To brighten your evening: Far-Right GOP bigot Outed, Resigns- Page 2

[Auggie27]

Posted: 8/31/04 at 8:23pm

RobbieJ's outrage is clear,and I concur. So many Rudy/Arnie GOPers -- and their followers -- who segregate "domestic issues" from those pertaining to national security consistently look the other way when this administration blatently and strategically uses "domestic issues" to shore up a radical right wing base.

How can gay Republicans not be deeply offended to the very marrow of their bones when their president -- in initiating a constitutional amendment to shut them out of fundamental rights -- carefully made sure to NOT make his party "a big tent." Have you ever -- EVER heard someone from the Bush regime say a single kind or compassionate thing about gay people? If Bush holds a personal belief about marriage being hetero-inclusive and yet theoretically also believes that gay people shouldn't be persecuted or denied human rights -- why not simply use the phrase "GAY PEOPLE" in a SINGLE speech? An inclusive one--that might argue that true compassion REQUIRES tolerance? Good God, these people worship JESUS -- the person who theoretically set the highest mark for tolerance in the history of the world!

No,I could almost forgive them for their "private" intolerance if they had the "public" grace, the humanity -- the so-called CHRISTIAN compassion -- to give a damn about, say, the gay teen bruised and bullied for the umpteenth time, thinking suicide is the only answer... or the lesbian girl sent into the streets, penniless by her traditional values-espousing parents because she came out. Our children -- our gay children, some of whom could grow up to write WEST SIDE STORY or THE GLASS MENAGERIE, both adored and performed regularly by Republicans--or merely be the kind neighbor down the street!-- need a safe, tolerant world to grow up and thrive in. And this president, no matter what his lip service suggests, is hell bent on NOT providing them with that safe world. I'll never forgive him for that.

Updated On: 8/31/04 at 08:23 PM

Posted: 8/31/04 at 8:43pm

Auggie - your pain is eloquently conveyed - and felt by many here at the table. I think this is what Namo was refering to earlier in the day in one of his posts. It's almost impossible to not envision a schism growing so wide within the party that nothing could bridge the gap. It's baffling to me, as they have had this group pulling the strings before (anyone remember Newt?) and it blew up in their faces so badly they were stunned into chaos. As much as I try to understand the fear that pushes them to keep 'looking the other way,' I can't see how, in the end, they will be able to justify themselves - even to each other.

Ultimately, considering the one arguement that I think could even possibly justify their continued support (national security) I still can't come up with reasonable answers. It's pretty well established that the current course has to be taken at least to its logical conclusion - no matter who is in office. So to override all the other concerns simply based on that issue is not a firm foundation. The other major unifying point is fiscal responsibility, and despite ckeaton's rational analysis, it is arguable as to whether the positive take on the situation is valid.

We who are human can't help but be dismayed that what touches our lives so completely can be dismissed so cavalierly. I myself am committed to trying to find ways where everyone has a viable voice, but the conditions become harder and harder to maintain that stance.

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 9:03am

DG: I agree with nearly everything you say. But don't forget the Reopublicans weren't "stunned" enough to lose the majority in the House or Senate (except briefly thanks to Senator Jeffords) and they weren't in disarray enough to slow the construction of horrendous policy decisions, the foundation of which was laid by President Reagan. Minimal social programs, undoing the Great Society, giving up on the war on poverty, gag rules on scientific research, massive budget-crippling tax cuts skewed to the wealthy and wasteful out of control military spending.

Ckeaton: You believe in the system a bit too much to think that wacko constitutional amendments can't prevail, I'm afraid. Let me point you toward something called Prohibition. And, leaving the interpretation of what is constitutional to 9 political appointees on the Supreme Court is sobering. Take a quick scan of some of the more egregious decisions they've handed down over the decades -- especially when it comes to civil rights. Thankfully, the system rights itself over time. But how long is appropriate for the disenfranchised to wait to enjoy equality and civil rights? Sorry, I don't think it's right that we have 13 million children living in poverty in this country; 9 million children without health insurance; growing racial disparities in health; large segments of our society being denied full civil rights and liberty.

It doesn't need to be this way, and I won't accept one more minute of complacency from our elected officials.

I'm with Auggie, as always.

[Plum]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 9:25am

If we're talking health insurance, what we need is to stop worshipping marketization as the fix to everything. But that's another story.

[ckeaton]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 11:45am

Zola, et. al.

I look forward to discussing all of the wonders that the Kerry/Edwards administration will have brought to us (should it happen). I look forward to the day when Mr. Heinz-Kerry solves poverty, discrimination, and disease. He is certainly a silver bullet for the U.S., a dull one at that... But any bullet is dangerous with enough force thrown behind it.

The truth of the matter is that no one president will make any difference in it all. Scientists and economists are working every day. It comes back to the people in the long run. We are evolving. Too slowly for some, but that's the nature of progress.

(Unless we are advocating communism? That way the government could see to it that everyone is equal in their bread lines.)

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 11:48am

gotta love it...

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 11:49am

"Scientists and economists are working every day."

Subverted, as least the scientists anyway, by the Bush administration. Don't tell me one president doesn't make a difference. Just look at what has happened at the CDC on Bush's watch. That is if he can tell time.

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 3:08pm

ckeaton: Kerry does have a plan to alleviate poverty. And an extensive plan on AIDS and global disease. I'm happy to discuss.

The point here is leadership and political will. The tone of the government is set by the top, and there is no doubt that we made great strides in the fight against AIDS during the Clinton Administration because the president himself was engaged in the fight. W is asleep at the wheel.

[ckeaton]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 3:38pm

When Kerry "alleviates poverty" I will buy you a bottle of your favorite moderatley priced spirits.

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 9/1/04 at 3:52pm

They have a plan. They acknowledge that poverty in the richest country in the world is unacceptable. I hope whoever wins the election addresses this pernicious problem instead of ignoring it. But the tried and true trickle-down clearly does not work. Bush cut all these taxes on the rich and the poverty numbers released last week show an uptick in poverty.

It doesn't have to be this way.