Gay Patriot Header Image

Pink Purge? What Pink Purge?

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 5:01 pm - October 23, 2006.
Filed under: FoleyGate,Gay Politics,Media Bias

One of the most amusing things about the aftermath of the Foley affair is the number of leftists, Democratic activists, MSM reporters and pundits and other Bush-haters speculating about what this means for the GOP. I mean, you’ve got people who have never attended a Republican meeting, who don’t spend much time with rank-and-file Republicans, who only know about the GOP from what they’ve seen in the media, trying to explain the party’s attitude toward gays.

And while outside of various urban and coastal areas, the GOP has not exactly embraced gay people with open arms, except in a few jurisdictions scattered across the country, various GOP committees and auxiliaries haven’t been rejecting us either. It seems that, by and large, most Republicans are willing to accept gay people into their organizations, but are unwilling to support gay marriage and, in some cases, wish we weren’t so open about our sexuality.

Last Wednesday, Johanna Neuman headlined her piece in the Los Angeles Times, “Some Seek ‘Pink Purge’ in the GOP.” Only it seems the “some” in her title refers not to Republicans, but to enemies of the GOP. She quotes one such enemy as seeing a “huge schism on the right,” leading a conservative pundit to ask “Isn’t it a bit unwise to use an enemy to the GOP as a source for about what is going on IN the GOP?

And despite what the MSM has said about social conservatives, even the most anti-gay among them “deny they are interested in removing gay staffers from the party.” Their concern is more where an elected official stands on their issues.

To be sure, things are not ideal for gay Republicans. The gay Republican staffers whom Ms. Neuman contacted for her article would not “speak for the record.” While we still have a ways to go with our own party, the GOP is hardly the anti-gay institution as defined by its enemies on the gay left — and their allies in the MSM. More often than not, they paint a picture of party that does reflect the party as it is, but as they have perceived it in their imagination.

While there’s no pink purge going in the GOP, there are still many places where gay Republicans cannot be all that open about their sexuality. For my part, I’m eager to work with the new leader of Log Cabin to address that problem, not through confrontation, but through gentle suasion.

– B. Daniel Blatt (GayPatriotWest@aol.com)

Share

12 Comments

  1. Well it’s not all bad. I’m happy to report that cosnervative talk-radio host Sean Hannity now provides a gay dating service.

    Comment by John — October 23, 2006 @ 6:04 pm - October 23, 2006

  2. So far the Pink Purge seems to be led by Mike Rogers and our “friends” on the Left.

    Comment by BoBo — October 23, 2006 @ 11:00 pm - October 23, 2006

  3. Unfortunately, I don’t think we will see the full brunt of this “pink purge” until after the election. You can bet your boots that the social conservative leaders are going to tell the GOP that they saved the GOP as best they could with turnout, and that if they want their support in 2008, the GOP had better start really going after the gays.

    Comment by Carl — October 24, 2006 @ 3:45 am - October 24, 2006

  4. You can bet your boots that the social conservative leaders are going to tell the GOP that they saved the GOP as best they could with turnout, and that if they want their support in 2008, the GOP had better start really going after the gays.

    And you base this on what?

    In general I think the Pink Purge is mostly a left construct of how they think the right is.

    I don’t think you could find a much more socially conservative man than Rick Santorum, and when one of his staffers was outed as gay, Santorum’s response was to keep him on staff.

    If I am wrong you can always and I am sure will scream “I told you so” but I don’t see it happening. Maybe some of the more out spoken mouth pieces will ask, but I doubt it will happen.

    Comment by just me — October 24, 2006 @ 7:23 am - October 24, 2006

  5. I can only imagine what kind of a-holes get together who listen to Hannity on a regular basis….

    Comment by James — October 24, 2006 @ 8:14 am - October 24, 2006

  6. James, if you haven’t learned yet –name calling isn’t a winning strategy for anyone in the GayLeftBorg. It may make you fell better as a flamer, but it doesn’t advance the debate even a little bit.

    Now, go tune in Chris Matthews, Jon Stewart, the DailyKos and MyDD for your next set of talking points.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — October 24, 2006 @ 10:07 am - October 24, 2006

  7. “It may make you feel better as a flamer”…….Now I think we are getting somewhere, while few would consider me effiminate, I think there is something in the ‘gay conservative’ that has a lot to do with disgust towards ‘that kind of homosexual’….

    Comment by James — October 24, 2006 @ 10:13 am - October 24, 2006

  8. Dobson will only allow the repubs to keep their gays in the closet.
    If the revelations of gay republicans in office slow down, the purge will pass, but if Rogers and the like keep up their despicable tactics, the purge will begin, but not with a load bang, but through the money and muscle of Dobson and his crew.
    His power will squeeze gays either into the closet, or into the democratic party.

    Comment by keogh — October 24, 2006 @ 10:26 am - October 24, 2006

  9. You wish, keogh.

    Why on earth would gays ever want to join the party that supports this sort of hate?

    B. Daniel Blatt

    You sound just like the Judenrat of the 1930’s.

    A gay Republican is as oxymoronic as an African-American Klansman.

    Comment by Michael — October 24, 2006 @ 11:44 am – October 24, 2006

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — October 24, 2006 @ 12:11 pm - October 24, 2006

  10. #8 – 401k must have found a new set of talking points to plagiarize, because his postings are actually trying to maintain a semblance of coherence.

    If anything, it is the RATS who are engaging in “pink purging,” otherwise why would they be trying to call it to everyone’s attention?

    I remind everyone of Peter’s Principle of Politics #69:

    “The gay rights movement was created in order to allow effeminate men easier access into the mainstream of society.”

    Prove me wrong.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 24, 2006 @ 1:59 pm - October 24, 2006

  11. -And you base this on what?-

    The rhetoric of influential social conservative leaders like Tony Perkins and Lou Sheldon.

    Comment by Carl — October 25, 2006 @ 4:03 am - October 25, 2006

  12. Or the shrill hypocrisy of people from ACT-UP, HRC and ANSWER.

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — October 25, 2006 @ 3:06 pm - October 25, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.