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

McCain Joins FRC Against DADT Repeal – The Politics of Slander Are Now His Values

Jim Burroway

December 21st, 2010

In 2000, back when Sen. John McCain was still a voice of reason and conscience for the Republican Party, he famously attacked the “self-appointed leaders” of the religious right, saying “the politics of division and slander are not our values.” But things change over the course of a decade. The Family “Research” Council, whose mastery of division and slander have landed them on the SPLC’s very short list of anti-gay hate groups, has announced that McCain will be working with them to figure out how to roll back repeal of DADT.

I’ve [Tony Perkins] already been in conversations with Hill leaders about holding hearings in the New Year, as well as statutory and legislative oversight steps that can be taken to turn back aspects of the repeal and slow down–if not stop–the rest. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others will be working with FRC to put a strict evaluation process in place. We want to ensure that the Pentagon is monitoring the effect of this radical change on the men and women in harm’s way. One way to do that is demanding specific measurables–like tracking the sexual assaults, dips in recruitment and retention, combat distractions, and more.

In other words, FRC will be up to their usual dirty tricks with fake statistics, and Sen. McCain will be all too happy to support them. That’s a far cry from 2000, when McCain traveled to Virginia Beach — Pat Robertson’s back yard — to denounce the very same thing that FRC has turned into an art form:

I recognize and celebrate that our country is founded upon Judeo- Christian values, and I have pledged my life to defend America and all her values, the values that have made us the noblest experiment in history. But public — but political intolerance by any political party is neither a Judeo-Christian nor an American value.

The political tactics of division and slander are not our values. They are corrupting influences on religion and politics, and those who practice them in the name of religion or in the name of the Republican Party or in the name of America shame our faith, our party and our country.

Neither party should be defined by pandering to the outer reaches of American politics and the agents of intolerance, whether they be Louis Farrakhan or Al Sharpton on the left, or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell on the right.

McCain’s stirring call to decency came about after he had been attacked in a vicious smear campaign orchestrated by the religious right during the South Carolina primaries. When he was the victim of those attacks, he mustered righteous indignation and refused to take those attacks quietly. But now that those attacks are against gay people, well…

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

Lindoro Almaviva
December 21st, 2010 | LINK

I am very happy to see John McCain become more and more unelectable, even as a republican.

Anyone wants to take bets on the fact that he doesn’t get elected to office in 2012?

Mario Marin
December 21st, 2010 | LINK

Well, he certainly won’t be elected to any office in 2012…. the term he was elected to in this last election ends in 2017…

Alex 0_0
December 21st, 2010 | LINK

Jim– how much damage can geezer-bigot McCain and closet-case Tony Perkins really do to repeal? Can they really screw it up for us?

Tone
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

John McCain has jumped the shark.

Bernie
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

@Alex, good question.

And as far as McCain goes, his electability is done for. He doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell.

As far as Perkins goes, his credibility is next to none.

KZ
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

Of all the trials and difficulties the United States is facing these days, THIS is the ‘problem’ Perkins and McCain choose to fix. The American public as a whole wanted DADT gone. Most service members don’t see openly gay men and women in the military as an issue. Many US allies allow gays to serve openly in their militaries with little to no problems. Why would anyone be this adamant about keeping DADT?

Chris McCoy
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

Bernie wrote:

Anyone wants to take bets on the fact that he doesn’t get elected to office in 2012?

John McCain was re-elected for the 4th time this just this past November (with a staggering 24 point margin over his General Election rival). He will be starting his 5th term in the Senate next year. That means he won’t be up for re-election untill 2016 (for the term that will begin in 2017).

Bernie wrote:

And as far as McCain goes, his electability is done for. He doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell.

6 years from now there will be all new controversies for people to complain about, and most people will have completely forgotten about December 2010.

Gus
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

McCain ever expected “the leadership of the military” to come out in favor of repeal. He got cover blaming the military leadership. The first ‘reasonable’ DADT position was purely political during a campaign. He never wanted repeal in the first place. He came out against the Christianists when it was politically to his advantage.

McCain’s actions and positions have always about McCain. We bought the ‘maverick’ nonsense, we have the problem. Because we didn’t like Goldwater, we didn’t take seriously Goldwater’s distain for this political opportunist.

As for his re-election prospects, he will say anything necessary to win and go all mavericky again.

L. Junius Brutus
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

Bernie: “And as far as McCain goes, his electability is done for. He doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell.”

What planet do you inhabit? One where people are actually sane?

BlackDog
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

Personally, I think John McCain might just be too senile to remember where his office is by 2017.

Since he lost the election in ’08 he’s done nothing but make an ass of himself. It was his good fortune that the Republicans in Arizona put up someone even less electable than him in the primaries.

jpeckjr
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

McCain now cuddles up to the smearmongers because he lost in South Carolina in 2000. He thought changing his approach would help him win, and it did in 2010 in Arizona. By 2016, when he runs again, he’ll be 84, I believe, not too old to be re-elected though. Can anyone say Robert Byrd?

As to Tony Perkins’ assurances to his constituency, that is all about raising money. I’m sure his “we’re going to be monitoring the situation” was followed with “we can’t do it without your money.”

BlackDog
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

Robert Byrd was at least somewhat useful (Well, to people in WV anyway) and was known for having principles occasionally. I think John McCain is simply a bitter, vengeful old man who hasn’t gotten over losing the presidential election in ’08.

Why he keeps throwing in with the same religious nuts that lost him the election, I don’t know. I might even have voted for him except for who his VP pick was.

I could not see voting for an old guy who (by election night) looked like he might keel over at any moment, not with Sarah waiting in the wings. That just did not seem like a wise decision, and I think his behavior since has shown a lot of other reasons why it wouldn’t have been.

justsearching
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

“One way to do that is demanding specific measurables–like tracking the sexual assaults, dips in recruitment and retention, combat distractions, and more.”

Yeah… as if sexual harassment is currently not a part of the US armed forces. ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23636487/ns/us_news-military/ ) Roughly 1/3 of women serving have been sexually harassed. The figure for men is around 6%. My guess is that a woman is fair game for some rowdy men, but a guy being too forward to another guy would be utterly unacceptable. Any form of sexual harassment from anyone of any sexual orientation against anyone else is unacceptable, but I feel that there will be a double standard on this issue.

As for recruitment and retention, I have a feeling that in the services will quit and give whiny interviews to sites like WND or drudgereport saying how their strong Christian faith prevents them from serving in the forces anymore. Overall, I doubt it will have much an effect on recruitment or retention. And if we lose or don’t obtain individuals who can’t adapt to new circumstances, so be it.

As for combat distractions… what are they looking for? Reports from men on the front lines saying that the dude next to them was hitting on them in the midst of combat?

Titus
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

I suspect that the Religious Right is going to try and *generate* problems in the military.

David
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

Titus, the religious right are already a problem in the military. All you have to do is to read the newspapers and look online to see that they have infiltrated the highest levels and even the WH (don’t forget that “gawd is in the mix).

Christopher Mongeau
December 22nd, 2010 | LINK

This report suggests that FRC and Tony Perkins were lying about McCain’s joining up with their camp:

“Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and others will be working with FRC to put a strict evaluation process in place”…

But a McCain source tells us that’s just not true, noting that “the law has been changed,” and that’s that.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/frc_claims_mccain_will_keep_leading_pro-dadt_fight.php

Not that I’m a McCain supporter at all, but seems even he doesn’t want association with a hate group.

AdrianT
December 23rd, 2010 | LINK

Be consistent in not trusting what you read on an FRC site.

Just like everything else they say, it seems the story about the collaboration with McCain is based on nothing but wishful thinking!

FRC always ceases to amaze me.

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.