Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Palin’s Anti-Gay “Pro-Gay” Veto

This commentary is the opinion of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of other authors at this site.

Jim Burroway

September 1st, 2008

That glimmer of hope that Sarah Palin might be persuadable concerning LGBT rights appears solidly extinguished. Michael Signorile’s at the RNC, and has this to report:

I went to the Alaska delegation and spoke with a woman who is in Palin’s cabinet. She assured me that Palin is not in favor of giving any rights to gays and didn’t want to give domestic partnership rights to government employees but that she had to veto the bill that would have rescinded such rights because of the Alaska Supreme Court ruling. So can we please cut this crap Log Cabin and the McCain campaign have been trying to put out: Palin only vetoed an antigay bill because she had to, by law. This woman, Annette Kreitzer, who serves in Sarah Palin’s cabinet in the Department of Administration, said, oh, well, it was the law — drat! — or something like that. I’ll play it tomorrow.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0 | TRACKBACK URL

AJD
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

That’s pretty consistent with what I read in the Anchorage Daily News.

Swampfox
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

Please follow up this story. My head is spinning with the logic that, “but that she had to veto the bill that would have rescinded such rights because of the Alaska Supreme Court ruling.” What was to stop her from signing the bill and letting someone take it all the way to the Alaskan Supreme Court?

AJD
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

This is kind of off-topic, but it says a lot about Palin that her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. Looks like she raised her daughter with a fine set of family values, eh?

KipEsquire
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

I’ve read GOP descriptions of this as a “smear” — as in, “it is a smear to suggest that Palin is pro-gay.”

Splendid.

Swampfox
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

I have to agree with KipEsquire until I learn more.

There is far too much speculation about Palin at this time. In defense of Palin ……….. her daughter is in her second trimester. She knew that this was coming …….. and, so did McCain.

Regan DuCasse
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

Hi Swampfox!
How are you, my friend? I’m counting how many anti gay, (oh the MINUTAE of what there is for them to bitch about over at TownHall!) the articles and in how many creative, and not so original ways the gay bashing continues.

We know each other well. I’m ‘du’, as you’ve probably guessed by now.
I have a LOT of respect for your patience, and how much personal information you’ve revealed there.

This stunt that McCain has pulled, is just that to me. A stunt.
And Bristol Palin is just one of many thousands of girls who got KNOCKED UP without being married.

What CHOICE would she have in her mother’s and McCain’s scheme of things?
What choice did Bristol have…really?

Not every teen in her same predicament has parents with steady jobs, health care or even caring loving parents or baby daddy’s.
And Palin and McCain can’t take it for granted that every person has the same motives or needs and assume anything about each individual situation with an unplanned pregnancy.

I’m sick of hearing how this situation won’t change how Palin can go about HER job in public office.
Well, yeah…it does say something about her as a MOTHER…and how she dares to judge other females not as fortunate as SHE is.

And THAT is the point of not trusting those in office who DO know how insulated they are from the real world consequnces and the real people who have to live in what THEY control.

Lynn David
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

Politics makes everyone a hypocrite.

lurker
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

now I wonder . . . if Palin’s daughter marries her “young man” as she is morally obligated to do, she’ll loose her Alaska state health benefits (which I’m assuming she has through her mom’s employment). That’ll be inconvenient, since she’ll want health benefits in order to support the birth.

But then, we really wouldn’t want Alaska taxpayers to support health benefits to support an immoral lifestyle!

Emily K
September 1st, 2008 | LINK

Lurker- : D

Samantha Davis
September 2nd, 2008 | LINK

SwampFox:

You’re right, she could have signed the bill and let it be fought all the way to the supreme court. However, that would have cost the state a great deal of money especially when the outcome of said trial would have been inevitable.

It could have also left the state up for quite a substantial lawsuit.

Swampfox
September 2nd, 2008 | LINK

Du, I haven’t got enough information on Palin to determine where I stand on her. Some people on the left were saying that the down’s syndrome child was the child of the 17 year year old daughter. There is a feeding frenzy going on about Palin. Don’t make the mistake in thinking that Palin is an insulated debutant, who doesn’t know the real world. I cam from a well-to-do family that had its dysfunctional moments.

Du, I hope that you are doing well.

marcus
September 2nd, 2008 | LINK

Actually, this encourages me. Despite her apparent strong personal preferences, she was able to see the issue objectively and follow the rule of law. We need people like this in government. I think her daughter’s situation is another example. It doesn’t make her a hypocrite. Kids do the darndest things, and when her daughter came to her pregnant, she gave her support in the course of action she endorsed. Sure, she doesn’t agree with many of us on a lot of issues, but I get the impression that she’s smart, sincere, and practices what she preaches. These are good things. As long as we have a firmly Democratic legislature, we can balance out any draconian moves by the executive. The only thing that scares the crap out of me is what could happen on the Court.

L. Junius Brutus
September 2nd, 2008 | LINK

marcus: The Senate that was 58-42 Democratic approved Clarence Thomas, and that was after he was hit with the Anita Hill allegations. Before that, it was expected that he would get 60 votes. If you want a gay-friendly, civil liberties-friendly Supreme Court, you need a Democratic president.

Mark F.
September 2nd, 2008 | LINK

Great! We have a choice of a moderately gay friendly pro-war, pro-militaristic, pro-special favors for big business administration or a gay unfriendly one. Choose wisely!

marcus
September 2nd, 2008 | LINK

Yeah, L. I agree. Like I said, the composition of the Supreme Court is the only thing that really freaks me out about a McCain/Palin administration with a strong Democrat legislature.

Perfect Moment Project
September 3rd, 2008 | LINK

Yikes, yikes, yikes … so Palin becomes VP and then in four years America elects her to P cause McCain is too old… What year is it then? 1914? Here’s a take on moving on…

Michigan-Matt
September 9th, 2008 | LINK

Jim, I was kind of surprised that anyone would take the biased, singularly bent reporting of MichaelSignorile as being credible.

Come on! The guy has trouble looking in the mirror in the morning and not lying to the face staring back at him.

I also spent time in St Paul, spent time at the LCR events, spent time on the floor, spent time with the Alaska delegation and our delegation was right next to them for the historic, feminist pro-American “Bit Pull with Lipstick” speech Palin gave.

You want to learn what really happened there and not just what the gayLeft attack dogs are feeding you… go check out some of GayPatriot’s commentary from the convention –it’s far more connected, accurate and helpful.

Palin’s going to tear thing sup in DC and everything –every issue– is up for grabs by her and her more liberal running mate, McCain. It’s a seachange moment for the GOP and America.

As a gay community, we’re quickly approaching a point in time –we may have already passed it– when our issues and progress on gay civil rights will require every single segment of the gay community working in concert for progress.

We aren’t going to get it if we keep cutting off 2/3rds of the likely power equation in DC. And we definitely won’t get it if we keep feeding with the red meat crowd that Signorile appeals and caters to…

We can’t afford to continue to be stupid and politically disconnected gays while the Nation marches off to a different set of drums.

For the love of Mike, Palin is far more approachable than JoeyBiden ever, ever was –even when he had his brains.

We’ve got to get a whole lot smarter about all this and who is fronted as the “gayVoice” in America… or we’ll be back to trusting HarrygReid and NancyP to carry our water and that hasn’t worked out too well, right?

Jim Burroway
September 9th, 2008 | LINK

This isn’t about taking Signorile’s word about anything. This was an interview that he conducted with a member of Palin’s cabinet — who is also a Palin supporter. Those was her words, which have been corroborated elsewhere.

So instead of attacking the messenger, how about addressing any evidence that Palin has anything but an anti-gay bone in her body. So far, I haven’t been able to find anything to give me any reason for hope.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.