Gay Patriot Header Image

On Gays Who Serve Despite DADT

Bill Quick offers the best succinct defense of these patriots I have heard to date, “Gays in the military have a greater respect for the liberties America offers than do those who hate them, and refuse to extend those liberties even to those who fight and die to preserve them.

Shouldn’t we want more such soldiers serving in our armed forces?

Warming (back) Up to Cheney

UPDATE from Dan:  Geez, Nick, have you been reading my mind? I too have criticized the former Vice President, but, after reading excerpts of the speech, started to wonder today as I drove to the Reagan Library if maybe I had been wrong to do so.

As many of you know, I took pretty direct objection to the former Vice President’s tone, and even his choice to speak out at all since leaving office.

That notwithstanding, I just finished reading his speech today in front of the American Enterprise Institute that the press in their tireless effort to bring about understanding and respect for the truth simply categorizes as a salvo between him and the current president. Of course it’s all gamesmanship to them.

I am immeasurably impressed with not only the measured tone, but also the gentlemanly choice of words and respect shown to the current president. (No, I’m not going to say “as opposed to how the current president treats him.” I think, frankly, Obama, while acting childish and coming up with all reasons possible to deflect responsibility for his own decisions, has at least been cordial with the men who came before him.) His criticisms, nevertheless, are as biting as they are completely spot-on.

Click the above link for the whole speech (recommended) or see the best parts after the jump:


Gay Marriage & the Legitimate Concerns of Social Conservatives

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 5:55 pm - May 21, 2009.
Filed under: Freedom,Gay Marriage,Gays & religion

Perhaps, because most of the social conservatives I’ve met lean libertarian, I am more sympathetic to them than are many gay people, nearly all of whom only read about them in left-leaning media and left-wing blogs.  From my first encounters with politically active Christians in the 1980s, I’ve been stuck at how similar their attitudes on some issues are to my own.

They didn’t want government to mandate how others should live, merely wanted it to leave them alone so they could practice their faith and educate their children as they saw fit.  They cited numerous court decisions which, they believed, made it more difficult for them to practice their faith and government policies which, they contended, made it difficult for them to profess that faith in public settings.

To wit, a 2004 California Supreme Court decision that “a Catholic group must provide coverage for birth control in its health insurance plan, regardless of the fact that contraception is contrary to teachings of the Catholic Church.”  This ruling forced the group to pay for a service which the Catholic Church forbids.

That is one reason I support New Hampshire Governor John Lynch’s veto of a bill which would recognize same-sex marriages in the Granite State; he asked the legislature tweak the bill, including “language that would protect churches and other religious institutions from prosecution if, for example, they refuse to perform same-sex marriages.”  Given the record of courts in limiting religious freedom, social conservatives have legitimate concerns that should states recognize same-sex marriage, state courts may require religious organizations to act in violation of their faiths’ creeds as did the California Supreme Court five years ago.


Obama: Still Running Against Bush

Posted by ColoradoPatriot at 5:50 pm - May 21, 2009.
Filed under: Liberal Hypocrisy,Obama Watch,Post 9-11 America

One of the most simple observations of the past election cycle was that Barack Obama wasn’t really running against John McCain, but rather against George W Bush, the least popular exiting president since, well, ever.  Some analysts even went so far as to joke that John McCain’s first name had been changed to Bush (as in “Bush/McCain” as the title for anything they wanted to throw at the Arizona Senator).

And naturally he should have.  He campaigned on amorphous and ehterial ideas like “hope” and “change”, few plans whose actual discussion would have made him electable whatsoever, and a shady past of his own.  Had David Axelrod suggested any other strategy, he’d have been guilty of professional malpractice.

But why does he now, after having been elected and installed, continue to campaign against George W Bush?  I have the luxury at HQ not to have a TV, and am fighting the temptation at the Undisclosed Alternate HQ to turn this one on lest the chattering classes spoil the beauty of reading.  So instead, I logged on to the White House website; and read the speech myself (well, since the president simply read it himself, anyway…)

It’s astonishing how much he’s still in campaign mode. For 5,484 words, the president goes on about how bad the past 8 years have been, and how the “previous administration” is the reason we’re in such danger today. Were it not for Bush’s actions, so counter to everything sacred in our country today, why I wouldn’t have to be wasting my time on all this, he basically says. To be fair, there are a couple stanzas about some steps he’s taking and their rationale (mostly that, again, it’s all still Bush’s fault). Then comes this hilarious doozy:

Now, this is what I mean when I say that we need to focus on the future. I recognize that many still have a strong desire to focus on the past. When it comes to actions of the last eight years, passions are high. Some Americans are angry; others want to re-fight debates that have been settled, in some cases debates that they have lost. I know that these debates lead directly, in some cases, to a call for a fuller accounting, perhaps through an independent commission.

Clearly the press isn’t going to notice, let alone call Mr. Obama on this irony. But shouldn’t they?

– Nick (ColoradoPatriot) from an Undisclosed (so glad I never told Biden about it) Alternate HQ

Blaming California Voters When They Should be Confronting Public Employee Unions

If you want an example to buttress Mitt Romney’s point that Democrats are the “Party of government“, just follow the reaction of California politicians to the the landslide defeat of their budget-boasting proposals on the state’s ballot earlier this week.  In contrast to Governor Schwarzenegger who seemed chastened by the results*, a leading Golden State Democrat is blaming the voters.

House Speaker Karen Bass said that we’re just tired and misinformed:

. . . it was really clear that voters were giving us a very specific message– This is too complicated. We don’t want to vote on it. We are fatigued with the number of elections we’ve had especially special elections and we want you to go back to Sacramento and resolve this.

She’s partially right.  We do want our state legislators to resolve this; we want them to make tough choices and cut the budget.  We prefer cuts in services to higher taxes.  In short, we want them to do their job instead of passing the buck onto us.

It’s not just Democratic legislators who don’t like what the voters have said by exercising their franchise.  Hugh alerts us to this headline in the Los Angeles Times: California voters exercise their power — and that’s the problem.

Our power’s not the problem.  The real problem is the power of the public employee unions.  Officials in Sacramento are going to have to do more than cut the salaries of “the governor, attorney general, controller, all legislators and other top elected state officials” an by 18%. They’re going to have to offer an across-the-board pay cut for all state employees while reducing the size of the state bureaucracy to its pre-Gray Davis number.  But, that would mean facing a confrontation with those unions.

It seems our politicians and liberal pundits are blaming the voters rather than focusing their ire on the state employees whose salaries we pay.

* (more…)

What Obama Could Learn From Beowulf

We might all better appreciate the most stirring epic in the English language were it not for the tragic events of 1066 which led to the corruption of our language.  Beowulf celebrated the heroic deeds of one of the greatest men of all time, the eponymous Geatish hero, who did not need a weapon to slay the monster Grendel.  That brave warrior was reputed to have the strength of thirty men in his right hand.

Unlike some warriors, many with lesser accomplishments than he, Beowulf did not readily boast of his deeds.  He only related the story of how he slew nine sea monsters to answer Unferth’s challenge that he lost a swimming competition to his friend Breca.  Perhaps that challenge strengthened the hero’s resolve to defeat Grendel — which he did later that night.

Beowulf knew that he would be measured not by his words, but by his deeds.  No wonder the harbor guard reminded him as much in welcoming him to Denmark:  “Each sharp shield-warrior/shall understand the difference (between) words and deeds.”  It wouldn’t be enough for Beowulf to tout his accomplishments as monster-slayer, he would have to slay the actual monster ravaging Hrothgar’s hall.

Now Obama’s supporters are beginning to grouse that there’s a huge gap between the Democrat’s rhetoric and his deeds.  We see this in so many areas, but, notably in the Administration’s decision not to move forward on repealing the Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT) policy banning gays from serving openly in the nation’s armed forces.

Words will only get you so far.  If Obama truly wishes to be a great leader, he needs to emulate one whose very actions defined courage and very manner defined leadership.  The Beowulf-poet left it to someone other that his hero to say what that man knew in his heart; it is the doing which matters.

Years from now, people will only remember the president’s words if he ties them to actual accomplishments.

GOP’s Free-Market Based Health Care Reform Bill Benefits Gays

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 12:00 pm - May 21, 2009.
Filed under: Conservative Ideas,GOProud,Real Reform

Last month in the National Review, Mark Hemingway debunked the notion peddled in the MSM, by liberal pundits and on left-wing blogs that the GOP, deprived of political power in our nation’s capital, is also bereft of new ideas.  He held that

The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder, who’s not known for being a partisan bomb thrower, appeared to be vying for the David Broder Award for Lazy Conventional Wisdom when he recently wrote, “My Republican friends keep asking me when I’ll take the GOP seriously again and why I’ve stopped writing about ticky-tak political gamesmanship and GOP consultant tricks. When they’re a serious party with serious ideas, then we can talk.”

Perhaps that notion stemmed from the 2008 campaign when Republican presidential nominee John McCain failed to adequately promote his own policy proposals, particularly his sensible proposal for health care reform.

So, let’s hope that when congressional Republicans put forward similarly sensible proposals, they do a better job than did our party’s presidential candidate in promoting them.  Today, GOProud is helping them do just that.  Yesterday, Republicans Senators Richard Burr (NC) and Tom Coburn, M.D. (OK) Representatives Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) introduced the Patients Choice Act, a comprehensive health care reform bill, in the Senate and House respectively.

Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud, was quick to praise the proposal, pointing out “This free-market based healthcare reform bill would expand access to domestic partner benefits and empower individuals – including gay and lesbian Americans – to take control over their own healthcare.”  (Emphasis added.)  I doubt, however, that other gay groups will hail how the free-market aspects of the Republican reform bill benefit gay people.  They seem to discount the private sector’s record in responding to our concerns.  Private companies have been quicker to offer domestic partnership benefits to same-sex partners than have government entities.

Simply put, private-sector approaches give us more choices:

The bicameral Patients Choice Act would make quality, affordable healthcare available to all Americans without creating government run healthcare. “Our friends on the left advocate for a larger role for the federal government in our healthcare system; the truth is that expanding the federal government’s involvement in healthcare will expand discrimination against gays and lesbians,” continued LaSalvia. “Federal laws currently prohibit the extension of domestic partner healthcare benefits and refuse to recognize same-sex relationships.”

We all recognize the need for comprehensive reform, but Democratic plans, which rely heavily on increased federal involvement, will only serve to exacerbate health care problems.  Democrats need to learn from the experience of government-run health care around the world where increased state involvement has led to lower quality, fewer services and longer waits.

Kudos to GOProud for pointing out the merits of the GOP’s market-based approach.  Let’s hope other gay groups don’t let their fealty to the Democratic Party and statist ideas prevent them from realizing how this approach, by offering more choices, is particularly beneficial to gay and lesbian Americans.

No Wonder They Demonize Conservatives

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 2:42 am - May 21, 2009.
Filed under: Liberals

It’s just the way they are.  It’s in their very nature.  I mean, by definition, they can’t even defend their own positions, so says Robert Frost, the great American poet who spoke at John F. Kennedy’s inauguration:  “A liberal is someone who can’t take his own side in an argument.