Gay Patriot Header Image

Washington Blade: Log Cabin Controlled by Democrats!?!

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 12:41 pm - February 26, 2009.
Filed under: Log Cabin Republicans,Tim Gill Watch

The Washington Blade today wonders if Log Cabin is under Democratic control:

The amount of money that the Gill Action Fund has contributed to the Log Cabin Republicans — about one-third of its total budget in some years — is raising questions about Democratic influence over the GOP organization and its search for a new president.

Tim Gill, founder and chair of Gill Action, is widely known for funding the campaigns of pro-gay politicians, many of them Democrats. He’s a wealthy entrepreneur and founder of Quark who has donated tens of thousands of dollars to various Democratic causes and candidates, including to the campaigns of Sens. John Kerry, John Edwards and Chris Dodd, as well as New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson. Gill is viewed as publicity shy, but made a rare public appearance at last year’s Democratic National Convention in Denver where he lives.

Now we’ve taken our hits for criticizing the organization.  But, our criticism has been largely muted since Patrick Sammon has taken over.  That outgoing Log Cabin President has shown an understanding for conservatives ideas, a commitment to Republican candidates and respect for right-of-center gay bloggers.

Now, we’ve got what is quite possibly the most responsible gay news source in the country looking into Log Cabin’s Democratic ties.

More on this as we learn more.

UPDATE:  If this following is true, it is truly damning:

The sources also said a controversial TV commercial that Log Cabin aired targeting anti-gay former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney in 2007 before the Iowa caucuses was written and funded by Gill Action, but executed through Log Cabin to ensure the GOP organization’s name was attached to it.

That would mean an organization run by Democrats used an ostensibly Republican organization to attack a Republican presidential candidate. Talk about political dirty tricks!

As you may remember, I took Log Cabin to task for running those ads:

Log Cabin Launches Another TV Ad Campaign Attacking a Republican

Log Cabin & Romney: Media Success, but Political Failure

Romney’s Withdrawal/Log Cabin’s Absence of Class

UP-UPDATE: Ben Smith at Politico has an interesting take on this story saying it’s a “sign of how hard it is for gay Republicans to survive in the” GOP. I disagree. If Patrick Guerriero’s Log Cabin had not so readily trashed the party during the Bush era, the organization might more readily have found funding forthcoming from gay and other Republicans.

Smith needs to recall how before Sammon took over, Log Cabin bent over backwards to please the left-leaning gay groups, often at the cost of alienating even their own rank-and-file.

Share

30 Comments

  1. [...] THE WASHINGTON BLADE WONDERS if the Log Cabin Republicans are controlled by Democrats. [...]

    Pingback by Instapundit » Blog Archive » THE WASHINGTON BLADE WONDERS if the Log Cabin Republicans are controlled by Democrats…. — February 26, 2009 @ 1:11 pm - February 26, 2009

  2. I’m not really that surprised. Given how many people on both sides have pulled similarly nasty tricks (although Republicans and conservatives seem to have more stats backing up their claims), it’s only a matter of time before someone begins using the practice of “shadow-governing”; using organizations backed by secret patrons has been a time-honored practice. On that basis, I also won’t be surprised if it turns out that the accusations in this article are actually correct.

    It’s disgusting that America, after all those decades of true freedom, is slowly succumbing to such corruption.

    Comment by Thomas B. — February 26, 2009 @ 1:24 pm - February 26, 2009

  3. Here in Los Angeles, that doesn’t seem to be the case. A lot of the Log Cabins are friends who are just to the right of Reagan. Given the atmosphere, they’re remarkably successful.

    Comment by RR Ryan — February 26, 2009 @ 1:44 pm - February 26, 2009

  4. The simplest truth is sometimes the hardest to accept. I applaud GP for taking on LC(R)s in the past, but the big-assed chit you gave to Sammon was not warranted. Not then. Not in retrospect. Not now.

    LogCabin(R)s will continue to try to wrestle a seat at the GOP table of big-boys, but the people at the table want us in the side chairs along the wall or serving dinner or doing the entertainment and flowers. That’s how the big guys at the table see gay GOPers. GP’s great work aside; it’s still true that GOP leaders are more comfortable bashing gays and gay civil rights than defending the promise of the Constitution and the DofI’s promise to allow us, all, to pursue happiness and equality. Except for guys like Kemp.

    Patrick”Tiny”Guerriero was a horrible leader. He took the organization toward the Left –looking for solace from kindred spirits over there– and the price for swilling all those pink Cosmos was to forget his role and adopt the enemy’s gameplan. TimGill isn’t the villan –Tiny is. And so is Sammon, to me.

    Sammon was no different because he continued to hide the truth about Tiny & the LC(R)s… when sunshine, transparency and an airing of who did what for whom while Tiny was MC of the LogCircusRing would have gone a long way in correcting the errors of the past.

    Of course, that would have required Sammon to get a set of nutts and some spine… three things most gay men adore… but, alas, only after money and material gains are met first. Sammon could speak well about the corruption of power in DC… he was knee-deep in it all.

    Like Sir Thos More offered, Sammon deserves to be asked: “…it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for Wales?”

    In the case at hand, “… but to protect Gill?”

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — February 26, 2009 @ 2:18 pm - February 26, 2009

  5. I have to admit that I think it’s frightening how Republicans in general have not articulated the serious argument that minorities should NOT be liberals. Minorities should always seek less government. More government is only helpful in places where we don’t mind mob rule. Thus, log cabin and religious right should be aligned in purpose, even though not in spirit or intent.

    Comment by Carolynp — February 26, 2009 @ 3:12 pm - February 26, 2009

  6. Chr*st! …No-wonder the LCR always winds-up eating in the kitchen at the kiddie-table at Republican events if this sort-of thing is true. What sort of oversight has the National Board been doing?

    And I still do not understand the LCR-Natl’s failure to reach out to the Grassroots. There are still many active Republican districts were there’s still no organized LCR presence. For example, 5-1/2 years latter there’s still no New Jersey Chapter despite the huge gay populations in the NYC and Philly suburbs. Yet it’s still quite doable for Republican politicians to gain elective office in New Jersey.

    Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — February 26, 2009 @ 3:14 pm - February 26, 2009

  7. Wild stuff.

    Sources also told the Blade that Patrick Sammon, the president of Log Cabin through last month, didn’t make major decisions without consulting Patrick Guerriero, a former Log Cabin president and current executive director of Gill Action. Sources said Sammon also consulted with Bill Smith, Gill Action’s national political director.

    “I don’t think there was a single significant decision that was made at Log Cabin under Patrick Sammon’s administration that was not passed through Gill Action,” one source said.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 26, 2009 @ 3:21 pm - February 26, 2009

  8. carolynp–please don’t assume that log cabin and religious right are not on the same page.

    As far as I know, the only opinion that I, possibly a member of that amorphous “religious right”, am likely not to share with a gay conservative is that I do not want the definition of marriage changed. If you want to marry, fine, but use a different word. Call it something else. Otherwise, if someone wants to designate a heterosexual marriage, they will have to waste time and breath saying “heterosexual marriage”, or similarly, “homosexual marriage”. There are reasons why words mean what they mean. Instead of forcing all of human history to come up with a different word to indicate “heterosexual marriage”, it’s up to the gay community to come up with a new word, whether it is civil union, or civil partnership, or something else. Let’s just stop fussing over words.
    The religious right already respects your right of privacy, freedom of speech, and your dignity as an individual human being. What more do you need? What is it you actually want, and why do you need it?

    There are a whole lot of things I want in life, but there’s no guarantee I’m going to get them. Should I expect everyone else in society to re-arrange itself to suit me?

    If you say that you want marriage to mean either a homosexual union or a heterosexual one, then are you trying to say there is no difference? And if there is no difference, then aren’t you implying there is no difference between a man and a woman? Please, just come up with another term, and put whatever legal-financial protections into it are necessary, but don’t use the same word.

    Otherwise, conservatives of any strip mostly agree—get the govt out of our lives. Let us select our own cars, toilets, etc., respect private property, allow freedom of political speech, freedom of choice in schools, etc. For Pete’s sake, let us live our own lives!

    Comment by Vivian — February 26, 2009 @ 3:52 pm - February 26, 2009

  9. It’s worth keeping in mind that all Republican groups have had funding issues over the last few years. While it is important for conservative and center-right gay groups to be independent in the long run, it is probably more important to survive right now and survival is a real problem right now for the Log Cabin Republicans.
    Of course, when times are better, the Log Cabin Republicans should cut their links with Gill Action.

    Comment by thuja — February 26, 2009 @ 4:04 pm - February 26, 2009

  10. “Smith needs to recall how before Sammon took over, Log Cabin bent over backwards to please the left-leaning gay groups.”

    Careful, Dan – you’re treading on late-night material here. ;-)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — February 26, 2009 @ 4:04 pm - February 26, 2009

  11. Unfortunatley, since the 1990′s, there have been some Democrats running the California republican party (NOT the Chairman, but a former one and a family that ran the LAGOP).

    Democrats want NO OPPOSITION to their policies.

    Comment by JSF — February 26, 2009 @ 4:21 pm - February 26, 2009

  12. Log Cabin Controlled by Democrats!?!

    Duh.

    Next you’ll discover Andrew Sullivan isn’t a conservative.

    Comment by DANEgerus — February 26, 2009 @ 5:58 pm - February 26, 2009

  13. This is a damn shame. I’m a straight Republican who wanted to see a much more prominent role for Gay Republicans, to counter the Sturmabteilungen tactics of Mike Rogers and the Ideology Police of the Gay Left. Now, given the groundbreaking reporting of the Blade, how are the rank and file of the Republican Party’s activist community supposed to treat outfits like Log Cabin, except with suspicion.

    It’s obvious what was going on. Gill and his group was controlling Log Cabin and using their good name as a front to act as augents provacateurs to make sure that Gay Republicans would never have any sort of entree into the Party. For example, I consider Mitt Romney to be a malignant a force in our party, and believe me, no one considers him more of a phony than I. However, attacking him directly was designed to give Gay Republicans a bad name among the rest of the Republican party. I suspect that the tactic worked like a charm.

    It is good that the Democrats control of Log Cabin has been exposed. Perhaps the organization can be salvaged?

    Comment by section9 — February 26, 2009 @ 6:08 pm - February 26, 2009

  14. UP-UPDATE: Ben Smith at Politico has an interesting take on this story saying it’s a “sign of how hard it is for gay Republicans to survive in the” GOP.

    That cracks me up. Oh, poh wittle gay Republicans! So wejected in the 21st centuwy!

    To grasp the full ridiculousness: imagine if the Democratic Hispanic caucus inexplicably, yet consistently ran ads that served the strategic aims of the other party, the GOP – and then were found to be on the take from Rush Limbaugh’s foundation, the last several years, and passing every significant decision by him – and then GPW (say) tsk-tsked, “It’s just a sign of how hard it is for Hispanic Democrats to survive in that party.”

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 26, 2009 @ 9:25 pm - February 26, 2009

  15. ILC, it is exactly for running ads like Log Cabin did against Romney that cost them the financial support of gay Republicans.

    But, you can imagine the media firestorm if it were reported that a major GOP donor gave money to a Democratic auxiliary to make mischief in that party’s primary?

    Hmmm. . . maybe there’s a post in that.

    Comment by GayPatriotWest — February 26, 2009 @ 9:31 pm - February 26, 2009

  16. Dan,

    Look at the grief Operation Chaos caused, and that was grass roots.

    Comment by The Livewire — February 26, 2009 @ 9:37 pm - February 26, 2009

  17. I had been thinking lately about getting involved with LCR because it seemed like a good time to help out and give the the organization some support. With the right seeming to unite on economic issues again thanks to Obama, I thought maybe LCR could get a better seat at the GOP table.

    But this Blade article gives me second thoughts. What’s an out and proud gay Republican boy to do? Is it worth trying to take LCR back, or is it time to start another group?

    Comment by Potomac Joe — February 26, 2009 @ 10:20 pm - February 26, 2009

  18. Section 9 – Great comments. All I have to say is “I TOLD YOU SO.”

    I have been hounding on Tim Gill & Log Cabin for almost four years. I didn’t have time to do the kind of reporting the Blade did. Although I note that all of their sources are “anonymous”. I happen to think we share a couple of the same sources. :)

    Regardless, I did do many hours of research here at GayPatriot trying to “follow the money” and lay out at least a circumstantial case that Gill controlled Log Cabin, and Log Cabin needed Gill or they would go bankrupt.

    *whew*

    That being said, perhaps the time for Log Cabin has passed and a Gay Conservative (note: not REPUBLICAN) group should take its place?

    Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — February 26, 2009 @ 10:23 pm - February 26, 2009

  19. It’s a bit hard to take seriously anyone who joins or is otherwise supportive of the idea of an organization based upon the well-traveled intersection of sexuality and politics and then expresses distaste (mock or true) when shenanigans occur, as they have since the beginning of politics.

    If being gay doesn’t or shouldn’t matter in GOP politics, if the party philosophy truly practices the idea that what matters is who rather than what you are, isn’t LCR a contradiction? LCR’s public/private philosophical crisis is due to Gill’s influence, Gill’s influence is borne of lack of funds, lack of funds is due to lack of rank-and-file membership, lack of rank-and-file membership is due to a philosophical crisis: Republicans generally aren’t joiners and don’t practice identity politics.

    LCR is an excuse for Democrats to point to chimerical schisms in the GOP platform and for confused gay Republican men to have sex in second-rate convention hotel rooms.

    Close the doors.

    Comment by Ignatius — February 26, 2009 @ 10:49 pm - February 26, 2009

  20. GPW – I was also thinking of those anti-Bush ads Log Cabin ran in 2004. You know, the ones suggesting he was a monster because he disagreed with them on gay marriage. Ran in August. And the fall campaign. Not endorsing Kerry, but basically trying to help Kerry.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 26, 2009 @ 11:49 pm - February 26, 2009

  21. perhaps the time for Log Cabin has passed and a Gay Conservative (note: not REPUBLICAN) group should take its place?

    How about… a group that tries to spread libertarian-conservative and Republican principles to gays… rather than a group that attempts, most unwisely and pathetically, to spread “gay principles” (i.e., leftist and Democratic principles) to conservatives?

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — February 26, 2009 @ 11:54 pm - February 26, 2009

  22. I’ve rather suspected this ever since Obama Party paid shills and criminals Mike Rogers and John Aravosis were bragging back in 2004 that LCR staffers were feeding them information for their harassment campaigns against conservative and Republican gays.

    Looks like the GOP called it correctly when it treated LCR like a bunch of Judases.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — February 27, 2009 @ 3:01 am - February 27, 2009

  23. [...] Washington Blade: Log Cabin Controlled by Democrats!?! [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » Media Silent when Democratic Philanthropist Funds Republican Group’s ads targeting Republican candidates — February 27, 2009 @ 3:09 am - February 27, 2009

  24. I think it’s worth pointing out that the Gill Action Fund very truly is a gay organization, not a democratic organization pretending to be a gay one, like the Human Rights Campaign. I remember reading a lengthy article about Gill’s organization some time ago (I’ll see if I can find it), that emphasized that Gill Action truly is a single-issue organization and dedicated to promoting candidates across the political spectrum who support gay rights. The mere fact that Gill is willing to support Log Cabin show the truth of this attitude, and Log Cabin’s actions under Patrick Sammon prove the absurdity of any accusation of Democratic control. There is zero evidence of operational control–endorsing McCain/Palin would surely not have been on any Democratically-dictated script–and the whole article seems based on disgruntled anonymous sources. Obviously we should wait to see how this goes, but I think this is likely to be a much smaller deal than it’s been presented here.

    Comment by Dan L — February 27, 2009 @ 4:14 am - February 27, 2009

  25. GAYPATRIOT EXCLUSIVE:Log Cabin Insider Discloses Shocking Detailsof Gay GOP’s Tim Gill Connection…

    ***GAYPATRIOT EXCLUSIVE***
    In the wake of the Washington Blade story yesterday suggesting strong ties between Log Cabin Republicans and left-wing liberal activist Tim Gill, I was contacted by a long-time Log Cabin insider.  He is aware of my long-time …

    Trackback by GayPatriot — February 27, 2009 @ 7:00 am - February 27, 2009

  26. I have to agree with others here: um, this surprises you how, exactly? It seems pretty obvious to me that the left would control an openly gay organization.

    Comment by Christopher Taylor — February 27, 2009 @ 11:12 am - February 27, 2009

  27. JSF.

    William Orozco, Kevin McCarthy, and Mary Toman were chairmen of the LA(GOP) Republican County Central Committee and as former member of the CCC I can tell you they were all solid conservatives. The family that you refer too bought the organization in 2002.

    Bruce, if you want to dig why not contact some of the chairs of the state LCR´s, such as Terry Hamilton of the LCR CA.

    Comment by Roberto — February 27, 2009 @ 6:10 pm - February 27, 2009

  28. [...] or Republican organization.   That failure become magnified when we learned that the group got substantial funding from a leading left-wing philanthropist.  Its credibility was [...]

    Pingback by GayPatriot » The Decline and Fall of the Log Cabin Republicans — April 18, 2009 @ 5:29 pm - April 18, 2009

  29. Tim Gill’s primary focus is gay rights issues, and being based in Colorado where Focus on the Family type social conservatives dominate the state GOP, that has often translated on a practical level to support of Democrats. I agree with Dan at #24: Gill’s support of Log Cabin is part of his focus on gay rights issues, and does not suggest that LCR is some sort of Democratic spy organization trying to infiltrate the GOP. Besides, I’d rather he spend his money on LCR than some overtly left leaning PAC.

    Perhaps the national org has some problems, but every local chapter I have visited is filled with True Republicans (from moderate to very conservative) who are also gay.

    Comment by Pink Elephant — April 18, 2009 @ 7:13 pm - April 18, 2009

  30. [...] has happened to this organization? When did the Log Cabin Republicans become a left-leaning, superficially-Republican, Dede Scozzafava-supporting, Tom Campbell-supporting group, that makes a [...]

    Pingback by The Cabin is On Fire « Welcome to GayConservative.org — April 28, 2010 @ 1:48 am - April 28, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.