When will the gay community's indulgence of Jim McGreevey end?
The disgraced former governor of New Jersey, in case anyone needs a reminder, was forced to announce his resignation in the summer of 2004 for, among other alleged offenses, putting his lover on the state payroll in a six-figure job for which he had few qualifications.
But that's not the story McGreevey would have you believe. Not if you listened to his resignation speech, read any of his interviews or his memoir, "The Confession," released to little acclaim last year. No, according to McGreevey, the reason he quit was because his "truth" is that he is "a gay American."
McGreevey, who readily admits that he is attention-starved and has been since he was a little boy, is now making headlines for his decision to become an Episcopalian priest. Bully for him.
There are millions of gay people in this country. Most of us are not as politically powerful and connected as Jim McGreevey once was. We work hard, pay our taxes, put up with discrimination, and, I'd like to think, if we ever get caught doing something wrong, do not rashly blame our fate on an inability to deal with sexual orientation. But Jim McGreevey was too much of a coward to admit that what he did was just plain wrong and that he was entirely to blame for his misfortune.
The world is unfair to gay people and the higher rates of suicide, depression and personally destructive behavior amongst gays, especially gay men, has a great deal to do with external homophobia. But let there be no mistake: McGreevey was forced to resign because he was a corrupt politician who shared more in common with the men in his administration now serving time in jail than he would care to believe.
Rather than own up to his abuse of office, McGreevey conflated his political corruption with his own struggles as a gay man. In so doing, he lent credence to the ignorant meme peddled by conservatives that gays are emotionally unstable and shifty people who cannot be trusted as individuals, never mind as public servants.
Conservatives once said gays should not be schoolteachers because they would molest students; they now say that soldiers should not be allowed to serve openly because they'll make sexual advances toward their fellow service members. McGreevey did the bigots' work for them by claiming it was his homosexuality that caused his resignation.
In his memoir, McGreevey says that even though it was wrong to carry on an affair with an employee, his lover Golan Cipel was more than qualified for the six-figure "consigliere" role that he played. In his desperate attempt to show that his sexual repression somehow caused his political corruption, McGreevey effortlessly unburdens himself of blame.
The logic of McGreevey's explanation dumps responsibility on the cruel, heterosexual world that repressed him, transformed him into a compulsive liar, fed his need for widespread public approval and - you guessed it - forced him to hire an unqualified foreign national with no FBI security clearance onto his personal staff and then sleep with him while his wife delivered their premature baby in an emergency C-section. Give me a break.
McGreevey's dissembling about "my truth" aids him in his mission to show that it was his homosexuality, or his psychologically diagnosed "severe adjustment disorder," that led him to behave inappropriately. Many straight politicians get in trouble for doing things similar to what McGreevey did, yet they do not make the absurd contention that their sexuality is an excuse for bad behavior. Never, in McGreevey's analysis, is anything plainly his fault and his fault alone.
Why can't McGreevey just recede into the past? As recent events indicate, McGreevey's desire for fame borders on the shameless. In addition to Oprah's couch, profiles in the Advocate and GQ and a highly publicized book tour, McGreevey auditioned for a role opposite Joan Rivers on a now-scuttled television show in which all three of the catty comedian's co-hosts would be gay men.
McGreevey's latest exploit is a desperate cry for attention, a shallow attempt to relive his 15 minutes of fame.
I think it's long past time we told him to just go away.
23 Comments for “Give Up on McGreevey”
posted by Jorge on
“Many straight politicians get in trouble for doing things similar to what McGreevey did, yet they do not make the absurd contention that their sexuality is an excuse for bad behavior.”
What about alcoholism? Oh, wait, that was a gay guy, too.
I find it hard to understand why if so many gay people dislike McGreevey (which I think is the case) why it isn’t more obvious, why he gets a lot of positive attention. But I could be wrong.
I think most people gay and straight get that the guy’s a narcisisst. But I haven’t heard many straight people tell him to go away either.
posted by Bill Herrmann on
Sorry to disagree but my partner and I read McGreevey’s book and I would call it the best coming out book ever. He’s such a likable, smart, intelligent guy. And I saw on the internet the discussion between him and Andrew Sullivan at that YMCA in New York and he was so articulate and capable. I don’t know what all the fuss is about, though I suspect that a lot of younger people don’t really know what the closet was like and the strange things one did when in there. McGreevey does come across as a throw-back to an earlier generation which is maybe why I can empathize with him so well.
posted by BobN on
Being from the other coast, I can’t quite grasp the reason righties on the East Coast hate McGreevey so much. My best guess is that he’s charismatic and a charismatic Democrat is dangerous. I admit, it’s not a great guess. But what IS the problem? If he was soooo corrupt, why no charges? Are we really supposed to believe that McGreevey’s coming out innoculated him against legal examination?
In this particular case, I don’t understand how the writer recognizes that external and internal homophobia can really mess someone up, but that McGreevey’s recklessness and poor judgement — even his failure to see all his recklessness and poor judgement — are entirely attributable to uh… well, something else, something innate in the man (like maybe his repressed sexuality???).
And, as to the last point, the plea for McGreevey to stay out of the limelight. Stop writing about him and maybe others will catch on. Just a thought.
posted by Brian Miller on
Anne Heche lied about her sexual orientation, claimed to be a lesbian, used Ellen DeGeneres to get ahead in her career, and then dumped Ellen — and she’s a queer pariah.
Jim McGreevey lied about his sexual orientation, claimed to be a straight man, used his former wife to get ahead in his career, and then dumped his wife — and he’s purported (by some) to be a “a likable, smart, intelligent guy.”
Go figure!
posted by Jorge on
I can’t speak for the right, but I have little use for McGreevey. There’s just something fake about him. Like on the Oprah show, he was all going on about his need to apologize and go through his inner demons. I’ve never heard a confession sound so narcissistic and creepy. Like he was congratulating himself. No he grew up a Catholic. You can see it all over him. But there’s a lot more to McGreevey than that, and there’s a lot more to him than his sexual orientation.
I mean look, the story that McGreevey resigned because of his sexual orientation lasted no more than 12 hours until people realized that we were in the 21st century.
Now I’m not angry at McGreevey, but I do not think his attitude sets a very good example. Nor in general do I think politicians, who get ahead by being manipulative and devoid of humility, should be among the vanguard of gay role models.
posted by Special Touch on
Finally! You are the first queer person I have heard finally call McGreevey out. All the other gay press sycophantically publishes his every whim and fancy. I remember when Rosie came out, and the gay press slammed her. I don’t get it!
But, I do have a theory: sexism. The white gay media loves this “likable, smart, intelligent” white guy. Nevermind the wife he’s used and abandoned or the public office he’s besmirched to come to terms with his repressed sexuality.
Frankly, McGreevey’s a terrible role model, and his quote (“I am a gay American”) only reinforces straight America’s association of ‘gay’ with ‘irresponsible’ and ‘selfish’.
@BobN: I think it’s interesting you attribute criticism of McGreevey to “east coast righties.” Are you thinking of someone in particular? or is that a completely unsubstantiated generalization? (I am east coast, but not a “rightie.”)
posted by Amicus on
My stomach turns when I read articles like this.
In an endless effort to socialize everything that gay and lesbian people do, we have the little pink police going around proclaiming that there is a “right way” to come out. Is there, really? Please, Jamie, why don’t you publish your ‘gay manifesto’ for Upstanding Gays? I guess you don’t come out after the first kiss, but you definately have to come out after the first slog? No? The second? After you are 18? Or, every day after you are 18? And siblings don’t count, but you have to tell the gay press, if they ask — and, God knows, if one ever moves from being a no-name to “fabulous”, by chance or hard work, they WILL “ask” — and everyone else, too?
For sure, people should be encouraged to come out earlier, rather than later – for their OWN good, but even if McGreevey supressed his sexuality, even if he is a “bad gay boy”, then how is it sooo awful that his story becomes well known, especially among those little Catholic boys who might be thinking of doing the same thing, right now, setting themselves up for a bucket load of personal heartbreak, capped off with being publicly denounced by their own for not having managed their ‘gayness’ well enough to be a ‘role model’, of having a deficient ‘gay aptitutde’?
I can tell you that my own ‘coming out’ was connected with the realization that ‘life is short’, that I’m not going to be defined by others’ expectations, and that this is my life, meaning that I’m going to live it the way I want, an objective that may or may not dovetail with some p.c. notion of what a “role model” amounts to.
Anyway, this whole thing caught my attention because I found this over at ClubWhirled, as referred by CitizenC, both of whom seem to cut _possibly_ unexpected slack for this story, slack which is much welcomed, from my perspective:
posted by BobN on
@special touch
My “completely unsubstantiated generalization” is based on reading a several comments over time by right-leaning, gay pundits. I was unaware that I was required to document my observations to post here. I’ll do better next time. As for “East Coast”, well, he was an East Coast governor, so it makes sense that writers living on that coast would be more interested in him.
posted by Hermes in DC on
Finally someone in the gay commentariat is calling out McGreevey for the seld-indulgent, attention-seeking, really sort of pathetic narcissist that he is. I agree with James Kirchick’s argument in full.
What honestly flabbergasts me is the readers who disagree. How can we posibly justify McGreevey’s conduct in office as the lamentable side-effects of being an understandably closeted gay man in a homophobic world. What a crock of shit.
McGreevey didn’t make a brave and self-determining coming out statement because he finally found the inner strength to do so even in the face of inner turmoil and fear. Many of us have done that and are rightly proud of ourselves. But that’s not what McGreevey did. He outed himself and resigned a high public office which he had been entrusted by New Jersey’s voters because he was about to be caught out for his bad behavior, to wit, conducting an out-of-wedlock affair with another man whom he also ensconced in a taxpayer funded sinecure for which the lover had inadequate credentials. And this wasn’t a visitors and conventions bureau board seat; Cipel had a HOMELAND SECURITY related post in NEW JERSEY in the aftermath of 9/11.
And the more (otherwise admirably) sympathetic among us are inclined to give him a pass because it’s hard to be gay? The only thing that was hard about being gay for Jim McGreevey is that it got in the way of his up-till-then relentless pursuit of ever-higher office and ego gratification.
There is absolutely nothing about him for the gay community to admire except perhaps for the pathos verging on melodrama of his undeniable talent as a politician and ambition comong crashing down in the face of his own venality.
Good riddance. And if the Episcopalians know what’s god for them, they won’t take him.
posted by Amicus on
The only thing that was hard about being gay for Jim McGreevey is that it got in the way of his up-till-then relentless pursuit of ever-higher office…
but…
How can we posibly justify McGreevey’s conduct in office as the lamentable side-effects of being an understandably closeted gay man in a homophobic world ..
It would seem you’ve made the case against yourself … and you’ve certainly refuted Jamie’s odd assertion that homophobia is an “absurd contention”. I’d love to read Jamie’s review of Brokeback Mountain, in which he observes that Ennis dissembles about his truth and the absurd contention by Annie Proulx (the author) that his sexuality has any adverse or psychologically challenging circumstances for his to overcome and blame Ennis’ own internal corruption (inarticulateness, belligerance) and lack of courage.
I have not read anyone who is trying to “justify” what Jim McGreevey did. However, it does seem possible to understand what he did and at least offer some amount of kindness and charity, instead of the ugly bitterness that is on display here (“good riddance”, etc.), for whatever reason.
And how would “we” judge him if he had finished his term, quietly divorced his wife, and moved on? You’d probably have a different tune.
How would you have judged him – assuming that is one’s role in life – if he had actually paid Cipel his blackmail/bribe money, instead of taking his lumps when he did? When you made your “brave choice” to come out, did it involve giving up your life’s work, a fantastic job as Govenor of an economically powerful state, your family/relationship support, and your source of income? Can you honestly say that you wouldn’t have acted just a little bit with consideration of those things, even if we agree that some of them ultimately amounted to self-made bars on the closet door?
Do you really believe that Jim has held himself out as an example of what to do, or has he admitted that what he did was “wrong”? Do you seriously think that his being the public eye is somehow meaningfully detracting from the ongoing efforts of the Victory folks to encourage and build openly gay elected officials? If you think that Jim doesn’t have substantial political and communication skills to share, then you seem to be obviously contradicted on the facts.
And don’t be so quick to agree with everything that Jamie said. McGreevey was not “forced to resign because he was a corrupt politician”, generally. He was forced to resign because he got involved with someone who was corrupt.
posted by Brian Miller on
When you made your “brave choice” to come out, did it involve giving up your life’s work, a fantastic job as Govenor of an economically powerful state, your family/relationship support, and your source of income?
Many of us made the more noble choice of not lying to get that great job and all that power in the first place.
We’re supposed to pity McGreevey’s calculated move to marry a woman — lie to her about loving her — and creation of a “model family” just to get more power.
We’re supposed to be “understanding” of him and his “pain” and ignore the confusion, anger and pain of the wife of many years who he lied to and used simply for his own personal gain — before throwing her and his child away to live a big gay life when their “usefulness” to his career ended.
We’re supposed to be sad that he lost the “great job” and the power that came from the sustained lie that he told — to the state, to his family, to his own daughter. And then, as he attempts to salvage the mess he made of his career by engaging in adulterous nepotism by appointing his lover in a position that his lover had no business being in, we’re supposed to applaud his “bravery.”
There’s no nobility in lies. There’s no bravery in using and throwing away other people for political gain. There’s no admiration in deception. There’s nothing to look up to in nepotism.
McGreevey was a fraud in office — deliberately creating a lie about himself to get power and prestige for himself at the expense of his family (and the security of the state of New Jersey, thanks to the role of his incompetent lover). Today, he’s a fraud out of office — a common huckster who lost it all after his numerous deceptions forced him out of office, who is trying to reinvent himself as a professional homosexual in a world that is far too full of professional homosexuals. He should be ignored — he has nothing to teach gay people (or straight people, for that matter) other than what NOT to do. . . and the fruits of deception and manipulation of others for one’s own gain.
posted by Amicus on
Not pity, not “sorry for”. Open up your heart!
28 “The older brother became angry and refused to go in. So his father went out and pleaded with him. 29 But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. 30 But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’
31 ” ‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. 32 But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ ”
The Prodigal Son
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Relative to that reference, Amicus, I would call your attention to verses 17 – 21 of that reference in Luke 15.
When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! I will set out and go back to my father and say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired men.’ So he got up and went to his father.
“But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him.
“The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’
So you see, McGreevey has a little problem with that; he’s come running up saying, well, maybe he did a few things wrong, but we should give him everything back because he’s gay. No remorse, no willingness to humble himself, nothing but arrogance — especially given his current attempts to badmouth his former wife.
And if we’re making Biblical references, I think a far better one for McGreevey is outlined in the parable of the wicked servant (Matthew 18:21 – 35) — again, given McGreevey’s slander and hate towards his ex-wife and his attempt to weasel his way out of the crimes he committed as governor using his sexual orientation.
My sympathy for McGreevey will come when he demonstrates that he is genuinely sorry for what he did and to whom he did it — and when he stops trying to manipulate and use other gays as cover for his misbehavior.
posted by Amicus on
Well, I’ll go one more round, maybe.
nothing but arrogance
Pshaw!
James, on announcing his affair with another man: “It was wrong. It was foolish. It was inexcusable. And for this, I ask the forgiveness and the grace of my wife. She has been extraordinary throughout this ordeal, and I am blessed by virtue of her love and strength.”
Source: CNN
Some more:
“McGreevey said he was not planning to watch his wife’s interview and declined to comment on her statements.
“I wish her well,” he said
You do recall that the title of his book is “Confession”? While Jamie is busy writing about ‘dissembling’, did you find something untruthful in the book or are you just guessing at his motives, mostly?
McGreevey’s slander and hate toward his ex-wife…
What do you think that gay men ought to do toward their former wives? End their own lives? What do you do for your former boyfriends (meaning, how “because he is gay” are your gripes)? The in-state understanding of Dina Matos is not quite the Oprah version, either. Tell me, do you really think her book is to help her daughter understand it all, as she says? You are aware that there is a custody battle going on, yes, after their informal arrangements fell apart? Do you think that infidelity with a gay man is somehow worse than just infidelity, which all couples sort out in far greater numbers than would warrant a book deal?
Last, on the issue of his ‘corruption’ in office. Why is this a ‘gay issue’? McGreevey was never gay-hostile while in office. In fact, he signed NJ’s ahead-of-the-curve DP law. Cipel had a role as a private adviser to the Governor, not some high-responsibility, senate-confirmed slot in Homeland Security.
And speaking of Cipel, by way of contrast, how is he, that charmer, doing today? I understand that he went back to his own ‘community’ and I haven’t seen anyone penning nasty notes about him, like the one that heads this thread, have you? humm….
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
The problem here is this, Amicus; Jim McGreevey is now trying to claim that his affair is his wife’s fault, because she should have known he was gay when he married her — and that he himself states in his own memoir that he only married her for political advantage, and she means nothing to him.
Meanwhile, as for corruption, try “Joseph Santiago”, “Charles Kushner”, and numerous other examples. Furthermore, since the New Jersey Constitution makes all such positions appointed, with the governor being the only statewide elected official, anyone who is in office under McGreevey is there because he put them there — and, as several examples show, encouraged them to do things that are patently illegal.
As for Cipel, we understand that McGreevey is now trying to insist that he’s the innocent victim and that everything is Cipel’s fault. But I don’t see it working.
Finally:
Do you think that infidelity with a gay man is somehow worse than just infidelity, which all couples sort out in far greater numbers than would warrant a book deal?
Hardly.
But you’re trying to argue that infidelity with a gay man is not only acceptable, but grounds for smearing and bashing your ex-wife, who you already admit you never loved, you misled, and who you only married for political purposes.
Like I said before, my sympathy for McGreevey will come when he demonstrates that he is genuinely sorry for what he did and to whom he did it — and when he stops trying to manipulate and use other gays as cover for his misbehavior.
But, as we can see, there are a lot of Democrat gays out there who are willing to be manipulated by him.
posted by Brian Miller on
James, on announcing his affair with another man: “It was wrong. It was foolish. It was inexcusable. And for this, I ask the forgiveness and the grace of my wife. She has been extraordinary throughout this ordeal, and I am blessed by virtue of her love and strength.”
James, in divorce court not much later:
The estranged wife of former New Jersey Gov. James E. McGreevey knew he was gay before they married, he claimed in court papers filed Monday.
McGreevey wrote that Dina Matos McGreevy “knew of my sexual orientation before our marriage, she chose to either ignore it or block it out of her mind, even when questioned by her friends.”
Oops, except that the wife claims she didn’t. And if she did, why did McGreevey feel the “need” to “apologize” to her?
Ahhhh, because that looked good for the press — and later, when it was convenient to change his story to help himself in court, he was back claiming she knew the whole thing was a sham from the get-go.
That’s character. NOT.
What do you think that gay men ought to do toward their former wives?
Not get a wife in the first place — and, failing that, take care of their family obligations.
Last time I checked, marriage was a two-way contract with significant commitments between two individuals, not an opportunity to “find yourself” and then walk away from your commitments to your spouse and children.
McGreevey wants to be seen as a noble hero, even as he publicly attacks his ex-wife as being “stupid” for not “seeing the obvious signs that he was gay.” (Of course, he wasn’t actually *out* to her, but it’s her own fault for “not listening to her friends.” Very responsible on his part).
He shows his young daughter male nudes and has had virtually no involvement in her life since being outed, if press reports are to be believed. And we already know he’s changed his story about 2 dozen times on the details of the case.
So we have a shattered family pulled together simply for his political benefit, which is being discarded now that it’s no longer necessary for his advancement and career. And we have yet another irresponsible idiot in the public eye who chooses to use his sexual orientation as an excuse for every callous, shallow, self-centered, irresponsible decision he’s made.
NOTHING is ever poor McGreevey’s fault. It’s his wife’s fault, his child’s fault, the fault of his ex-lover (who he tried to get a job for, abusing his authority). It’s the voters of New Jersey’s fault. It’s the fault of his party. It’s the fault of “society.”
How pathetic. I cannot think of a worse case study in character, self-control, self-respect, and responsibility in recent state political history.
posted by Amicus on
you’re trying to argue that infidelity with a gay man is not only acceptable…
No, you (and others) are the ones locked into the notion that somehow he has to “pay” – and continue to pay? – for his infidelity somehow, because he is gay.
Here is a contrast (that perhaps will highlight your own anti-gay bias?).
Rudy Giuliani was unfaithful to his wife during the time that they were married with two children. I believe he had an affair with someone who was on the staff, even. As his crowning achievement, he announced a separation from his wife at a press conference, which was the same time his wife heard about it too (quite the slap-in-the-face to the wife, that, eh?).
Today, he is the frontrunner for the GOP’s Presidential Nomination!
Oh, yeah, and before I forget, he was together in marriage with his second cousin for 14 years, which was why the Catholic Church ultimately gave him an annulment of his first marriage …
I don’t think bringing up the lawsuit stuff necessarily means too much in the context of judging character or showing duplicity. Haven’t we all seen the horrible things that couples will do to each other, when things turn sour?
I’m certainly not going to jump in, as you have done, and start to second guess a “he said”, “she said” match. I cannot understand why you are so anxious to do so. I can think of reasons why one would want to make the case for foreknowledge in a divorce lawsuit. I can also make the case that it’s impressive that Jim is fighting to continue to remain involved with his daughter against the threat of losing his visitation rights – he could have just ‘walked away’, right, as so many heterosexual fathers do …
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Unfortunately, Amicus, you just undercut your own argument.
Obviously you are still holding Rudy Giuliani, who has apologized and admitted that what he did was horribly wrong, responsible — while giving McGreevey, who is still, as Mr. Miller pointed out above, slandering and bashing his ex-wife over his right to show his daughter gay porn and to have her sleep with McGreevey and his lover in bed together.
Giuliani has paid. McGreevey has avoided payment, thanks to gullible gays, who he has manipulated into ignoring rampant state corruption, into blaming his affairs and sex trips to Jersey Turnpike rest stops on everyone but himself, and who are defending his slander and hate towards his ex-wife, not to mention his apparently odd desires to sleep with and show gay porn to his daughter.
What would advance gay rights immensely is to show that we don’t tolerate corrupt creeps based on their sexual orientation. But because McGreevey is gay — or at least claims to be gay for now — our national groups and gullible other gays soil themselves with his corrupt stain out of some sense of “unity”.
posted by Amicus on
Unfortunately, Amicus, you just undercut your own argument.
Did I? Why does pointing out how some people appear to be applying their own standard differently undercut what I said?
Giuliani has paid.
Do you mean the $6.8 million that he paid to avoid being declared in open court as having been cruel and inhuman to his wife?
Why are you free to characterize him as not ‘manipulative’ with that settlement payment?
Since his second marriage, Guiliani appears to have mostly given up on keeping in touch with his kids.
You want to talk about character and manipulativeness among politicians? How do you feel about Rudy raising money for Ralph Reed? !!
What would advance gay rights immensely is to show that we don’t tolerate corrupt creeps based on their sexual orientation.
You know, you and Jamie and others have just dug a giant black pit in from of ‘the closet’ door, haven’t you? Now, people are damned if they stay in the closet and damned if they ‘come out’. Since you are busy judging everyone, can “we” judge your motives in doing so?
As I said before, Golan Cipel went back to his community, and no one is writing nasty notes about him, that I know …
No, Jim is not perfect, but I’m not looking to let only ‘perfect people’ – or even ‘perfectly contrite’ people – into the ‘gay club’. Heck, I’m even ready to accept Foley back, when he is ready, so smother me with jam and call me a whimp, but I’ve already said why I’d do it … (Although I admit that seeing Melman back on the GOP’s dais recently raised some fur on the back of my neck … see, I’m not perfect either.)
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
Why are you free to characterize him as not ‘manipulative’ with that settlement payment?
Because he made it.
McGreevey, on the other hand, is now slandering his wife to AVOID having to make any sort of concession or payment to her.
Since his second marriage, Guiliani appears to have mostly given up on keeping in touch with his kids.
Is that why your article says this?
He said that he and his father had recently begun trying to reconcile. ?For a while there, we weren?t talking, for a decent amount of time,? Andrew said. ?But lately we?ve been having more contact and trying to figure things out.?
Likening that to McGreevey’s tactic of “reconnecting” with his daughter by slandering her mother publicly and calling her a stupid whore, and I think we see the problem.
You want to talk about character and manipulativeness among politicians? How do you feel about Rudy raising money for Ralph Reed?
That’s his choice.
Just as it was the choice of the numerous gays who are whining about it to give money to FMA supporters and to call people who supported that were allegedly antigay “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive”, to the tune of tens of millions of dollars.
Personally, I think it would be more worthwhile for gays to vent their ire about hypocrisy on the Democrat politicians who actively demand their money, then stab them in the back and the gays like McGreevey who support that, versus the Republican politicians who don’t ask for it in the first place. But I’m kind of odd that way.
You know, you and Jamie and others have just dug a giant black pit in from of ‘the closet’ door, haven’t you? Now, people are damned if they stay in the closet and damned if they ‘come out’.
Hardly.
McGreevey’s problem is not that he came out, but that he uses the fact that he came out as a get-out-of-consequences-free card.
I think Jamie summed it up best here (emphasis mine):
The logic of McGreevey?s explanation dumps responsibility on the cruel, heterosexual world that repressed him, transformed him into a compulsive liar, fed his need for widespread public approval and ? you guessed it ? forced him to hire an unqualified foreign national with no FBI security clearance onto his personal staff and then sleep with him while his wife delivered their premature baby in an emergency C-section. Give me a break.
McGreevey?s dissembling about ?my truth? aids him in his mission to show that it was his homosexuality, or his psychologically diagnosed ?severe adjustment disorder,? that led him to behave inappropriately. Many straight politicians get in trouble for doing things similar to what McGreevey did, yet they do not make the absurd contention that their sexuality is an excuse for bad behavior. Never, in McGreevey?s analysis, is anything plainly his fault and his fault alone.
posted by North Dallas Thirty on
constitutional amendments that they claimed were homophobic “pro-gay” and “gay supportive”.
If gays want to whine about hypocrisy, I would think they would worry more about the Democrat politicians who solicit millions in gay dollars, make promises, then turn around and casually break them when necessary, versus the Republican politicians who usually don’t bother with a constituency that irrationally hates them. But I’m kind of odd that way.
You know, you and Jamie and others have just dug a giant black pit in from of ‘the closet’ door, haven’t you? Now, people are damned if they stay in the closet and damned if they ‘come out’.
I think Jamie put it best in these words (emphasis mine):
The logic of McGreevey?s explanation dumps responsibility on the cruel, heterosexual world that repressed him, transformed him into a compulsive liar, fed his need for widespread public approval and ? you guessed it ? forced him to hire an unqualified foreign national with no FBI security clearance onto his personal staff and then sleep with him while his wife delivered their premature baby in an emergency C-section. Give me a break.
McGreevey?s dissembling about ?my truth? aids him in his mission to show that it was his homosexuality, or his psychologically diagnosed ?severe adjustment disorder,? that led him to behave inappropriately. Many straight politicians get in trouble for doing things similar to what McGreevey did, yet they do not make the absurd contention that their sexuality is an excuse for bad behavior. Never, in McGreevey?s analysis, is anything plainly his fault and his fault alone.
And I fully expect the same from Foley — an argument that his “being repressed” led to a fascination with teenage pages. Bullshit. He made that choice, and the consequences are his to deal with, not to palm off onto the gay community.
posted by Amicus on
How you know it is slander? [Ans: you do not]
And Jim is at fault because he didn’t pay the hush money that Rudy did – that’s your answer to how to deal with infidelity among public figures, pay for it to go away?
While you continue, with very thin evidence, to impugn Jim’s motives, I can do them same for Rudy. You won’t win that argument. To wit: Gee, Rudy’s reconciliation is all … part of his ‘dissembling’ and ‘the latest exploit in his desperate cry for attention’ and public office. He used his kids when he was in office (the public to a liking to their misbehaviors) and, now that he might need them to be President, he’s doing it again. See how I did that? Anyone can take the cheap-and-easy…
I don’t think that fear of the GOP on gay issues is irrational! Some people surely have blind and blanket criticisms, but it is entirely rational to be afraid and despondant, if you are gay, of the GOP being in power. What’s more to the point, it is entire rational to be more worried about the GOP in general than Jim McGreevey in particular, who did, afterall, sign a really good DP law.
If you think that $1,000 to Harold Ford is somehow worse than fundraising for Ralph Reed (or even the same), from a LGBT perspective, then you are free to make that argument. I doubt you’ll be persuasive.
The rest, including the repetition of Jamie’s surprising appraisal that homophobia is an “absurd contention” is already dealt with above.
I think that is all that I have to say. You get the last word, unless something new and interesting comes up.
posted by Brian Miller on
Rudy Giuliani was unfaithful to his wife during the time that they were married with two children. I believe he had an affair with someone who was on the staff, even. As his crowning achievement, he announced a separation from his wife at a press conference, which was the same time his wife heard about it too (quite the slap-in-the-face to the wife, that, eh?).
Today, he is the frontrunner for the GOP’s Presidential Nomination!
All this demonstrates is that the GOP and Democratic parties are both stuffed with “leaders” who have no morals, don’t keep their word, and view other people in their lives as footstools to elevate them to power.
This is a surprise. . . because?