Beyond the Beltway, Again

by on

GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is no supporter of gay equality, although he's not been an anti-gay demagogue, either. But a radio ad attacking McConnell, by AFSCME, the government-workers union, traffics in nasty homophobic innuendo in order to help elect his Democratic opponent.

8 Comments for “Beyond the Beltway, Again”

  1. posted by Richard J. Rosendall on

    I am a member of AFGE and not AFSCME, but I am saddened and disgusted as a union member, a Democrat, and a gay rights activist by the use of such a sleazy tactic. Even if McConnell were known for trafficking in anti-gay demagoguery, which he has not, the use of outing as a tactic trades in homophobia and therefore works counter to the cause of gay equality and dignity. The zealots do not care about this, because they think the end justifies the means. But if this is not just the sort of politics that Sen. Obama has been saying we need to move past, then what are we talking about? I was just writing about the offensiveness of Liddy Dole’s commercial calling her challenger “godless” and using an imitation of her rival’s voice to create the impression that she didn’t believe in God. Now this anti-McConnell ad, though there is no evidence that McConnell’s rival was involved, provides a matching bookend of beyond-the-pale sleaze in service of unbridled ambition.

  2. posted by Carl on

    “Even if McConnell were known for trafficking in anti-gay demagoguery, which he has not,”

    There were some homophobic attacks against Dan Mongiardo when he ran against GOP Senator Jim Bunning in 2004.

    http://www.wave3.com/Global/story.asp?S=2496073&nav=0RZFSX2m

    “On a campaign stop earlier this week, State Senate president David Williams referred to Mongiardo as a “limp wrist.” State Senator Elizabeth Tori said “I’m not even sure the word ‘man’ applies to him.””

    If McConnell had any objections to these attacks (and since he is basically in charge of the Kentucky GOP, his criticism would have had a big impact, he never voiced them that I can recall.

  3. posted by Jorge on

    Hmm. It’s only innuendo if people get it. Do people really get it?

  4. posted by Richard J. Rosendall on

    The point is not that McConnell is pro-gay, nor even that he has stood against homophobia. The point is that he is no Rick Santorum. If one is pro-outing, one could (and some do) make the case that any gay person who remains a Republican deserves to be outed. That is the path of zealotry. McConnell received HRC scorecard ratings of 0, 0, and 20 (out of 100) in the 108th, 109th, and 110th Congresses. Incidentally, the one vote on which he agreed with HRC’s position in the 110th, at least among those HRC scored, was his support for reauthorization of the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). So this guy obviously is among the worst on gay issues in the U.S. Senate. I oppose him for that reason.

    Among the problems with outing as a tactic are that it sullies those who use it, and it exploits the homophobia of voters. If we seek to combat homophobia, we should not traffic in it ourselves.

  5. posted by Carl on

    “The point is not that McConnell is pro-gay, nor even that he has stood against homophobia. The point is that he is no Rick Santorum.”

    I thought the point was that he had never demagogued on gay issues. What happened in that Bunning campaign was very, very blatant gay-baiting, and since McConnell is a huge player in the Kentucky GOP, I have a hard time giving him a pass.

    If the point is to say McConnell shouldn’t face these attacks, then I agree with you as well as Stephen.

  6. posted by Richard J. Rosendall on

    Carl, I am glad that we agree on the larger point, but your line that “since McConnell is a huge player in the Kentucky GOP, I have a hard time giving him a pass” stretches the definition of personal demagoguery. One can (and some do) make the case that ANY Republican who stays in the party after the demonization of gay people in recent years bears responsibility for it. But that just sounds too zealous to me. Noting that a politician has not personally been known for demagoguery on a particular issue does NOT make him a saint. But my reference to Santorum was not changing the subject. Santorum personally, directly, aggressively engaged in anti-gay demagoguery; and if that does not put him in a different category from Mitch McConnell who did not (to my knowledge) do that, then we’ve lost our perspective. Come on, that is not an exoneration of McConnell. If we cannot make reasonable distinctions, we cannot reason. And if we want any decency in our politics, we have to exercise some restraint and avoid sounding like so many Savonarolas.

  7. posted by PG on

    I hope that everyone who is troubled by this will contact the AFSCME. I sent them the following message:

    To whom it may concern,

    I am horrified at the advertisement the AFSCME is running against Mitch McConnell in Kentucky, and I urge you to remove them and to apologize for them. While there is disagreement among Democrats about the extent to which we should campaign for homosexuals’ equality, I hope there is no disagreement that our tactics should not sink to those of our opponents. Unfortunately, in referencing McConnell’s military record and asking that he be “straight” with voters, the AFSCME has found a low ground to share with Republicans, and it makes me ashamed to have made common cause with the AFSCME.

    Please, please reconsider such advertisements, and please remember that the Democratic coalition cannot be strengthened by using sexual orientation as a fear factor in politics.

  8. posted by randy on

    Perhaps, then, the solution should be that the Union announces that they are proud and happy to support a gay member of the Senate?

Comments are closed.