Gay Republican congressional candidate Carl DeMaio being attacked for his sexual orientation by progressive Democrats - perfect definition of hypocrisy

  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 29, 2014 12:26 AM GMT
    Understandable that Democrats attack Republicans and Republicans attack Democrats. When the Democrat attack is based on the Republican's gayness it is very telling.

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/04/28/california-house-race-no-one-puts-gay-republican-carl-demaio-in-corner/

    DeMaio has been the target of homophobic attacks. But where are those attacks coming from? It’s not always from the far right social conservatives you’d expect; rather, it’s been from DeMaio’s left – the liberal and Democrat-affiliated groups that you’d think would be proud that an openly gay successful businessman has decided to run for office.

    One false attack drew the attention of the San Diego Ethics Commission. An anonymous left-wing group funded a SuperPac and sent mailers of DeMaio Photoshopped next to a drag queen to neighborhoods with a majority of elderly and African-American voters, knowing that such a photo would depress support for DeMaio.

    That was so egregious and false that the group was fined by the city’s Ethics Commission, but even after that, and with his 100 percent voting record with the LGBT community, the Left still didn’t speak up to defend him. They told DeMaio, “It’s complicated.”

    "I've found more tolerance, acceptance and inclusion from social conservative groups who have to reconcile that I'm a Republican who happens to be gay...versus the intolerance the LGBT leaders see me as a gay man who happens to be a Republican," DeMaio said.

    As the race heats up and DeMaio gains in the polls ahead of the Republican primary on June 3rd, the LGBT groups have gone from silence about his candidacy to actively working against him.
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 29, 2014 3:50 AM GMT
    Interesting that not a word about this from the RJ far-left zealots who are quick to bash others when there is any slight to the LGBT community. Maybe to the RJ leftists the LGBT issues are only convenient to bash others but when intolerance exists among the left they are silent. Suggests the far left zealots on RJ only use LGBT issues when it suits their political agenda. Otherwise they don't really give a damn. Bunch of phony hypocrites.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 29, 2014 5:06 AM GMT
    Or maybe we're just sick of the baiting and contempt from people like you.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    Apr 29, 2014 3:21 PM GMT
    This just proves to everyone the hypocrisy and intolerance that exists in the democratic party and in large segments of the gay community. The democrats have done the same exact thing to gays as they have done to blacks and Hispanics, plead to them for votes and vow support for progressive causes and when these democrats get elected, the gay community gets the same negative treatment that the black and Hispanic communities receive when it is time to implement the promises, we all get thrown under an approaching bus. Go figure.
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 30, 2014 2:50 AM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidThis just proves to everyone the hypocrisy and intolerance that exists in the democratic party and in large segments of the gay community. The democrats have done the same exact thing to gays as they have done to blacks and Hispanics, plead to them for votes and vow support for progressive causes and when these democrats get elected, the gay community gets the same negative treatment that the black and Hispanic communities receive when it is time to implement the promises, we all get thrown under an approaching bus. Go figure.

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

    Apr 30, 2014 4:16 AM GMT
    topathlete said
    roadbikeRob saidThis just proves to everyone the hypocrisy and intolerance that exists in the democratic party and in large segments of the gay community. The democrats have done the same exact thing to gays as they have done to blacks and Hispanics, plead to them for votes and vow support for progressive causes and when these democrats get elected, the gay community gets the same negative treatment that the black and Hispanic communities receive when it is time to implement the promises, we all get thrown under an approaching bus. Go figure.

    Completely agree

    You would.icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 30, 2014 7:31 PM GMT
    Further example of how DeMaio is trying to promote diversity even if it could jeopardize his election chances. Yet the so-called "progressive" left continues to attack him and even the LGBT organizations are working against him. Further indication that the "progressives" including many on RJ are really about left-wing politics and only use LGBT issues when they conveniently suit their left-wing agenda.

    Openly Gay Republican Carl DeMaio Features Partner Johnathan Hale In Campaign Ad
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/13/carl-demaio-gay-campaign-ad_n_4780810.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 30, 2014 8:12 PM GMT
    The Democratic Party does not need gay Quislings, nor Marshal Petains. Collaborating with the enemy only strengthens the enemy, not us.
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 30, 2014 8:23 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidThe Democratic Party does not need gay Quislings, nor Marshal Petains. Collaborating with the enemy only strengthens the enemy, not us.

    Clear proof that your left-wing partisanship is more important to you than gay rights. Calling someone an enemy because they are Republican when they are doing their part to change attitudes within the Republican Party shows exactly what you are. Next time you get on your high horse advocating gay this, gay that here's an advance STFU. You are clearly a phony and you have just amply demonstrated it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 30, 2014 8:32 PM GMT
    topathlete saidCalling someone an enemy because they are Republican when they are doing their part to change attitudes within the Republican Party shows exactly what you are.

    Do take a reading comprehension course. I did not call DeMaio the enemy. The gay enemy is the Republican Party. DeMaio is a collaborator with them.

    Please Google these terms, and expand your education. Eventually I might be able to have an informed discussion with you. icon_smile.gif
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Apr 30, 2014 8:42 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidThis just proves to everyone the hypocrisy and intolerance that exists in the democratic party and in large segments of the gay community. The democrats have done the same exact thing to gays as they have done to blacks and Hispanics, plead to them for votes and vow support for progressive causes and when these democrats get elected, the gay community gets the same negative treatment that the black and Hispanic communities receive when it is time to implement the promises, we all get thrown under an approaching bus. Go figure.

    Except Obama doesn't really throw anyone under the bus. It's like he's walking a tightrope with his hands tied behind his back, but whenever he sees an opportunity to flex his muscles it's obvious which side he's on.

    He was the watershed moment in the gay marriage debate, when he said he had evolved.

    He reformed healthcare.

    He's an advocate for women's rights, immigration reform, gun control, clean energy.

    And I have to say, I really think his speech after the George Zimmerman verdict was a wake up call for racial inequality and profiling, and this country is progressing through a difficult debate, but going in the right direction, towards solidarity. That is the hope he promised.

    All of the above are the things he goes out on a limb for, despite obstruction from the republican party.
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 30, 2014 8:48 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    topathlete saidCalling someone an enemy because they are Republican when they are doing their part to change attitudes within the Republican Party shows exactly what you are.

    Do take a reading comprehension course. I did not call DeMaio the enemy. The gay enemy is the Republican Party. DeMaio is a collaborator with them.

    Please Google these terms, and expand your education. Eventually I might be able to have an informed discussion with you. icon_smile.gif

    Doesn't change the conclusion. Collaborating with the enemy or supporting the enemy is clear inference that you don't approve of his actions. His actions are aimed at changing attitudes within the Republican Party. In the future there will be both Republican and Democratic administrations and majorities in Congress. Having both major parties more tolerant of gay rights is definitely beneficial to gay folks. You with your partisanship would prefer to use gay issues to bash others who don't agree with your "progressive" politics. No different had you directly called him an enemy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 30, 2014 8:54 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    No different had you directly called him an enemy.

    But I didn't call him the enemy. You put those words in my mouth. That was your invention.

    But OK, if we are free to make those equivalencies and rhetorical links, then expect them to be applied to you. And please don't whine & protest when they are. (Though I expect you to do just that)
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 30, 2014 9:00 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    topathlete said
    No different had you directly called him an enemy.

    But I didn't call him the enemy. You put those words in my mouth. That was your invention.

    But OK, if we are free to make those equivalencies and rhetorical links, then expect them to be applied to you. And please don't whine & protest when they are. (Though I expect you to do just that)

    HaHa - time to give you a little reading comprehension lesson and I will provide a link so you can wise up.

    I said: No different had you directly called him an enemy.

    You said: But I didn't call him the enemy. You put those words in my mouth. That was your invention.

    You clearly don't understand subjunctive mood and the use of the word "had". So here's a little lesson from dummies.com for .... you guessed it...Dummies:
    http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/using-the-subjunctive-mood-in-english.html
    Look for the heading: Creating subjunctives with “had”

    But all the word smithing and grammar aside your priority of left-wing politics over gay issues is still very clear.

    Time to lift some weights - so bye for now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 30, 2014 9:12 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    Art_Deco said
    topathlete said
    No different had you directly called him an enemy.

    But I didn't call him the enemy. You put those words in my mouth. That was your invention.

    But OK, if we are free to make those equivalencies and rhetorical links, then expect them to be applied to you. And please don't whine & protest when they are. (Though I expect you to do just that)

    HaHa - time to give you a little reading comprehension lesson and I will provide a link so you can wise up.

    I said: No different had you directly called him an enemy.

    You said: But I didn't call him the enemy. You put those words in my mouth. That was your invention.

    You clearly don't understand subjunctive mood and the use of the word "had". So here's a little lesson from dummies.com for .... you guessed it...Dummies:
    http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/using-the-subjunctive-mood-in-english.html
    Look for the heading: Creating subjunctives with “had”

    Time to lift some weights - so bye for now.

    That has to rank as one of the lamest retorts I've ever read on this site. The "subjective had"??? Really. icon_rolleyes.gif

    You said I called him an enemy, which I didn't. Well, anyway, I realize now you're a moron, with no redeeming features. Just some kind of Right Wing disruptor here. We've got about a dozen in permanent residence, plus some who come & go. Sorry to be mean, but I do hope you fail in your agenda.
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    Apr 30, 2014 11:27 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    topathlete said
    Art_Deco said
    topathlete said
    No different had you directly called him an enemy.

    But I didn't call him the enemy. You put those words in my mouth. That was your invention.

    But OK, if we are free to make those equivalencies and rhetorical links, then expect them to be applied to you. And please don't whine & protest when they are. (Though I expect you to do just that)

    HaHa - time to give you a little reading comprehension lesson and I will provide a link so you can wise up.

    I said: No different had you directly called him an enemy.

    You said: But I didn't call him the enemy. You put those words in my mouth. That was your invention.

    You clearly don't understand subjunctive mood and the use of the word "had". So here's a little lesson from dummies.com for .... you guessed it...Dummies:
    http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/using-the-subjunctive-mood-in-english.html
    Look for the heading: Creating subjunctives with “had”

    Time to lift some weights - so bye for now.

    That has to rank as one of the lamest retorts I've ever read on this site. The "subjective had"??? Really. icon_rolleyes.gif

    You said I called him an enemy, which I didn't. Well, anyway, I realize now you're a moron, with no redeeming features. Just some kind of Right Wing disruptor here. We've got about a dozen in permanent residence, plus some who come & go. Sorry to be mean, but I do hope you fail in your agenda.

    I clarified my first statement about how you referred to him by explaining that the inference was the same. I used a subjunctive construct which you apparently didn't understand - even though I provided a link for Dummies. You are certainly in no position to call anyone a moron but understandable when getting your ass handed to you.

    Fact is aside from your squirming it's clear to any logical person reading this thread that you put "progressive" liberal politics above gay rights and only use gay rights when convenient.

    That is one of many differences between us. I am happy when either a Democrat or a Republican supports gay issues because I think it is best for the community as a whole. I might oppose a gay Democrat for other reasons but I would never bash his gayness or condone others who might do so.

    Another thing - I could and would support a Democrat such as Joe Manchin over a Republican such as Rick Santorum. Would bet a blowhard like you could never make a claim the other way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2014 12:08 AM GMT
    topathlete said
    Another thing - I could and would support a Democrat such as Joe Manchin over a Republican such as Rick Santorum. Would bet a blowhard like you could never make a claim the other way.

    There are no Democrats as far to the left as Santorum is to the right, so this is a silly challenge.
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    May 01, 2014 12:12 AM GMT
    ElectroShark said
    topathlete said
    Another thing - I could and would support a Democrat such as Joe Manchin over a Republican such as Rick Santorum. Would bet a blowhard like you could never make a claim the other way.

    There are no Democrats as far to the left as Santorum is to the right, so this is a silly challenge.

    Highly debatable. I could name a few Democrats but from your perspective they are not far left.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    May 01, 2014 1:12 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidThe Democratic Party does not need gay Quislings, nor Marshal Petains. Collaborating with the enemy only strengthens the enemy, not us.
    The only enemy here are the democrats and their blind sycophants in the gay community and that is the absolute truth. People in San Diego are very smart for preventing the democrats from gaining monopoly control over their city government. Evidently, San Diegans have been paying attention to what happened to most cities and older first ring suburbs that fell under permanent democratic monopolies and the severe decay and decline caused by the democrats and their failed urban policies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2014 5:06 PM GMT
    This may explain why "teh gayz" won't get behind the loathesome DeMaio.

    http://americablog.com/2014/04/anti-gay-gay-goper-surprised-anti-gays-like-gays.html
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    May 01, 2014 5:40 PM GMT
    ElectroShark saidThis may explain why "teh gayz" won't get behind the loathesome DeMaio.

    http://americablog.com/2014/04/anti-gay-gay-goper-surprised-anti-gays-like-gays.html

    The substance of that is he focuses on fiscal issues rather than social issues. Many who are conservative fiscally and moderate socially take the same stance. You would not understand that because you support the kind of government that this administration embraces. To others who believe it is damaging the country the perspective and therefore the priorities are quite different.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2014 6:31 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    ElectroShark saidThis may explain why "teh gayz" won't get behind the loathesome DeMaio.

    http://americablog.com/2014/04/anti-gay-gay-goper-surprised-anti-gays-like-gays.html

    The substance of that is he focuses on fiscal issues rather than social issues. Many who are conservative fiscally and moderate socially take the same stance. You would not understand that because you support the kind of government that this administration embraces. To others who believe it is damaging the country the perspective and therefore the priorities are quite different.

    You obviously didn't read the article. The substance is that he focuses on fiscal issues and actively disparages the need for LGBT protections. So why should any gay person vote for him?
    Also (as the article points out), you are indulging in the same kind of 'identity politics' that the right is always accusing the left of, in saying that the gay community 'ought' to back DeMaio----because he's gay.
    Um, no.
  • topathlete

    Posts: 882

    May 01, 2014 6:49 PM GMT
    ElectroShark said
    topathlete said
    ElectroShark saidThis may explain why "teh gayz" won't get behind the loathesome DeMaio.

    http://americablog.com/2014/04/anti-gay-gay-goper-surprised-anti-gays-like-gays.html

    The substance of that is he focuses on fiscal issues rather than social issues. Many who are conservative fiscally and moderate socially take the same stance. You would not understand that because you support the kind of government that this administration embraces. To others who believe it is damaging the country the perspective and therefore the priorities are quite different.

    You obviously didn't read the article. The substance is that he focuses on fiscal issues and actively disparages the need for LGBT protections. So why should any gay person vote for him?
    Also (as the article points out), you are indulging in the same kind of 'identity politics' that the right is always accusing the left of, in saying that the gay community 'ought' to back DeMaio----because he's gay.
    Um, no.

    I read the article and understood the difference between what he stated and did and what the left leaning author chose to falsely infer which you bought. I never said anyone should support him because he is gay. I pointed out beginning in the OP that some on the left were ridiculing him for being gay and that the LGBT groups were working against him despite specific stances he took supporting gay rights.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 01, 2014 7:41 PM GMT
    ElectroShark saidThis may explain why "teh gayz" won't get behind the loathesome DeMaio.

    http://americablog.com/2014/04/anti-gay-gay-goper-surprised-anti-gays-like-gays.html

    Thanks for finding and posting this - for us San Diego-deprived gayz who had never even heard of this guy.