national level.

 

[zsdersw]

If it happens, that would be a rare setback caused by them. Like I said, they rarely get much done. Even less so on a national level.

By all means, feel free to ignore them if you want. I, however, never will.

 

[Amused]

By all means, feel free to ignore them if you want. I, however, never will.

I didn't say ignore them, I said consider them for what little power they yield. When figuring the lesser of two evils, you have to put things in proper perspective.

While the RR's views may offend you most, consider the reality of how unsuccessful their agenda is.

 

[zsdersw]

I didn't say ignore them, I said consider them for what little power they yield. When figuring the lesser of two evils, you have to put things in proper perspective.

My (and hopefully yours and everyone else's) attention span can focus on more than one evil at one time.

While the RR's views may offend you most, consider the reality of how unsuccessful their agenda is.

Unsuccessful now and in the past != unsuccessful in the future.