Friday, October 13, 2006

Jesus H. Crist

Florida Republicant gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist has been “outed” as a homosexual in the press. For many of us, however, this is old news.

That Crist might be gay – I don’t know if he is – has been talked about in Florida for a while. Maybe it’s the perpetual tan (no one is calling George Hamilton gay) or the fact that he’s a lifelong bachelor (if that’s proof positive, then someone may as well slap a rainbow sticker on my car). Crist has denied it on at least one occasion.

I certainly don’t have a problem with Crist’s purported sexual orientation, though he’s definitely not my choice for governor. Neither is his Democratic opponent, Jim Davis, who’s way behind in the polls and is not likely to win.

Hell, Crist’s orientation may be a positive thing for the state. Perhaps there’s a, um, closeted liberal somewhere inside him.

Even if doesn’t change a single vote in this or in any election, I support the outing of gay Republicant politicians. I don’t know how one can be part of a party that actively campaigns against one’s own “lifestyle.”

I’m generally for allowing people (and
other creatures) to reveal their orientation if and when they’re ready; not so in this instance. No quarter for hypocrites!

We’ve all heard of an “Uncle Tom;” the Log Cabin Republicants and their ilk are “Uncle Bruces” as far as I’m concerned. They’re the GOP’s bastard child that the party has to accept (a registered voter is a registered voter), but are often embarrassed to acknowledge.

There’s some talk of a
mass outing of gay politicians on the way. I don’t know if this is just paranoid talk or what. But if it’s true, I’m looking forward to seeing the expressions on the faces of those ultra-consternatives who’ve been unwittingly supporting a “sodomite” with a “deviant” lifestyle "choice" that is an “abomination before God.”

30 comments:

Aunty Belle said...

heh heh...well, now Bawgs, if they's a massive outing party for GOPs ( hope so!) it may have opposite effect than ya think--mayhap it means GOP will cull 'em early...cause the base ain't gonna go fer open lifestyle ala Barney Frank.

Come ter the Front Porch, honey fer a laugh or two...blog therapy.

Pete Bogs said...

aunt b - the base is going to be ticked when it realizes it's been supporting so many of "those people"

Sanford B. Hines said...

Fuck both parties. The only thing that both parties do is split America. I will no longer have myself defined by a political party. Im human.

Hellpig said...

If bringing homos out of the rightwing closet gets those lunatic lefties to vote Right I am all for it...maybe there is hope yet......lol

Bird said...

great link there bogs.

hahahahaha - loved that comment in the article from the link - sex is fun.

duh? really?

i agree with you - out 'em all - the hypocrites. perhaps the closet gay repubs are filled with hate and self-loathing - they either need some therapy or some really good sex.

flap/flap/swooooooosh!

Jack K. said...

Really good sex! Now there is an idea and goal whose time has come. It may even be long past due.

Just remember to practice safe sex. lol, snerx.

rusty shakelford said...

I used to work at a cafe where some log cabin republicans used as a meeting place. I too asked them why they were republican when so many of there peers where not. Their reason was enlightening. First they pointed out that who they had sex with did not define them as a person. Why is it a heterosexual can define himself by something he believes in or does that is not sexual and a gay person cannot? Second, the mainstream gay rights movement seeks to change the existing set of laws to explicitly protect gays. What is the next step, all persons in the US will have to register their sexual orientation with the government? Just think of what that would do to the confused college kids.

Perhaps the fact that the log cabin republicans exist should cause you to review your take on the party. Maybe they are more inclusive than you think.

Perhaps its the republicans who think its no ones business where you stick it, but your own. Please forgive the double-entendre.

Aunty Belle said...

Bawgs, the base will be ticked, fer shure--over being manipulated.

Meanwhile, honey, why ain'tcha self examinin' on behalf of libs who call a black fella a nigger up at Cornell whar' "free speech" means a socialist state whar' only lib-speak is permitted, and ticket holidin' folks is turned back on account if the violence that libs threaten against any other speakers?

More important than Foley and Crist's abberations.

ANd then, youse so quiet 'bout ole Harry Reid...goodness ya'll libs, doan this stuff bother ya'?

See fer ole Aunty, this is why we'uns need the Fugitive Agrarian party!!

Pete Bogs said...

rusty - welcome back... I don't care about defining anyone by their orientation... it's just a fact that the GOP has championed anti-gay causes (marriage ban, anyone?) where Dems have typically not... interesting that the LCRs refused to endorse Bush in '04 over that very thing... they didn't endorse Kerry either, but he's on their side... see my Uncle Tom reference for more info...

aunt b - you didn't read yesterday's post... rather than being quiet bout Reid, I brought the topic up myself... I don't support "my own" when they do wrong - more people should be like me... lol

aunt b ps - if you think that I don't address your comments adequately in my own, it's because I don't always know the things to which you were referring...

aunt b ps ps - your comment above about your party never accepting open homosexuality is nothing to be proud of... I certainly hope I wouldn't see you at a gathering like I mention below...

ALL - I was out this evening and happened to pass a theatre where a gay film fest was showing... on the opposite corner were people with huge signs talking about sin and hay people going to hell... they were out there with their kids and everything... it was pure hate and it was disgusting, sick shit... and this is from the supposedly "good guys," devout Christians... I'll bet you money if you asked them how they vote they'll say GOP... something about that party just draws backward, narrowminded people...

Aunty Belle said...

Ok, sweet potato, I does see the Reid thang---good fer ya!

As fer not being proud of a party that is "never accepting open homosexuality", what I'se saying is it won't because to do so is to alienate the base--includin' Aunty Belle. Sigh...ya' knows we's on opposite sides of the same-sex union debate. It ain't a matter of pride, but of truth. Marriage is only a man and a woman. Aunty is in favor of respect fer all--an' shur would not be in favor of the stuff ya' witnessed outside the festival. Meanwhile, lots of the LCRs is furious wif' fellow gays over the witch hunt.

The big point--Americans, Red and Blue is being manipulated by the pols. As Reid and Foley show, the rot is on both sides of the aisle.

Jack K. said...

bogs, I wonder if those folks across the street were from Topeka? The Phelps clan are notorious around here, and are making a name for themselves nation-wide, for suc demonstrations. They do it for the opportunity to go to court to win big settlements for violation of freedom of speech guarantees. How else can they afford to maintain their compound of hate?

I should probably sign this one as anonymous. Who knows who is watching.

As for the same sex marriage issue. If people truly love and care about each other, they should form a union. Most do anyhow. The sanctity of the law gives them certain legal benefits.

I am still convinced that the only objection to gay unions is the physical, sexual aspect. It will take a lot of information to get me to see it any other way.

Blue said...

I still have trouble with people caring who others choose to love... Also - I don't care what you get up to in your own private space so long as your partner at the time is another consenting adult.

It would be nice if the media & politicians could get on with the job of responsibly reporting & running the country (respectively) without allowing their puerile little minds to constantly dwell on the sexual habits of others!

Pete Bogs said...

I think it's absurd for "gay" to be a political issue at all, whether it's marriage or anything else... for any part to use it is for them to drum up hate and ignorance... appeal to voters' reason, to their common sense, even to their morals, but not this way... it's not a moral issue as far as I'm concerned...

oh - and this is important - it's not a choice as far as I'm concerned... did any of us choose to be straight, or did it just come naturally to us?

Bird said...

i've argued this one before - but i can't get the "truth" part about marriage being between a man and a woman. i can get that HISTORICALLY that has been the custom,that historically - it is TRUE that marraige has been between a man and a woman - but i don't see why that can't be changed (historically, marraige has also been about the selling of property - and we've changed that a bit, now haven't we?). there's no absolute truth about marraige - it's a cultural convention. let's change the convention. why can't gay couples enjoy the benefits and safety nets provided for straight, married couples? why not allow gay couples to participate fully in society and be an open and acknolegeded part of building a strong and stable community. theoretically, marraige in general adds stability to society and the family. why do we insist on creating instability by denying marraige to gay couples?

Jack K. said...

Bogs, here is another take on the choice point. In my weird, wonderful, wacky take on existence it is all about choice. Between lives on the physical plane, we choose what lessons we will learn the next time we appear. Part of it could be to learn what it is like to be in heterosexual or homosexual relationship(s). It is all abou choice and consequence. If we don't learn the lesson this time we will at some future date. The choice is ours.

Just another way of view it all. I admit to being influenced by the Michael books.

Sanford B. Hines said...

There are no laws making being gay illigal in the USA. There are hate crime laws though. If anyone is arrested for a crime against someone that is gay it is a hate crime. It is not illigal to say you hate someone that is gay, but if a person physically beats someone that is gay without provication, that is illegal and thus a hate crime.

Hellpig said...

you think sherlock?

Sanford B. Hines said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Hellpig said...

Comment deleted findly getting the clue sherlock

Hellpig said...

Hey Bogs I seen u at TP did you like my work? I was the name stealing troll

Pete Bogs said...

hell - I didn't see your comments... unlike my own site, I don't really read the other comments...

K9 said...

/bark bark bark

what the vindictive mass outing shows is that all the tolerance talk and the privacy concerns that the left say they hold so dear is bullshit. when it serves their own goals they will and do destroy individuals.

these are the people who are so concerned about whos listening to their calls, looking at their internet and the sanctity of the privacy of known terrorist cells. but IM's and email of a GOP is open season. and what about all the indignant talk of who cares what people do in their bedrooms? they damn sure care if they can parlay it into destruction of their enemies. and they have defined conservatives as their enemies.

regardless of sexual orientation, if your personal sex life is the single most important aspect of your voting choices i say you are a self absorbed punk. the bigger picture for the country as a whole is more important that having everyone, not merely accept your alternative lifestyle, which MOST do, but give you a big ol medal for your courage to marry a dolphin.

and to aunty: that video of the students at columbia attacking, including physically, the black minuteman, calling him a house nigger is a perfect example of just how intolerant the left acutally are.
now they are going to see their hate crime bill swim up to bite them in the ass. good. because the radleft are the exactly like the westboro baptist church fag haters! no difference!

the american left: like bitchy little school girls running the high school: walk this way. talk this way. and if you dont? youre a hater! we'll attack you! we'll disapprove of you. destroy you, etc.

pro-black until you decide you think differently. then you are a nigger! that is the american left in action! this is the party of tolerance! of brotherly love. nay dear readers, they are paralyzed by the greatest most oppressive dogma on the planet. liberal secular relativism. crazy jihadis probably have more latitiude for free thinking than these dolts.

a once great party hijacked by the kozby kids.

*ptui*


/grrrrrrrr!

Pete Bogs said...

k9 - you're talking about the extreme left... I have no use for them either... Ward Churchill, for one, can kiss my ass... there are extremists on both sides... I think we can agree they suck...

what I saw this weekend was not just a different philosophy, it was pure, proactive hate... it was what you describe - if you're not like me, you're wrong - but it was coming from the far right...

I'm not familiar with all this "nigger" stuff you guys are talking about, but I would not have anything to do with it... the word never comes up in the liberal circles I operate in... we talk about the war, about Bush and about the corrupt GOP...

outing GOP gays is not an act of intolerance; whether it benefits anyone else politically or not, those hypocrites deserve to have people know who they really are... if you are anti-gay and are supporting a gay candidate, perhaps it's time for you to know it... I see no problem in criticizing someone who joins a party that publicly campaigns - actively so, like with the marriage amendment - against them... it's nuts...

aunt b - that stuff you said about marriage being a man and a woman is Biblical talk... but it's bad to mix religion and politics... on one end, you (as in YOU, aunt b) may end up passing over a candidate who'd do a good job simply because of their orientation... how sad is that? on the extreme end of the religion-politics spectrum you get the Taliban... either way, not a good thing...

K9 said...

/bark bark bark

bogs yes i am talking the extreme left. just as you are talking the extreme right as anti gay. its just not so among most conservatives....thats why i wrote a great party that has been hijacked by the KOZ types. i know you describe yourself as a lib but you mean it in the classic sense as it was traditionally understood. but now? its been bastardized into meaning extreme left.

/grr

Aunty Belle said...

Lawdy....looky ya'll lefties--Blue Bird, Bawgs, Hines, Jack...that marraige is man and woman is truth. Bird, it ain't "convention".

"Convention" is the PC version, honey that is shoved down yer throats. Why ? Cause they's agroup that cannot destroy marraigew unless you hep em' ...I done tole ya'll this--iffin' wouse was half the bloggers you aim ter be youd' check up on thereferences--iffin' youse more than hot air, when ya vote, ya need ter know this stuff--youse good folks, but youse being taken ter the cleaners on this point. Look up Paula Ettelbrick and gang.

These lesbian aacademics have stated PLAINLY that they do not really want marraige, but the "gay" marriage will kill off actual marriage and that that is their aim. ANd she ain't "fringe" she is left mainstrean.

She also supports hookers "rights" knowin' dern well that nobody wants to be a hooker, but that hooker advocacy demans women in the long run--her goal, she dreams of societal androgeny. This is a sick woman, an' she is a big part of the movement.

Marriage of one man to one woman is not about "choice" though it is presented as such to the gullible who sell t heor souls for "choice" thinkin' it give them god-like autonomy. It gives them hellish consequences.

Marriage is not a political insitution--no "legalization" of it will make it actual for same-sex pairs.

Marraige has definate function and purpose. It ain;t religion BAwgs, since elementary anthropology proves EVERY society has strong strictures on marriage--it is about the scientific reality that male and female is made ter fit in a certain way fer a certain purpose, and that purpose enhaances the socierty and preserves a group.

Get a grip, kids, sex makes babies. In order fer species to wanna propagate, sex is fun...

an' sex can be had outside of marriage (Always a bad plan) but then it is sex, not marriage. Marraige is about sex and takaing cae of the babies sex makes. It is a partnership--ideally fer life. Losts of folks made a mess of it (with hep from toxic culture)so to keeep folks from fellin' bad about failed marraiges and families, we's been defining marriage down so it won't have no meanin' a'tall.

Now think it out, sweet potatoes:

"love and commitment" is NOT a definition for when to have sex. Two of the same sex who decide to corrupt science/ natures's CLEAR design wana tell you that it is OK, cause they is committed and love each other...ok, well, they (or you) could be committed and love your cat,but that doam meman when ya' violate cat biology that youse married to yore cat.

YA' can be coomitted to and love the 9 kid you coach fer little legue, but ya' cain't marry him.

You may have love for and commitment to yore staff, but ya' cain;t marry all 22 of em'.

GAys have same right as anyone ter marry--marriage has same definition fer all--doan marry yore sister, doan marry underagers, doan marry more than one person.

Folks, keepin' marriage as nature designed it, the natural response of humans to the physiology and the purpose of that physiology is not in the least "prejudiced" agaist folks with aberrant orientations--yes it is aberrant.

BAwgs, I'se not goin' ter gointo the horrors of gay sex and its results...done that once an' it is so hideous I ain't up to it agin'. Suffice ter say that is so foul that
anyone who would sanction such has not a whit of compassion in them. Ya'll, does ya beleive in "choice" if yore friend wants ter throw hisself off the Sears tower? WHy not--it is his choice? THis is what ya does when ya encourage homosexual acts--it is literally deadly. Nothin' compassionate about it. So ya'll quit qwrappin' ya'self in cotton candy language when the truth is that anal fistulas is what youse encouragin'. Ya doan love no gays, ya loves the vision of yaself as "tolerant" Bull (feathers).

Now BAwgs, iffin' ya think that outing LCR is ok cause yosue onlyexposin' hypocrisy, youse not been informed by yore lib takin' points that in fact NOT ALL GAYS are in favor legalizin' gay unions--they doan want iit at all--why? Cause gay sex habits is by definition promiscuous---get'cha self a copy of After The Ball. Read what gay men say about their own "needs". They doan want someone pinnin' 'em doan to a marriage model (of monogamy).

YA'll is jes' yakkin' about stuff ya doan check on--the average gay "relationship" (males) is 1.1 years self reported in Europe, Canada an US in study of over 5000 men.

The push fer same sex "marraiges" is POLITICAL, get it? not compassionate. The goals is destruction of marriage as an institution at all.

An no, they doan make good homes either. AIn't even ONE study showin' that gay couples make good parents--cain't...homosexuality is a symptom of a deeper distrubance about oneself, one's person. Such folks do not make good parents as they is overly focused on they self. They's complusive about self, not selfless as a parent must be.

Now this heah ain't about Aunty being devoid of compassion fer gays..I'se wif the Dawg on this--a person oughta be about more'n they sex lives--homosexuals is often amazin' persons--witty, fun, talented, creative, all these traits is a contribution to the wider society and is welcomed and esteemed.

Last point--only narrowmindeness woud attempt to dismiss these comments as derived from the bible.

These points hold in all eras, all cultures, all ethnicities--ain't about the bible--humans is designed physiologically to procreate, and psychologically to care about their own, not the masses of chillen. Marriage is about that. It ain't about passin' pleasures, however pleasurable.

Aunty Belle said...

Bawgs, what the Dawg is refrring to is that at Cornell the lib students and their handlers called a Black man a nigger becuas that man had the audacity to believe in free speech.

trouble was he didn't say what the left wannted him ter say so now they's lttin' theior real bigorty show--as Pup notes, dems /libs is the MOST intolerant folks of all.

An this was nto the fringe left, but mainstream left defended and enocuraged by Cornell admistration & profs.

Is HOward Dean "fringe" ? Michael Moore? What is an example of
mainstream lib? ANd --like the "moderate" muslims, why doan "mainstream" libs denounce the "fringe" left? Why, cause the Fringe is very useful, says what the suits doan wanna say, but do wanna have drive debate.

Pete Bogs said...

k9 - I disagree... whereas in the GOP the vocal anti-gay folks are the leaders - Frist, Bush, etc. - the same can't be said for Dems... meaning, it's not Kerry or Dean saying "niggers," it's a bunch of idiotic protesters... Bush and Frist aren't saying "faggot" - you couldn't do that and survive politically... but it is the GOP leadership that's pushing marriage amendments, that's against orientation language in anti-discrimination laws, etc.

aunt b - I don’t consider Moore or Dean fringe, no… Moore isn’t even a politician, he’s a comedian/filmmaker… to hate him is to hate the messenger…

who is fringe left? like I said above, someone like Ward Churchill… the ACLU, when they defend NAMBLA…

gays will never kill marriage for straight people unless they allow it… this woman you mention, I’ve honestly never heard of her… and I’m a lefty… I’m not sure where she’s big, but she ain’t big with me…

I didn’t say marriage is a religious thing; I said the “one woman one man” language you were using is Biblical talk… btw, those nasty protesters had that message on one of their signs… I’m just telling you what I saw…

you can’t get me to believe gay is a choice, for reasons I’ve said… think about yourself for a minute… did you decide one day you’d be straight, or was it just there for you?

this post was never about gay marriage, it just morphed into that… this was about gay GOPs

ps – in my new job I work with a gay man who has a 12-year-old son… he married a woman years ago, then apparently made the switch… anyway, you should see how he dotes over his kid like any concerned parent… I don’t see any selfishness there… I think your comment to that effect was way off base…

Sanford B. Hines said...

I would like to know what each person that posted in this thread is. What are you? I would really like to know. I have an feeling that no one will resond with an answer. I will ask anyway.

Bird said...

bogs,
have i been halucinating?

didn't i see a post here this weekend that revealed your secret, life as an undercover dem operative? and now, it's disappeared.

hmmmmm....what's going on bogs?

is that really you bogs?

very suspicious is this.

i ain't drinkin' no more kool aid.

Pete Bogs said...

bird - I can neither confirm nor deny that...