Pandagon
Does Bob Shrum The more things change
"What's that sound?" "That? Why, that's just ol' George spinning in his grave."
The New York Times Plays D&D
John McCain's campaign blogger counters a New York Times story by forcefully rebutting another story that doesn't exist.
LCR chides 'gay left' for discussing John McCain's gay chief of staff
The fainting couch is needed for Scott Tucker over at the Log Cabin Republican's weblog BlogCabin. He's worked up over the reporting by Michelangelo Signorile and Mike Rogers about John McCain's professionally closeted Senate chief of staff Mark Buse and the hypocrisy it represents, given the Republican nominee's public anti-gay position on every major issue related to LGBT rights. (BTW, Mike Signorile has audio of an interview by Lisa Keen with yet another former Buse boyfriend who has gone on the record.)
The title of the post sums up the dilemma of the Log Cabin Republicans -- "The Politics of Personal Destruction at its Worst."
Mark Buse has been openly gay for years and has acknowledged as much. So the notion that he has been “outed” is simply false. But secondly–and this is the bigger point–this political stunt by Mike Rogers just proves what Log Cabin has been saying for years. John McCain is an inclusive Republican who hires the best people, regardless of sexual orientation.
Then what is the "personal destruction" you are talking about? If Buse is out, then discussing the fact that Mark Buse is gay shouldn't be of any consequence -- unless there is something wrong with being out of the closet to the Republican base.
Isn't that the real problem here? If John McCain is personally inclusive, why can he not be so as a candidate? McCain might consider Buse a family friend and not fire him for being gay, but what about the young gay person working at a DQ with an anti-gay boss -- he has no protections from getting axed if that boss learns of his employee's orientation. It's not inclusion when it only means the people in your inner circle.
And take this ridiculous statement from Tucker:
[C]an we please stop childishly lobbing the “homophobic” insult at Republicans who don’t agree with us on every issue? Rogers and his crowd keep saying McCain is “homophobic” or “anti-gay.” Words mean things. Calling John McCain homophobic doesn’t make it so. The truth is, Sen. John McCain is anything but homophobic. This is a man who has a record of hiring gay staff members–as evidenced by this recent “bombshell.”
Homophobia ("irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals") -- well, McCain's clearly not afraid of the homos. He's certainly willing to institutionalize discrimination of teh gayz, so what part of that "meaning" is misunderstood?
Even cutting Scott Tucker some undeserved slack -- what are you supposed to call someone who believe in tolerance on a one-to-one basis, but campaigns in support of anti-gay state marriage amendments, the continuation of DADT ("open homosexuality within the military services presents an intolerable risk to morale, cohesion, and discipline."), hate crimes expansion, ENDA, etc.? A professional anti-gay personal homosexualist? Is that more accurate? Or perhaps...um, a hypocrite?
This is why this story is newsworthy. The apparent fealty to the fringe anti-gay right by the McCain campaign -- from the opposition to basic LGBT rights to the selection of the real-deal fundie Palin -- does not project anything remotely resembling inclusion on our issues from my POV. It would be illuminating for the mainstream media to take a look at the public positions and personal practices of the Republican party generally, and specifically the McCain/Palin ticket to clear up any misconceptions people have -- both the "gay left" and the social conservatives on the right -- about where they truly stand.
Would the Log Cabin organization support some clarifying reporting on the matter?
As Mike Signorile noted, a post on Daily Kos about the Buse/McCain news is 626 comments strong -- it does show the interest, relevance and importance of the story.
Who is the bigger hypocrite here?Mark Buse, an openly gay man who is spending his life helping John McCain block important gay civil rights issues like marriage and adoption?
Or John McCain, who obviously has no problem with gay folks, but has adopted an anti-gay platform out of political expediency and a desire to court people like Sarah Palin, who think that if they just hate enough, they'll be Raptured into the love of Jesus when the End Times come.
NOTE: I can't wait to see how the professional "Christian" set is taking the news, since calls were directed to Focus On the Family HQ for a reaction. Daddy D is supposed to issue a statement.
Tony Perkins: If Prop 8 is defeated, the next step -- Christians will be jailed
The unhinged letter is below the fold.
Is San Quentin available for new business?
If marriage loses, religious liberty is next
September 23, 2008 | Refer a Friend
Dear XXXX,
I want you to hear something a California pastor said to me recently:
"If we lose, we go to jail."
It's just that simple, says Pastor Jim Garlow-if marriage loses in California, religious liberties everywhere will be next.
Family Research Council has been pouring resources into a national campaign to defend marriage and religious freedom, and . . .
I'm writing today to ask you again to stand with us. We still must raise $600,000 before the close of our fiscal year on September 30.
I know many Americans are feeling the pinch of a tight economy. As you prayerfully consider a gift, rest assured that FRC carefully stewards every dollar you give to the defense of marriage, religious freedom, parental rights, and human life.
The stakes are enormous. We face a national menace to religious liberty:
- In Boston, a Christian adoption agency was shut down for refusing to place orphans with homosexual couples.
- In New Mexico, a Christian-owned studio was fined more than $6,000 for refusing to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony.
- In San Francisco, the city council officially condemned Christian opposition to homosexual adoption as hateful and discriminatory rhetoric.
By God's grace and with your help, we can win this fight.
FRC has been protecting marriage during its 25-year history, and we've been voicing your values ever since activist judges in Massachusetts and California legalized counterfeit marriage and triggered a national debate.
Your prayers and generosity are enabling FRC to use our national platform to make the forceful case for traditional marriage in the media, in the churches, and at the grassroots.
In less than two months, voters in California, Florida, and Arizona will have the chance to place marriage out of the reach of activists and liberals.
Twenty-six states already have constitutional protections for marriage.
We pray that California, Florida, and Arizona will be added to that list once voters learn the truth about the lies the Left uses to justify counterfeit marriage.
The fight for marriage in the states is our first priority.
But we can't take our eye off Washington, D.C. politicians. Your support is vital as we stand up to liberals who want to criminalize your religious speech . . . threaten the religious liberties of employers . . . silence conservative and Christian broadcasting . . . raise taxes . . . and impose taxpayer funding of abortion and embryonic stem cell research.
Thank you for sacrificially giving whatever you can at this critical moment for faith, family, and freedom in America.
FRC national campaign to defend marriage needs your immediate support
Standing (Ephesians 6:13),
Tony Perkins
President
P.S. Please forward this e-mail to a friend.
Family Research Council: 801 G Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001
P: 202/393-2100 or 800/225-4008
Wingnuts look to favorite scapegoat
Yeah, a little less than a year ago it was obvious that when the crash came, the wingnuts would blame it on the minorities---here's my take from November 2007. And lo and behold, here we go---time to blame our crisis on the minorities!
