Heh. And to think: before the election, I kept hearing about the “shy Trump voters”: that Trump was going to do somewhat better than the polls said, because folks who wouldn’t even say that they’d hold their nose and vote for him would vote for him.
Fortunately for trump, (unfortunately for America) they were encouraged by the very proud trump voters. I hear there is going to be a parade!
Well, sure. But, again: there were proud Clinton voters, right? Didn’t they encourage the they-say-they’ll-hold-noses-and-vote-for-her folks? Just like proud Trump voters would’ve encouraged the can’t-even-say-they’ll-vote-for-him-at-all folks?
This.
And I’ll probably get myself pitted for this but: Because of gay men, men are officially better at everything on the planet. Including the “girlie” things like make-up, fashion and design.
So yeah, I’ve always thought gays needed better PR. (smirk)
Yes, but being proud of being a Clinton voter means being able to articulate why, in boring policy speak, that is not all that captivating.
Being a proud trump voter means being able to say things like “Lock her up!”, “Build the wall!”, “Law and Order!” as if these are actually substantive policies.
I want Trumper/Dopers to [del] stick their necks out[/del] come forward and support him on these specifIc issues (this one and the White Nationalism thing). Site dine pride in your winning candidate. They snipe at Hillary and The Liberals but no one can/will defend the man they voted for. Sad.
It’s okay though. Remember - as he rationalizes for you - he’s ninety-three years old. I paraphrase Denis Miller: My grandfather is ninety-three … we don’t let him operate the remote control for the TeeVee, ferchrissakes.
But he gets to vote in the Electoral College.
I was going to say we won’t let him remotely change the channel…but we’ll let him remotely change the President.
You’re hip to my jive, babe.
For the record, my mother is 92 and has never thought anything close to this.
Who’s going to be first, I wonder, to suggest therapeutic water-boarding?
Trump on the other hand does not have a history of homophobia.
Or anti-Semitism.
Or anywhere near the racism and sexism he is being accused of. He is simply an unqualified wealthy clown that got elected president and will be the source of unprecedented embarrassment for the next four years.
We will catch him staring down the cleavage of somebody’s wife and grabbing Aung San Suu Kyi by the pussy. The state department is going to have its hands full figuring out new ways to say “I’m sooooo sorry” and Melania will breathe a sigh of relief as she blocks out the world from her penthouse suite in Manhattan.
Every time you bring this up, it’s like we have never discussed it before: Never discussed his actual past history, never discussed the background of the people he has appointed, never discussed the opinions of those being considered for other appointments, never discussed the hate-filled rants and hate-filled rallies that supported him and voted for him(“Please! Stop!” he whispered…after they voted).
It’s as if you either have no memory of all that has been said before…or you’re getting the giggles from wasting our time.
Anny Middon:
Ridiculous.
Anti-gay folks are anti-gay because they believe in the Bible which says homosexuality is detestable in the eyes of G-d, and because this religious belief was ingrained in the consciousness of Western nations for two thousand years, have a hard time seeing it as a personal belief rather than as an incontrovertible fact.
It’s really that simple.
Which bible, bwana?
How many Bibles do you know of?
Or is this about to be one of those smart-ass “why do they wear mixed fabrics” tangents? Because ultimately, it doesn’t matter why Christians consider one part of Leviticus to still be in force, and another part irrelevant. The important point is that it’s a belief that Christians have held for two thousand years, and, being the dominant culture (and to some degree, also the temporal power) in the western world for much of that time, believers have come to see “homosexuality = bad” as a fact rather than as a personal belief/opinion.
Interesting, in that G-d apparently has no wife nor girlfriend, despite being G-d the Father, and His Son, who also has no wife nor girlfriend, and hangs out with a group of grown men, urging them to leave their wives and families, interesting that both mytho-historical figures would find homosexuality “detestable.” One of the most bizarre aspects of Christianity and its adherents, particularly the RC view, it its preoccupation with sexuality. Also odd that a priest is referred to as Father, when that is that one thing that he can never be allowed to become. That’s some crazy shit right there.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Those two things are not mutually exclusive.