From National Journal:
For months, the family values wing of the Republican Party has been protesting the inclusion of GOProud, a right-wing gay group, at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). You won’t hear any protesting, however, from conservative media mogul Andrew Breitbart.
“We’re going to have a big ol’ gay party,” he said on a radio show Wednesday. Breitbart says gays deserve a place within the Republican Party and he’s been “offended” by efforts to exclude them. Therefore, he’s throwing an 80’s-themed gay party to welcome them on board.
Say what you will about Breitbart or conservative firebrand Ann Coulter, who headlined a GOProud fundraiser in New York last fall—a transgression for which she was roundly denounced by social conservatives. Breitbart and Coulter are not supporters of gay legal equality (marriage, military, etc.) to be sure. But just the fact that they are willing to alienate themselves from the religious right by welcoming gay conservatives into the party’s tent is a sign that power is shifting away from the social conservative bloc.
On another political note: Jim Messina, a deputy White House chief of staff, will spearhead the Obama re-election campaign.
Will he accuse the GOP candidate of being gay, which is what Messina did when he worked for Sen. Max Baucus?
16 Comments for “Strange Bedfellows”
posted by Tom on
But just the fact that they are willing to alienate themselves from the religious right by welcoming gay conservatives into the party’s tent is a sign that power is shifting away from the social conservative bloc.
It is a sign of progress that the Republican Party is beginning to accept gays and lesbians who oppose same-sex marriage, military service by gays and lesbians, and so on. If the Republican Party is allowing them to do so openly, so much the better.
posted by another steve on
GOProud does support same-sex marriage and ending DADT. That’s precisely why social conservatives are furious they’ll be at CPAC. Brietbrat and Coulter don’t support us on these issues but favor GOProud’s inclusion, even if it means the religious right picks up its marbles and goes home. That’s what Miller is pointing out is significant.
posted by Tom on
GOProud does support same-sex marriage and ending DADT. That’s precisely why social conservatives are furious they’ll be at CPAC. Brietbrat and Coulter don’t support us on these issues but favor GOProud’s inclusion, even if it means the religious right picks up its marbles and goes home. That’s what Miller is pointing out is significant.
GOProud’s position are contained within “GOProud’s Conservative Agenda”, which does not expressly mention support for same-sex marriage and is silent on DADT.
On marriage, GOProud says this: “Opposing any anti-gay federal marriage amendment. Marriage should be a question for the states. A federal constitutional amendment on marriage would be an unprecedented federal power grab from the states.. Nary a word about support for same-sex marriage in the states or otherwise.
I do note that GOProud touted Senator Brown’s vote for DADT repeal, so I assume that you are right on that score.
posted by another steve on
The National Organizaton for Marriage (NOM) certainly thinks GoProud is pro-gay marriage:
“Justin Haas over at the NOM booth about the CNN moment and LaSalvia’s criticism; Haas said GOProud’s embrace of gay marriage and abortion rights raised questions about the role they wanted to play in conservative politics.”
posted by Tom on
NOM usually gets it wrong. I think that they did so in this case, anyway.
From TPM September 26, 2010: “GOProud’s executive director, Jimmy LaSalvia, told TPM after the speech, “I don’t agree with Ann Coulter about gay marriage, but there was a real conversation here. That’s what we’re trying to start.” He added, “We want people to see that it isn’t ‘us versus them.'” As an organization, he explained, GOProud focuses strictly on federal issues which means that, institutionally, they don’t take a position on state policy issues like same sex marriage. Unlike the Log Cabin Republicans who exist, according to LaSalvia, to push from many of the same agenda items as the “gay left,” GOProud seeks to redefine what are “gay” issues and push for issues of the largest importance to the LGBT community.”
LaSalvia’s statement is consistent with the GOProud website and other statements the group has made. Whether the group has changed its views since last fall, or whether NOM has inside knowledge that we don’t have, I don’t know. I’m just going by GOProud’s public statements.
I wouldn’t trust a word NOM says about anyone, let alone a gay/lesbian group. LaSilvia put it in an interview with the Washington Independent after last year’s CPAC (the “they” being NOM): GOProud’s executive director Jimmy LaSalvia was furious. “When the cameras were rolling,” said LaSalvia, “they were very nice. Now that the cameras aren’t rolling, rather than walking 20 feet over to us, they fire off a news release. What kind of man can’t walk across the row to deliver a message? I just have a question for them: Who’s the pansy at CPAC? What wusses. Just come over. Don’t play nice if you’re not going to be nice.”
posted by BobN on
The National Organizaton for Marriage (NOM) certainly thinks GoProud is pro-gay marriage:
And, being a gay person, you know they never get anything wrong…
Seriously, you should be ashamed of yourself for that assertion. Embrace GOProud for what it is, a pro-GOP organization of gay people. It is nothing more.
posted by Tom on
I think I finally found a statement from Jimmy LaSalvia the suggests — if not expressly says — that GOProud supports same-sex marriage:
“JL: We strongly support the repeal of DADT so that gay and lesbian service members can serve openly. We know there are thousands of them serving now; it’s not whether we’ll let them in, it’s whether we’ll keep them if they’re out.
We believe that marriage is best left to the states; we are against DOMA. The fact that government decides that marriage is a good thing, and there are certain responsibilities that come with that. The same legal rights and responsibilities are extended to same-sex couples. A lot of people are hung up on the word, and I understand our country is having a discussion on this, and it’s going to be a long discussion. There are a lot of people who aren’t there yet, and a lot of people who will never agree with me. But in the mean time, there are a whole bunch of policies on the table that we could pass tomorrow that would end a lot of that institutional discrimination. For instance, if you’re a couple on social security, and one partner dies, there’s no survivor benefit for a gay couple. If we had private social security accounts for gay couples…. There are commonsense Republican solutions that would improve the lives of gay couples.”
The statement was in a September 16, 2010, interview at Tufts University. I wish that they weren’t so byzantine about it. What is wrong with simply coming out and saying “We support same-sex marriage.”
It really shouldn’t be this hard to find out if GOProud supports same-sex marriage or not, but I’ll take it as a given that GOProud supports same-sex marriage in the states and will aggressively oppose, for example, efforts to repeal New Hampshire’s same-sex marriage law.
posted by BobN on
but I’ll take it as a given that GOProud supports same-sex marriage in the states and will aggressively oppose, for example, efforts to repeal New Hampshire’s same-sex marriage law.
Ha! Why take as a given something with absolutely no indication that it’s true? Show me GOProud “aggressively opposing” anything but President Obama and Democrats.
They are not a gay-rights organization. They are a GOP organization of gays. Nothing more.
posted by Tom on
I’m not going to hold my breath, BobN, waiting for GOProud to support same-sex marriage as it comes to a vote in New York this year, or oppose efforts to repeal same-sex marriage in New Hampshire next year. But I do hope that GOProud will join the marriage equality fight, if not this year or next, perhaps at some point in the future.
The conservative case for same-sex marriage has been made, conclusively in my opinion, and we are all just waiting for the GOP to wake up.
If I were running GOProud, I’d buy a thousand copies of Jon Rauch’s Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America and hand one to every delegate. I’m not sure that it would change any minds, but it would certainly be a good starting point for the “discussion” that GOProud seems to think might be coming to a theater near you soon.
posted by Jorge on
GOProud’s position are contained within “GOProud’s Conservative Agenda”, which does not expressly mention support for same-sex marriage and is silent on DADT.
Consider that the repeal bill passed.
I’m sure the repeal was one of the issues that used to be in the section “Defending the Constitution.” They changed the site around a bit.
posted by John on
I don’t trust the group myself, but in fairness GOProud did support DADT repeal. This was listed under their “legislative priorities” at their website and only removed once the legislation passed during the lame duck session. Now what the group actually did to work for DADT repeal, other than announce their support, I couldn’t say. I personally give SU & SLDN the credit for repeal and not partisan groups like GOProud.
As for same-sex marriage, the group doesn’t take a position for or against it that I can tell. GOProud doesn’t support constitutional amendments against it and believes it to be an issue for each of the states to decide for themselves. Being a national organizaiton without state affliates at the present time it shouldn’t be too surprising that they haven’t gotten involved on that level yet. Will they in the future? Beats me. GOProud has its uses I suppose but I personally wouldn’t turn to it for much. Everything else they claim to stand for I can find in quite a number of other groups so their reason for existence escapes me, other than smacking of the very identity politics they claim to eschew.
posted by Jorge on
But just the fact that they are willing to alienate themselves from the religious right by welcoming gay conservatives into the party’s tent is a sign that power is shifting away from the social conservative bloc.
I’m skeptical on that. I think it’s more alienating single-issue conservatives.
posted by Jack on
Question:
If Breitbart’s and Coulter’s antipathy to equal rights for gays isn’t based on religious conservatism, what is it based on? Once you eliminate the religious objection, not much remains to keep gays second-class.
posted by BobN on
For Coulter, you shouldn’t discount the power of cash.
posted by another steve on
If Breitbart’s and Coulter’s antipathy to equal rights for gays isn’t based on religious conservatism, what is it based on?
Conservatism by definition is resistant to change; conservatives fear that if you pull on one thread, the blanket unravels. And in many circumstances, they’ve been right — well-meant liberal programs have had extremely counter-productive results — welfare with no strings (prior to the Clinton/GOP Congress reforms).
Fortunately, over time in becomes clear what changes are counter-productive, and which are actually healthy for the body politic. I think as gay marriage plays out in the states, this will become clear.
Opposition to marriage equality that is religion-based is extremely difficult to overcome – there’s no arguing with those people. But opposition based on conservative deference to tradition can be surmounted by time and positive examples. And I think that is what we are beginning to see in the rising poll numbers in favor of marriage equality.
posted by Jorge on
In Coulter’s case, I believe it’s down the line social conservatism, with the Christian theological argument unapologetically acknowledged, but not part of the proof.
The problem is that Coulter tacitly acknowledges that the proof is lacking. I think her opposition boils down to resistance to liberal social revolution.