From the July 28 edition of Clear Channel's The War Room with Quinn & Rose:
Loading the player reg...
In a July 27 editorial, The Washington Times wrote that new regulations allowing same-sex partners of federal workers to receive long-term care insurance represents an "assault on marriage" by President Obama. From the Times editorial, titled, "Obama's assault on marriage":
President Obama's effort to undermine marriage as the union of one man and one woman advanced as an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) regulation took effect earlier this month. Under the new rules, Uncle Sam will provide long-term care insurance to the "domestic partners" of all federal employees as if they were partners in true wedlock.
Mr. Obama ordered the policy change in June 2009 when he instructed all relevant federal agencies to identify benefits that could be offered to homosexuals that live together. The president's memorandum on the subject represented a blatant effort to evade the Defense of Marriage Act. This law, enacted in 1996, prohibits federal regulations from referring to marriage as anything other than the "union between one man and one woman as husband and wife" and a spouse as anything other than "a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."
In May, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that a similar proposal to extend federal health benefits to homosexual partners would cost taxpayers an additional $400 million over 10 years, or $600 million if the benefits applied to current retirees. These figures assumed that one-third of 1 percent of federal employees would register as domestic partners. That estimate was based on the number of homosexuals who have signed up for equivalent offerings at the state and local government level.
If accurate, it would mean the White House is actively attacking the foundations of the traditional family to cater to a handful of extremists. Instead of finding yet more beneficiaries for federal largesse, the Obama administration ought to devote its attention to reining in the reckless spending that has burdened all families with a $13.3 trillion debt.
A July 15 Washington Times editorial titled "Obama's homosexual-Muslim conflict" called Muslims and homosexuals "radical groups" and claimed the Obama administration claimed "might have to decide" which group "it's most important to pander [to]: homosexuals or Muslims." The editorial also put the word "marriage" in scare quotes when discussing gay marriage. From the Washington Times:
"Human rights are gay rights," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clintonsaid recently, "and gay rights are human rights, once and for all." That's a touchy-feely liberal talking point, but don't tell it to the Muslims. Eventually, the Obama administration might have to decide to which radical group it's most important to pander: homosexuals or Muslims. There is some friction between these two Obama constituencies.
So, despite widespread opposition to homosexual "marriage" here at home, the U.S. government is pressuring foreign governments to offically recognize homosexual unions abroad. The main pushback is coming from the Muslim world, where "alternative lifestyle" is just another way of saying blasphemy.
On the June 22 broadcast of ABC's The View, co-host Sherri Shepherd and guest-host D.L. Hughley advanced what the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) has called "dangerous myths about African American gay and bisexual men." As GLAAD noted following the broadcast:
While discussing the FDA's ban that prevents gay and bisexual men from donating blood, Shepherd and Hughley communicated misinformation about the causes of increased HIV rates among African American women and used the phrase "down low" to describe men who have sex with men but publicly identify as heterosexual.
Here are excerpts from a transcript of the segment:Hughley: When you look at the prevalence of HIV in the African American Community, it's primarily young women who are getting it from men who are on the down low. That's the thing.
Shepherd: The down low is black men who've been going out. They are having sex with men and they're not telling their girlfriends or their wives that they're gay and their husbands, as well. And it's very prevalent with African American women because they come home and have sex with their wives or their girlfriends. And they're not telling them that they're gay.
Shepherd: It's so big in the Black community with women because they're having unprotected sex with men who have been having sex with... with men.
As GLAAD points out, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has "debunked the dangerous myth." Noting that "Dr. Kevin Fenton, director of the [CDC]'s National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention talked about his research to NNPA News in October 2009. Fenton said that the CDC 'has looked to see what proportion of [HIV] infections is coming from male partners who are bisexual and found there are actually relatively few,' and goes on to attribute most infections to other factors."
Thus far, GLAAD has been unsuccessful in its efforts to get a retraction from The View which led to the organiztion partnering with the Black AIDS Institute and the National Black Justice Coalition (NBJC) to run a full-page ad in Variety this week:
The ad reads in part, "On June 22, ABC's The View aired inaccurate information about HIV, blaming African American gay and bisexual men for increased HIV rates among straight African American women. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has publicly disproven this myth. And since June 22, thousands of people have written to ABC, asking that The View Provide correct information to viewers. Unfortunately, those requests have been greeted with silence from both ABC and The View."
On Tuesday, I noted that NBC's Today show was wrongly citing New York law in excluding same-sex couples from its "Modern Day Wedding Contest."
STATEMENT FROM NBC NEWS' 'TODAY' SHOW
Over the past few days TODAY has received a considerable response regarding our wedding contest application. The rules stated that eligible couples must be able to be legally married in New York, where we will host the wedding, therefore excluding same-sex couple applicants. Our intent was not to be discriminatory or exclusive. In 2005 when the wedding took place outside of New York, the application process was open to same-sex couples. We have listened to every voicemail and read every email. We take this feedback seriously, and we will change our application process. TODAY is a longtime supporter of the LGBT community, and GLAAD considers us an ally. We are committed to keeping those relationships strong and positive. We have opened up the application process to same-sex couples, and will extend the deadline to Monday, July 12. Moving forward, we ensure that our future wedding contests will be inclusive of all couples.
In a July 7 Washington Times op-ed, Robert Knight of Coral Ridge Ministries launched an all-out homophobic attack and fearmongered about the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Knight's homophobic rant is just the latest example of The Washington Times' long history of publishing anti-gay rhetoric and smears.
From Knight's Washington Times op-ed:
Speaking of Mr. Lieberman, can we finally ask some prominent conservatives to quit holding this man up as a great statesman simply because he supports the war on terrorism? Mr. Lieberman has sponsored or supported the hate-crimes law, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), "Cap-and-Tax," the gaying of the military, the stimulus boondoggle and last but not least, socialist ObamaCare.
On the gays in the military issue, the left is deploying its favorite weapon - implying inevitability. That's the tactic that scares wobbly Republicans who fear they'll be "on the wrong side of history." They won't, if they stick to respecting the military and upholding our God-given, transcendent moral order. They need to see through the liberals' theft of the moral capital of the black civil rights movement. Is being black really the same as Fred sizing up Larry for "the crime against nature"?
Besides, whatever your position is on homosexual activism, this is first and foremost about ensuring maximum efficiency and combat readiness of our armed forces. It's about giving our servicemen and women the best chance at victory and coming home alive. Injecting homosexuality into the barracks, showers, submarines and "diversity" training cannot possibly improve combat readiness or morale.
Forcing open homosexuality on the armed forces would destroy the volunteer military and bring back the compulsory draft. Since women are now deployed close to combat, and the only legal reason they are not eligible is their combat exemption, a new draft could include our daughters. And some would face pressure to have on-base abortions in order to complete their tours of duty.
Chaplains would be the first victims of Mr. Obama's homosexualization of the military, followed by anyone who violated "zero tolerance" policies for homosexual acceptance. Bible-believing Christians would quickly find themselves unwelcome in Barney Frank's new pansexual, cross-dressing military.
Other fallout includes family housing, reduction in retention, recruitment and unit cohesion, an increase in homosexual sexual assaults and a boost to overturning the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
The military is a bastion of traditional values and symbolizes America's strength and independence. Opening the ranks to open homosexuality will accomplish the left's dream - undermining the military and transforming it into a wrecking ball against Judeo-Christian morality.
Perhaps it was the July 4th holiday but Fox Nation has finally gotten around to advancing the disgustingly homophobic Drudge Report post that Media Matters' Ben Dimiero wrote about last week:
Proving yet again that his commitment to breaking "news" that appeals to the conservative noise machine trumps any commitment to facts and reality, Matt Drudge is currently hosting the following link on his website:
The article he links to makes no mention of gay employees being paid "more than" straight employees. What it does indicate is that Google will be adjusting the paychecks for its same-sex couples in order to cover a "disparity" in federal taxes on domestic partner benefits.
True to form, Fox Nation just can't miss an opportunity to pass along homophobic misinformation from the conservative noise machine. The right-wing website now has a link hyping Drudge's spin of the story on its main page and has also posted a link on its Twitter profile
From the Fox Nation website:
From the Fox Nation Twitter feed:
It's just further proof of Fox News' love/hate relationship with LGBT people.
Once again, NBC is holding a wedding contest in which the winning couple will be awarded a wedding aired live on the network's highly-rated Today morning show and an all-expense paid honeymoon.
Unfortunately, Today's "Modern Day Wedding Contest" isn't open to same-sex couples.
In a statement from NBC given to the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), the network said:
For the TODAY show wedding, the couple must be able to be legally married in New York, which is where the wedding will take place.
But, as GLAAD noted in response:
This is not a valid argument since New York State legally recognizes same-sex marriages licensed in other states. Same-sex couples can now legally obtain marriage licenses in Iowa, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Washington D.C. NBC is mistakenly equating the marriage license with the wedding celebration. Same-sex weddings are entirely legal in New York State. As long as the marriage license is conferred upon the same-sex couple by another state, New York State recognizes the marriage as a fully valid and legal one. NBC's exclusion of same-sex couples from its contest is not motivated by the law, but bias against these couples.
The Today Show is awarding a wedding celebration, not a marriage license. If a same-sex couple won the contest, producers and the winning couple could easily work together to ensure that the couple properly obtained and complied with the requirements of a marriage license in one of the license-conferring jurisdictions. The full wedding celebration would then take place on the Today Show. Given these legal realities, GLAAD has urged NBC to amend its contest rules and allow same-sex couples to apply.
With only days left until applications must be submitted (deadline is Friday, July 9), GLAAD is calling on those concerned with NBC's actions to contact the network and ask that it open the competition up to same-sex couples.
In 2000, an online movement of activists concerned with Dr. (Ph.D. in physiology not psychiatry) Laura Schlessinger's homophobic commentary organized an effort to get the controversial radio host's newly minted daytime television talk show pulled from the airwaves. According to StopDrLaura.com:
Over a ten-month period starting on March 1, 2000, this Web site galvanized thousands of activists across the US, Canada and beyond into an online juggernaut that forced Dr. Laura Schlessinger off television. In that short time, the pro-bono StopDrLaura.com registered over 50 million hits and 3 million visitors, while over 170 advertisers abandoned Dr. Laura's television show in the US and Canada, leading many to call the StopDrLaura.com campaign the first successful TV boycott in history (and winning it the Internet's prestigious "Golden Dot" award from George Washington University). Dr. Laura's TV show was finally canceled on March 30, 2001.
As Joe Strupp noted yesterday, Fox News host and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee " is getting a shot at broadcast television with a talk show on some Fox affiliates."
The Times reports: "'The Huckabee Show,' ... will have a preview run on weekdays for six weeks on some of the stations owned by the Fox Television Stations group, including WNYW in New York, KDFW in Dallas/Fort Worth, and WAGA in Atlanta. The preview, by the syndication unit of News Corporation, Twentieth Television, will begin on Monday, July 26."
Like Schlessinger, Huckabee is a regular offender when it comes to homophobic commentary. Just days ago Huckabee admitted he's opposed to gay marriage, in part, because of the "ick factor."
It remains to be seen whether grassroots activists will take to the internet as they did with Schlessinger to force The Huchabee Show's cancelation.
Here's just a sampling of Huckabee's most recent anti-gay commentary:
You can find more about Huckabee's record when it comes to LGBT issues, including his 1992 support for isolating people with HIV/AIDS away from the general population, right here.
From the June 30 edition of Talk Radio Network's The Savage Nation:
Loading the player reg...
About a year ago, I wrote about the media's skittishness to report on the hypocrisy of right-wing anti-gay leaders/politicians who live secret gay lives:
In early May, National Public Radio, a supposed bastion of liberal media bias, found itself in the crosshairs of the lesbian and gay community over an online review of Outrage, a documentary chronicling the hypocrisy of prominent, purportedly closeted politicians with staunchly anti-gay voting records.
What sparked the controversy was not the documentary itself, but the fact that NPR's review failed to name names. In fact, while Nathan Lee, the review's initial author, had included the identities of those fingered in the film, NPR editors took it upon themselves to censor the review prior to publication.
Would a review of a film exposing the hypocrisy of politicians on any other subject fail to identify the politicians in question? Not likely.
Sadly, it looks as though the same deferential treatment given to hypocritical closeted gay politicians by the media is at play with a recently outed anti-gay minister.
The story once again centers on whether or not he should have been outed at all and the way in which he was outed, rather than on his hypocritical anti-gay political agenda or the large number of cases we've seen play out like this with anti-gay leaders.
Check out this piece from Elizabeth Jensen from the New York Times Media Decoder blog:
The reaction was swift when Lavender Magazine, a biweekly for Minneapolis's gay and lesbian community, reported in its current issue that an outspokenly anti-homosexual local pastor attended a support group for people who want to remain chaste despite same-sex attraction.
The pastor, Tom Brock, was put on leave from North Minneapolis' Hope Lutheran, pending an investigation. The magazine, meanwhile is embroiled in a journalism ethics debate for sending its reporter undercover into the confidential support group.
Many Lavender Web site commentators applauded the story. But among the critics was an unidentified advertiser who wrote she would pull her ads, because "12 step programs, regardless of what is at issue or who attends, are sacred." National Lesbian & Gay Journalists Association board member Michael R. Triplett blogged that the ethics of the reporting were "suspect."
In a particularly controversial YouTube video, since pulled, Mr. Brock, Hope Lutheran's senior pastor and a cable and radio commentator, suggested that a 2009 Minneapolis tornado was a sign of God's displeasure because it struck as a Lutheran Church body was voting to approve the ordination of practicing homosexuals in committed relationships.
After getting the tip, Mr. Rocheford said that Lavender for seven months "worked on this step by legal step," eventually sending freelance reporter John Townsend undercover. "Reporters do that all the time," he said. "He didn't do anything unethical." He added: "I consulted with our libel attorney and because this man is a public figure it's a legitimate news story."
Mr. Rocheford said the magazine, with about 130,000 readers, has a policy against "outing" homosexuals. "One exception to the rule is a public figure who makes public pronouncements against the gay community and is in fact a homosexual," he said, noting that this is the only time he invoked that exception.
Reporters do stories on hypocrites all the time. Politicians. Business leaders. Community leaders. You name it. It seems the only issue that sparks concern is when the subjects at hand are closeted, anti-gay leaders who are outed.
As for the "12 step" issue here, I have to side with Rocheford:
[Rocheford] said he debated whether to use information from the support group, but decided that "I don't consider it a legitimate 12-step group. Those are there to help people with addictions and since when is homosexuality an addiction?"
The story, he added, "was legitimate, it was legal, and we did it punctiliously with ethical and legal considerations."
Last night CNN aired its latest …In America special titled "Gary and Tony Have a Baby" which the cable networked described as, "Soledad O'Brien [reporting] on a gay couple's journey to have a baby. Can these men achieve a life as mainstream as their parents?"
From the June 25 edition of Clear Channel's The War Room with Quinn and Rose:
Loading the player reg...
It was only a matter of time.
Fox Nation has linked to World Net Daily's "exclusive" story titled "'Homo Depot'? Chain hosts kiddie crafts at 'gay' fests," which I posted about earlier this afternoon.
The despicable premise of the story is that Home Depot is somehow helping to recruit kids for the "homosexual lifestyle" with it's "children's craft workshops" at various LGBT pride events this summer. As I said in the post from earlier today:
I hate to break it to Schilling and the [American Family Association], but LGBT people do have children. The notion that such activities at LGBT Pride functions might be an effort to "introduce children to the homosexual lifestyle" is vile bigotry intended to perpetuate the bogus myth that LGBT people are recruited into some sort of cult hell bent on advancing "the gay agenda."
By offering a link and write-up of WND's latest homophobic screed, Fox Nation is promoting an organization -- the AFA -- that thinks too many Indian-Americans are winning spelling bees and that gay sex is tantamount to domestic terrorism.
That ultimately is what's truly sad about News Corp.'s [Fox News' parent company] relationship with its LGBT "friends." The media company gives its employees decent protections and benefits while making the lives of the very same employees more difficult in the long-run by broadcasting homophobia and misinformation that harden anti-LGBT views and slow the movement for full equality under the law.
Under a headline reading "'Homo Depot'? Chain hosts kiddie crafts at 'gay' fests," World Net Daily today trumpeted criticism by a far-right fringe group over Home Depot's support of LGBT families.
You can't make this stuff up.
WND's Chelsea Schilling -- who has a history of attacking the LGBT community -- filed an "exclusive" report yesterday promoting homophobic attacks by the radical American Family Association:
Is Home Depot seeking to introduce children to the homosexual lifestyle?
The home-improvement giant has sponsored yet another "gay" pride event and provided children's craft workshops "in the midst of loud and boisterous gay activities" at the 2010 Southern Maine Pride Festival in Portland, Maine, according to the American Family Association.
"The worst offense is that Home Depot has set up kids' workshops at these gay pride festivals," explains AFA's director of special projects. "These are events that have loud, boisterous homosexual activists making their voices heard – and Home Depot is putting money behind setting up kids' booths at these kinds of events."
In a form letter to Home Depot, AFA tells the company its inclusion of children's activities at homosexual events is "irresponsible" and encourages children's attendance.
AFA spokesman Randy Sharp told One News Now, "You know, it's very simple. Home Depot should be like a lot of Fortune 500 companies and simply remain neutral in the culture war – don't give money, don't give vehicles, don't lend employee support to homosexual activities on Main Street USA."
I hate to break it to Schilling and the AFA, but LGBT people do have children. The notion that such activities at LGBT Pride functions might be an effort to "introduce children to the homosexual lifestyle" is vile bigotry intended to perpetuate the bogus myth that LGBT people are recruited into some sort of cult hell bent on advancing "the gay agenda."
So, what exactly is the AFA? It certainly sounds wholesome, but a review of its past comments tells an entirely different story. Political Correction -- Media Matters' partner organization -- offers some enlightening context:
Yep, you read that correctly. WND quotes an organization that thinks too many Indian-Americans are winning spelling bees and that gay sex is tantamount to domestic terrorism.
Of course, WND has a long history of promoting homophobia and misinformation on issues concerning the LGBT community so perhaps this was to be expected. Lest we forget, WND's Molotov Mitchell endorsed a proposed Uganda law that would permit the death penalty for homosexuality.