Washington outing blogger says 'a few more' to come

[talloulou]

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.

I can shake hands with all kinds of people I disagree with. :roll: Not all homosexuals have rabid hate for the "hate the sin, love the sinner types." I personally get annoyed with all that tripe but at the same time I don't see how you can claim a politician is gay bashing or hypocritical for being gay and merely by shaking hands with someone who looks down on a homosexual lifestyle.

 

[talloulou]

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.

Again I don't know much about these two. Show me a source where they are using hate speech gay bashing rhetoric. As far as legislation goes it is completely conceivable that a homosexual be against "hate crime" legislation as hate crime legislation is pretty stupid. Not everyone believes in bonus punishment for bonus victims. As far as the marriage stuff not all homosexuals advocate same sex marriage. So please give a specific example of their so called hypocrisy so I can better see what you're talking about.

 

[new coup for you]

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.

I agree with the intent of the action. I agree that they're loathsome self hating hypocrites. What I'm saying is that what will this will turn into, no matter how noble the intent, will be an anti-gay witch hunt. Red voters, the people whose representatives will undoubtedly be the targets of this, do not care about hypocrisy, they care about f.aggots. Their lives are so steeped in hypocrisy they're incapable of even recognizing it. But they do hate them some f.aggots. And that's how they'll make use of this information being provided to them.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Um isn't "outting" someone the largest taboo in the gay community?

 

[1069]

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 write about closeted people whose records are anti-gay," Rogers told the Post. "If you're a closeted Democrat or Republican and you don't bash gays or vote against gay rights to gain political points, I won't out you."

Awesome. This man's a true patriot and a real American hero.
Somebody ought to give him an award.

 

[akyron]

Awesome. This man's a true patriot and a real American hero.
Somebody ought to give him an award.

I dont believe you know the meaning of that phrase.

Medal of Honor Recipients

 

[FallingPianos]

am I the only person who thinks that even homophobic republicans have the right to privacy inside their own bedrooms?

 

[buttonpsi]

am I the only person who thinks that even homophobic republicans have the right to privacy inside their own bedrooms?

yes. They should be in the public like all politicians.
See: Clinton

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

am I the only person who thinks that even homophobic republicans have the right to privacy inside their own bedrooms?

No, you're not. 'Coming out' can be one of the most difficult things for anyone to do, what with negative family reaction, issues with friends, co-workers, problems a jobs, not to mention society at large. I've worked with people who have 'come out'. I've yet to see it go 'smoothly'. But beyond all this, it is a personal decision to come out and who to come out to. Those that believe this is appropriate are just reacting to emotional vigilantism and vengeance and are as hypocritical as those closeted gays who vote against gay issues. Doing this gives permission for this to occur, a potentially horrible situation.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

yes. They should be in the public like all politicians.
See: Clinton

Not when they sexually harass, and rape their staff.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

No, you're not. 'Coming out' can be one of the most difficult things for anyone to do, what with negative family reaction, issues with friends, co-workers, problems a jobs, not to mention society at large. I've worked with people who have 'come out'. I've yet to see it go 'smoothly'. But beyond all this, it is a personal decision to come out and who to come out to. Those that believe this is appropriate are just reacting to emotional vigilantism and vengeance and are as hypocritical as those closeted gays who vote against gay issues. Doing this gives permission for this to occur, a potentially horrible situation.

No it's the leftists doing this so it must be the right thing to do, they can't be bigots, outting is not only no longer the largest taboo in the gay community but by god the outter's are "hero's and should be granted medals." :roll:

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

No it's the leftists doing this so it must be the right thing to do, they can't be bigots, outting is not only no longer the largest taboo in the gay community but by god the outter's are "hero's and should be granted medals." :roll:

An observation folks. Look at the difference between my post and TOT's. We are both denouncing someone being outed, yet my post does this in a universal non-partisan manner. TOT, however, felt the need to bring partisanship into it, something completely unecessary. This is not a partisan issue...outing is wrong regardless of who does it.

 

[WI Crippler]

An observation folks. Look at the difference between my post and TOT's. We are both denouncing someone being outed, yet my post does this in a universal non-partisan manner. TOT, however, felt the need to bring partisanship into it, something completely unecessary. This is not a partisan issue...outing is wrong regardless of who does it.

Well what do you expect??

ToT wouldn't be ToT if he was trying to be like Captain Courtesy.

Although everybody on this site would be kind and respectable towards each other if everybody was like you Cap'n, it wouldn't be nearly as fun to read some of the great battles between some of our more partisan posters. What are you trying to do, turn DP into the NFL ( No Fun League) ??

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

An observation folks. Look at the difference between my post and TOT's. We are both denouncing someone being outed, yet my post does this in a universal non-partisan manner. TOT, however, felt the need to bring partisanship into it, something completely unecessary. This is not a partisan issue...outing is wrong regardless of who does it.

I don't see Republicans outting anyone and I don't see Republicans calling the people doing the outting "heroes".

 

[danarhea]

I don't see Republicans outting anyone and I don't see Republicans calling the people doing the outting "heroes".

That's because you and they don't want to lose any more Republicans in Congress. You are not about gay or anti-gay. You are only about partisanship. Americans have your number, TOT. LOL.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

That's because you and they don't want to lose any more Republicans in Congress. You are not about gay or anti-gay. You are only about partisanship.

Supporting the outting of gay Republicans and you have the audacity to accuse me of partisanship? Catch a ****ing clue. You can't bring partisanship to a conversation that is based on a partisan topic because the partisanship is right there in the god damn OP.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Well what do you expect??

ToT wouldn't be ToT if he was trying to be like Captain Courtesy.

Although everybody on this site would be kind and respectable towards each other if everybody was like you Cap'n, it wouldn't be nearly as fun to read some of the great battles between some of our more partisan posters. What are you trying to do, turn DP into the NFL ( No Fun League) ??

Just making an observation. I find watching a partisan battle as fun as anyone. Sit down and read a TOT-Billo war for some entertainment better than most TV shows. All in it's place, though. When it's not a partisan issue, I'm gonna point it out, so we can have fun in other ways. 'Outing' is wrong regardless of who does it.

 

[danarhea]

Just making an observation. I find watching a partisan battle as fun as anyone. Sit down and read a TOT-Billo war for some entertainment better than most TV shows. All in it's place, though. When it's not a partisan issue, I'm gonna point it out, so we can have fun in other ways. 'Outing' is wrong regardless of who does it.

Again, I must respectfully disagree. A good analogy would be someone who speaks of the sanctity of marriage, who at the same time, does it with hookers (If you thought I was speaking of David Vitter, you are correct). Although you cannot equate being gay with seeing prostitutes (One is a matter of preference, while the other is strictly illegal), it is not about whether one is gay, whether one sees hookers, or whether one claims to be a Christian while, at the same time, worships an idol. It is about the hypocrisy, not about any preference or activity, whether legal or illegal.

Finally, speaking about illegality, gay or anti-gay issues aside, Craig DID try to solicit sex in an airport mens' room (a public place), which is strictly illegal. There are plenty of people in the gay community who would condemn the hell out that kind of activity.

 

[mpg]

Again, I must respectfully disagree. A good analogy would be someone who speaks of the sanctity of marriage, who at the same time, does it with hookers (If you thought I was speaking of David Vitter, you are correct). Although you cannot equate being gay with seeing prostitutes (One is a matter of preference, while the other is strictly illegal), it is not about whether one is gay, whether one sees hookers, or whether one claims to be a Christian while, at the same time, worships an idol. It is about the hypocrisy, not about any preference or activity, whether legal or illegal.

Finally, speaking about illegality, gay or anti-gay issues aside, Craig DID try to solicit sex in an airport mens' room (a public place), which is strictly illegal. There are plenty of people in the gay community who would condemn the hell out that kind of activity.

Is it hypocritical for a gay person to be against gay marriage?

 

[WI Crippler]

Is it hypocritical for a gay person to be against gay marriage?

Married men across america say, "no it is not hypocritical. Its smart......" :2razz:

 

[FallingPianos]

Again, I must respectfully disagree. A good analogy would be someone who speaks of the sanctity of marriage, who at the same time, does it with hookers (If you thought I was speaking of David Vitter, you are correct). Although you cannot equate being gay with seeing prostitutes (One is a matter of preference, while the other is strictly illegal), it is not about whether one is gay, whether one sees hookers, or whether one claims to be a Christian while, at the same time, worships an idol. It is about the hypocrisy, not about any preference or activity, whether legal or illegal.

try this analogy:

a pro-choice activist somehow gets access to the medical records of a pro-life activist who has recently had an abortion, then publishes them on a blog.

such information is private, no matter how hypocritical the person in question is.