I thought things were getting better. *frustrated*

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

    Apr 16, 2015 3:07 PM GMT


    Yeesh.

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/15/log-cabin-republicans-banned-from-yet-another-conservative-conference/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 3:17 PM GMT
    meninlove said

    Yeesh.

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/15/log-cabin-republicans-banned-from-yet-another-conservative-conference/


    Disappointing news, yes, but we don't need the histrionics of the author piling on. And, let's not forget that the CA GOP recently formally recognized LCR of CA, which shoots down her sweeping denunciad of the GOP in a big way. Things like this will make LCR's eventual victory all the better - however much they're ignored or suppressed by the gay left and its mouthpieces.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 3:23 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    meninlove said

    Yeesh.

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/15/log-cabin-republicans-banned-from-yet-another-conservative-conference/


    Disappointing news, yes, but we don't need the histrionics of the author piling on. And, let's not forget that the CA GOP recently formally recognized LCR of CA, which shoots down her sweeping denunciad of the GOP in a big way. Things like this will make LCR's eventual victory all the better - however much they're ignored or suppressed by the gay left and its mouthpieces.



    Erm, you might have done what I did and ignored her rhetoric. Obviously I'm going to have to find another news report on this, if people are going to focus on the writer rather than the reported event.


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

    Apr 16, 2015 3:26 PM GMT
    meninlove said
    MGINSD said
    meninlove said

    Yeesh.

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/04/15/log-cabin-republicans-banned-from-yet-another-conservative-conference/


    Disappointing news, yes, but we don't need the histrionics of the author piling on. And, let's not forget that the CA GOP recently formally recognized LCR of CA, which shoots down her sweeping denunciad of the GOP in a big way. Things like this will make LCR's eventual victory all the better - however much they're ignored or suppressed by the gay left and its mouthpieces.



    Erm, you might have done what I did and ignored her rhetoric. Obviously I'm going to have to find another news report on this, if people are going to focus on the writer rather than the reported event.


    The two go hand in hand; she extrapolated this event waaaay beyond its context and ignored other facts at odds with it. But by all means, let's see if anyone else handled it more professionally and with less all-consuming bile.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 3:31 PM GMT


    Here:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/gay-gop-group-denied-official-spot-at-conservative-conference-in-colorado-1429142164
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 3:36 PM GMT
    meninlove said

    Here:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/gay-gop-group-denied-official-spot-at-conservative-conference-in-colorado-1429142164


    MUCH better article; thanks for posting it. Tells the story free from any demonizing and tells both sides w/o straying into any personal agenda of the author. I like how HRC butted in to snipe at Scott Walker. Maybe that's what they mean when they talk of being a "non-partisan" gay rights organization, since their distribution of contributions sure doesn't show that. Will the Victory Fund be far behind?
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Apr 16, 2015 3:42 PM GMT
    Well, they say there are 3 ways to go through life.

    The slowest people focus on PEOPLE.

    Most people focus on EVENTS.

    Intelligent people focus on the UNDERLYING PRECEDENT.

    Here, the author is a hyperbolic loon, but let's not focus on that. In terms of the event, yes it sucks for the LCRs. The real news here is the underlying precedent, which is that the GOP is adverse to LGBT issues and those continuing in to argue otherwise are blinded.

    At a certain point, can't you realize the GOP is laughing at your LGBT rear-end, and have the self respect to not beg them for acceptance. For example, the Civil Rights Movement largely focused on advancing legal protections, but it didn't suck at the tit of any one party. It was fundamentally based on "black churches," and was concerned with black (and other racial minority) equality. As such, this is why the LGBT movement is doing it's own thing, and generally aligns with Democratic interests, but in no way, shape or form does the LGBT movement marry itself to the Democratic party. For example, the HRC often calls out Dems for their failings and shortcomings.

    So, really, why in talking about LGBT rights and the new civil rights movement are the LCRs trying to marry LGBT interests to the GOP. It's a fools errand. It should be about LGBT issues, and insofar that politics are implicated, so be it. There isn't an equivalent Democratic LGBT group because the two should NEVER be married. You can only serve one master, to quote a well known book we all are familiar with.
  • Destinharbor

    Posts: 4433

    Apr 16, 2015 3:46 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    meninlove said

    Here:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/gay-gop-group-denied-official-spot-at-conservative-conference-in-colorado-1429142164


    MUCH better article; thanks for posting it. Tells the story free from any demonizing and tells both sides w/o straying into any personal agenda of the author. I like how HRC butted in to snipe at Scott Walker. Maybe that's what they mean when they talk of being a "non-partisan" gay rights organization, since their distribution of contributions sure doesn't show that. Will the Victory Fund be far behind?

    Utter bullshit. You are trying to play the victim card again. I'll listen when your beloved party stops passing laws every time it gets in power that demonizes us and strikes at us. Every single Republican announced candidate for President of the United States has intentionally taken an anti-gay position and you pretend it is only the fringe. Bullshit.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Apr 16, 2015 3:49 PM GMT
    Svnw688 saidWell, they say there are 3 ways to go through life.

    The slowest people focus on PEOPLE.

    Most people focus on EVENTS.

    Intelligent people focus on the UNDERLYING PRECEDENT.

    Here, the author is a hyperbolic loon, but let's not focus on that. In terms of the event, yes it sucks for the LCRs. The real news here is the underlying precedent, which is that the GOP is adverse to LGBT issues and those continuing in to argue otherwise are blinded.

    At a certain point, can't you realize the GOP is laughing at your LGBT rear-end, and have the self respect to not beg them for acceptance. For example, the Civil Rights Movement largely focused on advancing legal protections, but it didn't suck at the tit of any one party. It was fundamentally based on "black churches," and was concerned with black (and other racial minority) equality. As such, this is why the LGBT movement is doing it's own thing, and generally aligns with Democratic interests, but in no way, shape or form does the LGBT movement marry itself to the Democratic party. For example, the HRC often calls out Dems for their failings and shortcomings.

    So, really, why in talking about LGBT rights and the new civil rights movement are the LCRs trying to marry LGBT interests to the GOP. It's a fools errand. It should be about LGBT issues, and insofar that politics are implicated, so be it. There isn't an equivalent Democratic LGBT group because the two should NEVER be married. You can only serve one master, to quote a well known book we all are familiar with.

    I think MGINSD will willingly sit in the back of the bus as long as he can continue his crusade against immigrants.icon_evil.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 3:56 PM GMT
    Who's "begging for acceptance?" Nobody I know, and I've been active in LCR locally and nationally since the '90s. We've worked for it, steadily, w/o compromising our positions, often incurring the wrath of the GOP in doing so, as I can personally attest from my use of the "render unto Caesar" quote you mention against a GOP candidate, which many cited as contributing to his electoral loss. And, even if you want to speak in terms of precedents, which I do not believe is a correct way to approach this, "the circuits are split."

    As for HRC, it IS, and prides itself on being, "the equivalent Democratic LGBT group" you speak of, which is fine w/ us, since so many of their policies and personalities are just plain offensive to us. Let the bigots in the GOP laugh; I've seen my share of Democrats' lips curl after gay Demos have approached them and had their say. We'll keep on keepin' on until we bring the party around by OUR methods, not with the tiresome and alienating tactics of HRC and its allies on the gay Demo-left.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 3:57 PM GMT
    HottJoe said
    Svnw688 saidWell, they say there are 3 ways to go through life.

    The slowest people focus on PEOPLE.

    Most people focus on EVENTS.

    Intelligent people focus on the UNDERLYING PRECEDENT.

    Here, the author is a hyperbolic loon, but let's not focus on that. In terms of the event, yes it sucks for the LCRs. The real news here is the underlying precedent, which is that the GOP is adverse to LGBT issues and those continuing in to argue otherwise are blinded.

    At a certain point, can't you realize the GOP is laughing at your LGBT rear-end, and have the self respect to not beg them for acceptance. For example, the Civil Rights Movement largely focused on advancing legal protections, but it didn't suck at the tit of any one party. It was fundamentally based on "black churches," and was concerned with black (and other racial minority) equality. As such, this is why the LGBT movement is doing it's own thing, and generally aligns with Democratic interests, but in no way, shape or form does the LGBT movement marry itself to the Democratic party. For example, the HRC often calls out Dems for their failings and shortcomings.

    So, really, why in talking about LGBT rights and the new civil rights movement are the LCRs trying to marry LGBT interests to the GOP. It's a fools errand. It should be about LGBT issues, and insofar that politics are implicated, so be it. There isn't an equivalent Democratic LGBT group because the two should NEVER be married. You can only serve one master, to quote a well known book we all are familiar with.

    I think MGINSD will willingly sit in the back of the bus as long as he can continue his crusade against immigrants.icon_evil.gif


    Make that "against illegal immigrants," and you'll have the beginnings of something accurate.
  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Apr 16, 2015 3:59 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    HottJoe said
    Svnw688 saidWell, they say there are 3 ways to go through life.

    The slowest people focus on PEOPLE.

    Most people focus on EVENTS.

    Intelligent people focus on the UNDERLYING PRECEDENT.

    Here, the author is a hyperbolic loon, but let's not focus on that. In terms of the event, yes it sucks for the LCRs. The real news here is the underlying precedent, which is that the GOP is adverse to LGBT issues and those continuing in to argue otherwise are blinded.

    At a certain point, can't you realize the GOP is laughing at your LGBT rear-end, and have the self respect to not beg them for acceptance. For example, the Civil Rights Movement largely focused on advancing legal protections, but it didn't suck at the tit of any one party. It was fundamentally based on "black churches," and was concerned with black (and other racial minority) equality. As such, this is why the LGBT movement is doing it's own thing, and generally aligns with Democratic interests, but in no way, shape or form does the LGBT movement marry itself to the Democratic party. For example, the HRC often calls out Dems for their failings and shortcomings.

    So, really, why in talking about LGBT rights and the new civil rights movement are the LCRs trying to marry LGBT interests to the GOP. It's a fools errand. It should be about LGBT issues, and insofar that politics are implicated, so be it. There isn't an equivalent Democratic LGBT group because the two should NEVER be married. You can only serve one master, to quote a well known book we all are familiar with.

    I think MGINSD will willingly sit in the back of the bus as long as he can continue his crusade against immigrants.icon_evil.gif


    Make that "against illegal immigrants," and you'll have the beginnings of something accurate.

    So, then I take it you don't disagree with the part about willingly conceding to being a second class citizen in order to support a bigoted party???
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 4:03 PM GMT
    No, HJ, as usual, you got that wrong, too. Read what's written for a change, not what you want to see.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Apr 16, 2015 4:09 PM GMT
    HRC is NOT affiliated with the Democratic party, de jure. Perhaps de facto, because the Dem party is LGBT friendlier, but there's no connection.

    Whereas the LCRs are, per se, a gay political element. Let's not confuse the issue here.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Apr 16, 2015 8:34 PM GMT
    sorry, the Republicans don't care about your gay ass, even the "new" ones like Rubio and Cruz - they'd rather have you go to de-gaying boot camp and marry some Mexican mail-order bride and suck cock on the side like the rest of the gay Republicans

    even though gender equality and LGBT rights are THE most conservative issues in existence (per their definition of "conservatism") - they just don't give a shit, it's part of their Biblical foundation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 16, 2015 11:02 PM GMT
    Svnw688 saidHRC is NOT affiliated with the Democratic party, de jure. Perhaps de facto, because the Dem party is LGBT friendlier, but there's no connection.

    Whereas the LCRs are, per se, a gay political element. Let's not confuse the issue here.

    Agree - and let's avoid false distinctions, too. Like Demos separating themselves from Southern Democrats and HRC posing as a "nonpartisan advocacy group." TR and his original trust busters would have had a field day w/ all the interlocking interests between HRC and the Dems.