Gay Republicans vs. Breitbart: Hot Hypocrite on Hypocrite Action

[Rushlimpballs]

I have closeted gay friends. It annoys me but I understand given the homophobia in America. So, I don't bring it up and play along. But, if any of them ever started being hypocrites and working against other gays, I'd be the first one to rat them out.

[Senehtsotara]

Gay Republicans are suffering from a form of Stockholm syndrome.

[starscreamdkmo]

Breitbart is um gay too possibly

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond but when the gov gives themselves authority 2 rule on something, they give themselves authority over the issue including the authority 2 change their mind, which happens often in electoral democracies. This could happen @ the state lv 2 but since the feds can ignore the constitution since theres no authority above them 2 enforce it, the consequences are much worse. so saying the DC giant is on my side isnt reassuring when the only thing its consistent on is gaining power.

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond yea sorry about that last answer, I was a little all over the place. Basically, your argument is that on their own, the some states would discriminate against people in their laws. I say they would too but not as badly as say if the constitution didn't lay down a few guidelines. You think government should determine what is and isnt legal and enforce it because you assume they'll always be on your side, and maybe at first they are....

[803brando]

did you see the jacket perry was wearing in the commercial? same one in broke back mountain.

[beatlegreg07]

republicans are so gay. literally.

[MikeNitro94]

All radical groups splinter into tinier little sub-groups. The Republicans are falling apart because each nut job hates the next one, because they aren't radical enough. Conservatives are all so phony...they want to wait until the primaries to back a candidate. LOL. If they were so batshit Conservative like they say, they'd ALL be backing Michelle Bachman. Right now they are a leaderless bunch of backstabbers! If that's the Right, I wanna be wrong like a muhfucka!

[polemius01]

Outing someone who lives in the closet but does nothing at all top help lgbtq persons is reprehensible. Many closeted Hollywood gay men fall under that umbrella.

Outing a hypocritical gay man who works for homophobes and promotes their agenda of hatred is a civic duty.

[unassumption]

they've already outed themselves (or been outed) they just want to punish other republicans for being able to stay in the closet

[xadam2dudex]

Sam...did u just say YA'LL at the beginning of this video ?? was that in ur Rick Perry personna ? If not I guess u r from southern NYC..gays that support republicans are nuts and as brainwashed as the crazy tea baggers

[coffeebuzzz]

Just because someone is gay, doesn't mean that they can't be a braindead idiot who works against their own best interest.

[BarackMcBush]

Nothing special about GOP Fags , they are greedy selfish people (like the rest of the GOP) who just like to suck each others cocks.

[anoldcrow]

@laserthebeam1 pardon. i dont quite see difference?

[anoldcrow]

idk, ron paul and chris christie are liberal on the rights of the LGBT community

[BottleConcreteBlond]

@anoldcrow Christie's moderate--he's not in favor of gay marriage. To call Paul liberal on gay rights is off the mark. He claims that he wants to "leave it up to the states" which pretty much means he supports a states rights to deny equal rights to gays.

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond ... or allow polygamy/redefine the legal marriage age to be 16/ban heterosexual unions...

with Ron, all bets are off. Sure we know what some states would do right now if allowed that much freedom, but how different would things look in 10 or 100 years if that legal leeway remained in tact?

[Readabookism]

@anoldcrow seems like people would be allowed to live the way they see fit...as it is their life...as long as someone isnt hurting anyone else stay the fuck out of their business

[BottleConcreteBlond]

@anoldcrow In any case--to say that Ron Paul is "liberal" on LGBT rights is a bit of a stretch. He has never been really supportive of gay rights and has, from time to time, said negative things about gay people (such as, things were better when they stayed in the closet). Ron Paul says he is against Govt involvement in peoples lives--great, but how does that actually translate to LGBT rights? He doesn't say. And no one is trying to ban heterosexual unions--that's nuts.

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond Liberal was a bad choice of words. His policy there is like his international policy, keep the federal government out of it. As a christian he's probably against being gay on a personal level but as for political ethics, his ideal is for government to get out of the marriage business in total and let it be up to individuals via private contracts or the church. He thinks marriage falling under the authority of the likes of Newt Gingrich to be laughable. As a state governor...

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond ...or legislator that is the policy he would peruse, but for national office Ron Paul has to let the states to be as tyrannical as their voters want them to be.

banning heterosexual unions was a stretch, i wanted to illustrate much more can be done at state levels faster than in DC. California and medical marijuana, Mass. and gay marriage, the problem with federal power is that they can change their minds. Roe Vs. Wade is only a victory till our side ceases to be the 51%

[BottleConcreteBlond]

@anoldcrow Except that--if a couple who is gay goes to Florida or Utah they are no longer married so they are not treated equally under the law--this can only be resolved on a Federal level. And civil rights should not be left up to a popular vote.

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond yea but why would they want to go to states where the people wouldn't recognize their marriage? and if federal law waved its magic want one way, whose to stop it from waving it the other? do you feel your right to get an abortion is more secure after Roe v. Wade but when republicans have a majority in congress and the presidency or if it was left up to the states?

Im only saying the bigger the government the smaller the man

[nrf91]

@anoldcrow Let me try reframing your argument: "but why would black people want to go to states where people think they shouldn't marry whites?"

In other words, don't you tell me I have to accept those "coloreds" as equals!! We don't allow that around heeyah! States rights!! Who cares what the US constitution guarantees. Get your big government nose out of my life. Except if my neighbor wants to have an abortion. In that case, go get em big gubment!!

[anoldcrow]

@nrf91 Given the choice between there being 50 small malleable systems that could range anywhere from being as repressive as Iran to as free as the Netherlands depending on what the better part of a small population want so long as they dont institute jim crow type laws OR one big system that can do as it likes totally disregarding the parameters of the constitution as exemplified by the NDAA, I'll go with the one that lets me move away from places ruled and inhabited by dickheads.

[BottleConcreteBlond]

@anoldcrow Assuming you are privileged enough to be able to move away from places inhabited by dickheads, more power to you. In the meantime I will go on supporting equal rights for all Americans in every state and it it has to be done on a federal level--so be it.

[BottleConcreteBlond]

@anoldcrow People have families that live in other states that hey visit sometimes. People move to other states for jobs. People drive through states on their way to other states. There are any number of reasons poeple go to other states. I know you've lived an entitled life where you've never had to defend your relationships but If you really don't know these things your need to get out more.

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond I live in Taiwan. is that "out" enough for you?

Tell me, is it easier to buy your family bus tickets from TN to VA or plane tickets from the US to France?

your federal level protection is a house of cards, as soon as 51 people on a "representative" body or 5 out of 9 justices are inspired by books you don't read, your federal level won't guarantee you shit. Im from new orleans, i know how ineffective the fed is at protecting us. My state should assume more responsibility

[BottleConcreteBlond]

@anoldcrow You live in Taiway, so you have no stake in whether the US adopts gay marriage or not. Also, unless you're gay you probably don't care that gay couples are discriminated against. And wtf are you talking about that federal laws don't give protection? They give a form of redress--again, from your privileged position you probably don't understand that. BTW--I'm sure all the civil rights workers in the 50s and 60s would disagree with you about wether the fed gives protection.

[anoldcrow]

@BottleConcreteBlond *magic wand not want

[bistnenutte]

uhh, where uhhh, where ummm, uhhh ummm, where uhhh where where, the uhhh... oh yea! uhhh....

[AmericanNohbuddy]

I can understand being gay and having conservative ideology on things like the economy, but actually being registered Republican is just stupid.

[GiantSandles]

@AmericanNohbuddy but we half to register republican to vote for ron paul

(derp)

[thesparitan]

@AmericanNohbuddy That is exactly what I have been saying.