Good point by Bruce, but in his article, he downplays the anti-gay marriage amendments voted into law across the U.S. in the early 2000s.
If he wants to extoll the virtues of being Republican, he does himself more service by also acknowledging how far they have come. There is no shame in that.
Juansays
Or else they could be two faced about it and say they were all for it from the beginning just like the Democrats did.
CrayCrayPatriotsays
But, then, those amendments were by and large Republican-led. As a whole, the Democratic party “evolved” on gay marriage much earlier and more notably and in much greater numbers than the Republican party.
Breitbart had Loserpalooza in one of their articles. Wonder if they got the idea from me.
Sean Lsays
I’ve also been pointing to the standing ovation that Peter Thiel got at the RNC for saying he was proud to be gay.
Does anybody think the Pulse shooting had anything to do with it?
Martel's sonsays
Trump is a new development for an old party. And a great development. Good to have marriage for all. And let’s see how the GOP develops on this. I would suggest the development will be far better than how the Democrats took gay marriage was ‘their’s’ and everyone had to take all the rest of their growing radical shopping list.
Juansays
Perhaps, Vince, because Democrats will jump on any political opportunity they can whether they believe it or not.
CrayCrayPatriotsays
I’m pretty sure that the tens of thousands of people who marched in November 2008 were for gay marriage.
I’m pretty sure that the millions of people who voted against gay marriage in 2004 and other election years were against it.
Juansays
And I am certain the ONLY reasons Democratic politicians are for gay marriage is the Hollywood donations and LGBT activist foot soldiers.
Peter Hughessays
Better put some ice on that, al-Cray-da (as Bill Clinton said to Kathleen Willey).
You really had me fooled with Bruce and the Boss!
Good point by Bruce, but in his article, he downplays the anti-gay marriage amendments voted into law across the U.S. in the early 2000s.
If he wants to extoll the virtues of being Republican, he does himself more service by also acknowledging how far they have come. There is no shame in that.
Or else they could be two faced about it and say they were all for it from the beginning just like the Democrats did.
But, then, those amendments were by and large Republican-led. As a whole, the Democratic party “evolved” on gay marriage much earlier and more notably and in much greater numbers than the Republican party.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/20/loserpalooza-craziest-scenes-anti-trump-protests-d-c/amp/
Breitbart had Loserpalooza in one of their articles. Wonder if they got the idea from me.
I’ve also been pointing to the standing ovation that Peter Thiel got at the RNC for saying he was proud to be gay.
Does anybody think the Pulse shooting had anything to do with it?
Trump is a new development for an old party. And a great development. Good to have marriage for all. And let’s see how the GOP develops on this. I would suggest the development will be far better than how the Democrats took gay marriage was ‘their’s’ and everyone had to take all the rest of their growing radical shopping list.
Perhaps, Vince, because Democrats will jump on any political opportunity they can whether they believe it or not.
I’m pretty sure that the tens of thousands of people who marched in November 2008 were for gay marriage.
I’m pretty sure that the millions of people who voted against gay marriage in 2004 and other election years were against it.
And I am certain the ONLY reasons Democratic politicians are for gay marriage is the Hollywood donations and LGBT activist foot soldiers.
Better put some ice on that, al-Cray-da (as Bill Clinton said to Kathleen Willey).
Regards,
Peter H.