Liberal California State Senator Supports Rally for Iranian Democracy
I’ve never been much of a fan of California State Senator Mark Leno (D-San Francisco). His rhetoric on gay issues has been over-the-top and his attitudes toward Republicans lacks the respect he demands social conservatives extend to gay people.
But, you gotta give credit where it’s due. And unlike the better part of the gay leadership across the nation and in the Golden State, this openly gay state legislator has endorsed the San Franciso Rally for Iranian democracy that Michael Petrelis is organizing today in San Francisco. It would be nice if more left-wing Democrats followed suit. This is an issue which should not only unite the nation, but also the gay community.
it seems the leftist bloggers have been far ahead of the gay leadership in standing up for other brothers and sisters in Iran.
If you can make it, that rally is just a few hours away, today at 5 PM in Harvey Milk Plaza.
6 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
It’s mark leno, not jay leno.
Comment by Daveo — June 18, 2009 @ 5:07 pm - June 18, 2009
OOps, fixed. Thanks for catching that Dave!
Comment by GayPatriotWest — June 18, 2009 @ 5:10 pm - June 18, 2009
Mark Leno, Jay Leno – so what’s the difference?
I mean, both of them have huge egos and think that they’re entertaining.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — June 18, 2009 @ 5:20 pm - June 18, 2009
what an outrage. How can a Democrat show support for Democracy? He must be pandering to get conservative votes. harumph.
Comment by Kevin — June 18, 2009 @ 8:13 pm - June 18, 2009
Much to the chagrin of the Obama brown-nosers (boob, ghillie, etc.), protests are popping up all over creation in support of the Iranian people.
http://iran.whyweprotest.net/forumdisplay.php?f=4
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 19, 2009 @ 12:32 am - June 19, 2009
I was going to post this comment, in response to the prior recent entry here, on this topic; but it is even more pertinent for this one.
The issue of support the promotion of “democracy” – and having a hawkish approach to international affairs – does not align with a conservative vs. liberal dichotomy… When issues like this arise, there are often intra-movement cleavages, within both sides of the ideological spectrum.
It is specifically because of issues such as the one in your entry, that more liberals and Democrats should have supported the foreign policies of the George W. Bush administration, and should be hawkish now as well.
I have done earlier studies and overviews and analyses, of the liberal internationalists, who do in fact support aggressive action abroad, due to Wilsonian and human rights-based idealism. Other conservative bloggers, such as Dr. James Joyner have also dealt with this phenomenon. One major factor however, determining the liberals’ attitude towards these matters, was their reactionary nature, with the fact that a Republican was in the White House.
Nonetheless, some principled liberals chose to support policies such as the Iraq war and interventionism… In the Blogosphere particularly, much of the support for these policies came from left-of-center bloggers… As I discussed with Roger L. Simon at the Republican National Convention, Kesher Talk has had a good blogroll of the liberal hawks. Many of these bloggers, commentators, and liberal intellectuals (yes, such a thing does exist!
chose to endorse the Iraq war, based on the same principles that led them to support liberal internationalism during the Clinton administration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_hawk
Incidentally, in your area, there was the longtime San Francisco liberal U.S. Representative Tom Lantos (D), who, until his recent passing, was perhaps the most pro-war person in the United States Congress… Having served since around 1980, he was a backer of just about every single major military action that was initiated (and many which weren’t!), whether it was Republicans or Democrats who were in power.
Several California liberal members of Congress were actually criticizing the George W. Bush administration for not being hawkish enough, towards Iran:
Congressman Brad Sherman (D-CA): U.S. Bows Down to Iran
Congressman Tom Lantos (D-CA): Now or Never to Stop a Nuclear Iran
Even Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has, at times, done more saber rattling towards Iran than the GOP then-Chairmen of the foreign policy Committees, in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. The Democrat leadership does what is politically expedient – and/or takes the opposing side of the Republican leadership.
Aside from the topics of Iraq and Iran however, one other interesting note: I remember, when Operation Enduring Freedom began, after 9/11, there were many liberals who strongly supported taking aggressive actions against those Islamic countries. This was in part of course due to the reactions everyone was experiencing, at that time, but I noticed that another factor that was driving this support, for those on the left, was the human rights issue… For years in fact, liberals (including feminists and “gay rights” activists) had been attempting to draw attention to the Taliban, due to their oppression of groups such as women and homosexuals… Remember that infamous chain-letter petition e-mail from 1999?
Related info:
The Rise of Reactionary Liberalism, Rich Lowry
Bushaphobia aside, Liberals should support the Iraq war; Many already do, Michael Totten
Moral Imperative: Any self-respecting liberal ought to support an invasion of Iraq, Richard Just, The American Prospect
Anti-war Effort Perverts Liberal Values, Michael Kelly
Liberal Democrats Perverse Foreign Policy, Charles Krauthammer
Deploying the Marines for gays, feminism, and peacekeeping, Ann Coulter
Was Ralph Nader a Pro-War Candidate?, Brian Carnell, LeftWatch
Comment by Aakash — June 20, 2009 @ 3:58 pm - June 20, 2009