Home› A Moving Train

Teapublicans Jeer Gay Soldier

he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
edited September 2011 in A Moving Train
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/the-worst-fox-news-google-debate-moment-audience-boos-a-gay-soldier/245547/

The Teapublican candidates and their supports are repulsive and ignorant. Why do they think being gay is ONLY about sex? What a bunch of assholes.

They want less government... but they want to allow that government the decision of who/who not to kill. They cheer for the hypothetical concept of a man dying because he doesn't have health care. Now, they boo a gay soldier because he asks "are you going to support me if you're elected."

What a bunch of idiots. I'm not using a pejorative here... they are literally IDIOTS.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    he still stands wrote:
    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/09/the-worst-fox-news-google-debate-moment-audience-boos-a-gay-soldier/245547/

    The Teapublican candidates and their supports are repulsive and ignorant. Why do they think being gay is ONLY about sex? What a bunch of assholes.

    They want less government... but they want to allow that government the decision of who/who not to kill. They cheer for the hypothetical concept of a man dying because he doesn't have health care. Now, they boo a gay soldier because he asks "are you going to support me if you're elected."

    What a bunch of idiots. I'm not using a pejorative here... they are literally IDIOTS.

    :lol:

    Godfather.
  • he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
    Godfather. wrote:
    :lol:

    Godfather.

    Are you 12?
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • pjhawkspjhawks Posts: 12,594
    post deleted by admin
  • PJ51390PJ51390 Atlanta Posts: 728
    Yeah right!!!! How is all that hope and change working out for you now???

    The bottom line is we need something better in Washinton than we have now. Call them tea baggers, what ever you want, just know- we willl NEVER be able to spend our way out of what we are in now.

    The key to it all is spend less and smaller government. Socialism does NOT work!
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    so a few in the audience booed?

    I thought the Candidates did the jeering ... now that would be news


    it takes all kinds to make an audience
  • pjhawkspjhawks Posts: 12,594
    PJ51390 wrote:
    Yeah right!!!! How is all that hope and change working out for you now???

    The bottom line is we need something better in Washinton than we have now. Call them tea baggers, what ever you want, just know- we willl NEVER be able to spend our way out of what we are in now.

    The key to it all is spend less and smaller government. Socialism does NOT work!
    '
    thanks for proving my point above :D
  • he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
    PJ51390 wrote:
    Yeah right!!!! How is all that hope and change working out for you now???

    on topic... he ended the explicit discrimination against gays by the government that we've been fighting for since 1964. So, "all that hope and change" is working out pretty darn good.

    the rest of your comment is off topic and sounds like a Rush Limbaugh sound byte... misinformed and just plain not true. Re-examine your fact base.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    I was thinking with these 'audience wrong-doer idiot types' and their happenings,
    wouldn't it be a kicker to find out they belonged to the opposite party
    just trying to stir some shit up ... give the other party 'the look'

    wouldn't surprise me ...
    getting ready for the dirty play starting soon if it hasn't already

    who is sick to death of this stuff
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    PJ51390 wrote:
    Yeah right!!!! How is all that hope and change working out for you now???

    The bottom line is we need something better in Washinton than we have now. Call them tea baggers, what ever you want, just know- we willl NEVER be able to spend our way out of what we are in now.

    The key to it all is spend less and smaller government. Socialism does NOT work!
    where is the socialism??

    calling obama a socialist is an insult to socialists..

    perhaps you should read up on socialism before you start throwing that word around..
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Prince Of DorknessPrince Of Dorkness Posts: 3,763
    PJ51390 wrote:
    Yeah right!!!! How is all that hope and change working out for you now???

    It's working out pretty well for gay soldiers, actually. And It's working out pretty well for many Americans. And will continue to work out well if we stay the course.
    The key to it all is spend less and smaller government. Socialism does NOT work!

    Hm. An interesting comment. So... what is it about allowing gay soldiers to serve in the military is "socialist?"

    And I guess more to point... do you know what "socialism" means? Because our current president isn't a socialist.
    I can't drive without Pearl Jam
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    back on topic by the way...

    it is a shame that they have to pander to the lowest of the people in our country...the anti gay bigots...the selfish who do not want insurance for everyone, etc..
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • Cliffy6745Cliffy6745 Posts: 33,897
    Why is it, that after every republican debate, we talk about how the crowd either cheered death or booed a gay soldier or something else of the sort? The excuse is, it's just a "couple" of audience members but it's a couple audience members in every crowd. I think it is fair to say that once these dipshits become a trend (which they have), that these couple of members in the crowd are representative of the base of the new republican party, uneducated bigots.

    I am sure this will go over great with a few people here but I don't really give a shit.
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    inlet13 wrote:
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.
    :thumbup:
  • he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
    inlet13 wrote:
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.

    We're not talking about sensible republicans here... we're talking teapublicans (or tea party, or [deleted] what have you). And yes, you can label that entire subgroup as being moronic bigots. I've yet to meet one that isn't.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    inlet13 wrote:
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.

    so you believe that something called equal rights is not a high priority for a presidential debate. I can't imagine a higher one.
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    he still stands wrote:
    inlet13 wrote:
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.

    We're not talking about sensible republicans here... we're talking teapublicans (or tea party, or tea baggers, what have you). And yes, you can label that entire subgroup as being moronic bigots. I've yet to meet one that isn't.
    :wave:
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • Johnny AbruzzoJohnny Abruzzo Philly Posts: 11,775
    If I were still a Republican, I would be embarrassed to be associated with the Tea Bags.
    Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13;
    Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
    Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24

    Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    Johnny Abruzzo wrote:
    If I were still a Republican, I would be embarrassed to be associated with the Tea Bags.
    yes i can agree with you. i actually respected the gop before the tea party hijacked it and took it to the far fringes of the right.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    Johnny Abruzzo wrote:
    If I were still a Republican, I would be embarrassed to be associated with the Tea Bags.
    yes i can agree with you. i actually respected the gop before the tea party hijacked it and took it to the far fringes of the right.
    You have it backwards my friend ... the GOP hijacked the tea party.

    People that are true to the Tea Party's original charter are not concerned with gay marriage, DADT, abortions, and other social issues. That doesn't mean someone can't have an opinion on those issues, but they are not issues for which the Tea Party came to fruition. It came to fruition based on the following:

    * Fiscal Responsibility
    * Constitutionally Limited Government
    * Free Markets

    So someone jeering a gay soldier isn't a Teapublican, they are old-school social conservatives.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
  • he still standshe still stands Posts: 2,835
    Jason P wrote:
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    Johnny Abruzzo wrote:
    If I were still a Republican, I would be embarrassed to be associated with the Tea Bags.
    yes i can agree with you. i actually respected the gop before the tea party hijacked it and took it to the far fringes of the right.
    You have it backwards my friend ... the GOP hijacked the tea party.

    People that are true to the Tea Party's original charter are not concerned with gay marriage, DADT, abortions, and other social issues. That doesn't mean someone can't have an opinion on those issues, but they are not issues for which the Tea Party came to fruition. It came to fruition based on the following:

    * Fiscal Responsibility
    * Constitutionally Limited Government
    * Free Markets

    So someone jeering a gay soldier isn't a Teapublican, they are old-school social conservatives.

    so why don't you just call yourself a Libertarian?

    edit; regardless of who hijacked who, the Tea Party now is full of fascists who want to tell me how to live my personal life. If that's not your view then why associate yourself with them?
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • inlet13inlet13 Posts: 1,979
    fife wrote:
    inlet13 wrote:
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.

    so you believe that something called equal rights is not a high priority for a presidential debate. I can't imagine a higher one.

    Well, first, the economy, for instance, impacts our entire country. That's more important. Then there's about 100 other things.

    Second, I'd say the topic impacts less 5% of our population.

    Third, it's not really about equal rights. It's about a moral equivalency. Here's why: Don't Ask Don't Tell could be applied to both heterosexuals and homosexuals. That would mean they are still being treated equally. They both are not saying anything about that stuff. Am I for this? No. But, is it because of equal rights? Nope.

    Let me ask you, do you think it's not "equal" for a military woman to have to shower with military men? Why?

    To me, gay rights is about a strive for moral equivalency in the end. The irony, of course, is you can never really get there. People have their own views of right and wrong. What Bob thinks is ok and fine, might make Mary not comfortable. As a society, we can debate these things, but my thinking is the government should just get out of the judging right and wrong all together. That's why I'm fine with gays in the military. Let the military units handle it. So, get the government out.
    Here's a new demo called "in the fire":

    <object height="81" width="100%"> <param name="movie" value="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot;&gt;&lt;/param&gt; <param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param> <embed allowscriptaccess="always" height="81" src="https://player.soundcloud.com/player.swf?url=http://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/28998869&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="100%"></embed> </object> <span><a href=" - In the Fire (demo)</a> by <a href="
  • Johnny AbruzzoJohnny Abruzzo Philly Posts: 11,775
    What?!?

    I'm pretty sure repealing DADT is precisely the govt getting out of the decision. The military units are wanted to get rid of it years ago.

    That was the most confusing post I've read in years - I can't make any sense out of it. The right wing is way out of whack on this issue.
    Spectrum 10/27/09; New Orleans JazzFest 5/1/10; Made in America 9/2/12; Phila, PA 10/21/13; Phila, PA 10/22/13; Baltimore Arena 10/27/13;
    Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
    Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24

    Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    edited September 2011
    inlet13 wrote:
    fife wrote:
    inlet13 wrote:
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.

    so you believe that something called equal rights is not a high priority for a presidential debate. I can't imagine a higher one.

    Well, first, the economy, for instance, impacts our entire country. That's more important. Then there's about 100 other things.

    Second, I'd say the topic impacts less 5% of our population.

    Third, it's not really about equal rights. It's about a moral equivalency. Here's why: Don't Ask Don't Tell could be applied to both heterosexuals and homosexuals. That would mean they are still being treated equally. They both are not saying anything about that stuff. Am I for this? No. But, is it because of equal rights? Nope.

    Let me ask you, do you think it's not "equal" for a military woman to have to shower with military men? Why?

    To me, gay rights is about a strive for moral equivalency in the end. The irony, of course, is you can never really get there. People have their own views of right and wrong. What Bob thinks is ok and fine, might make Mary not comfortable. As a society, we can debate these things, but my thinking is the government should just get out of the judging right and wrong all together. That's why I'm fine with gays in the military. Let the military units handle it. So, get the government out.

    first off, equal rights effects the whole country too. i'm reminded of that old story about how ...

    "First they came for the communists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

    Then they came for me
    and there was no one left to speak out for me"

    second off i don't agree that it is a moral equivalency. while yes the same rule can be apply to both heterosexual and homosexual people lets be honest with ourselves its not. my cousin was in the army in the states and he would tell me that yes while people didn't ask him if he was "straight" comments from upper management assume that he was.

    3rd, you know that your question about woman and men shower together is crap and has nothing to do with equal rights. a fair analogy would be if would it be OK for woman to have to pretend to be men to join the army.

    sorry one last thing. the government should be involved in the military. the president is the leader. no government should ever place any laws that make people less equal in their country.
    Post edited by fife on
  • normnorm Posts: 31,146
    did any of the "candidates" denounce the booing?

    no?


    well there ya go
  • fifefife Posts: 3,327
    norm wrote:
    did any of the "candidates" denounce the booing?

    no?


    well there ya go

    and that right there is the point.
  • usamamasan1usamamasan1 Posts: 4,695
    he still stands wrote:
    inlet13 wrote:
    I think homosexuals should be able to be out and in the military. I think there are at least a few Republican candidates who agree with this stance. Trying to label the entire party based on one segment, is actually "stupid".

    Regardless, on the priority list of things that should be discussed during the Presidential debate, this is pretty damn low.

    We're not talking about sensible republicans here... we're talking teapublicans (or tea party, or tea baggers, what have you). And yes, you can label that entire subgroup as being moronic bigots. I've yet to meet one that isn't.

    Reported.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    OH SNAP!!!





    woot
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    actually usamamasan, are you going to condemn these people mocking the gay soldier? if not your silence implies that you agree with them. don't be offended when people say that the tea party has taken over the gop. the tea party is going to run the gop off of a cliff.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 19,156
    he still stands wrote:

    so why don't you just call yourself a Libertarian?

    edit; regardless of who hijacked who, the Tea Party now is full of fascists who want to tell me how to live my personal life. If that's not your view then why associate yourself with them?
    Because everyone I personally know who values the Tea Party is loving and kind. I don't go to rallies or crap like that, so I just know what I observe within the range of my eyeballs and ears. I don't see the things that are reported on this board or by the media by their unruly fascist and racist behavior.

    If I have to make a distinction based on media report or my eyeballs, I prefer to go with the judgement of my eyeballs.

    Also, I don't consider myself a "member" of the Tea Party or Libertarian movement. I appreciate the mantra of both organizations, but in the end I'm just some dude trying avoid letting the government rape me out of my money and freedom.
    Be Excellent To Each Other
    Party On, Dudes!
This discussion has been closed.