GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

We Need Carly Fiorina to Repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell

by

One of the primary reasons I’ve been so gung-ho for my gal Carly Fiorina is that she is a fiscal conservative who knows that we need to reduce the burdens government places on business while bucking her party on issues near and dear to my heart.  This accomplished woman both supports civil unions for gay couples and backs repeal of Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT).

While her opponent may hold similar views, Barbara Boxer’s been in the Senate for 18 years, and has so far failed to persuade any of her colleagues to vote on the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act or repealing DADT.  Indeed, as the San Francisco Chronicle acknowledged, the Democrat couldn’t even move a climate change bill that was the signature project of the Senate committee she chairs!

Because “Boxer personalizes the political discourse,” John McCain said, “she’s had so very little effect of any kind in the political process”.  A polarizing figure is little help in changing minds.  Carly Fiorina, by contrast, is a much more congenial woman.  It’s Republican Senators we need to reach on DADT repeal — and federal civil unions.  And my gal can reach out to them.

These folks are far more likely to listen to an upbeat Republican than a divisive Democrat.  A Republican Senator from the nation’s largest state will certainly have considerable sway over her colleagues.

Barbara Boxer may say all the right things on gay issues, but she’s had her chance — and failed.  She’s accomplished nothing for gay Californians.  The Senate is a deliberative body where one’s ability to influence her fellows matters as much as — if not more than — one’s politics.

We need Republican votes to repeal DADT.  Carly Fiorina can be a strong voice for repeal in the Republican caucus.  Boxer can’t even get her fellow Democrats to act on one of their pet issues.

Simply put, if you want to see DADT repealed in the 112th Congress, in California, Carly Fiorina is your gal.

Comments

  1. Because “Boxer personalizes the political discourse,” John McCain said, “she’s had so very little effect of any kind in the political process”. A polarizing figure is little help in changing minds.

    *Headdesk*

    I have thought repeatedly that come November 2nd, the Democrats will lose control of the house, Russ Feingold will be kicked out for the crime of being the most honest man in the senate, and Sharron Angle will actually become a Senator Sharron F***ing Angle, but I will still celebrate because Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina lost. Or, in other words, because you lost.

    Your incessant put-downs of Brown and Boxer have managed to personalize those races to the extent where I don’t even really care who wins any more. Hell, Whitman and Fiorina aren’t that bad! I’d be happy to live in a California with those two as governor and junior senator. There are so many worse politicians across America. I just them to lose so you have to eat it and so maybe you’ll finally shut the hell up for once (and you wanted to know why I still read this blog)!

    So it seems ironic that you criticize Boxer for being polarizing and personalizing the discourse when the only reason I give two shits about what’s happening in California is because of obnoxious little you!

  3. Serenity, please address the point of my post.

    If I’m wrong here, take issue with me. Show me where I’m wrong about Boxer. Show me where she has convinced Republicans to support legislation benefiting gays.

    Fine. You’re completely right. Boxer’s a terrible senator. She’s overly partisan, obnoxious, and can’t work with anyone. I may not agree with Fiorina on some policies, but she’s a better person and would make a better senator. I would probably vote for her (hell, with the deficit in California managing to scare me all the way over here in England, I’d definitely vote for Whitman).

    Yet I’m still supporting Brown and Boxer all the way.

    This isn’t about Boxer, the name and the face mean absolutely nothing to me. This is about you. This is about the gay conservative blogger who didn’t know when he’d said enough. The man who just had to post five times a day about the races in California because he obviously had nothing better to do than go on day after day about how terrible the ‘Failed Senator’ Boxer is and how Fiorina is ‘his gal’ who will be everything Boxer isn’t and get things done like she did at HP and blah blah blah it’s all just white noise to me!

    So there. You won. Happy?

  6. Serenity, huh?

    I find all this most amusing. I turn to blogging for a break from editing my dissertation.

    You don’t have to read my blog. If you don’t like my focus on the California races, then fine. I live here and fear that should Mrs. Boxer win, she’ll continue to fail the state as she has for 18 years.

    If this focus bothers you, there are countless other blogs for you to consult.

  7. I find all this most amusing.

    As do I. I feel a lot better have typed all that.

    I turn to blogging for a break from editing my dissertation.

    Given the rate of posting, I had trouble believing you had time to go to the bathroom.

    You don’t have to read my blog. If you don’t like my focus on the California races, then fine. I live here and fear that should Mrs. Boxer win, she’ll continue to fail the state as she has for 18 years.

    Indeed she will, and you’ll hate every second of it. Not much I can do about that except enjoy it.

    Of course that’s not really fair given how many other people live in California, but I’m clearly not thinking straight right now.

  9. I already addressed all of the pertinent points I could find in your post in my second response. If there’s anything I missed, you’ll need to point it out.

    [You did? The post was about how Boxer failed to accomplish anything for gay Californians and how Carly can do better. Must have missed your consideration of that idea. –Dan]

  11. I love it how the screaming little Pomposity tries to blame all of its problems and its irrational behavior on GPW.

    That’s typical. Failures like Pomposity invariably never take responsibility for anything. They never seem to realize that their inability to act like adults leads to them becoming helpless, infantile wards of the state, just like Pomposity is.

    Pomposity really demonstrates why gays and lesbians like itself should be committed. They are so helplessly stupid that they will deliberately injure themselves just because they think it will spite someone else. Pathetic.

  14. [You did? The post was about how Boxer failed to accomplish anything for gay Californians and how Carly can do better. Must have missed your consideration of that idea. –Dan]

    I thought I addressed that with my “Boxer’s a terrible senator. She’s overly partisan, obnoxious, and can’t work with anyone” statement (which I meant, that wasn’t a joke). Pretty heavily implying that Boxer’s abrasive, partisan personality is a problem when trying to accomplish just about anything. DADT and other gay rights issues fall under the category of ‘anything’ last I looked and Carly Fiorina may well be the type to convince some wavering moderate Republicans, of which there will likely be more of in the senate in 2011, to do the right thing.

    So on this issue at least, I actually agree with you. However, because I also still hate you, I’m going to be contrary for the purposes of making you a little bit more miserable. Freedom means the right to be stupid and illogical if it takes your fancy, and that’s what I’m doing.

  15. B. Daniel, I remember you complaining several times about people spending too much time on “divisive social issues”, yet you keep pushing for gay marriage and the repeal of DADT. But if traditionalists oppose those causes you tell them not to, that doing so will hurt Republicans. You tell them to keep silent on social issues even while you push for the social Left’s agenda, at least on gay issues. Apparently, in your world social issues are “divisive” only when they are approached from the socially conservative perspective. But promoting the socially liberal position is A-ok. I stand by my contention that you and other gay “conservatives” are really social liberal infiltrators working to subvert conservatism into an anti-traditionalist movement. You constant stumping for gay marriage and DADT repeal prove it.