Gay Patriot Header Image

Lessons in Intellectual Consistency

Posted by V the K at 7:24 am - December 20, 2013.
Filed under: Liberal Hypocrisy

  Bb5J6AkIgAActvg

Assault-weapons_2

Share

96 Comments

  1. Does anyone else find this condescending?

    Log Cabin Republicans Calls for “Moonshine Summit” with Duck Dynasty Family

    Washington, D.C. — Following the fallout from a recent interview in which Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson criticized gay Americans while citing his religious beliefs, and the Robertson family’s subsequent statement suggesting his suspension from the show could end their relationship with A&E, Log Cabin Republicans has suggested mediating this dispute with a “Moonshine Summit”.

    “Let’s put an end to all of the fussing and feuding and talk about this like adults,” Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director Gregory T. Angelo stated. “Phil, you have your views and we have ours, but I think you’d be surprised how much we all have in common, and there’s no better gay folk out there to make that case than Log Cabin Republicans. We’re conservative, we’re guided by our faith, and we believe in freedom of speech. Most important, we are all children of God; that’s the most important thing we have in common. So in the spirit of the season, let’s get together — your family and ours — raise a glass, and work this out.”

    Log Cabin Republicans is the nation’s largest Republican organization representing gay and lesbian conservatives and allies. The more than 30-year old organization has state and local Chapters nationwide — including a Chapter in Louisiana — a full-time office in Washington, DC, a federal political action committee and state political action committees.

    Comment by RobSchellinger — December 20, 2013 @ 3:25 pm - December 20, 2013

  2. …Log Cabin Republicans has suggested mediating this dispute with a “Moonshine Summit”.

    Translation: Let’s ride this bandwagon while it’s trending. We need cash, so let’s cash in by claiming there’s a ‘dispute’, claiming this ‘dispute’ needs mediation that only we can provide, and attempt to mock Obama’s Beer Summit by engaging in the very mockery A&E hoped for by calling it a ‘Moonshine Summit’.

    Comment by Ignatius — December 20, 2013 @ 3:39 pm - December 20, 2013

  3. what about Martin Bashir?

    You mean the guy who advocated a physical attack on a woman? What about him?

    I have seen the War on Women and it exists on the liberal left.

    Comment by RobSchellinger — December 20, 2013 @ 3:44 pm - December 20, 2013

  4. If someone had censored Martin Bashir’s teleprompter before he crudely attacked Sarah Palin, he’d still be employed. (The networks emply people to review scripts and monitor broadcasts. These people are called “censors.”) He would still be a piece of garbage, but he would still have his job.

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2013 @ 3:48 pm - December 20, 2013

  5. And Phil Robertson may have wanted a publicist at his side.
    Phil won’t be the last one popping off for an article.

    Spent an hour in Wally World aka Walmart yesterday waiting on photos

    Three aisles of Duck Dynasty gears, chotchke, and memorabilia
    And 6 end caps with more Duck Dynasty stuff. . .wow

    Comment by rusty — December 20, 2013 @ 4:02 pm - December 20, 2013

  6. “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules. You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

    – Saul Alinsky, Rules For Radicals, Rule #4

    Comment by gastorgrab — December 20, 2013 @ 4:05 pm - December 20, 2013

  7. Phil won’t be the last one popping off for an article.

    And you, Master Pisspants, won’t be the last leftist fool drinking from an (apparently) bottomless well of immaturity, hypocrisy, stupidity and narcissism.
    Maybe you’re the one who needs a ‘handler’.

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 4:16 pm - December 20, 2013

  8. Whew, such nit-picking. There is censorship and there is the act of poisoning free expression of a speaker. We can be speaking as lawyers and practitioners of the art of perfect word usage or we can speak casually as observers of life.

    The bully shouts “shut up” and waves a menacing fist. Oh, but that is not true censorship in the straight and narrow sense. Agreed.

    The boss says you may not make expressions of your religious belief system and retain your job. Oh, but that is not true censorship in the straight and narrow sense. Agreed.

    The teacher tells a kid that Santa is white and gets put on administrative leave. Oh, but that is not true censorship in the straight and narrow sense. Agreed.

    Martin Bashir goes on vacation during the firestorm following his rant that Sarah Palin deserves to have someone forcibly crap in her open mouth and pee on her face. He decides to quit his job and end the “vacation.” Oh, but that is not true censorship in the straight and narrow sense. Agreed.

    But, though it is NOT censorship in the straight and narrow definition of the word, it is a damned good imitation of the purpose of censorship.

    Political correctness and hate speech are other examples of “vernacular” censorship.

    Typically, the Alinsky crowd reaches first for any lever that will distort the argument and derail the concept.

    Phil Robertson in reality is a Christian with a strong, fairly fundamental belief system. He is well known to preach his faith. A + E made the choice to feature Phil Robertson and his clan in a reality show which included Phil Robertson in all of his well known reality. No sentient human could possibly take Phil Robertson on as an associate without knowing the reality of his system of priorities in terms of his belief system. Anything to the contrary is a dog that will not hunt. A + E can not come up with any written agreement by which Phil Robertson agreed to go publicly mute on his Christian faith and belief system. The man, despite his get up and red neck schtick is not a fool; he would never have made the agreement.

    There is a subset among gays that flash their feathers and squawk endlessly about their gay status and set forth all manner of demands of how the rest of humanity is supposed to comport themselves in their presence. I liken it to the bantam rooster raising a ruckus in the whole, endless barnyard of animals. For all his noise, if he walks behind a bull making a pasture paddy, he is going to be coated without regard to his self-presumed status.

    GLAAD sent forth some wet noodle who cried about how his two year old daughter might think less of her daddy because of Phil Robertson. I guess he will just have to read the GQ article to her. But why not crap all over GQ for printing the article?

    Perhaps you can tell that I regard the whole nuclear aspect of this supposed devastation of civilization as an attention getting hissy-fit by someone or many someones who need to get a life.

    A + E but Phil Robertson out to pasture until such time as they fire him or break him of his evil ways or something. That, of course, is not censorship in the straight and narrow sense. It is just an awfully good imitation of censorship.

    Comment by heliotrope — December 20, 2013 @ 4:48 pm - December 20, 2013

  9. So crudely attacking gays (wish Phil did) should not be censored, but crudely attacking the goddess Palin should be censored?

    Why don’t you just come out and say queers and libtards shouldn’t have the same rights, liberties, and rules applied to them as are applied to conservatives?

    Comment by James Edward — December 20, 2013 @ 4:48 pm - December 20, 2013

  10. Phil didn’t need a handler, hypersensitive gay lefty pajamaboys need to grow the hell up.

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2013 @ 4:49 pm - December 20, 2013

  11. So crudely attacking gays (wish Phil did) should not be censored, but crudely attacking the goddess Palin should be censored?

    OK, James Edwards, I am calling you out. Either put up or shut up:

    Link to the crude attack on gays made by Phil Robertson. Be very precise and articulate here. You have read it the way your mind wants to read it. Since not all of us are trapped in the narrow corridor that is your mind, be certain to explain what is crude, how it insults and how it injures.

    Either Link away or slink away. You have no standing whatsoever, so taking your word that Phil Robertson is a crude attacker of gays is worth about as much as a massage from Spongebob Squarepants.

    Comment by heliotrope — December 20, 2013 @ 5:04 pm - December 20, 2013

  12. Drudge links to an interesting article which, in my opinion, is a fair assessment of where things stand with this mess which A + E has put itself in.

    Comment by heliotrope — December 20, 2013 @ 5:06 pm - December 20, 2013

  13. Is it just me, or does James Edward seem really butt-hurt that Martin Bashir got fired?

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2013 @ 5:06 pm - December 20, 2013

  14. Ooops, the link:

    http://www.eonline.com/news/492909/duck-dynasty-family-very-serious-about-leaving-the-show

    Comment by heliotrope — December 20, 2013 @ 5:06 pm - December 20, 2013

  15. Comment by James Edward Moron — December 20, 2013 @ 4:48 pm

    He RESIGNED, you idiot.

    And if you need a source closer to your leftist liking, here’s the story from the PeterPuffington Host.”

    If Phil Robertson’s comments are an ‘attack’ on gays, what will you call it when some day, some grown up, somewhere, gets sick of your shrieking and screaming and punches you in your mouth, thus bloodying your pursed lips?

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 5:08 pm - December 20, 2013

  16. Is it just me, or does James Edward seem really butt-hurt that Martin Bashir got fired?

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2013 @ 5:06 pm

    Jane Edwina likes the scat references, and now she’s upset that Marty isn’t there to deliver them.

    Poor thing.

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 5:21 pm - December 20, 2013

  17. I’m so sorry conservatives have reading comprehension problems.

    What Phil said is violent, is malicious and is hateful. Just because you hate gays doesn’t mean his speech isn’t

    No one was cared Bashir was fired until you all displayed your hypocrisy and flipped out because this trash was fired.

    Oh Jman if Bashir’s comments were an “attack” on Palin what will you call it when some day, some grown up, somewhere gets tried of Palin’s shrieking and gang rapes her?

    Comment by James Edward — December 20, 2013 @ 5:24 pm - December 20, 2013

  18. what will you call it when some day, some grown up, somewhere gets tried of Palin’s shrieking and gang rapes her?

    You mean like Sandra Bernhardt suggested?

    You still haven’t demonstrated where Phil Robertson’s statement advocated violence against gays. Aside from the screaming voices in your head, can you cite a source?

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2013 @ 5:26 pm - December 20, 2013

  19. ..some grown up, … gets tried of Palin’s shrieking and gang rapes her?

    A grown up wouldn’t rape anyone, and since you’re a hyperventilating, bedwetting 3 year old girl I can understand how you’d make that mistake.
    Besides, my guess is that Ms. Palin’s skill with firearms would be put to good use in that hypothetical.

    Now ask me what I’d think if YOU were gang raped…

    Go take a nap, Suzy.

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 5:36 pm - December 20, 2013

  20. Comment by James Edward Talky Tina, the Martin Bashir Lover and ‘Sarah Palin should be raped’ Fetishist — December 20, 2013 @ 5:24 pm

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 5:39 pm - December 20, 2013

  21. James Edwards. What Martin Bashir and YOU both said is inciting to commit VIOLENT ASSAULT on another person. This is not what Phil Robertson said. He said NOTHING about assaulting another person. He said that homosexuality is a sin. If you find that statement “violent, malicious and hateful” but are ok proposing VIOLENT ASSAULT on another person, then you need serious therapy because those are some screwed up values you got there.

    Comment by Juan — December 20, 2013 @ 5:51 pm - December 20, 2013

  22. What jman said was also inciting to commit VIOLENT ASSAULT on another person.

    The point which I have made is that if Phil or the commenters say offensive, malicious and hateful against gays its okay. Jman twice incited violence on this blog alone.

    But when someone says something offensive, malicious or hateful against a conservative it is not okay.

    How is this not the height of hypocrisy?

    In the eyes of conservatives it is perfectly acceptable to physically attack gay people, rape gay people, and compare them to terrorists.

    Comment by James Edward — December 20, 2013 @ 5:59 pm - December 20, 2013

  23. What jman said was also inciting to commit VIOLENT ASSAULT on another person.

    No, Mary, I asked a “what if ?” using an instance of BATTERY as an example; the better to flesh out your hysterical use of the word ‘attack’ to describe Mr. Robertson’s remarks.
    As in…if you call his remarks an ‘attack’, what would you call it if (hypothetical in which something happens to you that should have happened a long time ago)?
    Or is that too nuanced for a little girl like you?

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 6:09 pm - December 20, 2013

  24. But then, you believe that if anyone tells you that everything about you isn’t perfectly lovable, then that’s a ‘violent assault’ and an ‘attack’ on gay people everywhere.
    Pop a 10mg valium and go watch a Glee marathon.
    You’ll feel better.

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 6:13 pm - December 20, 2013

  25. You all are the whinny bitches complaining that this redneck piece of trash was fired.

    Just because your scum of the earth who wants one set of rules for you and another set of rules for everyone else doesn’t mean we have to sit here and tolerate it.

    Comment by James Edward — December 20, 2013 @ 6:21 pm - December 20, 2013

  26. …doesn’t mean we have to sit here and tolerate it.

    No further questions, your Honor.

    Jane Edwina just convicted herself.
    And we thought she and her crew were all about ‘tolerance’.

    That’s some big talk coming from a shrieking queen.
    You’d better be careful that all those ‘gang rape’ fantasies that you wish for others don’t happen to YOU.

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 6:26 pm - December 20, 2013

  27. I find the following more offensive to gays than anything Robertson said.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azoWedQH8zQ

    Comment by Juan — December 20, 2013 @ 6:32 pm - December 20, 2013

  28. And Jane Edward can’t produce any examples of Phil Robertson threatening teh gheys with violence, so he just shrieks louder.

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2013 @ 8:10 pm - December 20, 2013

  29. @ V the K

    Because he just knows! You willfully ignorant fools!, how can you not discern the obvious murderous intent in “it’s not my place to judge”? It’s a dog whistle! It’s code! Can’t you see?!

    “Listen to me! They’re not human! Everyone! They’re here already! YOU’RE NEXT!!!”

    Comment by Sean — December 20, 2013 @ 8:18 pm - December 20, 2013

  30. @ #61, I wrote:

    OK, James Edwards, I am calling you out. Either put up or shut up:

    Link to the crude attack on gays made by Phil Robertson. Be very precise and articulate here. You have read it the way your mind wants to read it. Since not all of us are trapped in the narrow corridor that is your mind, be certain to explain what is crude, how it insults and how it injures.

    Either Link away or slink away.

    @ #67 James Edwards announces:

    I’m so sorry conservatives have reading comprehension problems.

    What Phil said is violent, is malicious and is hateful. Just because you hate gays doesn’t mean his speech isn’t

    There you have it. James Edwards by his own ignorant attack turns on “because you hate gays doesn’t mean his (Phil’s) speech isn’t (malicious and hateful.)

    I should fall on my knees and cower from this bit of blinding brilliance. Right?

    Meanwhile, James Edwards has confirmed that he is entirely incapable of identifying what words constituted a “crude attack on gays” and to be able to explain why it is “crude” and how it “insults and injures.”

    So, James Edwards is nothing more than a wounded sock-puppet of the whiny left who is just about on the edge of holding his breath until he turns blue …. as if a single soul in the entire universe shivs a git.

    Slink away, little man. You have clearly demonstrated that you don’t have the goods.

    Comment by heliotrope — December 20, 2013 @ 8:19 pm - December 20, 2013

  31. Why don’t you just come out and say queers and libtards shouldn’t have the same rights, liberties, and rules applied to them as are applied to conservatives?

    Seems to me that queers and libtards make the argument that they’re above rules well enough on their own. They’re also fairly keen on inventing rights and liberties as well.

    Comment by RobSchellinger — December 20, 2013 @ 9:46 pm - December 20, 2013

  32. Now, now, boys. We should admire James for living the central tenant of liberalism: for thee, not me. So James should be able to express himself to his little double rainbow-spewing heart’s content without a care in the world, but the second he hears something that puts a dampener on his day, the offender must immediately be publicly shamed and terminated from their job for the grand crime of hurting his feelings. When Person A must endure Person B’s words and actions without complaint or be punished, that isn’t tolerance or equality, that’s oppression and tyranny.

    Reminds me of that scene in Game of Thrones where somebody in a crowd of peasants throws a cow pie at King Joffrey. Joffrey orders his bodyguard to find the person responsible and kill them. The crowd erupts into a riot and almost kills Joffrey. James Edwards should take that as an object lesson.

    I’ve been called a “gay traitor” before. Right now, I wear that label with pride. I refuse to be lumped in with, and will actively work against, these shrieking queens who demand the upturning of American society and culture to try to relieve their neuroses and disorders. To the barricades, my fellow Americans. There’s a confrontation coming, and it’s going to be… fabulous.

    Comment by Sean — December 20, 2013 @ 10:37 pm - December 20, 2013

  33. …who demand the upturning of American society and culture to try to relieve their neuroses and disorders.

    Or…what happens when the 3% tail is always allowed to wag the 97% dog.

    And to be fair, it’s as much the fault of too many people in the 97%, who’ve given way too much latitude to unhinged freaks like Jane Edward and let them throw their tantrums and get their way with nary a comment or complaint.

    There’s a confrontation coming, and it’s going to be… fabulous.

    Watch what you say, or Jane Edward and Co. might get you fired from your job.
    You violent and oppressive gay hater.

    Comment by Jman1961 — December 20, 2013 @ 11:14 pm - December 20, 2013

  34. The amusing part about this is the people who have their panties in the most gigantic wad about this don’t even believe in Christianity anyway.

    Comment by V the K — December 20, 2013 @ 11:19 pm - December 20, 2013

  35. […] Gay Patriot says the Liberal Nazis are not really defending […]

    Pingback by Welcome to liberal fascism 101 | THE TEXAS SCRIBBLER — December 21, 2013 @ 1:27 am - December 21, 2013

  36. All of you are so intellectually dishonest and simple minded that you can even address my initial point.

    If it is acceptable to remove Bashir from media outlets it must be acceptable to remove Phil Robinson. If is is not acceptable to remove Phil Robinson then it must not be acceptable to remove Bashir.

    The only difference is that Bashir said nasty things about a conservative and Robinson said nasty things about gays.

    If you do not agree prior statement then either 1. you want rules to only apply to conservatives or 2. you are hateful homophobes who think such language is acceptable to use toward gays. (or three both)

    Oh and Sean. You’re not just a traitor and a collaborators you are a cheap sharmuta.

    It’s not 1993 it’s not even 2003. The gay rights movement was successful. 18 states and 39% percent of US has marriage equality. Eventually all of the blue and blueish purple states will pass marriage equality and then a simple full faith and credit lawsuit will mean de facto gay marriage across the country. Civilized states have already passed measures like ENDA. Millennials support equal rights and old people are dying.

    If a confrontation does happen y’all the wrong side. Sean and all you gay conservatives sold yourself out for nothing just like your intellectual and cowardly grandfathers- the group of thirteen.

    Comment by James Edward — December 21, 2013 @ 2:40 am - December 21, 2013

  37. LOL! This guy is precious! A guy saying that a woman should be subjected to somebody defecating in her mouth, a physical act of depraved violence, is the same as a man stating that he believes homosexuality is a sin but that God knows more about it then him, a theological opinion!

    Oh you poor baby. Last time I checked, there’s no risk of gays getting lynched by roving gangs of straight people. And a reversal of the social course isn’t going to result in that. Your side blathers about how much you like democracy, and you’re always so but when a state goes against your point of view, well, then you bust out federal judges to overturn the people’s decision and you say “the government has spoken.” You don’t care how many lives are wrecked, opponents jailed or fined, just as long as you get your way. This situation is as ridiculous as if the state of Georgia demanded that all states adopted its state constitution.

    The name-calling was disappointingly unoriginal. The old refrain of “whore” and “Jewish Nazi.” Yawn. The fact that you couldn’t actually refute me proves that you had nothing. You lost. You just pounded on the keyboard to try and get one last word in.

    Get off the computer and go see a psychiatrist for that persecution complex. You may come to see that the world is not such a dangerous place after all.

    Comment by Sean — December 21, 2013 @ 6:19 am - December 21, 2013

  38. If it is acceptable to remove Bashir from media outlets it must be acceptable to remove Phil Robinson. If is is not acceptable to remove Phil Robinson then it must not be acceptable to remove Bashir.

    Whew!

    Equivalency, any one?

    Clearly, James Edwards should agree that if it is OK to set out to impeach Richard Nixon it is equally OK to attempt to impeach Clinton and even the Obamessiah. There is only the equivalency that matters, not the actions or the charges.

    Ergo, using the James Edwards form of logical process, we may expect him to argue that any faith based perceived slander again gays is equivalent to fundamental Islamists actually brutally murdering gays.

    James Edwards is the great hyperbole leveler. A gnat bite and a .38 calibre shot to the temple are the same thing. Both are concussive insults to the body.

    The poor boy has no ability to handle anything nearing the level of critical thinking. That is why he is a liberal. Representative democracy is for adults. State socialism is for children. This cry baby is in his tantrum mode over some dirty birdie that called him a bad name. Now he wants uncle sugar to come and punish the bad man and make him cry. And he wants the whole group of gays who defended the man to be state ordered to wear a state required pink star with a slash line through it.

    Go back on the playground, James Edwards, the state will punish all the bullies you report to them. Soon it will just be you and your little imaginary playmate and his talking bunny rabbit with chicken feet instead of paws.

    Comment by heliotrope — December 21, 2013 @ 9:25 am - December 21, 2013

  39. If it is acceptable to remove Bashir from media outlets it must be acceptable to remove Phil Robinson. If is is not acceptable to remove Phil Robinson then it must not be acceptable to remove Bashir.

    His name is Robertson, dumbass.

    So, you have no grasp of the facts of a situation, yet you histrionically insist that you’re right and everyone who disagrees does so out of hate. What a well-programmed leftist tool you are.

    Comment by V the K — December 21, 2013 @ 9:43 am - December 21, 2013

  40. Elizabeth Scalia, who writes as The Anchoress and is the Managing Editor for the Catholic Portal at Patheos has a terrific column up which serves as a parallel and contrast to Phil Robertson’s statements which caused such a firestorm.

    For those (hardly you, James Edwards) who are intellectually curious about the church and homosexuality, I highly recommend this read:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/theanchoress/2013/12/20/i-am-the-momma-bear-of-new-homophiles/

    I love the concept of this created word: homophile.

    It puts things in perspective when dealing with loving the sinner while hating the sin.

    Comment by heliotrope — December 21, 2013 @ 10:14 am - December 21, 2013

  41. Aw. It’s such a shame that we finally get new meat, and it’s all gamy and tough.

    Comment by The_Livewire — December 21, 2013 @ 11:34 am - December 21, 2013

  42. James Edwards, what you do is called “projection”. Look it up and understand yourself.

    Comment by Juan — December 21, 2013 @ 11:52 am - December 21, 2013

  43. Something just occurred to me.

    If Phil is allowed to have a certain point of view but he isn’t allowed to tell anyone about it, isn’t that the same ‘Don’t Ask / Don’t Tell’ policy that GLAAD fought so hard against?

    Comment by gastorgrab — December 21, 2013 @ 12:48 pm - December 21, 2013

  44. Um… … We’re sending assault weapons to the rebels in Syria because we want to overthrow their regime. Their regime is, in our view, anti-American (pro-Iranian) and also a dictatorship.

    Comment by Mitch — December 21, 2013 @ 4:09 pm - December 21, 2013

  45. Um… The rebels in Syria are Islamist radicals.

    Comment by V the K — December 21, 2013 @ 6:04 pm - December 21, 2013

  46. Nevermind that the point of the comparison flew straight over your head.

    Comment by V the K — December 21, 2013 @ 6:05 pm - December 21, 2013

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.