Archive for August, 2011

Some young men decide to drink and streak in Virginia Beach
Meanwhile the fellow or fellows who tweet pictures of men on the street whose pulchritude they find share-worthy at the twitter account “Tap That Guy” share this New Yorker:
Jersey City #Irene


Read Full Post »

Since Rachel Maddow smeared me personally, for my tea party guide to DC, you might think I can’t be objective.  (Though even in that smear dear little Rachie reported on her show that I was from deepest, whitest Maine, as she found my guide to DC re-posted on a Maine tea party blog.  I’ve lived in DC and its suburbs since 1980, and have only been to Maine once for a two day conference at Bates College.  So I just cackle now when I see her ads where she is on the floor with 3×5 cards and sharpies talking about her passion for research.)

I’ve run into more than one “progressive” lesbian in DC who had little good to say about the Madcow.  Perhaps its because she went to Afghanistan and flaked about how Obama was just delivering essential city services, a kind of WPA or New Deal, for the Afghanistan people.

Here’s a new lesbian blog taking Jeff Imelt’s official ruling class dyke to task for her crony capitalist economics:

Rachel, Rachel, Rachel… Deconstructing The Rachel Maddow Show (and Paul Krugman, just for fun)

I’ve found that the best way to get through an entire episode of the Rachel Maddow Show is by washing down a Dramamine with a hefty snort of Jameson about 10 minutes before it begins. Otherwise, I might just blow a brain gasket if I haven’t pre-prepared. Certainly there are no doubts that Rachel Maddow is intelligent as few would ever deny this. She’s quite personable, charming, good-looking to boot, and I do like her wit as well, which makes it understandable why so many admire her. She pleasantly engages her guests, frames the issues well and sometimes asks heady questions. What can I say; she’s brainy and has a natural gift of the gab.
For my friends on the left (and those cute, impressionable, single lesbians on the dating websites) who are so enamored with squishy love for Rachel, and in most cases simply for the fact she’s gay, I wish there were a way I could debrief and deprogram viewers after an episode of The Rachel Maddow Show. If it’s not glaringly apparent already, there’s a reason it’s called a “show”, but peel away the sleek set, the competent and snappy a/v edits and the casual “just one of the girls” atmosphere and the “news” content presented isn’t specifically news more so than a giant editorial of selective, heavily-massaged, partisan opinion peppered with a few facts here and there. Her real role is keeping The Rift of the Great Partisan Divide between the left and the right going, but I have no doubts she truly believes what she is saying. I take issue with what she’s serving her audience which is either subtly misguided, horribly askew and listing with partisanship, or flat out wrong. Frankly, I grimace in seeing her ardent followers being led astray, or worse, being lied to either by omission or topic ignorance. No offense, but smart doesn’t necessarily make you correct no matter how well-educated you or your staff happens to be.
In the same time slot as Rachel’s show, pitted on the right, is FOX’s Sean Hannity and there certainly is a reason for that as well. Now, I don’t watch Hannity because I find him particularly vile and an insult to my own intelligence, but here’s the gist of the game: Maddow and Hannity are a Max Headroom-esque tag team of good cop/bad cop, depending on which side of the fence you sit. In current mainstream American political discourse, you’re expected to choose one of two sides and most folks willingly play along. However, the error in choosing a side of the fence is that there really is no fence. The fence is an illusion and Maddow and Hannity’s real job requirement is to make you believe in that barricade. To prove my point, some night during Rachel’s show (and preferably on an evening when you don’t have to work the next day), try playing the drinking game. Every time Rachel says “Republican”, “GOP” or something to that effect, take a drink. I’ll even give you a major break and allow the exemption of the words “tea party”. Chances are you’ll still be shit faced long before the second commercial break. Having tried this one evening with the aforementioned bottle of Jameson, let me tell you, it wasn’t pretty. Beer is the better alternative for this game.
“In our media-dominated age, news personalities such as Bill O’Reilly, Chris Matthews, Sean Hannity, and Rachel Maddow, among others, dispense the news with power and certainty like preachers used to dispense religion and boast vast viewerships that hang on their every word. Yet these talking heads are little more than Wizard of Oz-like front men for the powers-that-be, the mega corporations whose sphere of influence extends from the newsroom to the nexus of political power, Washington, DC.”  [Source]
Case and point (at the 1:30 mark, it’s four minutes of economic comedy): Maddow espouses this belief that the lack of economic growth is all the Republican’s fault and that ‘good government’, like Glenda the Good Witch, can’t get anything done because of resistance from the right, therefore she says the only alternative is to have the Federal Reserve print and inject money into the system to pull us out of the recession, et Voila! Mission accomplished! Excuse me, Rachel, let me help a sister out here to avoid any further embarrassment; you might want to take a look at this chart from the Fed because the policy you just described is exactly the policy the Fed has had in placesince August of 2007. All that Fed money you were hoping for? Yeah, I think the technical term for what the Fed has done is known as the Fiat Leg-Up of Biblical Proportions Plan. And the result: It hasn’t worked. It has only served to weaken the dollar’s value and prop up massive failure. So as a return favor, Rachel, please try not to bore yourself or the audience with the devilish details of monetary policy since you’re more than four years behind the learning curve on this. Save that stuff for those of us who have ventured into the deep end of the pool. I mean, even a basic working knowledge gets you into the game, but I’m afraid that since you showed your hand on monetary policy, you inadvertently told us everything we needed to know about youreconomic policy creds. In other words, ignorance of the topic destroyed your argument. I would suggest having an Austrian economist on to roughly lay out the Cliff Notes version of events which, by the way, they correctly predicted long before the housing debacle and economic fallout happened. (Don’t act surprised. It only gives you away.) But since they can’t even get Paul Krugman to accept a challenge to debate an Austrian economist, I won’t bother checking my coat in expectation of seeing one on the program anytime soon.
It’s no wonder Maddow thinks monetary policy is such a snoozer as she proved on national television to have no clue about it. I just pray she won’t take up a career in economics or investment advice. Really, I mean how embarrassing was that? Somehow I suspect that The Creature from Jekyll Island or Wall Street, Banks and American Foreign Policy were never high up on her reading list priorities. If a topic like Fed policy which is easily verifiable and right under your nose, then having to witness someone as smart as Maddow self-admitting to being so fundamentally wrong about it, what else is she wrong about? Well, how much time do you have? I’ll pour another shot….
More than likely Rachel has bought into NYT’s columnist Paul Krugman’s song and dance with her endless droning on about “more government stimulus”. Sure sounds like they’re singing in the same choir. And oh, do note that just because Krugman is labeled an ‘economist’ doesn’t mean he is good at it. Seriously, Krugman is so out of ideas he’s now calling for space aliens to invade planet Earth to help the US out of economic slump. I’m not kidding. Anyone with two critical thinking brain cells left to rub together could replace the words “space aliens” with “terrorists” in Krugman’s argument and easily see how well that has worked out over the last decade. Stimulus, indeed. This is hardly surprising ‘logic’ coming from those firmly entrenched in the “FDR was the greatest thing since sliced bread and World War II pulled us out of the Great Depression” camp. But just try your hand explaining that anyone can magically ‘solve’ bad unemployment numbers by disappearing a million men off to war. Or by saying stuff like: post-war congresses cut federal spending by 40% 38% 14% between 1946-48… because if you do you’re certainly going to get the deer in the headlights look and a room full of crickets from that crowd. Then there is the unpleasant moral issue of Krugman’s icky nonchalance of war being good for the economy although he looks the type to wet his pants by merely placing a loaded rifle and a hot grenade in his hands. He doesn’t seem concerned about the death, destruction and havoc created by his ‘economically good wars’ just as long as people are busy digging holes and filling them back up again,usually as graves these days. War as a mere economic tool is pretty grotesque, Paul. Keep in mind this advice is coming from the same guy who said in ‘02 that the housing bubble was a good idea.
Now Rachel does love her some big government, honey. She is the dream team captain of the MSNBC BigGov cheerleading squad. If you’ve seen her commercials, one is shot (by Spike Lee, I’m told) under an expansion bridge traversing a ravine where she points and basically proclaims that “This couldn’t happen without the government”. Right there it becomes obvious she didn’t watch, or at least absorb the first ten minutes of the film, The Corporation. You know, that sticky, historical fine print that clearly denotes that it was because of government-granted privileges to corporations that corporatism came about in the first place? Anyway, she erroneously insinuates that no one but government would want to build a bridge and that, in her opinion; we need government to make bridges happen. If you listen carefully, you begin to hear how she’s conflating government and society as being one in the same. The two are hardly synonymous and what she’s lobbying for surely isn’t something new under the sun. History is full of bad re-runs.

“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.” –Frederic Bastiat, The Law, 1850

And Maddow, like Krugman, is certainly out of innovative ideas. So just where is all that fine American ingenuity, Rachel? Well, why bother when it’s just much, much easier to defer your problems to the government, right?
“In the U.S.A., for example, government has a monopoly of mail delivery. Ask citizens if government should do this and most of them will reply in the affirmative. Why? Simply because government has pre-empted this activity for so many decades that all enterprisers have ceased to think how mail could be delivered were it a private enterprise opportunity. Indeed, most of them have come to believe that private enterprise would be wholly incapable of effective mail service. Yet, I note that each day we deliver more pounds of milk than mail. Further, milk is more perishable than a love letter, a catalogue, or an appeal for funds. We also note that the delivery of milk is more prompt and less costly to us than is the delivery of mail.
I ask myself, then, why shouldn’t private enterprise deliver mail? Private enterprise delivers freight. That’s heavier. But, no; my countrymen have lost faith in man’s ability, acting freely, to deliver letters. These people who get gas out of the earth inTexas and pipe it to my range hundreds of miles away; these men who bring each four pounds of oil halfway around the world for less cost than· government charges to deliver a one ounce
letter to the other side of the street in my home town; these men who build planes that will fly 150 people across the North American continent in less than four hours; these men who do such fantastic things have lost faith in themselves to do the simple chore of letter delivery.”
-Leonard E. Read, Why Not Try Freedom, 1958 [emphasis mine]
…just ask Lysander Spooner how his ingenuity worked out for him.
Privatization??? Oh, the horror! That’s a dirty word! Um, yeah. A little competition is a good thing. Why? Because a business has an incentive to perform well or else thepenalty is to go bankrupt and out of business. This is how real innovation forms. And imagine this: all businesses aren’t predatory corporate villains, especially the ones who don’t receive government subsidies and privileges. The computer with which you’re reading this, your cell phone, flat screen TV, your espresso machine, lawn mower, and every other amenity you use were made mostly by an honest-to-goodness company who just wanted to make money to sustain and benefit their own sustenance and improvement while providing a good product or service in return. (That’s called beingmutually beneficial.) These folks get up and go to work just like you do every day. (That’s called jobs.) And because of competition, they do their jobs in the most efficient and waste-free way possible because they know that there are 10 other companies out there in the same business, doing the same exact thing that will take a greater percentage of their customer share if they fail at being efficient and innovative. None of those consumer necessities and luxuries could be manufactured on our own and certainly the government can’t do it because government doesn’t possess the means to make x-Boxes or for that matter, bridges or roads. And poor Rachel sincerely believes that the government creates jobs.
Good grief. Governments don’t have the capacity to ‘create’ anything. The best they can do is take money from citizens by threat of coercion and become the bureaucratic middle man and then contract out the work. And sadly, in the end, government projects usually costs two to five times the initial budget expectations. So there goes Rachel, trying to get you to believe that if the government doesn’t do it, it can’t be done. How innovative and thought provoking. If you want to waste the most money possible on a project, then get the government involved. And if there is such an animal as a BigGov project that came in ‘at or below’ budget, I’d love to see it. I’m confident thinking that it’s a really short list, if existent at all. As a monopoly, in the absence of competition keeping them on their fiscal toes, government has no incentive whatsoever to be careful with other people’s money. The next time a major piece of legislation comes up, see how many pages are devoted to “waste, fraud, and abuse”. It’s quite telling.
Now if the corporations are your pet peeve, lest we not forget that Rachel Maddow’s paycheck is signed by one of the largest multi-national, mega-conglomerate corporations on the planet who just happen to be a top-tier beneficiary in the US government’s military contractor roster. Swooning queers and those still preoccupied with the fence haven’t realized that Maddow is a front man for a megalithic corporation that has an agenda: General Electric, the parent company of NBC, MSNBC and CNBC. (The words “parent company” have quite the paternalistic effect, don’t they?) GE enjoys a fat contract being one of the USGov’s biggest go-to guys for war toys, not to mention that GE pumps both the Dem and GOP campaign coffers equally to ensure their bread continues to get buttered. Sure, no conflict of interest there. No big whoop that Jeffery Immelt, GE’s CEO, is on Obama’s economic recovery team. And as much as I hear folks of all stripes complaining that “the corporate media is bought and paid for”, then really people, why the hell are you still listening? Even more incredible is that Rachel’s own education as a Rhodes Scholar is the product of wealth acquired by imperialism, colonialism and human exploitation… or does no one remember who Cecil Rhodes was? Oh, the irony here of the Rhodes scholarship being such a prestigioushonor.
Now back to our show….
Rachel’s segment on nullification had to be the most blatantly dishonest piece I have ever witnessed to date. Wow. Just wow. It set such a new low that FOX News was jealous. What it lacked in journalistic integrity and honest assessment, it sure made up for it in the propaganda and sensationalism departments. The selective bias of Rachel’s nullification bit is the stuff that a thinking person’s aneurysms are made of. The 10thAmendment Center was so uncharacteristically portrayed; I really don’t even know where to begin. Her attempts to shape this topic into both a partisan issue and a racism issue were so off the mark. When Monsanto was the behind-the-scenes driving force of a federal Food Safety Act that raised a lot of red flags. The 10th Amendment Center was there. Most of Rachel’s viewers would probably be horrified with the reality of GMO Frankenfoods and the fact Obama has appointed Monsanto execs and lobbyists to the USDA, FDA and Dept. of Agriculture. They might even be aghast to learn about the new food safety ‘laws’ restricting their rights to grow their own fruits and vegetables. Or about the SWAT team raids on organic food co-ops at gunpoint. Even the peaceful Amish aren’t immune to the gun-toting federal harassment. But there she was – defending the Monsanto-backed Food “Safety” bill under the guise of her distorted version of nullification. (Did the Patriot Act not teach us anything about congressional bill misnomers?) Besides reading the 10th Amendment right out of the Bill of Rights as if it were a bad thing, a few examples of nullification that Maddow conveniently left out weremedical marijuana, immigrant sanctuary cities, librarians protecting your records from the Feds – you know, all those wonderful nullification issues that left liberals are so good at. It’s no wonder that historian authors like Anthony Gregory aren’t invited on her show because he would have absolutely shred any remaining delusions on this topic which would have undoubtedly destroyed the Maddow Show’s credibility on nullification as being anything other than whack. Why would The Rachel Maddow Show choose to present nullification with this hysterical racist slant a la Refer Maddness redux and smear anyone who dares mention the word as a redneck, Confederate-loving, racist. Republican? It’s all about perception, isn’t it? If you wanted to make it a currency issue, Rachel, again I’ll refer you to the above Federal Reserve monetary chart. (I know how you love some charts, girl.) Maybe for fun you could try the Fed’s “What’s a dollar worth?” Game to gain some insight on what all the fuss is about. Again, topic ignorance destroyed your own arguments.
Now this is where the Dramamine kicks in. I will give Rachel credit for calling out Bush and she did the same initially when Obama charged out of the gate, but we haven’t heard much of that poignant effect from her since the Afghan troop surge in early ‘09. (And no matter how smart you may think she is, Rach, having Susan Rice on the show to regurgitate war talking points and lie about Pakistan does not count as poignant.) It seems Rachel has much more pressing issues building that psychological fence and trying to score Brownie points for Team Blue these days. Then again, I’m an idiot for confusing real journalism with a “show”.
Rachel Maddow does not want to grasp that a ‘humanitarian war’ is every bit as much of a war as a war-war. Or do I need to trot out Dick Cheney to explain that support for US military intervention in Libya is indeed a pro-war stance? For Maddow to ignore and omitCongressman Denis Kucinich’s recent calls of human rights violations committed by NATO forces in Libya – only to have Rachel cart out Juan Cole, a Libyan intervention supporter, it tends to firmly cement where the Maddow Show’s loyalties lie. Nevermind that this interventionist war was illegal to begin with, but why bother with those pesky little Rule of Law details anymore? Would her viewers get upset if the truth were to come out about NATO’s civilian ‘collateral damage’ and the US’s covert involvement in Libya? Nonetheless, I do understand that pictures of blown up, bloody, burned up body parts are just so bad for ratings. Why, what if someone of delicate sensibilities happens to see it? Its better we just block it out of our minds altogether. Even though the US & NATO ‘liberation efforts’ are killing and maiming thousands of innocent people, you were just doing them a favor by being such good humanitarians, right?
For shame, Rachel. You disappoint me more than my friends on the left did when they disappeared after Obama was elected. Just like Keith Olbermann, you were never anti-war, you were only anti-Bush. Maybe you don’t realize that Dick Cheney loves Obama, so perhaps you should be asking: Does that make me a neo-con now? Is it so hard to conceive that when armies lob missiles, send drones with bombs, and generally blow shit up that there are real people dying on the receiving end of your shit? And yet you still wonder where ‘terrorists’ come from? The only way to stop ‘terrorism’ is to cease being a terrorist yourself in the first place. War is war whether you want to pathetically label it a ‘humanitarian intervention’ or otherwise. This incredulous American desensitization to the real effects of war and who we’ve sadly become during the last decade disturbs me tremendously, especially in this age of instantaneous information outside the mainstream media ranks. So save the “I care about poor people/the economy/the environment” yammer. No. You don’t. You only care about the blue team winning.
A friend wrote:
I used to like Maddow when Bush was in office. While I haven’t listened to her or pretty much any of the other talking heads on a regular basis recently, I rarely agree with pretty much anything I hear from her these days. The problem is that her opposition to war, governmental abuse, and corruption, etc. is contingent upon who is in office. Mine isn’t.”
And in a nutshell, that’s the way the Team Red/Team Blue game is played and I’ll kindly remind Rachel that giving Obama the ol’ Partisan Pass is morally, philosophically, and intellectually dishonest. A few of us hold those in elected office to the same standards of accountability across the board, regardless of the R or D following their names. Here’s a hint: That’s called consistency. And just because ‘your guy’ is in office, it doesn’t make his crimes and usurpations any less criminal when he does it. This is why I despise the divisive nature of party line partisanship promoted by the mainstream mouthpieces and backed by the agendas of a corporate-owned media machine. As a vigilant lesbian, Rachel Maddow does not speak for me and she is hereby put on notice that The Duchess of Dykedom has got her number
Don’t worry, sweetie. I won’t be calling.

Read Full Post »

…Ron Paul, who has just been the target of a gay molestation by Sacha Baron Cohen.  The two leading contenders, Texas Governor Rick Perry, and as yet uncontested incumbent Barack Obama, are both at the center of elaborate gay conspiracy theories involving male ballerinas turned political operatives like Rahm Emmanuel, convenient suicides etc etc.  This is just a blog.  Be sure and share your gay conspiracy theories with us.  We won’t be offended.  We promise!

Here are two offerings:  a gay internet radio show that claims Rick Perry is gay, and a conservative blog (Fellowship of the Minds) that claims many of the men in the Obama regime including Barack Obama are gay. (Perhaps baritone economic voodoo flak Austin Ghouslbee quit because he was exhausted, being the only top in the OEO?)  No doubt after years of not being covered by the main stream media the National Enquirer will break the story in 2014 and all of this will be shown to be true.

Obama Member of Chicago Gay Man’s Club

The Wayne Madsen Report (WMR) is a mainly subscription news site ($7/month for “individual reader” subscribers) that claims to provide news ”from deep inside the Washington beltway.” Its editor is Wayne Madsen, a former US Navy officer, Washington, DC-based investigative journalist, author and syndicated columnist, with an impressive c.v.   
On May 24, 2010, WMR had a blockbuster report for subscribers only, which claims that Obama is a long-time member of a gay man’s club in Chicago, of which his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is also a member.
I first saw this story 3 days ago on Rense.com in an article titled “Madsen Is Vindicating Larry Sinclair.” [Note: Sinclair is a gay man who claims he had 2 sexual encounters with Obama in Chicago.] The article had a short excerpt from the WMR. I did not post it here on Fellowship at the time because I wanted to think about it.
I went back to Rense for the article today, but when I clicked “Obama’s Gay Club,” the article is no longer there, no doubt because its excerpt from WMR violated WMR’s pay-for-view policy. Instead, clicking “Obama’s Gay Club” brought me to the website of the man’s bath house club referenced in the WMR article – Man’s Country club in Chicago. Located at 5015 N. Clark St
Chicago, IL 60640 (phone: 773-878-2069), the club describes itself as:
“a private membership club for men 18 years and older. Man’s Country Chicago is a clean, safe place to hang out, meet guys who share the same interests as you, socialize, make friends, watch porn and play! Man’s Country Chicago / Where real men meet.”  
The club’s motto “Play hard, Play safe” and logo (below right) leave little doubt that it’s a gay club. If you still have doubts, take a look at the club’s “Photos” page, with 8 photos of “the hottest dancers in Chicago” — all men, such as this one (below left):

Fortunately, thanks to alert Fellowship memberTina, the entire WMR article is now posted on The JagHunter blog. Here it is!  


President Obama and his chief of staff Rahm Emanuel are lifetime members of the same gay bath house in uptown Chicago, according to informed sources in Chicago’s gay community, as well as veteran political sources in the city.  
The bath house, Man’s Country, caters to older white men and it has been in business for some 30 years and is known as one of uptown Chicago’s “grand old bathhouses.” WMR was told by sources who are familiar with the bath house that it provides one-year “lifetime” memberships to paying customers and that the club’s computerized files and pre-computer paper files, include membership information for both Obama and Emanuel. The data is as anonymized as possible for confidentiality purposes. However, sources close to “Man’s Country” believe the U.S. Secret Service has purged the computer and filing cabinet files of the membership data on Obama and Emanuel.  
Members of Man’s Country are also issued club identification cards. WMR learned that Obama and Emanuel possessed the ID cards, which were required for entry.  
Obama began frequenting Man’s Country in the mid-1990s, during the time he transitioned from a lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School to his election as an Illinois State Senator in 1996. Emanuel, reportedly joined Man’s Country after he left the Clinton White Hosue and moved back to Chicago in 1998, joining the investment firm of Wasserstein Perella and maintaining his membership during his 2002 campaign for the U.S. 5th District House seat vacated by Rod Blagojevich, who was elected governor.  
Man’s Country appears to be a “one stop shopping” center for gay men. The club’s website advertises steam rooms, “fantasy rooms,” bed rooms, male strippers, adult movies, and lockers.  
However, Man’s Country was not the only location for Obama’s predatory gay sex activities. The Chicago gay community is aware that Obama often made contacts with younger men at his famous “pick-up basketball” games. It was at these “pick up” matches where Obama first met Emanuel and a young Democratic campaign worker and senior bank vice president named Alexi Giannoulias. Currently running for Obama’s old U.S. Senate seat now occupied by Roland Burris, Giannoulias successfully ran for Illinois Treasurer in 2006 after being drafted for the run by Chicago’s Democratic machine.  
The Blagojevich trial: “Sex, Lies, and Audio tapes” — Fitzgerald’s US Attorney’s Office part of White House cover-up of gay sex in the Second City  
Giannoulias was a vice president and senior loan officer for his father’s bank, Broadway Bank, from 2002 to 2006. Broadway Bank made real estate loans to Antoin “Tony” Rezko, the chief of Rezmar Corporation. On May 13, 2008, Rezko was found guilty, after being indicted by a grand jury at the behest of the U.S. Attorney for Northern Illinois Patrick J. Fitzgerald, of six counts of wire fraud, six counts of mail fraud, two counts of corrupt solicitation, and two counts of money laundering. Rezko has been in solitary confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center at Van Buren and Clark in Chicago since June 2008. However, Rezko has not yet been officially sentenced to a federal prison. A Syrian-American, Rezko is considered to be a flight risk, even though his one-time fortune of $50 million has been reduced to zero.  
One Republican politician in Chicago told WMR that Rezko will be a prime witness for Blagojevich’s defense. “Figure it this way, Rezko’s been in solitary confinement in the city jail since June 0f 2008 . . . if he is released to appear at Blagojevich’s trial as the primary witness, everyone expects him to squeal like a pig,” said the Republican politico.  
In 2005, Rezko reportedly engaged in a complicated real estate “flip” through which his wife Rita and Obama agreed to split an empty lot adjoining a home that Obama bought in Chicago’s Kenwood district. The deal saw Obama buy the home for $1.65 million, which was $300,00 below market value. Obama then bought a strip of the adjoining property from Mrs. Rezko, a speculative deal that stood to make Obama a handsome profit. Since Rezko’s conviction, the property has has reportedly gone into bankruptcy. Giannoulias’s Broadway Bank was seized by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation on April 23, 2010, reportedly as Secretary of Treasury Tim Geithner was on his way to Chicago to present the bank with a bailout check. Geithner quickly changed his plans.  
Giannoulias, Broadway’s then-senior loan officer, has denied being involved in the decision to loan money to Rezko.  
Last month, Blagojevich’s trial judge, U.S. District Court judge James Zagel, a crony of former Illinois Republican Governor Jim Thompson, ruled that all 500 hours of phone calls intercepted and taped by Fitzgerald could not be played during Blagojevich’s trial as demanded by Blagojevich and his defense lawyers. Blagojevich demanded that Fitzgerald “show up in court and explain to everybody . . . why you don’t want those tapes that you made played in court.”  
WMR has learned that the tapes may contain salty references Obama’s and Emanuel’s private lives.  
WMR attempted to interview Blagojevich’s senior defense lawyer Sam Adam to no avail but other informed sources told us that the tapes, if played, would highlight the corruption of not only Obama, Emanuel, and other member of Obama’s Chicago “brain trust” but also Fitzgerald himself. WMR was told that Fitzgerald’s tactics have included providing sex and drugs to imprisoned felons to get them to provide perjured testimony at federal trials.  
It is exactly the type of federal prosecutorial misconduct by Fitzgerald that former Republican Governor said was used by state prosecutors when he commuted the death sentences of Illinois’s death row population. Ryan was indicted by Fitzgerald for fraud and he is currently serving out a federal prison sentence.  
Blagojevich’s trial is scheduled to begin on June 3 and Fitzgerald’s main interest is to keep the trial focused on Blagojevich, especially after he managed to “flip” Blagojevich’s former chief of staff John Harris to testify against the impeached and ousted governor. WMR learned from informed sources that one lawyer on Harris’s defense team is involved in a gay partner scandal that was discovered by the attorney’s wife.  
Some of the wiretaps may reveal that it was not Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s longtime friend and current White House policy adviser who was Obama’s top candidate to fill his U.S. Senate seat, but the young 32-year old “pick up basketball” friend of Obama, Giannoulias, then serving his second year as state Treasurer. However, Obama has avoided campaigning for Giannoulias in Illinois and there are indications that the president has “thrown Giannoulias under the bus,” according to some Democratic political circles in Chicago.  
Mutiple Chicago sources report that Republicans who see Giannoulias’s Obama connections as providing an edge in his Senate race this year should not celebrate prematurely. Giannoulias’s GOP opponent, U.S. Representative Mark Kirk, a Naval Reserve intelligence officer, has also been identified as a closeted gay man. Kirk divorced his wife last year after an eight-year marriage. They had no children.  
In addition, U.S. Representative Aaron Shock, who took over the House seat vacated by Obama’s Republican Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, is, according to Chicago Boy’s Town sources, a habitué of Minibar, a noted gay bar in Chicago’s gay district. For an extremely young first term member of the House, observers were surprised when GOP Minority Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia named Shock as a Deputy Minority Whip.  
Man’s Country, one of Chicago’s “grand old bathhouses” and located at 5015 North Clark Street in Chicago’s “Boystown,” was a frequent hangout for State Senator Obama and Rahm Emanuel  
Sources in Chicago’s gay community report that Obama was attracted to Man’s Country’s older white clientele because he generally enjoys being fellated by older white men. Obama would regularly be seen at Man’s Country on Wednesdays.  
Obama reportedly has never engaged in reciprocal activity. The sources also confirm the allegations made during the 2008 campaign by Larry Sinclair, a Chicago visitor who revealed that in 1999 he engaged in such oral sex activity and crack cocaine use with then-State senator Obama on two occasions, once in the back of a Chicago limousine operated by Five Star Limousine Service, and the other at a Chicago area motel, the Comfort Suites in Gurnee, Illinois.  
After revealing details of the encounter at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, Sinclair was arrested by Washington Metropolitan Police on a fugitive warrant issued by Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden, the son of Obama’s vice presidential running mate, Senator Joe Biden. Sinclair was charged with a misdemeanor count of theft of money orders, however, the state of Delaware declined prosecution. Beau Biden later declined to run for his father’s old Senate seat because of his duties to prosecute a major pedophilia case involving Lewes, Delaware pediatrician Dr. Earl Bradley. There are reports that Biden’s office helped to cover up Bradley’s activities, including failing to authorize search warants for Bradley’s office and computer.  
Chicago’s “DLC” — not the Democratic Leadership Council but the “Down Low Club” — a gay matchmaking service  
WMR spoke to several well-placed sources in Chicago who reported that Jeremiah Wright, the pastor of Obama’s former church of 20 years, Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC) on Chicago’s south side, ran what was essentially a matchmaking service for gay married black professional members of the church, including lawyers and businessmen, particularly those with children. The matchmaking club was called the “Down Low Club” but references to it over the phone and email simply referred to the group with the code phrase “DLC.” The ruse, according to our sources, was to make anyone who was eavesdropping on the communications believe that the references were to the Democratic Leadership Council, also known as the DLC.  
The gay DLC’s services were intended to keep ensure TUCC’s gay members avoided posting solicitations on web services like Craig’s List and refrain from cruising gay bars. The strategy was to protect them from getting busted and being “outed.”  
Among the members of the gay “DLC” were Obama and TUCC’s choir director, Donald Young, an openly gay man who reportedly had a sexual relationship with Obama. Two other gay members of the church were Larry Bland and Nate Spencer. Young and Bland were brutally murdered, execution style, in late 2007. Bland was murdered on November 17, 2007 and Young on December 24, 2007. The latter was killed by multiple gunshot wounds. Spencer reportedly died on December 26, 2007, official cause of death: “septicemia, pneumonia, and HIV.”  
“DLC” members often went on camping trips arranged by TUCC. Wright reportedly was the head of the “DLC” matchmaking services and ensured that its members protected each other.  
The “DLC’s” clientele included Obama and other gay members of TUCC, including, reportedly Young, Bland, and Spencer. Fox 32 Chicago reported that Bland’s mother, Josephine Bland, was so upset at her son inviting men into their home as a result of contacting them through gay web sites like “Adam4Adam,” she moved out.  
The gay community in Chicago knows to keep away from the TUCC and “DLC” stories because of the “creepiness” of the operation and the suspicious deaths of the three TUCC gay black men.  
Although Obama protected his alternate life style through the secretiveness of the “DLC,” he was not so careful when he proclaimed he was a state senator while frolicking at Man’s Country in uptown Chicago.  
Love: Obama’s personal trainer  
Reggie Love, a former Duke basketball and football player and unsuccessful National Basketball hopeful, currently serves as Obama’s personal trainer and White House “special assistant” — he has been called Obama’s “body man” — who receives a salary of $104,000 a year. Love is also reportedly one of Obama’s regular gay sex partners. Love joined Obama’s Senate staff in a senior staff position in 2006.  
Media General’s tabloid, the National Enquirer, proffered a story last year about Michelle Obama being furious about the relationship between her husband and his “body man.” TheEnquirer’s sister tabloid, The Globe, later floated a story about Obama having a relationship with a Democratic campaign official named Vera Baker. WMR has been told that this relationship was a clever ruse to throw off speculation about Obama’s actual past sex partners. Baker has apparently left the United States for relatively more obscurity in Martinique. Media General’s tabloids have scooped the mainstream media on sex scandals involving Bill Clinton and Gennifer Flowers and Monica Lewinsky, Tiger Woods, and John Edwards and Rielle Hunter.  
WMR’s Chicago sources believe the Secret Service records of presidential candidate Obama’s activities in Chicago would show that Obama regularly arrived at Love’s Chicago residence at 9:00 am and departed at 9:15 am. Sources told WMR that while 15 minutes is much too short for a personal training exercise, it is ample time for fellatio.  
Bill Frist, “Brokeback Mountain,” and Obama  
In 2006, after Obama became the junior senator from Illinois, WMR’s sources in the Congressional Black Caucus reported that there were persistent rumors of gay trysts between Obama and then-GOP Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee. The allegations at the time seemed unbelievable.  
However, based on Obama’s penchant for receiving fellatio from older white men, a column written by The Washington Post’s “In the Loop” columnist Al Kamen on April 7, 2006, some four months into Obama’s Senate term, may have expanded relevance. Kamen reported he received an invitation to attend Frist’s “5th Annual VOLPAC ’06 Weekend” in Nashville from April 21st to 23rd and that the invitation card required one to “unbuckle the cowboy’s pants and look inside to see what this was all about.” Kamen opined that the invitation seemed “a bit too ‘Brokeback Mountain.’”  
The invitation advertised that the shindig would feature “one-of-a-kind music and special friends,” although Kamen said there was no indication what made the “friends” so “special.” Kamen then wrote, “The back of the card shows the cowboy from behind with a red flowered handkerchief sticking out of his right pocket. Wait a minute — wasn’t there something about how this used to be some kind of code in the gay community years ago? A way to signal each other in crowded, noisy bars? So we checked the GayCityUSA.com’s Hanky Codes. Sure enough, there it was in the chart explaining what they mean: red hanky in right pocket. Oh, dear.”  
Rumors about Obama and Frist ran amok in Congressional Black Caucus circles in 2006.  
Although Frist ran on the pledge of only serving two terms, he became Senate Majority Leader with all the perks of the office. WMR’s sources in Chicago’s gay community revealed that Frist’s Majority Leader predecessor, Senator Trent Lott of Mississippi, was also known to seek the services of male prostitutes. Frist, who said he planned to run for President in 2006, decided against a run for the White House and also declined a run for Tennessee governor in 2010.  
With the rumor mill running at full speed in 2006, it is obvious why Frist abandoned politics so quickly for the medical business. Frist later endorsed Obama’s health care proposals. A year later, when GOP Senator Larry Craig was arrested while soliciting for sex in a men’s toilet stall at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, he changed his mind about immediately resigning his Senate seat. Knowing about his colleagues’ behavior, he dug in his heels and completed his term in January 2009.  
Rahm the “Sugar Daddy”  
Obama’s chief of staff Emanuel, who won a scholarship to the Joffrey Ballet but turned it down to attend college, is married and, like Obama, has children, in Emanuel’s case, a son and two daughters.  
However, Emanuel, who is 50, also travel frequently with a male companion, a wealthy Chicago real estate developer, some five to six years his senior. WMR has learned from Chicago’s gay community as well as political sources that Emanuel and his friend have gone together on a trip to India, skiing vacations, and soon plan a vacation in Florida, sans Mrs. Emanuel and the kids.  
In Chicago’s gay community, Emanuel is known as “sugar daddy,” promising young men with perks and lucrative positions if they sleep with him. On occasion, Emanuel has been with older men, such as his travel companion, but his preference is young, according to WMR’s sources. Emanuel also often uses bicycling and basketball venues to make his approaches. Being an Emanuel “basketball buddy” is a key to professional success.  
WMR spoke to one member of the gay community in Chicago who had first hand knowledge of one of Emanuel’s bed partners, an older man who runs a non-profit symphony organization.  
Obama’s other sex partners  
WMR has previously reported on Obama’s past trysts with Alabama Democratic U.S. Representative Artur Davis, a current primary candidate for governor of Alabama. Although not in the same class, Obama and Davis attended Harvard Law School during an overlap of their attendance at the law school.  
The information on Davis and Obama was gathered by opposition researchers for former Alabama Representative Earl Hilliard, who Davis defeated in the 2002 Democratic primary. Recently, WMR was informed by sources in Alabama that Attorney General Eric Holder traveled three days ago to Alabama to inform Davis that if he loses his primary race, he would be nominated by Obama to fill the job of U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Alabama, a position still held by Bush-appointee Leura Canary, one of the main prosecutors of convicted and jailed former Alabama Democratic Governor Don Siegelman.  
Chicago sources also informed WMR of another past gay partner of Obama, Massachusetts Democratic Governor Deval Patrick.  
Men who have reportedly had sexual relations with Barack Obama  
  • Donald Young, TUCC Choir director 
  • Larry Sinclair, gay escort 
  • Reggie Love, White House presidential assistant and Obama’s “body man” 
  • Artur Davis, US Representative from Alabama and gubernatorial candidate 
  • Bill Frist, former GOP Senate Majority Leader 
  • Deval Patrick, Governor of Massachusetts 
The Clear and Present Blackmail Threat   
Leading secret alternate life styles, Obama and his chief of staff provide classic blackmail threats. Considering Obama’s choice for the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan, who is reputedly a semi-open lesbian, the question must be posed how much Obama’s and Emanuel’s own covert life styles led to the decision to nominate Kagan, someone with no experience on a judicial bench.   Similarly, the fact that so much is known about Obama’s and Emanuel’s trysts in Chicago begs another important question. If politicians, gay community activists, and journalists in the Windy City are aware of Obama’s and Emanuel’s highly blackmailable gay life styles, the same can certainly hold true for the executives of one of Chicago’s corporate headquarters — that of BP America’s Production Operations.  
Throw in the intelligence agencies of America’s allies, friends, enemies, and the situation becomes a clear and present danger to the national security of the United States.  


Obama is leaving today for an extended Memorial Day weekend vacation in Chicago, returning to Washington, D.C. on Monday. No doubt it is a mere coincidence that the Man’s Country club will have a special event during the weekend: an International Mr. Leather 2010 contest!  
If you live in Chicago and find yourself in Man’s Country this weekend, be sure to say “hi” to the Commander Teabagger-in-Chief!  

Read Full Post »

Peter Thiel no longer most powerful Silicon Valley gay?

Thu Aug 25, 2011 

Like it or not, Tim Cook has been outed.

As with Anderson Cooper, consensus seems to be that Apple’s new chief executive officer is gay — though he’s never commented on his sexuality.

Now, with Cook atop the world’s largest public company, the media has begun to wring its hands about whether he should step farther out of his Silicon closet.

It all started last January, when Gawker took it upon itself to declare Cook “The Most Powerful Gay Man in Silicon Valley,” after he took over as interim head for an ailing Jobs.

Also read: Apple’s Steve Jobs Is Thomas Edison? Walt Disney? Nope, Jesus

A few months later, Out Magazine placed Cook atop its annual list of the most powerful gays and lesbians. Cook, a man who’s often described as “intensely private,” didn’t show up for the photo shoot.

And many in the press want the rainbow tour to continue — with or without Cook’s cooperation.

Over at the Atlantic, Nicholas Jackson writes that the Apple chief should acknowledge his sexual orientation.

“Cook is one of those at the high levels who is afraid to publicly confirm his homosexuality,” Jackson writes. “And he won’t be a role model for the LGBT community until he confirms the rumors and comes out of the glass closet he is assumed to be living in.”

Also read: New Steve Jobs Fake Surfaces — as a Taiwan Bestseller

Queerty’s Daniel Villarreal urged Cook to use his new platform at Apple to advocate for queer issues, pushing manufacturers it works with to extend benefits to same sex partners and inserting itself into the gay marriage debate.

“Bust open that Silicon closet and change the world, Tim!,” Villarreal writes.

Felix Salmon at Reuters writes that the press does a disservice to the gay rights movement by refusing to write openly about Cook’s homosexuality.

“There’s no ethical dilemma when it comes to reporting on Cook’s sexuality: rather, the ethical dilemma comes in not reporting it, thereby perpetuating the idea that there’s some kind of stigma associated with being gay,” Salmon writes. “Yes, the stigma does still exist in much of society. But it’s not the job of the press to perpetuate it. Quite the opposite.”

Not everyone in the media bubble was drinking the outing Kool-Aid.

On Twitter, the Business Insider’s Henry Blodget wrote: “ Actually, sorry Felix, I want to ignore it.”

Based on Thursday’s coverage, you might not have a choice, Henry.  

Read Full Post »

I guess the economy was still busy in 2006 because I missed this film back then.  (I wasn’t blogging then either.  Too busy.)

