link
Make sure you understand the priorities of the Democratic candidates.
They refuse to attend a debate hosted by the Fox News Channel, the cable news station seen by almost as many people as CNN and MSNBC combined, yet they will show that they only see issues by breaking everyone up into small groups (black/white, poor/rich, young/old). Instead of talking to conservatives, liberals, young, old, male, female at the FOX debate...they will pander to a very small group of people, and no doubt make them all seem like victims of evil conservatives.
Keep looking at this stuff as you decide whom to vote for...
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Presidential Candidates In First Ever Gay Debate
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comments:
Yeah, but this has nothing to do with you, or your side.
You're not a progressive.
If it has nothing to do with you and doesn't touch your life at all, why does it concern you so?
Fox is NOT a respectable news network, anyway, and there is no reason whatsoever for any Democratic candidate to feel obligated to participate in any of Fox's attempt to legitimize themselves.
Grow up, little boys. Stop sniffling.
If it has nothing to do with you and doesn't touch your life at all, why does it concern you so?
It's called "concern trolling", and it's one of the principal tools in the conservative's arsenal.
I could just see the Republican candidates at a gay debate.
Well, at least one soon-to-be Rethug candidate is reputed to be a little light in the loafers, despite appearances to the contrary...
I think the gay debate is going to be very gay. Hillary and Edwards will fit right in.
:)
And the Dems appeared at forums sponsored by labor, environmental groups, liberal religious groups, and so on.
The same way Republicans have appeared at forums sponsored by pro-corporate groups, conservative religious groups, and so on.
Yawn.
No. They're the ones affirming that they already have all the rights they need.
"I could just see the Republican candidates at a gay debate."
No you couldn't.
What is "concern trolling" supposed to be? It sounds like what Dems do to pretend they care about a given faction's concerns. Is that what you mean? Do you really think these Dem candidates give a flyin' rat's ass about homos? If so, could you pass that doob this way? The Dems have a long history of making up concerns to frighten people into voting for them. "If you vote for the Republican, he'll take away your..." fill in the blank.
"Fox is NOT a respectable news network" to you and the frog in your pocket perhaps. But their ratings suggest lots of people disagree with you.
Or course the Dem candidates won't debate on Fox.
Why the hell should they play hardball when they can simply play softball?
As far as "concern trolling" goes, you can hardly blame the Repubs for borrowing a few plays from the masters of disasters. After all Dems have rasied alarmism to an art form for the past 4 decades. As a matter of fact that's about all they've got. Just look how they've got all the brown pants running around watching the sky, waiting for it to fall.
On the other hand what you libweenies consider alarmism concerning terrorism, happens to be a very real danger to anyone that's been paying attention. Dittos with crime, illegal immigration, social security, and the harm done by liberal policies to the poor, particularly the inner city poor.
ohhhhh yeah!!!!! slap slap
Oh realism, chet, jay and hash. Aren't your faces just smarting?!
LOL
This is off topic, but I wanted to provide this link to a great video on global warming.
What a truley entertaining video that was Jim, the typical "strawman", and illustrated!
I've got to know, how many of your mommy's paper towels did you use, wiping the drool from your chin as you watched this masterful parady?
"Great video on global warming, indeed!
"On the other hand what you libweenies consider alarmism concerning terrorism, happens to be a very real danger to anyone that's been paying attention. Dittos with crime, illegal immigration, social security, and the harm done by liberal policies to the poor, particularly the inner city poor."
Not at all.
In fact, the premise is so weak, blamin doesn't even believe a word of it.
I am strictly for closed borders, deportation of illegals, and a five-year moratorium on legal immigration, because I realize that it is neocons who are responsible for the infestation of our nation with these illegals, despite the fact that conservatives (with typical cognitive dissonance) try to blame "the left" for their own betrayal of the American working class.
I realize that law enforcement has COMPLETELY fallen apart under the very Republican jackboot we were told would protect us.
Of course the dreaded "Islamofascism" and the terra hysteria are empty threats. They never existed in the first place!
They were invented by the neocons, the military industrial complex that Eisenhower himself warned us of, by private contractors whose loyalty is to company, not country, and powerful lobbies whose allegiance was never to American interests in the first place.
And this gives the flyover NASCAR set, who possess no meaningful work ethic, no possibilities, no future, no promise, etc. an excuse to invent clever barbs like "libweenies" to justify the idea they they're doing something to help the "war effort"....
I LOVE it when the homophobes and the patriotardics reveal themselves!
blamin said:
Oh yeah? well John Edwards is a sissy!
Take that!
because I realize that it is neocons who are responsible for the infestation of our nation with these illegals,
Hashpipe-stop drinking your bong water. Maybe all the smoke is clouding your hippie judgement. No one is more responsible for the immigration problem then your boy Teddy "I killed a chic and got away with it" Kennedy.
Hash
Every single paragraph (except the 1st) in your last post is a disjointed mess.
Despite Bush’s support of the last immigration bill fiasco, most Republican leaders were against it, while most of your Dem leaders were supportive. Conservatives understand the need for immediate solutions. As far as the root causes, Neocons, and NAFTA is concerned, that’s a whole other debate.
“ I realize that law enforcement has COMPLETELY fallen apart under the very Republican jackboot we were told would protect us.”
Let me get this straight, in your world, crime is a problem because Conservative Nazis have ruined law enforcement?!
“ Of course the dreaded "Islamofascism" and the terra hysteria are empty threats. They never existed in the first place!
They were invented by the neocons, the military industrial complex…” blah, blah, blah, regurgitated, parroted, pap coming deep from within a, dark, dark, haze/daze
I’ll tell you what was invented, Hashhaze, all the drivel about terrorism you repeat like a good little automaton, was invented by liberals, who couldn’t bring themselves to support Conservatives on this issue, and who knew that any pap they invented, that fit into your preconceived notions, would be swallowed whole with a grin and a little spittle on the chin.
As far as your little rant about flyover country – whatever you have to tell yourself, to continue your charade.
Realism
I never said Edwards was a sissy, I merely pointed out that many believe being effeminate is not the best quality for a man running for president, despite what you metrosexuals may believe.
They're the ones affirming that they already have all the rights they need.
Well, except for the more than 1000 rights guaranteed to married couples - and not civil unions - and that's just at the Federal level.
What is "concern trolling" supposed to be?
When you give disingenuous advice that would hamper the advisee in the guise of "helping" them, that's concern trolling.
Like when a conservative says "if Democrats really want to get their message out, they should debate on Fox News." That's concern trolling.
Do you really think these Dem candidates give a flyin' rat's ass about homos?
"Homos"? Is it necessary for you to use bigoted language? Seriously.
Or course the Dem candidates won't debate on Fox.
I don't think Democrats are required to reward Fox news for several years of being relentlessly dishonest and misrepresentative.
It seems to me that, in a free country, Democrats can take their debate wherever someone's willing to have them. I thought conservatives were all about the free market.
I never said Edwards was a sissy, I merely pointed out that many believe being effeminate is not the best quality for a man running for president,
No comment.
merely pointed out that many believe being effeminate is not the best quality for a man running for president
I tend to agree
"As far as the root causes, Neocons, and NAFTA is concerned, that’s a whole other debate."
No, it's not! Particularly when you realize that politicians blow like the wind at any given moment, and any change in the economy, population, etc., can cast illegals in a POSITIVE LIGHT.
Conservatism (or what it has become) cannot provide solutions for this or any other issues that face Americans, because it fixates on labelling, fixing blame, and casting itself as perpetual victim, for lack of substance.
"Let me get this straight, in your world, crime is a problem because Conservative Nazis have ruined law enforcement?!"
No, but because a large percentage of law enforcement bought into the lies of neoconservatism, without realizing that neoconservative objectives do not favor a safe America in the first place.
So, if they do their jobs, they operate at cross-purposes with the final end game of the same values they think they espouse, without realizing they actually are holding themselves back.
"...liberals, who couldn’t bring themselves to support Conservatives on this issue..."
Why should liberals feel FORCED to support conservatives, after such a legacy of corruption and total failure?
Respect must be earned.
""Homos"? Is it necessary for you to use bigoted language? Seriously."
Seriously. It's an abreviation for homosexuals which is tiresome to type out everytime I need to reference it. I do not use co-opted words like "gay", "fairy", "queer" or even "faggot" (except for fun on bowling night) because I don't approve of their misuse by homos. It taints every classic book, movie or song where those words were used as they were meant to. I am also unconcerned with any defensive posture they might take by my use of the shortened version. As they like to say regarding those of us who understand right and wrong, it's their problem.
Also, they need to be deprived of something offered to everyone else to be discriminated against. They are not. Besides, they don't really care about marriage anyway. Same-sex marriages are down in every place where it's offered, including where civil unions or whatever they're calling marriage by another name in a given state. Even in Toronto, where they are proud of the size of their homo/lez population, they've had only one such marriage thus far this year. Same-sex marriage is not their goal. Only total acceptance is.
Post a Comment