Well the Democrats exploit the ability of gay people to vote for them…as well as any other minority you’d care to list.

Don’t ever think the number one motivation of the Democrat “championing” of various groups is not capturing a demographic.

I’m all for the DADT repeal and even Gay marriage but I have no illusions about why Democrats have stood behind issuesw such as these.

On the hierarchy of credibility, the only thing lower than MSNBC is Media Matters. So it’s no surprise that Chris Matthews would want David Brock on his show. When compared to Brock, Matthews actually looks like a journalist. But it’s all relative, and to the rest of us, both of these gentlemen stopped caring about journalism long ago, and simply operate in the world of spin and partisan propaganda.

Ehhh…I don’t necessarily buy this. Most Conservative Christians oppose homosexuality based on their religion anyway. I don’t think it is necessarily homophobia, although I’m sure it exists in the GOP. Most people who oppose gay marriage and support DADT are in the GOP. I doubt I’d find much opposition about that statement.

This is not new for the Grand Oil Party. Just like they exploit the evangelicals, t/p, people of low intelligence, crazies etc etc.

dhg said:
Well the Democrats exploit the ability of gay people to vote for them…as well as any other minority you’d care to list.

Don’t ever think the number one motivation of the Democrat “championing” of various groups is not capturing a demographic.

I’m all for the DADT repeal and even Gay marriage but I have no illusions about why Democrats have stood behind issuesw such as these.

GOOD POST dhg

stoogedudes said:
Most people who oppose gay marriage and support DADT are in the GOP.

I’d recommend that you check the popular vote on California’s Prop 8. It’s a deeply bipartisan thang.

Brock . Now there’s a guy with zero principles . The Charlie Crist of the Internet .

Uh hoh geez…..listen to Brock.
Whining like a little girl that the GOP didn’t embrace his man love enough.
He acts like he was a hostage or something and thinks Karl Rove hides in his closet.
We sure miss having him on our side.

As far as groups that are exploited by a political party, there is no greater example than the exploitation of blacks by the Democrats and there is no greater proof than the state of the black community in Democrat strongholds.

Republicans love the rich and want more of them. Democrats love the poor and want more of them. The Democrats are winning, especially in the black community.

Pablo said:
I’d recommend that you check the popular vote on California’s Prop 8. It’s a deeply bipartisan thang.

I’m not saying that there aren’t Democrats opposed to gay marriage and DADT, just that you’ll find more opposition to these things in the GOP. There are also Republicans who support gay marriage and repealing DADT, obviously. Yes, you are most correct, it is bipartisan. But I stand by what I said before.

Wedge issues are used by both sides. FYI – http://OutMilitary.com – a new social network that just launched for gay & lesbian service members & supporters…

dhg said:
Well the Democrats exploit the ability of gay people to vote for them…as well as any other minority you’d care to list.

Don’t ever think the number one motivation of the Democrat “championing” of various groups is not capturing a demographic.

I’m all for the DADT repeal and even Gay marriage but I have no illusions about why Democrats have stood behind issuesw such as these.

I think we all gain when everyone is equal, stop being an idiot -_-

everyone will never be equal

Pablo says:
“Democrats love the poor and want more of them.”

From that kind of sheer misinformation, it’s clear that you’ve been stupified by Fox or Limbaugh or some other deceitful propagandist.

Before you get on your rear haunches, come up with a link of a reputable site that supports your claim that Democrats want more poor people. Otherwise, admit it; it was a stupid thing to write. Good propaganda does not make for accurate information.

You gotta watch those deceitful propagandists.
They will give you deceitful popaganda every time.

and now the fight starts for gay marriage in the military, what will happen?

“supports your claim that Democrats want more poor people.”

It is called the “Dream Act”. The Democrats dream of having a country full of poor ignorant immigrant voters.

Conservatives are motivated by fear of different types of people.
Liberals are motivated by tolerance of different types of people.

redleaf said:
Conservatives are motivated by fear of different types of people.Liberals are motivated by tolerance of different types of people.

wrong, explain your statement, never mind just your opinion

I don’t really don’t understand this DADT thing at all!
If being Gay is NOT a choice, but an affliction or mental thing.
then I would not want very many people to know, I would have a thing
about not wanting ( and I will put this here in a nice way) to stick my
head in the dirty underwear of someone of the same gender.
Call me what you want, but why would you want that out there???

“head in the dirty underwear of someone of the same gender.”

Sometimes people are just born with the wrong sex organs, occasionally people have a traumatic experience with people of the opposite sex and have no other place to turn.

Probably NOT wrong said:
If being Gay is NOT a choice, but an affliction or mental thing.

LMAO!
WOW!

Is this the same tactic the left/Democrat use when they exploit a fear of white people?

Moderate said:
It is called the “Dream Act”.

Which is just looking for more of the welfare state that has destroyed the black family.

Jon said:
I think we all gain when everyone is equal, stop being an idiot -_-

Looks like Jon would like to be Handicapper General when he grows up.

liberal definition of tolerance=approval, if you dont approve you are racist ,homophobic, or any other label they try to place on you

Jon said:
I think we all gain when everyone is equal, stop being an idiot -_-

Just look at Cuba and North Korea everyone is equal there. South Korea should imitate them instead of trying to be like the US.

http://www.albionmonitor.com/0301a/kdark.jpg

equality.

Matthews allows the pro-gay speaker to talk without interruption but when the opposite argument is presented he constantly interrupts. He suggests that only Republicans were against this? David Brock then brings up Civil Rights? When did sexual orientation become a Civil Right? Sexual orientation is an inherent right! A phony wedge issue? How does a group of people numbering around 2.1/2% of the population suggest their Civil Rights are being denied when they have exactly the same Civil Rights as everyone else? This has nothing to do with Civil Rights, and everything to do with “selective special rights”.

Big Eddie said:
Brock . Now there’s a guy with zero principles . The Charlie Crist of the Internet .

You got that right. Brock is the male version of Ariana Huffington. How can anyone believe ANYTHING these charlatans say. Either one will switch their “beliefs” at the drop of a hat (rather, drop of a dollar.) They both used to be conservatives, but when they realized there was money to be made by criticising those who they used to praise, they easily switch alligences. You can expect them to switch back when theres a book/website/magazine that’s worthy of access to their bank account.

Jon said:
I think we all gain when everyone is equal, stop being an idiot -_-

Stop wearing rose colored glasses over your blinders.Besides,everyone being equal means no way to exploit them for votes,which means they won’t stay equal long.

Get real man,it’s the way things work,it may be wrong,bad,corrupt and all that but as long as the people gaining the most from it being that way are the only people who can change it,it’s here to stay.

Probably NOT wrong says:
“I don’t really don’t understand this DADT thing at all!
If being Gay is NOT a choice, but an affliction or mental thing.
then I would not want very many people to know, I would have a thing
about not wanting ( and I will put this here in a nice way) to stick my
head in the dirty underwear of someone of the same gender.
Call me what you want,”

OK: Your’e an ignorant homophobe. Probably wrong, meet Yaho Fuk. Yaho Fuk, meet Propably wrong, another homophobe just like you. What a coincidence; you’re both defenders of Beck’s so-called honor.

Man o man; you two are just going to love the bombshell Beck is sitting on when it goes off.

There ya go!

As a True Right-Thinking American Patriot and a regular FOX NEWS (The Most Powerful Name in News) viewer, I KNOW that FEAR is what makes an American an AMERICAN!!!!111 But GAYS are the least of our worries – there are the MEXICANS, the MUSLINS, the BLACKS, the UNION THUGS, and MANY MANY more scary and different things!!!!1111 I remember when JEWS were in there too but now that we all love ISRAEL we aren’t allowed to be scared of them anymore!!!111 Oh man being scared of different people is the BEST!!!!!!!111

“remember when JEWS were in there too but now that we all love ISRAEL”

You do not know Jew hatred until you have traveled through most of the rest of the world, especially liberal Europe.

I wonder how David explains these Republicans away?

http://www.logcabin.org/site/c.nsKSL7PMLpF/b.5468093/k.BE4C/Home.htm

GlennBeckReview said:
Man o man; you two are just going to love the bombshell Beck is sitting on when it goes off.

Are you sure you wanna bring this up again? Wasn’t the humiliation you suffered after LYING about this “bombshell” several weeks ago enough?

Oh, GBR, please, please drop the Bombshell!
Please. The world waits for you! lol
BTW I am not a Glenn Beck Fan.
I am a Die Hard Conservative, but I think his antics are
more than silly most times.
As is this stupid, accomplish nothing internet thing
you are running. Silly!
You are pissing in the ocean……….

This Law’s fall is not a good thing to the Army. I liked very much DADT. Everybody could be gay under it and stay a soldier if one’s wished to.

Now the gay militancy will be on the rage to come out and Army is not a place for ANY militancy.

Let’s see if it that will not damage the institution and lose focus on what they must secure: America.

I am gay, btw.

See one thought:

There is barrack separeted for men and women, because could be “frictions” between the two groups. And you know what I am talking about…..

And, if gay man, or gay girl…will live together with gays and straight people….”frictions” will follow, won’t they?

Probably NOT wrong said:
I don’t really don’t understand this DADT thing at all!
If being Gay is NOT a choice, but an affliction or mental thing.
then I would not want very many people to know, I would have a thing
about not wanting ( and I will put this here in a nice way) to stick my
head in the dirty underwear of someone of the same gender.
Call me what you want, but why would you want that out there???

Actually, I just think its important that when we discuss what is colloquially called “Gay Sex” that we be entirely honest about what precisely that involves. The clinical, “G-rated” wording (“Gay Sex”) masks the disgusting reality of the act, just as “pro-choice” masks the ugly butchering of unborn human beings.

Were the fact of “Gay Sex”, as you call it, described more correctly, it would be far less accepted. But that is not really possible because the act itself is so thoroughly disgusting and detestable that most Americans would vomit at the mention of it.

Imagine a mainstream news program describing a sex act in which a “Gay(???”) man slurps down the semen of another “Gay” man that is ejaculated from a feces, blood, and vaseline penis — or several of them (as is the homosexual wont?) Or a probing of ones rectum by the penis of another man?

I dare say that water pressure across the country would drop as Americans flush their collective vomit down the toilet.

Why don’t we all admit this fact: There’s a reason that Homosexuality was kept in the closet throughout millenia, save for the last forty years. And it is unfair and cruel to force young men who enlisted in the service to serve their country to have to listen to the sexual/”romantic” adventures of gay servicmembers. They will simply want to vomit, as most everyone who knows the details of “Gay” sex does.

These people do NOT belong in the service. They do NOT belong in mainstream society. They need to keep their sexual perversion in their own private space, along with the beasties, the pedophiles, the “family lovers” , the S&Mers, and the rest of the whole demented, disturbed, twisted, perverted, disgusting lot.

felixw said:
On the hierarchy of credibility, the only thing lower than MSNBC is Media Matters. So it’s no surprise that Chris Matthews would want David Brock on his show. When compared to Brock, Matthews actually looks like a journalist. But it’s all relative, and to the rest of us, both of these gentlemen stopped caring about journalism long ago, and simply operate in the world of spin and partisan propaganda.

Since mediamatters is not credible I implore you to disprove one of their articles right now. Please confirm your ad hominem.

cjd ohio 1 said:
liberal definition of tolerance=approval, if you dont approve you are racist ,homophobic, or any other label they try to place on you

I would have never expected you to make such a blatantly false generalization. While toleration doesn’t mean you HAVE to cooperate with somebody, it does mean that you cannot EXCLUDE them from public institutions or force them to hide their nature.

Pablo said:
Which is just looking for more of the welfare state that has destroyed the black family.

WOOOOOOOOOW. I cannot even get my mind around this primarily because it’s just not true. AA families have had problems in America since its inception, particularly with father figures. Your statement is just plain wrong bias.

Pablo said:
As far as groups that are exploited by a political party, there is no greater example than the exploitation of blacks by the Democrats and there is no greater proof than the state of the black community in Democrat strongholds.

Republicans love the rich and want more of them. Democrats love the poor and want more of them. The Democrats are winning, especially in the black community.

This is a very stupid statement. Shall I educate you on the history of African American support of Democrats dating back to Roosevelt?

Why don’t we all admit this fact: There’s a reason that Homosexuality was kept in the closet throughout millenia, save for the last forty years. And it is unfair and cruel to force young men who enlisted in the service to serve their country to have to listen to the sexual/”romantic” adventures of gay servicmembers. They will simply want to vomit, as most everyone who knows the details of “Gay” sex does.

And for that reason, EVERY servicemember who elects to leave the military before their enlistment is up because of the change in DADT should be permitted an honorable discharge and full veterans benefits. There’s no reason we should make these fine young men and women have to tolerate the despicable, disgusting, perversions that a left-wing Congress and an illegitimate president have deemed “normal” in complete contravention of millenia of history, EVERY known religious practice, and the mores of the overwhelming majority of American society.

Wow, Paula, I didn’t want to get that explicit about the Gay sex, which
is why I referred to it as head in the underwear. But my point was, and I was
asking, expecting to be insulted, which I was.
If you absolutely have uncontrollable desires to commit those type acts,
why in the hell would you want anyone to
know about it??
I don’t think I would be bragging.
Homophobe, NOPE! Realistic, yep!!!
DADT best policy….YEP!!!

Brock is a loon. Nobody is AFRAID of gays. People are tired of the political correct crap that wants to make gays a “special” group with “special” rights.

This is just a tool used by the democrats to divide people. They hate gays. They always attack people they hate by claiming they are gay. Libs lie. That is their way of life.

The left doesn’t believe in American Values. They believe in Obama’s Values.

