"Marriage Equality Is a Conservative Cause"

[Berkut]

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.

[Ed Anger]

News travels to Poland slowly.

[Razgovory]

News travels to Poland slowly.

No, he's simply a dumb fuck.

[Martinus]

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.

[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]

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]

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.

[CountDeMoney]

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]

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.

[Gups]

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]

Six/half dozen