Karl Rove's step-father gay

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Compare to Rove and Bush made homophobia the centrepiece of their re-election strategy, not because of their own beliefs on gay marriage or gay people, but because of a calculated decision to exploit bigotry in the electorate for their own personal gain.

As opposed to outing Cheney's daughter at election time to try and exploit bigotry for Kerry's gain.

I could lay this out 100 times in 100 different ways, but you'll refuse to see it. You've already justified it in your own mind.

When gays out somebody, well that's a "minority" of gays. When conservatives out somebody, that's homophobia and all conservatives do it! If I told you that the majority of conservatives would be against "outing" as a political tactic, well I'd either be lying, or stupid, or immoral to say that cause you've already declared that the case!

You know what would be amazing - if someday science was able to prove that being gay was either 100% a lifestyle choice, or 100% genetic. Then we could solve these issues for once and for all and quit having to listen to sanctimonious zealots like you and the other end of the spectrum (that you act like the mirror image of).

local breeder checking out.


PS LumbergTech - do you have an original thought in your brain or do you just want to follow me around with inane & illogical comments?

Umm, she wasn't OUTED ... she was ALREADY "out." They were just pointing out something ALREADY KNOWN... nothing wrong with that.. it wasn't a secret that she was gay... therefore she can't be outed. Are you braindead?

 

[LumbergTech]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Compare to Rove and Bush made homophobia the centrepiece of their re-election strategy, not because of their own beliefs on gay marriage or gay people, but because of a calculated decision to exploit bigotry in the electorate for their own personal gain.

As opposed to outing Cheney's daughter at election time to try and exploit bigotry for Kerry's gain.

I could lay this out 100 times in 100 different ways, but you'll refuse to see it. You've already justified it in your own mind.

When gays out somebody, well that's a "minority" of gays. When conservatives out somebody, that's homophobia and all conservatives do it! If I told you that the majority of conservatives would be against "outing" as a political tactic, well I'd either be lying, or stupid, or immoral to say that cause you've already declared that the case!

You know what would be amazing - if someday science was able to prove that being gay was either 100% a lifestyle choice, or 100% genetic. Then we could solve these issues for once and for all and quit having to listen to sanctimonious zealots like you and the other end of the spectrum (that you act like the mirror image of).

local breeder checking out.


PS LumbergTech - do you have an original thought in your brain or do you just want to follow me around with inane & illogical comments?

the same could be said for you, all i see is you droning on and on using bs explanations, you bank off of your disagreement with others and in fact have nothing new to say yourself either ..and i happened to agree with him..you may think that you have some special knowledge of the intentions of politicians but you are full of crap, if someone is campaigning against gays and their father, a person who helped make them successful was gay, then i think that it should be public knowledge, you can try and say that certain people have an agenda, they may or may not, but that doesnt change the fact that the other person is full of crap, it doesnt entitle them to some kind of protection because other people in the world have an agenda

ill talk about john kerry for example,

personally, i dont realy think the guy stood for much, i think that he was sort of a party wh...and i really have little respect for him, but on the other hand, in a political situation, it is like a constant debate forum, i think that it is fair play to point out what can be perceived as hyprocisy in someones personal life when they are battling over how or who should run the country...where does this idea come from that people are allowed to hide their hypocrisy and then when it is uncovered somehow its a travesty?

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

I think you know your arguments here don't ring true, which is why I find them disappointing. I don't think aidanjm of all people is making fun of Rove for having a homosexual family member, just pointing out that his anti-gay campaign tactics are particularly hypocritical and phony considering his background. By the same token, I never heard a single liberal "make fun of" Mary Cheney, and there was no "outing" to be done since she was already openly gay - they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

I find it hard to believe that you, in your heart of hearts, believe Rove and his tactics are respectable - this is the same man who used push-polling to accuse John McCain of having an "illegitimate black child."

You are free to make unpersuasive arguments, but do yourself a favor and back off on the sanctimoniousness and feigned outrage. Nobody's buying.

I'm sorry - where did I in any way, shape or form defend Rove? And there's certainly no feigned (or real) outrage against this insanely gay-obsessed fellow aidanjm (does he post about anything else?). He's already proven he's a bigot in his own posts, both this one and in many previous.

The "outing" of Cheney's daughter came up via both Kerry and Edwards at national debates, IIRC. No, there was no intent to get the religious conservative voters talking/pissed off about that one, was there. :roll:

You can take your own sanctimoniousness commentary and put it on a shelf. Ignoring aidanjm's bigoted comments, ignoring the parallels between what Rove does and what Raw story (drugereport for the dems) have just done with the "OMG Rove is a homo" thing and selectively attacking my "feigned outrage" just shows that you're just as much a anti-bushitis infected partisan as any...

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

I think you know your arguments here don't ring true, which is why I find them disappointing. I don't think aidanjm of all people is making fun of Rove for having a homosexual family member, just pointing out that his anti-gay campaign tactics are particularly hypocritical and phony considering his background. By the same token, I never heard a single liberal "make fun of" Mary Cheney, and there was no "outing" to be done since she was already openly gay - they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

I find it hard to believe that you, in your heart of hearts, believe Rove and his tactics are respectable - this is the same man who used push-polling to accuse John McCain of having an "illegitimate black child."

You are free to make unpersuasive arguments, but do yourself a favor and back off on the sanctimoniousness and feigned outrage. Nobody's buying.

I'm sorry - where did I in any way, shape or form defend Rove? And there's certainly no feigned (or real) outrage against this insanely gay-obsessed fellow aidanjm (does he post about anything else?). He's already proven he's a bigot in his own posts, both this one and in many previous.

The "outing" of Cheney's daughter came up via both Kerry and Edwards at national debates, IIRC. No, there was no intent to get the religious conservative voters talking/pissed off about that one, was there. :roll:

You can take your own sanctimoniousness commentary and put it on a shelf. Ignoring aidanjm's bigoted comments, ignoring the parallels between what Rove does and what Raw story (drugereport for the dems) have just done with the "OMG Rove is a homo" thing and selectively attacking my "feigned outrage" just shows that you're just as much a anti-bushitis infected partisan as any...

Can't out someone who is already publicly gay. Keep repeating it though. If you repeat it enough, it becomes true!

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: aidanjm

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Nope, they just go out of their way to make sure that certain classes of people will always prize their victimhood and keep voting D.

The liberal agenda has nothing to do with so-called victimhood, and everything to do with liberty, freedom and equality.

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
And it's absolutely correct to say that both sides do it.

Wrong. I know it is fashionable and politically correct to suggest that liberals and conservatives are equally corrupt. However the facts tell a different story. Even over just the past 8 years, we have seen time and again, that Republicans account for the over-whelming majoirty of corrupt politicians and business leaders.

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
I realize that you're only focusing on one issue and with that narrow view you would be correct. But while the Rs take the pro-family/national security thing and beat people over the head with it the Ds are out there playing the race card and engaging in class warfare.

You don't know what you are talking about. In fact, you are speaking absolute rubbish. I have heard no Democratic politician in the US making a big issue over the "race card" or even "class warfare" during recent political campaigning. These were not even the main issues raised by Al Gore or John Kerry.

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
There is nothing moral about either approach. As groups, both sides will pull whatever dirty tricks, use any issue and exploit any group of people they think will advance their control.

Wrong again. The liberal approach - which is to seek freedom and equality for all citizens, is the inherently moral approach. Liberals and Democrats do not, on average, pull "dirty tricks". Republicans, on the other hand, RELY on dirty tricks, lies, and the inflaming of societal prejudices as their major campaigning methods.

IMO, and on average, people who vote Democrat/ Liberal are - objectively speaking - a better quality of human being (more moral, more honest, more intelligent) than people who vote Republican. But that's just my opinion, based as it is on the observable facts.

Have I mentioned that my mom killed that squirrel?

 

[LEDominator]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

I think you know your arguments here don't ring true, which is why I find them disappointing. I don't think aidanjm of all people is making fun of Rove for having a homosexual family member, just pointing out that his anti-gay campaign tactics are particularly hypocritical and phony considering his background. By the same token, I never heard a single liberal "make fun of" Mary Cheney, and there was no "outing" to be done since she was already openly gay - they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

I find it hard to believe that you, in your heart of hearts, believe Rove and his tactics are respectable - this is the same man who used push-polling to accuse John McCain of having an "illegitimate black child."

You are free to make unpersuasive arguments, but do yourself a favor and back off on the sanctimoniousness and feigned outrage. Nobody's buying.

I'm sorry - where did I in any way, shape or form defend Rove? And there's certainly no feigned (or real) outrage against this insanely gay-obsessed fellow aidanjm (does he post about anything else?). He's already proven he's a bigot in his own posts, both this one and in many previous.

The "outing" of Cheney's daughter came up via both Kerry and Edwards at national debates, IIRC. No, there was no intent to get the religious conservative voters talking/pissed off about that one, was there. :roll:

You can take your own sanctimoniousness commentary and put it on a shelf. Ignoring aidanjm's bigoted comments, ignoring the parallels between what Rove does and what Raw story (drugereport for the dems) have just done with the "OMG Rove is a homo" thing and selectively attacking my "feigned outrage" just shows that you're just as much a anti-bushitis infected partisan as any...

QFT. Unfortunately, people will always believe what they want to believe no matter what the facts. Case in point: how aida thinks the past 8 years have been solely Republican corruption. He just chooses to ignore the other cases of Democratic corruption.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: alchemize
You know what would be amazing - if someday science was able to prove that being gay was either 100% a lifestyle choice, or 100% genetic. Then we could solve these issues for once and for all and quit having to listen to sanctimonious zealots like you and the other end of the spectrum (that you act like the mirror image of).

If only Repulublicans were smart enough to read, and actually understand what they're reading: sexual preference is determined by the size of the INAH-3 portion of the brain.

 

[LEDominator]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: alchemize
You know what would be amazing - if someday science was able to prove that being gay was either 100% a lifestyle choice, or 100% genetic. Then we could solve these issues for once and for all and quit having to listen to sanctimonious zealots like you and the other end of the spectrum (that you act like the mirror image of).

If only Repulublicans were smart enough to read, and actually understand what they're reading: sexual preference is determined by the size of the INAH-3 portion of the brain.

Try it yourself:

Simon LeVay, in his study of the hypothalamic differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men, offered the following criticisms of his own research:

"It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.

"The INAH 3 is less likely to be the sole gay nucleus of the brain than a part of a chain of nuclei engaged in men and women's sexual behavior....Since I looked at adult brains, we don't know if the differences I found were there at birth, or if they appeared later." (Nimmons, 1994, p. 64).

 

[Termagant]

Lifer aidanjm wrote:

How does that fit in with Karl Rove's alleged homosexual lifestyle? (Never married, no kids, frequenting gay venues and clubs, making passes at handsome young men, the gay orgies, etc?)

Links, or better yet, pics? :camera: :roll:

Marriages

In July 1976, Rove married Houston socialite Valerie Wainright. In January 1977, he moved to Texas. The couple divorced in January 1980.

In January 1986, Rove married Darby Hickson, a graphic designer and former employee of Rove + Co. They have a son, Andrew Madison Rove, born in 1989 [3]. Darby is a survivor of breast cancer.

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

How much do you really know about Karl Rove?

 

[myocardia]

LED, all good scientists question everything, including their own findings. For instance, Einstein died thinking that his Cosmological Constant theory was his biggest mistake. It turns out that it was almost completely right, he just didn't have the ability to prove it back then, because there weren't instruments available to prove/disprove it.

That said, if religion weren't such a big deal in this country, there would have already been many hundreds, if not thousands, of similar studies done, because of that study, and we would all know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, why some people are homosexual.

Nearly every penny for research in this country comes directly from the U.S. government, and no politician on earth wants to be heralded by his opponent(s) as the candidate who supported spending a few million dollars, finding out what the religious portion of America doesn't want to know in the first place. The fact that his opponent would be willing to spend $500 million on a bridge that goes to nowhere (the Alaskan Senator) isn't enough to counteract that, in the minds of the idiots who make up the majority of the American population.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: alchemize

I'm sorry - where did I in any way, shape or form defend Rove? And there's certainly no feigned (or real) outrage against this insanely gay-obsessed fellow aidanjm (does he post about anything else?). He's already proven he's a bigot in his own posts, both this one and in many previous.

