During the congressional brouhaha last week, Rep. Pete Stark
(D-Calif.) let loose with this tirade:
"You little fruitcake, you little fruitcake, I said you are a fruitcake."
According to Fox News, which is always sensitive to any hint of anti-gay prejudice (yes, that's a joke), "Stark directed the word -- considered by some to be a gay slur -- at Republican Rep. Scott McInnis, who is married and by all accounts not gay."
Moreover:
Republican sources also claim that during the chaotic scene in the committee, Stark fired another gay slur in the direction of Chairman [Bill] Thomas. The word is too vulgar to print in full, but the last half of it is "sucker." -- Now, one Republican wants to know where is the outrage at the Democrat for his seemingly intolerant remarks. "This isn't the first time. That's the problem here. The Democrats fail to recognize this is an ongoing problem," said Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla.
Foley, of course, who would like to be Florida's GOP senate
candidate next year, has been the center of much
unwelcome speculation about his own alleged closeted
homosexuality. Which colors the following just a bit:
Foley questioned whether Democrats get a pass when it comes to casting aspersions, and whether there is indeed a double standard. "I trust that you would understand that if a Republican said that, there would be a public lynching," Foley said.
Well, it is a good point. Especially in light of the
following:
A spokesman from the gay activists group [the Human Rights Campaign], usually quick to condemn hints of slight or slur against the gay community, defended the hot-headed lawmaker [Stark], saying he probably used the word to mean McInnis was nutty.
Give me a break, as they say.
A follow-up story reports that "five sources have confirmed...that they heard Stark call Thomas that "sucker" word at Friday's meeting..." Any guesses as to how HRC's gonna spin that one?
One Sort of Inclusion.
In New Hampshire, the State Supreme Court heard arguments about whether a woman who is married to a man, but has sex with another woman, has committed adultery.
Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders filed a brief
calling for equal treatment, saying:
"Gay and lesbian relationships are as significant as non-gay ones and therefore pose the same threat to the marital union. . . . New Hampshire courts should treat gay adultery the same no matter the gender of the person with whom a spouse engages in an extramarital relationship."
True, but perhaps the state should also let us marry (or at
least be civil unionized) before allowing us equal opportunity to
be parties to adultery.
July 20, 2003
Defending Gay Marriage (and the Constitution).
Out congressmembers Barney Frank, Tammy Baldwin, and Jim Kolbe
are circulating a letter urging their congressional colleagues not
to support the proposed anti-gay Federal Marriage Amendment. Their
letter,
reports the Boston Globe, quotes Vice President Dick Cheney
from his VP debate in 2000 against Joe Lieberman, when Cheney said
that ''people should be free to enter into any kind of relationship
they want to enter into,'' and added:
''That matter [marriage] is regulated by the states. -- I think different states are likely to come to different conclusions, and that's appropriate. I don't think there should necessarily be a federal policy in this area.''
The letter signed by Frank, Baldwin, and Kolbe argues that
lawmakers should reject the constitutional amendment as an
intrusion on states' rights: The Globe reports:
''While we acknowledge that we do not find ourselves in complete agreement with the Vice President on all public policy issues,'' the letter said, ''we believe that [Cheney's statement], given one month before the presidential election, makes a very strong case against a Constitutional amendment which would establish precisely 'a federal policy' of the sort that the Vice President opposed."
Of course, one could question the last time Barney Frank had a kind word for federalism, but that would be churlish.
Interestingly, the anti-gay group Focus on the Family, when
denouncing the letter on its website under "Gay Lawmakers
Assail Marriage Amendment," weakly asserts "Cheney's words
during the debate don't lead everyone to the same
conclusion."
Guess they decided it would be too much of a political hot potato
to take on the VP directly.
In other marriage developments, Virginia's Richmond Times-Dispatch reports that Senator George Allen, who is reliably conservative and a member of the Senate Republican leadership, "has taken a separate tack from Majority Leader Bill Frist and has declined to endorse a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage," at least for now. A good sign.
Oh, Politics!
In other congressional news, during the brouhaha between House
Democrats and Republicans over whether a) the Demos were being
obstructionists over a pension reform bill by demanding a line by
line reading and then leaving the room, or b) the GOPers went
bonkers by calling the Capitol police to force the Demos back to
the chamber, the
Washington Post noted that:
one Democratic member of the panel called a Republican colleague "you little fruitcake" in the midst of the standoff.
Finally, ABC News correspondent Jeffrey Kofman's story claiming
low morale among U.S. soldiers in Iraq led, it seems,
to someone in the Bush White House (think gung-ho West Winger) to
have conservative webmeister Matt Drudge link to a story about
Kofman in the Advocate -- a story that reveals the ABC reporter is
both openly gay and a Canadian.
Drudge's link to the
Advocate piece was headlined: "ABC News Reporter Who Filed
Troop Complaint Story is Canadian."
Recent Postings