Posted on 08/20/2007 10:30:08 PM PDT by Coleus
Post 39 is a repost of my post 17 for emphasis.
You still are avoiding answering the question.
DID YOU READ IT?
You posted, “So I welcome any homosexuals who happen to otherwise have conservative values to my side of the fight.”
How can you post communists have conservative values TO post 39? Or 17?
Well the gays can join if they want. I’m just not turning my back on them.
I had 2 of Coulter’s books on preorder.
Godless: The Church of Liberalism
If Democrats Had Any Brains, They’d Be Republicans
I just cancelled them.
Romney have been endorsed by the Log Cabin Republicans twice.
I’m all for “big tens” and all that, however, even tents have walls. Having gone camping many, many times, I can tell you with some authority that there is an inside to a tent, and an outside. These two sides are quite distinct and do not overlap. Furthermore, there are things outside the tent that do not belong inside the tent. Bears spring to mind. Campfires are another item. Similarly, in a “big tent” party, there are things that do not belong inside the tent. Bears, obviously, are on the list here as well. Campfires, perhaps could be admitted into this tent. Large, flaming homosexuals, however, are an outside-the-tent item. If you are a Big, Gay Al kinda guy, but you really are far more concerned about high taxes than whether you and Bruce get to pretend you’re married, then come on into the tent. We’ll pretend that your just a campfire. If, however, you expect us to bring you and Bruce a wedding present just because you checked the little “R” on the voter registration form, you can go outside and sit with the grizzlies.
Well, that being the case....
Yes, I find that your information from post 17 is quite educational.... I missed it the first time through; Sorry for attributing it to someone who merely cut and pasted your info..
But I still would prefer a homosexual who is otherwise conservative to ANY liberal of heterosexual persuasion; the ‘Log Cabin Republicans’ founder’s political persuasions notwithstanding.
If someone backs me up in a street fight, I don’t really care what they did in their bedroom the night before or the night after.
God is welcome to sort them out later if he so chooses; as long as they didn’t vote for Gore or Kerry in the past, Or Hillary, Edwards or Obama in the future, I’ll consider them allies for now.
I’ll repeat again, the homosexuality is the red herring.
The Log Cabin Republicans are affiliated with communists, ANSWER and the antiwar movement.
We are not talking about two guys that want to listen to Barry Manilow on the weekend. We are talking about the communist party.
The more everyone allows them to use homosexuality as the area denial from looking further, the more we will not see Stonewall and ANSWER.
...umm... Nevermind.
The pursuit of happiness is not the pursuit of hedonism.
And the Nazi elite were fudgepackers.
FIRST OF ALL: I'm not now, nor ever in this thread been talking about the "Log Cabin Republicans"..... Your information in post #17 was interesting, but not really significant to my basic opinion on the substance of the ORIGINAL topic.
I specifically said, more than once, essentially that 'homosexuals that are otherwise conservative' are welcome in the GOP as far as I'm concerned. If you hate them, and believe that ALL homosexuals are communists; If you would rather they vote Democrat; that is between you, them, Karl Marx, God and the RNC.
SECOND: I repeat; My initial post that 'set you off' was never intended to speak to you AT ALL. I was only stating my opinion. The 'reply to thing' was only a matter of convenience from the (at the time) last post in the thread. As I have said previously: I blanked out the 'reply to' box, indicating that I was not answering anyone directly. If you chose to make this a personal feud, it is misdirected, and a complete waste of your time and mine.
Pitching a Big Tent?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067958/
W.R. - Misterije organizma (1971)
W.R.: Mysteries of the Organism
A dense film that cuts up footage of a primary plot of two young Yugoslavian girls, one a politico and the other a sexpot, and an affair with a visiting Russian skater. Mixing metaphors of Russia’s relationship with Yugoslavia, intercut with footage and interviews with Wilhelm Reich and Al Goldstein of Screw magazine. The film applies Reich’s theories of Orgone energy and analogies of Stalinism as a form of Freudian sexual repression. Also known as W.R. The Mysteries of the Organism in English subtitled version. Was banned in Yugoslavia shortly after it was made. Written by Malcolm Humes {mal@emf.net}
Half-documentary about Wilhelm Reich, scientist who tried to bring together teachings of Freud and Marx and was persecuted by Hitler, Stalin and McCarthy. The movie deals with the scientist and with the people who try to put his teachings into practice. Written by Dragan Antulov {dragan.antulov@altbbs.fido.hr}
This film treads a remarkably thin (perhaps non-existent) line between self-consciously satirical art and anarchic pornography. A sort of sexually liberated Eisensteinian journey, Makavejev proves that truth is always stranger (or at least more disturbing) than fiction. Waxing brilliant at times, and at others resigning to a sort of “Pull My Daisy” super-realism in the beat tradition, there are few films from this period that effect a more riveting commentary on Communism (whether or not any conclusions are actually reached).
Makavejev was always one of the clowns of the Third Cinema, and WR, his masterpiece, is no exception. Makavejev interweaves fiction, documentary, and found audio and video clips (a Stalinist propaganda film, electro-shock treatment footage) to create a fantastically bizarre but intelligent discussion of both the orgone energy theory of Wilhelm Reich and the relationship between Yugoslavia and the USSR in a post-Stalinist era.
I know. It sounds tedious, but it isn’t. In fact, it’s really fascinating. Among the clips Makavejev (a film theoretician in his own right, WR harkens back to the pre-Stalinist era of Soviet Montage) assembles are footage of performance art by the Yippie poet/singer Tuli Kapferberg and documentary clips of Jim Buckley, an editor for Screw Magazine, getting a mold of his penis made.
WR is bizarre, dogmatic, and at times, hard to watch, but having seen it twice now, I’ve come to appreciate its ways. By the time Vladimir breaks into song at the film’s end, you’ll be smiling too.
I have been trying to see this for many years, particularly after I discovered Reich in my reading in the early 80’s, read some of his writings as well as a great biography “Fury on Earth”. Now our library has it on a new video release, and I have to say it was worth the wait. It is a masterpiece of documentary insight into its subject Wilhelm Reich, of subversive cinema in that it has a great power to undermine the beliefs of the viewers/participators, and of classical comedy and drama as embodied (good choice of words) in the “fictional movie” within the documentary. Occasionally punctuated by the wild and crazy NY poet/musician Tuli Kupferberg roaming the streets of Manhattan in full battle array and carrying an M-16 (I don’t think they could get away with that these days, unless they had a Mr. De Niro in the cast.) Yes, it is blatant hippie/yippie revolutionary zeitgeist of 1968-1971, which was very much fueled by the father of the sexual revolution, Dr. Reich, who had died in 1957 in jail for not answering a subpoena to defend his claims of cancer cures. He said he would be judged by scientists but not by lawyers. Inasmuch as he was the only individual to have his books burned by both Hitler and the US government (FDA), his story and his philosophy should be more widely known, but of course he is still suppressed by some of the powers that be. The erotic content of “WR” is tame in the face of today’s hardcore but all the more effective for it, in that Reich condemned pornography but glorified healthy sexuality above all else. And for those “doves” that still populate the earth by the millions or billions, the words and deeds of the good Dr. Reich, who was exiled by Hitler and then Stalin (who is shown in this documentary in some amazing pseudo-heroic films he had made of himself,) still resonate. As do the words of Tuli Kupferberg and his band The Fugs, on the soundtrack: “Kill, kill, kill for peace...Near or far or very middle East...”
A prismatic view of hell-tinted sex, a subject explored exhaustively the same year by Ed Wood in NECROMANIA, Russ Meyer in BEYOND THE VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, and Michael Sarne in MYRA BRECKENRIDGE. Sex here is a schizophrenic action, emotionally and politically liberating, yet still somehow sinful and inflammatory. The subplot about Wilhelm Reich is more proof that society will brutally slaughter anyone even remotely resembling a potential savior. The bizarre collage and documentary parts are great, but the tangential Marxist subplot stinks, trying vainly to coalesce cultural suicide with political slapstick. Still intriguing is the notion that liberation is tied to the release of feelings and personal experiments such as breathing through crying and anger. But WR:MOTO poses more questions than it answers. Are free love and anarchy antithetical? Is communism really “milk and cookies?” Is sexual repression evil? Does beheading a female revolutionary qualify as gratuitous violence? The severed head pontificates: “Life without f**king isn’t worth a thing.”
The gist of the sex positive agenda? No moral judgements over any sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s).
If it feels good do it.
Everyone sexually active at every age.
And how this has ANY ties to conservatism I’ll never know. Pure pinko philosophy.
What makes you believe that a Communist would vote Democrat?
You mean, like, the liberals nominate about 10 presidential candidates but only really want one certain one elected? All the while the Dems get face time debates on all channels and only one sounds rational?
So the 9 token candidates can really act leftist while the real, preferred socialist candidate acts like a centrist? When she runs for president she will run as a "centrist" and claim to be a "new democrat" like Toni Blair ran as "new labour" in UK?
yitbos
Jesus H Christu.
Communists are a heck of a lot more likely to vote Democrat than Republican.... Especially since they aren’t (yet, anyway) running their own candidates for national office.
Where do you people get these ideas. Quit putting YOUR words into my FR posts. I never said ANYTHING like that. Sober up, get off the crack pipe or whatever it takes.
I’m going to log off before you and Calpernia make my head explode from your non sequiturs.
I shan’t reply to any more idiocies in this thread if I can avoid it.
We do not recognize interest groups based upon sexual behavior. That is a subject best left in the bedroom and has no place in the public forum. They are not a minority deserving of special rights. I will not address them as to foster this delusion.
The Republicans, spineless as they are, realize the danger of recognizing "special rights" based upon personal sexual behavior and the risk it presents towards the persecution of everyone else who does not participate in the said sexual behavior.
They are "gay" because they have gay sex. Sex is an act and the method of sex is a specific behavior.
They are not a "race". They are not an "ethnic group". They are not born with an identifiable birth defect or distinct chromosome.
They are gay because they behave that way. Very different from a man who is black, white or asian because they were born black, white or asian.
You cannot recognize special rights for personal sexual behavior. It opens the door for others to claim special rights for any given behavior on the basis of "sinister birth" or other false claims.
Can someone be born with a sexual attraction for animals? Can someone be born a pedophile or arsonist? These are all behaviors that emerge later in life. Would recognizing special rights for gay give those folks grounds for claiming similar rights in their future? Don't be so sure it wouldn't.
It doesn't help that advancing "homosexual rights" is one of the stated planks of implementing communist goals via destruction of American society. This is entered in the congressional record Here you go...
They must want him to lose. Why else would they give him their kiss of death?
yitbos
You posted: What could be a more patriotic name than Log Cabin Republicans.
***
I used to think that, too, until I learned on this site what “log cabin” means... It is not pretty, and it is NOT a house like Lincoln may have lived in. Think of where human (male) fecal matter is stored, which happens to be the “target” of male homosexual sex and you may re-think your position on the name Log Cabin Republicans.
I’m sorry’ My immediate reply to yours was less than perfectly coherent.
Don’t get me wrong: I still have an issue with what you said... But I’ll admit that I’m still a little upset from earlier discussions and getting kind of ‘punchy’ so I’m going to call truce for now.
Have a good night/morning.
The Log Cabin Republicans are affiliated with communists, ANSWER and the antiwar movement."
Reminds me of the Greek communist Ariana Huffington who, with her homosexual husband, penetrated the upper levels of GOP.
yitbos
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.