This poll for homosexuals and Bush bashing liberals only.

Presumably your point is that Bush has favoured a few gay individuals in his administration? More than Clinton did?

Of course, if this were true, I can see that this would totally outweigh the persecution of millions of ordinary Americans not in his elite circle.

Presumably if Hitler had had a Jewish cabinet member or two, he would have been an alright chap?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KMO @ Nov 6 2006, 07:47 AM) [snapback]344419[/snapback]</div>

It also completely overlooks who opened the door so GWB could appoint so many homosexuals.

• In 1993 Bill Clinton appointed Roberta Achtenberg Assistant Secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. She was the first openly gay/lesbian public official to be approved by the Senate. (Source: Wikipedia)
• In 1999 Bill Clinton used a recess appointment to name James Hormel as ambassador to Luxembourg. He was the first openly gay ambassador. (source: CNN)
• Clinton created the position of a presidential liaison to the gay and lesbian community. (source: MSNBC)
• On 11/8/1997, Clinton become the first sitting president to speak before a gay and lesbian organization. (Source: Federal Globe)

Besides making appointments, what else has Bush done for the gay & lesbian community?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Proco @ Nov 6 2006, 09:30 AM) [snapback]344452[/snapback]</div>

Also, "Don't Ask Don't Tell" was introduced by Clinton and Powell in 1993.

 

I don't know, but your posts would have more credibility if you'd use correct punctuation.

For example, an apostrophe indicates possession, so you don't need one for either "Gay's" or "Homosexual's."

Also, don't those two words mean the same thing?

I think we need a poll to determine this conclusively, before we move forward to the *really* important issues which confront us.

 

You should've included an "I don't know" to the list, because in truth, I really don't know. And frankly, I don't think it's germaine to my Bush-bashing.

The amount of social change that has occurred in the past 20 years concerning gays has been LARGE. It still isn't where it should be, by all means, but I would bet that there have been tons of gays in every administration going back to 1787...the general public just didn't know about it. Because of that, I have no idea who has the best "record" on appointing/hiring gays. It could be Calvin Coolidge for all any of us know.

The one thing I do know is that while Clinton signed the "Defense of Marriage Act," he didn't call for a constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage during an election year. That's all I do know.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Nov 6 2006, 11:58 AM) [snapback]344588[/snapback]</div>

Warren G. Harding... hands down.

Kow, it looks like a "Punctuation Nazi" tirade might be coming on.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(tripp @ Nov 6 2006, 02:49 PM) [snapback]344619[/snapback]</div>

I'm bracing myself.

Heck, even Toyota is not immune: the MFD flashes a message with the contraction "it's" when it should be "its."

Then again, it's also been know to instruct the driver to, "...please consult to a dealer..."
[laughing]

[attachmentid=5614]

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Wildkow @ Nov 6 2006, 04:26 AM) [snapback]344404[/snapback]</div>

Gee, how about all the Fundamentalist gay-bashers who are actually gay? How can you harp on gays with all the potential hypocrites out there who just SEEMED to be beacons of morality?

Me, I'll stick with the old idea that the squeaky wheel may be trying to draw attention away from itself...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mikepaul @ Nov 6 2006, 03:04 PM) [snapback]344632[/snapback]</div>

Yes.

If one's sexual preference wasn't such a big deal to everybody else, then the "Fundamentalist gay bashers who are actually gay" would probably more likely confront who they really are, and have a chance to seek less violent ways to express themselves and to whom they're attracted. BTW, sexual preference doesn't mean vaginal vs. anal penetration, if you were wondering. It means, attracted to a male or female.

Until homosexuality is no longer such an issue, lots of the people who are most vehemently against being gay will feel compelled to stay that way...and possibly hurt those who do feel less constrained by an abstract version of "morality."

 

I'm gay.

I'm happy go lucky. I always am happy.

So, yeah, I must be gay.

Have a Gay Ole' Time!!!

(was it only less then 40 years ago, that the Flintstones had a Gay Ole' Time??)

But...wait...I am not a homosexual, unless you mean that I like to have sex with homo sapiens. Then I am all for that.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TJandGENESIS @ Nov 7 2006, 06:33 AM) [snapback]344897[/snapback]</div>

And most times, doesn't just having sex make one gay? I mean, unless it's bad sex, of course.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(livelychick @ Nov 7 2006, 07:33 AM) [snapback]344926[/snapback]</div>

So really, all sex is gay sex unless it sucks?!?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MarinJohn @ Nov 7 2006, 12:43 PM) [snapback]345066[/snapback]</div>

 

You know, I used to smoke fags, until that word no longer meant cigarettes.
[laughing]

Good morning/afternoon/evening, everyone!

 

Question part 1:

I'm one of the Bush bashers; I'm a moderate Republican who believes that Bush has done more to hurt our country than any president in history.

As for part 2:

I could care less about the gay thing.