Those Unifying Democrats: Bill Clinton Calls GOP Gay Man "Self-Loathing"

Self-loathing? Just because he's a Republican?

There are a lot of responses to this.

First, I happen to know, in both real life and through INTERNET, a bunch of gay Republicans. Well, not a bunch, but given that it's a rare breed, I would guess I know about 75% of the entire Republican gay population of the United States.

They don't seem "self-loathing" to me-- they seem pretty damn self-assured and, well, kind of happy and centered. They're great guys. So great, in fact, that sometimes I go into a coat-room with them and let them do stuff to me.

Doesn't make ME gay, after all. I'm not the one squatting on a pile of hand-bags.

But seriously-- maybe it's just me, but gay Republicans seem like non-angry people. And you can say what you want about righteous anger and all the rest, but I don't think actual quaking, quivering angry is healthy -- and I stand by my belief that no one should feel that way about politics, at least until we are confronted with actual tyranny -- and I think that sort of stomach-churning anger is indicative of problems in one's life.

I was angry during impeachment-- about politics. I hope never to be that angry again, not over politics at least, and whether Bill really was "alone" with Monica in the Oval Office, and just stupidly obsessed with crap that, let's be honest, in the scheme of things doesn't have a thing to do with the people I love or the crazy blog-money I crave.

Next point: the implication here is that gay Republicans are self-loathing because the party, as a whole, objects to gay marriage.

Well, look, Bill, you did sign DOMA, didn't you? Not really a profile in courage if you really wanted to advance the cause of gay marriage. And Kerry, your wife, etc. -- just about anyone who doesn't have a cushy liberal Congressional district containing more Starbucks than hardware stores -- is against, at least on paper, gay marriage as well.

I hate this game the Democrats play. They want to claim they're really, really pro-gay-marriage or pro-minority-quotas, and they use that as a cudgel with which to beat Republicans, but, at the end of the day, damnit, if they don't usually end up voting pretty much the same way Republicans do.

I guess we all know they're lying, and that they reallly would like to advance these "progressive" causes, but can't due to political considerations, and so they claim to be all moderate 'n stuff and against these hot-button initiatives.

But honestly-- of what value is dishonesty and cravenness? And it's not like Republican office-holders don't face similar political considerations. If dishonesty and cravenness are virtues, then there an awful lot of Republicans, too, who deserve gay votes.

And finally: it is just repugnant to continually suggest that one's race or sexual orientation ought to dictate one's beliefs, values, and highest aspirations. That is, in fact, stereotyping gays and other minorities. It reduces the complexities of the human intellect and character to a crude check-box on a Tribal Identity Membership Card.

Do these humps not allow for the fact that some gays might have a touch of the ol' contrarian streak in them? I love contrarians. They're fun. I never was a conservative until I went to college and then blah-blah school and was thrown in with a bunch of liberal jackasses. And the more liberal jackassing I was exposed to, the more I felt like saying things what would make their hair singe.

Pretty much just to be a prick.

My entire political philosophy is informed by a strong urge to make strangers dislike me as quickly and as intensely as possible.

And I don't mind saying I've gotten pretty good at it. Of course, I was blessed with innate talents, too.

Click on the pic to call him a dick.

I'm so childish, I know.

All Quiet on the Shrill Shill Front Update: Andrew Sullivan, who usually just can't wait to opine on all matters gay or gay-ish, seems to have nothing much to say about this bit of reductionist stereotyping from his new pals in the Democratic Party.

Well, as he's said before, Lord knows he's not the easiest person to offend.

Maybe the third or fourth easiest. But top two? Definitely not.

Thanks to Slublog. I don't know why I bother with these hat-tips. It's not like a hat-tip on this stupid mornoblog wins you a new car or anything.

Obligatory Nanotech Update: In the future, no one will need to have sex of any sort at all, because we'll all be outfitted with little nanotech devices called "diddlebots" that will provide us with low-level, safe-to-drive sexual stimulation all day long.

Sort of like kinky-dirty little elves. In your pants.

posted by Ace at 04:20 PM

| Access Comments