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

To: OldFriend

Right...and, unless you didn't know he was gay..and would NEVER vote for a gay person, regardless of his/her behaviour...from what I have read in samantha's posts..he was a GOOD representative..as far as doing his job for his constituents...

Therefore, why NOT vote for him...IF this was unknown, or even if some of this is lies.

I have a feeling that enough of it is true to be a GOOD thing that he is gone...but, I also think a lot was lies, and is adding more, and more lies...not because of Foley, but because of the election.

ALL of the sources except Fordham seem to be anonymous...TOO convenient.


663 posted on 10/08/2006 2:31:04 PM PDT by Txsleuth (FREEPATHON TIME----You need FR, you know you do, so how about donating??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 651 | View Replies ]


To: Txsleuth
unless you didn't know he was gay..and would NEVER vote for a gay person, regardless of his/her behaviour...from what I have read in samantha's posts..he was a GOOD representative..as far as doing his job for his constituents...

Therefore, why NOT vote for him...IF this was unknown, or even if some of this is lies.

I think there may be something fundamental that even we are overlooking here.  We are falling prey to the same prejudices and stereotypes about conservatives, even "Christian conservatives" that the Democrats are counting on for this to work.  They have bought their own propaganda that all of us are like those loons from Kansas protesting at veteran's funerals because they see all of our problems in Iraq as punishment from God for allowing the scourge of gays to go unchallenged.

I am not a gay activist, by a long shot.  I object to and work against the "gay agenda" as well as object to the selling of the gay lifestyle in school.  I also feel that discrimination laws that require people to accommodate gays in their private property (particularly housing) is none of the governments business.  Having said that, I could give a damn what two men or two women do in the privacy of their own home.  I have a feeling that that is the attitude of 90% or more of self described conservatives.

I mean, I would object to a "flaming queer" teaching my kindergartner about "Tommy has two daddies."  I would also object to Anna Nicole Smith teaching that same class about lap dancing.  In an earlier post I related how everyone reacted to Nathan Lane coming out with "we knew" and an implied "we didn't care."  It didn't make me want to boycott The Lion King because he did a voice for it.  I objected to Ellen Degeneres' "coming out" prime time event because being a lesbian became the only thing she was and, most importantly, she was no longer funny.  I've always enjoyed everything I've seen Harvey Fierstein in and he's always been openly gay.  Would I want him to date my son?  Hell no.  Do I want to burn him at the stake?  Not a chance.

I think the calculations of all of the pundits and pollsters are based on assumptions about conservatives that just aren't true.  I think they're in for a big surprise.

I also get the feeling from comments from folks "who know" (my family is involved in theater... go figure) that the gay community is furious at the Democrats.  I'm getting rumbles of an active campaign to "teach them a lesson."  This election could end up with a lot of very surprised people standing there as winners, on the same side, and wondering "what the hell do we do now?"

And Nancy Pelosi will be truly saddened.

745 posted on 10/08/2006 3:57:10 PM PDT by Phsstpok (Often wrong, but never in doubt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies ]

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