Weird, But I'm Not Surprised

[Madeline]

umm she didn't just now become a conservative. No, I see nothing odd...and it isn't sudden. I have heard her talk against the political left many times over the last few years.

What? Let me repost it so you can get the full context.

Tammy Bruce - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1996, the NOW Executive Board voted nearly unanimously to censure Bruce for what it claimed were "racially insensitive comments" during the O.J. Simpson murder trial.[5] After months of infighting, Bruce resigned as president of Los Angeles NOW in June 1996.[6] Bruce claimed that the censure was due to her focus on domestic violence, as opposed to defense attorney Johnnie Cochran's "racial issues" trial argument.[4] Since then, Bruce has written about the dispute in her critique on what she sees as the failings of NOW, and the political left in general. She believes that the feminist establishment in the U.S. has abandoned authentic feminism.[7]

Like I said, she seemed to be fine as a Liberal up until she got censured by NOW. Then all of a sudden she turned over a new leaf.

On that note, I'm logging off for the night, night.

Apples and oranges. g'nite bert.

O. J. Simpson's murder trial was hard on everyone. We all felt those who did not take our side were "insensitive" at best....and those feelings were quite authentic. The spectacle pitted a black woman's yearning for justice for black men against her support for another chick who had died in an attack by her former partner.

Few black women I knew chose sisterhood over racial justice, and I was so goddamned mad about it I nearly got into a fistfight when the verdict was announced.

All these years later, we who lived it still think whatever our POV was, we were correct.

 

[beowolfe]

Too many big gay conservative blogs to doubt:

On being out, proud and conservative | Tammy Bruce | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

...So, when it comes to my comfort level as a conservative who happens to be gay, here's what I know: while many conservatives are people of faith and their religion promotes a very different point of view than mine on homosexuality (and a few other things!), I have found conservatives to be more tolerant, more curious and more understanding of those who are different to them than I ever did when ensconced in US liberal leadership.

Are there religious extremists on the right? Of course, but they are marginalised and rejected. As an example, this year at CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Conference), considered the premier, annual conservative gathering in America, a speaker stepped up to the podium and began verbally to attack gays and lesbians. He was summarily booed from the stage by a conservative audience that refused to allow such bigotry to continue. ...

Talking about confused!!! So, the conservatives won't let their members demagogue gays in their presence, but it's okay if they advocate for laws making their lifestyle illegal. This guy reminds me of some of the 'uncle tom's' in the 1950's and 1960's.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Too many big gay conservative blogs to doubt:

On being out, proud and conservative | Tammy Bruce | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

...So, when it comes to my comfort level as a conservative who happens to be gay, here's what I know: while many conservatives are people of faith and their religion promotes a very different point of view than mine on homosexuality (and a few other things!), I have found conservatives to be more tolerant, more curious and more understanding of those who are different to them than I ever did when ensconced in US liberal leadership.

Are there religious extremists on the right? Of course, but they are marginalised and rejected. As an example, this year at CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Conference), considered the premier, annual conservative gathering in America, a speaker stepped up to the podium and began verbally to attack gays and lesbians. He was summarily booed from the stage by a conservative audience that refused to allow such bigotry to continue. ...

Talking about confused!!! So, the conservatives won't let their members demagogue gays in their presence, but it's okay if they advocate for laws making their lifestyle illegal. This guy reminds me of some of the 'uncle tom's' in the 1950's and 1960's.

Tolerance doesn't mean agreement. We don't have to agree with or support their political goals to believe that they should be treated courteously and respectfully as individuals.

Saying that Democrats "tolerate" gays is like saying the Pope "tolerates" Catholics. There's no tolerance involved when discussing something you approve of and consider to belong to you. And let's face it, Democrats view gays, blacks, and Jews as their own private plantation, over which they are masters of all they survey. Their REAL tolerance levels are shown when discussing gays, blacks, and Jews who dare to leave the plantation and stop toeing the party line. I'm not that nasty and hostile to my worst enemies.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The classic closet racist remark: "And let's face it, Democrats view gays, blacks, and Jews as their own private plantation, over which they are masters of all they survey. Their REAL tolerance levels are shown when discussing gays, blacks, and Jews who dare to leave the plantation and stop toeing the party line. I'm not that nasty and hostile to my worst enemies."

Now wait for the closet classic defense of the racist remark.

 

[Charles_Main]

You do have a clue to how many conservative gay blogging sites there are, right? I mean you wouldn't just be having a conniption to be a cool 'liberal' with all those perfect feelings of empathy and brotherhood, right?

So wait, conservative gay blogging sites equals what exactly? You're getting away from the argument that was being made in the article you posted and the posts that are made on USMB. You've been here long enough, we both know how many of the Conservatives on USMB feel about homosexuality. Let's not bullshit ourselves here.

Here we go again. Yet another Pseron Who claims he knows what all conservative who post on USMB think on a subject. Even when you confront them with Conservatives like myself who do not think they way they expected. They still try and pigeon Hole all Conservatives into the same group.

I am a conservative and I support Gay rights, Gay marriage, and would vote for a Gay Candidate if they were a fiscal Conservative who believed in limiting the Feds power.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I know you would, Charles_Main, but quite a number here of the fauxright are racist, homophobic, and sexist. They always need to be called out because they damage good Republican policies. Those folks have to be cast off.

 

[Charles_Main]

I know you would, Charles_Main, but quite a number here of the fauxright are racist, homophobic, and sexist. They always need to be called out because they damage good Republican policies. Those folks have to be cast off.

I have no problem with them being called out. I have a problem with anyone who lumps all conservatives on this Board into the same group. Like Mod Did.

 

[beowolfe]

Too many big gay conservative blogs to doubt:

On being out, proud and conservative | Tammy Bruce | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Talking about confused!!! So, the conservatives won't let their members demagogue gays in their presence, but it's okay if they advocate for laws making their lifestyle illegal. This guy reminds me of some of the 'uncle tom's' in the 1950's and 1960's.

Tolerance doesn't mean agreement. We don't have to agree with or support their political goals to believe that they should be treated courteously and respectfully as individuals.

Saying that Democrats "tolerate" gays is like saying the Pope "tolerates" Catholics. There's no tolerance involved when discussing something you approve of and consider to belong to you. And let's face it, Democrats view gays, blacks, and Jews as their own private plantation, over which they are masters of all they survey. Their REAL tolerance levels are shown when discussing gays, blacks, and Jews who dare to leave the plantation and stop toeing the party line. I'm not that nasty and hostile to my worst enemies.

Just as tolerance doesn't mean outlawing something either. You guys are strange. "We won't speak ill of you while we make the very essence of what you are illegal." Remind me not to every rely on conservatives for tolerance. Your kind of tolerance will result in extinction or prison.

 

[Modbert]

I have no problem with them being called out. I have a problem with anyone who lumps all conservatives on this Board into the same group. Like Mod Did.

Except I didn't. Take notice in the post you responded to I used the word many.

 

[DiveCon]

I have no problem with them being called out. I have a problem with anyone who lumps all conservatives on this Board into the same group. Like Mod Did.

Except I didn't. Take notice in the post you responded to I used the word many.

the point being you SHOULD have used the word "some" because its not a majority

 

[Modbert]

the point being you SHOULD have used the word "some" because its not a majority

I never used the word all at any point in time in this thread. The only time I used the word most or majority is when referring to the gallup poll. Point being is, social conservatism has hijacked the Conservative movement for the past thirty years. Are they what should be considered real Conservatives? No.

However, those are the ones who are leading that movement and until they are tossed out by the real conservatives, they are going to be considered conservatives in polls. Same thing goes with those who consider themselves Democrats or Liberals and think Bush was behind 9/11. Moronic view to say the least, but they would still be considered a Democrat or Liberal in a poll.

 

[Dr Grump]

You do have a clue to how many conservative gay blogging sites there are, right? I mean you wouldn't just be having a conniption to be a cool 'liberal' with all those perfect feelings of empathy and brotherhood, right?

So wait, conservative gay blogging sites equals what exactly? You're getting away from the argument that was being made in the article you posted and the posts that are made on USMB. You've been here long enough, we both know how many of the Conservatives on USMB feel about homosexuality. Let's not bullshit ourselves here.

Here we go again. Yet another Pseron Who claims he knows what all conservative who post on USMB think on a subject. Even when you confront them with Conservatives like myself who do not think they way they expected. They still try and pigeon Hole all Conservatives into the same group.

I am a conservative and I support Gay rights, Gay marriage, and would vote for a Gay Candidate if they were a fiscal Conservative who believed in limiting the Feds power.

Note to Charles: See the bolded word. "Many" does not equal "all"....

 

[Dr Grump]

Tolerance doesn't mean agreement. We don't have to agree with or support their political goals to believe that they should be treated courteously and respectfully as individuals.

Saying that Democrats "tolerate" gays is like saying the Pope "tolerates" Catholics. There's no tolerance involved when discussing something you approve of and consider to belong to you. And let's face it, Democrats view gays, blacks, and Jews as their own private plantation, over which they are masters of all they survey. Their REAL tolerance levels are shown when discussing gays, blacks, and Jews who dare to leave the plantation and stop toeing the party line. I'm not that nasty and hostile to my worst enemies.

Bullshit. You were born nasty and hostile...

 

[DiveCon]

the point being you SHOULD have used the word "some" because its not a majority

I never used the word all at any point in time in this thread. The only time I used the word most or majority is when referring to the gallup poll. Point being is, social conservatism has hijacked the Conservative movement for the past thirty years. Are they what should be considered real Conservatives? No.

However, those are the ones who are leading that movement and until they are tossed out by the real conservatives, they are going to be considered conservatives in polls. Same thing goes with those who consider themselves Democrats or Liberals and think Bush was behind 9/11. Moronic view to say the least, but they would still be considered a Democrat or Liberal in a poll.

those that think bush was behind 9/11 i wouldnt put in either political party, but in a group all their own (troofer morons)
but even using the word "many" is inaccurate the word "some" is not

 

[Dr Grump]

I have no problem with them being called out. I have a problem with anyone who lumps all conservatives on this Board into the same group. Like Mod Did.

Except I didn't. Take notice in the post you responded to I used the word many.

the point being you SHOULD have used the word "some" because its not a majority

I call BS on that...I would say vast majority...

 

[DiveCon]

Except I didn't. Take notice in the post you responded to I used the word many.

the point being you SHOULD have used the word "some" because its not a majority

I call BS on that...I would say vast majority...

and, as usual, you are wrong

 

[Charles_Main]

social conservatism has hijacked the Conservative movement for the past thirty years.

Well take heart in the fact that there are Cons like me out here. Fighting them. Fiscally conservative, Limited government, Socially moderate to liberal. That's me.

 

[Modbert]

those that think bush was behind 9/11 i wouldnt put in either political party, but in a group all their own (troofer morons)
but even using the word "many" is inaccurate the word "some" is not

The word many and some are interchangeable. At this point, the majority of the thread bitching to me has been about semantics more than anything.

 

[Dr Grump]

the point being you SHOULD have used the word "some" because its not a majority

I call BS on that...I would say vast majority...

and, as usual, you are wrong

No I am not...been on this board a lot longer than you, and the vast majority of conservatives on this board is anti-homosexual. You know that list I made on the other thread? About 90 percent of them are anti-gay...and note the likes of Pale Rider and Liability are not even on that list and they are vehemently anti-gay....

 

[Dr Grump]

those that think bush was behind 9/11 i wouldnt put in either political party, but in a group all their own (troofer morons)
but even using the word "many" is inaccurate the word "some" is not

The word many and some are interchangeable. At this point, the majority of the thread bitching to me has been about semantics more than anything.

Yeah, I noticed that....