Florida Agenda

Daniel Radcliffe of “Harry Potter” fame has a few things to say about what he says is mean-spiritedness demonstrated by the GOP candidates for president towards LGBT persons.

In an interview with Attitude magazine, the star of the new horror-chiller “The Woman in Black” said that religion has its place in the church house, not the state house.

“I’m not religious, I’m an atheist, and a militant atheist when religion starts impacting on legislation. We need sex education in schools. Schools have to talk to kids from a young age about relationships, gay and straight,” offered Radcliffe.

Radcliffe, 22, said in the interview that he is “disgusted, amazed, stunned” by Republicans Rick Santorum and an early failed-favorite of the Tea Party set,

MicheleBachmann. Neither enjoys the vitriol, though, that the Hogwarts alum reserves for the governor of Texas.

“They disgusted me less than candidates like Rick Perry, who made that ridiculous advert wearing the ‘Brokeback’ jacket, and I think pretends to be homophobic just to win votes,”  Radcliffe said he thinks President Barack Obama is the best choice for those who support marriage equality for all Americans. “I’d rather have someone like him in the White House than the alternative,” he said.

“Don’t define yourself by your sexuality; don’t define as straight or gay. Define yourself as people and help another person if they’re in trouble. The ultimate reason gay marriage should be legalized everywhere is because, as a kid, you look to your mum and dad and they’re married, then you look at the gay couple who’ve been together for the same amount of time, but because they can’t get married their relationship doesn’t seem the same. Yes, gay marriage is about symbolically blessing a relationship, but the larger issue is about transmitting a fundamental message about equality. Gay people should have equality in law everywhere. If you grow up as a young gay man knowing you don’t have the same opportunities as everyone else, you’re going to feel victimized and massive prejudice towards you.”

Radcliffe says he had considered his own sexual identity and finds he possess a heterosexual identity. “I can quite happily say someone is handsome, good-looking, and I can see why someone would want to f**k them, but I’ve never felt that way about a man myself,” he told Attitude. “There is that moment in your late teens when you ask yourself the question, ‘Am I?’ but I wasn’t.”

That said, the magical movie star confessed, “This year I have a talent crush on Ryan Gosling. I think he’s fantastic and—ahem–you know he’d be nice afterwards. He seems smart. If I was gay, I would go for a smart man.”

Stone:Gay and lesbian voters should be very happy that Mitt Romney won the Sunshine State’s Republican presidential primary last month. The results showed that Florida Republicans care more about liberating our economy than shackling our community. By choosing a pro-growth businessman over a social conservative, Floridians chose to look  forward rather than backward.

Terrill: I don’t think that gay and lesbian voters have much to cheer about in any of the Republican candidates. Romney may be considered “Republican Light” in some circles, but we both know that he recently went on a tirade about Obama’s so-called “assault on marriage and religion,” so let’s not pretend that he will fall on the right (our “right”) side of that particular issue at the end of the day.

Stone: Speaking of Barack Obama, Florida voters look forward to  electing a new president.  Erosion of support among youth and the  elderly alike, not to mention Jews and Hispanics, will cost the  president come November.  With Obama’s approval ratings below 50 percent, the president is in real political trouble in the Sunshine State.  Like liberals always say, demographics are destiny.

Terrill: Speaking on behalf of all “liberals [who] always say” that—come to think of it, when do we say that?  This particular liberal does not think that approval ratings polls are worth the paper they’re printed on.  Personally, I have never been selected by such a poll for my opinion–I don’t own a landline telephone–so therein is your flaw.

Stone: Political activists don’t complain about polls unless they are behind in those polls’ numbers.  When you hear, “the only poll that matters is the one on Election Day,” for example, you can bet your bottom dollar that person’s cause is grasping at straws. But if you don’t  trust polls, which is a legitimate position to take, then trust your gut. President Obama won Florida with 51% of the vote. Since 2008,  do you think he has earned or lost support?  Yeah, that’s what I thought, too.

Terrill: I’m a multicultural kind of guy—and I realize that Florida’s Hispanic voters, mainly Cuban Americans, have always had a good number of Republicans in their midst. This year might be different, though, as Republicans like Arizona’s Jan Brewer, Donald Trump, and other “birthers,” “ID’ers,” and genuine racists have clearly indicated that not everyone is “American, First” in their eyes.  Romney is perhaps even worse when it comes to race issues. When you belong to a church that did not let a black person through the front door until the late 1970s, you’ve got big race-relation problems.  At least with Obama, Hispanic women are now represented in our highest court and gays can openly serve in their country’s armed forces with pride and dignity.

Stone: Left wing charges of “bigotry” neglect certain inconvenient truths. For starters, the reason gays can serve their country is that a  growing bipartisan consensus says they should.  For the LGBT  community, marriage equality is rightfully the mother of all culture wars.  I take great pride pointing out that both of the attorneys who argued Bush v. Gore in 2000, teamed up in bipartisan support for equality.  Liberals pummel conservatives as bigots on the issue, ignoring their own elephant in the room. Putting politics above  principle, Obama lacks the fortitude to speak up for marriage before the election. So I challenge any left-wing activist to come out from behind their 2012 rainbow sign and riddle me this: how does Obama’s position on marriage differ from Mitt Romney’s, again?

Terrill: I agree that Obama could stand to “gay up” his rhetoric on  marriage, but certainly not before the election. That would just  firebrand the opponents.  Regardless of Mitt Romney’s recent anti-gay marriage revelation, experience tells me that he would sign any bill that Congress brings him, no matter how objectionable.

By Cliff Dunn

Even as he struggles to convince mainstream conservatives that he is the logical standard-bearer to take on President Barack Obama in November, Mitt Romney’s triumph last month over the remaining GOP contenders in the Florida presidential primary has the blessing of the nation’s largest LGBT Republican organization.
“Having Gingrich out there reminding voters that Romney has stated support for gay rights will … play well in Florida,” said Clarke Cooper, executive director of the 22,000-member Log Cabin Republicans at the time of last month’s primary.

Romney’s victory over challengers Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul followed a contentious Sunshine State campaign in which the candidates made every effort to paint themselves as the natural successor to the Ronald Reagan, while utilizing every means at their individual and collective disposals to break the late president’s so-called Eleventh Commandment: “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.”

Romney’s adoption of hardball tactics may have helped propel him to victory in Florida, just ten days after a steep loss to Gingrich in South Carolina. The former House speaker’s victory raised questions about the former Massachusetts governor’s viability as a national contender. Gingrich’s stumble paved the way for former Pennsylvania senator Santorum to claim the  far-right of the playing field, a position which propelled him to triple wins last week in the Colorado and Minnesota GOP caucuses
and the non-binding Missouri Republican primary.

In December, Gingrich signed a pledge to uphold the Iowa Family Leader’s “Marriage Vow.” In a lengthy screed, the twice-divorced former Georgia congressman promised that, if elected “President, I will vigorously enforce the Defense of Marriage Act, which was enacted under my leadership as Speaker of the House, and ensure compliance with its provisions, especially in the military. I will also aggressively defend the constitutionality of DOMA in federal and state courts. I will support sending a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification. I will also oppose any judicial, bureaucratic, or legislative effort to define marriage in any manner other than as between one man and one woman. I will support all efforts to reform promptly any uneconomic or anti-marriage aspects of welfare and tax policy. I also pledge to uphold the institution of marriage through personal fidelity to my spouse and respect for the marital bonds of others.”

During a conference call last month for supporters of the Religious Right, Gingrich–whose marital history includes three marriages and an acknowledged record of infidelity–compared marriage equality to paganism: “It’s pretty simple: marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a historic doctrine driven deep into the Bible, both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament, and it’s a perfect example of what I mean by the rise of paganism. The effort to create alternatives to marriage between a man and a woman are perfectly natural pagan behaviors, but they are a fundamental violation of our civilization.”

In August 2005, Romney—then Governor of Massachusetts—told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews with regards to marriage equality in his state, “I hope that people will be able to decide that neither civil union, nor same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts.”

Fast forward six years to August 2011, when Romney intoned during the Iowa Republican debate “I believe we should have a federal amendment in the constitution that defines marriage as a relationship between a man and woman.”

Just before the Florida primary, officers of the Log Cabin Republicans held a caucus in which Romney beat Gingrich by a vote of 26 to 4.

The group’s Cooper noted that Florida has come long way since Broward County passed its contentious Human Rights Ordinance in 1995, which extends to persons, based on their sexual orientation, protection from discrimination in housing, employment, and public accommodations. “Overall, the general populous in the Sunshine State has become increasingly supportive of gay-rights related positions such as employment non-discrimination and the freedom to marry,” Cooper said.

“Any candidate attempting to use gays as a dividing rod in the 2012 election is bucking public trends of inclusion and will find themselves unable to win a general election. Politics is about addition and the long term gains are made through building coalitions, not employing wedge issues,” Cooper noted.

For his part, Romney continues to try and navigate the treacherous political waters between espousing fairness and equal protection for LGBT Americans, while not alienating “values” voters who turn out disproportionately during primary season, and who clearly turned out for Santorum in Colorado, Minnesota, and Missouri.

Romney said during a debate with Santorum that while governor of Massachusetts he appointed an openly-gay member to his cabinet as well as gay judges.

He qualified his progressive executive model, adding that “at the same time, from the very beginning in 1994, I said to the gay community, I do not favor same-sex marriage. I oppose same-sex marriage and that has been my view.” Then Romney seemingly qualified his qualifier: “If people are looking for someone who will discriminate against gays or will in any way try and suggest that people–that have different sexual orientation don’t have full rights
in this country, they won’t find that in me.”

The debate’s moderator asked Romney, “When was the last time you stood up and spoke out for increasing gay rights?” The candidate replied, “Right now,” although he did not list any particulars. This same Romney announced last week after California’s Proposition 8 ruling that, “Today, unelected judges cast aside the will of the people of California who voted to protect traditional marriage. This decision does not end this fight.”

By Phoebe Moses

FORT LAUDERDALE, FL – Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum, campaigning on Sunday, Jan. 22 in Broward County, received the endorsement of former Fort Lauderdale Mayor Jim Naugle.

During a campaign stop in Coral Springs, the former six-term mayor introduced Santorum, saying that conservatives “really only have one choice.”

Naugle’s remarks and endorsement came a day after Santorum, a former U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania, placed third in the South Carolina GOP presidential primary. Santorum finished behind fellow GOP contenders Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney.

Naugle, who was Fort Lauderdale’s longest-serving mayor, said of Santorum: “When you look at the candidate we’re here to support today, his unwavering support for the unborn, his unwavering support for the Second Amendment. He’s the only candidate left standing that has a position  on repealing ‘Obamacare’ that makes  any sense.”

Although a life-long Democrat, Naugle endorsed numerous Republican candidates during his eighteen years as mayor. He also earned the criticism of LGBT rights activists for controversial positions he took as the city’s chief executive.

In 2007, Naugle said that the city needed to purchase single-occupancy public toilets in Fort Lauderdale’s Holiday Park in order to “reduce homosexual sex in bathrooms.” The mayor first claimed that his orders to city police to arrest gay men accused of having sex in the park’s restrooms was intended to protect the city’s children, but he later said his purpose was to reduce the risk of HIV transmission. Fort Lauderdale Police reported four incidents of male sex acts in public restrooms during the period between November 2005 and November 2007.

Naugle said at the time: “We don’t have men and women having sex together in bathrooms–at least we don’t have reports of that. It’s men having sex with men, and I feel it’s necessary for an elected official to tell it like it is. I don’t subscribe to political correctness.”

In 2007, Naugle opposed the Stonewall Library & Archives, citing pornographic materials among the library’s collections. Stonewall Executive Director Jack Rutland countered that the three titles the mayor found objectionable were contained among the library’s non-circulating archive of 7000 titles, which were maintained for historical and research purposes only. In spite of Naugle’s fierce opposition, Fort Lauderdale city commissioners approved the library’s occupation of a city-owned building. That summer, the Broward Tourism Development Council expelled Naugle because of his positions concerning LGBT rights.

Naugle’s support for the Boy Scouts of America’s ban on gay troop leaders prompted the nine members of the Broward County Commission to unanimously sign a letter that called the county “safe, unbiased and gay friendly.”

After his public battles over gay rights, Naugle explained his choice of verbiage to describe LGBT issues: “I use the word homosexual. Most of them aren’t gay; they’re unhappy.”

Photo: Former City Commissioner Anthony Niedwicki and his partner Waymon at a  “Flush Naugle” Campaign Event in 2008.

By Nick Stone

If you believe in equality under the law, it might surprise you when I say that a Mormon Republican is our best bet for president in 2012. Take a deep breath and keep reading.

Let me start by saying that Republican candidates want gay votes. They just don’t think they are going to get them. In Republican circles, it can be an uphill battle to get candidates to campaign in gay and minority areas.  On the surface, it might seem that they don’t want your vote, but that’s simply untrue.

There was a time when the Republican Party was outwardly hostile toward gays.  This isn’t 2004, and George W. Bush isn’t president. Countless examples exist of the Democratic Party’s history of discrimination and repression, but I’ll forego that lesson for now. Just know that today’s Republican Party would truly surprise you if you gave it a second look.

It’s often said that demographics are the future of partisan politics. Growing numbers of Latinos, blacks, and gays are supposed to wipe out the Republican majority forever. But what these pundits don’t count on is the core of the Republican coalition. They don’t know that today’s Republican Party is flooded with the ranks of two groups: young people with an intense Libertarian streak (and lots of gay friends with fabulous weddings to attend), and former Democrats who have been turned-off by their party’s Obama-Pelosi wing of big, intrusive government. You know these as the Tea Party.

In New Hampshire several weeks ago, GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney was asked, “When was the last time you stood up for gay rights?” The moderator repeated Romney’s own words, “I think the gay community needs more support from the Republican Party, and I would be a voice in the Republican Party to foster anti-discrimination efforts.”

Romney did not back down from his pledge.  He said, “If people are looking for someone who will discriminate against gays, or will in any way try and suggest that people that have different sexual orientation in this country don’t have full rights, they won’t find that in me.” When was the last time he spoke out for gay rights?  “Right now,” he proclaimed among Republican challengers in a Republican audience.  That Republican audience’s reaction: thunderous applause.

Gays are not one-issue voters.  Many of us own businesses: we don’t want them killed by over-regulation. Many of us have children: we don’t want to leave them with a mountain of debt. All of us pay taxes: we don’t want them drown our family budgets. Many of us still vote Democrat, because that’s what gays are supposed to do.

South Florida LGBT voters led the way in 2010, swinging a full third of our votes to Republicans.  With Mitt Romney at the top of the GOP ticket, I’m confident that this November will pave the way for a brand new Republican coalition that stands for liberty for all.  If LGBT voters are willing to look forward, that will be the legacy of today’s Republican Party.  If you want to see real progress, take a chance on a Mormon Republican who has an open mind. Or, you can support a Democrat who takes your vote for granted.

Photo: Mitt Romney: Gay-Friendlier Than You Might Have Imagined.

Nick Stone is Vice President of the Broward County Young Republicans. You can read more of his work at DrawnLines.com

So Says Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern

By Alex Vaughn

Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern chose to continue her history of making outrageously inflammatory and hateful comments towards the Gay community on the eve of the 10th Anniversary of 9/11. As the world reflected 9/11, the worst terrorist attacks on US soil, she used the opportunity to claim that gay love is in fact worse than terrorism.

Kern explained that her current book titled “The Stoning of Sally Kern: The Liberal Attack on Christian Conservatism and Why We Must Take a Stand” was written in response to the backlash she received in 2008 as a result of her attacks on the gay community with similarly hateful statements in a nationally-released video. Kern had expressed that school children were being “indoctrinated” into the gay lifestyle, and that “studies show that no society that has totally embraced homosexuality has lasted more than a few decades.”
“[Gays] are the death knell, in this country. I honestly think it’s the biggest threat… that our nation has, even more so than terrorism, or Islam, which I think is a big threat,” Kern was recorded in her speech.

Now, in an interview with anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera, Kern explained, “In the last… fifteen to twenty years, we’ve had maybe three terrorist attacks on our soil with a little over 5,000 people regrettably losing their lives. In the same time frame, there have been hundreds of thousands who have died because of having AIDS. So which one’s the biggest threat?”

“Which has destroyed and ended the life of more people

? Terrorism attacks here in America or HIV/AIDS?” she asked.
She then went on to say that in addition to HIV/AIDS deaths, homosexuality is more dangerous than terrorism because people hear about it everyday, as if talking about homosexuality somehow destroys a nation.

“And you know, every day our young people, adults too, but especially our young people, are bombarded at school, in movies, in music, on TV, in the mall, in magazines, they’re bombarded with ‘homosexuality is normal and natural.’ Fortunately we don’t have to deal with a terrorist attack every day.” She went on to explain, that, “It’s more dangerous, and yes I think that it’s also more dangerous because it will tear down the moral fiber of this nation.” According to Kern, “We were founded as a nation upon the principles of religion and morality. If we take those out from under our society, we will lose what has made us a great nation, we will no longer be a virtuous people, which we see happening already. And without virtue, this nation will not survive.”

Her comments have caused uproar and as the recording of her statements went viral, they caught the attention of lesbian talk show host and comedienne Ellen DeGeneres, who made light of the speech by attempting to contact the representative and author on her talk show, with the aim of “clearing up misconceptions” that she may have. She was unable to leave a voicemail.

This is not the first time Kern has marginalized and attacked diverse minority groups. Kern was reprimanded earlier this year by the Oklahoma House when she said that African-American people “don’t work as hard” as white people. She also said last April that people of color don’t work hard in school because they think the government will “take care of them.”

NEW YORK, NY – Former Godfather’s Pizza CEO and Republican presidential candidate, Herman Caine, has declared that homosexuality i s a

choice.

Caine said, “I believe homosexuality is a sin because I’m a Bible-believing Christian. I believe it’s a sin. But I know that some people make that choice. That’s their choice.”

SAN FRANCISCO, CA – The Log Cabin Republican Club has filed a brief with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court challenging the Obama administration’s hold on repealing “Don’t Tell, Don’t Tell”. The Defense Department is holding off the implementation of the end of the ban on gays serving in the military until the Pentagon completes preparations and troop training.

The brief, filed by the Log Cabin Club, referred to the hold as “absurd” and feels the policy should be dropped immediately.

The brief claims that Congress, which voted to repeal DADT last December, doesn’t have the constitutionality to allow the law to stay in effect while the Pentagon claims they are certifying that the change in the law won’t damage combat readiness.

According to the brief filed with the court by the Log Cabin Republicans, “Even though a judge found this to be unconstitutional and the administration is not disagreeing with that, they are still investigating and able to discharge people.”

By BOB KECSKEMETY

I have a confession to make: I was a Republican up to six years ago.

You may be asking yourself, why would any gay person become a member of the Republican Party? That’s a very valid question however; I’ve always considered myself an American first, not a gay-American. I registered Republican back in 1972 because I was against a needless and endless war in Vietnam and I supported President Richard Nixon’s efforts to get us out of that war.

Now, I admit, Richard Nixon might not have been the most honest president this country had, but, it was the Democratic Party that got us into Vietnam in the first place, plus, I couldn’t imagine myself voting for a person named “Hubert Horatio Humphrey.” Also, some other things that Nixon was in favor of were a national healthcare program and equal rights for women. To this day, I can’t figure out how that crazy liberal ever got elected.

I’m referred to by pollsters as a “likely voter” meaning that I’m more apt to vote in any election whether it be large or small. Also, I always end up splitting the ticket and never voted straight party-line.

Anyway, I voted for Richard Nixon and I voted for Gerald Ford (1976) and I voted for Ronald Reagan — twice (1980 and 1984). After 1984, it wasn’t so easy for me anymore and, though I would vote in the other races in the general elections, I didn’t vote for President. I didn’t like George H.

W. Bush and didn’t vote for him (1988) nor could I find myself voting for the Democrat, Michael Dukakis.

I didn’t like Bill Clinton or his two Republican opponents, GB1 for reelection (1992) and Robert Dole (1996) so again, I didn’t vote for President. Finally, like father, like son, I didn’t vote for GB2 in 2000, didn’t care much for Al Gore either.

This was the election where Florida was the pivotal state on who would win or loose and we were introduced to “hanging chads” and “butterfly ballots.” Finally, after weeks of indecision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled GW to be the winner. Six of one, half a dozen of the other, I figured so it didn’t bother me much. But I did learn one important thing from that election, it doesn’t take millions of votes, even in a presidential election, to determine a winner or looser, it just took a few votes to make a difference and I could have been one of those few. Had I voted, I would have voted for Gore.

At first, GB2 didn’t seem so bad. He stayed out of the way and chopped wood on his ranch in Texas. Then came September 11, 2001 and he showed me, and the rest of the nation the he could hold the country together in times of national tragedy. I supported his actions immediately after the towers had fallen and I supported his move into Afghanistan. But then he turned his attention towards Iraq and I started to wonder what the hell was he doing? As it turned out, he got the U.S. into a war with no purpose except expansion of the U.S. ideology and oil. I started to see more tax breaks for the wealthy at the expense of the middle class which was rapidly shrinking.

By 2004, I had had enough. The Republican Party I knew was no longer the Republican Party that existed and I switched my registration to Democrat. I did not leave the G.O.P., the G.O.P. left me. Towards the end of that year, I held my nose and voted for John Kerry, my first Democrat for President. Then, in 2008, I enthusiastically voted for Barack Obama, my first enthusiastic vote for President since 1984 — 24 years.

Many gay activists are upset now because Obama has not done as much for the gay community as he promised in his campaign. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is still formally in effect and samesex marriage appears to still be in a standstill. I’m more disappointed that there is no national healthcare program that provides me with medical attention I need and I’ve resigned myself to the fact that I’m going to be one of many people that die each year because they don’t have health insurance. I was so looking forward to expansion of Medicare, but that proposal is long gone now.

But we have another election coming up on November 2 of this year and the Democratic Party is concerned that there is an “enthusiasm-gap” — people don’t care as much about voting — and that Democratic voters won’t turn out in the numbers they had two years ago supporting their party.

This mid-term election is the scariest thing I’ve ever seen. Some of the nutjobs that are running on the G.O.tea- Party ticket would cause Reagan to switch parties as the Tea Party makes him look like a loony liberal. And, to be honest, if they dug up the bones of Ronald Reagan stuck them upright in a chair and put his name on the ballot, I would vote for him again.

But these are the mid-term elections, meaning we have the chance to vote for a full House of Representatives, onethird of the Senate and many state and local elections but not for President and the results of this election rely on you and your vote. We learned in 2000 that it doesn’t take many votes to sway an election one way or the other, but it will take you to make your decision and vote.

The elections are just one month away. Find out who the candidates are and what they stand for. Find out who would be best to represent you and your needs whether those needs are those of a homosexual individual or an American. Vote as if your future depends on it because it does. If you don’t vote and things get any worse than they are now, you have no one to blame but yourself.

On a final note: I wish my good friend, Norm Kent, a speedy recovery