GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

McCORNthyism 2006

by

John Podhoretz hits its the nail right on the head this morning.

David Corn, 2006: “[The list] includes nine chiefs of staffs, two press secretaries, and two directors of communications—is that (if it’s acucurate) it shows that some of the religious right’s favorite representatives and senators have gay staffers helping them advance their political careers and agendas”

 

Joseph McCarthy, 1950: “A list of 205 people…who, nevertheless, are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department.” 

Gay Republicans may be the first target of this gay purging (using “The List” compiled by the Gay Left), but they won’t be the last.  This is the just the leading edge of serious damage to gays in the workplace beginning in the Federal government.

But since they are Republican staffers, it is okay to demonize and root them out, right?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Comments

  3. Again, I’d be cautious about this. I have no doubt Rogers loves this, but don’t ignore what Corn says either. If what he says about Gloria Borger is correct, the GOP will gladly throw them under the bus to get the heat off the leadership.

    And I doubt they need Roger’s to dump them either. They likely know who most of them are anyway.

  5. Valuing “tolerance and diversity” doesn’t mean you have to allow bad people who support bad policies using bad tactics to remain in positions of power. I can tolerate gay Republicans just fine when they are back in the private sector and can no longer use the power of the State to hurt people. Diversity doesn’t mean we have to have bad government policies equal in number to the good ones… gay Republicans have been undermining gay families, discriminating against gay soldiers, denying security clearances to gay government employees, and engaging in a spending spree that is sending ALL of us to the poorhouse. Why should we tolerate that? THROW THE BUMS OUT!

  6. Here’s a CBS report:

    CBS News has learned that several other top Republican staffers who handled the Foley matter are also gay. Their role in this controversy has caused a firestorm among GOP conservatives, who charge that a group of high-level gay Republican staffers were protecting a gay Republican congressman, reports CBS News correspondent Gloria Borger.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/04/politics/printable2059821.shtml

    With FRC, Dobson, Gingrich and WSJ hopping mad and trying make this about homosexuality, there could be problems. For now, Hastert seems content to blame Clinton and Soros.

  7. Hey, I had posted this under the “gay withhunt” section, but you removed the comments. I think it applies here as well (trying to remember exactly what I wrote):

    “I agree with you. However, as Republicans why don’t we focus on prosecuting the pedophiles in Congress and those who covered for them first?” I would rather see more effort there.

    Thanks,
    M.

  8. You mean you don’t think people are focusing enough on the sins of the Repubs? Also – pls. explain what sins here could be prosecuted if any since Foley ain’t Studds.

  9. #5 – “I can tolerate gay Republicans just fine when they are back in the private sector and can no longer use the power of the State to hurt people.”

    Oh, so it’s okay that gay RATS can do the same thing? You think it’s okay for the DNC to “seek and destroy” gay Republicans?

    Have you no sense of decency?

    Hey, Nonny, Nonny – get a f*#%ing clue.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

  10. Bruce, the GayLeftBorg has never been tolerant of differing opinions and wouldn’t be caught dead helping gay brothers unfairly targeted.

    You know the GayLeftBorg views those people as “cultural criminals” for helping GOP leaders maintain office… “detractors and defectors” from the GayLeft’s agenda and movement. You, Dan, and gay conservatives commenting here each day secure a fair share of that hatred and fomenting anger –just recall the jews-Nazi comparisons of this past year for conservative gays or GOP gays right here on this blog.

    It is as close to gay canabalism as the GayLeftBorg can get without having to wipe blood off their hands and they are LOVING it.

    MikeRogers had been claiming for 17 months he was going to bring down GOP House members with the scandal of outing gay Congressmen and staffers… he’s having his wish fulfulled. As posterboi for the GayLeftBorg, he’s proven intolerance and gay canabalism is the perfect antidote for gay GOP supporters.

    And they’ll further erode the image of gays in mainstream America (I’m not sure it could get any lower) in order to score political points. But then, these are the same cowards who have routinely placed partisan interests above natl security interests for the last 24 months.

  11. There are reports today that the page who traded IM’s with Foley was actually 18 at the time so with the pedophile angle gone how is this any different from the Clinton case? Except for the fact that Foley resigned while Clinton didn’t and Foley didn’t have sex with the objects of his unseemly middle aged obcession while Clinton did.

  12. Oh geez. You’re comparing McCarthy’s fictitious list of Commies to somebody’s list of gay people working directly against the interests of gay citizens. This is so 1990s.

  13. I can tolerate gay Republicans just fine when they are back in the private sector and can no longer use the power of the State to hurt people. Diversity doesn’t mean we have to have bad government policies equal in number to the good ones…

    LOL…..nice try, puppet.

    We don’t see you objecting to using the power of the state to allegedly hurt people when it’s Kerry, Clinton, or other Democrats doing it.

    Of course, you and your fellow puppets called those actions “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive” and gave them tens of millions of dollars in support.

    This has nothing to do with gay rights. It has everything to do with self-loathing leftists like yourself who need others to validate their bootlicking for the Democratic Party and have thus created the myth that all gays must be Democrats.

    Some of us are well past that phase in our sexuality and have found people who actually respect us for who we are, not just people like the Dems, who will be nice to us as long as we give them money and do whatever they tell us to do.

  14. Oh the outrage!

    Someone’s circulating a list of gay republican staffers and NDT is all exercised about it….while ignoring his party’s protection of a pervert.

    It’s too damn bad Foley turned out to be gay, but it’s so beside the point.

  15. Someone’s circulating a list of gay republican staffers and NDT is all exercised about it….while ignoring his party’s protection of a pervert.

    Considering that the man resigned, was stripped of all protections, and is now under criminal investigation, what exactly is being “protected”?

    Are you referring to the emails? Well, if that’s the case, then aren’t the Democrats who received them several months ago, but didn’t go to the FBI, also guilty of “protecting”?

    Furthermore, since the Democrats had the instant messages, which are even more damning, and the Republicans evidently did not, doesn’t that make them even MORE guilty?

    The lunacy of Dems’ arguments on this is incredible. There was no electoral reason whatsoever in November of 2005 to “protect” Foley. What happened is that a page’s family reported a problem with Foley sending emails to their son to the appropriate individuals and asked them to deal with it without causing a major public hubbub. Those emails, while odd, are hardly reason to call out the hounds — as was made obvious by the fact that the FBI didn’t even see them worthy of investigation when they received them initially from CREW.

    What the Democrats are trying to do is to conflate the emails with the instant messages, which are damning proof, and make it appear that Republican leadership was engaged in a coverup. However, what seems obvious is that Republican leadership never saw the instant messages — but Dem leadership did.

    What happens, JonathanG, is that Pelosi and other House Democrats knew the extent of Foley’s pedophilia before House Republicans did — mainly because their operatives dug it up first during the process of trying to find dirt to smear Foley.

    Pelosi and her minions then sat on it until it would have maximum electoral impact — and depended on her dupes like you to defend the fact that, while she claims not immediately reporting information was endangering children for political purposes, SHE HERSELF didn’t report it immediately for political purposes.

    And as far as protecting a pervert, who knows how many other underage boys Studds had sex with — but Democrats praised, applauded, and perpetuated him in office. Furthermore, given that Dems oppose age-of-consent laws as “imposing religious dogma”, what exactly are you criticizing?

  16. “You’re comparing McCarthy’s fictitious list of Commies to somebody’s list of gay people working directly against the interests of gay citizens.”

    In fact there were a lot of Commies in the government when McCarthy (and others such as Democrat Pat MaCarran and the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee that he chaired) were investigating the issue in the late 40’s and early 50’s. KGB files later confirmed that fact. Both political parties agreed at the time that it wasn’t a good idea to allow Commie spies to work in the higher echelons of the United States Government.

    **********************

    Are Democrats who are outing Republican gays working “in the interest of gay citizens” or have the Lefties arrogated unto themselves the privilege of deciding which gay citizens are worthy of privacy? This outing campaign is going to backfire, and badly.

  17. Gays who support the the outing of other Gays with whom they disagree can be far more accurately call self-hating & “Jewish Nazis” than any member of Log Cabin. One good result of this Foley mess is that it seems to have smoked out a whole bunch of those “tolerant” GayLeft Uncle Toms.

  18. Actually instead of creating lists of gay GOP staffers to fire, why not start talking to as many Pages and Former Pages to see if any of them have/had been approached by Foley or any other congress member in an inappropriate way. Find out who, and then get rid of the “who’s” that are doing this stuff.

    Targeting gay staffers and making them scapegoats isn’t going to help the problem-which it the exploitation of the Pages.

    Although I do think if a gay or any other staffer is found to have had more detailed knowledge of what was going on, beyond rumors, then they should be held accountable for that knowledge. I think one thing that bothers me is that with hindsight, people are out there encouraging investigations based on rumor-alone, and defending yourself against a rumor can be difficult to impossible, if it isn’t true.

  19. David Corn says he will NOT publish the list.

    Here’s what Corn said:

    Let’s be clear about one thing: the Mark Foley scandal is not about homosexuality. Some family value conservatives are suggesting it is. But anytime a gay Republican is outed by events, a dicey issue is raised: what about those GOPers who are gay and who serve a party that is anti-gay? Are they hypocrites, opportunists, or just confused individuals? Is it possible to support a party because you adhere to most of its tenets–even if that party refuses to recognize you as a full citizen? The men on The List might want to think hard about these questions–as they probably already have–for if I have a copy of The List, there’s a good chance it will be appearing soon on a website near everyone.

    More:
    http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/10/05/publiceye/entry2065637.shtml

  20. #21 – Sounds like David Corny is an old-fashioned blackmailer. Wonder what would happen if we started digging stuff up on him as well? Maybe that would make him sing a different tune.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

  22. From David Corn’s website:

    I have a copy. I’m not going to publish it. For one, I don’t know for a fact that the men on the list are gay. And generally I don’t fancy outing people–though I have not objected when others have outed gay Republicans, who, after all, work for a party that tries to limit the rights of gays and lesbians and that welcomes the support of those who demonize same-sexers.

    Hastert Unhinged? (And More on The List)

    I’ve received several requests for The List (see below), but I haven’t passed it on. And a few emails have come in with the same sort of query: is So-and-So who works for Senator So-and-So on the list? I haven’t answered such questions. But a reporter told me that The List is in other hands. He was told by an official at the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights lobby, that it had a copy. The HRC official refused to talk about it, though. What’s intriguing is that there is a Republican strategy to find scapegoats–other than House Speaker Denny Hastert, of course–and the two leading candidates seem to be Democrats (for somehow making this scandal a scandal) and gay Republicans (for presumably protecting the page-pursuing Mark Foley). From what I can tell, some of these gay GOPers are fighting back. I cannot say too much about this without disclosing more than I should about certain individuals. But there does seem to be a conflict brewing within Republican circles between straight cons and gay GOPers. I’m wondering how nasty this will become and if it will become public. Should that occur, things could get rather ugly.

    More:
    http://www.davidcorn.com/

  23. And generally I don’t fancy outing people–though I have not objected when others have outed gay Republicans, who, after all, work for a party that tries to limit the rights of gays and lesbians and that welcomes the support of those who demonize same-sexers.

    How about outing and harassing gay Democrats, then, who ALSO work for a party that applauds limiting the rights of gays and lesbians and who welcomes the support of those who demonize same-sexers?

    Isn’t it funny how these people who try to rationalize outing as something noble are ultimately exposed as nothing more than political opportunists?

    If you don’t like outing, David, then don’t do or facilitate it. Right now, all you’re doing is being a hypocrite by condemning people of one political affiliation for things you ignore in the other.

    That’s the mark of a spineless and selfish person.

  24. David… Corn… said… he… will… not… publish… the… list.

    Then he had no need to mention it in the first place.

    Notice how he’s setting up for the inevitable reversal, in which he will claim, “well, I might as well publish it, since reporters have it anyway”.

    I dare him to do it.

    Yes, it will hurt others. But what it will also do is to expose him and his fellow leftist puppets as gossipy, slime-sucking, blackmailing pigs.

  25. Re: The List.

    It’s well documented that numerous times when a list was prepared by Stalins henchmen for the next round of “liquidations” that Stalin would add the name of the list’s compiler to the bottom, and hand it back to the compiler to be forwarded to the appropriate section of the Secret Police. And they would dutifully comply…while knowing they were now doomed to destruction. And why?, because they knew the names on the list.

    Two people can keep a secret if one of them is dead.

    Lists, and secrets, only remain secrets when everyone who knows the secret are dead. Someone will publish that list…