"If an openly gay candidate ran for president on a pro-gun, low-taxes, get-the-government-out-of-my-face platform, I’d not only vote for them, I’d chip in to help redecorate the White House."
- Tam
In the case Tam is referencing the lady is bisexual, but the point remains unchanged.
The major things care about with regards to a politician are as follows. Do you believe in and will you defend my Constitutional rights? Will you curtail the size, scope and power of government and keep it the hell out of my business? (this includes low taxes of course) Are you pro-gun? Do you respect our servicemen and women? Do you have any personal integrity whatsoever?
I don't care one bit whether you like girls, guys, like to lick both the pink lolipop and munch the carpet, or have lifesized, anatomically correct blowup dolls of David Hasselhoff and Pamela Anderson in your bed at night. What you do in the bedroom and who you do it with is none of my concern. Keep your nose out of my bedroom and I'll keep mine out of yours.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
"What you do in the bedroom and who you do it with is none of my concern."
I need to know what turns the president on. I need to know my president's sexual history. I need to know if you have feelings for only one gender or two - or none. Your actions in bed ARE my business - every act be it 'normal' or erotic or very very strange. It IS my business.
I need to know that when Madame President is the lovely Mrs. North.
I think you are missing a very important point by limiting what you care about regarding a politician's look at the issues. That is that how they feel on those issues is probably a warning of how they wil wind up feeling on other issues when push comes to shove once they are in office and after they have hoodwinked you into voting for them based upon your limited issue outlook. Allow me to repeat the reply I left over at Sy Uncle:
"Just because someone is supposedly pro-gun does not mean you should vote for her. Sure, it is an important issue, but to imply you basically don't care about for what else they stand is less than wise. I would be willing to bet most folks thinking like that would have voted for Kirsten Gillibrand when she ran in NY for the House of Representatives. She ran pro-gun, anti-gay, anti illegal immigrant, and basically as a conservative Democrat. It was easy, if anyone looked, to see she was much the same as any RINO on the other side of the aisle. She never would have gotten my vote.
Then she ran, in a special election, for the Senate after having been appointed to fill Clinton's senate seat. What happened to her pro-gun stance and to her other so called conservative values? Her true colors came out - most of her support for guns rights has disappeared and she is pro-gay lobby and now not so anti illegal alien amnesty as she apparently once pretended to have been. She is now quite the progressive Demoncrat as she has cuddled up with Charles Schumer.
Why did she run as a conservative for the House - probably only as a trick to win out over a Republican in an area of NY State that had been traditionally conservative. Be careful of for whom you vote and why you vote for them."
All the best,
Glenn B
Mike W.,
I was speaking regarding a hypothetical presidential candidate, not the liberal Democrat in question. Perhaps I should have clarified that.
Glenn B.,
What you are saying doesn't even make sense. How is "pro-gun, anti-taxes, get-the-government-out-my-face" a "limited issue outlook"?
Tam - Nope, in retrospect I was unclear. I understood that your candidate was obviously a hypothetical one. the thread at Unc's referenced the bisexual liberal politician.
Keep out of my life, and defend me from those who would unwelcomely shove themselves into my life, and I could not care less what your own personal activities are or are not.
Something tells me a platform like that would take the country by storm... but that is probably raw optimism.
Post a Comment