Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Paul Varnell’s Legacy

Timothy Kincaid

December 13th, 2011

Paul Varnell was an outspoken activist and early leader in our community. But Paul’s contribution was unique in a way worth mentioning.

After DADT and with GOProud as comparison, gay Republicans such as Log Cabin are enjoying a moment of acceptance. But when Paul founded the Chicago Area Gay Republican Organization in 1984 (which, if I recall correctly was one of the local groups which merged in the 90s to become the national LCR organization) being Republican publicly within our community was to invite contempt and abuse. Paul did it anyway.

Paul went on to also found the Independent Gay Forum, a site for expressing and apply conservative or non-Progressive ideology to issues in the gay community. This was not an act without criticism. That didn’t stop him.

Most of our heroes and leaders know what it feels like to face adversity from anti-gay conservatives. Paul did too. But he also knows the feeling of being condemned, opposed, and hated by those within our community who could not see the value of thinking independently rather than blind loyalty to the Democratic Party.

Paul, through tenacity and consistency cut a clearing in our political jungle where others could grow and develop a political voice other than the expected, and by that all of our community was enriched.

(side note: I appreciate the IndyGayForum, but if you ever wonder why we monitor the comments, it’s in response to the hate circus that dominates their comment threads)
Karen Ocamb shares some of her recollections:

When I first started freelancing for Frontiers magazine in the late 1980s/early 1990s, I was intrigued that the gay publication printed opinion pieces from conservatives and people who were more independent-minded than most of the left-leaning gay community. I didn’t know that the late publisher Bob Craig was a Republican until one-time “moderate” Republican Gov. Pete Wilson vetoed the gay rights bill he promised to sign. Bob quit the GOP and became something of a mash-up between Libertarian/Independent/Democrat.

Perhaps the most prominent consistent voice for Libertarian/Independents on the Frontiers Opinion page was Paul Varnell, a one-time academic-turned-activist-turned-columnist, mostly for the Windy City Times. Some of Paul’s columns would drive liberals and leftists crazy. There were angry letters to the editor and even some staffers would throw up their hands, vexed beyond words. But that’s what made a Paul Varnell column so interesting to read: he made you think, especially if you disagreed with him. He forced you to analyze why you disagreed. For those of us who think thinking is fun, it was a great intellectual exercise that often yielded new thoughts.

Rest in peace, Paul. We are appreciative of what you gave us.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

Priya Lynn
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Independent Gay Forum was misleadingly named, hard right wingers dominated the discussion which I don’t have a problem with but they let it go too far with outrageous lies tolerated. I was a regular there for a couple of years but when they regularly let Northdallas 30 claim I demanded to have sex in public and that I regularly kicked, stabbed, and shot christians it was too much even for me so I stopped commenting there.

Lucrece
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Didn’t he also work for the NGLTF? That organization is about as cookie-cutter progressive cutthroat as it gets.

Ocamb is always a pleasure to read because while she’s progressiver herself, she’s always had impeccable ethic in allowing all voices their part and respects them for it. Not to mention her knowledge of local politics over in California makes her an encyclopedia of experiences that I think younger gay and lesbian people are being foolish in not recording.

Timothy Kincaid
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Yes, Karen is a rare journalist. Wherever you are on the political spectrum, you know that her data is sound, her questions are pointed, and her follow-up is thorough. You can disagree with her conclusions, but you can trust that her articles are not spin or fraud.

mike/
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

i was there for the first few meetings with Paul & the Chicago Area Gay Republican Organization;

at first, it did not seem that conservative and much more libertarian; it might have been workable, but it took a definite 90-180° turn to the right; there was less talk about equality & freedom and more about money & loss of community; i wasn’t sure back then if becoming ‘mainstream’ was a very good idea.

it was the opposite of the sales pitch initially used, so there was no choice, i dropped out; i chalk it up to an experience that i had to have;

but i must say that Paul was dynamic and that i was never really certain if he liked the way things were going either by what he did or personally stood for as far as the organization’s movement.

i admired him immensely though.

btw. when GoProud started, it was a 360° turn!!!

Lord_Byron
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

It’s hard for me personally not to show contempt towards gay GOP members. In my opinion they care more about lining their wallets than their own rights. You have Tony Fabrizio who has worked on the campaigns of people like Florida governor rick scott and also worked on an anti-marriage equality campaign. All i see it as people willing to screw others over to make a buck. When you invite Anne Coulter who insults lgbt people all the time i lose my respect for that person.

As for the part about being blindly loyal to the democratic party i think that is false. I vote for those that are liberal and that generally tends to be the democrats. There are of course democrats who oppose equal rights and I would never vote for them, but the majority of the GOP party platforms is anti-gay.

PJB863
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

I remember back in the day (late 80′s?) when I was getting my feet wet with local LGBT activism, I placed a call to either NGLTF or IGLTF (Illinois). I don’t even remember what I was outraged about.

About an hour later, none other than Paul called me back, got me calmed down, and and pointed out that many others felt the same way as I did. He was one of the most down-to-earth people in the movement I had talked to up to that point.

Timothy Kincaid
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Lord_Byron,

It’s hard for me personally not to show contempt towards gays. In my opinion they care more about appeasing their lust than their own soul. You have Jeffery Dahmer who has killed and ate the boys he molested. All i see it as people willing to screw others to feed their perverted habit. When you make a hero out of Harry Hay who marched for NAMBLA i lose my respect for that person.

Sound familiar?

When Peter LaBarbera or Pat Robertson say things like this, it generally is considered to be hate-filled bigotry. What is it called when you do it?

TampaZeke
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

With all due respect Timothy, it’s not “independent thinking” when one exchanges blind allegiance to the Democratic Party for blind allegiance to the Republican Party. And it’s unfair and offensive to act as if only Republican gays think for themselves. I was a Republican for my first 25 years and it wasn’t until I started thinking for myself that I became a Democrat and progressive.

Timothy Kincaid
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Zeke,

True. It’s not “independent thinking” to give blind allegiance to the Republican Party or any party. GOProud is a very clear example of just how stupid and wrong that kind of thinking can be.

But reality is reality. No one in our community demands loyalty to the Republican Party in order to be socially accepted. And while in today’s climate there is more tolerance for gay Republicans, in the 80′s many in the gay community absolutely did demand blind allegiance to the Democratic Party, its candidates, and its policies. I heard people, in all seriousness, explain how being gay made you understand the oppression of others and to see the need to advance progressive issues. Still do, come to think of it.

Being an independent thinker that disagreed with Republicans made you a popular man. Being an independent thinker that disagreed with Democrats could get you called all number of vile names screamed at the top of their lungs by people who felt that they were entitled to hate you.

I’m glad you think independently. Truly. I try, but I also know that my perspectives and history and biases and education and experiences all flavor and influence my thinking.

But, how to put this, Zeke you are not exactly the very first person I think of when the term non-partison is mentioned. :) If I recall correctly, our first interaction was over your declaration that I was a concern troll with the smuggness of Tom Delay for referring to the Democrat Party rather than the Democratic Party.

Lord_Byron
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

First, Timothy please don’t compare me to Robertson or LaBarbera. I don’t claim for 1) that my opinion is coming from god and 2) i am not trying to keep conservative LGBT members from their rights they are kind of doing that to themselves. When you belong to a party who has goals such as banning marriage equality, banning you from openly serving in the military, and who want to ignore the bullying and suicides going on in schools I just can’t see giving that person respect. Yes, there are different political views in the gay community, but what can you say about a person who worked on a campaign to ban marriage equality. What can you say about a person who supports Rick Perry who stated that it was wrong for the supreme court to strike down anti-sodomy laws as unconstitutional. I know I am getting specific, but really in my opinion if you work to get people elected who don’t respect you, who view you as an abomination or a freak, and think that you will cause the collapse of western civilization what respect do you deserve?

Can you answer me this Timothy: what is the point of being a conservative LGBT person other than the fiscal policies? Because when it comes to social issues LGBT people are viewed by many on the right as evil and the result of “sin”.

Timothy Kincaid
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Lucrese,

Do you have anything to back up your assertion about Fabrizio and what he does or doesn’t do in a bar or a bed? Your comment is in moderation until it can be substantiated. If you can back it up, I’ll happily approve it.

UPDATE: Thanks for the article, but “divorced dad in Miami Beach” is not evidence to support the statement that you made. Speculation is really all you have. I don’t know if Fabrizio is gay or not (I suspect so) but even if he is, we can’t just announce based on speculation that he picks up guys from bars (qualms or not). And you seem to have gotten the news about Fabrizio backwards. He did not “support Perry’s ‘Gay people are serving in the military but Christian Children can’t pray in school campaign’ but is in the news precisely because he argued against it and opposes it.

I know that people really really really want for the guys they don’t like to be horrible. But we can’t just make crap up about them.

Timothy Kincaid
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Lord_Byron

You seem to be suggesting that only those who claim that their opinion comes from god can engage in bigotry. That is bizarre and nonsensical.

You also seem to be suggesting that keeping people from their rights is somehow a necessary requirement for bigotry. That too is bizarre and nonsensical.

I thought an illustration might show you that hate speech is ugly no matter which side of the fence it comes from. I seem to have failed in that effort. Which isn’t really surprising; it fails with those who throw it at gay people as well.

You see, Lord Byron, I don’t have to defend gay Republicans. I’m not the one tossing out judgments and assigning characteristics to about one quarter to a third of the gay community and using them to justify some pretty nasty statements. I don’t have to find examples (however factually incorrect) to make my comments appear less like those of Peter LaBarbera.

Here’s the thing: you don’t have to like gay Republicans. Or gay people at all. You can have contempt for Asian drivers, lazy Mexicans, thieving negros, gay Republicans who love money more than rights, or any other group that you want to malign. You can even join a group dedicated to showing that contempt and wear sheets and pointy hats.

You just can’t do it here.

Or, better yet, you could consider that your declarations are just prejudice and that you are better than that. You could rethink your “contempt” criteria and perhaps find that you’ve not exactly been admirable here.

You wouldn’t have to agree with gay Republicans about, well, anything. And you’d still be free to show contempt for people who work against our freedom – including some GOProud members – just not assume that everyone has that attribute. You could still even hate those gay Republicans who don’t care about rights, but for that reason, NOT because they are Republicans.

That would be a really great thing. But, of course, its your life.

Priya Lynn
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Timothy said “You also seem to be suggesting that keeping people from their rights is somehow a necessary requirement for bigotry.”.

He doesn’t seem to be suggesting that to me. What he seems to be suggesting is that if two groups of people criticize others the group that criticizes and seeks to deny people their rights are worse than the group that just criticizes – I agree wholeheartedly with that.

Timothy Kincaid
December 13th, 2011 | LINK

Priya Lynn, you are entitled to your own opinion.

Lord_Byron
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

First off I am just going to state that for me to hate gay people i would have to hate myself. Now i admit that I misspoke then and it’s not really contempt, but more of strong disagreement with the political philosophy. I don’t hate, and i don’t even believe that i stated i hated them, people for just being republican. I hate those that disregard human rights in what appears to be an attempt to just pay less in taxes. I am aware that there are gay people that are members of the gop and also i know that not everyone single LGBT person thinks the same way. It is just a little incredulous, again in my opinion, to be gay and belong to the gop. To me it would be the same as a group of jews joining the nazi party. The majority of candidates for are running to be the nominee and vehemently anti-gay.

It annoys me to no end to see LGBT work for people or groups that want to deny equal rights. You have the head of G.W. Bush’s campaign who helped him get elected come out. You have people like the man working with perry who while hating the ad perry made is still working for a man who opposes Lawrence V Texas and worked on an anti-equality rights campaign. Then there is Roy Cohn and the wonderful things he did.

“You seem to be suggesting that only those who claim that their opinion comes from god can engage in bigotry. ”

As has been shown in the past the number one reason people cite for their opposition to equal rights is their religious/moral convictions.

“You also seem to be suggesting that keeping people from their rights is somehow a necessary requirement for bigotry.”

I am not suggesting that, but what is worse: a bigot who is a bigot but doesn’t have the power or doesn’t work deliberately against you or a bigot who works constantly to see that you are discriminated against in almost every possible way? Action isn’t needed to be a bigot, but i am more worried about those that take action with their bigotry than those that are all just talk.

