Subscribe to Breaking NewsWithers: Manhunt money still supports McCain
Just when you thought it was safe to reopen your Manhunt.net account, the hook up site is back in the news. When it was revealed last month that the site’s co-founder Jonathan Crutchley made the maximum donation to John McCain’s campaign, the blogosphere hit code red.
The fallout was crazy. Crutchley was asked to resign from Manhunt’s board, his business partner issued an apology and talked some noise about how Crutchley had seen the errors of his ways (with nothing from Crutchley of course), and team McCain said it would give the money back.
Well it looks like the McCain campaign really has no issue with gay lubed cash because it has not returned a dime back to Crutchley. Politico.com’s Ben Smith argues this should not be a surprise considering how McCain’s strength has never been the social issues warrior.
True statement, but by picking Sarah Palin as his running mate the Arizona senator was paying homage to those social conservatives in the GOP. They and Palin might draw the line at stumping for a guy who quietly spends money from a site that celebrates gay male sex.
The constant drumbeat against Crutchley is silly. You don’t like manhunt? Don’t use it. That simple. You don’t like Crutchley’s politics? Hey, I am NOT a McCain supporter, but Crutchley as a RIGHT to donate to whomever he damn well pleases. You don’t like that? Don’t vote for McCain. And more to the point, get out and do the friggin’ footwork. Donate to Obama then hit a local office and VOLUNTEER. Quit whining, get off your internet-tethered butts and WORK for change.
“They and Palin might draw the line at stumping for a guy who quietly spends money from a site that celebrates gay male sex.”
James, you are assuming they have moral and eithical standards…
Crutchley is free to give his money to anyone he wants, and is legally entitled to not be fired from a board from doing so (political affiliation is actually covered in civil rights law, dudes). Besides, since when does being gay automatically limit a gay person to one party? I know more than my fair share of gay Democrats who have no clue as to why they are in the party as opposed to being an independent, much less a Republican. When asked, they don’t even know the difference between the parties. Perhaps there should be some real education there, and not just blatant biased reporting. It really irks me that LGBT community is lead like cows to the slaughter for any Democrat, no matter how inappropriate they may be for any political position sought. We’re smarter than that… Regardless, just get out there and vote, vote vote!!
Funny. Regardless of political affiliation, I believe the words “politician” and “ethics” must be the tried and true example of the definition of an oxymoron. If anyone can’t tell, I’m soooo ready for a third, major party that encompasses liberal societal views along with my fiscal conservatism, of which neither party seems to currently have a grasp.