Gay Patriot Header Image

Fly in the Face of What Facts, Charles?
Or, the Homosexual Tea Party Narrative

Over at Just One Minute, Tom Maguire comments on “Charles Blow['s], the NY Times other professional grievance columnist” explanation “that the Tea Party is racist until they can prove otherwise”:

According to an article accompanying a Washington Post/ABC News poll released on Wednesday: “About 61 percent of tea party opponents say racism has a lot to do with the movement, a view held by just 7 percent of tea party supporters.”

This gulf of perception has left Tea Party organizers struggling to scrub the stain of racism from its image, but those efforts may fly in the face of the facts.

Once again, relying on the critics of an organization to determine the beliefs of the organization’s members.

This is like a film critics writing a series of scathing reviews of a movie and then talking about the gulf of perception that leaves the films producers struggling to scrub the stain of bad notices from the flick’s image.  This isn’t the pot calling the kettle black.  This is the pot photoshopping a picture of the kettle to make it black and then pronouncing it so.

And while Blow blathers on about “facts,” he offers no facts whatsoever to justify his accusations, trotting out only an interpretation of a study “highly skewed by political bias.”  Those looking for racism in the Tea Party movement will surely find it, just as those looking for gay participation in such rallies will also find it.

But, no one is accusing the Tea Parties of being focal points of the homosexual agenda.  It just doesn’t fit the narrative.  From my experience, however, there are clearly more gay men, more lesbians even, in the Tea Party movement than there are racists. Far more, far, far, far more.

Ponder that for a minute as you consider the left-wing narrative.

L.A. Times Says, “No, Ma’am”

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 11:40 am - May 8, 2010.
Filed under: 2010 Elections,California politics,LA Stories

Saying that outgoing U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer (D-San Francisco) “doesn’t display enough intellectual firepower”, the “editors at the biggest newspaper on the West Coast, who were expected to endorse Sen. Barbara Boxer in her primary campaign“:

The left-leaning Los Angeles Times on Friday declined to offer endorsements in all Democratic and Republican primaries for governor and Senate, saying the races have been undermined by politics and money.

But the newspaper’s decision to sit on the sidelines for the Boxer race could prove to be the most damaging of all, given the newspaper’s criticism of the three-term senator.

“On the Democratic side, we find that we’re no fans of incumbent Barbara Boxer,” the newspaper said in an editorial Friday. “She displays less intellectual firepower or leadership than she could.”

Boxer displaying “less intellectual firepower or leadership than she could”?!?! Now, that’s the understatement of the year.

Elucidating a media mind-set in explaining the decline of Newsweek

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 10:59 am - May 8, 2010.
Filed under: Arrogance of the Liberal Elites,Media Bias

In his piece on the decline and fall of Newsweek, Ace offers some insight into the liberal media mind-set:

They prefer being instructed that their opinions are not opinions at all, but facts and/or simple common sense and/or the manifestly just and right way to view the world. . . .

They don’t like hearing, for example, that by choosing Equality as the paramount good, they have decided that Freedom is a far less important good, and always to be compromised and diminished in order to expand Equality. They will insist, until their dying breath, that by choosing Equality over all else, they are actually also creating the most Freedom, too. . . .

And that’s why we’re so outraged at the MFM. This isn’t just about their smug arrogance or corrupt pretense of being the fair-and-objective Deciders. It’s a personal thing — our personal revulsion at a set of know-nothing inexpert, unprofessional clowns arrogating to themselves the power to decide what is and is not permitted in polite, enlightened discourse — but it’s not justpersonal.

(H/t:  Ed Driscoll and Glenn Reynolds.)

There’s more to it than that.  And the piece is a little long, well, okay a lot long, but well worth your time.