Gay Forums - Gay News & Events - GOProud vows to support Bachman if she is the Republican Presidential Candidate

GOProud vows to support Bachman if she is the Republican Presidential Candidate

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 5:44 PM GMT

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gay-conservative-group-reaches-bachmann-165236299.html

ArticleWhile the three-term Minnesota congresswoman has largely confined her basic campaign-trail message to economic issues, her past statements and policy positions regarding gay issues face ongoing scrutiny. As a Minnesota state legislator, Bachmann was a strong opponent of gay marriage, and this month, an advocacy group posted a video of a counselor at a Bachmann family-owned clinic telling a gay patient that he can be "cured" of homosexuality.
In an interview with Politico, GOProud Chairman Christopher Barron said he was "concerned" and "troubled" by Bachmann's record and past statements about gay issues, but would not "be part of any 'war against Michele Bachmann.'"
GOProud officials generally stress that sending a Republican to the White House trumps a candidate's view on one issue.
"We are committed to defeating Barrack Obama in 2012," LaSalvia said. "And want to be helpful to whoever secures the GOP nomination."

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 7:19 PM GMT

Gross.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 7:40 PM GMT

tazzari saidGross.

Oh but it gets so much better. Popular gay conservative blog "Gay Patriot" applauds these actions.

http://www.gaypatriot.net/2011/07/18/goproud-requests-meeting-with-michele-bachmann/

Gay PatriotAnother smart move from our friends at GOProud.

Instead of demagoguing Michele Bachmann’s stance on gay issues, Chris Barron, chairman of the group’s board, who like yours truly, is “concerned about comments Bachmann has made about gay people and . . . troubled by her support for a federal marriage amendment“, is requesting a meeting with the outspoken Minnesota Republican

Well, let’s hope that the line about lending a hand was a bit of reporter Chris Moody’s rhetorical embellishment.

Perhaps, if gay people approach Mrs. Bachmann with a mind to civil discourse (instead of berating her in a demagogic fashion), they might succeed in changing her views on homosexuality. Yeah, maybe it’s just a hope that a civil meeting could effect a change, but, heck, Democrats based an entire political campaign on such sentiments.

It could also help for her to learn that gay conservatives, like those Tea Party members who have made her their heroine, support small government and personal freedom and don’t turn to the state to solve our problems or resolve social issues.

ADDENDUM: Oh, and one more thing. To those who criticize this move, do you have a better plan to try to get Mrs. Bachmann to change her views on homosexuality?:

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 7:46 PM GMT

DoomsDayAlpaca said
tazzari saidGross.

Oh but it gets so much better. Popular gay conservative blog "Gay Patriot" applauds these actions.

http://www.gaypatriot.net/2011/07/18/goproud-requests-meeting-with-michele-bachmann/

Gay PatriotAnother smart move from our friends at GOProud.

Instead of demagoguing Michele Bachmann’s stance on gay issues, Chris Barron, chairman of the group’s board, who like yours truly, is “concerned about comments Bachmann has made about gay people and . . . troubled by her support for a federal marriage amendment“, is requesting a meeting with the outspoken Minnesota Republican

Well, let’s hope that the line about lending a hand was a bit of reporter Chris Moody’s rhetorical embellishment.

Perhaps, if gay people approach Mrs. Bachmann with a mind to civil discourse (instead of berating her in a demagogic fashion), they might succeed in changing her views on homosexuality. Yeah, maybe it’s just a hope that a civil meeting could effect a change, but, heck, Democrats based an entire political campaign on such sentiments.

It could also help for her to learn that gay conservatives, like those Tea Party members who have made her their heroine, support small government and personal freedom and don’t turn to the state to solve our problems or resolve social issues.

ADDENDUM: Oh, and one more thing. To those who criticize this move, do you have a better plan to try to get Mrs. Bachmann to change her views on homosexuality?:

I don't give a shit about changing her opinion. However I would expect a gay man would have enough sense not to vote for the cunt!

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 7:57 PM GMT

This is just more proof of the fact that GOProud is NOT a gay advocacy group.
They don't give a shit about advancing gay rights or representing gay Americans.
GOProud is a REPUBLICAN advocacy group that only cares about electing Repub candidates.
Even when they're Repub candidates who support and vote for an anti-gay agenda.

DON'T BE FOOLED BY GOPROUD'S BULLSHIT.
They are NOT on our side.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 8:05 PM GMT

Scruffypup said
DoomsDayAlpaca said
tazzari saidGross.

Oh but it gets so much better. Popular gay conservative blog "Gay Patriot" applauds these actions.

http://www.gaypatriot.net/2011/07/18/goproud-requests-meeting-with-michele-bachmann/

Gay PatriotAnother smart move from our friends at GOProud.

