How's that gay and ultra-conservative working out?

[dreadgeek]

So Ann Coulter was at Homocon, an event sponsored by the more conservative gay Republican group, GOProud and said, as only she could, that homosexuals are not deserving of marriage.

After a series of jokes about conservative that sounded -- and were received -- more like a stand-up act then a political speech, Coulter told the assembled (and predominantly wealthy) conservative gay crowd why they should oppose same sex marriage, adding, "I should warn you: I've never failed to talk gays out of gay marriage."

And then she did.

First, she ran down the stereotypical stand-up comedian's list of reasons, including that lacking the legal right to marriage allows the less-committed partner to weasel out of it. But in a more serious note, she parroted the losing arguments of the lawyers supporting California's Prop 8 and told the crowd that the reason she opposes (and they should oppose) same sex marriage is that it is strictly for procreation.

Whole article here.

Now, I'm not one to try to bring unnecessary--read any--attention to Ms Coulter but since these were her comments and since GOProud invited this woman to speak at their conference it set me to wondering: what ARE these people thinking? So I went to their web site and here, more or less, is their policy agenda:

GOProud’s Conservative Agenda

The so-called “gay agenda” is defined by the left through a narrow prism of legislative goals. While hate crimes and employment protections may be worthy goals, there are many other important priorities that receive little attention from the gay community. GOProud’s agenda emphasizes conservative and libertarian principles that will improve the daily lives of all Americans, but especially gay and lesbian Americans.

1 – TAX REFORM - Death tax repeal; domestic partner tax equity, and other changes to the tax code that will provide equity for gays and lesbians; cut in the capital gains and corporate tax rates to jump start our economy and create jobs; a fairer, flatter and substantially simpler tax code.

2 – HEALTHCARE REFORM – Free market healthcare reform. Legislation that will allow for the purchase of insurance across state lines – expanding access to domestic partner benefits; emphasizing individual ownership of healthcare insurance – such a shift would prevent discriminatory practices by an employer or the government.

3 – SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM - Bringing basic fairness to the Social Security system through the creation of inheritable personal savings accounts.

4 – DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL REPEAL – Repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.

5 – HOLDING THE LINE ON SPENDING – Standing up for all tax payers against wasteful and unneccessary spending to protect future generations from the mounting federal debt.

6 – FIGHTING GLOBAL EXTREMISTS – Standing strong against radical regimes who seek to criminalize gays and lesbians.

7 – DEFENDING OUR CONSTITUTION – Opposing any anti-gay federal marriage amendment.

8 – ENCOURAGING COMMUNITY ENTREPRENEURSHIP – Package of free market reforms to encourage and support small businesses and entrepreneurship in the gay community.

9 – REVITALIZING OUR COMMUNITIES – A package of urban related reforms; expanding historic tax preservation credits; support for school choice.

10 – DEFENDING OUR COMMUNITY – Protecting 2nd amendment rights.

Here is who they say they are:

Mission

GOProud represents gay conservatives and their allies. GOProud is committed to a traditional conservative agenda that emphasizes limited government, individual liberty, free markets and a confident foreign policy. GOProud promotes our traditional conservative agenda by influencing politics and policy at the federal level.
What we believe

We are conservatives who believe in limited government, individual liberty, free markets, a strong national defense and a confident foreign policy. We believe that every individual should be equal under the law. Click here to learn about our federal legislative priorities.
What we do

GOProud advocates for federal public policy initiatives consistent with our mission. We support policies that promote the power of individuals, limit government’s reach, enable economic growth through free market principles, and strengthen America’s position in the world. We support candidates for federal office who share our priorities.


However, here is what I found *the* most interesting on the web site. Their own take on Ms Coulter's speech:

“No one should be surprised that Ann was controversial and no one should be surprised at the histrionics from the left about her appearance. The truth is that if the left showed half as much outrage over Iran’s brutal treatment of gay people as they did about our party in New York, we might take their criticism seriously. Unfortunately, while Louis Farrakhan and members of the New Black Panther party broke bread with one of the most brutal anti-gay dictators in the world, the gay left was more focused on attacking a cocktail party.”

I'm not one to pull out Uncle Tom because, quite honestly, I think that phrase is overused. However, in this case, I think it is warranted. One cannot help but visualize some late-middle aged white gay man who makes John Waters look butch, camping it up for Ann in the green room and playing the non-threatening queen who, with the sacrifice of his dignity, makes conservatives feel good about their bigotry. Mighty accepting of Ann Coulter to take these queers money and then stand up and tell them that she doesn't think they deserve marriage rights.

Cheers
Aj

[Medusa]

And apparently made a comment that marriage "is not a civil right -- you're not black".

Now Im reading further into this group - These are Gay conservatives who *invited* Ann Coulter to speak? (that's the sound of my head exploding).
Im seriously trying to wrap my head around a group of marginalized people being so full of self-loathing that they would invite such an acidic twit (and PAY her?) for her putrid twaddle.

*twitch*

If I werent worried about appearing completely irrational and paranoid, I might suggest that this entire group is planted.

[Mitmo01]

insane in the membrane!!!!!, the fact that they paid that bloodsucker money to speak is surreal...

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Medusa

If I werent worried about appearing completely irrational and paranoid, I might suggest that this entire group is planted.

i might suggest that too, if i didn't want to appear that either

sometimes i wonder if Ann/Rush/Glenn etc are some way obscure performance art collective

[MsDemeanor]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

1 – TAX REFORM - Death tax repeal; domestic partner tax equity, and other changes to the tax code that will provide equity for gays and lesbians; cut in the capital gains and corporate tax rates to jump start our economy and create jobs; a fairer, flatter and substantially simpler tax code.

2 – HEALTHCARE REFORM – Free market healthcare reform. Legislation that will allow for the purchase of insurance across state lines – expanding access to domestic partner benefits; emphasizing individual ownership of healthcare insurance – such a shift would prevent discriminatory practices by an employer or the government.

3 – SOCIAL SECURITY REFORM - Bringing basic fairness to the Social Security system through the creation of inheritable personal savings accounts.

AKA "We support these things that will make our two professional white males with really good incomes stock portfolio grow even faster. Plus, we figure that most folks are too stupid to understand the actual impact of that whole insurance across state lines thing....it's a friggin jackpot for the insurance industry and our 401k's."

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

4 – DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL REPEAL – Repeal of the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.

"We threw this in 'cause we're queers and we're supposed to say this kinda stuff"

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

5 – HOLDING THE LINE ON SPENDING – Standing up for all tax payers against wasteful and unneccessary spending to protect future generations from the mounting federal debt.

"Even though this won't happen if taxes are cut and all that other blah blah blah up above, we figure that it sounds real good come election time."

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

6 – FIGHTING GLOBAL EXTREMISTS – Standing strong against radical regimes who seek to criminalize gays and lesbians.

"We added the 'who seek to....' part to the standard flag waving GOP crap 'cause we're queers and we're supposed to pander."

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

7 – DEFENDING OUR CONSTITUTION – Opposing any anti-gay federal marriage amendment.

"Only because it cuts our inheritance tax. On the other hand, it has the potential to make alimony a bitch."

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

8 – ENCOURAGING COMMUNITY ENTREPRENEURSHIP – Package of free market reforms to encourage and support small businesses and entrepreneurship in the gay community.

"Again, we pandered by adding that 'in the gay community part'. Actually, we conservatives only like small business as a talking point 'cause it gets people to vote for us. When it comes to actual legislation, like the one last week, we're totally against it. Those silly small businesses never made anyone's portfolios grow."

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

9 – REVITALIZING OUR COMMUNITIES – A package of urban related reforms; expanding historic tax preservation credits; support for school choice.

"We want our restored 1897 townhouse to be worth more and to get property tax breaks, plus we want to be able to make sure that little adopted Tommy gets to go to upper tier schools with all the other rich white future leaders of America, rather than having to mingle with the lower beings that tend to go to the same urban schools as the kids of us rich gays who clean up a few square blocks in less fortunate neighborhoods."

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

10 – DEFENDING OUR COMMUNITY – Protecting 2nd amendment rights.

"Yeah, 'cause guns are sexy!!"

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

...and members of the New Black Panther party...

"We're just as afraid of those three black guys as all the other white conservatives."

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Medusa

And apparently made a comment that marriage "is not a civil right -- you're not black".

Now Im reading further into this group - These are Gay conservatives who *invited* Ann Coulter to speak? (that's the sound of my head exploding).
Im seriously trying to wrap my head around a group of marginalized people being so full of self-loathing that they would invite such an acidic twit (and PAY her?) for her putrid twaddle.

*twitch*

If I werent worried about appearing completely irrational and paranoid, I might suggest that this entire group is planted.

You know, Medusa, I had that very same thought! However, for much the same reasons as you I eschew that particular line of thought.

That said, I have to say that I'm distressed by what has happened to the conservative movement in the last two decades. What is really tragic about this is that two of the four big pillars of the gay rights movement are, when you think about them, *deeply* conservative (in the sense of upholding tradition). They are, of course, the battle to allow gays and lesbians to serve in the military and the battle for marriage. Neither of these planks in the platform are particularly radical--20 years ago I was part of a small group of queer people claiming that the DADT battle was really important. Within the queer orthodoxy of the day the prevailing meme was that the military was no place that any self-respecting queer should WANT to be and so military service wasn't important. The prevailing meme on marriage was that same-sex marriage would simply recapitulate the heterosexist paradigm and, as such, was unworthy of our energies.

It is a sign of just how far *right* American politics have shifted that those two ideas are now considered left if not *far* left.

Current American Conservatism is not, in fact, conservative what-so-ever but is actually profoundly radical.

Cheers
Aj

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

One cannot help but visualize some late-middle aged white gay man who makes John Waters look butch, camping it up for Ann in the green room and playing the non-threatening queen who, with the sacrifice of his dignity, makes conservatives feel good about their bigotry. Mighty accepting of Ann Coulter to take these queers money and then stand up and tell them that she doesn't think they deserve marriage rights.

Cheers
Aj

This, says it all for me, Aj. Thanks for the thread. I remember listening toa HomoCon spokesperson on a radio show a few weeks ago about this event and Coulter- his rationalizations about the organization's mission and her speaking.

The entire time I listened, my image was that of just another upper-middle -class (this distinction is becoming more and more important to me), white guy worrying about his bottom-line, tax deductions (mainly, pass-throughs via sub-chapter S designation in which a small business can be making billions!), and losing what he somehow thinks he is deserving of due to his race, gender and socio-economic status. I just saw another tea-bagger with a rainbow feather boa. And of course, Coulter laughing all the way to the bank.

Oh, yes, there is quite a shift in what is conservative or liberal these days!

[Medusa]

This might be a little off-topic and my apologies if I am clumsy when tryign to tie it together (50 hours worked this week and its only Thursday!!) -

Black, Gay and Republican:

http://www.metroweekly.com/news/last...gay-counc.html

Admittedly, I'm kinda fascinated by this guy.

http://www.glaaforum.org/glaa_forum/...tionnaire.html


I guess this is one of those times where $$ is more important to a person than their civil rights as a Gay person, and perhaps another example of class being the primary drive?

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Medusa

This might be a little off-topic and my apologies if I am clumsy when tryign to tie it together (50 hours worked this week and its only Thursday!!) -

Black, Gay and Republican:

http://www.metroweekly.com/news/last...gay-counc.html

Admittedly, I'm kinda fascinated by this guy.

http://www.glaaforum.org/glaa_forum/...tionnaire.html


I guess this is one of those times where $$ is more important to a person than their civil rights as a Gay person, and perhaps another example of class being the primary drive?

Actually what I find most interesting about these two gentlemen is that they actually harken back to an *older* Republican party. Now, do I think that either of these two men have a snowball's chance in hell of making it in national Republican politics? No. Outside of the D.C. metro area their campaigns would be effectively over before they started. However, in DC they can get some ink because of the novelty factor if nothing else.

They are an example of how the GOP has, in the long-term, shot itself in the foot in order to make short-term electoral gains. Over the long-haul all of the Tim Day's in the world won't move the black or queer votes in the direction of the GOP as long as the party continues to espouse positions that are either passively or actively hostile to those communities.

Cheers
Aj

[wolfbittenpoet]

What happened to Log Cabin Republicanism? What happened to when republicans really were the liberals? I know it's idealistic but I think we need a modern day Abe Lincoln. Suspend civil liberties it's already occuring but at least make some long term changes.

Plus whoever hired Anne Coulter must be smoking crack.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by wolfbittenpoet

What happened to Log Cabin Republicanism? What happened to when republicans really were the liberals?

What happened? Five words: Richard Milhouse Nixon, Southern Strategy.

Suspend civil liberties it's already occuring but at least make some long term changes.

Could you expand on what you mean by that? Are you saying that civil liberties *should* be suspended for the sake of making long-term changes?

Cheers
Aj

[wolfbittenpoet]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

Could you expand on what you mean by that? Are you saying that civil liberties *should* be suspended for the sake of making long-term changes?

Cheers
Aj

Sorry forgot a sentence or my brain skipped. Civil liberties are being suspended or twisted out of recognition. I was referring to Lincoln's suspension of liberties during the Civil War. Yes it was wrong but changes came out of it. I don't see changes today except paranoia and more ways to define what should be undefinable.

I had purposely erased Tricky Dicky from my memory. If only he could be erased from history.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by dreadgeek

They are an example of how the GOP has, in the long-term, shot itself in the foot in order to make short-term electoral gains. Over the long-haul all of the Tim Day's in the world won't move the black or queer votes in the direction of the GOP as long as the party continues to espouse positions that are either passively or actively hostile to those communities.

Cheers
Aj

Yes. The short-term gains frustrate me, but, I do believe they are short-term and will be short-lived.

My older sister is Republican (and a Nevada resident where Harry Reid is up for re-election against a tea-bag backed candidate), has some tea-bag mentality (although, my being queer does bring her back, at times- I see the wheels turning when I talk about many things in my life to her- we were estranged for many years). Yet, she does see the "crazies" as just that and doesn't want to be put in that pile. Since she is 74 years old, what the GOP once represented is part of her experience as well as when she was home with a labor sided Democratic father and mother that were unskilled farm workers while she was a small child.

I keep thinking that the Independents will eventually swing back to a more moderate to liberal stance as the mid-terms close in. Frankly, I don't believe the Dems will lose as many congressional seats as predicted. And some new data is showing this. But..... this is no time for complacency. Especially since the health Care reform legislation is getting bad press BEFORE it is phased in and the real benefits in the long-term are actually felt. And they will be if it is not chopped to hell between now and 2012.

Part of me believes that Obama was right on by going for health care reform even in the midst of our economic mess. Yet, this cost the Dems in the short-tem with the mid-terms. But, I don’t believe as much as the right-wingers believe.

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by wolfbittenpoet

Sorry forgot a sentence or my brain skipped. Civil liberties are being suspended or twisted out of recognition. I was referring to Lincoln's suspension of liberties during the Civil War. Yes it was wrong but changes came out of it. I don't see changes today except paranoia and more ways to define what should be undefinable.

I had purposely erased Tricky Dicky from my memory. If only he could be erased from history.

Thanks for clarifying. Whew! Yeah, I would love to purge Tricky Dick from my memory but, unfortunately, he's lodged up there. Plus as time goes on and the GOP tries to rewrite its history I find myself increasingly having to remind conservatives that the Southern Strategy REALLY existed, was actually written down, that the man who framed it (Kevin Phillips) is alive and kicking and completely repentant over what his idea(s) have wrought on the American body politic and that it has resulted in the purge of moderates from the GOP.

Cheers
Aj

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by wolfbittenpoet

What happened to Log Cabin Republicanism? What happened to when republicans really were the liberals? I know it's idealistic but I think we need a modern day Abe Lincoln. Suspend civil liberties it's already occuring but at least make some long term changes.

Plus whoever hired Anne Coulter must be smoking crack.

Since the Southern Strategy came up yesterday, I thought I would put in this quote from Kevin Phillips (who authored the strategy) as quoted by the WaPo's Eugene Robinson in his column this morning. This is Phillips interviewed by the NYT in 1970:

"From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don't need any more than that," Phillips said, "but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That's where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats."

Robinson goes on to say that he wishes the GOP would do more to court the black vote. I'm going to do him one better and say that the GOP would do well to court the black and *queer* votes. Now, before I get deeper into this let me make it clear I am a political liberal that believes that social democracy is the most stable form of politico-economic arrangement yet conceived. That said, I'm also a political pragmatist and so I think that the Democratic party should have to compete for my vote both as a lesbian and as a black woman. Yet they don't HAVE to compete for my vote because the other party has almost nothing at all to offer me in their stated platform. If I look at something BEYOND my own short-term economic interests then the Democratic party is my natural home.

This is why these two black gay Republicans make *some* kind of sense to me. If you ignore the theocratic bent of the Republican party or dismiss the religious right as simply so many snake-handlers meeting in a basement church then if you are on a certain part of the economic food chain then voting Republican makes sense. The GOP is doing what makes strategic sense in the short-term but not in the long term. They would be better served by trying to sheer off the more economically secure people of color and queer people but that would require them alienating their older, conservative, white Christian base which isn't about to happen anytime before I am old and grey.

Now, would I vote Republican if they did outreach? No, because I have reasons for voting liberally that goes beyond the social issues (pro-choice, pro gay rights, etc.) but the GOP SHOULD be competing for my vote but they aren't.

Cheers
Aj