Log Cabin Republicans 1; Obama, 0 in DADT Repeal

In this topsy-turvey political season, things just got a little topsy-turveyer. The Log Cabin Republicans have succesffuly (for now) ended DADT while the Obama Fierce Advocate Administration will apparently fight that decision.

When justice rolls down like waters Obama wants to build a dam.

Log Cabin Happy with Steele; McConnell Okay with Anti-gay Label

The Log Cabin club of optimists are excited about Michael Steele as the new chair of the GOP. In an email I received today, they say:



"He is the right man at the right time to lead the GOP. Steele is an inclusive leader who will bring a new energy and a new vision to the GOP at a critical time."



Let's hope. Look, I was a Republican once. Back when the GOP was about limited government and fighting Commies. Reagan went after the Commies and the Commies are gone. And today's GOP wants to go after gays.



Sen. Mitch McConnell got some publicity recently for his saying the GOP risks becoming a permanent minority party. In a summation by Politico, McConnell was reported as saying:



"McConnell called on the GOP to push back against labels that have hurt the party in the past — anti-immigrant, anti-union and anti-environment — and to regain taxpayers’ trust that they support limited government spending. "



Well, what about the anti-gay label? Worried about that one, Senator?



Reagan went after the Commies. George W. Bush went after the gays and terrorists and the Constitution. For a whole generation of new voters, the GOP will be seen as anti-freedom and anti-gay (most young people, even Evangelicals, aren't hostile to gay people).



That's your problem, Senator.



But I don't think those religious zealots who run your party will let you change.



That's why I had to.

Log Cabin Shows its Pride

This was one of two pictures in an email sent out by DC Log Cabin inviting people to drop by to say hello or march with them in the Pride Parade.

I'm waiting to see what the Gertrude Stein Club sends out to see who's got the better looking bare chested party bois Pride Enthusiasts. Who knows, maybe I'll cancel my mountain plans.

The other picture in the email, btw, was Carol Schwartz. That will make MattyDale happy.

Social Issues Split Republicans?

The Log Cabiners released poll results of 2000 self-identified Republicans. From the Log Cabin release:

In a remarkable show of unity on a bill that will come up for a vote in the U.S. House this summer, an overwhelming 77% of Republicans believe an employer should not have the right to fire an employee based solely on their sexual orientation. Even among social conservatives, 67% don’t believe an employer should be able to fire someone for being gay.

49% of Republicans believe gays and lesbians should be able to serve openly in the U.S. military, while 42% are opposed.

That's good news in particular, more Republicans think gays should serve openly in the military than should not serve, which certainly puts them ahead of the GOP presidential candidates. However, I wonder what the result would have been if they had asked for support of Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal?

43% of Republicans support either marriage equality or civil unions. 51% oppose all relationship recognition.

One suspects that the actual breakdown shows that there's very little support for marriage equality and most of that 43 percent is for civil unions. Again, what would the result have been if they had tested "gay marriage" or "same sex marriage." Still, it appears to be good news showing a more moderate rank and file than the wingnuts would like us to think.

And then there's this:

The poll shows sharp disagreement on a range of social issues, however Republicans are united on some core priorities:

• 78% believe we should balance the federal budget
• 66% believe the government is too big
• 80% believe the federal government spends too much
• 69% believe taxes are too high and only 1% believe they aren’t high enough

The GOP also is united in its support for enforcing existing immigration laws and waging an aggressive war on terror.

This poll is good news for one would be presidential candidate -- Michael Bloomberg.

Ann Coulter and "Faggot"

You've probably heard that at the Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) Conference Ann Coulter called John Edwards a faggot.

Video here.

Pam at Pam's House Blend has an excellent commentary on the reaction to the comment from the left. Reacting to a blast fundraising email sent out by the Edwards campaign in response to Coulter's comments, Pam asks what the Edwards response does to condemn blatant homophobia, and answers:

Nothing. It doesn't even mention "gay," "lesbian," or "homophobia." It doesn't point out that Coulter's use of "faggot" as a slur on Edwards is also what spills from the lips of the kind of people who beat up a gay man for wearing pink pants, or murder a 72-year-old gay man by slamming him with a metal pipe.

She goes on to address the larger Democratic outlook:

If you're a homo, the message from Dems is that we're still invisible (see Dean's statement), the crazy granny in the attic, and only the granny's nearly feeble caretaker is allowed to say anything -- and even HRC never mentions gays or lesbians at all in its release (outside of its irrelevant boilerplate at the end). Even our advocacy organization couldn't find a paragraph to place Coulter's comments into context of the larger issue of homophobia. [Emphasis is Pam's]

And here's my perspective -- while in college, I was one of several faggots who attended the CPAC conference. Hey -- it's not impossible to be a "faggot" and conservative -- especially if you define conservative in the classical sense of limited government, which means government not concerned with the gender of the person I love.

President Reagan spoke at the main banquet that year. Reagan's conservatives were a more genteel brand than today's crass neanderthals. To be sure, Falwell and Robertson were around and powerful in those days and the party gave them their due. But there was a spark of libertarianism that counterbalanced to some extent those extreme voices. Social issues were never on the front burner then and the fundraising whipping boy was communism, not gays. I cannot imagine anyone uttering the word "faggot" from the podium at the CPAC conference I attended back in 1984.

Today, the spark of freedom in the conservative movement has been squashed. It's one reason I left the Republican Party (or to borrow from Reagan, the Republican Party left me).

The Log Cabiners should be denouncing Coulter's comments. Where are they?

Pro Gay Tax Legislation, Blocked by Dems, Part Two

A reader writes that the Democrats are not trying to block legislation in the Senate that would extend a tax break for domestic partners to small business owners, as I posted previously, citing a Log Cabin Republican news release. The reader writes:

Democrats are not blocking this bill. They support it - they wrote it. It will be Democrats (specifically Senator Baucus) who will move it into law. I suspect that an over-zealous staffer at Log Cabin either doesn't know the situation, or is just trying to cause trouble.

Actually, they are exploiting a procedural move by the Democrats to make trouble. Baucus may indeed support it, but he in fact did prevent Smith's amendment from moving forward. So we'll have to wait and see what happens -- I remain skeptical of the Democrats real commitment to gay issues.

The WashBlade has more.

And the Dems are Blocking the Pro Gay Bill Because?

The boys from Log Cabin Republicans sent out an email blast about an amendment by Republican Senator Gordon Smith (OR) to the Fair Minimum Wage Act that would allow small business owners (like yours truly) to deduct the health care premiums of domestic partners from their tax bill. According to the Log Cabinites:

Current law allows small business owners, independent contractors, and consultants to deduct the total cost of their health insurance premiums. They also can deduct the premiums for their spouse and children, but not domestic partners. Smith’s bill would correct that inequity.

But the bill is being blocked by the Democratic Chairman of Smith's Committee:

Senator Smith was prevented from offering his amendment during a recent Finance Committee hearing because Democrat Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) threatened to rule it out of order. Now Smith has introduced his amendment to the entire Senate, but Baucus is still threatening to use arcane Senate rules to stop the amendment.

Says the leader of the Cabinites:

“Democrat leaders should allow a vote on this important amendment. LGBT Democrats gave a lot of money and support to their Party last November,” said Log Cabin President Patrick Sammon. “Now Senate Democrats better not block the first piece of pro-gay legislation in the 110^th Congress. Majority Leader Harry Reid should stop Senator Baucus from obstructing this amendment and allow a vote by the full Senate.”

Seems like a fair amendment to me and seems like the dems should let it come up for a vote.