Virginia governor's anti-bias order removes language regarding sexual orientation

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

    Feb 19, 2010 3:19 AM GMT
    What is up with this guy? Did some guy he liked turn him down?


    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/09/AR2010020903739.html

    "On February 8, the Virginia Senate passed a bill that would have protected state workers from discrimination based on sexual orientation. One day later, a subcommittee in the Republican-dominated House of Delegates killed that same bill."

    http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/02/10/Va_House_of_Delegates_Kills_Worker_Protections/
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 19, 2010 11:37 AM GMT
    The answer is what both of those stories have in common

    ..... it's a letter of the alphabet that comes after "q" and is before "s" icon_neutral.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 19, 2010 3:42 PM GMT
    I dont care. I am not voting to give the Dems back their jobs until they decide to do something substantive for the gays in this state.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Feb 19, 2010 9:08 PM GMT
    Problem is Cas ... we got ourselves a two party system
    I'm pretty pissed at the spineless Dems myself

    But who you gonna vote for?
    The republicans?
    Ain't we been bruised and battered enough from them?
    You want some more?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 19, 2010 9:24 PM GMT
    GQjock saidProblem is Cas ... we got ourselves a two party system
    I'm pretty pissed at the spineless Dems myself

    But who you gonna vote for?
    The republicans?
    Ain't we been bruised and battered enough from them?
    You want some more?

    In Virginia, they cant do much more to gays. But to keep putting the Dems in when they wont do anything substantive for us is getting us nowhere. So I say, let the Dems stay without jobs until they realize they have to do better when they get their jobs back.

    This idea of holding us hostage cuz we dont have anyone else to vote for is getting us nowhere. Let's just turn that around...you dont get a job until you agree to act for us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 19, 2010 10:01 PM GMT
    i vote for the green party. some people say i'm throwing my vote away, but i'm voting for my conscience, and the dems aren't any better than the reps. i personally think the whole lot should be sent home.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14303

    Feb 20, 2010 6:10 PM GMT
    It is time to get rid of both the democrats and the republicans because neither party is concerned with the pressing issues facing our country today. They are only interested in public photo ops and getting reelected every four years.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 20, 2010 6:17 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidIt is time to get rid of both the democrats and the republicans because neither party is concerned with the pressing issues facing our country today. They are only interested in public photo ops and getting reelected every four years.

    A new Republican governor replaces the anti-gay discrimination order that was enacted by his Democratic predecessor. And from this you conclude that both Republicans & Democrats should be replaced. What's wrong with THAT argument???

    I see a pattern developing with Republicans: be as obstructionist, unreasonable and contrary to the pubic interest as you can. Wait for the public to make a knee-jerk reaction of disgust and blame ALL politicians.

    Except, the incumbents always take the worst beating at times like these, since they're seen as being nominally "in-charge" despite paralyzing Republican tactics in Congress. And Republicans have a fanatical voter base that will return them to office even if they wore horns and tails (which isn't far from the truth).

    So go ahead and wreck the political process, wreck the whole country if you have to, it serves the ends of the Republican Party. And produces responses like the one quoted above.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 20, 2010 6:32 PM GMT
    Voting for a third party candidate or not voting at all = voting for a Republican, because the Republicans are going to be voting a straight Republican ticket, and will NOT be staying home in Nov.
    If you're a quitter, or you don't care about living in a country run by and for the rich corporate powerful - fine, go ahead and vote third party, or stay home on election day, and help elect a Republican-controlled Congress.
    Just remember that it will make you an enabler of the corrupt, corporate shill, Republican party - NOT a principled, above the fray, independent.

    One year into the slow and painful process of fighting the deeply entrenched powers of corporate America, and you're ready to bail?
    That's pathetic.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14303

    Feb 20, 2010 6:42 PM GMT
    Here goes Red Vespa again being a blind sycophant to the democratic party. I guess some things will never change on realjock. As for voting third party, that is precisely what America needs right now another competing political party that will help put the feet of both the democrats and the republicans to the flames and change the way business is done in this country. Except for some significant but token pro gay legislation, the democrats have not been anymore pro gay than the GOP. On several major gay issues, the democrats have been very disappointing in their handling of these issues and their caving into right wing pressure.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 20, 2010 6:42 PM GMT
    rickrick91 saidVoting for a third party candidate or not voting at all = voting for a Republican, because the Republicans are going to be voting a straight Republican ticket, and will NOT be staying home in Nov.
    If you're a quitter, or you don't care about living in a country run by and for the rich corporate powerful - fine, go ahead and vote third party, or stay home on election day, and help elect a Republican-controlled Congress.
    Just remember that it will make you an enabler of the corrupt corporate shill Republican party - NOT a principled, above the fray, independent.

    One year into the slow and painful process of fighting the deeply entrenched powers of corporate America, and you're ready to bail?
    That's pathetic.

    I dont see it as bailing. I see it as not allowing the Dems to hold our vote hostage. The Dems are gonna want to be elected. They need the gay vote. If we vote automatically, no matter how the Dems perform on gay issues after they get elected, then the Dems will not, as they have shown in Virginia, really act in a meaningful way on gay issues. For example, if the Dems had made sexual orientation part of the law and not just an executive order, the current governor would not have been able to rescind that protection. Allowing the Dems to behave at only the minimum level of gay support leaves us in jeopardy at every election.

