Florida Agenda

By Marc Paige

When Mitt Romney selected a gay man, Richard Grenell, as his Foreign Policy and National Security Spokesman, the Log Cabin Republicans, GOProud, and LGBT conservatives everywhere hailed this appointment as proof that Romney, in his heart, was a fair man who will do right by the gay community.

But it took only ten days for Grenell to be gone, and Romney’s anti-gay bona fides to be stronger than ever. Grenell’s decision to leave the Romney presidential campaign came after a busy week of foreign policy news. While Grenell was allowed to listen in on a key press call on foreign policy, the New York Times reported that he was neither introduced at the beginning of the call, nor allowed to speak during the conversation.

Apparently, this humiliation was too much for Grenell, appointed to a position where relationships with reporters are vital to success. Grenell’s letter of resignation thanked Romney “for his belief in me and my abilities and his clear message to me that being openly gay was a non-issue for him and his team,” and placed the blame for his departure on “the hyper-partisan discussion of personal issues.

Furious voices on the right came fast to condemn Romney when he initially selected Grenell, the loudest being Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association. After Fischer took credit for Grenell’s resignation, his directive to Romney going forward was unequivocal: “I will flat-out guarantee you Romney is not going to make this mistake again. There is no way in the world that Mitt Romney is going to put a homosexual activist in any position of importance in his campaign.” At no point during the Grenell affair did Romney publicly speak out against the ugly voices of bigotry coming from the right. That would have taken conviction and leadership.

In his statement of regret over Grenell’s resignation, Romney’s language contained a dog whistle to the right to reassure them that he remains one of them: “We select people not based upon their ethnicity or their ‘sexual preference’…” (to be read as a choice and changeable), avoiding the accurate “sexual orientation” (derided by the right for its intrinsic and unchangeable connotation). What does all this mean for the November election? LGBT voters are a small constituency, representing perhaps five percent of the voting population.

But a growing number of young heterosexuals see LGBT equality as the civil rights issue of our time. The Grenell debacle has reminded young voters, as well as those with gay loved ones, that a Romney presidency, ruled by the right, will reverse the forward trajectory of LGBT equality in America. After his victory, an emboldened Bryan Fischer told The Nation magazine that candidate Romney must commit to other anti-gay measures, including vetoing the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) if it reaches his desk.

During his failed U.S. Senate run in 1994, Romney made a commitment to Massachusetts’ Log Cabin Republicans to co-sponsor ENDA at the federal level. But in 2007 Romney told Tim Russert on “Meet The Press” that he would not support ENDA at the federal level.

When Russert challenged this about face, Romney was unfazed: “Oh, Tim, if you’re looking to someone who’s never changed any positions on any policies, then I’m not your guy.” Now there’s a solid Romney conviction.

by Marc Paige

When a gay Republican tries to persuade LGBT people to support an anti-gay GOP candidate, the argument is always the same. First, they tell us the candidate is not really that bad on gay issues. Then, when confronted with the candidate’s blatant and incontrovertible homophobia, they have two defensive retorts: 1) Democrats have a history of being just as homophobic; 2) They are not single issue voters.

Nick Stone, Vice President of the Broward County Young Republicans, recently wrote in the Florida Agenda (Jan. 26, 2012: “The Big Tent GOP”) that LGBT people should be supporting Mitt Romney for president because, “If you believe in equality under the law, a Mormon Republican is our best bet for president in 2012.” That line could have worked if gay people didn’t read newspapers, or never heard Romney speak on TV. Unfortunately for Mr. Stone, we’ve done both.

In an August 25, 2005, appearance on MSNBC’s Hardball with Chris Matthews, then-Gov. Romney explained his Massachusetts strategy to undermine marriage equality and civil unions: “So we will have a constitutional convention this year. Hopefully, the decision of our legislature will be to let the people decide. And, specifically, I hope that people will be able to decide that neither civil union, nor same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts.”

Romney reiterated his views on another Hardball appearance on April 12, 2006: “I am not in favor of same- sex marriage. I am not in favor of civil unions. The Democratic Party, particularly in my state, has made an error by adopting a platform that supports gay marriage.”

At the televised Fox News Iowa debate this past August, Romney called for discrimination to be inscribed in our nation’s constitution: “I believe we should have a federal amendment in the constitution that defines marriage as a relationship between a man and woman, because I believe the ideal place to raise a child is in a home with a mom and a dad.”
Last month Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom assured the “Huffington Post” that Mitt is also firmly against gay couples having the equivalent rights of marriage, even by another name: “He has not been in favor of civil unions, if by civil unions you mean the equivalency to marriage but without the name marriage. What he has favored was a form of domestic partnership or a contractual relationship with
reciprocal benefits.”

The “reciprocal benefits” language is taken almost directly from the anti-gay Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI). The MFI website supports a “new category of contractual relationships entitled ‘reciprocal beneficiary contracts’ to define basic benefits.” Romney and his friends at MFI are willing to allow gay couples, who have built their lives together, to form contracts for hospital visitations. Gee, thanks Mitt!

In 2006 Romney donated $10,000 to MFI, which also promotes “ex-gay therapy.” Its website states: “Our compassion is for those struggling with same-sex attraction and we encourage the healing of individuals who wish to change their choice of lifestyle.”

If Mitt Romney had his way, the armed forces would still be discharging gay soldiers, or forcing them to hide in the closet. Thanks to President Obama and the Democratic congressional majority in 2010, the military’s discriminatory policy is as dead as Osama bin Laden, while General Motors and Detroit’s auto industry remains very much alive.

I do agree with one point in Mr. Stone’s article: it is “simply untrue” that the GOP doesn’t want our votes. Republicans would like nothing more than to peel off enough gay votes to help propel their conservative agenda to victory. GOP operatives are happy to get as many LGBT voters as possible to vote against their own interests.

Mr. Stone ends his piece by writing that Romney will bring gays “real progress,” while Obama “takes our vote for granted.” Stone’s assessment is only accurate if “real progress” means closing the door forever on gay couples and families getting full federal rights, and “taking our votes for granted” means signing hate crimes legislation inclusive of sexual orientation and gender identity, ending DADT, and refusing to defend in federal court the anti-gay Defense of Marriage Act.

On a Jan. 25 town hall conference call sponsored by Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition, Mitt Romney blasted President Obama for his “assault on marriage.” He pledged to “propose and promote” a marriage amendment to the constitution, and unlike Obama, “defend the Defense of Marriage Act.” While there is a small but growing number of Republican politicians who are turning away from their party’s history of anti-gay bigotry, Mitt Romney is definitely not one of them.

I’m not sure if Nick Stone is delusional, or he just thinks it’s acceptable for gays to be second-class citizens. Mitt Romney’s homophobia is real and tangible. He must not be allowed
his agenda of inscribing discrimination into our constitution, and taking us backwards.

Our nation’s Declaration of Independence declares “all men are created equal.” Gov. Romney doesn’t get that America’s promise is that all of us have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Luckily, President Obama does.

By Marc Paige

For those who believe the national Republican Party is progressing on LGBT issues, think again. With the rise of the Tea Party, the GOP has never been more homophobic. While gay Democrats and progressive allies have pushed the Democratic Party closer to embracing full equality, gay Republicans from Log Cabin and GOProud continue failing to bring their party into the twenty-first century.

Since conservative Republicans took control of the House of Representatives after the elections in 2010, they have focused not on jobs and the economy, but on their old standbys, God, guns, and gays. When President Obama declared that his administration would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court, the “deficit-obsessed” Republicans in Congress tripled the salary cap for lawyers to defend DOMA, from $500,000 to $1.5 million.

As House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi leads 130 members of her Democratic caucus in filing a friend-of-the-court brief challenging Republican determination to maintain the federal ban on marriage equality, House Republicans continue developing other ways to energize their base by attacking the LGBT community.

The Obama administration’s Depart-ment of Defense has authorized that military facilities be made available for private functions and ceremonies “on a sexual-orientation neutral basis.” So the House Armed Services Committee has passed an amendment forbidding U.S. military bases to be used to solemnize same-sex unions, and prohibiting military chaplains on base from performing these unions. All 35 Republican committee members supported the amendment; 23 of 26 Democrats were against it.

Eighty-six House Republicans have sent a letter urging the Senate leadership to pass similar legislation, declaring, “The use of federal property or federal employees to perform anything but opposite-sex ceremonies is a clear contravention of the law,” meaning DOMA. One of the signatories of this letter was Florida’s anti-gay Representative from District 22, Allen West.

In the Senate where the Democrats still hold a slim majority, the Judiciary Committee on November 10 voted to recommend passage of a bill to nullify DOMA. The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal DOMA, and offer federal benefits to same-sex couples married in states that recognize their relationships. It was passed on a straight party line vote: every Democrat voted in favor; every Republican opposed.

Reactions from two politicians over this Senate committee vote highlights the partisan divide on gay issues. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Democrat from New York, described her support for The Respect for Marriage Act this way: “Every loving, committed couple deserve the basic human right to get married, start a family, and have access to all the same rights and privileges that my husband and I enjoy.” In contrast, Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley showed his complete disdain for gay families by maintaining that marriage should be limited to heterosexuals to “foster unions that can result in procreation, create incentives for husbands and wives to support each other and their children,” and to promote “stable families, good environments for raising children, and religious beliefs.”

The Respect for Marriage Act has 31 co-sponsors in the Senate who are all Democrats, and 133 co-sponsors in the House, 132 Democrats plus one Republican, Florida’s Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. There is zero chance for this bill to become law while Republicans maintain control of the House.

Gay Republicans are quick to point out that the two most notoriously anti-gay pieces of legislation, the now repealed DADT, and DOMA, were signed into law by Bill Clinton, a Democratic president. But since the 1990s, the national Democratic Party has moved closer to the American ideal of equality for all; the Republican Party, not so much.

Republican presidential candidates Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Rick Perry, and Mitt Romney have all signed an anti-marriage equality pledge from the National Organization for Marriage. According to Brian Brown, president of NOM, “Gay marriage is going to be a bigger issue in 2012 than it was 2008, because the difference between the GOP nominee and President Obama is going to be large and clear.”

Brown is correct in noting the stark difference between the candidates on marriage equality. While President Obama has yet to embrace full marriage equality for gays, he supports federal recognition and all federal rights for gay couples, and opposes changing the U.S. Constitution to ban marriage equality. Mitt Romney, the likely Republican nominee, has pledged to support amending the Constitution to ban gay marriage, and to nominate Supreme Court justices, federal judges, and an attorney general committed to “rejecting the idea our Founding Fathers inserted a right to gay marriage into our Constitution.”

In his November 6 column, Miami Herald writer Leonard Pitts spoke to right wing incredulousness over the Democratic Party’s hegemony with black voters: “So why don’t blacks vote Republican? The answer is simple. Black people are not crazy. Being not crazy, they understand a simple truth about conservatives: They have never stood with, or up for, black people. Never.”

In the last ten years, the gay community has seen progress on LGBT issues at the federal level and in many states, when the Democrats hold the reigns of power. But too often we’ve seen our rights stagnate or even reversed when Republicans are in charge. One day, when the national Republican Party ends their war on LGBT people, the GOP will earn our voting consideration.

Until then, gays will also be “not crazy.”

Marc Paige is a writer, LGBT activist, and an AIDS prevention educator who is based in Fort Lauderdale. He can be reached at marcpaige@msn.com

ELECTION DEBATE CONTINUES …

While Matthew Tsien and Peter Ryskewecz have every right to place an ad in this newspaper urging Floridians to “Dare To Be Different” and vote Republican on November 2, given the slate of Republican candidates in this election cycle, a more apt title for this ad directed to gay people or anyone concerned with human rights might be “Dare To Be Stupid.”

Marco Rubio never saw a gay issue he supported. Rick Scott thinks gays should be banned from adopting, AND foster parenting.

The Democratic candidate for Attorney General, Dan Gelber, would accept the court ruling ending the Florida gay adoption ban. Republican Pam Bondi said she would appeal it to the Florida Supreme Court.

Democratic Congressman Ron Klein voted to end the military ban on out gays. Republican Allen West doesn’t think gays belong in the military at all, closeted or otherwise.

For most self-respecting gay men and women, LGBT rights are not the only issue we vote on, but they ARE a part of the mix. Messrs. Tsien and Ryskewecz fail to understand this.

MARC PAIGE

It is assumed that all Gays are Democrat voters except for a very few who are super rich. I am neither; but I am a Gay Republican business woman who recognizes that finally a greater number of gays and lesbians know that the GLBT political class and the Obama Democrats will say anything to scare us into the voter’s booth determined that we pull the Democrat lever.

“No funding for AIDS!” “No marriage equality!” “Rampant homophobia…”… goes the mantra. But most of it is a big lie and just because I am a lesbian does not mean I have to live a life of relentless left-wing lies. AIDS funding does not disappear with GOP majorities, and at least half of Republicans believe in civil unions. In fact, the lead attorney in overturning California’s Proposition 8 to ban same-sex marriage is also an out-spoken movement conservative.

We need a dramatic reduction in the federal government. The Post Office is technologically obsolete. The Commerce Department and Small Business Administration create neither jobs nor business; they are merely edifices of pretentiousness. The Health and Human Services Department is already duplicated at the state and local level. The Department of Education in Washington, D.C. has no student contact while its only real interest is in keeping inferior performing teachers employed in order to get their union dues, which are aimed at running class warfare ads during campaign time.

I want a country that is driven by ethical, democratic capitalism and puts people back to work. Our federal and state governments are out of control and run by greedy public-sector employee unions. Our government has tens of billions of dollars of unfunded pension obligations for which we, the taxpayer are liable. The career politicians have bankrupt Social Security and Medicare to the point where the government is the equivalent to 200 Enrons.

When all the votes are counted, we are going to find out that a lot of Gays and Lesbians became politically mature, wised up and voted Republican.

– D. A. ROBERTSON

To read the diatribe of “former Democrat”, you might believe that the economic history of the U.S. extends back only to January 20, 2009 (the day that President Obama was inaugurated.)

The fact is (Glen Beck notwithstanding) that the U.S. economy was under the policies and oversight of Republican Congressional control from 1995 to 2009, and the Presidency also was controlled by Republicans from 2001 to 2009.

Federal taxes are now the same rates as during the Bush years. And, deficits? Despite the fact of a budget surplus at the end of the Clinton presidency, and at least six Bush years of (artificially) booming economy, the Republican Congress and President always turned in annual deficits of several hundred $$Billion…and that was in good economic times!

Bailouts? Those were largely initiated by Bush, and his Goldman Sachs Treasury Secretary Henry Paulsen, to the tune of $700 Billion…all cheerfully funded and added to the deficit (lent back to us!) by the heirs of Mao Tse Tung of modern day China! (Take a look in the mirror, next time you shop at Wal-Mart, if you are looking for someone to blame for 10% unemployment in the U.S.! Try to find something at Wal-Mart that is not made in China!)

The shameful $150 Billion dollar bailout of AIG, by President Bush, ended up largely in the pockets of fat cat hedge funds and banks, and Wall Streeters, as payouts, after AIG stupidly “insured” the value of junk bonds, (which were magically rated AAA by Moody’s et al.) Our Bush-era economic system was raped and pillaged over and over, without a single kiss…no flowers…and obviously no respect the next day…since the same cast of characters wants yet another chance to stick it to us.

Mr. Former Democrat is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts. A huge herd of elephants roamed this country for most of the past ten years, and left massive dung piles everywhere. And, who is left to clean up the mess, and who is to be blamed for the lingering stench? Mr. Former has invented his own facts on that.

– FRED REISSNER