It’s on Showtime this week.  Of course it’s good — John Malkovich is in it.  IMDB has de-gayed the description on the internet (and we are told the gay mafia controls Hollywood — guess they’re a closeted mafia).  Malkovich plays a con man in London named Alan Conway who gets people, mainly cute 20 something guys who work in theater or rock bands, to buy him drinks, loan him money, and give him their bodies, because he convinces them he is director Stanley Kubrick and he will put them in his next movie.

The Alan Conway/Kubrick character changes his accent constantly, from southern to New Jersey etc.  Kind of like another con man running for election now who also tries to pull the wool over the gay community’s eyes.

Color Me Kubrick Poster

Color Me Kubrick (2005)
Colour Me Kubrick: A True…ish Story (original title)

86 min  –  Comedy | Drama   –  4 January 2006 (France)

Users: (3,702 votes28 reviews | Critics: 66 reviews Metascore: 57/100 (based on 21 reviews from Metacritic.com)

The true story of a man who posed as director Stanley Kubrick during the production of Kubrick’s last film, Eyes Wide Shut, despite knowing very little about his work and looking nothing like him.


Brian W. Cook


Anthony Frewin

1 nomination See more awards »

Related Videos

Color Me Kubrick -- The true story of a man who posed as director Stanley Kubrick during the production of Kubrick's last film, Eyes Wide Shut, despite knowing very little about his work and looking nothing like him.


Cast overview, first billed only:
Tom Allen Tom Allen
Scott Baker
Nick Barber Nick Barber
Angus Barnett
Lynda Baron Lynda Baron
Mrs. Vitali
Linda Bassett Linda Bassett
Trolley Lady
Marisa Berenson
Alex Witchell
Honor Blackman
Peter Bowles Peter Bowles
Paul Burnham Paul Burnham
Hex Mortimer
Paul Chowdhry Paul Chowdhry
Pub Announcer
Teresa Churcher Teresa Churcher
TV Journalist 2
Enzo Cilenti
Phil Cornwell Phil Cornwell
Police Duty Sgt
Kammy Darweish
TV Journalist 1


In London in the 1990s, a balding alcoholic with an unsteady American accent introduces himself in pubs and other social settings as Stanley Kubrick. Drinks and meals are suddenly on the house or paid for by an admiring person, usually a man, whose costumes, band, acting abilities or what have you, Stanley finds fascinating. He’s actually Alan Conway (1934-1998): we watch him parlay a self-confident manner and a small amount of movie knowledge into a persona whom others immediately hang their dreams on. In exchange, Stanley asks only that they pay the bill. Will he be exposed? Do prosecution and prison await? Or has the National Health something else in mind? 

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Plot Keywords:

 Stanley Kubrick | Alcoholic | Band | National Health | Drink  | See more »


 They wanted something for nothing. He gave them nothing for something. See more »


 Comedy | Drama

Parents Guide:

 Add content advisory for parents »




 UK | France



Release Date:

 4 January 2006 (France) See more »

Also Known As:

 Appelez-moi Kubrick See more »

Filming Locations:

 Isle of Man See more »

Box Office


 $70,677 (USA) (22 April 2007)

See more »

Company Credits

Show detailed company contact information on IMDbPro »

Technical Specs


 86 min

Sound Mix:

 DTS  | Dolby Digital



Aspect Ratio:

 1.85 : 1

See full technical specs »


Did You Know?


Final Film of William HootkinsSee more »


Alan Conway: The trouble with Marlon is that he thinks he’s Brando.
See more »


References The Man Who Would Be King (1975) See more »


“I’m Not The Man You Think I Am”
Performed by Bryan Adams
Written by Bryan Adams and Gretchen Peters
© Badams Music Limited (ASCAP) Admin. By Sony/ATV Tunes LLC
2004 Badman Ltd See more »

Read Full Post »

The pro-pedophilia academic conference has provided another occasion for equating pedophilia and homosexuality, both on the left, where some politically correct gay Democrats have attacked this blog for criticizing the conference, and on the right, where some conservatives ( see http://doctorbulldog.wordpress.com/2011/08/25/pedophilia-going-mainstream) are all to eager to claim gays are responsible.

Paving the Way for Condoning Child Rape
By Dr. Keith Ablow – August 25, 2011 – FoxNews.com

There were those who scoffed at my contention that Abercrombie and Fitch, the edgy retailer, was paving the way for mainstream pedophilia when it began marketing breast enhancing bikinis to girls as young as eight.
There were those who railed against my contention that the French edition of Vogue was kindling pedophilia and embracing it with its racy depictions of 10-year-old Thylane Lena-Rose Loubry-Blondeau in heavy makeup, a plunging neckline and stiletto heels.

There were others who suggested that I had a problem with breastfeeding, in general, when I took issue with The Breast Milk Baby, which encourages little girls to wear a vest that has flowers in place of larger nipples and nurse the doll.

But, now, there should be no doubt that our culture is poised to begin embracing pedophilia asa lifestyle choice, just like homosexuality. A group of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals called B4U-Act, which has representatives from Harvard and Johns Hopkins, gathered recently in Baltimore to organize their push to change the negative perception of pedophiles and encourage them to get help in a nonjudgmental environment.

While B4U-Act is not representative of mainstream psychiatry, and while the American Psychiatric Association (APA) did not participate in the group’s meeting, psychiatry has a history of caving into cultural pressure to stop defining controversial illnesses as pathological. You won’t even find ego-dystonic homosexuality—meaning, homosexual impulses that cause an individual to feel distressed and which that individual does not want to give into—in the DSM, anymore.

Some of the goals of B4U-Act are worthwhile. Encouraging pedophiles to seek psychiatric treatment to resist their pathological urges is a good thing, not a bad thing. I wish every pedophile would get help before ever hurting a child. And the group is absolutely right in asserting that some pedophiles—perhaps the vast majority of pedophiles—never actually do commit a crime. They live with their erotic desires for children without ever acting on them.
Dr. Fred Berlin, a Johns Hopkins psychiatrist, bonafide genius, and truly decent person, is quoted on the website of B4U-Act. His treatment protocols for sexual offenders and others with such impulses do indeed vastly reduce the likelihood that such individuals will hurt children, and his efforts are to be lauded.

But what the members of B4U-Act fail to realize is that there are some impulses worth repressing from consciousness—like the impulse to rape children. There are even thoughts worth repressing—like fantasies of having sex with children. When a society stigmatizes certain actions and thoughts—thereby driving them out of mainstream consciousness and into the shadows—that isn’t always a bad thing.

The group also fails to recognize that there are consequences to removing all moral judgment from a profession.  Psychiatry, for example, has become hostile to suggesting that alcoholics are actually choosing their drug over their families and jobs and other responsibilities—and that making that choice is morally reprehensible. Why isn’t it all right for psychiatrists to take a hard line against pedophilia and see it for what it is: a desire to violate and injure children that is both pathological and morally reprehensible and to be resisted by every means possible?

I’ve told more than one of my patients that his real diagnosis, given his behavior in embracing drugs, instead of his family or employment, shouldn’t be alcohol dependence or heroindependence, but “scumbag.” And I then have quickly added that they can do better than that—that they must choose to do better than that, because, deep inside, they are good and decent and lovable. I tell them they can find the courage to do the right thing, instead of the wrong thing. Yes, I sometimes use the word “wrong.” I judge them. It helps.

I would not hesitate to tell a pedophile that his desires are to injure and torture a child—that they are morally wrong—and that it is his responsibility to ferret out the source of those destructive desires and extinguish them. I wouldn’t for a moment commiserate about how hard it is to live in a society that criminalizes the acts he is moved to commit.

Suggesting to pedophiles that their thoughts and impulses are “understandable” and that they won’t be judged by the members of B4U-Act is the kind of message that encourages them to push harder to change what they think of as unfair laws that keep them from their base desires.

I hate to say I told you so, but . . . well . . . OK, I won’t.

Read Full Post »

AMES STRAW POLL: Bachmann and Paul win straw poll, Pawlenty out

The results are in! The Ames Straw Poll concluded this weekend and Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann came in first, followed closely by Texas Congressman Ron Paul. Minnesota Congressman Tim Pawlenty came in third, and has since dropped out of the race. Stay tuned for additional updates atwww.oneiowa.org!

  • Former New Mexico governor best known for calling Family Leader’s marriage vow “offensive.”
  • Believes government shouldn’t impose its values upon marriage.
  • Supports civil unions for gay and lesbian couples and does not believe government should be involved in marriage.
  • Perhaps the most unique Republican candidate, Karger is the first openly gay man to run for the Presidency of the United States.
  • Founded Californians Against Hate in 2008 to serve as watchdog of major donors and organizations working to take away marriage equality in California.
  • Filed a formal ethics complaint with the state of Maine against NOM regarding political donor reporting.
  • Supports civil marriage and civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.

Watch video of Straw Poll winner Bachmann during Meet the Press: “Can a gay couple who adopt children, in your mind, be considered a ‘family’?” 
Watch video for a quick recap of the Ames Straw Poll results 
With the anit-marriage bus tour sponsored in part by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), and Republican presidential candidates weighing in heavily on divisive social issues, especially the freedom to marry, it’s easy to get lost in the shuffle. But not to worry. One Iowa has put together a list of the candidates from the 2011 Ames Straw Poll, and where they stand on the freedom to marry for gay and lesbian couples.
It is important to remember that these candidates don’t represent all Republicans. Please visit Iowa Republicans for Freedom to read more about the conservative case for marriage equality and how fair-minded Republicans are advocating for equality.
Watch video of the Fox News GOP presidential debate
 Where the candidates stand:
MICHELE BACHMANN (28% in Ames Straw Poll)
  • In 2003, proposed constitutional amendment in Minnesota that would bar the state from legally recognizing marriage equality.
  • In 2004, organized “Minnesota for Marriage” rally with a coalition of religious leaders to ban marriage for gay and lesbian couples in the state.
  • Signed NOM anti-marriage pledge and Family Leader marriage vow.
Watch video
RON PAUL (27% in Ames Straw Poll)
  • Believes civil marriage should be decided on the state level, but personally believes marriage should be between a man and a woman.
  • Opposes all federal efforts to define marriage as between one man and one woman, or any other definition thereof.
  • Voted against Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004, but spoke in favor of Defense of Marriage Act that same year.
  • “Marriage should be between a single man and a single woman,” Paul says. “But, I don’t think the government should be involved. I mean, why should we have a license to be married? Less government would be better. If we have to have regulations, let the state government do it.”
Watch video
TIM PAWLENTY (13% at Ames Straw Poll; dropped out)
  • Former governor of Minnesota and social conservative who was one of three U.S. governors who publicly declared solidarity with Christian right-wing group Family Research Council.
  • Co-authored Defense of Marriage Act defining marriage between a man and a woman.
  • Signed NOM anti-marriage pledge and attended ‘Values Voters’ bus tour urging voters to protect traditional marriage.
  • After disappointing results at the Ames Straw Poll (13%), Pawlenty has dropped from the race.
Watch video 
RICK SANTORUM (9% at Ames Straw Poll)
  • In favor of Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004.
  • Claims that the freedom to practice faith is under attack through the redefinition of marriage.
  • After New York passed the legalization of marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples, Santorum claimed that NY was destroying marriage and the American family.
  • Signed NOM anti-marriage pledge and Family Leader marriage vow.
  • “…Our country is based on morals laws, ladies and gentlemen. There are things the states can’t do,” Santorum says, likening marriage equality to polygamy and incest.
Watch video
HERMAN CAIN (8% at Ames Straw Poll)
  • Believes that Americans need to protect the sanctity of marriage as defined between one man and one woman.
  • Does not support civil unions.
  • If elected, would reinstate “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
RICK PERRY (3% at Ames Straw Poll)
  •  Second longest serving U.S. governor after Iowa’s Terry Brandstad, Perry officially announced his candidacy for the 2012 election after the Ames Straw Poll vote.
  • Opposes any legal recognition of marriage equality.
  • Said Texas’ anti-sodomy law criminalizing homosexuality was “appropriate,” although the United States Supreme Court overruled the law in 2003 with Lawrence v. Texas.
  • Criticized President Obama for signing hate-crime legislation in 2010.
  • Supports Federal Marriage Amendment defining marriage as between one man, one woman.
MITT ROMNEY (3% at Ames Straw Poll)
  • Former governor of Massachusetts, opposed civil marriage and civil unions at that time but advocated tolerance and minimal domestic partnership benefits.
  • Favors anti-discrimination laws to protect lesbians and gays in the workplace.
  • November 2003, Massachusetts extended the freedom to marry to gay and lesbian couples. Romney backed a state constitutional amendment in February 2004 to ban marriage between gay and lesbian couples but still allow civil unions.
  • In 2005, Romney endorsed petition efforts to ban civil marriage and civil unions for gay and lesbian couples completely.
  • Urged U.S. Senate to vote in favor of Federal Marriage Amendment in 2004 and 2006.
  • Signed NOM anti-marriage pledge.
Watch video 
NEWT GINGRICH (2% at Ames Straw Poll)
  • Opposes civil marriage and civil unions for gay and lesbian couples.
  • Claimed the adoption of marriage equality in New York showed the nation is “drifting toward a terrible muddle.”
  • Supported Proposition 8 to overrule legalization of civil marriage for gay and lesbian couples in California.
  • Reportedly contributed $350,000 to discriminatory hate groups in 2010.
Watch video
JON HUNTSMAN, JR. (less than 1% at Ames Straw Poll)
  • Supports civil unions and other rights for gay and lesbian couples, but does not support civil marriage.
  • As Utah’s governor, Huntsman supported legislation that would have allowed civil unions for gay and lesbian couples in the state.
  • “…I believe our country can do a better job on equality,” Huntsman says.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »