Gay Patriot Header Image

More Details Emerging On Rep. Massa’s Ethics Charges

Late breaking developments tonight from The Politico:

A week after announcing he was retiring from Congress for health reasons, New York Democrat Eric Massa finds himself in the midst of a fast-growing sex scandal involving allegations that he had improper physical contact with several men who worked for him — including at least one intern.

In a widely anticipated interview on Glenn Beck’s Fox News show Tuesday night, Massa acknowledged that he had “groped” and “tickled” a male staffer at the congressman’s 50th birthday party.

He also said he’d used rough language when he shouldn’t have and that he had jokingly told a male staffer at a wedding reception that he’d rather have sex with him than with one of the bridesmaids.

But, Massa told Beck, “I did nothing sexual.”

Now does he mean “sexual” in the Bill Clinton definition?

Moving on….

The House ethics committee has received allegations that former Rep. Eric Massa groped at least three male staffers and conducted himself improperly with interns as well as full-time aides, a source familiar with the matter tells POLITICO.

One incident allegedly occurred when Massa traveled to San Francisco with an aide for a fundraising trip, a second source said.

I have been made aware of other rumors that put the Massa scandal into a whole new orbit.  I cannot print them until I get confirmation.  But I can assure you that this man has some serious criminal charges in his future.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Obama’s Focus, not Rahm, is the Real Problem

Please, please, please, don’t let me latest post on Rahm Emanuel obscure my criticism of this highly partisan Chicago political operative.  With all the attention focused on the White House Chief of Staff and criticism of his tactics reaching a fever pitch and going to rhetorical extremes, Jim Geraghty observes that “no one in Washington jumped up to deny” certain accusations against Rahm, notably the one about him selling his mother to get a vote.

My point is not that Rahm is a good guy nor that he’s worth defending (though I grant that some of the recent criticism has been over the top and unwarranted–and yes, you can go too far in criticizing even a man who merits criticism), but that the problem isn’t so much Rahm as it is Obama’s agenda.  He’s trying to sell policies the American people don’t want and is focusing on issues which are, at best, peripheral to the American people.

While I don’t agree with New York Times columnist Bob Herbert’s characterization of Republicans nor do I support the solutions he would offer, I do agree with his analysis of the causes for the Administration’s troubles:

The Obama administration and Democrats in general are in trouble because they are not urgently and effectively addressing the issue that most Americans want them to: the frightening economic insecurity that has put a chokehold on millions of American families. . . .

Instead of focusing with unwavering intensity on this increasingly tragic situation, making it their top domestic priority, President Obama and the Democrats on Capitol Hill have spent astonishing amounts of time and energy, and most of their political capital, on an obsessive quest to pass a health care bill. . . .

But while the nation is desperate for jobs, jobs, jobs, the Democrats have spent most of the Obama era chanting health care, health care, health care.

The president should remember that, during the 2008 campaign, the electoral tide (at least as measured in polls) began to turn in his favor when the scope of the financial meltdown became manifest.  People trusted him more than they did John McCain to focus on fixing the economy.  Save for his insistence at the outset of his Administration on swift passage of the legislation (AKA the “stimulus”) he claimed would do just that, the incumbent has spent the better part of his time in office addressing other matters.

Rahm’s only part of the problem.  The real problem is the president’s failure to focus on the real concerns of the American people.

Does Crist REALLY Want To Go “There”?

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 12:25 pm - March 9, 2010.
Filed under: 2010 Elections,National Politics

Really, Governor Crist?  This is what you’ve sunk to?

Florida Governor Charlie Crist was on with Greta Van Susteren on Monday March 8. During the interview he accused Marco Rubio of going to salons and getting a back wax.

Sounds pretty gay, doesn’t it?  Speaking of gay Governor Crist…. is this really a topic you want to play around with?  You know there are a lot of rumors about you in the Florida gay community.

Chortling about back waxes might lead your political opponents (gay liberals) to bring up those rumors in the General Election.

So, Gov. Crist…. is this REALLY a wise move?

Republican Primary voters will be the ultimate judges…. but they should tread lightly.  We know what happens when gay liberals come after Republicans with gay rumors swirling around them.

UPDATE: Erick Erickson at suggests we all pitch in and send Charlie Crist some back wax from  PatriotPartner suggests Oompa-Loompa back wax, perhaps?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Doing My Civic Duty Today

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 11:36 am - March 9, 2010.
Filed under: American History,Patriotism

Hey folks. I’m at the Mecklenberg County Courthouse today, serving on jury duty.  I was one of the first called this morning on a civil, personal injury case.

And one of the first dismissed from that courtroom.  Never did I think my chronic back injury would have a benefit to me!  *laughs*

Anyway, I’m here until at least 4pm.  I guess there is an afternoon round.

All-in-all, it is very well run and the jury room is great.  There are even donated pinball & video games!  Woot!

PS– I need some ideas for my next piece.  Please email me some ideas.  PLEASE!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Rahm: the Fall Guy

Welcome Instapundit Readers!  While you’re here, please check out my followup post, Obama’s Focus, not Rahm, is the Real Problem.

As one who first called for White House Chief of Rahm Emanuel’s resignation on this blog nearly a year ago (but have questioned his appointment since it was announced), I guess I should be pleased by the various left-wingers calling for his head and blaming the hyper-partisan Clinton veteran and Chicago politician for the president’s difficulties.

Memeorandum seems to have been linking stories about him (or accusations leveled against him) every day for the past week, with Rep. Eric Massa’s (D-NY) accusations the latest to lead the headlines.  The New York Times magazine is running a lengthy story of the “Limits of Rahmism.

Some of the coverage seems, well, a little bit sensationalistic, as if no men ever discussed business in the locker room before. I hate to make Rahm seem any less of an nasty partisan, but, guys do this all the time.  And while we’re at it, I join Michelle in warning conservatives against trusting Massa.  He seems more interested in the attention than anything else.

That said, you gotta wonder why, all of a sudden, a lot of criticism of Rahm has suddenly hit the fan.  And, to be sure, there have been a number of news outlets defending him.  Indeed, through Glenn Reynolds, I learn the Hill has devoted an online symposium to this very matter asking, “What does all of the chatter surrounding White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel say about the White House?”  Reynolds himself offers the best explanation:

Unity is easy when things are going well. Backbiting and fingerpointing start when things go badly. The leak attacks on Rahm Emanuel indicate that things are going badly.

Rahm is only to blame in that he is a hard-charging partisan political operative and not a level-headed administrator.  The president needs someone with a cooler head running the day-to-day operations in the executive branch.

All the said, Rahm isn’t the only person to blame for what’s going wrong in the Obama White House.  It’s just that certain folks are determined to make him the fall guy.  The real question is who are they?  And what do they seek to gain by attacking Rahm? (more…)

The Roy Ashburn Kerfuffle & “Gay Rights”

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 1:50 am - March 9, 2010.
Filed under: California politics,Gay America,Gay Politics

Perhaps, the most predictable thing about Republican California state Sen. Roy Ashburn, arrested last week in Sacramento for Driving Under the Influence (DUI), confirming yesterday that he is gay is the chorus of left-wing gay activists telling us that closeted gay politicians “vote against LBGT rights to squash rumors about their sexual orientation.

Granted there is some truth to this notion, but when you read the list of legislative proposals these activists describe as “rights,” you find the better part of them are not rights as the Founders defined them, but merely government regulations defining sexual orientation as a protected class.  Certainly these activists are hoping that once out of the closet, Senator Ashburn will adopt their agenda hook, line and sinker lest he be branded self-hating.  And soon when he votes their way and changes his party registration, they’ll be feting him for his courage.

Well, he would truly be courageous if once coming out, he said, “Yeah, I was short-sighted on some issues, but I still believe in freedom, so don’t support increasing the scope of state authority to ensure that no one, nowhere, no how treats a gay person in less than a politically correct manner.”

That said, I do hope he’ll change his views of the state’s domestic partnership program (he once opposed even that) and help lobby California Republican Representatives in Congress to join their colleagues in voting to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell.  But, there’s really not much else the government should be doing for gays.  It should leave us alone, treat us as individuals (and not members of a particular class) before the law, neither burdened nor benefited because of our difference from the social norm.

Government should leave us to address our problems on our own and in the communities to which we belong and which we’ve chosen.

All that said, my heart goes out to Roy Ashburn the man–and to his family.  It is unfortunate that he should have his private life made public.  But, then again, he should have known better than to drive a car after drinking to excess.

Perhaps though his coming out will help change attitudes toward gay people, particularly among the social conservatives who make up a large portion of his jurisdiction.  It is attitudes we still need to change not laws we need to enact.