    I would rather allow the Repuglicans to be in power now, so that the Dems will get the message that they must perform in a meaningful way when they return to power. I have had 40 years of their pussy-footing around. And I am tired of it. Perform or go sit it out.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 20, 2010 6:49 PM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidHere goes Red Vespa again being a blind sycophant to the democratic party.

    Point of Order: I believe this statement violates the JP Condordat (http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/838204) governing inter-member behavior on RJ. To wit: No attacking a poster, but only a posting.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 20, 2010 6:55 PM GMT
    It's sad that some gays would allow the Republicans to return to power because the Democrats haven't moved swiftly enough on gay rights issues.
    That's a very self-centered point of view.
    In this time of recovery from the Bush recession, and high unemployment, gay rights is really the only issue you care about and that decides your vote?

    In 2000, some very liberal Democrats wanted to teach the Democratic party a lesson for siding with the Republicans on welfare reform and other issues, and they voted for Nader.
    Thanks to the fact that their votes were MIA - they helped elect Bush, and 8 disasterous years followed.
    Voting third party or staying home has consequences.
    How would you like to see a new Republican-controlled Congress spending your tax dollars investigating Obama's birth certificate, etc, in an effort to try to impeach Obama, like they did Clinton?
    If you doubt they'd do it, you haven't been paying attention.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2010 1:27 AM GMT
    Caslon13000 said
    rickrick91 saidVoting for a third party candidate or not voting at all = voting for a Republican, because the Republicans are going to be voting a straight Republican ticket, and will NOT be staying home in Nov.
    If you're a quitter, or you don't care about living in a country run by and for the rich corporate powerful - fine, go ahead and vote third party, or stay home on election day, and help elect a Republican-controlled Congress.
    Just remember that it will make you an enabler of the corrupt corporate shill Republican party - NOT a principled, above the fray, independent.

    One year into the slow and painful process of fighting the deeply entrenched powers of corporate America, and you're ready to bail?
    That's pathetic.

    I dont see it as bailing. I see it as not allowing the Dems to hold our vote hostage. The Dems are gonna want to be elected. They need the gay vote. If we vote automatically, no matter how the Dems perform on gay issues after they get elected, then the Dems will not, as they have shown in Virginia, really act in a meaningful way on gay issues. For example, if the Dems had made sexual orientation part of the law and not just an executive order, the current governor would not have been able to rescind that protection. Allowing the Dems to behave at only the minimum level of gay support leaves us in jeopardy at every election.

    I would rather allow the Repuglicans to be in power now, so that the Dems will get the message that they must perform in a meaningful way when they return to power. I have had 40 years of their pussy-footing around. And I am tired of it. Perform or go sit it out.



    Ugh. Officially recanting my posting on the cancer forum.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2010 1:35 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    rickrick91 saidIt's sad that some gays would allow the Republicans to return to power because the Democrats haven't moved swiftly enough on gay rights issues.
    That's a very self-centered point of view.

    Some gays? How about most gays. The gay rights issue is the #1 reason most gays support Democrats.


    Concerns for social issues go far beyond gay rights. This is a gross and false misrepresentation. Fail.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2010 1:46 AM GMT
    roadbikeRob saidHere goes Red Vespa again being a blind sycophant to the democratic party. I guess some things will never change on realjock. As for voting third party, that is precisely what America needs right now another competing political party that will help put the feet of both the democrats and the republicans to the flames and change the way business is done in this country. Except for some significant but token pro gay legislation, the democrats have not been anymore pro gay than the GOP. On several major gay issues, the democrats have been very disappointing in their handling of these issues and their caving into right wing pressure.

    Read the above by rickrick91. It is YOU who are being blind, and putting the Republicans back in charge with your attitude. Voting 3rd party achieves nothing but splitting the vote, in favor of the Republicans.

    Or isn't that really what you want, despite your denials? Well, we've seen those Republicans tactics before. too. If you argue for things that will put Republicans back in power, then you ARE a Republican supporter. Actions speak louder than deceptive words.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 21, 2010 2:01 AM GMT
    Caslon13000 said
    roadbikeRob saidHere goes Red Vespa again being a blind sycophant to the democratic party.

    Point of Order: I believe this statement violates the JP Condordat (http://www.realjock.com/gayforums/838204) governing inter-member behavior on RJ. To wit: No attacking a poster, but only a posting.

    Oh, I don't mind. I mean, the thread's about a Republican governor removing discrimination protections for gays that Dems had enacted. And roadbikeRob's response is to tell us that the answer is to vote against Dems & Repubs alike, knowing full well such illogical rhetoric will actually serve to hurt Dems and help Repubs, in effect rewarding Republicans for attacking gays yet again.

    Now if his political agenda isn't pretty clear to everyone here from that obviously transparent tactic, then I guess that makes me a "sycophant" for seeing the deceit in his words. Seems pretty clear to me what we should be doing: Republicans attack gays, gays should oppose Republicans. But roadbikeRob's original idea is: Republicans attack gays, gays should vote Democrats out of office in response. Makes sense, huh?