Posted on 10/10/2006 7:34:47 AM PDT by ZGuy
Amid the fallout of the Mark Foley scandal, one consequence appears to be an increasing exposure of the influential role homosexuals have within the Republican party. As the New York Times reported Sunday, homosexuals in the Republican Party -- sometimes known by insider slang terms including the "velvet mafia" or the "pink elephants" -- are a well-established force in the GOP.
According to the Times, many of these homosexual Republicans "have held crucial staff positions for decades," and this has been even more the case in recent years. "They have played decisive roles in passing legislation, running campaigns and advancing careers," the article notes.
And although "gay" GOP members have had to be, in most cases, more discreet about their lifestyle than their counterparts in the Democratic Party, the Mark Foley scandal -- and the recent confirmation of the Florida congressman's homosexuality -- has put a new spotlight on just what influence these homosexuals have within the Republican Party.
As the Times observes, conservative blogs and websites have stated that homosexual staff members played principle roles in investigating the Foley case, suggesting that the party has been betrayed by homosexual men trying to hide misconduct by one of their own.
The newspaper also says a group of homosexual activists has started a document known as "the list," a roster of homosexual congressional staff members and their Republican bosses. The list, the Times suggests, is an apparent attempt to force homosexual Republicans working in and around the Capitol to be more open about their lifestyle choice.
Meanwhile, one pro-family activist is calling for more openness about another aspect of the scandal. Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth believes the media have taken great pains to avoid using the words "homosexual" or "gay" in coverage of the Foley scandal. "There's clearly an effort here to make this somehow a pedophile issue or something that's separate from the homosexual issue," he asserts, "and, of course, this is right up the homosexual alley."
There is a well-documented history of homosexual men pursuing underage boys, LaBarbera says; but homosexual activists are getting help in burying this fact. "What we're seeing here," he contends, "is another effort by the media, working with the gay lobby, to separate out Foley's predations on a teenage boy from the homosexual issue."
The media is not being intellectually honest about the Foley situation or the pattern that it illustrates, the pro-family activist insists. "There's a long history of homosexuals being predators on teenage boys," he says.
"The fact is, if you go all the way back to the days of ancient Greece, there were homosexual relationships between adult men and teenage boys; so it's really ridiculous to say this has nothing to do with homosexuality," LaBarbera notes. He says the media's reporting of the Foley scandal has been marked by a great deal of political correctness, while the media have actually helped homosexual activists bury the truth.
Endorse "good" gays like Jim Kolbe and Mark Foley and what do you get? One calling for gay marriage and one resigning in disgrace.
Those people are cancers in the GOP and end up doing far, far more harm than good.
I know of numerous people, with numerous kinds of obsessions, mental troubles, and ultimately harmful moral failings, whom I would stake my life on, if necessary. And we all have rights, but that doesn't make wrong right.
'Nuff said about that. The point is, if anyone fails to vote or wastes their vote on some third party spoiler (excepting Lieberman) and the result is the loss of the Republican House majority, our President will likely be impeached.
Whether the Pelosi mob would want to embarrass themselves in that way or just in others, it would be a harmful step backward. Every law, every judicial appointment, etc. matters.
There is an extensive network of gay Republican high level staff members, something that, as the article points out, has received very, very little attention before now.
There is very, very little known publicly about what these people are or are not pushing or influencing. Just because something isn't proven doesn't make it untrue.
Clearly it's a danger that we may have a group of Log Cabin subversives trying to 'turn' the GOP from within.
I did not "vote" for Foley or Kolbe.
But, you go ahead and leave the GOP over the issue. It will survive and you will have lost the best political home you have ever had.
Square pegs in round holes provide some questions to be raised even for simple conclusions.
To compare sex deviates to socially adjusted "normal" folks is ludicrous....irrational justification for queers that common sense cannot accept does not make one a "bigot", but rather a realist.
...and 2,000,000 conservative Christians.
Don't these folks realize how split the country is. We are practically 50-50.
And we cannot afford to piss off the mainstream of the party -- and, if you look at the marriage referendums, the mainstream of the voting public -- by playing footsie with gay rights activists.
It's ironic that that's exactly what they said about Foley.
He abused our trust! The Mark Foley I knew was upstanding etc etc, this is a Mark Foley I never knew ....
Well, what do you think? Is God behind Al Qaeda?
Wuli, stop making a fool of yourself. Go quote where I said I was leaving the GOP, or shut up.
Don't be such a troll.
Was God behind Nebuchadnezzar?
That's the theoretical parallel being drawn.
"There is an extensive network of gay Republican high level staff members, something that, as the article points out, has received very, very little attention before now."
No. The article does not identify any "extensive network of gay Republican high level staff members". It says there gays who "have held crucial staff positions for decades" [how many???, who decides what is a "crucial" position and who is a "crucial" member of Congress?? The New York Slimes??]
The line "influential role homosexuals have within the Republican party" is an editorial line written by the writers, and yet not substantiated by any evidence they produce, particularly when the intent of that line wants to imply that the "influential role" relates to a homosexual agenda.
The authors might have considered the source for their perception - "news" reports from The New York Times.
When the New York Slimes says: "They have played decisive roles in passing legislation, running campaigns and advancing careers," does the Times tell us, or does Agape even ask: "what legislation", "whose campaigns", "whose careers".
Does the Slimes tell us or does Agape ask the Slimes to demonstrate just where do we see GOP advance of "legislation", "campaigns" and "careers" that, demonstrate advancement of an agenda by said homosexuals. No.
The Times inserts an innuendo and then does nothing to back up where we can see evidence of it, and Agape simply takes The New York Times line, intended to slime the GOP and goes with it; as if The New York Times editorial opinion can be taken at face value.
The New York Slimes has been an apendage of the political left for many decades. The open and stated intent of the founders of CREW and Mike Rogers, the people behind "outing" Foley at this time, is an 11th hour political act to get social conservatives to leave the GOP this November, so that the Dims and the left would get Congressional Majorities.
Agape Press and you want to be their patsies. Go ahead.
And we cannot afford to piss off the mainstream of the party -- and, if you look at the marriage referendums, the mainstream of the voting public -- by playing footsie with gay rights activists.
I 100 percent agree with you that we should NOT cater to the gay right activists, but not kick them either. Well the activists yes. The Log Cabin Republicans who seem reasonable due to them being fiscal Republicans No.
Dem Homos = OK
actually only 19 percent of registered voters are "core democrat voters" while 35% or so are core republicans.
The balance is the "mushy middle" but they are the security moms and the angry men who don't vote for homsoexuals and don't vote for increasing taxes.
If you want an accurate picture look at the actuall passage rates of the marriage amendments.
Off topic but I must contest your tag line.....no way are my St.Louis Cardinals losing....LOL!!!!! All in good fun, I can't wait for the games.
Neither can I. I am happy, btw, that I will not have to lose my lunch like I did in the 80s, being treated to the ugly mugs of such players as Vince Coleman and Willie McGee.
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.