Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay Activist Mike Rogers to Out "30" Republican's
Wayne Besen ^ | Tuesday, September 04, 2007 | Waybe Besen

Posted on 09/05/2007 11:49:47 AM PDT by Jose Pen

According to The Washington Post, there are 33 names on Rogers' list of Congressional charlatans - 30 of them Republicans. If only one-third of these scoundrels get outed in the next two years, the earthquake on Capitol Hill will be so large that it may cause a war between GOP moderates and social conservatives.

About three years ago, I was lounging in a Montreal hotel room when I got a call from activist Mike Rogers. I was unaware of who he was, but this intense stranger began interrogating me for information about - well, I don't even remember what the topic was anymore. But, I do recall that he was about the toughest advocate I had encountered in quite some time. As I hung up the phone I thought, "thank God this guy is on our side."

In an era of softer advocacy, Rogers is decidedly in your face. Yet, he has integrated new media with old school activism to create a stunningly effective hybrid that has brought Capitol Hill to its knees. Well, the hypocritical, anti-gay Congressmen were already on their knees - but until Rogers came along with his "outing" website BlogActive, they were getting away with it. Rogers does not tiptoe (or is it tap foot) around the contentions issue of outing and has a string of successes, including the downfall of closeted former Virginia GOP Congressman Ed Schrock.

Since our initial conversation we have become friends. At his Washington apartment, he is a whirlwind of activity, fighting for a just cause with little reward. While our "mainstream" organizations have reaped a windfall of resources, Rogers, arguably our most effective voice, has had to scrape tooth and nail.

Unfortunately, the veneer of "respectability" often trumps results when it comes to supporting GLBT causes. With little more than willpower, Rogers has become a major powerbroker in our nation's capitol. This week, he was featured in a Washington Post article under the headline, "The Most Feared Man On The Hill?"

The downfall of Sen. Larry "Wide Stance" Craig has put Rogers in the spotlight, where he is finally getting his due. Months before "potty-gate," Rogers outed Craig for allegedly having sex at Washington's Union Station. Now that he has been vindicated (not the first time), he has gone from a pariah, in some circles, to downright prophetic.

In addition to the Washington Post feature, Rogers has made the rounds on CNN, NBC's Today Show and National Public Radio. He has earned his celebrity and his efforts deserve our full-fledged praise and support.

Still, some opponents - often in the GLBT community - have tried to smear Rogers as radical or loony. Sometimes, these slights are in the media, but more often than not, they are defamatory whispers at cocktail parties by those who feel threatened by his work. Far from radical, however, Rogers is refreshingly contemplative and levelheaded when it comes to the ethics of outing. He has a clear idea of where he stands and has been consistent in his rules of engagement.

"When those private lives are in direct conflict with the public policy that these officials espouse, I think it's fair game that their private lives be brought into this," Rogers told The Washington Post. "And I have a blog to do that with. Here's the question: What community is expected to protect its own enemies? Don't beat up the gay community, and then expect us to protect your secrets and your double life. It's just not right."

When one sits down with Rogers, it is immediately clear that he is unorthodox in his approach, but he is not a wild gunslinger shooting from the hip. He is smart, deliberative and obsessed with getting his facts right. Indeed, he has yet to be wrong in his outing campaigns and has corroborated evidence before he has gone forward. This mix of careful journalism and energetic activism is an exemplary illustration of how one enterprising activist can make a difference and change the world

Indeed, it is not Rogers who is radical, but those who perpetuate or enable the GLBT population's second-class citizenship who are the extremists. He is simply holding elected officials to the standard of truthfulness and trustworthiness they campaigned on to get elected.

According to The Washington Post, there are 33 names on Rogers' list of Congressional charlatans - 30 of them Republicans. If only one-third of these scoundrels get outed in the next two years, the earthquake on Capitol Hill will be so large that it may cause a war between GOP moderates and social conservatives. There is no way the Party can absorb, justify or explain an additional 10-30 closeted gay politicians and still claim to be the party of conservative "family values."

Our community should find a way to come up with at least $333,000 ($10,000 per potential hypocrite) to support Rogers' ongoing investigations. He is one of the few advocates who has consistently backed up his rhetoric and delivered tangible victories. If we do not give this hero what he deserves, then we deserve to be lorded over by Republican hypocrites who have built their careers by bashing queers.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: blackmail; dncbrownshirts; extortion; gaystapotactics; gop; homofascist; homosexualagenda; hypocrisy; ivegotalist; logcabin; mediabias; mikerogers; neomccarthyism; notbreakingnews; pinkpistols; strikeupthebanned; thelist; troll; zogbyism; zot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last
To: Jose Pen
What hypocrisy. If the left thinks being a homo is so great, why are they so excited about outing gay republicans?
21 posted on 09/05/2007 11:59:17 AM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

Can you not be sinful and still support family values with how you vote?

Homosexuality is a sin and as such, shouldn’t be put on a pedestal as a positive trait which is why these closeted guys are closeted. Shame is why they are closeted if these 30 are indeed gay.


22 posted on 09/05/2007 11:59:18 AM PDT by smith288 (Ohio State, close to being 2007 NCAA Champs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

And the number of dimocrats?


23 posted on 09/05/2007 11:59:55 AM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sheana
Unless of course there is a reason that gays are drawn to public office.

Pages?

24 posted on 09/05/2007 12:00:14 PM PDT by Phantom Lord (Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

Win at all costs no matter who you lie about. That plan might work. But then there is a coming judgment day. It won’t work forever.


25 posted on 09/05/2007 12:01:51 PM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen
Mike Rogers has the legal right to "out" any gay politician he wants to "out." He does not, however, have the legal right to extort a gay politician, especially when the desired payoff is a vote from that politican. Extortion is a felony, and when the targets of extortion are politicians, the entire system is corrupted in a vile and unacceptable way. 18 U.S.C. § 875(d) states, "Whoever, with the intent to extort from any person . . . any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate . . . commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another . . . shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

Arguably, Mike Rogers extorted Larry Craig by threatening to "out" him if he did not vote against the confirmation of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. For this, he deserves the condemnation of all morally responsible citizens of this country and, at least, an investigation by the federal government to look for possible criminal wrongdoing.

--RedState

26 posted on 09/05/2007 12:01:55 PM PDT by ZGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen
“with at least $333,000 ($10,000 per potential hypocrite) to support Rogers’ ongoing investigations”

Extortion?

27 posted on 09/05/2007 12:02:06 PM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

And yet, Rogers cannot point to a single piece of legislation Craig supported that would have made what Craig is accused of doing illegal.

So in other words, Craig was not pushing for legislation that he hypocritically violated.

This would be like calling a smoking lawmaker a hypocrite for pushing for public smoking bans.

Which is something many lawmakers, democrat and republican, do. Also drinkers who push for restrictions on drinking. Or christian and yet mistakenly supporting keeping religion out of schools.

You can be gay, and still not believe that the state should allow same-sex marriage, or grant special protection to gay people in hiring and firing decisions. You could be gay and not think that others should be forced to rent rooms to gay couples.

This is NOT hypocrisy. If a gay lawmaker is saying that homosexuality is a sin and should be banned, then YES, that is hypocrisy, and they should be outed. But if all they are doing is imposing reasonable restrictions on what the government does, their sexual preferences shouldn’t matter.

On the other hand, NO lawmaker should hide from the public something that, if revealed, would be considered harmful to them. That just opens them up to bribery.

Like Rogers, who has promised to keep this stuff secret IF the lawmakers vote the RIGHT way on gay matters.

It seems that such threats should be prosecuted as blackmail, and I don’t know what someone doesn’t take that tact.

If you specifically state that you are going to release harmful information about a politician unless they vote a certain way, that is blackmail.


28 posted on 09/05/2007 12:02:10 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen
Please, please, please, Dear God, let him help us nail Lindsey Graham Cracker's sorry posterior to the wall.

And when we're done with Graham Cracker, we can set our sights on Arlen Sphincter.

29 posted on 09/05/2007 12:02:49 PM PDT by KayEyeDoubleDee (const Tag &referenceToConstTag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen
"When those private lives are in direct conflict with the public policy that these officials espouse, I think it's fair game that their private lives be brought into this,"

Like John Edwards?
30 posted on 09/05/2007 12:03:14 PM PDT by elizabetty (I will announce my tagline message May 1..July 4.or.6.... Aug 8... Aug 25....Sept 6 on Dharma & Greg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

according to this faggot it is OK to be an elected official in the closet if only you are willing to NOT vote in the affirmative on special rights for fags, AGAINST the wishes of your constituents!

So another way of looking at this is as blackmail.....in which the payoff is to obstruct “democracy” or “representative” government. Come to think of it, it SHOULD be worthy of an obstruction of justice charge.......


31 posted on 09/05/2007 12:04:12 PM PDT by Vn_survivor_67-68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mrs. a
"The logic of the self-loathers escapes me..."

I thought this too. Are they saying gays are unfit for office? Or that they aren't allowed to be republicans? What they are of course really doing is exposing them, hoping that the neanderthals in the GOP will get rid of them simply for being gay.

32 posted on 09/05/2007 12:04:25 PM PDT by boop (Trunk Monkey. Is there anything he can't do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

List starts with Hillary — that would be good.


33 posted on 09/05/2007 12:05:05 PM PDT by Tarpon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: icwhatudo

Has anybody collected Larry Flynt’s $1 million for sleaze on Republicans?


34 posted on 09/05/2007 12:05:07 PM PDT by karnage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

Joe McCarthy had a list.


35 posted on 09/05/2007 12:07:59 PM PDT by pbear8 (Padre Pio please pray for Tony Snow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: karnage

Is this cuckoo puffs writer bragging, crying, or covering HRC’s derrier?


36 posted on 09/05/2007 12:10:30 PM PDT by crazyshrink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Orange1998

If we’re going to be the party of values, then our elected leaders must live them. Exposure is painful and can lead to short-term political loss. But I believe that it will lead to long-term gain for the country. I’m not sure what it would do to the party, but I don’t believe that the party can be successful saying one thing and tolerating another.


37 posted on 09/05/2007 12:12:28 PM PDT by twigs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty

That would be bad for Mike...


38 posted on 09/05/2007 12:14:00 PM PDT by TheDon (The DemocRAT party is the party of TREASON! Overthrow the terrorist's congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen
If you read it closely, they make it sound like 30 Congressmen or Senators. But then at the end, you see "10-30 gay politicians". So it sounds like some of those thirty might be top congressional staffers, not elected pols. So some of this is no big surprise.

If he outs them, it would be maximum damage to wait until after the primaries. I doubt that'll happen though. This is too bogus and he'll likely go with it now, releasing a few names at a time to capitalize on Larry Craig publicity.
39 posted on 09/05/2007 12:14:45 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jose Pen

Rogers is a slime.


40 posted on 09/05/2007 12:15:07 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson