| eva young | |||
| Eva Young is President of Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota and lives in Minneapolis with her cat, Kiddleleewink. You can also read her other blog here. | |||
|
|
|
||
latest posts
October 28, 2004
The issue of the courts has been put further on the front burner with the recent news that Chief Justice Renquist has been diagnosed with cancer. During the 2000 debates, President Bush has said the Justice he admires most is Antonin Scalia. Scalia's opinion in the Lawrence V Texas (sodomy) case was full of anti-gay invective.
State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers' validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today's decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding.
Notably, Clarence Thomas wrote a separate disent:
I write separately to note that the law before the Court today "is ... uncommonly silly." Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 527 (1965) (Stewart, J., dissenting). If I were a member of the Texas Legislature, I would vote to repeal it. Punishing someone for expressing his sexual preference through noncommercial consensual conduct with another adult does not appear to be a worthy way to expend valuable law enforcement resources.Notwithstanding this, I recognize that as a member of this Court I am not empowered to help petitioners and others similarly situated. My duty, rather, is to "decide cases 'agreeably to the Constitution and laws of the United States.' " Id., at 530. And, just like Justice Stewart, I "can find [neither in the Bill of Rights nor any other part of the Constitution a] general right of privacy," ibid., or as the Court terms it today, the "liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions," ante, at 1.
As my good friend, Charlie Mehler often reminds me, the prospect of Chief Justice Antonin Scalia is a significant reason to vote against President Bush.
filed under: Gay Politics
October 23, 2004
The Oklahoma Senate Race is one of the most hotly contested. Both candidates are using gay baiting tactics in order to win. Hard News: Oklahoma's News Weekly writes a strongly worded editorial urging gays to vote AGAINST the Democratic candidate.
Money quote:
Gays will have more political credibility and power if Carson is denied our votes.A vote for Carson would be interpreted by politicians as gays are willing to stand by a Democrat no matter what. By denying Carson the gay vote, it will be interpreted by politicians that they need to adjust not just their message but their actions regarding gays.
If writing discrimination into the Constitution does not get gays mad enough to deny a politician a vote, what issue would?
What should we do?
The key is to keep the pressure on.
Did Martin Luther King dutifully follow President Kennedy simply because Kennedy was a Democrat?
No, King turned up the heat on Kennedy. King continued to make speeches and organize marches. King’s leadership resulted in political action - The Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Carson went further than being an early vocal supporter of the FMA. Carson went further than voting for the FMA. Carson recently aired TV commercials boasting of his FMA vote! He has made the FMA a central issue of his campaign.
How should we react to this?
Do we reward Carson with the office of Senate?
Is that what we do?
HNO asserts politicians will respect us more if we stand our ground against those who would campaign and vote for the FMA.
Did Kennedy say to King, as Carson seems to be saying to gays, “I’m going to vote to allow the majority population the right to deny blacks the vote, equal education and equal employment. But, give me your money, your vote and don’t cause trouble because you know I’m a Democrat and I’m better on your other issues.”
We know King’s response. He kept the pressure on.
Why shouldn’t gays have the same response to Carson as King had to Kennedy?
If Carson loses, you’ll never see another Oklahoma Democrat gay-bash in a statewide race.
filed under: Bigots
October 23, 2004
From the Washington Blade, here.
The Washington Blade should have known better than agree to publish accusations from anonymous sources.
But then, both Instapundit and Votka Pundit did the same thing. Instapundit doesn't agree with Bush on the Leviticus Crowd nonsense, but it's so much easier to blame Log Cabin Republicans for the Bush decision to gay bait for political gain, than to blame the Bush campaign.
These attacks on Log Cabin Republicans from an anonymous "gay republican", suggest that Rove is worried about the impact of the LCR nonendorsement of
Bush is having.
It's real interesting how the vast majority of Gay Patriot's posts have been trashing Log Cabin Republicans - all from a safely anonymous position. Who is funding Gay Patriot?
"Gay Patriot West" describes an email he got from the femail President of Log Cabin Republicans of Virginia. Now from Press Reports about Log Cabin, I assume that is Rebecca Maestri. Both of the "patriots" are spreading their rumors by mass emails to Log Cabin people.
Log Cabin Republicans sent out a response to the rumors.
Sadly, as Election Day approaches, there are a handful of people trying to do damage Log Cabin Republicans at the end of an extraordinarily successful year for our organization. There are a number of rumors floating around that we would like to tackle head on.RUMOR: Log Cabin has lost members this year.
FACT: Log Cabin's membership has doubled since the beginning of the year. We've added over a thousand members in the last two months and continue getting new members every day.
RUMOR: Log Cabin has lost funding because of its aggressive fight to defend our Constitution.
FACT: Log Cabin has a record number of donors all around the nation. Our budget has quadrupled from last year.
RUMOR: The Log Cabin National Board is deeply divided.
FACT: The Log Cabin National Board is fully united in its mission to build equality for gays and lesbians within the Republican Party. The board's 22 to 2 vote not to endorse President Bush's re-election is evidence of an organization united in our purpose and committed to our mission.
RUMOR: Log Cabin Political Director Chris Barron is or has been a paid campaign operative for John Edwards.
FACT: Chris Barron is committed to building an inclusive Republican Party. He has been working tirelessly since he joined our staff in February to defend the Constitution and build a GOP committed to the principles of fairness and freedom. Chris has been open about the fact that in 1998, he volunteered for John Edwards in his Senate campaign against anti-gay Republican Lauch Faircloth (a former Democrat). Chris was not a paid employee of the Edwards for Senate campaign or the Edwards for President campaign, nor is he affiliated in any way with the Kerry/Edwards campaign. Chris has been and will continue to lead Log Cabin's efforts to support Republican candidates across the nation.
RUMOR: There is a chapter revolt against Log Cabin Executive Director Patrick Guerriero.
FACT: Patrick Guerriero enjoys the overwhelming support of our chapters, our grassroots membership and our National Board.
RUMOR: Log Cabin has kicked people out for supporting President Bush.
FACT: Log Cabin never has or will kick anyone out of this organization for supporting the President's re-election. One chapter, out of almost 50, chose to disregard the rules of the organization, which every other chapter followed, by deciding to endorse a federal candidate, in clear violation of the organization's by-laws.
Here's the reality: Log Cabin is growing in membership and growing in influence. Our principled commitment to defend the Constitution and stand up to the voices of intolerance in our party has upset some people. Now they're trying to distract us from our mission and distract you from Log Cabin's proud accomplishments during this difficult year. Every second we waste responding to the cynical voices working to undermine our mission takes us away from our true goals. During these last two weeks of the campaign, we will continue aggressively working to elect fair-minded Republicans to all levels of government. Their victories will be a testament to our party's hopeful future, built on a foundation of fairness and inclusion for all Americans.
It's also worth noting, I gave GP a scoop about Democrat Stephanie Herseth - who is supported the Federal Marriage Amendment also shacking up with a
Texas congressman (also supporting the FMA). Gay Patriot doesn't run with that - or with other stories about Democratic congresscritters or senators who
voting anti-gay. Instead, he seems to focus his bile, Log Cabin Republicans.
I went over to Gay Patriot's site and commented:
Yup, the Blade fell for the business of publishing rumours, without giving the names of who are spreading the rumors.Log Cabin Republicans has always been against Outing. Individual members of LCR are split on the issue of Outing. I know this from being on a number of lcr chat lists.
As far as follow the money goes, GP, why not some disclosure about who you are, and who is paying you.
What's sauce for the goose.
It's very easy to criticize from anonymity.
I have lots of respect for sources who will give on the record interviews. Off the record sources have no credibility.
Republicans for Environmental Protection made a similar decision. Their PAC is also withholding endorsement from Bush.
