You know what makes the irony so delicious?

[CatWoman]

the GOP rammed that "family values" crap down their base's throat. Last election it was all about gay baiting, and gay hating.

Now we see that there is a SUBSTANTIAL number of gays in the GOP. Not only that, but they hold powerful jobs in the highest echelons of our government.

As Wonkette tagged them, they are the "Velvet Mafia".

All of those bible thumping jackasses have been played like a cheap fiddle.

Family values my ass.

[Catherine Vincent]

1. Yep!

All those repressed gays in their party and they won't know who to vote for!

[RagAss]

2. .....the horror.....the horror.......

[cynatnite]

3. I love watching them choke on that 'family values' shit they spewed...

They deserve everything they're getting. I'm relishing every second of this.

It fucking pisses me off that we're called immoral, unpatriotic, traitors and all that other vile crap that came out of their pieholes.

Let them choke on every goddamn word they spewed at us.

Other than that, I'm not bitter. :evilgrin:

[rustydog]

4. I was gonna answer ketchup..but you weren't talking flavor were you.

The part I'm enjoying is how the hasterts, Boeners, Man On Dog himself so adamantly anti-gay, hates them all,t hey are sinners of biblical proportion, yet they were all straangely silent about foley trolling the pool of congressional pages....

[rustydog]

5. I was gonna answer ketchup..but you weren't talking flavor were you.

The part I'm enjoying is how the Hasterts, Boeners, Man On Dog himself so adamantly anti-gay, hates them all,they are sinners of biblical proportion, yet they were all strangely silent about foley trolling the pool of congressional pages....

[PerfectSage]

6. You know what makes the irony so delicious?

The 2006 Q4 FReepathon target is 70,000 teenage boys.

That 2 minute hate for bible thumping jackasses felt good.

[Oilwellian]

7. The delicious irony...

has given me a shit eating grin for the past several days. :D

[Warren DeMontague]

8. Well, duh. I mean, look at some of 'em. If Ralph Reed is straight, I'm

black.

If Rick Santorum isn't at least slightly light in the loafers, I'm a World Famous Peruvian Pan-Flutist.

If Ken Mehlman doesn't belong to at least one Harley Riding Leather Daddy, I'm a tasty new zero fat snack biscuit.

[G Hawes]

11. So, are you saying that

you can tell from appearances who is gay and who is not?

[Warren DeMontague]

12. In those cases I mentioned,

Yes.

[CatWoman]

13. I don't think you're being fair here

I've known several men who I "thought" were gay and they turned out to be the biggest skirt chasers.

And then, too, I 've known a lot of men who I thought to be completely macho, and they turned out to be bigger wimps than me.

[Warren DeMontague]

15. I'm not making any kind of broad statement.

I also don't think there's anything wrong with being gay. Nothing, whatsoever. With most people, speculating about their sexual preference doesn't even cross my mind. I could honestly care less.

The problem is with people who are closeted gays, simultaneously working for a party with an anti-gay rights agenda.

That said- specifically: Mehlman, Reed, and Santorum? C'mon. :smoke:

[CatWoman]

16. ooooooooo

ok.

I'll give ya Mehlman :smoke:

Think Drier is shaking in his high heels about now? :)

[Warren DeMontague]

17. Erk! There's another one.

Sooner or later they'll figure out that hypocrisy doesn't pay.

[Change has come]

21. lets not forget Rove and his dear gay Step- father. . .n/t

[G Hawes]

18. Well, pardon me.

I was led to believe that people here at DU were above that kind of stereotypical thinking.

I guess I was wrong.

[Warren DeMontague]

22. Oh, give it a rest, mac. I've got gay family members.

They'll talk your ear off about their "Gay-dar". As I say elsewhere in the thread, the problem isn't people who are gay, it's closeted gay people working for a party with an anti-gay rights agenda. That, my friend, spells H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-S-Y.

Maybe I'm wrong about Santorum, Reed, and Mehlman. But I doubt it, especially in regards to Mehlman.

Welcome to DU.

[G Hawes]

24. That's nice.

Pardon me for thinking that it's wrong for you to dub people as gay on the basis of your unsubstantiated feelings, which seem to be wholly politcally motivated.

I'm as left as left gets and I just don't like it.

Thanks for the welcome, but if it's always as homophobic as this, I don't think I'll stick around.

[Warren DeMontague]

26. Do you think there's something wrong with merely being gay?

I don't. I don't think there's anything wrong with those gents being gay. Maybe it has something to do with living in the Bay Area, but I just don't think it's that big of a deal.

I do think there's something wrong with the hypocrisy involved in them shilling for not just the GOP, but the worst parts of its Christian Conservative, "family values" base. The people who are responsible for some of the most vicious anti-gay attacks in American Politics today. I find it ironic as well as hypocritical, which was part of the thread topic.

Interestingly enough, a number of gay bloggers and pundits agree with me.

http://gayorbit.net/?p=147

http://www.washblade.com/2004/5-28/news/national/bushmum.cfm

http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?ItemID=18160

[G Hawes]

30. The hypocrisy here is yours

You're assuming these men are gay and you're using it against them presumptively to call them hypocrites, but you still have no idea whether they are gay or not, and you're basing your assumption that they are on your so called "gaydar".

Whether they are or not is beside the point, really. And the addition of the logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum to your argument does not change that.

I ignored your earlier logical fallacies and I ignored your "but some of my best friends are gay" argument as well, but I'm not going to post on this thread any more because I find it repulsive.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. No, I'm speculating that they may be

and saying if they are, it definitely makes them Hypocrites.

Here's a question, Mr. Keeps-threatening-to-leave-the-thread: Why are you so eager to defend the likes of Mehlman, Reed, and Rick Santorum?

[G Hawes]

33. *sigh* how many strawmen will you construct in your efforts to

draw attention away from your homophobic posts?

I have not, and will not, defend the politics of the likes of Mehlman, Reed, or Santorum.

I will, however, draw attention to homophobic remarks such as yours no matter who they are directed at because that is supposed to be one of the things that separates "us" from "them".

[Warren DeMontague]

34. Ah, nice non-answer.

Well, stick around for a bit.

It quickly becomes pretty clear who is "us" and who is "them". 'Nite.

[G Hawes]

35. It wasn't a non-answer at all.

I know who "us" and "them" are.

I also know all about those who pretend to be "us" while harboring "them" tendencies.

You know, homophobes.

Nite.

[Change has come]

23. DU is a wonderful and tolerant place. . .

This thread is about the hypocrisy of these (possibly) closeted gay men.

[G Hawes]

25. It doesn't look that way

when posts such as the one I responded to initially above go unchallenged.

How can it be about hypocrisy when the basis for saying so is that there are some "(possibly) closeted gay men" in the discussion?

The "possibly" is the problem because it's based on nothing more than someone's feeling that he has a keen sense of "gaydar". I'm sorry, but I think it's wrong to make fun of people and label them without a little more than a "feeling" that someone isn't "manly" enough for everyone here.

Anyway, I'm not here to fight with anyone. I just found the posts above offensive and said so. I didn't come here for homophobic crap.

I won't bother with this thread any longer.

[Warren DeMontague]

27. Please explain how it was homophobic or bashing.

Nowhere did I say anyone "wasn't manly enough". Now I think you're flailing, and desperately trying to stir up a sense of indignation where there's no justification for one. If you're genuinely offended, and not merely working on some phony outrage, then I apologize. I'm truly about the least homophobic person you're likely to come across, but if you're determined to have that viewpoint there's not much I can do about it.

IMHO, what's "not manly" is working for a party that aims to deny civil rights to 10% of the population.

[G Hawes]

28. Your posts #8 and #12

are, in my view, utterly homophobic.

If you don't see that, and if you don't understand that, there is little I can do for you.

[Warren DeMontague]

29. Okay, well, again, we disagree. If you think merely saying someone is gay

amounts to an insult, I might think you have a legitimate gripe. As I said, I'm sorry if it rubbed you the wrong way. I don't think there's anything wrong with being gay. And as I linked in the other post, numerous Gay pundits and bloggers have made the identical point, at least regarding Mehlman.

I guess they're homophobes, too. Go figure.

[G Hawes]

31. See #30

n/t

[sandnsea]

39. Wednesday must not be 'gaydar' day

:crazy:

Personally, I've got no clue. It doesn't occur to me to think about people's sexual orientation so unless they say they're gay themselves, I'm oblvious. But I sure know other DUers seem to think they've got gaydar, don't quite know why you aren't allowed.

[Booster]

9. Which reminds me - do we even have an equivalent to the

Log Cabin Republicans?

[Change has come]

19. Speaking of delicious irony,

There must be quite a few Grande Dames in the LCR that are having their panties in a twist.

:rofl: :popcorn: :rofl:

[Catherine Vincent]

10. And who'd thought we'd get two bombshell sex scandals two years in a row.

Year 2005 - White House Reporter Jeff Gannon outed after a slew of naked pics on the internets

Year 2006 - Sexual predator after underage pages

What will the year 2007 bring?

[CatWoman]

14. Unfortunately, we didn't get a lot of mileage out of the Gannon situation

I think that situation should have been pushed harder.

[AtomicKitten]

20. yes, it is delightful

and I'm enjoying every minute of the implosion

[Dr Fate]

36. Yes- and we know how those types hate to eat crow.

Great point CW- and they will be resentful too.

[opihimoimoi]

38. Crow Sashimi w/o wasabi...we have to find ways for the PUBs to taste

RAW CROW so they know better than to remain PUB.

Falling for the PUB Scam is one thing....remaining loyal to assholes is another.

[TahitiNut]

37. Irony always tastes better before it rusts.

:dunce: