A Republican becomes the first first openly gay state representative in the KeyStone State:

State Rep. Mike Fleck (R-Huntingdon) publicly acknowledged Saturday that he is gay, making him the first openly gay lawmaker in Pa. and the only* currently sitting openly gay Republican state legislator in the entire country.

. . . .

“Coming out is hard enough, but doing it in the public eye is definitely something I never anticipated,” he said. “I’m still the exact same person and I’m still a Republican and, most importantly, I’m still a person of faith trying to live life as a servant of God and the public. The only difference now is that I will also be doing so as honestly as I know how.”

He said his party affiliation remains strong.

“The Republican party is all about the government needing to stay out of people’s lives,” Fleck said. “I’m not a one-issue person and it’s not a one-issue party.”

Well said, Representative Fleck. Wish more people understood this about gay Republicans. Our political calculus doesn’t revolve around our sexuality nor does the agenda of our party.

Folks at the Advocate would be wise to learn from this gay elected official — and to watch how his party receives him.

Contrast how a gay-left wing radio host handles a gay conservative caller with how Rush Limbaugh responds to a similar type of caller.

Rush doesn’t lambaste this man even as he says he supports gay marriage.

And the conservative talker concludes the conversation, saying, “I’m glad you called.”

(H/t Breitbart via Bruce.)

Twice in the past twenty-four hours or so, I have received reports via Facebook of gay men coming out for Romney, only to encounter attacks from their gay peers.

People “are surprised”, one wrote, as if writing about my own initial experiences coming out conservative, “when I say I’m a republican. They ask me how I can be a Gay Jew and a republican at the same time.” The other had a “Question for you Dan! Why do LGBT people hate conservative LGBT people … I have so many haters right now!”

Yes, why do they hate?

“Let’s be honest,” the second man wrote

. . . the left doesn’t hate me because I am mean or brash or too aggressive – the same label can be applied to many of my critics. No, the left hates me because I have the audacity to stand up to them. They hate me because I am a conservative who happens to be gay. They hate me because I won’t be bullied by them. They hate me because I have dared to wander off the liberal plantation, because I refuse to play the victim card, and because I have rejected their failed big government, single-issue, tunnel-visioned agenda.”

He concluded,  ”They hate me because I am a conservative who happens to be gay.”

Upon reading the first draft of this post, the first correspondent disagreed with the language used by the second:

my frieends and I don’t hate each other they just become another person when they find out that I am a Republican. (more…)

In just a few months, gay Americans will no longer have to experience the embarrassment of having a mean-spirited liberal as the most prominent gay Congressman.  With the retirement of Barney Frank, more pleasantly disposed gay Democrats, like Colorado’s Jared Polis, should come to the fore.

And while the unhappy Mr. Frank will no longer be representing Massachusetts in the U.S. House of Representatives, it seems increasingly likely that another gay man — and one with a much better understanding of the way the world works and a keen appreciation of the burdens the government places upon individuals — will be representing the Bay State in Washington., D.C.

It seems increasingly likely that Richard Tisei, the only congressional challenger I have officially endorsed this year, appears poised to oust Democrat John Tierney in the state’s 6th Congressional District.

The National Journal ranked the race as “the 11th most likely to turn over among the 435 seats in the House” and” the Rothenberg Political Report, another nationally regarded nonpartisan observer, tipped the race to ‘Lean Republican’ from ‘Toss-up.’”  That’s good news for Massachusetts, for gay Americans in general and gay Republicans in particular.

His campaign could always use a few extra bucks to make sure they get his supporters to the polls next month.  Join me in supporting this good man.

When I alerted Jim Hoft that one of our critics had made insinuations about his “feelings” toward us, he thanked us in post.  We are most grateful for the acknowledgement.  The feedback from his reputedly rabid right-wing readers helps show just how far off our critic was by suggesting that our fellow conservatives really don’t think very highly of us.

Truth Teller wrote:

My wife and I were out last night with our very close, gay friends…we go out with them all the time.

Guess what? They are as conservative as they come (fiscally, of course).

Adam said that, “The only people I’ve ever known to use the word ‘faggot’ were leftists. Ironic.”  And Buffalobob thanked me . . .

. . . for being the forthright man you are. We can agree or disagree in our discussions. That is what freedom is. That is what our first amendment guarantees us. Those who try to shout us down, accuse us of racism, accuse us of being intolerant, demand that we follow in lockstep with their ideology are everything and more that we are falsely accused of.

Opable quipped that “Dan’s misguided poster thought Jim was a Pharisee…found out Jim is actually a Good Samaritan.”

Seems that those who comment at Jim’s site have much in common with the bloggers whom they follow, perhaps opposed to state recognition of gay marriage, but in favor of treating gay individuals with dignity.

Reader MV passed along this interview David Lampo gave on Republicans and gay rights:

Having received a review copy of David’s book, A Fundamental Freedom: Why Republicans, Conservatives, and Libertarians Should Support Gay Rights, earlier in the summer, I read it and had mixed feelings. Perhaps, I should take the time to write a more formal review.

Lampo does a good job of debunking notions of anti-gay attitudes in the Tea Party, but at times, repeats the gay left narrative about Republican intolerance.

That said, if you have a moment, give the video a watch.

Back in the 1990s, nearly a full year lapsed between Republican Congressman and candidates signing the Contract with America and Log Cabin endorsing that document promising government reform.  The prominence Republicans gave to the Contract returning its focus to real reform and fiscal responsibility.  Having gained such prominence from attacking the GOP in 1992, the then-leadership of the ostensibly Republican organization was wary of embracing the GOP, even when it was not focusing on social issues.

How thing have changed.  Two days after presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney announced his selection of Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate, the current Executive Director of Log Cabin, wrote in the Daily Caller that

Congressman Paul Ryan is a strong choice for vice president, and his addition to the GOP ticket will help Republican candidates up and down the ballot. As chairman of the House Budget Committee and author of the Republican “Path to Prosperity,” nobody is more qualified to articulate a conservative economic vision to restore the American economy and stimulate job creation.

Unfortunately, Cooper used his opinion piece to make the case for statist legislation, but the fact remains that he has openly embraced the “conservative economic vision” that Ryan has promoted.  He even indicated on Facebook that he “liked” Paul Ryan for VP:

Clarke’s willingness to champion Republican politicians like Ryan and real conservative reforms has served to distinguish him from some of his predecessors. And Clarke is not the only right-of-center gay leader to herald Romney’s pick. Shortly after the Republican announced his choice, GOProud’s Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia called Ryan “a bold and inspired pick“: (more…)

On its web-page, GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) claims to “hold the media accountable for the words and images they produce. When media is used as a platform to defame and stereotype LGBT people, GLAAD takes action.”  Apparently this standard applies only to those who use media to defame and stereotype gay people of a certain political persuasion.

When individuals use media to defame gay Republicans, GLAAD takes no action.  Yesterday, when a BuzzFeed reporter said openly gay Republican Richard Grenell’s “tweets often appear to reveal insecurities about your own masculinity“, GLAAD did not call on the reporter to apologize.*

As Grenell told Breitbart’s John Nolte, “Groups like GLAAD are no longer effective because they stay silent when the left attacks gay conservatives.”

GLAAD is not the only outfit to make light of the tweet.  Nolte reminds us that “BuzzFeed Politics’ Editor-In-Chief, Ben Smith (pictured), has only commented about his employee’s behavior on Twitter with jokes and dismissive comments.”  Perhaps, you might say that’s his style, to engage in such banter.

Nolte reminds us that when conservatives directed anti-gay attacks on Grenell, “BuzzFeed Politics found that troubling enough for a feature piece critical of Mitt Romney.”

And HRC, the outfit which blew a gasket when a Republican politician failed to speak out after her daughter used the word “faggot” on Facebook remains silent when a reporter suggests a gay Republican has insecurities about his masculinity.

* (more…)

Every now and again, you meet a gay ex-Republican who tells you that he left the GOP because of the party’s intolerance.

Events this past week, however, have made it increasingly apparent that such folks left not because of the GOP’s supposed intolerance, but because of that they experienced in the gay community.  They were simply tired of being ostracized — and otherwise marginalized — for their political views.
——-

*(or hide)

—–

FROM THE COMMENTS:  Redneck Fag answers the title question in the affirmative:  ”It happened to me when I was living in San Francisco during the Reagan years but it didn’t last long. I soon saw the problem: wanting to conform and be popular . . . .”

That does seem to be the problem.

I expect to have more to say later in the day about HotAir’s interview with our friend Jimmy LaSalvia, but want to keep this post brief to focus on one thing Jimmy said in response to the question about the mean-spirited attacks on GOProud coming from the left:

It seems that it’s OK to use racist, masochistic, anti-Semitic, and homophobic words and phrases when attacking gay conservatives. Nobody in the mainstream media condemns it or comes to our defense. We are fortunate to have a lot of friends in the conservative blogosphere who regularly stand up for us. That means a lot to us, and it gives us the resolve to continue to stand up to the left wing bullies.

Read the whole thing. Emphasis added.  Once again (and this reaffirmed in my conversation with Richard Grenell last night), the overwhelming (as in over 90%) of the vicious attacks on gay conservatives come from the gay left, many of which, to borrow an expression from Alan Jay Lerner, “would make a sailor blush“.

Do wonder when our friends in the legacy media will get around to reporting the story of this liberal intolerance.

This is not the first time left-wing bullies have expressed their animus against gay conservatives in hateful terms.  Nor will it (alas!) be the last.

Although, in the month of May, I had blogged extensively about Richard Grenell, I had not met the man until last night (though we may have crossed paths at the 2008 Log Cabin Convention in San Diego–which we both attended).

My friend Bridget Johnson, invited Ric, Greg Hernandez and myself to join her for cocktails while she was in LA as part of her work for pjmedia. He a wonderfully nice and very witty man and, like many gay Republicans, comfortable in his skin, out in both communities.

Save for one comment he made, I did not ask his permission to quote him on anything and will respect the social nature of our get-together. That comment was something I had found absent in the legacy media’s coverage of his departure from the Romney campaign.

Ric pointed out that, “not one elected Republican criticized me.

Does seem to  call into question that whole media narrative about an intolerant Republican Party. No wonder that fact didn’t get much coverage.

It’s not just Dan Savage.  Another left-of-center Obama supporter has offered a prejudiced view of gay conservatives.

In response to GOProud’s endorsement of Mitt Romney, Joe Behar wondered if “the GOProud guys are just attracted to Mitt Romney’s sons Matt, Mutt, Tag, Tip, Tack, and Bashful“. “Does Joy“, asks our reader Greg who alerted me to this story. . .

. . . really believe that gay men only think with their penises? And the stereotyping of gay men as mincing enthusiasts of Broadway musicals is pretty “out there” as well. Such claims from a conservative would be equally offensive — and would be the basis for the same sort of outrage that a Dan Savage type comment from a conservative would be.

Will gay groups take Mrs. Behar to task for her prejudiced assumption about the attitudes of this subset of the gay community?  So far I can’t find anything on the web-pages of HRC or NGLTF.  Nor do they have anything about Mr. Savage’s “hateful remarks” (borrowing the term HRC used when Sarah Palin’s daughter called some a “f***ot”.)

Does it even occur to Behar that gay people, like most Americans consider a great variety of factors when choosing a political candidate to support?

About a year and a half ago, when Sarah Palin’s daughter called someone a “faggot” on Facebook, Joe Solmonese, the then-President of the Human Rights Campaign asked that former Alaska governor to “use this as a teachable moment and tell all of our young people that this kind of language is simply unacceptable“.

Well, now that a man a year older than Mrs. Palin has used the same unacceptable word to slur an entire class of people, will Chad Griffin, Mr. Solmonese’s successor call on Dan Savage not just to apologize — as Mrs. Palin’s daughter has done, but also, given Mr. Savage’s interest in young people, ask him to explain just how hurtful this term can be?  And how wrong it is to slur a minority within a minority, gay conservatives.

And while we’re on the subject, given how some of our critics bandy about the expression, “self-hating,” should we wonder if it’s self-hating when one gay man uses the term to slur a group of his fellow gays — who happen to hold political views at odds with his own?

Savage, as Breitbart’s Ben Shapiro reminds us . . .

. . . is, of course, the host of a show on MTV about sex, a syndicated sex columnist, the man who bullied Christian students who walked out on his anti-Bible ranting, the perverter of Rick Santorum’s name, the licker of doorknobs in Gary Bauer’s office, and an all-around nice guy. Some in the media have labeled him the “spokesgay” – seriously.

Two gay slurs in one Tweet. The gay left must be proud of their self-appointed spokesman. So must the Obama Administration, which has labeled this massive bully a hero of the anti-bullying movement, invited him to the White House, and cut videos on behalf of his It Gets Better Project. (more…)

Seems I’m getting a lot of my blogging tips today from Facebook.  One friend linked an article about Bravo host Andy Cohen who, even though he executive produced the documentary, Gay Republicans, doesn’t get gay Republicans:

I’m interested in why someone would support a party that doesn’t necessarily support equality for that person. And I can only assume it’s about the wallet. It’s about ‘I’m a fiscal Republican’.

. . . .

So, I can’t — I can’t understand, Chris, the idea of saying, ‘Oh well, they’re going to put more money in my bank account. Who cares if they don’t believe I can get married?’ I don’t get it.

Hey, Andy, it’s not about equality.  It’s about freedom.  And we support the GOP because we believe the best government is that which governs least.  You’d think that someone who would take the time to make a documentary about gay Republicans would take the time to understand their ideas.

FROM THE COMMENTS:  Tim in MT offers:

Only in liberal la-la land can 2 adult men go on TV and tell each other “I don’t get it!” about other people’s ideas and think they come across as thoughtful commentators… *eyeroll*

Indeed.

Seems that Texas Republicans have taken a step in the right direction.  Rob Schlein, president of Metroplex Republicans of Dallas, wrote yesterday that the day marked . . .

. . . the beginning of a more inclusive Texas Republican Party that has removed several anti-gay planks about banning gay scouting and gay adoption, and linking pedophilia with our sexual orientation. The core members of Metroplex Republicans have worked for years at all levels within the party to affect this change. From seeking allies at party events, to attending conventions at precinct, senate district and state levels, we have advocated for removal of all anti-gay language for a long period.

(H/t Jimmy LaSalvia’s (on Facebook ).)  Emphasis added.  Seems Schlein’s group adopted the exact same strategy we developed when I helmed the Log Cabin Republicans of Northern Virginia, reach out to Republicans at party events rather than demand change in public fora.

The Texas GOP may not yet have advanced as far as we would like; the party still needs to make more changes.  Thanks to the efforts of groups like Schlein’s, they are moving in the right direction.

Kudos to Rob for his diligent — and painstaking work — to change minds and broaden our party’s base!

Over at Drawnlines Politics, Nick Stone reminds us that Andrew Breitbart “was a man of inclusion“, using “his larger than life personality to rally unlikely groups around the conservative brotherhood”:

He served on the advisory council of gay republican group GOProud and was known to have many gay, liberal and minority friends. While this fact rarely caused any right wing outrage, it did however spark left wing meltdown. . . .

He served on the advisory council of gay republican group GOProud and was known to have many gay, liberal and minority friends. While this fact rarely caused any right wing outrage, it did however spark left wing meltdown. . . .

Breitbart knew how to remind us that what united us was more important than what divided us.

Indeed.  Andrew welcomed all those willing to challenge the liberal hegemony on our public discourse into his coalition.  He may not be a hero, but he did define a standard for the modern conservative moment.  It’s not the nature of your difference which matters, but the degree of your commitment to conservative ideals.

On Sunday, when I was celebrating Gay Pride in West Hollywood and relaxing with a friend at Universal Studios in the Valley, gay voices in the blogosphere (and on Facebook) were abuzz about Frank Bruni’s New York Times Op-Ed “The G.O.P.’s Gay Trajectory” which focused on a billionaire hedge fund manager Paul E. Singer’s new American Unity PAC, whose “sole mission will be to encourage Republican candidates to support same-sex marriage, in part by helping them to feel financially shielded from any blowback from well-funded groups that oppose it.”

What struck me about the piece was that Bruni gave Singer the last word, putting forward a notion which is only now gaining currency:

One Republican who unequivocally opposes marriage equality [sic]* is the man Singer backs for president: Mitt Romney. Does that trouble Singer?

“I feel very strongly that Obama needs to be fired, and that the Republicans are right on most things,” he said, adding that with continued work on marriage equality [sic], he expects to persuade more Republicans of its rightness, too.

“I think it would be naïve of me to take this issue and just upend everything else I believe,” he said. “Because I think we’re making progress.”

Emphasis added.  This is what I have been hearing gay Republicans say for as long as I have been out as a gay Republican, that we continue to support the GOP because overall even as we disagree with our party on some issues.

Until recently, we have regretted that there has been no national organization making that simply point clearly.  Things seem to have changed when GOProud set up shop.  Even Log Cabin now is beginning to sound like Paul Singer.

* (more…)

Every now and again, when a social conservative garners headlines for an anti-gay rant, a reader will e-mail me (or offer a comment) asking why I didn’t cover it — or, in a less civil manner, suggesting that my silence indicates an indifference to right-wing animus.

My basic response to such inquiries is simple:  (1) other blogs and news sites already cover that story and (2) I just don’t have time to cover every topic of concern.

Moreover, we try to cover the stories that aren’t covered — particularly one story of concern to gay Republicans and conservatives that the media, even the gay media, seem intent on ignoring.  As I put it yesterday in my post on civility:

My most recent post on the Grenell matter should have been an occasion for our readers to consider yet again the most unreported story in the gay media  – and indeed a social phenomenon that only receives passing notice even in the conservative press, that of the of strong intolerance among certain liberals toward people like us, gay conservatives.

Richard Grenell observed that “Some of the most hateful, mean-spirited intolerant comments about me being the foreign policy and national security spokesman for Governor Romney … were coming from the left.”  (Emphasis added.)

Now, whenever we bring up this topic, some of our liberal readers will accuse us of whining.  Does that mean then that they’re whining when they point to anti-gay animus among social conservatives?

We see the media reporting stories of that animus, but where pray tell, do we see stories about anti-gay conservative animus among the supposedly enlightened set?

UPDATE:  GOProud Executive Director Jimmy LaSalvia passes on these reports of his organization standing up to the left-wing intolerance described above.

My most recent post on the Grenell matter should have been an occasion for our readers to consider yet again the most unreported story in the gay media  – and indeed a social phenomenon that only receives passing notice even in the conservative press, that of the of strong intolerance among certain liberals toward people like us, gay conservatives.

Indeed, there are liberal hate sites whose bitter, negative bloggers devote the better part of their time to leveling personal attacks on conservatives, reserving a particular venom for right-of-center gays who do not toe the “equality” party line.

Given how regularly these sites misrepresented my arguments, I haven’t checked them since George W. Bush was president.

Unfortunately, it seems that some of our readers, on both side of the political aisle, have stooped to the level of the hate bloggers in leveling personal attacks on others who have chimed in, offering opposing points of view.  In recent days, I have been checking the comments section less and less frequently.  And when I do, it often feels foreign to me as if it’s part of the blog entirely independent of its bloggers.

So, once again, I ask, readers, please keep the comments civil.  You diminish the quality of your own arguments, making your case far less compelling, when you make assumptions about or level ad hominem attacks against your ideological adversaries.

And all this in a post about the hateful, mean-spirited attacks a prominent gay conservative received.  Those on the left help make my point while those on the right diminish theirs.

Shortly after we learned that Richard Grenell decided to step down at Mitt Romney’s foreign policy/national security spokesman, I tried to reach the former aide to John Bolton to ask him a simple question:  whether or not, he, like most gay conservatives, received more grief from the gay left than from social conservatives.

Well, my blogger friends may or may not have passed my messages on to Mr. Grenell.  But, I may finally be getting an answer — or a close approximation of one.  Our reader Leah alerted me to blogger William A. Jacobson’s post where that law professor excerpted an article from Palm Springs’s Desert Sun reporting the gay Republican “took heat from both the political left and the right“:

In an interview with The Desert Sun, Grenell said: “The far left doesn’t want a gay person to be conservative and the far right doesn’t want a conservative to be gay. Some of the most hateful, mean-spirited intolerant comments about me being the foreign policy and national security spokesman for Governor Romney … were coming from the left.”

But it was the far right that gloated louder than the far left after Grenell’s resignation. Leading the charge was the conservative American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer, who called Grenell’s resignation a “huge win for us.”

Grenell denies he was forced out by social conservatives, noting that he’s been an openly-gay Republican spokesman for decades.

Emphasis added.  He insisted that he resigned because he didn’t believe that he should be the story:  ”When the messenger becomes part of the message — if you really care about these issues — you should step aside.”

So, folks on the left offered some of the most hateful, mean-spirited intolerant comments about him being the foreign policy and national security spokesman for Governor Romney . . . . Hmmm. . . . Does parallel the experience of us here at GayPatriot — and the reports we have received from our readers.

Wonder when the legacy media will get around to cover that particular aspect of the Grenell matter — or the general story about left-wing intolerance toward “uppity” conservative minorities — and if they’re going to ask the “first gay president”, to borrow and paraphrase an expression, to differentiate himself from such hateful, mean-spirited rhetoric.