FRC really knows how to advance a cause. Ours.
The Family Research Council's newest strategy at this late DADT hour: Building on the idea that openly heterosexual soldiers are on the cusp of fleeing or dying, thanks to the so-called homosexual agenda:
Winter isn't officially upon us until next week, but it looks like Snowe and Flake have already melted. Two Republicans, Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine) and Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.), both made stunning decisions to back a bill that could force soldiers to leave their jobs--or be hurt doing them. Despite warnings from General James Amos that overturning "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" would cost Marines lives and limbs, more Republicans are chickening out when the troops need them most. [SOURCE]
That's a sweet thing to lay at people's feet for the sake of political gain, ain't it?
But believe it or not, that's actually enot the most telling comment we saw in today's FRC "Washington Update." No, no -- that honor would actually go to this quip:
Attempting to explain her turncoat maneuver, [Sen. Olympia Snowe] said she arrived at her decision after "careful analysis" (which, considering how her state just voted to protect marriage, probably wasn't as careful as it should have been). [SOURCE]
We say telling, because it completely belies the "it's only about marriage" strategies that these folks always use whenever nuptial parity is on a state ballot. Here we have FRC -- major players in Maine, like all other marriage states -- connecting a completely unrelated issue right smack back to the marriage matter, simply because both conversations have gay people at heart (despite how lacking that heart might be). FRC's suggestion seems to be that Sen. Snowe's primary source of information gathering on DADT should not have been the Pentagon report or the opinions of folks like Gates or Mullen, but rather the most recent way that a majority of citizens from her home state chose to treat gay people. The suggested answer seeming to be that discrimination is transferrable, with only the target needing to remain the same, not the issue up for debate.
If that's what they wanna go with, fine. But we're gonna throw it right back in their faces the next time we read a "this is not about discriminating against gays -- it's about protecting marriage" press release. That is, of course, unless our suddenly-gay-only military is unable to stave off world domination with only the pride flags and Quiche Lorraines that we plan to radically use as replacement weapons, ultimately stripping us of the right to call out Southern Poverty Law Center-designated "hate groups" on their homo-hostile nonsense.
comments powered by Disqus