Archive for the ‘Leftovers’ Category

It seems Joe deleted my reply on his blog where I pointed out his numerous factual errors, supposedly he says because his blog automatically deletes any post that has more than one HTML link in it.  I am not sure why I saw it posted then, and it was erased a day later.  Whatever.


1) The DC Delegate, Eleanor Holmes Norton, votes on committees. She is not a non-voting delegate. When the Democrats control the house they take all the final votes in Congress on “The Committee of the Whole” and they appoint her to it. She also sits on committees that vote on who gets to supply the federal government in DC with office space, and the Studely Corporation, which develops these office building, donated $43,000 to her campaign one year.
2) Besides running a gay blog for 2 years, BigHomo, that is funnier than this one, I have donated around $30,000 mainly to pro-Gay Democrats, as well as Libertarians, and a few hundred to Republican Congressman Jim Kolbe, after he came out. Here are more 2000-2006 contributions fromOpenSecrets.org:
WASHINGTON,DC 20009REALTOR8/2/00$1,200Gay & Lesbian Victory FundMAJORS, BRUCE P
WASHINGTON,DC 20009REALTOR10/9/00$500Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte (D)MAJORS, BRUCE P
WASHINGTON,DC 20037BRIAN LOGAN REAL ESTAT3/13/02$250Harkin, Tom (D)1

3) You are the one supporting a President, Obama, who is raiding marijuana growers, killing Pakistani kids with predator drones, remaining silent as North Carolina outlaws gay marriage (Biden gaffed him out weeks later), and lying constantly to the voters.  I’m supporting Gary Johnson.  You are supporting a party that denies school choice to gay kids incarcerated in day camps where they are bullied and beaten.  You are the one supporting a party that funds itself by rounding up poor brown and black kids and selling them to educrat cartels in the modern day slave trade.

If anyone is a homocon it would be you.  Though perhaps vicious racist homoreactionary fits better?


GOProud Issues House Endorsements

Today GOProud issued its list of endorsements for the U.S. House. With the exceptions of Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Massachusetts homocon Richard Tisei, I’m not noticing anybody on this list with much of a history of supporting LGBT rights.  Shocking, I know.  Mary Mack Bono and Charles Djouwere among the few Republicans to vote in favor of repealing DADT, but have supported other anti-gay bills.  Please jump in if you note other exceptions.

Charlie Bass (NH-2)(incumbent)
Sean Bielat (MA-4)
Judy Biggert (IL-11) (incumbent)
Mary Bono Mack (CA-45) (incumbent)
Gary DeLong (CA-47)
John Dennis (CA-8)
Charlie Dent (PA-15) (incumbent)
Mario Diaz-Balart (FL-25) (incumbent)
Charles Djou (HI-1)
Brendan Doherty (RI-1)
Robert Dold (IL-10) (incumbent)
Renee Elmers (NC-2) (incumbent)
Frank Guinta (NH-1) (incumbent)
Richard Hanna (NY-22) (incumbent)
Nan Hayworth (NY-18) (incumbent)
Joe Heck (NV-3) (incumbent)
Bruce Majors (DC) (Libertarian)
Dave Reichert (WA-8) (incumbent)
Andrew Roraback (CT-5)
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18) (incumbent)
Pete Sessions (TX-32) (incumbent)
Steve Stivers (OH-15) (incumbent)
Scott Tipton (CO-3) (incumbent)
Richard Tisei (MA-6)
Greg Walden (OR-2) (incumbent)

NOTE: Homocon Bruce Majors is running for the non-voting DC seat.  His campaign site is virtually empty so we presume this is some kind of protest candidacy.


Read Full Post »

The case for individual rights of all people including gay people, including the right to enter into marriage contracts and be equal before the law, is not a weak case that is intellectually indefensible and needs Leftard fascism to protect it from questions and criticism.  And even if it did, free thought and free speech are more important rights than the right to marry.  YouTube censored this 16 year old girl’s video.

The gay community does not need some “progressive” (pro-regressive) thought control Stalinists making us look too pansy assed to argue with a 16 year old.




The following video produced by sixteen-year-old Madeleine McAulay has been banned by YouTube because it did not meet their “community guidelines.” The video, which had garnered over 20,000 hits in only a week, was submitted to Breitbart News for consideration when it was first released. We are proud to host this video at Breitbart News and we invite everyone to Tweet it, Facebook it and embed it in their blogs. Not because we necessarily agree with Ms. McAulay, but because we believe, as our founder did, that our nation is stronger because of active and engaging debate of all ideas.

Read Full Post »

Addicting Info is a socialist disinformation site where way over 60% of the articles are actually out and out lies, spun to protect the Obama regime and the tax predator ruling class.

Today’s whorish lies include one on gay adoption, occasioned by a Virginia state level bill that would protect the freedom of association of private Virginia adoption agencies that do not want to make gay adoptions.  Of course this same freedom of association is what would allow you to start an adoption agency that specialized in gay adoptions, or lesbian adoptions (or African American adoptions, or that deliberately treated all couples equally, or that had any other special mission).

Just as the Stalinists currently are trying to force everyone who doesn’t approve of sterilization (etc.) to pay for insurance plans that provide it, they are trying to make it impossible for a pregnant woman who wants to give her baby up only to a specific type of person or couple (gay or straight, two parent, the same race, etc.) to be unable to do so.  Increasing the chance that she might choose abortion.  One can imagine for example, a pregnant woman whose gay siblings had suffered abuse at the hands of homophobic parents, who discovers from genetic testing that her baby is likely to be gay, who wants to choose an adoption agency that would only place her baby with a gay couple.  The fascists at Addicting Info would deny her access to such a “discriminatory” adoption agency.

This is replicated throughout the economy.  Currently it is illegal in DC and many counties and some states for a realtor to tell people whether neighbors, buyers, sellers, etc. are gay or straight.  I once had a lesbian (and socialist) friend and client (the type who would parrot Addicting Info, though she is smarter than their scribblers) who was house shopping ask me which blocks or areas were most friendly for a lesbian couple planning a child.  I had to tell her it is illegal in DC for me to provide any information about the neighbors, because sexual orientation is a protected class in DC, and fair housing laws violate real estate agent’s free speech to answer such a question.  If she had wanted to go to Virginia, where sexual orientation is not a protected class, I could have answered her.

Virginia To Deny Gay Adoption On Religious Grounds

February 11, 2012


The war against the LGBT community is alive and well in the state of Virginia, and children are being caught in the crossfire. On Friday, the Virginia Senate passed SB 349, which gives private adoption agencies the power to deny the placement of children with same-sex couples on religious grounds.
Known as the ‘conscience clause’ bill, the bill allows adoption agencies to deny same-sex couples the opportunity to adopt children, even if they are well qualified to do so. The Senate passed the bill along partisan lines 22-18 and the House has already passed a version of the bill. Governor McDonnell is expected to sign the bill the second it hits his desk.

The bill is supposedly being passed to defend the religious freedom of faith based adoption agencies, of which there are over 80. Many of the agencies also happen to be state funded, which begs the question: How is it possible for government money to be used to violate the First Amendment? The answer, of course, is that it shouldn’t be.
Democratic state Senator Adam Ebbin says, “This bill authorizes every one of the 80 private adoption agencies licensed in Virginia to refuse to offer their services to any LGBT person based on a written moral policy, which they can make up tomorrow. The bill says they can do that no matter how qualified the prospective mom and dad is to become a parent.”
According to the Washington Blade, “Ebbin and other opponents of the bill said that although it doesn’t say so directly, they believe it is aimed mostly at allowing adoption agencies to turn away LGBT people as adoptive or foster parents. The bill doesn’t change the state’s existing adoption and foster placement law and policies that allow an agency to place a child with a gay parent if the agency wishes to do so. Existing law prohibits placement of children with an unmarried couple, gay or straight, but it does not bar single parent adoptions or foster placements for gays.” But Ebbin thinks it could one day lead to a bill that directly bans same-sex couples from adopting.
The ones hurt the most by this bill are the children whose only wish is to have parents that love and care for them. By passing this bill, Virginia Republicans are essentially allowing adoption agencies to deny children a loving home because a couple doesn’t meet their religious standards. So what if the couple are atheists, interracial or, heaven forbid, Muslim? There are still “good Christians” that would rather see a child languish in the system until they attain their majority than be placed with such “unholy” parents. No one should have the right to make that kind of call based on their own personal morals much less their religion.
Judge not lest ye be judged seems to be a foreign concept to the GOP and the ones that pay the price for their intolerance are the children. But what else is new?

Read Full Post »

It is difficult to believe that gays would fare better under a Palestinian regime than they do under Israel.  Given the statist policies of many Arab and Islamic states, there is little reason to believe the average Palestinian of any sexual orientation would fare better under a Palestinian state than they do now.

I often chide libertarian friends who fall into the “progressive” double standard of demanding Jews be suicidally better, more liberal, more libertarian, more humanitarian, than anyone around them, that even if Theodore Herzl had been an acolyte of Murray Rothbard, and Israel had become more Jewish purely through free immigration and Jews renting and buying farms and homes, anti-Semites would still be shooting rockets at them, and tyrannies would be funding it if not doing it.

The Self-Destructive Insanity of Pro-Palestinian Gay Activists

Posted by Bruce Bawer Bio ↓ on Nov 25th, 2011

  • On November 22, the New York Times ran an op-ed by the radical leftist lesbian Jewish playwright Sarah Schulman which did a great public service – it provided a perfect illustration of the utter lunacy of the anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian queer left.
    Schulman opened her piece, entitled “Israel and ‘Pinkwashing,’” by quoting a line from William Butler Yeats (a writer who, incidentally, would have found both her work and her politics utterly vile).  The line, also the title of a famous short story by Delmore Schwartz, was this: “In dreams begin responsibilities.”  Schulman maintained that Yeats’s words “resonate with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people who have witnessed dramatic shifts in our relationship to power.”  She meant by this that while gay people have won rights and respect in various countries around the world, “these changes have given rise to a nefarious phenomenon: the co-opting of white gay people by anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim political forces in Western Europe and Israel.”
    Schulman went on to express her revulsion at the enthusiasm of some Dutch gays for the late Pim Fortuyn and for the very much alive Geert Wilders, and at the fact that the English Defense League has over a hundred gay members.  She also took me on: “In Norway,” she wrote, “Anders Behring Breivik, the extremist who massacred 77 people in July, cited Bruce Bawer, a gay American writer critical of Muslim immigration, as an influence.”  (In fact, Breivik made it clear in his writings that I was not an influence on him – he considered me too much of a libertarian.  But no matter.)
    Never mind that all this is true.  For Schulman, it’s all “’pinkwashing’: a deliberate strategy to conceal the continuing violations of Palestinians’ human rights behind an image of modernity signified by Israeli gay life.”  In the sentences that followed, Schulman actually seemed to be trying to get away with implying that Palestinian “gay life” is comparable to “Israeli  gay life”: “Homosexuality,” she wrote, “has been decriminalized in the West Bank since the 1950s, when anti-sodomy laws imposed under British colonial influence were removed from the Jordanian penal code, which Palestinians follow.”  I would encourage Schulman to open a gay bar in Ramallah and see what happens.
    Though “some people of good will…mistakenly judge how advanced a country is by how it responds to homosexuality,” insisted Schulman, things like “the relative openness of Tel Aviv are incomplete indicators of human rights.”  Perhaps not, but they happen to be of a piece with every other single indicator of human rights in Israel relative to human rights in the territories now governed by Hamas – or, for that matter, in every Muslim country in the region.  How about women’s rights, Sarah?  Is the status of women in Israel, as compared to their status elsewhere in the Middle East, also an “incomplete indicator”?
    Schulman, it should be noted, is a relic – sorry, veteran – of the Gay Wars of ancient times, which is to say the 1970s and 80s.  Back then she was one of the shining stars of the minuscule but then powerful radical gay activist subculture, which subordinated the real interests and convictions of the overwhelming majority of gay people to its own far-left, anti-capitalist ideology.  Back then, in its heyday, Schulman and her Marxist confrères called the shots in gay political activism; today, except in the academy (where they reign over the inane discipline known as “Queer Studies”), they’ve dwindled almost to utter irrelevance in society at large.  Indeed, if Schulman singles me out for special obloquy, it may be because my 1993 book A Place at the Table: The Gay Individual in American Society helped spell the beginning of the end for her own brand of anger-driven, ideology-obsessed, and terminally counterproductive gay politics.

    Which is not to say that Schulman is a lone voice.  If only.  That there exists a group with the grotesque name Queers Against Israeli Apartheid (under the auspices of which Schulman apparently gave a talk earlier this year) shows that the sick old strain of self-destructive gay politics is, in some quarters, not only still alive and kicking but more twisted than ever.  To be sure, it never stops being remarkable to me that anyone who professes to care about human freedom – especially someone who is gay and a woman and a Jew! – can be anything but a fervent supporter of Israel, a small free country surrounded by Jew-hating, woman-oppressing, gay-killing neighbors that are intent on destroying it.  But then this is what happens, alas, when a mind is so besotted with ideology as to blind itself to even the most obvious of realities.

    About Bruce Bawer

    Bruce Bawer is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center and the author of “While Europe Slept” and “Surrender.” His e-book, “The New Quislings”, about the Norwegian Left’s exploitation of the July 22 mass murders in Norway, will be published in early January by Harper Collins.

    The “depictions of immigrants” by people like me and Wilders “as ‘homophobic fanatics,’” wrote Schulman, “opportunistically ignore the existence of Muslim gays and their allies within their communities.”  On the contrary, I and many other anti-jihadists have written extensively about gay Muslims.  What Schulman “opportunistically ignores” is that gay Muslims in Western Europe tend to live in terror of being found out by their families and communities.  Their very lives are at risk.  So dire is their plight that until recently there was not a single “out” gay Muslim in all of Norway, where I live.  I am now personally acquainted with the country’s first openly gay male Muslim and its first openly lesbian Muslim, and I can inform Schulman that their lives have been made exceedingly difficult by the Muslim communities that Schulman is so eager to defend.
    To depict Muslims as antigay, Schulman further maintained, is to “render invisible the role that fundamentalist Christians, the Roman Catholic Church and Orthodox Jews play in perpetuating fear and even hatred of gays.”  Yes, there’s hostility to gay people all over the place.  The difference is that even the most famously gay-hating Christian on the planet, Fred “God Hates Fags” Phelps, doesn’t call for the murder of gay people and, as far as I know, has not killed any gays himself.  By contrast, sharia law prescribes the death penalty for homosexuality – a punishment that has been carried out innumerable times by the governments of several Islamic countries as well as by countless Muslim families both in the Muslim world and in the West.
    But does Schulman care about that?  Apparently not.  She is the kind of leftist for whom ideology will always trump reality.  What she is exercised about is the fact that Israel is, according to her, marketing itself as gay-friendly: Tel Aviv’s tourism board, for example, is spending about $90 million “to brand the city as ‘an international gay vacation destination.’”  Also, 

    Benjamin Netanyahu told the U.S. Congress in May “that the Middle East was ‘a region where women are stoned, gays are hanged, Christians are persecuted.’”

    Read Full Post »


    Yet another occasion for the leftover blogsphere to go into full talking points regurgitation about the evil Ayn Rand.  Dozens of unknown twits who cannot spell or think recite the latest StinkRegress and Tedium Tatters pensees about how Ayn Rand hypocritically accepted a social security check in her old age (after making double FICA payments for years as a self-employed person) etc etc ad nauseum.

    The little airheaded pole smokers divide among themselves in the comments sections on whether they would reject the TrueBlood hunk sexually (and what completely-divorced-from-reality narcissistic fantasy are they living in to think they have an option?) or overlook his belief that The Fountainhead is a great novel if they could get tea bagged by him.

    Joe Manganiello’s “25 Things You Don’t Know About”: crush killer or interesting?

    Back when I was dating, I had a rule to avoid guys who were so into Ayn Rand that they mentioned it on the first date. Like it was fine if they read some of her books, but if they read them and ascribed to her philosophy so thoroughly that they werepreaching to me about it, that was a deal breaker. This was after a hot guy tried to pick me up at a bar and then proceeded to spend the next 40 minutes telling me about Objectivism like he was doing me a favor. From then on, I considered a strong interest in Rand a warning sign that the guy was annoying, and that rule served me well a couple of times afterwards.
    (Disclosure: I read half of Atlas Shrugged at one point, but found it interminable. This was years ago, and maybe I didn’t “get” it.) So it’s disappointing to me that “True Blood” hottie Joe Manganiello just has to mention in his “25 Things You Don’t Know About Me” profile that The Fountainhead is his absolute favorite book. Really? He’s never read a better book than that? I don’t care what kind of abs he has, I’m getting a flashback to my 21 year-old self, stuck in the bar with that dude who looked promising until he tried to convert me to Rand’s “amazing” philosophy. I think I was so bored my mouth was hanging open. Mangy’s other 24 things seem to be about his various accomplishments, and it’s less interesting than boasting. Is he one of those guys who talks endlessly about himself? Maybe that’s unfair given that he’s supposed to do that here. Still, I’m not impressed.

    1. I am excellent at knife-throwing.
    2. My eyes are so bad, they can’t be corrected by laser surgery.
    3. I made the junior Olympic volleyball team when I was 16.
    4. I worked as a roadie for the rock band Goldfinger.
    5. I was an altar boy.
    6. I once planned on playing college basketball and joining the FBI.
    7. I love Disneyland.
    8. I was asked to skip two grades in elementary school but chose not to.
    9. I shaved my head twice and got my front teeth pulled out for stage roles incollege.
    10. I sang backup on one of The Used’s albums.
    11. I love karaoke.
    12. My favorite city is Venice, Italy.
    13. My favorite movie is Fight Club.
    14. My first concert was Pantera.
    15. I won third place in a chess tournament when I was 6.
    16. I got a 750 on the mat portion of the SATs.
    17. I am a die-hard Pittsburgh Steelers fan.
    18. I trained as a boxer and was a sparring partner for an NHL player.
    19. At age 16 I got paid to dress up like Captain Morgan at abrs.
    20. My favorite play is A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennesse Williams.
    21. Last summer, I caught a touchdown pass from Joe Montana in a charity game.
    22. My favorite book is The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand.
    23. I appeared full frontal nude in an off-Broadway play.
    24. I have a bachelor of fine arts degree in classical theater.
    25. When I was young, I prayed that God would turn me into a werewolf.

    [From US Weekly, print edition, September 5, 2011]
    The rest of the “25 Things” are mildly interesting. Like he seems like he’s had various interesting experiences. They sound braggy though, and I know that’s the nature of these lists but the posturing seems obvious to me. Maybe it’s the Rand connection, which that one guy ruined for me that fateful night. I hope he grew out of it. It strikes me that Manganiello hasn’t read much if that’s his favorite book of all time. Maybe Kaiser is right about him. Hot but dumb. I’m so team Eric now. I would still like to see full frontal pictures of the guy on stage though, if they exist.
    Photo above is from from 8/23/11. He’s just not doing it for me anymore! (credit: Fame) He’s also show strategically trying to remove his sunglasses in London on 8/3/11. (credit: WENN) And shirtless from GQ

    Read Full Post »

    I am at Chesapeake Pride, about 11 miles south of Maryland’s capitol city, Annapolis, in southern Anne Arundel County, in a ruralish suburb called Edgewater at a small state park on the Chesapeake Bay called Mayo Beach.  It’s a beautiful sunny day and the water and sky are beautiful and it’s 91 Farenheit.  This rural gay Pride summer festival has grown to attract 700 people last year and was expected to grow to 1,000 this week.  (www.chesapeakepridefestival.org).

    But the State of Maryland denied them a license to sell beer.

    I am working a booth and it’s sunny and hot and beautiful and I am looking at gorgeous water.

    I really want a beer.

    It looks like fewer people are showing up than last time.

    The festival organizers, busy Annapolis area businesswomen, admit they were late in applying for the license.  But other people have been late to do so as well.  There is an “appeals” process where people who are late can ask the County license commission to grant them a license for special events even if they did not apply within the government mandated time period.  The bureaucrats voted to turn them down, 2-1.  Anecdotally I am told they do not routinely deny this appeal to other groups.  Wonder what was different about this group? Board of License Commissioners Melvin Hyatt voted to issue the license, which was issued last year; Commissioners John G. Warner and James Thomas voted to deny it.

    It’s funny, the political groups here include two Democrat groups, one Green Party, and two different libertarian tables (a Libertarian Party table and a generic gay lower-case “l” libertarian table where I am pushing, among other things, this blog.)  I will say once again the gay community has been held hostage to the regulatory state favored by the gay leftovers of the Democratic Party.  (See the post below on how many years it took to create the popular gay restaurant DuplexDiner in gay-friendly DC.)

    I joked with one of the women organizing the event that I have a bottle of red wine in my car and I am going to get it and serve it under the table, since I am a libertarian and don’t believe in licenses.  She hesitates and tells me that maybe she is going to become one today too.

    Read Full Post »

    Was Aristotle the only great philosopher who was heterosexual?  From Plato and Socrates to Locke and Wittgenstein, bisexual, gay, or “confirmed batchelor” thinkers have contributed a disproportionately high amount to the cannon of Great Books and Great Ideas of the Western World.

    Isn’t it ironic that anti-Western leftovers attack these “dead white male” thinkers, when, besides the fact that they include many Greeks and Jews (even Sephardic Jews), who themselves are sometimes students or involved in a philosophical conversation with (pre- and post-Islamic) Arab scholars, these Western thinkers also seem to have a large gay minority much greater than their share of the population?

    Isn’t it ironic that socially conservative scholars, often associated with Judaism or Catholicism, do appreciate these thinkers (albeit without recognizing their sexuality and the possible transcendence via alienation it may have provided)?

    Should the State of California just start teaching high school juniors and seniors, at least in AP classes, Plato and Locke and Kant, as part of their gay-inclusive curriculum?  (Instead of showing them videos of the Folsom Street Fair or teaching them how to put condoms on bananas?)

    “From timber so crooked as that from which man is carved, nothing entirely straight can be made.”
    –Immanuel Kant

    Immanuel Kant was born in 1724 in Königsberg, the capital of Prussia at that time, today the city ofKaliningrad in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad Oblast. He was the fourth of eleven children (four of them reached adulthood). Baptized ‘Emanuel’, he changed his name to ‘Immanuel’[6] after learning Hebrew. In his entire life, he never traveled more than ten miles from Königsberg.[7] His father, Johann Georg Kant (1682–1746), was a German harnessmaker from Memel, at the timePrussia’s most northeastern city (now KlaipėdaLithuania). His mother, Regina Dorothea Reuter (1697–1737), was born in Nuremberg.[8]Kant’s grandfather had emigrated from Scotland to East Prussia, and his father still spelled their family name “Cant.”[9] In his youth, Kant was a solid, albeit unspectacular, student. He was brought up in a Pietist household that stressed intense religious devotion, personal humility, and a literal interpretation of the Bible. Consequently, Kant received a stern education – strict, punitive, and disciplinary – that preferred Latin and religious instruction over mathematics and science.[10] The common myths concerning Kant’s personal mannerisms are enumerated, explained, and refuted in Goldthwait’s introduction to his translation of Observations on the Feeling of the Beautiful and Sublime.[11] It is often held that Kant lived a very strict and predictable life, leading to the oft-repeated story that neighbors would set their clocks by his daily walks. He never married, but did not seem to lack a rewarding social life – he was a popular teacher and a modestly successful author even before starting on his major philosophical works.

    Read Full Post »

    Older Posts »