Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...LGBT group critical of gay Republican endorsement of McCain
09.03.2008 9:06am EDT
(Minneapolis, Minnesota) The nation’s largest LGBT civil rights organization is taking Log Cabin Republicans to task for endorsing John McCain and Sarah Palin.
“John McCain claims to be a maverick who breaks with his party, but on matters of LGBT equality, he’s shown that he’s anything but,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese.“He actively campaigned for a constitutional amendment that would have banned marriage and domestic partnerships for same-sex couples in his home state of Arizona. He went so far as to appear in television commercials for that campaign, is now supporting an amendment to strip marriage equality from California couples and has said that he would vote for a federal marriage amendment if laws already banning marriage equality were to be struck down by federal courts,” he said.
HRC is equally concerned about the Log Cabin endorsement of Vice Presidential candidate Palin:
“Sarah Palin has also supported bans on marriage and even domestic partner benefits in Alaska. The Republican Party, McCain and Palin’s party, has declared in its platform that they want to pass the federal marriage amendment. Their party’s platform also calls gay and lesbian Americans unfit for military service, supports policies that would allow faith-based organizations to deny us jobs and services using federal dollars, and attacks judges who acknowledge our equality under the law. The Human Rights Campaign endorses mavericks on both sides of the aisle— neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin is among them,” said Solmonese.
Log Cabin’s endorsement of the McCain/Palin ticket was not unexpected. The gay GOP group made its announcement Tuesday following a 12-2 vote of its national board of directors.
“On the most important issue that LGBT Americans faced in the last decade—the federal marriage amendment—Sen. John McCain stood with us. Now we stand with him,” said Log Cabin Republicans President Patrick Sammon.
“Sen. McCain showed courage by bucking his own party’s leadership and the president – twice voting against the amendment. He gave an impassioned speech on the Senate floor, calling the amendment ‘antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans.’ He paid a political price for his vote,” said Sammon.
Log Cabin noted, however, that it does have some disagreements with McCain on LGBT issues.
“We have honest disagreements with Sen. McCain on a number of gay rights issues. Log Cabin will continue our conversation with him and other Republican leaders about issues affecting gay and lesbian Americans. We will speak out when there’s disagreement—either during the upcoming campaign or when John McCain is President,” said Sammon.
Log Cabin Republicans endorsed then-Governor George W. Bush in 2000, but declined to endorse President Bush in 2004—largely over the president’s push for a federal anti-gay marriage constitutional amendment and his decision to use gay people as a wedge issue in winning re-election.
In addition to the ‘charming’ things Repubs say about gay people (Trent lott’s “compar[ing] being gay to problems like alcoholism and kleptomania”, let’s not ever forget would-be President Hucklebee who compared our marriages to “marrying an animal or a child”. Their very goal is to debase us, diminish us, demean us and de-humanize us.
Kari, you said, “George, I’m sorry, but you are part of the problem here.”, but you neglect to say WHY I am “part of the problem”.
Your “speculation” that your “reason for [my] being part of the problem stems from [your unfounded perception of my] lack of intelligence, knowledge or some other personal attribute, but I will refrain.”
Of course you will refrain. You don’t even know me, so anything you could type would be nothing more than speculation as opposed to explanation – something you lack entirely (on that point at least).
“Instead, I would encourage you to get off your high-horse, take a step back and see the big picture here.”
The big picture is that the Rethuglicans will shit on gay people and their rights each and every time (can you say “Mary Cheney”?) – it’s part and parcel of their platform.
“The dems promise us things but they don’t deliver. Why? Because they know it will get them kicked out of office. Why should we vote for them in the first place if their contributions to our struggle for equality are big words and empty promises?”
They’re only “empty” because of the resistance of hard line Rethuglicans, rabid rightwingreligiouszealots, and a largely bigotted population that refuses to acknowledge that gay Americans are not a threat – to democracy, to family values or to the institution of marriage, and who would indeed kick progressives out of office. You’re blaming the victims and not the bullies here.
Those “big words” regarding equality for gay Americans never come out of the mouths of Republicans at all – that is the part of the “big picture” that you refuse to see for yourself.
As for your short-sghted comment, “What pro-LGBT legislation have the dems passed at the federal level? They’ve been in office two years, surely they’ve passed some, right?”, ever hear of a thing called the Presidential veto?
I am a Democrat who realizes that the Democrats aren’t perfect. Bill Clinton let us down with DADT and by signing DOMA. The Democratic congress didn’t deliver ENDA or inclusive hate crimes legislation. (I know, it would have been vetoed, but it sure would be nice to have that on record: Dems pro-equality; Repubs anti-equality.) Much of what we’ve gotten from the Democrats has been lip service, and moderate obstruction of anti-gay Republican efforts.
Still, it’s a heck of a lot better than what we’ve gotten from Repubs. At least the Dems are proposing pro-equality legislation. Virtually every state and city-level act has been carried out by Democrats, not Republicans.
I look at this thing like a lottery ticket. We probably aren’t going to win the mega-bucks, but we may win a partial prize. Is the Republican ticket more likely to pay off, or the Democratic ticket? There can be no doubt for any of us that the Democrats may only give us half a loaf, but it’ll be a half a loaf more than we’ll ever get from the Republicans. Gays who vote for Republicans are kissing away ANY chance for equality in our lifetimes.
Kari,
I became a Demcorat 10 years ago, after seeing the Republican party veering rapidly away from me at an increasingly rapid speeding. One deciding factor was the incredibly vile and homophobic tone of the 1992 GOP presidential convention with the antigay warlike tone set by Patrick Buchanan pledging a “cultural war”. Another moment was then powerful antigay Trent Lott of Mississippi (brought down by a maverick progay Republican Chafee of Rhode Island who upset Trent Lott’s apple cart by his defection to the Indepents, upending the fragile balance of GOP numbers costing Lott his post as Speaker and earning Chafee much GOP anger) Lott compared being gay to problems like alcoholism and kleptomania further alienating me from the GOP. The GOP was not the party of my grandfather’s time. My grandfather was a soft-spoken gentleman, and republican he never spoke ill of anyone and never condoned discrimination of any type and even though we went to church on Sunday never a Bible pounding your going to hell type.
I saw the GOP was over the years hijacked by Newt Gingrich and whole raft of frightening Trent Lott, Jesse Helms, and Pat Buchanan bigoted types.
The party of Abe Lincoln became the party from antigay hell. The GOP is no friend of the gay community and I could see a lifetime of “begging crumbs of acceptance” from the GOP political table as opposed to finally living in the 21st century with a president who is finally going to sign some laws into being with the power to change gay lives for the better. We should see one anigay federal law after another repealed by a stroke of Obama’s presidential pen. etc.
McCain is living in the 1950s, Obama is living in the 21st century and is from a civil rights background. Obama is not perfect for gay marriage, but compared to McSame, he is in my mind if backed up by an even stronger and more progay Democrat majority congress the one to bring real improvement as an end to DADT, etc. Favors abortion, favors gay adoption of kids, would not interfere with an individual state government that mostly wants gay marriage etc. In general favors gay rights, against a US constitution amendment to ban gay marriage, and etc.
Kari,
I am a gay Democrat, maybe no major gay legisalation has passed in the last 2 years, but in the past several years, keep in mind that Federal Marriage Protection amendments to the US Constitution had failed or been derailed in Congress whenever it raised “its ugly head.” Keep in mind that the Democrats in the statehouse in Noston prevented a constitutional amendment from seeing the light of day to get placed on the ballot for the voters of that state in 2008, let’s not forget sight impaired Democrat Governor David Patterson of New York State directed state agencies in New York State to begin recognizing foreign and out-of-state gay marriages, a decision that survived a challenge in court brought by conservatives.
So, there have been some progress here and there on the state level.
However, after this year’s November elections are over with the country nearing a choice of either straight ahead with little difference in direction for gays or with Obama one cnange after another possible at federal level imagine the road the gay community is on beginning to bend bit by bit in another direction.
And don’t forget Kari that Barney Frank just told us quite recently that this being an election year that if we pick up a few additional Democrats in Congress this year, plus have Obama as president, then we have fewer Republicans around to obstruct gay civil rights legislation at the federal level plus we’d have a President who would sign such things a repeal TO DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL etc. Sentiment has been building up over the years for an end to that policy in both Congress and more and more retired generals have spoken out against this outdated policy. I think we will see such existing legislation in the works waiting for a chance at passage as the Uniting Families Act coming forward putting an end to forcing binational gay couples to flee to another land that recognizes such relationships I think we could see that being signed into law by Obama with his hands untied by an even more strongly demcorat majority. Barney Frank is predicting with this scenario an end to one piece of existing antigay federal law after another. Obama’s position on many gay issues are IN STARK CONTRAST to McCain’s.
TedB. wrote:
“Black Pot vs Black Kettle…. The HRC has been in the hip-pocket of the Democratic Party for decades while the DNC treats the G/L community as an ATM. The HRC doesn’t even pretend to be nonpartisan or ven bipartisan any more.
I’m supposed to be surprised that the HRC and the LCR disagree on McCain vs Obama?”
I couldn’t POSSIBLY agree MORE.
John: Oh really? What pro-LGBT legislation have the dems passed at the federal level?
They’ve been in office two years, surely they’ve passed some, right?
I follow the political process very closely.
I’m waiting for an example rather than generalizations. The last major legislation that the Senate or House took up was Don’s Ask, Don’t Tell and DOMA. The Democrats and the Republicans voted overwhelmingly for both issues.
Trace, do you follow the political process at all. Every major piece of pro LGBT legislation, at the federal, state and local levels, from equal adoption laws, to ant-discrimination ordinances, to hate crimes legislation, to allowing us to be intimate without fear of arrest before the US Supreme Court overturned Bowers V Hardwiuck, was mainly supported by Democrats and overwhelmingly opposed by Republicans. All you need to do is look at the legislative record of any progay bill for confirmation. Your comments are, quite frankly, baffling.
George, I’m sorry, but you are part of the problem here. I could speculate that your reason for being part of the problem stems from lack of intelligence, knowledge or some other personal attribute, but I will refrain.
Instead, I would encourage you to get off your high-horse, take a step back and see the big picture here. The dems promise us things but they don’t deliver. Why? Because they know it will get them kicked out of office. Why should we vote for them in the first place if their contributions to our struggle for equality are big words and empty promises?
As much as I dislike the HRC at times, they’re right on this issue, and they have endorsed Republicans in the past.
George, I could not agree with you more. Your insight and drive speaks for me and the masses of GLBT in this country. Thank you for being both bold and accurate.
I’m still waiting for someone to point out what the Democratic Party has done for gay people.
Yes, certainly they take our money and contributions.
Of course they pander to us and make statements that will make gay folk feel good.
Yeah, they’ll give us Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
Why no doubt they’ll sign DOMA into law.
But other than those fine things, what have the Democrats done that the Republicans have not?
…. Oh, that’s right…. Nothing.
The LCR has been around since the late 1970’s, and in 30 years, has done zip – zilch – nada – nothing to promote Gay rights in the USA, but has instead stood soundly on everyone remaining in the closet (in the 1980’s, they tried to promote the idea that the way to Gay rights was for everyone to act “straight” and stop bringing attention to the Gay minority in the USA). In my experience, they’re mainly A-list gays who have so much money they can buy themselves out of any discriminatory actions taken against them. In my opinion, they are a disgrace, embarassment, and an enemy of sober, sound, and progressive Gays across the USA.
I am not sure the Log Cabin republican group is actually a gay group. They vote against their own best interests, and the ones I met were metro alpha male types, not in a good way.
I live in Arizona and seeing the Mc Cain commercial for straights-only marriage was sickening, and very non maverick like.
Of course Palin is a homophobe, she is one of those women who think that all men should be attracted to her and her supple breasts, I know the type well.