Just when you thought there was no new depths for these Bush bigots to plumb…Homophobia becomes a fully outted and approved Bush/Cheney campaign tactic. Why hide it in the closet? I guess we should expect nothing less from these people. Sad and pathetic. Be horrified..
Vote November 2nd.
(Comments are now closed.)
(Comments are now closed.)
BB SIDEBAR NOTICE
Thanks to you, The BRAD BLOG has been trouble-making and muckraking for … 22 YEARS!!!
Please help The BRAD BLOG, BradCast and Green News Report remain independent and 100% reader and listener supported in our 23rd YEAR!!!
What a disgusting distortion by another hatemongering homophobic anti-American group. Notice how this group fails to identify itself in name or location. "Hit and run" dirty politics at its worst.
Wow. That brings repugnance to an all time low. Differing with someone over civil unions is one thing but that is disgusting.
This webpage does not come from the Bush Administration as neither did the swift boat ads.
Despicable is Kerry guaranteeing safety if he is elected and Edwards saying folks like Reeves will get up and walk if they are elected.
This is so out of control — a DKos diary on a Hawaii Republican state senate candidate that supports execution of gays. His name is Robb Finberg, a pastor for the Christian Fellowship Church. He is a freakshow.
Video is here (WMA):
http://mikegabbard.info/rob_finberg.htm
The fun begins about halfway through.
Pam’s House Blend
Paul,
Wouldn’t Cheney guaranteeing tragedy if he and Bush are not re-elected be equally "despicable"?
And it doesn’t matter if these people aren’t part of the official Bush campaign. Through his support of the FMA and his supporters spewing some of the most vile anti-gay rhetoric to come down the pike in recent years, Bush has turned the Republican Party into a haven for bigots like this. And it kills me to see the party I supported for almost my entire life trashed in a four-year period by W.
> Wouldn’t Cheney guaranteeing tragedy if he and Bush are not re-elected be equally "despicable"?
I do not think he said that. Kerry is going to cut and run in Iraq and he is not serious about Terrorism so we know what Cheney’s statement means.
> And it kills me to see the party I supported for almost my entire life trashed in a four-year period by W.
You mean, trashed by the left as in Bush is Hitler and the "worst president ever." You are not a real Republican.
Ah yes, the "real Republican" tag. So the "big tent" rhetoric is finally scrapped, eh Paul?
Well, if being a Republican now means being anti-gay, running up deficits, spending without accountability, waging war without a clue of how to win the peace, fear-mongering to cover up your own massive defects, using government to encroach on personal liberties… the list is endless, but the bottom line is that I am glad I am no longer a Republican, because the Republican Party has morphed into something new and disturbing that I don’t want to be a part of.
And I’ll leave it to Brad or John or Jaime to highlight the numerous times that Bush and/or Cheney have used the threat of terrorism to scaremonger votes. But how you can accuse Kerry of bad faith in light of Bush’s utter failure in Iraq is astounding. He can’t even secure the Green Zone, Paul. Wake up.
Paul, please show where Kerry ever said (or implied) he would "cut and run"
In the meantime, Rumsfeld said last week we could begin pulling out troops in January.
Get your facts straight.
Your comment about Teddy is not only wrong, it’s pathetic. Unless you mean by saying that Teddy is "not a real Republican" you mean that, unlike you and the vast majority of Bush Supporters, Teddy actually understands the issues.
And by the way, Teddy has already said he is (for now) leaving the Republican because he’s a *CONSERVATIVE*. That’s a distinction you also clearly do not understand.
> war without a clue of how to win the peace
What does that mean? That is a clever sounding catch phrase but it means nothing. In order to have peace, you must destroy your enemy and then negoiate.
> using government to encroach on personal liberties
Are you referring to the Patriot Act? 911 commission wants to expand the act.
What personal liberties are being encroached?
> fear-mongering to cover up your own massive defects
What fear mongering? We have an enemy who hates Jews, Israel, America, and they want to destroy us.
Republicans are not anti-gay, just anti-gay marriage. We do have the Log Cabin Republicans!
> spending without accountability
We are in a war.
You are not a Democrat either, if you are a conservative. You are more likely a Libertarian. Do you actually think that Kerry is a conservative?
The best part of Kerry being a president is gridlock and that would be good but he may try to push liberal social issues that would backfire on him and the Democrats. I have always said that Clinton was the best thing for the Republican Party, outside of Reagan of course.
Paul, I don’t know what scares me more: that you actually believe the stuff you write, or that there are more people out there who think like you.
> In order to have peace, you must destroy your enemy and then negoiate.
Funny, W’s daddy figured out a few years back that occupying Iraq would probably be a bad idea. Sure you can destroy them, but then who do you negotiate with?
>What personal liberties are being encroached?
Do you honestly feel safer today than before 9-11? Expanding the Patriot Act makes for a bigger gov’t. I thought you Republicans were against that? And BTW, just because I ask to see a search warrant to have the police search my trunk, does not make me a terrorist…. it just means I know my right to not have illegal searches done to me. I don’t feel it necessary to take away this right from me or anyone else.
>We are in a war.
So spending without accountability is ok for as long as we are in a war. And since this war has no definite targets (unless you count Osama, who YOUR PRESIDENT isn’t concerned about) we could be at this a long time, eh? To hell with that… spending outside your means is fiscally irresponsible. He IS the first MBA to hold the office right? Why doesn’t he act the part? Oh, maybe because the only businesses he’s ran have been DISASTERS.
Lets see me try to respond to all the posts in some what of an order.
First off, those aren’t the views of the Republican party as a whole. Thats like saying that all Democrats think Fahrenheit 9/11 is their personal bible.
Pam – Thats wrong, again not the views of all conservatives and Republicans.
Teddy – You don’t like Bush. That doesn’t mean you can’t be a Republican. However, if you don’t like the way the party is being run, thats fine to say you don’t like it. Perhaps you have a point – Bush has strong support from around 80 percent of the Republicans.
Brad – I don’t recall him saying he would cut and run, but I wouldn’t bet my life on him not cutting and running. I have heard things about Kerry wanting to add more troops, which seems odd considering the wrong war/time/place.
I also understand the issues and am a true Republican *and* conservative. I might not agree with Bush 100%, but I agree with Kerry much much much less. Overall on policies I agree with Bush about 65% and with Kerry only 15%.
Vance – I don’t agree with the destroy your enemy statement either. Probably a poor choice of words. Comparing Bush to his ‘daddy’ looks petty I might add. I don’t feel any of my liberties have been taken away either. I guess to each their own.
And off topic, Brad – once again, nice job on making the site firefox friendly 🙂
Troll said:
"I don’t feel any of my liberties have been taken away either."
And, unless you’re Jewish (which I don’t think you are), if you lived in some European countries in say…the 1920’s and 30’s you’d not feel any of your liberties were taken away either. So why be concerned? It hasn’t effected *you* after all!
The words of Martin Neimöller apply here i think Brad:
‘First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist, so I said nothing. Then they came for the Social Democrats, but I was not a Social Democrat, so I did nothing. Then came the trade unionists, but I was not a trade unionist. And then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did little. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to stand up for me.’
Troll,
Please expand on just how much of your freedom you’re willing to give away to feel *safer*. I don’t think its too inconceivable to see the Patriot Act expanding into a National ID card system… which would make us just like the old USSR. How about showing your PAPERS at every state border, or for you East Coast people, at every Toll Booth?
No, I don’t believe in restricting law enforcement (which is the argument I frequently hear in favor of the Patriot Act). But I do believe in the "innocent until proven guilty" provision of our legal process. I refuse to let this or any other administration enact laws that restrict personal freedom.
Our right to disagree in an open forum could be the next to go, Troll. There’s more I could tell you about my personal views on this, but this isn’t the place to post them. If you want to know, send me an email.
You liberals (and Jews I guess) are all paranoid.
Pam – Thats wrong, again not the views of all conservatives and Republicans.
Troll, I agree, it’s not what all conservatives or Republicans think, but the problem with the Bush admin is that they have riled up the far-Right evangelicals such as Robb Finberg and created an environment that cultivates open intolerance.
Troll, I just thought of something. Liberals worrying about rights is a joke. They find rights not found in the constitution and then try to take away rights that are in the constitution – like gun ownership.
> Troll writes Vance – I don’t agree with the destroy your enemy statement either"
When we dropped two bombs on Japan, we destroyed our enemy, and forced them to the peace table. That is what I meant!
About the Patriot Act:
It has to be constantly reviewed and passed by Congress. Every six months, abuses of it can be brought to attention to fix them. The *potential* of the Patriot act scares me to be quite honest. As for how many liberties I’d give up to be safe, it all depends on the situation I guess. There’s a point where I’d give up many of my liberties. If you aren’t alive, you can’t experience any liberties.
Paul – Although I see your point, and am on the right side of the political spectrum, don’t you feel that you are a little on the extreme side?
Troll, thank you for pointing that out to Paul. I shall stay hopeful that one day we’ll be able to award you the BRAD BLOG "Intellectual Honesty" award. You’re moving in the right direction. But you’re not there yet 🙂
In reviewing the other comments on this thread, one other point jumped out at me for Blindfolded Paul…
He said:
"Republicans are not anti-gay, just anti-gay marriage. We do have the Log Cabin Republicans!"
Right. And they REFUSED TO ENDORSE BUSH this year. Any idea why they would do that?
And if you haven’t seen the video of the State Senate candidate from Hawaii that Pam pointed to (I believe her originally link was broken) please give it a look. These are the kind of people your Republican party is now fostering.
> don’t you feel that you are a little on the extreme side?
Nope!
You first have to destroy your enemy, and then negotiate.
Did we negotiate with Saddam in 1991 – nope!
Did we negotiate with Hitler – nope!
Once Israel destroys Arafat, Hamas, and other terrorists groups, then we can talk peace and land for the Palestinians. Israel has never done that and they have never had peace. Well, they have had periods of peace like after they kicked butt – one example – 1967.
No peace agreement ended the Cold War. We bankrupted Russia! We destroyed them in a different way.
Paul, "Live by the sword, die by the sword." I was raised with this thought drilled into my head. See, I was raised by extended family… grandma killed japaneese occupiers in the Philippines as a young girl. Your allusion to how we ended WWII really hits home with me.
But let me tell you, I believe there’s a BETTER WAY. You mention that there’s never been peace in the Middle East, but you fail to recognize that they’ve been living by the sword for thousands of years. The idea of "…an eye for an eye" will only continue to make us all blind.
Isn’t it time that as a species, as the dominant creature on this earth, we use the intelligence given us and find a better solution than MORE VIOLENCE?