Chris Crain, former editor of the Washington Blade (and I must add, a generally reasonable voice) wrote a column recently saying that “gays should find no solace” in Sen. John McCain. He also questions Log Cabin’s take on Mitt Romney’s candidacy and says “Log Cabin can’t be too happy with McCain.” While we haven’t endorsed McCain for president, some items in his post deserve a response. Chris really misses the boat with this column.
Here is Chris’s column, with a few responses from Log Cabin (Chris’s words are in bold; my response to him in italics):
“I don’t really understand why John McCain is so attractive as the ‘McMaverick Republican’ to GOP moderates, especially if they are gay.”
While Chris is clearly not a McCain supporter, it is hard to understand how he doesn’t see why McCain might be an attractive choice for some gay Republicans. McCain is on his way to wrapping up the GOP nomination with no help (and with outright hostility) from most so-called social conservatives . This isn’t an insignificant fact. James Dobson will be taken off speed-dial in a President McCain White House. How any gay person can gloss over that fact is beyond me.
“When Mitt Romney bowed to mathematical realities, after Super Duper Tuesday and quit the presidential race…Log Cabin Republicans responded with barely contained jubilance.”
Well, to be fair, I wouldn’t call it “barely contained jubilance.” We danced around the office and broke out some sparkling cider, but I wouldn’t say the celebration was “jubilant.”
While there’s no question Log Cabin had a score to settle with Romney, who promised as recently as 1994 that he would be a more effective advocate for gay rights than Ted Kennedy. But is it really the Log Cabin view that Romney’s pro-gay past is inconsistent with being a true conservative, and his anti-gay presidential campaign reflects ‘newfound conservative rhetoric’?”
No. That’s why the ads we launched highlighting Romney’s record made no mention of gay issues. It IS our view that the Romney who once ran from the Reagan legacy like it was a smelly gym sock, only to brand himself a “Reagan conservative” in a later White House run, is not consistent and not conservative. Ditto his flips on taxes, guns, abortion, and just about every other major issue.
“Log Cabin can’t be too happy with McCain, the McMaverick Republican…McCain does oppose a federal marriage amendment (on federalism grounds), but the president doesn’t get a vote on constitutional amendments…”
If the president’s opinion on a federal marriage amendment doesn’t matter, then why did Chris care when President Bush endorsed it?
“…and there’s zero likelihood that a President McCain will waste an iota of political capital opposing congressional Republicans on a marriage amendment.”
Chris, where were you during the showdown over the federal marriage amendment? McCain gave the most impassioned speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate against the amendment, calling it “antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans.” Chris glosses over this fact and then goes so far as to say that McCain wouldn’t be there to oppose such a measure as president. That’s disingenuous to say the least.
“It’s true that McCain doesn’t pander to the right with rhetoric about ‘traditional family values’…Many moderates and libertarians still love McCain for calling out Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell as ‘agents of intolerance’ back in 2000. But let’s not forget how McCain sucked up to both of them in advance of this presidential run, even speaking at Falwell’s Liberty University…”
Okay, so, if I’m hearing you correctly, it’s a deal-breaker for a politician to appear with those who preach intolerance of gays? Guess you won’t be voting for Barack Obama then.
-posted by Scott Tucker
Posted: February 22nd, 2008 under Elections, In the News, Log Cabin In Focus.
Comments: none
Powerful op-ed today in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer from Log Cabin National Board Member Joel Hastings. Washington State is on the verge of moving closer to an expanded domestic partnership bill. The legislation passed the House and is expected to move through the Senate soon. Joel makes the case that domestic partnerships should be something all Republicans can unite around.
A snazzy new