Breitbart.tv

This is just the first of MANY clips Breitbart is going to be playing, introducing and encompassing homosexuality into the Tea Party. Next will probably be abortion. After all, why stop with homosexuality when your base is feminism.

This is one exceptionally smart lady. Damn glad she is on our side.

She sure scares the liberals. They spend a great deal of energy on speculation about her.

"You know the one thing that's wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say."
- Bill Clinton, former U.S. President

You are an idiot like your hero Slick Willy.

the headline is wrong, according to the actual video.
Shes supporting having a "healthy debate" not "throwing support behind proud"
she believes that not avoiding conferences or events like these because of someones social view is the adult way to proceed.

You're dead on, Marco. They are terrified of her.

Throwing her support behind? Nah. She just kind of saying what Breitbart is saying. We need people from all walks of life to participate in the process. The left doesn't have an exclusive on certain groups or organizations.

The leftist media are going to crucify her three times over now that big O has started his re-election bid.

Conservatives nor the GOP have anything to be proud about with GOPride !

CPAC has done itself a great injustice inviting a non Conservative group into its laird.

"throws support behind GOProud"?
Pretty tepid support, AB, considering she doesn't even mention the group's name once.

If you think Clinton is my hero, then you're the idiot here.

The funny thing is the Libtards
still have no idea of how powerful Palin's plan
along with all the Tea-Party Heros of Freedom
to crush Libs & Rinos in 2012, in both the Senate,
and House and take back the White House.

No surprise here – she kind of danced around that one. Still looking for her to address her rt with bruce on dadt. Certainly has avoided that or at least we haven't seen it. Was rather interesting that since her interview was with cbn she quoted scripture rather then some of her other choice words.

I'm pro-gay conservatives.

Are GOProud in favor of gay marriage or garriage or what? Just asking.

The problem I have with GOProud is that many of their supporters are RINOs like Grover Norquist. I respect Sen. Jim DeMint's position. Some things are not debatable; you just have to agree to disagree on the issue.

It's interesting Andy slipped this one in while the Super Bowl was playing. It's obvious he supports the "packers" here.

Hear ye, Hear ye – ALL Tea Party Groups …DO NOT let ANY Republican Group Co-Opt you …REPEAT. And
DO NOT let ANY ONE Steer you in ANY ONE Direction …the Grass is NOT Always Greener.

As long-time conservative who welcomes both Evangelicals and homosexuals to the conservative cause- Bravo Sarah Palin!
In fact, the majority of conservatives support civil unions (that have all the same rights of marriage) for gay couples. Hopefully, gays will not be bitter about the semantics of civil union vs. the word "marriage". Many people who totally accept homosexual civil unions still want the word marriage to be used for a man and a woman. This is because the marriage concept has been acculturated as such for centuries. I say let the people of each state decide on the marriage issue.

Laird?

Yes, and we are all adults here.

So, the conservatives are proved, once again, to be the tolerant ones on the political scene.

Unlike the racist, homophic reactionary left.

This is not a patriot teaparty site. I can't believe you'd been sucked in. Amazing amount of "Proofs" can be considered left wing talking point, Including Michele Bachmann not in line for voting not to have Bush investigated for war crimes? Don't waste my time. Bush'es "war crimes" is just as likely as not to have kept your buddys at this site alive. You really think that it's a mistake that we didn't see any more terrorist attack attempts on our soil from 2001 to 2008? And how many have there been since? And it's just luck that any haven't succeeded- Home land security sure didn't stop them! And I'm not even starting about Sarah Palin either, because your right she's not lock step with all tea party ideals- specially endorsing candidates like McCain and Foriena- and not for all the crap this site of yours list. Diversity is not going to destroy the conservative cause. Adult conversation and debate will only make it grow stronger.

I officially love her!

I support anybody that supports me! There are a lot of Gay conservatives. Gay conservatives put up with way more from Gay liberals than they put up with from just plain conservatives. I also support black conservatives and any other conservative. We need all we can get for the fight we are in to re-defeat communism.

You can't beat a dead horse that just got back up and kicked you in the groin.

LOVE YA', SARAH!!!

There is no such thing as a gay Conservative.

Gays have a moral deficiency and therefore cannot be considered Conservative…. they are mutually exclusive !

If I was gay, I wouldn't want to be on the dead end left either.

They believe in a strong military and sound fiscal policy. That makes them a conservative group.

You are freaking kidding…..right?

That is what got the GOP in the position they are already in…people like you who will suppost anyone (RINO's) who will support your cause (until after you vote them into office) !

There is no such thing as a gay Conservative.

Gays have a moral deficiency (that is what makes them gay for Christ sakes!) and therefore cannot be considered Conservative…. they are mutually exclusive !
WAKE THE F- UP !

That is what got the GOP in the position they are already in…people like you who will suppost anyone (RINO's) who will support your cause (until after you vote them into office) !

There is no such thing as a gay Conservative.

Gays have a moral deficiency (that is what makes them gay for Christ sakes!) and therefore cannot be considered Conservative…. they are mutually exclusive !
WAKE THE F- UP !

We have bigger issues in this country than who is sleeping with each other. I don't want it pushed onto first graders, but I don't want any sexual issues discussed in school. Our job as conservatives is to identify the Marxists and defeat them, one by one, educate the young people to understand why socialism is evil and destructive, and elect people who will follow the constitution. Color, sex or gender don't matter.

Ignorant fools like you are the biggest threat to a free and open society.

Wrong, show me the poll that shows that.

I would say that most conservatives support that the government's involvement in marriage must come to an end.

Why does it take a license to get married in the first place? What, is marriage against the law? If homosexuals want to get a lawyer and draw up a contract, FINE, but getting MARRIED is the provenance of a man and a woman.

If you are a real man and can separate your personal feelings from government responsibilities, this isn't an issue. You can also call this Libertarian, in modern vernacular.

Every degenerate ass pounding freak or racist scumbag should be able to speak what's on his/her mind. That's what free speech is for. If these sodomites aren't protected then neither is anyone else. Only liberals/communists and their ilk disregard opposing views and pass laws to inhibit speech. Only big government leftist aholes do this. Keep that in mind when you want to ban somebody from presenting their point of view.

Hearing people out is fine. Ignoring them is fine. Calling them scumbag degenerates is fine. The homosexuals have to get used to that. Because it's part of free speech. It works both ways. So even if they're in a gay club or KKK members or Communist Obama supporters, it doesn't matter. This has nothing to do with your personal beliefs. It has to do with law applying to all people equally.

That's all the lady is saying. They can present their point of view and get humiliated all they want. I say bring it on. If you introduce race, religion, sex or the like to a discussion about government, you aren't a Conservative. You have already shown your hand. Pretend all you want black only groups and gay only groups, but the fact that you segment yourself from your neighbor means you are the one with issues. Not the guy calling you an asshat.

Well, it seems Andrew has attempted to twist what Future President Palin said.

Bad form Breitbart. BAD FORM.

By the way, why does it take a license to get married? Is marriage illegal or something?

If a gay couple wants to get a lawyer and draw up a contract, fine, but marriage is the providence of a man and a woman. I say we get rid of ALL the freebies that married couples get, this would end the argument.

Tell me, why is it that the Democrats are able to keep their people on the plantation? It is because they give them freebies. Time to get RID OF ALL THE FREEBIES!

And will be polygamy be embraced too, Sarah and Andrew???? And why not, it's not "your" kind of relationship? The irony is, polygamy is more natural than homosexuality, which is against nature all together, but apparently now the Conservatives are supposed to embrace them, the homo-agenda that is? Let's bring in the conservative weed smokers into the "conservative" movement, and while we are at it, let's bring in the lawbidding "conservative" NAMBLA perverts. What the heck, let's bring in the pro-choice people too, they're "conservative" too. Who say's a pro-choice person can't be "conservative"??? The conservative movement needs "diversity" not values!!!! Please.

