Subscribe to Breaking NewsRuby-Sachs: GOP Thinks Gay Marriage is Socialist
U.S. Representative Steve King (R-IA) made an interesting comment on a Conservative talk show yesterday:
They want public affirmation. They want access to public funds and resources. Eventually all those resources will be pooled because that’s the direction we’re going. And not only is it a radical social idea, it is a purely socialist concept in the final analysis.
The “they” in that sentence, are the gay marriers. That is, those who wish to plow through the fabric of traditional marriage. As a proud member of that group, I am thrilled to know that being for equal rights now comes with an automatic membership to the socialist party.
Let’s be honest, I do believe in a lot of aspects of socialism. I like socialized medicine, for example, and socialized education systems and there are a lot of other essential services that I think should be free and equally distributed to everyone.
But I believe in public marriage the most.
At least, I can say that I think public funds should be available to everyone who wants to use them to file paperwork to get married, or divorced or any other relationship recognition right none of us have right now.
But most of all, I love that the gay marriage movement is so powerful, so threatening that we have been inducted into the vast American socialist conspiracy.
Thank you Rep. King. And thank you to all who will be marching in our campaign for socialism on October 11th.
I though the GOP was trying to change their image as the “party of ‘No.’” No sex. No minorities. No immigration. No welfare. No social security.
I guess not.
To quote King Charles from the movie The Libertine: Anyone can oppose, it’s fun to be against things, but there comes a time when you have to start being for things as well.
This is the insanist thing yet. The satirical National Inquisition has this follow up, revealing the full socialist conspiracy: ” 10 to 15 percent of Americans are secretly Marxist revolutionaries, merely posing as gay people. There are no real gay people. It’s just something we made up as a cover.”
http://www.natinq.com
The article title needs work
“Ruby-Sachs: GOP Thinks Gay Marriage is Socialist”
“Thinks” is a very generous word, it implies thought, logic and reason as opposed to blind belief and bigotry.
Drewski, thanks for the clarification on the details in Canada and England..helpful.
And of course I totally agree with your assessment, starting with the Southern Baptists going from D to R in the 60’s (when I was born, so too young to remember).
All that you list about what is wrong with the R party is so correct….and so sad. They can keep their name but need to give up conservative. Great comments..thanks.
Republicans need to seriously start asking whether they’re for the good of the country at all anymore. All they do is sit on their bums and complain and incite violence. Sounds like the 1 kid on the block that nobody in their right mind would ever want to babysit, haha.
So it started with words and morphed into murder (the census worker). Good job GOP, fox news, et al. Your proving all of us right.
We’re the next target it looks like, so I hope we don’t see a spike in hate-related crimes because of this.
Highly amusing to see SOCIAL conservatives fearmongering about “socialism”.
Humans being social animals, any system of government that we create for ourselves is a form of socialism. What people really disagree about is the degree of government control, what is to be controlled/left free (business concerns, individual liberties), the means by which it’s regulated, and where the power to do so is vested.
I’ll grant you that in current usage the word “socialist” refers to a general position on the degree of government involvement, but this and other words like “conservative” and “liberal” have become less and less meaningful thanks to their use as pejoratives.
If these people are really concerned about socialism, perhaps they should start by calling for the government to entirely stop recognizing marriage as the basis for distributing government subsidized benefits & privileges. Trouble is, I rather doubt they want and end to the legal responsibilities imposed by government upon couples in recognition of their marriages. Can’t have it both ways. Civil recognition and regulation of marriage is a policy grounded in a socialistic approach, no matter how much or how little the government is involved.
He’s calling it socialist, because that’s the word they used to describe health care reform, and it worked to scare the less educationally astute among us into opposing it. Since it worked for health care reform, he figures it’ll work equally well for gay marriage.
It shows how willing the GOP is to intentionally misinform and misguide the masses. They care nothing of truth…only control at any cost, including the very liberties they claim so vehemently to uphold.
@ DaveW–well, not entirely. Ontario owns all but a few hospitals in the province. There is no private primary health insurance to speak of, but there are private plans for dental, optical and pharmacare (last may be superceded if Ontario gets its shit together like Quebec and finally covers scrips). Doctors who don’t get paid by OHIP…only significant group I can think of would be plastic surgeons for purely cosmetic procedures, but I could be wrong. And technically, the UK does NOT have “socialized” medicine, because there are more than a few doctors who aren’t part of NHS (or they work both NHS and private–dentists especially, and no bad jokes), and there are more than a few clinics and hospitals not owned by an NHS Trust.
Anyway, how the hell has the GOP been so completely overtaken by these freaks? I mentioned it in another thread, months ago, about a comment made to LBJ when he signed the Civil Rights Act. Sen. Richard Russell Jr (D-GA) told Johnson that the Civil Rights Act would cost LBJ and the Dems both the Southern vote, but also Johnson’s election in 1968. He was right, and Johnson pretty much acknowledged it, but it’s funny because now that Republican “gain” has become the party’s ruin. It has no real credibility left. It’s not just the Party of No, it’s the Party of I Need Court-Ordered Medication. Antigay, anti-government (unless it’s invading countries that piss us off), anti-foreign (unless we get cheap oil and room to torture), anti-immigration (unless they’re nine-to-a-room illegals providing cheap lawncare in Scottsdale and North County San Diego), anti-science (unless it’s military technology sold to some oil-owning despot we try and fail to unseat five years later)–it’s just too much crazy coming out at one time from one source. What happened to the party that argued a clear concept of federal powers being only those so specified, with others remaining with the sovereign states? Nope–that’d wipe out DADT and DOMA. What happened to the idea that a few solid regulations are better for business than a byzantine maze of exceptions, all of which leave US small and mid-sized businesses at a huge disadvantage? What happened to a clear understanding that our sovereignty is not for sale? What happened to the idea that each of us is responsible for our actions, so that the state isn’t the grand facilitator of fraud and other criminal activities (as currently displayed by our addict-mentality financial sector)? The GOP has given us a pluto-kleptocracy, the worst of the Middle East, East Asia and Latin America combined. And what the GOP shrilly describes as Democratic “socialism” is what Europeans, Canadians and Australians would expect from a center-right to right-wing government. We’ve gone off the rails. We still have room to restore some rule of law, but not much. And somehow this is all because of gays and a president who shouldn’t be so…what’s the word people like Rep Wilson use when they’re down home?…oh, I think it’s “uppity.” And that says all that need be said. Last I knew, the South didn’t just lose the Civil War, it lost because of an inherently failed economic model (slave labor producing ag-based commodities). I can’t help but wonder if a return to that failed model might be what Wilson and the teabaggers are aiming for, assuming all the way that THEY won’t be the ones doing the actual producing.
Emma, you probably didn’t mean you like socialized medicine, did you?
Single payer is not socialized medicine….I think its a terrible word but really only fits in an English system where the government delivers the care, as with education, the government owns/runs the schools and hires everyone.
With single payer it is still privately delivered care.
Now maybe you really do like socialized medicine. I would rather have private sector employees cutting me open even if the government is paying.
I think rather you meant socialized health insurance?
As for public funds available for helping people file paperwork…..ha? Socialized, subsidized, whatever: bad idea. Everyone wants everything for free and I end up paying. No thanks.
What is however maddening about what you have quoted is how it creates such a horrible non-truth that people will cling to and perpetuate: that we want access to public money, as if we want a free-bie. That money is MY TAX DOLLARS that I want my spouse to get if he survives me! Who cares about the word he chose…just to get people to agree…its the idea he puts forth, that our wanting what we paid for is different than straights wanting it. I think most people would disagree if his wording didn’t confuse him.
Marriage equality is about dignity and civil rights but for me first and foremost it is about fairness and MONEY!
James Martin: have you checked with your so-called millionaire gay friends lately? Affluent gays voted Republican for years because we fealt government should keep its hands off our earnings. But since the republicans abandoned killing the death tax and the regressive income tax in favor of hugely expanding government and focusing on being the theocratic party while throwing us under the bus, we have no reason at all to vote for them. Conservatism is not bigoted but it seems republicanism is.
I now vote libertarian. did everyone hear that Glenn Beck supports marriage equality? Surprised? I wasn’t.
That’s odd, the last I looked, my millionaire gay friends vote Republican and are as capitalist as William F. Buckley.
The GOP is anti-everything. They are against health care reform, immigration reform, equality for all. The Republican party has a broad audience in the religious communities. Some have used the term Muslim extremist. They have never acknowledged the existence of Christian extremist who in my view are real terrorists. U.S. Representative Steve King is an example. He and others brainwash people into thinking that gay marriage is a form of socialism with hopes of increasing homophobia in our country. That is a form of preaching terrorism. Radical Christianity is terrorism. Wake up people!
Am I the only one to see the monster in the room???? They equate us as socielist like the equated the ussr with evil & they all called for there death! Except diffrence is they can reach us!!!! There telling the nut jobs to destroy us! Are gathering places not to mention are organizations need to be on gaurd NOW. Sure I could be wrong perhaps there is no imminant attack planned fact I REALY hope I am. I would hate to see that fanatic faciest hate aimed at are core…..
ooh, ooh can I get called a Nazi next? ooh ooh and please question my birthplace.
Ah, but we miss the point.
Just like transfer of wealth is hunky-dory okay as long as its going from the poorest to the richest, socialism and socialist programs–you know, like hetero-marriage, for profit insurance, state financed private colleges et al–are just fine as long as they benefit only straight white christian America.
If marriage equality is a “socialist” concept, then the Republicans also have to hold the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address are also socialist documents, since all of these stressed the equality of humanity in one way or another.
If anything, Republicans should be more interested in passing same-sex marriage into law, since those entering into a marriage relationship, whether with a partner of the opposite sex or the same sex have made the choice to a faithful, exclusive relationship with one partner for life, and not to have multiple sexual partners.
If married opposite-sex partners are eligible for certain public resources and rights, there is no reason to hold these back from marriage same-sex partners.