Skip to comments.The Worst Fox News-Google Debate Moment: Audience Boos a Gay Soldier
Posted on 09/23/2011 12:19:04 AM PDT by lbryce
The last three GOP presidential primary debates have been nearly as notable for the actions of audience-members as for the candidates who appeared before them.
In California at the MSNBC-Politico debate at the Reagan library, the audience applauded mention of the high number of executions in Texas and Rick Perry's defense of the death penalty. "If you come into our state and you kill one of our children, you kill a police officer, you're involved with another crime and you kill one of our citizens, you will face the ultimate justice in the state of Texas, and that is that you will be executed," the Texas governor said to hoots, whistles, and applause.
In Tampa, Fla., at the CNN-Tea Party Express debate, the audience cheered the idea of letting an uninsured 30-year-old man die (video) without care, greeting the idea with applause and shouts of "Yeah!"
And last night, at the Fox News-Google debate in Orlando, Fla., some audience-members booed a recently-out gay soldier stationed in Iraq who submitted a question through Google's YouTube video-sharing site. His offense? Asking the candidates if they would circumvent the progress made for gays and lesbians in the military.
Watch the interaction with Stephen Hill:
"Any type of sexual activity has no place in the military," former senator Rick Santorum told Hill, saying that the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban on out service constituted "special privileges" and "social experimentation."
The audience response led former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer to tweet, "Booing a soldier serving our nation is uncalled for. If I were on stage, I would make that point."
But he wasn't on the stage, and none standing there spoke up on Hill's behalf.
(Excerpt) Read more at theatlantic.com ...
You nailed it, that is exactly what it seems like.
Why don’t these “journalists” ask the people that supposedly Boo why they did... why are they blaming the GOP Audience? Oh, never mind..
Would that be ari the “poofter” fleischer?
In your post you’ve discussed those subjects more than he did by asking a policy question.
I just don’t get the freaking out. And if you can’t see the difference between pedophilia and two consenting adults doing whatever gross thing they feel like doing together, I don’t know what to say.
Why don’t you petition for him to be tossed out of the military? Does it bother you that gays have served and died to protect your life and liberties? How about non-gays who’ve done things you and I wouldn’t approve of—not every person who serves in the military shares your values.
I don’t get people who freak out over these people anymore than I get what these people are into. Plenty of folks around here probably do things in their own homes I would object to. I couldn’t care less what consenting adults do, even if I find it disgusting. All I ask is that they mind their own business and keep out of mine, and as long as they are not hurting anyone but themselves, it’s none of my business, or yours, frankly.
Just asking a question about a real policy isn’t the end of the world. It sure won’t stop me from voting for representatives who oppose that policy. And I’m just not getting where people get all this anger about something I never think about...until I read your post.
Please by all means, leave again.
If they kept it private, as you say, how do we know that any gay men “bravely served the United States in every war since the Revolution”? We don’t “know” anything of the sort. We can only guess that some may have. Try not to repeat the mantra of the left.
Why wasnt Stephen identified by his rank?
I didnt hear the booing, because as soon as the video was over I wondered aloud to my wife why the service members rank was not given.
In every case I can think of where a service member is on the news media, they are identified by their rank, even after their ETS.
This stood out to me
I wondered the same, I also wondered why he first sent in a video with his face hidden, then uncovered after the repeal. (as MK made sure to dramatically tell everyone)
Everyone knew DADT was to be repealed, he never needed to cover his face (he could have stipulated if the DADT repeal was somehow blocked, just go with sound or blur his face)
He had on his Iraq tee, he said he had to lie before being deployed to Iraq for fear of losing his job—does that mean somebody broke the DADT law in asking him? Was he suspected?
I just found him suspect or very dramatic.
I disagree. When I was in the army, many soldiers behaved poorly. Further, the left has booed our soldiers for decades for doing their duty, and has had no problem doing a heck of a lot worse to our troops than booing one individual.
How do you know he was a pitcher and not a catcher?
That sentence should be repeated from the mountaintops every day.
He was booed because he’s bringing his sexual choices into the military. To hell with Fleischer.
You keep on saying how you do not care if a soldier is openly homosexual in order to put down others who do very well care.
So if a soldier is openly making it known that he sex with animals are you also alright with that?
Or if a soldier openly admits that he is a pedophile? Do you still not care?
This soldier got booed for being a pervert and deserved such. He should not be serving this nation if he is a pervert so he deserves no additional respect for doing so.
oops, ARMY tee not Iraq
So then you feel the same way about pedophiles?
BS! This soldier is a pervert and deserved to be booed.
The only bad thing was that it was only 3 or 4 people that had the courage to boo. People are so afraid to speak the truth. A Republican debate...full of Republicans.... where people boo or cheer the positions they hear...and only 3 or 4 boo this pervert? A sad day indeed.
If he had asked why he can’t have sex with animals on a military base are we also supposed to respect him as a soldier?
I’m not all right with the perverted things you and others think up—who sits around thinking about such gross stuff? Not me. If you say it’s homosexuals, you sure seem to think about what they think about a lot.
If you can’t see the difference between sex with an animal, and sex with a consenting fellow adult, I don’t know what your definition of ‘conservative’ means.
Let me be clear about this, since you folks can’t seem to understand no matter how many times I type it—I’m not condoning anything they or you or anyone else does with a fellow consenting adult because I DO NOT CARE what any two adults do in their own lives. And the reason I do not care is because that’s the conservative way—the government and the rest of us should not be so interested in what CONSENTING ADULT CITIZENS are doing with each other.
This means there are countless people out there doing stuff I wouldn’t do, don’t believe in, and don’t care for.
And so what?
It’s completely different from using the public schools to prosletyze—I’m against that. It’s completely different from giving gays special rights—I’m against that.
But as a conservative, I have NO RIGHT and I certainly don’t give a damn what people do with their own lives.
I can’t figure out what supposed conservatives are so fixated on these subjects—the issue at hand is about a serving military members asking a policy question. That’s it.
What’s funny is how folks here are cheerleading this silly booing, like they’re at a sporting event, when we’re trying to present a reasonable ADULT alternative to the childish left.
Instead we have handed the libs a golden soundbite—conservatives booing the military.
You and others can say over and over and over “We’re not booing his service!” but you simply aren’t grasping the reality.
And please, spare me this: “You keep on saying how you do not care if a soldier is openly homosexual in order to put down others who do very well care.”
Expressing MY point of view isn’t in itself putting down someone who has another point of view. If you think anyone merely having a different position from yours is a put-down, you really need to get over yourself. The world doesn’t revolve around you, and I don’t express my opinion to put anyone else down, merely to express my opinion. If one needs to play victim, that’s the weakest case ever—that someone else doesn’t agree with you. Boo flippin hoo.
Booing his sodomy and the forcing of his sin upon me is correct
Those “faggot soldiers” have chosen to put themselves in harms way for you, your family, and friends.
How is he 'forcing his sin on' you, unless you're hanging around people like that? Good God, the need to pose as the put-upon is positively liberal. No lib gay has ever 'foced his sin' on me--that's disgusting.
I officially give up on this thread. If you think that momentary feel-good of booing a military man is worth the gift of that clip, enjoy.
If we can't think of the larger picture when we want our emotional outbursts above all else, we've already lost the next election--and the gay lobby has already won.
He is the one who said that being gay is *who he is.*
Santorum did a great job. This is social experimentation and shouldn’t be turned into a political game show question.
You are probably gay but I will say this anyway: frankly, I don't give crap about queer soldiers they can GTH. The only reason why this DADT repeal is flying is that the economy is so bad. As soon (if ever) the economy picks up the volunteer military is finished.
You one of those 'Log Cabin' republicans?
Two consenting adults do NOT have God's permisssion to do anything they please.
Your lack of clarity on this is telling
Forcing the acceptance of sodomy on America is what is happening
Are DRUNKS insisting we accept drunkeness?
Are pedophiles demanding we accept their pedophilia?
Why is one of those true?
And which one is connected to the homo soldier?
Why are homos demanding we accept their homo-ness?
The laws that are being forcedupon people are not just, Holy laws, they are laws that insist we accept the sin of men, that we accept what God has always called sin.
We need to accept the drug addict
we need to accept the drunk
we need to accept the pedophile
we need to accept the racism of some
we need to accept the false religion that orders it’s adherants to kill Christians and Jews
people like you who refuse to say STOP except against laws that tell you to behave...
You MUST be a ron paul fan
We pay their salaries, Every sailor, soldier, airman and/or marine is a representative of our country. The faggot soldier give the wrong impression, that we are weak and effeminate and not serious like the Europeans. It's dangerous. You are dangerous and are probably gay to boot. Heck maybe that was you in the youtube.
If that's true, why is your entire post a lie?
I said none of the things you accuse me of.
It's telling that you can't have a discussion based on an opposing opinion. So you just make stuff up.
Since you can't argue my actual position but have to simply bring in all sorts of off-topic stuff as a diversion from your inability to respond to my actual points, you are dismissed.
Minding ones own business doesn't usually include announcing a sexual preference, that is asking for a reaction, either of acceptance, rejection, or silence (silence, that's odd, eh--reverse DADT, but they are allowed to break the DA part).
It can be hurtful to the one being addressed, because now you will be forced to hold your opinion, of something that may be highly immoral to you, and if opinion is spoken of non-acceptence--judgement will be rendered--GUILTY-- non-pc homophobe hate crime.
Held up by the media as terrible evil(like this article in several papers, for example) or the military guy who has a negative opinion of homosexuals losing his job if he isn't silent
Just asking a question about a real policy isnt the end of the world.
If a question is asked for the sole reason of an answer--there is no need to declare sexual preference. Just as Santorum stated. The man expected preferential treatment and I highly suspect he wanted to get a reaction. That is not pure of heart and only seeking an answer.
Will Christian beliefs be as protected as sexual preference?
I think Dark wolf plays for the other team.
So your point is exactly the same as the point made by the left-wing over and over again....
As long as it is ‘two consenting adults’ then what is wrong with it?
BS. First off you completetly ignore the fact that the term ‘two consenting adults’ needs to be defined and that your entire homosexual rights movement attacks allowing the people to have representation in order to define such things.
Secondly, if you think that ‘two consenting adults’ is such a sacred criteria for respecting any type of perverted sex act the why not ‘three consenting adults’ or how about four or five?
And sorry if I do not want to make special allowances for the perversion of homosexuality the way you want to. I do not care to see much of a difference between those who promote homosexuality or those who promote pedophelia or any other type of perversion. THEY ARE ATTACKING OUR SCHOOLS WITH THIS PERVERSION AGENDA.
I must have missed all the oppression of Christian belief in this country of 80%+ Christians.
Where did all this victim stuff come from? Talk about lefty infiltration.
I have said over and over I do NOT want that, but I've now learned my lesson--you are another of those so scared of true conservative ideas that you can't engage on actual points made, so you just make stuff up.
You can't handle honest discussion, so you smear--just like the left.
I've repeatedly said the homosexuals MUST be stopped if they try to push their stuff in the schools, and MUST be prevented from gaining special rights.
But you can't handle that someone isn't afraid of them as you are, but who simply thinks "What you do isn't my business, but when you try to foist it on the rest of us--THEN it's a problem."
All as a diversion from the real issue--that this clip is solid gold for the left.
Obama thanks you and your scared kind, who can't see the REAL threat from the homosexual lobby.
Calling someone gay is a smear? au contraire it is perfectly acceptable now right? They should be boo'ed because it is "normal" now right?
Tell us are you gay or not? A simple yes or no will do.
Point missed! There is (or should be) only one kind of soldier...a soldier plain and simple. Anyone who identifies themselves as a ____-Soldier isnt much of a soldier and should be shown the door/released from service. It is a dangerous and destructive distraction from the work at hand (killing our enemy and breaking their stuff). I am living this hell. I have been in service with the Marines for 24 years and am demoralized by the actions of this administration. It should be a non-issue, but because of soldiers like this and other activists on the “inside” it isnt.
I must have missed all the oppression of Christian belief in this country of 80%+ Christians.
Where did all this victim stuff come from? Talk about lefty infiltration
Whoa—I didn’t claim victim. I asked a valid question.
Clearly, “The Atlantic” cares more about political correctness than America’s security.
I have the message from the top and they deleted all the references to homosexual conduct from all the manuals. They also deleted stuff about bisexuality etc from all the manuals. I can’t post it here but any one in uniform can verify.
Last try: What does that have to do with anything? I said they "won" a victory by having this video to show over and over, and you know Maddow and that bunch WILL.
FACT-the gay issue is only potent in the media. The rest of the country is sick of it and wants it to go away.
Good God, we agree on something, even if you don't know it.
People seem to forget how gay marriage was a stealth issue in the 2004 campaign. It won't be this time around because it's not on the front burner. But that's why THIS sort of thing is just what the gay lobby wants.
We can’t say homosexual anymore. That would land you in the EO office. The correct term is gay.
Tell us are you gay or not? A simple yes or no will do.
Darkwolf isn’t gay [s]he has stated [s]he doesn’t approve of it, but wishes for a more live and let live.
If Palin’s running, as her drones assert, it is *convenient* she doesn’t (yet) have to participate in these debates and actually answer questions. Her response to this would be priceless. I’ll bet we won’t see any tweets or Facebook posts from her in regard to this. Better safe than sorry, eh Sarah?
Are you gay?
Are you gay?
No, are you? hahaha! :p
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.