Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Log Cabin Republicans... Infiltrators with a mission
World Net Daily ^ | 5/2/03 | WND

Posted on 05/03/2003 7:56:12 PM PDT by Paloma_55

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-89 last
To: Mr. Mojo
BTTT
51 posted on 05/04/2003 8:01:09 AM PDT by GrandMoM ("Vengeance is Mine , I will repay," says the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: E Rocc
Is there a reason you are posting that on a thread about gay Republicans?

Yes, I seen that you're a Brown's fan & decided to go off-topic with a little levity.

52 posted on 05/04/2003 8:36:38 AM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Sister_T
Then the Casey family and other conservative Democrats like former Congressman Phelps needs to start a movement to bring back faith and family back to the Democratic Party. It will be just as difficult as the "big tent" republicans quest to broaden the party.
53 posted on 05/04/2003 9:00:19 AM PDT by Munson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RepublicanChick; hank377
I feel it is necessary to give my support to gay Republicans.

Well one has to ask oneself, is it worth that 3% of the vote to sell one's soul...

I have no delusions about the GOP being pure as the driven snow. I am also not under the delusion that every single homosexual is a pink-feather-boa-toting flamer out on the street corners in fishnet hose trying to seduce little boys every weekend. I am also libertarian enough to believe that it's none of the govt's durn business what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own domicile, and folks should do whatever floats their boat as long as they don't bother me or cost me money.

That being said: how can an honorable Republican justify an alliance with those vocal members of a group whose whole shtick derives from something as base and animal as what appendage goes in whose orifice?

Think about it-- defining yourself first and foremost by your sexuality. The gods meant higher things for us than that.

I am an American first, a scientist second, and unsolicited questions about my sexual orientation will be met with pugilism.

54 posted on 05/04/2003 9:25:12 AM PDT by maxwell (Well I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
What do we need 3% of the population for, when they have proven that they are immoral, they are perverted, they will lie, cheat and deceive to obtain their objectives.

Pretty good description of the paleocons.

55 posted on 05/04/2003 9:30:34 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine (if it has walked, talked and quacked like a duck for 25 years, it is a duck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
I am a Bible-believing Christian first, and a Conservative Republican second. I came to the GOP because they strongly support conservative values and family. If our party's goal of "inclusion" means condoning sin, then I want no part of it. I see it this way- what does it profit a man to gain a few votes but loose his soul? I don't claim to be without sin, none of us are. However, I believe that so many of our society's problems stem from NOT discouraging sin. I do not advocate gay-bashing in any form, but neither do I think we should be supporting the Gay & Lesbian agenda.
56 posted on 05/04/2003 10:49:58 AM PDT by Ferret Fawcet (A wise man's heart inclines him toward the Right, but a fool's heart...to the Left ~ Ecc 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Byron_the_Aussie
I am not suggesting that we should kick out homosexuals. I would say "get rid of the liberals from the party". Most of the Log Cabin Republicans are liberal. They organize on the fact that they like anal sex.

If someone is a Republican, supports Republican values, recognizes that the Republican Party is based upon conservatism (social and economic) and they are willing to play within that paradigm, fine.

I have met so freakin many LCRs who are LIBERAL, but claim to be moderates. Their thought is that if they support government funded abortion, gay marriage, etc... but they want tax cuts, that makes them moderate. No. It makes them libertarian.. which is essentially liberal on social issues.
57 posted on 05/04/2003 12:23:59 PM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: E Rocc
First off, when I mentioned 3%, that is total number of homosexuals. When you look at the LCR, they represent a fraction of a percent of the Republican party at best.

Second, they are DESTRUCTIVE to the party. They oppose basic platform elements.

Third, the fact that they reject social norms and morality has demonstrated to me over the years that they will lie, cheat, and do whatever they think helps meet their objective. In this case, undermining of the Republican Party.

Why do these people organize upon the fact that they are queers?

What if there was an "Adultering Republicans" group? Should we endorse them? Gather them in? I hate to say it, but such a group would likely have more numbers than the LCR. I would say that anyone who wanted to organize on the fact they are adulterers should also be banned.
58 posted on 05/04/2003 12:28:50 PM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: hank377
I am glad you are in the Republican Party but if you are truely in the conservative movement you will support Sen. Santorum's position that consensual sex between adults is not a Constiutional right.
59 posted on 05/04/2003 12:57:58 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hank377
"how can you prevent me or anyone from entering into a contract with another sentient adult? "

Contracts for sex are against public policy. Marriage exists, in part, to deal with issues such as children and what happens on the death of their parents. Same sex perversions are incapable of creating life, therefore they have no need for those governmental protections.
60 posted on 05/04/2003 1:02:11 PM PDT by narses (Christe Eleison)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ferret Fawcet
If our party's goal of "inclusion" means condoning sin, then I want no part of it.
The point is there is a significant difference between condoning "sin" and banning it by law. While any consistent libertarian or conservative would oppose the LCRs if they are agitating for special rights, the views of some that private and personal matters are indeed government's business makes it clear that they have legitimate reasons to organize and lobby.

-Eric

61 posted on 05/05/2003 5:18:07 AM PDT by E Rocc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
Second, they are DESTRUCTIVE to the party. They oppose basic platform elements.
So did Barry Goldwater when the platform was under control of the Eastern Establishment Republicans. For that matter so did Ronald Reagan, whenever the platforms reverted to them post-Goldwater. They moved for change within the party, and today we call those people RINOs.

As the LCRs seem to generally agree with the party's goals (minimal government intrusion in the economy, strong defense, etc..), I see no reason to write them out of the party over matters that are none of government's business, anyway.

-Eric

62 posted on 05/05/2003 5:23:19 AM PDT by E Rocc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
You're forgetting the critical role played in the Simon fiasco by so-called "pro-family organizations."

Instead of finding out what the situation actually was, they simply stepped into attack.

63 posted on 05/05/2003 5:25:31 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
You're forgetting the critical role played in the Simon fiasco by so-called "pro-family organizations." Instead of finding out what the situation actually was, they simply stepped into attack.

And of course... That was the plan.

That's like blaming the fire department for rushing to a fire. Be fair! That release came from Simon's office. It took Simon about a week to get the facts out, that he did not author the document. He was wrestling with the PR side of denying it... The media was waiting with bated breath to put out the headline "Simon, the homophobe, denies survey!".

He was put into a lose-lose situation by a LCR posing as a Republican.
64 posted on 05/05/2003 6:34:05 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
That's like blaming the fire department for rushing to a fire.

No, it's like blaming a Marine for opening fire on his buddies without engaging in any of the due diligence expected of someone employing deadly force.

Be fair! That release came from Simon's office. It took Simon about a week to get the facts out, that he did not author the document.

The "pro-family" groups, as they always do in California, used it as an excuse to clobber the Republican candidate and then endorse some third-party goofball with zero chance of winning.

They've done this before, and they've done it with the declared goal of getting pro-abort and pro-gay-marriage Democrats elected. The "pro-family" groups are NOT our friends out here, and until they start ACTING like friends, they should be treated as presumptive enemies.

65 posted on 05/05/2003 8:25:09 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah; Grampa Dave; Chancellor Palpatine
If some of these groups on certain issues did NOT exist, the Dems woul dinvent them so as to smear the GOP with the usual claptrap.
66 posted on 05/05/2003 8:29:57 AM PDT by hchutch (America came, America saw, America liberated; as for those who hate us, Oderint dum Metuant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
No, it's like blaming a Marine for opening fire on his buddies without engaging in any of the due diligence expected of someone employing deadly force.
Let's get it straight... Its like the infantry launching a strike to coordinates that were given it over the radio... by the authorized director of coordinates... only to find out those coordinates were directed at headquarters.

You seem to believe that the guy who did the dirty deed is innocent, while those who reacted to his action are somehow guilty.

The pro-family members of the Republican Party were upset to see Simon's Campaign Headquarters put out that release. It took a week to find out that Simon had nothing to do with the release. Simon was put in a tight spot. He couldn't immediately come out and deny the survey because the homos in the media were set to pounce on him.
He had to figure out how to address what happened. Either way, he was screwed. He either alienated his conservative base, or he admitted to incompetency in operating a campaign by allowing such idiots into the headquarters.
Face it, the big mistake was taking Riordan's people in... attempting to be big tent... and letting ANY Log Cabin types into his campaign.
You are amazing... blaming conservatives for overreacting to an act of sabotage...and ignoring the act itself.
67 posted on 05/06/2003 5:47:20 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: hank377
"two sentient adults?"

Does that mean you're free to marry your sister?

Slippery slope indeed.

68 posted on 05/06/2003 5:52:59 AM PDT by bribriagain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
Let's get it straight... Its like the infantry launching a strike to coordinates that were given it over the radio... by the authorized director of coordinates... only to find out those coordinates were directed at headquarters.

Wrong. The speed with which the "pro-family" groups moved on this implies that either (a) they really do not engage brain before opening mouth, or (b) they knew this was coming, and did nothing to warn Simon, because said warning would interfere with their agenda.

From my experience with one of these groups, I'm inclined to believe the latter.

The pro-family members of the Republican Party were upset to see Simon's Campaign Headquarters put out that release.

No, they weren't upset.

They were f***ing ecstatic, because it gave them an excuse to engage in vote-splitting rhetoric.

I'm more familiar with those a$$holes than you are--they DELIBERATELY plotted to get a tax-and-spend, pro-gay-marriage, pro-abort extremist elected in place of a fiscal conservative who didn't support state-funded abortion (or, for that matter, any state-funded non-emergency medical care).

And the damndest things always seem to happen when these "pro-family" groups are treated as friends by campaign managers. Internal campaign documents usually have a habit of turning up in Democrat hands, usually right after the "pro-family" group publicly flips to the zero-chance third-party fruitcake.

69 posted on 05/06/2003 5:56:38 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: hank377
Hanks, Sorry, I missed your post earlier.

You seem to think that morality and religion are linked, and since we have a "separation of church and state"... clearly, you are also not a constitutionalist... morality has no place in the Republican Party.
BZZZZT!!

Wrong! Morality is central to our social fabric. Families are based on a set of moral constraints that have held the test of time. Society defines morality, not me, not you.

You choose to defy social order and engage in behavior that is immoral.

Fine!
But don't expect me or the Republican Party to accept your behavior.
You say we are all guaranteed equal protection and somehow think that means you should be able to butt-bang someone without any repercussions?? Do we have equal protection for drunks? How about for drug users? How about for someone who openly admits that they get off on nude little kids...don't touch them..just get off seeing them?? Where is the line in your world? WHO ARE YOU to define morality as you see fit and tell society to go to hell??
The Republican Party owes you NOTHING and I am doing everything I can to make sure that you guys get exactly that!
If you want to butt-bang in private, fine... nothing I can do about it... but don't hold your breath thinking that the world will accept you as normal when you have a mental defect.
70 posted on 05/06/2003 5:59:40 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Sorry. I was there. I am engaged with the Republican Party central committee in a California County. When I saw the article come out, my first reaction was to state to the rest of our committee that Simon had better get a reaction out very quickly to refute that statement, or I was going to withdraw my support for him and work on other candidate's campaigns. Most of the activists in our County agreed with me.

For days, we waited for Simon to make a statement. His campaign took close to a week to refute the article. That week took a lot of wind out of his sails. We were very glad when the story finally came out because we WANTED to believe the guy, but we could not believe how long it took to do so.

Later, as the truth came out, it became apparent that Simon was incompetent to manage a campaign, naive for believing that Riordan's people would actually help him succeed, and a victim of sabotage.

But to blame him... or the conservatives... while letting the actual evil-doer walk... that is ludicrous!

The LCR has only one objective, to undermine the Republican Party and normalize homosexual activity. Face it, they realize that as long as 16 year olds think homosexuality is wrong... they have a LOT more work to bring kids into their fold. Once they get it normalized, they can solicit the kids with much more ease...
71 posted on 05/06/2003 6:11:33 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
Sorry. I was there. I am engaged with the Republican Party central committee in a California County. When I saw the article come out, my first reaction was to state to the rest of our committee that Simon had better get a reaction out very quickly to refute that statement, or I was going to withdraw my support for him and work on other candidate's campaigns. Most of the activists in our County agreed with me.

It's people like you that should be run out of the party. You are known by what you DO, not what you SAY.

And in a critical moment, you proceeded to backstab Simon.

You demand all manner of things, and then you split off when things do not go perfectly.

I saw how fast the usual suspects jumped on this down here in San Diego--hell, I hadn't seen the Drudge Report of the flap before I heard about their reaction. They had advanced notice--and they did nothing to help Simon prior to this coming out.

But to blame him... or the conservatives... while letting the actual evil-doer walk... that is ludicrous!

No, it's realistic. Can the guy who did it; don't trust the LCR--but be VERY CLEAR on the fact that the "pro-family" groups out there are about as friendly as a nest of vipers.

They may SAY "conservative," but I judge them by their fruits. No pun intended.

72 posted on 05/06/2003 6:17:09 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: hank377
Thanks to the seperation of church and state, religous arguements on the basic immorality of homosexuality are worthless . . . The only problem with the RNC mission statement is it's blatant exclusion of homosexuals as citizens . . . .

As is true for incest, necrophilia, bestiality and other sexual perversions, disgust for and abhorrence of homosexual behavior is deeply rooted in the human psyche. Proscriptions against it are found in virtually all religions, but it transcends religion. Tolerance for homosexual beheavior must be forcibly learned through indoctrination. It does not and will not arise spontaneously.

And your assertion that you have been "excluded" from the RNC mission statment is a steaming pile of horse manure. You are included and have always been included. It is your private sexual perversion that has not been publically celebrated and embraced by the RNC mission statement. You are unwilling to accept equality with all the other men and women in the Republican Party. You want something more. You want them to publically accept your sickness as "good."

Deal with your sickness in private. The Republican Party will accept you and your good efforts on behalf of the Party.

73 posted on 05/06/2003 6:33:06 AM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
You are not making sense at all.

The evil-doer infiltrates a campaign, orders an artillary hit on headquarters itself... then YOU attack the people who helped Simon out of that mess???

Once the air cleared, those "pro-family" folks jumped back on and worked tirelessly to help Simon. We took his apology and worked with him. I met him and he is a really nice guy... not too smart politically... but a nice guy.

Once the liberals secured this state, they started working on the Republican Party to geld it much like the East Coasters have done. We have liberals INSIDE the Republican party and they were going to make sure that a conservative Republican NEVER gets elected... even to the point of sabotage.

You have a very skewed perspective on this to believe that the pro-family element within the Republican party is anything other than the bedrock of the party... it is. We are the foundation.

We worked hard on phone trees, walking precincts, and everything necessary to bring Simon into the governor's office. The "moderates" (many of whom are liberals on social issues and fiscal libertarians) not only failed to deliver, they undermined Simon whenever possible.

They just can't accept having a conservative in the governor's office. They would rather have Davis.
74 posted on 05/06/2003 9:51:52 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
You are not making sense at all.

The evil-doer infiltrates a campaign, orders an artillary hit on headquarters itself... then YOU attack the people who helped Simon out of that mess???

Their "help" consisted of inserting a knife in Simon's back when he was down.

And, mind you, some of these groups went off on Simon so damn fast, and in such an organized fashion, that they HAD to have advance knowledge of the survey--and they did NOTHING to stop it, or to warn Simon that there was a problem brewing.

I judge people by their deeds. The "pro-family conservatives" in this state are really closet liberal extremists--because they do the liberals' dirty work.

Once the air cleared, those "pro-family" folks jumped back on and worked tirelessly to help Simon.

After they made sure that the damage inflicted on Simon was fatal.

We have liberals INSIDE the Republican party and they were going to make sure that a conservative Republican NEVER gets elected... even to the point of sabotage.

The most blatant sabotage I've seen is the Suslov conservatives backstabbing any candidate who doesn't promise to fall on his or her sword when commanded to do so by the Suslovites.

You have a very skewed perspective on this to believe that the pro-family element within the Republican party is anything other than the bedrock of the party... it is. We are the foundation.

I've seen the "pro-family" groups that are not directly affiliaited with the GOP play these games one time too many to stomach them. They've played this game before--they even BRAGGED about playing this game prior to 2002. "I am idiot, hear me roar."

We worked hard on phone trees, walking precincts, and everything necessary to bring Simon into the governor's office.

When the crisis hit, you people cut and run. If I were running the GOP, I'd throw the lot of you out and replace you with real pro-family conservatives, most of whom have been chased out of public life by the Suslovites. Prove that you're really pro-family and really conservative by not back-stabbing the GOP for three or four election cycles, and maybe you can come back in.

The "moderates" (many of whom are liberals on social issues and fiscal libertarians) not only failed to deliver, they undermined Simon whenever possible.

Oh, come on.

The local GOP had to deal with anti-Simon push-polls paid for by "pro-family" groups.

They just can't accept having a conservative in the governor's office. They would rather have Davis.

The Suslov conservatives out here would rather have Davis in office than their anointed candidate...and with five or six conservatives running in a primary, that means you're going to get five or six PO'd Suslovite organizations looking for an opportunity to shove the knife in.

75 posted on 05/06/2003 10:15:36 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
If Simon was not the conservative candidate, who was?
76 posted on 05/06/2003 10:58:48 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
IIRC, there were a couple of fringe GOP players, and some of the "usual suspects" had migrated to the USTP since 1998.
77 posted on 05/06/2003 11:07:55 AM PDT by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
I agree that the Log Cabin Republicans are disgusting and I wish for them to become Democrats but the problem is we as conservatives cannot come off as gay bashers as you do in your post. I think homosexuality is immoral but if we bash them we just give them ammunition against us. They'll call us nazis, facists and any name they can think of.

If we come off as gay bashers than main streamers won't take us seriously, they'll liken us to the shortwave radio nuts.

78 posted on 05/06/2003 11:20:40 AM PDT by Dengar01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hank377
Hank,
I concur with much of your thinking, although its hard to concentrate given the thunderous roar of the vigorous bible thumping by the forgiving christians here.

Marriage is a contract between people and, requires no endorsement from a government, shaman or a deity. The problem is that government conveys benefits (e.g. tax treatment of gifts,) and penalties (marriage tax penalty,) upon certain marriages. Equal treatment under the law is a worthy pursuit usually supported by Republicans, certainly more so than by Democrats. Marriages recognized by the government only mean you need a license before you can marry and then the government has a say in how you conduct your marriage, or terminate it.
79 posted on 05/06/2003 11:44:07 AM PDT by LiberationIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I'm not going to say that your point is totally wrong because I don't have the facts to argue against it. There may have been ultra-conservatives that disliked Simon out there. I did not see them.

However, what I can say is that there were a LOT of true-blue, hard-working conservatives out there (myself included) that were manning phone banks, walking precincts, and working our butts off to get Simon elected. When the LCR infiltrator wrote that survey, used Simon's electronic signature (which was only available because he was *inside* the campaign, and released it to the SF Chron.... the energy within the core was deflated for a good week. And THAT is what was intended. It was not intended to create an image of "tolerance" by Simon... he did not need the .2% increase in votes such a move might cause... it was intended to take away 50% of his base.

Fortunately, despite the momentary panic, Simon got the gumption to admit that he was a political idiot that had allowed such a thing to happen. But he was damaged goods at that point. It was either admit to being a political idiot, or lose half of his base.

It was a diabolical act by an evil and disgusting group.
80 posted on 05/07/2003 5:38:38 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: LiberationIT
Equal Protection?

Should we give equal protection to adulterers, liars, pedophiles, thieves, drug-abusers, polygamists and other forms of anti-social behavior?

Your argument is bogus. Despite the continued drum-pounding about a "gay gene", the simple fact is that there is no such thing. It is not a genetic predisposition that endows its victims with some form of civil right. It is a sexual behavior...a deviant one at that... and therefore deserves no such equal protection any more than any other form of anti-social behavior.

Regarding Bible thumping... I was disgusted by homos LONG before I became a Christian. You should become more "tolerant" of Christians and others who disagree with you.
81 posted on 05/07/2003 5:44:21 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Dengar01
Since when has "gay bashing" come into the realm of speech?

I remember the old days when such a thing involved a baseball bat... was EXTREMELY rare... and was used to create sympathy for those guys who hung out at public parks near the restrooms looking for young boys to "get high and have some fun together".

Simply stating one's opinion can not be construed as "bashing".

My problem is not with people who are flawed...we all are... it is with the activists who are trying to redefine morality to allow their behavior to be normalized. They are beyond simply homosexuals, they are liars and they will use any means to achieve their objectives.

Most homosexuals are victims. Victims of a mental illness that takes away their ability to have a normal life... Victims of those gay activists.

What really irks me is that rather than treat them, they are being told that they don't require treatment...that they should just live with the disease. This has been extended to people with such severe gender id problems that they want to actually have elements cut off, etc... what a real travesty.
82 posted on 05/07/2003 5:50:39 AM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
Of course we don't give equal protection to pedophiles and thieves as their actions infringe on the rights of others. Adultery and polygamy can be covered by contracts. Lying depends on whether or not damage is done.

Please don't mistake my characterizing of the thumpers as intolerance, I don’t find them disgusting (your view of "homos",) I find the thumpers amusing. Thanks for the chuckles.
83 posted on 05/07/2003 2:54:59 PM PDT by LiberationIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
Newsflash: Look up Eva Young, LCR President in Minnesota (if memory serves). She moderates the highly anti-Christian usqueers.com

Yes, the agenda is to infiltrate and use their money and "so-called" small government platform to get attention.

They actually don't want money to go to supporting any Christian or family-oriented anything - hence the "small government" claim is a cover for the real "anti-Christian/anti-family" agenda.
84 posted on 05/07/2003 3:05:09 PM PDT by mabelkitty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
I agree with you about the gay activists. I am entirely against the activists I think they should be jailed for some of their behavior. I know that they want to initiate more (especially younger) people into their deviancy (ie Gay Straight Alliances in High Schools, even the high school I went to). However the gay activists polarize us as "evil, so on so forth" when we make statements like "we should kill the fags or something to that degree".

Look at what GLAAD did to Michael Savage they tried to get him thrown off MSNBC before his first show aired. These are vicious people and we can't give them any ammunition against us.

I agree with you entirely I just believe we shouldn't resort to name calling it just makes us look bad. The gay activists hate us and there are some that do target Christians and moralist leaders for death. These are the ones who should be jailed. But the moderate ones like to try and take our words and twist them to deem us out to be "short wave radio nuts".

85 posted on 05/07/2003 8:49:48 PM PDT by Dengar01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
I have never heard the Log Cabin Republicans ever do anything but make things difficult for Republicans. I've never heard of them saying or doing anything to knot a Democrat brow. Have any of you?

This are the issues the Nothern Virginia chapter website features:

Criminal law:
Virginia sodomy law
"Hate crimes" legislation

Family law:
Adoption & custody
Gay marriage & domestic partnership

Non-discrimination:
ENDA
Fairfax County schools
Virginia Tech

Taxes:
Federal estate tax

The only issue remotely Republican is the Estate Tax. Everything else is music to Democrat ears. The LCR are about as Republican as a San Francisco bath house.

86 posted on 05/07/2003 9:10:23 PM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Plutarch
Maybe we should redefine their name to be more fitting???

LOG CRAMMIN REARENDERS

:)
87 posted on 05/08/2003 2:22:33 PM PDT by Paloma_55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55
{This is why the homos are in the Republican Party. To sabotage it, and ultimately disable it from stopping their agenda.

We should kick their sorry asses out.}

My sentiments exactly! If the Log Cabin types honestly wish to advance conservative principles, then I will welcome them in. However if they are nothing but a bunch of disruptor trolls then who knows them? They should be working for the Howard Dean campaign.
88 posted on 06/03/2003 7:12:28 PM PDT by Kuksool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool
then who knows them = then who needs them
89 posted on 06/03/2003 7:18:46 PM PDT by Kuksool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-89 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson