Nathan Deal has out-hated Karen Handel to become the Republicans’ choice for the next governor of Georgia. Proclaiming to represent conservative values, which of course means profiling Hispanic citizens and demonizing gay people who happen to want committed relationships, Deal questioned Handel’s hate bona fides and won.

Karen Handel left tell-tale signs she didn’t hate quite enough. Gay people are awful, terrible, sinful, Godless heathens and their desire to love, honor and obey each other threatens to wreck the marriages of heterosexuals who would henceforth look at their own marriages and say, what’s the point of being married if gay people can marry?… Huh?

Anyway, it appears that Karen Handel at one point thought that gay people might not automatically go to hell and therefore, her credentials in Georgia, where the majority seem to favor hell for gays, suffered.

Go to hell gays, go back to Mexico you worthless Latino job stealers who want better lives for your families. “Give me your tired, your poor, your….” Hey, can’t we put something else on that statue?

Southern Christian conservatism used to mean making doggone sure that blacks and whites didn’t inter-marry or that blacks didn’t eat at the same lunch counter that served their white-Christian-loving selves. Times change and the new enemy of all that is pure and good are gays whose radical, nefarious agenda is, of all things, equal protection under the law.

“Thank God for Gays” should be their motto! It’s nice to have a demon to rally around when your real goal is to create a corporate structure to run the country on the backs of the middle class. Insuring the Bush tax cuts are preserved at the cost of middle class taxes and a huge deficit is boring compared to Sodom and Gomorrah.

I’m sure they and their corporate friends (oops, I mean corporate citizens, or is that Citizens United?) are sharing the love with Gay people who, because of their heathen desire to love has handed on a silver platter the demon they needed for their bait and hate scheme.

Deal certainly has earned his hate rep, doing a call out to Ghetto Grandmothers.  Of course, you can’t blame the guy for doing whatever it takes to stay in state government. Deal “personally intervened with Georgia leaders to preserve an obscure state program that earns his company nearly $300,000 a year,” according to the Atlanta newspaper based in Dunwoody. Memo to Screwtape: Forget about Wormwood, this guy Deal is already in and could show you a trick or two!

And a note from the nominee: Thank you Gays! Keep wanting to have loving committed relationships! God is so proud of me for hating you and Karen Handel, well, she may as well be Jesus or something with all that compassion we exposed in her checkered past.

Billy Howard

Billy Howard

Billy Howard is a commercial and documentary photographer with an emphasis on education and global health.

  1. BRAVO!!!!! I have long loathed the political tool of hate. As far as I am concerned if the boys want to know where family values started breaking down they can trace it to political ads and their buddy Rush Limbaugh, the patron saint of hate.

  2. Alex Kearns

    Thank you, Billy. Perhaps Mr Deal should go and live in Canada for a few years (my apologies to all Canadians). Existing heterosexual marriages did not spontaneously combust, nor did the rate of marriage drop like a rock when the Civil Unions Act was passed. In fact it led to a more cohesive and functional society that was one step closer to freedom from irrational hate-based divisiveness.

    What a “deal” this guy is: anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-healthcare, antediluvian.
    From his website: “Endorsed by the NRA and in the Republican primary runoff, Nathan has battled liberals in Washington to protect Georgia gunowners’ right to bear arms.” Constitution in one hand and the Bible in the other…oh yeah – get ready for a one-two punch as Deal attempts to beat the civilization out of us.

  3. I wonder how Mr. Deal ‘deals’ with the Biblical notion of “by your fruit shall they know you”.
    Oh wait: FRUIT. That explains it.
    And of course now the Republican leaders are wishing to
    repeal the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Oh joy! Just the group to start tinkering with established clauses in the Constitution they revere so much. But then I’m sure they must be correct as with Original Intent, they have dug them all up to question them.
    A little more than tongue in cheek, but I’m sure you catch my drift.
    Great article and please keep up the good work

  4. Well and bravely said, Billy-Bob. As much as I sometimes miss Atlanta, I do not miss the medieval mentality of politics there, especially conservative politics. I remember how appalled I was when I first moved there in 1980 and the Confederate battle flag was still incorporated into the state flag. This reminds me to register and vote in California. We are saying farewell to the “Governator” and have as our choices the former Queen of E-Bay and the former “Governor Moonbeam.”

  5. Trevor Stone Irvin

    I was hoping I could use gays as a convenient scapegoat … But, my wife insists the entire trouble with her marriage is me.
    Good piece Billy.


  6. Billy,

    You’ve done it again. If I were looking in from the outside, I’d question whether this is even real life. But since I live in the middle of it, I know you’ve hit the nail on the head. Again. Thanks.

    Meanwhile, here’s a link to the first of two columns on ethics I’m doing for the Banner-Herald.

    Send money to Roy and pray for peace,

    1. Billy Howard

      Great column Myra. It’s depressing that we leave it to the politicians to police themselves and no wonder that finding any clues to ethics complaints is a task worthy of Sherlock Holmes.

  7. Billy, old friend – I’ll trade you Jim DeMint for Nathan Deal and two future draft picks!

  8. I love the words and the way you strung them together… but almost as good is that first picture, which is about the scariest thing I’ve ever seen Photoshopped!

    Unless it isn’t actually Photoshopped?

    If it isn’t, then somebody needs to go rescue that poor little dog.

  9. Jon Sinton

    Loving this, Billy. Nice going! I always heard love was strong, but the Republicans proved that hate is the ticket. A shame Ms. Handel couldn’t muster up a little more.

  10. Cliff Green

    Billy, do you remember Nathan “Shady” Deal’s early career? He ran for the Georgia General Assembly as a Democrat and served several terms. Then, he ran for the U.S. Congress as a Democrat and was re-elected a couple of times. Just when it looked as if ol’ Shady’s career was about to take off, chicken house owners in and around Gainesville got all nervous about something and Shady said, “I’m not going to bend with the winds just for short-term political gains. I’m sticking with the party that brought me this far…” No, wait! That was someone else.
    In fact, Shady Deal, with his moist finger in the wind, switched to the GOP just after a re-election campaign. But never let it be said that Shady is an ungenerous man: he offered to return campaign contributions to those who though they were supporting a Democrat when in fact they were giving to a closet Republican.
    Now I ask you, is this a man of quality, or what?

  11. Billy,

    You ar not only a great writer but now also quite the illustrator. I love Mr. Deal’s suit.

    Your words are power. Keep it up. I am on your train….


  12. Thes states held a referendum and the people voted against it? What right has a judge to usurp the popular soverignty of many millions of state voters? If you are in the country illegally, you are breaking the law. In most cases, there are consequences for breaking the law. Progressive liberals would rather compound the offense by encouraging the government to tax it (who cares these SSN ID’s were stolen — big deal…) Pathetic.

    1. Billy Howard

      I’ve missed you Francois! Under your reasoning we would still have segregated schools and white’s only lunch counters. When it comes to personal freedom I don’t care how many people in how many states vote against it. Democracy is not the right to vote to deny someone else a freedom you enjoy.

    2. Nobody’s sovereign. Nobody’s got a right to restrict humans from any corner of the globe. People are neither legal nor illegal, although, in the past, some people were considered illegitimate.

      In the instant case, the effort to declare inoffensive humans who wander about on the earth to be legal or illegal, depending on whether they’ve got the coin of the realm or still have to earn it, is really nothing more than a back-door effort to segregate populations and assign them a rank.

      Apparently, there are some people who are bound and determined to classify humans as either superior or inferior. One suspects that determination is rooted in a pervasive sense of insecurity and an individual need to define oneself in comparison to someone else.
      Insecurity, unfortunately, is one of those emotions that it’s not worth while to accommodate because no outside intervention can cure it. Insecure, endemically fearful people either get over it on their own, or not.

      From a practical stand-point, the people being complained about are, for the most part, not immigrants in the sense that they have any desire to take up permanent residence in the United States. Also, although many people, being sensitive to other people’s feelings, make an effort to comply with the preferences of a population with which they want to engage, law purporting to set standards for potential immigrants are extra-jurisdictional. The U.S. has no business making laws that criminalize the behavior of the citizens of other lands.

      1. Billy Howard

        Your comment deserves to be its own post. Beautiful and befitting a country that loudly proclaims its Christian heritage. What Would Jesus Do? I think you’ve provided the Answer.

  13. Such children. Billy: when someone has a rational point to make about law, economics or warfare, yelping, “You’re a RACIST!!” no longer works. All those cards have been dealt and played by the intellectually bankrupt progressive left whose agenda is winding faster than political support for the Imam-in-Chief.

    Monica: put on a short-sleeve blouse and skirt, go fly to Riyahd, and let me know if you still believe there are no “illegal” people. If they don’t stone you on the spot, report back and let us know how nice the prisons are.

    1. Billy Howard

      If you believe, as I do, that homosexuals deserve the same rights as heterosexuals and that while some people choose to be homosexual, some people, who biologically prefer their own sex, choose to be heterosexual. The vast majority on both sides are just born that way and to deny them the full rights of any other citizen is not in keeping with the great notion of what our country stands for.
      As for rational argument: equating your statement that citizens voted for the denial of rights to gay people and thus we should stand by their vote, is exactly the same as the states rights arguments of the 50’s and 60’s that tried to deny rights to blacks. If you take explaining the historical reality of your comments as racist, then so be it. As for your snide “Iman in Chief” Get a life. First you don’t like his Christian church now you decide he’s Muslim, based on…….nothing of course! The terrorist are laughing at us for doing their job, turning moderate muslims into villains and exposing the hypocrisy in our freedom: of religion, of who we can love, for them. I’m sure they’ll give you a medal.

      1. Billy Howard

        And back to the original post, Nathan Deal spent thousands on advertisements proclaiming that he was against gay people more than Karen Handel was against gay people. He spent the money under the assumption that enough Georgians hated the idea of equal rights for gay people that he would win. Money well spent. Fifty years ago he would have been using fear of black people. It’s just the other side of the same trick coin. Hate is a powerful ally when you don’t have any creative agenda to offer.

  14. Being against gay marriage is not the same as being against gays. Again you attempt to foment irrational emotive paranoia by saying first the Republicans will jail the gays then the blacks. Pure idiocy. There are no cattle cars or firing squads involved here. If the freaking moderators of LikeTheDemocrats would stop embargoing and over-editing my posts, you would have read that I do have a solution: end state-licensed marriage. What purpose does that serve? Marriage is a cultural phenomena and should be rightly left to cultural institutions outside state control. Gays can get “married” wherever they want. I suppose you could make an argument to retain child- and dependant-related tax deductions, but obviously one doesn’t need to be married to have kids. And another argument for a consumption tax.

    To the extent that marriage continues to be a government-licensed enterprise, it is rightly subject to the will of the people. If for whatever reason the people think non-heterosexual unions ought not be recognized and there is a constitutional means for them to express that concern legislatively or through referenda — them’s the breaks. There are other means for homosexuals to handle probate matters outside of marriage through contract law.

    There is nothing controversial about recognizing the obvious difference between two opposite sex couples being married and two same-sex couples forming a union. Marriage is and has always been recognized as being between man and woman. The controversial measure is extending that definition to allow for other arrangments that were clearly not intended for as long as the institution of marriage has existed.

    Free Francois!

    1. Billy Howard

      Being against black people eating at my lunch counter is not about being against black people. Same story, different group to hate. Free gay people to have the same rights as everyone else, then we’ll see about free Francois. I have yet to hear any argument that explains how granting marriage status to gay people would harm anyone else. It certainly doesn’t affect anyone else’s marriage and if it does then their marriage wasn’t worth much in the first place. Does it offend your religious sensibilities? Last I heard we still have separation of Church and State, although their is a huge movement to bring that wall down. Denying equality to gays is our own American version of Sharia Law. Demonize and separate a portion of the population, it makes it easier to demonize and hate them. Do you socialize with any gay people? Any black people? Any hispanic people? Or are all your friends just like you with the same ideas, the same ethnic background the same same same. And if you do have a diversity of friends, and it would be ashamed if you didn’t, is that the reason you use a fake name, so they won’t know how you really feel about them?

Comments are closed.