Here’s some interesting news from my always reliable Log Cabin “Republican” insider…
First, the never-took-flight Congressional candidacy of former Log Cabin National Field Director Jeff Cook is about to end. Sources tell me Jeff may leave the race as early as today. I have contacted the campaign and am awaiting a response.
Second, word has it that a group of former Log Cabin leaders across the country as well as former LCR major donors are going to put up a alternative slate of Board Directors at the upcoming LCR convention. This is an idea I had been talking about with some colleagues at the end of last year, so I’m glad to see someone has taken the initiative. I have offered my support for the alternative slate so we can, once and for all, put the “Republican” back into Log Cabin.
We need this organization to represent the millions of gays who are Americans first and not in bed with the radical anti-American agenda of the Gay Left organizations.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Amen to that!
What, no comment at all today on the Bush Administration changing the wording of how sexual orientation can (or can not) be used in approving security clearances? Oh, that’s right. In your world, there is nobody in the Bush Administration that is attempting to do harm to gay Americans and thus, the change was completely innocent. Of course! Let the silence continue.
Anonymous? Is that you God of Biscuits? LOL Where’s your courage to stand out and proud, dude?
For those not aware, GoB thinks that the rewrite of a Clinton era EO is proof that Bush hates all gays. In fact, the rewrite, according to GoB, is just like the attempts by well meaning state legislators to keep sexual predators from preying on school age kids on or near the playgroupnd.
Yes, he actually links the two items together in a parallel universe. But it isn’t reality based.
I think GoB was caught soliciting and the misdemeanor continues to haunt the clarity of his judgment. The jewel is that the Clinton Administration may have had to include the language because of their promulgation of DADT… but good ol defender of the Clinton reign God of Biscuits wouldn’t want you to know that fact.
If you care, you can read his nonsense here:
http://www.godofbiscuits.com/blog/
GoB has a real problem….
Regards,
Peter Hughes
Bruce – can you post or send me the slate of alternative candidates?
Robert- I will as soon as it is official!
The NYTimes will publish a review of Kevin Phillips’ new book on Sunday (available on-line now). Presuming you’ve read the review, any thoughts?
why no, Michigan Matt, that wasn’t me, but YOU…you accuse me of all manner of things and then utterly misread/misunderstand, either intentionally or because you’re just incapable of understanding pattern matching…
Why are you on a site like this if you thing that homosexuals are simply perverts?
LOL.. looks like Matt trolled out “GoB” to reveal Himself. ROFL.
This year I intend to be at the LCR Convention, finances willing, and I for one would love to see LCR remember that they are “Republicans”. It’s only two years to the 2008 Primary Season; and connections and alliances need to be forged in the next 18-months if the LCR is to have any “throw-weight” in time for the GOP Convention. And part of that includes accumulating some clout and influence at the local and state-levels….not just the Beltway cocktail circuit.
Keep us informed, GP.
GoB, it’s ok dude. Really. It’s ok. To heal we must first admit our faults and you’ve started that journey down the road of Political Freedom Trail… repeat after me: I will not linger on the Democrat Plantation any longer… I will not linger on the…
You are not “American first” you are “GOP first”. While I don’t doubt your patriotism, “gaypatriot.org” is rather misleading. A more accurate description would be “gaypartisan.org”. The Republican point of view, at least in practice, is not always, or even often, the “Patriotic” point of view. Not that the Democrats are any better, and they may indeed be worse, but the points of view most often expressed here are Republican press releases, not non-partisan patriotic ideas. Actually, the majority of posts on this blog continue to be rabid-dog attacks on the “Left” or the “MSM” more than anything else. It’s basically just Daily KOS flipped to the Right.
Ah, yes, the Log Cabineers. The Don Quixotes of gay Republicanism.
Patrick, for someone who’s been roundly best-ed by nearly all commentators in practically every thread, for you to lecture anyone on the appropos naming of a blog, managing a blog, selecting topics, winnowing out policies, or anything else is… is… like the Menendez kids killing their parents and then asking the Court for mercy ’cause they’re orphans.
For someone who maintains a near religious fervor in wearing the false cloth of supposed nonpartisanship, you push the boundary of patriot and partisan beyond their individual limits of elasticity.
I think Bruce and his fellow posters here hit the nail on the head: they –and me too– are sons of the American order first. Gay second. And then a whole lot of things third I don’t want to know about.
It’s what is refreshing and reaffirming about Bruce and his blog and the community here. They aren’t mindless GayLeft march-alongs comfortable in their Democrat Party straight jacket.
They haven’t subverted their sense of the gay civil rights to a place setting at the Democrat table. And they sure as Hell don’t feel a need to worship at the altar of gay leaders.