My latest video on Obama’s Values.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9x7WLL9vsP8

Ed Lascar said:
This Law’s fall is not a good thing to the Army. I liked very much DADT. Everybody could be gay under it and stay a soldier if one’s wished to. Now the gay militancy will be on the rage to come out and Army is not a place for ANY militancy. Let’s see if it that will not damage the institution and lose focus on what they must secure: America. I am gay, btw.

You are a good man Ed.

GlennBeckReview said:
Man o man; you two are just going to love the bombshell Beck is sitting on when it goes off.

LOL, there you go again. Do you love being a lying fool. Beck is just shaking in his boots. LOL

Is this the site to be on if you are a homophobe?

MG, Brock is the original $3 dollar bill.

TrollJuice said:
Is this the site to be on if you are a homophobe?

If by “homophobe” you mean “True American Right-Thinking Patriot who believes that the left’s constant coddling of the GAYS will lead to WIDESPREAD MORAL DECAY and the DESTRUCTION of our Proud American Military”, then YES!!!!!!!1111 You’ve come to the RIGHT PLACE!!!!!!1111

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
WOOOOOOOOOW. I cannot even get my mind around this primarily because it’s just not true. AA families have had problems in America since its inception, particularly with father figures. Your statement is just plain wrong bias.

Sorry dude, but its you thats wrong. In the 1950′s two parent black families was over 70% … now it’s around 40%.

http://www.census.gov/apsd/www/statbrief/sb93_2.pdf

What happened in between these dates? Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
I would have never expected you to make such a blatantly false generalization. While toleration doesn’t mean you HAVE to cooperate with somebody, it does mean that you cannot EXCLUDE them from public institutions or force them to hide their nature.

sorry reasonable lib, i get tired of being label a racist or homophobe on here sometimes, you are right i shouldn’t generalize

but the real fight begins now, because DADT is not the end of it , its the beginning

Scott_in_MI said:
Sorry dude, but its you thats wrong. In the 1950’s two parent black families was over 70% … now it’s around 40%.

http://www.census.gov/apsd/www/statbrief/sb93_2.pdf

What happened in between these dates? Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty

The original New Deal program Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was restricted to widows who had lost their breadwinner.

LBJ changed it to include ANY household where there was no male family head- making any divorced or single mother eligible for taxpayer money. This made it more lucrative NOT to be married. In 1950, 88% of white and 78% of black families lived in a traditional marriage.

In 1967, black families started to break up. Twenty years later fully 70% of black families lived in single-female households. Whites in single-female households rose 50% but blacks rose 200%!

notsofast said:
The original New Deal program Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was restricted to widows who had lost their breadwinner. LBJ changed it to include ANY household where there was no male family head- making any divorced or single mother eligible for taxpayer money. This made it more lucrative NOT to be married. In 1950, 88% of white and 78% of black families lived in a traditional marriage. In 1967, black families started to break up. Twenty years later fully 70% of black families lived in single-female households. Whites in single-female households rose 50% but blacks rose 200%!

Our elected leaders know about these numbers and they understand that its their governmental policies which DESTROYED the black famly structure and is working on doing the same for whites. Many liberals see this and refuse to change it (because it might cause them a group of voters.) Now tell me everyone, which party is looking out for the interest of minorities?

notsofast said:
The original New Deal program Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was restricted to widows who had lost their breadwinner. LBJ changed it to include ANY household where there was no male family head- making any divorced or single mother eligible for taxpayer money. This made it more lucrative NOT to be married. In 1950, 88% of white and 78% of black families lived in a traditional marriage. In 1967, black families started to break up. Twenty years later fully 70% of black families lived in single-female households. Whites in single-female households rose 50% but blacks rose 200%!

This is just one aspect of the destruction of the black…the second part is inner city schools where less than half of the students graduate high school. I a vicious circle of perpetual poverty. Like Walter Williams says: the KKK could’nnt have done a better job at destroying the black family.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/01/national/main3985714.shtml

Scott_in_MI said:
This is just one aspect of the destruction of the black…the second part is inner city schools where less than half of the students graduate high school. I a vicious circle of perpetual poverty. Like Walter Williams says: the KKK could’nnt have done a better job at destroying the black family.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/01/national/main3985714.shtml

A couple of brainiacs discussing the New Deal and African Americans, using a nice cut a paste job. Well, if there is an expert in the destruction of the black family it would certainly be you.

You are stupid beyond imagination.

SarahP said:
A couple of brainiacs discussing the New Deal and African Americans, using a nice cut a paste job. Well, if there is an expert in the destruction of the black family it would certainly be you. You are stupid beyond imagination.

Well well well. If it isn’t my cross burning friend. Did the library have that book I told you to get? I know it’ll be difficult for you to walk through the African/American section, but reading Ellison’s book is the first step toward eradicating your extreme racism

Scott_in_MI said:
Well well well. If it isn’t my cross burning friend. Did the library have that book I told you to get? I know it’ll be difficult for you to walk through the African/American section, but reading Ellison’s book is the first step toward eradicating your extreme racism

Actually as a reminder. You support just4thefaxs who uses terms like “fag” and “wetback” and “groid.” As it turns out you support the use of these terms and therefore you are a racist. Nice try though. Bring it on dip shit!! LMAO!!

SarahP said:
A couple of brainiacs discussing the New Deal and African Americans, using a nice cut a paste job. Well, if there is an expert in the destruction of the black family it would certainly be you. You are stupid beyond imagination.

By the way, I see you couldn’t refute anything I said regarding the destruction of the black family, but I’m sure it made you smile to see the chaos your party forced upon the black family.

Scott_in_MI said:
By the way, I see you couldn’t refute anything I said regarding the destruction of the black family, but I’m sure it made you smile to see the chaos your party forced upon the black family.

Do you support what just4thefax said? I’ll remind you as many times as it takes to sink into your brain – which is probably a fools errand. He uses terms like “fag” and “wetback” and “groid.” Do you support those terms. A simple yes or no will do. That’s “yes” or “no.” I’m trying to keep in simple for you.

Debate you on the issue of the New Deal and the black family? Are you seriously that learning disabled? The level of stupidity is palpable.

SarahP said:
Actually as a reminder. You support just4thefaxs who uses terms like “fag” and “wetback” and “groid.” As it turns out you support the use of these terms and therefore you are a racist. Nice try though. Bring it on dip shit!! LMAO!!

So I take it that’s a no about Ellison’s book. Sad. However, I still haven’t given up on you little fellow. I know that we’ll get that hate out of you if only you’re shown enough love. Come here little one, let me give you a hug.

SarahP said:
Do you support what just4thefax said? I’ll remind you as many times as it takes to sink into your brain – which is probably a fools errand. He uses terms like “fag” and “wetback” and “groid.” Do you support those terms. A simple yes or no will do. That’s “yes” or “no.” I’m trying to keep in simple for you. Debate you on the issue of the New Deal and the black family? Are you seriously that learning disabled? The level of stupidity is palpable.

Of course I don’t support them, but the fact that you so easily throw such terms around- and accusing everyone who disagrees with your points as racist- (in threads other than yesterday’s one involving you and justthefaxs) points to a certain hostility thats inside you.

Scott_in_MI said:
So I take it that’s a no about Ellison’s book. Sad. However, I still haven’t given up on you little fellow. I know that we’ll get that hate out of you if only you’re shown enough love. Come here little one, let me give you a hug.

Pathetic, you are incapable of answering a simple yes or no question about your racism. Of course its easy to conclude that you are not particularly well read, that much should be obvious. But what has become a bit of surprise is that scott in MI is a racist – now it’s obvious.

Scott in MI has no problem at all with words like “fag” and “wetback” and “groid.” if you hurry you can catch the cross burning – in your front yard.

Scott_in_MI said:
Of course I don’t support them, but the fact that you so easily throw such terms around- and accusing everyone who disagrees with your points as racist- (in threads other than yesterday’s one involving you and justthefaxs) points to a certain hostility thats inside you.

No asshole, are you listening? Just4thefax threw around the terms. Remove the tin foil hat you nit wit.

SarahP said:
Debate you on the issue of the New Deal and the black family? Are you seriously that learning disabled? The level of stupidity is palpable.

I don’t know where the New Deal/black family topic came from…we were discussing the The Great Society/Johnson impact on black families. Anyone could see that. Perhaps it is you thats learning disabled.

SarahP said:
Pathetic, you are incapable of answering a simple yes or no question about your racism. Of course its easy to conclude that you are not particularly well read, that much should be obvious. But what has become a bit of surprise is that scott in MI is a racist – now it’s obvious. Scott in MI has no problem at all with words like “fag” and “wetback” and “groid.” if you hurry you can catch the cross burning – in your front yard.

What is pathetic is you not knowing that “of course I don’t” is another way of saying “no, I dont support words like “fag” ‘wetback.’” I know that “of course I don’t ” has bigger words, but if that’s to tough for you to figure out, perhaps you should get a dictionary.

Scott_in_MI said:
I don’t know where the New Deal/black family topic came from…we were discussing the The Great Society/Johnson impact on black families. Anyone could see that. Perhaps it is you thats learning disabled.

Right, you clearly know your history. At any rate, you had your chance to take a stand against bigotry and racism and instead you sat there with your thumb up your ass. You are a paragon of courage…not to mention a history buff.

SarahP said:
No asshole, are you listening? Just4thefax threw around the terms. Remove the tin foil hat you nit wit.

Such anger you possess Sarah. Perhaps you should talk to your psychologist about your raceproblems AND your anger problems. I’m sure you’re a nice person, but such black clouds on your soul aren’t good for you.

David Brock along with Arianna Huffington should be treated by Republicans in exactly the same way Ron Silver and David Mamet were treated by Democrats, with utter disregard.

In David Brock’s case, one wonders how someone could come up with his attack on Anita Hill and Hilary Clinton in one part of his life then in very short order spin around and pretend to espouse the opposite principles.

SarahP said:
Right, you clearly know your history. At any rate, you had your chance to take a stand against bigotry and racism and instead you sat there with your thumb up your ass. You are a paragon of courage…not to mention a history buff.

It gives me such great pleasure to win debates. When another person can’t even come up with an argument except “right, you know your history” I know that my facts have DESTROYED that person’s points.

I’ll will now leave on that high/victorious point. Have a good evening Sarah.

M Colins said:
In David Brock’s case, one wonders how someone could come up with his attack on Anita Hill and Hilary Clinton in one part of his life then in very short order spin around and pretend to espouse the opposite principles.

One word: Money.

When George Soros started Media Matters, he wanted a “republican” to head MMFA in order to ggive it a non partisan reputation. He threw a bunch of money at Brock. Since Brock is such a scumbag, he threw any previous thought/belief/credibility out the window when he started sucking at the tit of Soros.

SarahP said:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/01/national/main3985714.shtml

A couple of brainiacs discussing the New Deal and African Americans, using a nice cut a paste job. Well, if there is an expert in the destruction of the black family it would certainly be you.

I’m so happy that blacks can depend on white gutter trash such as you to save them.

notsofast said:
I’m so happy that blacks can depend on white gutter trash such as you to save them.

I think you mean keeping them in perpetual poverty so they’ll always be a safe and reliable vote for the democratic party.

dhg said:
Well the Democrats exploit the ability of gay people to vote for them…as well as any other minority you’d care to list.

Don’t ever think the number one motivation of the Democrat “championing” of various groups is not capturing a demographic.

I’m all for the DADT repeal and even Gay marriage but I have no illusions about why Democrats have stood behind issuesw such as these.

they haven’t.. until now. Democrats just sway according to the polls.. They just follow the wind, sailing without directions..

The real democratic party has been lost long time ago. Democratic party right now is more like the labor party in UK – it is centrist and its policies just don’t work because they combine the worst of both sides(liberal and conservative).

GlennBeckReview said:
“Man o man; you two are just going to love the bombshell Beck is sitting on when it goes off.”

Scott_in_MI says:
“Are you sure you wanna bring this up again? Wasn’t the humiliation you suffered after LYING about this “bombshell” several weeks ago enough?”

There was no humiliation on my part; the story that I’m privy to has not been published yet. Your assertion that I’m “lying” about this information is only a sly technique from you to try to get me to convey the information before it’s published. That’s not going to happen.

The bombshell turns out to be more explosive than I knew about even two weeks ago. This involves activities on Beck’s part that are not just about his past, but very much his present, or at least very recent past (two weeks). It also involves innocent victims. These people, in Beck’s world of smash mouth discourse, are going to become collateral damage. Their lives will be damaged because of Beck’s hypocritical behavior…when the reporter publishes on his schedule, not yours, not Mediaite’s, not Beck’s and not on my schedule.

Yes, Beckerheads, there is a bombshell.

Probably NOT wrong says:
“Oh, GBR, please, please drop the Bombshell! Please. The world waits for you! lol
BTW I am not a Glenn Beck Fan. I am a Die Hard Conservative, but I think his antics are
more than silly most times.
As is this stupid, accomplish nothing internet thing you are running. Silly!”

First, so many contradictions in your comment, hard to determine where to start. If you aren’t a fan of Beck and think that he is silly, which is like saying that Limbaugh’s lies are silly when they are in fact corrosive to the body politic and political discourse, why do you attack me? Then, you claim that my Review, which points out some of the many lies Beck tells, some of the more obvious examples of his hypocrisy and points out how he’s a charlatan in more ways than not, is “silly.” If Beck is silly, then pointed and honest criticism of him is certainly not silly. Is that too much for a “die hear conservative” to understand? I suspect so.

I think that Becks antics are more than silly at times too, they’re utterly absurd, but he’s an entertainment genius. They get him ratings and followers. His absurd antics are the least of my concerns. HuffPo might fret over his silliness, but I could really give a shit about his distractions. I take him at his word when he says that he is a rodeo clown.

I would address Beck as a serious reactionary and counter his political arguments, i.e., take him seriously, if he were not first a liar, a hypocrite and an utter fake as a “thinker.” He is worse than a nuisance; Beck is a threat to the President’s lifeBeck is a threat to the President’s life. That anchor text, btw, does not point to my Review. I am not the only one alarmed by Beck and recognize the threat his violent rhetoric poses to our public institutions and the people in them.

I’m not the only one running an “Internet thing;” I’m just the one who brings these arguments to Mediaite where you see the most obvious efforts I make to undermine the lies of this yellow propagandist and fake Christian.

Now, just because you’re a “die hard Conservative,” and by that I suspect you mean that you’re a reactionary, I offer you some holiday paradox: right is wrong, and left is right.

Cheers.

beck is a threat to the presidents life? how? explain in detail? that is quite the thing to accuse one of…

There’s a Beck ‘bombshell’ out there, but GBR won’t reveal it. Beck is a threat to the president, but GBR won’t reveal the particulars. Perhaps Jack Bauer should have a session with GBR and try to get this information out of him. After all, if the president is being threatened, we should know about it.

cjd ohio, click on the link (hot text). The authors of The Glenn Beck Report cover this. If you want my angle on this, consider how a fundamentalist Christian might rationalize killing Lucifer’s partner on Earth. That is what Beck conveys about President Obama. You’re right, cjd, it’s quite a thing for Beck to accuse the President of, but he gets away with it because he’s beyond reproach at Fox. Beck incites assassination. I hear it. Wexler at The Glenn Beck Report hears it. You know damn well that there are reactionaries who fantasize about this.

Beck should have been fired long ago. Comparing the President to Lucifer was just one of many reasons. It’s worse than absurd. It puts the hypocrisy in Beck’s claim to pray for Obama. I guess when you paint a target on someone’s chest, you feel like you hope the shooter misses. It’s too much. Beck is dangerous and absurd beyond reason.

GlennBeckReview said:
cjd ohio, click on the link (hot text). The authors of The Glenn Beck Report cover this. If you want my angle on this, consider how a fundamentalist Christian might rationalize killing Lucifer’s partner on Earth. That is what Beck conveys about President Obama. You’re right, cjd, it’s quite a thing for Beck to accuse the President of, but he gets away with it because he’s beyond reproach at Fox. Beck incites assassination. I hear it. Wexler at The Glenn Beck Report hears it. You know damn well that there are reactionaries who fantasize about this. Beck should have been fired long ago. Comparing the President to Lucifer was just one of many reasons. It’s worse than absurd. It puts the hypocrisy in Beck’s claim to pray for Obama. I guess when you paint a target on someone’s chest, you feel like you hope the shooter misses. It’s too much. Beck is dangerous and absurd beyond reason.

you are reaching for stuff now, unreal…… every president goes through this shit reagan was the anti-christ, bush , a war criminal, clinton,was going to destroy the country, give me a break

GBR, night after night when Bush was in office, Keith Olbermann would’ve been taking it easy if he’d only compared Bush to Satan. Wasn’t he inciting assassination? Where was your worry and outrage?

GBR is nuttier than a Port-a-Potty at a Peanut Festival!
Man has serious issues!
I never called Glenn Beck a Liar, Numbnuts!
I just don’t like some of his antics when he is on TV!
I would be very surprised if he knows you exist on this planet,
I would be even more surprised is he was losing much sleep over
the “Bombshell” you nuts are about to drop!
Try to forget Glenn Beck for at least tomorrow! Your head may
feel better!
Jesus love you!!! I think……………..

GlennBeckReview said:
“cjd ohio, click on the link (hot text). The authors of The Glenn Beck Report cover this. If you want my angle on this, consider how a fundamentalist Christian might rationalize killing Lucifer’s partner on Earth. That is what Beck conveys about President Obama. You’re right, cjd, it’s quite a thing for Beck to accuse the President of, but he gets away with it because he’s beyond reproach at Fox. Beck incites assassination. I hear it. Wexler at The Glenn Beck Report hears it. You know damn well that there are reactionaries who fantasize about this. Beck should have been fired long ago. Comparing the President to Lucifer was just one of many reasons. It’s worse than absurd. It puts the hypocrisy in Beck’s claim to pray for Obama. I guess when you paint a target on someone’s chest, you feel like you hope the shooter misses. It’s too much. Beck is dangerous and absurd beyond reason.”

cjd ohio 1 says:
“you are reaching for stuff now, unreal”

First of all, I’m conveying what Wexler at The Glenn Beck Report has written. I endorse that view. Did you bother listening to Beck compare the President to Lucifer? Did you bother informing yourself about this dangerous propagandist? One retarded reactionary Christian is all it will take to cause bloodshed. God knows, there are plenty of them in this country. One could make the case that Just4thefacts is pretty close to a retarded so-called Christian.

Wexler and I are not, by any stretch, the only ones who believe that Beck instigates violence. If you weren’t a sycophant of Mr. Beck, you might have an opportunity to assimilate the facts of his violent and dangerous rhetoric with a modicum of success. Beck wants people to wake up, but those in greatest need of consciousness are his blinded and stupified followers.

OH, OK! That ‘splains it! Ole Wex over at the
Glenn Beck Report!
DING DONG!!! DING DONG!!

OK cjd, here’s an article that spells out Beck’s danger in great detail. Enjoy:
http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/149129/how_glenn_beck's_twisted_worldview_goads_disturbed_people_into_acts_of_violence/?page=entire

GlennBeckReview said:
OK cjd, here’s an article that spells out Beck’s danger in great detail. Enjoy:http://www.alternet.org/teaparty/149129/how_glenn_beck’s_twisted_worldview_goads_disturbed_people_into_acts_of_violence/?page=entire

thanks for the media matters link, but i dont really watch glen beck, on the other hand what you are saying is bullshit and your opinion, which your are entitled too

dhg, good post.

Brock is an insufferable d-bag when he says ““I was in the right wing then and I knew what they were doing then..” because quislings who bolts from right to left such as Randy Andy Sullivan and Arianna Huffin&puffin & this pathetic excuse for a humanoid all bolt for convenience, just as the Demonrats pander to blacks [urban plantations] Hispanics [illegal immigration legalized] and gays [an articulate committed base with a lot of free time and a persecution complex for being pervs].

It’s all about what FelixW brilliantly summarizes with the leaden cynicism of a Demonrat base with a captive lamestream media:

“On the hierarchy of credibility, the only thing lower than MSNBC is Media Matters. So it’s no surprise that Chris Matthews would want David Brock on his show. When compared to Brock, Matthews actually looks like a journalist. But it’s all relative, and to the rest of us, both of these gentlemen stopped caring about journalism long ago, and simply operate in the world of spin and partisan propaganda.”

Bravo, felixw, for succinctly nailing that coonskin to the wall.

Hilarious, the thread devolves into Beck and Palin, more fodder for the Dr Demento Keith Olbermann to whinge about Beck & Palin getting all that free media time. So does Joe Biden, for the same two reasons, the amazing things he & they say [many true, but not-to-be-said-out-loud in a politically-correct lamestream media environment] and Biden’s often totally absurd take on things [Hezbollah's been kicked out of Lebanon, all the while their assassination terrorist campaign is MURDERING the Christian and Sunni opposition out of existence!!!].

Biden was Chmn of the SenFornAffairsCte & I’m an ex-FSO and Arabist, so Joe’s fecality-on-the-air is particularly galling—I also lived in Beirut for a year.

Brock is a complete fool and turncoat, which gets rewarded just as Arianna Puffbag and Crazy Andy Sullivan also get rewarded for morphing from “conservatism” to zany mouthings of DemonratNationalCommittee talking point memos. With enough panache and sick humor to make the stuff palatable to uneducated arrogant libtards who believe they’re smarter than everyone else, but are victims of fixed ideas and received opinions.

Beck is a very provocative, often wrong but advocating a POV more interesting thant the standard PC fare the perfessers make students swallow at so-called ‘universities.’ And Palin is outspoken, with a vivacious and perky point of view from the Alaskan hinterlands that is much more interesting than the exhalations of second-rate suck-ups like spermburper Brock and sodhole Sullivan.

I personally wouldn’t back Palin in a primary, preferring a grown-up charisma-challenged self-made businessman like Mitt Romney or even a Dakotan like Thune. But if it were her versus Obummer, I’d hold my nose and vote for the non-socialist, non-statist alternative to a welfare state on steroids.

GlennBeckReview said:
Beck is a threat to the President’s lifeBeck is a threat to the President’s life.

GBR is a total loon. His website is one BIG lie. He is so dumb he thought he could sue people for calling him a liar. He and his crew should be in a home for the insane.

GlennBeckReview said:
The bombshell turns out to be more explosive than I knew about even two weeks ago. This involves activities on Beck’s part that are not just about his past, but very much his present, or at least very recent past (two weeks). It also involves innocent victims. These people, in Beck’s world of smash mouth discourse, are going to become collateral damage. Their lives will be damaged because of Beck’s hypocritical behavior…when the reporter publishes on his schedule, not yours, not Mediaite’s, not Beck’s and not on my schedule.
Yes, Beckerheads, there is a bombshell.

If you want proof GBR is INSANE just read the above comment. He is delusional. There is no “reporter”. There is NO bombshell. Nobody will be damaged. This loons parents should take him behind the woodshed and give him the beating of his life for making up stories.