As of March 3, 2010, H.R. 3017 had 198 cosponsors in the House, 192 Democrats and 6 Republicans. Bush promised to veto it, and Obama promises to sign it.
Can you guess what big-government, tax-and-spend liberal nonsense H.R. 3017 is, Scylla?
Bonus points: How about H.R. 1283? The 192 cosponsors consist of 190 Democrats and 2 Republicans. Obviously not a bill that gay people care about though, right?
The next promise Obama will break?
Let’s not get out of hand here. The Democrats are pretty reprehensible when it comes to gay rights, but they remain the party that’s least likely to back a “Stone the Queers” amendment to the Constitution. This entire situation exists primarily because Republican party is such a vile, hate filled organization that gays don’t have any real alternatives to the Democrats. When you stop buddying up to preachers who blame hurricanes on us, then you can come back and talk. Until then, try to remember that you’re actually the greater of two evils, here.
Sorry, is this not fitting your trolling narrative? I think you’re supposed to hand-wave about the partisan affiliation of a Judge as your rebuttal.
This is why you, personally suck.
How the fuck do you come off calling me, the evil. Do you mean because I’m a conservative and all conservatives hate gay, therefore I hate gays and I’m therefore evil?
It seems like the main product of the left is fear-mongering against Republicans in order to keep the minorities in line. I mean, if it’s not to stand up against the evil hateful Republicans, than exactly what does the left have to recommend itself?
This one dimensional pandering and fear-mongering by assholes like yourself on the left is perhaps the deepest and most entrenched example of cynical prejudicial race-baiting that exists at a systemic level in this country.
I got news for you. We have a black president. Discrimination and hate based on race and sexual preference is on it’s way out. We are entering the post-racial, post- discriminatory age. People that have a real problem with other people based on race or sexual preference are the ones that are looked down on by the majority these days.
You need to sell another lie, because the picture the left would like to paint of itself as the crusading superhero fighting for the underdog against prejudice and discrimination from the right has not aged well. You’re just another fat guy in spandex selling fear
And here I thought Scylla was posting slyly with half-smile. But it turns out, he seriously believes this shit. My apologies. I retract my comment about trolling and replace it with stunned disbelief that you could be so willfully ignorant.
Since putting arguments into your opponents mouths (as the only way to defeat the) appears to be your forte (and the primary tactic of the ledt) why are you bothering to debate me?
Why not just take your one trick pony show to the left where you can preach to the choir?
Is this a debate? If so, why don’t you address my points?
And I wasn’t putting an argument in your mouth, I was making fun of your previous post. Sorry you couldn’t tell the difference.
Your statement about being post discrimination will only make sense after your party, which has historically been overwhelmingly white, both denounces the racist elements and actually gets a little integration. The black president we have only happened because the other party won.
So, now you’re all butthurt about it! (Hey, you started it!)
What if they’re telling you the truth? And what if they are right? On what basis do you presume malice? Have you some secret policy documents:“Hey, time to fuck over the gays, why the heck not!” You trusted them before, but now you know that they are…universally!..cynical bigots. All of them?
What I actually said was “we’ll see if we can get this thing done.” In the peckerwood dialect in which I was raised, that it is a conditional, a way of saying what one hopes to accomplish despite discouragements. You see, with you or without you, we keep on going, because its the right thing to do. Gay doesn’t matter, or, more to the point, it doesn’t especially matter, it matters just as much as latino, black, or any human condition whatsoever. Justice matters, everything else is commentary.
Not a Democrat. Damn sure not a mealy-mouth, menshevik, centrist, business-friendly, Blue Dead Dog Clintonista. Don’t mind being called a hippy, just watch it, is all.
Oh yeah, good point. The right are a bunch of racists as evidenced by the fact that the previous administration had no minorities in it. :rolleyes:
Idiot.
Of the 43 Black elected federal officials in 2008, do you know how many were Republicans? I’ll give you a clue. It’s roughly the same percentage chance that Republicans won’t filibuster the two bills I identified above: Zero. (Which is not to say that appointing cabinet members without regard to race isn’t a step in the right direction.)
Actually, it’s because I’m almost 35, and I’m still wearing GrrAnimals.
Did I call you evil? I don’t think that I did. I called the Republican party evil. I also called the Democratic party backstabbing cowards. Does this mean I think that every single member of the Democratic party is a backstabbing coward? Unlikely, as I’m a registered Democrat. If you want to take assigning a pejorative to a group is the same as assigning a pejorative to every individual member of a group, that’s fine. But that’s going to be a difficult position to defend when you’re starting threads entitled, “Liberals hate gays.” By that standard, you just called me a homophobe, so why shouldn’t I call you evil?
But I don’t think you called me a homophobe, any more than I think I called you evil.
This is largely a fair and accurate summation of the relationship between Democrats and gays. However, I don’t think I would term it as “fear-mongering,” precisely, because the Republicans really are as bad as the Democrats say. Significantly worse, actually, because Democrats routinely let Republicans slide on the most outrageous anti-gay slurs.
But yes, at least in the context of gay rights, the primary purpose served by Democrats is to ensure that Republicans are not elected to office. Beyond that, they have proven themselves to be entirely useless.
Really? More than, say, Tom “[The gay] is the greatest threat to our freedom that we face today” Coburn? More than Sally “The homosexual agenda is just destroying our nation” Kerns? More than David “[Gay marriage] is the crossroads where [hurrican] Katrina meets [hurricane] Rita” Vittier? I may be engaged in one dimensional pandering and fear-mongering, but I’m pretty clearly in the bush leagues compared to the Senate Republicans.
Okay… Is he also gay? Because otherwise, I’m not sure I’m seeing the relevance.
True, true, and half-true. Beating on gays is still a winning electoral strategy in most of this country. It is getting less and less effective, but I think it’s rather stretching things to give Republicans the credit for that. Or the Democrats, for that matter - again, neither party is particularly enamored of gay rights, but only one of them regularly has high-placed members call us godless abominations.
You might want to scroll up and read some of my other posts in this thread.
It’s not actually spandex: they don’t make GrrAnimals in my size.
Colin Powell is secretly Italian. Saw him dance once, news video of a Pubbie gathering. Almost gave it away, right there, but no black people were watching.
Point of minor correction: the clothing brand is actually Garanimals, which is a play on the name of the manufacturer, Garan Incorporated.
Miller
Previous post:
“Until then, try to remember that you’re actually the greater of two evils, here.”
I kinda figured when you said “you” in your response to me, you were referring to me.
If that’s the truth, fine. But the time to tell me the truth is before you ask me for my vote, not after you’ve won the election.
Most of them, yes. How many Democratic politicians are explicitly and unambiguously in favor of gay marriage? There are some, sure. Not a lot. Some of them weasel around it. Those would be the cynics. Some of them come right out and say they’re opposed to gay marriage. Those would be the bigots. Sometimes there’s overlap between the two, and you get your genuine cynical bigot.
No, you don’t. That’s pretty much the crux of the argument, here.
In this thread, you have explicitly stated that gay rights should take a backseat to the concerns of blacks and Latinos, for the good of the party. So, apparently, it matters quite a bit less than many other human conditions.
That’s a shame, because of the terms you just listed, “hippy” is by far the most derogatory.
Fair point. I should have said, “your party is the greater of two evils.” My apologies for the unintentional insult.
Again, no. The whole point is that you are doing no such thing. While there has been progress on the front of rights for homosexuals, the driving forces for that progress have nothing to do with the Democrats. They’ve been about as active on the subject as the same number of beef carcasses. Any progress made is in spite of them, not because of them.
Never said any such thing.