Gay Patriot Header Image

Stonewall Democrats Concede Their Party is one of Race-Baiting Conspiracy Theorists

A reader forwarded us a strategy memo he got from the Stonewall Democrats which includes this passage:

John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin demonstrates that the Republican Party is still the party of James Dobson and Pat Robertson.

According to Time Magazine, Wasilla Bible Church is one of the largest and most influential organizations in the “Bible Belt” region of southern Alaska. It’s not surprising then that the city’s former councilmember and mayor Sarah Palin is a member. However, it is alarming that Palin chooses to worship at a church that promotes conversion therapy for “homosexuals” and supported Focus on the Family’s recent “ex-gay” conference Love Won Out. Should be Vice President?

I guess that means, they judge a candidate by her membership in a church, assuming she agrees with everything her church does.

By their very definition, then, the Democratic nominee for president is a race-baiting conspiracy theorist given his twenty-year membership in the Trinity United Church of Christ, then led by a pastor who often issued venomous statements attacking the United States, promoting conspiracy theories and badmouthing white people.  Obama chose to worship at a church that promoted the Palestinian terror organization Hamas in its bullet.

Since the Democratic Party nominated Barack Obama who attended this church, they, by Stonewall Democrats’ own logic, subscribe to those views.

WOW. And some of them accuse us of being self-hating.  How could gay people be party of such a party?

Obama chose to worship at a church that promoted solidarity with Palestinian terrorists and whose pastor badmouthed the United States in general and white people in particular.  Should such a man be President?

Share

34 Comments

  1. Palin chooses to worship at a church that promotes conversion therapy for “homosexuals”

    Look, if somebody has homosexual orientation and wants to change, or wants to develop the discipline not to act on it, what’s wrong with that? Why can’t someone be supported in that choice? Or, are people only allowed to make choices that are politically correct?

    Comment by V the K — October 23, 2008 @ 12:05 pm - October 23, 2008

  2. The shocking thing about this campaign is that McCain has said he will not use the Reverend Wright issue. It is appalling that the MSM allows Obama make the statement that he didn’t hear what Wright was espousing from the pulpit. Sure, and show me one Catholic that does not know the church’s position on abortion.

    Comment by Swampfox — October 23, 2008 @ 12:35 pm - October 23, 2008

  3. Sure, and show me one Catholic that does not know the church’s position on abortion.

    Nancy Pelosi. 🙂

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 23, 2008 @ 12:50 pm - October 23, 2008

  4. To V the K, I tried my best to deny my homosexuality. I have never acted upon it. I, also, didn’t try to deceive any women about my sexuality. I only told my parents that I was gay and two psychiatrists about my homosexuality……..neither one tried conversion therapy. Last year I sank into a bout of major depression that caused me to nearly take my own life. I spent 17 days in the ADU section of the local hospital. When I got of the hospital I wrote down a list and got on the phone and called some family and friends and told them that I was gay. Not one person that I have told has rejected me. I am still working on it all……………….

    Comment by Swampfox — October 23, 2008 @ 12:55 pm - October 23, 2008

  5. Which is fine, Swampfox. V’s point is that there’s nothing inherently wrong with offering people the choice and the assistance if they want to do so.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 23, 2008 @ 1:00 pm - October 23, 2008

  6. Exactly, NDT. It’s hypocritical that people who demand support for their choice to be open and active about their sexuality deny support to those who would make a different choice.

    Comment by V the K — October 23, 2008 @ 1:10 pm - October 23, 2008

  7. To North Dallas Thirty, the choice should be there. However, I don’t think that the choice in my case was right for me. When I came of age homosexuality was still classified a mental illness. I told my parents that I was gay back in 1969……………during my first two weeks of college. I was taken to a psychiatrist that very day. The result was that I just went into the closet of perpetual denial.

    Comment by Swampfox — October 23, 2008 @ 1:13 pm - October 23, 2008

  8. Dan, you don’t have to look to gayLeft radicalized groups like the Stonewall Democrats for this tactic; blogs like Independent Gay Forum and Box Turtle have been foisting the “Palin’s church is conversionist” since the “story” first broke inside the gay community. Just like they’ve been arguing that the Mormons are behind the state FMA proposals in order to impose their religious views on ALL America. It’s the gayLeft’s equlivalent to a Bloody Shirt or baiting.

    Of course, it’s mostly a non-story since Palin’s church pastor has been on record as arguing for tolerance, understanding, compassion and outreach by his flock to gays long before that point.

    I think the McCain campaign made a calculation that didn’t pan out when he unilaterally took the Wright issue off the table… I think he thought others (conservative media, maybe a 526, state parties) would keep it alive and he could still distance himself from it by declaring it off-limits and still look presidential.

    I’m waiting for those radicalized gayLeft groups to acknowledge that McCain’s campaign deserves credit for not making gay marriage a divisive social issue in this election. Waiting, but not holding my breath.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 23, 2008 @ 2:41 pm - October 23, 2008

  9. This is really amazing considering that Obama chose to campaign with Donnie McClurkin and refused to have his picture taken with the mayor of SF. (Even though he was holding a fundraiser for him). Obama also refuses to be interviewed by any of the gay press. So who is the anti-gay candidate here?

    Comment by CognitiveDissonance — October 23, 2008 @ 3:05 pm - October 23, 2008

  10. Wow.

    I would like to thank you for being here. This is my first visit to this site, and I have to say that your political conservativism is based in an ignorance so dense that it could be packaged for sale. Your logic is flawed, biased, and hateful against not only yourselves as homosexuals but at the general idea of political equality for those people who are fortunate enough to be gay in a country that allows for this self expression without legal reprisals.

    The idea that any self respecting American could respect much less vote for the conservativism that you preach is obscene, and, to a finer point, an insult to the very foundations of the American Nation. I was lucky enough to have been born an American, and hold a deep pity for those of you who do not realize what this means. When you are an American, it is your responsibility and duty to spread the freedoms and liberties that we are allowed to all of our citizens, not just the select few. Limiting ourselves only to homosexual issues, the conservatives of this country are guilty of the highest of treason in their continual disregard for this necessary equality of all people on all levels of American society.
    The conservative legislative bodies have made it legal to discriminate against homosexuals on a federal level – Stephens v. United States – stating that homosexuals do not constitute a legal minority, a nice little bit of legal hatred hammered through during the Reagan years.

    Had I the time and the motivation to delve far deeper than I desire into your disturbing and troubled philosophies, I am certain that I could pull them apart systematically to the base self hatred and fear that lives within your black, withered hearts. As it stands, I hope never to encounter your kind in real life, but know that if I do, I shall do my best to recude you to said fear and self hatred as above. Tears, also, if I’m really lucky.

    Yours sincerely,

    A left leaning, self loving, accepting-of-others homosexual American

    PS – Hypocritical Faggots

    Comment by Anonymous — October 23, 2008 @ 3:56 pm - October 23, 2008

  11. *#4*

    Swampfox, I am very sorry to learn of the situation and hospitalization you faced last year. Please know that you are in the ongoing thoughts and prayers of this blog’s readers. If nothing else, the knowledge that you’re not alone will hopefully give you comfort.

    Comment by JR — October 23, 2008 @ 4:04 pm - October 23, 2008

  12. Um, Anonymous, no wonder you hide behind your anonymity.

    You write, “The idea that any self respecting American could respect much less vote for the conservativism that you preach is obscene, and, to a finer point, an insult to the very foundations of the American Nation.

    Nowhere do you once identify that you even understand the conservatism we espouse. You call disturbed and troubled that which you don’t understand. Please identify what is disturbing and troubling and please show the sellf-hatred.

    Yet another example of the name-calling and bile directed against gay conservatives. How very often our critics confirm our points.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — October 23, 2008 @ 4:58 pm - October 23, 2008

  13. LMAO @ Anonymous. Your post just proved so many points that have been made here before.

    Comment by OutliciousTV — October 23, 2008 @ 5:09 pm - October 23, 2008

  14. Oh BTW the stonewall democrats will be out in Weho Friday and Saturday night registering people to vote if you’re up for causing trouble. 😉

    Comment by OutliciousTV — October 23, 2008 @ 5:11 pm - October 23, 2008

  15. How about instead of causing trouble, we just promote our candidates?

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — October 23, 2008 @ 5:18 pm - October 23, 2008

  16. OutliciousTV,

    Why would you want to cause trouble? What does that say about your views of democratic practices and the use of voter suppression as a means to an end? The implication is that you want to stop some Americans from registering to vote because you disagree with their political views. Am I right? It sounds that way. If that is the case, isn’t that highly immoral and unethical behavior? How do you reconcile that with conservative values?
    __

    As for the comments on the Stonewall Democrats, it’s a shame that they are making a blanket statement on Palin’s church. I’m sure that Palin’s church must do some good works.

    However, have not many conservatives done similar things with Obama and his associations? Obama must believe certain things because he knows someone, etc.

    The sword cuts both ways.
    ____

    As for curative therapy, one can’t pray the gay away. Being gay isn’t a mental illness. Why do some of you believe that? There is plenty of evidence that shows that homosexuality is a naturally occurring development based on in utero exposure to hormones and or genetic expression. (To the latter, there does not have to be a specific “gay” gene, as much as some genes can express themselves differently because of exposure to different environmental factors.)

    That said, haven’t Palin’s comments about wanting a federal amendment to ban all forms of domestic partnerships recognized by the state an area of concern? Warrant a question of support of her? Why is it not possible to say that John McCain is a better person than Palin because of his more tolerant stances?

    I find myself a bit confused by some of the statements on this site. On the one hand, I’ve seen endorsements of McCain’s position to denounce any kind of federal amendment but on the other hand, I continue to see blind adoration of Palin.

    Again, instead of name calling and invective, why not discuss the issue?

    I lean more progressive and independent. I can say that I like Obama well enough. Think Bill Clinton is a sleaze bag. Jimmy Carter is a nice Christian but was not a great president. I can also give Reagan some credit for helping to take down the Soviets. But, I’ll also criticize Reagan for his use of documented racism to win votes by invoking States Rights at Philadelphia, MS.

    Do you folks believe in blind party loyalty? Is Palin above criticism? If so, why? Doesn’t it disturb you that she would like to see gays be permanently made second class citizens through an amendment to the U.S. Constitution? I can’t imagine Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan supporting such a move. Neither man was a saint, but given Reagan’s support of gays when he was governor, I think he would be very shocked.

    Again, can we have a discussion? (In particular, ND30, please don’t try to connect me to some idiot liberal who supports the FMA since I don’t support him). Lets focus on Palin.

    Comment by blake — October 23, 2008 @ 5:38 pm - October 23, 2008

  17. Just for fun, let’s take turn changing Anonymous’s post into haiku.

    Like wind in autumn
    Conservative gays scare me
    I must insult you.

    Comment by V the K — October 23, 2008 @ 5:55 pm - October 23, 2008

  18. Blind adoration of Palin? Hardly.

    I’ve basically faulted the media for failing to cover her record while dwelling on insignificant things.

    And no, we don’t think she’s above criticism nor ever have said as much. Wherever would you get that notion? It seems the MSM assume she’s beneath praise.

    Yes, let’s focus on Palin if you like. But, on her complete record and not just a few silly comments she’s made. You say we engage in blind adoration? Go check my posts and see how I’ve faulted her for the way she handled the Couric interview.

    I’ll get around to addrressing her comments on a constitutional amendment, but on my own schedule.

    When are you going to get around to acknowledging her qualities?

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — October 23, 2008 @ 6:24 pm - October 23, 2008

  19. Thanks for your prayers and thoughts JR.

    I saw my psychologist this afternoon for one hour. I am doing well. One thing she and I discussed was my conservatism and the fact that I will be voting for McCain. As I told her if I only voted on the gay issue I would vote for Obama, but for me it is more complex.

    Comment by Swampfox — October 23, 2008 @ 6:42 pm - October 23, 2008

  20. People, what needs to be realized here is that Blake, as a typical Obama shill, is merely following one of Saul Alinsky’s rules.

    Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this. They can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.

    The way to counteract this is simple; fight fire with fire.

    Point out how gay Democrats like Blake and gay organizations like HRC have fully endorsed and supported FMA supporters. Point out how gays like Blake have supported Democrats like Howard Dean pandering to Pat Robertson. Point out how gay Democrats like Blake have fully endorsed and supported fraudulent voter registration by Democrat organizations. Point out how gay Democrats like Blake regularly practice hate against gay conservatives and wish death on their children. Point out how gay Democrats like Blake have previously screamed that anyone who opposed gay marriage and considered marriage to be a “sacred union” were religious bigots.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 23, 2008 @ 6:43 pm - October 23, 2008

  21. Why would you want to cause trouble? What does that say about your views of democratic practices and the use of voter suppression as a means to an end?

    WTF dude!! Light the F up and get a life!! I’m not going to suppress anyone’s vote. I was only implying getting into a friendly debate with the partisans when they approach me about registering.

    I’ve come out of the grocery store here in West Hollywood many a time and get approached by someone registering people saying “would you like to help Obama win?” I try to say something clever just to watch ’em get all flustered. It’s just typical sh*t stirring.

    But jeez dude, get a life!

    Comment by OutliciousTV — October 23, 2008 @ 7:35 pm - October 23, 2008

  22. How about instead of causing trouble, we just promote our candidates?

    That could work. Promoting our candidates would be considered causing trouble in Weho.

    Comment by OutliciousTV — October 23, 2008 @ 7:37 pm - October 23, 2008

  23. First time to this site
    Winter’s cold flows from my mouth
    In a coward’s form

    Comment by OutliciousTV — October 23, 2008 @ 7:42 pm - October 23, 2008

  24. People,

    You’ve missed the best part of Anonymous’ truly hilarious comment:

    Yours sincerely,

    A left leaning, self loving, accepting-of-others homosexual American

    PS – Hypocritical Faggots

    Bwah Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! Accepting of others indeed!

    I hope never to encounter your kind in real life

    The feeling is mutual, I’m sure.

    Comment by Dave — October 23, 2008 @ 8:31 pm - October 23, 2008

  25. Yeah, I missed that. Guess he’s not as accepting of others as he claims. Thanks for drawing that to my attention. 🙂

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — October 23, 2008 @ 8:35 pm - October 23, 2008

  26. Hey! Be kind to anonymous. He is the lead lemming.

    Comment by heliotrope — October 23, 2008 @ 9:30 pm - October 23, 2008

  27. I saw the video of Palin’s pastor explaining why he invited the reparative/conversioin therapy at Palin’s church. I believe the Pastor was doing what he felt that had to do to combat the some of the horrid anti-gay remarks of some of his own congregation. I do wish that he would invite the other side to speak to his congregation. You can’t just pray the gay away ……………….also, even though some of us might think that such therapy should be available, what message does that send to gay teenagers and parents of gay teens?

    Comment by Swampfox — October 23, 2008 @ 10:16 pm - October 23, 2008

  28. Forgot in my comment #18 to link this post I wrote: GayPatriotWest — October 23, 2008 @ 10:33 pm - October 23, 2008

  29. You can’t just pray the gay away ……………….also, even though some of us might think that such therapy should be available, what message does that send to gay teenagers and parents of gay teens?

    I don’t agree with the practice; however, being the Libertarian that I am, it’s your life and you’re allowed to make stupid choices if you want.

    Comment by OutliciousTV — October 23, 2008 @ 11:51 pm - October 23, 2008

  30. *#27*

    Swampfox, I am pleased that your recovery continues. Do remember that you are not alone.

    BTW, you raised an excellent point regarding reparative therapy. Its success rate is abysmal, and study after study has confirmed this fact.

    Comment by JR — October 24, 2008 @ 12:24 am - October 24, 2008

  31. The idea that any self respecting American could respect much less vote for the conservativism that you preach is obscene, and, to a finer point, an insult to the very foundations of the American Nation. …The conservative legislative bodies have made it legal to discriminate against homosexuals…

    Yes, the founders were adamantly opposed to the freedom of association. It has always been one of the foundational precepts of the United States that the federal government should have the power to force individuals to interact with those they don’t wish to.

    Comment by American Elephant — October 24, 2008 @ 1:31 am - October 24, 2008

  32. That said, haven’t Palin’s comments about wanting a federal amendment to ban all forms of domestic partnerships recognized by the state an area of concern? Warrant a question of support of her?

    Some have more important things to worry about than just ourselves and what we want. Given how the gay left supports those who actively work against gays with no qualms, one truly has to ask “WTF?”. Especially when Bush stated that he supported letting states decide on civil unions made him a racist, sexist, bigot homophobe.

    As for not being able to “pray the gay away”, who says? Who are you to make that pronouncement? Why shouldn’t someone be allowed to do so, if they want, without arrogant queens demeaning them for it?

    Ok, forget the former and please reply to my last three questions.

    Crap like that is just the sort of thing that made me realize that the whole “celebrate diversity” and the rainbow flag is nothing more than a steaming pile of BS to sell t-shirts and bumper stickers. Gays and liberals “celebrate diversity” as long as you’re fuckable (with a Gay.com cock) and a liberal who will vote for the liberals no questions asked.

    “Sure, idividiuality’s fine as long as we all do it together!” – Major Frank Burns

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 24, 2008 @ 2:47 am - October 24, 2008

  33. But, I’ll also criticize Reagan for his use of documented racism to win votes by invoking States Rights at Philadelphia, MS.

    Well sure! We can’t have people believing in what the US Constitution says. That would undermine the policies of the liberal left. Gotta paint everything you disagree with as “racist” in an attempt to shut people up.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — October 24, 2008 @ 3:09 am - October 24, 2008

  34. even though some of us might think that such therapy should be available, what message does that send to gay teenagers and parents of gay teens?

    That if they don’t want to be gay, they don’t have to be? Why is that such a horrible message? To me, it sounds empowering.

    I wouldn’t want someone who wanted to be gay to be forced into reparative therapy, but those who don’t want to be gay should be supported in their choices as well. I mean, we’re supposed to support transgendered people who surgically and chemically mutilate their bodies into some crude facsimile of the opposite sex, but we can’t support someone who says, “I don’t want to be gay,” or “I don’t want to act on my feelings of attraction?”

    Comment by V the K — October 24, 2008 @ 11:48 am - October 24, 2008

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.