Homocon

10:30 a.m. : Here at the studio in Bothell, listening to the pre-show banter and talking about whether I identify myself as "Republican" or "Conservative". I said "Conservative", but I think that's more because I come from a cultural generation that prides itself on independence and eschews labels. "Conservative" is less a label than an identification of core social and economic values, but I think I'm just splitting hairs at this point.

10:40 a.m. : Talking about how Sean Hannity gets on our nerves when he asks a question and then spends the rest of the time answering it himself, instead of letting his guests speak.

10:43 a.m. : Monty Python and "The Gods Must Be Crazy"

10:47 a.m. : It's the 30th anniversary of the Fall of Saigon. And now we're talking about podcasting. Scott is saying that MTV VJ Adam Curry came up with the whole Podcasting idea. Adam Curry? Really?

11:00 a.m. : We're a go!

11:06 a.m. : The co-hosts are a riot. Lots of energy. Bush radio address -- social security again. I believe it was Ann Althouse that was blogging the other day about how tired she is of hearing about filibusters, judicial nominees and social security. She said, "Where are the big topics?" I concur.

11:11 a.m. : "Thank you, George."

11:14 a.m. : The social security system is not a retirement system. "There is nothing about the social security system we have that's worth saving . . . wean people off the dependence on government."

11:15 a.m. : Audi driving left-wing nut-jobs? But Scott, I drive an Audi . . .

11:20 a.m. : Fellow blogger Ambra Nykol and I are quietly waiting our turn, tapping away at our laptops.

11:24 a.m. : Repeal the new gas tax increase.

11:29 a.m. : Big Tent! The drama begins. Next we'll have a telephone interview with the founder of Muslims for Bush, Muhammad Ali Hasan.

11:35 a.m. : "We get paid back in tax cuts," and we laugh. "President Bush really is the most pro-muslim American politician we've ever had." Wow. How come I never hear any other Muslim's say that? "Saddam Hussein has killed more Muslims than any other world leader."

11:39 a.m. : Cracking up about the Michael Moore reference. "That kid with the kite was probably the only happy person in Iraq." Oh, he just said "Iraq is a lot like America was in the 1930's," . . . wow.

11:44 a.m. : I like this guy.

11:49 a.m. : What sets Muslims for America apart from CAIR? "The problem with CAIR . . . creating a negative environment for Muslims in America. It's very partisan, Muslims are becoming divided." Ha! "A one bloc voting group that's ready to become marginalized by the Democrats."

12 noon : We're on, both Ambra Nykol and I, as representatives of the "diverse" blogosphere. She, a black female conservative, and me, a white gay conservative. Should prove interesting, as we're both chatty, and have a lot to say.

5:40 p.m. : The show has been over for several hours. I had a great time. The co-hosts were terrific, and my fellow blogger, Ambra, was great. I was sitting next to her the whole time thinking, "Damn, she's really good at this. How did she get so good at thinking on her feet?" It took me a bit to find my own pace, but once that happened, I, uhm, tended to take the ball and run. But it was good fun. I enjoyed the experience of hanging out for a couple of hours with like-minded individuals, though I think I was the only non-Christian in the room (funny, though, how I get along better with a roomful of Christians than a roomful of lefties), and I was, of course, the only gay male there. But hey -- Ambra was the only black female there, so we both got to be "tokens". I suppose that's only to be expected when you're not straight and white in America.

But that's why I appreciate the Republican Party so much -- I can be gay and an atheist and still have a great discussion about politics and philosophy with other Republicans. There's still a place for me at the table. With the Gay Left, once you say you think gay marriage is a crock, they don't even want to hear another word from you. So much for the alleged tolerance and diversity.

I'll download the MP3 of the show tomorrow and post segments of it on the site. Hope some of you were able to catch the lively discussion.

DOWNLOAD ALERT:
Actually, here's the audio now.

OFF TOPIC:
Oh my god! This is frickin' hee-larious (and so true!).

Posted by at 6:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)

I'd like to take this opportunity to introduce you to just a few of my fellow conservative-homosexual bloggers and columnists (for those who insist that I must be a freakish anomaly). Please take the opportunity to acquaint yourself with their various shapes, sizes, influences and attitudes, of which you'll find a refreshing variety. I've included short quotes with links to their relevant postings and articles.

Lavender But Not Pink:
"Democrats like to pretend to be gay-friendly, but they rarely come through on their promises to us. Their whole tactic with us is, "You don't want one of those horrible Republicans to get elected, do you?" They take us for granted and rarely do anything for us. Republican politicians are perceived as less gay-friendly, but this is chiefly because they only make promises they intend to honor."

"Dr. Laura Schlessinger was demonized and threatened for stating that people who have AIDS or are HIV+ should not have sex, a statement which I considered as obvious as that when I have a cold, I shouldn't take a sip from my friend's can of Pepsi."

"The majority of Americans, crossing party lines, are not in favor of gay marriage at this time. Though that didn't stop a liberal blogger whose site I visited recently from making the sweeping assertion that "the Bush administration has disregarded the call for gay marriage." No, it just recognized that the call for no gay marriage was larger. Also, some of you may recall that the Clinton administration "ignored" that call too."

Steve Yuhas:
"If gays believe that the line between gay marriage and heterosexual marriage is arbitrary and baseless, why then should there be any line at all? Either society has a right to set limits and standards on marriage or it doesn't. I think it does, and I think that the line should be drawn where it always has been: and that is to say that marriage is a heterosexual institution."

"Gay pride in San Diego and other major American cities is the one weekend where all the eyes of the media are trained on gay folks, and they take every opportunity to summon every stereotype that they demand straight America dismiss and conduct themselves in a way inconsistent with every public decency law on the books."

"A cursory search reveals what anyone with an ounce of common sense could figure out – the typical suspects (gays, pro-abortion, anti-Catholic Catholics) hate Benedict XVI and the rest of the faithful loves him for defending their faith . . . Nobody forces grown men and women to be members of a particular faith and if you don’t like your faith leave it, but why demand a faith change when it is you who are violating doctrine?"

Gay Patriot West:
"So often do those on the left brand us gay conservatives "self-loathing" that it seems to be the "default" reaction of liberals to a gay person who does not fit into the liberal view of what a gay person should be. In reality, all they're doing is fixing a label on something they refuse to understand."

"Too many gay activists and leaders, it seems, have failed to ask themselves what they, through their activism and lobbying, ultimately seek to accomplish . . . gay leaders should focus on the "vision thing," what they, through their activism, ultimately seek to accomplish. As they do that, they will see how good things really are for us, how far we have come and understand how close we are to fully realizing that vision."

"Once again, we confront the narrow-mindedness of certain partisan Democrats who refuse to understand gay Republicans. Clinton's smear confirms the point I made in my most recent (substantive) post, that conservatives "are stigmatized by many on the left who assume that being a part of some minority, be it one of race, religion or sexual orientation requires one to adopt the principles of contemporary American liberalism."

Queer Conservative:
"I'm a former Democrat that can no longer deal with or ignore the idiocy of the left, and who is also worried about far right drift of the republicans. Let's DO SOMETHING!"

"Ann Coulter is right - we should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity, or Buddhism, or Zoroastrianism, or anything other than what they believe in now. Their peaceful beliefs are killing us!"

"American's rarely absorb an idea or philosophy from another culture without giving it a uniquely American spin. I can see it now . . . an Islam changed from the inside out; dragged kicking and screaming a full four centuries into the future. An islamic American superpower standing against fuedalism, theocracy, and totalitarianism. A female president leading the charge. Wouldn't that make the Ayatollah role over in his grave."

Posted by at 5:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Everybody's new favorite blogger ("Who -- me?!") will be appearing as a guest on this coming Saturday's Republican Radio program as part of a lineup discussing the social and philosophical diversity of today's Republican Party.

The show will include conservatives of all stripes -- Muslim, Latino, Black, male, female, business owner, artist, straight, gay, etc. The host will be asking me mostly about how I formed my conservative beliefs, the story behind this blog, and what it's like to be a conservative member of an overwhelmingly leftist community.

My resultant, near-ceaseless blather should make for an entertaining, cringe-inducing program, if nothing else.

Listeners in the Pacific Northwest area can tune in live from 11a.m. to 1 p.m. on these stations: Seattle's 1300AM KOL, Olympia's 920AM KGTK and Spokane's 1230AM KSBN.

Outside the Pacific Northwest, including worldwide, Talk Radio fans can tune in via the Universal Talk Network this Saturday online. The show runs from 20:00-22:00 GMT.

Posted by at 7:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Philippe Cousteau, president of EarthEcho International and the son of famous marine scientist Jacques Cousteau, held a press conference April 26th to express support for an energy producing windmill park in the Atlantic Ocean, just south of Long Island.

"Today we draw a symbolic line in the sand," he stated, to a small gathering of bored journalists and handholding activists, "and say we're tired of being held hostage to OPEC and other foreign oil producers, and we're going to do something positive to develop an alternative energy resource."

Philippe Cousteau's "positive" solution? A windfarm in the ocean that's 8 square miles large, has a projected cost of several hundred million dollars and is estimated to produce the energy equivalent of 13.5 million barrels of oil . . . over a 20 year period!

OPEC pumps out 29.44 million barrels of oil per day, of which the United States consumes 19.7 million barrels . . . again, per day. This would make Cousteau's offshore 8 square mile windfarm capable of producing the OPEC-busting energy equivalent of approximately 1849 barrels of oil per day, at an initial cost of several hundred million dollars, and that's without factoring in the inevitable additional maintenance and repair costs.

Much was made of the supposed elimination of "millions of tons of combustion emissions" from entering the atmosphere (over a 20 year period, natch), though precious little information was offered as to how much this allegedly "efficient" alternative energy might end up costing the residents of Long Island in real dollars.

MEANWHILE: With much less fanfare, Doug Crabtree of the Alternative Energy Resource Organization (AERO), based in Helena, Montana, has developed a process for transforming used cooking oil into biodiesel fuel capable of powering modern engines. The fuel is made through a chemical process where glycerin is separated from vegetable oil fat. The resulting product has lower emissions than petroleum diesel, is less toxic than table salt and it biodegrades as fast as natural sugar. Tanner Franklin, who produces small quantities of the product at his Canyon Ferry home using waste frying oil, has been powering a VW Bus on the stuff for the past year.

Discussions are still in the fledgling stage, but Crabtree sees promise, despite the lack of press conferences or a famous father's name to invoke: "It takes the initial investment and getting all the players to the table," Crabtree says. "But it's not insurmountable . . . I fully intend to have something going this spring or summer. Whether that's on an individual basis or with a small co-op, it's too soon to say."

If you're interested in investing in, or contributing to, AERO's biodiesel fuel project, you can contact Doug Crabtree through the Montana Organic Certification Program.

WINDBAG RUNNER-UP:
"'Cuz the third-world is, you know, like, so cool!"

Posted by at 5:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

1. "With your help, the DCCC (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee) will put an end to Tom DeLay's House of Scandal . . . once and for all."

2. "the only thing that’s important is to build a vague impression of staggering momentum: DeLay has to go."

3. "But if criticizing DeLay used to be suicidal, recently it's become fashionable."

4. "We're looking for a slogan -- something short, something memorable, and something that lets the people of his district know that it's time for him to go. "

5. "Hyperbole, no stranger on Capitol Hill, is a key weapon in a fight tightly coordinated by party leaders."

6. ""I think a lot of members think he's taking arrows for all of us," Rep. Roy Blunt, third-ranking among GOP leaders, told The Associated Press."

7. "The Democrats have taken to charging that the House is being distracted from its policy work because of the DeLay controversy of their making. This amounts to saying: "Stop us before we attack Tom DeLay again!"

8. "The history of Tom DeLay in Congress is that he's pushed every envelope. It is often the case that powerful people get their comeuppance because of something that a lot of people would see as a technicality."

9. "He is so repellent . . . self-righteous, humorless, resentful, scowling, perpetually angry"

10. "The very fact that the Mainstream Media are so desperately struggling to smear Tom DeLay is proof positive of what a good job he is doing at leveling the electoral playing field."

Posted by at 5:46 PM | Permalink

1. Barbara Boxer could just sit the next four years out. It's an idea . . .

2. My secret identity.

3. Phil: The Monster Who Sometimes Likes to Eat a Cookie. (Thanks, Ace).

4. Pass the kneepads.

5. This should have won a Pulitzer.

6. Because the mainstream press is so, well, you know, controlled by conservatives.

7. And to think that the ACLU once used to be a valuable, reputable organization. How times have changed.

8. A black female conservative . . . *gasp!* I wonder how often she's called an Uncle Tom? Two, three times a day?

9. New study shows abusing steroids weakens the spinal column.

10. Me want!

Posted by at 4:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (12)

Octavio Roca, a card-carrying member of the Gay Left, does his best duck-and-cover when it comes to facing the notion that (gasp!) there's more than one way to live the fabulous gay life.

"The year's scariest horror movie happens to be a documentary, and (Wash Westmoreland's 'Gay Republicans') is it. Gay Republicans is one of those concepts -- like, say, Jews for Hitler or the MLK chapter of the KKK -- that sound more than a little creepy."

And here I thought the whole Bush = Hitler / Republicans = Nazis meme was just sad and tired enough to have dropped off the pop culture lexicon by now. Silly me.

But it gets even better: ""I would feel more comfortable in a room full of Republicans than in a room full of gays," says one of the self-loathing queers interviewed in Wash Westmoreland's fair and balanced film. Some of them include a Palm Beach hairdresser desperate to fit in with the crowd whose hair he does, an especially repugnant frosted-hair conventioneer, and others of that trash-with-money ilk."

I suppose we're to assume from the above that Roca doesn't have any money and, therefore, feels both morally and socially superior existing simply as trash without any of the dreaded complications and concurrent responsibilities connected with wealth, but it's difficult to know for certain. What we can know for certain, however, is that Octavio Roca is a marginal Arts & Entertainment critic for the just as marginal Miami New Times, concocting bodice-heaving prose pieces, cleverly disguised as reviews, that Jacqueline Susann could only gaze upon in sheer envy.

Such is the lofty perch from which to sneeer upon "frosted hair conventioneer"s.

Our Octavio covers Dance, Theater and Film with an emotional rapacity that less-enlightened denizens of the New Age might be forgiven for labeling over-the-top. For Example: TOUCH, a play by Toni Press-Coffman: "a lovely pastiche of raw feelings, of the awkward dance to the music of faith and reason . . . The fragile tenderness of a prostitute's touch rings true, but its resonance is dampened by clichés."

Uh-huh. And then there's luna del pingüino by Octavio Campos: "Campos in his moonscape boasts a buto master's patience and the insouciance of a French mime, Lipsynka's drag sensibility and the seriousness of Pina Bausch. He is a convert on a holy mission to please."

Right, gotcha -- 'cause French mime and bad San Francisco drag is what every serious artist longs to be compared to. And then there's his predictably obsequious critique of It's a Fabulous Life!, a "loose and merry musical adaptation" (i.e. blatant ripoff) of Frank Capra's classic film, It's a Wonderful Life. And it's GAY!: "The gay hero of "It's A Fabulous Life!" is facing troubles Jimmy Stewart's George Bailey never dreamed of in "It's A Wonderful Life": Four more years of Dubya, for starters, with fundamentalist bigots on the rise, yahoos baying for blood in the halls of Congress and right-wing ayatollahs ready to pounce and crush any semblance of diversity, tolerance and hope."

He makes it sound like South Beach circa 2005 is Cuba on a bad day. Are things really that bleak for poor Octavio? Let's read further and find out.

"The time is the last presidential election," Octavio pens dourly, near the end of his brief but distraught reportage of 'Gay Republicans', "and several Log Cabin Republicans find their blind faith shattered as they struggle to support a candidate who makes a fetish of kissing the ass of the Christian right even if that means writing bigotry into the Constitution and trampling on the civil rights of gay citizens. It's not a pretty picture."

Oh dear!

Perhaps it was simply the unambiguous quality of the documentary format that's to blame, twisting Roca into the peevish little knot from which he seemed to have scribbled his review of conservative gays Wash Westmoreland's film. No prostitutes to romanticize, no drag queens to identify with, no beefcakes twirling about in song and dance -- it must have been a truly brutal and terrifying experience for poor Octavio to witness a world in which his gay-ghetto rainbow sensibilities are duly shunned like last night's blind date when the drugs wear off.

It's not a pretty picture, indeed.

Posted by at 9:30 PM | Permalink

The Conservative Blogosphere is wearily amused at liberal-come-lately Andrew Sullivan's latest episode of shock, outrage and disgust (and don't forget betrayal, dismay and bewilderment! -- ed.), this time regarding the selection of Cardinal Ratzinger as the new Pope.

". . . those of us who are struggling against what our Church is becoming, and the repressive priorities it is embracing, can only contemplate a form of despair."

Earth to Andy -- it's the Catholic-frickin'-Church, you big ninny. What? You were expecting an invitation to the voting table? "Let's ask gay Catholics who they'd like to be Pope, shall we?" Hello! Let me fill you in on the memo you seem to have missed -- there aren't supposed to be any gay Catholics!

Cruising by Andy's website of late has become akin to slowing down the car and craning for a better look at the bloody wreck by the side of the road -- it's messy, it's ugly and thank God it's not me.

From his petulant, foot-stomping dislike of the current President (and Karl Rove), his outright campaigning for John Kerry (who represents the worst sort of excesses of the Democratic Party), his Eeyore-ic mutterings regarding the necessary political and cultural revamp of the Middle East (starting with Iraq), and now his flailing, spittle-flecked tantrums over the Catholic Church's selection of a Pope who embodies the moral, social and political philosophies of, well, the Catholic Church, I think we can all safely assume that little Andy's "I'm a Gay Conservative . . . really!" charade is long past over.

Fer real.

I mean, c'mon, when 23% of your readership hail from the dark nether-regions of Barbara Boxer Land and Hillary Clinton Empire, it becomes more than a little disingenuous to claim that your latest song-and-dance routines aren't created implicity for their wallets toe-tapping pleasure.

CASE IN POINT: "THE POLITICAL ANALOGY: I was trying to explain last night to a non-Catholic just how dumb-struck many reformist Catholics are by the elevation of Ratzinger. And then I found a way to explain. This is the religious equivalent of having had four terms of George W. Bush only to find that his successor as president is Karl Rove. Get it now?"

Little Mr. Sullivan is just another sad example of the urbanized gay man whose identity politics trump everything else to the point where he can't even begin to fathom a world that exists utterly free from and independent of the confines of his own myopic sexual priorities.

On a Related Note:
Top Ten Changes the New Pope Will Enact to Make Christianity More Acceptable to Liberals.

Posted by at 4:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

1. QUESTION: What about all the evidence that shows that homosexuality "is genetic"? ANSWER: There is not any, and none of the research itself claims there is; only the press and, sadly, certain researchers do-when speaking in sound bites to the public.

2. The story of the so-called ‘gay gene’ is indicative of scientific experiments and conclusions molding themselves into media forces that then seem to have a life of their own.

3. There is no evidence for the "gay gene", a study claims to have found.

4. Will we ever find a "gay" or "transsexual gene"? Most likely not.

5. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited.

6. "I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain . . . Since I look at adult brains, we don't know if the differences I found were there at birth or if they appeared later."

7. Twin studies show that something other than genetics must account for homosexuality because nearly half of the identical twin studied didn't have the same sexual preference.

8. Overall, data appear to indicate that genetic factors play some role in the development of sexual orientation, but that they probably account for only a minority of variation and that further work will be needed to quantify their influence more precisely.

9. There is no question that people who think sexuality is inborne are, in general, much better disposed towards gay people and gay rights than people who think it's some kind of lifestyle choice.

10. LeVay, Hamer, Friedman, Downey, Byne and Parsons concluded that homosexuality is not a purely biological phenomenon. All of these researchers arrive at the same conclusion: an interactionist model (not the "born that way" theory) reflects the current data to explain the development of homosexuality.

Outside reading.

Posted by at 1:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)

1. "There is a lot to be said for crotchety old guys who aren't impressed by people with big titles and small resumes."

2. "America's finest Secretary of Defense in a half century."

3. "I love Donald Rumsfeld. His unerring ability to get to the heart of the matter simply astounds me."

4. "Donald Rumsfeld deserves the thanks of a grateful nation, not the small-minded verbal sniping from lesser men who would likely quail in fear if they ever had to make a life and death decision."

5. The Poetry of D.H. Rumsfeld.

6. "Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld tops the list of hunks."

7. "Donald Rumsfeld (currently as much a TV sex symbol as he is a defense secretary) is swaggering, blunt, jokey and edgy."

8. "The secretary of defense is hotter than the exhaust fumes on a B-52."

9. "There is no getting away from the fact that the American Defence Secretary is a star of dazzling magnitude. "

10. "Men like George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld have made it "daddy party time" in the nation's capital."

Posted by at 5:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

"Arthur Finkelstein is probably one of the brightest, cutting-edge political scientists I've ever met," said New York Republican Senator Al D'Amato in an interview in 1996, regarding the reclusive consultant's personal life and habits. "I don't think a person's sexual orientation, his private life -- a person's private life shouldn't be brought up, and I think the question is offensive, it's wrong."

But former President Bill Clinton brought up just that when he publicly lashed out at Arthur Finkelstein on April 13th, outing Finkelstein to mainstream news audiences by suggesting that Finkelstein is "self-loathing" to work on behalf of the Republican Party, even though, under Bill Clinton's leadership, gay men and women enjoyed such dubious advances as the military's present Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, plus the Defense of Marriage Act, approved in 1996, which denies federal recognition of same-sex marriages and gives states the right to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states.

According to Newseek Magazine, Bill Clinton also advised John Kerry, during Kerry's 2004 Presidential candidacy, to support the same-sex marriage bans on the ballots in 11 states, hinting that Kerry could win those states by supporting bans on gay marriage. So for Clinton to go on record as somehow "saddened" by a gay man's decision to work with the Republican Party is a great irony, indeed.

Yet aside from being part of one more tired "outrage" that drops from Bill Clinton's mouth (Thanks, Bill -- we feel your pain), Arthur Finkelstein is perhaps best known for his successful, and successfully brutal, campaigns to get conservative leaders elected. His list of past electoral endeavors include carefully orchestrated upset victories for Senators Al D'Amato, Jesse Helms, Governor George Pataki and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while also working with such Republican luminaries as Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

"There's a Finkelstein formula," complained Democratic consultant Mark Mellman. "Just brand somebody a liberal, and use the word over and over again as a kind of name-calling."

Speaking of name-calling, Finkelstein has been by tagged by liberal pundits as "another gay bashing G.O.P. consultant", "the ultra conservative Republican consultant" and "one of the Republicans' most vicious attack dogs", yet Arthur Finkelstein has led a relatively low-key existence in his Massachusetts home with his partner and their two adopted children while working as a near invisible yet well-paid political consultant for some of the most prominent names in conservative politics.

But is Finkelstein as far-right as people like to portray him? In a December, 2004 interview with Boaz Gaon of Maariv, an Israeli daily newspaper, the "ultra-conservative" Finkelstein warned, "The political centre has disappeared, and the Republican Party has become the party of the Christian right more so than in any other period in modern history." He then added, "Bush courted the evangelical vote and turned these elections, in fact, into a referendum on the religious and cultural nature of America. This is my problem."

Finkelstein has also regularly described himself as a libertarian who supports same-sex marriage and abortion rights while opposing big government. When asked his reasons for marrying his longtime partner in a Massachusetts ceremony, Finkelstein responded: "I believe that visitation rights, health care benefits and other human relationship contracts that are taken for granted by all married people should be available to partners."

Another article states, "Mr. Finkelstein did not view his marriage as a political statement and had specifically decided to have a civil ceremony rather than a religious one . . . over the past 20 years, Mr. Finkelstein had identified himself as a libertarian and an opponent of big government, distancing himself from social conservatives as they have gained political muscle and dominance in the party."

The significance of these statements should not be ignored.

For most leftists, especially gay leftists (and Bill Clinton), the idea that a gay man or woman can find things like international and fiscal policy more important than sexual identity is beyond their ability to fathom, so to them, Arthur Finkelstein (or Mary Cheney, or any other Republican homosexual) is a "hypocrite" of the worst sort -- the self-loathing fag!

Yet, in what can only be interpreted as direct defiance of the less moderate elements taking hold of the Republican Party, "one of the Republicans' most vicious attack dogs" quietly married his partner of 40 years in a civil ceremony in Massachusetts. So perhaps the lesson to be learned here is not that Arthur Finkelstein is a "sad" man with a confused sense of political loyalties, but rather that the Republican Party, and by extension the entire American political spectrum, is way better off with moderately conservative gay men and women in positions of influence within the modern GOP.

Arthur Finkelstein "is a wonderful, decent person, and whatever his sexual orientation is -- that's his business," said Republican Senator D'Amato. It's unfortunate that Mr. Clinton couldn't show the same respect.

Posted by at 9:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Attending nearly half a dozen colleges without getting a degree, Karl Rove is an information processing machine with his own heretical idea of how all the disparate pieces fit together. The political equivalent of a Grand Unified Theorist, Rove lives and breathes in a realm where data, ideology and human emotion merge into the explanation of everything.

Vilified by the shrinking left as "America's Joseph Goebbels" (Geobbels was Hitler's Minister of Propaganda -- Republican, Nazi, Hitler -- get it?) and "a cross between Sesame Street's Mr. Hooper and the Third Reich's Heinrich Himmler" (Republican, Nazi, Hitler -- see? get it now?), as well as "a despicable creep and a wart on the fanny of American democracy", Karl Rove introduced the concept of Einsteinian thought experiments into modern politics, carefully noting the measurable differences in outcome between just paying attention and paying extremely close attention to every last detail.

The results have been nothing short of astounding for the modern Republican Party.

In November of 2002, Time Magazine labeled Karl Rove as "the President's most trusted political strategist and arguably one of the shrewdest men in Washington" for his successful campaign to reshape the political character of the House and Senate, while in 2004, Barbara Walters dubbed Rove one of "The Most Fascinating People of the Year".

A self-described back-scenes nerd, yet a bane to the chattering classes across the country, Rove lifted himself out from beneath the rootless shadow of a broken family (he never knew his father, his stepfather walked out when he was 19, and his mother committed suicide 12 years later) through politics, realizing access to his own American dream by diving headlong into the rarified obsessions of the ideologue (he was a vocal Nixon supporter from the age of nine). While his peers were waxing their cars and cruising for girls, Rove was learning the ins and outs of the power structures in America, resulting in a shrewd eye for raw talent and a near Olympian determination to win at all costs.

What Rove was able to recognize throughout the decades of his increasingly deft political maneuvering is that leadership is about what's economically and psychologically healthy for the country in the long haul, rather than just what feels good at the moment. Nearly the entire mainstream media snorted in derision as George Bush, Rove's hand-picked candidate, was proffered as a presidential candidate for the 2000 race, yet each subsequent year after Bush's election to the office has shown a flourishing of the former fly-boy into a highly competent, eminently practical and deeply caring man.

Thank you, Karl Rove, for your mordant wit, your keen intellect and your ruthless ambition, for your firm guidance in transforming the Republican Party into a modern and internationally engaged arm of conservative thought, and, especially, thank you that Al Gore and John Kerry never became Presidents of these United States.

"C'mon everybody. Go, Howard Dean!" -- Karl Rove

OFF TOPIC:
Very interesting read regarding Bill Clinton's "self-loathing" remarks about Republican strategist Arthur Finkelstein.

Money quote: "On the one hand, it's hard to see how a self-respecting gay person could support a party that deployed such hateful, untruthful campaign tactics. On the other hand, it's easy to see why 23 percent of gay and lesbian Americans voted to re-elect President Bush when the alternative was John Kerry, who last showed courage on a boat in Vietnam in the 1960s."

Indeed.

Posted by at 4:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

1. Crappy art from a dictator's even crappier progeny. Perhaps it will hang in the U.N.

2. Conspiracy-nutter.

3. Who'd a thunk? Republi-wear.

4. Sore loser.

5. Good idea.

6. Yea! A robot video!

7. Gratuitous beefcake.

8. Get yours today!

Posted by at 10:48 PM | Permalink

"When Massachusetts embarked on its humane road to marriage-rights equality in 2003, advocates may have had little idea how massive the backlash would be, inside and especially outside the commonwealth."

Gee, ya think?

The Gay Left's thoughtless and obsessive push for what they have somehow concluded is a "right to wed" demeans the social and political values of the majority of this country's citizens, which has done more to singlehandedly inspire a backlash against the idea of homosexual unions than any supposed religious bigotry or alleged fundie-hatred.

A relaxation of social mores that would naturally have occurred over the course of the next several decades, and which was already, albeit slowly, occurring has unfortunately been undercut and, doubtless, set back years by a fringe group of gay protest-junkies who have to have everything (stamping foot on the ground) NOW! NOW! NOW!

I guess they have to have some consolation for Bush's election (Go, Georgie!).

There is the opinion that accepting and encouraging a more gradual cultural shift regarding same-sex marriage would have been akin to Rosa Parks shuffling off to the back of the bus yet one more time, except that that particular analogy is so off-target as to be laughable (if not insulting to the history of the black civil rights movement). Gay men and women are not denied housing, education, employment opportunities or a seat at the front of the bus. We can vote, use restrooms without peril (unless you're George Michael, or unless George Michael is in the restroom with you), order lunch at our favorite restaurants, obtain independent health coverage and quality health care, and despite our fractional numbers, we're more than adequately represented in the arts, in news media reports, in sports and in politics.

The argument that our "rights" are being trampled because we're not presently afforded state sanctioned marriage with all its legal accouterment is a specious argument. Homosexual men and women, throughout all of history, have rarely, if at all, held a "right" to get married to the same gender, and it would be difficult to claim that a right is being trampled when such as right has never before been granted. Social and governmental support for same-sex marriage represents, not simply a cultural shift, but rather a break with the traditions of most of civilized history. There are marginal examples of cultures which have tolerated and accepted the cultural codification of same-sex relationships, but these are few and far between, and this attitude has been rarely more than a footnote throughout history.

This is not, by any means, an argument for the indefinite continuation of what may someday be considered a confusing chapter in human wants and psychological desires, but rather an argument for less "I'm a victim!" attitude and more recognition of how much progress has already been made.

Listening to the Gay Left shriek about how oppressed they are, and how society treats them like "second-class citizens", one might almost be forgiven for believing that being gay in the United States is a hardship, yet the opposite is true. Homosexuality has been decriminalized, delisted as a psychological illness and fully embraced as a comic device in Hollywood movies . . .

*ahem*

I'm fully aware that not everyone may like it that I've chosen to be gay, but I'm also not searching for the government's approval in order to make up for whatever it was I didn't get from mommy or daddy. A Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage wasn't even a glimmer in my daddy's eye until San Francisco Mayor (natch) Gavin Newsome declared himself a spokesman for all human culture, took the law into his own hands and the entire nation got Rosie O'Donnell locked in a lesbian kiss across the 6 o'clock news.

Ew! That's an image I've been trying to rid myself of ever since.

Posted by at 6:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

Outing gay politicians who don't toe the Gay-Agenda line is "in". . . ?

Money quote: "These particular hypocrites are making decisions that impact the lives of LGBT people directly, whether it's in thwarting LGBT inclusive anti-discrimination law or pushing anti-family marriage amendments. . . The expectation of privacy is not the same for a public figure as it is for a private individual."

Let's just call this for what it is -- blackmail. The "give me what I want or I'll ruin your life" brigade have no moral high-ground to claim. Initiating whisper campaigns, harassing people at their work places and releasing talking-points to the media composed of innuendo regarding a politician's sex life is not only vicious, but also contemptuous of the very idea of respect that the blackmailer is demanding.

What's up with the whole LGBT deal, anyway? Last I knew, it was GLBT, but I suppose that having to apologize for being a man doesn't stop with heterosexuals (No, really, ladies first!).

And can we stop pretending "gay" has anything, at all, in common with "transgender"? Indulging a lifelong discomfort with your biological gender does not make someone a minority with legally protected rights . . . of course, neither does choosing to buck the status quo and get busy with members of the same sex, but that's another topic altogether.

We're not "minorities" in need of civil rights protection, and if I hear one more moronic homo compare his or her experience of being gay with what it was like during the Black civil rights movement in this country . . . as if!

Note to all the professional victims out there -- STF Up and MoveOn.org. You want society to embrace you? Get a job, marry the opposite sex and have children. Otherwise, grow a backbone, take responsibility for the choices you make in life, and learn to live with the natural consequences of taking the road less traveled. Gay people have freedoms, choices and options in this country, and all this "I'm oppressed!" bullsh*t does nothing but reveal a petulant and perpetually whiny character.

You want what Joe and Suzy down the street have? Then, for God's sake, live like Joe and Suzy down the street. Make their choices, live their lives, walk a mile in their shoes instead of chaining yourself to a capitol building and insisting that they walk twenty in yours . . . or else.

Posted by at 6:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

1. Sen. John Thune’s good looks were noted earlier this week by Jon Stewart on “The Daily Show,” who said Thune makes Sen. John Edwards look like Sen. George Voinovich.

2. a former high school basketball star whose good looks and Christian conservative credentials give him strong appeal

3. movie star good looks

4. 6 feet 4 and tan, with the good looks of a television anchor

5. Thune has plenty of charm and affability to go with his movie-star good looks . . . He has the tall, lean build of a basketball player

6. the star basketball player with model good looks . . .

7. and even Johnson supporters concede that Thune is helped by his lanky good looks and smooth style . . .

8. the transcendentally handsome, intelligent, charismatic and pluperfectly moral John Thune

9. But keep the photos coming, you handsome dude!

10. 41-year-old movie-star-handsome House member

11. Tom Daschle is out . . . whupped by a telegenic John Thune.

12. a smiling handsome John Thune

13. a handsome and honed challenger

14. God Bless Thune (that EXTREMELY handsome man)

Posted by at 6:48 PM | Permalink

With so much of the attention currently focused on Rome, Homocon has decided to oblige its readership with an in-depth profile of an integral part of the former pontiff's daily routine -- the fabulous Swiss Guard!

Don't ask, Don't tell indeed.

Clad in a fabric combination Martha Stewart would have killed to utilize as a slipcover for the family sofa, the Swiss Guard was originally founded as a group of tough and killer mercenaries who were hired out by the Swiss government. Massacred time and again (especially for French causes), the Swiss constitution abolished governmental mercenaries in 1874, with the sole exception being the 100 strong Swiss Guard of the Vatican, founded in 1505 by Pope Julius II, who continue on as the personal guard of the pope.

In order to qualify for such a plum and colorful assignment, applicants must fit the following standards: a Swiss citizen; a faithful Roman Catholic, and free of scandal; must have attended military school in Switzerland; be unamrried and between 19 and 30 years old; 5'8" and taller; have at least a high-school diploma.

But beyond the nerve-wracking and physically grueling task of protecting the Vatican against the hordes of barbaric tourists asking for directions to the toilet, the Swiss Guard must also be on the ready for band practice, drum and choir practice, as well as table-tennis, marches, shooting practice and courses in self-defense (undoubtedly so they can fend off the fashion police). And when the Pope is scheduled for a public appearance, the Swiss Guard shed their poofter stripes for plain clothes and join the Vatican police to form a protective human shield around the Pope, comprised of 19 to 30 year old, Northern European, unmarried men.

*sigh*

Current Vatican tailor Ety Cicioni discovered, to his dismay, that there were no patterns and no instructions for how to make the Fear and Loathing in Vatican City uniform of the Swiss Guards. All he had to go on was a finished piece.

"My wife and I took it where I had worked before and there we totally took it apart. We reconstructed this unique uniform which is made of 154 pieces. I really had to study it and spend time on it before I understood it," Ety said.

The design of the Busby Berkeley ensemble is popularly attributed to art-fag Michelangelo, but the present configuration was really designed by a commandant of the guards, who was particularly deft with a needle and thread, in 1914.

"They're not just buttoned up, and ready for show," said Msgr. Charles Burns, a church historian who spent more than 25 years as an official of the Vatican archives. "The Swiss Guard are very highly trained for any emergency . . . You won't see them slouching or hanging around smoking a cigarette like the carabinieri," he added, referring with a shrug to the Italian military police.

The original term of service in the Swiss Guard is for two years, with the option of extending it up to 25 years.

Posted by at 9:19 PM | Permalink

At what point does it become evident that a "scandal" is not a scandal, that the racehorse has given up the ghost and the people attempting to still whip it towards some kind of finish line simply need to climb off the cold, dead beast and move on?

Poor Jeff Gannon James Guckert whatever his name is -- it's bizarre to me that we have a press that screams holy hell about their precious free speech until somebody in the right place at the right time asks questions they don't like.

Gannon had the nerve to raise an issue that a lot of Americans (including me) are genuinely concerned about -- how can the President work with Democratic leaders in Congress "who seem to have divorced themselves from reality"? From the ensuing shrieks and howls of liberal outrage, you'd have thought that someone had just thrown a barrel of holy water on the entire White House press corps.

It was because of this that the libs went after him with such ferocity. The issue is not that he wrote under a pseudonym (as it's been explained ad nauseam that numerous current journalists and media figures work under assumed names, such as Larry King, Mike Wallace and Jon Stewart), and the issue is not that he may or may not be gay, as "the gays" are one of the left's favorite lapdogs (as long as they have the good sense to discreetly hide themselves from view at any national-level political conventions and vote an, uhm, straight Democratic ticket) -- no, the issue is that this "may-or-may-not-be-gay" man (who, by the unwritten rules of the lib playbook, should automatically be on their side! *gasp* -- the traitor!) out and out stated, in front of a roomful of loony lefties armed with cameras, microphones, pens and paper, that the real reason that so many Democratic leaders in Congress are purposely obstructive in their dealings with the present elected administration is because they're "divorced from reality".

I mean, c'mon -- Barbara Boxer? Diane Feinstein? Robert Byrd? Cynthia McKinney? Nancy Pelosi? Maxine Waters? Ted Kennedy? I think the man had a point . . .

Posted by at 4:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (9)

Oh, thank God! This whole plastic-silverware thing was driving me batty!

And I predict that this will totally suck (quite literally). I mean, really -- an Elton John musical about vampires? The whole concept is so gay as to miss the mainstream market-dollar completely!

Speaking of plastic and disposable, whatever happened to Olivia Newton John? Huh? WTF HAPPENED?!

I remember it was such a big deal that they (Who's "they"? Don't pretend you don't know -- I'm talking about the Evil Corporate Empire! Oh, THEM again . . . *sigh*) transformed this wholesome, easy-listening Aussie into a bona-fide sleaze-tart. Now that it's done on such a regular basis, no one thinks the slightest thing about it.

The likes of Britney owe a far greater debt to pop-princess-turned-big-business-whore Olivia than they ever will to lifelong STD-magnet Madonna. IMHO.

But they all end up in the same place . . .

Posted by at 11:27 PM | Permalink

1. I have to admit that I don't understand people who obsessively spend inordinate amounts of time, money and effort savaging celebrities in national advertising campaigns, throwing buckets of red paint on police officers and fashion models, vandalizing shops & businesses and wandering about publicly naked in protest of cramped chicken farm conditions or the supposed evils of killing a cow.

Did Mommy and Daddy pay no attention to them at all?

2. “I have no idea if he’s gay or not,” said gay Republican activist Carl Schmid, when asked his thoughts about rumors regarding current Republican National Committee Chair Ken Mehlman. Schmid supported President Bush in the 2000 and 2004 presidential election campaigns, and continues to be a supporter of the present administration. “We should not be going on a fishing expedition over whether someone is gay. If he’s gay, that’s wonderful,” Schmid said. “If he’s not gay, that’s wonderful, too.”

3. Bitch Fight!

4. Somebody left the barn door open.

Posted by at 7:46 PM | Permalink