Pelosi Can't Clean David Corn's Swamp

While Nutsy Pelosi is going on about clearing up some imaginary GOP swamp, the evidently immoral David Corn continues to play coy as he shills for the Stalinist Left. Corn's post is more likely intended to give his Gay Liberal friends plausible deniability if and when they get around to leaking the list. I suspect any reputable media outlet would turn them down. But Corn seems happy to do the dirty work and that makes him no better than them.

Copies of The List (see below) have been sent by gay politicos to a variety of social conservative groups that look to the Republican Party to make their religious right dreams come true. The recipients include the Christian Coalition, Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, the Alliance for Marriage, Concerned Women of America, the Eagle Forum, and the Southern Baptist Convention. Officials at most of these groups have had something to say about homosexuality and gay rights in the wake of the Mark Foley scandal.

What's the point? The senders--gay people of a non-Republican bent--seem to be hoping to set off a civil war within the GOP, to turn the anti-gay social cons against the GOP's Velvet Mafia. These Washington gays have been seething for years about gay Republican staffers who serve a party that opposes gay rights and that welcomes the support of people who demonize or dehumanize gays and lesbians. "Maybe now the social conservatives will realize one reason why their agenda is stalled on Capitol Hill," says a gay politico. Another says, "The inherent inconsistency of a coalition that shelters both gay loathing 'Christian' conservatives and conservative gays will soon suffer its final rupture."

Will it? We shall see, as the Foley scandal continues to unfold, and The List continues to circulate.

Comments

[DR]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA YOU RETHUGS ARE SO FUCKED HAHAHAHAH!

[bill]

Like with the KKK of old, the Democrats take off the mask. They just can't help themselves, reverting to old tricks when they loose everything else.

We'll see how intolerant donks really are in the coming days.

[DR]

I have the list. It's pretty damning. I'm considering emailing it to Messrs. Boehner, Hastert and Blunt, but I'm sure it's already made its way over to them. You guys are going to have a literal civil war over this.

[Emily]

DR - I take it that you are a gay-bashing liberal? Wow, how bigoted of you! Luckily for us Republicans, you don't have a say in our party politics. I'm off to write notes to my senators and congressmen telling them I'm happy to vote for them no matter how flaming they are as long as their politics are good for America.

[DR]

I'm a conservative, not a liberal. I don't care if a guy wants to marry a guy. I do care if there are those types of people trying to keep others like them from doing so.

[Kevin]

Does anyone on the right even care if a person is gay or not, assuming they don't try to get any special rights passed on gay people's behalf? If so, I haven't met them.

[DR]

We'll find out come election time, won't we? >:-)

[Kevin]

How? You're not suggesting Republicans losing the election means Conservatives hate gay people, are you?

[DR]

I'm saying the GOP's base -- an uninformed group of rednecks who stridently believe homosexauls are deviants -- will stay home if it is found that there is a group of homosexuals infiltrating the Republican party.

[j.pickens]

No, we already know what will happen come election day. It's you who will be left bewildered when the GOP maintains control.

[DR]

I would be concerned if the GOP does maintain control, and would regard it as election-tampering. By the way, I'm an election judge in a major county and have some deep suspicions about the electronic voting hardware. That's probably not a good thing, eh? :(

[kate]

most of the american public prefers civil union over gay marriage, republican and democrat alike. to say the base of the republican party are rednecks is an unfortunate mistake for the democrats to continue to assume. just because some feel gay marriage is wrong and that marriage should be between a man and a woman , does not make them a homophobe, redneck, or stupid. it's 2006, what family doesn't have a gay cousin, uncle, co-worker or whatever that they care about or perhaps admire their work etc. while they may not agree with gay marriage, it doesn't mean they don't have compassion for that person. that's where the left gets it wrong, that's what they fail to understand or choose to ignore. who's playing with a person's sexual preference here? who's the pawn? who's the homophobe? i'd say the left are the hypocrites just like they are with every other minority group. oh, and then there's the large group of fiscal conservatives who don't give a rat's ass what one does with their personal life. and independents, like myself, who only care about lower taxes and fighting terrorists. life and political leanings aren't always so easy to decipher especially when one is filled with propoganda, hate, and a case of the stupids.

