• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Anger on Display Among Conservative PAC Audience

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,257
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Other than Ann Coulter calling John Edwards a f@ggot, the anger of Conservatives at the CPAC Conference was directed pretty exclusively at the Republican Party. Go figure. I am now expecting at least a couple of Bush supporters here to start calling CPAC a hippie pinko tree-hugging Liberal organization.

Article is here.
 
Other than Ann Coulter calling John Edwards a f@ggot, the anger of Conservatives at the CPAC Conference was directed pretty exclusively at the Republican Party. Go figure. I am now expecting at least a couple of Bush supporters here to start calling CPAC a hippie pinko tree-hugging Liberal organization.

Article is here.

Not me. The current batch of conservatives have pretty much abandoned their values to maintain power in D.C., they deserve all the bashing they get. BTW, I've been saying that about Edwards too, I think slimebag is equally appropriate for the guy.
 
Not me. The current batch of conservatives have pretty much abandoned their values to maintain power in D.C., they deserve all the bashing they get. BTW, I've been saying that about Edwards too, I think slimebag is equally appropriate for the guy.

You've been saying what about Edwards too? That he's a f@ggot? Wow, you must be proud of yourself. :roll:
 
You've been saying what about Edwards too? That he's a f@ggot? Wow, you must be proud of yourself. :roll:


**Yeah, f@ggot doesn't begin to describe Edwards. Did uou watch Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh last night on Fox "The 1/2 hour hour" comedy show? You're still my favorite female on DP, aps, but no one, and I mean no one can ever replace my girlfriend Ann Coulter for being the funniest female on TV. She should be getting some kind of award for her brilliance and ability to make people laugh at these liberal hacks.
 
You've been saying what about Edwards too? That he's a f@ggot? Wow, you must be proud of yourself. :roll:
Actually, yes I am. I think he's an idiot, coward, socialist f@#$%! closet case who is exactly what's wrong with this country(with all due respect to the gay community, who I do respect). I take back nothing.
 
Actually, yes I am. I think he's an idiot, coward, socialist f@#$%! closet case who is exactly what's wrong with this country(with all due respect to the gay community, who I do respect). I take back nothing.

I take no offense. :mrgreen:

That's mainly because I see Edwards pretty much the same way...:2wave:
 
Actually, yes I am. I think he's an idiot, coward, socialist f@#$%! closet case who is exactly what's wrong with this country(with all due respect to the gay community, who I do respect). I take back nothing.

I am not an Edwards fan, but if I wanted to insult him, calling him a f@ggot would not be the word I would use.
 
I am not an Edwards fan, but if I wanted to insult him, calling him a f@ggot would not be the word I would use.

Why not...there is a big difference between a gay man and whiny little f@ggot beyatch. Edwards falls into the latter category.
 
Why not...there is a big difference between a gay man and whiny little f@ggot beyatch. Edwards falls into the latter category.

I am glad you're not offended by the use of that word. It's not a part of my vocabulary, so it never occurs to me when I am thinking insulting thoughts about someone.

There is something about Edwards (and his wife) that rubs me the wrong way. I have no interest in him for the Democratic nominee. He won't get it.
 
Other than Ann Coulter calling John Edwards a f@ggot, the anger of Conservatives at the CPAC Conference was directed pretty exclusively at the Republican Party. Go figure. I am now expecting at least a couple of Bush supporters here to start calling CPAC a hippie pinko tree-hugging Liberal organization.

Article is here.


The people attending the conference are the base of the Republican Party.........More Power to them.......
 
Why not...there is a big difference between a gay man and whiny little f@ggot beyatch. Edwards falls into the latter category.

I agree, I don't know if Edwards is Gay or not but he fits the MO of a lot of Gay Men in that he acts very feminine (Present company excluded jallman;) )
 
I agree, I don't know if Edwards is Gay or not but he fits the MO of a lot of Gay Men in that he acts very feminine (Present company excluded jallman;) )

This response shows how very little you know about gay men. The idea that you would state a stereotype (that gay men act feminine) as fact, just shows how little experience you have outside your own world. I know a lot of effeminate straight men....and I know a large number of very "manly" gay men...I don't think you can stick a label on any one group and draw the kind of inferences that you love to do.
 
This response shows how very little you know about gay men. The idea that you would state a stereotype (that gay men act feminine) as fact, just shows how little experience you have outside your own world. I know a lot of effeminate straight men....and I know a large number of very "manly" gay men...I don't think you can stick a label on any one group and draw the kind of inferences that you love to do.

Hey disneydude...chill, it was just a friendly jest.
 
This response shows how very little you know about gay men. The idea that you would state a stereotype (that gay men act feminine) as fact, just shows how little experience you have outside your own world. I know a lot of effeminate straight men....and I know a large number of very "manly" gay men...I don't think you can stick a label on any one group and draw the kind of inferences that you love to do.


Come on DD I am not saying that all Gay men are like that but some are......Why do you think they dress up in drag in gay pride parades.....

I knew a Gunners mate when I was aboard this destroyer who was one of the most masculine guys you would see...........Sadly he was caught making unwanted sexual advances against a shipmate and got discharged..........
 
