GOProud: A Press Release That Conservatives Can Believe In

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

GOProud: A Press Release That Conservatives Can Believe In

Written By : John Hawkins

I’ve been a supporter of GOProud, the group for gay conservatives that broke off from the bogus Log Cabin Republicans.

Seeing the press release GOProud put out today hammering Tom Campbell reminded me of why I supported the group in the first place even though personally, Campbell would be my second choice in the California Senate race behind Chuck DeVore (Fiorina is so politically incompetent, I tend to think she’d implode).

Here’s what the press release was titled: “National Gay Group Criticizes Tom Campbell’s Record.”

So, what do you think the release was about? Well, according to liberal gay groups, the only two issues that matter for gay Americans are gay marriage and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” GOProud on the other hand, has a much wider agenda,

Tom Campbell – Wrong on Israel, Wrong on Fighting Global Extremism, Wrong for Gay Voters

Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director “The greatest threat facing gay people worldwide is the spread of radical anti-gay Islam. Tom Campbell’s record makes it clear he either doesn’t understand that or is unwilling to confront it.”

(Washington, D.C.) – According to press reports, former U.S. Rep. Tom Campbell (R-CA) is courting gay voters in his current run for U.S. Senate. “Gay voters should know where Tom Campbell stands on all the issues,” said Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud – the only national organization representing gay conservatives and their allies. “The greatest threat facing gay people worldwide is the spread of radical anti-gay Islam. Unfortunately, Tom Campbell’s record makes it clear he either doesn’t understand that or is unwilling to confront it.”

Campbell wrote a letter of support for convicted terrorist Sami Al-Arian, who actually raised money for Campbell’s failed run for Senate in 2000. Al-Arian was indicted in February 2003 as the North American head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. In the indictment, it was revealed that in Al-Arian’s communications with his colleagues were discussions of terrorist operations. Among the victims of these operations in Israel were several Americans.

“Tom Campbell raised money from and publicly voiced support for a convicted terrorist,” continued LaSalvia. “A man who once publicly declared, ‘Jihad is our path. Victory to Islam. Death to Israel. Revolution. Revolution until victory. Rolling to Jerusalem.”

In his failed 2000 Senate bid, Campbell called for the creation of an independent Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem, argued that Israel received too much U.S. aid, and attacked former President Bill Clinton for being too pro-Israel.

While in Congress, Campbell was one of only a handful of Representatives to vote against both a resolution expressing support for Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and against the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state.

“Israel is one of the United States most important and loyal allies, and quite frankly Tom Campbell’s record and rhetoric look more like Pat Buchanan’s then Ronald Reagan’s,” said LaSalvia. “Israel is a beacon of freedom and tolerance in a sea of radically anti-gay regimes in the Middle East. You simply cannot claim to support equality of opportunity for gays and lesbians while at the same time seeking to undermine the only country in the Middle East that treats gay people with dignity and respect.”

In 2000, Campbell supported easing sanctions on the anti-gay regime of Saddam Hussein, and in 2004, Campbell called for the complete withdrawal of American forces from Iraq.

“GOProud is a vocal supporter of Israel, and as an organization, we believe strongly in the need to elect leaders who will stand up for Israel and will fight the spread of radical anti-gay Islam. Sadly, Tom Campbell’s rhetoric and record make it clear he is not one of those leaders,” concluded LaSalvia.

# # #

GOProud represents gay conservatives and their allies. GOProud is committed to a traditional conservative agenda that emphasizes limited government, individual liberty, free markets and a confident foreign policy. GOProud promotes our traditional conservative agenda by influencing politics and policy.

As I’ve said before about GOProud,

Yes, like most conservatives, I am not ever going to see eye-to-eye with GOProud on gay marriage. Of course, I am probably not ever going to see eye-to-eye with Paleocons on trade, diehard social conservatives on banning pornography, Libertarians on foreign policy, and Sarah Palin on her endorsement of John McCain. So what? Are we all going to splinter off now? Yes, it’s important to stick to our principles, but there also has to be some room for disagreement as well. We do need to be able to say, “Yeah, we may disagree sometimes, but we’re still on the same side and can work together on a lot of issues.”

With that in mind, I was glad to see GOProud at CPAC, I’m glad to have them in the Republican Party, and I’m glad to have them in the conservative movement. I hope other conservatives will have the same attitude and I also hope any remaining gay conservatives who might still be lingering in the Log Cabin Republicans will abandon that phony group and migrate over to GOProud instead.

http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

I still don’t get how you can form an identity group and then still call yourself a Conservative. Why not just be Conservatives? Why do they have to be “gay Conservatives?” I don’t identify myself as a hetero Conservative, or an Italian/Irish/German-American Conservative, or a Dark-Haired Conservative, or a Glasses-Wearing Conservative.
Parker

Because you aren’t being discriminated against. There is no “anti dark-hair” movement brewing amongst Conservatives. Until the Conseratives buck up and support the gay-rights movement, we will always have to label ourselves “gay Conservatives.” And yes, I am a proud member of GOProud. It still shocks me that we are still legally allowed to be discriminated in the workplace, the military, and with marriage. The Republican Party has always been the leader in non-discrimination laws, but why can’t we be better than the liberals in this fight to give the growing gay population in America these basic rights?
Power_System_Oper

Why even foster a divide amongst conservatives over this issue? Lets stick with the major issue which continues to impact all consevatives.

Why won’t the 160+ gutless GOP memebes of the House of Representatives stand up for fiscal conservatives and agree to co-sponsor Rep Paul Ryan’s detailed plan of specific spending cuts which will balance the budget without having to raise taxes?

If you want to stay out from under the bus
Don’t give Repbulican pols your trust
So from my conservative point of view
Choose a Libertarian to represent you

Power_System_Oper
xxxxxxxxx
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

Posted by Power_System_Oper
2010-04-06 09:35:49

Blatant threadjack. Moderators, can you remove the indicated post by an admitted Obama supporter?
http://TheNixonTape.Blogspot.Com Dick_Nixon

I post on RWN because its easy and fun to fluster political ideologues who are more obsessed with attacking the opposition than they are in boosting their own positive aspects. The vast majority of RWN OP’s and its responders focus their ideological energy on the negative by attacking the opposition. Fortunately for me, there almost always exists in the real world examples of both sides committing the same types of infractions for which negative focused political bloggers attack the opposition. That is what makes many RWN OP’s and their supporters such easy marks to fluster. I can almost almost always find a real world example of when the other dog got kicked. The leftist blogs are just as vulnerable in that regard. I’ve actually tried it. Its not near as much fun. The liberal bloggers don’t get their panties in as much of a knot as do conservative bloggers when I infuse the “whoose dog got kicked” game into their partisan negative attacks.

Posted by snohomish

Here is where PSO confessed under another user name to trolling.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

I have to ask again, where’s the line? Where do you decide someone is too extreme or holds a position which you cannot support despite their conservative statements? If someone was an organization of conservatives defined by their love of having sex with children would they be welcome, simply because they acted conservative otherwise? Where, John, do you decide “that’s too much, no thanks?”
D-Vega

Heh, heh, heh. Interesting pairing here.

Gay conservatives may have lower taxes with conservatives, but would be treated as if their sexual identity is akin to smoking cigarettes or riding a motorcycle. A lifestyle choice that could be broken with the help of Christian values.

And yet, for votes and fundraising they are certainly welcomed with open arms.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

Vega, you should proof before you hit submit, that comment was gibberish.
President_Friedman

Posted by Christopher_Taylor
2010-04-06 15:41:27

“Where do you decide someone is too extreme or holds a position which you cannot support despite their conservative statements?”

I think John was pretty clear that, in spite of their otherwise conservative statements, there are some positions held by GOProud that he cannot support.

“If someone was an organization of conservatives defined by their love of having sex with children would they be welcome, simply because they acted conservative otherwise?”

I think we can safely say that an overwhelming majority of conservatives (and liberals too, for that matter) would not welcome child molestors, regardless of their political ideology. I know you and I disagree that, given the context, this is a reasonable question to ask, even if it is meant to be rhetorical. Still, I’m sure we both agree on what John’s (and pretty much everyone’s) answer would be. I understand your point, but think the question you ask is a bit too easily batted down to apply towards it. Your other question is much better:

“I have to ask again, where’s the line?”

Righ or wrong, the line is wherever a majority of voters decide to put it. The real question here is whether the traditional line should be redrawn in relation to homosexuals who are willing to put other conservative issues ahead of their own personal agendas, and I think John answers that pretty clearly.
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

Because you aren’t being discriminated against. There is no “anti dark-hair” movement brewing amongst Conservatives.

And there’s no anti-gay movement, either. That’s Fred Phelps you’re thinking of.

Until the Conseratives buck up and support the gay-rights movement, we will always have to label ourselves “gay Conservatives.”

And what does this “gay rights movement” want? Special treatment and special rights. Sorry, but no. If you’re going to be different from the other 94% of people, you can’t force us to pretend your differences don’t exist.

It still shocks me that we are still legally allowed to be discriminated in the workplace, the military, and with marriage.

Since the first is illegal, I’d be shocked too. The second is a military decision that should not be subjected to political correctness or social experimentation. The third does not exist, as there is no such thing as gay marriage — marriage being between a man and a woman in our (and, for that matter, any successful) culture.

this fight to give the growing gay population in America these basic rights?

What “basic rights” are denied you? The “right” to force people to pretend your sexual practices are the same as the norm? Well, they’re not. They’re different from the norm, and while you can not (and should not) be discriminated against, that doesn’t mean you get to force us to include “Heather Has Two Mommies” in our kids’ schools. I don’t care what you do in private, but don’t tell me I have to approve of it in public. You want the “right” to force religious or civil authorities to perform a meaningless ceremony for you? Well, they shouldn’t. It’s against the tenets of their faith on one hand, and against one of the core institutions of our civilisation on the other. You can not force our entire society to change its basic institutions to suit you. This whole idea of forming a “gay rights” activist group is completely at odds with being Conservative, just as if you were forming a “conservative” group to promote the philosophy of “black liberation theology” preacher Jeremiah Wright. It’s an oxymoron in action.
http://networdblog.blogspot.com/ Christopher_Taylor

Actually no he hasn’t answered it, Pres. He’s just presumed that homosexuality is perfectly neutral and thus to be ignored. And that’s why I ask about the line, where and how do you make the decision of what’s acceptable and what isn’t? How does he choose what behavior he’s willing to shrug at and ignore as long as it gets votes and political support. Upon what basis does he make this decision and where is the line drawn where he says “look, I agree with these points politically but you’re just not welcome with us because of what you stand for and identify yourselves as.”

And the gay population is not growing, its just getting louder and more publicly acceptable. Its not like the human species is getting more gay, and if it were, that would be a pretty powerful indictment of the absurdity of evolution.
libliever

Posted by Christopher_Taylor
2010-04-06 23:03:18

SHUT THE FUCK UP BIGOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

Posted by libliever
2010-04-06 23:32:12

Ahh, the voice of the tolerant Left. See what I mean? If you dare to hold a belief system contrary to the Left’s agenda, you are labeled a bigot and told to shut the fuck up. Literally.
whats_up

Ahh, the voice of the tolerant Left. See what I mean? If you dare to hold a belief system contrary to the Left’s agenda, you are labeled a bigot and told to shut the fuck up. Literally.

Posted by CavalierX
2010-04-07 08:31:55

As opposed to holding a belief system contrary to the Right, you are labeled as being perverted and not allowed the same rights as others. Typical Conservatives
StanInFtWorth

and not allowed the same rights as others.
Posted by whats_up 2010-04-07 10:33:58

REALLY? There are special rights for straight people? And laws that apply to straights that do not apply to others?

Please fill us in, crthns.
President_Friedman

“He’s just presumed that homosexuality is perfectly neutral and thus to be ignored.”

I don’t think he presumes that at all. It is a pretty accurate description of my personal stance on the issue, but I know from his posts in the past that Hawkins is a conservative Christian who presumably believes what the Bible says about homosexuality being a sin. The question is, if you believe that way, how do you differentiate between which sinners you are going to ally yourself with in order to further your political causes?
libliever

Posted by President_Friedman
2010-04-07 11:55:11

Why do you even bother?

Chrissie Taylor is a BIGOT pure and simple as is CavalierX.
President_Friedman

Posted by libliever
2010-04-07 13:06:50

As are you. As am I. As is anybody who holds any kind of opinion about others that they are not willing to budge on.

And also, I bother because I understand that C_T and Cav are thinkers, and I respect and want to better understand their thinking on this subject, even if I might disagree with their conclusions. See, I’m not even so sure that C_T doesn’t ultimately agree with Hawkins on this issue. I’ve never heard him state his own opinion about it, only ask John to clarify the metrics HE is using to make such a decision. I know from many years of engaging him intellectually that to C_T, the integrity of your logic is often as important as the conclusion you come to.

And finally, I bother because I thimk it is an interesting subject: How DOES a person, as a Christian, decide which sinners get to be in your club and which don’t? I can’t think of a good Christian argument for excluding homosexuals that wouldn’t also logically neccecitate the exclusion of atheists, agnostics, gluttons, and heterosexual couples who “shack up”. Or in Cav’s case, as an agnostic, how do you exclude homosexuals based on naturalistic reasons, but welcome with open arms a married heterosexual couple who are capable of having children but refuse to do so… to me it seems they would be guilty of the same transgression against nature.
http://guardian.blogdrive.com/ CavalierX

Pres: I’m not excluding anyone. I’m merely pointing out that identity politics are inherently antithetical to the Conservative principle that everyone should be treated as an equal individual, not part of a supposedly monolithic group – especially not a self-proclaimed victim group that’s seeking special privileges. If you’re a Conservative, be a Conservative – it’s all the label you need.

If I Was Your President (Boyfriend Spoof)

Premium Right Ads

Blogads Right

Previous Features

40 Of The Most Bad-Ass, Masculine, Manly, Alpha Male Quotes Of All Time

Why Men Are Becoming Wimpy, Video Game Playing Slackers Who Don’t Want To Get Married

Horror You Will Never Get Out Of Your Brain Again: Bronies

The 10 Best Obama Ate A Dog Images From Around The Web

User Info

Features

Archives Best of RWN Humor John Hawkins Interviews Quotes Special to RWN