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.

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.

OPINION

‘You Just Don’t Do It’: Federal Judge Denounces Alito’s Flags as ‘Stop the Steal’ Stickers

Published

on

A senior U.S. district judge is denouncing U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito‘s flying of two insurrection-related flags at his homes in Virginia and New Jersey, declaring the actions “improper. And dumb.”

Judge Michael Ponsor, 77, who has served on the federal bench since 1984, writes in a Friday New York Times op-ed that he has “known scores, possibly hundreds, of federal trial and appellate judges pretty well,” and “can’t think of a single one, no matter who appointed her or him, who has engaged or would engage in conduct like that.”

“You just don’t do that sort of thing, whether it may be considered over the line, or just edging up to the margin. Flying those flags was tantamount to sticking a ‘Stop the steal’ bumper sticker on your car. You just don’t do it.”

Justice Alito’s first flag scandal came late last week, when The New York Times reported an upside down U.S. flag had flown at his Virginia home jut days before Joe Biden was sworn in as President. That flag is associated with the insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021. As of January, more than 1200 who were there that day have been arrested and charged with crimes.

Alito blamed his wife, claiming she made the decision to fly the flag upside down, which according to the U.S. flag code should only be done to signal distress. Martha-Ann Alito, her husband claimed, had gotten into an argument with a neighbor and manifested her anger by flying the “Stop the Steal” flag.

READ MORE: ‘Investigate Now’: As Alito Scandal Grows Pressure Mounts on ‘MIA’ and ‘AWOL’ Judiciary Chair

The second flag scandal came on Wednesday, when The Times again revealed an Alito insurrection-related flag, this time at his New Jersey home, where the Alitos were flying the “Appeal to Heaven” flag which has ties both to the insurrectionists, and to extreme right Christian nationalists.

Justice Alito has not made any public comment defending his second flag.

Judge Ponsor offered up a hypothetical to counter Justice Alito’s claim his wife was to blame, in this case, an example of him presiding over a death penalty case.

“Let’s say my wife was strongly opposed to the death penalty and wished to speak out publicly against it. I’m not saying this is true, but let’s imagine it. The primary emotional current in our marriage is, of course, deep and passionate love, but right next to that is equally deep and passionate respect. We would have had a problem, and we would have needed to talk,” Ponsor explained.

“In this hypothetical situation, I hope that my wife would have held off making any public statements about capital punishment, and restrained herself from talking about the issue with me, while the trial unfolded. On the other hand, if my wife had felt strongly that she needed to espouse her viewpoint publicly, I would have had to recuse myself from presiding over the case, based on the appearance of partiality.”

READ MORE: ‘Going for the Jugular’: Legal Scholar Warns ‘Trumpers’ Want to End Major Civil Right

Note he mentions as a sitting federal judge he would have applied the same standards that jurors are expected to observe: to not discuss the case with anyone, including their spouses.

And should there have been a discussion, or if she were to air her views publicly, he would be forced to recuse himself from the case.

Justice Alito has not recused from any 2020 presidential election cases, any Trump-related cases, any insurrection-related cases.

That includes the Trump “absolute immunity” case the Supreme Court heard in April, for which they have yet to rule.

The Supreme Court “recently adopted an ethics code to ‘guide the conduct’ of the justices,” Ponsor observes. “One of its canons states that a justice should ‘act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.’ That’s all very well. But basic ethical behavior should not rely on laws or regulations. It should be folded into a judge’s DNA. That didn’t happen here.”

READ MORE: Trump Adviser Scanned and Saved Contents of Box That Had Classified Docs: Report

Continue Reading

OPINION

Trump’s Bronx Rally Attendance Claim Fuels Mockery as Aerial Images Show a Different Story

Published

on

Once again the Trump campaign is claiming massive attendance at his latest rally, and once again internet users are making a mockery of those claims – as a local ABC reporter reveals a few facts about attendance and the attendees.

“Trump vows to ‘save’ deep-blue New York City in massive, historic Bronx rally,” Fox News‘s Brandon Gillespie, Paul Steinhauser, and Michael Ruiz reported Thursday evening. “25,000 supporters of the former president descended on Crotona Park, Trump’s campaign said.”

The Associated Press offered a different take.

“Former President Donald Trump campaigned Thursday in one of the most Democratic counties in the nation, holding a rally in the South Bronx as he tries to woo minority voters days before a Manhattan jury will begin deliberations on whether to convict him of felony charges in his criminal hush money trial.”

ABC 7 New York’s Jim Dolan, reporting from the Trump rally in the South Bronx Thursday, served up a reality check (video below).

READ MORE: Trump Adviser Scanned and Saved Contents of Box That Had Classified Docs: Report

“Donald Trump can now say he held a rally in the South Bronx, home to immigrants and minority communities, and that it was well attended. It’s just not clear that the people who attended were from the Bronx. The campaign controlled who got in and the campaign of course, picked only supporters,” Dolan revealed. “Trump’s motorcade arrived in Crotona Park tonight. The crowd surged to get a look at him, more like a pop star than a politician. Not everyone wants a pop star for President.”

One person in the park told ABC 7, Trump is “a big fat bigot. And he just doesn’t have any love in his heart, for anyone, anyone of color. Anyone who’s in the LGBTQ plus community.”

Another called Trump, “a crook, a liar, and he tries to make money off people. And that’s what he’s doing right now,” and claimed the attendees are “all from out of state.”

“Go out there and look at all them cars that are parked and check where they came from? Tennessee, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Texas.”

U.S. Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), who represents the South Bronx, was also at the park and told ABC 7, “If you did a poll about who’s more popular, Donald Trump or lead paint. I suspect lead is more popular than Donald Trump in the Bronx.”

READ MORE: ‘Not an Accident’: Trump’s ‘Unified Reich’ Video Alarms Historians and Fascism Experts

Congressman Torres also posted this commentary to social media:

The Trump campaign’s claim of 25,000 in attendance was belied by ABC 7’s aerial photography (screenshot, above), which was from Dolan’s report:

Meanwhile, some internet users had a good time mocking the Trump campaign’s claims by posting images clearly not of Trump’s Bronx rally.

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Contemptuous’: Justice Alito’s Actions ‘Close to Treason’ Suggests Constitutional Scholar

Continue Reading

News

‘Will You Accept the Results?’: Cruz’s Election Denialism Shut Down in ‘Brutal’ Interview

Published

on

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) promoted Donald Trump’s false election denialism and was challenged by a CNN anchor in an interview being praised by several media watchers.

During the Wednesday interview Cruz suggested to host Kaitlan Collins that Democrats or Hillary Clinton criticizing election results was equivalent to Donald Trump’s “Big Lie” campaign, which included over 60 legal challenges and countless false allegations of massive fraud. He also insisted there was a “peaceful transfer of power” after the 2020 presidential election despite the violent and deadly January 6 insurrection for which more than 1200 people have been criminally charged and for which the ex-president is facing several indictments. In the end, Collins appeared to cut the interview short.

“Will you certify the election results?” in the November election, Collins asked the Texas Republican on Wednesday, noting he was the first in the Senate to say he would not certify the 2020 election results. “Do you plan to object or will you accept the results regardless of who wins the election?”

“So Kaitlan,” Cruz replied, “I gotta say, I think that’s actually a ridiculous question.”

“It’s a yes or no question,” Collins replied.

“No it’s not that let me explain why it’s a ridiculous question,” Cruz alleged combatively. “It’s not a question – have you ever asked Democrat that?”

READ MORE: ‘Investigate Now’: As Alito Scandal Grows Pressure Mounts on ‘MIA’ and ‘AWOL’ Judiciary Chair

“Of course,” Collins replied.

“What Democrat?” Cruz demanded to know.

After a short back-and-forth, Collins said, “I know, I know, I’ve been on this road many, many times, but no Democrat – you can not compare the two situations. We have talked about that, we’ve seen the audio of that when they protested,” Collins said,  appearing to refer to Hillary Clinton having called the 2016 presidential election “stolen,” which she did three years after the election, in 2019.

“Have you ever had a sitting president who refused to facilitate the peaceful transition of power refused to acknowledge that his successor won the presidency?” Collins asked Cruz.

“So, A, we did have a peaceful transfer of power. I was there on January 20. I was there on the swearing in,” Cruz insisted, ignoring the January 6 insurrection.

“Barely,” Collins replied..

Cruz continued to refer to individual “objections” Democrats have made about results of elections – not formal, legal objections (except Al Gore in 2000) but comments or remarks, or individual objections to one state elections – not organized campaigns.

So you’re asking, ‘Will you promise no matter what to agree an election is illegitimate regardless of what happens?’ and that would be an absurd thing to claim,” Cruz said.

Again, after some back-and forth, Collins said, “This isn’t a game. There was no widespread voter fraud.”

“It is a game,” Cruz responded. “You only ask Republicans that.”

It November of 2022, the right-wing Cato Institute published an opinion piece titled, “Yes, Democrats Have Called Some Elections Illegitimate. GOP Election Denialism Is Far Worse,” and added: “It’s not even close.”

READ MORE: ‘Contemptuous’: Justice Alito’s Actions ‘Close to Treason’ Suggests Constitutional Scholar

Collins later pointed out that it is only Republicans who have “tried to block the transition of power. You have to acknowledge that.”

“So my question for you again: free and fair election. Will you accept the results regardless of who wins?” Collins again asked.

“Look, if the Democrats win, I will accept the result, but I’m not going to ignore fraud regardless of what happens.”

“Was there fraud in 202o?” Collins pressed.

“Of course there was fraud,” Cruz insisted.

“No, that wasn’t and you still objected,” Collins pointed out.

“Oh, you know, for a fact there was zero voter fraud really? What’s your basis for that? Show me your evidence,” Cruz demanded, inserting “zero” when Collins meant fraud “that would have changed the outcome,” as she noted later.

Commenting on the interview, writer Charlotte Clymer, a former press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign said, “This is brilliant.”

“I seriously cannot remember the last time any journalist on cable news confronted the bad faith of a MAGA politician this insistently,” Clymer remarked. “For five minutes (!), Kaitlin Collins pressed Ted Cruz and demanded a good faith answer.”

Democratic strategist and former DNC official Adam Parkhomenko commented, “this is just brutal.” He added Cruz was “being humiliated.”

Calling it, “Well done,” journalist Ahmed Baba wrote: “Kaitlan Collins interjecting with fact-checks multiple times and ending the interview after Ted Cruz refused to engage in the facts and continued to spread his propaganda.”

Watch below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Adviser Scanned and Saved Contents of Box That Had Classified Docs: Report

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.