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 ...
” What the heck is going on here? “
The people booing recognized the attack on our military and American Culture that the gay soldier represents and voiced their disgust.
This is exactly correct. I can't even talk about my faith in the public square but these people can wave their private parts in my face and I'm supposed to sit there and smile. Sorry.
Thousands of hookers and bargirls just had heart attacks.
He was booed for promoting the homosexual agenda. He should be thrown out of the army for homosexuality or at least tested for steroids. People are sick and tired of tolerance politics.
Santorum hit a home run on that question.
Pray for America
I have no respect for any sexual perverts, whether they are soldiers or congressmen or teachers or preachers. I refuse to apologize for rejecting the homosexual agenda - anywhere and everywhere.
More accurately, they cheered Paul's answer, which by the way, was one of the more lucid things he has ever said.
Incorrect on many levels.
One they booing his homosexuality. Two they booed is defiant public defense of immorality. Three they booed his questionable commitment to duty, for by his appearance and question he brought shame upon all.
Despite the sick fads of current society much of morality is still an absolute. Homosexuality is wrong.
The audience would have likewise booed a UN Soldier defending sex with children that was done so that those children could get food.
The Atlantic article is pecifically about the effect a few boos out of an audience of hundreds, and the effect these few boos might have on the elections, and how bad the few boos make the republicans appear.
But careful examination of the questions reveal each and every one of the questions to be loaded, cleverly-framed gotcha questions that really had no place in the dabate. And it just seemed to me that the boo-bids (probably younger, activist types) were reacting to the inappropriate trap-nature of the questions themselves rather than reacting badly to a 30-year old guy needing health care, the death penalty, and gay people.
If you can't tell the difference between a respectable soldier and an embarrassment to the uniform, you are a moral castrato and your opinion is worthless.
Honor apart from morality does not exist.
Yes, we are asked to honor the man because he is homosexual? NO! Never.
For that he deserves rebuke for the dishonor of his behavior. It was GREAT and WONDERFUL that we still boo the dishonorable.
I am seek of “being in the service” having become a free ride to perks and excuses. A man or woman of integrity would never ask for or accept such.
Bring back Moral Turpitude.
Honor apart from morality does not exist.
************
Did you make that up? That is good and I will forever remember it.
Gay definitely. Thankfully those “queer soldiers” DO “give a crap”.
In this case, it would be like a cop standing up and defending unions. I'd boo him---not because he's a cop but because he's supporting union thugs, whatever his other good qualities.
True homos don’t ask, they tell up front...
When I served in the military, ( ‘58- ‘62 ) it was, by law, forbidden for military members to engage in a media public debate on politics.
My question is, was that law stricken from the the books and, if not, was this ‘proud’ homosexual soldier in violation of military Code?
Honor apart from morality does not exist.
I see a tight parallel to those who claim to be “ethical” and atheist.
"up front"?
Anyone remember a few years back when some politician went to a BX/PX/NX and saw the porn magazines on sale?
He got legislation passed to ban all the magazines except for a few T & A ones. His reason was the American public should not support that type of activity. This was completely bogus because AAFES makes their own money from sales not from taxpayers pockets.
Outserve or Outcast will be bringing their version of homo porn to a local BX/PX/NX near you.
Take your queer politics somewhere else.
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.