58 Comments

1. Another View:

That just shows how all the right wing religious kooks don’t have a clue. Your values mean nothing. It’s about your evangelical vote. That’s all. But go ahead an give them four more years. I actually will have my taxes raised. I am in that 2%, but I will keep living good. I just won’t give my dogs quite as much steak. My point is you guys can’t afford it. But McCain is the super rich guy who you wanna have a beer with. Obama is not as wealthy as I.

Sep 17, 2008 - 3:33 am 2. aunt ralph:

Gosh, wander much?

Maybe we like Sarah because she doesn’t claim to know as much about ‘you guys’ as you do.

Sep 17, 2008 - 3:56 am 3. Andrew Ian Dodge:

In the UK homosexuals are not a monolithic voting bloke either.

Its always amusing to listen to those who claim this is true.

What people do in their spare time is up to them. Simple as that.

Sep 17, 2008 - 4:01 am 4. Andrea Fuzzi:

She’s not robotObama,programmed to satisfy his handlers’ money invested

Sep 17, 2008 - 5:13 am 5. Toad:

“My brother is gay. My daughter is a lesbian. My uncle is gay. & etc.” Comments from evangelicals I know. You don’t kick someone you’ve known and loved/love out into the snow……You tease the crap out them sometimes though.

Sep 17, 2008 - 5:58 am 6. HardHeadedWoman:

I would imagine that much of the US is just like Alaska in their “live and let live” attitude. In spite of Paul Begala designating Wyoming as homophobic and racist we live quite happily side by side with our Gay friends, relatives and neighbors whom we love and support the same as our straight friends, relatives and neighbors. In fact, in my opinion, the best way to promote understanding and acceptance for Gays is to live amongst us all as part of us, which you are and as you do. Not well expressed but I hope that what I’m trying to convey is understood.

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:24 am 7. Will:

My gay friends and I were already going to vote for MCcain before Sarah Palin came on scene. We made the decision long ago not to vote for Obama because it would be dangerous for him to be President. Obama could not pass a background check for emplyoment with the FBI or Secret Service due to his friendship with Bill Ayers.

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:37 am 8. Lynn:

Do you remember Charlie Brown’s teacher and how she would be talking and all the kids heard was rah, rah, rah, rah? When I tried to read this article that all I heard. Couldn’t get the photo of that little boy out of my head. In my face? Yes. Was it intentional? Probably. All I could think was: Where is his mother?

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:47 am 9. AJ:

“But McCain is the super rich guy who you wanna have a beer with. Obama is not as wealthy as I”

Obama made 4.5 million last year. Nice try, buddy. Obama is an elitist who raked in 10 million last night from the scum of the earth in H-wood.

Evangelicals have no power. That’s a cliche, and wrong.

Excellent article, Mr. Blatt.

Sep 17, 2008 - 7:21 am 10. Scott:

I am a gay man and I am voting for McCain. I will not vote for Democrats until they are serious about the war and the threat of Islamist extremism. I imagine I won’t be voting for a Dem for a long, long time.

Sep 17, 2008 - 7:40 am 11. Randy:

I am a “used to be gay” man and that church and conference do not claim to “cure” anyone. Repeating that misinformation dismisses the reality of many of us who have, or had, same sex attractions but do not identify as gay … and don’t have too.

Regardless, I am glad that it seems some who have embraced a gay identity can appreciate Palin’s many admirable qualities.

Sep 17, 2008 - 8:01 am 12. Olivia:

Of course this is true even though liberals do not want to believe it. Why is it assumed that if you are in a minority group that you can’t be a three-dimensional person and vote for the candidate of your own choosing. We hear this kind of crap from Obama himself regarding women. Because yeah as a woman I don’t care about the economy, national security, or energy. It’s all about my uterus (and it’s status at the federal level). Give me a break. The Democrats are in for a rude awakening.

Sep 17, 2008 - 8:33 am 13. Confidently heterosexual Paul:

Kudos to all who by their own thoughts and actions challenge truly demeaning caricatures and pigeonholing, you are simply beautiful to behold no matter whether you identify as a homosexual, an evangelical, or anything else.

I see that in Palin and maybe that’s the core of what others, unlike and alike me, also see?

Sep 17, 2008 - 9:36 am 14. Mike T:

A lot of gays aren’t like Andrew Sullivan; they don’t base all of their views exclusively on who is or isn’t for allowing them to get a state marriage license.

Sep 17, 2008 - 9:50 am 15. Irish Gal:

Sarah vetoed a bill opposing same sex benefits. Good for her.

Sep 17, 2008 - 10:08 am 16. F.A.Hagen:

Sometimes when you read an article, it is written from such a human perspective that it leaves you a better person. Thanks for giving us a more nuanced perspective on the political views of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters to counter the one-dimensional rantings we get from the Andrew Sullivans. It takes much more courage to write the way you do.

Sep 17, 2008 - 10:54 am 17. PalinSucks:

Sarah Palin vetoed a bill denying same sex benefits only because it was unconstitutional. The FACT is that she’s on the record as opposing same sex benefits.

Palin’s views on social issues match up quite nicely with those held by radical Islamists in the Middle East. And three of her churches are connected with the fringe Third Wave movement and “Joel’s Army,” which seeks to bring Christian theocracy to the US and suggests that the proper way to deal with gays is stoning them.

Sarah Palin is no friend to gay people, and certainly no friend to democracy as we know it.

Sep 17, 2008 - 11:39 am 18. Kirk:

Narrowing your entire worldview through the keyhole of a sex act is usually the approach of the gay political movement that has a very extreme agenda. The fact that they have successfully shoved this agenda through different parts of government in blue states does not change the fact that what consenting adults chose to do in their bedrooms should be private, not a worldview and a lifestyle.

Sep 17, 2008 - 11:57 am 19. Annabel:

Could you cite that FACT, PalinSucks?
As for your claim that “her views match up quite nicely with those held by radical Islamists”, you obviously know nothing about either.

Sep 17, 2008 - 12:00 pm 20. Les:

To PalinSucks: Are you voting for Obama, then? The Rev. he chooses to pray with, Rev. James Meeks, hosts “Hell Houses” at Halloween where LGBT people are depicted burning in hell. But in Obama’s case, his religious affiliations aren’t reflective of anything he might actually believe. I’m not voting for McCain, but the hatred directed at Palin is absurd. She hasn’t tried to legislate her beliefs and is no different than Obama in her association with homophobic churches.

Sep 17, 2008 - 12:10 pm 21. Am I being Punk'd?:

Palin still attends and supports a church that hosts a “PRAY THE GAY AWAY” workshop. This church also claims that they can “love” gays out of their “lifestyle”.

The person you’re supporting for vice president thinks being gay is a choice. And not a very good choice, either.

Alaska was one of the first U.S. states to pass a constitutional ban on gay marriage, in 1998. Palin has stated that she supported that amendment.

It just astounds me that any gay person can walk backwards and embrace a woman like this. It’s a slap at every gay person who came before you and fought for the few rights you have now.

Sep 17, 2008 - 12:52 pm 22. GayPatriot » Pajamas Piece–Palin and Gays:

[...] Media just posted my piece on how some gays are reacting to Sarah Palin. Please note, given how the gay media has reacted to her, I chose to focus on the support she [...]

Sep 17, 2008 - 1:46 pm 23. Chris in Toronto:

Re: Am I being Punk’d?

It astounds you to discover that homos are not single-issue voters? Sheesh.

Sep 17, 2008 - 3:21 pm 24. Am I being Punk'd?:

@ Chris in Toronto:

Which “single issue” are you talking about? Banning same sex marriage? Opposing the expansion of hate crime laws against gay people? Supporting a church that seeks to turn gay people straight through prayer? Opposing a Supreme Court ruling giving benefits to same-sex couples?

Those sound like several issues to me.

But if you’re grouping them all under the category of “Gays should not have the same rights as others because the bible tells me so”, then yes, I am astounded that any gay person would support such ignorance in their government.

Sep 17, 2008 - 5:06 pm 25. Javelin:

Andrea Fuzzi:

She’s not robotObama,programmed to satisfy his handlers’ money invested
So true, she is a robotic right wing religious droid programmed to lure all the clueless ignorant people in, including the gun nuts with sex appeal. I’m sure a month ago you never even heard of her or Wasila or could tell me the capital of Alaska, but now, thanks to illogical emotional appeal, people like you pretend she is some surrogate mommy or sister you always wanted.

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:15 pm 26. Joshua:

This article is fascinating. It’s like watching William F. Buckley review the latest LP from Public Enemy and start off by talking about the consummate skill of the drummer. You guys don’t even understand the basic anatomy of the subject.

Gay civil rights isn’t just about “what people do in their spare time.” It’s about civil equality on the aspects of straight sexual relationships that have a public legal character: marriage, parenting rights, taxes, employment discrimination, next-of-kin, medical decisions, and so on. And the gay civil rights movement is not a negotiable issue for most gays. Most gays aren’t turned off by Republicans because Republicans are mean to them — though some are. They’re turned off by Republicans because Republicans are committed to supporting the legislative agenda of religious organizations that actively seeks to criminalize and disenfranchise them.

So some gays have no problem with Palin — some gays have no problem with the idea of being cured of their homosexuality by prayer. A certain percentage of any group can be counted on not to know what’s good for them. In any event, some gays being pro-Palin doesn’t mean that Palin isn’t anti-gay, it just means that some gays think the Republican agenda on points other than gay civil rights is more important than their own interests in those areas.

And just as a point of order, if Alaskans were genuinely libertarian, in the old Barry Goldwater sense of the word, they wouldn’t support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

Sep 17, 2008 - 6:28 pm 27. Sari Buida:

I like Sarah Palin. She has a lot of leadership experiences, i can’t compare her to Mr.McCain or Mr Obama. They are very clever and have great performances. I am not gay, i like Sarah Palin.

Sep 17, 2008 - 8:10 pm 28. Wing and a Whim:

“If Alaskans were genuinely libertarian”

…Woah there, kiddo. Seriously, are “Alaskans” supposed to be a single block minority, all rigidly marching lock-step to your stereotype?

Speaking as an Alaskan, who happens to be bisexual, what I do in my bedroom is my own business. Is it the be-all and end-all of my existence? Not at all – my life and politics are not completely controlled by my glands and desires.

Here’s why the whole Palin-voting-against-banning-benefits happened.

Frankly, Alaska is not California. It doesn’t want to be. The people of the state made that pretty clear when they voted to ban homosexual marriage, gay or lesbian. You’re not in bad company; the state doesn’t recognize common-law marriages, either. It’s pretty clear on what marriage is, and shacking up doesn’t fit the bill, whether or not I agree. (If we go for civil unions up here, we’d be pretty likely to succeed, but given that marriage is seen as a very Christian act, and the majority of Christians are pretty clear on the man-and-woman part, trying to steal all the pomp and circumstance and privileges without endorsing the substance is oh so… Obama? I knew this campaign sounded familiar.)

But when we banned gay marriage, we left this legal and moral problem where state workers who now could not be married were not eligible for any of the rights that their straight counterparts had. So our courts ruled that we had to extend benefits to the people whom we had otherwise legally shut out from having them – that we must treat all workers equally. It created quite a stink – not because the gays were getting access to benefits! No, it was because now all the straights that were shacking up but unmarried – remember we don’t recognize common law – weren’t eligible to the benefits that the “unmarried” gays were, and they wanted to have their cake and eat it too (as long as it wasn’t wedding cake.)

Loren Leman, otherwise known as That Slimeball, promptly started lobbying and pushing a bill to specifically ban the state workers from having their court-granted rights. He pushed it publicly as keeping the state from having to indiscriminately give out benefits to all partners, and keeping costs down, but really tried to pander to every anti-gay bone in the public’s body. Which didn’t work, because the court decision was pretty widely seen as having to take our medicine for banning marriage, and accepted.

Palin promptly shot it down – for exactly the reasons she states. She’s not “pro-gay”, she’s not “anti-gay”, she’s pretty darn constitutional. Which is why we love her. Well, that, and the way she’s taken apart the good old boy network, starting with putting her foot down and emphatically stopping contractors from getting away with building incredibly sub-code new housing in the Valley and sticking the new homeowners with the heating and repair bills.

Relax. She’s not going to make us wear pink triangles, she’s not going to shut down all abortion clinics, and she’s got two years of governing over 50% of the United States (we’re bigger than you think), dealing with two foreign countries, and has made Big Oil back down to protect the interests of her constituents.

She may continue to pull her trick of pissing off folks by wielding line-item veto and cutting pet projects that can’t justify their existence, though, regardless of whether they’re your special interest group’s or not. Maybe we can put Obama to work raising money for them privately with that silver tongue of his – there’s always a market for honeyed words with no more solid foundation that “hope” of unspecified “change”.

Sep 18, 2008 - 12:19 am 29. Victor:

Here in South Africa gays can get legally married. My 25th anniversary was last week but I’m not “married”. Not me or any of my friends is the least interested in the government’s red tape, paperwork or opinion of our private affairs. Andrew “marriage certificate” Sullivan is unlike the gay guys I know. What people do in private or in their churches is of no concern to me. Upholding western liberal capitalism is paramount. Palin will defend the freedoms of America and by doing that ensure that my freedom here is South Africa will also prevail. Palin is hugely popular in this part of the world.

Sep 18, 2008 - 6:04 am 30. Doubting David:

Yeah, “curing” homosexuality might make you pause a bit in your enthusiasm. And how about censoring library books, promoting the notion that the world was created 5,000 years ago and touting the war in Iraq as a holy mission? I was a McCain man until this VP choice. I am now firmly in the ranks of the undecided. Sarah Palin is an ignorant, bigoted, totally unqualified candidate. How in the world can you, a gay American with claims to possessing a brain, support her as a possible President of the US?

Sep 18, 2008 - 8:39 am 31. Nic:

Gay people tend to be like straight people, they are all different with different opinions, different religious and political beliefs. I’m not sure that just because “…most of my readers were enthusiastic about Sarah Palin.” the ‘gay vote’ (no such thing!) is going Republican, it just means that PEOPLE (straight or gay, black or white) tend to read the newspapers, blogs, etc, that mirror/confirm their own opinions – well apart from those nut jobs who trawl the internet trying to find things to disagree with or get angry about!

That said, if she doesn’t speak out against this ‘curing’ homosexuality thing then it is only natural that people will assume that she supports it!

Sep 18, 2008 - 9:23 am 32. geokstr:

Doubting David:

Nice try, you phony creep.

I’ve about had it up to here with all the dishonest emails that start with:

“1′m a life long Republican but now…”

“As a conservative, I was going to vote for McCain, but now…”

“I was a McCain man until…”

This a tactic cooked up many years ago by the left to combat the growth of conservative talk radio. It was specifically advanced as a means of swamping the call lines with ostensible conservatives/republicans who then spit out the democratic talking points.

It has since been successfully adapted to the internet, as you can see by David’s post. Similar posts can be found everywhere Obama’s worshippers need to combat the truth getting out. They appear on nearly every conservative, independent and relatively objective blog, as if on cue (but for reason you never see them on the leftist blogs). Something the least bit negative about Obama or the least bit positive about Palin or McCain appears on the internet – watch out, within minutes, posts will appear from people who claim they used to be conservatives or republicans but now because of…

They will use the same talking points, no matter how ridiculous or how thoroughly debunked, like David’s trash about “touting the war in Iraq as a holy mission” (she said no such thing, she said we can only pray that what we are doing in Iraq is in line with the will of God), or this crap about a 5,000 year old world, which was picked up by the supposed genius Matt Damon and objective journalist Mo Dowd when it was nothing more than a HOAX quote from a blogger who admitted it he just made it up:
http://unbearablebobness.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/08/governor-sarah-palin-quotes.html

It’s evident on C-Span all the time, where they had to go to three lines, supposedly reserved for democrats, republicans and independents, when the democrats kept flooding the lines. Now, on the repblican and independent lines, all you get are callers who start off with “I’m a republican, but now…”, or “I was an independent, but now”, and they immediately go into a left wing rant with the predictable talking point.

Apparently, since a huge amount of leftists live on the dole, they have more time to do this sort of dishonest drivel than those on the right, who actually work for a living.

On some conservative blogs now, they have lengthy lists of the so-called “life-long republicans” touted by the Obama-tanked media who have suddenly renounced their party because of (list your liberal talking point and/or lie about Palin here). Most of these so-called “life-long republicans” turn out to be Obama delegates, people who ran as democrats for office in the past, who have given money to democrats all their lives, etc., ad nauseum, all of which was readily discovered in 30 seconds, by just googling their names, apparently too difficult for the tech-savvy “journalists” perpetrating all this BS to help their bud.

You, David are disgusting. Get some honor (look it up.)

Sep 18, 2008 - 10:30 am 33. Dr. Mark:

Joshua, Conservatives/traditionalists can easily be tolerant (in the classic definition)of anyone. Where the rubber meets the road, however, is where traditional values will collide with the homosexual agenda. Gay-Marriage is an oxymoron to any with main-line religious values and must continue to be so. The homosexual lobby with the assistance of classic marketing techniques has attempted to “normalize” abberant behaviors for over 20 years, they have almost been successful. Don’t ever confuse tolerance with endorsement (which the homosexual lobby wishes)..something which will never (mercifully) materialize.

Sep 18, 2008 - 10:40 am 34. Heather:

The person you’re supporting for vice president thinks being gay is a choice.

So you’re saying people are incapable of choosing their sexual partners and which acts they do with them?

And you can’t figure out why most people disagree with your worldview that human beings are nothing but rutting animals with no control?

Curious.

Sep 18, 2008 - 1:13 pm 35. nick:

She wanted to harm Gays by not allowing benefits!

DUH!!

but AG told her it was illegal to do so,

if not for that SHE WOULD HAVE DENIED benefits to Gay employees

I think your friends are racists and/or liars.

Sep 18, 2008 - 3:21 pm 36. nick:

yes Scott since you dont have to worry about being drafted

or have courage to enlist.

great excuse – I am gay.

Sep 18, 2008 - 3:24 pm 37. nlcatter:

you are so dumb

Obama could not pass a background check for emplyoment with the FBI or Secret Service due to his friendship with Bill Ayers.

hes not trying to work for FBI and President candidates dont need background checks!

Sep 18, 2008 - 3:40 pm 38. Dave:

“And how about censoring library books, promoting the notion that the world was created 5,000 years ago and touting the war in Iraq as a holy mission?”

Doubting David,

There is no library censorship, that’s a fraudulent story. The librarian there says it’s a made up thing, that she never even SUGGESTED doing that.

She does NOT promote new earth creationism. There is no evidence EVER that she has done this, let alone that she’s doing it as a political leader. New Earth Creationism is kind of dumb, and she’s not dumb.

‘touting the war in Iraq as a holy war’ is NOT what she did. She said a prayer that, as her son and others were going off to war, that they were ‘in God’s will’. It’s a desire to do what God wants, not a declaration that they ARE doing what God wants. It’s a humble desire to follow God’s will, not a statement of what it IS.

People talking about CHristianity and the bible who do not know anything about it almost always get it catastrophically wrong.

Christianity is about being humble. IT’s fundamentalist Islam that forges ahead loudly and proudly declaring they’re doing God’s will. And they cut off people’s heads on video.

As soon as you can show us a Christian beheading video, some southern preacher quoting a new testament verse as he chops off the head of a gay guy, THEN you can criticize us. Until then, no moral equivalencies please, as they only make you look stoopid.

Sep 18, 2008 - 5:05 pm 39. AER:

I don’t know how any self-respecting gay person or woman (which I am) could vote for Palin. She is anti-feminist and anti-gay. She wants to take away women’s right to choose and gays’ rights to the same freedoms as straight people. That’s just not right. Palin wants to send gay people to camps to get them to become straight. Crazy! I know my gay friends are voting for Obama despite the fact that they make more than $500,000 a year and so their taxes will increase. I guess freedom is worth it to them.

Sep 18, 2008 - 8:49 pm 40. Theresa:

I was surprised but HAPPY to see gay supporters for Palin… I have some gay friends however; they are not on board.. They will NOT vote for BO, but are unsure of Palin. I have researched and she has stated that she believes marriage is between one man and one woman (it’s that religious thing) however, she has stated she has Gay Friends and Sarah Palin did veto a bill denying same sex benefits. I do not think she would be a great asset to the gay community; however I don’t think she will cause problems either. I have done much research on Obama and frankly he scares the hell out of me. He has too many ties to the Muslim community and I know there is NO TOLERENCE for gays in the Muslim world. I just don’t trust the man, not too mention his inexperience. Anyway, I’m just glad to see the support. Oh by the way I’m a Republican woman who is Pro-Choice (yea were out here) – I do not advocate abortions so I could say I’m pro- life.. but that decision is between a woman, her doctor and God. You would never be able to stop abortions completely… so the choice should be there and I really believe that Roe vs Wade will not be allowed to be overturned… they just can’t go back to backstreet alley abortions, it wouldn’t be stand for.

McCain/Palin 2008

Sep 19, 2008 - 12:49 am 41. Vince P:

I love how the Leftists are so bigoted that they lash out against gay people for having views they don’t agree with.

Do you see these moronic gay Leftist Thought Police telling straight people what their politics should be? No , of course, yet they feel they can prey on gay people. Why is that? Do Leftists feel that gay people are of lessor mental capacity and need your supervision and approval for the things they value?

I believe there should be anti-harassement/anti-slavery legislation to bar Leftists from using social dynamics to humiliate and then control the thoughts of the people these bigots target.

Leftists out of our minds! And especially out of our wallets. And pray for the day out of our schools.

Sep 19, 2008 - 1:36 am 42. Nic:

“yes Scott since you dont have to worry about being drafted
or have courage to enlist.
great excuse – I am gay”

A little unfair, given that the US military sacks gay service personnel if they find out about them (even decorated war veterans)! So gay service personnel can’t defend themselves as they will then loose their jobs! Lift the ban, like almost all other NATO countries have, then try that cheap shot again once gay service personnel can answer back! You’d be surprised just how many are serving the USA in silence and constant fear of discovery!

Note: Of the 26 countries that make up NATO, all but Bulgaria, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Turkey and the USA allow gay people to serve in the military and of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, two (Britain, France) permit gay people to serve openly, and three (United States, Russia, China) do not.

So the USA is in great company… Bulgaria, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Turkey, Russia and China… no of which are particularly know for tolerance and civil liberties! What ever happened to “All men are created equal”?!

Sep 19, 2008 - 11:14 am 43. Francesca:

“A certain percentage of any group can be counted on not to know what’s good for them. ”

Well thank you for summing up the mentality of the left!

Sep 19, 2008 - 11:37 am 44. nlcatter:

Mccain/palin will not lift that ban!

cant you understand anything!

Sep 19, 2008 - 1:29 pm 45. nlcatter:

“Sarah Palin did veto a bill denying same sex benefits. ”

not becasue she did not like it!

she did like the bill

becase it was UNCONSTITutIONAL!

you are a MORON!

Sep 19, 2008 - 1:31 pm 46. nlcatter:

Palin on City Council did say she did not want a BOOK in library.

what book? Pastor, I am Gay by former PFLAG regional director Reverend Howard Bess.

her AOG church rails against Gays and wants to “CURE” them

Sep 19, 2008 - 1:33 pm 47. Stephen C.:

Palin, originally baptized a Roman Catholic later was “born again” as a Pentecostal Evengelical.

I think the distinction to be made here is that there is a difference between the old fundamentalist/evangelical church of the South and the evangelical churches of the West and the Northwest.

When the rubber hits the road there is a more
“frontier” libertarian quality to the Western Evangelical lifestyle and less community pressure for conformity, reflected in Alaska where, to survive, you learn to respect and depend upon your neighbor.

Sep 19, 2008 - 8:35 pm 48. Matt:

It’s pretty simple, really. Of course there are gays who will vote for Sarah Palin. Republicans have perfected the art of getting people to vote against their own interests.

How much do you wanna bet the teeny weeny tiny minority of gays that likes Sarah Palin does so because they are either militaristic in their approach to foreign policy, wealthy, or part of the strange, self-hating crowd of homosexuals for Jesus?

Sep 20, 2008 - 11:22 am 49. Kristine:

Um, Joshua… “They’re turned off by Republicans because Republicans are committed to supporting the legislative agenda of religious organizations that actively seeks to criminalize and disenfranchise them.”

That’s crap. I’m REALLY tired of people like you who endlessly believe that every single Republican is exactly the same.

I’m an atheist, pro-choice, anti-abortion Republican who couldn’t care less about what consenting adults do. I’m also pro-gay marriage and equal benefits and legal rights.

There was a time when the Republican party was absolutely NOT interested in this ridiculous legislating of “morals”.

It’s the religious wing that has a stranglehold on the party who MUST be stopped. The “neocons” have to go as well.

MOST Republicans I know want a return to base. Small government, strong defense, lower taxes, etc.

So please send a memo out to all the other closed-minded bigots who refuse to believe the truth that Republicans are quite varied.

Back to the basics for the GOP. Fiscal conservatives and socially MYOB.

Sep 21, 2008 - 12:58 pm 50. Nic:

Kristine: Excellent, now you just need to get your own party back from the right wing nut jobs… Palin getting the VP nomination isn’t going to help your cause much though! Can’t the decent, sensible Republicans like you field an alternative candidate? From what you say they’d win hands down, especially as so many Democrats appear to hate Obama and would most certainly vote for a moderate Republican!

Sep 22, 2008 - 5:03 am 51. Doubting David:

Sorry Geokster, you’ve got it wrong. I may be a creep, but I’m not a phony creep. No fifth column, no sneak attack from a liberal aerie on the evangelical subculture that wants to get one of its own into office. And thanks for parsing the “God’s mission” comment. Here is exactly what she said to Charles Gibson: ‘…our national leaders are sending them (our soldiers) on a task that is from God…there is a plan, and that plan is God’s plan.’ I’ve read several accounts of the book censoring episode and it appears Palin attempted to subcontract it out to a subordinate (a standard operating procedure of hers) but was rebuffed by the librarian. In the Gibson interview, she also indicated that she would consider going to war with Russia over South Ossetia and Abkhazia. I’d like to ask her how old she thinks the universe is, but am not likely to get the chance as the campaign has only let her out once so far (to decidedly mixed reviews), and has kept her chained to her peg the rest of the time.

As for you Dave, I actually live in the Muslim world and more than share your fears about the jihadi threat: This is why I was with McCain. But nominating Palin was, well…beyond the pale. We just can’t risk this undereducated, totally unqualified person becoming President of the United States.

Sep 22, 2008 - 9:07 am 52. judith:

Well, just because a person has a different lifestyle doesn’t mean that some of them arent’t nuts! I mean, do you really want to vote for a woman who demands the front leg of each wolf that is killed after being run down to exhaustion and then shot from a plane? She’s a wack and yes, as a 24 year alaskan, the library story is true! I remember the news when it happened. So, be careful about your denying statements unless you were there. As far as gays are concerned. Who cares if they vote for her. They will probably regret it if she and McCain get elected. Oh by the way, the Focus on the Family nutcases are in Anchorage right now, fixing the homosexuals so that they can become straight. Maybe you should sign up!

Sep 22, 2008 - 10:25 am 53. doctorate:

Another Hillary supporter for McCain here. At least with McCain and Palin, we know where they stand and neither tries to “hide the ball” on issues.

My sentiments, as aptly expressed by the writer Riverdaughter: “…the straw that finally broke the camel’s back is the overt sexism, first directed at Hillary and then at Sarah Palin. Do we look like we just fell off the turnip truck? Do you think you can just whisper “roe” in our ears and we’ll jump through hoops for you? If Roe is so important to the Democrats, why do so few of their candidates have any mention of reproductive rights on their websites? Why was Obama courting the evangelical vote? Why did the platform committee water down the section on choice? Why is there one message for evangelicals and Republicans and a different message for Democratic women? Where does he stand on the issue? And when are we going to stop having male politicians holding Roe over our heads? And lay off Sarah Palin, for God’s sakes! It makes you Obama women look like mindless reactionary sexists determined to undermine your own gender.”

Sep 23, 2008 - 9:42 pm 54. doctorate:

Update, courtesy The Confluence:

“Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign is reportedly launching a “Faith, Family, and Values Tour” next week that will include Catholic legal scholar Douglas Kmiec as one of the campaign’s surrogates. Kmiec wrote an op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle this summer in which he urged support for passing California’s marriage ban, Proposition 8.

Obama is now campaigning with a supporter of California’s Prop 8, a constitutional ban to CA’s now legal gay marriage. This should be unacceptable to anyone in the gay community. Contact HRC and ask them if they will continue to endorse Obama.”

Sep 23, 2008 - 9:45 pm 55. doctorate:

Update, courtesy The Confluence

“Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign is reportedly launching a “Faith, Family, and Values Tour” next week that will include Catholic legal scholar Douglas Kmiec as one of the campaign’s surrogates. Kmiec wrote an op-ed for the San Francisco Chronicle this summer in which he urged support for passing California’s marriage ban, Proposition 8.

Obama is now campaigning with a supporter of California’s Prop 8, a constitutional ban to CA’s now legal gay marriage. This should be unacceptable to anyone in the gay community. Contact HRC here and ask them if they will continue to endorse Obama.”

Sep 23, 2008 - 9:47 pm 56. judith:

You ask us to lay off Sarah? She does not represent mainstream women! I am a woman who put myself through a master’s degree and raised 2 children simultaneously. This was without my ex’s help. He had to be sued to pay child support and kicked and screamed all the way. He is a republican, by the way. Additionally, I developed and maintained my own business while supporting women’s/children’s issues. I have to say, Sarah does not speak for me in any way, shape or form. She is the worst kind of self serving female. One who shows disdain for rape victims as well as manipulating her own child for the vote. And McCain? He is a panderer. He’d have chosen anyone to help his flagging nomination. He flip-flops and then cannot remember what he said! This is a scary duo. But, because this is a free nation (at least for the timed being!) you are free to vote for whomever you wish. But, like those of you who wanted W, be careful what you wish for. You just might not like the result.

Sep 24, 2008 - 1:07 pm 57. Louise:

Obama went to Harvard. The guy CARES !

Oct 4, 2008 - 5:11 pm 58. Empigeomi:

I don’t even know,fellow!) continued to write in the same vein, it is interesting people!

Nov 4, 2008 - 7:14 am