Instead of demagoguing Michele Bachmann’s stance on gay issues, Chris Barron, chairman of the group’s board, who like yours truly, is “concerned about comments Bachmann has made about gay people and . . . troubled by her support for a federal marriage amendment“, is requesting a meeting with the outspoken Minnesota Republican

Well, let’s hope that the line about lending a hand was a bit of reporter Chris Moody’s rhetorical embellishment.

Perhaps, if gay people approach Mrs. Bachmann with a mind to civil discourse (instead of berating her in a demagogic fashion), they might succeed in changing her views on homosexuality. Yeah, maybe it’s just a hope that a civil meeting could effect a change, but, heck, Democrats based an entire political campaign on such sentiments.

It could also help for her to learn that gay conservatives, like those Tea Party members who have made her their heroine, support small government and personal freedom and don’t turn to the state to solve our problems or resolve social issues.

ADDENDUM: Oh, and one more thing. To those who criticize this move, do you have a better plan to try to get Mrs. Bachmann to change her views on homosexuality?:

I don't give a shit about changing her opinion. However I would expect a gay man would have enough sense not to vote for the cunt!

Just listen to the self loathing that is implicit in the words from Gay"Patriot" posted above.
The writer blames gay Americans for the fact that Bachmann hates gays.
He blames gay Americans for "berating her in a demogogic fashion".
He alleges that we provoked her into hating gays by not being nice enough to her, and that only by being sweet to her will she ever stop hating gays.

Yeah - it's OUR fault.

What BS.
We've responded to HER hateful antigay venom.
We're responded appropriately to Bachmann's attacks on us.

What's inappropriate is making excuses for this hatefilled bigoted woman.

What's inappropriate - and pathetic - is being so filled with self loathing that you blame yourself for the hatred and intolerant words and actions of others.

tongun18

Posts: 594

Jul 18, 2011 8:14 PM GMT

Disappointing. The irony is, that ignoring her stance on gay rights, the marriage amendment (and other social issues) causes them to ignore the fact that her positions are in direct conflict with her assertion that she "support[s] small government and personal freedom and do[es]n’t turn to the state to solve our problems or resolve social issues". A marriage amendment to the US Constitution, as she would propose it, would be a substantial increase to the size and scope of the federal government. She has no problem with government as long as it falls in line with her position on the issues. And on what does she base her positions on those issues??? The bible! To me, such a basis without any other sufficient support or evidence runs afoul of the concept of separation of church and state--we are not a theocracy and should not be using scripture to craft law. Yet another violation of a conservative tenant.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 8:47 PM GMT

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/bachmann-tosses-all-reason-aside/2011/07/14/gIQAhx76DI_blog.htmlMy grandmother was illiterate. She was cossetted in an impregnable ignorance that made her confident in her judgment and unassailable in her opinions. She died many years ago, but I fear she has come back . . . as Michele Bachmann.
...
For all I know, Bachmann is right and the predicted debt ceiling calamity will be another Y2K “problem,” when computers the world were predicted to crash at the stroke of midnight, Jan. 1, 2000. That did not happen; many experts were wrong. But the experts are not always wrong or not even usually wrong, and even when they are, they can supply reasons for their mistake. What is scary about Bachmann is that she has done away with reason itself. She believes what she believes because she believes it. I have seen this before. Grandma, welcome back.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 9:06 PM GMT

GOProud-- who?

Is this another anti gay, mormon hate group? It´s just, judging from their behaviour, that´s exactly who they appear to be. What a load of snivelling, spineless cunt lickers.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 9:08 PM GMT

BACHMANN: Lord, the day is at hand. We are in the last days. You are a Jehovah God. We know that the times are in your hands. And we give them to you…The day is at hand, Lord, when your return will come nigh. Nothing is more important than bringing sheep into the fold. Than bringing new life into the kingdom…You have weeded that garden. The harvest is at hand.

Now I know where those ridiculous posts come from on RJ about the Harvest.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 11:24 PM GMT

Any group claiming to be republican or democrat have to be careful about not appearing as though they will be ready to turn on the candidate chosen to represent the party They don't support Bachmann by any stretch of the imagination.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 18, 2011 11:34 PM GMT

It's win-win.
She gets more support and publicity. Gopgroud shows that they really are a gay group because they found a "diva" to support. Her husband found more potential clients for his gay therapy. Everyone wins

...except for everyone else.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 12:00 AM GMT

mocktwinkie saidAny group claiming to be republican or democrat have to be careful about not appearing as though they will be ready to turn on the candidate chosen to represent the party They don't support Bachmann by any stretch of the imagination.

Any group considering their own credibility might want to be careful with even suggesting they might support a COMPLETE LUNATIC.

Putting Political Party First......before the interest of good governance for their country......does NOT suggest patriotism.

creature

Posts: 5197

Jul 19, 2011 12:43 AM GMT

southbeach1500 said
Scruffypup said
I don't give a shit about changing her opinion. However I would expect a gay man would have enough sense not to vote for the cunt!

Some of us (admittedly a minority) when forced to choose between voting for Obama and all his "evolving on the issue of gay marriage" blather, and someone else who actually has the right idea about cutting government spending, cutting taxes and reversing course away from the "ideals" of more Federal government involvement in every aspect of American life, from what kind of light bulb you can have in your home to forcing you to purchase health insurance from a private insurance company, would vote for that other candidate.

It used to amaze me that gay men don't have much sense when it comes to choosing who to vote for, but now I understand - it's all about the "gay issues" with most gays.

Southbeach,

You know well enough regarding all the topics that appear in the News & Politics sub-forum that it is more than just the gay issues. Don't play dumb.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 1:28 AM GMT

Most liberals wouldn't understand or perceive the psychology in all of this and what Goproud is actually hoping to accomplish. This is an ingenious strategy because it could just end up making Michelle Bachmann look worse by demonstrating that she is against a group that is ostensibly willing to support her. It's intended to either force her to change her vocal policies or show everyone just what a true bigot and hater she really is!

mke_bt

Posts: 707

Jul 19, 2011 1:42 AM GMT

mocktwinkie saidMost liberals wouldn't understand or perceive the psychology in all of this and what Goproud is actually hoping to accomplish. This is an ingenious strategy because it could just end up making Michelle Bachmann look worse by demonstrating that she is against a group that is ostensibly willing to support her. It's intended to either force her to change her vocal policies or show everyone just what a true bigot and hater she really is!

I guess I'm not "most liberals". This strategy was the first thing that went through my mind. My hope is they get in her face. A good question to ask her would be along these lines, "As a couple who has been practicing Reparative Therapy all these years to what do you owe your success?". Then again, I could just be a bit too optimistic.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 1:44 AM GMT

mocktwinkie saidMost liberals wouldn't understand or perceive the psychology in all of this and what Goproud is actually hoping to accomplish. This is an ingenious strategy because it could just end up making Michelle Bachmann look worse by demonstrating that she is against a group that is ostensibly willing to support her. It's intended to either force her to change her vocal policies or show everyone just what a true bigot and hater she really is!

Yea no, GOProud learned to keep their mouth shut when it comes to calling "nasty bigots" just that, "nasty bigots". It cost them their invitation to CPAC.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 3:11 AM GMT

southbeach1500 said
creature said
southbeach1500 said
It used to amaze me that gay men don't have much sense when it comes to choosing who to vote for, but now I understand - it's all about the "gay issues" with most gays.

Southbeach,

You know well enough regarding all the topics that appear in the News & Politics sub-forum that it is more than just the gay issues. Don't play dumb.

It's either:

a) The gays are incapable of voting for someone who doesn't support "gay issues"

or

b) The gays are pretty dumb when it comes to economics since the evidence is all around them that the Democrat's and Obama's "economic plan" is a failure and destroying the country.

So, which is it?

Post this "evidence" that you claim exists proving that the Democrats and Obama are "destroying the country".

FYI - the country had already been destroyed when Obama took office - BY BUSH.
The country was in the depths of the worst recession since the Great Depression when Obama took office.

The Repubs ran the country into the ground during the Bush administration.
They doubled the National Debt, they brought on the worst recession in 70 years and they did nothing to try to stop or ease a severe housing crisis.

FYI - every recession for the last 30 years has hit when there's been a REPUB in the White House - including the 2007-2009 Bush recession.

FYI - the last five Dem presidents have reduced the National Debt, while the last four Repub presidents have increased the National Debt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
Reagan more than tripled the National Debt.
Dubya doubled it.

Your suggestion that we need to go back to the same Bush/Repub economic policies that wrecked the economy to begin with is insane.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 3:43 AM GMT

mocktwinkie saidMost liberals wouldn't understand or perceive the psychology in all of this and what Goproud is actually hoping to accomplish. This is an ingenious strategy because it could just end up making Michelle Bachmann look worse by demonstrating that she is against a group that is ostensibly willing to support her. It's intended to either force her to change her vocal policies or show everyone just what a true bigot and hater she really is!

"Most liberals wouldn't understand" you say.

I think many Social Conservatives may misread GOProud's capitulation.

It just seems like a certain group of gays can accept that they are 'BARBARIANS" who need reeducating.....as Marcus Bachmann tells us.

GOProud has a messaging problem with liberals and conservatives.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 3:52 AM GMT

SOUTHBEACH said Some of us (admittedly a minority) when forced to choose between voting for Obama and all his "evolving on the issue of gay marriage" blather, and someone else who actually has the right idea about cutting government spending, cutting taxes and reversing course away from the "ideals" of more Federal government involvement in every aspect of American life, from what kind of light bulb you can have in your home to forcing you to purchase health insurance from a private insurance company, would vote for that other candidate.

It used to amaze me that gay men don't have much sense when it comes to choosing who to vote for, but now I understand - it's all about the "gay issues" with most gays.

Not surprising, but yet again, YOU don't get it. And based on other posts, YOU never will. But I will explain why. Well, actually, YOU explained why. I'm just going to point it out. The bold area is the evidence of your double speak. Voting for someone who wants to reverse the intrusiveness of the federal gov't? Give me a fracking break. The fact that she wants to introduce a constitutional amendment defining marriage and brick walling those who would become her constituents if she were to be president is laughable at best and you stating it is the height of ridiculousness. If a constitutional amendment is intrusive on her part the way you say the healthcare mandate is, you are as blind as a bat asleep in a cave during the day. Intrusiveness indeed.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 4:00 AM GMT

q1w2e3 said

{...video of crazy ass bitch ranting...}

BACHMANN: Lord, the day is at hand. We are in the last days. You are a Jehovah God. We know that the times are in your hands. And we give them to you…The day is at hand, Lord, when your return will come nigh. Nothing is more important than bringing sheep into the fold. Than bringing new life into the kingdom…You have weeded that garden. The harvest is at hand.

Now I know where those ridiculous posts come from on RJ about the Harvest.

Maybe...

Michele Bachmann = Stuart = TheReaper...?

trollololol

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 4:08 AM GMT

As to claims that GOProud is trying to be as "crazy as a fox" by supporting this incorrigibly hateful woman and her enabling husband of questionable heterosexuality...

I highly doubt that GOProud has sufficient moment with Republican moderates and independents (wherever they may be allowed to vote in GOP primaries).

It might work in FL which if memory serves is an open primary, but most of the southern states are very socially conservative, have closed primaries, and will sing to the tune of the pro-hate message of the Bachmanns.

In other words, the odds are very against the GOProud for that sort of strat to work, as opposed to actively opposing the Bachmanns or drumming up support for Herman Cain or Ron Paul who are more likely to have a neutral position if not even a degree of active support for LGBT equality.

President Bachmann would be a far greater evil for America than a second round of President Obama by a long shot.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 4:23 AM GMT

tongun18 saidDisappointing. The irony is, that ignoring her stance on gay rights, the marriage amendment (and other social issues) causes them to ignore the fact that her positions are in direct conflict with her assertion that she "support[s] small government and personal freedom and do[es]n’t turn to the state to solve our problems or resolve social issues". A marriage amendment to the US Constitution, as she would propose it, would be a substantial increase to the size and scope of the federal government. She has no problem with government as long as it falls in line with her position on the issues. And on what does she base her positions on those issues??? The bible! To me, such a basis without any other sufficient support or evidence runs afoul of the concept of separation of church and state--we are not a theocracy and should not be using scripture to craft law. Yet another violation of a conservative tenant.

>APPLAUSE< >APPLAUSE<

Thank You.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 4:52 AM GMT

B787 said
tongun18 saidDisappointing. The irony is, that ignoring her stance on gay rights, the marriage amendment (and other social issues) causes them to ignore the fact that her positions are in direct conflict with her assertion that she "support[s] small government and personal freedom and do[es]n’t turn to the state to solve our problems or resolve social issues". A marriage amendment to the US Constitution, as she would propose it, would be a substantial increase to the size and scope of the federal government. She has no problem with government as long as it falls in line with her position on the issues. And on what does she base her positions on those issues??? The bible! To me, such a basis without any other sufficient support or evidence runs afoul of the concept of separation of church and state--we are not a theocracy and should not be using scripture to craft law. Yet another violation of a conservative tenant.

>APPLAUSE< >APPLAUSE<

Thank You.

Somehow she's considered to be a "Tea Party" leader and favorite?

If the "Tea Party" stands for limited government and focusing on economic issues rather than on social issues, how the hell does Ms. Bachmann with her extreme focus on social issues and greater government intrusion qualify as a "Tea Party" Republican?

Oh wait, that's right.
I forgot.
The Teabaggers are full of shit.

Posted by a hidden member.
Log in to view his profile

Jul 19, 2011 5:01 AM GMT

Not only is Michelle Bachmann homophobic, she might even be a racist as well. About a week ago, she signed a bill created by a right wind advocacy group stating that she promises to stay faithful to her husband. However, what it also said in the bill as a racial statement that said "you agree that black children had it better growing up during times of slavery." She claims she did not read the bill. She said "If I would have read it, I would not have signed it." Oh that's okay, it's not like when you become President you should actually "read" anything that you sign into law.

Forums > Gay News & Events Forum Rules

GOProud vows to support Bachman if she is the Republican Presidential Candidate