Gay Patriot Header Image

No… Lindsey Graham REALLY Didn’t Go THERE, Right?!?

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 2:41 pm - July 1, 2010.
Filed under: Post 9-11 America

Definitely the quote of the day or the decade!

“I know it’s really gonna upset a lot of gay men — I’m sure hundreds of ’em are gonna be jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge — but I ain’t available. I ain’t gay. Sorry.” — US Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC)

Well, despite persistent rumors to the contrary, I’ll take Sen. Graham at his word.

I just hope we aren’t seeing a Gary Hart moment in it’s infancy.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Is The Era of Aborting Gay & Lesbian Babies Upon Us?

Posted by Bruce Carroll at 2:40 pm - July 1, 2010.
Filed under: Post 9-11 America

I’ve been warning for many years that scientific developments may lead to the day where parents can choose whether to abort their unborn child based on knowing his/her sexual orientation.

It seems my fears are coming true sooner rather than later…

Pediatric endocrinologist Maria New—of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine and Florida International University—isn’t just trying to prevent lesbianism by treating pregnant women with an experimental hormone. She’s also trying to prevent the births of girls who display an “abnormal” disinterest in babies, don’t want to play with girls’ toys or become mothers, and whose “career preferences” are deemed too “masculine.”

And yet, the head of the Human Rights Campaign was the chief fundraiser for the abortionists-on-demand, and the Gay Left routinely plants their flag firmly with pro-abortion causes.

Now that science is studying ways for gays/lesbians to never be born, I guess the Gay Left are like those “Jews who worked for Nazis” by their continued support of abortionist political causes.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Yahoo! Leads With Communist Propaganda!?!?

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 1:18 pm - July 1, 2010.
Filed under: Hysteria on the Left,Media Bias

On its main page, Yahoo! leads with a big news item (photo included), informing us that 16-year-old Elian Gonzalez speaks out.  Not once does AP writer William Weissert inform us that, the young Mr. Gonzalez can only speak out with permission of Cuban authorities.  Given the nature of the government that rules the island where he currently resides, likely offers their talking points in order to secure a better life for himself and family.

In this article, we learn nothing of the squalid living conditions in Cuba–and how because of his prominence, Mr. Gonzalez surely has a higher standard of living than most of the unfortunate denizens of that island.

We read, “The younger Gonzalez was celebrated as a hero and his father, a restaurant employee, was elected to parliament.”  Um, elected to parliament?  To the average reader that suggests that the elder Gonzalez gained such popular acclaim that he was swept into office by a wave of patriotic sentiment. Not exactly.  The Communist Party handpicked him to run in an uncontested election where its candidates always win.

Wonder why Mr. Weissert failed to mention that?

We read of an

. . . event was organized by Cuba’s Council of Churches, which includes all major Cuban religions except the Roman Catholic Church, and was held at the Episcopal Santisima Trinidad Cathedral in Havana. The council staged a celebration in the same church days after Gonzalez’s return in 2000.

Wonder why Mr. Weissert failed to mention that this is not an independent organization, but is, in fact, controlled by the Cuban Communist Party.

When the younger Gonzalez returned to Cuba, Weissert breathlessly reports of another wave of patriotic fervor:

. . . men, women and children jammed the road from Havana’s airport, cheering, waving Cuban flags and throwing flowers as the motorcade carrying them passed.

He forget to mention that those citizens didn’t have make choice in the matter, being required to participate by the authorities in this totalitarian nation.

In short, this article makes it appear that there was a groundswell of popular and religious support for the return of Mr. Gonzalez when all there was a stage-managed events designed to enhance the power of the Communist State.  And yet another Western reporter falls for the charade.

Hand Mr. Weissert and Yahoo! the Walter Duranty award.

Casual sex for single gay men: barrier to finding LTR?

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 3:05 am - July 1, 2010.
Filed under: (Gay) Male Sexuality & the Monogamous Ideal

A friend recently sent me a text which I found it difficult to answer from my cell phone.  Indeed, can’t really give him an answer even now.  At one point in my life, I would have offered a quick and easy answer, but now I’m not so sure how to address his question without relating multiple, often seemingly contradictory thoughts and including numerous anecdotes.

Here, in its entirety, is the text transcribed:

Casual sex: healthy outlet for the single gay or barrier to finding an LTR?

Now, I would lean toward the former answer, but with lots (and lots (and lots and lots (and lots and lots and lots))) of caveats.   We are by nature sexual beings.  I don’t think it’s healthy for us to refrain from sexual expression (for a long period) just because we haven’t found a life-partner.

As one who tried celibacy for a while, I realize it has many beneficial aspects for the short term, but realize that once those benefits are realized it kind of feeds on itself.  (Note to self: finding a better way to express this.)

Perhaps, when I have given the matter some more thought, I can craft a more insightful post.  For now, I’ll just pose his question to y’all and invite you to consider it in the comments section below.

Democratic Senator Lambastes Boxer for Grandstanding

Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) took his fellow partisan Barbara Boxer (D-DailyKos) to task for grandstanding on the oil spill, rushing to pass legislation that would “send a Big Oil-bashing message“:

But I do have some concern about a total removal, a total unlimited liability. I mean, there was a reason for Price Anderson [nuclear industry liability limits]. I don’t know if those policy reasons are still applicable today or not, but there was a reason, and it was passed. I’m going to vote against this amendment, but I just hope that in the future we know what the heck it is we’re doing. This amendment may have the effect of driving out some smaller companies, I don’t know. It may have the effect of allowing foreign outfits come in, I don’t know.

Emphasis added.  (Read the whole thing.)

In her rush to pass a bill, any bill, to show that she is doing something, anything to punish BP, Mrs. Boxer has not really considered the consequences of the legislation she has crafted.  Given the impact of the recession on small companies (which Mrs. Boxer could see if she spent any time in the state she officially represents in the Senate), she would know just how severe that impact has been.

In her zeal to look like a knight in shining armor astride a white horse, Mrs. Boxer is once again paying little heed to smaller enterprises, you know, those her beloved president says creates two-thirds of the new jobs.

Ever eager to do the Obama Administration’s bidding, Boxer has earned the ire not just of her colleague from the Treasure State, but is also operating at cross purposes with her own state’s senior Senator, a Bay Area Democrat like herself.  Dianne Feinstein believes we must first fix the leak.

While some Democratic Senators are trying to do their jobs, Mrs. Boxer just can’t let go out of her partisan ideology.  Ma’am, that’s not a good way to respond to a crisis.