Conversation with GOProud

[Tammy Hope]

From a source not often cited here (obviously) - the interviewee pretty much expresses my views, other than the fact that I don't identify myself as Republican but as a libertarian who's often forced to vote Republican as the lesser of two evils.

http://biggovernment.com/bparks/2010/02/26/conversation-with-goproud/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BigGovernment+%28Big+Government%29&utm_content=Twitter

[Dana Lane]

The Conservative party (GOP) fights to take the rights of most of the people in this forum (US of course). It is a bit perplexing to me that someone who suffers directly from the hand of a specific group would support that group. Kind of like a termite going to work for terminex. I am only stating my own opinion, of course. Maybe one day I can be enlightened to this subject.

[gennee]

Laura I read the article which I found informative. I am a registered independent whose views are diverse.

Gennee

[AmySmiles]

The Conservative party (GOP) fights to take the rights of most of the people in this forum (US of course). It is a bit perplexing to me that someone who suffers directly from the hand of a specific group would support that group. Kind of like a termite going to work for terminex. I am only stating my own opinion, of course. Maybe one day I can be enlightened to this subject.

You need to look at it from a different viewpoint I think.  Laura sounds like she falls into the same category as I do.  I vote 3rd party unless I think it's absolutely necessary to vote Republican or Democrat to avoid a particular outcome.  One of the big problems with the two party system is that it tends to make people think of others as little boxes that agree with everything that party says - which is very rarely the case.  I vote based on priorities, and I'd wager she does as well from the posts she's written.  So, even though I think the GOP's stance on GLBT rights is appalling I would still vote for them in certain (very situational) cases because I think the Democratic party's stances on economic policy are even worse.

[LordKAT]

I think it sucks when you have to vote only one party in the primaries tho. That makes no sense to me.

[lisagurl]

I think it sucks when you have to vote only one party in the primaries tho. That makes no sense to me.

The concept is you vote for the worst candidate so when they come to the general election they are easy to beat.

[Tammy Hope]

The Conservative party (GOP) fights to take the rights of most of the people in this forum (US of course). It is a bit perplexing to me that someone who suffers directly from the hand of a specific group would support that group. Kind of like a termite going to work for terminex. I am only stating my own opinion, of course. Maybe one day I can be enlightened to this subject.

I disagree with your wording here.

At their worst, conservatives fight the EXPANSION of recognition of rights. In general terms, they do not work as a party to TAKE any rights  - granted certain interest groups who normally vote conservatively like the Mormons campaigned directly to roll back gains concerning gay marriage.

The flaw in your logic, though, is this: IF one thinks that the conservative party is right on OTHER issues which one considers vitally important, then there is every bit as much logic in trying to move that party in our direction on the issues which pretain to us as there is in trying to move the other party in a more conservative direction in terms of, for instance, economic policies.

I have found, in my very limited experience, that when people are exposed to me now at first they might find it funny or off-putting but for most of them, constant exposure (as in for instance a checker who sees me through her line often during a given month) "normalizes" me and it becomes much more difficult to see me as a fool or a freak.

In like manner, as long as LGBT people remain the rock throwers outside the gates of the GOP, they remain the "freaks" (in political terms) - once "regular" Republicans interact with us on a regular basis, we have "put a face on" the once off-putting demographic and it becomes harder to dismiss our concerns.

It's a long slow process but it's better, in my view, than simply writing off one party as totally useless.

It's never good for a party to assume that a particular segment of it's base has "no other place to go" - we'd do well not to fall into that trap.

IMHO.

[SusanKG]

The concept is you vote for the worst candidate so when they come to the general election they are easy to beat.

That theory is a good one, except it doesn't work; the worst candidate very often wins the general election as well!

In like manner, as long as LGBT people remain the rock throwers outside the gates of the GOP, they remain the "freaks" (in political terms) - once "regular" Republicans interact with us on a regular basis, we have "put a face on" the once off-putting demographic and it becomes harder to dismiss our concerns.

It's a long slow process but it's better, in my view, than simply writing off one party as totally useless.

It's certainly slow; the recent GOPAC convention invited a republican gay group to participate in the process. Some rabid family first ultra wrong winger from, I believe the aledged left coast state California, lectured everybody from the podium about being inclusive enough to defy god's law, or some such rant. And no, I do not attribute his position to every one in the movement, but they tolerate and often facilitate that nonsense and bigotry. By doing so, they tacitly endorse it.

SusanKG

[Flan]

they both suck
(there, an opinion from a centrist )

[cynthialee]

I am sorry Laura but the shear amount of bigotry in the people that make up the bulk of the conservative movemnet is stagering.
I have seen the vile vitriol and hate that the right has for us. The conservative movemnet is slowly purging those who are differ with them on any point.
To see how the conservative movement is hateful is easy. Just start looking at right wing blogs and online newspapers and search transgender and start reading the coments.....They absolutly hate and despise us. We can never be accepted because some scripture in Leviticus is held up as the final authority of morality, for everyone even people like myself who are not Christian. I understand that the 'right' is the political ideology that most talks to your values. And honestly the right has a few good ideasa. But you have to understand that people like myself are hated for not being Christian. People like me WE are hated for daring to violate anchient scriptures prohibiting crossdressing that should have no bearing on our lives. To take it a point farther I am a Wiccan. That means witch. The worst case senerio of Christian opinion on witchcraft is hapining right now in Africa. They got their ideas from American evangelicals who came to christianise the black man.

Please reconsider your political affiliations.

[tekla]

It's easy to see without looking too far that we are in a situation where none of the old answers will serve as solutions to the current problems.  We are not going to 'tax and spend' our way out of this, and a couple of decades of the conservative solution of 'spend and spend' have left us in a real bad way and we're at the end of that road also.  And the big time liberal states are in exactly the same position that many of the old line conservative states are, which is pretty much total financial ruin.

once "regular" Republicans interact with us on a regular basis, we have "put a face on" the once off-putting demographic and it becomes harder to dismiss our concerns.

That makes sense to me.  After all, how long did it take for the white slaveholders to 'put a face' on their slaves and say, "wow, they are just people too, perhaps we should not hold them in human bondage and buy and sell them like cattle, and just free them?"  Couple of months?  A few years at most according to that logic.

And hey, I'd meet with Republicans in San Francisco if either of them could be found.

[Tammy Hope]

That theory is a good one, except it doesn't work; the worst candidate very often wins the general election as well!

It's certainly slow; the recent GOPAC convention invited a republican gay group to participate in the process. Some rabid family first ultra wrong winger from, I believe the aledged left coast state California, lectured everybody from the podium about being inclusive enough to defy god's law, or some such rant. And no, I do not attribute his position to every one in the movement, but they tolerate and often facilitate that nonsense and bigotry. By doing so, they tacitly endorse it.

SusanKG

Some of the bigger name  right wing figures hotly disavowed that fool too. Even if he was right (and obviously he isn't) he couldn't have been MORE ham-handed in his remarks and thereby he ultimately undermined his own position by his lack of class.

but yeah, it's a VERY slow process of course.
Post Merge: March 01, 2010, 10:15:38 PM

they both suck
(there, an opinion from a centrist )

tis the nature of men. do away with both of them and start two new ones from scratch and within 20 years both of them would suck just as badly.

There's no such thing as a really great political party, if you ever get as far as "marginally tolerable" you should take a picture because it won't come around again in your lifetime.

[Flan]

tis the nature of men. do away with both of them and start two new ones from scratch and within 20 years both of them would suck just as badly.

yeah, which reminds me of the quote about politicians and soiled diapers, as in they both need regular changing.

[Tammy Hope]

I am sorry Laura but the shear amount of bigotry in the people that make up the bulk of the conservative movemnet is stagering.
I have seen the vile vitriol and hate that the right has for us. The conservative movemnet is slowly purging those who are differ with them on any point.
To see how the conservative movement is hateful is easy. Just start looking at right wing blogs and online newspapers and search transgender and start reading the coments.....They absolutly hate and despise us. We can never be accepted because some scripture in Leviticus is held up as the final authority of morality, for everyone even people like myself who are not Christian. I understand that the 'right' is the political ideology that most talks to your values. And honestly the right has a few good ideasa. But you have to understand that people like myself are hated for not being Christian. People like me WE are hated for daring to violate anchient scriptures prohibiting crossdressing that should have no bearing on our lives. To take it a point farther I am a Wiccan. That means witch. The worst case senerio of Christian opinion on witchcraft is hapining right now in Africa. They got their ideas from American evangelicals who came to christianise the black man.

Please reconsider your political affiliations.

I don't believe ANY affiliation is flattered by an examination of it's fringe.

and yes, "witch hunters" and those who try to cite the Old Testament as relevant to transsexuals, and those who write blogs and the like - even higher profile folks like Peter LaBarara (or ever how you spell it) are FRINGE people.

If you think that GWB, or Dick Cheney or Mitch McConnell or any Republican or right-winger of any power takes Peter B seriously...well...you give him and his ilk far too much credit.

in the days of the internet, everyone has a megaphone, no matter how nutty.

doesn't mean they have any real influence or power. they have no more real standing that 9/11 "truthers" who think George Bush was behind that attack have on the left wing of political ideas. Just because Rosie O'Donnel or Charlie Sheen is famous doesn't mean they aren't fringe nuts.

Whatever party I deal with, I won't make my choice based on what the nutters on either side say or do.

[tekla]

Might I remind you (all of you, all of us) that due to the fact that we live in a representative democracy, that it's never the fault of the parties, it's always the fault of the people who elect them.

The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves...
Julius Caesar (I, ii)

[AmySmiles]

Ah Tekla, if only it were that simple.  People vote based on the choices given to them, and those choices rarely come about without money from interested parties prodding said choices in very particular directions on many issues.  The fault is partly with the people and partly with the corruption that has been part of governments for as long as there have been governments.

It's sad really, but I doubt either of those two factors will ever change.

[Dana Lane]

I will come back and comment more later but it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to realize the 'conservative' party does not want us to have the rights everyone else does. If someone can show me official respectable conservative sites that have content on why we should all have rights please post them here. I would love to see them.
Post Merge: March 02, 2010, 10:21:37 AM

At their worst, conservatives fight the EXPANSION of recognition of rights. In general terms, they do not work as a party to TAKE any rights  - granted certain interest groups who normally vote conservatively like the Mormons campaigned directly to roll back gains concerning gay marriage.

Okay, point taken about taking away rights as far as LGBT is concerned. We could argue other rights such as abortion that is constantly under attack from the Republican party. But, is it okay to defend fighting the expansion of someone's rights? Basic rights to be able to work and make a living? Be able to live in an apartment? Use the appropriate bathroom?

The flaw in your logic, though, is this: IF one thinks that the conservative party is right on OTHER issues which one considers vitally important, then there is every bit as much logic in trying to move that party in our direction on the issues which pretain to us as there is in trying to move the other party in a more conservative direction in terms of, for instance, economic policies.

I would like to have my civil rights today thank you. Can you imagine how long it will be before the right accepts the LGBT community to an extent they want to give us all the same rights they have?

I have found, in my very limited experience, that when people are exposed to me now at first they might find it funny or off-putting but for most of them, constant exposure (as in for instance a checker who sees me through her line often during a given month) "normalizes" me and it becomes much more difficult to see me as a fool or a freak.

In like manner, as long as LGBT people remain the rock throwers outside the gates of the GOP, they remain the "freaks" (in political terms) - once "regular" Republicans interact with us on a regular basis, we have "put a face on" the once off-putting demographic and it becomes harder to dismiss our concerns.

Yes, this I can understand but this can also be done while we are supporting people that fight for our rights instead of against our rights.

It's a long slow process but it's better, in my view, than simply writing off one party as totally useless.

In my eyes they are in fact getting useless. This poll is frightening to say the least. I look at this and the way the GOP has just about shut down the government with record breaking filibusters and I think they are totally useless. Sorry.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/2/2/832988/-The-2010-Comprehensive-Daily-Kos-Research-2000-Poll-of-Self-Identified-Republicans

* 63% of Republicans believe Barack Obama is a socialist.
* 39% of Republicans believe he should be impeached.
* 36% believe he was not born in the United States (22% are not sure)
* 31% believe he is "a racist who hates White people"
* 24% believe President Obama "wants the terrorists to win" (33% are not sure)
* 23% say they want their state to secede from the Union.

It's never good for a party to assume that a particular segment of it's base has "no other place to go" - we'd do well not to fall into that trap.

IMHO.
[/quote]

[tekla]

Rights, or no rights matter little if your not even making it past simple competence. Our system of governance is broken, and neither side has demonstrated any ability to fix it, far from it, I think both sides are devoted to exacerbating the problem.  Indeed, both sides attempt to create the appearance of national leadership, when, in fact, there is none, and there really hasn't been true political leadership in our lifetime (unless you were alive when FDR was president).

I don't even think that there are any real choices offered in the media.  There is no real debate about anything important, but rather the endless spinning of manufactured controversy designed on the Roman premise of bread and circuses to distract people from any real discussion of any real issues.

It's political pabulum for an infantilized nation.  It's become completely devoid of any intellectual basis, and has devolved into mere character assassination.  We used to be better than this.  But we used to have competent government also.

Worse it seems to be driven by an ever increasing sense of personal helplessness and worthlessness.  To avoid the obvious (that we need to get out and work for change and demand that the real problems be faced and addressed) it reduces that guilt and self-blame by projecting it onto someone else, rather than analyzing and choosing between some rather hard alternatives they dodge that by offering the childish pap of offering up an enemy to fight.

[Tammy Hope]

But, is it okay to defend fighting the expansion of someone's rights? Basic rights to be able to work and make a living? Be able to live in an apartment? Use the appropriate bathroom?

these are not positions I support. however, I know of no political party which uniformly supports what i support and opposes what i oppose.

I would like to have my civil rights today thank you. Can you imagine how long it will be before the right accepts the LGBT community to an extent they want to give us all the same rights they have?

And I would like the nation to still exist so that ANY one has ANY rights fifty years from now. It's a matter of delayed gratification.

Now, admittedly the Republicans took only about a decade to lose their focus and start transforming into "Democrat-lite" when it came to big-government, big spending behavior, and for that I am most displeased.

However, in the current political landscape, there is a small - call it maybe 15% - chance the Republicans will get off the stick and find a way to pull us away from the financial precipice that IS looming directly in front of us, and there is a minuscule - call it .05% - chance the Democrats will do so.

In my not-so-humble opinion, if the debt crisis is not averted, our civil rights are moot because there will be no government competent to protect them and our current government may well be replaced with one who oppresses all of us to a far greater degree than the matters which you described.

When we have people in positions of power who master the BASIC concepts of responsible government and the elementary principles of fiduciary judgment - and exercise that ability in the execution of their office, THEN I will take note of which of them is friendliest to the expansion of rights for people like me who deviate from social norms.

I respect your priorities, and do not and will not mock them - I ask that in like manner others respect my priorities.

Yes, this I can understand but this can also be done while we are supporting people that fight for our rights instead of against our rights.

Tis the nature of politics to demonize those who are "across the aisle" from you. The only way people like us are "normalized" to right wingers is when we are not only on the other side.

In my eyes they are in fact getting useless. This poll is frightening to say the least. I look at this and the way the GOP has just about shut down the government with record breaking filibusters and I think they are totally useless. Sorry.

the WHAT now?

Record breaking fillibusters?

How does that work exactly? Until early this year the Democrats had a fillibuster-proof majority and there hasn't been one single fillibuster since Scott Brown was sworn in.

The Republicans do not have the power to stop anything the Democrats really want to do, even now. Or at least the conservatives don't.

Take, for instance, rescinding DADT - If every Democrat in the senate votes for it, all you need is to get Collins or Snowe or Brown even (who's hardly a flaming right winger) or any of a few other middle-of-the-road Republicans - just ONE - to vote for it.

If it doesn't go through, it WON'T be because of a Republican filibuster.

I fear you are getting too much of your political info from DK.

Oh, and by the way...

* 63% of Republicans believe Barack Obama is a socialist.

This is the only item in that poll which got close to majority agreement - and there's very good reason for it.

He is.

the only reason it isn't common knowledge is because even Socialists know they cannot gain and keep power if they admit that they are Socialists.

Everything in his background, his admitted prominent influences, his associations, his stated opinions, his policy proposals indicates nothing else.

He is a disciple of Alinsky and the whole point in Alinsky's book was to bring about a socialistic form of government.

Every move Obama has made so far, and every move he has voiced support for, follows Alinsky's plan.

Democrats and left-wingers who deny this are willfully blinding themselves because they find the term pejorative.

Or at least, politically inconvenient.

Not unlike, in fact, the way that many prominent Liberals try to distance themselves from the term "liberal" in favor of "Progressive" - hoping the public doesn't realize that early 20th century Progressives were very enamored of....

Socialism.

Post Merge: March 02, 2010, 11:26:07 PM

Rights, or no rights matter little if your not even making it past simple competence. Our system of governance is broken, and neither side has demonstrated any ability to fix it, far from it, I think both sides are devoted to exacerbating the problem.  Indeed, both sides attempt to create the appearance of national leadership, when, in fact, there is none, and there really hasn't been true political leadership in our lifetime (unless you were alive when FDR was president).

I'm with you on pretty much everything in this post EXCEPT if you mean to imply praise for FDR.

YES, he provided assertive leadership - but in all the WRONG directions.


Well, there is this too - love him or hate him, Reagan was in fact a strong leader and moved the entire political conversation in his direction. One may feel that was a wrong direction, as I do about FDR, but one can't realistically accuse Reagan of failing to lead.

[SusanKG]

And I would like the nation to still exist so that ANY one has ANY rights fifty years from now. It's a matter of delayed gratification. 

The main assault on rights comes from the wrong-wingers. THe last time the Rupublicans supported rights was with Lincoln and the attack on slavery. I want my rights and freedoms NOW!

Record breaking fillibusters?

How does that work exactly? Until early this year the Democrats had a fillibuster-proof majority and there hasn't been one single fillibuster since Scott Brown was sworn in.

The Republicans do not have the power to stop anything the Democrats really want to do, even now. Or at least the conservatives don't.

Take, for instance, rescinding DADT - If every Democrat in the senate votes for it, all you need is to get Collins or Snowe or Brown even (who's hardly a flaming right winger) or any of a few other middle-of-the-road Republicans - just ONE - to vote for it.

If it doesn't go through, it WON'T be because of a Republican filibuster.

The main point is not who is filibustering against whom. The point is the minority is blocking almost all progress (whether or not in a direction you may or may not approve), by the majority by only one or more of the minority blocking a vote. That is undemocratic and antidemocratic. It is worse then ever now because the minority is dead set on making the first black president fail, and to hell with the country.

Oh, and by the way...This is the only item in that poll which got close to majority agreement - and there's very good reason for it.
He is.
the only reason it isn't common knowledge is because even Socialists know they cannot gain and keep power if they admit that they are Socialists.
Everything in his background, his admitted prominent influences, his associations, his stated opinions, his policy proposals indicates nothing else.
He is a disciple of Alinsky and the whole point in Alinsky's book was to bring about a socialistic form of government.
Every move Obama has made so far, and every move he has voiced support for, follows Alinsky's plan.
Democrats and left-wingers who deny this are willfully blinding themselves because they find the term pejorative.
Or at least, politically inconvenient.
Not unlike, in fact, the way that many prominent Liberals try to distance themselves from the term "liberal" in favor of "Progressive" - hoping the public doesn't realize that early 20th century Progressives were very enamored of....
Socialism. 

1. Nothing in the constitution of The United States of America prohibits socialism.
2. I do not consider the term perjorative.
3. Obama is not a socialist - he is fairly middle of the road. Much (and I am not accusing you of this) the name-calling he receives is because of race.
4. I am not a socialist, I just play one on the internet.

SusanKG