GOProud and the Religious Right

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
http://www.advocate.com/Politics/Commentary/Lessons_Learned/

A commentary by Michelangelo Signorile

There are two things we’ve learned from GOProud, the small, often obnoxious right-wing gay group that makes the Log Cabin Republicans seem like liberals. For the uninitiated, this is the group that supports outspokenly anti-equality public figures — from Ann Coulter, who was paid to speak to the group, to Donald Trump, who is opposed to any gay unions—and targeted gay congressman Barney Frank during the 2010 election with an ad that called him “catty.”

First off, denialists and elitists who believe they are superior to other gays — even if the attitude masks a pitiful self-loathing — are clearly as prevalent as ever in the LGBT movement, except that they can now be out of the closet. Perversely, the fact that we can find such people in GOProud is a measure of our success.
The other thing we’ve learned is that the Christian right, contrary to all the media blather about it losing steam as the Tea Party ascends, still has a grip on the GOP, and this can actually be helpful in gaining civil rights through the Democratic Party—if the Democrats recognize a useful wedge issue staring them in the face.

On the first count, let’s look back in history. There’ve always been gays in even the most extreme corners of the Republican Party. There was the reckless senator Joseph McCarthy’s right-hand man, Roy Cohn, who helped his boss ferret out both alleged communists and homosexuals in the government in the 1950s. In the ’80s closeted conservative activist Terry Dolan vocally supported the antigay agenda of Christian right leaders as chair of the National Conservative Political Action Committee. He helped elect—and wrote a book about—Ronald Reagan, who bowed to religious extremists and ignored AIDS, the disease that took Dolan’s life in 1986 at the age of 35.

Justin Raimondo was the openly gay campaign manager of the virulently antigay Pat Buchanan’s 1992 presidential campaign. In the new century we had Ken Mehlman, chair of the Republican National Committee and, later, George W. Bush’s reelection campaign manager, who promoted anti–gay marriage amendments across the country, helping the GOP to win with hate. And let’s not forget Mary Cheney, who, like Mehlman now, is out, but gives money to antigay politicians even as she enjoys the benefits of hard-won gay rights advances.

Their motivations are probably unique to each but there are some commonalities: a desire to be close to power; a hunger for attention and GOP approval; a selfish devotion to Republican “fiscal” policies over civil rights; and a belligerence toward gay activists, whom they seem to detest.

GOProud’s Chris Barron fits right in, often appearing desperate for Republican acceptance, compromising his positions at a moment’s notice—if he even had any to begin with. Formerly political director for the Log Cabin Republicans, he broke away and cofounded GOProud, claiming that Log Cabin wasn’t conservative enough. Since its founding in 2009, GOProud slowly moved in the direction of not taking any pro-gay positions, all in an attempt to be included in the Republican Party, even though Barron oddly once tweeted that GOProud is “a gay organization, we only work on gay issues.”

GOProud is opposed to the proposed Employment Non-Discrimination Act and the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which is now law. And fearing being cut out of the annual Conservative Political Action Conference — which for 2012 has banned groups that support any pro-gay legislation — Barron told the blog RedState last February, “Considering we don’t support gay marriage and DADT isn’t part of our 2011 legislative agenda [I’m] not sure how this affects us at all.”

Barron and GOProud now also support House speaker John Boehner defending section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act in federal appeals court after President Obama announced he believed the law is unconstitutional — though Barron himself is legally married to a man in Washington, D.C. Barron’s husband, to whom he refers a lot in his tweets, is a D.C. teacher who wrote a piece in MetroWeekly about how kids learn to be bullies from adults who bully one another. But there couldn’t possibly be a better example of an adult bullying other adults than Barron tweeting this: “The gay left = the American Taliban. Hateful, angry and dumb as shit.” He’s also tweeted that Andrew Sullivan is “fat,” “pathetic,” and “self-important” and that Meghan McCain is “intensely stupid.”

Barron has said in a radio interview that he wanted to see as many candidates as possible in the Republican primaries — including, presumably, even the antigay ones, which is most of them — but then tweeted that Fred Karger, the only openly gay announced candidate (who is associated with GOProud’s rival group, Log Cabin, and actually forcefully takes on homophobic politicians), is a “fake candidate.”

Barron’s impulsive tweets are telling in a variety of ways. He obsessively tweets about his abs and his workouts in a way that betrays a guy who’s pretty insecure about his body and perhaps his very manhood, out to prove he’s a real guy, not like those other gays, such as the “catty” Barney Frank, who Barron tweeted has a “purse” and wants to “sit in Scott Brown’s lap.”

This insecurity over masculinity seems to be a theme at GOProud. In a YouTube clip that received much attention over the winter, GOProud member Matt Hissey says he doesn’t like most gays: “I don’t really like gay people that much. Gay people frustrate me, the stereotypical gay people, it frustrates me…”

In an interview on my radio program, Barron had a meltdown after I noted blatant hypocrisy in his apologizing for having rightly called conservative power attorney Cleta Mitchell a “nasty bigot” in a public forum. Conservatives at CPAC and across the right-wing blogosphere expressed outrage at his comment, and conservative lesbian radio host Tammy Bruce quit the GOProud board within days. GOProud’s invitation back to CPAC was jeopardized as well, in yet another example of Barron’s volatile nature getting him in trouble. Attempting to stop the bleeding, he issued a slobbering apology for his bad “language.”

When I noted that it was “wussy” of him to apologize to Mitchell while refusing to apologize for calling the gay left “dumb as shit,” Barron lashed out, and I had to bring the interview to a close.

In the end, CPAC chair Alberto Cardenas indicated GOProud likely won’t be invited back, bowing to conservative groups like the Family Research Council, which, along with other groups, boycotted CPAC.

“They used that platform to be quite aggressive,” Cardenas told conservative publication Human Events of GOProud. “The ideal GOProud participation would have been, ‘You know what, guys? This is an inclusive society. We’re as interested in these fiscal issues as you are. Fill your website with fiscal issues that you’re for and be a mainstream discusser of issues. We just happen to have a different lifestyle.’ ” In other words, sit down, shut up, and don’t challenge homophobia.

And that’s what GOProud’s drama tells us about the endurance of the Christian right: It still wields a great deal of power in the GOP (witness how abortion became front and center in the budget battle), even as mainstream America is well beyond its issues.

The media claimed that the Tea Party was something new, focused on fiscal issues, not social ones, and had supplanted the religious right. But in fact, what we’ve come to learn is that it is often the same old crowd, and many of the Tea Party activists are also moral crusaders. That was borne out in the campaigns by two of the most prominent Tea Party Senate candidates in 2010, Sharron Angle and Christine O’Donnell.

GOProud is useful to the GOP insofar as it provides the cover of being “tolerant” of gays at a time when a majority of Americans now support marriage equality, and as younger voters support full equality in huge numbers. But Cardenas’s statement shows the limit of that tolerance. Those who control the GOP don’t want to see open gays in the party at all — even if they’re only supporting “fiscal” reforms.

That makes LGBT rights a wedge issue for Democrats to now wield against Republicans instead of the other way around, as it had been for so long. When President Obama decided not to defend DOMA, it was good for the LGBT movement but also great politics for him, something we all hope he and Democratic leaders have realized. It put the GOP on the defensive, as John Boehner showed no passion in defending DOMA — and knows most Americans don’t support DOMA — but had no choice because of that antigay base, which GOProud’s wild ride underscores is still very much in charge.

I largely agree. It seems like GOProud is more the token African-American, Asian, or Hispanic person in advertisements than a part of the GOP that's taken seriously.

From my perspective, all I can think of is: "With friends like this ... "
 
Last edited:

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,137
55,662
136
GOProud is one of the more pathetic organizations I've seen, they are basically the new Uncle Toms. I like how they seem to think if they are nasty enough to gay people that the Republicans will finally let them into the club. I've got news for them though, the Republicans aren't interested in letting them in the club, now or ever. No amount of obsequiousness is going to change that.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
11,112
1,587
126
Unfortunately you'll always have people wiling to compromise one belief for another. I've known this for years thanks to my parents. Both vote Republican in every election but are both very socially liberal. I'm trying to fix them, but it's slow going. I admit that I often wonder why any woman, black person, or homosexual would vote Republican. Even if you agree with some policies the party doesn't think women should have the right to choose, would never elect a black president and nearly half refused to believe a half black president could be a US citizen, and refuses to accept homosexuals as equal persons under the law.

I don't think it's self hating, I think it's people with blinders on. They have strong feelings about one small thing but ignore the vastness of things done by the Republican party that hurts them.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,137
55,662
136
Unfortunately you'll always have people wiling to compromise one belief for another. I've known this for years thanks to my parents. Both vote Republican in every election but are both very socially liberal. I'm trying to fix them, but it's slow going. I admit that I often wonder why any woman, black person, or homosexual would vote Republican. Even if you agree with some policies the party doesn't think women should have the right to choose, would never elect a black president and nearly half refused to believe a half black president could be a US citizen, and refuses to accept homosexuals as equal persons under the law.

I don't think it's self hating, I think it's people with blinders on. They have strong feelings about one small thing but ignore the vastness of things done by the Republican party that hurts them.

GOProud is definitely self hating. There is a group of people who do exactly how you describe, the Log Cabin Republicans. They believe that fiscal policy is more important than social policy, so they are part of the GOP, but they don't bash gay people the way GOProud does.

There's nothing wrong with a gay person deciding that other things are more important than gay rights, but it's sort of sad to see a group of gay people actively working to limit their own rights.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Perhaps you should consider shifting your focus to anti-gay Democrats/Republicans currently holding office rather than these easy fringe targets...and it's bullshit to imply they broadly represent the views of an entire party. We can play that game all day long if you wish. Just a thought.
 

zsdersw

Lifer
Oct 29, 2003
10,505
2
0
Perhaps you should consider shifting your focus to anti-gay Democrats/Republicans currently holding office rather than these easy fringe targets.

Who says I'm focusing on this? I just thought it was an interesting and mostly spot-on commentary.

..and it's bullshit to imply they broadly represent the views of an entire party. We can play that game all day long if you wish. Just a thought.

Where and by whom is that implication being made?
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I don't know anything about GOProud, but surely just because one is gay doesn't mean that gay marriage or "gay issues" must be one's most important concern, or even in the top ten. There must be gay people who love this country and value its traditions more than their own interests, or gay people with no interest in marriage but big interest in smaller government, strongly anti-abortion, etc. One of the things I hate most about the left is its assumption that anyone who is a minority, female, or gay becomes the property of the left and must always march in lockstep with those who presumably know best how they should vote, or be labeled as self-hating. Like I said, I don't know (at least well) any gay people, but I see no reason that being gay should necessarily circumscribe one's entire political beliefs.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,137
55,662
136
I don't know anything about GOProud, but surely just because one is gay doesn't mean that gay marriage or "gay issues" must be one's most important concern, or even in the top ten. There must be gay people who love this country and value its traditions more than their own interests, or gay people with no interest in marriage but big interest in smaller government, strongly anti-abortion, etc. One of the things I hate most about the left is its assumption that anyone who is a minority, female, or gay becomes the property of the left and must always march in lockstep with those who presumably know best how they should vote, or be labeled as self-hating. Like I said, I don't know (at least well) any gay people, but I see no reason that being gay should necessarily circumscribe one's entire political beliefs.

It doesn't. Did you read the thread? There is another Republican leaning group called the log cabin republicans who have been around for quite a long time now. They agree with Republicans on fiscal issues and deem them more important than the social ones, unlike GOProud however, they are not self hating gays and attempt to push the Republican party to be more inclusive.

Once again you are apparently creating a baffling stance for those on 'the left' to take, that those on the left don't actually take.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
I don't know anything about GOProud, but surely just because one is gay doesn't mean that gay marriage or "gay issues" must be one's most important concern, or even in the top ten. There must be gay people who love this country and value its traditions more than their own interests, or gay people with no interest in marriage but big interest in smaller government, strongly anti-abortion, etc. One of the things I hate most about the left is its assumption that anyone who is a minority, female, or gay becomes the property of the left and must always march in lockstep with those who presumably know best how they should vote, or be labeled as self-hating. Like I said, I don't know (at least well) any gay people, but I see no reason that being gay should necessarily circumscribe one's entire political beliefs.
It doesn't. Did you read the thread? There is another Republican leaning group called the log cabin republicans who have been around for quite a long time now. They agree with Republicans on fiscal issues and deem them more important than the social ones, unlike GOProud however, they are not self hating gays and attempt to push the Republican party to be more inclusive.

Once again you are apparently creating a baffling stance for those on 'the left' to take, that those on the left don't actually take.
You actually repeated the behavior (referring to gays who do not toe your agenda, at least on social issues, as "self-hating") in the same post you accused me of creating it. Gettum clue: You are not morally or intellectually superior to GOProud. You do NOT get to decide which policies, priorities, parties or politicians are in their best interests.

Again, being gay should not automatically stop one from being socially conservative. I am not a regular church goer, but I'd certainly argue against abolishing churches. There is no reason a gay person cannot believe in maintaining our traditional society, including hetero-only marriage, even while recognizing that he or she does not completely fit into it and would therefore be giving up rights. I personally don't believe that locking gays out of marriage is acceptable as a matter of freedom, personal rights, and equality even though I do treasure our traditional society, but that's MY choice and MY priorities, and I have no right to impose those on others. Arguably, it would be morally easier for a gay person to believe otherwise, as a gay person would be living with the consequences of that belief as opposed to me imposing on others the price of maintaining my druthers. And there's certainly no reason that a gay person could not believe that abortion is so heinous that stopping it is much more important than gay marriage. Social conservatism, although I don't support most of it, is not just opposition to gay marriage.

To make an analogy, would you say that a white male who supports affirmative action, thereby limiting his own options and reducing his odds of getting a desirable appointment, is self-hating. I'm guessing not. As a knee-jerk progressive, you accept those agreeing with you as correct while labeling those who make other choices and priorities as mentally defective - in this case, self-hating. Contrast that with myself; as a libertarian conservative, I am not labeling you as self-hating if you choose to advocate for and support affirmative action.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,137
55,662
136
You actually repeated the behavior (referring to gays who do not toe your agenda, at least on social issues, as "self-hating") in the same post you accused me of creating it. Gettum clue: You are not morally or intellectually superior to GOProud. You do NOT get to decide which policies, priorities, parties or politicians are in their best interests.

Again, being gay should not automatically stop one from being socially conservative. I am not a regular church goer, but I'd certainly argue against abolishing churches. There is no reason a gay person cannot believe in maintaining our traditional society, including hetero-only marriage, even while recognizing that he or she does not completely fit into it and would therefore be giving up rights. I personally don't believe that locking gays out of marriage is acceptable as a matter of freedom, personal rights, and equality even though I do treasure our traditional society, but that's MY choice and MY priorities, and I have no right to impose those on others. Arguably, it would be morally easier for a gay person to believe otherwise, as a gay person would be living with the consequences of that belief as opposed to me imposing on others the price of maintaining my druthers. And there's certainly no reason that a gay person could not believe that abortion is so heinous that stopping it is much more important than gay marriage. Social conservatism, although I don't support most of it, is not just opposition to gay marriage.

To make an analogy, would you say that a white male who supports affirmative action, thereby limiting his own options and reducing his odds of getting a desirable appointment, is self-hating. I'm guessing not. As a knee-jerk progressive, you accept those agreeing with you as correct while labeling those who make other choices and priorities as mentally defective - in this case, self-hating. Contrast that with myself; as a libertarian conservative, I am not labeling you as self-hating if you choose to advocate for and support affirmative action.

See, you don't even know why people support affirmative action. I don't support it because I think it hurts me, I think it helps us all. So of course my position wouldn't be self hating. Your examples are quite illuminating as to why you have such delusional ideas about what people on the left think.

As for GOProud, their positions are ones that directly harm themselves (such as opposing the repeal of DADT and DOMA), and as we've covered in many other threads the arguments for supporting these laws are irrational. When someone undertakes irrational behavior that harms themselves, I'm very comfortable with labeling them as self hating. It's called the acknowledgement of reality.
 

wuliheron

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
3,536
0
0
When someone undertakes irrational behavior that harms themselves, I'm very comfortable with labeling them as self hating. It's called the acknowledgement of reality.

That's just religious and moral intolerance. Its not irrational or self hate when hurt yourself and others in the name of morality and God. Its called "tough love". You know, like the terrorists blowing themselves up.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
See, you don't even know why people support affirmative action. I don't support it because I think it hurts me, I think it helps us all. So of course my position wouldn't be self hating. Your examples are quite illuminating as to why you have such delusional ideas about what people on the left think.

As for GOProud, their positions are ones that directly harm themselves (such as opposing the repeal of DADT and DOMA), and as we've covered in many other threads the arguments for supporting these laws are irrational. When someone undertakes irrational behavior that harms themselves, I'm very comfortable with labeling them as self hating. It's called the acknowledgement of reality.
Again you appoint yourself in the role of parent, confident that you know better than do they what is best for these people. This is in a nutshell the problem with the progressive position - you guys replace an all-knowing G-d with an all-knowing bureaucrat, confident that you know best for everyone.

Perhaps you can explain to the unenlightened here why you are so morally superior that YOU get to decide not only what political positions are best for these people, but even what positions are "irrational behavior" for them.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
See, you don't even know why people support affirmative action. I don't support it because I think it hurts me, I think it helps us all. So of course my position wouldn't be self hating. Your examples are quite illuminating as to why you have such delusional ideas about what people on the left think.

As for GOProud, their positions are ones that directly harm themselves (such as opposing the repeal of DADT and DOMA), and as we've covered in many other threads the arguments for supporting these laws are irrational. When someone undertakes irrational behavior that harms themselves, I'm very comfortable with labeling them as self hating. It's called the acknowledgement of reality.

Then I guess the problem is they'd disagree with what you think harms them.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
88,137
55,662
136
Again you appoint yourself in the role of parent, confident that you know better than do they what is best for these people. This is in a nutshell the problem with the progressive position - you guys replace an all-knowing G-d with an all-knowing bureaucrat, confident that you know best for everyone.

Perhaps you can explain to the unenlightened here why you are so morally superior that YOU get to decide not only what political positions are best for these people, but even what positions are "irrational behavior" for them.

I didn't say I was morally superior, just that their positions are irrational. They are irrational because they are based upon the belief in certain consequences to gay marriage/gay integration in the military/etc that are not supported by the evidence. This evidence is certainly available to a nationwide group of this sort, but they have chosen either to ignore it or discount it. People who have opinions that go against the evidence are irrational. What's so difficult to understand about this?

I'm not trying to decide what political opinions they have. For about the eight hundredth time on here, you are inventing motives for progressives to hold. I am merely stating the fact that they are self hating individuals because they hold irrational beliefs that manifestly damage their membership.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
I didn't say I was morally superior, just that their positions are irrational. They are irrational because they are based upon the belief in certain consequences to gay marriage/gay integration in the military/etc that are not supported by the evidence. This evidence is certainly available to a nationwide group of this sort, but they have chosen either to ignore it or discount it. People who have opinions that go against the evidence are irrational. What's so difficult to understand about this?

I'm not trying to decide what political opinions they have. For about the eight hundredth time on here, you are inventing motives for progressives to hold. I am merely stating the fact that they are self hating individuals because they hold irrational beliefs that manifestly damage their membership.

Yesterday I found out that skim milk fattens you more than whole milk does.

A thinking person probably holds some reservation about the long-term effect of things, even if perfectly scientific studies point in the opposite direction.

There's nothing irrational about that.
 

woolfe9999

Diamond Member
Mar 28, 2005
7,153
0
0
Again you appoint yourself in the role of parent, confident that you know better than do they what is best for these people. This is in a nutshell the problem with the progressive position - you guys replace an all-knowing G-d with an all-knowing bureaucrat, confident that you know best for everyone.

Perhaps you can explain to the unenlightened here why you are so morally superior that YOU get to decide not only what political positions are best for these people, but even what positions are "irrational behavior" for them.

Oh come on man. Cut the relativistic crap. You judge liberals on this board all the time as being irrational and all sorts of other pejoratives. Are you appointing yourself in the role of
"parent?" This board is about people evaluating the opinions and positions of others, and often about passing judgment on them. It's hypocritical for you to suddenly take the position that it isn't right to judge others for their political views, just because in this case you happen to favor the one being judged over the one doing the judging.

For the record, I can see little explanation for why anyone would support discrimination against a group to which they belong, unless they are trying to gain acceptance by "kissing the master's ass." When I read about these people referring to others gays as "dumb as shit" and saying "I don't like gay people," what immediately came to mind was Jewish capo's in Auschwitz flogging other Jewish inmates to please their SS captors (note: this comparison is far more figurative than literal). It's truly pathetic. I can understand why a gay person could take a right wing position on any issue, but not this one.

- wolf
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
Oh come on man. Cut the relativistic crap. You judge liberals on this board all the time as being irrational and all sorts of other pejoratives. Are you appointing yourself in the role of
"parent?" This board is about people evaluating the opinions and positions of others, and often about passing judgment on them. It's hypocritical for you to suddenly take the position that it isn't right to judge others for their political views, just because in this case you happen to favor the one being judged over the one doing the judging.

For the record, I can see little explanation for why anyone would support discrimination against a group to which they belong, unless they are trying to gain acceptance by "kissing the master's ass." When I read about these people referring to others gays as "dumb as shit" and saying "I don't like gay people," what immediately came to mind was Jewish capo's in Auschwitz flogging other Jewish inmates to please their SS captors (note: this comparison is far more figurative than literal). It's truly pathetic. I can understand why a gay person could take a right wing position on any issue, but not this one.

- wolf

Do women who are against abortion fit into the irrational group?
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
Yes, everything anyone says on this discussion board is "according to" the person who said it. Are you going to throw that reply in after every single post made here?

There's a difference between being truly irrational and being called irrational because you happen not to believe the way I think you should.

My problem with eskimo's argument is, in essence, that he's saying GOProud should be in favor of a position not because it's true, but because it benefits them.

If the position is true, then anyone who's against it is irrational. If it isn't true and they believe in it because it benefits them, then that's irrational.
 
Last edited:

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Meh, I've never heard of these guys until 3 minutes ago.

The primary issue with the GOP is religion. A secular conservative party (think Conservative aside from religion, abortion, and gay rights) would be a powerhouse if done right.