McCain Campaign Accepts Log Cabin’s Endorsement

Timothy Kincaid

September 3rd, 2008

Yesterday at Log Cabin Republicans’ Big Tent Event, the McCain campaign accepted the gay group’s endorsement. Mike DuHaime, the National Political Director, spoke on behalf of the candidate and the campaign.

He told the crowd of 200 people, “On behalf of Senator McCain and the campaign, thank you for this endorsement. Sen. McCain is running an inclusive campaign and he’ll have an inclusive administration [as president].”

DuHaime also said that Sen. McCain will win this election because he is the “only one who has the ability to unite the entire party.” He went on to say that everyone supporting Sen. McCain must talk to others about why they’re voting for him. “This is so important in the gay and lesbian community,” said DuHaime.

As Ed Stoddard writing for Reuters noted,

The endorsement may boost McCain’s reputation as a maverick who reaches across partisan lines, but it may not go down well with his party’s conservative Christian base.

The campaign’s acceptance of endorsement, a first for Log Cabin, was also accompanied by unprecedented access to the convention. These steps, while not on par with the way in which the Democratic Party welcomed its gay delegates, are welcome and an indication of a growing acceptance of gay men and women in the fabric of the nation.

L. Junius Brutus

September 3rd, 2008

Are you sure? I distinctly remember Bush accepting their endorsement and meeting with them – after the primary in 2000.

And that is an accurate comparison. McCain will be exactly the way Bush is on these issues. Bush nominally favored the marriage amendment, but did nothing for it (unless it helped him politically). Neither will McCain. But they will both veto legislation that grants equal rights and appoint Supreme Court justices who believe that it’s OK for us to be treated like criminals, and who might gut anti-discrimination laws using religious freedom as a pretext.

Timothy Kincaid

September 3rd, 2008

No, L. Junius, you are mistaken.

Bush met with a delegation of gay Republicans under the condition that they not be an official Log Cabin delegation. They are generally refered to as the Austin 12.

And, incidentally, while Bush indicated an intention to veto pro-gay legislation, none reached his desk.


September 3rd, 2008

I can’t recall the specifics, but I do remember Log Cabin endorsements and/or money being turned down by candidates.

I wonder if Log Cabin got assurances from McCain’s campaign that their endorsement would be accepted on some level (if not by the candidate himself). Given what has happened in the past, it would only seem prudent.


September 3rd, 2008

ah the wonders of the internet and google:
Log Cabin Republicans Vote to Withhold Endorsement from President Bush

OTHER BIG NEWS> THE ‘MILK’ trailer is out. Sean Penn looks fantastic.


September 3rd, 2008

Um, either I’m confused or the writer for Reuters is.

Just how does it boost McCain’s reputation “as a maverick who reaches across partisan lines” to accept an endorsement from the Log Cabin Republicans?


September 4th, 2008

“I’m John McCain. Join me in supporting Proposition _______.” (fill in the blank as appropriate for FL, AZ, CA).

The Palin/McCain ticket will bring the Christianists out in droves, contribute directly and purposefully to the passage of the three anti-SSM propositions, and provide the theocons with a claimed mandate to erase the ‘gay agenda.’


September 4th, 2008

I agree, Timothy. This is a good sign of ever-increasing acceptance of gay people in our culture.


September 5th, 2008

I think people (like me) on the left side of the gay community should think about cutting the LCR’s a little more slack and being slower to criticize them. After all, if McCain gets elected (cringe), the LCR’s are the only part of the gay community he’s likely to listen to. And I can’t think of a more thankless, dirty job than kissing up to republicans. Somebody DOESN’T have to do it, but the LCR’s choose to do it for the good of the community, and I think that’s worth giving them a break and even maybe some encouragement.


September 6th, 2008

As a former Republican, I’m all for seeing the party become more moderate and inclusive, but I have the distinct feeling they won’t hesitate to use the hatred of many towards us and our families for their own political gain. It is, after all, what has worked for them time and time again.


September 7th, 2008

I’m thinking out loud here, so be kind.

If McCain thought it should be ok to fire blacks or deny them housing simply because of their skin colour;

If McCain thought blacks should not serve in the same military units as whites, to preserve whites from having to interact with blacks;

If McCain thought blacks should not be allowed to marry, or have federal or state recognized unions;

If McCain thought spouses of blacks should not be able to draw upon Social Security or Veterans benefits of their spouse;

If McCain thought that while killing a Christian because they are a Christian is considered a hate crime, but that killing a black because they are black should not be considered by law to be a hate crime;

If McCain thought that states should pass Constitutional Amendments to forever ban blacks from marrying;

If McCain thought that blacks should not be allowed to adopt

do you really think any organization of African Americans would support him? Or if they did, what would you think of them?

Just thinking out loud – honestly. I think internalized homophobia might be stronger than I first realized.


September 8th, 2008

tristam offers: “The Palin/McCain ticket will bring the Christianists out in droves, contribute directly and purposefully to the passage of the three anti-SSM propositions, and provide the theocons with a claimed mandate to erase the ‘gay agenda.’”

Ummm, paging reality for tristam. In California, Prop 8 passage may actually be helped by Barack Obama bringing droves of newly registered black Christians and anti-gay bigots to the polls.

Maybe you should rethink who you’re willing to jump in the sack with in order to advance an agenda that is, at best, gay neutral and at worst, hurtful to the advance of gay civil rights.

Emily K

September 8th, 2008

As if McCain is much better, Matt. Maybe vote for the Green or Libertarian parties.

Timothy Kincaid

September 8th, 2008

Folks, let’s please keep comments relevant to the topic of the thread, i.e. the McCain campaign’s acceptance of the Log Cabin endorsement.


September 8th, 2008

Sorry Tim, my bad.

How’s this: the LCRs endorsed McCain because they, too, sense a seachange moment occuring within the GOP by McCain-the-Maverick gaining the Party’s nomination. That nomination, the LCRs know, came about because McCain has a legendary reputation AND RECORD of being anti-establishment, anti-Party, unapologetically bipartisan to the concern of most farRight whackjobs and, most importantly, the LCR Bd endorsed McCain (and were greeted by the presence of two of his senior campaign advisors) because the LCR leadership knows McCain is a seachange candidate within the Party and may lead to more moderate, progressive GOP.

Just like Reagan brought a ton of farRight and mostly religious delegates into the Party, McCain is bringing in progressive and moderate leadership to the Party… and that is good for gay civil rights.

Frankly, if a member of the LCR Board was writing here he/she would tell you that if the gayLeft in America really, really, really wants to cripple one of their most vocal, activist opponents in the culture war… the religious right… gays evertwhere ought to be following the lead of gay GOPers and helping to elect McCain-the-Maverick.

LCRs endorsed him because they know, better than most, that McCain’s record is worth far more to gay civil rights advancing than all the emptysuited whispered promised from his opponents’ side of the aisle.

At least that’s what I got out of the LCR endorsement… not the potential for access, the potential for CHANGE.

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, never shared)

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


Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.