[B Moe]

"I'm a conservative, not a liberal."

"I'm an election judge in a major county and have some deep suspicions about the electronic voting hardware."

You still married to Morgan Fairchild, DR?

[Drumwaster]

"I would be concerned if the GOP does maintain control, and would regard it as election-tampering."

So the GOP either loses, or they cheated, right? There's no possible way that the GOP could hold the seats just because real Republicans don't give a shit about the person, just the politics, and that any seat they happen to win is because someone cheated, right?

Funny how that is the only defense you can come up with, innit? Never, "Wow, maybe we should take a look at how the People see the sham policies we pretend to have and see how dangerous it would be having a Dem in control during wartime", but "they must have STOLEN THE ELECTION!!" And you wonder why you have lost every election since 1998...

"I'm a conservative, not a liberal."

O RLY?

Oh, wait, I should have guessed. With opening statements like "AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA YOU RETHUGS ARE SO FUCKED HAHAHAHAH!", it should have been immediately obvious. After all, I hear "Rethugs" from the local Conservative Caucus all the time.

Except, y'know, NOT. The only place you see that word is from those who claim that the sex life of an elected politician isn't anyone's business. But only as long as he's got a 'D' after his name.

Hypocrites and morons, every one of you....

[stace]

This DR guy may be the same "conservative" who's visited some other right-of-center sites, like this one

http://www.indepundit.com/archive2/2006/09/goodnight_ladie.html

and Ace.

He shows a different email, but if it's the same guy, he's a member of Code Pink. Going on a limb here, but I don't think many conservatives belong to Code Pink.

[Steve]

David Corn's type of "progressive" doesn't tolerate gay citizens unless they vote for Democrats.

But, if you're a successful, America-loving Gay person, it's open-season on you now. So, don't even think about running for public office!

Corn needs a blog-swirly, and the Blogosphere should give it to him.
-Steve

[DR]

My association with Code Pink does not mean I'm not conservative. It just means I'm anti-war and pro-troop.

[Drumwaster]

"It just means I'm anti-war and pro-troop."

Translation: "I haven't worked up the nerve to call them 'baby-killer' to their faces yet."

In case the irony of your statement hasn't hit home, that's a bit like saying "I'm anti-surgery, but pro-surgeon." The only morons who can say that with a straight face are those who have either not been willing to tell the truth, or has not been able. Well, that, and those who think that a military exists only to serve as a combination Peace Corps/social experimentation ground for their latest Self-Help Theory of the Week.

[DR]

Hmm, I wasn't aware one has to support the war to support our brave men and women doing their jobs. Color me surprised.

[qwfwq]

DR = Douchebage Republican

You can fuck off at any time, you Stalinist tool.

[Drumwaster]

"our brave men and women doing their jobs."

What "jobs" would that be? What "jobs" do the soldiers and sailors have, if not to fight wars? (Even in peacetime, they practice fighting wars, as you would know if you had bothered to think; which requires the generous assumption that you are even capable of that act.) Every job in the military exists for one thing, and one thing only: to kill people and break things as efficiently as possible. Even the REMFs do so by making it easier for the fighting men on the pointy end of the spear to accelerate entropy...

Just because Donks use them to build roads and schools doesn't change that fact. You could use a butter knife as an ersatz screwdriver or a rock as a hammer, too, but that doesn't mean that you can throw away your toolbox.

[Jason Coleman]

The left is foolish if they think their "outing" campaign is going to gain any traction or anything even resembling civil warfare within the party.

There are plenty of out and closeted gay republicans, most republicans simply do not care if someone is gay or straight. Most rebublicans care about someones political positions, personal morality and their stances on the issues.

Rather than see their mass outings produce outrage within the party, what they'll see from this campaign is alot of "So whats" and "Really, he's gay, wow, didn't know that. Hey, wait a minute libbie, what happened to your supposed stance on an individuals absolute right to privacy."

Rather than expose anything within the Republican party (other than personal sexual preferences of Republicans, which we view as immaterial) the left will only show in a brighter light their hypocrisy and vitriol.

So please, continue with the outing, continue to gay bash, lefties, the only thing you're really doing is galvanizing our base, driving many of your moderate Dems over to our side and exposing what's long been known within the Republican party, that we have gay members, and we respect their right to be gay/straight, out/closeted.

Just because someone is gay, doesn't mean they support everything the far left gay lobby throws out there. Most gay republicans don't care for gay marriage, yet support civil unions, because simply put, that's the right course.

In fact, most gay republicans in long term committed relationships have already figured out how simple it is to secure all of the benefits of marriage through the formation of LLC's (joint filing and insurance - the gay marriage liscense), powers of attorney and medical proxy.

Gay republicans in large part realize that marriage is a priviledge designed to promote childbirth and a stable homelife, they don't see cause to mess with that. If they want the benefits of the priviledge, they know how to get them and don't feel the need for the "look at me" "look at me"'s that homosexuals on the left constantly bleat on with.

Notice how the leftist homosexuals reject civil unions. Why is that? It's because for them it's not about the benefits of marriage, it's about damaging "breeders", and undermining marriage.

--Jason

[Jason Coleman]

Oh yeah, I also think it's interesting, that now that they see the wheels falling off the bus that held their original manufactured plan, that some are already starting the "election is stolen" mantra. Expect to see much more of this to come as we approach the election, then when there is retention, even gains, in the House and Senate, we'll have hanging chads, recouts and baseless accusations over and over and over again.

It's part of their playbook now. Call every lost election stolen.

--Jason

[DR]

You can bet we will raise a stink over any election results that do not have the Democrats trouncing the Rethugs.

[Jason Coleman]

If you think there's going to be a "trouncing" of the Republicans, you're in for a shock.

Here's a hint DR, when you use terms like Rethug, all you do is galvinize anyone who's ever voted Republican to vote Republican again. That was the major failing of the Democrats. When they started attacking the people who vote Republican, by calling them names and implying that they are stupid, ignorant, redneck, fundie, etc, you lost the chance to get their support.

Each time you roll out the McChimp-Halliburton labels you only show yourselves to be devoid of anything real to say. When you create false documents and push them off as real, you show yourselves devoid of anything real to say. When you start throwing the gay community under the bus for short term (days) gain, you show yourself devoid of anything real to say.

That's why you're losing elections, it's not because they are being stolen, it's because the Democrats have been driving Democrats away from the party. The staunches Republicans I know are former Democrats who left during the Clinton years. I was a Democrat driven away during the HW years. You had the majority once and you squandered it. The Democrats drove people away by becoming unhinged and focusing on special interests rather than the interest of the whole. The whole responded by moving away from you.

The media hype of Republican downfall is merely that, wishful hype that the media will get multi-million dollar stories. You think they are your allies, and individuals in the media may well be, but the media as a whole is not your ally and they are setting you up to make asses of yourselves again, crying for recounts, claiming fraud and more. The media will publish your claims and then when the investigations are complete, the fraud will be shown to be mostly on your side AGAIN.

Good luck, DR, you're going to need it, because Foley isn't delivering you the House or the Senate, the Democrats jumped the shark when they didn't accept the fall of the responsible party and tried to shift responsibility to someone else. When that didn't work, the Democrats are now trying to make this election about gayness.

Here's a clue. People will talk about gayness all day long, but when that curtain closes behind them, real issues take precedent, and the Democrats simply don't have anything useful to say on those issues.

--Jason

[Jason Coleman]

Point of clarification: The responsible party was Foley, and trying to shift blame to Hastert is where the Democrats went wrong. If they had kept the focus on Foley, the demonizations would have worked, by shifting the focus to Hastert and trotting out these ridiculous LISTS, you've only shown the whole event for the smoke and mirrors game it was. The republicans kicked Foley out within hours of the IM's becoming known, if the Dems would have kept focus on Foley, they could have gained ground, people see through transferrence and now the Dem opportunity is basically lost.

--Jason

[DR]

I don't understand why the poor/middle class vote for Rethugs. They're just voting against their own class interests.