• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Powerful GOP lobbyist drafts bill to ban gay athletes from playing in the NFL

specklebang said:
IMHO, you are wrong about the outcome. There are some GOP candidates, from minor states like Kansas, who market their bigotry as a vote getter. Might work in KS but overall, I think that even the Conservative have conceded the battle for gay equality. So, I think it will have the opposite of its intended effect overall.

If extremists were running the GOP, Obama would have been opposed by Santorum (not Romney) and there would have been no concessions on the debt ceiling. My Conservative friends, people who pay taxes and vote, do not support extremism. The era of the evangelical is ending in most places. KS is not representative of the USA overall.

I could be wrong :)roll:) but I expect the GOP will turn its attention toward fiscal matters rather than social issues.
Click to expand...

Indiana has a gay marriage ban bill pending. Its clearly to get the vote out, because the social issues motivate the base on off presidential election years.
 
"Powerful GOP lobbyist." Yeah, right.
 
Crovax said:
So I suppose you would just hop right into your local gym shower with a bunch of guys?
Click to expand...

That's rather a silly question. Of course I wouldn't hop into the shower with a bunch of guys, gay or otherwise. I would have no problem hopping into the shower with a bunch of women, gay or otherwise.

I think your "gotcha" didn't exactly "get" anybody.
 
Anagram said:
He hardly speaks for the GOP and I doubt that this bill is ever cosponsored by any member of Congress. You can't attribute the ridiculousness of this "powerful" lobbyist to the entire party.
Click to expand...

classic liberal demean and defame tactic. this has nothing to do with the GOP but a lobbyist that has no power at all whatsoever. there isn't a congressman out there that would even put this up for a vote.
 
Wow. Another right winger doing what right wingers do so well. Love me some compassionate conservatives.
 
While this Jack Burkman character is a dickhead, here's a little more on him:

You Can Ignore the Wannabe Radio Host Who Wants to Ban Gay NFL Players - The Wire

Raw Story calls Burkman "powerful," based in part on The Hill's assessment that he signed more new lobbying clients in 2013 than any other firm. In fact, the firm did less than $2 million in business in this Congress, through the first three quarters of 2013.

And Burkman isn't just a lobbyist. He's also a heavy-hitter with 21 followers on Twitter, a "radio show" that appears to be nothing more than a podcast, and a pronounced issue with gay people. Here, from last February, Burkman criticizes the establishment media for forcing the Boy Scouts to accept gay people: "Ladies and gentlemen, if you have a son, if you have a son in the Boy Scouts, get him out now." As of writing, the Boy Scouts of America has not collapsed in a moral panic.

It's not clear how Congress would even enforce a ban on accepting gay players, which is one reason that policy experts, not lobbyist/podcast hosts, are generally the ones to draft legislation. The league receives some tax exemption, but that's a small stick for Congress to wave. Any attempt by the government to limit who private entities might hire would 1) probably lose in court and 2) seems somewhat contrary to the worldview of a conservative like Burkman.

Burkman says he has political support for the measure, which is probably true. But he didn't indicate to The Hill any members of Congress who might want to carry a lobbyist's anti-gay NFL bill — perhaps because there are not many members of Congress who would be willing to do so.

Update: Burkman told the Huffington Post's Sam Stein that he has five members of the House and a senator interested in co-sponsoring the bill. He didn't name any of them.

Burkman's real goal is actually to get people to talk about Jack Burkman. He has succeeded, so now we can all go back to not knowing who he is.
Click to expand...
 
ludin said:
classic liberal demean and defame tactic. this has nothing to do with the GOP but a lobbyist that has no power at all whatsoever. there isn't a congressman out there that would even put this up for a vote.
Click to expand...

He would be anointed if he was in AZ.
 
Top Cat said:
He would be anointed if he was in AZ.
Click to expand...
he isn't so it doesn't matter.

he is a no name guy that I have never heard of spouting off at the mouth. I could probably find as many quotes from left wing lobbyist and/or even politicians that the board would run out of drive space.

the fact that the OP tried to portray this as a GOP thing is dishonest as a whole. it's a lobbyist shooting his mouth off.
 
ludin said:
he isn't so it doesn't matter.

he is a no name guy that I have never heard of spouting off at the mouth. I could probably find as many quotes from left wing lobbyist and/or even politicians that the board would run out of drive space.

the fact that the OP tried to portray this as a GOP thing is dishonest as a whole. it's a lobbyist shooting his mouth off.
Click to expand...

Don't know one way or the other. However, the bleacher report quotes the same thing from The Hill site. It's making the rounds. The question is he a powerful GOP lobbyist as claim. If he is, it taints the GOP.
 
Boo Radley said:
Don't know one way or the other. However, the bleacher report quotes the same thing from The Hill site. It's making the rounds. The question is he a powerful GOP lobbyist as claim. If he is, it taints the GOP.
Click to expand...

...and if he's not, it's not like it matters. This doesn't affect the existing taint of the GOP. It merely confirms it.
 
Threegoofs said:
...and if he's not, it's not like it matters. This doesn't affect the existing taint of the GOP. It merely confirms it.
Click to expand...

Well, from Palin to Santorum to King there's enough stupid to worry.
 
joko104 said:
"Powerful GOP lobbyist." Yeah, right.
Click to expand...

Correct. The man is a nobody trying to drum up business for his podcast show. His goal was to get us to talk about him, and he succeeded.
 
Boo Radley said:
Don't know one way or the other. However, the bleacher report quotes the same thing from The Hill site. It's making the rounds. The question is he a powerful GOP lobbyist as claim. If he is, it taints the GOP.
Click to expand...

He's not. He's a chump.
 
Boo Radley said:
Don't know one way or the other. However, the bleacher report quotes the same thing from The Hill site. It's making the rounds. The question is he a powerful GOP lobbyist as claim. If he is, it taints the GOP.
Click to expand...

not really. just another radical spouting off. no one in the GOP congress would even support it or even consider it. this is a non-issue that they are trying to dig up as usual since liberals have a hard time actually bringing up real points.

Alinsky is a live an well in the radical left wing.
 
Last edited:
ludin said:
not really. just another radical spouting off. no one in the GOP congress would even support it or even consider it. this is a non-issue that they are trying to dig up as usual since liberals have a hard time actually bringing up real points.

salsinky is a live an well in the radical left wing.
Click to expand...

Well, you just list credibility by misusing Salsinky. It means you not the propaganda, but not the real work.
 
Ridiculous. This bill is actively denying rights to a certain group of people - which is unconstitutional.
 
Boo Radley said:
Well, you just list credibility by misusing Salsinky. It means you not the propaganda, but not the real work.
Click to expand...

actually it was a typo Alinsky is who I was referring to. my apologies.
 
Dayvid said:
Ridiculous. This bill is actively denying rights to a certain group of people - which is unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

:doh this isn't even a bill. lobbyist can't write bills. only congress can write bills. this is a proposal by some nut job. this will never even make it to the floor of the senate or the house.
 
ludin said:
actually it was a typo Alinsky is who I was referring to. my apologies.
Click to expand...

True, not what I was talking about. His work has been misrepresented by GOP propaganda.
 
ludin said:
:doh this isn't even a bill. lobbyist can't write bills. only congress can write bills. this is a proposal by some nut job. this will never even make it to the floor of the senate or the house.
Click to expand...

From what I know of Congress, lobbyists pretty much write ALL the bills. It's a rare piece of legislation that doesn't get crafted on K street.

Congress just modifies and votes on them.

But I'm sure your knowledge is much deeper than mine....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom