Gay Patriot Header Image

Why Do Those Who So Readily Revile Us Devote So Much of their Day to this Object of their Revulsion?

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 8:25 pm - April 16, 2009.
Filed under: Blogging,Random Thoughts

Yesterday, after the rally in Van Nuys, a reader and I went out to dinner to discuss the events of the day, relationships and family and blogging.  She, who seems to follow the comments threads more regularly than I, wondered about the fervor of a particular critic.

In response, I echoed a question I have posed from time to time in the threads, wondering why some who revel in criticizing us, often accusing us of being self-hating and otherwise narrow-minded, spend so much time on this blog.  If our words so offend their sensibilities, why do they return to read them on a regular basis?  Do they delight in being offended?  (Although sometimes it seems they don’t read so much as skim, seizing on a point which particularly excites them.)

Like many right-of-center bloggers, I used to read Andrew Sullivan every day.  He was once my first stop in the blogosphere.  Yet, as he started to resemble the angry left, I ratcheted down my reading until I only read his blog when another blogger (usually on the right, but sometimes in the middle) linked him.

I found that other conservative bloggers reacted similarly.  When they found his rhetoric offensive, they decided they would rather not be offended.

Now, I welcome criticism; some of our critics, notably the fellow who calls himself Scottland, offer some pretty sound rebuttals to our arguments, often (but not always) without rancor.  I’m glad they liven up the debate in the threads which sometimes seems a discussion entirely independent of Bruce or myself–or anything either of us has said.

As I write this, something comes to mind, a memory of a conversation I had in DC with a friend who then worked for Log Cabin’s national office.  He told me how a certain “ex-gay” leader used to regularly contact him when he was in the nation’s capital.  That leader, even after renouncing his gay identity, apparently frequented gatherings of gay groups.

My friend was convinced this guy had the hots for him (after all, he was an attractive fellow).

If we use that anecdote as analogy, that would make these critics closet conservatives.  And maybe they are. I don’t know.  I just throw it out there in this speculative post which I guess serves more to invite discussion than offer any conclusion.

It’s just that I wonder why those who are ever ready to make assumptions about us, criticize us, sometimes in the most mean-spirited of language, spend so much time on our blog.

Obama’s Rhetoric Convinces me Tea Parties Have Legs

Welcome Instapundit Readers!  While you’re here, you might want to engage in a little thought experiment I set up for Jan Schakowsky (the Illinois Democrat who called the tea parties “despicable” and “shameful.”)

Just days after signing a near-trillion dollar “stimulus” package further increasing a deficit he ran against, President Obama convened a Fiscal Responsibility Summit at the White House. On the day when more than a quarter-million people across the nation protested (among other things) his spending plans, anticipating that he’ll have to raise taxes to pay for them, he promises to simply our “monstrous tax code.”

Even as he proposes doubling if not trebling the national debt, he regularly speaks about being responsible stewards of tax dollars, calling his latest budget, which increases the national debt at a far faster pace than did his predecessor, “A New Era of Responsibility.”

He knows this idea resonates with the American people.  Heck, I think he and his campaign team were aware that it resonated particularly well with rank-and-file Republicans (and recently ex-Republicans) unhappy with how Republicans they elected, expecting them to hold the line on federal spending, lost sight of that mandate.

No wonder he regularly decried then-President Bush’s spending habits during his campaign, proposing “throughout” his campaign “a net spending cut.

Given the high percentage of Ron Paul supporters and other non-Republican libertarians at yesterday’s rallies, there’s clearly a large crowd of people the GOP could reach should it return to its Reaganite roots. We’re not there yet, not nearly so.

But, the President’s record (both in his successful campaign and once in office) as well as the turnout yesterday show that fiscal responsibility resonates.  Unless the President acts in accordance with his words (and there’s no sign of that at present), expect this phenomenon to spread.

If the GOP wants to tap into this success, it only need put forward policies which respond to our discontent and which recognize why the President repeatedly references “responsibility” when discussing federal spending.

On the Projections of Political Activsts (& not just leftists)

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 7:03 pm - April 16, 2009.
Filed under: Random Thoughts

Yesterday, at the Santa Monica “Tea Party,” there was a very unhappy man eager to do battle with Code Pink should they arrive constantly trying to get the crowd to join him in a chant, “Jail Barney Frank.”  Despite my criticisms of the unhappy Democrat from Massachusetts, I did not join in.  It didn’t think served the purpose of the rally to personalize it.

While most of the people at the rally seemed of good humor, this man did not.  He snarled at my suggestion that we be respectful of counter-protesters.

His presence served to remind me that the left does not have a monopoly on activists who seem to be projecting their inner demons on political figures.

While some may ascribe this man’s obsession with the mean-spirited Democrat to his own repression of his urges for intimacy with men, I think it was something else.

Whenever I blog about Mr. Frank, I use the adjective “unhappy” to describe him.  He never smiles when I see him on TV, always scowls and just appears to lead a very lonely and discontented existence.  Look, I could be wrong.  I don’t know what his life is like.  But, that’s my impression.  Were he not a public figure who regularly attacks his adversaries, I would not so speculate.

You’ll note that the first adjective I used to describe the man at the rally obsessed with Barney Frank is that very adjective I use to describe his nemesis, “unhappy.”  He had nearly the same demeanor as the Massachusetts Democrat.  Of all the protesters, he seemed to having the least amount of fun.

So, I wondered, just wondered if he was projecting his denoms onto Barney because he senses a kindred spirit, albeit one with more worldly success than he.

Over a quarter-million “Tea Party” protesters

UP-UP-UP-UPDATE: The estimates of tea party protesters keeps growing.  One estimate has the tally at nearly 500,000, while Nate Silver (see below) now estimates over 300,000 attended the various rallies.  Jim Geraghty has upped his estimate to 337,682.

In a comment, our reader Scottland, one our most civil critics links liberal blogger and polling expert Nate Silver who finds that over a quarter-million people attended yesterday’s “Tea Parties:”

. . . based on news accounts of 306 “Tea Party” protests in different cities across the country yesterday, I get a cumulative attendance of 262,025, with a fair number of (probably mostly smaller) events still unaccounted for.

These figures, wherever possible, are drawn from objective attempts to estimate crowd sizes, such as police accounts or estimates made by reporters. Organizers of these events have strong incentives to exaggerate crowd sizes.

Interesting then another reader said the police gave a higher estimate (3,000) for the turnout out at the Van Nuys rally than she, other participants and I had estimated (1,500-2000).  Now, Silver notes he left out a number of rallies.  He lists neither of the rallies I attended.  So, it’s possible that more 300,000 people attended these protests.

Well, even if we lowball the estimate, using Silver’s number and add in just 2,000 folks at those remaining tea parties (which you’d get just by adding the two I attended), there were 50,000 more people protesting higher government spending, including Obama’s budget, than those who signed petitions in favor of the spendthrift document.

As I wrote last week, to consider the tea parties a success:

We simply need to have more people protesting the president’s budget than signed petitions supporting it:  214,000.  Unlike the DNC’s Organizing for America which grew out of the Obama’s presidential campaign, the tea party effort is just getting started.  [This was the outfit which gathered the signatures.]  We don’t have a long-established organization in place with the resources of a national political party possessing a database of 13 million supporters.

And given that many (if not most) of these rallies were held during the day when some of those most likely to attend had to work, the turnout becomes even more impressive.  And you also have to consider that we did not have a central command directing our efforts, providing experienced organizers with lists of volunteers or offering funding to pay for the rallies and bus participants to the rally sites.

It was a haphazard affair, largely run by a variety of individuals across the country, many of whom had never previously organized such events.

And we’re just got started.  Unless the President and Congress take action to curb the increases in federal spending, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

UPDATE:  Raven’s current tally at Redstate is 310,000.

UP-UPDATE:  Jim Geraghty pegs it at 333,682.

UP-UP-UPDATE:  Almost half a million?  Glenn links a roundup of counts, from Silver’s 262,025 to 456,444.

The Mother Complexes of Republican-Haters?

This morning while reading Robert Johnson’s Lying with the Heavenly Woman: Understanding and Integrating the Feminine Archetypes in Men’s Lives, for my dissertation, I chanced upon this passage:

Many men in our culture are permanently stuck in this contamination, and they are constantly fighting a mother.  What a variety of forms there are!  A man’s own mother only begins the long list.  The poor waitress in the restaurant who elicits a man’s rage because she brought the wrong order, the woman office manager, the woman traffic officer, the Republican Party, and the mother in a thousand other disguises incur the wrath of the man who has not made this differentiation between the inner complex and the outer form.

Emphasis added.

It is interesting that he included the Republican Party on the individuals or institutions who elicit certain men’s rage.  Must be that a lot of this psychologist’s clients vent against the GOP.  (I’m sure that some extreme social conservatives with similar psychoses frequently mention “homosexuals”.)

It just all goes to my point about the psychological basis of such animosity.  It’s not the object so much that they hate, but the demon they’re trying to exorcize.

GayPatriot Readers: More Generous than the Vice President

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 12:46 pm - April 16, 2009.
Filed under: Biden Watch,Liberal Hypocrisy,Worthy Causes

On Tuesday, when I was identified Children’s Hospital/Los Angeles as one my charitable donations to my tax guy, he, recalling my past returns, commented that I always support that international leader in pediatrics.  I always support them, I replied, because of the institution’s sterling reputation.

He then related how when his nephew was suffering from a complicated respiratory problem, he was airlifted there and received extraordinary care.  He’s doing fine today.  It made me feel good to hear an example of the good work that one of “my” charities does.

Because I would be getting back a little more from the feds than I had anticipated, when I returned home to find a solicitation from the hospital in my pile of mail to be sorted, I instantly cut them a check.  I’m sure I’m not alone.  I’m sure countless other Americans, when getting money back, are equally generous.  If not more so.

Unless of course they’re the Vice President of the United States.  On Tuesday, I gave more to Children’s Hospital than the total amount Joe Biden gave to charitable organizations in 1998 or 1999 on an adjusted gross income considerably less than his (via Volokh via Glenn).

You’d think somebody so generous with other people’s money would be more generous with his own.

While Biden has given more in recent year than he has in years past, he gave less than $2,000 last year on an income greater than $250,000.  According to the New York Times, “the White House said the Bidens have made additional donations to charity not listed on the returns.”  And the White House hosted a Fiscal Responsibility Summit only days after the president signed a near-trillion dollar “stimulus,” further boosting the deficit he derided on the campaign trail.

There are many causes worthy of our support, particularly in these tough times.  I hope you’ll join me in supporting Children’s Hospital/Los Angeles.  And when you do so, maybe write the Vice President and ask him to support this great facility as well, without dipping into our tax dollars to do so.

ADDENDUM:  This is not the first time I blogged on this.  The last time I did so, several of our readers commented that they too gave more in charity than does the Vice President.

Van Nuys Tea Party Report

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 3:03 am - April 16, 2009.
Filed under: LA Stories,Tea Party

This rally where I arrived about 7 PM was much more subdued than the one in Santa Monica even though the crowd was about four times as big. As in Santa Monica, protesters were waving signs at passing motorists who regularly honked their support.

Signs celebrating the Gipper were in abundance as well as a plethora of clever references to piracy. There was one man eager to get protesters (as per this DailyKos acolyte) to say silly things as he recorded them on his video camera.

Once again, the spirit was a festive one. A lot of people were coming from work, hence the larger crowd.  The Santa Monica rally had been held during the work day.

And there was a more organized public portion of the protest, with a variety of speakers, including actors and activists. One person said, “This is not the end, it’s the beginning.”

Given how little attention the MSM paid to these, they can only grow as word of their success seeps out.


Someone read the speech that launched Obama’s presidential campaign:


Santa Monica “Tea Party” Report

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 1:46 am - April 16, 2009.
Filed under: LA Stories,Tea Party

Well, it was excessively windy when I arrived in Santa Monica so much so that they moved the protest from the Pier to the corner of Colorado and Ocean.

It was a most diverse crowd. One young man arrived on a skateboard while one old woman arrived, leaning on her walker. There were a lot of young people, maybe one-third of the crowd was under 30. And a good number of Ron Paul supporters, maybe one-fifth of the crowd.

It was haphazard. People were coming and going all day. And no one was sure who was in charge. While angry about federal spending, people were very, very friendly to one another. It almost seemed like a party at one point.

At the height of the rally, we estimate that there were about 400 people there, pretty good considering it was in the middle of the day in one of the most liberal jurisdictions in LA County.

I left this party to attend the evening rally in Van Nuys which drew a much larger crowd, maybe as many as 2,000. Fewer Ron Paul supporters there.

Here are a few of my Santa Monica pictures. In a later post, I’ll include those from Van Nuys.

Despite this woman’s loss of income, her spirits remained high.

And here are two ladies agitating for liberty, one of them our loyal reader Leah:

This was not just a Republican rally:

And here’s Leah laughing with a lesbian:

A sign that speaks for itself:


Addressing a Child’s Fears

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 1:45 am - April 16, 2009.
Filed under: Free Speech,LA Stories,Tea Party

To address this child’s fears . . .

. . . this man has a suggestion:

Santa Monica Tea Party Report: Lesbian for Liberty

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 1:19 am - April 16, 2009.
Filed under: Freedom,Friendship,LA Stories,Tea Party

For my first report from the Santa Monica Tea party where we gather that about 400 gathered at its height. People had been coming and coming from about 1:40 or so when I got there until about 6:00 when I left.

This is my left-leaning lesbian friend, featured frequently on this blog. Left-leaning she may be, but liberty she loves.

When she was waving this sign, a socially conservative woman asked her, “Aren’t you afraid of us?”

To this my friend replied, “Are you afraid of me?”

She wasn’t. And together they continued to demonstrate their disgust at the excessive government spending the president has proposed.