Skip to main content

The following information was in our local newspaper today: Log Cabin Republicans plan to "honor" our radical, right wing anti-gay Congress critter, Ann Marie Buerkle at a fundraiser Thursday.

You read that right.

Apparently, Log Cabin Republicans are planning to “honor” some gay-hating Republican Congress critters, including our hate-filled radical right-wing extremist misrepresentative in Washington, Ann Marie Buerkle, at a fundraising event in Washington Thursday (at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference, according to our local newspaper).

So, let me get this right. Ann Marie Buerkle, who has never voted in support of any gay rights legislation and who is, in fact, one of the biggest hate-mongers in terms of doing her best to prevent those in the gay community from having the same rights as everyone else, who is dedicated to trying to ensure that they are treated as second-class citizens, is being honored by the Log Cabin Republicans?

And, let me get this right. Not only is this anti-gay bigot being “honored,” by them, but these Log Cabin Republicans are going to do this as part of a fundraiser, to help raise money for Buerkle's re-election? Really?

The rationale by these Log Cabin Republicans is that they support these crackpots on fiscal matters, so want to be sure to continue to be able to work on changing their viewpoints on gay matters.

Using their logic (or lack thereof), if the Log Cabin Republicans had been around during the 1930's and 1940's, they would have been assisting Adolph Hitler in exterminating gay people because they wanted to keep their dialogue open with him in the hopes of eventually changing his mind.

Are Log Cabin Republicans insane, or just plain stupid?


Log Cabin Republicans, insane, stupid or something else?

3%6 votes
13%22 votes
66%112 votes
17%29 votes

| 169 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Butu she's also committed to keeping their taxes (12+ / 0-)

    ... low.

    And that's typically the only thing that these folks care about.

    •  so you think they're myopic or Narcissistic (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Radical def, grrr

      rather than insane or stupid (that is to say, so politically near-sighted that they only care about taxes regardless of how much it may hurt them personally, or Narcissistic in that they care more about money for themseves in the way of lower taxes than they do about their own well being)?

    • is all about the racism with gay repubs (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SoCalLiberal, tiponeill

      they might blah blah about taxes but scratch the surface of a gay repub and they are repub because of racism

      •  I disagree. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Marie, AUBoy2007, bythesea, Chitown Kev

        I know a number of gay Republicans. It's about taxes, first and foremost.

        •  every 1 I have met as a gay man = racists (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          former room mate, at the bars, around town etc every single last gay repub I have met is racist

          SOME of them  might spout the taxes thing to hide it but dig deeper and ALLl turn out to be racist

          •  they have black members. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Chitown Kev, phonatic

            who mostly seem to prefer non-black men.

            But having known founding LCR members from the groups's inception, I could not call the entire cluster racist. Not that there aren't some dudes with issues.

            Elitist, yes.

            Selfish? Yes.

            A very tight knit group of insiders? Yes.

            These guys want to keep what they feel is theirs. While timidly allowing other to be kept away from social progress. It took years to get LCR to sign onto Marriage Equality because they were afraid to rock to conservative boat. They were happy having their lives even it it meant others were denied. They kinda felt they earned that place. And keeping others from getting it was their way of fighting for their rights.

            •  lol, some black gay republicans DO like black men (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              DEMonrat ankle biter

              after all, I dated one for a spell a long time ago...

              (granted this was in 1991- I remember watching the Thomas-Hill hearings with him...and we got into it about that)

            •  Overall, kravitz is correct (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              Maybe all of the LCR gays YOU have met are racist (or perhaps forced to portray themselves as racist), but kravitz is correct that that is not true for all and especially for founding members.  My deceased partner was a founding member here in San Diego back in the '80s.  And as a veteran, it was a way for him to express his beliefs regarding the need to be strong on military defense.  But it was not because of any racist beliefs.

              He did believe that the gay community should rally support around responsible, qualified, competent, and viable gay candidates regardless of partisanship.  And because of that he blasted the national LCRs for endorsing the Republican opponent of Democrat Christine Kehoe (now a state senator) when she ran for US Congress because he felt that many moderate Republicans would agree with her fiscal and economic positions.

              He also loved to be on Republican telefundraising lists so that he could the telefundraisers for Sen. Jesse Helms why he as a gay man would never contribute to a Helms campaign.

              And when he and I jointly discussed and filled out our absentee ballots in 1998, the last election he was able to vote in, he confided in me that while he maintained his Republican registration because he was not going to allow Helms and the other Republican homophobes run him out, he could not vote for any Republican on that year's ballot and was voting straight Democratic.

              Please do not oversimplify and stereotype all LCRs.  The sane ones are extremely important to work with when needing to identify and sway sane Republican pols who will support LGBT rights.  They do exist even if they are few.

              •  "the gay community should rally support around... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                ...responsible, qualified, competent, and viable gay candidates regardless of partisanship."

                There. Are. None.

                And the answer to the title question is "Stupid".

                I'm the plowman in the valley - with my face full of mud

                by labradog on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 05:05:08 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  I think the racism... (4+ / 0-) far more related to being Republican, and not at all related to being gay.

        Which is not to say there aren't probably some gay racists, especially among the Republicans, but just saying...

        Democracy is the most fundamental revolutionary principle.

        by Radical def on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 08:45:09 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  no not related to beign gay, related to being a (0+ / 0-)

          gay repub

          the racism comes first, then they care about their gayness

          talking to them , I have foudn they will gladly go off to the gas chambers as long as "those people" get trashed racially

          gay repubs are nutz

          •  I don't think you can make a completely blanket (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            DEMonrat ankle biter

            statement, but would agree that anecdotal observation of mine does support the idea that they are almost always turn out racist to a degree (or if not, then at least rather indifferent to and largely unmoved by concerns about racism).

  •  They're republicans (10+ / 0-)

    You expect sanity from them?

    P.S. I am not a crackpot.

    by BoiseBlue on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 07:50:16 AM PST

  •  The idea is fundamentally sound. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AUBoy2007, luckylizard, bythesea

    Equality for LGBT people would happen faster if both parties were in favor of it.

    The execution, however, is also fundamentally flawed.

    •  "The idea is fundamentally sound." Nope. (5+ / 0-)

      It makes a fatal assumption: that conservatives can be persuaded to be for gay rights. To see that gays are not some 'other' or the enemy. That they're not abominations unto God.

      And that will never happen. It doesn't matter if the equality message is coming from one of their own or not. Republicans will never be persuaded en mass. For the GOP to favor gay rights would require a fundamental transformation of the conservative mindset. It's akin to expecting Alan Keyes to end the racism of the party. It just won't happen.

      All the Log Cabiners do is provide cover for the GOP against charges of homophobia and gay bashing.

      •  We don't need all republicans. (0+ / 0-)

        We need just enough of them.  Like the four Senators in NY who voted for marriage equality.

        One should no more deplore homosexuality than left-handedness. ~Towards a Quaker View of Sex, 1964 (Proud left-handed queer here!) SSP: wmlawman

        by AUBoy2007 on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 10:21:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Those 4 didn't change their votes because of the (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Radical def, wdrath

          Log Cabins. They looked at the polling in their district and considered their longterm political futures. They know that gay bashing is a long run political loser.

        •  But at what cost to other constituencies? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Are gays willing to trade off what can only be nominal gains for their cause, if that means other constituencies who are egregiously hurt by the Republicans will then consider them to be unprincipled opportunists, willing to sacrifice everyone else, for their own gain?

          Far better, it seems to me, to work more closely with those most likely to ultimately deliver the goods (the Democrats) than to play footsie with fascists (the Republicans), who would just as soon turn and kill you, the minute they sufficiently consolidate their own power.

          I don't know specifics of those 4 you mention, and can see the possibility that support for them might not have hurt Democratic prospects, or other constituencies, directly, maybe, under some theoretical circumstances...

          But otherwise, and in general, such an approach seems to be playing with fire, and unlikely to gain the kind of really useful support that's really needed, for more comprehensive, meaningful change than most Republicans would EVER Even contemplate.

          Democracy is the most fundamental revolutionary principle.

          by Radical def on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 11:12:20 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Democrats have a history... (0+ / 0-)

            ...of not delivering the goods in many cases.

            So we GLBT people should just accept that we will never be equal?

            •  I don't know what makes you say that... (0+ / 0-)

              Compared to the Republicans...there's no comparison.

              The past is past, but the future is looking better to me than it ever did before.

              If women and POC have not reached true equity yet, after all this time, I don't see how you can reasonably expect to see it immediately, all of a sudden, for gays either.

              Indeed, it goes beyond that, to the fundamental class issues of social and economic injustice, in general.

              The struggle continues.

              The real, comprehensive, meaningful changes we want to see will only come with democracy, which will only happen with progressive, liberal and rational moderate filibuster-proof Democratic Super Majorities in the House and Senate, that are Not rotten with Blue Dog ilk.

              The Right must be purged, and suppressed, democratically, electorally, legislatively and judicially, to the greatest extent possible, to have Any hope, for Any substantial change.

              I see NO other material feasible option, for justice, or peace, or to save the planet.

              As long as the Republicans and their Chamber of Commerce sponsors are in charge, the whole world is screwed.

              So...just saying, any other focus seems...irrational.

              Democracy is the most fundamental revolutionary principle.

              by Radical def on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 04:38:35 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  There are asshole conservatives (0+ / 0-)

        that are very pro-gay.  I have known a few.  Just being an asshole doesn't mean being a bigot or anti-gay and personal history may be a powerful factor for favoring gay rights (close and important friendships in life, family).  Now, it may take a certain type of personality to do so a the risk of political/business connections and support, but some are that type as well.

    •  If pigs could fly, then... (0+ / 0-)

      ...whatever, lol.

      "Fundamental flaw" is that it's not going to happen.

      Democracy is the most fundamental revolutionary principle.

      by Radical def on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 11:13:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Paper Name?, Location?, Link? - n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  extra tips for "misrepresentative" (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wdrath, Pandoras Box, luckylizard

    I might have to steal that from time to time. Hope you don't mind terribly.

    Scientific Materialism debunked here

    by wilderness voice on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 08:00:16 AM PST

  •  gays make up 15% of the 1%, too (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    My Spin, Marie, zed, luckylizard, bythesea

    they're not crazy...they're probably just wealthy, and tolerate homophobes more easily than the tax collector.

    "By your late thirties the ground has begun to grow hard. It grows harder and harder until the day that it admits you.” Thomas McGuane, Nobody's Angel

    by Keith930 on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 08:05:30 AM PST

    •  so they are just Narcissists? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ...who care more about money than how they are treated by their fellow Republicans?

      •  They're pretty much convinced that their (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        socioeconomic position will keep them safe if gay rights and societal safety go downhill. It's the money. For some people, it's like tunnel long as they have enough money, nothing bad can happen to them.

        A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves. - Edward R. Murrow

        by jayjaybear on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 12:23:52 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  self-hatred is always hilarious (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


  •  Stockholm Syndrome (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Is the the reason that come to mind for me.

    -approaching Curmudgeonry with pleasure

    by Calfacon on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 08:36:42 AM PST

  •  To answer your question (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    luckylizard, wdrath

    A little from Column A, a little from Column B.  

    Log Cabin Republicans honestly make me ill.  

    Check out my new blog:

    by SoCalLiberal on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 08:44:58 AM PST

  •  Will the critter show up? (4+ / 0-)

    I'm surprised she isn't afraid of catching teh gay cooties.

    Make breakfast - not war.

    by tvb on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 08:49:29 AM PST

  •  Greed. n/t (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Marie, wdrath
  •  The logic of bribery... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    If you start with the proposition that most elected officials will change their votes in response to financial incentives, then it seems entirely logical that the gay community can bribe its way to legal equality.

    The logic is even more compelling when considering the voting power of the gay community. If you start with the proposition that 5 to 10 percent of the voting population is gay, then its logical to conclude that the community till never have the voting power to affect election outcomes, and can only achieve its goals through other means.

  •  and semi-seriously... (0+ / 0-)

    I'm not sure that the Log Cabin Republicans should be criticized for their tactics.

    Gay rights have come a long way in the time that this group has been around and they certainly have succeeded in promoting the notion that (some) Republicans are for equal rights too.

    As much as the Log Cabin boys seem to be an example of the world gone mad, there is an argument to be made that they acheived some real successes.

    •  While gay rights have come a long way (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Radical def, wdrath

      the push back from the republicans is getting stronger and stronger. The demonization of gay people, non-christians and minorities is required to be a viable republican candidate.  

      If log cabin republicans were working within the republican party to try to promote socially liberal but fiscally conservative candidates, that would be one thing.  But to promote someone who is fighting to keep you from having basic human rights - that's reprehensible.

      explain how letting gays marry will directly affect your own heterosexual relationship?

      by bluestatesam on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 10:47:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Somehow I'm very doubtful... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      That they have had any real impact whatsoever within the Republican party as a whole.

      And to whatever extent that they, like the few token Blacks, Latinos, or women in their party, are held up as false "proof" of diversity, I think they do more harm than good, in that regard, by a long shot.

      Democracy is the most fundamental revolutionary principle.

      by Radical def on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 11:01:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree and think their impact (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        is very limited.  You do see it on local and state politicians occasionally though (that said I believe the constituencies of said politicians plays a dramatically greater role than any LCR/GOPround influence at all).

  •  What I find more...annoying... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grrr, wdrath

    Is the tendency of some Democrats to vacillate between Democrats and Republicans, and/or to flirt with electoral boycott and splitting sentiments, over one single issue (or several), if they don't get everything they may legitimately want, need, and deserve, immediately.

    Most often, such absolutist positions tend to ignore the real politik of what's materially feasible, especially while hostage to Right wing majorities determined to turn every issue into a bargaining chip, ensuring that any gains for one group will have to come out of the hide of another group.

    There's a diary on the front page now, rationalizing that gays should "reward" those few rare Republicans who have voted for gay rights issues...with campaign donations, volunteers and votes.

    While I might not have a big problem with that, if it doesn't hurt Democratic prospects in any way, I do think such perspectives are playing with fire, and subject to cross an unprincipled, opportunist line in terms of the greater good...which ultimately is not going to tend to endear such elements to the general public.

    Like, say they vote for gay rights, but against unions.

    That's just great...then some union people will hate teh gays for supporting the union-busting Republican?

    Not a good trade off, I think.

    Another diary today (not on the front page), touting an alliance between some elements of OWS and the TeaParty swine, over NDDA...really goes off the deep end, AS IF any of the people involved are really our friends, or our "comrades".

    When it does cross that line, especially to the extent of subjectively reviling the Prez and the Party, as "betrayers", for not delivering moar, faster, better, I think it does their "own" cause far more harm than good...especially when they tend to do so in such a hyperbolic oppositionalist manner as to assert no solidarity whatsoever, as is too often the case around the more hot button issues.

    This might seem OT, but I see some...relationship, in terms of stupid and crazy, unprincipled and opportunist, etc.  

    Democracy is the most fundamental revolutionary principle.

    by Radical def on Sun Feb 05, 2012 at 10:29:08 AM PST

  •  Some Slaves fought for the Confederacy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Southerners love to make this argument...never actually saw any documented evidence of this, but I suppose there could be isolated instances. Isn't that what the LC Republicans are doing? Masochism, self hatred and self delusion are powerful forces...I suppose.

  •  The dont care about gay people (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grrr, wdrath

    I know that sounds ridiculous since they are gay people. But the thing is, they are wealthy enough that they dont feel threatened. Ask yourself, who is going to threaten Mary Cheney? one. She will never have to worry about visitation rights or being able to keep her kids safe. No one is busting into her bedroom.

    So the log cabiners, being free to not worry about their civil liberties focus entirely on money, their money and how to get more of it. So that naturally makes them Republicans.

  •  Insane or just stupid? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Uh, both, Alex.

    Now, I'll take working class whites for $500, Mr. Trebek.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site