Yep, tooooo bad. For her its a political watering down moment. But it's great for me, because I can officially write her off for national office.

Check out a quote I found:
“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.” -Herbert Spencer

Sarah Palin is an extreme threat to BOTH the left and the right. She has integrity and she isn't "for sale". That is a concept that neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can understand or accept.

I say we need to repel the DADT for everyone. Just jump in and air your dirty laundery everyone- Come away from that closet- why, it's ok. I'll start- I'm a straight married man, though I'll write with a lisp and tell you I'm flaming if I can get a laugh. Heck, 30 million clowns out of work in the US and I try to be funny. I'm OK with gay marriages as long as it's done at the Justice of the peace and not forced down the throats of the Churches (unless they wanna). I'm against ANY making out or sexually provocotive activity in public of any gender mix (or individual), so don't take it personal San Francisco. And me and my wife will teach our children what they need to know about sex as we see fit. DADT be damned!

If homosexuals want to marry-let them. Who cares. The real threat to society is NOT gay people. It is moral relativity. The Ten Commandments used to be important. The Supreme Court, the Dems and Republicans now view the commandments as an impediment to getting rich off of taxpayer $$$. Homosexuality is a diversionary subject used to distract the public.

I believe the headline says that she throws support behind GOProud's *participation*. In other words, having all ideas at the table. Don't think "Breitbart" was trying to say that she supports GOProud's politics, only pointing out that they have a right to participate.

The headline says that Sarah supports GOProud's participation, not politics. She said she wanted all ideas at the table.

She's buying into Reagan's "80%" rule without taking into consideration that 3% of the population can destroy 100% of this country's moral foundation. I agree completely that AB should finish coming out swiftly. This slow debutante's entrance is only making him look fey and feckless. It does NOT help the cause he purports to defend.

Sarah…Just Say NO to the Big Tent!!!

I also have to comment on your musing in this regard…You are making the argument that Sarah is pandering. It would seem to be the case. If that is true, then we truly do not have a standard-bearer. I will not support a pro- homosexual, abortion, or Progressive/Socialist agenda. Nor will I support any candidate who does.

My God, Sarah! What hast thou wrought?

Two things are readily apparent from the clip. First, her support is not very supportive but rather a political answer. Second, she does not understand the issues involved. Or, if she does understand, does not wish to provide an accurate and defineable answer. Here may be where Sarah Palin the candidate begins to jump the shark.

We have a gigantic debt, a runaway government, a commie in the White House, scores of illegals waltzing across our border, and Islamics infiltrating our country with stealth jihad. Who is gay or straight is the LEAST of our problems right now. Let this become a distraction, and you're all playing into the libs' hands.

Wow… what a bunch of narrow minded idiots. So, you don't think Conservatives should have anything to do with gays or lesbians. How about nothing to do Jews? or how about anybody who isn't white? got a friggin check list, do you?

Sarah Palin is a Christian. She is also a conservative with libertarian leanings. If she decides to be inclusive and welcome gays, lesbians, blacks, jews, hispanics, three legged dogs or one legged people into the Conservative movement, its none of your friggin business. Who the hell are you to decide who should be Conservative and who isn't… jerk offs.

Palin understands that being a conservative advocating for limited government and individual liberty means not laying awake in bed worrying about what her consenting adult neighbors are doing. Worrying about where another guy sticks his chilli dog is weird. If I hear one more pastor on the news talk about the evils of homosexuality, only to have that same pastor's butt buddy come out of the woodwork the next week, I think l'll scream.

She's broadening her base…Smart move.

That is what got the GOP in the position they are already in…

No that would be folks who ranted and raved and jumped up and down about social issues while spending like a bunch of drunken sailors. You know the folks who completely undermined conservative commitment to limited government.

I'm not one of those huggy, kissy kissy type of people who believes that everything will be alright if we all just hug a tree…what I am though is a realist and IMO gays are here to stay and I say we should embrace them if they have conservative views. As I've stated before there IS such a thing as conservative gays, my brother and his partner are proof, they're not flamboyant, they don't flaunt their lifestyle and they believe in God, plus they're just all around GOOD, decent human beings.

I think the marriage certificate is primarily about property rights, at least as far as the government is concerned. Of course, almost all of the special privileges that automatically some with the paper can be duplicated for additional expense by gay or unmarried couples. Except the right to dig into your deceased spouse's leftover social security benefits, of course.

That's gay.

Let's just gt the government out of marriage altogether. Marriage should be a religious rite with no government involvement whatsoever, no preferences, allowances, tax or other inducements or penalties. Non-contestable civil union pre-nup contracts replacing all common law family courts.

i'm liking sarah more and more all the time. what she says here is all that the gay folks are asking for: their right to participation in the public discourse. of course, gay people are going to be concerned with issues that particularly affect their lives (that boogey-man, so-called 'gay agenda'), but that does not mean that they are not also concerned with bloated government, high taxes, the national debt, secure borders, and the threat of creeping islamic tyranny.

We need to start issuing Pink Triangles before the Nation is brought to its knees!

And for those who don't get it: /sarc

"So, you don't think Conservatives should have anything to do with gays or lesbians."

What I do think is that ….. Conservatives should't allow a group of gays with liberal ideals whose existence is completely against Nature and therefore not Conservative, to join our only CONSERVATIVE GROUP !!
(That is what liberals are…. That is what liberals do ! )

Don't you people get it….. They are infiltrating your foundation and you are falling for it once again !

If gays want to be partially Conservative (let's say financvially conservative)…. then let them form the Partially Conservative Political Action Committee (PCPAC)…. because they are not Morally Conservative and to be a Conservative you must be MORALLY CONSERVATIVE along with the rest of the catagories!

NOT THE CONSERVATIVE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE !

Being a Conservative does not allow you to choose what you want to be conservative about.

I agree

I'm ready to tear up the constitution to destroy the gay agenda and the abortion agenda. That is why I'm totally with the TEA Party.

I'm against beating the socialists if it means uniting with gays. I'd rather lose to the socialists than unite with anyone I disagree with. Real Conservatives have principles. The heck with politics. Did Jesus try to get elected President? Of course not.

What does that mean in practice? Some gays are for X some are against it. The only thing I can do in such a circumstance is stay home. Same goes for those abortion folks.

True Conservatives need fewer allies. A LOT fewer allies. What we need is purges. I am in the process of cornering the Ex-Lax supply so I can make a buck from the elimination of crap from the GOP.

We don't need alliances with God on our side.

And in case you are thick: /sarc

BTW I was once at -110. I'm only at -55. This is an attempt to get back where I belong. And to destroy the GOP coalition in the process. Republicans have been winning far too many elections lately. I intend to put a stop to that.

Sarah Palin has values, something we are missing :http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0203/The-deficit-Americans-should-think-about-most-personal-character

Great comment: 1. Identify and stop anyone following Marx, Stalin & Mao. 2. Let parents discuss sex with their children. The constitution is imperative.

Sarah Palin has values, something we are missing

winstonlabrador 77p · 2 hours ago

————————————————————————————

Would these be the values Sarah Palin pass on to her kids you speak of
http://www.stupidsheeple.com/index.php/2008090140...

"allow for healthy debate, which is needed in order for people to gather information and make up their own minds about issues….the more information that people have the better.”

I'm glad to have confirmed for me one of my fundamental reasons for liking Palin; she might not be The Smartest Person Ever but the President doesn't have to be. The job of the President is to surround herself (;-P ) with people who have expertise she might not have but at the end of the day SHE makes the decision.

We all have moral deficiencies. At least, that's what I was taught in church as a kid. Why this particular deficiency might prevent someone from being a true conservative is beyond me. Being gay may or may not prevent someone from entering heaven (that's beyond my pay grade, to be honest), but we're not talking about heaven here. We're talking about politics. Everything I've seen shows that GOProud seems to agree with conservatives on just about everything else. And not even all conservatives agree on gay marriage (some of us believe that government has no business in our private lives). So please, take your moral preening elsewhere.

Well, it seems I read the headline incorrect. Just read through her statement and the headline again.

Hmmmm, the Constitutional Libertarian admits mistake.

SORRY BREITBART!

Sorry, but DeMint is wrong on this. Everything is worthy of debate. This is precisely why conservatives initially lost the debate over abortion back in the 1960s: they thought it wasn't worth debating. And then they lost the debate. And we've spent forty years now trying to regain lost ground because the movement was too content with the status quo. If we don't debate it, others will make the decisions for us. If we don't have the debate, a whole generation will grow up without knowing *why* we think what we think.

Debate on these points is always ongoing, always constant. When we stop debating things, we are giving up participation in the future political discussion.

She doesn't understand the issues involved? How so? She offered a political answer because it was a political question: should GOProud participate? She answered the question. No one asked her about GOProud's agenda. Her answer was perfectly reasonable. It seems you want to think she doesn't understand, but I think it's more likely that you simply don't like her answer, not that it had any deficiencies in itself.

I think this attitude of hers is fundamentally healthy for anyone engaged in politics. It's more important to have strong guiding principles than to think you are the smartest person on the block. I don't have any reason to think Palin is either incredibly smart or incredibly dumb. I'm sure she's perfectly well educated. I'm more frightened of politicians who think they know everything (Obama is a very clear example of this), because then they *act as if they know everything.* They don't. And they're unwilling to absorb information when they've already committed to a course of action. Palin is open-minded and willing to listen. And she's willing to make tough decisions. In my mind, this makes her perfectly well qualified to be President. I doubt America will agree with me on that, and I'm not committed to vote for her. But this idea that she's not qualified is simply ridiculous. Of course she is.

The basic planks in the conservative platform cannot be up for negotiation. The left will infiltrate and the movement will deteriorate into the old Republican party of poll following independents and treacherous establishment party leaders. If Americans who choose to live aspects of their lives in a manner contrary to conservative ideals can and will keep their mouths shut about it and embrace the full platform, they are welcome. I don't care about a big tent that leaks and falls over when the wind blows.

I tend to agree, at least to some extent, with your analysis of Breitbart and Palin.

Why do we need to push in favor of the gay agenda anyway? Either Breitbart's doing this for a personal alliance with them, or else he's trying to prove to the left (and center?) that he's not bigoted. If it's the latter, don't bother sacrificing ideals to prove anything, Andrew; it's a waste of time, and it's a wrong strategy.

It seems like the old Traditionalist/Libertarian fight has reemerged from its hibernation. The fact is that younger conservatives are more libertarian, accepting of differences in personal behavior and less moralistic. Palin would be crazy not to pick up that scent and track it.

Keep up your hatred of these folks, and we'll continue to get our asses kicked!!!! Don;t think because of what happened in Nov that it's smooth sailing.
In fact this is the time you need be the most vigilant. We have taken a huge segment of the statist power. This invokes the EXACT media reactions we are seeing which will be to take every attempt to make conservative citizens appear to be racists and homophobes.
Do i believe that we should redifine an entire institution to accomadate, NO, but you have to at least talk to these peple like adults and find common ground.
If we don't, then I hope you liked the last 2 years, because Democrats will win time and time again by spreading false perceptions of us. Keep it up, and they'll be no stopping them. Then they'll just implement all this crap anyway, and not give a damn what you really think.

Personally I LOVE Gay Conservatives, just because they piss off the militant leftist gays so much it's funny to watch.

And you DON'T have any moral decencies?
There was only one 'perfect' man-and his nave wasn't Dave.
While I don't approve of same-sex marriage or the repeal of DADT-which GOProud supports-the rest of their agenda is conservative.
I have ZERO problem with them having a place at the table.

Norquist isn't a RINO-he's a paleo-con.
He's also one of the biggest supporters of radical Islam/anti Israel in the GOP.
That is a MUCH bigger problem for me.

Claiming to be proud of one's moral deficiency the opposite of acknowledging a moral deficiency. Dare I say it constitutes, um, moral preening? GOProud is not about privacy but publicity. It is not about concealing private, shameful conduct but is about putting it front and center for all to see.

I'm 40 and started out as a religious-right conservative. Over the years I'm become more-but not entirely-libertarian…kind of a 'Conservatarian'.
Btw: Palin made the right call on this but I'm NOT a Palinista.
I prefer Tim Pawlenty.

I remember when the gays were trying to become more main stream. They said they did not want marriage then, but slowly and surely that deception changed, didn't it.

Me either. Just looking for someone who will say what their principles are and then ACT on them, consistently.

I agree with you that one should have an answer as to why he believes the way he does and to be able to defend one's position. But debating the issue at CPAC will not change anyone's mind. In fact, I don't believe it (a person's private sex life) should be made an issue, but GOProud is making it one. I think DeMint is making a statement with his actions, but I do think you are right in that he needs to address the issue with a verbal statement as well.
What is happening here is there are other groups that are trying to infiltrate the conservative movement by using GOProud as a way in. See the comment below. And this: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=247341

Bravo! Bravo! Spoken with the eloquence of a true libertarian.

They don't believe it actually is a moral deficiency. It's called "disagreement." Maybe you should look it up. And since it is you (and Dave, above) that think a single disagreement over morals is enough to keep someone out of the conservative movement, it is indeed you and not they who are preening. You don't want your pure conservative movement tarnished by people you disagree with (on a single point, no less).

I have no illusions about convincing you of this, but the idea that conservatives must agree on every single point in order to belong is so incredibly silly that I have a difficult time taking seriously anyone espousing it. Conservatives disagree on a lot of things: singling out homosexuality as the point at which people are thrown out of the movement is a sign of an irrational mind.

I just saw all the typos in my comment..
'Decencies' should be 'deficiencies' and 'nav' should be 'name'.
Sorry guys, I haven't had my coffee yet.

We debate because we must, not because it will change anyone's mind. Debate is worthwhile in itself, aside from convincing others.

Gay marriage is an issue whether you like it or not, and it's not GOProud that's making it an issue. They're merely responding to it. The issue is raised by culture, not any specific group, and the issue would not go away if GOProud didn't exist. It's like in a family when there's a problem and everyone gangs up on the one family member that insists everyone talk about it. That person isn't responsible for the problem. The problem exists whether or not the person brings it up. And not talking about it doesn't make it go away. Blaming GOProud for this is silly. Conservatives need to debate the issue, and they wouldn't if GOProud wasn't there. Whether or not you agree with GOProud's position on the issue, having the debate is necessary. Don't blame the messenger, here.

Your worries about "infiltration" are misplaced. What is happening is that a lot of long-existing disagreement among conservatives is getting aired out, no doubt because of the increase libertarianism of the movement over the last few years. It's not infiltration at all. Most of these people and opinions have been a part of the conservative movement for a very long time. What we're seeing is a clarification of principles and what they mean in regards to social controversy (like homosexuality). Airing out disagreement makes people uncomfortable. Resorting to words like "infiltration" is all about asserting ideological purity and control, precisely the wrong approach when for the first time in a generation, the conservative movement is on the edge of making a political breakthrough. There are always people unhappy with big-tent politics. That's fine, but they need to learn to disagree amicably, especially when there is so much overlapping agreement in other areas.

I'm lazy, so I'll just repost a comment I made a couple of weeks ago in Big Gov., regarding Breitbart's support of GOProud:

Time for a reality check.

Get wise, or get beat.

On that, I agree. There aren't a lot of paleos left in the GOP (remnants from an earlier generation, for the most part) but Norquist is probably one of the most prominent. It's a problem, but Norquist's influence is limited, and while most conservatives will agree with Norquist on many things, they generally recognize that on Islam, Norquist is completely wrong.

the biggest "threat" to our society are the "sheeple". So, I'm assuming polygamy is good to have too? According to you. I assume consenting adult relationships between family members is good with you. Its all "moral relativity", apparently according to you! I pity the mind-set of "anything goes".

When a Princeton Professor ADVOCATES non-forceful sex with animal, and when a Columbia Professor engages in sex with his adult daughter for years…these Professors are obvious PIONEERS forging the way for sheeple, like yourself, to embrace their values and their ways. And when a small minority demand their "rights", you too will cave. Not, saying that it's your lifestyle, but the sheeple again like yourself will say…"let them do it, it's their business not yours, and it has no affect on society". Oh, and not to mention having sex with that "hot" sexy robot….they look so human like, we'll forget they are robots. And robots need costly "health-care", aka "mechanical care", so if I can marry my robot, maybe they can get health/mechanical benefits too???? Afterall, think of all the diseases we can eliminate if we only had sex with robots. Mechanics are our friends. I can guarantee you, that all that I mentioned will become "mainstream" realities, because of people like you and the great academia professors mentioned above. Thanks.

@ Selah_Rose

You have the moral I.Q. of a sewer rat.

Who paid for that garbage from 2008? Soros? Eric Boehlert?
Please.

Ummmmm it looks like she said that she doesn't try to avoid people if she disagrees with them, or is not afraid to address people with whom she disagrees. Sounds reasonable.
You can't convert others to your view if you hide or segregate yourself too much.
Ann Coulter addressed the gay republicans, and laid her disagreement with gay marriage right out on the table with them. It could be that some people don't have the gonadal fortitude to do such a thing.

A person is either for liberty or against it. The constitution is clear. Your agenda is NOT part of it. You appear to want the world to be as you like it. Too F-ing bad. Each person has the right to pursue happiness as long as it does not violate the constitutional rights of others. Your view is much more akin to Hitler's view. He also had very specific plans for homosexuals (and minorities). He also supported and fomented a hatred of those who were "undesirable". He also supported thugs in uniforms. Wow…you seem to have much in common.

A good post ages like a fine wine, Joe.

You're 100% right: nothing would side track the important agenda of the Conservative/Libertarian coalition than a descent into policing the morals of consenting adults. "Values voters" need to step back and ask themselves how much more they will loose if Progressivism continues its march.

@philipjames
Well said.

@ArbutusJoe

Amen, brother!

Yeah, all walks of life, such as pedophiles too. Let's bring them into the tent as well. Why not? We need to be more inclusive. Don't want to shut anyone out.

The issue at CPAC is whether GOProud – a liberal social organization – should be allowed to co-sponsor the event. The issue has nothing to do with dialogue or with debate. It certainly has nothing to do with presenting honest opinions to a diverse group. Therefore, she either fails to understand the issues involved or she ignores the issues involved for a political (election) reason. Her answer is political in its intent rather than its content.

First: Marriage should not be a federal issue, but rather relegated to the states, or the local administration of DC.
Second: Marriage should not be a state issue, but rather a church sacrement. The government should get out of marriage, and out of divorce.
Third: Until the above two happen, we have other things to work on. Not raising the debt ceiling being a good start. Elimination of Title 42. Elimination of Dept of Education. Elimination of dept of Energy. Elimination of Dept of Agriculture. Return of Dept of Commerce to constitional limits. and on and on

Fools to think that social issues do not affect fiscal issues.

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.