This response shows how very little you know about gay men. The idea that you would state a stereotype (that gay men act feminine) as fact, just shows how little experience you have outside your own world. I know a lot of effeminate straight men....and I know a large number of very "manly" gay men...I don't think you can stick a label on any one group and draw the kind of inferences that you love to do.


I meant no offense to any guy person....its just the way it is........Just like in a lesbian relationship a lot of time you have one lesbian playing the male in a butch manner............

There is a lesbian on Air America her name escapes me, looks more like a guy then a lot of guys...........
 
I meant no offense to any guy person....its just the way it is........Just like in a lesbian relationship a lot of time you have one lesbian playing the male in a butch manner............

There is a lesbian on Air America her name escapes me, looks more like a guy then a lot of guys...........

This is soooo ridiculous I shouldn't even respond because it is obvious that you are talking out your #$% and have no concept. Its like people asking gay men "which of you is the male and the female"....or it reminds me of Hank Hill on "King of the Hill" asking his laotian neighbor if he is "Chinese or Japanese" to which he responds, "neither, I'm laotian"....and Hank Hill saying...."ok....hmmmm....so......are you Chinese or Japanese".

Look....trust me...I am not getting all bent out of shape....actually when I encounter statements like this....its usually best to just chalk it up to lack of experience....I actually find it rather amusing because I can't tell if you REALLY are saying this because you believe it....or if you are saying these things to incite a discussion.....

Just in case its the former let me just say.....most Lesbian couples do not have 1 person who acts and looks male and one that acts and looks female. In fact, most of the time, "Butch" women tend to pair up with other "Butch" women.....believe it or not Navy.....most gay men do not consider themselves "Catchers" or "Pitchers".....you can throw out generalizations but just like other stereotypical prejudices, they really speak more about the person making the generalization than they do about the people of whom they speak.

You can call it making a mountain out of a molehill.....I call it just trying to be a sincere and respectful person to my fellow human beings.
 
This is soooo ridiculous I shouldn't even respond because it is obvious that you are talking out your #$% and have no concept. Its like people asking gay men "which of you is the male and the female"....or it reminds me of Hank Hill on "King of the Hill" asking his laotian neighbor if he is "Chinese or Japanese" to which he responds, "neither, I'm laotian"....and Hank Hill saying...."ok....hmmmm....so......are you Chinese or Japanese".

Look....trust me...I am not getting all bent out of shape....actually when I encounter statements like this....its usually best to just chalk it up to lack of experience....I actually find it rather amusing because I can't tell if you REALLY are saying this because you believe it....or if you are saying these things to incite a discussion.....

Just in case its the former let me just say.....most Lesbian couples do not have 1 person who acts and looks male and one that acts and looks female. In fact, most of the time, "Butch" women tend to pair up with other "Butch" women.....believe it or not Navy.....most gay men do not consider themselves "Catchers" or "Pitchers".....you can throw out generalizations but just like other stereotypical prejudices, they really speak more about the person making the generalization than they do about the people of whom they speak.

You can call it making a mountain out of a molehill.....I call it just trying to be a sincere and respectful person to my fellow human beings.


I have never met anyone in my life that is so out of touch..To say that in a gay or lesbian relationship in some cases one of the two people does not take the place of the opposite sex is ridculous.........

In my last work place we had a gay couple working there............One was very masculine and a athelete....the other was very shy, soft voiced, coy and wore very feminine colors........Unforetunately he died from AIDS but that does not take away from the fact that in a lot of gay relationships the partners assume roles............

I am done with you on this...........You make no sense.......
 
See Navy:

Once again your memory fails you.....you make a generalization based on a stereotype and then when called out...you come back by saying...."well it is true in SOME cases". EXACTLY. That was my point...thank you. Yes...in fact there are SOME cases in which your generalization applies....but originally you claimed it was typical....well thats just that....typical of your overgeneralized statements.....and NOW I am through with you on this.
 
Let's review what he actually said:
Navy Pride said:
I agree, I don't know if Edwards is Gay or not but he fits the MO of a lot of Gay Men in that he acts very feminine (Present company excluded jallman;) )
He didn't say all gay men, he said a lot of gay men. That is not a stereotype, it's simply an observation. An accurate one, too...
 
See Navy:

Once again your memory fails you.....you make a generalization based on a stereotype and then when called out...you come back by saying...."well it is true in SOME cases". EXACTLY. That was my point...thank you. Yes...in fact there are SOME cases in which your generalization applies....but originally you claimed it was typical....well thats just that....typical of your overgeneralized statements.....and NOW I am through with you on this.

Your so full of it..........I never said it was typical...........I said there are a lot of instances like that.I even cited a couple..........
 
Your so full of it..........I never said it was typical...........I said there are a lot of instances like that.I even cited a couple..........

Unlike you....I am true to my word....I'm done with you on this.
 
I take no offense. :mrgreen:

That's mainly because I see Edwards pretty much the same way...:2wave:
Amen! I was worried you might get offended, but realized you've got thicker skin than that.:cheers:
 
Back
Top Bottom