Jump to content

Beefcake Cawthorn is a proselytizing jackass who needs his own thread


TheStoicPaisano

Recommended Posts

 I don't care that he's in the closet either. It is amusing to watch the star of the anti-republic fascist manly man party self-immolate. 

If he's gay and trying to hide it, it's a hilariously poor effort. He wouldn't need to hide it if he were a member of the pro-republic party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

That Venmo stuff has to be guys joking around. If not, he’s even dumber than people on this thread have been strenuously arguing.  Actually is pretty damn stupid for a rep to even joke about that with an aide. 

I don't know why people don't use the "private" setting when they transact via venmo.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet he did use the private setting or else a Democratic group would have already leaked this.

This came from “a friend” - AKA someone in the NC GQP who was close enough to get inside info.

These latest “attacks” - the insider trading, the gay stuff, and the almost immediate release of police and TSA info is coming from inside the house.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

 

Ordinarily, nobody should care that a homosexual is in the closet, because a person's sexuality is their own private matter, and when to come out should be a person's own choice that, even in 2022, is still fraught with peril and fear. 

But when a closeted homosexual is an elected official and a member of a political party that has consistently pursued the establishment of laws, policies, and general social behavior to discriminate and degradate the LGBTQ population, then yeah, I fucking care that a closeted homosexual is living a double, and hypocritical, life.  I say that not knowing Cawthorn's public stance or voting record when it comes to LGBTQ issues, but there have been several elected Republican officials in the past who were outed as gay after a career of opposing gay rights.

If you've never seen the HBO documentary Outrage, I recommend it.

 

Now, fucking a staffer, gay or straight, is a whole other matter, and I enjoy watching that one play out.

I believe you, I, and Bama are in agreement here. Not caring about Cawthorn being in the closet means to me (us) that such a status is none of my business. I only bother with this because of the possibility that you think we are not in agreement or that someone might read your excellent post and be misled into thinking there is disagreement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I believe you, I, and Bama are in agreement here. Not caring about Cawthorn being in the closet means to me (us) that such a status is none of my business. I only bother with this because of the possibility that you think we are not in agreement or that someone might read your excellent post and be misled into thinking there is disagreement. 

Just to clarify, I was expounding on Bama and your response, and thought you'd likely agree with the further explanation.

Edited by South Austin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flip a coin:

Heads: A year from now, Cawthorn and his friend are together, out of the closet and out of politics, quite mellow and happy, sampling infinitely complicated brewpub products at their home in Asheville.

Tails: A year from now, Cawthorn is even deeper into politics when not heading his "Stop Gay Rapist Groomers" foundation, where he and his new wife Becky Sue McChickenfried Cawthorn testify tearfully about Madison's harrowing escape from molestation and liberal Rino brainwashing. They will have relocated to Texas, to Frisco.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Haha 3
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

Flip a coin:

Heads: A year from now, Cawthorn and his friend are together, out of the closet and out of politics, quite mellow and happy, sampling infinitely complicated brewpub products at their home in Asheville.

Tails: A year from now, Cawthorn is even deeper into politics when not heading his "Stop Gay Rapist Groomers" foundation, where he and his new wife Becky Sue McChickenfried Cawthorn testify tearfully about Madison's harrowing escape from molestation and liberal Rino brainwashing. They will have relocated to Texas, to Frisco.

It's a trick.  Your coin is double-tailed.

  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dieucla98 said:

Part of me misses the days when Ted Cruz was the worst part of the Republican Party and there was still some level of respect there. But this wheels on fire shit is entertaining and I'm here for all of it.

they only have themselves to blame. which means they'll blame the dems

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, South Austin said:

 

Ordinarily, nobody should care that a homosexual is in the closet, because a person's sexuality is their own private matter, and when to come out should be a person's own choice that, even in 2022, is still fraught with peril and fear. 

But when a closeted homosexual is an elected official and a member of a political party that has consistently pursued the establishment of laws, policies, and general social behavior to discriminate against and degradate the LGBTQ population, then yeah, I fucking care that a closeted homosexual is living a double, and hypocritical, life.  I say that not knowing Cawthorn's public stance or voting record when it comes to LGBTQ issues, but there have been several elected Republican officials in the past who were outed as gay after a career of opposing gay rights.

If you've never seen the HBO documentary Outrage, I recommend it.

 

Now, fucking a staffer, gay or straight, is a whole other matter, and I en joy watching that one play out.

Are you as outraged at Dems attacking the 2nd Amendment rights of others but wanted guns or private security for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ohh you got me.

 

Still the question is unanswered.

 

Look Cawthorn a closeted fag no doubt. Just like Hotze and Lowery locally.

But hypocrisy is still hypocrisy .

 

And my last line of defense is I got booted out of Rice, thank you very much

Edited by immamac
Vacation.
  • Fuck You 19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, OWLVIS said:

Are you as outraged at Dems attacking the 2nd Amendment rights of others but wanted guns or private security for themselves.

Holy non sequitur, Batman!

But okay, I’ll play your little reindeer game.

Yes, I’m as outraged that Republicans can’t grasp the notion that just as the First Amendment’s right of free speech is not an absolute and is subject to reasonable governmental regulations, so is the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

Holy non sequitur, Batman!

But okay, I’ll play your little reindeer game.

Yes, I’m as outraged that Republicans can’t grasp the notion that just as the First Amendment’s right of free speech is not an absolute and is subject to reasonable governmental regulations, so is the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms.

That's not even a necessary rebuttal.  Somehow our former Rice undergrad seems to think the Democrats are pushing for legislation which allows them certain types of gun ownership that Republicans won't be able to enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's not even a necessary rebuttal.  Somehow our former Rice undergrad seems to think the Democrats are pushing for legislation which allows them certain types of gun ownership that Republicans won't be able to enjoy.

Yes, I know. But why pass up the opportunity to shove more Republican hypocrisy down Cletus’s throat?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll answer for myself. Yes, if there’s some rich and/or Hollywood person that’s out there publicly espousing that all guns are bad and nobody should have guns, but allows or prefers their own security detail to be armed, that’s hypocrisy at a high level and I condemn it. 
 

what are there, maybe 5 such people in this country?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, South Austin said:

 

Ordinarily, nobody should care that a homosexual is in the closet, because a person's sexuality is their own private matter, and when to come out should be a person's own choice that, even in 2022, is still fraught with peril and fear. 

But when a closeted homosexual is an elected official and a member of a political party that has consistently pursued the establishment of laws, policies, and general social behavior to discriminate against and degradate the LGBTQ population, then yeah, I fucking care that a closeted homosexual is living a double, and hypocritical, life.  I say that not knowing Cawthorn's public stance or voting record when it comes to LGBTQ issues, but there have been several elected Republican officials in the past who were outed as gay after a career of opposing gay rights.

If you've never seen the HBO documentary Outrage, I recommend it.

 

Now, fucking a staffer, gay or straight, is a whole other matter, and I enjoy watching that one play out.

And, most of his caustic and stupid social positions are implicitly anti-gay,if not explicitly. 

 

And I bet his retrograde idiot constituency cares a lot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That's not even a necessary rebuttal.  Somehow our former Rice undergrad seems to think the Democrats are pushing for legislation which allows them certain types of gun ownership that Republicans won't be able to enjoy.

Doesn't have to be legislation exclusively.  Look Im not defending Cawthorn , he's an absolute fraud.

But the D controlled Harris Co. Commissioners Court is voting private security for themselves while cutting funding law enforcement as crime rates rise and Felons are out without Bond. Thats a direct result of their actions.

If you fail to see it guess that's on  your UT education.

You can keep calling me names. I'll live

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, OWLVIS said:

Doesn't have to be legislation exclusively.  Look Im not defending Cawthorn , he's an absolute fraud.

But the D controlled Harris Co. Commissioners Court is voting private security for themselves while cutting funding law enforcement as crime rates rise and Felons are out without Bond. Thats a direct result of their actions.

If you fail to see it guess that's on  your UT education.

You can keep calling me names. I'll live

That's not suppression of anyone's 2nd Amendment rights, and I didn't call you a name.  I mean, maybe you flunked out of Rice as a grad student, but "undergrad" isn't exactly a pejorative word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, OWLVIS said:

Doesn't have to be legislation exclusively.  Look Im not defending Cawthorn , he's an absolute fraud.

But the D controlled Harris Co. Commissioners Court is voting private security for themselves while cutting funding law enforcement as crime rates rise and Felons are out without Bond. Thats a direct result of their actions.

If you fail to see it guess that's on  your UT education.

You can keep calling me names. I'll live

image.gif.d6a4f75e311511f03f10047cf476cd11.gif

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

The crime rate talking point has really gotten going over the past year. But I’ve not seen much data to support it.  Maybe I’ll go look for some on Harris county since he mentioned it. 

The main reason Harris County's bail system changed was not some librul DA.  It was held unconstitutional by the Fifth fucking Circuit.  That means it would have been found offensive to human rights in Nazi Germany.

The unconstitutional system permitted a judge to look up on offense on a scorecard and assign a bail amount.  Now they actually have to think about it and are too lazy to do so.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

The crime rate talking point has really gotten going over the past year. But I’ve not seen much data to support it.  Maybe I’ll go look for some on Harris county since he mentioned it. 

His initial point seems to be contradicted by this recent article:

Harris County Commissioners approve increase in law enforcement spending

 

Oh, and a salient quote from the article:

Quote

Overall violent crime in Houston was down slightly from the year before.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The main reason Harris County's bail system changed was not some librul DA.  It was held unconstitutional by the Fifth fucking Circuit.  That means it would have been found offensive to human rights in Nazi Germany.

The unconstitutional system permitted a judge to look up on offense on a scorecard and assign a bail amount.  Now they actually have to think about it and are too lazy to do so.

Dallas Co. already appealed and won. And Harris Co expanded it to felons. the ruling only applied to misdemeanors.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

His initial point seems to be contradicted by this recent article:

Harris County Commissioners approve increase in law enforcement spending

 

Oh, and a salient quote from the article:

 

Comm. Cry approved the increase in Health Care Costs, Retirement  That increased spending .but denied the requests for funding to put boot on the ground .Also denied the Dem DA request for additional prosecutors 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OWLVIS said:

Dallas Co. already appealed and won. And Harris Co expanded it to felons. the ruling only applied to misdemeanors.

 

Dallas is different.  Harris County lost the appeal.  While the case was technically only applicable to misdemeanors, among other things, the Fifth Circuit held that bail required an individualized risk assessment for each defendant, implicitly holding all "bail schedules" unconstitutional, whether felony or misdemeanor.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Dallas is different.  Harris County lost the appeal.  While the case was technically only applicable to misdemeanors, among other things, the Fifth Circuit held that bail required an individualized risk assessment for each defendant, implicitly holding all "bail schedules" unconstitutional, whether felony or misdemeanor.

Technical lawyer talk for I was right.

  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

OK, now show us how this is anti-2nd Amendment.

If only a select few can have the private protection of arms whether by carrying or have the protection provided , muh rights have been infringed .

Jesus , I didnt expect the Spanish Inquisition

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...