Lucrece
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Just to clarify that article. He objected to the ad, but has decided to continue working with the Perry campaign.

Whether he’s gay is not even a question. GOProud is currently paying the price of outing this man (because anti-gay GOP’s resent losing employees to community outrage). He doesn’t just work for gay-friendly Republicans — he actually works with openly anti-gay politicians like Rick Scott and Rick Perry.

He helps anti-gay politicians become elected. There is no debate about whether he’s complicit in harming gay people. Those politicians he coordinated a campaign for have already acted against the welfare of gay people. He earns amounts of $260,000+ for aiding and abetting the marginalization of his people.

Marauder
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

“Can you answer me this Timothy: what is the point of being a conservative LGBT person other than the fiscal policies?”

Not Timothy, but here are some possible “points” of being a conservative LGBT person.

- you think we need a strong national defense.

- you think we need to protect the US borders because aside from people who want a better life, there are drug runners, violent offenders, and other types of criminals coming here illegally.

- you think the federal government has too much control over the lives of Americans.

- you’re pro-life.

- you think you ought to be able to own a gun in order to go hunting or defend yourself.

- you think Obama’s health care bill created more problems than it solved.

- you think people should be free to engage in religions expression in public forums.

Sorry, Lord_Byron, but I don’t get the impression you’ve really been seriously looking for an answer to your question. Maybe this is your attempt to change that, but it’s not all that hard to look at some conservative LGBT sites and commentators and read about why they believe what they do.

Jay Jonson
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

It is outrageous to compare Lord Byron’s statement to the sentiments of LaBarbera. The equivalence you see simply indicates ignorance and blindness.

TampaZeke
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Timothy, I’m SO very glad you brought that incident up because more than demonstrating that I am not non-partisan it demonstrates that, in spite of all your self-congratulating of being a wee bit better than the rest of us because of your “independent thinking”, YOU are actually quite guilty of being partisan when it suites you and you’re silly, childish and Rovian use of “the Democrat Party” (multiple times) was a perfect demonstration of it.

I make no bones about being a progressive who most often sides with the Democratic Party on issues. That’s as much due to the right wing, fundamentalist cliff that the Republicans chose to jump off of as it is due to any subscription to ideological purity of the Democratic Party. I have very strong disagreements with many Democrats including disagreeing on entitlement programs run amok which I feel harms families and fathers. I also disagree with unrestricted abortion but not being a woman I feel that my opinion is my opinion and not something I wish to force on the people who actually get pregnant. I have other strong disagreements that I am pretty vocal about (including times when I supported your conservative opinion though it wasn’t widely supported here) even if you choose not to remember those instances. Like Priya above, I was a regular visitor and fan of Independent Gay Forum until the extreme ND30 and GayPatriot wing completely took over. It was my attempts at finding a home for my conservative side at GayPatriot and IGF that pushed me even further left.

How’s that for blind allegiance to the Democratic platform?

TampaZeke
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Marauder, it’s interesting to me that a number of the things you listed are what drew me away from the Republican Party and to the Democratic Party. Strong national defense that isn’t misused. Supporting the troops by not sending them to unethical and illegal wars based on lies. Supporting getting Washington out of the private lives of people by not getting them involved in the very personal end of life issues of individuals the way Republicans tried to do from Washington during the Teri Shiavo drama or trying to pass a Federal Marriage Amendment to FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY take away the rights of states to determine their own marriage laws. I support gun possession laws but don’t believe gun possession should be unregulated and I think it’s INSANE to pass laws that guns cannot be prohibited in BARS, CHURCHES and UNIVERSITY CLASSES (and here in Florida even within government buildings like the state capitol). And I believe people should be able to express their religion publicly but I don’t believe that religions should be able to LEGISLATE their beliefs and force them on people who believe differently. I believe that if Christians are allowed to erect religious iconography at City Hall then they should support and promote Wiccans and Jews and Druids and Muslims being allowed to do the same (which they most certainly DON’T). I believe that people who promote prayer in schools aren’t promoting freedom of religion but rather sectarian Christian promotion and that is easily proven by bringing in an Imam to lead the morning prayers. Heck half the school would erupt in outrage if you brought in a Catholic Priest.

My point is, ALL of the points you raised are more complex to me than the Republicans allow them to be when they raise these issues as reasons to be Republican and I personally find the Democratic Party more open to broader interpretations of what these important values mean.

Priya Lynn
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Maurader said “you think people should be free to engage in religions expression in public forums.

Sorry, Lord_Byron, but I don’t get the impression you’ve really been seriously looking for an answer to your question. Maybe this is your attempt to change that, but it’s not all that hard to look at some conservative LGBT sites and commentators and read about why they believe what they do.”

Freedom to engage in religious expressions in public forums is not a reason to favour republicans over democrats. No one is denying anyone the freedom to express their religion in public forums, Democrats support that just as much as republicans.

I similarly find much of the rest of your list dishonest in that Democrats support many of those things as well.

All that aside the bigest non-reason to be a republican is the idea that Republicans stand for fiscal conservatism. That may have been true 50 years ago, but has not been the case for a long, long time, – its Democrats who are managing the government in a fiscally responsible manner and when republicans like Bush get in they proclaim “Deficits don’t matter.”, run up the deficit knowing that when Democrats get elected they’ll have to raise taxes, cut spending to deal with it and then the Republicans will hammer them for doing the responsible thing.

Jay said “It is outrageous to compare Lord Byron’s statement to the sentiments of LaBarbera.”.

I agree. Even if you consider both bigots one is doing everything he can to deprive people of their rights and the other is not. That is a world of difference between the two.

Timothy Kincaid
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Byron, I agree with you and Priya and Jay that your own bigotry is not quite as insidious as some other forms of bigotry.

Zeke, silly fellow. That Rovian insult existed only in your perception and imagination (along with my non-existent self-congratulations). I havent a clue as to why that would even be considered an insult to say “Democrat” instead of “Democratic” but it seems it is and when you complained (accused, actually) i complied with your demands. It matters not at all to me – other that forcing myself to change a linguistic habit.

I also have no qualms with where your registration stands or what positions brought it there. It seems that you base your affiliation on your positions on various issues, as one should (rather than basing one’s position by what one’s party tells one to believe). But when it comes to pure party loyalty and defense (and finding insult where none was intended), well … let’s just say that you keep us from any undue criticism of the Democratic Party.

Lord_Byron
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Marauder

“you think we need a strong national defense.”

Funny thing about conservatives, particular college young republicans, they support the wars in iraq, but are unwilling to fight the wars themselves. I support a strong national defense I just don’t believe that starting wars over lies is a great way to have a national defense. Not only that, but it seems that the GOP fail to realize that arming crazy militants with weapons because they are our ally at the time is a bad thing.

“you think we need to protect the US borders because aside from people who want a better life, there are drug runners, violent offenders, and other types of criminals coming here illegally.”

Part of the reason for the drug running is because of the failed republican lead war on drugs. Really though I find it funny when states like texas complain about illegal immigrants. Texas was created because a bunch of american illegals went against the mexican government and not only moved into the area, but also moved in will slaves when mexico had outlawed slavery.

“you think the federal government has too much control over the lives of Americans”

hypocritical statement since the GOP has shown that they want the government to deal with the personal lives of citizens, but the government shouldn’t deal with the regulation of business.

“you’re pro-life.”

the gop is pro-life is pro-life when it comes to a group of cells, but is more than happy to execute actually living people. they are also really pro-life when it comes to forcing people to live even when they are a vegetable. I am pro-choice and even though i oppose abortion i am not going to tell a women that she can’t get one.

“you think you ought to be able to own a gun in order to go hunting or defend yourself.”

I do think that you should be able to own a gun, but i also think that there should be restrictions. no one needs to own a machine gun.

“you think people should be free to engage in religions expression in public forums.”

very often when that comes to the GOP they are only talking about christianity. also religious expression does not give religions the right to actively try hurting lgbt people.

” you think Obama’s health care bill created more problems than it solved.”

sorry disagree with that entirely. insurance companies should not be denying patients because of pre-existing conditions. i have seen what being uninsured has done to people and i think the health care bill is a good start.

just one last note, but the gop also can’t claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility when it decided that deficits don’t matter and who seem to think that two unfunded wars have no impact on the recession. almost 50% of the federal budget is military. we spend more than the rest of the world combined on our military. that in no way is fiscally sound.

Timothy Kincaid
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Wow, Lord_Byron, you just don’t get it, do you?

You can have whatever opinion or view you like, and the opinions you stated suggest that you shouldn’t be in the GOP. You have different beliefs and goals than those who are in that party. And some of your criticisms are valid.

But you can’t just make crap up.

Really – even if you don’t like Republicans, even if you think that they all have horns and eat babies – you can’t just make crap up.

Where did you get your “information” that young Republicans “support the wars in iraq, but are unwilling to fight the wars themselves”? Did you just pull that out of your ass?

Provide support.

Otherwise, you aren’t telling us a “funny thing about conservatives” at all; you’re just lying.

Priya Lynn
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

I don’t think its controversial to suggest that many, perhaps most people who support a war wouldn’t be willing to fight in it themselves. I supported the war in Afghanistan, I’ve supported other wars. Would I ever fight in one? Not a chance. If I remember correctly a majority of Americans supported the war in Iraq at one time, but I’m sure only a small minority of Americans would willingly fight in such a war whether Democrat or Republican.

Timothy Kincaid
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Priya Lynn,

True. Most people of any party whether supportive of a war or not prefer not to fight in it themselves.

But that is not a “Funny thing about conservatives, particular college young republicans”. If it is a funny thing, it is a funny thing about people in general but LESS SO about Republicans. In 2008, polling showed roughly that military members supported John McCain by about 70% to 30% over Barack Obama.

Lord_Byron can hate whomever he likes. He just can’t make crap up about them and post it at BTB.

Lord_Byron
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

I am biased and I have my prejudices I am willing to admit that. It is true that a majority of people who support the wars would never fight the war themselves. I focus mainly though on the GOP because historically they have been the most hawkish when it comes to war. Support came from the 2004 GOP National Convention. Yes i am aware that it is purely anecdotal evidence, but when you get responses like “As long as there’s a steady stream of volunteers, I don’t see why I necessarily should volunteer,” coming from young gop members.

Again just a biased opinion, but if you are willing to state that you support the war then you should be willing to volunteer and fight in the war and not just let others do it for you. THe majority of those that often vote in favor of war don’t generally have to worry about losing their own kids.

TampaZeke
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Timothy, you’re not usually this condescending, snippy and self-righteous. Are you having a bad day or is this just an issue that really pushes your buttons?

Priya Lynn
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Timothy, I thought about it after I posted and if I remember correctly most military members are Republican identified so I think one could generalize and say Republican war supporters are more willing to fight themselves than Democrat war supporters.

Timothy Kincaid
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

Priya, thanks.

Zeke, probably both. Wait til you see my rant about police abuse.

Byron, you can have your prejudices. But BTB shouldn’t be home for prejudice nor should any of us let bias masquerading as fact go unchallenged. Agree?

Lord_Byron
December 14th, 2011 | LINK

I agree with that and did not come here to start a fight. I enjoy the blog, but as you can tell I have strong feelings when it comes to certain things.

Marauder
December 15th, 2011 | LINK

I’m not asking anyone to agree with the reasons I listed why someone might be an LGBT conservative person. I’m just giving reasons I’ve seen from LGBT conservative people themselves.

Priya Lynn
December 15th, 2011 | LINK

Marauder, I’m just saying that some of the reasons you gave are false, such as being free to engage in religious expression in public forums. No democrat opposes that. Now if you had said one of the reasons for a gay person to be a Republican is the desire to have the government promote and be subservient to religious principles that would be a more truthful expression of what many Republicans seek.

Marauder
December 16th, 2011 | LINK

You might think the reasons are false, Priya Lynn…but other people don’t. That’s what you’re not getting here. Even if something seems totally obvious to you, some other people don’t see it that way.

Priya Lynn
December 16th, 2011 | LINK

I don’t believe you Maurader. When Rick Perry says children aren’t allowed to pray in school or celebrate christmas I’m sure he knows its a lie.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.