I’ll ask the same question I did on the white nationalism thread: are any Trump supporters bothered by someone who believes this being in a position close to the P-elect and overseeing domestic policy?
“Gays can be reformed, just like arsonists, Trump’s new domestic policy adviser has said”
It’s funny, I can’t imagine any confidently heterosexual guys who would talk so much about homosexuality, its causes and methods to not be homosexual anymore.
Oh good lord, Ken Blackwell is back? I haven’t heard that name in ten years. He’s quite nuts. He ran for governor of Ohio in 2006 and was shellacked quite comprehensively. It was the worst showing for the Ohio GOP since 1912. What’s with Trump and all these washed-up has-beens?
They’ve just been biding their time, apparently.
He’s rather limited in his options. Anyone who has a future in politics wants to keep a safe distance from Trump. He gets to choose from too old to continue and too crazy to have a future.
Also keep in mind Trump is very nostalgic, a nepotist and he’s old himself, he’s going to pick people he’s known from his past.
The irony gets thicker and thicker. Tighty righty people bitch all the time about how lefties demonize anything conservative as being homophobic, racist, etc. etc. Its almost as if the Trumpniks studied all that and cobbled together the perfect nightmare. Not just vicious and hateful opinions, but all of them, like a box of vile chocolates, gay gumballs, racist raisinettes, cockroach cluster.
I would almost think it a kind of parody, if they had that much self awareness and a sense of humor as well. A dark, cramped, constipated sense of humor, but still…
Bring your pretty words and bitterness on over for some Trumpness carols, I’m bombing over there! (You ugly word people can come too, as long as you’re sufficiently bitter.)
At least one Trump voter here absolutely agrees, in substance if not specifics. I’m sure there are even more who just don’t care. As long as nobody is being shoved in an oven, what’s the big deal, as long as their taxes go down?
But call them bigots, and their feelings are hurt. That’s why they voted for this. Sure showed us, huh?
I just can’t help but think that Ken Blackwell finds gay men . . . smoking HOT!
CMC fnord!
Or maybe they thought, “May as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb.”
For any not familiar with the saying: “For years I’ve been told I’m a racist for thinking voters should show ID and a homophobe for thinking a photographer shouldn’t have to shoot a gay wedding if he doesn’t want to, so why not?”
“For years I’ve been told I’m a bomb-throwing Leninist for thinking the government has a role to play in promoting social welfare and keeping income inequality in check, so why not?” [starts throwing actual bombs]
Had to sneak that in there, did you, lad? Just couldn’t resist? For the one hundred and umpteenth time, I repeat: there is nothing inherently racist about voter ID, or even wrong. It’s about using that to attain and cement a political advantage, to suppress voters and their votes. You prefer to argue the point you can win rather than the point actually advanced.
Its as if I insisted that Christmas has become commercialized, and you respond that, no, you’re wrong, Christmas Day is officially the 25th of December. Undeniably true, but utterly irrelevant.
Will you please stop doing that? There’s a good fellow.
Two problems here.
Firstly: those are the simplified, strawman/nutpick versions of liberal arguments. Voter ID laws are demonstrably racist in effect, if not intent. Attempts to further them may very well be based on racial animus. Pretty easy to turn this into “If you support voter ID laws, you’re racist” if you’re trying to discredit the opposing argument and make it seem like the other side is being unreasonable. Same with the photographer - if you simplify the argument enough, the entirely reasonable argument of “You shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate against homosexual people when offering goods and services” can be turned into… well, what you just said.
Secondly: “I’ve been accused of being a little bit of an asshole for quite some time (for reasons that are largely justified but I did not understand), and I’m sick of it, so why not just be as big of an asshole as I can possibly be”. What.
This is more accurate: “For years, you’ve been accusing me of being a racist, a sexist, and a homophobe. I guess now I can admit you were right all along and those accusations have all been true.”
People didn’t become racist because they’re accused of racism. They get accused of racism because they’re already racist.
This is just another example of conservatives finally admitting that what the liberals have been saying for years is true.
What about gay arsonists?
There’s nothing inherently racist about slavery either. But in the real world, both were applied on the basis of race.
Flaming in every sense of the word.
Perhaps Bricker was not speaking about you, specifically. He probably wasn’t even speaking about himself, considering the post he was responding to. He can correct me if I’m wrong, but I read his post as reflective of what lots of Americans are thinking when they are broad-brushed called racists for supporting a particular policy that is not, as you yourself say, inherently racist.
I always thought flaming homosexuals meant like Village People gay.
Apparently I was ill informed.
Sorry, not clear to me which position you are agreeing with. Please clarify.
I’ll amend that to “as long as nobody they know and/or love is being shoved into an oven.” Trouble is, the oven shovers trend to cast their nets wider as time goes on.