#rsrh …You know something?

Let’s not get this entire mess out for the record, for once.  Let’s just summarize.  It is in fact possible to disapprove of Rick Perry’s social-conservative ad without also hating social conservatives, ceasing to support Perry, or viciously and profanely outing (warning: language NSFW) Perry’s pollster.  Something that GOProud should have thought about before it made itself radioactive and embarrassed its putative allies on the Right by doing that last one.

Put another way: this was not a good explanation, GOProud.  I am a social moderate and same-sex marriage supporter who wanted the end of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell… and I have no intention of defending your group on this.  You guys screwed up.  Own it, so that we can move on.


  • lourae says:

    I have always thought a person’s sexual inclinations the LEAST interesting thing about ’em. Talk about knee-jerk, ridiculous over-reaction—Mr. Lane’s Rule #3 applies here.

  • Brad S says:

    What was so ridiculous about GOProud’s stance? Frankly, IMHO, they’re right to highlight the use of LGBT political talent in the service of what are (to them) evil ends. One of the great ways to get these issues to fade in the background is to make it unacceptable for folks like Fabrizzo to work against their own interests, regardless of the paycheck (which, if I had to bet, is not as great of a paycheck as we think).

  • DaveP. says:

    “Unacceptable to work against their own interests”??!

    Wow- so his “interests” as a gay man outweigh his interests as an American, right? And therefore, any invasion of his privacy is his own fault- he was asking for it by daring not to conform, right?
    And who gets to define those interests- GOProud? You? .

    C’mon, tell us about how GOProud has the right to enforce doctrinal purity using threat of public outing.

    Barring these cretins from that conservative forum is looking better in retrospect, and barring them from the Convention is looking better all the time. Allies like this, we don’t need.

  • Brad S says:

    Let me ask this for you, DaveP: Do you think it is appropriate for LGBT political talent on the VRWC side of things to smile and keep quiet while another part of the VRWC demonizes people of their own sexuality in a bid to maximize base turnout for candidates like Rick Perry? Or should those same LGBT politcal operatives shut up, take their paycheck, and be grateful for gainful employment?

    Sorry I have to be so harsh about this, but this sort of behavior is what holds both the VRWC and the LGBT people down. Especially in a time in which these sort of political tactics (on all sides of politics) have more than passed the point of diminishing returns.

  • DaveP. says:

    Repeat after me, Brad:
    “It’s Okay To Use Someone’s Sexuality As A Weapon Against Them”

    “It’s Okay To Blackmail People Who Support The Wrong Politics”.

    “Extortion Is Fine, As Long As The Victim Is Gay.”

    “The Only Important Thing About Someone Is Their Sexual Orientation, And It’s Okay To Judge Them By That.”

    Hell, why bother repeating it? In your two posts, you just said all those things.

  • Moe, I certainly appreciate your support for marriage equality and the repeal of DADT. But I have to say that sexual orientation is not private for anyone. It is one of the fundamental ways that people use to create rapport, find common ground and build their social network. I challenge you to try an experiment for a week: don’t reveal to anyone a single detail of your life that would let people know you are heterosexual. This includes not mentioning your wife and children — and actively hiding your connection to them. Having to do this deadens the heart and tears the mind and soul. And it turns out to be a pointless sacrifice because most people figure you out right away no matter what you do and one of the biggest giveaways is being secretive — although that also is why gays marry and then lead double lives. It sounds to me like Jimmy and Chris were fielding calls from reporters who were well aware that Fabrizio is gay. I think they were right to answer those questions honestly and to call Fabrizio out. One of the biggest problems conservative gays have in talking to Leftist gays about fiscal conservatism and the need for a strong national defense is their belief that we are comparable to Jewish Nazi collaborators. Leftist diversity is about different identity groups all toeing the same line. They do not understand that diversity in the conservative movement is about ideas, and groups with ideas that are mutually exclusive may still congregate in the conservative big tent. So when someone like Fabrizio really does demonize gays for money, I cannot for the life of me see why we have an obligation to keep their secret-that-is-never-really-secret and be complicit in our own destruction in a way that is not required of anyone else ever. The benefits of doing this are potentially huge — Leftists gays will have proof that listening to conservative gays about fiscal conservatism is NOT suicide and it will show them they have a place to go when they realize that the real suicide is sticking with socialism. We really cannot persuade Leftist gays of the glories of conservatism without outing the collaborators wherever we encounter them.

  • DaveP. says:

    Instapundit brought up the White Citizens Councils today- organizations of proSegregation and anti voting rights whites that would boycott and ostracize any whites in their community that didn’t “support their people” and “act in their own best interests” by supporting segregation. People would be driven out of jobs, subjected to anonymous hate messages, demonized… because they were exercising the right of freedom of conscience.
    Same language, same type of behavior, same end in mind- enforcing political orthodoxy via coercion. I don’t see any difference here, and I doubt the ethics of anyone who does.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Site by Neil Stevens | Theme by