Damned because of party affiliation, again

Imagine how the Democrat party would be partying away IF they had a beautiful black lesbian Secretary of State. Picture the rhapsodizing over the multicultural diversity of sexual expression, the lyricism of equal opportunity and affirmative action, the role model for the younger generations. All of which would be accompanied by the world’s smallest violin playing in the background a tune of victimization…

Now here’s what it looks like when the said Secretary of State is a Republican:

For the record, in the book Kessler goes into the long-discussed rumors about Rice and the few times her sexual orientation has been gossiped about or discussed in the media, but he also talks about how single, older (heterosexual) women often “unfairly” have their sexual orientation questioned, and says in the book that Rice has been the target of “nasty attacks” in this regard. He mentions that she was linked to a man once — back in college. Even if Rice is heterosexual, however, it is fascinating and mind-boggling that this woman whose best male friend is an openly gay liberal and whose best female “friend” is a “liberal progressive,” would work for a president who has opposed every gay rights initiative and tried to enshrine religious hatred in the Constitution. What does it say about them as well?

I wish they had listed “every gay rights initiative” they want, while calling for the resignation of a gay man playing footsie in the bathroom. Interesting, also, how they claim Pres. Bush “tried to enshrine religious hatred in the Constitution” – rich, isn’t it, coming from the people who constantly insult Catholics and Christians, and drill Mitt Romney with impertinent questions on being a Mormon when their own Senate majority leader is a Mormon.

More here:

The GOP is great at trotting out a few Auntie Toms to show you how loving they are.

Racial slurs combined with sexual innuendo, indeed.

And let’s not get into all the outrage when people question Hillary’s sexuality. By their criteria, the right to privacy applies only to members of the Democrat party, and only conservatives have psycho-sexual issues, at least according to them.

Not that I’m surprised. After all, as Gerard wrote about The List

A morally aware person with a respect for the privacy of a fellow human being’s sexuality would not write about such a list at all. Case closed. But I don’t look for any real moral awareness to rise from the reactionary spear carriers of the party of “post-modern moral certitude and relativistic rectitude.” It’s just another example of the extremes of the Democratic Party going after the blood of the moderates, Democrat or Republican, straight or, in this instance, gay.

As Gagdad Bob was saying the other day,

One of the appeals of leftism is that you can never be called a hypocrite. That is, if you have no standards, then there is no standard by which to judge you.

Technorati tags: Condoleezza Rice

Digg!

Share on Facebook

3 Responses to “Damned because of party affiliation, again”

  1. Mark Says:

    Excellent points Fausta

  2. Always On Watch Says:

    If the leftists didn’t have hypocrisy as an intrinsic part of their existence, would they just dry up and blow away?

  3. Beth Says:

    OH MY GOD.
    Why on earth does Mike Rogers think this is “relevant?” Of COURSE she’s welcome in the “inner circle”–it’s based on her world views, not her f’n personal life! GAWD!
    Those scum are once again, trying desperately to criminalize and stigmatize politics, and using their own (!) sexual orientation to do it!

    This is an OUTRAGE.