Comments on: Simpson on Santorum

By: MattNYC

MattNYC — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:49:52 +0000

Sen. Simpson can be very rational. And then he can tell retirees who don’t get million-dollar (GOVERNMENT) Senate pensions that they can eat dog food or starve for all he cares (god forbid that millionaires pay more into SS).

By: MattNYC

MattNYC — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:46:39 +0000

I am wondering when Frothy will propose a Constitutional Amendment to give a man the right to marry an incubator (or maybe even just a uterus)–but only one at a time, of course. Since that’s the only way he views women, might as well cut out the middle-woman. And infertility/barrenness will be the ONLY legally allowable reason for divorce.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 05:13:39 +0000

Jim,

I appreciate that you have a perspective on Republicans that is more attuned to the grass roots than many gays who have no interaction. However, your assessment of democrats is as flawed as is their assessment of republicans.

In isn’t actually true that half of democrats oppose our equality. Yes blacks are demographically not our allies. And while Latinos vote about the same as whites, they mostly are democrats and do bring down an otherwise very supportive number. Yet still democrats poll around 65 to 75 for equality and many prominent black and hispanic leaders are working in their communities on our behalf.

So while it is true that we need both- something you will always see acknowledged at BTB – it is not accurate to suggest that the current state of the two parties is similar.

My recommendation is that gay democrats applaud those republicans who support us without having to put down the republican party with their next breath. And that gay republicans appreciate and acknowledge where the democratic party is as a whole.

And thankfully that’s what most BTB readers do.

By: Jim Hlavac

Jim Hlavac — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 03:24:21 +0000

I’m sure most readers and writers of this blog t\do not often wade into Republican, Right Wing and Tea Party websites, as I do, (for economically and defense wise I’m sort of a Republican Right Wing Tea Partier,) but what I have found there are many people who state often that they find it sad that Santorum is “gay obsessed.” That’s the common phrase. And when I think of old time Republicanism, I think of Barry Goldwater, who warned back in the 1960s, “God forbid if the evangelicals get a hold of this party, it’ll be the end of the Republicans.” And it was Goldwater who said, in 1994, while DOMA and DADT were being signed by Clinton the Democrat: “You don’t have to like it, but gay Americans deserve full constitutional rights including marriage and military service.” The debate within the Republicans on this issue is fairly open, the evangelicals have been winning. The party has been declining. Alas, within the Democratic Party there is no debate, but some weird willingness to have 1/2 the party’s constituents be rapidly anti-gay, (yes, African-Americans and Latinos, Catholics and many Union members,) while pretending on the surface to be “pro-gay” when they are nothing of the sort. And too may gays are duped by this charade.

Meanwhile, it behooves gay folks to not adhere to one party or the other, but argue tooth and nail to both: “You will accept us gays, or suffer,” for we gays need all 300 million Americans and both political parties to accept us, not just one or the other, or only half of either. If we want the “culture war” against us to be over, then we must get all the anti-gays to drop that stance, whether they be vocal Republicans, or silent Democrats. It is, of course, easier to fight the vocal ones, while the silent snakes get away with doing nothing. They’re evolving, I hear, ahem.

And gays should recognize this, and stop trashing gays for being Republican or Democrat, but all get involved for pushing all the nation to our side.

By: Lindoro Almaviva

Lindoro Almaviva — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:48:46 +0000

Joe is reporting maryland passed marriage equality:

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2012/02/live-maryland-senate-marriage-vote.html

By: andrew

andrew — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:24:07 +0000

You can have an honest difference of opinions with someone like Simpson.

The benefit of Santorum is that he reminds us that, when they feel safe enough, the rightwing theocratic idealogical purists reveal themselves for what they are, and it’s just not the same as the rank and file GOP that I grew up with. Not even close.

Santorum may be the illness that helps the GOP cure itself…

By: Lindoro Almaviva

Lindoro Almaviva — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 22:55:20 +0000

Now, how about him for President?

By: Lucrece

Lucrece — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:47:29 +0000

What was the point of stating that Obama is not for gay marriage? He may be cowardly as Christie says.

The difference between Obama and “courageous” Republicans like Christie is that he has let DOMA be undefended in court, opposes marriage bans, and especially unlike Christie would not veto a marriage equality bill.

There’s much to be said about Obama’s fairweather rhetoric, but unlike mainstream Republicans he’s not an enemy at least.

By: Charles

Charles — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:38:12 +0000

I know that Santorum is against gay marriage, but doesn’t he have a high ranking member of his campaign staff who is gay? For the record, Obama is not for gay marriage.

By: Tor

Tor — Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:24:01 +0000

Sometimes I am proud of my home state. I have a love/hate stance on Simpson. Once, I took a commuter flight from Cody to Denver, and Simpson was on board. I really wanted to ask him how he felt about what had been happening to the Republican party, but I chickened out. I bet I would have gotten an earful.