« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Amid More Leftism, Bigotry From GOProud and Their Apologists, Breitbart Resigns From Advisory Board

Andrew Breitbart resigned from the GOProud Advisory Board this weekend. I wrote about GOProud’s retaliatory outing of Governor Perry’s Chief Pollster and how this really ended up outing them – and their bigotry and Leftism – last Friday here at RedState. I had hoped to leave it at that because I’m not fond of beating dead horses; it gets kind of icky and messy and I’m a girl. However, GOProud just keeps doubling down on the jackass, as do their apologists, and their lame attempts at excuses must be refuted.

See, there is a dirty little secret about a strain found in some GOP circles. People are so desperate to be all ‘I heart my gays! I’m not like those redneck rubes!” that they will immediately jump to be ‘allies’, warranted or not.  Because, ‘hip and enlightened.’ I have no such qualms. I’m a 40 year old broad who embroiders for fun and watches reality shows un-ironically. I drink Miller Lite beer from a bottle. I wear aprons, for cripes sake. Clearly, I don’t care much about  being hip or enlightened; in fact, I’ve seen nothing to convince me that either is a good thing.

While some think it’s being all super cool and allies-y and ‘friends of the gays’, it’s the exact opposite. It’s the same as ‘some of my best friends are black’.  Some of it is silly wanting to be cool stuff, as Stuff White People Like so hilariously explains. But even when it’s sad, little desperate coolness-craving, it is still totally NOT being “a friend of the gays.” It’s ridiculous to claim ‘friend of the gays’ when defending the insistence – and enforcement –  that if you are gay you must hold certain beliefs. It is the opposite of  helping gay people when you condone and excuse those who seek to force them into conformity and who will punish them for the crime of not believing their orientation is indivisibly linked to their politics/beliefs.

It is also absolutely bigoted.

This is the bigotry and the lefty tactics that those who are desperately spinning for GOProud are perpetuating. And some of the spinning is just absurd.

You see, some are claiming that some people already knew that Governor Perry’s pollster was gay (even though that still hasn’t been confirmed nor denied – and shouldn’t be. It’s nobody’s business). See, it wasn’t an outing-0uting! SOME people – like Chris Barron and Jimmy LaSalvia of GOProud, conveniently – already knew. No big whoop! It was just a sorta outing. Sheesh, people!

First, I don’t know who they spoke with other than members of GOProud’s advisory board, but I heard from several D.C. based consultants who have known and worked with Governor Perry’s pollster for years and never knew his sexual orientation. One long-time Republican political consultant who has worked with Fabrizio said:

We’ve worked with him before and he’s outstanding. And…I had NO IDEA he was gay and had never heard it anywhere. It IS an outing. And it’s nobody’s business. Period.”

Second, Jimmy LaSalvia admitted to the outing himself, before issuing false claims of ‘oh, we didn’t know he wasn’t out-out!’. When asked by a radio host to come on the air to clarify his revolting F-word tweet aimed at Fabrizio, LaSalvia chose not to by replying that what he’d said already said enough and he didn’t want to play in the ‘outing sandbox’. Huh. That’s weird. How could it be an outing sandbox if no one was being outed?

Third, while the outing is reprehensible and vile, even if one wants to fool themselves into believing it wasn’t a purposeful outing, the reasons for the contemptible F-word slur and the tactics involved in everything that occurred thereafter are right out of the Lefty playbook.  I mean, right from the start GOProud showed they were not a conservative organization. One of their ‘we are the victims! Totally not our fault’ excuses is that the press called them up asking about a gay man working for Governor Perry while he ran an ‘anti-gay’ ad. A conservative organization would have said a) the man’s sexual orientation has nothing to do with his job nor his political beliefs. Every person is an individual. and b) while we may not agree with the ad, since we supported the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’, it is not ‘anti-gay’. People can disagree with things like same-sex marriage or the repeal of DADT and not be painted as anti-gay H8Rs!!

They did neither. Instead, they demonized Governor Perry as an anti-gay hater and went so far as to call him Un-American (Gee, when have I heard that before? Perhaps from Nancy Pelosi and Senator Reid in regards to the Tea Party and the town hall meetings prior to the passage of Obamacare?) They then employed the tactics of shaming and of personal destruction to punish Fabrizio for daring – DARING – to work for a man who did not agree with their agenda and for being a ‘f**gots who line their pockets with checks from anti-gay homophobes while throwing the rest of us under the bus“.

How dare he? He’s gay (allegedly) so he must think the exact same way we do. And if he doesn’t, we’ll make damn sure he knows he’s punished for not conforming.  And, well, we’ll throw HIM under the bus. We’ll then blame him for ‘not keeping it secret well enough.’ No really. They did:

if Tony Fabrizio wanted it to be a secret that he was gay he probably should have done a better job of letting other people know it was supposed to be a secret.

If he was outed-outed or not doesn’t change GOProud’s intent nor the fact that they are enforcing conformity by blackmail and/or punishment. They demanded Fabrizio resign. They demonized him and his boss. They are still blaming him for what  they did (classic victim mentality; it’s nothing we did wrong. It’s everyone else). Because they disagreed with something his boss said. Because, gay. Andrew Breitbart had it right; he resigned because he knows that we should not and cannot accept such behavior. He could not in good conscience remain a part of such an organization, as he notes in his resignation letter, printed at The Daily Caller:

I have a zero tolerance attitude toward the intentional infliction of vocational and family harm by divulging the details of an individual’s sexual orientation as a weapon of political destruction. As an “Advisory Board member” I was not consulted on this extreme and punitive act.  Clearly, there are more productive means to debate controversial ideas and settle conflicts. Therefore, I cannot in good conscience stand with GOProud. I still stand by gay conservatives who boldly and in the face of much criticism from many fronts fight for limited government, lower taxes, a strong national defense as well as the other core conservative principles.

We cannot and should not ever condone the vile Leftist tactic of ‘Conform or you shall be punished!’ It is no different at all than how the Left insists that all African-Americans or all women or all Hispanics think the same. Nor is it different from how they seek to treat some with preferential treatment – excusing any and all bad behavior – because they know that encouraging and enabling a victim mentality means more control for them while they treat the ‘victims’ like pets who must obey their behavioral rules. Identity politics – race based, gender based, orientation based, whichever – is their bread and butter. It’s how they control and force conformity. It is, quite frankly, political correctness Totalitarianism. And they will blackmail and personally destroy if that is threatened, in order to keep the collective masses in line.

We would not accept this from a woman’s group who maybe sometimes threw in some talk about fiscal responsibility. We wouldn’t accept it if they then also constantly railed against any female politician – or a female employee of said politician – and called her a ‘gender traitor’ because she spoke out as pro-life. We wouldn’t accept an African-American man being called an Uncle Tom if he worked for a politician who was against affirmative action. Why on earth would we accept it in this case?

And if we do, that is the very definition of bigotry. If that’s the new conservatism, then no thank you.

 

 

COMMENTS

  • biglarryk56

    …There’s no bigger group of homophobes than a group of homosexuals.

  • wombat888

    I like Gingrich, Romney and Paul, in that order, but will vote for any of the Republicans over Obama.

    That out of the way:

    What’s up with this site’s shrill GOP on GOP bashing? Is it always this way?

    Do you want to beat Obama, or do you want to score little points at the expense of other Republicans?

    • acat

      Republican in the general. Or, put slightly differently, “Vote for the most conservative candidate available who can win the general election.”

      Naturally, there’s some disagreement over which leg of Reagan’s three legged stool to use to measure “conservative”, and ‘can win the general election’ is quite subjective.

      Mew

      • heraklios

        If the GOP Establishment shoves Mitt Romney down our throats, then it’s all out war between us and them for the next decade, no matter if Obama wins again or not. Repeat after me: No more GHW Bushes, No more Doles, No more McCains….a conservative or nothing

        • acat

          Were you one of the wiseacres who stayed home in 2008 because “McCain’s not good enough” ?

          Mew

          • heraklios

            The Northeast-Wall Street Establishment does this every 4 years and we need to fight back and take back our party. We may have a rough few years but eventually we will drive them out of the party and reclaim it for true conservatives. They have all of the media, the insiders and the big money but there are more of us than them.

          • acat

            Do us both a favor and go look at the history of the Canadian conservatives from about 1975 to present day.

            Mew

          • heraklios

            which is more than Romney and many of the other Establishment Republicans in NY and DC would have done. I don’t know the details of Canadian politics but I suspect there are far fewer conservatives there than in America. Plus, their parliamentary system allows for rapid change compared to our system which made it extremely difficult to oust the left-wing welfare state once it got into power

          • acat

            which is how they got into Kyoto in the first place. Not to mention a boatload of other idiocy the Harper administration is having to clean up.

            Mew

          • heraklios

            Look at Britain. Any time a conservative actually raises his head out of the foxhole, the Tory Establishment blows it off. A majority of Brits have wanted a referendum on membership in the EU for 15 years now but the “Conservative” party won’t allow it. They play the same game as the Establishment GOP here; treat conservatives as one of many consituencies in the selection process, give them some vague promises, and then ignore them once they obtain power. If the UKIP can someday dislodge the entrenched professional Tory politicians, perhaps it will give us a roadmap for doing the same here.

            Also, with Harper, although better than Cretien and the most recent liberal (can’t recall his name), he is far from what I would consider really conservative. But then again, conservatives aren’t that numerous in Canada so he is probably the best the right can get.

          • acat
          • heraklios

            The trouble is, the GOP is a pretty top-down organization so even if you get some conservatives in the precinct, county and district committees, all of the elected officials and other party grandees still sit on the state committee and make it almost impossible to effect real change. Electing the top Executive (President or Governor) gives conservatives a chance because the executive can then fill lower positions with his supporters. Only this way can the Establishment figures be replaced or marginalized. Since the GOP is top-down, so must our takeover be top-down too. It won’t work any other way.

          • acat

            I refuse to participate further in your delusion.

            Mew

          • heraklios

            If the sky is falling, better find a sturdy rock to hide under

    • Bill S

      Don’t threadjack….

      • Tbone

        nt

        • acat

          Had to go pull on it didn’cha.

          Mew

    • jasondallastx

      anyone who disagrees with hardline conservatism is the enemy right now.

      But that’s just until the primary is over. Once that happens, then the enemy is the dems.

      So, at that point, notion of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” will take effect and they’ll tell us to join hands with them and vote for the candidate. Which is what we’ll do, whoever it is.

      And yes, you nailed the tone of this site – shrill.

      • heraklios

        If you think a substantial section of the GOP, particularly in the South, will ever vote for Willard Mittens then you are hugely misinformed

      • acat

        – Maxim # 29 from “The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries”, see here.

        The only difference Red State should see is the size of the bonfire we need to hold the nominee’s feet over to make sure they remember who brung ‘em to the hoedown.

        Mew

        • heraklios

          how do you think he will be if he gets the nomination? The the GOP Establishment to force Romney on us is equivilent to them spitting in our face. You may take that laying down but a bunch of us never will. We will be content to wait until another day to take back our party and our country.

          • acat

            First, no votes have been cast yet.

            Second, Romney is not doing well; his cloak of inevitability is worn out, far too early, and his poll numbers are declining.

            Third, no matter who the nominee is, feet need to be held to the fire by conservatives. The only question is how big a fire.

            Do I like Romney? No. I will, however, colour in the oval for him if he’s the nominee. Why? Because holding his feet to the fire may actually work. The alternative is another four years of Dear Leader Obama .. and holding his feet to anything short of an A-bomb is not gonna help.

            Mew

          • heraklios

            He is already trashing conservative even BEFORE he is the nominee; I shudder to think what he will do to us after (God-forbid he wins). We have nothing if he is the nominee. A majority of Republican Congressmen are as bad as he is and support him. Many of the conservative media support him too. All of the big Republican leaning financiers will be for him, if they aren’t already, to get favors in case he wins. We will have NOTHING but the same cotempt and scorn this entrenched GOP Establishment has shown us for years. Again, for me, if they do this to us again this year, this will be the year I get off the bus.

          • acat

            As for “no leverage”, that’s why we need to work locally, in the State races, and especially to get actual conservatives into Congress.

            Mew

          • heraklios

            along with quite possibly a Democratic Congress again. I guess sometimes a person, or party, has to hit rock bottom before they can’t begin recovery. I guess we’ve also seen this movie before. Between 1928 and 1952 no Republican won the Presidency with the GOP running Hoover, Landon, Wilkie and Dewey, all good centrist “electable” Republicans.

          • acat

            I’m a Perry supporter.

            Are you perhaps a Newt supporter?

            Mew

          • heraklios

            I can support any of the others pretty strongly. Perry is fine, probably the best conservative so I hope he can stage a come back. I don’t actually work to nominate anyone because I work in a job that prohibits most political activities by statute. But I definitely will seek to influence my friends, neighbors and others to boot Obama.

          • acat

            Give me your #1, #2, #3 picks, with reasons.

            Mew

          • heraklios

            #1: Bachmann, strong social conservative, really understands the importance of strong families; comes from humble background so understands the needs and concerns of real people.

            #2 Perry, good federalist, strong convictions, strong values, may be most electable in November if he can get back on track

            #3 Gingrich, intelligent, willing to take the fight to the enemy; probably could be more easily led to consistent conservative positions than the other moderates; also comes from a humble background and presumably knows about real life.

          • californiagold

            …in fact, if someone put a gun next to my head and forced me to vote for one of these guys, I’d have less concern about Romney than Gingrich. Here’s why…

            While both are flip floppers that will say anything you want to hear, at least Romney is more attractive to independent voters. Most every poll I’ve read in the last few months shows Romney polling much stronger among indies, as well as women, than Gingrich.

            The best case scenario would be if neither Gingrich or Romney were the nominee. But if it’s Newt, you can expect an electoral disaster similar to 1964.

          • heraklios

            because he is one of them. Maybe west coast indies go for him too over Newt but none of these states ever vote GOP anyway. In the Republican heartland and swing states (Ohio, WV, Iowa, MO, Colorado, even western PA, Florida), there’s no way a wealthy northeastern, Wall Street venture capitalist outperforms Newt

          • californiagold

            As I stated before, I’m not a Romney supporter, but if it comes down to choosing between Romney and Gingrich, there really is no choice if you want to have a chance at defeating Obama.

            The polling data from swing states mirrors that of blue states regarding Romney’s strength among indies. Furthermore, the 2012 race was/is supposed to be a referendum on Obama. If Newt Gingrich is the nominee, the focus will be off of Obama and instead be on Newt and his personality. That’s not the way republicans can win in 2012.

            Romney, even with all his faults, is far less controversial.If we want to keep the focus on Obama’s record, that’s the type of campaign that we need to run in order to win in November…no matter who the candidate is.

          • tomatin

            Less controversial because he’s aligned with the liberal media more closely.

  • jeffery6

    travelling around together in a clown car. What a ****ing gong show this is. Just imagine any one of those goofs beathing Obama!

    (REDACTED, even though he couldn’t even spell the word right)

    • Tbone

      Whatever beathing is.

    • lineholder

      Might be a good idea before you post anything else.

    • gekster

      nt

    • Bill S

      you’re obviously not in the right place.

      Bye.

      P.S.: Sarah isn’t coming to the rescue…

  • http://boldcolor.blogspot.com/ Paula

    has no place in the GOP. Really, do we have GOPBlack? GOPMuslims? GOPLittlePeople? Advocating for special rights because of the color of your skin, your religion, your height, or your sexual habits is a fine endeavor for a PAC, but it has no place in the GOP. Or, I would argue, the conservative movement. That’s the domain of the other side.

    This example just serves to highlight how identity groups can put their “rights” ahead of everything and everyone who gets in their way.

    Seems like the GOP ought to take some action against them. Can just any group tack GOP onto their name/cause?

    • zachv

      GOProud hasn’t anything to do with the Republican party apart from the similarity in the name. It’s a 527 organization.

      Looking specifically at the RNC, on their front page they have links to rnclatinos.com and rncwomen.com. I have no idea if those are organizations, but both websites do have ‘Paid for by the RNC’ at the bottom. Violation of identity politics? Perhaps?

      Should we include what I assume are non-affiliated PACs and 527s and a simple Google Search reveals to me a National Black Republican Association, a Republican National Hispanic Assembly, a Republican Jewish Coalition, the National Federation of Women, and a Muslim Republicans website … I have no idea how well funded these organizations are, but they exist and they have website.

      Point is: I being gay, prefer to have a society that views homosexuality as mainstream and allows same sex partnerships. I, however, would NEVER give a cent to an organization that is antithetical to conservatism. So, interest groups are formed for efficiency and to pool resources. It’s Poli Sci 101.

      It’s also the reason as to why we have massive and powerful identity interest groups like Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, NOM or the Alliance Defense Fund that are active in lobbying against same-sex marriage, non-discrimination laws and gay adoption. These groups, like GOProud, are not affiliated with the GOP, but are identity groups fighting to advance their beliefs. I don’t know if they self-identify as conservative, but they certainly don’t support liberal Democrats.

      End all: It’s just a shame that GOProud is lead by two characters that have no respect for anyone.

      • zachv

        … is that unlike GOProud and the left, there’s no “you must hold certain beliefs” amongst these groups.

        That is what needs to be condemned and called out. That’s what is disgusting and reprehensible.

      • retire05

        “Point is, I being gay, prefer to have a society that views homosexuality as mainstream and allows same sex partnerships.”

        Why must you add a caveat to your statement of opinion? If I said that I prefer a society where social welfare was limited, and rare, would it make my opinion any more valid if I identified myself as Christian, or male, or female, or black, or white, or wealthy, or any of the adjectives that could be used by someone?

        You premised your statement of peference with “I being gay”, as if using identity politics gave credence to your opinion. It doesn’t, although you seem to think that being a homosexual gives you some sort of superiority when it comes to the subject of homosexuality.

        Most conservatives denounced identity politics. You played right into it. There is no reason to out yourself. It is your private business and has no more place in your political philosophy than does your financial statement. If it does, then you are by no means a conservative.

        • zachv

          … in the first post and if I didn’t I would have gotten a lot of accusations that I supported them and the whole “you must hold certain beliefs”. I don’t, but forgot that in the first post. So I wrote the second post.

  • romeg

    was, somehow, Anti-Gay or Anti-homosexual.

    He poses a question in the form of a juxtaposition of two groups that self identify on the basis of some aspect of their behavior and beliefs. If homosexuals are permitted to live their lives and engage in service to the country while setting themselves out solely on the basis of their sexual orientation, why is it that Christians are prohibited from going about proclaiming THEIR identity as Christians, as followers of Christ?

    How is that anti-gay or anti-homosexual?

    That GOProud embraced (you can hardly say they ‘Fell into’ or ‘Walked into’ a trap) the opportunity to support the meme that Conservatives are anti-gay is beyond reprehensible and betrays who they really are.

    Lori is, as is usually the case, spot on here. GOProud is not a group
    of Conservative homosexuals; they are a group of homosexuals that tend to support and vote for not particularly conservative Republicans when it is convenient for them to do so.

  • streiff

    Is being gay shameful? If it is, maybe you shouldn’t be engaged in the activity. If it isn’t, you can’t be “outed.”

    I think GOProud is detestable and I’m still stunned that conservatives ever associated with this group, other than the obvious.

    • westcoastpatriette

      Stuff White People Like–I love it.

      Some conservatives have actually been duped along these lines….thinking it’s truly admirable to show their ability to be tolerant. Nauseating.

  • johnt

    I thought that tolerance is a general, broad based practice, how else to call yourself tolerant. But then I also thought that the bedroom, maybe even the back seat ot the car, was private. Turns out. it’s a political issue and cause. This is leftism for you, on again, off again principles. Fascism comes to sex, to be expected in a society were the emotionally unstable, the shaky egos, need constant assurance of their worth, the constant need of a cause.

    • tyman

      …why can’t your open mindedness accept my close mindedness?

  • jomo2009

    Chris Barron is on Red Eye Greg Gutfeld and co. should ask him about this. So far,as best as I can tell, he’s been silent on this matter.