Skip to main content

View Diary: More gay bashing on the left: "Talk about voting against your own interest!" (95 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well name one thing the Republicans (7+ / 0-)

    have done for gay rights!  Your contention that "Straight Democrats" worked against gay rights. I'm straight I have never worked against gay rights. This goes for all my straight democratic friend and relatives.

    It's not a "pledge for America" it is a "pledge for American Corporations."

    by regis on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 11:17:14 AM PDT

    •  You are right I can't name one thing Republicans (5+ / 0-)

      did. But then that makes Dems in Washington equal to Repubs in Washington. As for my comments about straight Democrats, I meant the ones in government.

    •  Actually, I can think of something (9+ / 0-)

      the two most prominent gay rights rulings from the Supreme Court were written by a Republican, Justice Anthony Kennedy. Also, those are the two most important things to come from the federal government to gay rights.

      •  Interesting example. . . (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fizziks

        Keep in mind that, if Democrats hadn't taken back control of the Senate in 1986, Robert Bork would be sitting in Kennedy's chair.  Talk about party mattering for gay rights!

        In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

        by cardinal on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 11:38:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Bork wasn't rejected because of his position (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          slatsg, TheGeneral, craigkg

          on gay rights. Yeh, ultimately it helped to have Democrats in the Senate after the '86 elections. But it is only coincidental that Bork was rejected and we wound up with a pro-gay Kennedy. Let's not pretend that the Democrats were opposing Bork on his gay rights stances.

          •  And, let's remember that the Democrats (5+ / 0-)

            also approved Scalia and Thomas. So, they coincidentally sent off one anti-gay justice and approved two others.

          •  I didn't say that Dems (0+ / 0-)

            rejected Bork because of his stance on gay rights.  I simply said that party is highly consequential for the advancement or retrenchment of gay rights in America.

            In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

            by cardinal on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 11:44:36 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  generally speaking (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              cardinal, TiaRachel, Kitsap River

              I would rather have Democrats than Republicans, which is why I have never voted for a Republican in my life.

              But because you "only" get 70 percent of the gay vote is not an excuse to bash gay people. When straights vote at a rate above 70 percent for Democrats, then a straight person can criticize a gay person for being regressive with his vote. But until then shut up and show your gratitude to gay people for voting so overwhelmingly Democratic.

              •  I agree with that, (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                enhydra lutris

                except for this part:

                When straights vote at a rate above 70 percent for Democrats, then a straight person can criticize a gay person for being regressive with his vote.

                That will never happen because a large proportion of straight folks hate gays.  The fairer comparison would be whether at least 70% of allies voted Dem.  But we'll never know the answer.

                But I agree with your larger point.  There's a difference between trying to solve the puzzle of why certain segments of society vote against their interests -- which is hardly unique to gay Republicans -- vs. bashing a minority group because it didn't vote "pure" enough.  If anyone here is doing the latter, then they clearly deserve your criticism.  As for gay Republicans, I went to college in Orange County, CA, the hotbed of Log Cabinism, and I knew tons of them.  They simply prioritized other things like their upper-bracket tax cuts ahead of sexuality politics.  I didn't agree with them; but I never criticized them for it.

                In Rand McNally, they wear hats on their feet, and hamburgers eat people!

                by cardinal on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 12:02:37 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  How about the Log Cabin REPUBLICANS?! (9+ / 0-)

      The Log Cabin REPUBLICANS got DADT overturned. It's Obama who is appealing that ruling, and Obama who got the ruling stayed during appeal.  You may not have worked against gay rights, but the head of your party is.

      Besides, saying "you should vote Democratic, we don't hate you as much as Republicans do" encourages the soft bigotry of the left, and I refuse to do that any more.

      Minority rights should never be subject to majority vote.

      by lostboyjim on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 11:45:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So become a Republican (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skohayes

        By the way- Bill Clinton gave us DADT and DOMA.

        And the only way to overturn what is law is to have Congress write another law in place of that one, or have the Supreme Court decide.

        Also, the DOJ is supposed to work independently from the Executive Branch. I know for some this is a shock because Alberto Gonzales did such a bang up job working independently from Bush.

        The job of the DOJ is to DEFEND the laws that already exist in this country.

        I want NCLB repealed yesterday, too. But I realize that fixing that mistake will take time also.

        •  The job of the DOJ is to DEFEND the laws that (0+ / 0-)

          already exist in this country...

          What, like the ones against murder, torture, kidnapping, extrajudicial assassination, war crimes such as wars of aggression?  Yeah, they're really doing a bang up job of defending the laws that already exist in this country.

          Wow, Independents put down the centrist Blue Dogs, and somehow liberals are to blame?

          by Ezekial 23 20 on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 02:15:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  get over it (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dirkster42, orestes1963

          look, the question was, "What have republicans done for me"...I was answering the question.

          In regards to you, while the DOJ is independent, it will take orders from the executive.  You can look at Gonzales, I'm looking at Clinton chosing not to appeal then it was ruled that soldiers couldn't be kicked out because of HIV.  The Executive, can, and should, have a voice in what the DOJ does.

          And it isn't the job of the DOJ to "DEFEND" unconstitutional laws (which is what DADT was ruled to be).

          Minority rights should never be subject to majority vote.

          by lostboyjim on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 02:33:31 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Will you people nevr stop with (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RfrancisR

          the idiot talking points.  The DOJ is not independent of the executive.  It is part of the executive branch.  Politics should not dictate who gets prosecuted, but the executive decides where resources will be employed.  For example, why has the DOJ not investigated Bush crimes?  Because the chief executive decided not to look backwards.  So either inform yourself on the functioning of the executive branch (if you write from an uninformed position) and stop propogating this lie in defense of the president.  

      •  Dang, I skipped over this before posting the same (0+ / 0-)

        reply below :P

        Wow, Independents put down the centrist Blue Dogs, and somehow liberals are to blame?

        by Ezekial 23 20 on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 02:14:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Ted Olson isn't exactly Mr. Democrat (7+ / 0-)

      yet it is in part his work that has helped in the court cases against Prop 8 in California.  The LCR has been instrumental in litigating against DADT.

      It's about time I changed my signature.

      by Khun David on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 11:52:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Utterly fallacious. Behavior of Republicans is (5+ / 0-)

      completely irrelevant to questions of behavior of Democrats. Injecting it is completely out of place.  Second, your anecdotal evidence, touching as it is, has nothing to do with the truth or falsity of statements about "Straight Democrats" unless those statements specifically say *"ALL"* Straight Democrats.

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt -

      by enhydra lutris on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 12:17:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Ok. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RfrancisR

      The challenge to DADT going through the courts right now is from the 'Log Cabin Republicans'.

      The administration keeps trying to block DADT from being repealed any time soon, while Republicans are trying to kill it in the courts.

      Wow, Independents put down the centrist Blue Dogs, and somehow liberals are to blame?

      by Ezekial 23 20 on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 02:13:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  While GAY republicans (0+ / 0-)

        are trying to kill it in the courts, Republicans as a whole don't care about the Log Cabin Republicans or GOProud. As a matter of fact, they work actively to remove gay rights from current law (witness Rick Scott in Florida wanting to bring back the anti-gay adoption bill that Crist vetoed).

        How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

        by skohayes on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 03:10:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And straight Dems (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RfrancisR

          are trying to block it being killed.

          So there are some stupid straight people, and some stupid gay people.  But gays still vote more overwhelmingly Dem than straight folks do, so the whole singling them out as group and complaining that they don't vote dem enough is pretty damn stupid.

          Wow, Independents put down the centrist Blue Dogs, and somehow liberals are to blame?

          by Ezekial 23 20 on Sat Nov 06, 2010 at 03:54:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'm not singling gays out (0+ / 0-)

            I don't blame them for this debacle any more than I blame the rest of the Dems that didn't turn out.
            I actually wrote the first part wrong in my post, I should have said gay republicans are bringing these issues infront of the courts (not trying to kill it, as I wrote above), while the party they support is actively trying to remove all the advances the GLBT community has had in the last decade.
            It just seems crazy to vote for a Republican if you're gay. Not stupid, just somewhat insane if you're an informed voter.

            How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

            by skohayes on Sun Nov 07, 2010 at 02:30:09 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site