Salon's Helpful Advice for Log Cabin Republicans: The Illustrated Nutshell version

posted by Damozel | If you're gay and fundamentally averse to Democrats, Salon has published a helpful guide to the GOP that will at least keep you from voting for Republicans who really despise you.

Maybe you are rich and you don't want anyone to raise your taxes. Perhaps you are just determined to stay the course in Iraq, privatize Social Security, and drop oil wells into the Alaskan wilderness. Jack Abramoff might even be an old drinking buddy. It doesn't really matter. Whatever the cause, you are in a quandary. Your only viable choice in the coming presidential election is to vote for a Republican, and that means voting for a party that has spent much of the last decade casting you and your way of life as an assault on the wholesome goodness of the American family.....What is a right-leaning homosexual to do in this presidential election? Start by taking a closer look at the candidates in the Republican field.  (Salon; links in original)

Yes, my gay-yet-unshakeably-conservative friends, you can choose your own brand of you-neglecting/persecuting authoritarian right wing leader, from Giuliani----who is desperately trying to "distance" himself from his gay-friendly past---to Sam Brownback, the defender of the faith and the family, who has no such friendliness to retract or conceal.  So which shall it be:  the candidate who doesn't really hate you but will turn his back on you without remorse to get elected or the one who unabashedly despises your lifestyle?

So let's join Scherer and Van Heuvelen for a closer and more systematic look at the "field," shall we?

Scherer and Van Heuvelen discuss the candidates according to their relative positions along what the authors call the "Giuliani-Keyes spectrum of gay friendliness.  On one end, there is Rudy Giuliani, a former New York mayor who has lived with gay friends, favors gay domestic partnerships, and sometimes dresses in drag. At the other end, there is Alan Keyes, who calls lesbians "selfish hedonists," even though his only daughter is a lesbian. There exists, shall we say, a veritable rainbow of variation in between."(Salon)

The authors classify the GOP candidates as follows.  Click the link for details on the one who seems right for you; this is, as advertised, the nutshell version.

• Rudy Giuliani: The Party Bender*

   *For those familiar with British slang, an unintentionally hilarious choice of phrase.  Well, I say "unintentional"....

Giuliani, with a colorful history of behaving in non-gay-averse ways, is now desperately back-pedaling or reframing his views or actually saying what he secretly felt while living with his gay pals and being "nuzzled" by Donald Trump.  Sadly for him, but not for the rest of us, the "values voters" don't seem persuaded.

Giuliani's candidacy is seen by religious conservatives as a direct threat. Were Giuliani to win the nomination, many conservative Christian leaders, including Focus on the Family president James Dobson, have promised to withhold their support, suggesting the potential defection of many of the "values voters" so crucial to GOP victories.(Salon)   

Yeah, I know you've seen the Trump/Giuliani footage before, but does it ever really get old?  Watching it kind of makes me like Giuliani a little, or would if I could only forget the ferret rant and the firefighters debacle.

John McCain: The Almost Agnostic

McCain's a good guy, really.  Trying to be an increasingly right-wing Republican has clearly taken a toll on his gravitas.

With rare exception (sic), he has avoided engaging in the politics of sexuality through much of his political career, evidently because he doesn't really see much role for government in these matters. As he put it, "I've never talked about people's private lives or their personal conduct."...[T]here is little doubt that a McCain presidency would avoid any crusades against gay and lesbian rights. For this reason, among others, Focus on the Family's Dobson has also promised not to vote Republican if McCain wins the party's nomination.(Salon; links in original)

If I were going to vote for an authoritarian warmonger who can't give a straight answer about gay marriage, he'd be my guy.   :

• Ron Paul: The Libertarian    

He believes that government's role is to stay out of the lives of citizens. It follows, therefore, that he is against a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. In fact, he is not even sure that government needs to be involved in marriage in the first place...This door swings both ways. He is also against federal laws that could protect gays and lesbians from discrimination, including hate-crime laws and ENDA.... If Paul becomes president, it is a safe bet that he will not do much to help or hinder the cause of gay and lesbian rights. (Salon)   

I laugh every time someone starts giving me the school of Ayn Rand line of crap, but of course all libertarians aren't like that, just most of them.  And while Ron Paul totally respects your right to be gay if you want to, he also thinks the states should get to determine the right to marry.

This guy asks the right question.

And you can see right here a clip of Paul and far right (but oh-so-wrong) "values" candidate Keyes (below) debating the "values" values..  Sure, he may seem a bit mad (in both senses) at times and he may not look like Hollywood's idea of a president and the Manolo has twice mocked his taste in shoes and cheap suits, but at least he won't actively support legislation that will increase the social and political burden of being gay.  On the other hand, he won't stop it either, at least at the state level, I imagine, but what the hell:  you can always move...somewhere else, I guess.

  Fred Thompson: The Third Way

During his announcement tour in early September, Fred Thompson told reporters that he had found a third way through the thicket of the gay marriage debate. He would not support amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage. But he did support amending the Constitution to prevent state or federal judges from legalizing marriage without the consent of state legislatures. He also wanted to amend the Constitution to make it clear that a same-sex marriage in one state did not have to be honored by any other states....In his short time as a candidate, Thompson has seemed to downplay most social issues....Predictably, these positions are not good enough for the Focus on the Family's Dobson." (Salon; links in original)  

Oh, yawn.  Is America---or at least the Republican part of it----really just jonesing for another old actor to inhabit the corridors of power and play at being President?  Could anyone be more boring than the man whom Nixon thought too dumb to do him any good during the Watergate cover-up?   

(Salon)

Mitt Romney: The Switch-Hitter*

*Yet another unfortunate choice of phrase.  Scherer really needs to catch up on sex-preference slurs.

Evidently he used to be sort of not-gay-unfriendly and---because he's basically a decent guy---has flip-flopped a bit (like McCain) because of it.  He's not going to let you get married, though. 

This is a tough guy to figure out... In...recent years, he has become one of the nation's most public supporters of amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage, even testifying before Congress on the issue. He has.... announced that he supports the current military policy as it stands....In other areas, he has not completely reversed himself.   

In recent interviews, he has defended his appointment of gay judges as governor and maintained that he supports contractual domestic partnership benefits for gay couples....As recently as 2002, his campaign distributed a pink flier to celebrate Pride Weekend. "All citizens deserve equal rights regardless of their sexual preference," the flier read."...The Romney record on these issues is such a muddle that his performance in the White House is difficult to predict...."If people are looking for people who are anti-gay, they aren't going to find that with me," he said at one stop in Iowa this year. "But I am going to fight to protect traditional marriage."(Salon; links in original) 

For example:

 

Mike Huckabee: The Kinder, Gentler Evangelical

[O]n the trail, he tries to avoid coming off like a proselytizing preacher, downplaying his faith-based disapproval of homosexuality. "I want us to be very careful that we don't come across as having some animosity or hatred toward people, even [those] whose lifestyles are inexplicable to us," he said at the Values Voter Debate. In stump speeches, he often makes only passing reference to "traditional family" issues....(Salon)

  But there are some definite caveats.

There.  But he did say it kindly and gently; you've got to give him that.

Tom Tancredo: The One-Issue Candidate

Except not so much when it comes to you.

The campaign of Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo is so devoted to a single issue -- ending illegal immigration -- that he hardly speaks about anything else. That said, he takes a hard-line view of most policy matters concerning homosexuality. "We have to remember that we are always just one kooky judge away from actually having homosexual marriage forced on all the rest of us," he warned at the Values Voter Debate on Sept. 17 (Salon; links in original) 

And there's plenty more along the same lines.

From this point we move to the really truly unfriendly candidates.  Fortunately for you, there seems little chance any of them will get elected.  At least not this time.  But be forewarned: they're getting plenty of practice for next time.

Duncan Hunter: The Straight Man

Hunter is among those few Republican candidates who advance the concept that homosexuality itself is immoral. To explain his opposition to ENDA, he says the Boy Scouts have a right to ban gay scout leaders. He is against hate-crime laws for sexual orientation and in favor of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. "Every American family should have the right to say it's a matter of moral principle that we do not accept homosexual activity," he said at the debate.(Salon)

He is also Ann Coulter's favorite candidate.

And then there's this:

Sam Brownback: Defender of the "Family"

Love the sinner, hate the sexual sins.

When Gen. Peter Pace called homosexuality "immoral," Brownback was one of the few Republicans to offer his public support....In the wake of the Pace controversy, a reporter asked him to describe his feelings about homosexuality. "I do not believe being a homosexual is immoral, but I do believe homosexual acts are," he told the Associated Press. "The church has clear teachings on this."(Salon)

Alan Keyes: The Lord's Messenger

Whereas this guy---you can see him debating Ron Paul above---doesn't even pretend to love the sinner.

A perennial political candidate and former State Department employee, Keyes announced his candidacy in mid-September. It has all the markings of a moral crusade, with gays and lesbians in the crosshairs...He has called homosexuality the practice of "hedonistic self-gratification," and described Vice President Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter Mary as a "selfish hedonist." After his own daughter, Maya Marcel-Keyes, announced she was a lesbian, she said he stopped funding her college education..(Salon)

A true Christianist, in short.

So there you are, you poor fools.   (I know, I know:  a God-bothering blogger who calls her gay brethren "fools" is subject to hellfire.)  That's the range of choices open to you---speaking of nutshells.

Related BN-Politics' Posts:

• Ferrets versus Giuliani.

• The Giuliani Campaign has a New York Moment; John McCain Steps Up (or In).

• Heartbroken Republican Voters Break Up With McCain

• McCain Harshes on the Varmint Hunter's Immigration Policies; I Consider Certain Alleged Practices.

• Rudy Plays the "Anti-Troop" and "Flip Flop" Cards--on the Same Day

• The Southern Lady's Favorite Republican Candidate

• Putting My Mind at Ease About Fred Thompson

• For Giuliani, Does Illegal Corporate Friendliness Begin at Home?

• Joe Biden Takes on Giuliani....

• Giuliani: Why Other Heroes of 911 Beg to Differ

• Romney's Iowa Victory and What It Means

• And All This Time I Thought I Knew What Freedom Was

• Giuliani Jabs Romney over Indicted Donor

• Giuliani:  America's Mayor and Leading Baseball Fan! (update)

• FEC Complaint Filed Against Fred Thompson

• Romney: Rich Enough to Buy the Presidency?

• Fred, You Naughty Boy, You

• Fox News Defends Giuliani:  When Is a Cigar Just a Cigar?

• Fred Thompson Confirms

• Ron Paul Wins Maryland Straw Poll -- and Major Media Covered it

• Romney Adviser Linked to Nasty Anti-Thompson Website

Comments

[Rich Paul]

I would say Ron Paul is the answer.

The question is, should we preserve the structure of our Federal system, with a minimally powered federal government, and state governments which can adjust to their populations.

Before you assume that tolerance of gays should be imposed at the Federal level, remember that this level of centralization would allow IN-tolerance of gays to imposed on gay-friendly states at the Federal level, given a small shift in the political winds.

When you let the Feds impose your values on an Kansas hick, you also create the opportunity for that Kansas hick to use the Feds to impose his values on you.