Stop being the stupid party

[FJO]

The party is not controlled by extremists. But they have enough influence combined with the Republican propaganda machine to force moderate candidates to pander to extremists

Romneys 47% blunder is an example. So is taking Paul Ryan as VP

Taking Joe Biden for Vice President and the appointment of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State reveals the real and true character of Obama.

Would you take some for your running mate who openly and without shame denigrated your race?

Or for that matter would you name someone for your Secretary of State whose husband considered you only good enough to bring the coffee?

No wonder you are laughed at on this Board.

Is that the best you can do to refute what I said?

I pity you, you back-stabbing prick.

 

[Stephanie]

Beholden to talk radio....dear gawd

can you people can up with anything more stupid?

 

[FJO]

.

*** PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION, I'M NOT TELLING THE GOP WHAT TO DO, THIS IS NOT A CONSPIRACY, THIS IS NOT A COMMIE TAKEOVER, THIS IS JUST OPINION, PLEASE AVOID THIS POST IF YOU'RE A DITTOHEAD, THANK YOU ***​

I'm not yet convinced that the GOP has to "move left" to survive. That could very well be, but it seems to me that the first thing they have to do is marginalize the crazies who are so damaging the conservative message and the conservative brand.

At some point, the GOP needs to understand/admit that demographics are rapidly changing, and then create and implement a plan for attracting those people. All they've managed to do at this point is piss them off, and they have to admit that, as well.

Marginalize the crazies, create and deliver a positive and attractive message, then see where you are before moving left.

.

Excellent points. In my opinion, the main problem with the GOP in this past decade if not longer, is that they have become beholden to talk radio show hosts like limbaugh and hannity. then they start adopting their agendas and postures. The "47%" is one example, the "Blacks on the Democrat plantation", "deport them now!", "the minutemen", "the low information voters", "the Kenyan", "He's a Muslim!", "his birth certificate", "His mother is a whore and was on welfare", "The Blacks are brainwashed that's why they vote democrat.", "The minorities want handouts, that's why they vote democrat.", etc. is what their brand is now.

If the republican party marketed Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Huntsman, and Gary Johnson, they would make a lot of inroads in my opinion.

Have you seen what Democrats said about Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie lately?

 

[Mac1958]

.

"If you vote for a Democrat, you're a stupid commie leach. Mega dittos, Rush!"

Wow, with a campaign slogan like that, how can they lose?



.

 

[Pheonixops]

Beholden to talk radio....dear gawd

can you people can up with anything more stupid?

Stephanie, come on now.

 

[JakeStarkey]

FJO mumble, "Is that the best you can do to refute what I said? I pity you, you back-stabbing prick."

In fact, the reactionaries and radicals far to the right are the back-stabbing pricks to the GOP.

 

[Pheonixops]

.

*** PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS JUST MY HUMBLE OPINION, I'M NOT TELLING THE GOP WHAT TO DO, THIS IS NOT A CONSPIRACY, THIS IS NOT A COMMIE TAKEOVER, THIS IS JUST OPINION, PLEASE AVOID THIS POST IF YOU'RE A DITTOHEAD, THANK YOU ***​

I'm not yet convinced that the GOP has to "move left" to survive. That could very well be, but it seems to me that the first thing they have to do is marginalize the crazies who are so damaging the conservative message and the conservative brand.

At some point, the GOP needs to understand/admit that demographics are rapidly changing, and then create and implement a plan for attracting those people. All they've managed to do at this point is piss them off, and they have to admit that, as well.

Marginalize the crazies, create and deliver a positive and attractive message, then see where you are before moving left.

.

Excellent points. In my opinion, the main problem with the GOP in this past decade if not longer, is that they have become beholden to talk radio show hosts like limbaugh and hannity. then they start adopting their agendas and postures. The "47%" is one example, the "Blacks on the Democrat plantation", "deport them now!", "the minutemen", "the low information voters", "the Kenyan", "He's a Muslim!", "his birth certificate", "His mother is a whore and was on welfare", "The Blacks are brainwashed that's why they vote democrat.", "The minorities want handouts, that's why they vote democrat.", etc. is what their brand is now.

If the republican party marketed Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie, Huntsman, and Gary Johnson, they would make a lot of inroads in my opinion.

Have you seen what Democrats said about Michael Steele, Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio, Chris Christie lately?

No, what have them said about them lately? each side has their 'hardliners' and 'hardliner support' but if they want to make in roads with more moderate and undecided types of voters, I think taking the tack that I am suggesting may be the better way to go. What I see about the aforementioned people who I suggested, is that they offer more diversity and seem to want to change the GOP into a more inclusive party. I think that's a great idea. For instance, I would vote for Michael Steele over west and cain anytime. I would vote for Gary Johnson or Huntsman over rand paul, Romney, McCain, Palin, ryan, etc. Sen. McCain's daughter is starting to show another new face of the Republican Party.

The republican party needs to go back to it's Liberal roots in my opinion.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Stop comparing blacks to gays. Where in the constitution does it say that all people have the right to be married?

It’s perfectly appropriate to compare the ignorance and hate exhibited toward African Americans to that of gays, as the discrimination that both suffered was equally offensive to the Constitution and the fundamental tenets of this Nation.

Those who work to deny same-sex couples access to marriage are on the wrong side of history, as were those who worked to deny Blacks and other minorities their civil liberties.

No it isn't. It's exploiting what others went through for political gain. Democrats are the party that listens to blacks right? See how they think about being exploited by gays.

Nonsense.

The courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that homosexuals constitute a class of persons entitled to equal protection and due process rights.

Gays were beaten and unlawfully arrested by law enforcement during and before the 60s, homosexuals were denied equal access to state laws (See: Romer v. Evans (1996)), and many states actually made being gay a criminal offense, laws that were only recently invalidated (See: Lawrence v. Texas (2003)).

So, yes, gays have indeed suffered violations of their civil liberties, just as have Blacks and other minorities - just as heinous, just as ignorant, just as offensive to the Constitution.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Obama was pres for 4 years, he just won reelection by the majority of votes.

That means he is mainstream and YOU are the minority party.

so, Bush was President just four years ago, that must mean he was mainstream and of course you were the minority party THEN

your party cheats in elections

were you not the one who keeps saying there is VERY little voter fraud?......

 

[Truthmatters]

The republican party is not getting voters to commit fraud they are keeping voters from voting

 

[jknowgood]

The republican party is not getting voters to commit fraud they are keeping voters from voting

How? By asking for an id? Minority's need an id to buy their 40 oz and pack of newports.

 

[FJO]

FJO mumble, "Is that the best you can do to refute what I said? I pity you, you back-stabbing prick."

In fact, the reactionaries and radicals far to the right are the back-stabbing pricks to the GOP.

If you had quoted the post I was referring to, including your own words that other poster are laughing at me, and if you had named just ONE (1) of those who are laughing at me, not including yourself, your post would have some meaning.

As it is, it is an incoherent mumble.

 

[Rocko]

It’s perfectly appropriate to compare the ignorance and hate exhibited toward African Americans to that of gays, as the discrimination that both suffered was equally offensive to the Constitution and the fundamental tenets of this Nation.

Those who work to deny same-sex couples access to marriage are on the wrong side of history, as were those who worked to deny Blacks and other minorities their civil liberties.

No it isn't. It's exploiting what others went through for political gain. Democrats are the party that listens to blacks right? See how they think about being exploited by gays.

Nonsense.

The courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that homosexuals constitute a class of persons entitled to equal protection and due process rights.

Gays were beaten and unlawfully arrested by law enforcement during and before the 60s, homosexuals were denied equal access to state laws (See: Romer v. Evans (1996)), and many states actually made being gay a criminal offense, laws that were only recently invalidated (See: Lawrence v. Texas (2003)).

So, yes, gays have indeed suffered violations of their civil liberties, just as have Blacks and other minorities - just as heinous, just as ignorant, just as offensive to the Constitution.

You're going to compare gay legislative struggels to slavery and civil rights? I'm not saying gays have had it eaisy or have it eaisy, for that matter, but the political obstacles are not comparable.

 

[rightwinger]

No it isn't. It's exploiting what others went through for political gain. Democrats are the party that listens to blacks right? See how they think about being exploited by gays.

Nonsense.

The courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that homosexuals constitute a class of persons entitled to equal protection and due process rights.

Gays were beaten and unlawfully arrested by law enforcement during and before the 60s, homosexuals were denied equal access to state laws (See: Romer v. Evans (1996)), and many states actually made being gay a criminal offense, laws that were only recently invalidated (See: Lawrence v. Texas (2003)).

So, yes, gays have indeed suffered violations of their civil liberties, just as have Blacks and other minorities - just as heinous, just as ignorant, just as offensive to the Constitution.

You're going to compare gay legislative struggels to slavery and civil rights? I'm not saying gays have had it eaisy or have it eaisy, for that matter, but the political obstacles are not comparable.

Yes it is

Unjustified hatred is still unjustified hatred

 

[FJO]

Nonsense.

The courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that homosexuals constitute a class of persons entitled to equal protection and due process rights.

Gays were beaten and unlawfully arrested by law enforcement during and before the 60s, homosexuals were denied equal access to state laws (See: Romer v. Evans (1996)), and many states actually made being gay a criminal offense, laws that were only recently invalidated (See: Lawrence v. Texas (2003)).

So, yes, gays have indeed suffered violations of their civil liberties, just as have Blacks and other minorities - just as heinous, just as ignorant, just as offensive to the Constitution.

You're going to compare gay legislative struggels to slavery and civil rights? I'm not saying gays have had it eaisy or have it eaisy, for that matter, but the political obstacles are not comparable.

Yes it is

Unjustified hatred is still unjustified hatred

And do you know that for certain, because you are gay and suffered from unjustified hatred?

 

[regent]

I for one defend the Republican's right to be the stupid party. First, they have earned that privilage and secondly they seem to have no intention of giving up that position.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The republican party is not getting voters to commit fraud they are keeping voters from voting

that's called fraud......"Electoral fraud is illegal interference with the process of an election. Acts of fraud affect vote counts to bring about an election result, whether by increasing the vote share of the favored candidate, depressing the vote share of the rival candidates, or both.".......
by keeping voters from voting as you claim......they would be interfering with the process of an election......and they would be trying to depress the vote share of the rival candidates.......now you claimed this very seldom happens that's why you said in the threads on this why we don't need to show id.....care to splain?.....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No it isn't. It's exploiting what others went through for political gain. Democrats are the party that listens to blacks right? See how they think about being exploited by gays.

Nonsense.

The courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that homosexuals constitute a class of persons entitled to equal protection and due process rights.

Gays were beaten and unlawfully arrested by law enforcement during and before the 60s, homosexuals were denied equal access to state laws (See: Romer v. Evans (1996)), and many states actually made being gay a criminal offense, laws that were only recently invalidated (See: Lawrence v. Texas (2003)).

So, yes, gays have indeed suffered violations of their civil liberties, just as have Blacks and other minorities - just as heinous, just as ignorant, just as offensive to the Constitution.

You're going to compare gay legislative struggels to slavery and civil rights? I'm not saying gays have had it eaisy or have it eaisy, for that matter, but the political obstacles are not comparable.

The issue isn’t the political obstacles faced but the Constitutional case law in effect starting in the early 50s to today.

In Hernandez v. Texas (1954), for example, the Court held that discriminatory practices were un-Constitutional. Subsequent Supreme Court rulings provided a greater understanding of equal protection rights in the context of substantive due process.

By the early 60s an accepted body of case law clearly prohibited due process violations, including beating citizens by police or arresting citizens absent warrant or probable cause, simply because of ‘who they were.’

Again, a violation of civil liberties is a violation of civil liberties, all equally offensive to the Constitution. That a suspect or particular class of persons suffers civil liberties violations for a longer period of time, or those violations are more egregious, does not mitigate the seriousness of the violations, nor the appropriate and timely remedy thereof.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Nonsense.

The courts, including the Supreme Court, have consistently held that homosexuals constitute a class of persons entitled to equal protection and due process rights.

Gays were beaten and unlawfully arrested by law enforcement during and before the 60s, homosexuals were denied equal access to state laws (See: Romer v. Evans (1996)), and many states actually made being gay a criminal offense, laws that were only recently invalidated (See: Lawrence v. Texas (2003)).

So, yes, gays have indeed suffered violations of their civil liberties, just as have Blacks and other minorities - just as heinous, just as ignorant, just as offensive to the Constitution.

You're going to compare gay legislative struggels to slavery and civil rights? I'm not saying gays have had it eaisy or have it eaisy, for that matter, but the political obstacles are not comparable.

Yes it is

Unjustified hatred is still unjustified hatred

you know what RW?.....many blacks have disagreed with that.....and that includes some of the blacks on this board......one said something like this...."gays don't have separate facilities they have to use.......gays don't have to sit at the back of the bus......gays can vote".....and this guy went on and named quite a few things and told the person who i am taking it was gay...."that your struggle is nothing like ours so don't compare us".... just sayin......

 

[JakeStarkey]

FJO mumble, "Is that the best you can do to refute what I said? I pity you, you back-stabbing prick."

In fact, the reactionaries and radicals far to the right are the back-stabbing pricks to the GOP.

If you had quoted the post I was referring to, including your own words that other poster are laughing at me, and if you had named just ONE (1) of those who are laughing at me, not including yourself, your post would have some meaning.

As it is, it is an incoherent mumble.

Yes, Mr. Mumbles.