Biggest boos in GOP debate reserved for gay soldier in Iraq

Quote:

---

Over the past several debates, crowds’ reactions have made headlines instead of just the candidates. They applauded Gov. Rick Perry’s execution record and cheered for a hypothetical, dying man without insurance.

Here’s the transcript of what happened:

(Army’s Stephen) Hill: “In 2010, when I was deployed to Iraq, I had to lie about who I was, because I’m a gay soldier, and I didn’t want to lose my job.

“My question is, under one of your presidencies, do you intend to circumvent the progress that’s been made for gay and lesbian soldiers in the military?”

(BOOING)

Santorum: “Yeah, I — I would say, any type of sexual activity has absolutely no place in the military. And the fact that they’re making a point to include it as a provision within the military that we are going to recognize a group of people and give them a special privilege to — to — and removing ‘don’t ask/don’t tell’ I think tries to inject social policy into the military. And the military’s job is to do one thing, and that is to defend our country.

“We need to give the military, which is all-volunteer, the ability to do so in a way that is most efficient at protecting our men and women in uniform.”

(APPLAUSE)

“And I believe this undermines that ability.”

(APPLAUSE)

Moderator Megyn Kelly: “So what — what — what would you do with soldiers like Stephen Hill? I mean, he’s — now he’s out. He’s — you know, you saw his face on camera. When he first submitted this video to us, it was without his face on camera. Now he’s out. So what would you do as president?”

Santorum: “I think it’s — it’s — it’s — look, what we’re doing is playing social experimentation with — with our military right now. And that’s tragic.

“I would — I would just say that, going forward, we would — we would reinstitute that policy, if Rick Santorum was president, period.

“That policy would be reinstituted. And as far as people who are in — in — I would not throw them out, because that would be unfair to them because of the policy of this administration, but we would move forward in — in conformity with what was happening in the past, which was, sex is not an issue. It is — it should not be an issue. Leave it alone, keep it — keep it to yourself, whether you’re a heterosexual or a homosexual.”

According to a Pew Forum poll conducted last year, “By a two-to-one margin, most Americans support allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military (60% favor vs. 30% oppose). The level of support has been consistent in recent years. Majorities of Democrats (67%) and independents (64%) favor allowing gays and lesbians to serve in the military, while Republicans are more divided (47% favor and 43% oppose).”

---

And you red teamers think these fools are going to win the moderates and independents?

why is it all about sex with the conservatives? sex,sex,sex...

NPR had a fncking MARINE MAJOR!! on the day DADT died. He came out on NPR.

A few days later, they checked back with him for reactions.

He said he got one sergeant who did not object to his gayness but wished he would not not have gone so public with it.

All the rest of the Marines who contacted him, going back to some he hadn't seen since boot camp many years ago, said for them, he's still a Marine and nothing has changed.

Repugs, "Christians", tea baggers, are totally out of step with the majority Americans who want to PROGRESS the country, not REGRESS it. (alert: verbing nouns)

gays serve openly with no problems in 21st century armies like Germany, UK, France, etc, etc. Welcome to the modern world US Army.

Che's Rebel Army has been welcoming gays since day 1. Those fuckers can cook and clean up the encampment rather well. Not to mention our uniforms are the talk of the jungle :tu

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

NPR had a fncking MARINE MAJOR!! on the day DADT died. He came out on NPR.

A few days later, they checked back with him for reactions.

He said he got one sergeant who did not object to his gayness but wished he would not not have gone so public with it.

All the rest of the Marines who contacted him, going back to some he hadn't seen since boot camp many years ago, said for them, he's still a Marine and nothing has changed.

Repugs, "Christians", tea baggers, are totally out of step with the majority Americans who want to PROGRESS the country, not REGRESS it. (alert: verbing nouns)

---

More Republicans support, rather than oppose gays serving openly. My preacher specifically preached in favor of them openly serving not two weeks ago - you are far more bigoted than most of the groups you rail on about.

That shit pissed me off. Bunch of 300lb dumbfuk inbred bubbas booing a goddamned soldier. WTF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

And you red teamers think these fools are going to win the moderates and independents?
.

---

Yes. Obama sucks at his job. It's simple.

"you are far more bigoted than most of the groups you rail on about."

bigoted? moi? I simply observe and comment on, and rail against, the FACTS of tea bagger/VRWC/Repug sociopathic, close-minded regressiveness.

Your preacher is clearly an exception to the public face of "Christians".

Young Christians don't give a shit about gays bigotboutons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

"you are far more bigoted than most of the groups you rail on about."

bigoted? moi? I simply observe and comment on, and rail against, the FACTS of tea bagger/VRWC/Repug sociopathic, close-minded regressiveness.

Your preacher is clearly an exception to the public face of "Christians".

---

He didn't get booed - he go applause. There were over 600 Christians in attendance - Methodist, btw.

What is the "public" face of Christianity? The most public is the pope. Has he weighed in on the issue? Next, probably, Billy Graham, or his son, Franklin - probably the most visible Christian leaders in this country today; I couldn't find anything from them. What YOU see, as visible, is what the media wants you to see - what drives ratings. You are being manipulated, and with a bigoted soul, you believe what you already "know" to be true. You are the redneck who sees a 'mescin being lead away in handcuffs and mutters, "figures" to all around him -

Also, why don't you Google "Christians against Westboro Baptist", and see what that reveals.


I will pray for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

He didn't get booed - he go applause.

---

Zero applause. Plenty of boos.



boutons is pretty much right on this one

I assume 101A was talking about the 600 Christians in his church who, by his account, applauded when his minister supported gays serving openly.

Which of course isn't what boutons was talking about, but I think 101A was trying to demonstrate that his church is more representative of modern Christianity that the people who booed at the debate.

regardless. these GOP/teabagger debates on national tv are showing this party allows/condones and even incites hates for groups like the gays, the mexicans, the uninsured, the poor and the affected by national disasters.

It's documented on film. Nobody can deny this. this is why IMO boutons is more right than wrong in his assessment.

christian vs christian?

who should direct?

you won't find crookskanks in his church. lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

regardless. these GOP/teabagger debates on national tv are showing this party allows/condones and even incites hates for groups like the gays, the mexicans, the uninsured, the poor and the affected by national disasters.

It's documented on film. Nobody can deny this. this is why IMO boutons is more right than wrong in his assessment.

---

I'm incapable of making value judgements, I am programmed merely to make factual clarifications.

Beyorp meeeep morg.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

you won't find crookskanks in his church. lol

---

Why are you specifically mentioning me? I made one remark in the DADT thread, and it wasn't even a hateful remark. Should I be flattered that I'm on your mind so much? :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scott

I assume 101A was talking about the 600 Christians in his church who, by his account, applauded when his minister supported gays serving openly.

Which of course isn't what boutons was talking about, but I think 101A was trying to demonstrate that his church is more representative of modern Christianity that the people who booed at the debate.

---

To clarify:

After the normal service, our pastor asked us to stick around - that he had something to say beyond the day's sermon.

He started by saying, "The debt crisis is not the Democrat's fault" - to which there was a quiet rustling, as it IS a largely Republican congregation.

Then he said, "The debt crisis in not the Republican's fault". (Not so much rustling)

"The debt crisis can be laid right at the foot of the cross."

He then explained that the church had failed society to such an extent - in educating, in feeding the poor, in providing guidance and good works that we are, essentially, reaping what we have sown. He then went on to illustrate his point by talking about Westboro Baptist Church, and explaining that we, obviously, should not only not support that kind of distortion of Christianity, but that we ought to stand between haters and homosexuals, and say, "you only get to them if you go through me". "Hate the sin, love the sinner", etc... to which there was applause.

Hope that explains the context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

regardless. these GOP/teabagger debates on national tv are showing this party allows/condones and even incites hates for groups like the gays, the mexicans, the uninsured, the poor and the affected by national disasters.

It's documented on film. Nobody can deny this. this is why IMO boutons is more right than wrong in his assessment.

---

Bullshit. It shows that the audience had haters. Nothing more.

BTW, over 70% of the population of this country defines itself as "Christian". If we, as a group, REALLY didn't want something to happen, it wouldn't. All of the intolerance of, hate for and ridicule toward Christians is done specifically because of their tolerance of such things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Bullshit. It shows that the audience had haters. Nothing more.

---

yup and a good percentage on EVERY debate so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

yup and a good percentage on EVERY debate so far.

---

Fair enough.

How do you know the people in the audience were not Democrat operatives?

/wc

there were like three people that were booing... hardly representative of the entire audience.

about what Rick Santorum said about it undermining our military capability or some shit like that: what inkling does he have that it would do that? i'd like to hear it from the generals on the ground if that's the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

How do you know the people in the audience were not Democrat operatives?

/wc

---

Well you'd have to assume they were


sincerely,

yonivore

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

there were like three people that were booing... hardly representative of the entire audience.

---

all it takes is a few bad apples to take things to another level.

the fact that politicians cater to these bad apples and the rest of the audience allows them to hate is concerning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

there were like three people that were booing... hardly representative of the entire audience.

about what Rick Santorum said about it undermining our military capability or some shit like that: what inkling does he have that it would do that? i'd like to hear it from the generals on the ground if that's the case.

---

Other than being a politician, and nothing else to do, I have no idea what Santorum is doing in this race. I'm from Pa, and he couldn't even win reelection against a ho-hum Democrat candidate in this (swing) state.

He has NO chance in the general election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

all it takes is a few bad apples to take things to another level.

the fact that politicians cater to these bad apples and the rest of the audience allows them to hate is concerning.

---

it's still not representative. OP tried to make it out like the whole plays was errupting in boos. it was the same thing the other debate when you had a few dumbasses in the crowd. the media takes it to a whole other level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

the media takes it to a whole other level.

---

welcome to politics. Keep your bad apples in check if you don't want this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Other than being a politician, and nothing else to do, I have no idea what Santorum is doing in this race. I'm from Pa, and he couldn't even win reelection against a ho-hum Democrat candidate in this (swing) state.

He has NO chance in the general election.

---

what bugs me is that on the issue of whether we should stay in Iraq, he basically said something to effect of "we should listen to the generals on ground," but on this issue, he doesn't cite what the generals think we should do. you either listen to what the generals have to say or you don't.

My opinion is that it is completely fair to say the people booing were a fringe, extreme minority of the people there.

My concern is that these kind of expressions are left unchecked and it becomes acceptable behavior. I don't mean we need to outlaw booing gays in the military, which is protected speech. But the freedom of speech also includes the freedom of your dumb ass to be ridiculed when you say some stupid shit. That "check" is missing from a lot of these examples at the Republican debates (just as its missing from examples all over the country from liberals and conservatives alike).

We probably have fringe extremists at the 10% tails of both sides, leaving the rest of the 80% of America who operate on varying degrees of reasonableness. However, maybe there is the next 10-20% next to the tails whose views aren't THAT different, and could be persuaded. That is where the unchecked message does the most damage.

The best analogy I can think of:

If no one says anything to the bully on the playground picking on the small kid, then a lot of people are going to think that bully is "cool". But if a large group of students stands up, calls out, and denounces the bully - then his actions are no longer "cool".

For better or worse (usually worse), society relies on peer pressure over an actual set of hard ethics to determine how we feel about things, and that is the danger of these sorts of things (which is why I feel a personal obligation to call out boutons and Wild Cobra at every opportunity, because they are the internet equivalent).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

all it takes is a few bad apples to take things to another level.

the fact that politicians cater to these bad apples and the rest of the audience allows them to hate is concerning.

---

Apparently they were being shushed by the people around them. Additionally, there was apparently a big jump in twitter activity from the people in the crowd that were talking about despicableness of their boos.

I don't have twitter, so I can't confirm, but it was reported this way on CNN this morning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

welcome to politics. Keep your bad apples in check if you don't want this.

---

i don't care whether they do it or not. the media blowing it up/distorting it, that i do care about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scott

My opinion is that it is completely fair to say the people booing were a fringe, extreme minority of the people there.

My concern is that these kind of expressions are left unchecked and it becomes acceptable behavior. I don't mean we need to outlaw booing gays in the military, which is protected speech. But the freedom of speech also includes the freedom of your dumb ass to be ridiculed when you say some stupid shit. That "check" is missing from a lot of these examples at the Republican debates (just as its missing from examples all over the country from liberals and conservatives alike).

We probably have fringe extremists at the 10% tails of both sides, leaving the rest of the 80% of America who operate on varying degrees of reasonableness. However, maybe there is the next 10-20% next to the tails whose views aren't THAT different, and could be persuaded. That is where the unchecked message does the most damage.

The best analogy I can think of:

If no one says anything to the bully on the playground picking on the small kid, then a lot of people are going to think that bully is "cool". But if a large group of students stands up, calls out, and denounces the bully - then his actions are no longer "cool".

For better or worse (usually worse), society relies on peer pressure over an actual set of hard ethics to determine how we feel about things, and that is the danger of these sorts of things (which is why I feel a personal obligation to call out boutons and Wild Cobra at every opportunity, because they are the internet equivalent).

---

Good point.

At least ONE of the politicians on that stage ought to have the stones to say, "Some respect, THAT is a Soldier in the United States Army!" I mean, hell, they want to be his Commander in Chief, don't they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

I mean, hell, they want to be his Commander in Chief, don't they?

---

You forgot (no homo), tbh :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101a

good point.

At least one of the politicians on that stage ought to have the stones to say, "some respect, that is a soldier in the united states army!" i mean, hell, they want to be his commander in chief, don't they?

---

+1000

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

Good point.

At least ONE of the politicians on that stage ought to have the stones to say, "Some respect, THAT is a Soldier in the United States Army!" I mean, hell, they want to be his Commander in Chief, don't they?

---

This crap happens when the left and right extremes of each party go unchecked

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

i don't care whether they do it or not. the media blowing it up/distorting it, that i do care about.

---

yes blame the media :rolleyes

the display was on national tv for everyone to see. This is why latest polls show only 28% of the country views the Tea Party favorably

The surprising aspect of the Marine Major coming out on NPR was that it was the Marine Generals, of all the services, most opposed to dropping DADT.

It would be great of one or some of those Generals would do us a Ted Haggard. :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

there were like three people that were booing... hardly representative of the entire audience.

about what Rick Santorum said about it undermining our military capability or some shit like that: what inkling does he have that it would do that? i'd like to hear it from the generals on the ground if that's the case.

---

Doesn't the military have rules about public displays of affection in either sex/situation?

I'm not defending Santorum, just asking.

So, according to Santorum, heterosexual members would not be able to "out" themselves either, to make it fair. So no dating, marriage, having children, etc etc...

That sounds like it would work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CosmicCowboy

Doesn't the military have rules about public displays of affection in either sex/situation?

I'm not defending Santorum, just asking.

---

In uniform, yes, and you are supposed to be a rep for your service at all times. But DADT covered any situation... If a supervisor saw you kissing the same sex outside work, then by the regs, they'd be obligated to report you. (I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't report though.)

What about the shower boners? Did anyone boo shower boners?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

BTW, over 70% of the population of this country defines itself as "Christian". If we, as a group, REALLY didn't want something to happen, it wouldn't. All of the intolerance of, hate for and ridicule toward Christians is done specifically because of their tolerance of such things.

---

Obviously, the self-definition of "Christian" various from true to hypocritically, pharisaically false. When I put "Christian" in quote, I mean the kinds of "Christian" assholes, money grubbers, tele-preachers, Popoff's, fakes, End Time scare-mongerers, freaks who emphasize the OT way over Christ's teachings and example in the NT.

Where were all the true Christians when the Repugs were lying the country into Iraq?

Where are they now not insisting that America quit murdering people in 70 countries and not insisting that two bogus, botched wars be ended?

LOL lookup santorum in urban dictionary, funny shit:

As his happy cries subsided, the sweet sticky santorum began dribbling from his distended asshole like melted mocha frappuccino. He told me that he loved me. It was only then that I realized the man I'd sodomized in a Pittsburgh bathouse was noe other than Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA). I felt dirty.

We like doing it in the bathtub so we can just wash away the santorum afterward.

Baby, we got santorum all over the sheets again....

"As she pounded her gaping asshole with the dildo, some SANTORUM leaked out, and so the director demanded a scene re-shoot."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

Where were all so true Christians when the Repugs were lying the country into Iraq?

Where are they now not insisting that America quit murdering people in 70 countries and not insisting that two bogus, botched wars be ended?

---

Some are. In fact, based on the numbers, MOST of the people opposed to the wars are probably Christian.

Not sure what 70 countries you are referring to. Your software acting up again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by George Gervin's Afro

And you red teamers think these fools are going to win the moderates and independents?

why is it all about sex with the conservatives? sex,sex,sex...

---

Do you want someone to be a fool and lie about their ideas for votes, or do you want their true beliefs?

I think when most people take a hard look for who they vote for, those who aren't a partisan like you, vote quite a bit for integrity,

"lie about their ideas for votes"

lying is all politicians and corporations do. They'll tell any lie to hide their crimes and serve their own interests (get elected, get bribes, make profits).

You really think Jimmy Ricky really lives all this bullshit Christ-talks he spews to the bubbas and dominionist Taleban?

You Republicans must be real proud of yourself over these last 3 debates.

If only I were younger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Do you want someone to be a fool and lie about their ideas for votes, or do you want their true beliefs?

I think when most people take a hard look for who they vote for, those who aren't a partisan like you, vote quite a bit for integrity,

---

Stop your lying. You don't give a shit about anything other than the "R" next to their name.

Seriously no one chastised the people who booed?

And someone needs to tell Santorum the social experiment is over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Seriously no one chastised the people who booed?

And someone needs to tell Santorum the social experiment is over.

---

None of the candidates, no.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DMX7

Stop your lying. You don't give a shit about anything other than the "R" next to their name.

---

I would prefer a "L", but dimply not accept any of the "D" who have run. That effectively only leaves the "R".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

Seriously no one chastised the people who booed?

---

Why would they when there is no political gain in doing so. I've never heard a democratic candidate take on the crazies on the left during a primary run. It would be politically dumb to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

And someone needs to tell Santorum the social experiment is over.

---

No need to tell him anything, he's irrelevant.

Was it a boo?

One voice sounded like a "no" to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Was it a boo?

One voice sounded like a "no" to me.

---

maybe they spotted a spook.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Why would they when there is no political gain in doing so. I've never heard a democratic candidate take on the crazies on the left during a primary run. It would be politically dumb to do so.

---

It could easily be done to cater to militarism and jingoism in the audience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cheguevara

Zero applause. Plenty of boos.

---

I hear the opposite. Plenty of applause and no boos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

maybe they spotted a spook.

---

Listen carefully.

I hear two voices. One is a clear "no." The other sounds like support of what the soldier says.

Plug some good headphones in, instead of listening through your computer speakers.

um, everyone, fox news, ari fleischer, cnn, everyone is chastising those in the crowd for booing that soldier. Additionally everyone is pretty pissed that no one had the spine to stand up and tell those people to stfu.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

um, everyone, fox news, ari fleischer, cnn, everyone is chastising those in the crowd for booing that soldier.

---

yah...but.....we're they wearing headphones.....really good ones...or just listening to their computer speakers?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drachen

um, everyone, fox news, ari fleischer, cnn, everyone is chastising those in the crowd for booing that soldier. Additionally everyone is pretty pissed that no one had the spine to stand up and tell those people to stfu.

---

Why do people continue to believe the OP instead of listening for yourself?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Why do people continue to believe the OP instead of listening for yourself?

---

You think news organizations are using SpursTalk as a source?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Why do people continue to believe the OP instead of listening for yourself?

---

I watched the debate in its entirety on a TV last night. I heard it for myself then. I was mad about it then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

You think news organizations are using SpursTalk as a source?

---

When on the receiving end of it, your posting style can suck. Reading as a third party, however, sometimes is funny as shit.

This would be one of those times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scott

My opinion is that it is completely fair to say the people booing were a fringe, extreme minority of the people there.

My concern is that these kind of expressions are left unchecked and it becomes acceptable behavior. I don't mean we need to outlaw booing gays in the military, which is protected speech. But the freedom of speech also includes the freedom of your dumb ass to be ridiculed when you say some stupid shit. That "check" is missing from a lot of these examples at the Republican debates (just as its missing from examples all over the country from liberals and conservatives alike).

We probably have fringe extremists at the 10% tails of both sides, leaving the rest of the 80% of America who operate on varying degrees of reasonableness. However, maybe there is the next 10-20% next to the tails whose views aren't THAT different, and could be persuaded. That is where the unchecked message does the most damage.

The best analogy I can think of:

If no one says anything to the bully on the playground picking on the small kid, then a lot of people are going to think that bully is "cool". But if a large group of students stands up, calls out, and denounces the bully - then his actions are no longer "cool".

For better or worse (usually worse), society relies on peer pressure over an actual set of hard ethics to determine how we feel about things, and that is the danger of these sorts of things (which is why I feel a personal obligation to call out boutons and Wild Cobra at every opportunity, because they are the internet equivalent).

---

This.

Ultimately, people have a right to be hateful and ignorant. I was more bothered by the fact no one attempted to shut the crowd up after disrespecting the troops they've been telling us to support for all these years.

That, and I was amused to pieces at watching the gears creak around in Santorum's head as he tried to figure out how to reconcile reinstating DADT without kicking folks who have now asked and told out of the service.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by clambake

yah...but.....we're they wearing headphones.....really good ones...or just listening to their computer speakers?

---

Computer speakers.

And they probably couldn't see the secret hand signals, either, because they don't have high resolution monitors and special eyes.

Good thing no one in the crowd yelled "Let's take the sons of bitches out!", the fake outrage from the left would be unbearable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

So, according to Santorum, heterosexual members would not be able to "out" themselves either, to make it fair. So no dating, marriage, having children, etc etc...

That sounds like it would work.

---

His answer was just so blatantly dishonest. This kind of shit just infuriates me and its pointless because there's nothing I can do about it. I get so angry when any politician sits up there and flat out says something they know is not true. They basically think I'm too stupid to recognize what they're doing and I just find that infuriating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Good thing no one in the crowd yelled "Let's take the sons of bitches out!", the fake outrage from the left would be unbearable.

---

Fake outrage? No, there is no fake outrage at all. There is real outrage at the idiocy of booing the man and outrage at the stupid comments that ensued.

Not sure why you would think there was any fake outrage when whats there is pretty damn offensive, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

I hear the opposite. Plenty of applause and no boos.

---

What
The
Fuck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Fake outrage? No, there is no fake outrage at all. There is real outrage at the idiocy of booing the man and outrage at the stupid comments that ensued.

---

:lol My mistake, of course it's real for you. I forgot that outrage is only fake when it's the other side that's outraged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

:lol My mistake, of course it's real for you. I forgot that outrage is only fake when it's the other side that's outraged.

---

I'm a bit confused. Was the outrage on your side real when Hoffa said to take out Republicans through the electoral process?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

I'm a bit confused. Was the outrage on your side real when Hoffa said to take out Republicans through the electoral process?

---

No it was fake imo, just as this "outrage" is.

LOL at you changing what Hoffa said.

Conclusion: Never believe what you hear through your computer/TV speakers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

:lol My mistake, of course it's real for you. I forgot that outrage is only fake when it's the other side that's outraged.

---

You should point to specifics where I complain about legit outrage being fake?

Do you think what happened is OK?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

No it was fake imo, just as this "outrage" is.

LOL at you changing what Hoffa said.

---

You're not outraged at people booing a solider serving simply because he's gay and you're not outraged at a politician lying to you like you're an idiot?

Is there a different clip than that youtube in post #10?

I hear no booing in it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

No it was fake imo, just as this "outrage" is.

LOL at you changing what Hoffa said.

---

"Everybody here has a vote. If we go back and we keep the eye on the prize, let's take these son of a bitches [sic] out and give America back to America where we belong."

What do you think he said?

It was a turrble speech but if he was advocating actual violence in that quote, I didn't see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Is there a different clip than that youtube in post #10?

I hear no booing in it.

---

With speakers or headphones?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Is there a different clip than that youtube in post #10?

I hear no booing in it.

---

You realize, I'm sure, that once you plug the headphones into your computer you are supposed to then place them in or on your ears. Right?

Another thing is we don't know if those who were booing were booing the policy or the soldier. You can still have great respect for gay servicemen and women if you support DADT.

That may have been why none of the candidates said anything. They may have just assumed the policy was the issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 101A

To clarify:

After the normal service, our pastor asked us to stick around - that he had something to say beyond the day's sermon.

He started by saying, "The debt crisis is not the Democrat's fault" - to which there was a quiet rustling, as it IS a largely Republican congregation.

Then he said, "The debt crisis in not the Republican's fault". (Not so much rustling)

"The debt crisis can be laid right at the foot of the cross."

He then explained that the church had failed society to such an extent - in educating, in feeding the poor, in providing guidance and good works that we are, essentially, reaping what we have sown. He then went on to illustrate his point by talking about Westboro Baptist Church, and explaining that we, obviously, should not only not support that kind of distortion of Christianity, but that we ought to stand between haters and homosexuals, and say, "you only get to them if you go through me". "Hate the sin, love the sinner", etc... to which there was applause.

Hope that explains the context.

---

What a neat thing for a pastor to do. I applaud his courage...and I think he is right.

Thanks for sharing. It gives me hope in some church somewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mingus

Another thing is we don't know if those who were booing were booing the policy or the soldier. You can still have great respect for gay servicemen and women if you support DADT.

That may have been why none of the candidates said anything. They may have just assumed the policy was the issue.

---

WTF? No, you can't?

Can you explain that logic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Do you think what happened is OK?

---

See my post before this thread was even started
http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/show...99#post5416599

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

You're not outraged at people booing a solider serving simply because he's gay

---

It's not clear if the maybe 5 people who did it were booing him personally for being gay or booing the repeal of DADT. If it was the former then they are idiots, if it was the latter then they are just wrong. In either case, no I'm not outraged and I don't believe you are truly outraged either.

Quote:

---

and you're not outraged at a politician lying to you like you're an idiot?

---

Why are you bringing Obama into this?

Why don't you believe I'm outraged? I just told you I was outraged. You think I'm lying?

If you thought it was fucked up sounds like you were outraged too.

Wait, I mean I guess you were fake outraged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

"Everybody here has a vote. If we go back and we keep the eye on the prize, let's take these son of a bitches [sic] out and give America back to America where we belong."

What do you think he said?

It was a turrble speech but if he was advocating actual violence in that quote, I didn't see it.

---

I think now you have accurately posted what he said. I never said I thought he was advocating actual violence. I don't even think it was a terrible speech. I guess my larger point is that I think it is ridiculous that we now have both sides trying to make mountains out of molehills. There is nothing wrong with what Hoffa said, there is nothing wrong with Palin "targeting" certain democrats for defeat. I don't believe the idea that this type of language will lead to otherwise sane people to commiting violence. Or Scott's assertion that somehow because the few people that booed weren't immediately chastised that it may lead to larger consequences. All of it is a non issue to me and I don't believe any of those who claim "outrage" over those things. Yes, the few who booed are assholes but it's nothing more than a few assholes being assholes.

I plugged in my headphones, good ones, but all I heard was devil music.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

Why don't you believe I'm outraged? I just told you I was outraged. You think I'm lying?

---

Yes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

If you thought it was fucked up sounds like you were outraged too.

---

No it's just fucked up for them to boo him. I wasn't outraged though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Yes

---

You're welcome to believe as you wish but you can go fuck yourself for calling me a liar. I don't think highly enough of your opinion to warrant lying to sway it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Listen carefully.

I hear two voices. One is a clear "no." The other sounds like support of what the soldier says.

Plug some good headphones in, instead of listening through your computer speakers.

---

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao I gotta visit the Political Forum more often. This is fucking hilarious :lmao :lmao :lmao The gay soldier getting booed by a bunch of ignorant redneck faggots couldn't be any more crystal fucking clear on any set of speakers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MannyIsGod

You're welcome to believe as you wish but you can go fuck yourself for calling me a liar. I don't think highly enough of your opinion to warrant lying to sway it.

---

Outraged again huh? :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Monostradamus

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao I gotta visit the Political Forum more often. This is fucking hilarious :lmao :lmao :lmao The gay soldier getting booed by a bunch of ignorant redneck faggots couldn't be any more crystal fucking clear on any set of speakers.

---

WC really is an incredible case study into the mind of a dulusional Tea Bagger. He's helped me understand how sad people like him are. Didn't hear booing, lol??? You got to be fucking kidding me. :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Listen carefully.

I hear two voices. One is a clear "no." The other sounds like support of what the soldier says.

Plug some good headphones in, instead of listening through your computer speakers.

---

:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao :lmao

:lmao

Wow, I've seen some pretty pathetic excuses for people booing, but this is the first time I've seen anyone deny outright that there was booing.

A new bar has been set.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurminator

:lmao

Wow, I've seen some pretty pathetic excuses for people booing, but this is the first time I've seen anyone deny outright that there was booing.

A new bar has been set.

---

Listen carefully. The first voice is ending in an "oooh" sound, not a "uuuh" sound. The second sounds more like an sound of being ecstatic. What about all the cheering and applause when he starts discussing the role of the military, and at the end?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurminator

:lmao

Wow, I've seen some pretty pathetic excuses for people booing, but this is the first time I've seen anyone deny outright that there was booing.

A new bar has been set.

---

I actually think Newt Gingrich got the "biggest boos in the GOP debate" when he was introduced.

I was watching the debate and I've watched the video. There were a couple of boos but, that loud Son of Bitch screamed "Noooooo!" like someone had pour ice water down his back.

It was a sad display but nothing compared to Rick Santorum's pathetic answer.