Blogcasting from the worldwide headquarters of the not-so-vast gay right wing conspiracy.
Representing the millions of patriotic gays and lesbians across the USA by standing up for freedom, fairness, free speech, privacy and true American values.
As I’ve been driving cross country and reading about the Oil Spill (and occasionally getting some information from various news or broadcast networks), a number of things have struck me, notably the number of federal regulations making it difficult for those ready and willing to help provide relief or stop the leak and contain its spread to do so.
We’ve read about the Jones Act which limits the ability of foreign-owned ships to help out. Of course, a signature from the president could waive that in the present crisis. I’m sure our readers can quickly come up with other areas where regulation or bureaucratic inertia has delayed (or prevented) assistance from getting through.
This morning, Glenn Reynolds linked a piece on Bureaucracy Standing In The Way Of Oil Spill Clean Up Efforts. This is where the energetic executive comes in. The president should be doing what he can to cut through the bureaucracy, wiling to step on toes with the primary goal of stopping the leak and limiting its spread. In short, it is executive action which is key at the present moment — not legislative initiatives.
And yet, President Obama saw fit to use this, um, well, “crisis” to push passage of Cap and Trade. That he would use his Oval Office Address to that end shows just how clueless he is, particularly about the power of his office.
He should be using the tools at his disposal to cut through bureaucracy instead of asking another branch of government to expand it.
Recovery Summer? Biggest frenzy of stimulus spending to date?
So they’re saving it all for the summer before the mid-term elections in order to goose the economy in time for the mid-term elections? Kind of like trying to use federal dollars to limit Democratic losses?
Maybe Obama and his Democrats should have tried to bribe the private sector instead of siphoning the better part of the the funds to state governments so they wouldn’t have to make hard choices, cutting spending and reducing benefits to public employees (who join unions which help fund the Democratic Party).
With Obama’s response to the Gulf Oil Spill crisis, Democrats and their cheerleaders in the mainstream media are, to some extent, reaping what they sowed when they rushed to criticize then-President George W. Bush’s response to Hurricane Katrina.
Then, they behaved as if the federal government was the exclusive provider of relief services and downplayed (or outright ignored) evidence of incompetence at the state and local levels. They wanted to create a narrative of W’s incompetence. In the process, then, they had to make the federal government the primary responder to such disasters.
Obama has also made it easier for others to fault his manner of leadership. Instead of taking responsibility for the crisis or at least pressing the responsible authorities to act responsibly, he’s casting about looking for others to blame. Obama, Jennifer Rubin writes,
. . . can never pass up the chance to pass the buck. He describes the difficulties with the Minerals Management Services as if someone else had been president for over a year and as if this is the fault of “deregulators” rather than a massive bureaucracy without accountability
(Even his sidekick in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has joined the game, blaming George W. Bush, nearly 17 full months into the Obama Administration. You’d think they could come up with a different playbook.)
Indeed, it seems that our politicians have agendas other than addressing the problem at hand. Right now, the primary issue should be stopping the leak and containing the spread of the oil. Just as with the problem of illegal immigration, the first issue we need address is securing the border.
Obama, however, would rather pander to the special interests who support his party, using his White House address to press for cap and trade. Instead of considering new legislative initiatives to appease liberal interest groups, he should be formulating an executive response to the problem at hand. (more…)
It was just that long ago that President Obama gave his first address to a joint session of Congress to thunderous, often bipartisan, cheers. . . .
Jindal [by contrast] bombed. Democrats cackled.
Jindal’s hollow sounding delivery in the darkened main hall of his official residence made him seem like an Audio-Animatronic character on Disney’s Haunted Mansion ride. . . .
And now, the president finds himself the captive of a so-far unstoppable oil spill that reinforces Democratic fears that Obama was all talk and gives everyone else reason to doubt his competence.
Seems the contrast between Obama and Jindal helps define the real nature of the president’s appeal and his real failure as an executive. He can talk a good talk, but just can’t walk the walk. The Democrat may be a master of scripted eloquence, but executive competence eludes him.
Meanwhile, Jindal has distinguished himself by the aggressive manner in which he responded to the oil spill, his ability to get things done hampered by the slow response from the White House.
