Hmm, does Mr. Eric Olsen posses within him the ability to actually formulate any ideas and articulate them or does he just concoct elaborate snide sneers (complete with esoteric cultural references, of course!)? It does appear that way.

If this young man’s previous emotional outbursts are any indication, he’d be well advised to not cast aspersions upon anything yours truly posts here. Tossing about the broadest of generalizations whilst in the heat of a petulant fit, then expecting a reasoned response is akin to the unfortunate woman who summons law enforcement when her order of McNuggets proves unsatisfactory.

That said, I’ve never been one to attach myself to a particular party in the blind hope of having all my dreams and desires made manifest. As an openly gay conservative Objectivist, I maintain that in the 36 years since becoming eligible to vote, not a single elected official my support helped into office shared every single one of my values, nor did I expect them to. Thus, I find the practice of becoming a disciple of any one politician or political party highly disingenuous, and the attempted marginalization of those who don’t share that adoration thoroughly repugnant. Such behavior is not only ignorant, but does nothing more than reveal a complete inability to think for oneself.

I will say, however, that as a former Army officer during the Cold War and Desert Storm, I personally would like to see DADT repealed. Having been housed in a myriad of B.O.Q.’s (bachelor officer’s quarters), I never had occasion to witness open displays of hetero sex, nor any situation reminiscent of a frat house. In addition, while I cannot speak for the enlisted personnel under my command (who were housed in far closer quarters), military SOP dictated a level of personal discretion all were expected to show, enlisted and commissioned alike.

However, I remain professionally unconvinced that arbitrarily and capriciously rolling back DADT is a particularly wise idea. We have yet to see the reasoned and thoughtful debate this issue demands from either side of the aisle, and until I am reinstated as a member of the Joint Chiefs, I choose to defer my judgement to the commanders responsible for the welfare of the military, and NOT the public at large.

One last thing, as for the “hateful, self-loathing queen” remark, I’ll ask you to leave my mother out of this discussion…

I suppose that you would want us to believe that Republicans forced his beloved lord BJ to refuse to contribute an amicus in the Romer v. Evans case.

Perhaps Republicans forced him to sign a law barring HIV+ folks from entering the country or booting HIV+ folks from the military.

Or maybe Republicans forced Bill Richardson to call a guy maricón on the Imus show.

Or maybe Republicans are forcing Chairman Maobama and Holder to fight the LCR DADT lawsuit tooth and nail.

Or maybe Republicans forced the Breck Girl to say “I’m not comfortable around THOSE people“. [emphasis mine]

Hey, maybe Republicans forced Chairman Maobama to tour with Donnie McClurkin!

Or maybe they forced Pete Stark to call a Republican a “little fruitcake” on Capitol Hill.

Or maybe it was Republicans who forced liberals to use the “Everybody knows gays are pedophiles” meme during the Foley kerfuffle most notably Patty Wetterling.

Yeah, it had to be that “Vast right-wing conspiracy”. That’s the ticket.

Do you really believe Obama doesn’t support gay rights? Grow up, please.

Can you show us any evidence besides his fellatio of the “gay community”? As Senator, there was nothing stopping him from getting the ball rolling on ending DADT. He could have if he’d done anything other than pushing Rosa Parks postage stamps and voting “Present”.

Just listen to Limbaugh or Hannity or Ingraham, the most popular people among Republicans.

I was listening to Hannity the other day. He said, in reference to gays, that he doesn’t care what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes. Can you provide evidence to the contrary?

I listen to Rush pretty frequently and he gets a fair amount of callers who state right off the bat that they are gay or lesbians. Can you provide any evidence that he’s a “bigot”?

No wonder the rest of the world hates (hates!) the Republican Party;

[Citation Needed]

I’m just glad the only people who vote for the GOP are homophobic Southerners

Didn’t you just say that we all live in NYC? Besides, if you look at the county by county election maps for 2000 and 2004, EVERY state had a fair amount of red counties.

And what of the “homophobic” blacks who vote liberal? How do you square that? Or do you even care as long as they stay on the liberal plantation?

So are you guys seriously telling me that the GOP is better for gays than the Democrats? Seriously?

That wasn’t the issue in Dan’s post, my most mature adult friend Davy. The issue was reflexive bowing and scrapping that gays do before the Democrats. You are the one who turned the thread into a the Dems vs. the Repubs fight.

And why when considering a party to support, does a homosexual have to give the most wait to gay issues? Does being better for gays outweigh being better for the country? All a person, gay or straight, has to do to give his support to the Republicans is to consider them better for the nation than the Democrats. That doesn’t entail liking the GOP or supporting everything the party does. (See my points in posts #41 and #50.)

I can understand being conservative and being gay, obviously.

You understand being gay and being conservative? Hardly. If you did you wouldn’t need me lecturing you on the above.

But being gay and supporting such an obviously anti-gay organisation like the Republican Party of the United States is just highly irresponsible and I can only seem to make sense of it when I consider what all gay Republicans are obviously greedy, self loathing, bitter queens.

And supporting the socialist and anti-freedom, anti-humanist and anti-life, anti-national defense and sovereignty policies of the Democratic Party is just so highly irresponsible that all gay Democrats must be weak-minded fools in perpetual need of having their egos stroked.

Still more amazing adulthood on display from DavyJG!

After making a very direct (and quite nasty) accusation against Sarah Palin in comment #18, the very adult Davy was asked by Dan (at #21) to provide some real evidence:

And please provide for me the evidence on which you base the accusation against Mrs. Palin. On what grounds do you call her a “disgusting homophobe”?

Facts, please?

Being a very mature adult, Davy ignored this reasonable request.

At #32, Davy, being a most mature gentleman, called Michelle Malkin “despicable.” No reasons were given for this label. He then accused American Elephant of enjoying “misrepresenting the facts and stripping them of any context that you deem inconvenient. ” After making this accusation because AE had the temerity to point out that Texas’ anti-Sodomy law was passed by Democrats, and that Bill Clinton signed DADT and DOMA into law, the most adult Davy proceeds to spin a most entertaining story:

DOMA and DADT were instituted by Clinton because of Republican homophobia, not Democratic homophobia.

Davy has conveniently forgotten how Sam Nunn led the charge on keeping military gays in the closet.

DOMA was installed as law because otherwise Republicans would have banned same sex marriage federally outright.

Right. Because we all know the Federal Constitution places state marriage laws under Congressional jurisdiction.

No wonder the rest of the world hates (hates!) the Republican Party; no wonder Bush was a joke and Reagan is a symbol of all consuming, destructive greed. Such is the modern Republican party and you’re more than welcome to it!

Indeed. Bush was such a joke that the Iranians and Al Qaeda were glad when he left office. And Reagan was such a symbol of wickedness that people from all over lined up for hours to pay their respects after he died.

And then after producing all of these wonderful displays of incredible adulthood, the great DavyJG has the gall to ask of Eric Olsen if he “posses within him the ability to actually formulate any ideas and articulate them or does he just concoct elaborate snide sneers”? Amazing maturity. Truly amazing!

at #10:

gay Republicans are wealthy white guys who live in big cities in New York and California and never have to face discrimination

So what are you saying, Davy? That rural areas are bastions of Democratic Party power? That well-off white folk in large cities (New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco) never vote for Democrats?

They’re selfish; they choose measly tax cuts over actual progress on gay acceptance

Maybe. And gay Democrats are selfless, right? So selfless that they support:

– the Democrats’ socialist schemes over the principles on which the American Republic was founded

– support the Democrats’ appeasing attitude toward regimes like Iran over the security of the nation

– support Dem politicians who favor partial-birth abortion (like Barbara Boxer) and oppose born alive infant protection acts (like Barack Obama) over the rights of babies.

All for some soothing lip service about how wonderful homosexuality is. Yep, that’s selflessness extraordinaire.

Nice to see you posting again CLDave.

Thank you, Livewire.

Did YOU know that she signed the legislation that provided benefits to gay state employees against her own will? She was ordered to do so by the Alaska supreme court. Make no mistake: Sarah Palin is a disgusting homophobe.

Now there’s the logic of a grown up! Opposing treating gay couples like married couples makes one an automatic homophobe. Why even opposing the details of a specific piece of domestic partner benefits legislation probably signifies homophobia.

Wow. I’ve got to hand it to you, Davy, you truly are fit to lecture Dan Blatt on growing up.

PS: A supreme court can’t force a governor to do anything. The court is dependent on the executive authority for it’s rulings to have force; the executive is not dependent on the court.

Grow up, please.

Now that, Davy, is irony in action, for it is you who needs to grow up, not Dan.

I don’t understand how someone can actively support the largest, most virulently homophobic organisation in this country

Dan does not support the anti-homosexual components of the Republican Party. You know this if you’ve paid serious attention to this blog. And if you honestly think the GOP is the most virulently homophobic organization in the U.S. you need to have your head examined.

In unequivocal terms, he said he will repeal DOMA and DADT, he will pass civil unions legislation and that he will pass ENDA and hate crimes legislation.

You missed the whole point of the post, didn’t you? Talk is cheap. Just when is Obama going to do all of this? Before this year’s Christmas recess? During next year’s election season? Or after his socialize the nation agenda has put the Republicans back into power in Congress? Do tell.

Is it me or is Lev-er Davey’s argument now “I’m going to ignore your citations and keep saying things over and over again until I’m blue in the face, even if I can’t back them up.

Democrats talking about and making slow progress is supposedly bad for gays while Republicans actively working against getting legislation passed that extend protections and partner benefits to gays is good. I just can’t follow that logic.

It’s no wonder you can’t follow that logic, Mr. Moderate, since that isn’t Dan’s logic. (Or as DoDoGuRu put it, “Reading isn’t your strong suit, is it?”)

Dan’s concern is that most gay Americans — and all the leading gay rights organizations — reflexively support Democrats regardless of actions.

Obama and his fellow Democrats could easily end Uncle Sam’s own unfair treatment of gays. Instead they focus on grabbing more power for the federal government with ENDA and hate crimes laws. (But even these take a back seat to socializing the country.)

When gay people like Dan object to this, people like you, Mr. Moderate, imply they are hypocrites. That’s rubbish.

I also think it’s interesting that no one will answer the question “Is the GOP better for gays than the Democratic Party?”. But of course it hasn’t. The gay Republican doesn’t want to admit that his party hates him so absolutely as to use his relationship as a means of scaring people into voting for the Right (like Bush did a mere 5 years ago).

As for Clinton, again, some intellectual honesty would be nice. Bill Clinton wanted gays to serve openly, there was opposition from congress (mainly from Republicans, Democrats didn’t have a big enough majority in the early 90s which was in fact the point I was making earlier in this thread). Bill Clinton enacted DOMA in order to protect the right of states like Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont and Iowa to pass marriage equality. If you feel more comfortable lying to yourself and pretending that Obama and Clinton are just as bad as Bush was, then go ahead. But you’re being dishonest with yourself and you know that.

At least Charlie Brown isn’t dumb enough to pay Lucy to yank the football away again and again and agin. However, you and your ilk are that dumb. Sh*t or get off the pot when it comes to supporting Democrats that get what they need from you and drop you like bad trash.

How many times will you continue to pay aNigerian Prince $1000 for your winning lottery ticket before you smarten up that it’s a scam to seperate a sucker from his money?

But of course you know all of this, you just want your taxes cut so you’ll lie and mislead and lie again, right? No wonder the rest of the world hates (hates!) the Republican Party; no wonder Bush was a joke and Reagan is a symbol of all consuming, destructive greed. Such is the modern Republican party and you’re more than welcome to it!

Much like Plan 9 from Outer Space, Davy’s comments are so thoroughly lacking in anything resembling coherent thought and reason, they become almost instantaneous cult classics for the complete absence of logic in favor of over-the-top camp and tastelessness.

In short, one feels almost less intelligent for having tried to read such petulant tripe.

Poor Davy sounds like he is getting all his news from the Guardian – did you catch the “honourably?” – Jeez! Who’s checking the greencards around here?

Best wishes,

I can understand being conservative and being gay, obviously. But being gay and supporting such an obviously anti-gay organisation like the Republican Party of the United States is just highly irresponsible and I can only seem to make sense of it when I consider what all gay Republicans are obviously greedy, self loathing, bitter queens.