Say Anything Blog

I don’t know about Johnson County Republicans but that list doesn’t reflect Republican values.

It’s full of lies if it claims that it does.

I’ll just pick out one point for now as I was just going to bed.

What party is gay bashing?  The Democrats are bashing Foley and now Larry Craig.  They are claiming that they have a list of Republicans that are gay.

The Republicans aren’t doing that.

The rest of your list is as much newspeak as that.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Whistler,

I didn’t come up with writing this.  This is a life-long backer of the Republican Party.  The reason that I put it up here is so that people could see what old-time Republicans are saying about your Party.

And if the Republican Party doesn’t bash gays, why aren’t they open about it, even when asked?

bak, if this is someone else’s writing you need to attribute it to them and make sure you have permission to republish the whole thing.

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

And if the Republican Party doesn’t bash gays, why aren’t they open about it, even when asked?

What are you talking about.  We don’t obsess over someone’s orientation like the lefties.

Beside why would it be anybody’s business?

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

bak72,

Your post mentions casting that “first ballot” in 1968, but your blog’s “About Me” section lists your age as 34 with a wife and a 2 year old son.

Similarly, those latest poll results you’ve posted have neither a date nor a source cited, making them effectively meaningless.

It’s hard to tell exactly what point you are trying to make… except perhaps that you are no better at fooling others than you are at fooling yourself.

Rob,

It isn’t the complete article.  There was more after where I left off, and I should have put that this was written by the Johnson County Sun.  My mistake. 

What are you talking about.  We don’t obsess over someone’s orientation like the lefties.

Beside why would it be anybody’s business?

You don’t obsess over someone’s orientation?  Oh please.

Besides, why would it be anybody’s business?  You need to tell me that.  Why do Republicans want sodomy laws on the books if they don’t care what homosexuals do behind closed doors?  Why do Republicans bash San Francisco because it has a large amount of gay people?  Why do most conservative people refer to gay people as “those people”? 

Tell me why David Dreier, a leading Republican in congress has opposed the following:

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which would have banned discrimination against gay people in hiring

Voted for banning adoption by gay and lesbian couples in the District of Columbia (3,000 miles away from Dreier’s district)

Voted to allow federally funded charities to discriminate against gays in employment, even where local laws prohibit such bias

Since Republicans like all kinds of people in their caucus, why weren’t the majority up in arms over these blatant votes against gay people? 

Whistler, according to a couple of people who have expressed themselves on my blog and here that I’m a communist fag who doesn’t support America.  That does show some intolerence for homosexuals by members of the right, I would say.

bak72: Conservatives don’t believe in “special rights” for favored groups, like you lefties do.  In fact, we don’t believe in “favored groups”, either.  Everyone gets the same rights, even white, christian, conservative men have the same free speech rights as everyone else.  We don’t believe in the fascist PC, and we believe everyone is responsible for the choices they make in life.  If you choose to do something that is only done by about 5% of the population, you won’t have the same representation in the public discourse as the other 95% of the population.  That is the consequence of choice; if you choose to walk around in a clown suit, for instance, you will be laughed at, and will not enjoy the same job opportunities that people have who dress normally.  Duh.  It is not the duty of either the court system, the legal system, or the taxpayers to guarantee you the same outcomes as you would get if you chose to ditch the clown suit and wear normal clothes.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

bak, just to be on the safe side, could you put a blockquote around what you’re quoting and link back to your source in the post?  Or at least give a citation to who wrote it?

I don’t want to run into a plagiarism problem here.

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

bak72 said, It isn’t the complete article.

It isn’t?

Write your own articles.

I don’t think bak meant to imply that this was his own work.  Honest mistake.

I would feel better though, bak, if you didn’t quote the entire article and cited your source.

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

Bak72:
As someone who first voted Republican in 1972 let me say I agree with the article.  The big change came when we welcomed the southern bible thumpers into the party.
I wish we could give them back.

It’s nice to see the lefties tolerance towards people’s faiths.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Whistler:
I have nothing against their faith, I just want it kept out of politics.  The Shiavo case was a perfect example.

So everyone else is able to project their personal beliefs into how they vote except those people who actually have a religious belief.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

So everyone else is able to project their personal beliefs into how they vote except those people who actually have a religious belief.

BINGO!

And now the Courier in Ohio has “unendorsed” Ken Blackwell (R) for governor.

We don’t obsess over someone’s orientation like the lefties.

