Monday, April 20, 2009

Will the Republicans Reverse Their Position on Gay Rights?

Question: What do you call a Republican who supports gay rights?

Answer: A Democrat.

Okay, I can be serious now.

In the ongoing battle between the moderates and conservatives for the heart and soul of the GOP, the ever-contentious issue of gay rights may have just taken center stage. According to FOX News, Steve Schmidt, who served as Sen. John McCain’s chief campaign strategist and advisor during the 2008 presidential election, told an audience of fellow Republicans that the GOP needs to become more receptive to gay rights, including same-sex marriage. Otherwise, says Schmidt, it risks becoming the “religious party.”

"If you put public policy issues to a religious test, you risk becoming a religious party," he said. "And in a free country a political party cannot be viable in the long-term if it is seen as a sectarian party."

Why, you may ask, is Schmidt still alive after telling members of his own party this? The answer is because he was speaking to the gays and lesbians in the GOP – all two of them.

Okay, okay, I’ll stop with the jokes. I wear!

In his first political appearance since his former boss received an electoral ass-whooping courtesy of President Obama, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, and the Gordon Gekkos on Wall Street, Schmidt addressed a Washington, D.C. convention for the Log Cabin Republicans last Friday.

For those of you who aren’t familiar with the LCR, it’s a grassroots group composed primarily of sane homosexuals within the GOP – as opposed to twisted ones like former Sen. Larry Craig and former Rep. Mark Foley.

While Schmidt acknowledged that it would be impossible to convince the Republican base to accept same-sex marriage anytime in the near future, he said Republicans should at least endorse civil unions for now, and quit using the Bible as a rationale for opposing same-sex marriages.

"If the party is seen as anti-gay, then that is injurious to its candidates" in Democrat-leaning and competitive states, he said.

Give up the Bible? You might as well tell Osama Bin Laden to give up the Koran, or Nancy Pelosi to give up Botox.

“Schmidt predicted gay marriage will create a bigger and bigger divide between the GOP and the electorate in the years ahead,” FOX reports. “He said that as young voters age, they may adopt conservative views on the economy and national security -- but they will not abandon liberal, social beliefs. This would put the Republican Party at odds with a swath of voters, Schmidt said.”

Steve also added that social conservatives were still an "indispensable part of the conservative coalition."

During his speech, Schmidt talked a little about his lesbian sister and her relationship to him and his family. “On a personal level, my sister and her partner are an important part of my life and our children’s life,” he said. “I admire your group and your organization and I encourage you to keep fighting for what you believe in because the day is going to come.”

In related news, Meghan McCain, the (grand?)daughter of Sen. McCain and a rising star among gay conservatives, spoke to a group of Log Cabin Republicans on Saturday evening. In her address, Ms. McCain took shots at what she called “old school Republicans,” saying they were “scared shitless” of the country’s changing landscape.

"I feel too many Republicans want to cling to past successes," she said. "There are those who think we can win the White House and Congress back by being 'more' conservative. Worse, there are those who think we can win by changing nothing at all about what our party has become. They just want to wait for the other side to be perceived as worse than us. I think we're seeing a war brewing in the Republican Party. But it is not between us and Democrats. It is not between us and liberals. It is between the future and the past."

As an independent RINO-lover and a person with a minimal level of tolerance, I can generally agree with this. If the Republicans want to focus on legitimate issues like the president’s gargantuan budget and present realistic alternatives, that’s totally fine with me. But they need to ease up on the gay thing. I can understand why some people might have principled concerns about same-sex marriage, but much of the anti-gay rhetoric I hear coming from social conservatives strikes me as ignorant and mean-spirited.

Okay, I got to end with one more joke!

Question: What’s the difference between a gay Republican and a straight Republican?

Answer: One just wants to screw his or her partner, while the other wants to screw everyone else.


  1. Actually, given that the vast majority (still close to 80%) in this country still oppose same-sex marriage - Conservative Republicans are still on the right side of this issue.

    If any politician wants to stay in office they need to listen to the majority and quit catering to the minority in this country.

  2. Actually, BooBoo, if you paid attention to the latest CNN opinion poll, that number is closer to 55%. Back when Americans were still debating whether or not blacks and whites could marry each other, well over 55% of the population opposed interracial marriage. Many times, like now, the majority is just plain stupid.

    If Republicans really want people to think that they're the party of less government intervention, they have to promote keeping government out of marriage, abortion, and drug control.

  3. Social issues don't really belong in politics I think. These issues can be settled in referendums or on a local level. Both parties claim they are "big tent" but, in reality, are still held to their special interests. Why one special interest is held over another is politics.

  4. Bill - I only get my poll numbers from non-partisan pollsters like zogby and rasmussen. Those CNN polls are always skewed. Sorry - but the latest Zogby poll puts 73% of Americans against gay marriage and sample size and selection is pretty much 1/3d Dem, 1/3d Repub, and 1/3d independents.

    Like I said - I'm not a Republican. I'm a Conservative that believes in values, principles, and morals. Gay marriage does not fit in with that. Personally, I really don't give a rat's ass which way the Repubs go on this issue. I won't be voting for them anyway

  5. LOL! Rasmussen and Zogby - non-partisan!
    What a joke!
    I'm not really up on Zogby but when was the last time Rasmussen didn't do a push poll for Faux Noise? If you are lumping Zogby in with Rasmussen, then Zogby is similarly infected.
    Also, next time you include numbers like 1/3 this and 1/2 that, kindly also place a link to where you got those numbers or we'll all think you made them up.

  6. Personally, I'm opposed to same-sex marriage, although i support civil unions, but the truth is that I don't care that much about this issue one way or the other. As far as I'm concerned, this country has much bigger problems to deal with. I'm totally willing to vote for a candidate who supports same-sex marriage if I agree with him or her on issues that I deem more pressing, like the economy or foreign policy.
    That being said, these 2 articles caught my eye because i was surprised to learn that there are still Republican moderates around who actually think they're going to be able to convince the Christian jihadists to ease up on the gays.

  7. The agenda of the GOP since Obama took office is the issue of "too much government." There are times that I agree with them. But if they're going to bitch about Obama demanding the resignation of a CEO (as I did), what possible right do they have to intervene into a couple's right to live as they wish? When is this country going to realize that we are supposed to be a nation of choices? It's none of their business, none of yours, and none of mine. Look at the stats on divorce rates among heterosexuals vs gay marriages? Let's all just mind our own fuckin business; if you don't believe in gay marriage, then don't do it! Christ, I am so sick and tired of these nonsensical issues that I could puke. With all the problems this country has; do you really think that how two people who love each other choose to live their lives should even be debated? What a week; between the teabaggers with no agenda and the GOP with an agenda that they should stay out of; horseshit has been accomplished.

  8. It is interesting that one would be indifferent to politicizing something as personal and private as sexuality while at the same time being derisive and hostile to those who would politicize something as personal and private as religion.

  9. "It is interesting that one would be indifferent to politicizing something as personal and private as sexuality while at the same time being derisive and hostile to those who would politicize something as personal and private as religion."

    I think religion should stay out of the public sphere as much as possible. I don't have a problem with a candidate who holds sincere religious beliefs in his private life so long as he doesn't seek to control others' lives according to those beliefs. And I can't stand people who take their faith, which should be personal, and rub my nose in it, like Huckabee did.

  10. @Burro-I'm not sure who your comment was directed at but I don't believe in politicizing religion either. This is a nation of choices; something we have seem to have forgotten.
    See related article.

  11. I agree with Animal here. Religion is supposed to be something each American has the CHOICE to embrace (and which flavor to embrace) or stay free of. That choice, like any other choice, is not one the government has a right to interfere with.

    Read the First Amendment sometime, that is what guarantees our freedom from either government interference with Religion or Religious interference with government.

    It is not the "anti-religious" forces that are politicizing religion - it is the fundamentalist theists that are! Keep your religious views out of politics and we won't make a political issue of your religion.

    We should have learned with Prohibition that one cannot legislate morality.

    Bobo, I'm sorry, but your stats are just a bit off, why the heck do you think that a State legislature could vote to legalize gay marriage if that many of their constituents were against it? Or why is it that if that many are against gay marriage that the ban in California only passed by less than 4%?

    History is against you at this point - huge percentages of young voters are against you - more and more of the under 30 crowd are identifying themselves as socially independent or liberal.

  12. My signature of the week:
    ARTICLE 11.

    As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,
    -and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation,
    it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption
    of the harmony existing between the two countries.

    -The Barbary Treaty of 1797 - Ratified by the President of the United States and the Senate of the United States

    I agree with Burro that religion should never be an issue in politics and I wish the damn Repugnants would leave it out of politics, government and all public offices.



blogger templates | Make Money Online