18 responses

  1. TomTallis
    December 30, 2012

    ‘That’s an incredible amount of money to tell everyone that Hormel is “wrong on gay rights.”’

    I think you meant Hegel…

    • Jim Burroway
      December 30, 2012

      I did. Thanks for the correction.

  2. TomTallis
    December 30, 2012

    Glenn Greenwald has a good piece in the Guardian today on the same subject.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/30/hagel-log-cabin-republicans-ad

  3. tomchicago01
    December 30, 2012

    LCR is noisily scraping their chairs on the floor, desperately trying to find a place and get their legs under the table only to discover that all they’re going to get to eat is some cold soup.

  4. Hank
    December 30, 2012

    Hear hear!

  5. tim
    December 30, 2012

    The LCR has made the same mistakes that the HRC made. Becoming an ultra partisan organization while selling out the reason they were created.

    Neither org gets my cash anymore.

  6. Sami
    December 30, 2012

    I take serious issue with this article and it’s claim that the LCR still had any credibility left to lose.

  7. Ben in Oakland
    December 30, 2012

    Well, Sami said it before I did. I have credited LCR with some accomplishments, but they are so eager to be the lap dogs of the Republican Party that they long ago lost credibility with me as anything other than conservatives who are willing to say they’re gay, and occasionally put their money where their feet are.

    I’m an American first, and a conservative republican second.

    Spoken like a true American conservative republican. Gay doesn’t register all that much.

  8. tristram
    December 30, 2012

    @Jim Burroway – Hagel’s full statement was not that weak. He went beyond characterizing his original comments as ‘insensitive’ to state that those comments do not reflect his present views and that he is fully committed to implementing the repeal of DADT:

    “My comments 14 years ago in 1998 were insensitive,” Hagel said. “They do not reflect my views or the totality of my public record, and I apologize to Ambassador Hormel and any LGBT Americans who may question my commitment to their civil rights. I am fully supportive of ‘open service’ and committed to LGBT military families.”

    Hagel is by far Obama’s most qualified potential SecDef. Given the major issues the SecDef will have to deal with in the next 4 years, we need to put the nation’s interest first and support the President on this one. Fortunately, based on Obama’s track record and Hagel’s statement, that does not mean diminishing the momentum we have built toward full equality.

  9. Timothy Kincaid
    December 31, 2012

    It seems that Log Cabin thinks Hagel as Secretary of defense is bad for our community. So do I.

    They also think he’s bad on Middle East issues. So do I.

    So what is their crime here?

    Is it that they spent money on this ad that you think they should have spent somewhere else? Those are mot my priorities, but considering that not a cent of that money came from me, I’m not sure I get to make that call.

    Is it that Cooper made contradictory statements? Yeah, I agree that’s stupid. But it certainly isn’t worth all this anger and ire.

    Or is it that Log Cabin’s position is the same as the Republican Party on the issue? Is it the perception that Log Cabin just might in some way be advancing a Republican goal as opposed to a Democrat goal?

    Maybe not, but that’s how this reads to me.

    You seem to be proposing that the only purpose for gay Republicans is to oppose the Republican Party. Or, at least, to never disagree with Democratic goals.

    Which is why Log Cabin quit caring what the “the community” thinks about them decades ago. They – and the quarter to third of gay people who agree with them – do what they think is best for gay people and the nation, not what gay Democrats think best and don’t give much weight to the opinions of people who regularly call them kapos and Uncle Toms. (Yes, I know that you do not. But even those who do not do so generally don’t publicly disagree with those who do.)

    Sometimes they get it very wrong, like endorsing Romney. Sometimes they get it very right, like DADT. But they aren’t worried about being expelled from a community that kicked them out when Carter was in office.

    As for “where’d they get the money”, I have no inside info. But I have a good guess. There happens to be an organization that is very affluent and very committed to gay rights and very connected to Log Cabin which I also suspect is very supportive of Israel. (Hint: think New York).

    And if my guess is right, then you can decide if it’s a crime against the community to oppose the administration on Obama’s Secretary of Defense possible nominee through funds provided by an ally. But if so, I’m rolling my eyes.

    One other minor thing. I assume you’re on LCR’s email list (like me, I’m sure you get dozens of groups). Several months ago I noticed that they were accepting applications for a new director.

  10. Jim Burroway
    December 31, 2012

    Timothy, I do wish you would respond to the post that I wrote and not to the one you seem to think I wrote. I don’t give a rat’s patootie whether they support Republican or Democratic principles. In fact, I would expect them to support Republican ones, but *not* at the expense of the LGBT community.

    Let me try to approach it this way.

    Their motto is “inclusion wins,” isn’t it?

    Doesn’t that mean fostering inclusion within the Republican party whenever the opportunity arises?

    And isn’t Hagel a Republican?

    And didn’t he at least express some movement toward inclusion?

    Romeny didn’t. Where is his NYTimes $100K ad?

    And what does this say to any other Republican who moves toward inclusion?

    What I would expect is for the LCR to, you know, work toward inclusion, which might mean figuring out how to at least acknowledge that there was some movement. And one might think that one way to do that might be not to continue to highlight a fourteen-year-old comment without somehow acknowledging Hagel’s more recent statement which shows precisely the kind of movement that LCR claims (false, we now know) to be working towards.

    But what this latest action says is that none of LCR’s grand talk about “inclusion” matters one bit. The ONLY thing they care about anymore is whether a Republican steps outside of the increasingly narrowly drawn Party Lines. When you do that, then inclusion doesn’t mean shit. And if you stay within Party Lines, exclusion doesn’t matter.

    Which, when you think about it, really means that there is now no practical difference between LCR and GOProud. The only difference now is that Ann Coulter prefers one over the other.

    • Jim Burroway
      December 31, 2012

      And by the way, I did subscribe to LCR emails, but for whatever reason, I haven’t been getting them lately. In fact, it’s been a vey long time since I’ve gotten one, now that I think of it.

  11. Timothy Kincaid
    December 31, 2012

    If your objection was that they were not supporting Republicans that were moving towards inclusion, perhaps that point was a bit understated. I missed it completely.

    And I think you already know my opinion on Hagel’s ‘oh I didn’t really mean it and since I want to be Sec of Defense I now hold opinions that are 180 degrees from my voting record’. I’m with Barney Frank on this one.

    And while we’re discussing Party Line, what is the Republican Party Line on Hagel? I don’t know. I’ve heard some Republicans support him and some do not. In fact, the only Party Line that I know is the President’s.

    So it looks like LCR is guilty of NOT upholding that Party Line. Guess that makes them partisan extremists, huh?

  12. Timothy Kincaid
    December 31, 2012

    And, by the way, I can’t fathom how opposing Hagel is “at the expense of the LGBT community”.

  13. Jim Burroway
    January 1, 2013

    I’m sure you are quite aware that Hagel has done two things against the Party Line: 1) he recognizes that Hillary clinton is secretary of state and not Netanyahu, and 2) that he would dare to work for a Democratic administration when the Part Line is to always say NO to anything that hints at cooperation.

    And, by the way, I can’t fathom how opposing Hagel is “at the expense of the LGBT community”.

    If you think that addressing 14 year old comments in a manner that shifts the conversation towards inclusion and opens up the opportunity for dialogue — one, which hasn’t yet taken place as far as I am concerned — and getting slammed as though that opening never took place is NOT at the expense of the LGBT community, then let’s just see how the LCR’s new “exclusion wins” mode of operation goes over in the long haul.

    LCR has placed party purity over inclusion, and that ALWAYS works against the LGBT community, whether it’s the LCR doing it or Barney Frank.

    Otherwise, I’d have to have a double standard myself. And I refuse to get one.

  14. Robert
    January 1, 2013

    Jim-

    Timothy didn’t get the inclusive portion of Hagel’s statement as he got his news information from Fox News, which left out the edifying comments.

    He ranted about the “apology” and slammed it, but couldn’t be bothered to post the entire thing.

    I don’t care for Hagel, I thought he was a poor choice, partly for his past stances and his voting record on LGBT issues, and the fact that I think there are perfectly qualified Democrats who can hold that position. THias constant use of Republicans as SOD is damning to the democratic party in that it suggests that a Democrat can’t run Defense. Why Obama kept Gates for so long is beyond me, and the very brief tenure of Panetta makes little sense either. I believe we should have a Democrat in the position, but I’m pretty swayed by Party over person sometimes, because I don’t trust Republican’s to tell the truth, ever. On this site the conservative is sloppy in reporting and leaves out a LOT of pertinent information, presenting a dishonest conversation stemming from a dishonest origin. Your article and some linked on here by tristram have made me re-think this particular nomination. The President gets to pick, not me, so I will trust his judgement when it comes down to it.

  15. Priya Lynn
    January 1, 2013

    Timothy said “And while we’re discussing Party Line, what is the Republican Party Line on Hagel? I don’t know. I’ve heard some Republicans support him and some do not. In fact, the only Party Line that I know is the President’s.”.

    I really don’t believe there is any American who doesn’t know what the Republican party line is. The Republican party line is to oppose anything the Democrats want to do regardless even when what the Democrats propose was an idea the Repulicans had proposed themselves in the past or fully supported when they were in government.

  16. Timothy Kincaid
    January 1, 2013

    I’m sure you are quite aware that Hagel has done two things against the Party Line: 1) he recognizes that Hillary clinton is secretary of state and not Netanyahu, and 2) that he would dare to work for a Democratic administration when the Part Line is to always say NO to anything that hints at cooperation.

    Wow. I had to check to see if someone wasn’t just using your name.

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

Back to top
mobile desktop