Obsess is exactly what the republicans do over the “gay” issue.  They legislate morality as to ‘protecting marriage” from the gays making sure they will never be able to “marry.” It is indeed the backbone of the Republican party but this year it just ain’t working as a campaign issue.

The big change came when we welcomed the southern bible thumpers into the party.
I wish we could give them back.

greg,

I’m struck by the similarity between your sentiments expressed here, and the bigotry of some Southern Democrats (including WV Senator Robert Byrd) toward Black voters.  Obviously, bigotry, whether based on race or religion, is still very much alive and well.  In the North as well as the South

What you seem to overlook is that those “southern bible thumpers” as you are pleased to call them, the conservative Reagan Democrats, have exactly the same right to participate politically, to express their policy preferences, and to vote their conscience as you do.

Indeed, were you a little more astute, and less effete as well, it might just occur to you that without those same Southern conservatives who you disdain with such relish, the Republicans are a minority party, with no hope of retaining power.  The Nelson Rockefeller-Bob Michel wing of the GOP, won no national elections and accomplished next to nothing.  When Republicans run as conservative, and behave as conservatives, we win.  When we act like silk-stocking clones of Democrats, we lose… as we ought to.

Perhaps then, Greg, you really would be less ill at ease among the Democrats.  Your policy preferences seem to be a near perfect match for theirs… as does your intolerance.

Puzzlefeet says, Obsess is exactly what the republicans do over the “gay” issue.  They legislate morality as to ‘protecting marriage” from the gays making sure they will never be able to “marry.”

Sorry. Not wanting to change one of the bedrocks of Western Civilization doesn’t equate to “obsession” with gays.

Take the opposite view and ask yourself if it makes much sense - are you obsessing over gays because you endorse “gay marriage”? Perhaps in your case that is true, but I doubt it is true for most supporters of “gay marriage”.

It is indeed the backbone of the Republican party but this year it just ain’t working as a campaign issue.

The backbone? Haha. That’s stretching the issue just a bit in importance.

Bat:

“When Republicans run as conservative, and behave as conservatives, we win.”

Sorry, but there’s nothing even remotely conservative about the current crop of Republicans.  Bloated budgets, Religous pandering, eagerness for foreign military inteventions… the list goes on.
They are more electable now as I think you pointed out, but it’s at the expense of principles I found dear.

The Washington Post has an extensive article on whats the matter with Kansas:

Moderates in Kansas Decide They’re Not in GOP Anymore

..bring back Dick Armey as Majority Leader

..and a Goldwater for the Senate ..

Obsess is exactly what the republicans do over the “gay” issue.

Hey, which radio show had that liberal activist on to “out” some gay Republican politicians against their will?  Was that Ed Schultz?  They guy whose show stays on the air because its backed by money from a bunch of prominent Democrats?

Why do Democrats only like liberal gay people?

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

As someone who first voted Republican in 1972 let me say I agree with the article.  The big change came when we welcomed the southern bible thumpers into the party.
I wish we could give them back.

What is basically happening in Kansas is that as the Religious wing of the Republican party is becoming the dominant wing of the GOP, other Republicans (fiscal conservative etc) are diffecting to the Democratic party in drove:

Nor is Morrison alone. In a state that voted nearly 2 to 1 for President Bush in 2004, nine former Republicans will be on the November ballot as Democrats. Among them is Mark Parkinson, a former chairman of the Kansas Republican Party, who changed parties to run for lieutenant governor with the popular Democratic governor, Kathleen Sebelius.

“I’d reached a breaking point,” Parkinson said, preparing for a rally in Wichita alongside Sebelius. “I want to work on relevant issues and not on a lot of things that don’t matter.”

somewhat of a lesson for the National party. ..

Barry Goldwater had similar feelings in his days,

Barry Goldwater:

“When you say ‘radical right’ today, I think of these moneymaking ventures by fellows like Pat Robertson and others who are trying to take the Republican Party and make a religious organization out of it. If that ever happens, kiss politics goodbye.” He said about Jerry Falwell, founder of the Moral Majority, “I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass,”

. ..Former Republican Majority Leader Dick Armey does too:

In recent weeks, Mr. Armey has stepped up a public campaign against the influence of Dr. James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family and an influential voice among evangelical protestants. In an interview published last month in “The Elephant in the Room,” a book by Ryan Sager about splits among conservatives, Mr. Armey accused Congressional Republicans of “blatant pandering to James Dobson” and “his gang of thugs,” whom Mr. Armey called “real nasty bullies” — arguments he reprised on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal and in an open letter on the Web site organization FreedomWorks.

In an interview this week, Mr. Armey said catering to Dr. Dobson and his allies had led the party to abandon budget-cutting. And he said Christian conservatives could cost Republicans seats around the country, especially in Ohio.

“The Republicans are talking about things like gay marriage and so forth, and the Democrats are talking about the things people care about, like how do I pay my bills?” he said.

Mr. Armey also pinned some of the blame on Tom DeLay, the former Republican House majority leader, who “was always more comfortable with the social conservatives, the evangelical wing of the party, than he was with the business wing.”

Mr. Armey, who identifies himself as an evangelical, said he was tired of Christian conservative leaders threatening that their supporters would stay away from the ballot box unless they got what they wanted.

greg,

I would agree that many of the “current crop” of Republicans are not conservatives… starting with Mr. Bush.  The foremost example is federal spending, but there are plenty of others examples such as steel import quotas, the unconscienable lack of real immigration security and national border integrity, the lack of party discipline in the Senate, particularly as pertains to up-or-down votes on appellate level judicial nominees, and, speaking of McCain, the obscene BCFRA.

On the other hand, much HAS been accomplished.  Tax cuts, certainly.  But also tort reform, No-Child-Left-Behind which may yet be made to work effectively, and the appointment of two suitably conservative, if not yet originalist, Supreme Court justices, including Chief Roberts.

In the domestic arena there are two major items left undone, Social Security reform and true tax reform.  Democrats are scared to death of both… as they should be.

In foreign affairs, you are mistaken, as are former President Bush, and former Secretary of State Jim Baker.  Saddam Hussein should have been taken out long ago.  His attempted assasination of the former President Bush was more than reason enough.  To suggest that he was “contained” is self-delusional b**sh*t.  What we know so far about the Oil-for-Food scandal more than demonstrates the point.  Besides, that’s the same thing that was said of Kim Jong Il’s nuclear weapons program during the 1990’s.  Didn’t work there either.  The fact that Saddam’s nuclear weapons program was located in Libya, not Iraq, does not mean it was any less of a threat, does it?

These are not the 1970’s, Greg, and the policies and treaty mechanisms that may have served us back then (well, sort of) are of little use now.  If anything, the threats we face today are far more virulent than those we faced 30 or 40 years ago.  The world has changed.  Some good and some bad.  We can no longer afford the false luxury and security of that cocoon you find so wistfully comforting.

The Republican party is between a rock and a hard place.  Fiscal conservatives feel it has expanded government spending too much, while many religious conservatives feel it hasn’t done enough to make policy of their agenda.

Hey, Rob, you want to list the right wing radio stations and their stance on gay marriage and how many show they talked about gay marriage and obsessed on it?  Let me know when you get the list done.

Why should respect for a gay’s person’s privacy equated with gay marriage?

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Hey, Rob, you want to list the right wing radio stations and their stance on gay marriage and how many show they talked about gay marriage and obsessed on it?  Let me know when you get the list done.

What does one’s position on gay marriage have to do with the extortion on Ed Schulz’s show?  Opposing gay marriage is one thing, but at least those guys aren’t violating anyone’s privacy.

Again, why do you Democrats only like homosexuals who agree with your politics?

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

It means anti-public education, though claiming to support it.

Bush has increased education more than any president in my lifetime and set standards along with.  That’s anti-public education?

It means weak support of our universities, while praising them.

Again,
Bush has increased education more than any president in my lifetime.  Didn’t he increase student loans and gov’t college education grants? 

It means anti-stem cell research.

Didn’t Bush allow limited stem-cell research?

It means ridiculing global warming.

Isn’t the science questionable? Or should we just dump our economy because scientist say so?  There are many scientists who disagree with man-made global warming.

It means gay bashing. Not so much gay marriage, but just bashing gays.

You mean like outing republican closet homo’s for political gain?  Or, do you simply mean everyone must accept homosexuality?

It means immigrant bashing. I’m talking about the viciousness.

Me too. *Illegal* aliens aren’t immigrants, but they are vicious.  See those rallies in CA?  See them demand and threatening to take back California?

It means putting religion in public schools. Not just prayer.

It means mocking evolution and claiming it is not science.

Evolution is a mockery of science.  Science is limited by its method of investigation to natural causes and natural explantions.  It cannot prove God or any act thereof.  Evolution demands that if God created he did it through evolution.  Scientific method is unable to prove this.

It means denigrating even abstinence-based sex education

What?  Republicans and pro-life advocate have and continue to support such education.  You’re off your rocker.

Looks like the moonbats got to that guy from Kansas.  Good post HG!

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

P: Hate to break this to you, but there is no such thing as “gay marriage”.  Whatever it is that gays do, it ain’t marriage, and never will be.  Why are you obsessed with cramming this phony idea of “gay marriage” down our throats?  We don’t want it, and wherever it has been put to a vote, it has been soundly defeated.  Don’t you respect the will of the people?

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Why are you obsessed with cramming this phony idea of “gay marriage”

My opinion is that being homosexual is such an unhappy lifestyle.  The homosexuals are externalising their unhappiness by blaming Republicans for not allowing them to marry.

If they get that “right” they’ll still be unhappy and unwilling to confront the real problem of their unhappiness.  So it will be not enough homosexuals on TV or not having homosexual-only proms or something.

What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.

Religious marriage should never have been recognized by the state to begin with. Civil unions should be the only legal unions, and of course any consenting adults, regardless of gender, should be able to reap the benefits.

The religious right’s obscession with gay marriage, and homosexuality in general, is somewhat curious though. Why all the focus on gays?

Chad: Why all the focus on trying to force the selfish desires of a small minority group on all the rest of us?  Whenever it has been put to a vote, it is overwhelmingly rejected.  Marriage, btw, existed before organized religion, so your anti-religious argument is bunk.  This isn’t an atheist country, either.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

"Why all the focus on trying to force the selfish desires of a small minority group on all the rest of us?”

What does to gay people getting married have to do with you *at all*?

“Marriage, btw, existed before organized religion, so your anti-religious argument is bunk.”

Then you should have no problem nullifying all religious marriages?

“This isn’t an atheist country, either.”

Sadly, you are correct. However, there is such a thing as the seperation of church and state.

“Why all the focus on trying to force the selfish desires of a small minority group on all the rest of us?”

What does to gay people getting married have to do with you *at all*?

It’s only when they try to hijack something that has nothing to do with them that I object.

“Marriage, btw, existed before organized religion, so your anti-religious argument is bunk.”

Then you should have no problem nullifying all religious marriages?

That’s a very small tail wagging a very large dog.  Why not just “nullify” homosexual activity?  It would damage far fewer people.  Your suggestion is hateful and ridiculous.

“This isn’t an atheist country, either.”

Sadly, you are correct. However, there is such a thing as the seperation of church and state.

Read the First Amendment sometime.  It contains no reference to “separation of church and state”, but it does say that Congress shall make no law...prohibiting the free exercise(of religion).  If you’re going to make a Constitutional argument, at least read the Constitution.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

Chad: BTW, I’m not sad that we are a Christian nation; it is one of the secrets of our success, which is why you lefties are trying to destroy it.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

HG

Bush has increased education more than any president in my lifetime and set standards along with.  That’s anti-public education? ....

HG, the article is about is about Religious conservative activist in the state of Kansad, its not about Bush.

Anon,

The article attempts to trash conservative republicans, while praising traditional (moderate) republicans, and concludes that conservative democrats are the better choice this election.  Kansas is not the only state affected by this decision.  A democrat majority will result in far left leadership in either house. Such a departure from the republican party in Kansas will result in an advance in liberalism.  At least with a current republican leadership an agenda closer to that of the moderate republicans has been advanced.  Bush is responsible for setting that agenda, but he won’t be if the libs are running either house.

Hope this clears it up.

HG: Because of the far-left lurch of the Democrat Party since Clinton, there are no longer any genuine “conservative Democrats”, except in leftie mythology.  The leaders of the Dem Party; Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid(and Clinton) are far left fringies.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.

R108,

I agree.  I haven’t seen any conservative democrats since Miller.  Lieberman is the best they can put forth and although he gets the war right, he is a social leftie.
You have to wonder what this Kansas moderate is hoping to accomplish with such an unprincipled decision.  It seems moderates are missing something—I think it’s conviction.

HG: If Joe Lieberman is a “conservative Democrat”, why does he vote liberal 90% of the time?  Shifting definitions…
I will accept Zell, though.  That’s one, and the Dems have purged him anyway.  Ditto Lieberman.

If you don’t know by now, don’t mess with it.