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 ...
If you say you will put DADT back—you will get the military vote.
The privacy of the ballot protects from being arrested by the PC MPs for the new military thought crime of “homophobia.”
The Democratic party of John F. Kennedy (before the commies took control) had to deal with this kind of thing in the 60s when some Strom Thurmond Dixiecrat goons stood up and went wacko with a cheer or a boo from time to time. It wasnt always cut and dry blatent or intended to be an intentional symbol of hatred, but it looks terrible on television.
the only difference is that the media was not against the Dems in those days. they are against us
The economy is collapsing in unsustainable debt and this is the most important issue........MY A**!
(No Pun Intended)
I don’t think people are thinking strategery... ;) ...but they should.
I hope people enjoyed that boo, cuz you can be sure we’re going to be seeing it over and over and over in the coming months leading up to the election. And it won’t be our side repeating it.
Exactly. Anyone who thinks the gay rights agenda is worth a place in the national conversation has way different priorities than the average person.
How do we know that some of the booers at these debates weren’’t agents-provocateurs planted by the other side? (Inquiring minds want to know).
Santorum got it dead on.
That soldier wanted to out himself as gay and people didn’t approve—just like that gay military magazine said—GET OVER IT.
The Germans heckled 0bidi0t on his 08 Euro tour. He cancelled France the next day.
Ever stop to think they were booing the question? The fact that he exposes himself (no pun intended)opens him up for reactions such as this. His service is respected; his lifestyle is not.
We have had to grant special status to homosexuals and told to shut up. Just as this soldier exercises his free speech and freedom of association, so too did the audience.
There is a difference between booing a question asked, which was a “gotcha” question and the person asking it for his personal beliefs, actions, etc.
This author is doing what all liberals do in pulling the race card on anyone who asks a similar question of OZERO or criticizes him in any way.
With gays, it is “Hi, I’m GAY” first and foremost. That they are soldiers, or teachers (or whatever) appears to be secondary to their gay agenda. This is an indicator of the narcissism that permeates their “me first” thinking. It is they who can’t seem to “get over it (being gay).” In essence, they are proclaiming their “special status” and expectations to be coddled like babies.
The vice that dare not speak its name has become the vice that won’t shut up.
The unbridled narcissism of gays is the reason people dislike them. It’s ALWAYS about them and their precious sexuality - world wide, 24/7/365.
Economy tanking? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
Country overrun by illegals? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
War in Afghanistan/Iraq/Libya/Somalia/etc a disastrous embarrassment? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
Government schools turning out indoctrinated morons? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
Government trying to disarm the citizens through Fast & Furious? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
Terrorist cells forming throughout the land? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
Feral gangs taking over large swaths of our country? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
EPA ruining our energy and industrial and agricultural competitiveness? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
Dollar worthless? Earthquakes and tsunamis? Corruption and graft? Public union thuggery? Iran getting nukes? People don’t like where I like to put my penis.
Aren’t you people listening??? I said, people don’t like where I like to put my penis!!! I’m gonna get the government to FORCE you to like where I like to put my penis. My PENIS! My precious PENIS!!! You understand? MY PENIS!!! It’s a Gay Penis! It’s ALL I care about, and I’m gonna force you to care about it and love it like I do. You hear?!! MY PENIS!!!!!
I agree in principle, but in both these cases (the previous debate) I saw it as more booing the policy, not the individuals involved.
That said, don’t go there!
Santorum gained a lot of ground tonight, IMHO.
I think once Perry fades (and he will), Santorum will emerge as the candidate best-suited to take on Romney and win.
And I’m not a person who has paid the least bit of attention to Santorum in this race. But in the last two debates he has spoken with authenticity, not in canned soundbites. He also seems quite relaxed and simply focused on making points that are meaningful to the country’s problems.
Faggot soldiers who want to push the radical homosexual agenda on the US military make me throw up in my mouth a little.
Speaking of that, has Obama ever gotten around to getting the UCMJ changed or is he expecting homosexuals to be celibate so as to be compliant with the Code?
That’s a little over-dramatic, don’t you think?
Most people understand that boorish behavior is representative of the individuals engaging in it.
We can all do our part to stop this “I’m special” treatment by refusing to use PC jargon. These people are NOT gay; they are homosexuals. Just as the terrorists are Mohammedans, not Muslims.
I am sure that there are many other instances where we have been forced t accept an increasingly “words mean what I say they mean” environment. STOP IT NOW!
I didn’t think he was being booed for his behavior. I thought the policy was being booed and then the booing stopped as soon as it became clear that the soldier was FOR homosexuals in the military.
IOW, at first, I thought, and perhaps the audience did as well, that the soldier was in the process of saying “what are you going to do about this atrocious politicalization of the military that was the repeal of DADT?”
Anyway, clearly people should be more measured in their responses.
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.