From Yahoo News:
Mike Rogers, who writes the blogs Blogactive.com and PageOneQ (where I found this link), is fighting back against anti-gay politicians when he finds evidence that they are actually closeted homosexuals.
He outs them.
Rogers is a muckraking gay blogger who uses his insider's knowledge of Washington politics and broad blanket of contacts to "out" gay politicos — but only, he says, if they are undermining gay rights. Critics call his tactics divisive and politically motivated.
Rogers, a longtime gay activist, started blogactive.com in 2004, using it to yank out of the closet at least two dozen high-ranking political figures, including senators, congressmen and Bush administration officials.
He's outed so many closeted gay politicos, he's starting to make Capitol Hill look like Brokeback Mountain. All of them, he says, use their positions to actively oppose the equal rights of gay citizens while at the same time, secretly live a gay life.
People have called Rogers a gay terrorist, but he says, "The only people who say things like that are people who have a vested interest in protecting the closet."
"I feel more sad for [the people I out] than anger," Rogers says. "... That they are in this position, that they are self-loathing, willing to wake up everyday and go to work against the very community they are a member of is quite shocking.
"Many gay organizations are troubled by outing but stop short of condemning it. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation "doesn't encourage outing, period," says GLAAD's Rashad Robinson. "But there is an argument that can be made — and many make it — for holding closeted political figures who attack and exploit gay people and our families for political gain accountable for their actions.
"However, the Log Cabin Republicans, a gay Republican group, disagree. "Log Cabin is strongly against outing," says its president, Patrick Sammon. "It is unproductive and motivated by vengeance. It does nothing to further the cause of equality for gay and lesbian Americans."
I think the response by the Log Cabin Republicans (I still don't understand how a self-respecting GLBT person can be a Republican given that party's hostility toward the community) is really sad. I applaud Rogers' activities. Of course they are politically motivated, just like the actions of those who work hard to deny rights to GLBT people. I think exposing closeted, self-loathing politicans who work as enemies of gay rights need to be flushed out into an honest public debate outside of their closets.
Honesty and truth in politics--it's a radical idea but it just might work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yeah, I like this guy too! Hypocrites are just that, and should be called on the carpet. We'd certainly out someone who works for the ONDCP, but uses coke on the weekend.
ReplyDeleteEven if you don't understand it, we do exist. And contrary to popular myth, we are not all "self-hating". It has a lot to do with a philosohpical loyalty to Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, who advocated, "the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order." Granted some have strayed, and some will continue to stray, but that's where we're rooted.
ReplyDeleteYes these great men are dead, but their legacy lives on, and at my level of involvement, the ideas of induvidualism and social and economic freedom are very prominent. The young generation in the Republican party is where I am, and I'm comfortable there, and they're comfortable with me. Don't let a few nuts who are prominent stain the rest of us.
(I'd like to add that Reagan was instrumental in defeating the Briggs Intiative in California. He came out against it officialy, something he did even though it could have harmed his presidential campaign. Something he did because he thought it was right.)
(And don't forget that Barry Goldwater got a Fred Phelps protest at his funeral for being too gay friendly.)
(And when Peter Pace made his statements on the immorality of homosexuality, one of the first politicians to publicly rebuke him was Senator John Warner (R-VA). He did this of his own accord while most of the Democratic candidates for president were dodging the question.)
As for outing politicians or political aides, how is this fair to them, regardless of politics? They are trying to deal with it (or trying to hide it), and who is anyone else to do something like that. Sure some of them pursue things that I don't agree with, but what I can't see is how it's fair to dig something that personal out and use it for political reasons.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI another quote that I love, by way of explanation. It's from a speach that Ronald Reagan delivered in support of Barry Goldwater's 1964 campaign for president:
ReplyDeleteThis is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capitol can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.
The way I see it, even in the debate tonight, far too many Democrats think that we should move toward a more centralized model of government. I think this is wrong, and I think it's dangerous.
It's because we have already made moves toward more centralized government control that debate over such a monstrosity as a "Federal Marriage Ammendment" is not just laughed out of Congress, condemned by the spirit of Amendment X, in conjunction with the powers listed in Article I Section 8.
[About my removed comment. It was this one, but I didn't do my proofreading and had a few spelling and grammatical errors. Sorry.]
Nicely said, psudain. As to the blogger - there are plenty of people who wonder how any self-respecting gay person can be a Christian, too. The answer is the same - we're Republicans because we have a certain set of beliefs about the nature of government and its proper role in society, and we stay despite occasional abuse because somebody has to do it. The GOP is as much our home as anybody else's - there is nothing inherently antigay about conservatism. Frankly, you want to see a gay-friendly America? Then you damned well better support those of us doing the hardest work out there- talking to people who actually disagree. We've got plenty of self-respect - fact is, I question the self-respect of gays who stay in a party that takes advantage of them, takes their votes and their money, and then runs like hell when it's time to take a stand. I'll take the guy who tells me he doesn't like me to my face anyday - at least he's honest, and somebody I can do something about.
ReplyDeleteI hear you folks and I get it, to an extent. What I don't get is how, assuming you are gay, that you could support a party that is working so hard to restrict your rights. Just off the top of my head there is the Federal Marriage Amendment, the opposition to the Matthew Shepard Bill, and opposition to workplace discrimination legislation. I agree that the Democrats have taken the GLBT voters for granted, but at least they haven't used them as scapegoats to rally the right-wing and get their voters to the polls.
ReplyDeleteGood subject, Jim. As you know, I was a Christian lesbian who also happened to be a Republican for most of my life. I voted for Reagan the second time and was proud to do so. That was the first election I was eligible to vote in! Over the years, I have become disillusioned with the Republican party as a whole. The platform clearly says what they want for America is to be free of gay and lesbian "influence". They want us to go back into the closet and never come out again. I can't support that. I'm conservative enough on other issues to refuse to join the Democratic Party, so where does that leave me? I registered to vote when I moved to New Mexico and when it asked for party affiliation, I checked Independent. It's the only choice I could stomach.
ReplyDeleteI honestly think that our two party system is failing us. America is a diverse country and 2 parties aren't enough to cover all that diversity. We need to look more to individual candidates and their views than to what party they are a member of.
Just my two cents. Smile.
Sharone
Not trying to get argumentative, but the official platform from 2004 makes one statement on gay rights issues. It is supportive of the FMA. I clearly disagree with that support, but there are a lot of other Republicans who think the same way. For example, Fred Thompson is opposed to FMA for the reason that the Federal government shouldn't have that power. And many (if not most) Republicans are friendly (at the least) to equal legal rights.
ReplyDeleteIf you look at the current "Issues" page at the GOP's website, it makes no mention of opposition to gay rights issues. The party is split on some of them.
So part of the reason I'm here (here being the GOP) is the underlying philosophical agreement on a lot of counts, but there's also the fact that I can work to change people's minds from within the party a lot more effectively than somebody outside of it. It makes people think, because I'm actually somebody they know, not a stereotype in the media or a talking head on TV.
And while I do agree with Sharone about looking at induvidual candidates, the fact remains that we do have a two-party system, and for right now, it seems to me that any change will need to be effected through that system.
I can see where you're coming from. However, the GOP isn't really defined by their website. That's my opinion, of course, but I've seen a major shift in the way that Republican candidates cater to the far Right wing. When James Dobson says he doesn't think a candidate is "Christian" enough for him to support the candidacy, there's something wrong. Literally millions of people hang on his every word when it comes to politics.
ReplyDeleteThere are absolutely a lot of Republicans that are friendly to us and support us, but the party as a whole seems to be hung up on being so different from the Democrats that it bends over backwards to please the religious right.
I do applaud anyone who's decide to stay in the GOP and fight from within. It takes a lot of guts!
Sharone
Hey, AllGod'sChildren... thanks for getting it. It's nice to get a bit of respect, even when we disagree about the state of the Republican party. I think it's changing, and I think the religious right is gonna get a pretty sharp kick in the teeth pretty soon - so it's my job to do the best I can, and patiently endure until the party sees the light. Thanks again.
ReplyDeleteAny closeted politician,Republican or Democrat deserves to be and must be outed when he or she deliberately votes for legislation discriminating against their fellow LGBT constituents. It is tantamount to saying that Jews should have voted for Hitler. I don't care for Republicans or Democrats at best and no longer vote for the Dems since that mealy-mouthed performance by John Kerry in 2004. Out of all of the viable Democratic candidates, only Dennis Kucinich has any integrity and a clear platform, but he's not going anywhere unfortunately because he puts honesty above party politics and is willing to risk his career to do the decent thing. Our two party system is corrupt and if you think taking back the White House by voting for Clinton, Obama or Edwards is going to make any significant change, dream on. Its going to be four more years of the same. We are NOT high on their list of priorities, never have been, never will be.
ReplyDeleteRobert, NYC.