Washington outing blogger says 'a few more' to come

[danarhea]

The Washington blogger who had a part in outing both Larry Craig and Mark Foley is the most feared man in Washington right now. During the next few months, he says that he is going to out a few more closeted gay Republicans, one by one. It isn't about their gayness, he says. It's about their hypocrisy. I completely agree.

Article is here.

 

[new coup for you]

I really find the whole concept of forced outing offensive. Coming out is a huge ordeal, particularly if your old (or old and married) and no one has the right to force you to do it.

 

[RightinNYC]

Rogers has already listed them all at his blog, unless he's actually claiming that he has more information that he's been withholding for whatever reason (which would be very uncharacteristic of him.

Oh, and it was amusing to see this little tidbit at the end, which I'm sure had no impact on this fawning profile of Rogers:

Rogers is a technical consultant for Raw Story

 

[niftydrifty]

I really find the whole concept of forced outing offensive. Coming out is a huge ordeal, particularly if your old (or old and married) and no one has the right to force you to do it.

He's not outing gayness. He's outing hypocrisy. If no one knew that Barney Frank was gay, do you think that fact would harm him politically? It wouldn't.

 

[new coup for you]

But he wont be creating any real change in politics, so what's the point? As I said in the Craig post, outing these politicians will not change the voting of their districts. Idaho is not going to see the light and vote for someone who isn't a homophobe Neanderthal. They're just going to vote for another homophobe who happens to not be gay.

Also the reason Craig was really outed was that he got caught, not that someone posted about him on their blog.

Maybe after Craig's outing people will pay more attention to the blog? Maybe? I don't know. In my experience when you come out as gay most people already know, or have suspicions. I suspect everyone that's going to be outed is already commonly known to be gay within the beltway.

 

[Cold Highway]

This ought to be interesting.

 

[new coup for you]

worst case scenario it degenerates into "your gay", "no your gay" mud slinging a la middle school.

 

[mpg]

He's not outing gayness. He's outing hypocrisy. If no one knew that Barney Frank was gay, do you think that fact would harm him politically? It wouldn't.

What hypocrisy?

 

[danarhea]

What hypocrisy?

The hypocrisy is that they are closeted gays who are not only openly pushing an anti-gay agenda, but are part of the moral values crowd which sends the message that there is something wrong with gays. The way I see it, if someone is legislating and preaching against gays, while being secretly gay, then he deserves to be outed.

 

[danarhea]

Rogers has already listed them all at his blog, unless he's actually claiming that he has more information that he's been withholding for whatever reason (which would be very uncharacteristic of him.

Oh, and it was amusing to see this little tidbit at the end, which I'm sure had no impact on this fawning profile of Rogers:

Actually, Raw Story got most of its information about Rogers from this article in the Washington Post. I know, I know, you will now say that the Washington Post's love for Rogers caused them to write their article. LOL.

 

[Dr_Patrick]

The Washington blogger who had a part in outing both Larry Craig and Mark Foley is the most feared man in Washington right now. During the next few months, he says that he is going to out a few more closeted gay Republicans, one by one. It isn't about their gayness, he says. It's about their hypocrisy. I completely agree.

Article is here.

I can definitely see the logic of both sides of this issue. However, isn't he being just as bad as they are by outing them? I agree that they are hypocrites, which is really nothing new for politicians, but I think it's incredibly cruel and it crosses the line to out them. Plus, the motivating factor seems to be more partisan than being an actual "do-gooder".

 

[danarhea]

I can definitely see the logic of both sides of this issue. However, isn't he being just as bad as they are by outing them? I agree that they are hypocrites, which is really nothing new for politicians, but I think it's incredibly cruel and it crosses the line to out them. Plus, it seems to be more of a partisan ploy than anything.

If they are already being cruel to a segment of our society and are part of an attempt to portray that segment as somehow not as deserving of the rights and privileges that come with being an American as they are, then they are fair game.

 

[WI Crippler]

So a gay man who votes against gay marriage is a hypocrite??

He already knows what marriage is like in the straight world and doesn't want to hurt his community by letting them make the same mistakes.

I think he's genius......

 

[Dr_Patrick]

If they are already being cruel to a segment of our society and are part of an attempt to portray that segment as somehow not as deserving of the rights and privileges that come with being an American as they are, then they are fair game.

Don't get me wrong, I am completely against these politicians and all that they stand for. I guess I just believe in the old ideal of "two wrongs don't make a right".

 

[Dr_Patrick]

So a gay man who votes against gay marriage is a hypocrite??

He already knows what marriage is like in the straight world and doesn't want to hurt his community by letting them make the same mistakes.

I think he's genius......

He's absolutely a hypocrite. Just because he may have certain views about marriage doesn't mean that he should try to deny those rights to others.

 

[WI Crippler]

He's absolutely a hypocrite. Just because he may have certain views about marriage doesn't mean that he should try to deny those rights to others.

You need a new sarcasm meter.

 

[Dr_Patrick]

You need a new sarcasm meter.

Don't worry, I detected your sarcasm.

 

[danarhea]

Don't get me wrong, I am completely against these politicians and all that they stand for. I guess I just believe in the old ideal of "two wrongs don't make a right".

Welcome to the world of politics.

 

[talloulou]

If I were a gay man or lesbian woman I'd still be a Republican because I'd still want to keep my money! Republicans need to quit being anti-homosexual. As far as "outing" gay Republicans that's just retarded. Unless they are actively and loudly spewing anti-homosexual nonsense it's wrong to assume that just because they are Republicans they are hypocrites. I don't imagine that even for homosexuals "being gay" is their biggest and number one political priority. :roll:

 

[danarhea]

If I were a gay man or lesbian woman I'd still be a Republican because I'd still want to keep my money! Republicans need to quit being anti-homosexual. As far as "outing" gay Republicans that's just retarded. Unless they are actively and loudly spewing anti-homosexual nonsense it's wrong to assume that just because they are Republicans they are hypocrites. I don't imagine that even for homosexuals "being gay" is their biggest and number one political priority. :roll:

Check out the backgrounds of Larry Craig, and Mark Foley.

 

[talloulou]

Check out the backgrounds of Larry Craig, and Mark Foley.

Do you have quotes or sources showing them spewing anti-homosexual nonsense?

 

[WI Crippler]

Do you have quotes or sources showing them spewing anti-homosexual nonsense?

They probably voted against gay rights legislation, which makes them homophobes, and then when they get "outed" removes the homophobe sticker and replaces it with a hypocrite sticker.

 

[new coup for you]

Yes, Craig and Foley were homophobes. Can you guarantee me that only homophobes will be targeted by this? And whose definition of homophobe will we be using? I believe that being in the closet is bad. But it's something you have the right to be.

As we've seen with both Foley and Craig, red America is not concerned with their lies or hypocrisy. They're concerned that they're gay, because they don't like gays. All this will do is create an anti-gay witch hunt.

 

[Cold Highway]

If I were a gay man or lesbian woman I'd still be a Republican because I'd still want to keep my money! Republicans need to quit being anti-homosexual. As far as "outing" gay Republicans that's just retarded. Unless they are actively and loudly spewing anti-homosexual nonsense it's wrong to assume that just because they are Republicans they are hypocrites. I don't imagine that even for homosexuals "being gay" is their biggest and number one political priority. :roll:

Sometimes spewing it actively and loudly doesnt have to be enough. When you see them shaking hands with people like Dobson, Perkins and Robertson it sends a clear enough message to the homosexual community. I agree that small government and allowing me to keep my money are the best way to go in this country but look on who sticks up for gay rights and look who doesnt or at the least condemns their way of life. As we have seen in the debates gay rights arent the highest priority its basicly Iraq, health care, abortion and immigration being the dominate issues right now.

 

[danarhea]

Yes, Craig and Foley were homophobes. Can you guarantee me that only homophobes will be targeted by this? And whose definition of homophobe will we be using? I believe that being in the closet is bad. But it's something you have the right to be.

As we've seen with both Foley and Craig, red America is not concerned with their lies or hypocrisy. They're concerned that they're gay, because they don't like gays. All this will do is create an anti-gay witch hunt.

I respectfully disagree. If someone is in the closet, and at the same time, is bashing gays in both rhetoric and legislation, then they need to be outed. It is not about their being gay but being hypocrites. This is fair, especially since the outer has not, is not, and will not be outing those who are in the closet but not bashing gays. That, in itself, is enough to know that these clowns are not being outed for their gayness, but for their hypocrisy. This is not an anti-gay witch hunt.