News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

"Marriage Equality Is a Conservative Cause"

Started by Berkut, February 21, 2013, 02:34:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Berkut

Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2013, 07:16:11 AM
Quote from: Tyr on February 21, 2013, 06:59:26 PM
I read an article the other day from the Washington Post about how Bush was actually one of the best humanitarian presidents the US ever had due to an anti-aids bill and various whatnot.

Yeah, it's actually funny how these things go. For all his rhetoric, when it comes to various "gay interest" policies, Bush's only solid legacy was the increased anti-HIV funding, whereas Clinton's was DOMA and DADT.  ;)

Ugggh. This again.

DADT when enacted was a major coup for gay rights. It moved the military from an open ban on gays, to tolerating them as long as they kept it quiet. Holding it against Clinton as some kind of evidence of being anti-gay is simply ignorant, or would be if this had not been explained already.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Ed Anger

Stay Alive...Let the Man Drive

Razgovory

I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Martinus

Quote from: Berkut on February 22, 2013, 09:30:31 AM
Quote from: Martinus on February 22, 2013, 07:16:11 AM
Quote from: Tyr on February 21, 2013, 06:59:26 PM
I read an article the other day from the Washington Post about how Bush was actually one of the best humanitarian presidents the US ever had due to an anti-aids bill and various whatnot.

Yeah, it's actually funny how these things go. For all his rhetoric, when it comes to various "gay interest" policies, Bush's only solid legacy was the increased anti-HIV funding, whereas Clinton's was DOMA and DADT.  ;)

Ugggh. This again.

DADT when enacted was a major coup for gay rights. It moved the military from an open ban on gays, to tolerating them as long as they kept it quiet. Holding it against Clinton as some kind of evidence of being anti-gay is simply ignorant, or would be if this had not been explained already.

What about DOMA?

And by the way, I was illustrating an irony/paradox that a President's apparent stance may actually end up being at odds with what is left after him, not calling Clinton a homophobe.

Sheilbh

I think you can overegg Huntsman. He's making solid points, especially on developing policies to communicate but he's no reformist conservative hero.

His Presidential campaign mainly, sadly, consisted of bafflingly insulting the party base (which is different than arguing with it) and a lack of spine - remember he agreed that he'd veto a deal with a Democratic Congress that delivered $10 of spending cuts for every $1 of new revenue.

Also there's no reason the GOP should move on social issues in general. They're right to have the abortion policy they do, but they need to look at the way they communicate it. I think on gay rights they should move to a total federalist position rather than anything more severe.
Let's bomb Russia!

CountDeMoney

He's also one of the few voices--and the only candidate on the right, IIRC--that endorsed breaking up the big banks after 2008.  Gotta back that one.

CountDeMoney

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 24, 2013, 11:28:59 AM
Also there's no reason the GOP should move on social issues in general. They're right to have the abortion policy they do, but they need to look at the way they communicate it. I think on gay rights they should move to a total federalist position rather than anything more severe.

Well, that's just not gonna happen.  The GOP has staked "family values" as their claim for over 30 years.  The War on Fags and Whore Pills will always be their gig.

Sheilbh

Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 24, 2013, 11:42:08 AM
He's also one of the few voices--and the only candidate on the right, IIRC--that endorsed breaking up the big banks after 2008.  Gotta back that one.
Yeah. From a right wing perspective too. He also had a relatively coherent tax policy if a rather ambitious one.

He should have run as a reformist conservative. He had the most pro-life record of all the candidates and had cut lots of regulations in Utah, he was widely praised by business groups for being such a liberaliser. The saddest and weirdest thing about his campaign was that he could as credibly claim to be a conservative as anyone else on the stage. He just didn't try.
Let's bomb Russia!

CountDeMoney

Quote from: Sheilbh on February 24, 2013, 11:47:20 AM
The saddest and weirdest thing about his campaign was that he could as credibly claim to be a conservative as anyone else on the stage. He just didn't try.

Sure he did, and the media routinely touted his credentials as the most conservative on record--hell, he was the only conservative the Lame Stream Media actually liked, from Time to MSNBC;  unfortunately, the GOP primary system only saw his traitorous ambassadorial appointment in working with That Black Kenyan Muslim Secular Commie Nazi Guy, and they were more than satisfied with perpetuating only the most batshit candidates far too long in the process.  And you'll only see more of the same in 2016.

One would think that, after acknowledging a primary system that's out of control, conservatives would want to gain greater control over the Teabagger yahoos pushing the primary process.  So what do they do? Re-elect that fruity assfuck Reince Priebus as RNC chairman again.  Unopposed.

I so look forward to more Bachmann, Santorum, Paul and Cruz happy fun time in the next GOP primary season, as everybody tries to out-goofball everyone else.

Eddie Teach

Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 24, 2013, 11:43:21 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on February 24, 2013, 11:28:59 AM
Also there's no reason the GOP should move on social issues in general. They're right to have the abortion policy they do, but they need to look at the way they communicate it. I think on gay rights they should move to a total federalist position rather than anything more severe.

Well, that's just not gonna happen.  The GOP has staked "family values" as their claim for over 30 years.  The War on Fags and Whore Pills will always be their gig.

It'll only be their gig as long as they can convince themselves it works.
To sleep, perchance to dream. But in that sleep of death, what dreams may come?

Gups

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on February 25, 2013, 01:17:32 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on February 24, 2013, 11:43:21 AM

Well, that's just not gonna happen.  The GOP has staked "family values" as their claim for over 30 years.  The War on Fags and Whore Pills will always be their gig.

It'll only be their gig as long as they can convince themselves it works might work next time, if only Americans would wake up to what's really happening.

FYP

Eddie Teach

To sleep, perchance to dream. But in that sleep of death, what dreams may come?