Your reasoning is here sound. However, a homosexual might go to work for a specifically pro-straight-marriage organization cause if he wanted access to data. Political Infiltration. It's also done in businesses -- business infiltration. And in countries with spies.
In this particular thread matter, however.. liberals flung together a bunch of hoohaa. They don't specifically "say" that Mr. Gannon is gay in a double life. Oh, nooo. They play hopskotch with loose data. And their prime argument with him, as they allege, based upon their rumor/insinuation that he is gay, is that at a conservative news site, Talon News, he has asserted or taken position which are anti-gay MARRIAGE. Therefore, and based upon this rubric, they assert him as a hypocrite.
Let the facts be clear here. There is no known evidence that Mr. Gannon is either straight, gay, or A Stranger In a Strange Land named Valentine.
And it is now quite established, factually, that he is not personally, directly, involvedly -- with porno sites. Straight or Gay.
The point of the liberal "dots" is to let the reader "assume" that Mr. Gannon is a) gay, b) a hypocrite, c) and therefore the President must be impeached.
And this "picture" is brought to the world by those who want to see Gay Marriage a reality. And I read today where the upholding of a "gay marriage" ruling was upheld in court in NY today. My, my... oh the timing. And goodness, but the Eason Jordan story still hasn't really aired yet.. but..
Anyway, I hope this makes the points clearer.
You are quite correct, conservatives are a moral people. Moral people uphold timeheld, constitutional standards. And anyone may apply for a daily pass at WH press briefings, regardless of sex, ethnicity, race, and provided that they are indeed a news organization. Jeff's crime? He asked unusual questions! And he actually read something about Valerie Plame "case" that "established credentialed" journalists hadn't seen first (or did and didn't want anyone to know). And now they are mad.
In this particular thread matter, however.. liberals flung together a bunch of hoohaa. They don't specifically "say" that Mr. Gannon is gay in a double life. Oh, nooo. They play hopskotch with loose data. And their prime argument with him, as they allege, based upon their rumor/insinuation that he is gay, is that at a conservative news site, Talon News, he has asserted or taken position which are anti-gay MARRIAGE. Therefore, and based upon this rubric, they assert him as a hypocrite.
I had to come back. Forget the variables; there is one person in particular who uses this specific form of debate (straw dog thrown in as instant premise, then the piling on through dots). Michael Kinsley.
Goodnight.
All valid points. I don't really know if he is gay, but Terry Dolan and Robert Bauman definitely were.
And in response to the gentleman's reply earlier, conservatism has never said that being BLACK is wrong, but it has said that being homosexual is wrong.
Nonetheless, you bring up a valid point that a gay man might be against gay marriage, but what about someone like Robert Bauman who was SO vehemently against homosexuality, yet died of AIDS he picked up from a teenage male prostitute?
I just wonder if they are conflicted by their homosexuality and thus come out against it, maybe in hopes of defeating it within themselves? I dunno...
I definitely think Gannon should have been allowed to ask questions of President Bush, whether he used a fake name or not.
Shoot, most of the movie stars in Hollywood have fake names. Karl Malden was Maladen Sekulivich, Bob Dylan is Robert Zimmerman, John Wayne was Marion Morrison, etc. Gannon's reasons seemed legit.
Gannon has as much right to a place at a press briefing as anybody else, with his web connections. Same as World Net Daily has a right to be there, or Peter Jennings, who has NO degree, just a malignant dislike of anything Christian, conservative or Republican.
Now, if it DOES turn out that Gannon is a homosexual, then I think he should have said it on his website, so he couldn't be blindsided like this.
Ed