Gay Patriot Header Image

Log Cabin: Senate Dems Hold Hate Crimes Hostage Over Iraq

Yesterday, after Senate Democrats failed yet again to force surrender in Iraq…. Senate Majority Leader, and Baby-In-Chief, Harry Reid took his toys and went home:  He pulled the Defense Authorization Bill entirely.   So in one fell swoop, Reid put the truth to the lie that Congressional Democrats “support the troops”.   He is now using the troops as a pawn in his attempt to force President Bush and General Petraeus to surrender to Al-Qaeda in Iraq.  Shameful.

What has gone mostly unnoticed, however, is that there are other key provisions in the Defense Authorization Bill.  One of those provisions was (allegedly) a key component of the Democrats’ agenda (again, allegedly):  a Hate Crimes amendment.

Patrick Sammon, Log Cabin (Republicans) President, called the spade a spade….

But Patrick Sammon, president of Log Cabin Republicans, a national gay group, accused Senate Democrats of holding the hate crimes bill “hostage” to what he called their doomed attempt to force President Bush to change his policies on the war.

“The bottom line is the Democrats don’t have the votes to pass their Iraq amendments,” Sammon said. “Even if they did, everyone knows the president would veto the bill.”

Great point.  If hate crimes legislation is soooooooooooo important to the Democrats… why was this, of all legislative vehicles, the one they chose to focus the amendment towards.

The usual Gay Borg lackeys chimed in, of course, with their expected defense of their political masters.

“The Senate obviously devoted all of its attention to the Iraq war,” said Brad Luna, spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign, the national gay advocacy group coordinating lobbying efforts for the hate crimes bill. “This had nothing to do with the hate crimes bill.”

John Marble, spokesperson for National Stonewall Democrats, a gay Democratic group, accused Log Cabin of attempting to deflect attention from what he called the Republican Party’s poor record on gay rights.

“The Republicans delivered virtually nothing on GLBT issues while they controlled Congress for more than a decade,” Marble said. “Log Cabin should spend more time securing additional votes for the hate crimes bill rather than making up charges about the Democrats.”

A reminder to Mr. Marble…. Democrats controlled the US House for 40 years before 1995, and the Senate many times throughout.  The only major gay rights legislation or mandate to come from the Democrats when they had the chance in power:  Defense of Marriage Act and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.   Great record, eh?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)



  1. If this stops an Orwellian thought-control law from passing, and if it precipitates another showdown over Iraq policy that the White House has the guts to win like the last one… then it’s a win-win.

    But that’s a lot of “ifs”. IOW, I worry.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 19, 2007 @ 11:23 am - July 19, 2007

  2. Of coarse they would attach it to the latest defense appropriations bill, since that method worked the first time with the minimum wage increase. To be fair, I’m sure it wouldn’t be too hard to find that Republicans did the same thing for their pet projects during their tenure as majority.

    Didn’t DOMA get introduced in ’96, after the Republicans took the house? (too lazy to look it up right now)

    Comment by sonicfrog — July 19, 2007 @ 11:36 am - July 19, 2007

  3. Sonic-

    I forget actual date of DOMA as well at the moment. But here’s my point… for 40 years, the Dems did NOTHING while they had control of all three branches of government (at various times).

    When something was passed (albeit by a GOP Congress perhaps), it was negative and signed by a DEMOCRAT President, who is lauded by the Gay Left as the “Gay Messiah”.

    It just don’t make no sense to me. But I’m just a Frozen Caveman Lawyer …

    Comment by GayPatriot — July 19, 2007 @ 11:42 am - July 19, 2007

  4. What does Hate Crimes have to do with the war?
    If Democrats were serious they would introduce their thought police bill on it’s own. As usual it’s just lip service to the “gay borg left”, which I find insulting to all Borgs to be lumped in with these nuts, which they blindly accept wihtout questioning.

    Comment by Ousslander — July 19, 2007 @ 11:43 am - July 19, 2007

  5. “What does Hate Crimes have to do with the war?”

    Are You Kidding!!! To many Democrats, the GWOT is the greatest “Hate Crime” of them all!!!

    Comment by sonicfrog — July 19, 2007 @ 12:10 pm - July 19, 2007

  6. Oops, should have read:

    For many Democrats, the GWOT is the greatest “Hate Crime” of them all!!!

    Comment by sonicfrog — July 19, 2007 @ 12:12 pm - July 19, 2007

  7. […] Original post by GayPatriot […]

    Pingback by Politics: 2008 HQ » Blog Archive » Log Cabin: Senate Dems Hold Hate Crimes Hostage Over Iraq — July 19, 2007 @ 12:45 pm - July 19, 2007

  8. DOMA was a Republican Congress, but, it was something that President Clinton urged and was proud to sign. In fact, I could be wrong, but I think I remember Clinton saying he would propose an FMA / MPA, if that should become necessary due to Court decisions. So yeah, Democrats get half the blame for DOMA.

    DADT was all Democrats. They controlled both houses of Congress. Clinton precipated the issue by fumbling it – turning what should have been a low-key executive order into a national crisis – and then by caving in to Congressional homophobes led by Sen. Sam Nunn, a Democrat.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 19, 2007 @ 12:56 pm - July 19, 2007

  9. […] Posted by Nate Nelson on July 19th, 2007 Turns out that vital support for our troops on the ground isn’t the only thing that took a back seat to the Democratic obsession with the destruction of Iraq. Log Cabin Republicans President Patrick Sammon points out that the Democrats’ promised extension of hate crime laws to sexual orientation and gender identity have also been pushed to the side (H/T: Gay Patriot). […]

    Pingback by Showing Us How Much They Care « Nate Nelson — July 19, 2007 @ 4:38 pm - July 19, 2007

  10. Um…the Democratic controlled House already passedthe Hate Crimes Bill. That’s how it got to the Senate. And I’m not sure if you expect gay Dems to be so self-absorbed as to put passage of that relatively insignificant bill ahead of the war.

    Before 1994, Dems also gradually built support–almost exclusively Dem support–for ENDA and its predecessor bill, as well as held hearing on antigay employment discrimination as early as 1979. Reagan’s election in 1980 ended any realistic chance of that movement going anywhere for a decade. But Dems in Congress continued to build support, so that passage was on the verge of a realistic possibility before the gay-hating GOP took over.

    And DOMA was enacted in 1996, as a GOP tactic to force Clinton to choose between alienating a component of his base or taking a controversial public position. He chose the former, but he certainly didn’t propose DOMA.

    What a freak show of denial and misinformation this pathetic thread is!

    Comment by Steve — July 19, 2007 @ 8:40 pm - July 19, 2007

  11. I am disappointed the Matthew Shepard Act stalled due to the withdrawal of the defense authorization bill. Yet, realistically, it makes no difference whether the hate crimes bill is passed tomorrow or a year from now, as the President has said he will veto it. Still, getting both houses of Congress to pass the legislation in the same session would be an achievement, despite the promised veto.

    Which, btw, it must be noted: The Bush presidency ends exactly 1 year and 6 months from tomorrow. Oh man, just the thought of seeing his limousine leaving Washington for the final time gets me giddy!

    Comment by Chase — July 19, 2007 @ 10:32 pm - July 19, 2007

  12. DADT was all Democrats. They controlled both houses of Congress.

    Yes, but that was prior to the political realignment of 1994. The geographic base of the Democratic Party prior to 1994 was the South and whether those southerners had an (R) or a (D) next to their name, they were all bigots. Thus, even much of the Democratic leadership was hostile to gay rights then. Those men and their ideological cousins left the party in the mid-90’s.

    Now the geographic base of the Democratic Party is the Northeast and West Coast. Heck, the Speaker Of The House is the representative for the Castro. It’s a whole different ballgame than 1993. It’s like comparing apples and oranges.

    Comment by Chase — July 19, 2007 @ 11:01 pm - July 19, 2007

  13. For a group that says Liberals should let go of the past, y’all seem to love to drag it up as much as possible when it comes to attacking Liberals

    Comment by Kevin — July 19, 2007 @ 11:28 pm - July 19, 2007

  14. And DOMA was enacted in 1996, as a GOP tactic to force Clinton to choose between alienating a component of his base or taking a controversial public position. He chose the former, but he certainly didn’t propose DOMA.

    If I recall correctly, Steve’s comment is pretty close to the way this went down. This was a result of the continued backlash of Clinton’s failed attempt to open up the military to openly gay servicemen and women. The new Republican House majority was sowing their oats during this period. Then the budget standoff happened. Though both parties had legitimate reasons for the stalemate, Clinton, through his superior political skills and superb showmanship (even if you don’t like him you have to admit, he’s a marvel to watch), was able to pin the entire blame on the congress, and at the same time, find his voice again. He became a stronger figure because he now had the public on his side. And then came Monica….

    Comment by sonicfrog — July 20, 2007 @ 10:31 am - July 20, 2007

  15. You know, you might have a point if, the GOP leadership would have allowed a hate crimes bill that includes LGBT persons to be voted on by the whole House and Senate and get through a conference committee. But we all know that exactly 4 GOP Senators and maybe 20 GOP Congresspeople actually support the HCPA.

    You might have a point if your exalted President wouldn’t have vetoed the hate crimes bill the first time it hits his desk (regardless of what it was attached to) because he supports hate crimes laws, but not for queers.

    You might have a point if you guys actually supported the legislation that you are condemning the Dems for not being able to withstand a Republican filibuster for.

    Your very tired arguments referring to decades old GOP led initiatives like DADT and the Defense of Marriage Act that had some Democratic support and were signed by Bill Clinton 15 or so years ago might have some weight if you could name one thing that the GOP has done in the interim. The people blocking progress are the Republicans. Period. I’m surprised we don’t see you guys attacking the Grover Cleveland administration. For what, I don’t know. But you guys will come up with something.

    If it hadnt been for your conservative GOP, Clinton wouldn’t have been stopped when he tried publically to allow LGBT servicemembers to serve openly. It sucks that he caved against overwhelming pressure from every single elected GOP Senator and Congressman, but I blame the GOP more than Clinton. They both get blame.

    With regards to Clinton signing the DOMA act, that sucked too. But Bruce, DOMA came up after the GOP came to power, and was pushed by your GOP leaders as a way to drive a wedge against the Democrats. Clinton caved here too.

    Clinton, finally provided decent funding of HIV/AIDS causes, issued an executive order banning discrimination against LGBT persons by the Federal Government (since cynically abrogated by the Bush Administration in all but name by Mr. Scott Bloch), advocated the passage of the ENDA, HCPA, and for the right of all to serve. Clinton tried and failed. No GOP leader has tried to anything.

    So you are upset with the Democrats not being able to overcome a GOP filibuster of legislation passed by Democrats that you don’t support? And that your President promised to veto?

    Comment by Tom in NYC — July 22, 2007 @ 5:07 pm - July 22, 2007

  16. Yes, Tom; we all know that Clinton was so bereft over being “forced” to do all these antigay things, that he had to run ads on Christian radio stations touting his support of DOMA and DADT as examples of how he had “fought for our values and America is better for it”.

    Gays like yourself are just like leftist black people; you always blame “whitey”, or in your case “Republicans”, for all of your problems, and because of it, the Democrats can manipulate you into doing whatever they like.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 22, 2007 @ 10:47 pm - July 22, 2007

  17. North Dallas Thirty, you’re a pitiful guy.

    Of course, Dem politicians let down gays all the time. Clinton’s ’96 radio ad–for which gay Dems attacked him immediately–is just one example. A much better example, frankly, is John Kerry’s endorsement of a marriage amendment in Massachusetts. And he was certainly criticized for that. I know I criticized him loudly and often for it.

    But the bizarre point of the initial post here seemed to be that the GOP is as good on gay issues as the Dem party or at least that the Dem party is as bad on gay issues as the GOP. That is a ridiculous claim that a few pathetic Log Cabiners have been making for years, including claiming in 2000 that George Bush was more pro-gay than Al Gore. FYI, this kind of thing doesn’t convince anyone who isn’t already as out of touch with reality as you are; it only makes you look stupid–and pathetic.

    No, Republicans aren’t the problem; antigay bigots are the problem. But the GOP has a chronic history of coddling and pandering to antigay bigots. Let’s see there’s Bill Clinton’s rural Idaho radio ad from 1996 versus, just to pick one GOP example, repeatedly forcing the House and Senate to vote on an amendment to forever strip gay couples of equal protection under the Constitution. Yeah, those seem about comparable to me. Please!

    I’m sorry that you’re so unhappy that the party you otherwise love so much constantly bashes gays in order to win the votes of antigay bigots. Ranting about every little disappointment of Dem politicians, however, won’t do anything to make the GOP any less bigot-coddling. It’s just venting on your part, and the rest of us pity you for being driven to it.

    Comment by Steve — July 23, 2007 @ 1:13 pm - July 23, 2007

  18. Let’s see there’s Bill Clinton’s rural Idaho radio ad from 1996 versus, just to pick one GOP example, repeatedly forcing the House and Senate to vote on an amendment to forever strip gay couples of equal protection under the Constitution.

    If leftist gay Democrats like you oppose the FMA, Steve, why are you, your leaders, and HRC giving money and endorsements to people who support it?

    In short, Democrats not only support homophobia, they a) lie to gay people and say they don’t and b) they mislead gay people into giving them millions of dollars annually to support their homophobic campaigns (like John Kerry).

    That IS worse. Much worse.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 23, 2007 @ 1:31 pm - July 23, 2007

  19. #18 – NDT, I think the term you are looking for is “useful idiots.” Or “lockbox votes.” Both mean the same thing to the Dhimmicrats.

    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — July 23, 2007 @ 4:47 pm - July 23, 2007

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.