California Democrats (and their allies in the mainstream media) would like nothing more than to make the Senate contest in California this fall a vote on anything but the record of the incumbent. They’ll make an off-the-record comment on said incumbent’s hair to be the most revealing gaffe since Bill Clinton talked about lighting up a doobie and not breathing in.
And then Mrs. Boxer will talk about all the jobs she’s bound and determined to create as if she’s a newcomer to the political scene who hasn’t been at this game for some time and had not already promised us that the “stimulus” she supported would create lots and lots of jobs. Meanwhile, unemployment has gone up since her first election to the United States Senate during a recession. (It’s even gone up since she voted for said “stimulus”–while she claims it’s created or saved jobs.)
Yup, that’s right, when Mrs. Boxer was elected to the Senate at the tail end of a mild recession, unemployment in the (then-still) Golden State stood at 9.8%. And now, after she’s served 18 years in the Senate, it’s over 12%, despite her vote for that near $1 trillion stimulus designed to bring that number down. No wonder her opponent’s Deputy Campaign Manager for Communications Julie Soderlund said, “Barbara Boxer is concerned with one job and one job only: her own.”
With Vice President Joe Biden slated to host fundraisers for Mrs. Boxer in the Silicon Valley and in Los Angeles on July 8 and July 9, it’s clear Boxer’s running scared and filling her coffers in order to deflect attention from the job she’s already done. But, Carly’s campaign will have none of that. Soderland insists that the ”election this November will be a referendum on Barbara Boxer’s failed 28-year political career in Washington”. (more…)
Over the weekend, the Log Cabin Republican organization hit a new low — which I didn’t think was possible. After this blog and others exposed LCR decomposing into a front organization for the leftist Tim Gill Foundation… and after LCR’s former Executive Director left the place in financial ruin, even I didn’t think it could get worse.
The Log Cabin Republicans of Los Angeles are holding a special event at this weekend’s gay pride festival in L.A.: A tea bag toss!
Contestants can buy a tea bag and win a prize if they toss it into the open “mouths” of three politicians: gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown (D), House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Sarah Palin.
“We figured this year we ought to take it up a notch and do something that is engaging and somewhat amusing and shows that we can even laugh at ourselves,” Scott Schmidt, president of of Log Cabin-Los Angeles, told the San Francisco Chronicle.
He said he included Palin in the game in order to give the game a more bipartisan feel, telling the Chronicle that she had raised the sales tax when she was mayor of Wasilla, Alaska.
Thanks to Log Cabin, the ugly slur “teabagger” — first coined for the Tea Party by none other than Anderson Cooper — is being reinforced. And, to top it off… Log Cabin has the teabag going into Sarah Palin’s mouth. Palin — the number one target for liberals is assailed in this bizarre stunt by a so-called Republican organization.
Palin has gone through enough mindless attacks — why does an alleged Republican organization have to target her as well with a disgusting sexual slur?
Well, that’s stunt is sure to please crazy Andy Sullivan and get LCR’s Schmidt an invite to the next big Gay Lefty party. Congrats, Scott.
Meantime, the new Log Cabin Executive Director was instrumental in helping defeat gay conservative Congressional candidate Matthew Berry. Mark Ciavola at RightPride.org notes:
[T]hey [Log Cabin] supported the pro-choice, anti-gay Iraq War veteran Patrick Murray in Virginia’s 8th Congressional District over the pro-life, conservative, former FCC lawyer Matthew Berry. Oh, did I mention that Berry is a gay conservative? So why would Log Cabin support Murray, over a gay conservative who is pro-life, and stands up for state’s rights and the repeal of DADT? Simple: Log Cabin no longer has the best interests of the Gay Right at heart – and hasn’t for some time. They raised money for Murray, who won the primary against Berry last Tuesday. Good job R. Clarke Cooper!
It is no surprise that Cooper follows in the unseemly tradition of Patrick Guerriero. My source on the Log Cabin board told me they chose Cooper under specific instructions from Tim Gill — who is the group’s major donor and who is one of the Gay Left’s most prolific fundraisers.
I have decided to go on a personal crusade against Log Cabin Republicans. As a gay conservative — they should be “outed” completely as a left-wing fringe organization. I have some specific actions in mind which I will reveal over the next few days. Good, clean fun stuff.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
[GP Ed. Note: In full disclosure, I am the Treasurer of the gay conservative group, GOProud. This blog item reflects my own personal feelings and does not necessarily reflect the views of GOProud or any of its members.]
