The New Republican Wardrobe for Spring: Wooden Shoes and White Sheets

As I was researching the N Y Daily News web site yesterday, for a reason why the Yankees keep winning with a line up of virtual unknowns, I ran across an interesting article: Geert Wilders has been invited to speak at a G.O.P. event in Palm Beach Florida.  For those who don’t follow Dutch politics, Wilders is an openly pro gay man who is head of the Dutch Party for Freedom.  Their interest in economics is negligible, however they support strong measures to restrict and  hinder the practice of Islam in Holland.  Many commentators of European politics compare them to the racist National Front once led by the bigoted, anti-semitic Jean Marie Le Pen of France.

Today, the Times Dispatch informs us of a Facebook post by Republican delegate from Hanover, indicating that recent protesters in Baltimore should have been subjected to police dogs similar to those experienced by Civil Rights protesters in the 1960’s.  “Buddy” should resign immediately.  The G.O.P’s tolerance of this type of politics speaks more for their values than any platform ever will.

Les Schreiber

There are currently no comments highlighted.

13 responses to “The New Republican Wardrobe for Spring: Wooden Shoes and White Sheets

  1. you know – the GOP cannot seem to help themselves on these things.

    As soon as they think they got it under control – another rogue breaks from the herd and dives off the cliff…

  2. Les, Are you sure Geert Wilders is gay? And if he is, so what? I thought only bigoted, homophobic Republicans would care about that — not a progressive like you! (Pim Fortuyn was a conservative gay Dutchman, but I don’t believe Wilders is.)

    As for Wilders’ statements about immigration, you say, “Many commentators of European politics compare them to the racist National Front once led by the bigoted, anti-semitic Jean Marie Le Pen of France.”

    Does Wilders embrace the National Front? Do you have evidence of a meaningful similarity in views — as in, actual, real-live quotes? Or is that just guilt by association — a tactic that progressives denounced when it was Joe McCarthy attacking communists but enthusiastically embraced as a tool for smearing people on the right?

  3. Well … the GOP runs for federal office individuals who threaten to resort to 2nd amendment solutions if they lose the election. And not one leader of the GOP says anything.

    • the GOP establishment is held hostage by the goons and nut-jobs.

      THey are petrified that they will be dealt with like Cantor was – and you know what – they right!

      the inmates are in charge…

  4. The party is pro gay rights. I misspoke convening his personal sexual status. However, the party Geert heads is certainly out there. He spoke at the recent cartoon convention near Dallas Texas which was sponsored by a group that the Southern Poverty Law Center classifies as racist.

    • I sometimes wonder if in this country – we had cartoonists depicting Jesus Christ performing lewd acts and other mostly inconceivable acts – that we’d not
      have some kind of reactions.

      Are we willing to sustain the free speech that disgusts us that we say other religions are too sensitive about?

      • No one rioted when the NEA (National Endowment for the Arts) funded the exhibition of the Andres Serrano photography entitled “Piss Christ.” There were many protests and angry words, but no riots. There were more stronger reactions in Australia than in the U.S.
        Giant Food sells a beer named “Sweet Baby Jesus.” I don’t see any riots when I go to the grocery store.

        • TMT – no, we’re talking about really blasphemous stuff… depicting God as a child molester or worse…

          do you THOSE kinds of cartoons would be tolerated by even evangelicals?

          • TooManyTaxes

            I stand by my statements. There was plenty of protests and angry words, but no riots. I would not be surprised to learn Serrano received death threats. But there still were no riots.

            I do think there is a difference between the right to say or depict something and the common sense not to do so on all occasions.

          • TMT – yes – I understand but I had a question and that question is – can you envision levels of “free speech” depicting Christ in outrageous graphical ways

            and do you think that is acceptable in all cases even if abhorrent?

            are we really prepared for that standard of free speech?

            we know there is such a thing as yelling fire in a theater…

            are there other “speech” that can be thought of as so inflammatory as to …be unacceptable?

            bonus question – do you think cable TV should be able to use any words on TV to describe black people or loose women or illegitimate children, etc?

            where is that free speech? is it restricted? why?

        • Tolerated? There’s always the Westboro Baptist sort, consisting of hard-core loonies who will make a scene just to make a scene, even at funerals, over lgbt issues (and presumably over religious issues too, as they perceive them).

          But you know, Christianity comes to us from a teacher who refused to lead an armed rebellion, lived with some very unsavory people at the bottom of the social heap, taught peaceful acceptance of authority, and died a very ugly death at the authorities’ hands; it’s hard to malign Jesus to his followers today beyond what was said and done to him at the time. The historical Mohammed was a powerful political as well as military and religious leader — quite another matter to speak ill about him to those who revere his achievements, either then or now.

          • For those that believe in Jesus the only one true religion – and in addition believe other religions are not , in effect, true religions based on the true GOD – then yes but there are a LOT of people on this planet that fall into that “other” category – entire nations of millions of people where Christianity is a distinct minority.

            People believe strongly in religion – just different ones. 1.5 billion people believe in Islam not Christianity.

            within each religion – it’s considered blasphemous to impugn their perceived “god” … with words or graphics.

            so my actual question is – not what one of us believes is the true GOD but whether we are willing to have that person depicted by those who do not believe in him – in really disgusting and ugly ways that we seem okay with for other religions?

            I don’t see how that does not happen at some point since most of us feel that it’s okay to do it to other religions and that violent responses are unacceptable and the internet exposes all to all.

            but as typical for me – I often take the devil’s advocate view as sort of a bias check… or truth check on perceptions and views – and I’ll claim my own biases well as ignorance – also.

            and I have a bit of trouble with the concept that 3/4 of the people on planet earth are headed to hell for believing in the wrong religion.. and other minor quibbles.

        • You’re right, Andres Serrano just received death threats. Way to rise above the fray, guys!

          “but no riots.”

          There were serious conversations in Congress at the time of Piss Christ about defunding the NEA altogether. While that failed, a decency clause was able to make it through. The system heard the grievances of the people who were offended and responded to those grievances.

          Why do you want to give people cookies for not rioting when the system listened to them?

          “Hey, the thing we wanted to happen did happen so let’s burn it down!”

          Oh, wait, I get it now. That’s how you’re used to seeing people respond when their college team wins. Your confusion is understandable.

Leave a Reply