Gays To Democrats: Kiss Our Collective Ass

Uh-oh. Once the Democratic party has lost it's queers, then the negros are probably next. Am I right, Harry, or am I right? ;-)

That's right, Tusk readers, it appears mo's across the country have finally figured out what conservative gays like myself have known all along...the Democrat party doesn't give a drag queen's boa about ending Don't Ask Don't Tell, repealing DOMA or expanding equality across the board in any way for homosexuals. It's all published in the newest issue of The Advocate, the nation's leading GLBT publication and one of my favorite magazines. You can read the whole story here, but only The Tusk will tell you why you can't trust a liberal activist, even when they are beginning to see the light. Though encouraging, the story does little to shine the light on Democrat ineffectiveness and complete disregard in respect to gay rights.

Now, in 2010 after decades of blind adherence to a liberal ideology and undying loyalty to a terribly inept political party, gay rights activists are finally starting to notice all of the anti-gay measures signed into law by Democrats, namely Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

On page two the author, James Kirchick, tells of a fond time in the late 1970'2 when gays around the country rallied to defeat the Briggs Initiative, a California proposition that would have made it illegal for homosexuals to teach in public schools. What Kirchick fails to mention is that it was the staunch opposition of the state's Republican governor that virtually single-handedly defeated the measure. That governor was Ronald Reagan, himself. Log Cabin Republicans tells us how it was. Eat your heart out, Perez:

In California, Republican State Senator John Briggs, who had ambitions to be governor, proposed a statewide ballot initiative to prevent gay and lesbian people from teaching in public schools. The so-called Briggs Initiative also permitted the firing of any educator who was determined to be "advocating, imposing, encouraging or promoting" homosexuality.

One poll showed support for the Briggs Initiative leading 61% to 31%. That's when gay conservatives turned to former governor Ronald Reagan. At the time he was preparing to mount a campaign for the Republican presidential nomination in 1980. His advisors all thought he was committing political suicide when he decided to be an outspoken foe of the Briggs Initiative.

Reagan's forceful opposition helped defeat the Briggs Initiative. In November 1978, voters rejected the Briggs Initiative by more than a million votes. Even in conservative Orange County, Briggs' home base, the initiative lost. Long-time Democratic gay activist David Mixner met with Reagan in 1978 to personally lobby him on the Briggs initiative, recalling, "Never have I been treated more graciously by a human being. He turned opinion around and saved that election for us," Mixner said. "We would have been in deep trouble. He just thought it was wrong and came out against it."

Wait a minute...David Mixner...why, I think I have heard that name before. Well, yes! Yes, I have! Mr. Kirchick talks about him quite a bit in his piece for The Advocate. In fact, Mr. Mixner is leading a boycott of the DNC by many homosexuals. Sayeth Kirchick of the famed Mixner:

Mixner and company remain defiant—whatever the consequences. “The goal is freedom,” he says, “And we have to go get it. They’re not going to give it to us. Instead of pumping money into the Democratic Party right now, we should be pumping money into our struggle for civil rights. Lobbying Washington. Challenging state ballot initiatives. Engaging in civil disobedience….

Apparently, Mixner never learned that he could get a lot further by dealing with sensible conservative like Reagan instead of ridiculously shallow Democrats like Clinton and Obama.

At least gays are learning. I nearly laughed out loud when I read the following paragraph, where Kirchick discovers the magic trick behind winning conservative lobbies: Don't put all your eggs in one basket:

But this view holds only if one considers gay rights to be a “liberal” issue. And that is where the gay rights movement may be making a major strategic mistake. It’s widely acknowledged that two of the most successful lobbies in Washington are the National Rifle Association, which advocates for the loosening of gun laws, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, which encourages a strong relationship between the United States and Israel. These organizations have members across the country and are feared and respected on Capitol Hill for the sway they have over Congress.

The most salient feature of both the NRA and AIPAC is that they are bipartisan lobbies...Advocates of gun rights and Israel have been successful in persuading appreciable numbers of Democrats and Republicans that their causes are in the national interest and that by supporting them, politicians will help ensure, not jeopardize, their electoral success. After many years of relentless campaigning, the NRA has, for the most part, been successful in keeping Congress from legislating on guns. And AIPAC can rely on the signatures of most congressmen whenever a resolution is introduced that expresses support for Israel.

You mean if a special interest group wants to achieve it's goals it would be wise to reach out to both parties? Ooooh now I get it. One gets the feeling that Mr. Kirchick wants a medal for this stunning display of "No shit, Sherlock" logic. Truly, Mr. Kirchick, what a glittering jewel of investigative prowess you are to have discovered such a truly effective way of lobbying Congress...and all just one step behind everyone else! Kudos!

For years I have said that homosexuals risk falling into the same trap that the African-American community has fallen into by voting predictably and overwhelmingly Democratic for so long. At least it finally appears the queers are waking up to the sham that the Democratic party is, and has been.

Next cover of The Advocate: "Gays to DNC: We Want Our Money Back!"