News, gossip, commentary, rantings and ravings on the latest on anti-LGBT politicians and their actions – sometimes repulsive, sometimes hypocritical and sometimes down-right hilarious.
North Carolina state Sen. David Hoyle (D-Gaston) announced Dec. 9 he’d step down at the end of his term in 2010. Hoyle, chairman of the Senate’s Finance Committee, had been considered the third most powerful member of the Senate’s leadership, after President Pro Tempore Marc Basnight and former Majority Leader Tony Rand.
One advocate thinks the senator’s consistent, conservative social views might have played a key role in the body’s slow progress on pro-equality issues.
Sing with me… It’s that time of year, when I sit at my desk and research the year, sifting through… o-old stories of important ga-ay news!
I was in the office late last night putting our Dec. 12 print issue of Q-Notes to bed. I wanted to get in the office and start work on our last issue of the year. Our Dec. 26 print issue will include a run-down of the LGBT Carolinas’ most important news and happenings over the past year, as well as a profile on Q-Notes‘ Person of the Year 2009.
This will be my third “retrospective,” year-end issue since joining the staff in the fall of 2007. As with the previous two years, I’m looking forward to and will enjoy sifting through each of the preceding 25 issues of this year’s papers.
Back when Democrat Heath Shuler was running for U.S. House there was an awful lot of talk about how having any Democrat would be better than any Republican. Of course, it really doesn’t matter when the Democrat being elected is just as conservative as the Republican he replaced.
Shuler’s 11th District covers the western-most tip of North Carolina. It is a conservative district, no doubt, and he has to answer to the constituents who put him in office. But his anti-LGBT and other conservative stances make him more foe than a friend, something the Democratic Party doesn’t need as more and more LGBT people find the party distrustful and slow to tackle our civil rights.
[Sammon] sees an encouraging sign in that the governor of South Carolina is talking about how the party’s position on gay issues is driving young voters away.
Umm… Did Sammon completely miss that whole “South Carolina is so gay” debacle over the summer, or is he just ignoring the facts?
Gov. Mark Sanford is pro-gay, even moderately so? Only in our dreams.
When South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford learned that his state was being advertised as a gay tourism destination, he ordered a Cabinet-level department head “to do the right thing personnel-wise or process-wise to ensure this does not happen again,” Sanford’s spokesman Joel Sawyer told Q-Notes.
[..snip..]
In the Governor’s office, Sawyer said that the state will not promote itself as a tourist destination through campaigns “aimed at a specific group of people.”
Sawyer said the “so gay” ad should have been “run up the flagpole,” but did not know whether any standard procedures were violated at the time it was approved.
“It defies common sense that someone would sign off on an advertising campaign that controversial,” Sawyer said.
Asked whether South Carolina would, for example, position itself as a tourist destination for African-Americans by utilizing black media and promoting vacation spots of relevant cultural interest, Sawyer said that the state does not “get into targeting a specific group that might have a social or political agenda.”
NAACP, the leading U.S. African-American advocacy organization, is working to boycott South Carolina tourism due to the state’s official display of the Confederate flag.
“We don’t believe that the average South Carolina taxpayer would agree” with advertising the state as a gay tourist destination, Sawyer concluded.
Governor Sanford mandated that PRT director Chad Prosser will from now on have to personally sign off on all advertising campaigns, Sawyer said.
Sanford’s just eying a future career in some place other than the Palm(I’m-looking-backward)etto State. He’s figured out he’s got to play nice in a political world quickly changing right before his very eyes. His “gay friendly” nature doesn’t really come all that naturally, but I guess in the interest of career development he’s willing to give it a go.
Marriage equality matters to many readers of InterstateQ I imagine. “Democrats are for LGBT rights, Republicans are against them” seems to be the generally accepted view of American politics, but after listening to the views of the presidential front runners, I can’t help but notice they sound rather similar to one another. That’s not to say they don’t differ in important areas, just that when it comes to legal recognition of gay relationships, they seem equal. Watch for yourself after the jump.
Despite the fact our Republic is supposed to be “of the people, by the people,” Congressman Patrick McHenry thinks he has a better idea: Let voters buy their way to elected representation and political power.
From Pat Go Bye-Bye we learn that McHenry is offering campaign contributors several “sponsorship” levels with various “benefits.”
Have $9,200? Well, be a member of McHenry’s “Congressional Circle.” You’ll get a semi-annual conference call, the McHenry Campaign Insider newsletter, a private weekend Washington, D.C. retreat, free tickets to all campaign events and free entry to McHenry’s annual Christmas party.
Don’t have quite that much cash to dole out? It’s okay — just fork over $4,600 and get the following benefits: tickets to two campaign events, free entry to McHenry’s annual Christmas party, a semi-annual conference call and the Campaign Insider.
Oh. Wait. You’re an average American forking over large amounts of cash for gas, utility bills, a mortgage and food? Oh, I’m sorry — You’re shit out of luck.
The piece, written by Mary Frances Forrester, the wife of Sen. James Forrester (R-Gaston County), was published Feb. 29, but it took me quite a bit of time to sift through information on some of the topics she addressed. I was going to make a rebuttal to Mrs. Forrester’s op-ed the focus of my next Q-Notes editorial, but repeated attempts to contact Mrs. Forrester failed. Because I could never get in touch with her to get a list of sources she used in constructing her op-ed, I didn’t feel comfortable writing on it for the paper.
Disclaimer: I went to film school. I also work in television. That should help explain why many of my posts revolve around videos: I can’t get enough. The following is a video that I wish was never made, that we lived in a world devoid of such source material. But that time is not yet and in the interim, I’m inspired to see the faces of people standing up with a different message: Not us, not here.
The following video clip contains audio of Oklahoma State Rep Sally Kern in an anti-gay diatribe. Rep Kearn put out a statement in response which, in part, reads:
“To put this simply, as a Christian I believe homosexuality is not moral. Obviously, you have the right as an American to choose that lifestyle, but I also have the right to express my views and my fellow Oklahomans have the right to debate these issues.”
Representative Kern may believe whatever she chooses to believe, but she may not claim to speak on behalf of Christianity (which is frothing with disagreement about whether gay relationships are sinful) nor should she abuse her position of authority to demean, slander, and marginalize an entire group of American citizens.
When she calls homosexuality more dangerous than terrorism or Islam, what are we to expect? Are we to be surprised when “American loving, Christian citizens” take matters into their own hands to remove this so-called dangerous threat? How do we blame Brandon for the murder of Lawrence “Larry” King? Where is the line drawn?
Please listen to the video and send it to your friends. America deserves to know that such words are filling their government buildings. We need to know, we need to change.