RECENT  POSTS:  » One of America's most anti-gay organizations rallies for the Duggars; because of course they would » Photo: Stop! Turn around! Don't let NOM force you onto the dead-end pier that is their cause! » One day, two country singers—zero closets » Fringe pro-discrimination group thinks it can stop companies from sponsoring HRC event; adorable » Video: Josh Duggar promoting civil inequality for thousands of grown kids (and counting) » Brian Brown's focus on Kansas, Gov. Brownback shows how much of a political game this is for him » Tiny fraction of North Carolina magistrates choose to free up their days rather than serve local gays » Video: Reality star Josh Duggar leads sad little inequality rally in Little Rock, AR » READ: Federal judge strikes Montana's discriminatory marriage ban » Major global brand P&G comes out for marriage equality  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

09/03/2008

Video: Remind us to never ask Patrick Sammon to define 'inclusive'

by Jeremy Hooper

Log Cabin Republicans' Patrick Sammon went on CNN today to talk about his organization's endorsement of John McCain. GLAAD has sent us the clip:

Hmm. John McCain voted against the FMA, yet he supports both the California anti-gay amendment and the one in his home state of Arizona. He doesn't want to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He opposes ENDA. Plus both he and Sarah Palin have indicated non-support for a whole host of other LGBT rights matters (such as hate crimes legislation).

Support this ticket all you want, Patrick. We respect that you and your organization have differing viewpoints regarding the role of government. But the "inclusive" spin? Just stop it. Please. Just stop it! It is making even your defenders -- and we at G-A-Y have always been friendly to LCR -- lose respect for all that you claim to stand for.

Patrick Sammon on CNN Discussing LCR Endorsement [GLAAD Blog]

**SEE ALSO: Our right-leaning pal Chris Crain has a great roundup of all of the LCR endorsement developments.

**HRC's response to the LCR endorsement:

"John McCain claims to be a maverick who breaks with his party, but on matters of LGBT equality, he's shown that he's anything but. He actively campaigned for a constitutional amendment that would have banned marriage and domestic partnerships for same-sex couples in his home state of Arizona. He went so far as to appear in television commercials for that campaign, is now supporting an amendment to strip marriage equality from California couples and has said that he would vote for a federal marriage amendment if laws already banning marriage equality were to be struck down by federal courts. Sarah Palin has also supported bans on marriage and even domestic partner benefits in Alaska. The Republican Party, McCain and Palin's party, has declared in its platform that they want to pass the federal marriage amendment. Their party's platform also calls gay and lesbian Americans unfit for military service, supports policies that would allow faith-based organizations to deny us jobs and services using federal dollars, and attacks judges who acknowledge our equality under the law. The Human Rights Campaign endorses mavericks on both sides of the aisle- neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin is among them"
Human Rights Campaign Statement on Log Cabin Republican Endorsement of McCain/Palin [HRC]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

I don't pretend to speak for LCR or Patrick Sammon, but I think by "inclusive" he's not refering to policy. I think that he is saying that unlike the Bush administration, McCain is not actively campaigning against gay equality and that gay people are welcome in the campaign and, according to his probably the administration).

I think the difference is between those who say "Go away, heathen" and those who say "I disagree with you but I'll listen to you".

Of course, many others may think that is inadequately inclusive.

Posted by: Timothy | Sep 3, 2008 3:45:26 PM

But Timothy, I would say that he totally IS campaigning along anti-gay lines. He has made his support for the trio of marriage amendments known.

I understand how some (you?) like him despite the nonsupport in certain areas. Hell, even on the Dem side we have to overlook some things. But I truly feel like LCR has been working overtime trying to spin McCain and Palin both as something that is simply not supported by their records.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 3, 2008 4:01:39 PM

I think that Patrick Sammon should try to use more words that don't have S's in them. That Lissssthp is a bit annoying.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Sep 3, 2008 5:01:32 PM

Well, not exactly.

I don't enjoy being in the position of defending McCain's position on marriage, but for accuracy's sake:

The CA Yes on 8 campaign asked for his position and received an email with the vaguest of endorsements:

"I support the efforts of the people of California to recognize marriage as a unique institution between a man and a woman, just as we did in my home state of Arizona. I do not believe judges should be making these decisions"

I don't know the status of FL, but I don't think he's on record for the current AZ campaign (or perhaps I have that backwards). McCain also promised the fundies to talk about gay marriage, but if he has ever mentioned the propositions or gay marriage during his speeches, I can't find it.

It's not exactly what I would call "campaigning" on the issue.

I too want accuracy without the spin. But if I took some gay blogs (not this one) as truth, I'd think that McCain want to replace the government with a theocracy and is the equivalent of Rick Santorum. Neither position is accurate.

Posted by: Timothy | Sep 3, 2008 7:09:29 PM

I simply can't understand the LCR.

I think this guy must be a very tormented person.

Can't you select some sort of superior being or organization and then simply thrive in the abuse that you know you're going to get from it? Maybe that's what the LCR is all about.

I'm just say'n......

db

Posted by: dave b | Sep 3, 2008 8:01:00 PM

Well maybe "campaigning" on the issue is too strong. But he does, without debate, come down in favor of state-level marriage amendments. Always.

No, he's not a Santorum. No, he doesn't make a habit of bashing gay lives and loves. But it's hard to disconnect his position on the issue of state-level marriage amendments from his every political operation.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 3, 2008 8:09:20 PM

I do applaud the LRC's attempts to change the Republicans from the inside, but doing things like endorsing a candidate that basically promised to overturn Lawrence v. Texas is beyond idiotic.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Sep 4, 2008 4:33:11 PM

I completely agree with the idea of trying to change the GOP from the inside and I think that, at the state and local level, the LCRs have made some progress in blue states. I'm usre the log cabins have alot more influence with Governor Schwarzenegger then the religous right in California.

What's enfuraiting is when they pretend to be making more progress at the national level then they actually are, and they actively try to mislead gay voters (many of whom are probably not as well informed as the type of people who read this blog) into believing there is not much difference on gay issues.

It would be one thing if Schwarzenegger, or lincoln Chafee or Olympia Snowe were the Republican nominee but they are not, nor could they be in the current climate of the Repiblican party. And the LCR should stop pretending otherwise.

Posted by: Phil | Sep 4, 2008 9:49:34 PM

Phil: That is exactly what's driving me (and others) nuts about LCR's McCain/Palin endorsement. It's fine that they view the role of government differently -- we expect that. But they are absolutely making it sound as if McCain/Palin are just a step away from being as dedicated to gay rights as the Dems and Obam, when that just isn't the case.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 4, 2008 11:33:01 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails