Connect with us

Dan Savage, Michelle Malkin, GOProud, And ‘House Faggots’

Published

on

Today Dan Savage posted to Twitter his feelings upon learning that GOProud, the gay Republican Tea Party group, had endorsed Mitt Romney:

 

Yes, that’s a link to The New Civil Rights Movement and our excellent story deconstructing the ludicrousness of the GOProud endorsement, complete with a chart and poll results. Savage apparently thought well enough of our article detailing the GOProud/Romney endorsement to post it to his 83,712 followers on Twitter. Followers or not, many on Twitter — and off — were off-put.

Savage’s tweet got well over 70 retweets, some asking, “You’re leading the fight against bullying?,” or, “Is it okay if a straight guy like me uses the word ‪#faggot‬ ? …Faggot,” or “#liberaltolerance.”

Others were more virulently opposed, like “Twitchy,” Michelle Malkin’s ludicrous attempt to capture the thoughts of anonymous Twitter users and claim them as leftist thugs. What riper market than millions upon millions of anonymous donors to her cause?

In, “#ItGetsWorse: Anti-bully Dan Savage uses gay slur to bash GOProud; Update: New video showcasing Savage’s bullying,” Malkin (or her anonymous “Twitchy Staff”) wrote, anonymously:

File under: Unexpectedly! Self-proclaimed gay rights advocate and anti-bullying crusader Dan Savage laid bare his intolerance once again, this time hurling the f*ggot-bomb at gay conservative organization GOProud. GOProud, you see, had the gall to stray from the Gay Left’s plantation and announce its support for Mitt Romney

You can imagine the rest.

The Huffington Post opened their story with:

When Dan Savage, the gay-rights advocate and sex columnist known for his brand of straight talk, is angry, don’t expect him to hide it.

He’s angry.

And that’s the point.

The other point: No one cares what GOProud says or does. They are about as irrelevant as an ant at a picnic. Sure, they’re a good way to expose Republican flapdoodle, but aside from giving us more Ann Coulter codswallop, no one — I mean, no one — pays attention to anything they say or do.

So why elevate their importance, Dan?

Frankly, as regular readers know, I have “colleagueuely” chastised, and clearly castigated Dan Savage for his many missteps.

I think calling anyone a “faggot” is just plain wrong — regardless of how angry you are. And I certainly won’t defend Dan here.

If Bryan Fischer or Chris Barron or a next-door neighbor said the “f word,” I’d have a problem with it. A big one.

It’s wrong, and I’m willing to bet Dan knows it. Dan should apologize. So should GOProud for endorsing Romney, but that’s another story. Neither, I expect, will.

What’s disturbing to me is time and time again, Dan goes out of his way to give our enemies (yes, enemies — people who advocate for your death, imprisonment, people who want me and my relationship to be illegal, are enemies, period) ammunition.

Did Dan bully those high school journalism students? No. It’s bull to say he did. Did he give fodder to the right? Yes.

Were Dan’s New York Times interview comments poorly timed and inappropriate? Yes.

And can we all just agree that Dan has done more good than harm, and agree that he is not the official representative for the gay community?

Unlike Michelle Malkin, who sees anonymous tweets as evidence of a left wing conspiracy, I don’t think it’s fair to take one person and blame their trespasses on their entire race/political party/city/region/county/religion/orientation/gender/etc.

If the world were to end today, and if I believed in Heaven, (or Hell,) I believe God — if he is the being Christians would like us to think he is — would weigh Michelle Malkin against Dan Savage and the winner by a million miles would be Dan Savage. Dan has done more good for all the people in this world in a year than Michelle has done in her entire life.

That’s all I’d like to say about today’s episode.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘The American People Are on Our Side’: Democrat Offers Idea to Save Women’s Freedoms

Published

on

Speaking to MSNBC’s Mehdi Hasan on Sunday, Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY), a Harvard Law School graduate, explained that Congress could protect the freedoms of women and his plan doesn’t have anything to do with an attempt to overthrow the government.

“I knew that we would arrive at this point,” Jones explained. “My colleague scoffed at me at the time that I introduced the bill, in April of 2021. Of course, the American people are on our side, when you look at poll after poll. And thankfully, we do have about 58 House members who are supportive of adding four seats to the Supreme Court, but that is not nearly enough. We can’t pass the Women’s Health Protection Act, after getting rid of the filibuster, which we obviously need to do. But this Supreme Court has shown a willingness to strike down newly enacted laws by Congress. They did so with the decision after decision of the Voting Rights Act, which has been reauthorized nearly unanimously. I’m under no illusions anything short of court reform, specifically adding seats to the Supreme Court, is going to preserve fundamental rights permanently.”

He disputed President Joe Biden’s statement that adding seats to the court would be “polarizing.” Already, the American people have the lowest opinion level of the Supreme Court in history. Jones said that the more polarizing thing is the degradation of the most fundamental rights in America: personal freedoms.

“Whether it is the right to abortion, which is a 50-year-old Constitutional right, or of course, imminently, the right to contraception, and the right to marriage equality, and the right to same-sex intimacy,” Jones continued, citing key court decisions cited by Justice Clarence Thomas that he wants to see fall next.

Jones went on to say that one of his ideas with the new voting rights bill was to add a provision that would deprive the Supreme Court of jurisdiction to review the constitutionality and legality of the statute.

“We have seen that this supreme court majority, this far-right majority is hostile to democracy itself,” said Jones. “If we are to vote on the Women’s Health Protection Act for the second time this term, I am pushing to include a provision to deprive the Supreme Court of review of that statute. There is precedent for this, it has been done before, and it is a practice that has been upheld before. We know that most of the cases the Supreme Court decides, it is only able to decide because of the jurisdiction that Congress has explicitly legislated it to have. The Constitution is very narrow in terms of the scope of jurisdiction that it grants to the Supreme Court. We have tools at our disposal here.”

See the full conversation below:

 

Image by Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States via Wikimedia

Continue Reading

News

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves Dismisses ‘Real Small, Minor Number’ of Rapes Requiring Abortions

Published

on

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R) declined to say on Sunday if he would sign a bill removing abortion exceptions for rape because they only represent a “real small, minor number” of cases.

During an interview on Fox News, host Mike Emmanuel asked Reeves if he would remove the abortion exceptions for rape in Mississippi.

Reeves sidestepped the question by insisting that the bill would never make it through the legislature.

“There’s a lot of effort, particularly in Washington and other places mainly by the Democrats, to try to talk only about the real small, minor number of exceptions that may exist,” he complained. “Over 90% of all abortions that are done in America, some 63 million babies aborted since Roe was wrongly decided in 1973, over 90% of those are elective abortions.”

Reeves argued that the “far-left” should not be talking about “all these exceptions and minor numbers.”

Watch the video below from Fox News.

 

Continue Reading

News

Trump Hinted Jan. 6 Would Be His ‘Last-Ditch’ Attempt to Overturn the Election Results: Filmmaker Alex Holder

Published

on

In an interview with the Guardian’s Hugo Lowell, a British documentary maker who was filming behind-the-scenes footage in Donald Trump’s White House on Jan 6th claimed he knew something bad was about to happen before supporters of the former president stormed the Capitol and sent lawmakers fleeing for their lives.

Alex Holder, whose film crew was on hand and filming Trump and his children Don Jr, Eric and Ivanka on Jan 6th, stated there was a feeling among his people that something momentous was about to happen.

According to Lowell, “Holder was there for it all: three sit-down interviews with Trump, including one at the White House, numerous other interviews with Trump’s adult children, private conversations among top aides and advisers before the election, and around the Capitol itself as it got stormed.” adding, “The access to Trump, and listening to him and his inner circle, led him to suspect that the former president’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election would somehow culminate in some event at the Capitol on 6 January.”

Asked about what his feeling was prior to the riot that engulfed the Capitol building, Holder explained, “I wasn’t 100% sure, but it was sort of a feeling, so we prepared for that thing to happen. The reason we thought January 6 was because, in Trump’s mind, the last-ditch effort was to stop the process” of the vote certification by Congress.

RELATED: Man behind J6 documentary needs ‘two armed guards’ due to Trump supporters’ threats: BBC

He elaborated, “That ceremonial process that takes place in Congress on January 6, he felt, was the last time where he could, in his mind, stop the election going to the wrong person, as it were. The rhetoric that was coming out was that the election was rigged, [that] we need to fight.”

According to the Guardian report, Holder has, “testified for about four hours behind closed doors last week about his roughly 100 hours of footage, used for an upcoming documentary titled Unprecedented, and turned over to House investigators the parts demanded in a subpoena compelling his cooperation.”

Lowell added, “Holder said he additionally did a one-to-one interview with then-vice president Mike Pence, including a scene where Pence briefly reviews an email about the 25th amendment – which concerns the removal of a US president – which was privately discussed among senior White House officials in the wake of the Capitol attack.”

You can read more here.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.