News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.



The Log Cabin Republicans' 'education' of the LGBT community on McCain begins

by: Pam Spaulding

Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 09:00:00 AM EDT


I almost lost my lunch reading this spin.  You might recall from a recent post that the Log Cabin Republicans organization said it "will do its part to educate gay and lesbian voters about Sen. McCain in the weeks ahead." Are you ready for the "education"?
As a Republican organization, Log Cabin only endorses GOP candidates.  While the organization has yet to decide on endorsing the Republican candidate for president, we're encouraged that U.S. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has won our party's nomination.

Sen. McCain has had a long relationship with Log Cabin Republicans dating back to the opening of our organization's national office in the mid 1990s.  Log Cabin endorsed Sen. McCain's re-election to the U.S. Senate in 2004.  Log Cabin's national board of directors will soon decide whether to endorse Sen. McCain's presidential bid.

...During his previous run for the White House, McCain met with Log Cabin Republicans in 1999 during the heat of the Republican presidential primary season (which, at the time, no other Republican nominee for president had done).  Eager to show his support for the gay and lesbian community, McCain told then-Log Cabin Executive Director Richard Tafel, "I just want you to know, Rich, that I am unashamed, unembarrassed and proud to work with you."

...Already, some in the LGBT community are dismissing Sen. McCain's votes against the federal marriage amendment.  But this is disingenuous, to say the least.  It took enormous political courage for a Republican Senator from red-state Arizona to buck his own party leadership and President Bush on this hot-button issue.  And it's important to remember that Sen. McCain didn't just vote "no" on the marriage amendment.  He took to the floor of the U.S. Senate and delivered one of the most impassioned speeches against the anti-gay measure, calling it "antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans."

Following a recent report by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) heavily criticizing McCain's record on gay and lesbian issues, a McCain campaign spokesperson said: "Sen. McCain is seeking support from all Americans this November, based on his vision for moving America forward and his long record of treating people with respect and dignity. He was proud to receive an endorsement from the Log Cabin Republicans in his 2004 re-election campaign, and we're confident he'll win strong support this fall."

Are you ready to hurl yet? Halt that impulse...there's more after the jump.
Pam Spaulding :: The Log Cabin Republicans' 'education' of the LGBT community on McCain begins
Here's the Real McCain, according to the LCR, the man who allegedly, quietly, secretly courts your vote.
While we respect those who believe that only traditional "scorecard" LGBT issues such as hate crimes and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) should matter to gay people, we disagree.  The vast majority of LGBT Americans are not one-issue voters.  Like all Americans, gays and lesbians have wide-ranging concerns-from foreign policy to the environment to soaring gas prices to the size of the federal government and more.

McCain's positions on these and many issues will attract independents, including gays and lesbians.  Sen. McCain supports taking an aggressive posture against totalitarian regimes-regimes that threaten, imprison, and kill gay and lesbian people.  By contrast, Sen. Obama has received harsh criticism (and even some skepticism from his fellow Democrats) for indicating he would meet with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad  without conditions.

Additionally, Sen. McCain's philosophy on other issues will attract gay and lesbian voters.  He supports measures that will benefit gay and lesbian business people.  His views on the proper role and scope of the federal government, as well as taxes and spending, energy and the environment may also have wide appeal.  He also supports social security reform that may provide for private retirement accounts, which will directly benefit non-married LGBT Americans.

Sen. McCain is undoubtedly running a campaign to reach out to independent voters, including gay Americans.  We believe he stands a significant chance of receiving more gay votes than George W. Bush did in 2004.

OK. Reality check time:
"I believe that the institution of marriage should be reserved for the union of one man and one woman, said Sen. McCain. The Protect Marriage Arizona Amendment would allow the people of Arizona to decide on the definition of marriage in our state. I wholeheartedly support the Protect Marriage Arizona Amendment and I hope that the voters in Arizona choose to support it as well."
-- John McCain in 2005, supporting Protect Marriage Arizona's ballot initiative (that eventually failed at the polls).

"The legislation unambiguously maintains that open homosexuality within the military services presents an intolerable risk to morale, cohesion and discipline."
--McCain, in an April 16 letter to Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) on why DADT must remain in place.

"John McCain will be a marvelous selection as our nominee. He is with us on abortion. He is with us on the marriage issue."
-- " Rev. Lou Sheldon, of the Traditional Values Coalition

"John McCain is sort of ideal. He doesn't use social issues as wedge issues. He emphasizes the things that united all Republicans."
-- James Vaughn, the California director of the Log Cabin Republicans

It's nice to see the LCRs and the unhinged Lou Sheldon on the same page, huh?

Now, with all that said and done, I will say this -- I don't believe that John McCain is a homophobe when it comes to personal relationships; in fact a little bird told me he has high-level staff that are not only gay, but socially out of the closet. The fact of the matter is that John McCain is unwilling to challenge the far right wing of his party to ensure that good friend Rich Tafel, a man the Arizona senator says he was "unashamed, unembarrassed and proud to work with" has the same civil rights and responsibilities McCain has.

I would support a Republican who was willing to stand up for civil equality - if we were actually a demographic that was openly courted by the GOP; that would actually place more natural pressure on the Democrats to actually do something rather than show us their jellyfish spinelessness time and again. But that's not the GOP I see -- McCain had all primary season long to reject the professional fundie set and come out for fairness. If there are any "promising signs" from the McCain campaign, as the LCR calls them, they were not evident in any of the strategies the public saw.

Democrats may not be right on all the issues - I've certainly had problems with all of the candidates this year, but Barack Obama and those who ran in 2008 have been clear in their support for pro-LGBT legislation on all fronts, with marriage equality as the obvious stumbling block.  That's a world of difference from McCain's public stand and all of his votes aside from FMA.

That's the bottom line - personal statements of support are not equivalent to working publicly to expand rights, not restrict them. That's my problem with the LCRs. I agree with their mission of moving the GOP toward a more inclusive view, but LGBTs have been vilified incessantly by this party for DECADES - where is the improvement? It's not a single-issue matter for gays to avoid voting for a candidate who says he would want  to put another Roberts or Alito on the SCOTUS, or openly opposes hate crimes legislation or ENDA. If there isn't a candidate in favor of the most basic protections of LGBTs, I'm sorry, a promise of permanent tax cuts doesn't mean much out here in Red State America when you can be fired for being gay.

This little vignette from the LCR convention in May 2007 says it all about the mindset:

David Keeton, a small-business owner in Dallas, and his partner, Rob Schlein, said they supported Giuliani because of his record as New York mayor and his response to the Sept. 11 terror attacks. "I'm an American first, then a Republican second, and gay falls in third or fourth," said Keeton, who wore a Ronald Reagan pin on his lapel.

Both said they recently met former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney at a fundraiser and had their picture taken with him. They were offended when Romney told the crowd that he opposed gay marriage and civil unions. "We're part of the Republican Party, but he just alienated people who had paid $1,500 for a table," Keeton said.

Well, while Keeton is ranking and voting his loyalties, it may not occur to him that there are a hell of a lot of people without the means or circumstances in Red states to place being a Republican higher over the problem of being fired from their job or worry about being gay- or trans-bashed.

Related:
* McCain Blend posts

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
He's a friend of the gay community alright
The same way that Thomas Jefferson was a friend of the Black community.

OK
So which gay man is McCain sleeping with? ;)

Cause any fool knows, a dog needs a home; a shelter from pigs on the wing

[ Parent ]
Thomas Jefferson supported abolishing slavery
from the beginning and actually worked throughout his life to limit the slave trade. He believed in equal rights for all men. Abolishing slavery, however, would have torn the fragile Confederacy of States apart before it even had a chance to establish itself. In the South, slavery was, unfortunately, integral to the economy. Jefferson was deeply mired in debt as it was. Although he was able to free five of his slaves upon his death, the rest had to be sold to cover his debts along with most of his estate.

When the states did come to blows 80 years laters over States' Rights, slavery was a central issue. The South only lost because it's agricultural-based economy couldn't sustain an extended war effort and its supporting infrastructure literally fell apart.

Although both believe strongly in States' Rights, Jefferson did more to support Equal Rights and fight discrimination than McCain has done. In fact, McCain supports state-sponsored discrimination in the form of State Constitutional Marriage Amendments.


[ Parent ]
So, he was against slavery
as long as it didn't effect his personal finances?

John Addams farmed. He hired people and worked the fields himself. As did Abagail. Jefferson was many things - among them was a man who would let his children live in slavery. He doesn't get a pass on that since (as you note) he so obviously knew it was wrong.


[ Parent ]
He couldn't just free his slaves
Under the law at the time, they were considered property and, thus, collateral against his debts. In essence, the bank owned them. Yes, he owned slaves. Yes, he believed blacks were inferior to whites and that whites and blacks could not live under the same government. Most white people, even among the abolitionist crowd, believed the same things. However, he was a radical progressive for his time. Jefferson was a political genius who walked a fine line between holding a motley collection of states together and seeing everything he worked so hard for fall apart. He felt guilty that he owned slaves, but it was his personal finances (i.e. the lack of liquid assets) that prevented him from freeing them.

John Adams' farm, like most farms in New England, was tiny compared to the large Southern estates like Montecello or Mount Vernon.

Also, don't forget that, at that time, a free black male had more rights than a white female. We shouldn't make the same mistakes the Religious Right does in their interpretation of the Bible. Whether we like it or not, we are all products of the era we grow up in. Progress will always be met with resistance.


[ Parent ]
Jefferson wanted blacks in Africa, not free blacks in the US
His writings clearly indicate that he believed the Africans (blacks) to be inferior in intellectual and moral capacity, and to be incompatible with the free Anglo-European white-founded colonies and their methods of governance. Jefferson favored shipping the freed slaves back to Africa, although he was not an active promoter of the Liberia scheme.

[ Parent ]
Almost all of the white colonists believed the same things at the time
But his writings also called the institution of slavery immoral which was not a universally held belief, even in the Northern States.

[ Parent ]
Log Cabin Liars
"As a Republican organization, Log Cabin only endorses GOP candidates."

In 2004 they endorsed John Kerry.

McCain is a flip flopper, and I don't believe he can be trusted.


Sorry Rob79 but that simply isn't true...

In 2004 the LCR withheld their endorsement.  They did NOT endorse John Kerry.  They didn't endorse anyone.  

Their by laws specifically forbid them from endorsing non-Republican candidates.  


[ Parent ]
It is rather difficult for me to believe that a man who "disagrees" with
my constitutional rights - and then supports state efforts to AMEND constitutions to specifically limit MY rights. . .and who arrogantly believes that HIS opinion about my constitutional rights is valid while MY opinion about HIS isn't. . .and who believes in appointing Supreme Court justices who pointedly assert that I am a second-class American. . .is someone who intends to be President of ALL Americans. He can't even recognize the LGBT population as FULL Americans.

He might as well just be proposing laws declaring us to be counted as 3/4 of a citizen.


Log Cabin Republicans?
More like Cave Dwelling Republicans. Oh, wait, is that a redundancy?

One agreement with the LCR statement
The vast majority of LGBT Americans are not one-issue voters.

I agree totally.  

However, even if McCain fully supported the "one-issue" of equality for LGBT citizens, his positions on most other issues would make it very difficult for me to vote for him.  Probably impossible, because as the LCR said, I'm not a single issue voter.


Pathetic...
...is the only way to describe those self-loathing LCR losers.

LCR you owe our community for 8 years of HELL
Why don't you do something really useful to educate Republicans about LGBT folks, like outing Condi, Lindsey Graham, Charlie Christ, Patrick McHenry, Mitch McConnell...The queer Republicans who aren't online child predators, blowing their sleeping Republican youth members, or cruising Men's Rooms. I think that could be a very positive learning experience at you CONVENTION.

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner


Bridge for Sale
Perhaps the LCR would like to throw in "education" about the 45 nuclear reactors McCain vows to license across the county...you know that "green" energy alternative because there's not carbon emissions.  

Bridge to 1980 - McCain :P
Nuclear reactors are a silly idea because they will bring forth nuclear waste that nobody would like to store in their neighborhoods.

McCain is getting there, but he's not quite there. He lacks common sense.  


[ Parent ]
For those who think the LCRs are fooling themselves...
TAPPER: You oppose same-sex marriage.

OBAMA: Yes.

And

OBAMA: You know, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman...

Compare and contrast with:

McCAIN: I believe that the institution of marriage should be reserved for the union of one man and one woman...

The difference is obvious, right?

Who's fooling who then?

You have to go past the sound-bytes, past the second-hand stuff. Here is a more complete view:

TAPPER: You oppose same-sex marriage.

OBAMA: Yes.

TAPPER: Do you think that the fact that this is now going on in California, does that cause you to re-think your pledge to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act?

OBAMA: No. I still think that these are decisions that need to be made at a state and local level. I'm a strong supporter of civil unions. And I think that, you know, we're involved in a national conversation about this issue.

You know, I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I also think that same-sex partners should be able to visit each other in hospitals, they should be able to transfer property, they should be able to get the same federal rights and benefits that are conferred onto married couples.

And so, you know, as president, my job is to make sure that the federal government is not discriminating and that we maintain the federal government's historic role in not meddling with what states are doing when it comes to marriage law. That's what I'll do as president.

As far as I can see, there is no significant difference between the McCain and Obama camps on GLBT issues. To be cynical, one stabs us in the front, the other stabs us in the back. But only one gets the GLBT vote as a bloc, no matter what the actual policies are. Look at how much the DNC has actually rather than symbolically achieved, with ENDA and the Matthew Shepard act... they'll be law one day, real soon now, they promise.

More Democrats voted against ENDA than Republicans voted for it, remember. The LCRs may be wrong, but don't say you're not doing exactly the same thing yourselves.

There is no situation so complex it can't get even worse


You think that shows that the two are the SAME?

Are you kidding?  Is that what you really took from what you posted?

Can you show me where McCain has said ANYTHING that came close to, "I also think that same-sex partners should be able to visit each other in hospitals, they should be able to transfer property, they should be able to get the same federal rights and benefits that are conferred onto married couples."

Get back to me on that if you would.

I'll be right here waiting when you find it.


[ Parent ]
There's nothing new about a cynical political hack
telling audiences what they want to hear so you may be right.  But don't be surprised if His Holiness starts sucking up to the homophobic right as soon as he gets the nomination.

And why shouldn't he? He's got a significant number of LGBT voters willing to march in lockstep behind him no matter what he does, and to get in a defensive huff when any kind of reality check appears on the horizon.

His Holiness has said quite clearly that he'll support anything the states want to do to LGBT citizens. And he's said it more than once. And there's no reason for him to not do that once he's President.


[ Parent ]
Guess Which Presidential Candidate Said This In An Interview
'We must be careful to keep our eyes on the prize-equal rights for every American. We must continue to fight for the Employment Non Discrimination Act. We ust vigorously expand hate-crime legislation and be vigilant about how these laws are enforced. We must continue to expand adoption rights to make them consistent and seamless throughout all 50 states, and we must repeal the "Don't Ask Don't Tell' military policy.'

This interview was done in Chicago's Windy City Times GLBT paper on February 11, 2004

So can you guess who the candidate was?   Hint, it wasn't John McCain or Hhillary Clinton.
 


I assume it was the devotee
of States' Rights and separate-but-equal when it comes to LGBT citizens.

Hint, that isn't John McCain. Double-hint: it's a POTUS candidate who many voters still think can raise the dead and walk on water.


[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Join the Blend Chat Room



Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox