« GWOT got ya down? Need a laugh? | Main | Yiddish Proverb Sunday! Read, so you should learn! »
February 27, 2005
Gannon-fodder for the gay-hating Left.
I've refrained from commenting on Gannongate because, honestly, I haven't been able to figure out exactly what it's about. I've read thousands of words about it, yet if you asked me to write a one-sentence summary of the issues at stake, I really couldn't.
I figured maybe I just wasn't paying enough attention. That's common enough. Or maybe I wasn't smart enough, or versed enough in the context of the case, to make any sense of it. Also not unheard of. Or maybe I was just missing that one key piece of information that would make everything fall into place with a satisfied, "Aha!"
But I'm coming to believe that the reason I can't understand Gannongate is that there's really no "there" there. Gannongate is a fierce dust storm whipping around all kinds of garbage and detritus, but every time I look past the pelting filth and into the vortex, there's nothing in there.
The strongest impression I'm left with after brushing off all the flying dreck is this.
The left is furious because the Bush administration:
- does not administer a strict morality test to every potential member of the press pool.
- allows gay reporters in the press pool, even if they have actual gay sex in their background. Presumably the White House should shun and punish gay hustlers, though we're never told exactly why.
- does not do deep, invasive CIA-style background searches on every potential member of the press pool, to ensure that no one who has participated in an activity that the Christian Right disapproves of ever has a shot at attending a press conference.
- allows partisan reporters, or those from obscure organizations, to question the president. Presumably there should be an audience-size cutoff and a partisanship test, which would of course have to apply equally to the Left.
Basically, the Bush administration is being pilloried for not being bigoted enough.
I'm stunned by the gleeful openness of the Left's jihad against this guy for having allegedly been a gay escort.
More than that, I continue to be incredibly discouraged by the free pass the Left gets from gays.
This is one of the many reasons why, though I care a great deal about civil rights for gays, I can never, ever support the Democratic party in its current form ever again. Forced to choose, I settle for the Republican stance on homosexuality. I don't agree with it, and I wish it were progressive, instead of just seeking to solidify the current status quo, but at least the Republican Party says what it means on gay rights.
By contrast, I am disgusted by the pathetic, pandering lip service the Democrats offer gays, and the tragic eagerness with which the "gay community" laps up the half-assed, wishy-washy sorta-promises year after year. No wonder the Republicans write gays off; they can afford to. Nothing they can do or say will win them those votes anyway. Gays have asked for nothing from the Dems, and have eagerly accepted the nothing they receive, while always finding a way to blame "the Right" for the scarcity of gay-rights goodies. I don't know whether homosexuality is hard-wired from the womb, but apparently the need to vote Democrat is hard-wired in homosexuals.
But maybe Gannongate explains the need for gays to vote Democrat: Because a gay Republican unleashes the inner Fred Phelps in every Lefty. Gay Democrats, you see, are a put-upon, protected, victimized minority, and anyone who has a critical thing to say about them is a bigot indulging in hate speech. But gay Republicans — why, they're unclean, immoral faggots who'd hump any filthy pervert with a few dollars in his Vaseline-smeared paws, and how dare they even hope for a place in the public discourse, let alone in the White House press room!
There are some things I'll just never understand. One of them is why most gays think the Democratic Party is on their side, or has any use for them beyond their ability to pull a lever in a voting booth.
Update: More on this at Right Wing News and Brainster.
Update: Just One Minute reports great news from the White House Correspondents Association: They're not accepting the Gay Hustler Trojan Horse that comes bearing a press credentialing crackdown. Pressure to crack down on who has access to the White House -- isn't it delicious that this should come from the same moonbats who screamed about the loss of free speech in AshKKKroft's AmeriKKKa?
Posted by EtherPundit at February 27, 2005 08:10 AM Category: Bush Administration , Current Affairs , Media
Comments
Every point you make regarding gays and the Democratic Party goes double for blacks and the Democratic Party.
Posted by: Van Helsing ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.etherhouse.com/etherhouse/nav-commenters.gif)
at February 27, 2005 02:55 PM
"As a blogger, Mr. Gannon's new tactic is to encourage fellow right-wing bloggers to portray him as the victim of a homophobic left-wing witch hunt that destroyed his privacy. Given that it was Mr. Gannon himself who voluntarily exhibited his own private life by appearing on Web sites advertising his services as a $200-per-hour escort, that's a hard case to make. But it is a clever way to deflect attention from an actual sexual witch hunt conducted by his own fake news organization in early 2004. It was none other than Talon News that advanced the fictional story that a young woman 'taped an interview with one of the major television networks' substantiating a rumor on the Drudge Report that John F. Kerry had had an extramarital affair with an intern. (Mr. Kerry had to publicly deny the story just as his campaign came out of the gate.)" -- Frank Rich, NYT
If you do some searching around the blogosphere, Ether, you may find it hard to make your case that Gannon's sexuality is the central issue, or even a relevant issue, on Left Wing blogs. Just try....
Posted by: Brad at March 3, 2005 01:33 PM
You people have no morals whatever. You have no shame, either. Harriet Hypocrites, that's what you are, and stupid, too. Here's a reality check for you reichers: You can type "The Gay Hating Left" till your fingers fall off, but the fact is the right is anti-gay, and that's a fact. It is your bubble boy, George WTC Bush, who advanced the ban on gay marriage, and your goons in the senate and house who so lustily clamor for this crap. Liars!
- tabbs
Posted by: Tabbs at March 3, 2005 07:29 PM
Ah, tabbs! March 3, 2005 was a banner day for EtherHouse. For you're not truly a blogger until you've been addressed as "you people," and been called "stupid" and a liar. And you gave me all three in one comment!
All this, and you violated Godwin's law! (NB: "Reich" is capitalized.)
Then, a light dusting of humor to sweeten the dish: "Harriet Hypocrite," a memorable new epithet.
I couldn't have written it better myself. Many thanks, tabbs!
Posted by: EtherPundit at March 5, 2005 10:01 PM
Brad and Tabbs,
Do a Google search for "Defense of Marriage Act," and see which President signed it into law.
While you're there, do another for "Don't Ask Don't Tell."
After you master the search engine, maybe you can explain to me why I can't get Google to find me any examples of John Kerry and his ilk proposing any kind of Gay Rights bills. Or demanding acceptance of gays in the military. Or gay marriage.
And beyond all that, please explain why any of this has a darn thing to do with Gannon or any other reporter being given a pass to a press conference. Are you actually saying that gays should be blocked from the White House?
Because that seems to be the only complaint you guys have about Gannon. But, hey if you really insist....
Posted by: Mick McMick at March 6, 2005 04:24 PM
As for the Drudge rumor, that came from Wonder-Boy Clinton's (and Michael Moore's) pick for the White House: Wesley Clark.
Posted by: Mick McMick at March 6, 2005 04:27 PM
Mick,
You're right that the Defense of Marriage Act was signed by a Democratic President. However, you may not have realized that Sen. John Kerry voted AGAINST it.
My original point was that Leftists are not attacking Gannon for being gay or being a gay hustler. They are attacking him, and the White House, for allowing a fake reporter access to those White House press briefings. If you can find some examples of Leftists attacking Gannon solely for his sexuality, I'd love to see them. Every blogger I have read--and Leftist pundits too, like Frank Rich (whom I quoted above) criticizes Gannon for something other than his sexuality. The Right is pretending like Gannon is somehow the victim of an anti-gay Left when in reality they are trying to deflect attention from the true nature of this controvery: a fake reporter planted in WH Press conferences by a former Republican Convention delegate in order to throw softball questions at the President.
Posted by: Brad at March 7, 2005 02:18 PM