Liberals hate gays

[Miller]

@elucidator

Everything? No way, its already gone too far, the rock is rolling down hill, and maybe it could be slowed, but I very much doubt it can be stopped.

At at least part of that is the stupidity of our enemies, bless their shriveled little hearts! Like the example you point to, gay marriage. They screamed themselves hoarse, setting their hair on fire, “everybody come see the horror of gay marriage”. And they plastered pictures all over everywhere, come look! Come see!

And America did. And America saw a couple of nice middle aged ladies cutting a wedding cake and said “Hey, the looks kinda like Aunt Edith! Sorta, well, you know, normal. And that guy marrying that other guy, he looks a lot like Fred from Accounting. Hey! That is Fred from Accounting!”

Yeah, I remember that. That was pretty good. You know what else I remember? I remember the Democratic party standing around with their dicks in their hands, not doing a single goddamned thing to help us out. I’m going to remember that for a long, long time.

I think Obama’s judgement on DADT was flawed, but I have no doubt it was well meaning. And I sure as hell trust his judgment better than the other guy, and thats all I get. But I do think he underestimated the degree of acceptance within the ranks, he could have pulled a Truman and it would have worked.

What I see is that he made a placating deal with the brass hats, to respect their wishes for a more gradual transition. Which he bought into, on acceptance on their part that it was going to happen, he’s willing to be prudent and cautious about change, but the change* will *happen. Period. Full stop.

Sure it will. Real soon. Right after this election, maybe even. Or the next one. Or the one after that. But it will happen. The Democrats promised, after all.

I was seventeen the first time I heard that line, when Clinton was running for his first term. I’m going to be thirty five next week. It’s been the same song and dance for nearly twenty years now, and I’m getting pretty tired of this particular tune.

It can be done, it is not impossible, jut goddam difficult! And if enough of us pull on this end of the rope, all together, all pulling the same way, we will win. I’d like it to happen before its time for my dirt nap, but I don’t matter, I’m just one set of hands pulling in this tug of war. And hey! there’s a spot opened up, right next to me! Be proud to have you on board, if you’ve a mind to.

You keep trying to use these teamwork metaphors. And they keep failing, because the relationship between the Democratic mainstream and gay voters isn’t a team relationship. We aren’t on the same team, luci. Gays don’t vote Democrat because we think the Democrats are going to help us. Most of us know better than to expect that. You’re simply the chumps we vote for as placeholders to keep the other guys out.

So go peddle your hippie-dippie, kumbayaa, let’s-all-be-friends bullshit somewhere else.

[Der_Trihs]

@elucidator

Choosing is a duty, it comes with the privilege of voting, it is as close to sacred as a secular order can offer. It is your duty to choose, even between two ugly bettys. And so long as the Dems are even one iota more favorable to justice and equality, I’m going to vote that one iota. Every fucking time! And if its a pain in the butt and its too slow and I don’t like cutting deals, tough shit. Man up and choose.

Don’t expect people to be enthusiastic between choosing between eating a bowl of sewage and a bowl of broken glass. Especially when they are expected to pay for it.

@elucidator

I think Obama’s judgement on DADT was flawed, but I have no doubt it was well meaning. And I sure as hell trust his judgment better than the other guy, and thats all I get. But I do think he underestimated the degree of acceptance within the ranks, he could have pulled a Truman and it would have worked.

What I see is that he made a placating deal with the brass hats, to respect their wishes for a more gradual transition. Which he bought into, on acceptance on their part that it was going to happen, he’s willing to be prudent and cautious about change, but the change* will *happen. Period. Full stop.

And I think he’s just another homophobic bigot, just one who is willing to pander a little to the homosexuals he hates during election season.

[Lakai]

@elucidator

It can be done, it is not impossible, jut goddam difficult! And if enough of us pull on this end of the rope, all together, all pulling the same way, we will win. I’d like it to happen before its time for my dirt nap, but I don’t matter, I’m just one set of hands pulling in this tug of war. And hey! there’s a spot opened up, right next to me! Be proud to have you on board, if you’ve a mind to.

You are free to vote which ever way you want. But what do LGBT’s win if they vote for Democrats? Republicans can’t really make anything worse for them. By not voting there is at least a chance the Democrats will get the message and change.

I agree Democrats are slightly better than Republicans. The GOP passes bad laws and the Democrats pass ineffectual ones. Sometimes working within the system is so pointless that you have to risk harm to do some real good.

[Lakai]

@Der_Trihs

And I think he’s just another homophobic bigot, just one who is willing to pander a little to the homosexuals he hates during election season.

Hypocrite yes, but I don’t think he’s a bigot. A bigot wouldn’t support the repeal of DADT.

[elucidator]

@Miller

…So go peddle your hippie-dippie, kumbayaa, let’s-all-be-friends bullshit somewhere else.

Well, peace on you, brother.

[Leaper]

Devil’s advocate (because this is a specific point raised on this page of replies): Republicans can and will hurt chances at gay rights by (assuming a Republican president) voting in Supreme Court justices who will do things like overturn Lawrence v Texas and uphold gay marriage bans.

[Der_Trihs]

@Lakai

Hypocrite yes, but I don’t think he’s a bigot. A bigot wouldn’t support the repeal of DADT.

No, but he might say he did for political profit, but avoid following though. Like Obama.

[Trepa_Mayfield]

@elucidator

Well, they ain’t much, I’ll grant you that. But there’s a fuck of a lot of them. Now, have you got something to replace representational democracy, and the power to make it stick? No? Then you are going to cut deals with the liberals. Or lose. Your call.

While I do believe you are accurate, your complete lack of sympathy to gay people makes people want to disagree with you. If you weren’t so incredibly, toxicly, obnoxiously smug, maybe people wouldn’t be more tempted to stay home and not vote. You say that we are pushing the Democrats apart: no, people like you are, who tell people to just shut up and deal with it when they make perfectly valid points about problems inside the Democratic leadership.

[Mosier]

It’s very simple, and non-dramatic. If gays want Democrats to support their agenda, they need to stop voting for Democrats who don’t support their agenda. There is no controversy in that position. Gays don’t “lose” in that scenario, because they had nothing to lose. McCain/Palin America looks exactly like Obama/Biden America, from the perspective of gay rights advocates.

[boytyperanma]

@Leaper

Devil’s advocate (because this is a specific point raised on this page of replies): Republicans can and will hurt chances at gay rights by (assuming a Republican president) voting in Supreme Court justices who will do things like overturn Lawrence v Texas and uphold gay marriage bans.

Considering their record so far that isn’t a very convincing argument. If their goal has been to pick judges who will find against gay rights, they really suck at it.

Republican appointee’s on the supreme court slit evenly 3 for 3 against in Lawrence v Texas.
Prop 8 in California was overturned by a Republican appointee.

[Revenant_Threshold]

@Mosier

It’s very simple, and non-dramatic. If gays want Democrats to support their agenda, they need to stop voting for Democrats who don’t support their agenda. There is no controversy in that position. Gays don’t “lose” in that scenario, because they had nothing to lose. McCain/Palin America looks exactly like Obama/Biden America, from the perspective of gay rights advocates.

That seems a bit too simple. Gay and gay-friendly groups aren’t that large an amount of the population; i’m not so sure that people put off by a notably non-gay-friendly Democract could not be replaced by people attracted to a non-gay-friendly Democrat, nor that the amount lost would necessarily be all that bothersome to a candidate in the first place.

I’m not sure I agree with your last point. That Obama/Biden haven’t done enough doesn’t mean that McCain/Palin couldn’t have done more in the opposite direction. To perhaps refine elucidator’s tug-of-war analogy, it’s like being invited to join a team that’s set on holding out for a draw because they don’t want to rile the other team up for other, more important matches; not a particularly enticing prospect, except if you don’t join in the other team win outright. But don’t worry, some day, we’ll all expend effort together on the match you want to win. Promise.

[Leaper]

@boytyperanma

Considering their record so far that isn’t a very convincing argument. If their goal has been to pick judges who will find against gay rights, they really suck at it.

Republican appointee’s on the supreme court slit evenly 3 for 3 against in Lawrence v Texas.
Prop 8 in California was overturned by a Republican appointee.

One could argue that of the three on the “wrong side,” as it were, two were among the latest Republican appointees (not counting Roberts, of course), so they’re getting better at it.

[elucidator]

Well, OK, then what’s the plan that is so much better than the tedious, tiresome stuff I’m offering. You got a better plan, why not bring it?

You going to withold your support for the Dems so they lose? How does that help you any? Even if one accepts the fanciful notion that the Dems and the Tparty are equivalent, how are you in any way improved?

Revolution is right out, you could wait for your demographic numbers to overwhelm the general population. Might take awhile.

So, your plan is to withold your support until the Dem leadership comes begging? Well what good is that, you already said you wouldn’t believe them anyway!

And here’s a question I don’t have the answer to, maybe you do: how big a bunch of people are we talking about, here? Are there yet any reliable numbers on how many gay voters there are? Is it a number likely to strike fear in the hearts of pols? And of that fearsome mass, how many vote in lockstep?

And what if the Dems win without you? Then what?

If you can do this thing without allies, go for it! I’d love it, I’ve seen so few miracles. I would cheer, stomp and get drunk as hell in celebration.

But if in the cold light of dawn you realize you will need allies and partners, then you got the progressive movement, and that’s about it. So, if you’re thinking that, might as well tell you right up front, we lose a lot of fights. The other guys are smart, rich, unscrupulous, and mean. Been at this more than forty years and, brother, I have had my ass kicked.

So if that’s too much for you, you better fold. Just go sit somewhere and cry in your beer and we’ll see if we can get this thing done.

And if you have a better plan, bring it. But if your plan is to bring the powers that be to their knees by the sheer mass of your numbers, I might need some convincing.

[Mosier]

@elucidator

You going to withold your support for the Dems so they lose? How does that help you any?

Democrats would be more friendly to gays, if they knew the vote of the gay community depended on it. Right now it’s taken for granted. If the democrats lose a few elections because they did nothing to support gay rights, and it leads to stronger gay support from Democrats, how is that anything other than a win?

[Der_Trihs]

@elucidator

If you can do this thing without allies, go for it! I’d love it, I’ve seen so few miracles. I would cheer, stomp and get drunk as hell in celebration.

But if in the cold light of dawn you realize you will need allies and partners, then you got the progressive movement, and that’s about it.

You are ignoring the basic complaint here, namely that the so-called progressive movement is not their ally and shows no interest in being one. And that what has been accomplished has been accomplished without them. They may indeed need the “progressives” as allies, but in that case they are just screwed because the “progressives” aren’t allies and likely won’t ever be.

A one way relationship where X gives and gives while Y just takes and does nothing in return isn’t an alliance.

[Revenant_Threshold]

It doesn’t strike me that recognising a bad plan as a bad plan requires that we have an alternative, good plan to take it’s place. I can only speak for myself, but really I can’t think of any superior ways of actually going about this, unfortunetly. That a shitty situation is, perhaps, an unavoidable shitty situation doesn’t mean that we can’t point out how shitty it is; especially when the the shitty situation is being spun as some sort of we’re-all-in-this-together, teambuilding exercise. “Allies” presupposes some level of reciprocity; it’s not just one helping the other, it’s both helping both. One group calling for everyone to come together in brotherhood to support it’s goals, and then leaving the phone off the hook when those helpful groups decide they’d quite like a bit of help too, isn’t an alliance, it’s parasitic.

If you go to a pub, chances are you’ll be happy to buy a round the first few times. What goes around, comes around. But if every time your friends convince you to buy the first round, and then decide to leave afterwards - you’re eventually going to stop turning up.

[elucidator]

Are your numbers that big? Most of the Dems and lefites I know support gay rights without hesitation, but they do it because its the right thing to do. I don’t know of any of them wringing their hands in woe at the prospect of losing the gay vote.

Hell, its even possible, I suppose, that a Dem in a close district with a lot of rubes and yahoos, he might even benefit from your public scorn and contempt, especially if his opponent is trying to make an issue of it.

If the Dems get totally killed, then your demographic won’t matter. If they totally win, it doesn’t matter. It only matters that much when the balance is right at the tipping point. If that’s the sum of your strategy, its pretty darn risky. If you’re going for kidnapping, here, you probably should be sure you got the kid tied up in the basement before you write the ransom note.

[jayjay]

“Come back, baby! It’ll be different this time! I’ll take anger management classes! I swear I’ll treat you right if you come back now!”

[Scylla]

There’s also GOProud, on top of the Log Cabin Republican (figuratively, of course.).

All these Republican groups fighting for civil rights, and conservative judges declaring discriminatory laws unconstitutional, and all these Democratic doing their best to create uphold, and delay the repeal of these discriminatory laws…

Well, damn! It’s enough to make your average God-fearing intolerant social conservative become a Democrat.

Good riddance.

[Miller]

@elucidator

But if in the cold light of dawn you realize you will need allies and partners, then you got the progressive movement, and that’s about it.

Have you read a single word anyone else here has written?

We know we need friends and allies. The problem is, the people who keep claiming to be our friends and allies keep fucking us in the ass. And not in the way that we like! Our friends and allies talk about how much they care about us… until they get into office, and then it’s, “Oh, it’s not the right time in the election cycle for that.” “We’d love to, but we’d alienate the Latinos, and we really need their support.” “We can’t risk a conservative backlash, sorry.” That’s not what friends do, luci. Friends help. Where’s our help?

So if that’s too much for you, you better fold. Just go sit somewhere and cry in your beer and we’ll see if we can get this thing done.

You’ll get it done? Christ, I guess that answers my earlier question: you really haven’t read any single word anyone else here has written. The entire issue here is that you don’t fucking do anything at all! If the Democrats would actually get off their asses and help us out, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.