GETTING tea-bagged? undoubtedly!

If I recall, AE, the aforementioned Ms. Anderson Cooper made the infamous statement: “It’s hard to talk when you are tea-bagging.”

Methinks the lady speaks from personal experience.

Regards,
Peter H.

But instead they hide their sexuality in order to maintain the blatant lie that they are objective.

Shouldn’t Americans know when someone who claims to be objectively informing them is instead blatantly lying to them and shoveling propaganda down their throats?

As for antigay Democrats, sure why not? But why Anderson Cooper? Has he held any influence for pushing antigay policy?

Anderson Cooper is a highly partisan “journalist”. Constantly critical of Republicans, and constantly praising and promoting Obama, Democrats and the liberal agenda in general.

Most recently he mocked half a million Americans protesting Democrat policies and the vast expansion of the federal government by making snide tea-bagging jokes. Hardly objective.

During Katrina the man was absolutely hysterical reporting lies, fabrications and rumors as they were the truth. And I could go on.

Gay liberals are among the most politically active groups there are.

I think its completely relevant and, if anything, certainly as legitimate, if not more so, for viewers to be made aware of Anderson Cooper’s secret sexuality so they can determine if it is preventing him from presenting what is supposed to be objective reporting, than it is for them to be made aware of the sexuality of a politician who is expected to be ideological.

The idea that being gay means you must support the liberal gay agenda is as preposterous as the idea that being black means you must support Jesse Jackson or Barack Obama. I am an out gay man who opposes probably most of the liberal gay agenda and wholeheartedly supports conservatism and the majority of the Republican agenda. Including opposing the judiciary taking any role in gay marriage, and having serious doubts if allowing gay marriage would benefit the institution or the country. (It decidedly hasn’t elsewhere).

Anderson Cooper, on the other hand, is SUPPOSED to be objective. His profession is supposed to require it. Yet he is far from it. A much better case can be made that Anderson Cooper and other partisan gay “journalists” should be outed than that politicians should.

I thought GOProud said that it would be focused not on gay issues but on mainstream issues like the estate tax and health care reform.

Either A) you weren’t paying attention or 2) you ASSumed as much when somebody else told you.

Do these people even know what they are about or are they just making it up as the go along?

Well Rob, on the left side of the aisle, you are considered by some to be a “traitor” to your orientation if you are still closeted. Therefore, using that type of liberal logic (oxymoron, I know), Miss Andrea Cooper is being a hypocrite by not being out and proud.

Although I do recall Kathy Griffin making a joke about him during Hurricane Katrina about how he wouldn’t get his Pradas wet.

Regarding influence, he’s a part of the Drool-By Media. Enough said.

Regards,
Peter H.

Do you meat-eaters like being confronted by vegans? Do women who believe they have absolute sovereign control over their bodies like being confronted by pro-life advocates? Why would forcing someone to accept themselves for being gay be any better?

People get married for a lot of reasons. There are many heterosexual couples who are not particularly attracted to each other sexually who get married because they like crossword puzzles. You don’t have to be sexually attracted to get married. If someone who is mostly sexually attracted to men marries a woman because she’s better at crossword puzzles, there is nothing wrong with that as long as they’re honest with each other. It’s that old “two consenting adults” thing that the gay left prizes so much until two consenting adults do something they don’t like.

It is possible to be attracted to a person of the same sex, and still self identify as heterosexual. So such a person could comfortably be married.

It’s not a binary situation.

Ashpenaz, I agree with that. However, I also believe that if one is not going to act on their sexual orientation, they should also not get married to (or have sex with) a person of the sex they are not attracted to. Otherwise, so much for their morals.

This is good:

But why Anderson Cooper? Has he held any influence for pushing antigay policy?

Really? I thought we were all supposed to out & proud. But then I think that angle was pushed so bitter old queens like Michelangelo could pick up a little something extra at the supermarket.

Are they just outing closeted Republicans, or closeted Democrats as well? Why don’t they start by outing some journalists. I’m still waiting for Anderson Cooper to admit he’s gay. I rarely run into anyone who hasn’t dated him. Woops! Did I just out him?

As for antigay Democrats, sure why not? But why Anderson Cooper? Has he held any influence for pushing antigay policy?

The liberals weapon of choice, the race card, is being traded in for the gay card.

The gay card can be played both ways, so it is more powerful.
It can be used as a victim shield, like the race card, bit it can also function as an offensive weapon via ‘outings’ and scandals

I find the prospect of outing someone to be dangerous. You have no idea how their social circle may react, and you can cause tremendous collateral damage.

Not that leftists ever cared about that.