Back in April I wrote an article for GayConservative.org titled “The Cabin is On Fire,” outlining the downfall of the longest-running organization representing the Gay Right – the Log Cabin Republicans. I mentioned their spotty past of placating to liberal groups such as Human Rights Campaign, and their refusal to endorse the only Republican in the Presidential Election of 2004. I feel as though I laid out a pretty convincing case for their impending demise.
After fourteen months without an executive director, Log Cabin sent out a press release announcing their new E.D. as R. Clarke Cooper, a “former diplomat and veteran.” According to the release, Cooper is an “eight-year veteran of the George W. Bush Administration,” an administration Log Cabin opposed in 2004, even going so far as to attack Bush and Cheney in a series of web ads.
Does this spell new life for the lame-duck organization? Not quite. In fact, what I suspected was a lame-duck organization, is actually just lame.
This past week two very interesting news items came to light, which show Log Cabin’s true colors:
First, they supported the pro-choice, anti-gay Iraq War veteran Patrick Murray in Virginia’s 8th Congressional District over the pro-life, conservative, former FCC lawyer Matthew Berry. Oh, did I mention that Berry is a gay conservative? Matthew Berry believes each state should choose its own same-sex marriage laws, and that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell should be repealed. These are reasons Murray used to sway voters away from the gay conservative. So why would Log Cabin support Murray, over a gay conservative who is pro-life, and stands up for state’s rights and the repeal of DADT? Simple: Log Cabin no longer has the best interests of the Gay Right at heart – and hasn’t for some time. They raised money for Murray, who won the primary against Berry last Tuesday. Good job R. Clarke Cooper!
The other tidbit pertains to Log Cabin’s plans for Gay Pride in Los Angeles. Their booth will include a “Tea Bag Toss,” where people can buy tea bags to throw through the “mouths” of three politicians: Jerry Brown, Democratic candidate for Governor; Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House; And…
Sarah Palin.
Why Sarah Palin, you ask? To give the game a more bipartisan feel. Not only is this a vulgar way to “do something that is engaging and somewhat amusing,” but clearly is intended to earn favor with the heavily liberal gay audience in L.A.
Still don’t think Log Cabin panders to liberals in the gay community? I say GUILTY as CHARGED.
Log Cabin Chairman Terry Hamilton and newly-appointed Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper need to take a good, long look in the mirror. Log Cabin used to be a place where right-of-center gays could find a home. Today, the organization is being driven into the ground by liberal appeasers who barely have any Republican values left.
It is time for all Gay Conservatives, Republicans and even Independents, to disavow this corrupt and misguided organization. Not only does it lie to its members to raise funds for its non-Republican activities, but it gives the REAL Gay Right a bad name.
Perhaps Terry Hamilton and R. Clarke Cooper should be the ones getting teabagged at Gay Pride this weekend.
*The views expressed in this blog are the author’s, and do not necessarily represent the views of Right Pride or GOProud.
While I have long recognized that while the GOP cannot win by excluding social conservatives, I realize that to win it needs keep its focus (as did the Gipper) on fiscal and national security issues. Thus, I was heartened to read yesterday about the “truce” that one of the nation’s most accomplished Governors is proposing.
. . . Daniels says the truce was “just a suggestion. It was an expression of urgency I think that all Americans should feel about certain other questions like the debt burden.”
Daniels continued, “I chose the word truce because no one has to change their point and no one has to surrender. Simply, we have to come together to address what I believe are the most urgent problems of the country.”
The governor’s broader concern about the limits and priorities of government is certainly warranted. Our government hides behind infighting to ignore looming existential crises, and yet is currently micromanaging your salt intake and making sure employers don’t have unpaid interns.
. . . emphasized the need to focus like a laser beam on the existential threats facing the country – the two big issues he’s previously identified being the war on terror and the country’s precarious fiscal position. “We’re going to need a lot more than 50.1 percent of the country to come together to keep from becoming Greece,” he said.
Emphasis added.
Right on, Mitch! Seems at least one prominent Republican has familiarized himself with the record — and vision — of Ronald Reagan.
When even former Democratic California House Speaker Willie Brown finds that “80 percent of the state, county and city budget deficits are due to employee costs“, it should be a no-brainer that public officials at all levels should be doing as their counterparts in the private sector are doing — either laying off employees or cutting their salaries.
Under the Obama administration, the government is doing such a good job that it’s decided to reward itself. Last year, Uncle Sam paid out $408 million in bonuses to 1.3 million federal workers, according to the Asbury Park Press, which obtained the information through a Freedom of Information Act request. That’s about $80 million more than the previous year. About one in four federal workers received a bonus, and awards ranged from $25 to, in the case of one lucky State Department worker, $94,500. . . .
Federal bonuses are being doled out liberally, even as federal salaries are exploding. From December 2007 through June 2009, the number of federal workers earning six figures increased from 14 to 19 percent. In 2008, average federal compensation, including pay and benefits, was $119,982 — considerably more than the $59,909 average in the private sector, according to the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Economic Analysis. In the midst of a brutal economic downturn that saw millions of jobs lost and unemployment soar above 10 percent, the Office of Personnel Management data shows the federal workforce actually added nearly 100,000 jobs from December 2008 to December 2009.
Added 100,000 jobs? Even as the federal government is taking on more employees, the unemployment rate is soaring. Hmmm. . .
Now, I don’t mean to sound cynical, but I’m wondering if there’s method to the Administration’s madness. I mean, if he is increasing the salaries of federal employees, wouldn’t that increase the amount said employees fork over to their unions thus increasing the amount the unions spend to help elect Democrats. (Are their dues proportional to their income as are taxes?)
And the more federal employees there are, the more members of public employee unions there are, thus the more readily are filled the coffers of the special interest group most loyal to the Democrats.
Last week, Internet ads started appearing on conservative Web sites attacking Nevada GOP Senate candidate Sharron Angle. A group calling itself the “Patriot Majority” — replete with a logo of a Minuteman holding a musket — declared Angle “Nevada’s WORST legislator!” and a “professional politician” who is in the pocket of Wall Street. An attack from Tea Party detractors on the right? Quite the opposite. The Patriot Majority was formed by a former spokesman for Sen. Harry Reid and is funded by organized labor. Why would Reid supporters use a faux Tea Party group to attack his opponent? It gets to the heart of Reid’s reelection strategy. To win, he must divide the Republican nominee from her electoral base.
Well, running a nasty campaign is easier than running on your record. Read the whole thing. (more…)
I was about to do a post on taking time off from blogging about politics, saying that what time I did spent blogging would be related to my reunion and that on the “UNofficial” blog of my alma mater.
But, given how much I have heard at my reunion when I mentioned my support for the Republican nominee for the United States Senate or on the Internets when I check my e-mail/scan the blogs about some comment Carly Fiorina made about her fall opponent’s hair, I thought I’d weigh in on that weighty subject.
First, Carly should have known better than to say such a thing (whatever she did say) on an open mike. (Good thing is that she’s learning this lesson early on in the campaign.)
Second, so what? We all say such things about the appearance of others (particularly our rivals). I doubt it will make any difference in the campaign (save to show her as, well, just a regular gal). Interesting how lefties are getting so upset about this. Guess they’d rather focus on a Republican candidate’s gaffes than on the Democratic incumbent’s record.
Don’t remember the media making much of a fuss of Mrs. Boxer’s obnoxious and mean-spirited comments — and those on the record.
Comparing the media treatment of that 3-term Democrat’s “Don’t Call Me Ma’am” comment to her opponent’s hair comment, Mary Helen Ramming observes:
When Carly Fiorina made fun of Barbara Boxer’s hair this week, female bloggers, pundits, and columnists screamed for an immediate apology from Ms. Fiorina. Come on gals, really, as if you want to be held responsible for every comment you have made chatting away with colleagues and co-workers. Put a live mic and camera in front of your face and I bet your demeanor and the content of your comments changes rapidly. (more…)
I just got back from a late breakfast with a representative of Mike Fallon, who’s running this year in my home district of CO-1 (Denver). We had a wide-ranging discussion about policies and what it’s going to take to get our Nation back on track.
I am convinced that Mike is the right choice to represent this district in Congress and am proud to endorse him and ask you to join me in contributing to his campaign and contacting your friends and relatives in Colorado’s First Congressional District and asking them to vote for him.
Mike is an emergency room surgeon who knows all too well the upcoming negative repercussions of the SoHCA2010 and has made its repeal his first and foremost goal if elected. His agenda, which he calls his “Cure For Congress”, is centered around fiscal sanity, shrinking the size and cost of government, and fostering a more receptive atmosphere for small business (he’s a businessman himself). He sums it up as: “Healthy people, a healthy economy, and a healthy government make a strong country.”
Having met Mike and his family, I can tell you, he’s the real deal. He’s charismatic, attractive, totally genuine, and ultimately electable. I’m not exaggerating when I say, think Scott Brown.
Mike is not a politician and is utterly approachable. I think these characteristics will ultimately do him very much good in this cosmopolitan yet Western pull-no-punches district. Need more incentive? He’s running to unseat ultra-Left bazillion-term Pelosi lackey and Deputy Majority Whip Diana DeGette, the only woman who could live up to Pat Schroeder’s embarrassing legacy of profligate spending, disrespect for life, and disdain for liberty. And she’s been doing it for over a dozen years. It’s beyond time to retire her.
That such a great candidate has come along in Mike Fallon only proves the providence of this time in Colorado politics. Please join with me in doing whatever you can to help make Mike one of dozens of Republicans to unseat undeserving Democrats in the 112th Congress.
I’m having such a good time reconnecting with friends at my reunion, including a great heart-to-heart with a classmate whom I barely knew back in the day but has since come out. I doubt I’ll be blogging much this weekend.
I do want to remind our readers in Vermont and New Hampshire (and even western Mass) about our dinner this Sunday, June 13 in Brattleboro, Vermont.
Come out as a gay conservative who supports a Republican candidate who opposes “marriage quality” (whatever that is) and some left-wing critic will call you self-hating. But, if a Democrat (or other approved public figure) opposes same-sex marriage, he gets a pass from the guardians of proper opinions on gay people.
Try to explain that all those who oppose state recognition of same-sex marriage do not do so out of animosity for homosexuals, but out of a belief that marriage represents a union between two individuals of different sexes and have someone act as if they’re covering their ears and repeating in an ever louder voice, “I’m not listening. I’m not listening.”
At least that’s how mainstream media would try and spin it. Most leftists in the press have simply tried to bury those less than “typically gay” quotes. Why? Well, when Elton John speaks the truth, it disrupts the sensationalized narrative that the media and Hollywood have been setting for years; If you don’t support gay marriage, you must secretly despise gay people.
It’s Hate Vs. Gay. Period.
Clearly there are some people even in the gay community tired of the blatant pandering and simple-mindedness.
(Via Instapundit.) And some of those people blog on this very site. :-)
Crowder quotes Elton John’s views on state recognition of same-sex marriage–which are nearly identical to my own.
What Crowder’s post really points to is the difficulty of having a good conversation on gay marriage when its most zealous advocates define their adversaries in such harsh terms. Either you’re with us or you’re a hater.
When Barbara Boxer joined a unanimous Senate Democratic caucus in voting for their party’s “stimulus,” unemployment in her jurisdiction (AKA the (once-)Golden State stood at 10.7%. She quoted the President as saying the policy would create (or save) 400,000 jobs in California.
Now, she’s running for reelection, telling us it created (or saved) 150,000 jobs (that’s 250,000 fewer than the president advertised). Yet, nearly 400,000 fewer people* are working in California than were employed when Mrs. Boxer voted for the big-spending boondoggle. Unemployment now stands at 12.6%, a full three points higher than it was when she first took office (during a recession).
I am proud [Mrs. Boxer writes] of my record of fighting to create jobs for California. I have met construction workers, law enforcement officers, teachers, scientists, and many other hard-working Californians who are working because of the Recovery Act — a bill that has saved or created 150,000 California jobs. Yet Carly Fiorina…opposed that critical bill…
According to Recovery.gov, the stimulus has already sent $27.7 billion to California. So if you take Boxer’s number at face value, that translates to $186,000 per job. That’s more than Boxer makes annually as a senator. In fact, $27.7 billion would have been enough to hire 750,000 new staff assistants for her office. (Just imagine the constituent service you’d get!)
Even by Mrs. Boxer’s own wild claims, the “stimulus” has not yet provided the jobs she promised us. And more Californians are out of work than were when she first took office and when she voted for the stimulus.
And she has the cheek to campaign on the jobs she’s created.
Hey, Ma’am, government doesn’t create jobs. The private sector does. We’d be better off turning to someone who actually knows how the private sector works to fix the problems created by an out-of-control federal government.
Among the many topics touched upon last night in the most marvelous Boston dinner (great food and amazing conversation), we discussed Sarah Palin. We all admired the former Alaska Governor (though to varying degrees), but also agreed that she’s not positioning herself well for the White House.
That said, another woman we GayPatriots all admire, the magnificent and munificent (with her wisdom) Tammy Bruce has interviewed that accomplished woman. And if two such talented women appear together in the same podcast, it surely merits your attention.
One notion that comes up frequently on conservative blogs, including this one, about the president’s agenda is that it is nothing new, merely the codifying of various items which have been on various items on the Democratic wish list for the past generation or two (or three).
Just, look at health care, Obama pushed through an overhaul whose unpopularity seemed to grow in direct proportion to the attention he gave to it. And yet even after Scott Brown’s victory in Massachusetts, largely on public opposition to said legislation, the president persisted in pushing it through Congress — even though the American people made clear they didn’t want it.
He seeks to move public opinion after the legislation has passed, not pass the legislation in response to public outcry. For the president and his Democrats, their agenda trumps the popular will — and the current needs of American society.
A real leader addresses the concerns of the people and responds to circumstances with solutions appropriate to the problem at hand. When crises emerge, he turns his attention to them, working relentlessly at meeting the needs of the day, even putting aside other items on his long-term agenda to do so. See George W. Bush and the attacks of 9/11 or Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the Second World War.
But that’s a half-truth. Presidencies rise and fall far more by their response to great events than to the event itself.
“Presidents are ultimately judged by how they handle the unexpected,” presidential historian Richard Norton Smith wrote in an email exchange. “JFK may have blown the Bay of Pigs but more than recovered a year later in Cuba. … Just as he moved away from his cautious approach to civil rights as newspaper pictures and TV reports from Birmingham — the equivalent of today’s unstopped pipe at the bottom of the Gulf — made him realize that the presidency is, indeed, ultimately a place of moral leadership.”
But, when facing the unexpected, Obama has been slow to shift course, preferring to keep his focus on his legislative agenda rather than focus on the unexpected crisis. (more…)
Hey all. We are only a couple hours away from the CMT Music Awards here in Nashville. It is hard to see, but the attached photo is the “Blue Carpet” where Country Music’s stars are entering the Bridgestone Arena.
Last night’s Grand Ole Opry show was phenomenal. Carrie Underwood’s voice gave me goosebumps. Especially when she bridged “Jesus, Take The Wheel” into “How Great Thou Art.” Whoa!
Trisha Yearwood & Josh Turner were also fan-friggin-tastic.
Anyway, I’m trying to keep folks updated on the Nashville trip on Twitter. Follow Me!
The more I learn about the antics of gay leaders (and other organizers of gay events) in this country and abroad, the more convinced I become that their primary concern is not promoting greater social acceptance of gay people, but in becoming the gay auxiliaries of various left-wing (and often anti-Western) movements.
. . . in the wake of the Gaza flotilla incident, the organizers of the Madrid parade folded quickly to pressure to get rid of the Israeli participants.
Before the invitation was officially withdrawn, it was reportedly “hinted” to the Israelis that their participation in the event would be an “embarrassment” and would mean the additional expense of increased security. When the Israelis failed to take the hint and voluntarily stay home, the axe fell on them.
No matter that Israel is, of nations in the Mideast, the most tolerant of gay people. No matter that the flotilla was sponsored in large part by terrorist organizations which advocate the execution of gay people. No matter that gay people face persecution in the terrorist-run enclave of Gaza.
It will be interesting to see what (if any) gay organizations condemn this exclusion and commend Israel for its policies protecting gay people and allowing our fellows in the Jewish State to live openly and celebrate publicly.
As Allison Kaplan Sommer put it in the post linked above, “Those who are truly interested in lesbian and gay rights should welcome Israel with open arms as a model of tolerance in an intolerant region.”
Yet, to all too many gay organizations, that tolerance matters less than belonging to the “Grand Coalition of those Oppressed by Western Civilization.”
