For a while, I considered attending the Log Cabin fundraiser tonight featuring the good governor of the Golden State, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Not only would it be a chance to meet the governor and hobnob with gay Republicans, but also a sign that I was hopeful that as it picks a new leader, this ostensibly Republican organization would focus more on building bridges to the GOP than on kowtowing to the left-leaning gay leadership.
And while outgoing Log Cabin President Patrick Guerriero has done a few things in the past year to distinguish himself from the gay groups, as he prepares to take his leave from Log Cabin, he has (as I have noted repeatedly before) been bending over backwards not to offend those groups. Perhaps, by appearing with Governor Schwarzenegger tonight, Patrick will learn that no matter how positive an record a Republican has on gay issues, unless he toes the gay groups’ line (without the slightest deviaiton), he will earn their scorn. Although the governor signed a great variety of pro-gay bills — and made clear his support for the state’s pioneering domestic partnership program, gay activists hold him in contempt for vetoing a bill recognizing gay marriage in the Golden State.
And even that veto likely did more good than harm.
After the legislature passed the bill, social conservatives were gathering signatures for a state referendum which would not only ban gay marriage, but would aso overturn the state’s domestic partnership program. Given that Proposition 22 (a state referendum defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman) passed overwhelmingly in 2000, had that proposal made the Golden State’s ballot, it stood a good chance of passing.
When the Governor vetoed the gay marriage bill, he deprived the social conservatives of the impetus they needed to rally the public to their cause. No longer could they make the case to voters that the state was bypassing the people by recognizing gay marriage. As a result, they failed gather enough signatures for their gratuitous referendum; it will not be on the ballot this year.
Given all the good the Governor has done, I wanted to show my support for him tonight even though the money from tonight’s event goes not to the Governor’s campaign coffers, but to Log Cabin’s depleted treasury. And when I learned that Patrick was stepping down as head of Log Cabin, I had considered going to the dinner.
It was, however, the tone of Patrick’s response to the president’s speech earlier this month reiterating his support for a constitutional amendment defining marriage that caused me to change my mind. Instead of responding with in a responsible manner, taking issue with the president’s points (which he would have been right to do), Patrick adopted the angry tone of the national gay leaders and released a nasty, confrontational missive, eschewing civility and insulting the president.
Let me repeat: Patrick was right to crticize the president for his support of this amendment. He was wrong to adopt the tone he used in his letter. I simply cannot support an ostensibly Republican organization whose leader so shuns civil discourse, particularly when addressing the president from his own party — on an issue of such importance.
Under Patrick Guerriero’s leadership, Log Cabin has seemed more eager to attack the Republican President of the United States than to distinguish itself from the left-wing gay groups. No matter how much I like the Governor — and appreciate his leadership — I cannot then in good conscience, give money to the organization while Patrick Guerriero is still at its helm.
Given how gay groups have reacted to Governor Schwarzenegger, the leaders of this ostensibly gay Republican group should realize that these groups are more interested in attacking Republicans than in reaching any kind of consensus on gay issues. Log Cabin should be doing what it can to distinguish itself from the angry, partisan rhetoric of the national gay organizations. Instead, with a few notable exceptions, it has joined them in mean-spirited attacks on the president and has pretty much held its fire when Democrats take stands on gay issues for which the national gay leadership lambastes Republicans.
I am hopeful that the next leader of Log Cabin will be more eager to build bridges to the GOP and willing to distinguish him- (or her-) self from the national gay groups. Should Log Cabin’s board pick such an individual, I will be delighted to support the organization, rhetorically as well as financially.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
Very well argued piece.
What? The Log Cabin Republicans want to have a leader?
What’s next, a “Republican” mission statement that they actually adhere-to?
Considering that in my state, after over 2-1/2 years of “trying”, they STILL can’t organize a follow-up cocktail party for the set-agenda of establishing a LCR chapter here in New Jersey…..grrrr. There are 901,000 register Republicans in this state; and 2.5-million “unaffiliated”, and yet no gay-voters who just might support some of the Republicans?
Considering that the president “of his own party” was — for no other purpose than to pander to social conservatives — advocating that Patrick and every other gay be constitutionally made second class citizens, I thought Patrick’s open letter was quite restrained.
So it can join the “angry partisan rhetoric” of the GOP?
The problem with building bridges to the GOP is that there is no one there on the other side. And thats NOT Patrick’s fault. Log Cabin got frozen out, along with most gay and lesbian members of the party when the President’s campaign dropped “compassionate conservatism” and went with “Culture War” as overall strategy toward campaigns and governance. And if you are going to have a war, you are going to need some enemies. Even if they were your former friends.
You shouldn’t be “making bridges” to the GOP, Dan. What you should be doing is reforming it. And in fact, you might try burning some of the bridges your Party has made to the Christianists. It might not be a way in the short term to win elections for the GOP, but it might be a way for the GOP to mean something more than political expediency carried to a new low of cynicism and moral depravity.
At the moment “GOP” does not mean “Conservative”. Until you do something about that basic equation, it doesn’t really matter who is running LCR.
Besides which, I abhor this idea of always looking for the next knight in shiny armor to come along and redeem the GOP. Thats what Bush was originally marketed as, remember? “The Compassionate Conservative”. I got sucker punched with it the first time and I’m not going to get taken in by it again.
What the hell is a “Christianist,” Gryphon?
Regards,
Peter H.
That’s Gryph’s excuse for why gay leftists should be assholes to Republicans.
You see, Gryph just can’t make the connection to the fact that both parties are aware of his irrational hatred, typical of so many gays, and are acting accordingly.
Republicans have figured out that, no matter what they do, Gryph will cling to his “Christianist” fantasies and excuses, so it’s no great loss to ignore him and go after other voters who he turns off.
Democrats have figured out that, no matter what they do, Gryph will cling to his “Christianist” fantasies and excuses, so he’ll gladly shut up and cough up cash and support on command so THEY can go after the other voters who he turns off.
Gryph – The way a group like LCR “reforms” the party is by “building bridges” to and supporting Republicans who have regarded our issues with honest discourse and civility (IE the seven Republican Senators who voted against the FMA).
Dan – Amen. But go easy on Patrick G. So he stumbled? He’s still done some awesome things at LCR, and I think he deserves all of our support.
And he’s cute. 😉
My question is – there are nice, congenial gay Republicans who tirelessly work for the GOP and probably have a lot of power in the inner GOP circles. Have they been able to do anything to accomplish a more moderate shift in the GOP’s attitudes towards gays?
It’s easy to talk about how awful gay groups are, but this is the same conversation that has been had over and over and over, with the implication being if gay groups are sweet, then the Republicans will love them.
APF (in #7)–As a former club president, I appreciate what he club presidents have been saying, that Patrick has done a better job than his predecessor of reaching out to and working with them. That’s no small thing. And he did briefly hire a Field Director.
Yeah, he’s kind of cute. 🙂
Carl, I never said gay groups need to be sweet, just not angry. As I’ve said numerous times before, the tone has got to change.
Dan, nicely written piece.
I think it’s telling that even on a piece about LC’s fundraising effort in little California, some here –with BushHatred at full tilt (Gramps, that’s you) will take any opportunity to offer “advice” to the GOP from the shores of religious bigotry.
What animates more and more of the GayLeft isn’t that Bush is President… or that Gore lost… or that Kerry wasn’t any better… it’s that Bush is a Christian, apparently God-centered, and works with the Religious Right AND Left in America to correct the failures from cultural/moral decay which are have been clearly evident and building in society over the last 50 years.
It’s that Bush is a Christian and –God forbid– works with Christians to achieve social progress.
Gramps, the bigotry on your side of the culture war has been outed. And your use of a term like “Christianist” –although not original (please see Andie Sullivan) nor clever– is to try to link the religious right to Islamo-fundamentalists and terrorists. It ain’t working except in the small confines of the bigoted, wildly hate-filled Left. Bitter ain’t selling to America, boy. A lesson for the BushHate crowd: bitter men always fail to lead. O swear I can watch films of Hitler in his ramp-up to power and his facila expressions are no different than some of those on the bitter, impotent Left.
I know the BushHate crowd is into fantasy and Star Wars so, like Lord Vader, I write: you’ve given in to your hatred. You’ve joined the Dark Side and –here’s the main point– YOU are hurting the gay community’s opportunity for progress. Go cripple the Democrat Party with your full tilt hatred, but leave gay activism alone. Please.
Again, good piece Dan. Spot on –no GOPer should let up until LC returns to the fold and works within the Party for change, not by using Open Letter stunts. Think of it: the ExecDir of LC had to use an Open Letter format? It underscores his failure as a leader of gay GOP organization. Failure.
I’m a gay leftist (*braces for an onslaught*) but, hey, I thought this was a well-written piece. Kudos, Gay Patriot, for continuing to be so articulate. We could use more intelligent discourse such as this!
Mike, we could use more honest and thoughtful people on your side as well. Your post is a refreshing alternative to some of the moonbats we get on this site. Thanks for your civil remarks.
Regards,
Peter H.