GLBTs:Are you uncomfortable with *gay* being brought into the Gannon story

Since there is clearly a rift between us, I'm trying to figure out where we stand percentage-wise.

Expose the bastards for all of their vile hypocrisy!

exposed and made fun of by right wing pundits...

There would be widespread outrage here.
I'd be interested to see the poll results then.

we've been shit on time & again by this administration

sorry, sometimes ya gotta play rough when defending your simple right to exist

In that it shows what hyprocrits the "right wing" can be. Here's this guy writing story after story on the anti-gay agenda of this administration and it turns out that he may in fact be gay himself. And quite possibly someone on the White House staff as well. That's just my take on it.

Normally, I don't think orientation matters, but in the case of such vile hyprocracy, I think it's core to the story.

Are you only interested in GLBT-ers opinions?

do as you wish... I was just trying to see where GLBT's stand percentage-wise :hi:

If he is against homosexuality, but practices it in private - it shows he has serious emotional problems - and thus his writings have little credibility.

but then again I don't usually read TalonNews. Mr. Gannon/whatever his name is is a disgrace to journalism but the very fact that smirk has to hire these fake journalists prove that he is very nervous about something.. and I think that any scandal that makes this administration look bad is a good scandal.

On the one hand, I am tired of this becoming another gay bashing party. On the other hand, I am glad that the bushites and other rightwinged homophobes have been caught with their pants down since this angle is making it more likely to have the whole thing get out into MSM. However, I don't want it to be seen as just a sexual preference problem but the fact that the bushites and rightwinghomophobes are hypocritical lying assholes.

Overall I would go more for not bothered.

If they are, then so am I.

I suspect that most of the queer population is incensed about the hypocrisy of the Bush pseudo-Papacy, and is willing to stifle its annoyance in return for dealing a crushing blow to homophobia.

Do any gay DUers want to weigh in on this?

--p!

I think the one's that are making it a gay issue are the one's that don't understand it's not a gay issue. If you see my post above, you'll see that I find him to be a hypocrit and I think hipocracy should always be exposed, especially if it is someone who is gay writing anti-gay material.

The question is why is this man using the cloak of "christian conservative?" Does it help his business as an escort? There are bigger questions to answer, IMO, than the "gay thing."

with all the "positive reinforcement" we've been getting from our own folks - "not that there's anything wrong with that, ya know?"

This guy was making his living off of repeating and promoting the anti gay stance of this admin - and apparently selling his ass on line (which goes way over the top compared to him logging on to gay.com looking for a little discrete sex and getting busted).

This isn't a gay issue, it's all about access, coverup and who knew what and allowed it to happen.

they claim they won the election by putting gay-bashing referendums on the ballot. I want these fuckers to be cut with the same blade they used against the gay community. I like to think that it is the poetry of Karma.

received and ... why?

him and have lied, and lied, and lied, and presented themselves to the country as if they are god on earth, on human beings without clay feet, or morally far above and beyond reproach, tremble, tremble, tremble and be shamed unto their knees telling the truth and asking for forgivenness. that is what they deserve, i.e. bush and scott mcclellan.

and mine this for all it's worth. (But I DO feel uncomfortable making others feel uncomfortable over the subject itself). We have to remember that such behaviour isn't the problem; hypocricy is. And the IMPORTANT thing to bear in mind is that he's a part of that SLEAZE-MACHINE that has cheapened the politics of this country as it had never been done before. NO forgiveness there.

pnorman

When I hear the word "freedom" mentioned by Bush anymore I cringe. As long as the promotion of the Bush agenda goes through, they don't care what is at the core of the issues. If a gay person prints anti-gay stories to promote an anti-gay agenda to get money from the religious right so the agenda gets passed, all the better for Bush and Co.

I just wonder if people will pay attention to this, the 30th scandal in the administration.

that this has blurred our focus on what should be the real scandal. Doesn't really matter if he is a gay prostitute or Time's Person-of-the-Year, the real scandal is that he got access to the White House and much sensitive information with very questionable creditials under a fake name. And all the while, Scott and Karl are telling tales and spinning the story to cover their collective ass.

... I think focusing on that aspect of the story shines the spotlight on the wrong issue. The primary one should be that an untrained journalist operating under a pseudonym and working for a phony news outlet is regularly admitted to White House briefings and news conferences because he acts as a megaphone for the right wing and the White House. If Gannon/Guckert/??? were part of the alternative press and asked only probing questions of the White House, he would have been immediately banished on grounds of phony credentials. That's the fundamental hypocrisy.

A secondary matter, somewhat involving the gay issue, is how Gannon/Guckert/??? managed to receive background clearance for access to the White House. If his background was investigated as thoroughly as some others, then there must have been some hypocritical judgments made by a White House which is annoyed by gay issues to continue to allow him access, given his background.

Cheers.

but this case really is different. He was engaged in illegal conduct and that conduct can't be discussed without outing him. This isn't garden variety hypocracy, its illegality.

"no I am not uncomfortable" ugh. Doesn't the phrase double negative not ring a bell with you :-)

;)

with a ruler:spank:

any gay person who actively works to oppress other gay people deserves to be called on his homosexuality.

ordinarily i'm against outing -- because i think there is an agreement to ''hunt'' certain gay folk.
and ordinarily -- i'm not ok with letting straight people{liberal or other wise} ''hunt'' any gay folk.

homophobia is every where -- among liberals as well as conservatives.

but what's his name, like roy cohn, actively ''hunted'' gay folk with his writings.
and that makes him dangerous in the extreme.
bring him down.

Good way of describing it. My feelings about outing exactly.

homosexuality itself, and if not intended as a personal indictment of him because of something like that. And certainly NOT if if it can illustrate some of the absurd hypocrisy of the right wing kooks and their own fascination with homosex.

On the other hand.... I DO have a problem with it if his sexuality is being bandied about as being a personal negative or character flaw. Any attempt to tar him or discredit him based SOLELY on his sexuality is a mistake.

Are people for real?

This man is one of the WORST homophobes in the press.

He passes the pig tezt with flying colors.

Mike Rogers
BlogActive.com

PS: If he ended up sleeping with McClellan for access as some has suggested...this could be bigger than Watergate. Open the flood gates on these haters.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=73

You know, several years ago, Barney Frank was brought up before the House Ethics Committee for charges that he was using his influence as a Congressman to help a male prostitute who was living with Frank. The press went after that story.

But this story...with Gannon and possible involvement with the White House Press Secretary...is far, far more serious.

<this could be bigger than Watergate> ... But will MSM bury it? :shrug:

:yourock:

but it's the liberals that are using the term "gay hooker" more than the freepers are

and unfortunately, the freeprs actually see this story for what it is--nothing

it's a distraction from the real business at hand

people are wasting energy going after this guy who may or may not be gay; who may or may not be a hustler; who may or may not be a plant; etc etc etc

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

For two reasons really!

1) No where has it been proven that the man is actually gay. He could be bisexual (but that still is not proven), or he could be greedy (my bet.) Did you see the prices he was charging for sex?

2) Too many people have been hanging onto the gay male sex angle rather than what the bigger picture. And to me, that just rings of freeperish tones.

But I can see the value in outing anti-gay gay Republicans. Self-hatred is one thing if you keep it to yourself. But a gay man openly working to oppress other GLBT'ers is like those anti-abortionist who "had abortions then regretted it," or like a black man joining the Klan.

I say point out the hypocrites where you see them. Of course, I would still like to remind everyone that the opinion of the GLBT community of course overrides mine when it comes to outing, but that's just what I think.

It must be part of the story.

I'm glad we have this thread to put things in perspective and to counter the prissy, shrill, and whining complaint-threads.

I'm Bi. And I'm married to a lesbian. Just so it's clear.

It's not the fact Gannon/Guckert is gay. It's that he's also written a number of virulently anti-gay articles. It's that he's engaged in illegal activities (prostitution) at the same time he was getting regular access to the White House. According to the state of Delaware, he's also a tax cheat.

It's not his orientation, it's the HYPOCRISY.

And not just his, but that of the entire sickening Shrub administration, and the Repugs, and all that they represent.

That's why we have to keep asking, "How exactly did a gay prostitute rate daily access to the White House press room? Why did you call on him to ask partisan soft-ball questions? And what was this man doing within mere feet of the POTUS?"

Call this whore out!

to call everyone gay as if it's a curse. Rush Limbaugh is GAY! Antonin Scalia is GAY! There's a fine line... and, it's not as if I've read all the Gannon posts or even all the threads, that would be impossible, but I haven't read anything specifically about Gannon that offends me as a gay person. Some other subjects have been infected with it though, so it bears watching how it's used.

When I see progressives leaping up to call everyone 'gay', it makes me pause. Especially in light of all the transphobic 'Ann Coulter is a man baby,' posts the site receives.

As far as Gannon goes, I think it's relevant, but the excoriation of Gannon should be pursued in a cold, relentless, determined manner that foregrounds the Bush Admin's hypocrisy and their lack of security. I think that we should keep our dignity and not stoop to "Gannon's a big homo! Ha ha ha!' rhetoric.

it's really how it's spun, right? It depends on how it's handled Right now I'm more "issue-oriented" toward the sex worker thing. I don't care if he's gay or not or a whore or not. I care about him being a total asshole. And that's the real story here.

I haven't really heard all that much about this on the mainstream media - most of my info has come from the 'net. But I do get the feeling that the gay issue may become more of an issue - you know, why did he do so wrong? Well, because he's gay! Why did he prostitute himself for the administration? Because, he's a whore! Yeah, but those are really bigoted answers. I hang with whores because most of them are really decent people - unlike Mr. Gannon.

And the gay thing is simply a non-starter. "Oh yes I did what I did insupport of an anti-gay government because I'm gay".Well he ain't gonna say it and even if he did it's too stupid for words. So, we will just see how this plays out.

I don't trust the media not to demonize gay men or whores, but I just don't think this is big enough for them to bother that much.

And you know what? Some gay people really aren't very nice.(Just look at Andrew Sullivan.) And some whores aren't either. It's stupid not to admit that. The question is whether the issue is this man's mendacity or his being gay/ a whore.

Khash.

(Apologies to any sex workers who object to my use of the word whore. It was not my intention to offend. Having whored myself, I can only have respect for those who do a good job.)

although it's certainly interesting. IMO even the prior employment isn't the issue - it's the access and the connections.

I could care less who he was selling himself to before, I want to know who hired him this time.

:hi:

People are laughing at this. They're making jokes about Gannon being gay and then turning around and saying their all for gay rights and respect.

That's hypocritical in my opinion,

But since when does a gay's opinion matter in the Democratic Party?

Its not the fact that hes gay.
Its the fact that hes a anti-gay person, that is a gay gigalo...
With porn sites, and he did other shit to.. (little fuzzy on that actually- Fake reporter?)