Connect with us

So, Where DOES Sarah Palin Stand On Gay Rights?

Published

on

Sarah Palin is the spark in the media’s tinder. A word, a wink, hell, even a nod can send the media into an all-out frenzy for days. It’s no wonder Palin herself calls them the “lamestream media” — they fall for her lameness almost daily.

Take this ludicrous exercise in journalistic malpractice.

Monday night, the former Republican Vice Presidential candidate, former Governor, former chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, former Mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, former “Miss Congeniality,” former sportscaster, former head of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Sarah Palin retweeted lesbian conservative commentator Tammy Bruce’s tweet about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Bruce had tweeted, “But this hypocrisy is just truly too much. Enuf already–the more someone complains about the homos the more we should look under their bed.”

Immediately, the media was all over this. Gawker, unsurprisingly, was the first, asking, “Did Sarah Palin Just Tweet Her Position on ‘Homos’?“ Soon came CNN, Huffington Post, ABC, and so on, all the way into Wednesday, when the Washington Post dipped their toes into the Palin pool of myopia.

All asked, “what does this mean?” None — and I mean, none — bothered to do any research on Palin’s stance on gay rights. I did, as I have since Palin hit the national stage two and a half years ago.

Tuesday morning I threw together a few comments I found of Palin’s to prove she was anti-gay.

Now, I offer you an even more complete list of Sarah Palin’s positions on gay rights.

Suffice it to say, she’s not in our corner. Palin, whose unfavorables are at an all-time high, does NOT support the LGBTQ community, at all, in any shape, whatsoever. Those, like Tammy Bruce, who post-retweet tried to reconfigure Palin’s stance, should be ashamed of themselves. Bruce, especially, who, after the retweet heard ’round the world, wrote that Palin “is not a Culture Warrior, however. She is, which should be apparent by her Facebook postings and opinion pieces, a Policy Wonk. She is also, which is clearly evident, a charismatic leader who remains grounded by her character, faith and family.”

(Oh course, we all know millions of “policy wonks” who use Facebook as their main platform, right?)

Bruce continues, saying, “Some have suggested this ‘completely changes the 2012 election.’ Not really–perhaps for some who believed the LSM and Gay Gestapo lie that Sarah Palin was somehow a bigot or homophobe, I hope this does cause some to take a second look at Palin, away from the left’s predictable “She’s a Hater!!” meme.”

Well, Ms. Bruce, Palin is a hater. You may not see it, since your eyes are squarely focused on Sarah Palin’s coattails, but the rest of us in the reality-based world do.

So, here you go. Sarah Palin’s positions on gay rights:

Sarah Palin is against same-sex marriage:

  • Palin has said, “I am pro-life and I believe that marriage should only be between and man and a woman.” (Campaign website, www.palinforgovernor.com, “Issues” Nov 7, 2006)
  • “Ms. Palin said she supported Alaska’s decision to amend its Constitution to ban same-sex marriage. But she used her first veto as governor to block a bill that would have prohibited the state from granting health benefits to same-sex partners of public employees.” (New York Times)
  • “Here’s what Sarah Palin has to say about same-sex marriage. Palin said she’s not out to judge anyone and has good friends who are gay, but that she supported the 1998 constitutional amendment.” “Elected officials can’t defy the court when it comes to how rights are applied, she said, but she would support a ballot question that would deny benefits to homosexual couples. “I believe that honoring the family structure is that important,” Palin said. She said she doesn’t know if people choose to be gay.” (Anchorage Daily News, via OnTheIssues)

Sarah Palin is against spousal benefits for same-sex couples:

Q: Do you support the Alaska Supreme Court’s ruling that spousal benefits for state employees should be given to same-sex couples?

A: No, I believe spousal benefits are reserved for married citizens as defined in our constitution.

Q: In relationship to families, what are your top three priorities if elected governor?

A: 1. Creating an atmosphere where parents feel welcome to choose the venues of education for their children.
2. Preserving the definition of “marriage” as defined in our constitution.
3. Cracking down on the things that harm family life: gangs, drug use, and infringement of our liberties including attacks on our 2nd Amendment rights. (Eagle Forum 2006 Gubernatorial Candidate Questionnaire Jul 31, 2006)

Sarah Palin is on the record against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal:

For the record, Palin came out last year against repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” although she suggested her first concern about repeal was the timing — “I don’t think so right now… And I say that because there are other things to be worried about right now with the military. I think that kind of on the back burner, is sufficient for now.”

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Palin is not on the record as for or against ENDA, but given all her other positions, I would bet she’s against that, too.

Bottom line, Sarah Palin is not the blank slate the media assumes. She’s made her positions very clear. She is anti-gay, and is on the record as being so. Hear that, Tammy Bruce?

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

‘Stomach Turning’: Trump Defends His J6 Pardons as ‘Great for Humanity’

Published

on

President Donald Trump aboard Air Force One on Sunday announced that the nearly 1600 people he pardoned after they had been convicted of January 6-related crimes did not assault anyone but had been assaulted by the U.S. government, and his granting those pardons on his first day back in office was “a great thing for humanity.”

Trump was sitting next to a large map of what he announced is now the “Gulf of America,” and had signed an executive order requiring that new designation as the plane flew over what has, for hundreds of years, been called the Gulf of Mexico. Some observers have noted that Trump is also attempting to reshape the narrative of the January 6 insurrection and attack on the U.S. Capitol by claiming that those convicted of crimes were actually victims.

Reminded by a reporter that he had planned to honor first responders at the Super Bowl, President Trump was asked why he would pardon people who had assaulted first responders.

READ MORE: ‘People Are Really Angry’: Fury Over Musk and DOGE Triggers Spike in Calls to Congress

“I pardoned people that were assaulted themselves. They were assaulted by our government,” Trump insisted, despite countless hours of footage of people he pardoned attacking the U.S. Capitol, and some of them attacking law enforcement officers.

“I pardoned J6 people who were assaulted by our government. That’s who assaulted — and they were treated unfairly, there’s never been a group of people in this country outside of maybe one instance that I can think of, but I won’t get into it, that were treated more horribly than the people of J6,” Trump insisted.

“I didn’t assault, they didn’t assault. They were assaulted, and what I did was a great thing for humanity.”

Just days after Trump handed down the pardons, The New York Times reported that even some of his close allies “opposed granting clemency to those rioters found guilty of violent crimes, especially the more than 600 who were convicted of assaulting or resisting police officers. Of those defendants, nearly 175 used a dangerous or deadly weapon, prosecutors say.”

On January 20, via a presidential proclamation, Trump announced he was commuting the sentences of 14 of some of the worst January 6 offenders, and granting “a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.”

READ MORE: ‘Bring Him Back’: JD Vance Wants Musk to Rehire 25 Year Old DOGE ‘Kid’ After Racist Posts

Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, a senior fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice, called the pardons “an attempt to rewrite history and erase an attack on the Constitution and the country.”

Critics are blasting President Trump’s remarks on Sunday, including his claim the people he pardoned had been assaulted by “our government.”

“This administration & the GOP are completely rewriting the events of January 6. The president is doing it here. They pretend all the evidence, footage, confessions, & documents just don’t exist, that we didn’t see it happen. It’s an authoritarian move, & it should terrify us all,” observed T. Kenny Fountain, an associate professor whose bio says he researches extremism, conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and disinformation.

Noted political scientist and professor of politics Larry Sabato called Trump’s remarks “Absolutely stomach-turning.”

Journalist Jim Acosta wrote simply, “Disgraceful.”

Award-winning investigative reporter Phil Williams posted video from January 6 and wrote, “These people were all pardoned.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Inherits Biden’s ‘Astonishing’ Jobs Legacy, But Prices Are Now Climbing on His Watch

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

News

‘People Are Really Angry’: Fury Over Musk and DOGE Triggers Spike in Calls to Congress

Published

on

Members of Congress say they are being flooded with calls from angry constituents about President Donald Trump’s Director of the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk, and what he is doing inside the federal government.

“Senators’ phone systems have been overloaded, lawmakers said, with some voters unable to get through to leave a message. The outpouring of complaints and confusion has put pressure on lawmakers to find out more about Musk’s project, heightening tensions between the billionaire tech mogul and the government,” The Washington Post reports.

Republican Lisa Murkowski of Alaska “said the Senate’s phones were receiving 1,600 calls each minute, compared with the usual 40 calls per minute. Many of the calls she’s been receiving are from people concerned about U.S. DOGE Service employees having broad access to government systems and sensitive information. The callers are asking whether their information is compromised and about why there isn’t more transparency about what is happening, she said.”

READ MORE: ‘Bring Him Back’: JD Vance Wants Musk to Rehire 25 Year Old DOGE ‘Kid’ After Racist Posts

On Monday, the Office of U.S. Senator Andy Kim (D-NJ) said, “We’re receiving reports of phones being offline across the Senate. Our office is immediately at work to address the issue and get our phones online again.”

U.S. Senator Tina Smith (D-MN) called it, “a deluge on DOGE”

“Truly our office has gotten more phone calls on Elon Musk and what the heck he’s doing mucking around in federal government than I think anything we’ve gotten in years. … People are really angry,” she told The Post.

On social media, Senator Smith added, “Musk is unpopular because Americans can see that he’s running rampant inside the federal government and no one believes he’s doing this to help us — he’s doing it to help himself. That’s what corruption looks like. I’ve been getting more calls into my office in the last week than any time I can remember. People are mad about it and they should be.”

READ MORE: Trump Inherits Biden’s ‘Astonishing’ Jobs Legacy, But Prices Are Now Climbing on His Watch

“We can hardly answer the phones fast enough. It’s a combination of fear, confusion and heartbreak, because of the importance of some of these programs,” U.S. Senator Angus King (I-ME) told The Post, saying “he’s been hearing from constituents ‘constantly’ on DOGE and Musk.”

The surge of telephone calls appears to have been going on all week.

“Callers are getting busy signals and voicemail inboxes are full at many U.S. Senate offices as people try to reach out and voice their opinions on President Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks, executive orders and moves to dismantle various federal programs,” the Associated Press reported on Wednesday. “The influx of phone calls — which some in the Senate say are at unprecedented volumes — come as Trump and ally Elon Musk are working to shrink the federal government during the president’s first weeks in office. They are shuttering agencies, temporarily freezing funding and pushing workers to resign, all while staffers with Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency infiltrate departments in a stated effort to root out fraud and abuse.”

READ MORE: Pam Bondi Quietly Disbands DOJ Task Force Targeting Russian Oligarchs

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Bring Him Back’: JD Vance Wants Musk to Rehire 25 Year Old DOGE ‘Kid’ After Racist Posts

Published

on

Vice President JD Vance is under fire after encouraging Department of Government Efficiency head Elon Musk to re-hire the 25-year old whose racist posts led to his reported resignation.

The Wall Street Journal broke the story that a “key DOGE staff member who gained access to the Treasury Department’s central-payments system resigned Thursday after he was linked to a deleted social-media account that advocated racism and eugenics.”

“Marko Elez, a 25-year-old who is part of a cadre of Elon Musk lieutenants deployed by the Department of Government Efficiency to scrutinize federal spending, resigned after The Wall Street Journal asked the White House about his connection to the account,” the Journal reported.

According to The Journal, that account posted, “Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool,” and, “You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity.”

READ MORE: Trump Inherits Biden’s ‘Astonishing’ Jobs Legacy, But Prices Are Now Climbing on His Watch

“Normalize Indian hate,” was another post, according to the Journal, which noted that it was “in reference to a post noting the prevalence of people from India in Silicon Valley.”

“The user appeared to have a special dislike for Indian software engineers,” the WSJ added.

That account also posted, according to the Journal, “I would not mind at all if Gaza and Israel were both wiped off the face of the Earth.”

U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen, a Democrat from Tennessee, wrote on X about the posts, and asked, “Does this not sound like someone shaped by the same ideology that fueled apartheid South Africa?”

U.S. Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-MI) added, “Elon Musk thinks racism is OK, as long as Twitter says so. This man should not be anywhere near our government.”

Journalist Jay Bookman, a columnist for the Georgia Recorder, also weighed in. He wrote, “I wonder what made the kid think racism had suddenly become cool. Who was he hanging out with that would make him think such a curious thing? Elon, do you know?”

READ MORE: Pam Bondi Quietly Disbands DOJ Task Force Targeting Russian Oligarchs

Friday morning, Musk asked his 216 million followers on his social media site X, “Bring back @DOGE staffer who made inappropriate statements via a now deleted pseudonym?”

As of this writing, 78% said “Yes.”

The Vice President, a Republican from Ohio, responded to Musk.

“Here’s my view,” Vance, unprompted, wrote. “I obviously disagree with some of Elez’s posts, but I don’t think stupid social media activity should ruin a kid’s life. We shouldn’t reward journalists who try to destroy people. Ever. So I say bring him back. If he’s a bad dude or a terrible member of the team, fire him for that.”

Critics were quick to chastise the Vice President.

“Then bring him back! You’re the big tough guy with all the power now, right? (or at least you work with those two guys),” scolded former Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau. “You don’t get to play the victim anymore and hide behind the mean journalists and the cancel culture libs. You’re in charge now. If you want to hire back the guy who says he’s ‘racist’ and couldn’t be paid to marry outside of his ethnicity – who said he wants to ‘normalize Indian hate’ – do it! Not sure I could look my family in the eye if I did something like that, but maybe you can. So live your truth, pal. Bring back the racist.”

Some were quick to remind Vance that his wife, who has faced attacks from white supremacists, is of Indian heritage.

Technology executive Anil Dash commented, “This is about the CRIME of giving this man access to the treasury — everyone already knows you don’t care about having your wife and children humiliated by your fellow MAGA racists. He’s not a child, and no one appointed him or the other known security threats at DOGE.”

Political commentator Brian Tyler Cohen added, “The husband of an Indian-American wife and the father of 3 Indian-American kids wants to bring back the staffer who posted “normalize Indian hate.”

Others rejected the idea that a 25-year old is just a “kid,” especially since those posts reportedly were made last year.

“He’s either a kid who is too young and stupid to be held accountable for his actions. Or he’s an adult with a taxpayer-funded job that includes having access to American’s most sensitive information, which demands a high standards and accountability. Can’t have it both ways,” noted The Bulwark’s Sarah Longwell.

“So he’s a racist kid with no impulse control, but he should have access to the system that doles out trillions of dollars of the federal budget and see all of our personal information,” observed Daily KOS’s Emily C. Singer.

Others pushed back against Vance’s attack on the media, making clear that America has a right to know.

“Setting aside everything else (i.e. ‘kid’), it would seem to be in the public interest to understand whether someone with such a consequential job is a secret racist,” wrote The Washington Post’s Aaron Blake. “That’s what reporting is. People can react how they will. He’s not only in the arena; he’s a central player.”

“I get that there’s no shame and decency left,” economics writer Joey Politano said, “you can self ID as a racist eugenicist and still have insanely important roles in this admin, but the most insulting thing here is treating a 25 year old like a uwu smol bean child who can’t be held responsible for his actions.”

“A 25-year-old is not a kid. He made blatant and disgusting racist posts in the last few months,” commented veteran Jared Ryan Sears, who writes The Pragmatic Humanist. Quoting what someone said is not ‘ruining their life’ it is reporting. It is shameful to defend such a terrible person while demonizing a journalist for reporting about him.”

Former White House correspondent Sam Youngman offered a big picture view: “Too weak to stand up for his own family. Think he’ll stand up for yours?”

READ MORE: ‘Last Thing I Want Is That Guy’: Dem Warns Against Musk ‘Trying to Control the Airspace’

 

Image via Reuters

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.