HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Ron Paul Campaign Scrubs ...

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 08:37 AM

Ron Paul Campaign Scrubs Radical Anti-Gay Pastor From Website

The Ron Paul campaign appears to have removed a press release touting the endorsement of Rev. Phillip G. Kayser, a Nebraska pastor who has called for instituting the death penalty against homosexuals.


http://tinyurl.com/bneh7ez

28 replies, 6394 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 28 replies Author Time Post
Reply Ron Paul Campaign Scrubs Radical Anti-Gay Pastor From Website (Original post)
sellitman Dec 2011 OP
comipinko Dec 2011 #1
sellitman Dec 2011 #2
freshwest Dec 2011 #12
sarge43 Dec 2011 #3
tavalon Dec 2011 #4
yellowcanine Dec 2011 #5
tavalon Dec 2011 #7
Javaman Dec 2011 #6
Politicub Dec 2011 #8
MADem Dec 2011 #11
sarcasmo Dec 2011 #9
freshwest Dec 2011 #25
AlwaysQuestion Dec 2011 #10
Balthasar Bekker Dec 2011 #13
sarge43 Dec 2011 #14
Balthasar Bekker Dec 2011 #15
sellitman Dec 2011 #18
MNBrewer Dec 2011 #16
Angry Dragon Dec 2011 #17
musette_sf Dec 2011 #19
slay Dec 2011 #20
obamanut2012 Dec 2011 #21
slay Dec 2011 #22
obamanut2012 Dec 2011 #23
slay Dec 2011 #24
sarcasmo Dec 2011 #28
musette_sf Dec 2011 #26
slay Dec 2011 #27

Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 08:43 AM

1. Look closer,

 

he has moved it to the "cabinet appointee" page, under "Attorney General"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to comipinko (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 09:15 AM

2. Even better!

What a worthless piece of crap this man is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to comipinko (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:15 AM

12. All the better to carry out the plan? Will fiscal conservatives still vote for him?

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:50 AM - Edit history (1)

'There is no comparing Paul and Santorum, said [Dan] Savage, because Paul is a leave-us-alone libertarian. “Ron is older than my father, far less toxic than Santorum, and, as he isn't beloved of religious conservatives, he isn't out there stoking the hatreds of our social and political enemies,” he explained.

“And Ron may not like gay people, and may not want to hang out with us or use our toilets, but he's content to leave us the fuck alone and recognizes that gay citizens are entitled to the same rights as all other citizens. Santorum, on the other hand, believes that his bigotry must be given the force of law. That's an important difference.”

That’s more or less what Paul and his campaign say about all of the newsletters. The man’s been in public office, on and off, since 1976. Where’s the anti-gay record? In 2004, Paul was one of only 27 House Republicans who voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment. In 2010, he flipped from a “no” to a “yes” on repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

“I have received several calls and visits from constituents who, in spite of the heavy investment in their training, have been forced out of the military simply because they were discovered to be homosexual," he explained. “To me, this seems like an awful waste.”

He’s worked alongside gay libertarians before. Would-be social conservative kingmakers say they can’t back Paul because his federalism would let gay rights flower in the states. “Sometimes,” Iowa FAMiLY Leader CEO Bob Vander Plaats said this month, “his libertarian views trump his moral compass.”'

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2011/12/ron_paul_s_anti_gay_newsletters_why_they_don_t_bother_liberal_gays.single.html

Others may be warned off, even if libertarian policies lead to fascism. Historically, those with sufficient wealth, have not suffered from being different than the majority. That's the libertarian version of freedom and liberty, that those with the wealth, can live without being bothered.

Is anyone going to harm Cheney's daughter or Robertson's son, or any children of wealthy scions anymore than Bush's twins were punished? No, these pogroms won't apply to them, they will apply to the rest of us, though. So hopefully many will note the long-term plan of Paulites:

'Reached by phone, Kayser confirmed to TPM that he believed in reinstating Biblical punishments for homosexuals — including the death penalty — even if he didn’t see much hope for it happening anytime soon. While he said he and Paul disagree on gay rights, noting that Paul recently voted for repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, he supported the campaign because he believed Paul’s federalist take on the Constitution would allow states more latitude to implement fundamentalist law. Especially since under Kayser’s own interpretation of the Constitution there is no separation of Church and State.

“Under a Ron Paul presidency, states would be freed up to not have political correctness imposed on them, but obviously some state would follow what’s politically correct,” he said. “What he’s trying to do, whether he agrees with the Constitution’s position or not, is restrict himself to the Constitution. That is something I very much appreciate.”

Kayser’s allegiance to the Paul campaign may reflect who the campaign has chosen to sell Paul to the churches. Mike Heath, who became Ron Paul’s Iowa state director this fall, has spent his career on the Christian right. In Iowa, Heath has focused on outreach to the religious community in the state, where Paul has made an effort to target evangelical voters.

Heath spent 14 years running the Christian Civic League of Maine (which has since changed its name). As a prominent figure in Maine, Heath slowly alienated the Christian right in the state with his extreme tactics. In 2004, for example, he launched a witch hunt to out gay members of the Maine legislature, asking supporters, according to the Portland Press Herald, to “e-mail us tips, rumors, speculation and facts” regarding the sexual orientation of the state’s political leaders, adding, “We are, of course, most interested in the leaders among us who want to overturn marriage, eliminate the mother/father family as the ideal, etc.” The result was that his own organization suspended him for a month.'

http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/ron-paul-hired-anti-gay-activist-to-run-iowa-campaign.php

Democrats can vote for Paul's 'anti-war' stance, despite his caveat, his willingness to engage in 'declared wars,' and his stance on marijuana as he is against regulating the 'free market.'

If people overlook his extreme social and financial conservativism, for what they consider might help their personal interest at the expense of others, they'll vote for him like any good Republican, or stay at home, their defacto vote for the GOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 09:26 AM

3. Too late

Once it's on the net, it's the gift that keeps on giving. Ask Bible Spice about that.

Psst Paul, either you believe this and you should man up for your beliefs. Or, you're a posser and you're merely throwing red meat to the mouth breathers.

Which it is: Coward or hypocrite? Probably both.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 09:35 AM

4. Could we have the picture to go with that?

I'm contusion amazed at how the repups just don't get this Internet tube thingy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:13 AM

5. The internet tubes will bite you when you least expect it. Ask Ted Stevens. Oops. Guess that is

not possible. Never mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yellowcanine (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:24 AM

7. And yet, as a political junkie,

I am quite aware that he coined that stupidity. The thing that blows me away, is that this is not new technology, but looking at the republicans and the police, you would think they were unaware of how these tubes work, and work really fast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:15 AM

6. I call this the "top dog revision"

it happens anytime any repuke suddenly leads the pack. They have their lackies quickly go through their website to scrub any stupid thing they said in the past that might throw their lead in jeopardy.

paul now is feeling the weight of his new found ego.

notice, now more than before, he's evading questions and being more vague. Or my personal favorite, he turns the tables on the questioner and puts them on the spot instead of answering the question.

I honestly can't see how any libertarian halfwit could ever believe that paul was a straight shooter when he's never answering questions about the rest of his platform other than legalizing pot and getting out of the war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:31 AM

8. Paul is beyond fake. His ability to pull the wool

over the eyes of some of those on DU is staggering.

I don't understand the appeal of Paul or libertarianism in general. It's a juvenile philosophy at best.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Politicub (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:15 AM

11. This is a microcosm of the real world, one side of it, anyway.

Not everyone can be the sharpest tool in the shed.

Then again, some come here thinking that if Liberal Equals Tolerant, it must also mean "putting up with their idiotic shit." They find out soon enough that this isn't quite the case here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:40 AM

9. Visting 295 churches to promote a campaign.

Those 295 churches should all have their tax exempt status revoked ASAP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sarcasmo (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:59 PM

25. +a million. How was that missed? Thanks for the reminder and see my post above,.

Since Kayser doesn't believe in the separation of church and state. No conflict to the Paulites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:12 AM

10. Religon run amok

I get such a pit in my stomach when I realize that there are actually people out there who would persecute groups of other people whose only crime is following what Mother Nature has emphatically declared is their sexual orientation. I'm just glad that my sexual orientation was designated heterosexual because quite frankly I don't think I'd have the strength to constantly be battling to be just who I am. That one of the nutters is an actual physician horrifies me. That another is a pastor who's a believer in a loving god--well, that just sends me over the divide. And now we have other nutters trying to cover up Paul's shameful, repugnant endorsement. These oh so dangerous crackpots are beyond understanding at any level. We are right to express our collective disgust!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sellitman (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:09 PM

13. If Ron Paul were anti-gay, why he did he vote against the FMA?

 

If he were racist, why was he the only Texas House Republican to vote in favor of making Rev. Martin Luther King Day a national holiday?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-groshoff/ron-paul-homophobic_b_1171695.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Balthasar Bekker (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:24 PM

14. Because he's Mitt Romney with fangs

He's anything anyone wants him to be at any given time, ie a hypocrite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Balthasar Bekker (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 03:18 PM

18. Nothing short of total equality is good enough for me

They all have miles to go

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Balthasar Bekker (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:45 PM

16. There are no antigay federalists?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Balthasar Bekker (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 02:19 PM

17. ........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Balthasar Bekker (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 03:31 PM

19. What are R Paul fanbois doing on DU promoting R Paul?

R Paul is not a Democrat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to musette_sf (Reply #19)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 03:45 PM

20. There is nothing wrong with discussing Ron Paul

 

and i'll say right now that i AM troubled enough with his past that i could never vote for him. but you have to admit he does drawn from a relatively large spectrum of people when getting supporters. i know a few misinformed Dems who are thinking of voting for him - best thing to do is to show them why they shouldn't vote for Ron Paul. Calling someone a "fanbois" is nowhere near as good as refuting his argument with facts IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slay (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:30 PM

21. EarlG has said this isn't allowed

Ron Paul Apologists aka fanbois have no place spouting this stuff on here, as per the Admins. The poster isn't "discussing" Ron Paul, he is boostering him, and throwing President Obama under the bus in order to do so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:32 PM

22. I try to err on the side of non-censorship

 

i know other Dems here are fine with censoring others though.

i saw nowhere in his post where he was trying to get others to support ron paul, but whatever - i don't support ron paul but see no reason why he can not be discussed since he is one of the people who might face Obama in 2012.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slay (Reply #22)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:40 PM

23. He is an apologist for Paul -- a no-no

As per EarlG. He just banned a long-time poster for this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:42 PM

24. yeah it's his board, he can do as he wants

 

but i strongly disagree with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to obamanut2012 (Reply #21)

Fri Dec 30, 2011, 11:22 AM

28. Earl G advocates censorship?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slay (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:09 PM

26. There is a difference between "discussing" and "supporting"

and I would not have made my comment had the poster been DISCUSSING. But the poster was SUPPORTING.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to musette_sf (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:17 PM

27. I support some of Ron Paul's positions - like ending these horrible wars

 

but i don't support the man himself. i don't know enough about the poster to know what he meant in regards to ron paul.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread