Now here is a twofer; good for our Armed Forces and the GOP presidential campaigns.
Why the GOP candidates don't push for repeal of the Fag Act that was hurriedly passed in a lame duck Congress by men and women who were just defeated at the polls is beyond me. There is little public support for a homo military and the rat Congress at the time run by Pelosi and Reid were scared to death to vote on it before the election.
Anyone afraid to profess repeal the the Fag Act will not have the courage to repeal Obamacare or take on the administrative agencies that are in actuality ruling our country. It is essential to roll back the damage done by these people.
Wanna kick your campaign into high gear? Want the money to roll in? Tell Christianne Amanpour today that homos do not belong in our military.
43 comments
And you wonder why people view you psychos as completely nuts.
It's a lame duck congress because they wouldn't do one thing that you wanted because they were confronted with massive evidence to show what you wanted was stupid, pointless, and a complete waste?
Fag Act? Oh, you mean the repeal of DADT! News flash, fundie.. There have been homosexuals in the military as long as there has been a military, something your chickenhawk homophobic ass wouldn't know.
There is little public support for a homo military
Most normal people don't give two shits who's defending them. And if that's not enough, the military itself came in and said they had no problem with repealing DADT so your opinion is worthless on the subject.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, There have always been gays in the military. For the past 19.5 years, I have served beside them and have known at least a dozen who I have known were gay. In have bunked next to them in tents, I have showered next to them, I have worked next to them. They were just as much airmen, soldiers, marines and sailors as anyone else they served with and I would happily serve with them for as long as I am in the military.
One of the very first US military members wounded in Iraq is a gay Marine.
I invite you to say that to his face, so I can watch him kick your ass from here to next Tuesday.
Yeah, he got his legs blown off serving his country. He could probably still kick your ass with the prosthetics.
"Wanna kick your campaign into high gear? Want the money to roll in? Tell Christianne Amanpour today that homos do not belong in our military."
Wanna get kicked in the ass? Try to pass the bedsheet boy act.
"Fag Act"
(*switches to Doug Piranha mode *):
Fred Phelps, is that you?!
image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faggot_(food)
Do they allow smoking in barracks? And are pork meatballs in onion gravy served in US military mess halls?
[/smartarse]
"Why the GOP candidates don't push for repeal of the Fag Act that was hurriedly passed in a lame duck Congress by men and women who were just defeated at the polls is beyond me."
I'm sure if you tried hard enough, you could find a few million more things that are beyond you too.
Three words, fucker:
Alexander The Great.
Now go fist yourself.
Why is it every time I read an internet post where someone uses the terms "fag," "gay," and "homo," that it sounds like some immature 12 year old boy?
Personally, I'd love for the Republican candidates to all say that they're for repealing policies allowing gays to serve in the military. What better way to commit political suicide and ensure Obama's reelection?
There are literally thousands of gays in the military. Many are decorated heroes for their actions in combat. The only thing repealing DADT did was make sure that a gay soldier can continue to serve and not get a dishonorable discharge merely for his (or her) sexual orientation.
> Wanna kick your campaign into high gear? Want the money to roll in?
...why are all American political candidates so concerned about money? I know effective campaigning can be expensive in a large country like the United States, but dammit, it shouldn't be the first concern.
I mean, it's as if some people would just know they'd get roundly beaten in elections, so their primary concern would be to just get the all-important money from supporters and live off of it for a while.
I mean, they could just focus their campaign on some stupid idea that some poor bastards believe, but that doesn't actually have any real public support, so they won't actually get elected and can just shrug and move on and whine about sheeple who don't know a good idea when they see one.
Ahaha, ha, what a silly scam this would be, it would totally not happen these days when people are at least half-clueful...
> that homos do not belong in our military.
...wait a second, that's not a popular idea at all. Are you saying...?...
Not gonna happen. Gays are slowly getting more and more support. The Republican-assisted gay marriage law in New York proves it. Such a repeal would remove all those who supported the repeal from Congress.
I will give you credit for one thing though: the current congress SUCKS! If it is not Republicans stonewalling plans it's the Democrats. I say we start a congressional cleansing and vote against ALL incumbents.
WWWWolf: "...why are all American political candidates so concerned about money? I know effective campaigning can be expensive in a large country like the United States, but dammit, it shouldn't be the first concern."
A U.S. congressional district is usually much larger (in both area and population) than, say, a British MP's. There are 650 MPs in the British House of Commons, representing 62 million people. There are 435 members of the U.S. House of Representatives, representing 308 million.
Partly as a result, televisions ads are a major part of American campaigns, and that air time has to be paid for, whereas Britain has restrictions on political ads and provides free air time for party political broadcasts.
WWWWolf: "I mean, it's as if some people would just know they'd get roundly beaten in elections, so their primary concern would be to just get the all-important money from supporters and live off of it for a while."
That would be illegal under federal law. Contributions left over after a campaign can not be diverted for personal expenses.
I stopped reading once I spotted 'Fag Act' (first two words that caught my eye). You clearly have nothing important to say, and your vitriol-soaked opinions are minuscule. Now, if you could be so kind, there's a toilet/spit bucket for disgusting froth somewhere with your name on it.
@PAnz: "Lame Duck" is a political term of art for an individual politician or a legislative majority in the time between an election they lost and the end of the term, when they still hold office, but will not do so shortly. It's not a slur, just a descriptor, although waiting to pass legislation until you're a lame duck (and it can't cost you anything) is generally seen as a sign of cowardice.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