The "outing" of Cheney's daughter came up via both Kerry and Edwards at national debates, IIRC. No, there was no intent to get the religious conservative voters talking/pissed off about that one, was there. :roll:

You can take your own sanctimoniousness commentary and put it on a shelf. Ignoring aidanjm's bigoted comments, ignoring the parallels between what Rove does and what Raw story (drugereport for the dems) have just done with the "OMG Rove is a homo" thing and selectively attacking my "feigned outrage" just shows that you're just as much a anti-bushitis infected partisan as any...

Jeez, this is really really weak stuff coming from you. Even if aidanjm is a bigot, he's bigoted against straight men, not gay ones, and his bias has zero relevance to this discussion.

Kerry and Edwards couldn't "out" Mary Cheney - she was already out, and all they were doing was pointing out the concern that the White House's fire-breathing rhetoric on gay marriage seemed inconsistent with Cheney having a gay daughter. I thought Kerry handled it appropriately sensitively, whereas Edwards fumbled it a bit, but in neither case was this outing or mockery.

I don't deny my "anti-bushitis." I honestly think any patriot has to be concerned with the direction in which he is taking this country. Even you have admitted Clinton was a better president, and it must have been a bitter pill. I could respect that admission - I can't respect your posts in this thread, which are roughly as steady as a scaffolding built of cooked pasta.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Termagant
Lifer aidanjm wrote:

How does that fit in with Karl Rove's alleged homosexual lifestyle? (Never married, no kids, frequenting gay venues and clubs, making passes at handsome young men, the gay orgies, etc?)

Links, or better yet, pics? :camera: :roll:

Marriages

In July 1976, Rove married Houston socialite Valerie Wainright. In January 1977, he moved to Texas. The couple divorced in January 1980.

In January 1986, Rove married Darby Hickson, a graphic designer and former employee of Rove + Co. They have a son, Andrew Madison Rove, born in 1989 [3]. Darby is a survivor of breast cancer.

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

How much do you really know about Karl Rove?

LOL too funny. Sounds like he's still married? I'm sure aidanjm will be back to support his comments and correct his misstatements.

Please all carry on with your partisan hackery, we all know your party does no wrong and it's all the other sides fault.

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: LEDominator

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

I think you know your arguments here don't ring true, which is why I find them disappointing. I don't think aidanjm of all people is making fun of Rove for having a homosexual family member, just pointing out that his anti-gay campaign tactics are particularly hypocritical and phony considering his background. By the same token, I never heard a single liberal "make fun of" Mary Cheney, and there was no "outing" to be done since she was already openly gay - they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

I find it hard to believe that you, in your heart of hearts, believe Rove and his tactics are respectable - this is the same man who used push-polling to accuse John McCain of having an "illegitimate black child."

You are free to make unpersuasive arguments, but do yourself a favor and back off on the sanctimoniousness and feigned outrage. Nobody's buying.

I'm sorry - where did I in any way, shape or form defend Rove? And there's certainly no feigned (or real) outrage against this insanely gay-obsessed fellow aidanjm (does he post about anything else?). He's already proven he's a bigot in his own posts, both this one and in many previous.

The "outing" of Cheney's daughter came up via both Kerry and Edwards at national debates, IIRC. No, there was no intent to get the religious conservative voters talking/pissed off about that one, was there. :roll:

You can take your own sanctimoniousness commentary and put it on a shelf. Ignoring aidanjm's bigoted comments, ignoring the parallels between what Rove does and what Raw story (drugereport for the dems) have just done with the "OMG Rove is a homo" thing and selectively attacking my "feigned outrage" just shows that you're just as much a anti-bushitis infected partisan as any...

QFT. Unfortunately, people will always believe what they want to believe no matter what the facts. Case in point: how aida thinks the past 8 years have been solely Republican corruption. He just chooses to ignore the other cases of Democratic corruption.

Hahaha. Still repeating things to prove their truth. Can't "out" someone already publicly gay.

And while the last 8 years may not be "solely" Republican corruption... 85%+ have been... which is a significant amount more. Should we focus on the 15% or the 85%? Hmm.. hard choice!

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Termagant
Lifer aidanjm wrote:

How does that fit in with Karl Rove's alleged homosexual lifestyle? (Never married, no kids, frequenting gay venues and clubs, making passes at handsome young men, the gay orgies, etc?)

Links, or better yet, pics? :camera: :roll:

Marriages

In July 1976, Rove married Houston socialite Valerie Wainright. In January 1977, he moved to Texas. The couple divorced in January 1980.

In January 1986, Rove married Darby Hickson, a graphic designer and former employee of Rove + Co. They have a son, Andrew Madison Rove, born in 1989 [3]. Darby is a survivor of breast cancer.

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

How much do you really know about Karl Rove?

Hahahahhahahahaha... pw0ned in the worst possible way. :laugh:

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

...........- they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

.

From Wikipedia:
"Hypocrisy is the act of pretending to have morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practice. The word derives from the late Latin hypocrisis and Greek hupokrisis both meaning play-acting or pretence. The word is arguably derived from hypo- meaning under, + krinein meaning to decide/to dispute.[citation needed]

A classic example of a hypocritical act is to criticize others for carrying out some action while carrying out the same action oneself"


To characterize Rove or Cheney as hypocrits merely because they have gay relatives makes no sense. I am not defending Rove or Cheney here, rather proper use of English words and good communication.

Fern

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

...........- they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

.

From Wikipedia:
"Hypocrisy is the act of pretending to have morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practice. The word derives from the late Latin hypocrisis and Greek hupokrisis both meaning play-acting or pretence. The word is arguably derived from hypo- meaning under, + krinein meaning to decide/to dispute.[citation needed]

A classic example of a hypocritical act is to criticize others for carrying out some action while carrying out the same action oneself"


To characterize Rove or Cheney as hypocrits merely because they have gay relatives makes no sense. I am not defending Rove or Cheney here, rather proper use of English words and good communication.

Fern

It is a nice try, but the point the poster was trying to make was that Cheney's own daughter is gay and he supports her personally, while politically not supporting her.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

...........- they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

.

From Wikipedia:
"Hypocrisy is the act of pretending to have morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practice. The word derives from the late Latin hypocrisis and Greek hupokrisis both meaning play-acting or pretence. The word is arguably derived from hypo- meaning under, + krinein meaning to decide/to dispute.[citation needed]

A classic example of a hypocritical act is to criticize others for carrying out some action while carrying out the same action oneself"


To characterize Rove or Cheney as hypocrits merely because they have gay relatives makes no sense. I am not defending Rove or Cheney here, rather proper use of English words and good communication.

Fern

:thumbsup:

The thread is based on a very strange assumption:

"The actions of your parents dictate what you should believe/support. And if for some reason you don't support/believe what your parents do you are a hypocrit."

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Termagant
Lifer aidanjm wrote:

How does that fit in with Karl Rove's alleged homosexual lifestyle? (Never married, no kids, frequenting gay venues and clubs, making passes at handsome young men, the gay orgies, etc?)

Links, or better yet, pics? :camera: :roll:

Google on "Karl Rove gay" for the most widely disseminated allegations.

Originally posted by: Termagant

Marriages

In July 1976, Rove married Houston socialite Valerie Wainright. In January 1977, he moved to Texas. The couple divorced in January 1980.

In January 1986, Rove married Darby Hickson, a graphic designer and former employee of Rove + Co. They have a son, Andrew Madison Rove, born in 1989 [3]. Darby is a survivor of breast cancer.

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

How much do you really know about Karl Rove?

Just what I've read in various articles. The first marriage was (supposedly) to a young, naive socialite from Houston. Rove spent no time with her and that marriage ended in a few years. He remained unmarried until he was 37 years old. Then there was a hurriedly organised marriage to a low-level employee in his firm.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: alchemize
LOL too funny. Sounds like he's still married? I'm sure aidanjm will be back to support his comments and correct his misstatements.

