October 1, 2008

How Stupid Is John Cain? He Wants Us Chickens to Consider Voting for Colonel Sanders

Unbelievable interview in the Washington Blade:

‘I hope gay and lesbian Americans will give full consideration to supporting me’

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, sorry, couldn’t help that. Let’s do go on.

Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told the Blade in an exclusive written interview this week that he appreciates the Log Cabin Republicans’ decision to endorse him, and he hopes “gay and lesbian Americans will give full consideration to supporting me.” …

BWAHAHAH—! Damn. Sorry.

McCain reiterated his long-held position that he would leave it up to military leaders to decide whether the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law should be retained or repealed. …

Yeah, and he said he’d leave marriage to the states, too — until he realized he needed to suck James Dobson’s Bible bookmark a lot harder to win over the evangelamentals.

Washington Blade: What personal experiences or friendships in your life have shaped how you view gay issues?

I can answer that! Your North Vietnamese captors were “pretty damned sadistic” homosexuals who seemed to get a “big bang” out of torturing you.

John McCain: I have known former Congressman Jim Kolbe for 25 years.

That punk?! Mr. Forced-Out-of-the-Closet, who won’t even co-sponsor the UAFA because he’s got the connections to keep his Panamanian lover in the U.S. as long as he wants? That Jim Kolbe?

Don’t make me laugh — Jim Kolbe isn’t gay — he’s just a homosexual. And he’d still be a Larry Craig-style homosexual if he hadn’t been outed by Kurt Wolfe.

… When he came out in 1996…

Was forced out.

…there was no question that I would stand by him. He’s a friend and a patriot and has been an admirable public servant, and a good example of why someone’s sexuality should not be relevant in public life.

Yeah, you wouldn’t want your screwing around on your first wife or the Vicki Iseman story to be made “relevant in public life,” would you, Johnny?

I have also known former Tempe Mayor [Neil] Giuliano for many years.

A Log Cabinette. A Jew for Hitler.

He headed Mayors for McCain in our 2000 campaign. …

Like I said, a Jew for Hitler.

Blade: Do you have any role models who are openly gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender?

McCain: I had the humbling experience of speaking at Mark Bingham’s funeral after the attacks on Sept. 11. Mark had supported me during the 2000 campaign.

That’s sad to hear.

Unfortunately, I barely knew him, but our country learned about him after 9-11. He was one of the heroes on 9-11 who tried to retake control of United Flight 93. His efforts along with the other brave patriots could have saved hundreds of lives. I honor and respect Mark. …

What, a queer has to die saving his country before you can “honor and respect” him? You sure don’t “honor and respect” those of us still alive and living with your party’s vile attacks on us every day of the week.

Blade: Would you decline to nominate a qualified Supreme Court justice, cabinet member or other appointed position just because the person is openly gay?

McCain: I have always hired the most qualified and competent people — regardless of their political party, race, gender, religion or sexual orientation.

Blade: Would you decline to nominate a qualified Supreme Court justice or cabinet member who had a history of anti-gay rulings?

McCain: I will nominate judges who interpret the Constitution, not judges who legislate from the bench. Legislators pass laws; judges interpret them. Unfortunately, too many judges have become confused [about] their role. …

Just the answer I expected: a non-answer.

Translation: “I’m gonna pack SCOTUS with all the Scalias and Thomases I can dig up, and there’s not a damned thing you can do about it, so kiss your ‘rights’ goodbye, pansies.”

Then he pats himself on the back for supporting PEPFAR, and then he avoids the question of whether he’d have a LGBT liaison in the White House:

I have already publicly stated that there will be no White House Office of Political Affairs in my administration — professional politics should be at the party committees, where it has a rightful place, not in the White House. I intend to be a President for all Americans. …

Except gay ones.

He also won’t give a straight answer on ENDA or DADT (you expected him to?).

Blade: Would a McCain administration be willing to meet with and work with gay leaders to discuss matters of interest to the gay community?

McCain: I have met with leaders of Log Cabin Republicans in my campaigns. I am always willing to listen to all viewpoints and that will continue if I become President.

Dog whistle: “I’m only willing to meet with fag— er, Uncle Tom— er, Republican homos. The rest of you can bite me.”

Next, he says he appreciates the endorsement of the Log Cabinettes, and then delivers the punch line:

I hope gay and lesbian Americans will give full consideration to supporting me. The stakes are high in this election. I will have an inclusive administration and I will be a president for all Americans.

My Aunt Fanny you will.

Next, he goes back to paying lip service to “states’ rights” and marriage equality, driving his homophobia home for the benefit of the religious extremists:

However, at the same time, my own view is that marriage should be reserved for a man and a woman. That’s what I supported in Arizona. I realize this is a controversial issue and we must conduct this debate in a way that respects the dignity of every person.

There’s no “debate” on equal rights — you’re either for equality, or you’re against it. It’s clear where you stand, McCain.

And you wouldn’t recognize the “dignity of every person” if it bit you in the ass. (Tell me, have you stopped using the word “gooks”? And do you still stand by “I will hate them as long as I live”?)

He then points out that he voted against the FMA, because “this should be a state matter, and not one for the federal government — as long as no state is forced to adopt some other state’s standard.”

Next, the Blade corners him on his opposition to LGBT adoption:

Blade: Regarding adoption by same-sex couples, you have been quoted as saying you don’t believe it’s appropriate. Can you elaborate?

McCain: I hope my comments are not misinterpreted. I respect the hundreds of thousands of gay and lesbian people who are doing their best to raise the children they have adopted. As someone who adopted a child, Cindy and I know better than most couples the amazing satisfaction that comes from providing love to an unwanted child. I believe a child is best raised by a mother and father because of the unique contributions that they make together to the development of a child. …

Taking your talking points from Maggie Gallagher then, are you?

As I did in my home state of Arizona, I support the effort in California to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman. However, the people of California will ultimately decide this issue, and I’ll of course respect the decision of the voters.

Homophobic little jerk.

Lots more of the same, and then:

Blade: Del Martin died on Aug. 27. She and Phyllis Lyon, her partner of 55 years, got married in the first legal gay union in California in June —affording Phyllis many of the basic protections and rights granted to married couples, such as hospital visitation and estate planning issues. Do you envision a time when all GLBT citizens will have similar basic rights? During your administration?

McCain: I respect that Del and Phyllis spent a lifetime together. As I stated earlier, however, I believe that issues regarding marriage and family laws are best decided by the states and not the federal government.

Never mind that Del and Phyllis were far more successful at marriage than you could ever hope to be, McCain. Jealous much?

Next, he tries (and fails) to justify voting against the Matthew Shepard Act, and finally dodges a Boy Scouts question.

Now, all you homos and ‘phobes voting for McCain, raise your hands — I want to know who you are so I can avoid getting the stink of you on me.

Posted by: Sapphocrat

 |  |


Filed under: Arizona, California, Civil Rights, Election 2008, Employment/ENDA, Focus on the Family/James Dobson, Gay Republicans, HIV/AIDS, Hate Crimes, Homophobia, Immigration, John McCain, Marriage Equality, Military/DADT, Parenting, Proposition 8, Radical Religious Right, Republican Sexcapades, Republicans






September 30, 2008

New York Times Takes Clear, Strong Stand Against Prop 8 (and Prop 102 and Amdt 2)

Just beautiful — and well worth the click and full read:

Preserving California’s Constitution

California voters will have a chance in November to protect the rights of gay men and women, and to preserve the state’s Constitution. They should vote against Proposition 8, which seeks to amend that Constitution to prevent people of the same sex from marrying. …

Opponents of giving gay couples the protections, dignity and respect that come with marriage are working furiously to try to overturn the court ruling through Proposition 8. It is our fervent hope that Californians will reject this mean-spirited attempt to embed second-class treatment of one group of citizens in the State Constitution. …

The proponents of Proposition 8 make the familiar claim that legalizing same-sex marriage undercuts marriage between men and women. But thousands of gay and lesbian couples have been married in California since the May ruling and marriage remains intact.

Similar discriminatory measures are on the ballot in Arizona and Florida. They also should be rejected.

Thank you, NYT!

Posted by: Sapphocrat

 |  |


Filed under: Arizona, California, Florida, Marriage Equality, Media, Proposition 8






September 20, 2008

Now, About That Anti-Marriage Crusade in Arizona…

I’m afraid I’ve been horribly negligent about bringing more (much-needed) attention to the fight against Arizona’s Proposition 102, which (you guessed it) threatens to enshrine discrimination in the state’s constitution by outlawing marriage equality. (And just guess who’s driving the anti-gay crusade? Yep, the Mormons, who are bound and determined to force the rest of us to live by their beliefs, and are failing miserably to adhere to their own Articles of Faith, particularly 11 and 12.)

Naturally, I’m more inclined to concentrate on California’s Prop 8, not only because it’s my state (and, frankly, the chances of my marriage being annulled if Prop 8 passes are extremely slim), but because of California’s unique position: This is the first time the anti-gay crusaders are trying to take away the right to marriage that we already have — and their success would set a dangerous precedent in California and throughout the nation.

None of that, however, makes the battles for marriage equality in Arizona and Florida (which is also facing an anti-gay constitutional-amendment vote) any less important, or urgent.

In Arizona, the No on Prop 102 folks need our help, and they need it now:

VoteNoProp102.com

Obviously, we can’t vote in Arizona, but I just this minute made a donation of $102, and as I write this Buffy is (literally) digging her credit card out of her purse to make a second donation.

Please join us and do the same, no matter where you live.

Posted by: Sapphocrat

 |  |


Filed under: Arizona, LDS/Mormons, Marriage Equality






 

 
VOTE NOV. 4th!

 
Know the
SIX BIG LIES
About Proposition 8
a.k.a. "Six Consequences
If Proposition 8 Fails"

 
CALIFORNIA

California - Vote No On Proposition 8
 

Protect Marriage! Vote NO on California Proposition 8!
NO ON H8!
Wide variety of designs to
STOP California's anti-marriage amendment, Proposition 8

 
Can I Vote On YOUR Marriage Now?
Can I Vote On
Your Marriage Now?

Ripped off by
copycats everywhere!
Do the right thing
and get the original!

 
 
 
ARIZONA

Arizona - Vote No On Proposition 102 - Again!
 
 
 
FLORIDA

Florida - Vote No On Amendment 2