Comments on: Barney Frank thinks Victory Fund is in a “cultural lag” http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734 News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:53:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Jay http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144593 Jay Sun, 16 Sep 2012 20:43:04 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144593 I would not be so sure that the Democrats will not take control of the House. This election may turn out to be a blow out for the Democrats. The Republicans are becoming so erratic and their candidate is so unpresidential, I think it is entirely possible that the Republicans lose enough House seats to switch control. From that perspective, it is very important that a traditionally Democratic seat be held, especially since it is occupied by someone with an impeccably pro-gay voting record. (And besides, if Tisei is so persuasive, why hasn't he persuaded his former Governor, Mitt Romney, to support gay rights?) I would not be so sure that the Democrats will not take control of the House. This election may turn out to be a blow out for the Democrats. The Republicans are becoming so erratic and their candidate is so unpresidential, I think it is entirely possible that the Republicans lose enough House seats to switch control. From that perspective, it is very important that a traditionally Democratic seat be held, especially since it is occupied by someone with an impeccably pro-gay voting record. (And besides, if Tisei is so persuasive, why hasn’t he persuaded his former Governor, Mitt Romney, to support gay rights?)

]]> By: Robert http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144513 Robert Sun, 16 Sep 2012 17:35:24 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144513 Tony said: " So really, the question is about whether you want another gay person in there trying to change peoples’ minds, or another straight ally who can’t get anything done because they aren’t in the majority." Well, I'd like to ask, what difference this scenario makes in regards to this race? The gay canidadte can't get anything done because the republican party will have nothing to do with it, and will never bring gay rights issues. So does having one more gay person who won't be able to achieve any legislative LGBT goals or a straight ally who is in the minority but would change the numbers in the House? Hmmm, I'd vote for the straight ally. I have found that simply because an individual is gay does not make that individual the best person for the job. Chris Barron and the likes of GOProud are Gay, but I would NEVER EVER vote for them. Voting for a cnadidate strictly BECUASE they are gay is stupid. Gay people are not perfect and infallable, and I don't agree politically with Gay Republicans, so what makes you think we should vote for someone JUST because they are gay. I don't vote for every democrat, and I'm not going to vote for every gay person. Some people just are not worthy of my vote, sexuality aside. Tony said:

” So really, the question is about whether you want another gay person in there trying to change peoples’ minds, or another straight ally who can’t get anything done because they aren’t in the majority.”

Well, I’d like to ask, what difference this scenario makes in regards to this race? The gay canidadte can’t get anything done because the republican party will have nothing to do with it, and will never bring gay rights issues. So does having one more gay person who won’t be able to achieve any legislative LGBT goals or a straight ally who is in the minority but would change the numbers in the House? Hmmm, I’d vote for the straight ally. I have found that simply because an individual is gay does not make that individual the best person for the job. Chris Barron and the likes of GOProud are Gay, but I would NEVER EVER vote for them. Voting for a cnadidate strictly BECUASE they are gay is stupid. Gay people are not perfect and infallable, and I don’t agree politically with Gay Republicans, so what makes you think we should vote for someone JUST because they are gay. I don’t vote for every democrat, and I’m not going to vote for every gay person. Some people just are not worthy of my vote, sexuality aside.

]]> By: Gene in L.A. http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144494 Gene in L.A. Sun, 16 Sep 2012 17:00:27 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144494 Tony, yes, this should be the end. I never said or hinted that I would vote against someone because they're gay. I said their being gay ALONE isn't reason enough for me to vote for them. I won't vote for ANYONE who isn't going to support my goals, gay, straight, or in-between. You are free to vote for gay people without knowing their politics as much as you want. All I've said is I won't do that. If you've been trying to convince me otherwise, you've failed. Have a nice life. Tony, yes, this should be the end. I never said or hinted that I would vote against someone because they’re gay. I said their being gay ALONE isn’t reason enough for me to vote for them. I won’t vote for ANYONE who isn’t going to support my goals, gay, straight, or in-between. You are free to vote for gay people without knowing their politics as much as you want. All I’ve said is I won’t do that. If you’ve been trying to convince me otherwise, you’ve failed.

Have a nice life.

]]> By: Tony http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144487 Tony Sun, 16 Sep 2012 16:35:30 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144487 Jay, the Democrats aren't going to win the House. So really, the question is about whether you want another gay person in there trying to change peoples' minds, or another straight ally who can't get anything done because they aren't in the majority. Jay, the Democrats aren’t going to win the House. So really, the question is about whether you want another gay person in there trying to change peoples’ minds, or another straight ally who can’t get anything done because they aren’t in the majority.

]]> By: Tony http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144484 Tony Sun, 16 Sep 2012 16:33:22 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144484 Again, it went straight over your head. You said that if straight people voted for someone just because they were straight that gay people would be pissed off. You insinuated that we shouldn't be voting for someone just because they are gay, and equated it with a straight person voting for someone just because they are straight. I don't know how many different ways I can say it; they are not the same thing. That's where I brought up minorities. I'm done now, old man. Why are commenters, no matter what site, always so dense? Again, it went straight over your head. You said that if straight people voted for someone just because they were straight that gay people would be pissed off. You insinuated that we shouldn’t be voting for someone just because they are gay, and equated it with a straight person voting for someone just because they are straight. I don’t know how many different ways I can say it; they are not the same thing. That’s where I brought up minorities. I’m done now, old man.

Why are commenters, no matter what site, always so dense?

]]> By: Jay http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144458 Jay Sun, 16 Sep 2012 15:44:16 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144458 The Victory Fund is making a huge mistake in doubling down on its support for Tisei. They risk destroying their brand and creating the kind of mess that the HRC got into in the 1998 when they, for example, endorsed the detestable Alphonse D'Amato against Chuck Schumer for U.S. Senator from New York. Their criteria then favored incumbents, even if they were as stupid and homophobic as D'Amato, whose only pro-gay position involved tepid support for allowing gay and lesbians to serve in the military. There was a major reaction against that endorsement, and many members resigned in protest. I have donated to the Victory Fund for many years. Or rather, I have donated through the Victory Fund to candidates that they have endorsed. I would be very upset if I thought that money I gave to the Victory Fund was being used to support Tisei. I am in favor of supporting gay Republicans when they run against anti-gay opponents. I even voted for a (straight) Republican who ran against an anti-gay Democrat. But it is folly to vote for a gay Republican whose record on gay issues is much less admirable than the record of his straight Democratic opponent. It is also folly for the Victory Fund to endorse such a candidate. The Victory Fund is making a huge mistake in doubling down on its support for Tisei. They risk destroying their brand and creating the kind of mess that the HRC got into in the 1998 when they, for example, endorsed the detestable Alphonse D’Amato against Chuck Schumer for U.S. Senator from New York. Their criteria then favored incumbents, even if they were as stupid and homophobic as D’Amato, whose only pro-gay position involved tepid support for allowing gay and lesbians to serve in the military. There was a major reaction against that endorsement, and many members resigned in protest.

I have donated to the Victory Fund for many years. Or rather, I have donated through the Victory Fund to candidates that they have endorsed. I would be very upset if I thought that money I gave to the Victory Fund was being used to support Tisei.

I am in favor of supporting gay Republicans when they run against anti-gay opponents. I even voted for a (straight) Republican who ran against an anti-gay Democrat. But it is folly to vote for a gay Republican whose record on gay issues is much less admirable than the record of his straight Democratic opponent. It is also folly for the Victory Fund to endorse such a candidate.

]]> By: Jay http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144454 Jay Sun, 16 Sep 2012 15:31:40 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144454 Kincaid's attacks on Barney Frank are disgraceful. Given two good candidates, one who is gay and one who is straight, I would probably vote for the gay candidate because we are underrepresented. But that is not the choice people are confronted with in the race between Tierney and Tisei. Tierney is a straight man who has been a steadfast and stalwart supporter of the glbtq community. Tisei is a gay man who would give the Republican Party control of the House and thereby prevent any action on gay positive bills and would facilitate a whole rash of anti-gay bills, which he might vote against but which he could not stop. A vote for Tisei is a vote against gay rights. Kincaid’s attacks on Barney Frank are disgraceful. Given two good candidates, one who is gay and one who is straight, I would probably vote for the gay candidate because we are underrepresented. But that is not the choice people are confronted with in the race between Tierney and Tisei. Tierney is a straight man who has been a steadfast and stalwart supporter of the glbtq community. Tisei is a gay man who would give the Republican Party control of the House and thereby prevent any action on gay positive bills and would facilitate a whole rash of anti-gay bills, which he might vote against but which he could not stop. A vote for Tisei is a vote against gay rights.

]]> By: Robert http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144448 Robert Sun, 16 Sep 2012 15:15:38 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144448 Tim, you are starting to be somewhat predictable at your attempts to twist people's views into something they are not. You say: "I am surprised at how many people are opposing the Victory Fund. They are the primary source through which our community funds gay legislators. " When in fact not ONE individual has written that they "OPPOSE" the Victory Fund. Some did write that they think it not entirely beneficial to elect someone JUST because they are gay. There is a big difference, but thanks for trying to twist your readers views into something they are not. It's a pretty dishonest tact, usually taken by those who lost the argument. If you can't win based on the merits of what you write, twist the other person's words to make it appear you got the best of them. Do you have ANY standards that don't have some dishonesty in them? Tim, you are starting to be somewhat predictable at your attempts to twist people’s views into something they are not. You say:

“I am surprised at how many people are opposing the Victory Fund. They are the primary source through which our community funds gay legislators. ”

When in fact not ONE individual has written that they “OPPOSE” the Victory Fund. Some did write that they think it not entirely beneficial to elect someone JUST because they are gay. There is a big difference, but thanks for trying to twist your readers views into something they are not. It’s a pretty dishonest tact, usually taken by those who lost the argument. If you can’t win based on the merits of what you write, twist the other person’s words to make it appear you got the best of them.

Do you have ANY standards that don’t have some dishonesty in them?

]]> By: Gene in L.A. http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144211 Gene in L.A. Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:15:40 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144211 Tony, I see the problem. It isn't my grammar; it's your comprehension. I will admit that sentence is clumsy, but it's grammatically correct. I didn't mean "you are." I meant "your." Change the word "comparing" to "comparison" and maybe you'll get what it says. You say to me "Voting for someone specifically to keep that particular minority out of power is wrong in the same way that 'straight pride' would be ridiculous since the other 11 months of the year are straight pride." What have I said that leads you to think I disagree with that sentiment? I haven't said anything at all about voting to keep any group or minority or subset of politicians out of office, certainly not gay people, not even gay Republicans. My post made clear I'm fine with gay Republicans who care as much about gay rights as I do. Your very first response to me was to accuse me of sounding like someone who wants "straight pride and white history month." I've been a gay activist for over 40 years. The newsflash that "the other 11 months of the year are straight pride" is something we were talking about before the Stonewall riots. Get off my case and use your energy to do some good. Tony, I see the problem. It isn’t my grammar; it’s your comprehension. I will admit that sentence is clumsy, but it’s grammatically correct. I didn’t mean “you are.” I meant “your.” Change the word “comparing” to “comparison” and maybe you’ll get what it says.

You say to me “Voting for someone specifically to keep that particular minority out of power is wrong in the same way that ‘straight pride’ would be ridiculous since the other 11 months of the year are straight pride.” What have I said that leads you to think I disagree with that sentiment? I haven’t said anything at all about voting to keep any group or minority or subset of politicians out of office, certainly not gay people, not even gay Republicans. My post made clear I’m fine with gay Republicans who care as much about gay rights as I do.

Your very first response to me was to accuse me of sounding like someone who wants “straight pride and white history month.” I’ve been a gay activist for over 40 years. The newsflash that “the other 11 months of the year are straight pride” is something we were talking about before the Stonewall riots. Get off my case and use your energy to do some good.

]]> By: David Waite http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2012/09/14/48734/comment-page-1#comment-144149 David Waite Sun, 16 Sep 2012 03:34:45 +0000 http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=48734#comment-144149 Timothy, you have no way of verifying this dubious statement. <strong>"They are the primary source through which our community funds gay legislators."</strong> Just for the discussion's sake, let me offer a devil's advocate "not surely die" to counter and refute your "surely die" ploy. I take your statement to mean it is the primary source <strong>you</strong> use to fund gay legislators. If in turn I say it is not the primary source our community uses, I have no way of verifying such a dubious statement. What I would therefore say is the truthful statement that it is not <strong>my</strong> primary source. I do my homework on individuals before those individuals get a piece of my wallet. Whatever percentage of the Victory Fund's or the DCCC's overhead comes out of my contribution is money which doesn't buy air time and stationery for my candidates. I strongly recommend every other person, GLBT, straight, Dem, GOP, Liberal or Conservative do their homework and make up their minds about whether individual candidates are a proper fit for their funding. Giving through gatekeepers isn't just mentally and politically lazy, it is also fundamentally undemocratic. Timothy, you have no way of verifying this dubious statement.
“They are the primary source through which our community funds gay legislators.”

Just for the discussion’s sake, let me offer a devil’s advocate “not surely die” to counter and refute your “surely die” ploy. I take your statement to mean it is the primary source you use to fund gay legislators.

If in turn I say it is not the primary source our community uses, I have no way of verifying such a dubious statement. What I would therefore say is the truthful statement that it is not my primary source. I do my homework on individuals before those individuals get a piece of my wallet. Whatever percentage of the Victory Fund’s or the DCCC’s overhead comes out of my contribution is money which doesn’t buy air time and stationery for my candidates.

I strongly recommend every other person, GLBT, straight, Dem, GOP, Liberal or Conservative do their homework and make up their minds about whether individual candidates are a proper fit for their funding. Giving through gatekeepers isn’t just mentally and politically lazy, it is also fundamentally undemocratic.

]]>