Connect with us

Marcus Bachmann: Is It OK To Make Fun Of Him Because You Think He’s Gay?

Published

on

Marcus Bachmann may be receiving even more attention than his addled wife, Michele, for his anti-gay comments, for calling gays “barbarians” that need “discipline,” and some gays, it seems, are fighting back — by calling Marcus Bachmann “gay.” Mr. Bachmann, some think, has certain effeminate characteristics, has made statements that some think reveal a latent homosexuality, and certainly might fit a profile of extreme-homophobes — such as George Rekers — who get caught in homosexual or same-sex sexual incidents.

READ: 10 Questions Bachmann’s Husband Must Answer About “Christian Counseling”

But, absent any proof, or circumstantial evidence, is it OK to call Marcus Bachmann “gay?,” as if it were a bad thing? Isn’t that what the LGBT community has fought against for decades, and more recently, effectively, with campaigns such as the It Gets Better project, GLSEN and the Ad Council’s 2009 ad campaign from thinkb4youspeak.com, “That’s So Gay,” and all the anti-bullying initiatives that have finally been embraced by the federal government?

Right-wing extremists recently have turned the tables on our community, claiming they are “victims,” that gays are “bullies,” and guilty of “hate crimes.” Doesn’t calling Marcus Bachmann “gay,” because he may sound a bit effeminate, feed into their anti-gay hatred meme?

I don’t know if Marcus Bachmann is gay — and neither do you. If he is, the media one day will uncover evidence and he will reach the depths of disgrace, joining the ranks of Ted Haggard, George Rekers, Bishop Eddie Long, etc., etc., etc.

Now, let me be clear: Marcus Bachmann deserves to be vilified — for his anti-gay bigotry and hatred, for mixing his special blend of “Christian counseling” and claiming it’s therapy, for using and possibly mis-using state and federal funds for his Bachmann and Associates business, for even trying to turn people straight who are gay, for his 2005 presentation, titled, “The Truth About the Homosexual Agenda,” which culminated in three people claiming Bachmann had “cured” their homosexuality.

But when gay people and our allies start calling someone gay because he speaks with a lisp, or walks “funny,” or dances “strangely,” how are we any better than the school yard bullies — or the right wing extremists — who use the word “gay,” as a slur, like “f*g,” or the “n” word, or other ethnic or minority-focused rhetoric?

WATCH: Bachmann’s Radical Beliefs A Liability With General Public

Gaydar, which runs an iPhone app, the purpose of which I have no idea, today offered Marcus Bachmann “a complimentary lifetime membership.” Their Gaydar blog states,

“As a rep at Gaydar HQ explains, “Marcus Bachmann is popping up on everyone else’s gaydar, we figure he might want to be on the real Gaydar!”

I don’t think that’s funny. I do think it reinforces old stereotypes and those who do so put old kids even more at risk. When it’s one by those in our community, I am truly ashamed.

Stonewall DFL Chair David Joseph DeGrio, speaking for himself, said to the Minnesota Independent, “I don’t view saying that someone’s gay is a negative thing, but I believe that perceived sexuality was being used as an attack on Marcus Bachmann, and I find it unacceptable to use perceived sexuality as an attack on anybody.”

“The message I see it sending is a bit hypocritical because we’re advocating for policies in schools to stop this exact thing, saying someone’s effeminate or someone speaks with a high-pitched voice or even [saying] someone is gay because this a gay characteristic,” DeGrio said.

The Independent also published a Facebook note DeGrio wrote, which states in part,

“In the past week I’ve had several people, including some from the LGBT activist community, make comments mocking the perceived sexuality of Marcus Bachmann. I find this completely unacceptable. Think about the terrible example being set for kids who overhear such intimations about Marcus Bachmann.

“We oppose this exact kind of mockery and bullying in the schools because kids commit suicide over these exact same jokes and perceptions.

“If, by some chance, Marcus Bachmann is living a lie we should have compassion and understanding. We know what it’s like to live each day hiding truth and fearing discovery by others.”

That last part goes too far for my taste — if Marcus Bachmann is gay, he deserves to be vilified and excoriated until his final day for the harm he has done to the LGBT community. Heck, he deserves it anyway, but more so if he’s been attacking the very people for who they are if he’s one of us.

DeGrio told The New Civil Rights Movement, “I want to reiterate that I have no problem attacking [Marcus Bachmann’s] bigotry, homophobia and clinical practices, he should be challenged. But people also must acknowledge that not all virulent homophobes are closet cases, some people are just bigots.

“I do have a problem assuming, based upon mannerisms, that he’s gay or bi. As an LGBT activist I constantly fight against stereotype-based labels because not all gays are the same. Making an assumption based upon pitch of voice, body language or looks is what leads to kids being called ‘faggot’ or ‘dyke’ on a daily basis. As an educator I try to set a better example for the youth in our society.”

It’s not OK to make ad hominen attacks on Bachmann — or anyone else.

Attack the Marcus Bachmanns of this world for being ignorant. Attack them for being bigots. Attack them for literally causing people harm. Attack them for being unable to make rational, objective decisions about people. Attack them for their anti-gay hatred masked by a veil of religion and traditional morals. Attack them becuse they should know better.

But don’t attack them for the very thing we recoil at — being attacked for being gay — especially when you don’t know if they are. That makes us no better than they are.

Related Topics:
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

‘Something’s Fishy Here’: Trump’s Latest $175 Million Bond Filings Questioned by Experts

Published

36 mins ago

on

April 16, 2024

By

Attorneys for Donald Trump waited until less than two hours before midnight Monday to file revisions to the ex-president’s $175 million bond for the judgment in his civil fraud case after New York State Attorney General Letitia James questioned the validity of his first bond. Legal experts are now questioning details of the new bond filings. Some suggest a portion of the $175 million might also currently be in use to secure other debts or obligations.

After Trump was found liable for manipulation of his net worth in the civil business fraud case and ordered to pay a $354.9 million penalty plus interest, he was required to post bond to ensure the people of the State of New York would receive $454.2 million if his appeal is unsuccessful.

“The judge said that the former president’s ‘complete lack of contrition’ bordered on pathological,” The New York Times reported two months ago.

Trump’s attorneys later declared it impossible for him to come up with a bond of that amount, and an appeals court drastically reduced the required bond amount to $175 million.

READ MORE: ‘Your Client Is a Criminal Defendant’: Judge Denies Trump Request to Skip Trial for SCOTUS

After 10 PM Monday night, ahead of the midnight deadline, attorneys for Donald Trump in court filings said the $175 million bond is secured, and is tied to a Trump account at Charles Schwab that has over $175 million in cash, CNN reports. The filing states the California company securing the bond, Knight Specialty Insurance Company (KSIC),  has administrative access to it and can pay out the $175 million if needed.

Trump’s attorneys “asked the judge to set aside the attorney general’s challenge to the bond and award him costs and fees.”

Professor of law Andrew Weissmann, a frequent MSNBC legal analyst and former Dept. of Justice official, is raising questions.

“Something’s fishy here,” he wrote late Monday night. “If Trump has $175M free and clear, why not just directly post it and not pay a fee for a surety bond? And the agreement does not give Knight a lien on the account as collateral and seems to afford Trump a two-day window to dissipate the account.”

A screenshot of a portion of the filing, posted by MSNBC’s Lisa Rubin, states, “Schwab, as custodian of the account, has acknowledged KSIC’s right to exercise control over the account within two business days of receiving notice from KSIC of KSIC’s intent to activate the control.”

Attorney and journalist Seth Abramson in a series of posts on social media claimed, “so this is looking very bad for Donald Trump. He says in his Monday night filing that the Schwab account has $175.3 million *in total*, so *if* Axos Bank is depending on that same account for a (semi-)liquid $100M in collateral on another loan, this bond filing is DOA.”

After asking, “Is Trump double-dipping?” Abramson posted more details.

NCRM has not verified those claims.

Attorney Lupe B. Luppen adds, “it took about ten seconds from opening the account security agreement to find a significant drafting error, which makes the signature page look like it belongs to a different agreement (DJT Jr’s attestation identifies the wrong secured party—a Chubb co.).”

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

Late Monday night on MSNBC Weissmann “expressed incredulity,” as Mediaite reported, saying of Trump and his bond: “It is just so remarkable. This is somebody who has been found by two juries to have defamed somebody, who has been found to have sexually assaulted somebody – the company of which has been found criminally liable for a decade-long tax conspiracy, criminally, and has been found to have committed fraud, has to post a bond of $175 million, is on trial starting today for a criminal case involving 34 felonies.”

“And he can’t find a frigging company that is registered in New York? Meaning, that they are licensed to do business here, which it appears they are not, and that has the wherewithal to pay the money because remember, the whole point is that you either have to put up the money now or you have to find a bond company that is sufficiently liquid that the plaintiff can look to that bond company if at the end of the day the judgment is affirmed.”

Attorney General Letitia James earlier had alleged KSIC, the company that secured the bond, was not registered to do so in New York. Experts questioned the language of that filing, claiming it did not require the company that secured the bond to actually pay out $175 million should Trump lose his appeal and be ordered to pay the full amount.

Calling it a “bizarre contract,” earlier this month The Daily Beast reported, “the legal document from Knight Specialty Insurance Company doesn’t actually promise it will pay the money if the former president loses his $464 million bank fraud case on appeal. Instead, it says Trump will pay, negating the whole point of an insurance company guarantee.”

READ MORE: ‘Not a Good Start’: Judge Slams Trump’s ‘Offensive’ Recusal Claims as a ‘Loose End’

 

Continue Reading

News

‘Your Client Is a Criminal Defendant’: Judge Denies Trump Request to Skip Trial for SCOTUS

Published

17 hours ago

on

April 15, 2024

By

Barely hours after New York State Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan gave Donald Trump the same set of rules requiring him to appear in court as all other criminal defendants, the ex-president’s attorney requested his client be allowed to skip trial next Thursday to attend the U.S. Supreme Court arguments on his immunity claim.

“If you do not show up there will be an arrest,” Judge Merchan had told Trump Monday at the start of his criminal trial, according to MSNBC’s Jesse Rodriguez. Trump is facing 34 felony charges for falsification of business records related to his alleged attempts to cover up hush money payments in an effort to protect his 2016 presidential campaign.

Judge Merchan had read from the same rules that apply to all defendants, but right at the end of day one of trial Trump attorney Todd Blanche made his request.

MSNBC’s Lisa Rubin reports, “after the potential jurors are gone, the fireworks start after Blanche asks Merchan to allow Trump to attend the SCOTUS argument on presidential immunity next Thursday, 4/25.”

READ MORE: ‘What Will Happen in the Situation Room?’: Trump Appearing to Sleep in Court Fuels Concerns

“The Manhattan DA’s office opposes the request, saying they have accommodated Trump enough,” MSNBC’s Katie Phang adds, citing Rubin’s reporting.

Judge Merchan “acknowledges a Supreme Court argument is a ‘big deal,’ but says that the jury’s time is a big deal too. Blanche says they don’t think they should be here at all, suggesting that the trial never should have been scheduled during campaign season.”

“That comment appeared to trigger Merchan, who asked, voice dripping with incredulity, ‘You don’t think you should be here at all?'” Rubin writes.

“He then softly asks Blanche to move along from that objection, on which he has already ruled. Merchan then got stern, ruling that Trump is not required to be at SCOTUS but is required, by law, to attend his criminal trial here.”

“Your client is a criminal defendant in New York. He is required to be here. He is not required to be in the Supreme Court. I will see him here next week,” Judge Merchan told Blanche, CBS News’ Scott MacFarlane reported.

That was not the only request Trump’s attorneys made to have their client excused from the criminal proceedings.

Lawfare managing editor Tyler McBrien reports, “Blanche says that the campaign has taken pains to schedule events on Wednesdays and asks Merchan if Trump be excused from any hearings that take place on Wednesdays, when the jury is in recess. Merchan says he will take this into consideration.”

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

Blanche also asked Judge Merchan to allow Trump to skip trial to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation. While the judge has yet to rule, Trump told reporters at the end of day one of trial, “it looks like the judge will not let me go to the graduation.”

The judge told Trump, “I cannot rule on those dates at this time.”

But Trump told reporters, “It looks like the judge isn’t going to allow me to escape this scam, it’s a scam trial.”

Watch below or at this link
.

 

 

Continue Reading

News

‘What Will Happen in the Situation Room?’: Trump Appearing to Sleep in Court Fuels Concerns

Published

19 hours ago

on

April 15, 2024

By

Donald Trump’s apparent sleeping in court on day one of his criminal trial for alleged business fraud related to a cover-up of “hush money” election interference has critics concerned.

While initial reactions to the news largely mocked him as “Sleepy Don,” or “Drowsy Don,” political and legal experts are wondering if the 77-year old ex-president would be able to stay awake during times of crisis, when an alert president would be critical to the nation’s security.

The New York Times‘ Maggie Haberman, the longtime “Trump whisperer,” reported the ex-president “seemed alternately irritated and exhausted Monday morning,” “appeared to nod off a few times, his mouth going slack and his head drooping onto his chest.” She added the ex-president’s attorney “passed him notes for several minutes before Mr. Trump appeared to jolt awake and notice them.”

READ MORE: ‘Staged Photo Op’ of Trump With Black Chick-fil-A Patrons Was ‘True Retail Politics’ Says Fox News

Haberman followed up her Times article with a CNN appearance detailing more of what she saw. The Guardian‘s Victoria Bekiempis, MSNBC’s Katie Phang, and others also reported Trump was seen nodding off.

Critics raised concerns that question Trump’s ability to perform the duties of President.

“If Trump is too old and weak to stay awake at his own criminal trial, what do you think will happen in the Situation Room?” asked former senior advisor to President Barack Obama Dan Pfeiffer.

Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Will Bunch invoked Hillary Clinton’s famous “3 AM phone call” ad from the 2008 campaign, and wrote:

“2008: Which candidate can handle the 3 a.m. phone call?

2024: Which candidate can handle the 3 p.m. phone call?”

Several also noted that Clinton, the former U.S. Secretary of State, testified for 11 hours on live television before a congressional committee and did not fall asleep. Some also noted that President Joe Biden sat for a five-hour deposition with Special Consul Robert Hur and did not fall asleep.

READ MORE: ‘Not a Good Start’: Judge Slams Trump’s ‘Offensive’ Recusal Claims as a ‘Loose End’

Calling it “simply incredible,” professor of law, MSNBC/NBC News legal contributor and former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance asked, “If he can’t keep his eyes open when his own liberty is at stake, why would Americans have confidence he’s capable of focus when our country’s interests require sound presidential leadership?”

MSNBC contributor Brian Tyler Cohen commented, “To be clear, ‘Sleepy Joe’ is awake and criss-crossing the country, while Trump is literally asleep at his own criminal trial.”

Former journalist Jennifer Schultz observed, “Moment of truth for all the legacy media outlets who hyped the Biden age stories. Now we have actual evidence of the other candidate falling asleep at a critical time.”

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.