Those Lovable Democrats

Nimh, could it be as simple as the fact that Bush and Cheney never act like homosexuals that they aren't mistaken for homosexuals?

And sheesh Nimh, no sense of humor at all? We have to take all the jokes, innuendo, and jabs aimed at our guys, but we aren't supposed to retaliate even in a good natured way?

Kerry and Edwards will NOT allow release of a Dem fund raiser this past week because Whoopie Goldberg was talking about Bush in a double entendre 'bush below the belt' manner and they knew how bad that would make them look. The GOP and the media want that tape.

Just look at these pictures
http://www.drudgereport.com/kerryk.htm
and if you didn't know who these guys were and didn't know they were both married with kids, what would you think? Nothing derogatory at all has been said about gays and it isn't homophobic to point out how something looks.

Frankly I hadn't given that much thought until another member started commenting about homophobia. I think that's ridiculous.

Ummmmmm I dont think anyone mainstream is mistaking Kerry and Edwards for homosexuals ... that must be a angry-far-righter thing.

In fact, I dont believe even they mean it -- they're just trying some shtick, thaz all.

Reflects pretty badly on 'em, too.

Ah well. I don't know why I am continually surprised at the blatant double standard.

Hey, if you think this was funny, go on, have a grand time. I'd be a little bit worried about how I was getting across, myself, too tho - what, in election times an' all ...



Ehm, you have this victimised thing going on, Fox, that strikes me a bit odd somehow. Being much into polls and stuff and just generally curious, I surf past quite some conservative blogs and so on, and there seems to be no lack of jokes, innuendo, and jabs at Kerry, both tasteless and funny enough. I really dont get this crucifixion thing - its really not just your guy who's being singled out.

I mean, I dont wanna put up one of those unfeasible statistical challenges here, but if you'd count how often yer average liberal poster here on a2k makes fun of Bush versus how often, say, McG, Timber, Sofia or you jabs at Kerry, I dont think you'll find much of an imbalance there ...

Or is it that if someone posts another inane Bushbasher here, you get to cry shame and roll your eyes, but if you do the same thing, we should respectfully nod at your legitimate "retaliation"?


Ehmmm ... lemme come up with a parallel here.

Say, someone comes up with a, "doesnt Bush look like a negro?" shtick. Hard to imagine yeah, but nothing's unimaginable on that score. And then they go on making fun at Bush in joking just how much he looks and acts like, well, ha ha ha, a black guy! Funny, funny! Say we come up with some carefully selected pictures in which he just looks soo 'black' and some hilarious-sounding stereotype about blacks thats equivalent to the "wearing matching outfits when they ride bikes together this weekend" gay thing in this piece. And contrast it all with a Kerry who's described as simply very white, what, "the scion of generations of reserved and genteel WASP breeding". Which is made out to be a very good thing, unlike the black-looking Bush, at whom we'll "just have to grin and bear it".

You wouldnt detect a hint of racism in there? I mean, nothing derogatory would have been said about blacks, per se - just about how Bush looked sooo black-guy, ha ha ha, look how silly he looks, how grating!

Man, I'm sorry. I mean, the piece is best forgotten, its not like I'd wanna sue anyone over it or anything - its just stupid. But if you dont detect some homophobia in this piece then I can imagine how you're just puzzled when people mention homophobia in the Republican Party ...


When someone posts another set of pictures making fun of how Bush moves or walks, I think its just stoopid too. <shrugs>

Havent seen the NYT chief editor do the equivalent tho - so perhaps more like a different than a double standard, after all, there?

And then there's your claim that you "haven't seen that [they are fags] insinuation from anybody but the Kerry/Edwards side" ...

Nimh, so who else but the Kerry/Edwards side has used the word 'fags' or suggested there would be something WRONG with Kerry and Edwards being gay? Seems to me you guys whining about it are the ones with the problem.

I don't see anywhere in this thread I have complained about our side getting poked fun at. You are also the one who seems to have a problem with that. So who's the victim here?

Redheat, the Dems have been campaigning non-stop and full-out since the 2000 race began. Managing nothing better than a within-the-margin-of-error dead heat is not a circumstance from which they might take comfort. At this respective point in his campaign, Dukakis enjoyed a double-digit lead, BTW.

Nimh writes:


Just so I don't ignore your example, Bush would have to be in a position where he was dressed or behaving as some Negros behave in order for that to make any sense. So lets use another example:

Let's say Bush was waving a Confederate flag and pumping his fist in the air at some Southern Nascar rally. I can just see the story now: "Red faced, wild eyed, shouting militia style epithats to the crowd, one could almost imagine a gun rack across the back of the driver's seat and bull horns on the hood of the presidential limousine.

Now there's a fair comparison. Would that be funny? Bush supporters might bristle a bit and go look for something to retaliate with. I guarantee you, Kerry supporters would giggle.

Err, what about the initial piece you posted? Sure, it didnt say, "fags are stupid" - it just
1) insisted on how gay Kerry/Edwards come across, in all kinds of stereotyping, fun-making descriptions
2) contrasted that with the honest-to-god masculinity of Bush/Cheney
3) used the contrast to make Kerry/Edwards look ridiculous and a grating thing we'll just have to "bear"

Hey, if you wanna turn the WT piece around into, like, a sincere, empowering appeal to us all to accept and respect Kerry's and Edward's gayness, go ahead - Orwellian linguistics abound here already, anyway.


Well, in this thread it was just the whiny bit about how
"We have to take all the jokes, innuendo, and jabs aimed at our guys, but we aren't supposed to retaliate"
... which is based, I guess, on us reacting here in exactly the way that you react to Bush-bashing in other threads.

And of course we know you longer than this thread - you regularly return to this, "we're never allowed anything, while you just go running rampant" thing. Dont see how you're getting anything back you're not giving yourself when others do what you do here, myself <shrugs>. Makes me wonder about who's keeping which double standards again ...

Okay Nimh. I was having fun with the thread. I suggest that if you don't like it, feel free not to read it. I wasn't whining about the jokes; I was observing the liberal whining when it's their ox getting gored and the double standard applied in cases like this. You are beautifully demonstrating that very double standard.

Err, so how exactly did Kerry and Edwards dress or behave like gays here? I mean, as a Bush supporter, facing many an attempt from the left to make Bush look silly, you'll know that you can make anyone look weird on a photo. So what exactly did they do? Did they kiss? Lock each other in a tight embrace? Have sex? Move in with one another? File for marriage in San Francisco?

Bush and Kerry didnt "behave as gays". You people just try to make a deal like that, and the only reason I can imagine you doing so is the expectation that some people (potential voters and such) do think that looking gay is a bad thing. Now ask me again which camp is playing to homophobia here.


Yeah, very fair. Putting your arm round your friend's (or business partner's) shoulder to show (or fake) team spirit = waving a racially offensive, politically inflammatory flag. Not. Of course Bush would be hacked into over that flag, Dean was about just even mentioning it. No comparison.

But, I do understand your point, even if I think you got the proportions all wrong. So let us imagine that Bush was waving the Stars 'n' Stripes and pumping his fist in the air at some Southern Nascar rally. Yeah, the Moore-type liberals would have a field day with that. And no, it wouldnt be funny either. It would just be more stoopid stuff.

Now, some humour, yeah, that would be nice. <sighs>

(Seems like I'm perennially late one post ...)


How am I doing that, Fox?

By blasting your partisan sillyness in much the same way you blast the leftists' partisan sillyness?

Sounds like a fair enough deal, doesnt it? Why is it a double standard if we do it, and a normal reaction if you do it?

Or have you been going around criticizing conservative piss-takes of Kerry as passionately as you object to Bush-bashing?

(And all thats even disregarding the fact that it is nimh you're talking to here, not bi-polar bear or hobitbob -- you wont catch me posting "let's-make-bush-look-silly" threads here or anything ...)

Well Nimh, if its news, it's discussable on A2K and this good natured jabs at Kerry and Edwards are not just in the Times or here on A2K but it is all over the place. At least two of our local talk radio stations spent quite a bit of time talking about Kerry and Edwards and "men hugging' and what did people think about that?

I dislike having the thesis of a thread diverted to make me the issue and I say so, which generally prompts accusations of victimhood and whining from you and Craven. I don't do that to other people.

And I can say with no reservations that yes, when anybody is accused falsely or unfairly, be s/he Democrat, Republican, or Martian, I say that it is unfair. In this thread nobody has accused anybody of anything other than their obvious behavior.

And I have a healthy sense of humor and this is funny to me. It would be funny if it were Bush and Cheney as well--somebody has been posting a pic of Bush and Cheney in the limo that just begs for suggestive captions. Maybe its a cultural thing that you don't see it as funny. That's something I can't help with.

Whining is whining, whoever does it.

Yeah Timber, but define whining

Sure. Whining

ROFL

Yeah, I'm pretty sure its a cultural thing that makes me think a chief editor's crude shtick of making a politician look ridiculous by going on about how gay he looks isn't very funny.

But I doubt the cultural thing is an American/Dutch thing.

There's an opinion we share, nimh

ohmigawd





pages and pages of it


Just look at the way they're looking at each other. And the way their legs are crossed, and well, you know how couples mirror each other.



you can make this lovely internet work any way you want it to.

A soulful gaze at a friend.



It's not particularly smart from any angle. Or funny.
What are people learning in journalism school?