You suck because of your job? Who do people think they are?

[Emerson]

I just got done reading the thread about santorums gay staffer and the many posts that include "What a piece of shit" "Maybe he can work for the KKK next" "THESE MOTHERFUCKING ROY COHNS"

Who the hell do people think they are?

Should people who work for repubs just quit their jobs and end up living in a box?

It seems some people don't have a clue what the economy has been like the past several years. Unless you have ungodly high skills that are in super high demand you can no longer be so picky as to who you work for.

I got laid off over six months ago and with more job inquiries than I can count (at least over 200) I can't get so much as an interview. If a repub offered me a job today I would take it in a heart beat. At this point I don't even want to think about how long it's going to take to pay down the debt I've gotten in to since being laid off.

It's easy to sit on your ass and criticize people for their employer while you have a steady income and a nice meal every day.

I wonder how many who criticize others for their employer work for a company that donates to repubs or have a boss that is one of them. I have a feeling it would be a large number.

Yes it sucks to work for them. But with the current economy picking and choosing an employer is a luxury many no longer have. Attacking someone for their employer is extremely low and trashy.

[bryant69]

1. Moral Purity

Sure would be nice. Too bad I have to eat.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[Dora]

2. Well-put.

:applause:

[mattclearing]

3. "Should people who work for repubs just quit their jobs?"

In a nutshell yes, even if they end up living in a box.

A box with dignity is better than a house built on innocent blood.

[Emerson]

5. So, what company do you work for?

If we find out they donated to repubs when will you be submitting your resignation?

[mattclearing]

76. They didn't.

:P

[muriel_volestrangler]

200. It's not a question of donations

by being a staffer for a Republican senator, you are being a Republican. Therefore, you are fair game for criticism and insults on a Democratic board. Would you let Scott McClellan off, because he needs a job?

There's a world of difference between working for a company whose owners donate a bit of their profits to Republicans, and having a job actively pushing their agenda. Surely you can see that.

[LSK]

11. And then theres reality....

Do you have a family? Do you have children???

I cant believe some stuff people write...

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sequoia]

37. Yeah, right.

Some of my family and friends are Republican, should I desert them? Does dignity feed your family?

[mattclearing]

83. If they voted for Bush...

...they are not your friends.

As for your family, there are some things in life you can't control.

But when you work for people, that means that you are personally responsible for their success...it is an endorsement of their efforts.

Family really has nothing to do with my post.

[imenja]

4. there are also a good number of gay Republicans

This is still America. People are allowed to think differently from us. Those sorts of comments are ugly. I think it's better to confront the staffer on specific issues, like the GOP's position on gay rights, rather than rely on epithets that only demonstrate poor character on the part of the speaker.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

6. Sorry, but I've had the same job for 23 years and if my boss

went on television regularly and actively campaigned against my human rights I would quit and then compete with him.

It's easy to sit on your ass as a {presumed) heterosexual and claim it's no big deal and that people need work.

People need rights too.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

14. Oh..so now you are criticizing me for having a job?

I just said I wouldn't sit on my high horse for very long. I'm industrious and entrprenuerial.

What I am not is a complete hypocrite who would work for a scum that totally supports removing all my rights.

[Emerson]

26. Nope

Just think going hungry for a while would put some sense in to you.

"I'm industrious and entrprenuerial"

Good for you. So you would start a business? I assume then that you have good credit, education, experience, and business skills? As well as capitol to get it off the ground?

Proof positive you have no idea what it's like to be unemployed for any period of time. Most people can not afford to start a business, or do not have the skills to be as successful as one needs to be.

Or is everyone supposed to be in as good as a position to start a business as you? How is one supposed to start a business when they are negative in the bank account after being unemployed for a long period of time?

I know. Maybe they can take out a $100,000 loan and then when the business goes under the can live in slavery with the new bankruptcy law in effect. That's a great plan.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

32. YOu don't know jack shit about me and some businesses can be

started for almost no capital.

I suppose in your world black people should be hungry enough to publish and edit flyers for the KKK

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

41. Resorting to personal attacks since you can't prove your point?

Look, if we can't expect ethics from educated professionals in a bad economy then let's all proclaim that ENRON was right to rip off it's employees and shareholders. OK?

[Emerson]

44. I have not made a personal attack

I am simply calling it like it is. 23 years employed does not give you a clue what it's like to look for employment in the bush economy. Not an attack, just a fact.

Your attempt to shift this to "working for the KKK" and enron has also been noted.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

47. You've made them throughout. And the basic premise of your post

is that a gay man should work for the man out to strip all gays of even basic rights since he needs a job. I guess he needs a job more than he needs his right to exist.

Your other premise is that in a bad economy people just can't have ethics. Nevermind that a void of ethics created the economic condition in the first place.

[Emerson]

55. Repub senators don't give a damn about GLBT rights

one way or another.

They use it to motivate the idiot fundie masses that vote for them as they do abortion. Period.

Santorum gives speeches to the idiots on the floor, but he could care less if the repub base gets anything.

Please spare me the "the man out to strip all gays of even basic rights" argument. Only the fundies are naive enough to believe the repubs bring up the issue for anything other than votes.

"Nevermind that a void of ethics created the economic condition in the first place."

Interesting catch 22 isn't it.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

62. You are the one who started a thread lambasting people

for criticizing a man that would work for someone promoting hatred against him.

If YOU would do that, then fine. Some of us worry less about a job than about the ill effect of hatred such as gay bashing etc.

Allow me to repeat myself in case you didn't hear me the first time.

I WOULD NEVER WORK FOR SOMEONE ACTIVELY PROMOTING HATRED AND VIOLENCE AGAINST ME.

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mondo joe]

56. LOL - be an antigay communications guy or be homeless? Those are

the choices?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

63. I thought binary wasn't even the tech language of the day anymore

;-)

[Emerson]

80. Actually that's called machine code

and it's VERY difficult to write. It's a low level language. Usually you write it for a BIOS/firmware.... which every system board and certain hardware (like CD/DVD drives) needs. It is most certainly the language of the day for that hardware. This work is usually done in Asia.

Of course C++ and other RAD (rapid application development) languages are much more common for every day software dev.

[skypilot]

7. I see.

The only options for this guy are working for Santorum or living in a box? And I'm sure there are alot of people who would criticize this guy who don't have a steady income and a nice meal every day. We all realize that the economy sucks but this guy is not some isolated case. The Republican party is FULL of gays who either push or support people who push anti-gay legislation. Our outrage has nothing to do with moral purity.

[Emerson]

13. There are a lot of political jobs where he is

if you see a job listing for a staffer and you've been unemployed for months you really don't care who it is you'll be working for. Maybe he could move to a different place. Of course that costs a ton of money and makes the job search even more difficult as you have few leads and don't know the area well.

When you're unemployed you don't sit around and X out all the listings that are repub.

Also I question your "full of gays" claim. They have maybe 10% of the GLBT population *at most*. Everyone else is a dem.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

17. And you know this how?

[Emerson]

20. Oh I don't know

just seems like DC would be a place you'd find lots of listings for political jobs. But surely that would be a secret. Would be hard to find out if that was true or not.

[skypilot]

21. Where in the article does it say...

...that he'd been unemployed for months? And my '"full of gays" claim"' was not so much a "claim" as a figure of speech. By "full of gays" I mean that there are alot. More than I can understand considering today's political climate and the Republicans' (especially Santorum's) well-known anti-gay stance.

[Emerson]

27. If he quit his job

he would be unemployed for months. It doesn't need to say it in the article. That's the simple reality of the bush economy.

[skypilot]

30. If he quit his job without securing another one first...

...he might, MIGHT be unemployed for months. Neither you nor I know what else is on this guy's resume and what else he is qualified to do. If I were him I'd be searching for another job while working for Santorum rather spending any time at all going on record telling people what a swell guy Santorum is.

On edit: And if he did end up unemployed for months he'd have the Republican scumbags that he works for partly to thank for it.

[Emerson]

35. Please get a dose of reality

so when employers start calling his current employer for references don't you think that would prompt them to begin looking for a replacement?

I know that's what my past employers would have done when they found I was looking for a new job. They would say bye to me as soon as they found a replacement. (which might be two days, a week tops after finding out I was going to quit)

[skypilot]

42. As someone else has noted...

...on this thread, for this guy to get where he is he most likely has connections. I'm sure he could work around the problem of having a potential new employer calling his current employer for references. And people change jobs all the time. Something tells me that this guy could manage. I'm not feeling too much pity for him. But you go right ahead.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

36. No, sir..that is YOUR REALITY.

My friend is quitting his job and going straight to a new job as we speak. In fact, he has 600 hours of comp time coming and he will be paid double for the next 4 months

[Emerson]

39. What field is he in?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

43. Medical

and not a highly trained position either

[Emerson]

46. Oh gee

medical. Certainly not a field in any kind of demand. :eyes:

What about those of us who did IT before everything was shipped out of the country? Yea, we are certainly in the same boat as those with medical degrees.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

49. I know people in IT getting jobs right now

And as I said, he does not have any formal degrees.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

52. LOL...no proof so you call BS..again, you cannot back your basic

premise so you simply attack others

[Emerson]

57. You're the one that should bring proof

when you make claims that you know people getting IT jobs right now. Until I see some evidence of that I call BS. That claim goes against the reality that 1. The jobs have been outsourced. and 2. There are too many IT pros for the jobs available.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

64. Depends on where you live

People are getting jobs in California right now

[Emerson]

73. Silicon valley and other locations in CA are an exception to the rule

if you are highly skilled with a very very impressive resume you might be able to get in the door with some hardware R&D and the like.

My job along with most others who did IT for the company is now in India. I can have it back... if I move to India and apply for it.

This outsourcing has moved to other sectors as well and it's only getting worse. And that's only one of the factors working against the number of jobs available.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

85. what did you do at your company?

fellow IT worker here, just wondering what you did that got outsourced.

[Emerson]

98. Tier 3 tech support

[SheepyMcSheepster]

103. so you just answer phones all day?

must have been a rather large company to have 3 tiers of support. how many IT employees were there?

i would recommend getting into something that requires you to actually touch hardware like network admin etc.

this things can't be shipped over seas, someone will always have physically touch hardware.

[Emerson]

106. That's what I'm looking at now

I worked with hardware prior to being moved to support.

[ProfessorGAC]

59. How Did The Thread Become About You?

I thought we were talking about a high level political operative with loads of connections working against his own self-interest.

Now, it's all about how hard IT jobs are to get? A strong basic premise is not that easily sidetracked. Or, at least it shouldn't be.
The Professor

[Emerson]

60. No it's not about me

It's about people who want criticize ANYONE who works for repubs. That includes the staffer and that includes anyone else who does.

I'm simply saying those who think it's easy to find a job in the bush economy obviously have not had to look for any.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

67. But therein lies the lapse of logic. They are criticizing a gay man

for working for Santorum; a man that actually uses hate speech against gays to curry favor...I suppose old black Joe should see if David Duke has any positions available...it's a bad economy dontcha know?

[Emerson]

69. Yes he uses hate speech for votes

but what anti-gay legislation has santorum actually gotten passed in the body?

His communications director is likely not a fool and realizes it's only playing another repub wedge issue to get votes.

Or do you honestly believe repub office holders actually want to get rid of abortion and gay rights and thus lose the primary wedge issues they use to get votes?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

72. That doesn't matter. Gay people get killed over his rants.

I am sorry that your situation is such that you believe all morals should be left at the door. I'm not there and don't plan to be.

[mondo joe]

75. No, he's not a fool - he's just a fascist like his boss. But a gay one.

[skypilot]

48. And do these words ring a bell???

"There are a lot of political jobs where he is"

They should. They are yours. If there are so many political jobs where he is then he has choices. It seems that he made his.

[Emerson]

65. There are a lot of political jobs

but that doesn't mean they are un-filled jobs.

There are a lot of jobs everywhere. The problem in the bush economy is that none of them are open positions.

[skypilot]

71. Nice dodge.

Then do these words sound familiar?

"...if you see a job listing for a staffer...blah, blah, blah..."

Your were clearly talking about "a lot of political jobs" in terms of the ones that are listed and thus unfilled. Like I said, nice dodge.

[Emerson]

84. Nope

There are a lot of political jobs. If one becomes open, and you see the listing for it, you take it.

Just because you see a listing for a staffer position doesn't mean there is more than one. Nice leap of logic.

[mondo joe]

86. See a listing for it? Do they ADVERTISE for Communications Director

in the HELP WANTED section of the paper?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[skypilot]

91. ...you see the listing for it, you take it...

Yeah, because apparently there's absolutely NOTHING ELSE that this guy is willing or qualified to. Just because you are having so much trouble finding a job in your local supermarkets doesn't mean that this guy is in the position of having to snatch up the first job he sees. But you keep right on defending him. I'm sure he and Santorum are oh so concerned with your predicament.

[mondo joe]

93. I guess the KKK Communications Director position was filled.

But Fred Phelps may be hiring.

;-)

[tanyev]

8. There's a difference between working for someone who happens to

be a Republican and being a loyal employee of RICK SANTORUM for over a decade. Big difference.

[Emerson]

16. When your employer donates to the repub party

don't you think some of that money distributes and ends up in repub senators/reps pockets? Including santorum.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

18. and you know THIS how?

[ProfessorGAC]

25. Way To Wield The Hammer, NSMA

The OP screed is a complaint in search of a problem.
The Professor

[mondo joe]

54. This guy isn't just working for him - he is actively supporting his anti-

gay agenda.

[Zenlitened]

94. Exactly. How this went from a matter of not working for Santorum...

... to "what if your company gave money to republicans" is anybody's guess.

Is today "Hyperbole Friday"? I would have worn a different T-shirt if I'd known. :D

[K-W]

10. If you were talking about a receptionist you would have a point.

But Santorum's communications director is most certainly capable of finding gainful employment outside of the Republican party if he so chooses.

For any poltically significant jobs, by and large the people are choosing sides when they choose employers.

[skypilot]

15. Exactly!!!

As though no one on the Democratic side of the aisle could use a Communications Director.

[Ediacara]

12. Oh Jesus Christ!!

Yes they should live in a box! I'm gay and I would rather live one hundred years in a box than work one minute for that bigot hater that uses Jesus to justify the hate that spews from his oily black heart!

But luckily for the staffer, even in the worst of the recession, there was always WalMart, or Target, or McDonalds which would be better than living in a box. A gay man, even a gay Republican, working for a gay-hating bigot is beyond self-hate.

[Emerson]

19. I can see you've never lived in a box

[devilgrrl]

29. And you have lived in a box?

Tell us about it.

[Emerson]

40. No I have not

but anyone who sits around talking about how a box is better than working for a repub obviously has never lived in one, nor does he have kids to feed. (and if he does I question what kind of parent would make that kind of choice)

[Ediacara]

77. Santorum isn't "a Republican"

He's HATE INCARNATE. This guy would be fine in my eyes working for McCain, or Smith, or Snowe, or Chaffee etc. You're premise is idiotic for two reasons:

1) Santorum isn't just "a Republican," he's a hater above and beyond the call of his party
2) Working for Santorum or living in a box are not his only options, and to even suggest as such is absurd.

[Zenlitened]

138. Prediction: You're not going to get a response from the OP.

Because you've laid bare the flaw in argument that makes this whole thread bogus from the start.

Santorum isn't just "a Republican," he's a hater above and beyond the call of his party

:hi:

[Emerson]

146. Whole thread bogus from the start?

Santorum is an elected office holder. Criticing him is different from criticizing someone who performs a non elected job.

Never did I say criticizing an elected office holder was on the same grounds.

[mondo joe]

151. But you already can't say whether Santorum is harmful to gays or not.

Is he harmful to the US in any way?

[Zenlitened]

169. *sigh*

You're good, I'll admit that. You zig, you zag. You toss a little chaff out one side, a little out the other.

But tell me... how did this become a discussion of the pros and cons of criticizing an elected official?

Face it, you took a statement about a gay man working for someone who actively seeks to hurt gays and lesbians, and ran wild with it.

Your claim that it's "just politics," that Santorum really has no effect on the lives of gays and lesbians = bogus.

Your attempts to compare the situation to employer political contributions = bogus.

Your premise that working for Santorum is equivalent to working for ANY republican = bogus.

You're willingness to continue this comic opera even though any number of posters have shown your position to be mere absurdity = priceless.

:rofl:

[Ediacara]

61. AND NEITHER HAVE YOU!

Your assumption that this guy's only two options for jobs are 1) Santorum or 2) box is idiotic.

This guy is self-hating and an idiot. Santorum is as close to a machine that runs on hate as we're likely to find on this planet, and I don't doubt that Santorum would have killed this man if he ever once so much as acted like he was about to hit on Rick.

How any human being, let alone a gay man, can work for the likes of Santorum is beyond my comprehension. Santorum is an example of everything that's wrong with the world, and this guy had other options.

For you to claim it's just box or Santorum is quite simply wrong.

[mondo joe]

88. Yup - it's a ridiculous birfurcation: Anti-gay Nazi or Homelessness.

The idea that the only job this guy could get is working for his own worst enemy is idiotic.

[imenja]

23. What you don't get is that the GOP power brokers don't care about gays

The cultural argument, anti-Gay, pro-Church, and even abortion, is all part of the GOP propaganda machine. Their real goal is to promote the interests of corporations and the wealthy few. They developed the cultural argument in order to get support from middle Americans uncomfortable with social change. (History demonstrates that culture often has served as a proxy for economic dislocation). Rightist cultural propaganda has been a great triumph of the Republican party. It has not only helped them engineer unprecedented political dominance, but it has changed the terms of politics among the left as well. Why so few see through it escapes me.

[devilgrrl]

34. Excellent analysis!

I wish I could have put that way myself. :applause:

[Ediacara]

66. I know the GOP as a whole doesn't give a shit

But Santorum himself does. Santorum is a hater of the worst variety. This guy could have worked for all sorts of sane Republicans like McCain or Chafee or Snowe or Collins or Gregg or Smith or Specter, but he chose to work for the BIGGEST HATER in the party.

There IS something wrong with a guy that does that.

[indigo32]

102. True

but for those of us who are at serious risk of the masses, Gay for example, that is no comfort. Words spoeken by so called leaders do matter. BTW DOMA Laws do too.
I work right now, for what is likely Repub management. Privately owned company. BUT, there are openly gay people, myself included, who work here too, without any problems. A little different than Rick Santorum.

[mondo joe]

104. What you don't get is the anti gay disinformation IS harmful to gays

In employment, in legal battles and - in case you failed to notice, in state amendments.

[Zenlitened]

141. Then why hasn't ENDA passed? Or hate crimes legislation?

And where is the practical difference between a mere "cultural argument" and a very real lack of civil rights protections for gays and lesbians?

[Sequoia]

22. I'm hearing ya!

My job is a real bore now and doesn't pay much and I work for a company that donates heavily to the Repub party, but I have a family to support. My mate would love to work, he goes everyday with our child to the empoloyment office, but they could care less. We're to the point where we might divorce so we can take advantage of human services. Doesn't that suck, family values, yeah, that's what this Administration is all about. They want to drive families apart if you ask me.

I make now what I did in the 1980s and my rent is triple what I paid then, not to mention the cost of living. Oh, to be able to go to Yosemite for vacation would be heaven. People scorn me because I'm the breadwinner and look with contempt on men who can get a damn job or worse, the homeless families. One woman at work said to me, "Well, if they can push a shopping cart, they can get a job." Easy for her to say, I hope she feels the sting of unemployment then she won't be so quick to judge others. It's tough out there and if my enemy feeds me I sure won't bite the hand.

Good luck buddy, I hope you and my mate get a job.

[SammyWinstonJack]

28. Compassionate conservatism

How callous of her to say that! "Well, if they can push a shopping cart, they can get a job."

[Emerson]

31. Not even a shopping cart anymore!

I'm at the point where I've gone to every grocery store even remotely close to me. What is that answer I always get? "All of our positions are filled"

Not as if a grocery store pays enough to live on anyway, but it's better than nothing.

[skypilot]

58. Rick Santorum and his communications director...

...will help you find a job.

[Emerson]

68. His communications directors job

is to trick fundies in to believing santorum actually gives a damn one way or another about GLBT rights in order to get votes. He does not actually work against gay rights as some are dishonest enough to claim.

Behind the scenes they probably sit around the office laughing at the fools while they print up anti-gay legislation they have no intention of actually passing and killing the wedge issue. They'll print up tons of anti-gay positions just as they do anti-abortion positions, but the truth of the matter is they have no intention of killing the wedge issues that get them the most votes.

His job description should read "Obtain votes from right wing fools using fake wedge issues"

[skypilot]

74. Jesus H. Christ!!!!!

So you believe the Republicans don't actually follow through on their anti-gay agenda? It's all just talk, right? Tell that to the gay people who have no legal recourse if they are fired for being gay, or who can't marry, or adopt children, or inherit property from a deceased partner.
Anyone else here care to add to the list?

[Emerson]

89. In some states

GLBT is a protected class in employment. Mass has marriage rights. Also you can adopt in all states except Florida. Even the TEXAS REPUBLICANS (the worst in the nation IMO) did not pass proposed legislation to take away adoption rights. They talked about it, but backed down. Yet the fools in the repub base vote for them because they talked about it. They're playing a wedge issue.

Tell me - what anti-gay legislation has ACTUALLY passed in the senate since bush has taken office that takes AWAY GLBT rights?

Can you name me ONE piece of legislation they have passed that takes away any GLBT rights? You can't because they haven't passed any.

They are certainly not giving rights, but they are also certainly not taking them away. They like to TALK about taking them away, but that's all it is - talk. They are USING the repub base to get votes. This is called USING A WEDGE ISSUE. If they wanted to pass anti-gay legislation it would have already been passed. They've controlled the senate for a long time now. They don't care what the base wants. All they care about is having a nice congressperson job.

[skypilot]

97. So we should just ignore it all then right?

The only thing of any importance is that you find yourself a job, right?
Things are just fine as long as gays are a protected class in "some states", right? I like you.

On edit: And to the extent that gays are a protected class in SOME states, we certainly don't have assholes like Santorum or the folks who work for him to thank for it.

[Emerson]

105. Yea that's what I said

we should just ignore it. And you accuse me of a dodge?

If you want to go after the real people behind the anti-gay bigotry you won't find it in the US senate. All you'll find there are repub using wedge issues.

The real people behind it are much less visible. They're the ones sitting around in the churches pushing it, and the ignorant and uneducated repub masses.

[mondo joe]

107. Thanks for being a Santorum defender. And it's not even April 1!

[Emerson]

113. I'm not defending santorum

I'm only stating the fact that he doesn't actually care about pushing the fundie agenda.

[mondo joe]

117. So is Santorum harmful to gays or not?

Simple yes or no question.

[Emerson]

124. In a practical way?

No, because he doesn't actually DO anything with his position (i.e. legislation that passes) to push the fundie agenda.

MAYBE you could make an argument that his speeches on the floor are harmful, but anyone who takes them seriously is likely already beyond gone. Most average people who heard his box turtle reference laughed at him. The daily show even did a segment on it. I don't buy the argument that his speeches are negative to GLBT rights due to the fact the only people who take him seriously already have that position regardless of what he says. Therefore it's a netural effect.

Otherwise I see it as a way to make sure he gets votes to stay in office. If the masses he catered to wanted GLBT rights he would probably switch positions overnight.

[mondo joe]

128. Yes or no: Is he harmful to gays or not?

Thank you.

[Emerson]

133. It's is not a black and white issue

Do you believe harm can be done by playing fools for votes? Because that's about all he does.

[mondo joe]

136. Thanks for the evasion.

I knew you wouldn't answer.

[Emerson]

142. Not an evasion

You want to make this in to something more than playing a wedge issue when it's not. You apparently can't see that repub office holders use wedge issues yet don't actually care about the issue. When you get more experience in politics you'll realize that that's what santorum does.

[mondo joe]

153. Do you think Santorum is harmful to the US in any way? Yes or no.

[Emerson]

168. Yes

only in that he gives one more vote to the repubs in the senate.

Otherwise he's a nobody senator that few take seriously.

[mondo joe]

176. What harm do you believe Santorum has done to the US?

[skypilot]

OK.

You ignore the anti-gay bigotry of the Republican party and I'll ignore the fact that you can't find a job. Deal?

And your attempt to turn the source of anti-gay bigotry into some kind of "chicken or egg" thing just won't do. The bigotry comes from the bottom and the top.

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mondo joe]

79. Bullshit. He's spreading anti-gay lies. He's increasing misinformation.

He's aactually WORSE than Santorum.

[PassingFair]

87. Have you tried Haliburton? I hear that...

they are hiring....

[mondo joe]

92. Have you considered the one common element to every job you don't get?

The answer to the problem might be more personal than the economy.

[Zenlitened]

145. I've heard employers are looking for people with analytical skills...

... these days. :eyes:

[mondo joe]

53. There's a big fucking difference between working for a Repub and actually

being a gay man SPREADING his anti-gay lies and bigotry.

[Zenlitened]

111. Shhhhh... what're you tryin' to do...

... let some common sense slip into the discussion?

:D

:hi:

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. There's a difference between working for them and pushing

their hateful agenda.

That's why the posts specified Roy Cohn -- ultra conservative Repub aparatchik who pushed the anti-gay agenda while being gay himself.

It's one thing to get by quietly living in the closet, and quite another being the blue-hatted Jew helping the Gestapo clear the ghetto.

[Sequoia]

45. Maybe that Rick S. is a closet queen.

Wouldn't surprise me in the least. Those who talk the loudest....yeah.

[devilgrrl]

81. His obsession with man/man - man/dog sex is a little unsettling

Makes you wonder.

[Terran]

33. Oh give me a f*cking break

Anyone who has the wherewithall to get a job on the staff of a US Senator can find another good job if they wanted to. People who work in the higher echelons of politics do so because they want to, because they have the connections, and they generally support the ideology of who they work for.

Now, if we're just talking about a secretary or a clerk or something, that's different. But I suspect we're talking about an "aide" to Senator Frothy Fecal Matter?

[mondo joe]

50. A gay man for Santorum is no different than a black man for the KKK

or a Jew for Nazis.

This isn't just working for a Republican - this is fanning the flames of anti gay bigotry.

[donco6]

70. I quit a job on principle before.

I was working for a large fundamentalist church in Lincoln, NE. I was the publications director, which meant I ghost-wrote all the literature. I never wrote anything political - it wasn't that type of church. Just Bible exposition and stuff.

However, they started a radio ministry which was beginning to border on sensationalistic political commentary stuff, and they wanted me to be the director of that. It would have been a big raise. But instead, I turned in my notice and packed my stuff and headed for Denver. No job.

I just couldn't do it anymore.

That was ten years ago. I found a job, found a better job, found a life partner, and have been happy.

Give this guy some time. Maybe he's really committed to it all, maybe not. You never know what will happen tomorrow.

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Emerson]

95. Get real

The repubs in office DON'T CARE about the base and their anti-gay agenda.

Santorum gives speeches on the floor for VOTES. The repubs in the senate have not passed any anti-gay legislation since bush took office. They are USING the repub base.

If santorum ACTUALLY gave a damn about GLBT rights then WHY does he have a GLBT person working for him? You want to know the answer? Because he actually doesn't give a damn about taking away GLBT rights, but he likes to talk about it for all the votes it gets him.

[mondo joe]

96. They're spreading anti gay disinformation that fuels anti-gay state laws

And if you can defend that it doesn't speak well to your clarity of thought.

[Zenlitened]

99. Must be nice, to live your life so insulated from the effects...

... of the anti-gay hate speech that goes on in this country.

:crazy:

[mondo joe]

101. Indeed. Did you think on DU you'd see a Santorum defender?

Since the OP maintains the CD is okay because Santorum is harmless, then Santorum is okay. And I guess that makes Bush and Rover okay too.

[Zenlitened]

110. It's disappointing, but not wholly unexpected.

There is a small but very vocal contingent on DU that basically insists, "Why don't you gays just shut up!"

This isn't very different. The OP is essentially saying Santorum, his hurtful attitudes, his role in keeping GLBT civil rights protections from becoming the law of the land... he's basically saying "no big deal."

And then claims to be the one enlightening us with his cogent understanding of reality.

Laughable, if it didn't make ya wanna spit.

[mondo joe]

114. Actually I think this particular thread is something else.

If you know what I mean.

[Zenlitened]

187. Oh, it'll attract 'em soon enough. Don't worry.

:puke:

[Zenlitened]

90. "Should people who work for repubs just quit their jobs."

If the repub is as sick and horrible and evil as Santorum, then the answer is a resounding "yes."

Pretty simple.

[mondo joe]

100. If you have no prob with this guy, you have no prob with Santorum.

If you think what Santorum says is not important, why be opposed to Santorum at all?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

108. First you post that...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1918080&mesg_id=1918148

...and then you post THIS?

Seems to me you're doing the very thing you denounced.

[Emerson]

112. I did not support

attacking people for their job, and I never will. This guy doesn't even do anything other than play the repub masses for votes.

If you work for a company that gives to repubs, and make money for that company, then you are essentially doing the same thing this guy is but in a less direct manner.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

120. You ain't fooling no one, compadre. (nt)

[mondo joe]

122. Then you have no problem with Santorum, Bush, Rove or Cheney.

After all, per you they have the right to do or say anything to hold a job.

[Emerson]

126. They are not holding a "job"

they hold an elected office which is a VERY different matter.

It's unfortunate you can't see the difference.

[mondo joe]

132. Karl Rove is not elected. Per your argument he's in his rights

to do or say anything to hold that job.

[Emerson]

140. Bull shit

Your dishonest claims and those who want to spin this matter in to supporting santorum, bush, etc is worse than FOX news.

Rove BROKE THE LAW. Yet you want to compare that to my argument that one should not attack a person for performing their job. Performing your job does not include breaking the law. If your "job" DOES include breaking the law then you're performing criminal acts, not a job.

You know full well I am talking about people who perform their job WITHIN the law.

[Zenlitened]

150. We don't know that Rove broke the law. To date, he has not...

... been charged with a crime, let alone tried and convicted.

So criminality is not part of the discussion here. Ethicality is, if you can wrap your head around that concept.

[Emerson]

164. You've just lost all credibility with me

Ok, we don't "know" he broke the law. Whatever.

[Zenlitened]

171. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

I've lost all credibility with you!

Oh my goodness gracious. How terribly sad!

Keep on dancin' baby, this little show of yours is a gas!

[mondo joe]

156. So OTHER THAN exposing Valerie Plame you'd have no prob w Rove.

Since that's your only difference, by your rationale Karl Rove is no different than this guy.

[Emerson]

166. This guy is working for

a bottom of the barrel senator. Santorum has little influence and is considered a joke by most people.

This staffer is hardly on the same level as rove.

[mondo joe]

173. So now you're changing your argument - it's not what they do or say

but how powerful they are.

Nice - keep changing that losing argument!

[mondo joe]

118. The MO is announced: "If I was a right winger that wanted to...

...shut up the progressive blogs I would do it by posing as a 'moderate democrat' that thought the 'tin foil' was giving us a 'bad image'."

[RetroLounge]

109. Wow, haven't seen such twisted logic in a while

:eyes:

Maybe Santorum will give you a job?

RL

edit: spelling

[DaveJ]

116. Not twisted in general.

Let's see ,someone has a family of 4, kids to feed, he probably should not turn down a job based on his employer's political affiliation.

Otherwise that's like saying everyone who disagrees with Bu$h's politics should leave the U.S.

Like Emerson, jobs are not freely available to me either. The market picks me for the most part. I cannot just chose whatever job I want.

I don't know anything about Santorum, but in general I think a man has to feed his family.

[Name removed]

119. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mondo joe]

121. This is NOT a matter of the employer's political affiliation.

No one has advocated that people quit jobs if their bosses are republicans.

This is a question of being directly responsible for the communications of one of the most virulent anti-gay personalities, and taking on the job of spreading hurtful lies.

If you have no problem with this guy, why have a problem with Santorum at all?

[DaveJ]

130. A lot job force their employees to lie

Yet those employees have no other choice to work there.

If you want to go after the grunts to get to the leader, then keep in mind that's the same concept that conflicts like the Iraq war are based on.

I see your point but I think you may need to look at this from a broader perspective and consider the economic climate we are in.

[mondo joe]

134. This is the communications director, not a grunt. Your argument

would work the same for Karl Rove - he's just "a grunt".

So if you think this guy is OK you'd have to say the same about Rove.

[DaveJ]

143. All I'm saying is attack the guy for what he choses

How about this. Why doesn't a Democrat offer to hire the guy in an equivalent position, then see what he choses. That would be a true judge of his character.

[Zenlitened]

155. How're those tap-dancing lessons coming?

:rofl:

[mondo joe]

159. Why hire a guy with such poor character? Should the dems hire Rove?

Would that be a good idea?

[Zenlitened]

135. Uh, a Director of Communications is hardly a "grunt."

Seriously, you might to hold off on advising folks to take a "broader perspective" until you've given it a try yourself.

[mondo joe]

148. What do you expect from someone who admits he doesn't know

anything about the matter (Santorum) but feels free to toss out opinions anyway?

[Emerson]

162. It IS a grunt

when you're working for a senator that is largely considered a joke by most people. If he actually worked for a respected senator he might be able to get a better position. In fact I would say he works for santorum because everyone else could get better. Likely this guy took the first job he could get.

[mondo joe]

163. To the contrary, he is part of the adminstration. By your definition

Karl Rove is a grunt.

[Emerson]

170. Let's see

working for santorum... Maybe a handful of people ever see what you put out.

Working for bush... whole nation sees what you put out.

Yes, clearly rove is a grunt.

[mondo joe]

186. LOL - keep changing your argument! I love it!!!

If you're in the administration you're a grunt, unless it's presidential.

[Emerson]

191. Pretty much

that's how it is.

[mondo joe]

197. Please define "grunt". Thank you.

[Zenlitened]

181. Oh, yeah. Took the first job he could get.

I'll certainly accept your assumption there. After all, every other bit of "logic" you've shared with us has been iron-clad. :eyes:

You know, it's no crime to admit it when your argument has been shown -- over and over again -- to be flat-out wrong.

[Emerson]

189. You just don't understand how it works in DC

If you're a staffer that is not top notch do you think you'll be working for Reid? Afraid not.

Of course you can always move down to the bottom with santorum.

Working for santorum is a CLEAR indication he does not have his pick of jobs in DC. It's not an assumption - that's simply how it works.

[Zenlitened]

198. Ah yes, the "you don't understand" post, coupled with the...

... "that's the way it is" post.

A double-whammy!

Try as you might, you have failed to make a rational or connvincing case. But that's not surprising, since your original post was based on the nonsensical notion that working for santorum is equivalent to working for any republican.

Um, you do remember your original post, don't you? It's been a while, and you've taken us down many side-roads since. But it's still there, in all its comic glory, if you scroll up.

[mondo joe]

199. So how does that bear out on your unemployment?

Is it a sign of being the bottom of the barrel?

[RetroLounge]

131. We are not talking about political affilliation

The OP was talking about a gay staffer working for someone who would take away his rights. Different situation.

"I don't know anything about Santorum" - as your post proved. Maybe you should try reading a few things before responding next time.

:shrug:

RL

[skypilot]

137. This communications director is gay.

Somehow I doubt that he has four kids and a wife.

[Emerson]

147. There are plenty of GLBT people

with a family, and that includes kids.

[skypilot]

154. But we're not talking about them.

We're talking abouth this guy and something tells me that if he had a family that includes kids he'd be quite vocal about it considering that he works for the "family values" party.

[Zenlitened]

157. .

[mondo joe]

123. Your argument would hold true for Santorum himself, or Bush or Cheney

or Rove or anyone, because your argument is they have the right to do or say anything to hold the job they wish to have.

[Zorra]

125. How low do we set the bar?

At what point do we abandon our principles for money?

I do see your point, it's a tough call, and appears to me to be a decision that individuals must make for themselves according to what their consciences can live with.

It is unfortunate that we have been somewhat led to believe that economic security is a guarantee in the USA, and that we have many lucrative options in this "land of milk and honey" and the American Dream. It just ain't always so.

I hope you find a good job, one that is lucrative and suitable to your beliefs at the same time, or that some other good thing comes along and solves your dilemma.

Good luck to you.

[mondo joe]

129. Based on the OP, Karl Rove is OK because he's just doing what he

needs to do to hold down a job.

[DaveJ]

139. In a way, yes.

Taking Karl down won't change anything (unless he really is in charge).

The fish rots from the head.

This is just an issue of what the individual's own choice are when they really have a choice. If you want to attack someone based on their own opinions, that's different than attacking someone for their job.

[skypilot]

144. what the individuals choices are when they have a choice.

That is the crux of the matter. This guy is obviously educated and works for a powerful up-and-coming senator. I doubt that his choices are limited--certainly not as limited as most folks'. He has made a choice. He works for a virulently anti-gay senator (and he is gay) and that is why his is being lambasted on this board.

[DaveJ]

149. If that's the case then okay....

I don't know enough about the guy to make a judgment. Many of us don't have a choice. I think he should be offered a job in the Democratic party so we can see what he choses. It is possible that he is on a career path and has been provided no alternate route at this point.

[Emerson]

158. What world are you living in?

Santorum is a "powerful" senator? Was that a serious claim?

Working for santorum is bottom of the barrel work. "Communications director" is not a globally powerful position when you're working for a joke of a senator.

A comparison - Being an "executive" at a company with 5 employees is different than being an "executive" at a company with 80,000 employees.

Santorum is the company with 5 employees.

You and others make it sound like this guy could have his pick of any job he wants. So a person that works for box turtle santorum can have any job he wants? Yea, a "communications director" for mr box tutrle is clearly a very powerful position. :eyes: Certainly will get you any job in DC with that on the resume.

[skypilot]

165. He's powerful enough.

Hopefully, that will change soon if Bob Casey takes him out. And in case you hadn't noticed, veritable "nobodies" can and do go quite far, quite suddenly, in this administration.

You make it sound as though this poor communications director is stuck with nothing more than a choice between McDonald's and Burger King.

By the way, shouldn't you be out pounding the pavement?

[Emerson]

172. He is

this guy has a choice of working for santorum or no job at all.

If you're working for santorum that means santorum was the BEST you could do. Since this is santorum it means it was working for him or no one.

[skypilot]

178. You have absolutely no way of knowing...

...any of what you just posted. That post was barely worth responding to. And I repeat, isn't there something else you should be doing right about now?

[Emerson]

182. No way of knowing?

You don't know much about how jobs work in DC do you?

If you're the absolute BEST staffer out there you get a job with a senator who actually has influence like Reid.

If you're a bottom of the barrel staffer you work under someone like santorum who is a joke in DC.

Yes sky, I DO have a way of knowing that because that's simply how it works in DC.

[skypilot]

185. God, you're slippery.

I'm not talking about the way things "work in D.C." in general. I'm talking about this guy's particular circumstances. You think Santorum is a joke? Fine. But this guy is still a long way from living in a box. Give me a fucking break.

[Emerson]

192. Really?

A long way huh?

So let's say he left santorum. Would Reid take him on? What qualifications does he have that would cause Reid to take him? Working for santorum?

How about mccain? Of course he's a senator that isn't taken for a joke as santorum is. Therefore you actually have to have more on the resume than "worked for santorum".

Name me a senator other than santorum that would be likely to take him on. Santorum is pretty much the lowest you can go in the senate food chain.

[mondo joe]

194. That's your defense of Rove again.

Who else would he work for? Therefore he's justified.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[mondo joe]

179. Please stop making shit up. You have no idea what

his job prospects are or were.

You could say the same thing for Rove: He could work for Bush or no one.

[Emerson]

183. Afraid I do

that's how the food chain works in DC.

If you work for a powerful senator you are good, if you work for a joke of a senator you don't have very good qualifications at all.

That's the pecking order in DC mondo. Wedge issues are also the play of the day. I'm sorry if both of that is new to you.

[mondo joe]

188. Again, you have no idea what his relationship was or is, and same

about his job prospects.

You have NO WAY to know.

Please stop making shit up.

[Emerson]

193. Santorum is the bottom of the barrel in the senate

that's the fact of the matter. This guy does not have his pick of any job in DC.

[mondo joe]

196. If that's a matter of fact, as you say, please produce some empirical

evidence to support the claim.

[mondo joe]

167. Do you believe Santorum is in any way harmful to the United States?

Yes or no, please.

[mondo joe]

161. So you have no problem with Karl Rove. Fine.

Do you have a problem with the GOP at all?

[Emerson]

175. Where did I say I had no problem with rove?

Show me where I said that mondo, otherwise you will get no more responses from me. Your spinning is good enough to get you a job at fox.

[mondo joe]

177. I didn't address that to you. Look at the thread.

But clearly your defense of this guy applies to Rove as well - he's just holding down a political job.

[Zorra]

195. Some people would be homeless and support themselves by

picking up aluminum cans rather than support the Bu*h government in any way.

Others will support themselves by knowingly working for a malevolent Senator that is actively persecuting them and is part of a fascist movement that is destroying the United States.

Matters of conscience, strength, will, resourcefulness, and adaptability, and principle.

Do you fight the fascists and join the Resistance on whatever level, or do you support the fascists?

It's an individual choice.

But following orders is never an excuse for committing a crime against humanity.

[Neshanic]

152. Emerson, do you write comedy? Maybe that's your job issue.

I mean really. Are you trying for sarcasm funny? If it is you better find another day job.

"If a repub offered me a job today I would take it in a heart beat."

Well, you better tell them your sexual orientation first, if you live in a right to work state. If you are gay, which I find hard to believe, since you wrote this crap, you will be fired anyway, because some fundy overheard you say "I love you" to your significant other. Yes that is true, and happen to a good friend of mine.

"Unless you have ungodly high skills that are in super high demand you can no longer be so picky as to who you work for."

Maybe you could work as a screener for that adoption agency that will not accept Catholic parents.

[Book Lover]

160. That man is in a different class than you and I

For ones such as he, opportunities are made. Wake up, Emerson. It's lovely that your compassion extends so far, but that staffer is not going to suffer like you if he loses his job.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

174. Sorry, but that staffer IS a traitor....

to his gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.

You can scream all you want about a bad economy or make some lame, twisted argument about how Santorum just uses his anti-gay rhetoric for votes, but it is just an attempt to whitewash the truth: Santorum speaks out against gays and their rights and uses his influence as a Senator to push his anti-gay agenda.

A gay man has willingly worked for the past eight years to help this anti-gay Senator with his goals -- that gay man should be ashamed of himself. There is a word for people like him: collaborator.

[enki23]

180. when your job is working for santorum? yes.

this is the communications director for a powerful republican politico. he isn't catering his fucking luncheons. he's his COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR. he isn't going to be living in a fucking box if he resigns. anyone too dim to realize that one is... pretty goddamned dim. i'll have to assume you're smarter than that, and are being this way deliberately.

again, santorum is not "a repub." communications director for rick santorum is not "a job." a black man working as communications director for david duke would be equally reprehensible. i'm not afraid to say that either, and i'm a straight white guy. i don't think i should be.

this particular gay man is a fucking sleazebag, not because he's gay, but because he works for santorum. he'd also be a piece of shit if he were straight. it's just that this adds "unbelievable fucking hypocrisy" to the usual list of negative republican traits.

[Emerson]

184. Good god

where does this "santorum is powerful" stuff come from?

He is largely considered a JOKE by most people - and that includes other senators. He is not powerful. He's not even taken seriously.

[Neshanic]

190. Really? then you would be a perfect candidate to work for him.

Get that smoking resume out you industrious little scamp you!

[mondo joe]

201. So are you now saying Santorum is not harmful to the USA?

I think you need to make up your mind.

Is he harrmful or not?

[Moderator]

202. Locking.....

This has become inflammatory and the conversation
has run its course.