Would you think that Log Cabin Republicans should endorse Alan Keyes because he is the Illinois Republican Party endorsed candidate? What about racist David Duke?
filed under: Log Cabin Republicans
October 16, 2004
Gay Patriot is in a tizzy over Patrick Guerriero....
TOPIC: Patrick Guerriero & the RNC: In the Log Cabin posting from Friday, a reader called Honest Abe commented the following:The problem Patrick has is a lack of integrity. In August he met with Maria Cino (dep Chair RNC) and told her that while an endorsement was not at all likely Log Cabin would not go on the attack. Once the non-endorsement was announced they would work on electing (or reelecting) gay friendly GOPers.
Instead, in the LA Times, gay rags nationwide and now on CNN - Patrick is attacking the President.
When you lie to senior GOP official they remember - for a long time. An article on Patrick this spring in GQ remarked that he had put "a blowtorch to an otherwise pretty impressive resume."
Indeed he has - time to go.Indeed! Perhaps I should start my "Patrick Guerriero Slinks Home To MA Clock" before Election Day? (Can someone with computer intellect volunteer to help?)
Some later comments challenged the veracity of this story. While I cannot verify what was said, I can absolutely confirm via my contacts at the RNC that the meeting between Patrick and Maria did take place. Patrick knows what was said.
I'm just curious whether this story is accurate. To me it sounds like a he said, she said, sort of thing.
This meeting would have happened BEFORE the RNC "bible ban" flyers were exposed. Log Cabin Republicans tends to get called to comment on all this sort of nonsense. For the RNC to expect Log Cabin Republicans to be silent on this sort of nonsense is beyond the pail.
Patrick was attacking the way the President's campaign was using gay families as a wedge. If Patrick Guerriero, leader of Log Cabin Republicans doesn't speak up to this nonsense when he gets on TV, who will?
And again - both Gay Patriot and "Honest Abe" are spreading their rumors anonymously.
filed under:
October 16, 2004
Here and here. What's got his undies in a bunch is this Washington Blade Editorial, praising Log Cabin Republicans for being an organization with principles.
He's also pushing the Karl Rove inspired Cheney family line about Mary Cheney.... This is from his comments:
I do not think it is tasteless to bring up Mary Cheney. Using gay people like you and I as political pawns to mobilize your base, as the Bush administration has done, affects us personally. I think that by bringing up Mary Cheney Kerry has simply personalized the debate and exposed the Bush/Cheney hypocrisy. Bush and Cheney don't give a shit about gay marriage either way, it's just a convenient issue that mobilizes the religious right in middle america who have never met a gay person in their life and are therefore terrified of them. No one in their administration actually believed for a second that that insane amendment would pass. They simply wanted the publicity to drum up support from their base.
Exactly. The lasting damage is being done at the state level. And way too much gay money is going to the Kerry/Edwards sinkhole, rather than to fighting those amendments.
filed under: Blogs
October 16, 2004
I'm curious whether anyone is seriously not going to vote for Bush because they found out from Kerry/Edwards that Mary Cheney is gay.
That's what Gary Bauer said in the New York Times - when he said that he was concerned that Kerry pointing out Dick Cheney's daughter was gay (which was pointed out by Dick Cheney last month), that the "traditional values" voters would stay home.
These voters are not "traditional values" voters, they are bigots. Mary Cheney is fine with who she is - and by all indications her family is too. After all, she was a "professional gay", when she worked as the gay liasson for the Coors Beer company in the 1990s.
As Andrew Sullivan says:
BUSTED: Gary Bauer has long denied he's anti-gay, or catering to anti-gay prejudice. But this morning he came clean, in referring to Kerry's mentioning Mary Cheney's lesbianism:"I think it is part of a strategy to suppress traditional-values voters, to knock 1 or 2 percent off in some rural areas by causing people to turn on the president."
Think about that for a minute. Bauer believes that his core supporters would be likely to "turn" on the president just because the vice-president's daughter is a lesbian. Notice that there's no indication of homosexual "acts", just a revulsion at Mary Cheney's simple identity as a lesbian. This is their base. This is why they're worried. Some of the subtler arguments I've heard overnight say the
following: it's not that homosexuality is wrong; it's just that many people believe that and Kerry therefore exploited their homophobia to gain a point. I don't buy it, but let's assume the worst in Kerry's motives for the sake of argument. What these emailers are saying is that Kerry should hedge what he says in order to cater to the homophobia of Bush's base. Why on earth should he? The truth here is obvious: Bush and Cheney are closet tolerants. They have no problem with gay people personally; but they use hostility to gay people for
political purposes, even if it means attacking members of their own families. What they are currently objecting to is the fact that their hypocrisy has been exposed. To which the only answer is: if you don't want to be exposed as a hypocrite, don't be one.
EY: That's what I find dispicable.....
Also - from Chuck Muth:
OUTING MARY CHENEYBoth John Edwards and John Kerry found it necessary to publicly point out in their national debates that Mary Cheney, the vice president's daughter, is a lesbian. There can be only one reason for this coordinated national "outing": To make sure that fundamentalist Christians know that the Cheneys have a lesbian in the family. They hope this fact will cause such Christians to stay home and/or not vote for the Bush/Cheney ticket because of it.
This is not "Outing".... Mary Cheney was already out, and in fact was a "professional gay" when she worked for Coors beer, to market to the gay community.
Mrs. Cheney called this "a cheap and tawdry political trick." Mrs. Cheney was being WAY too polite. This is gutter politics and homo-baiting from the left. I'm disappointed that prominent gay organizations haven't deplored it.Seriously, let's suppose the shoe was on the other foot. Let's say that Dick Gephardt had ended up being the Democrat presidential nominee rather than John Kerry. Gephardt has a gay daughter. Now, can you imagine for one minute George W. Bush or Dick Cheney bringing this fact up in a debate with Gephardt? And if they did, can you imagine the outrage which would have exploded from gay groups, not to mention in mainstream newsrooms from coast-to-coast? Where's the intellectual consistency here?
The difference here, is that Dick and Jane Gephardt used Chrissy Gephardt as a liasson to the gay community during the Gephardt campaign for president. Saying someone is gay is not an insult.
What would be FAR worse, however, is if this "cheap and tawdry political trick" works and some Christians DO stay home just because the Cheneys have a gay daughter.
If they stay home for that reason, they aren't Christian, they are bigots.
It seems that the Bushies are really worried that some in the Leviticus Crowd will stay home because they found out Mary Cheney was gay. I'm pretty sure that KEdwards did this in a calculating way. It was speaking to their gay base, saying the PC thing, that being gay is biological. What I find interesting is that the Bushies are trying to shut this down.
Andrew Sullivan says it better. [scroll down for the entry]
A CONSERVATIVE GAFFE: Here's an amazing admission:
"While the Democrats have been hurling specious and unsubstantiated charges about Republicans suppressing the African-American vote, Kerry and Edwards are leading their party's effort — on national television no less — to discourage religious and social conservatives from going to the ballot box for President Bush."
How? By mentioning the fact that Dick Cheney's daughter is openly lesbian. Now why on earth would that fact make one less likely to vote for Bush-Cheney? The only possible reason is that these voters are bigots, and it is partly on that basis that the GOP is appealing to them. If that weren't the case, Cesar Conda's argument wouldn't hold up at all. Well, at least he's honest. So too is NRO for running the piece: we're catering to homophobes and don't mess with that! Just please don't tell me that the GOP is a tolerant or inclusive party. If you depend on bigots to win elections, and you pander to them, and rev them up by demonizing minorities, don't expect the rest of us to sympathize when you're caught red-handed.
Andrew Sullivan hits the nail on the head. I think Log Cabin Republicans' Patrick Guerriero says it well:
Senator Kerry could have made his point about gay and lesbian Americans without mentioning the Vice-President's daughter.However, this shouldn't distract us from the fact that President Bush, Karl Rove and other Republicans have been using gay and lesbian families as a political wedge issue in this campaign.
Log Cabin Republicans have a message for both campaigns. For Senator Kerry and Senator Edwards, you do not need to talk about the Vice President's daughter in order to discuss your positions on gay and lesbian issues. For President Bush and Karl Rove, you have a moral obligation to stop using gay and lesbian families as a political wedge issue. Our country and our party deserve better.
Kudos to Patrick Guerriero. Personally, I think on the national level, Log Cabin Republicans ought to be focusing on helping the Republicans who deserve our help - one such is Indiana Governor Candidate, Mitch Daniels - who won in a Republican Primary against the Leviticus Crowd candidate. The Gay Baiting by the Democratic Party in Indiana was broken here at Outlet Radio first. The AFA Indiana is now having a cow because Daniels had an outreach meeting with Gay voters. The AFA Indiana predictably said that was like meeting with child molesters.
In Ohio, both US Senators and Governor Taft (all Republicans) have come out publically against the Ohio hate amendment.
It will be interesting to see what Kerry and Bush say about that amendment. I'd love to see Bush asked the question in Ohio: Do you agree with the Republican Secretary of State, or the Republican Senators and Governor about the Ohio constitutional amendment.
filed under: Presidential Politics
October 12, 2004
A legislative candidate source told me about this.
From: Jeff Davis To: Undisclosed-Recipient:; Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2004 5:28 AM Subject: URGENT: Defense of Marriage PledgeI am contacting you to make a final request that you sign our Defense of Marriage Pledge. We are publishing our voter's guides in the next few days and our records show that we have not yet received a signed pledge form from you.
THIS CAN BE A KEY DIFFERENTIATOR BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR COMPETITOR(S) IN YOUR HOUSE RACE. Nearly all DFL and Green party candidates have refused to sign the pledge. If you would like to see a list of who has signed and not signed the pledge, click on this link http://www.mnmarriage.com/Elections.htm
All you need to do is print-out the attached form, sign it and fax it back to the number on the bottom of the form. Please call me if I can answer any questions. Thank you for your attention.
Regards,
Jeff Davis
President, Minnesota Citizens in Defense of Marriage
1730 New Brighton Blvd., PMB233
Minneapolis, MN 55413
phone: 651.633.6773
fax: 501.647.7108
email: jeff@mnmarriage.com
website: www.mnmarriage.com
This candidate called the Jeffrey Davis character, and asked if he would support an amendment that would ban gay marriage but allow civil unions - kind of like the amendment in Massachusetts. Davis said no way, so this candidate told him to go Cheney himself.
When I talked to Jeffrey Davis during the truth truck heyday, he told me that the reason we needed this constitutional amendment is to prevent a bill like the Canadian "hate speech" bill to pass here. I've always thought these were two separate issues.
Davis's site makes a point of saying they aren't an "anti-homosexual hate group". At the same time, the site posts lots of bigoted drivel about gays. So yea, whatever Jeffrey.
filed under: Bigots
October 07, 2004
UPDATED:
I could swear I saw both Mary Cheney and partner Heather Poe go up on stage to join Dick Cheney after the debate.
John Aravosis mentions this. He's furious.
My speculation: Mary and Heather didn't show up on stage when Cheney spoke at the Republican convention - because it would have meant giving credibility to the anti-gay message coming from the party. But they went up on stage to support Dick Cheney - Mary's father. That's family values in my view.
Did HRC advise Edwards to mention Mary Cheney during the debate? All the while mentioning at least twice: "John Kerry and I oppose Gay Marriage". Ya think?
Then the statement by Cheryl Jacques:
Tonight we saw the worst kind of flip flop. Vice President Cheney said he supported his daughter, but then said he supported President Bush’s effort to discriminate against her. John Edwards affirmed his and Senator Kerry’s support for protections for same-sex couples and chastised President Bush for using the Constitution to divide the American people.
Don't even go there on flip flops on this issue. Log Cabin notably put no press release out to defend Bush. Why should they? They didn't endorse him.
filed under: Family Values
October 07, 2004
From David Frum's Diary on National Review....
OK just caught debate rerun on CNN. What can one say about John Edwards's performance? He certainly did not make Al Gore's error in 1996: With his repeated and worshipful descriptions of John Kerry--not to mention Edwards's moist good looks--you have to say that he would fill the role of First Lady much better than Teresa Heinz is likely to do. It would all have been very impressive--if Cheney's scalpel had not so swiftly and mercilessly sliced Edwards's living liver out of his body, impaled it quivering on a stick, and paraded it before Edwards' soulful eyes before the poor man expired.
Andrew Sullivan gave him the Derbyshire Award nomination. Now when is the awards ceremony going to be. He's competing with Senator Cornyn (do a google on "cornyn box turtle") to get the Cornyn Post....
filed under: Bigots
October 05, 2004
Here....
filed under: Gay Politics
October 05, 2004
A NEW LOW: South Carolina Republican Senate candidate, Jim DeMint, has now reached another anti-gay low. His was the campaign that accidentally sent out an email using the word "dike," and now he's declaring that gays should not be allowed to teach in public schools:DeMint, a Greenville congressman, said the government should not endorse homosexuality and “folks teaching in school need to represent our values." Tenenbaum, the state education superintendent, called DeMint’s position "un-American." DeMint said after the debate that he would not require teachers to admit to being gay, but if they were "openly gay, I do not think that they should be teaching at public schools."
It's interesting to remember that, two generations ago, Ronald Reagan specifically opposed a California initiative to bar gays from teaching. But today's Republican party is not Reagan's party any more. It's Santorum's.
It should be noted that Inez Tanenbaum has taken a position in favor of the hate amendment.
filed under: Bigots
October 04, 2004
Stephanie Herseth (D, South Dakota) was one of the Democrats who voted for the so called marriage protection act. However it seems that while she is willing to blame gays for undermining the institution of marriage, in her own personal life, she is shacking up.
From Roll Call on Herseth's romance with Texas congressman
The Capitol Hill publication Roll Call has an item in today's edition headlined "Sitting in a Tree," regarding Stephanie Herseth's relationship with Rep. Max Sandlin, a Democrat from Texas:Sorry, guys. The newest, most eligible bachelorette in Congress appears to be off the market.
Rep. Stephanie Herseth (D), who just won the special South Dakota election, had a boyfriend waiting for her on Capitol Hill when she arrived last week.
He's Democratic Rep. Max Sandlin, a four-term Texan.
The couple met during Herseth's failed 2002 election bid against then- Rep. Bill Janklow (R-S.D.), who recently was released from prison for his second-degree manslaughter conviction. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which has its own version of a "big buddy" program, appointed Sandlin to be Herseth's mentor during that campaign.
Maybe the DCCC should have a match-making business on the side?
"Representative Herseth and Representative Sandlin met during the last election cycle. They remained friends after the 2002 election and have had a relationship for approximately a year," her spokesman, Russ Levsen, told HOH.
Sandlin, who is divorced with four children, also worked hard to campaign and raise money for his girlfriend during her winning campaign against GOP state Sen. Larry Diedrich in the June 1 special election.
He said having just arrived in Washington, the new Congresswoman has not found permanent housing yet. For now, he said, she's staying at the Capitol Suites.
But Herseth, 33, and Sandlin, 52, were seen Wednesday morning in front of Sandlin's apartment building near D and First streets Southeast.
Yup, Family Values..... Where's Mike Rogers when you need him? I thought that heterosexual hypocrites were going to be Outed also.
Update:
See also Wonkette: Sex and Power, South Dakota Style
filed under: Family Values
October 02, 2004
I've been meaning to write the RNC to let them know how I feel about the bible ban flyer. Here's a copy of the letter.
to: dgurley@rnchq.org, chairman@gop.com, kewarner@aol.com, administration@gop.com, rncommunications@gop.com, counsel@gop.com, memberrelations@gop.com, finance@gop.com, political@gop.com, jbanning@rnchq.org, mcino@rnchq.org, shogenson@rnchq.org, tjosefiak@rnchq.org, cspies@rnchq.org, mduncan@rnchq.org, lsigler@rnchq.org, info@georgewbush.com, opinion@coleman.senate.gov, chair@mngop.com, mbb@mngop.com, mn-logcabin@yahoogroups.com, mbrunswick@startribune.com, editor@lavendermagazine.com, press@glbtpress.com, dthompson@am1500.com, sjanesek@aol.com, linda.koblick@co.hennepin.mn.us, randy.johnson@co.hennepin.mn.us, penny.steele@co.hennepin.mn.us, chuckmuth@earthlink.net, gaypatriot2004@aol.com, pvarnell@aol.com, culturewatch@indegayforum.org From: "Eva Young" Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 08:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Please Apoligise for the RNC Mailer that Insults People of Faith and Gays
Maria Cino
Vice Chair
Republican National CommitteeRon Eibensteiner, Chair
Republican Party of MinnesotaDear Maria:
I am very disappointed to read the Republican
National Committee is behind the attrocious flyer
claimed that "liberals" would ban the bible and allow gay marriage. Does this flyer mean that conservatives will replace the constitution with the bible?Minnesota Republican Party Chair, Ron Eibensteiner, RNC Committee Members Jack Meek and Evie Axdahl, have the obligation to publically commit to deep sixing this mailing in Minnesota (if it hasn't already gone out). If it has, they should apologise for insulting the intelligence of Minnesota voters - especially conservative christians. This mailing suggests that the Republican Party thinks people of faith are
ignorant bigots.When I met you at the Log Cabin Republicans Washington Flyin in May of 2000, I had thought you were genuinely committed to inclusion within the Republican Party. I am very disappointed that the voices of inclusion within the Republican National Committee failed to
stop this mailer.I also would like to call on President Bush and Vice President Cheney to explicitly repudiate this mailer. In 2000 the NAACP did a horrendous ad claiming that Bush was responsible for the horrendous murder of James Byrd because Bush opposed hate crimes legislation. That ad was demogoguery of the worst sort - but it was put out by the NAACP - NOT the Democratic National Committee. This ad was put out by the Republican National Committee. Now the RNC has the obligation to condemn this ad and to fire the
staffers responsible for putting it out.The question is: is the Republican Party the party of the people that graced the podium in New York: Rudy Giuliani, Arnold Schwarzenegger and John McCain, or the party of Jerry "gays caused America to be attacked on 911" Falwell, Senator Rick "man on dog sex" Santorum, Alan "gays are selfish hedonists" Keyes. Pandering to bigotry is a double edged sword. I encourage you to take the high road in this campaign.
Eva Young
President
Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota
I posted this letter on Republicannationalcommittee@yahoogroups.com, and I've already been banned from posting on that list.
filed under: Bigots
, Gay Marriage
, Presidential Politics
, Republican Politics
October 02, 2004
They get coverage in the Oklahoma Weekly Gazette.
This is in the belly of the beast in Oklahoma. The Democrats are pretty anti-gay there too.
filed under: Gay Politics
October 02, 2004
Here....
Tuesday, September 14, 2004 Keyes and Friends Not "Conservatives" Paul Varnell's column titled "Gay-Obsessed Conservatives: Keyed Up and Nowhere to Go" hit the nail on the head, but the title [provided by IGF's editor] is incorrect.The characters he describes are NOT conservative, and we should not be helping them to hide behind the "conservative" label. Bigots or anti-gay activists both are better terms to describe these characters. If IGF used quotations around "conservative" (as the Leviticus crowd does with the word gay ("gay"), it would make the point.
It annoys me no end when I hear the nonsense pushed by Falwell, Keyes, Santorum et al referred to as "conservative" — there's nothing conservative about bigotry or gay obsession.
This is a major pet peeve for me. I'm glad the letter was published.
filed under: Gay Politics
October 02, 2004
John Aravosis has been a major booster of the "outing" campaign. His blog mentions anti-gay things the Republicans do on a regular basis. So why hasn't he commented on the FMA vote in the house? Check out his blog.... Lots of talk about the debate, and no mention of the FMA vote.
filed under: Gay Politics
October 02, 2004
From an editorial in the Ledger.
The Mel Martinez U.S. Senate campaign has done it again -- issued an untrue and inflammatory statement that the candidate has been forced to disclaim. The first time was shortly before the Aug. 31 Republican primary, when the Martinez campaign accused rival candidate Bill McCollum of being "antifamily" and, because of his support for a hate-crime bill, "pandering to the radical homosexual agenda." Martinez blamed his campaign staff for the gutter-level tactics and apologized privately to McCollum after the primary. He hasn't issued a public apology however.This week, according to The Tampa Tribune, the Martinez campaign sent an e-mail to CubanAmerican radio stations in South Florida attacking former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, who is campaigning for Democratic Senate nominee Betty Castor. The email said Reno "sent a crew of armed thugs" to take custody of 6year-old Elian Gonzalez four years ago. The operation -- which followed unsuccessful court challenges to sending the small boy back to his father in Cuba -- actually was carried out by U.S. marshals, and agents of the Border Patrol and Immigration and Nationalization Service.
When Martinez was questioned about the matter on a CNN political show Tuesday, he said the comment was "inappropriate," but he wasn't responsible for it. "It was put out by someone in the office," he said, adding that it was "absolutely not my words and never would be my words."
Martinez is no stranger to politics. He ran for lieutenant governor in 1994 and subsequently was elected the county chairman (mayor) in Orange County. He ought to know by now that a candidate is responsible for the actions of his campaign staff. That's why political commercials now must carry a personal voucher from the candidate for the advertising content.
If Martinez really wants to disassociate himself from incendiary statements issued in his name, the simplest way would be to disassociate those who issued them from his campaign organization.
Exactly. This reminds me of when Log Cabin Republicans of Minnesota met with Norm Coleman - and I confronted with an anti-gay flyer put out by his campaign, and Norm said he had "no choice" in the matter. This is part of the reason why I have no respect for Norm Coleman.
filed under:
October 01, 2004
Here....
Correction: Emily's List did NOT delete my comment. I found the comment.
After the hate amendment vote, I dropped by Emily's List to let the readers there know about Stephanie Herseth's vote in favor of the Hate Amendment.
Stonewall Democrats Trail Mix has let my comment stand.
Here's news about another Emily's List Candidate: Anti-gay Stephanie Herseth voted for the Hate Amendment today.UPDATED:
Anti-Gay Emily's List Endorsed Stephanie Herseth voted aye.
So I'd suggest those who oppose anti-gay bigotry, write checks to other inclusive Emily's List Candidates (not Inez Tanenbaum or Stephanie Herseth).... Betty Castor is one such candidate. Nancy Farmer in Missouri is another.
Send copies of those checks to Herseth and Tanenbaum - and let them know why.
Herseth already voted for the anti-gay court stripping bill (Hostetler) - now, how is she going to explain voting against a court stripping bill when one gets introduced - as it surely will - for abortion rulings.
Nope, bet she didn't think about that. And she's a lawyer, so she should understand separation of powers.
Duh....
Posted by Eva Young on Thu., September 30, 2004 at 9:06:49 PM.
NSD's Trailmix responded:
Stonewall Democrats will give no support to any Democrat who voted for this amendment. TrailMix encourages our readers to contact these representatives directly and to express this sentiment. -- TrailMix
Now where is Mike Rogers? Will he Out the Staffers of the Democrats who voted for this bill?
filed under: Gay Marriage
