Eh, Ron Paul stood up a little about the “let him die” idiots.
I have no idea what you are yapping about. I asked a question and have yet to hear a response.
The only one on the stage that has claimed not to hear the booing was Santorum. Each candidate had plenty of time on the stage afterwords to condemn the crowds behavior. A few of them after being hit with negative press over their lack of reaction have made statements saying they did not agree with the booing. The time to say that was then not after the fact. Their inaction was passive support of bigotry. They at best lack the courage to lead.
You can type but you can’t read? How very odd.
The ad at the bottom of the page is “stop Obama’s assault on our veterans” from the Ron Paul Presidential Campaign Committee.
See the rich irony you paid members are missing out on?
Yes, I can read, thank you. I just don’t understand who you can tell what I believe about “lefties” from my post or can tell if I don’t get out enough. In other words don’t assign motivations or beliefs to people you don’t know, you’ll just come off sounding like an ass.
I agree that there are racists in the NPD*, and I condemn their hateful rhetoric and actions - but this does not represent the views of all the NPD.
*modern right-wing radical party of Germany; commonly seen as the reaction to the banning of the NSDAP as a party. Anti-gay, anti-immigration, strongly anti-turk. Notably fringe and generally worth ignoring.
Look, you may not be a homophobe, and I respect that. But that said, it doesn’t matter: you’re supporting the party of homophobia, bigotry, and prejudice. When most of the republican presidential candidates sign a pledge to “family values”; when they will openly speak out against a gay serviceman because he is gay; when nobody will dare call Santorum–an enemy in this race–out on his very clear logical errors, either because they agree or because they are scared of being branded as a supporter of gay rights, then it is fair to brand the party as homophobic. And as long as that is part of the party line, people who support the republican party have a duty to either act to change that through whatever means they have, or they lose the right to complain when they are labeled as supporters of homophobia and detractors of social progress.
That is an awesome clip.
Let me introduce you to a concept rather popular hereabouts. It’s called a “quote”, by which you illustrate a posters views with their own words, those words being a reliable indicator of views.
By which you imply the Dems are inherently less likely to be shocked at dissing a serviceman. A slander of long standing and durable. You present a hypothetical Dem response as though it were a fact, and then offer to compare the Dem regard for servicemen against your own, and find it wanting.
You offer a comparison between something that did happen and something that didn’t, and assure us in aggrieved tones of butthurt that if the one that didn’t happen did happen, it would be much worse. Apparently hoping that an insinuation can outweigh a fact.
You got nothin’.
First, you can take your condescending attitude and shove it.
I merely asked a question of another poster.
I did not preface my comment with “since this is what I believe…” You simply read into it what you wanted to see. Besides, I happen to think that what actually happened is much worse than if it would have been in the reverse. While this may be an unfair stereotype I’d be willing to wager that the boo’ers were right of center on the political scale, conservative Christians and pro military all the way. However the incident shows that they let their bigotry trump everything else.
elucidator, you’re completely off-base. Cumberdale worded his hypothetical a bit poorly maybe, but he’s clearly doing a standard “if the party names were reversed” hypothetical. Going all attack-dog on the unintentional implication that of course the Democratic candidates wouldn’t say anything about booing audience members is overkill.
Huh? Looked to me like a jigger of “liberal hypocrisy” on the rocks with a dash of “They hate the troops” bitters. Rather have a swampwater fizz.
Nope. You were off base here.
He thought they were saying “boo-urns.”
The pit is weak. He pits the audience without understanding they are the Republicans. The audience is not filled with people off the streets. It is filled with people who have shown loyalty and given money to the party or have worked for it. They are a fair representative of the Republican followers.
Cumberdale was asking OMGABC whether or not he would condemn Democrats if audience members booed service members and the candidates didn’t remark on it at a Democratic Party debate. It’s just a hypothetical, and it’s one intended to expose hypocrisy in conservatives who would condemn Democrats doing so hypothetically but would excuse Republicans who actually did it. So, yes, off-base.
And now you’ve made me explain the joke, so no drinks for you.
How many people were booing (can’t see the link, sorry, I’m limited to 1G right now)? If it’s just like 1% of the crowd I seriously don’t think that it’s worth pitting over. No offense because I support full-on LGBT rights, but if it’s not a significant ratio then it’s just a wee bit hasty.
I think people are being more than a little unfair to the audience.
That soldier was quite ripped.
Considering how many social conservatives have turned out to be repressed closet-cases isn’t there a strong possibility the were going “Woo! Woo!”
You do not know how many. You are making up a statistic. Nor do you tell us how many you would consider significant. Some think 1 is too many. This was not the whole Republican party, but it was all Republicans. It is a representation of the party.
Well younger Republicans and moderates elected in 2010 are starting to change the GOP from within-but I don’t think the Republican politicians as a whole are homophobic but like as you said unwilling to piss off the base. But then on the other hand even Ann Coulter spoke at a GOProud
I think its self-evident that probably most of the crowd is Republican, thus I did not need to include that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard_and_James_Byrd,_Jr._Hate_Crimes_Prevention_Act
Voila. Well the bill did have some Republican support but opposition to the bill came for reasons of constitutionality (such as the US commitssion on Civil Rights)
No it did not pick Republicans from all varieties from all regions-the audience is skewed toward the locality and whatever groups bothered to make the trip.
I’m not making up anything. I’m asking for a percentage of the audience actually booing. If the OP is going to put the audience you need to show that the attitude is reflective of ‘the audience’ and not just a few random assholes. I’m not quite sure where the line from individual to collective guilt is, but I think that 1-5% of the audience misbehaving is too low for it.