You mean my speculative comments on Karl Rove's own sexual orientation? My own instinct is that he is, indeed, a homosexual man. Not that that is the main thrust of this thread.

Originally posted by: alchemize
Please all carry on with your partisan hackery, we all know your party does no wrong and it's all the other sides fault.

I don't see the democratic party, or liberals in general, exploiting homophobia to win elections.

 

[alchemize]

You have issues with projection I think. Seems to be a common issue to homosexuals, wanting every straight male to be gay. It's an odd phenomenom.

Of course not, they exploit other positions, and generally lose elections. Topics for another thread I think.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I don't see the democratic party, or liberals in general, exploiting homophobia to win elections.

Nope. As I said earlier they prefer to use the race card and engage in class warfare.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: aidanjm
I don't see the democratic party, or liberals in general, exploiting homophobia to win elections.

Nope. As I said earlier they prefer to use the race card and engage in class warfare.

Speaking of class warfare, what did you make of all the heat Kerry and Edwards took in 2004 because of their wealth?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: Fern
To characterize Rove or Cheney as hypocrits merely because they have gay relatives makes no sense. I am not defending Rove or Cheney here, rather proper use of English words and good communication.

Rove and Bush are individuals who by all accounts have no problem with gay people personally; gay people are among their closest advisors, friends and family members. It is known that Bush did not want to lend his support to the federal amendment seeking to ban gay marriage (he was strong-armed into doing this by right wing christian groups - who threatened to withrdraw support if he did not come out in support of banning same-sex marriage at the federal level). At the same time, these people are willing to use homophobia for political gain. This began on a very crude level with Rove putting rumours into circulation suggesting Bush's opponent/s were homosexual (in an environment where calling someone homosexual is a way of slurring that individual). Obviously Rove has since refined his methods which exploit the public's hatred or disdain for homosexual people. I wouldn't call Rove and Bush hypocritical, so much as morally degenerate. It is morally degenerate to viciously inflame and exploit some of the worst apects of human nature - bigotry - solely for political gain. The moral degeneracy is highlighted when you consider Rove and Bush have gay relatives, friends, parents, advisers - yet they are using tactics and promoting legislation that inflicts harm on gay people in general.

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: shadow9d9

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: alchemize
Now THAT'S true partisanship with a splash of bigotry tossed in. If I didn't know you better, I'd say you were a pro-Bush troll trying to make liberals look bad!

/golf clap

Alchy:

...........- they were just pointing out the hypocrisy of Cheney playing on the most negative, homophobic sentiments among the Republican base, in spite of the fact that his daughter is a lesbian.

.

From Wikipedia:
"Hypocrisy is the act of pretending to have morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practice. The word derives from the late Latin hypocrisis and Greek hupokrisis both meaning play-acting or pretence. The word is arguably derived from hypo- meaning under, + krinein meaning to decide/to dispute.[citation needed]

A classic example of a hypocritical act is to criticize others for carrying out some action while carrying out the same action oneself"


To characterize Rove or Cheney as hypocrits merely because they have gay relatives makes no sense. I am not defending Rove or Cheney here, rather proper use of English words and good communication.

Fern

It is a nice try, but the point the poster was trying to make was that Cheney's own daughter is gay and he supports her personally, while politically not supporting her.

By all accounts Rove was loyal and supportive towards his homosexual father at a personal level (commenting that his father "lived his life the way he wanted to") - but at the same time is not willing to support his father on a political level. In fact, throughout his career, Rove has promoted legislation and methods which would restrict his homosexual father of political or civil rights. That does seem hypocritical. You have to wonder what Rove's gay father thought of his son's methods. Did he see them as a betrayal?

 

[aidanjm]

Originally posted by: alchemize
You have issues with projection I think. Seems to be a common issue to homosexuals, wanting every straight male to be gay. It's an odd phenomenom.

I certainly don't "want" Rove to be gay - he is a sociopathic creep who does nothing for the reputation of gay men in general. I just can't see a heterosexual man having the deep understanding required to exploit gay-hatred with such incredible finesse.