Remember Patrick McHenry, the NC Republican congressman who tried to transform Foleygate into a Democratic scheme, engineered by that eeeeevil George Soros and his infernal concubine Nancy Pelosi? The moment I saw him spout that crap, my concept of allowable political discourse expanded.In the past, I could sympathize with the argument that a politician's private life should remain private. But McHenry's fact-free spew persuaded me that we should toss open the closet doors whenever a right-wing pol-with-a-secret lies about his sexuality in order to help the party of gay-bashers maintain power.
No tolerance for the intolerant. No need to respect the privacy of any congressperson who voted for Bush's right to invade our privacy.
Surprise, surprise, surprise (in the words of another son of North Carolina, also a "confirmed bachelor"): Patrick McHenry himself turns out to be a closeted gay man. At least, so claims Bob Fertik, whom I admire and trust.
How do I know Patrick McHenry is gay? Let me put it this way: "everyone" knows Patrick McHenry is gay.Others echo what Fertik here says. The following comes from the Queer Standard, a website which appears to be devoted to the North Carolina gay community:
This weekend I learned that "everyone" knew Mark Foley was gay. Isn't that strange, since last week no one (outside the DC gay community) knew Mark Foley was gay?
In McHenry's case, I have completely reliable sources. With any luck they will go on the record soon.
Yeah...um...no surprise there. But seriously now… Fertik isn’t kidding. I’ve had discussions with a few folks not only in North Carolina but across the country and the “reliable sources” on McHenry’s gay-ness are real.I'll have much more along these lines in a very short while. But how do we get these truths in front of the Jesus voters?
I talked to one person in North Carolina, a resident of McHenry’s district, who says that he has heard McHenry once led a gay youth support group.
McHenry’s closet-case, anti-gay, anti-himself, anti-people-just-like-him days in Congress are soon to be over!
18 comments:
Wow, just when I didn't think I could get any more disgusted with the Republicans -- an entire party of J. Edgar Hoovers! Oh, Joy!
As a bit of background, if the Republican party was actually conservative, I would have been one my entire life. At age 18, I was a delegate to the state (NE) Republican convention. I considered Ronald Reagan a joke, and was horrified when he won the nomination. I didn't quit the party for good until 1992, though. Bush Sr. Hatemongering was more than I could swallow. Now I'm a man without a party.
One thing about liberals who constantly agitate for more big government social engineering projects: How do they/you continue to advocate these things after seeing how utterly corrupt everything in government ultimately becomes? You want to trust your medical care to these swine?
I wouldn't trust my license plate printing to them...
To David M. Stern, M.D.:
Your post points to the rot, hypocrisy and casual felonies of the Republican party, but not of all politics and certainly not of all government.
Republicans (in power) are absolutely right when they say "government" is the problem, but only because they -- and non-Republicans who share their corruption of mind -- are setting policy and looting the store.
Sure, crap goes on no matter which party is in power, particularly in the U.S., where the range of permissible debate is so narrow and candidates of both parties are funded by essentially the same sources.
But there are matters of degree, which (these days) turn out to be matters of life and death.
The "problems" of mass society can't be solved by individuals acting alone, and to pretend that we're living on the frontier, is absurd. At least government is at times somewhat responsive to the public. This is in marked contrast to big business, to which total power will devolve, in the absence of government.
If you're really an M.D., what do think the U.S. health care system would look like today without public subsidies? Maybe like Guatemala? And who do you think made your education possible?
Are there any heterosexual republicans any more?
When does the cheerleader-in-chief get outed?
Josephs asks:
"But how do we get these truths in front of the Jesus voters?"
The Jesus voters suffer from exactly the same pathology: deep-seated shame, which expresses itself as intolerance of others.
The whole damn evangelical movement is based on mental illness -- or, at the least, exploits deep-seated insecurities. Here we have millions of people convinced they're going to heaven, simply because they profess to believe in Jesus. Meanwhile, a gay man who tirelessly sacrifices his life for others, is going to burn in hell for eternity, along with all non-Christians and secular humanists.
Who could embrace such a notion? It's a form of mental illness.
anon 10:28
Bravo! I agree with you regarding the over the top born again Christian, the "jesus campers", are suffering a form of mental illness: delusions.
They spend their spare time convincing themselves ("looky here, I saw the sign of Jesus over there on that tree--the branches look like him on the cross--praise the lord") and the nonbelievers that they are right and everyone who doesn't believe in jesus is going to hell.
please be sure to catch a screening of "Jesus Camp" or go to their website and buy a copy of it.
http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/
basically it shows 90 minutes of emotional, psychological, spiritual abuse of very young children, as young as 3 years old in Becky Smith's war against Satan and her need to recruit the very young as warriors.
10:28 anon:
"The Jesus voters suffer from exactly the same pathology: deep-seated shame, which expresses itself as intolerance of others."
this is a far more accurate statement than most of the general american population is truly aware of.
the "safety" of the free-for-all faith based organizations has managed to accumulate a mass of repressed and/or dangerous, hateful individuals.
from closeted gays struggling with their identity vs. their religion, to pedophiles to racists to you name it. religion allows admittance and forgiveness... repeated forgiveness.
no need to uphold long-lasting standards or morals for daily life. if you screw up, just ask for forgiveness. and wham bam! heaven here we come!
the GOP is not the only organization that is ripe with hypocrites.
getting the religiousites to open their eyes to the hypocrisy of republican gays and the crimes of GOP pedophiles will require ripping down many more facades and pouring bukets of salt in wounds all across the country. not just in d.c.
dr. stern, your track out of the republican party actually seems to match that of my friend, also a midwesterner, who gave me the dean book. she, however, recognizes that THIS corrupt government is NOT what our founders had in mind. she recognizes that what THIS particular corrupt government has done is thoroughly illegal and unconstitutional. it is neither conservative nor liberal; it is fascist.
as for your position on THIS government, all i can say is good judgment.
and no, i would not trust my medical care to 'THESE people,' precisely because they have insisted on keeping the entire process private; in other words, FOR PROFIT.
when folks come to understand that government fails in direct proportion to the power they give to private corporations, whose only purpose for existence is profit, we might be able to right this ship of state.
giving over so much of government business - the general welfare of its citizens - to private corporations and their lust for profit, their unadulterated greed, THIS is what has corrupted our government.
think about it; i defy anyone to name a single problem that we suffer today that is not a result of corporate greed. from global warming to our occupation of iraq to our shredded economy to our worthless (to most citizens) healthcare system to campaign coffers to lobbying and pork, it is corporate greed that drives the devastation.
and you can include our now eviscerated constitution in that list. corporations are the furthest thing from democratic in their structure and their impact on our country (land, economy, resources, citizens, etc.), and the only thing that stands between them and ultimate and unbridled power is the voice of the people. that's why they hate democracy, they hate america, and they hate the free press. that is why they can lie without conscience, because they sold it for power, and they hire people who can be forced to lie because they harbor dark secrets.
that is why the rightwing authoritarian is almost 100% likely to be a conservative and NOT a liberal.
liberals respect the notion of equality and invite different ideas, perspectives, and people into the mix. they recognize, as did FDR, that there are many ways to move forward but only one way to stand still. they recognize that nothing can be cut in stone except the golden rule. they recognize the principles expressed so eloquently in the declaration of independence and the constitution for what they are, liberal ideals that do not inherently leave room for corporate power if the citizenry stays awake.
we will never get our country back until we impose very strict regulations on corporate power. the sooner the democrats embrace this truth, the sooner it will happen. but who knows; even they may become as much a victim of this entire corruption mess. either way, it will ultimately be up to us as citizens to hold their feet to the fire.
THIS is the liberal legacy in this country, fighting all the Scrooges and Simon Legrees and PG&Es and WalMarts who take advantage of the weak and work to manipulate laws instead of abiding by them, for their own selfish interests.
i continue to advocate for government social projects (your use of 'engineering' here betrays the propaganda you heard so much of from the reaganites) because that is precisely what i want my government to do. that is what government is SUPPOSED to do! i want my government to make sure our infrastructure serves the people and not some ceo. i want my government to make sure everyone in this country has access to medical care, period. i want my government to maintain clean air and water and conserve our resources for future generations. i want my government to make sure that every child is educated. i want my government to excel in diplomacy so that we will never be in a war that only lines corporate pockets. i want my government to make sure that those who steal our tax dollars and rape our land and poison our water and kill off our youth for war profits suffer far more consequences than the poor dude on the corner with nothing to live for but his next toke who is now serving more time in prison for holding pot than duke cunningham and jack abramoff will serve for their heinous crimes combined.
so if you're concerned about your medical care, vote to make it universal; the greatest advances in medicine in this country have come through government grants, and virtually none from private industry (because industry doesn't take the risks and will actually invest in its own self-perpetuation). if you're concerned about your government, vote to get the greedy corporate bastards out of there.
and consider the full meaning of this country's liberal legacy. if you have not taken the time to do so as yet, i may well give you a boost and post something on it soon. i confess to being so utterly fed up with the diabolical campaign to make liberal a dirty word i could vomit.
Are we trying to get the info in front of the Jesus voters so they'll reject GOP hypocrisy -- or so they'll reject gay GOP candidates? Seems like a narrow path to tread, here...
Narrow? Not to me. Look, do you want to fracture Republican support or don't you? If you do, then you must focus on the most obvious fault line. The Republicans got into power largely by pandering to the anti-gay fears of the Jesus voters. Yet the Republican leadership itself is largely composed of self-hating gays.
Do you want to exploit that dichotomy, or do you want to continue to allow Republicans to spread lies?
re David M. Stern, M.D.:
No disrespect to David, but the rest of the civilised world has never been able to make sense of the contempt of Americans for the role of government in the lives of its citizens.
The public service in Europe, Canada, Australia etc all provide excellent public services in education, health, elections, consumer protection.
There is a clear recognition in these countries that government has key responsibilities to all citizens, just as citizens, and not the "rugged individualism/ devil take the hindmost" of US politics.
I like the US and its people. But the social programs of Roosevelt which are so easily demonised by the Right in your country have been taken much further and with greater success elsewhere. You really haven't experienced good social government.
Your public health system and your high rates of incarceration, just as examples, cry out for root and brach reform of the European kind. Other countries do it. Give yourselves a break. Lose the ideological blinkers and try more government of the better kind.
"No tolerance for the intolerant. No need to respect the privacy of any congressperson who voted for Bush's right to invade our privacy."
This has to be THE most precise moral defense I've read throughout this whole fiasco. Should've happened in '04, but alas. Better late than never.
Go git'm Joe.
We MUST exploit the dichotomay. I've read, on Evangelical polictical pages, that Republicans, "...are not heavy, they're my brothers," in the same breath as...Democrats are gay-tolerant, etc., and therefore NOT "my brothers."
We've GOT to get religion OUT of politics altogther. Funny what religion can do...
Miss P.
I read somewhere tht the reason Republicans are destined to failure is because they don't belive in government. So, once in office they tend to dismantle it. I see that has already happened and I couldn't agree more with that analysis. I don't think I need provide examples.
I think Democrats simply support effective government. Key word, effective. Large, small, medium, I think the idea is to get the job of the people done whatever it takes. New key word, the people. And now that the terms "effective" and "the people" have hit new lows I think maybe, just maybe, some people will be able to figure Democrats out. Maybe.
Miss P.
The only purpose of a government is the health, welfare and security of its citizens.
US is 36th in infant deaths.
40-45 million citizens have NO health care coverage.
Medicare has been proven to be MORE cost-effective than private insurance and should be expanded, not cut back.
None of our nuclear power plants are protected from possible terrorist attacks, as are none of our ports or the shipping activity thereto.
Our children are taught test questions, not the ability to think and reason and geography and civics and science.
We have more citizens in prison than any other 'first world' country and the overwhelming number are black or brown (aka "poor").
There has been a 50-year campaign against unions to the point that only 8% of our workers are now represented.
Don't kid yourself, we have big government and it's not going to get smaller. The only thing the republicans are doing is to switch the focus and the tax money to the rich, the corporations, the war machinery and any 'faith-based' organization that will vote republican.
No one wants pure socialism which, as we've seen, doesn't work in practicality. Now we have seen in this country that pure capitalism doesn't work either. But to create a country with balance takes intelligence and concentration. Both of which seem to be missing in this administration. Probably even in this country.
fallinglady
Great commentaries from all. I especially liked the one from dr. elsewhere. The Corporation must be re-designed, or at the very least stripped of its power to influence the media, which is the only real check on corporate power.
What's never discussed in this country is the "rights" corporations enjoy. So ingrained are these "entitlements", that we never even question their source or effect.
Corporate powers are not "god-given" or based on our ethical traditions. They're the result of charters. I.e., we the people granted these rights (alas, through our elected representatives). There's nothing sacrosanct about these rights. They're not "human rights". They have no ethical basis.
A politician who advocated revision of corporate charters would, of course, be murdered in the media. On the other hand, vast numbers of Americans, including Republicans, believe corporations have too much power.
This is yet another issue which, like universal health care, belies our democracy. Large majorities want it, but they ain't getting it -- because corporate America doesn't approve.
gosh, terrific discussion here. everyone, really.
with respect to anon700's point about corporate rights, i fear you are sadly mistaken. the corporate charter has gone the way of the dodo bird, essentially. in the late 19th century, an obscure case before the SC got mishandled at the clerical level, and ever since then, corporations have been insisting that they are 'persons' and possess the same rights as persons.
(i highly recommend thom hartmann's 'unequal protection' on all these points.)
of course, we all know they are not persons, but they have since then demanded that they be allowed the same rights as you and i supposedly enjoy. hence the nightmare we currently suffer.
the problem with losing the charter requirement is that now these corporations exist 'in perpetuity,' in other words, forever, as long as they have the cash. unlike you and i. they are no longer required to renew these charters annually by proving that they have maintained their end of the bargain with the society that has granted them this privilege of doing business. such as, not poisoning air or water, not abusing workers, not defrauding the public, not holding communities under threat (e.g., walmart), not bribing politicians, and not committing tax fraud. they should also be required to show some actions as public service, such as charity donations to the community, or providing health and child care for their employees.
but you're absolutely right; because corporations own the 'free' press, these notions will never see the light of day.
how true we have made jefferson's choice:
Were it Left to Me to Decide Whether We Should Have Government Without Newspapers or Newspapers Without Government, I Should not Hesitate a Moment to Prefer the Latter
dr. elsewhere,
I'm not sure I get you: all I was saying is, the rights of corporations exist largely in statute, and can be changed. There is nothing sacrosanct or permanent about those rights, including the notion of "personhood".
Post a Comment