My state is sick.

Well, a couple of points.
First is this: My God, to read the headlines you would think the entire crowd was ready with pitchforks. This was maybe 4-10 idiots at the most in a crowd of 3-4,000 that made an ass out of themselves. So what?

Second: I find it interesting that the left is once again using the gays as a political prop...every leftist has been pointing to this all day...however the left has been booing the military--regardless of sexual orientation--for years..so how is this so different from that?

 

It sounded like way more than 4-10 to me.

I don't know what you're talking about. The left has been opposed to the wars for several years, but not our soldiers. There's a really big difference.

 

Sounded like more than 10?
Perhaps you were looking at a different video.

As far as the left supporting the military...what about the left..even city officials..declaring San Francisco in 2005 a "military free zone" and "the military is not welcome"

Please..this whole "we support the troops but not the mission" is the biggest pussy cop out in the world. The two are the same. You support them or you don't..no in between

 

I think that only a few people boo'd at the beginning of the video, but a large amount of people did seem to agree with Santorum.

And I agree with the very last part, that sex shouldn't really be involved in the military, however, that's not the point at all of LGBT people being openly allowed into the military, because it isn't special rights, it's equal rights. Same with when African Americans weren't allowed in the US Military. Except you couldn't really fake being white.

Also, I remember the 2005 San Fran Military Free Zone thing, but I really don't think it's official. I just tried looking it up, and all I can really find is various articles and blog posts from 2005. I think it was more of a smaller demographic that was opposed to the large military history that the city has, and was trying to lobby for it's removal, but that obviously caught the attention of the media.

I think if it actually became official, it would've been a lot easier to find now. But I do agree that that sort of thing is really fucking horrible.

 

No, I'm pretty sure it was the same one. The difference is that I'm not trying to make excuses or downplay the actions of a bunch of hatemongers. These were probably the same people that cheered the death of the uninsured. You would never see something like that at a democratic debate.

I think it's fair to say that there are extremists on both sides, but we shouldn't make excuses for them, and just because one has done it isn't justification to then perpetuate something so wrong.

I have family members in the military, and I support them 100% but I do not nor have I ever supported the war in Iraq. We don't live in a black and white world Redstate. You shouldn't make claims like that.

 

J-
Never meant that is was law...just pointing out what the thought was.

And I think the cheers were for the answer to the question...which I thoigh was decent for a debate...rather than rejecting a gay army guy

---------- Post added 23rd Sep 2011 at 09:56 PM ----------

I'll make claims however I want.

My big brother served in Iraq..I support him and I support the mission...so go peddle that "I don;t support Iraq" to some one besides me.

 

If you want to be bull-headed and inaccurate about it then go ahead, just don't expect me to take it laying down because you basically just accused me of being a "pussy cop-out" which is just completely ridiculous and uncalled for, honestly. It's very petty, especially considering I've done absolutely nothing but vocalize my opinion. I would never make this or any other debate on EC personal.

Good for him, but don't act like you're some kind of ideal patriot because of it. I have cousins on both sides of the family that have served on a combat tour, and I genuinely love them and support them and want only the best for them, but I don't approve of the war. It's almost like love the sinner, hate the sin, but I actually mean it and I'm not just saying it. I don't understand why you think it's so hard to differentiate between the two.

Not to mention, there's way more to the military's "mission" than Iraq that I do support--so maybe you shouldn't generalize so much in the future, kthx?

 

Rick Santorum makes me sick to my stomach and makes me disgusted to be from Pennsylvania.

If a republican wins the election, I will leave this country.

 

you can support the troops without supporting a specific mission. it has been proven repeatedly that the bush administration repeatedly lied to the american people and the military about why we needed to go to iraq, in a series of lies that continued to follow each lie after the previous one was proven to be a lie. That alone is why alot of democrats, and even republicans, are against the war in iraq, but still support the war in afganastan. You can honor the troops without honoring the corruptions of non-military entities pushing those troops into a war by lieing through their teeth for profit. there is not denying that the bush administration walked away with buttshits of profit from contracts, because magically, the majority of contracts went to companies owned or operated formerly by bush administration emploees.

Military service is not tied only to one party, as both democrats and republicans serve our country in the armed forces. It is just a popular lie of the republicans that they love the military more... yet they frequently block bills, even clean ones, that would fund better equipment and armor for our soldiers, that fund mental health programs for our veterens, and other things you would expect a 'we love our troops more than you' party would support. both parties support our troops, and both parties fail at times to live up to that ideal.

in the end, anyone who says one party is more patriotic than the other party when it comes to our troops is an idiot.



to get back on topic. it was way more than 4-10 people. in such a large space that holds that many bodies, 4-10 people would only be heard if they were mic'd into the sound system. I have worked tech for events in large capacity audatoriums, and places like where they held that debate tend be designed to accousticly channel the stage, while suppressing the audience's noise. 4-10 people out of 3000+ cannot make such a dent without having amplifiers. it sounded more like 150-300 people at the very least.

but regardless, it speaks of the lack of morals or common sense that republicans would mock anyone who wants to serve their country. Conservatives like to pretend, as often is implied by their behavior and words about the military, that the armed forces is some private club. their fighting against LGBT soldiers serving openly in the military is reflective of when they argued against women being allowed in the military, and when they argued against blacks being allowed in the military. all through this, in each of these struggles, conservatives have used to exact same arguements about first keeping the military a segregated entity, then a male only entitity, then a straight only entities.

Republicans can bitch about it all they want. they can whore themselves out to the bigotted and uneducated wings of their party all they want. DADT is not coming back, and a majority of americans at a statistical rate that shows that even a majority of republicans, supported its repeal, including a majority of military service members who cared enough to fill out the questionaire in record numbers.

republicans saying they will repeal DADT is as valid as a politican saying they will get rid of the First Ammendment of the Constitution!

 

Don't expect me to take it lying down either...I accused you of being a "pussy cop out"? Really? well...either you are too sensitive or the truth hurts...I'll let you make that decision. And..you obviously are as inaccurate as you choose to be.

I'm acting like I am some patriot because I support my brother...and the U.S. military? It's just what I think you should do. It's simply called supporting your country...maybe you should look into it.

 

I think nationalism is stupid. (*Observes the worms spewing out the can*)

 

I think you support the idea of war more than the war itself. thats the way what you are saying makes it seem.

Republicans and conservative can pretend all they want that only they love this country, but the fact of the matter is, it is not true, never has been, and never will be.

Stop pretending that you own the flag... patriotisem is not a republican brand, nor will it ever be. patriotisem for this country is a american brand, not owned by any party.

So just because you get pissed off because democrats hold to "for the people by the people" to mean that the people are suposed to come first, not the wealthy elites, doesn't mean we hate this country. Just because liberals and some conservatives reject the proven lies that were fed to us by a corrupt white house to get us into iraq, wasting and destroying countless american lives in the process, does not mean we hate this country... ironicly, it means we want this country to live up to its ideals and promises: ideals and promises that no party owns, but both fail throughout the history of this country to properly live up to and achieve.

 

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McAeQiLmEYU[/YOUTUBE]

 

He doesn't mean it. He's just emotionally driven, and will avoid taking issues to their logical conclusion if it means going against his own emotionally derived basis.

 

Repealing DADTisn't about sex. Being able to talk openly about and to your loved one when far from home was taken for granted by straight people. This is about honesty. DADT required soldiers to lie if they had a sig. other and wanted to keep their job. If Rick is serious about his position, he would forbid straight people from talking about their personal lives as well. What an asshat.

 

It's patriotism...not patriotisem....God your spelling drives me crazy...get SPELL CHECK!

Secondly...God you liberals are so easy to bait and so predictable...you fall for that line and go off on rants every single time...have a good day

And Jim is right...I am probably too close on an emotional basis to have an objective view on that entire matter.

 

Yeah, you did. I don't think I'm too sensitive, and that was definitely far from the truth. I think it really just stemmed from your general disdain of anything left-orientated.

I said you shouldn't act like you're an ideal patriot, not "some patriot." There's a difference there. I support the war in Afghanistan and the peace-keeping missions our military engages in, but we went to Iraq on bad intelligence, some would say outright lies, and completely destabilized the country and squandered billions of dollars and ended hundreds of thousands of lives for absolutely nothing. Sometimes your country is wrong, and we're not entitled to anything as Americans--just saying.