Party officials caught saying they'll do everything to stop him, despite popular support.

Originally posted by VikingWarlord
reply to post by charles1952

 

That's the only thing that matters to gays. They don't care about job creation, infrastructure, the economy, and a million other issues that are far more pressing.

edit on 8/4/12 by VikingWarlord because: spelling

Everyone running for office promises to create jobs, fix infrastructure and improve the economy. Not all politicians promise to discriminate against certain people based on their sexual orientation. That makes it easier for them thar gays.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by acuna
The Democrats have plenty of reasons to disavow this guy. If he really was a Democrat why would he belong to a conservative group that works against things that the Dems work for? He may look like a duck but he's walking kinda funny

Here's a link to another Huffington article about the group he's associated with:

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I'm with buster2010 and Realspoke...and I agree with honor93...animals don't lie

Are you suggesting that there is no such thing as Pro Life Democrats? Or Democrats that believe in traditional marriage?

If this was the case, how do you explain what is known as "conservative democrats"?

You just posted how you know he is a Republican because he admitted it.
The post you replied to does not mention gay marriage or abortion.
It says he is working against things they work for.
It seems the list is longer than 2.

Originally posted by antonia
reply to post by nunyadammm

 

Well, they'd probably be up in arms if a Democrat pulled this crap on the GOP party. It's ok when their side does it. That's ats for ya.

If a Democrat sneezes they accuse him of treason and ask him to produce documented proof of his innocence but this guy admits he lied and Bezzer up there calls him an honest politician.

Boggles the mind.

reply to post by MrWendal


I'm not suggesting that there are no pro-life, democrats...or democrats that oppose same sex marriage. I'm just saying that it would be pretty odd for a democrat to belong to an organization that "focuses its efforts on opposing gay marriage while promoting school prayer, anti-abortion legislation" (from the article)

There are dems that oppose gay marriage, support school prayer and are pro-life, but they're not the norm. That's what I'm suggesting. The democrats are disavowing him because that group is not in line with where they stand on said issues, and the fact that the group has been labeled a hate group by a respected organization.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by acuna or anybody else

 

Dear acuna or anyone,

I'm really not clear about this. Is the only objection that he is opposed to gay marriage and acts on his beliefs? If there is more, I could understand the party's position on this. But with just this . . .

With respect,
Charles1952

edit on 4-8-2012 by charles1952 because: Change reply line

The objection is to the fact that he belonged to a group that was not only labeled as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center but also worked proactively to oppose gay marriage, promote school prayer and promote anti-abortion legislation...not exactly things that democrats do. Not that there can't be a conservative democrat but this is more than odd.

Please don't get the idea that just because you "act on your beliefs" that you are working against your party. Generalizations hurt everyone, regardless of party. Not all dems are bad, not all repubs are bad, not all tea partiers are bad. Every side has something good to say...and every side has something weird to say...and every side has some stupid things to say

Cheers!

link

Tennessee is an open primary state where Republicans can vote in a democratic primary and vice versa... so, this guy could have actually received more Republican votes in a Democratic primary than democratic votes...

I would call this guy a plant candidate! This is outrageous that voters can cross party lines and vote in another party's primary...

it is bad enough that gerrymandering has destroyed any real sense of democracy from the ground up..... but for an opposing political party to choose who they might run against is just plain dumb ??/

Where the hell has democracy gone in our former republic?

Like it or not, Gay Marriage To Be Officially Part Of Democrat Party Platform...

If a person was elected as the GOP candidate in Tenn, yet had "liberal" views about marriage equality and the right to abortion, the GOP in that state would likely disavow him, too.

Originally posted by fnpmitchreturns
link

Tennessee is an open primary state where Republicans can vote in a democratic primary and vice versa... so, this guy could have actually received more Republican votes in a Democratic primary than democratic votes...

I would call this guy a plant candidate! This is outrageous that voters can cross party lines and vote in another party's primary...

it is bad enough that gerrymandering has destroyed any real sense of democracy from the ground up..... but for an opposing political party to choose who they might run against is just plain dumb ??/

Where the hell has democracy gone in our former republic?

Well, that's a democracy for you, get to vote for whoever you want regardless of party affiliation. If people voted for the best candidate and not the party, I think things would be better off. You could be right, a planted candidate, hmmmm.

reply to post by charles1952


I hope said party leaders die in blood and fire in American revolution.

I almost ALWAYS avoid the "It's like WWII" comments, as I believe they're invalid... But this is a special case. This is blatant fascism, and let's not forget the Nazi party preventing political leaders they disliked from getting into office.

We'd be better off, anyways.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by VikingWarlord

 

Dear VikingWarlord,

Absolutely no offense taken. You came across as very mildly extreme.

And I agree that there isn't much coverage of events like "Gays Pick Up the Stream Week." (I think that's because it doesn't happen.) All of the activities I see mentioned are centered on them and their desires. I may be missing things, of course, and am willing to be corrected.

I just had a thought about their political influence. Could it be that they can raise a lot of money, and have no trouble attacking politicians they don't like in very public ways?

With respect,
Charles1952

I wonder if the slaves gave much thought to the economy before they were freed? Just a thought. If it was your rights being denied you might tend to be more focused on that. Almost every gay person I know is in a committed, long term relationship, and has never been the promisuous stereotypical gay person. This is why, as a Christian, I support marriage equality. That, and we don't live in a theocracy, thank God. Perhaps some of you should study the Puritans.

I am highly pro-choice, but honestly that is an issue I could look past IF his other stances on the issues of the Constitution and freedom are that liberal. These are the views we need in the White House at the moment, although economic beliefs may or may not be a deal breaker, whatever this man's views are. Those are the most important issues, imo, for the upcoming election: Constitutional freedom, economic policy, and defense strategy.

We need someone who will make this a more open democracy, or just take it back to a democracy in general; someone who will stand up to Wall Street and the bankers who have way too much political influence; we need someone who can get things done, and get the people behind him; and we need someone who will pull out troops and greatly decrease our involvement overseas...Also, someone who refocuses those resources here at home, which would greatly improve the well-being of a lot of people.

They're not just Gay rights, they are human rights! And the political parties serve largely to give the voter an idea of where the candidate/politican stands on the issues. This is basic American government class. The republicans have been truly acting like nazis as of late with all their tricks, and voting suppression they are trying to perpetrate across the nation with these #ed up voter ID laws. It is sick, this is sickening. Stop being a bunch of neo-con #s! You say the dems wanna make the country into Orwells 1984. I say I would rather be there than in (any religious figure's) year 12. Stop bitching and evolve. Jesus Christ.

reply to post by MaterialSpiritual

Please forgive me, but I see several questionable positions in your statement, and I feel compelled to address them.

They're not just Gay rights, they are human rights!

If i may steal from something I said in a different thread:

It seems to me, and this is only a preliminary thought, that it is a civil rights issue only because the people supporting it want it to be seen as a civil rights issue. This may be off the topic, but:
Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses."
From wiki www.ask.com... They don't think it's a civil rights issue yet. Some countries do and some don't. Even in this country, as I've mentioned, the state puts a number of restrictions on who can marry, so it hardly seems to be established as a civil right that only gays are being deprived of.

There's serious discussion on whether it should even be a civil right, let alone a human right. I think your statement lacks any credible support. Besides, what new right does a non-gay couple get under this concept? No, forget the human rights idea, at least as you've presented it.

And the political parties serve largely to give the voter an idea of where the candidate/politican stands on the issues.

You're glossing over real life. Olympia Snowe and Ron Paul are both Republicans, but they might as well not be on the same planet. You may not be old enough to remember the "Reagan Democrats," I suspect Barney Frank wasn't one of them. Individuals are common in politics.

The republicans have been truly acting like nazis as of late with all their tricks, and voting suppression they are trying to perpetrate across the nation with these #ed up voter ID laws. It is sick, this is sickening.

Oh those Nazis with their tricks. You do see that the comparison is beyond silly, don't you? You don't like voter ID laws, OK, some agree with you, some don't.

Stop being a bunch of neo-con #s!

That hurt. I have seen many different definitions for "neo-cons." The most popular seems to be "A Republican I really don't like." Feel free to offer yours.

You say the dems wanna make the country into Orwells 1984. I say I would rather be there than in (any religious figure's) year 12.

This statement started out to make sense, then, well . . . Try again?

Stop bitching and evolve.

Actually, when I started the thread, it was to point out that it appeared the Democrat Party of Tennessee had become a single issue party, controlled by a tiny sliver of the electorate. I'm not complaining, just looking for intelligent discussion.

Jesus Christ.

That was foul, profane, unneccesary, childish, and offensive. I usually sign off to posters in my threads with "With respect, Charles1952." I have no respect for you. An apology to those in the thread would be appropriate.

Originally posted by acuna
The Democrats have plenty of reasons to disavow this guy. If he really was a Democrat why would he belong to a conservative group that works against things that the Dems work for? He may look like a duck but he's walking kinda funny

Here's a link to another Huffington article about the group he's associated with:

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I'm with buster2010 and Realspoke...and I agree with honor93...animals don't lie

And yet you read and believe Hiffingtom??? LOL...moron

Originally posted by Yosemite Sam

Originally posted by acuna
The Democrats have plenty of reasons to disavow this guy. If he really was a Democrat why would he belong to a conservative group that works against things that the Dems work for? He may look like a duck but he's walking kinda funny

Here's a link to another Huffington article about the group he's associated with:

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I'm with buster2010 and Realspoke...and I agree with honor93...animals don't lie

And yet you read and believe Hiffingtom??? LOL...moron

First off let me tell you I love starting my Mondays being called a moron by a complete stranger, thanks for that. I'm really impressed with your ability to resort to name calling right away.

If you actually read the article you would have seen that the author sourced everything she said. You probably didn't read it or even try to find another source that would either discredit the article I mentioned or support it. That would be the reasonable thing to do. It's people like you that are not only not helping the political conversation here in the US but you're hurting it. If you don't agree with the article feel free to give us a link to another article.

What do you read?

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by VikingWarlord

 

Dear VikingWarlord,

Thanks for the response. I think that may be a little extreme, but it seems like that's the number one issue for sure.

What I don't understand is how, with about 4% of the population, are they able to wrap a national party around their finger? Gays aren't going to vote Republican, so how did they get such amazing influence?

With respect,
Charles1952

You have to understand that gay's got to where they are through terrorism. Heck they got Homosexuality removed as a mental illness via a campaign of bomb threats and sending diced kittens and puppies in the mail.