Nope Patrick, I think Bruce does a lot better at being American first –and proud of it– and gay second when it comes to politics, personal honor, and a code of conduct than you or other “nonpartisan” gay blogs have ever done.
raj is back! let the gay pontificate begin anew! trumpet cue anyone?
Hey Matt…
My St. Bernard just farted. Will that suffice?
Eric in Stitches
I wont continue my membership in the Log Cabins because of reporting by Gay Patriot. Unless the leadership changes. Thanks
Eric, if he can do it in key, sure. The operative part is that the dog is already a Saint and raj is doing the gay pontificate.
Interesting that we’re talking about “Gays who are Americans first.” I think a great many people in George Bush’s GOP would claim that homosexuality is inherently incompatible with American identity — in other words, that Gays are anti-American because we exist. That we are not willing to lay aside our individual liberties on behalf of the Far Right’s imagined common good is, for them, iron-clad proof of our immorality and anti-American intentions.
I’m sure I’m not the first to point out that “Gay Patriot” is considered an oxymoron on the Right as well as the Left — and perhaps even more of an oxymoron on the Right than the Left, given liberals’ tortuous redefinition of “patriotism” to include anything a conservative might deem anathema. Indeed, the genius in this blog’s name is its willingness to tackle the seeming contradiction between homosexuality and patriotism head on.
And BTW, I’m proud to be a Log Cabin Republican.
I use Anonymous with a a fake e-mail address because I never used to get any spam in my e-mail account. Shortly after I posted on here for the first time with my actual name and e-mail address, I started recieving tons of spam each day. Is that connected? Not nessecarily, but i’m not interested in finding out how high my spam count can go, if it is.
But no, I don’t think the rewrite of the language is ‘proof that Bush hates gays’. I would venture to guess President Bush (like the Dubai ports issue) found out about it from reading news reports. However, it is extremely naive to deny that there are many, many people within the Bush Administration who do not like gay people and wish to do harm to gay people. And you don’t need to be a linguistic to figure that out the change in the language of this directive is significant. The language used to say sexual orientation couldn’t be used as a reason for denying a security clearance. It now says sexual orientation can not be used as the “sole basis” for denying a security clearance. That is a huge difference.
Anonymous, I’m not a linguitist and I don’t have to be a hard core Democrat partisan and gay activist to understand that what SlickWilly’s Administration may or may not have done to cater to the Democrat Party’s kook gay fringe doesn’t mean that a Bush Administration has to do the same thing… hence the change. It isn’t significant or it would have happened in the first 100 days. It’s only significant to the idiots who got the language put in and then sold our community down the river on DADTDH and DOMA and other issues by the only “gay Democrat” President we’ve had.
I don’t doubt you THINK there are people in the WH, the EO, the Administration who have an animus toward gays… but I have to tell you that in my dealings with hundreds of mid- to upper-level Administration personnel and staff on a regular basis, I sure don’t see. I see professionals for whom sexual orientation isn’t the be-all, defining issue it might be for Liberal gays.
But then, I don’t see HRC bumper stickers in the EO parking lots anymore. I don’t see pink triangles on the cars I pass heading into security at the WH. And I don’t hear about after hour drinking orgies at gay bars with senior EO staffers –as I used to when SlickWilly and AlGore were running the show at 1600.
The point is you may think the same anger expressed by some kooks on the religious right represent the views of the Administration, EO or WH –but you’d be wrong.
The only thing “huge” is your paranoia. The EO can change language in execuitve orders all it wants; security clearances shouldn’t be denied based on sexual orientation anymore than fitness for military duty. And, despite the bloody shirt you try to wave, it isn’t. Not then. Not now.
I’m going to be a the LCR Convention and would like to meet/have a cocktail with anyone who posts here. Perhaps we can have an informal get together.
I am.
Why do you care if Jeff Cook decides to stay in or get out of the race for Congress? You haven’t mentioned his race before now. Jeff has made all of us proud. He is running a campaign based on solid conservative principles. You should thank Jeff for being a strong voice for gay Republicans!
And Jeff Cook is/was running against someone who voted for the Federal Marriage Amendment. I guess maybe that isn’t important, because he’s from Log Cabin?
I’m less troubled by the change in policy than I am by McClellan’s Orwellian insistence that nothing has changed.
If the Bush administration truly believes in the rule of law, it must acknowledge that laws are made of words and that words mean something. Alas, it would seem that America now has its first deconstructionist presidency, in which our legal code may be considered an “open work,” subject to endless and unbounded intervention. (Even Bill Clinton couldn’t achieve this feat, though it wasn’t for lack of effort.)
Someone is obsessed with Patrick G.
Yeah, the glee about Jeff Cook shows you for what you are: a hater that likes to project that characteristic on everyone you hate. Sort of sad. And one can get a sense from your writing that you think you are important. But you are not. So more pity, than sadness.