Gay Patriot Header Image

Anti-Israel Figure to address Democratic Convention

Organizers of the Democratic National Convention announced on Tuesday that former Georgia Governor James Earl Carter, Jr., also known “Jimmy,” with a long anti-Israel record since his forced retirement twenty-eight years ago, will address the gathering next Monday, August 25.

Carter, who served one term as president from 1977-1981 before being defeated in landslide in the 1980 election, carrying only six states, has, since that defeat, blamed Israel for most of the problems in the conflict the Jewish State faces with the Palestinian Arabs.  Earlier this year, despite objections by his own nation’s State Department, the disgraced former president met with Khaled Meshal, a leader of the Hamas organization, in Syria.

The State Department has designated Hamas a terrorist organization.

He called Israeli treatment of the Palestinians,  “one of the greatest human rights crimes on earth,” yet did not offer any such hyperbolic language to condemn the Palestinian authority which tacitly condones suicide bombings.  Indeed, the governing party of that authority, Fatah, is linked to a terrorist organization, the Al Asqa brigades.

Carter even ignored Israel’s right to defend its borders when it, in 2006, responded to attacks from the terrorist organization, Hezbollah, based in Lebanon, across Israel’s northern border.

If presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama wishes to assure voters of his commitment to the Jewish State, he will remove this anti-Israel speaker from the program of its party’s convention.

UPDATE:  Here’s a reason why Carter’s presence should trouble Obama: Obama’s Numbers With Jewish Voters Drop Below McGovern’s.

UP-UPDATE: In a must-read piece on Pajamas, Phyllis Chesler has more on the Democrats’ choice of this anti-Israel politician to speak on the opening night of their convention.

End of Days

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 7:38 pm - August 20, 2008.
Filed under: Post 9-11 America

Speaking of Philadelphia (below), truly we are in the end of times.   My US Airways flight to Philadelphia actually took off on time (no waiting in Charlotte) and landed early.

Maybe Obamessiah is directing air traffic these days too?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Hey Al Gore! Get Your Ass to Philadelphia!!

Holy sh– !! I just arrived in Philadelphia on a business trip and it is only 75 degrees!! 75 degrees in mid-August!

Forget Global Warming silliness, I am starting to wonder about global cooling.

Oh that’s right — fluctuations in weather aren’t called “weather” anymore.

Everything is now “climate change”.

UPDATE – Looks like I was onto something.  I just saw this article from Drudge:  Farmers’ Almanac says cold winter ahead.  

Households worried about the high cost of keeping warm this winter will draw little comfort from the Farmers’ Almanac, which predicts below-average temperatures for most of the U.S.

“Numb’s the word,” says the 192-year-old publication, which claims an accuracy rate of 80 to 85 percent for its forecasts that are prepared two years in advance.

The almanac’s 2009 edition, which goes on sale Tuesday, says at least two-thirds of the country can expect colder than average temperatures, with only the Far West and Southeast in line for near-normal readings.

[Angered, Global Warming flings his black cape aside with disgust and puts a hex on the Farmers’ Almanac.]

So watch your favorite liberal suddenly viewing gas prices as being more important than the greening of America.  By the way, what is Al Gore’s accuracy rate?  Does anyone know?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Sullivan Loses Sight of Conservative Case for Gay Marriage

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 2:30 am - August 20, 2008.
Filed under: Ex-Conservatives,Gay Marriage

From the publication of his essay, “Here Comes the Groom: a Conservative Case for Gay Marriage” in August 1989 until February 24, 2004, Andrew Sullivan offered some of the most compelling arguments for gay marriage. One could almost say that for the better part of those nearly fifteen years, Andrew wrote or edited (in the New Republic or in his anthology, Same-Sex Marriage: Pro and Con), nearly every serious piece on how that ancient institution benefits gays published in the United States.

But, lately, his writings on marriage have become increasingly banal and self-absorbed. He barely writes any any more about how that institution benefits society, but instead focuses on how it benefits himself. He barely mentions the social purposes of marriage and instead repeats the same slogans gay rights’ activists use to defend a institution few of them seem to understand.

This change has become most clear in Andrew’s recent essay on his “Big Fat Straight (sic) Wedding” for the Atlantic. While he does make a good point about the importance of having a ceremony celebrating his nuptials in front of family and close friends, he never establishes why he couldn’t have done this before Massachusetts recognized same-sex marriages.

It’s almost as if Andrew “needed” the state’s validation so that he could publicly acknowledge his commitment to his partner. Even before Goodridge (the Massachusetts court decision mandating the state recognize gay marriages), there was no law preventing gay people from holding such ceremonies and calling their unions “marriages.”

I can hardly count the number of couples who, before November 2003 (when Goodridge was handed down), told me about their weddings or referred to their same-sex spouse, as “wife” or “husband.” Yet, for Andrew, without the State’s approval, their ceremonies would have been meaningless.

To be sure, this essay may be just a sweet piece on the meaning of his own wedding. It well-written and gets at one of the social purposes of such ceremonies. But, it is of a piece with Andrew’s 2004 Time essay, “Why The M Word Matters To Me,” where he wrote that only marriage would let young gay kids “know that he doesn’t have to choose between himself and his family anymore [and] . . . know that his love has dignity, that he does indeed have a future as a full and equal part of the human race. ”

Oh really?  They need state recognition to do that?  

In The New American Revolution, Tammy Bruce found that Sullivan, in his essay, “actually equated government recognition of gay marriage as a necessary element to all gay people feeling wanted and accepted.”