Despite the perception that there is some magic fax machine between Karl Rove’s office and all of the conservative bloggers, I do not automatically print White House material because it came from Karl.  Hmm… come to think of it, I don’t think I have ever received a fax from anyone that tells me what to say.  But I digress…

A friend of mine who works on Capitol Hill sent this to me earlier today.  The White House put out this Fact Sheet describing the struggle America and the free world faces against the rising tide of Islamic fascism.  I thought it would be important to post this so things constantly remain in perspective.  (Click on “more” below for full text.) 

For A Half Century, America’s Primary Goal In The Middle East Was Stability.  As we fought the Soviet Union in the Cold War, it was important to support Middle Eastern governments that rejected Communism.

Then The Forces Of Liberty Rose Up, The Berlin Wall Fell, And The Soviet Union Collapsed – But At The Same Time, An Undercurrent Of Danger Was Rising In The Middle East.  The terrorist movement multiplied and resentment boiled over into worldwide violence.  Extremists in Iran seized American hostages, Hezbollah terrorists murdered American troops in Beirut and Saudi Arabia, terrorists set off a truck bomb at the World Trade Center in 1993, and Al Qaeda bombed two U.S. embassies in East Africa and the USS Cole. 

On 9/11, We Realized That Years Of Pursuing Stability To Promote Peace Left Us With Neither.  Instead, the lack of freedom made the Middle East an incubator for terrorism.  The pre-9/11 status quo was dangerous and unacceptable.

The strategy outlined in this memo underscores what is going on in the real world.  It also highlights the undeniable facts that Democrats are undermining a winning American strategy at every turn.   They oppose staying to fight in Iraq, they tried to “kill the Patriot Act”, they oppose wiretapping terrorist phone calls, they opposed the Department of Homeland Security unless it protected union perks.  They have consistently opposed every tool and every strategy the Bush Administration has used since 9/11 (with the exception of the Battle of Afghanistan).  It is frightening to think about the message of “full retreat” that Islamic terrorists and terror-supporters would receive if Democrats had their way.

It is a fact that the anti-war Democrat Party fails to grasp: stability without freedom is not peace.  The problem for America’s security is clear as well:  The Democrat Party elite (followed closely behind by the Gay Leftists like puppy dogs needing attention) are still living in denial as September 10th Americans.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

(more…)

Whether he is calling members of the US military “terrorists” or undermining the Commander In Chief in a time of war, John Kerry has a history of trying to destroy our nation.  Now he is undermining our electoral process….

An e-mail from Kerry will be sent to 100,000 Democratic donors Tuesday asking them to support U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland for governor of Ohio. The bulk of the e-mail criticizes Strickland’s opponent, GOP Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, for his dual role in 2004 as President Bush’s honorary Ohio campaign co-chairman and the state’s top election official.

“He used the power of his state office to try to intimidate Ohioans and suppress the Democratic vote,” Kerry says in the e-mail, according to a copy provided in advance.

Kerry, D-Massachusetts, conceded the election when he lost Ohio and its 20 electoral votes. A recount requested by minor-party candidates showed Bush won by about 118,000 votes out of 5.5 million cast. But Kerry’s e-mail says Blackwell “used his office to abuse our democracy and threaten basic voting rights.”

Kerry has absolutely no facts (something many GP commenters can relate to) to back up his 35-year history of bashing America.  Unfortunately, he is one of the leaders of the modern Democratic Party.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

I’m with The Ace at Polipundit on this….. I hope 150 million people watch this ABC docudrama/miniseries, “The Path to 9/11.”

The writing, acting, directing, editing, cinematography, and overall story-telling are first-rate. “The Path to 9/11″ is fast-paced and thoroughly gripping the entire way. The five-hour miniseries (aired over two nights) is based on the 9/11 Commission report, and also on ABC News correspondent John Miller’s book, “The Cell.” ABC is going to air the first three hours on Sunday, September 10, and the final two hours (which culminate in a shattering depiction of 9/11) on Monday, September 11.

It will also show, as the 9/11 Commission Report showed, that the Path to 9/11 weaved throughout the PC-conscious Clinton presidency.  Fresh from seeing an advanced screening of the miniseries, Giovundi Murty at Human Events Online says…..

This is the first Hollywood production I’ve seen that honestly depicts how the Clinton administration repeatedly bungled the capture of Osama Bin Laden. One astonishing sequence in “The Path to 9/11″ shows the CIA and the Northern Alliance surrounding Bin Laden’s house in Afghanistan.  They’re on the verge of capturing Bin Laden, but they need final approval from the Clinton administration in order to go ahead.  They phone Clinton, but he and his senior staff refuse to give authorization for the capture of Bin Laden, for fear of political fall-out if the mission should go wrong and civilians are harmed.  National Security Adviser Sandy Berger in essence tells the team in Afghanistan that if they want to capture Bin Laden, they’ll have to go ahead and do it on their own without any official authorization.  That way, their necks will be on the line – and not his. 

The astonished CIA agent on the ground in Afghanistan repeatedly asks Berger if this is really what the administration wants.  Berger refuses to answer, and then finally just hangs up on the agent.  The CIA team and the Northern Alliance, just a few feet from capturing Bin Laden, have to abandon the entire mission.  Bin Laden and Al Qaeda shortly thereafter bomb the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, killing over 225 men, women, and children, and wounding over 4000.  The episode is a perfect example of Clinton-era irresponsibility and incompetence.

I wonder if this incident is at all related to Sandy “Stickyfingers” Berger’s stealing of classified documents from the National Archives? 

And there’s this from writer/producer of the miniseries Cyrus Nowrasteh…

It also dramatizes the frequent opportunities the Administration had in the ’90s to stop Bin Laden in his tracks – but lacked the will to do so. We also reveal the day-by-day lead-up of clues and opportunities in 2001 right up to the day of the 9/11 attacks. This is a terror thriller as well as a history lesson. I think people will be engaged and enlightened.

The 9/11 report details the Clinton’s administration’s response — or lack of response — to Al Qaeda and how this emboldened Bin Laden to keep attacking American interests. The worst example is the response to the October, 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen where 17 American sailors were killed. There simply was no response. Nothing.

Unfortunately, the American media has not presented the true facts behind the “Path to 9/11″ and they succeeded in spinning the 9/11 Commission Report as an attack against the Bush Administration. 

Perhaps we are all fortunate that most Americans “waited for the movie” on this one and will tune into what sounds like an excellent miniseries.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Paul at Wizbang has an excellent and comprehensive look at the cover-up, then admittance, by the US Corps of Engineers that the hurricane didn’t cause the flooding in New Orleans.   There is even video proving his case!

The structural flaws of the levees themselves caused the flooding.  The storm just hastened the inevitable collapse of the walls the kept back the water.  The approach of Katrina and the evacuation of many (if not all) of the city resulted in tens-of-thousands of people living through the breach versus had the inevitable levee breach occurred suddenly with no warning — which Paul suggests was going to happen at some point anyway.

In the months since Katrina, we’ve learned that the storm was a Category 1 by the time she hit New Orleans. No “Super Hurricane,” just an average storm. We’ve also learned that the New Orleans Hurricane Protection System was not overwhelmed by Katrina, it collapsed. Causing the Corps of Engineers admit they flooded New Orleans not Katrina… An admission that got scant little media coverage. The Great Flood of New Orleans was not a natural disaster but a man made one.

The reason the Corps finally had to admit responsibility was that the floodwall that failed -flooding 70% of the city- basically collapsed under its own weight. It was undeniable. The Corps tried for months to claim the water came over the top of the floodwall and washed it away from the backside. (Which would make it Congress’s fault) Everyone who has seen the break or looked at the surge data knew this was a lie; that the wall suffered a catastrophic failure before the water reached the top. Almost a year later, the Corps admitted that the floodwall suffered from multiple fatal design flaws and failed prematurely.

If you think you know why New Orleans flooded, think again.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

As I watch the documentary, Surviving Katrina on the Discovery Channel, I’m impressed that this program shows the flooded buses, that is, the school busses that Mayor Ray Nagin failed to use to evacuate the 100,000 citizens of his city who did not have cars. This is the first time I have seen a non-conservative news/information outlet show a picture of those vehicles, an image of the failure of the New Orlean city government to deal with the hurricane.

In their eagerness to use the Katrina disaster as fodder for their increasingly negative reporting of the Administration, all too many in the MSM neglected numerous facts, like the flooded busses which demonstrate the failure of state and local governments to respond to Katrina. So far, this documentary seems to be the exception to so much I’ve seen in the MSM on Katrina. It makes clear that government officials on all levels blundered in responding to the disaster.

Perhaps, that’s because of the size of the disaster. It was one of the largest natural disasters in U.S. history. (I even heard one pundit call it the largest natural disaster in our history.) And given the size of the storm and its impact on one of America’s largest cities, it’s remarkable how well relief officials, at all levels, did. Glenn Reynolds (aka Instapundit) has referenced (e.g., here) a Popular Mechanics report which found that “response to Hurricane Katrina was by far the largest–and fastest-rescue effort in U.S. history, with nearly 100,000 emergency personnel arriving on the scene within three days of the storm’s landfall.“

Contrast the destruction Katrina wrought and that of the Hurricane that struck Galveston, Texas in September 1900. A city which then at had 38,000 residents lost between 6,000 and 8,000 people. If New Orleans had lost the same percentage of its citizens, somewhere between 75,000 and 100,000 people would have died in that city alone.

That said, there were problems with the evacuation and relief of the city. All too many are all too eager to point the blame at President Bush. During the coverage of the storm, people kept saying that if President Clinton’s Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) director, James Lee Witt had been in charge, he would have done a better job of providing relief to the city. Yet, they fail to point out that during his tenure, Mr. Witt never had to confront a natural disaster of the size of Katrina.

And while there is little doubt that Mr. Witt did a fine job, in most cases, his job was made easier by competent local officials. It’s not FEMA’s job to manage disaster relief, but to assist state and local governments who, rather than the federal government, have the “primary responsibilty” to respond to such catastrophes.

(more…)

Okay…. we are going to try something interesting.   I’m going to attempt to “live podcast” the Emmy Awards tonight via BlogTalkRadio.com.

What you need to do is click on the icon below and then look for the “It’s Emmy Time” link and click on that.  There are a couple technical things I have to do in the next hour to make this work….. so cross your fingers.

Also, there is a call-in number where I can have guests.  The call-in number is (347) 996-3938.  I have no bloody clue if there is a charge…..so that’s my disclaimer.  Use internet phone if you can!

Oh yeah, and to make it even more likely to be a disaster….. I will be on AIM with screen name:  GayPatriot2004.   I will take questions and comments there as well.

Hopefully this will work!  Stay tuned and tune-in at 8PM Eastern time!

-Bruce (GayPatriot…. on the air???)

Bruce Kesler of Democracy Project e-mailed me a link to this article about a Washington State woman who is challenging her former employer’s policy of providing “domestic-partner benefits to same-sex couples but not unmarried straight partners.” In her complaint filed with the state Human Rights Commission, Miss Sandi Scott-Moore claims Honeywell, her erstwhile employer, is violating the state’s new gay-rights law.

Unfortunately, I think Miss Scott-Moore has a strong case under the new law. As Joe Marra, a Seattle employment attorney told the Seattle Times: “The law says you can’t discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.” And it appears that Honeywell is discriminating against unmarried heterosexuals by not offering them the same benefits it offers to unmarried gays.

While it may appear discriminatory, Honeywell, just like a number of corporations offers domestic partnership benefits to unmarried same-sex couples (and not unmarried straight ones) because that no state (save Massachusetts) recognizes gay marriages.

If Miss Scott-Moore — or any other employee of such a company — was shacking up with her (or his) different-sex beloved and wanted benefits, all she would need do is go on down to the county courthouse (or wherever they get marriage licenses in the Evergreen State) and get married. Since an individual living with his (or her) same-sex beloved couldn’t do that, companies provide a means for them to get the benefits whcih they have long been offering married employees.

While Honeywell does not offer benefits to unmarried different-sex couples, “a recent Hewitt Associates study” found that among companies offering domestic partnership benefits, “58 percent extended them to both gay and straight employees.” I personally think those companies policies discourage marriage*, but respect the right of each enterprise to set its own employment policies.

Similarly, Honeywell should be free to offer domestic partnership benefits only to those who could not have their unions sanctioned by the state. One reason I oppose non-discrimination laws is that they deprive corporations of the freedom to set their own employment policies.

Honeywell has a sound policy which takes account of existing social/political realities. It provides a means for employees who cannot get marriage licenses to get the benefits the companies offers to married employees. It would be a shame it Washington State’s gay-rights’ legislation would end this sensible private-sector solution.

-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com

*I believe company policies which offer benefits to both same-sex and different-sex couples are anti-marriage because they put couples shacking up together on the same level as married couples, as employees don’t need to get married to have the benefits of marriage. Since states do not recognize same-sex unions, companies, which extend benefits to such unions (and not different-sex unmarried couples) correct for a flaw in government policy. I understand that some such policies have sunset provisions to take effect when the state recognizes same-sex unions.

Call me heartless (many of you do anyway), but I can’t quite decide which female I’m more tired of hearing about right now — Jon Benet or Katrina.

In the GayPatriot spirit of snarkiness, I’d like you all to nominate your favorite media-driven Katrina myth that the American public now believes is absolute fact.

My favorite:  That the Federal Government blew up the levees because “George Bush hates black people.”  (Spike Lee continues to promote this lie….)

FACT:  More white people died in Katrina than any other ethnic group.

My other favorite Katrina story line is that while Ray Nagin couldn’t get these buses started to help his people leave the city before the storm hit, he had no problem finding buses to bring people back to New Orleans for his primary election win.

So nominate away for your favorite hysteria-driven myth (*cough* LIE *cough*) from the drive-by media. 

**MORNING UPDATE** – Mayor “Motormouth” Nagin is at it again, taking a shot at Ground Zero in New York City. 

When a “60 Minutes” correspondent pointed out flood-damaged cars on the streets, Nagin shot back, “You guys in New York can’t get a hole in the ground fixed, and it’s five years later. So let’s be fair,” according to CBS.

Does this man have no shame?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

What is it with Presidential losers becoming crazy?  If this isn’t’ Algore becoming a caricature of himself I don’t know what is.

Al Gore Buys San Francisco Condo – The American Thinker

Buried at the end of a Matier & Ross column in the San Francisco Chronicle is the news that Al and Tipper Gore have purchased a luxury condo in San Francisco.

Gore is a businessman these days—sitting on the boards of Apple Computer Inc. and Current TV, the cable and satellite channel he started with investor Joel Hyatt—”and those take him (to the Bay Area) pretty regularly for board meetings and the like,” said his spokeswoman, Kalee Kreider.

It also helps explain why Al and Tipper Gore recently bought a luxury condo at San Francisco’s St. Regis tower at Third and Mission streets.

Now where shall I begin?  Since when is sitting on a board of directors make Gore a “businessman”?  But at least he is living up to the Limosine Liberal label by taking up house at a “luxury condo.

I am at least comforted to know that if I do visit San Fran, that Algore won’t be carrying a firearm.  I mean we all know he can’t shoot straight….

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Sen. Hillary Clinton is taking up where her husband left off.   During President Bill Clinton’s term, he repeatedly “zeroed-out” AIDS funding his the Presidential Budget he sent up to Congress.  You never heard much about it, because it was the post-1995 Republican-controlled Congress (mostly thanks to then Rep. Tom Coburn and Sen. Arlen Specter) that restored and increased funding each year.

Well, here’s what Hillary is up to now — threatening renewal of the Ryan White Act.

Sen. Clinton Delays AIDS Law’s Renewal, Citing Cut in NY Funds – Washington Post

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is holding up renewal of the primary federal law that battles HIV/AIDS, the 1990 Ryan White Act, causing a rift among activists on the subject and threatening approval of the legislation this year.

Clinton (D-N.Y.) said she opposes the measure because it would lower funding for her home state. But some AIDS groups also see broader political motives at work. Other states that would lose out include California, Florida and Illinois — all places Clinton would need to win if she seeks the presidency. Her critics also note that many of the states that would receive higher funding under the new formula are rural and Southern, which tend to vote Republican.

Now here’s what you won’t hear out of this story, but it is true.  The “old formula” was designed when the scourge of AIDS disproportionally affected San Francisco and New York.  But the “old formula” is subsidizing an infrastructure designed for people dying, not people living.  The people living with HIV/AIDS are not growing in the Blue States, they are growing in the Red States.

The current law’s formula is based on the number of patients with AIDS; the new funding formula would, in effect, distribute funding based on the number of patients with HIV or AIDS.

Support for any particular formula “depends where you sit,” said Ernest Hopkins, director of federal affairs for the San Francisco AIDS Foundation. From his vantage, he said, the bill in the Senate “is a problem.”

Of course Mr. Hopkins, from San Francisco, gets paid from the Ryan White act under the current formula.  How interesting….

The senator’s insistence on a different formula — one closer to current law — has angered several groups that represent AIDS and HIV patients who stand to get more money under the pending bill. Last week, Harry C. Alford, chief executive of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, wrote a letter to Clinton that said, “It is with sadness that I learn about your efforts to block” the law’s reauthorization.

Alford said that people of color, particularly in the South, are contracting AIDS at a rapid pace and need more funding than was envisioned when the current formula was devised. “I must share with you the bewilderment of African Americans throughout the country who cannot understand why you are taking this stand against opening the door to more equitable funding that will chiefly benefit people of color,” he wrote.

Clinton’s excuse: the Ryan White measure as drafted “would have a devastating impact on New York” and “unfairly shift millions of dollars in funding away from New York and other states that have been hardest hit by the epidemic, jeopardizing their ability to provide vital care and treatment services.”  The key phrase is have been hardest hit.

If this were a Republican Senator, one might even accuse her of racist politics.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

While struggling with the introduction to a paper, one of my favorite quotations suddenly popped into my head. I’m not sure yet whether I’ll be using it, but I thought I would share it with y’all. Carl Jung wrote these words in a September 14, 1960 letter to Chilean diplomat Miguel Serrano who includes them in his book, Jung & Hesse: A Record of Two Friendships:

Thus an old alchemist gave the following consolation to one of his disciples: ‘No matter how isolated you are and how lonely you feel, if you do your work truly and conscientiously, unknown friends will come and seek you’. 

There are many reasons why, I believe, my man Ahnuld will cruise to reelection for a full term as Governor of the Golden State this fall, not the least of which is the caliber of his opponent. While Schwarzenegger’s poll numbers have remained constant in the mid-40s, those of Phil Angelides, his Democratic opponent have tumbled into the 30s even after he got the bounce from winning the Democratic nomination and launched a barrage of TV ads.

While the governor’s ads have largely been positive, focusing on his accomplishments since Gray Davis was recalled (and he elected) and reminding voters how Angelides’ high-tax policies would take us back to the days of that hapless predecessor.

Today, while working out at the gym, I saw California Democrats’ latest ad against the state’s Republican Governor. Using footage from a campaign appearance Schwazenegger made in 2004 on behalf of the president, the ad attempts to link him to a man not particularly popular in the Golden State.

I don’t think this ad will help much. Indeed, it shows that some Democrats are so obsessed with Bush-hatred that they assume that all those who don’t approve of the president’s performance in office hate him as much as they do. To be sure, the ad will remind those who really hate Bush that our governor backed him in ‘04, but nearly all of those people are already planning to vote against the incumbent with that pesky little R after his name.

Most people who disapprove of the president’s performance in office aren’t as obsessed with him as his full-time adversaries (including many Democratic party officials and campaign consultants) would have us believe. They may disapprove of his performance, but they don’t base their every political decision on that disapproval.

Most undecided California voters (even those who don’t like the president) aren’t likely to base their gubernatorial vote upon which candidate supports or opposes the President of the United States. Instead, they want to see which candidate can best serve the Golden State.

And if the latest polls are any indication, fewer and fewer people have any confidence that Angelides is that man; he’s running well behind the percentage of registered Democrats in the state. Attacking Governor Schwarzenegger for supporting Bush isn’t going to reassure Californians that he can do a better job than that good man has done.

-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com

It is hard to believe we had to put up with Scott McClellan between two great Presidential Press Secretaries — Fleischer and Snow.  

Ari shows his stuff by calling Jimmy Carter for what he is:  Terrorist Enabler and Sympathizer.  Ari wrote a letter to the former Collapser-in-Chief….

I just read the transcript of your interview with the German magazine, Der Spiegel, in which you accuse Israel of launching an “unjustified attack on Lebanon.”

Even after the interviewer reminded you that Israel was the first to get attacked, you charged Israel with lacking “any legal or moral justification for their massive bombing of the entire nation of Lebanon.”

As someone who served in the White House as a spokesman for a President, I am reluctant to criticize another President, but in this instance my conscience compels me to do so.

Mr. President, your words are music to Hezbollah’s ears and your message is a blow to long-term peace.

Just as you underestimated the threat of the Soviet Union in the 1970s, you underestimate the threat of radical Islam today.  Your condemnation of Israel, the victim, only encourages Hezbollah, the attacker, to bide its time and attack again.

I’m sorry to see you articulate about Hezbollah and its aggression the same weak world-view that encouraged Soviet aggression.  As Ronald Reagan showed us, peace through strength is the only formulation understood by those bent on destruction.

I understand your longing for peace and your fond hope that Hezbollah can be reasoned with.  However, when you call Israel’s defense “an attack”, when you call what is justified “unjustified”, and when you call morality immoral, I conclude that the pro-defense, strong foreign policy lessons of the 70s and 80s remain unacceptable to you.  Also, when you criticize Israel for targeting so-called “civilian” areas in Beirut and other areas where Hezbollah hides its operations, the result would be – if Israel listened to you – the creation of safe havens from which more violence and rocket attacks would be planned and launched.

Sadly, Hezbollah today is planning its next war.  For the sake of peace, Israel deserves your praise, not your condemnation.

You go, Ari!

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

You just can’t make this stuff up….

Cold Cash Congressman to Lead Katrina Tours – ABC News

The Louisiana Democratic Congressman caught on FBI surveillance tapes taking $90,000 in cash has been selected by the Democratic Congressional caucus to lead a delegation from Capitol Hill on a tour of New Orleans next week to “join in prayer with the people of the region, to reflect and remember.” 

Jefferson has denied any wrongdoing in a case that sparked controversy when the FBI searched his Capitol Hill offices.  The cash was discovered in a freezer in Jefferson’s home.

When I saw the headline,  I just assumed the Democratic Congressman would be charging $10,000 a head for his “Katrina Tours.”

But wait, there’s more!  The “CoC” continues for the Democrats in Tennessee!

State Sen. Jerry Cooper was indicted today by a federal grand jury in Chattanooga on three felony counts stemming from his role in a land deal that has already led to two people’s convictions.

Cooper, D-Morrison, is accused of bank fraud, mail fraud and conspiracy to commit bank and mail fraud. He could face as much as 65 years in prison and more than $2 million in fines if convicted, according to the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Eastern District of Tennessee.

Come to think of it, I haven’t heard Speaker-to-be-in-her-mind Pelosi (*downing a shot of whiskey*) use the phrase “culture of corruption” for quite…some…time.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Lesbian Gang Attacks and Stabs Man in New York City – Advocate.com

A group of lesbians from Newark, N.J., attacked and stabbed a straight man in downtown New York City early Friday morning after the man apparently came on to one of the women. Wayne Buckle, 28, was allegedly whipped by belts and then stabbed with a steak knife by Patreese Johnson in retaliation for the unwanted advance, the New York Daily News reports.

According to a police source, one of the women yelled “She’s my girl, and no one hits on my girl!” during the incident. Later, at the police station house, where the seven suspects were charged with gang assault and criminal possession of a weapon, another  woman told the Daily News that Buckle “called us [homophobic slur] and he said he was going to f— us all.” Said another: “He spit on us and threw a cigarette. This is a hate crime.”

Okay, first of all the whole phrase “lesbian gang” just gives me the shivers.  It is like a vision out of a “Simpsons” episode.

But isn’t it interesting that it is automatically a hate crime when the stab victim is accused by a lesbian?   What about the reverse hate crime when the straight guy is pounced on by a pack of knife-wielding wild urban lesbians? 

So yet again while the urban gays whine about the world being “intolerant” to our community, I didn’t see an account of the straight guy going for his weapon in this story.  Come to think of it, I haven’t seen a lot of devout Christians leaving their churches brandishing weapons against gays in America.

Of course the “do as I want, not as I do” theory of tolerance by the Gay Left is becoming a pattern this year. 

I’m guessing that these types of attacks will be praised and encouraged by the Human Rights Campaign as “appropriate reparations” for years of oppression.

Here’s a thought:  turn the other cheek and act like an adult.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

It seems that California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger can’t do anything to please Geoff Kors, Executive Director of Equality California, an organization seeking “to achieve equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) Californians.” Although the Governor has signed a number of pro-gay bills and made clear his support for the state’s landmark domestic partnership program, Kors seems more concerned about that pesky little (R) after the governor’s name.

As BoiFromTroy has shown, under Kors’ leadership, Equality California has is not much more than a group of “Democrat Hacks.” Kors shows his partisan animosity yet again in a release faulting the Golden State GOP for hiring a social conservative lobbyist to promote the governor to this constiuency.

While Kors calls the appointment of Ben Lopez, who has lobbied for Lou Sheldon’s “Traditional Values Coalition,” an “affront, not just to the LGBT community, but to all fair-minded Californians who oppose the manipulative,” he doesn’t point to any statements (or policies) by the governor or the state GOP to show how they amounts (as Kors claim) to “breach of their promise to our community.” Both the governor and state GOP party Chair Duf Sundheim have touted the state GOP’s inclusion.

It seems to be that by bringing on Lopez, the party is being inclusive of social conservatives. His appointment is hardly a breach of any promise.

Kors’ anger, however, seems to be misplaced and seems to be more a part of his general animosity toward Republicans. It’s one thing to hire a lobbyist who has worked for an anti-gay outfit. It’s quite another to put forward anti-gay policies. As Governor of the Golden State, Arnold Schwarzenegger has a solid record of tolerance and understanding on gay issues. He has reached out to the gay community, included gay men and lesbians on his team and in his Administration and signed a great variety of bills which benefit gay and lesbian Californians.

Instead of getting his panties all in a bundle over this one appointment, Kors should look at Schwarzenegger’s overall record. And if he were not so intolerant of Republicans, he might acknowledge that Repubilcan’s accomplishments.

But, then again, it’s just par for the course that leaders for gay rights’ organizations to judge a politician less by his actual record than by his political affiliation. And to these narrow-minded leftists, the letter R after a politician’s name killeth.

-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com

UPDATE (08-23): BoifromTroy notes that the California GOP has fired Lopez. LIke me, he wonders what “Equality California was so upset about in the first place.“:

The State party didn’t hire Lopez because it and the Governor believed in all of the nefarious things which TVC [Traditional Values Coalition] promotes. Rather, Victory ‘06 had to hire someone like Lopez to “shore up the base” precisely because Governor Schwarzenegger does not promote such an agenda!

House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland) must be gnashing his teeth that he lost his bid for the job he now has to Nancy Pelosi in October 2001. Had he been elected Whip that year, he would likely have succeeded Richard Gephardt as House Minority Leader in 2002 and would be the face of House Democrats today. With Hoyer at the helm, Democrats would be in a far better position to win a majority in the House this fall.

With a Gallup poll showing Republicans closing the gap (from an 11-point deficit to just 2 points) in the “generic Congressional ballot” and with the recent AP poll that Bruce cited earlier today, it’s far from clear that a Democratic takeover of Congress in the offing for this fall.

As Bruce noted, most Americans have yet to focus on the fall Elections. When they look at the Democrats, not only will they see their local candidates, but they will also see House Minority Leader Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Reid, both who have used their positions to obstruct the president’s agenda. They never seem to miss an opportunity to criticize the president.

In the fall, that opposition may not be enough to sway enough voters to their side. Most Americans prefer congressional leaders who do more than oppose the president, but actually put forward policies to help address the nation’s problems. While the Republicans have been far from perfect, they have at least put forward some legislation. Which the Democrats have obstructed.

Perhaps had the Democrats had leaders who were not so obsessed with the president, individuals willing to compromise with the GOP on a variety of initiatives, they might stand a better chance of winning control of Congress this fall. Such leadership would show that the Democrats are interested in governing. With Steny Hoyer at their helm, they would have a leader who, while critical of the president, has at least said publicly “He is the president of the United States, and he deserves some respect.“

(more…)

If the MSM told the truth about Joe Wilson’s dishonesty as often as it mispresents Karl Rove’s role in (what Best of the Web’s James Taranto calls) the “Valerie Plame kerfuffle, the American people might have a better opinion of the president’s top political aide and a lesser one of that dishonest, but media-savvy, Democrat.

In an article today on Rove, the man the president calls the “architect” of his 2004 re-election victory, reporters Susan Page, David Jackson and Richard Benedetto get the facts wrong when they write:

The grand jury Fitzgerald impaneled heard evidence that Rove had mentioned the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame in conversations with at least two reporters, including columnist Robert Novak, but the prosecutor decided against charging Rove with breaking the law by disclosing her name or lying in testimony about it.

Perhaps they grand jury did hear evidence that Rove mentioned Ms. Plame’s name. But, Rove himself never actually mentioned her name.

This Washington Post headline says its all Rove Told Reporter of Plame’s Role But Didn’t Name Her. The presidential aide merely told Time magazine reporter Matt Cooper that it was “Wilson’s wife, who apparently works at the agency on [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip.”

Rove only had one other conversation (with someone from the media) on the topic. When columnist Robert Novak “said he had learned that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA,” Rove replied, “I heard that, too.“

Karl Rove never mentioned Valerie Plame’s name to reporters. It’s too bad these USA Today reporters didn’t check their facts before publishing this piece.

I was delighted to learn (via Instapundit) that one of my favorite bloggers stands by her man (and mine) for the 2008 GOP nomination for president of the United States. While the Anchoress doesn’t think Rudy Giuliani is the “perfect man” for the job, she, like me, trusts him “to carry forth the war on terror as it needs to be carried.” And on another key issue, she trusts him to appoint “strict constitutionalist SCOTUS judges.“

While I very much enjoy the Anchoress’s blog, I disagree with her on a number of issues. I like her because she always constructs thoughtful arguments and does so again in this piece defending her support for the former Mayor of the Big Apple. She believes he has the skills and character to lead our nation at this difficult time. So make sure to read her post; she makes a great case for a good man.

With 68 percent of Americans not yet focused at all on the November mid-term Congressional elections, it is a fair to say that the Chattering Class is making mountains of molehills in their undaunting and definitive predictions of Speaker Nancy Pelosi. (**takes a shot of bourbon after having to type that**)

After all, we’ve been through this drill before. Ever since the mid-term elections of 1996, the Democrats and their comrades in the MSM have been assuring their supporters they will “Take Back The House” this year. No, THIS year. No, THIS YEAR. Really, this year.

The Washington Times has a further look at the latest polling data and puts some context behind it all.

An Associated Press-Ipsos poll of 1,001 Americans, including 813 registered voters, conducted last week found that 71 percent think the country is on the wrong track, compared with only 26 percent who say it’s going in the right direction.

This year’s primary results, where three congressional incumbents were dumped by the voters, “combined with Congress’s abysmal job-approval ratings and extremely high ‘wrong-track’ numbers — indicate a very volatile, turbulent election year, the kind that incumbents hate for good reason,” election forecaster Charlie Cook writes in the National Journal.

But an earlier poll of 1,047 Americans conducted for CNN by Opinion Research Corporation from Aug. 2 to 3 drew a dramatically different response when it asked people, “How well are things going in the country today?”

A combined 55 percent said things were going “fairly well” (47 percent) or “very well” (8 percent), compared with those who said “pretty badly” (29 percent) or “very badly” (15 percent).

Keating Holland, CNN’s polling director, said the question is fundamentally different from the right track/wrong track that other pollsters ask, but he acknowledged that “it is a measurement of how well Americans think things are going in the country today.”

(GP Polling Editorial Note: Aug. 2nd and 3rd are weeknights…. traditionally a better time to fairly sample Republicans who are known not to be home on Friday nights and weekends when polling is done then.)

I would simply warn those popping their champagne bottles over an assured Democratic victory to keep it on ice, and your bravado in check, until Americans actually vote. Remember, in the United States of America actual votes that are cast count — exit polls do not count.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from GPW): Over at Wizbang, Alexander McClure notes that on “the generic congressional ballot between Republicans and Democrats, the margin is now only 2 points.” In the last poll, the Democrats led by 11 points. Looks like things are looking up for the Grand Old Party.