Gays for McCain? It is like Jews for Hitler

[thoreau]

I hear rumblings on LJ - and also at the gym this morning - about gay men who (if Hillary is not on the ticket for the Democratic Party) will give their vote to McCain. I cannot understand voting for a war mongering, sexist, abortion foe with a sense of the world that continues the road of alienation and bully tactics that is bush and reagan's foreign policy. He's also not friendly even REMOTELY to gay rights - (granted mainstream politics in this country isn't all that friendly anyhow but...) even if he did show up on Ellen's show.

I can't see how a vote for McCain - who is a ruthless conservative of the WORST kind - is a protest against Obama not choosing Hillary.

Not voting? perhaps. and I'd wholeheartedly support that gesture actually.

But voting for McCain and actively campaigning for him? Thats simply aiding the enemy politically of everything progressive. I don't understand that.

and lets not be naive here - McCain and his party are the enemy of all things progressive in this country. Supporting the GOP when their platform devalues women, doesn't recognize gay people as equal citizens, fights to make reproductive rights illegal, and continues to fight and support wars on the backs of our young men and women in the service, and to give the GOP license to continue bullying it's way around the world and destroying whats left of the confidence in America as a superpower abroad?

Gay people voting for McCain in the next election is the equivalent of a Jew voting for Hitler... Look at what the GOP has done to this country in the last eight years of Bush. It's disgraceful. McCain will change a few things - but he's a conservative religious dinosaur. Voting for him is simply voting your own rights and value as a gay person away.

Comments

[tinman11201.livejournal.com]

Thank you Robert and thank god someone still has a voice of reason about themselves.

[bitterlawngnome.livejournal.com]

Just the tiniest little objection, Hitler killed off a bunch of my relatives in a concentration camp, but I don't think McCain is advocating that. So perhaps a less exaggerated comparison?

I think your point is totally valid it's just the language...

[starzinked.livejournal.com]

a-friggen-men!!!

Cutting off the nose to spite the face

[tonethbone.livejournal.com]

What people say in their posts on LJ ...to impress their readers..and what they actually do (especially in this case ...McCain & Obama) are often two different things...Ignore them

[holy13nation.livejournal.com]

Lat night a friend whose partner resides in San Francisco said his other half was doing exactly that...and a number of his friends. I was startled. They seemed to think Obama had some hidden black agenda when I thought it more likely that the amount he would have had to compromise to get this far would make him little more than a paper tiger.
Besides, everyone always goes on about how it's the men behind the scenes that pull the strings etc. Why would that be any different with Obama ?

[audrabaudra.livejournal.com]

So what if Obama does have a "hidden black agenda?" I'm sure he does, and it's about time that someone with an actual idea about social equity in this country -- coming from a Black viewpoint, gay viewpoint, ANY kind of minority viewpoint -- has a say-so in the echelons of power.

Don't Bush and McCain and their cronies have an overt White heterosexist, war-mongering, America First and Fuck Everybody Else agenda...but that's going to be okay with the electorate because "the devil we know....?"

The people with whom you were speaking were projecting their own deep racism onto Obama by accusing him of having a hidden race-based agenda. They have their own race-based issues to work on -- and theirs are less hidden than they might like to think.

[geometrician.livejournal.com]

Robert, I saw some of those comments on LJ and they literally chilled me. I agree with the analogy -- I think that if McCain, et al., could figure out a way to get away with it, we would be in concentration camps by the end of the year.

Just as a point of interest, Hitler also never advocated for putting folks into concentration camps or murdering them en masse; at least not openly. Some may find your analogy exaggerative. This gay Jew, for one, does not.

[squalidbear.livejournal.com]

In a I'm-pissed-that-my-candidate-didn't-make-it kind of a way, Chuck suggested that he might vote for McCain. I told him that our relationship would be over if he did.

I'm not sure if I am serious or not.

[pectopah.livejournal.com]

I just don't get it.

I voted for Reagan when I was in the closet, but not any more and certainly not now. A friend of mine who is not out to his quite conservative Christian family voted for Bush in 2004 because "he is the only one who will keep us safe". I am pretty sure he is voting for McCain this time.

[bluebear2.livejournal.com]

Um... isn't it a secret vote? Does he have to tell his family who he votes for?

[pectopah.livejournal.com]

No, he doesn't, but they are close and they talk about it. I have to give him credit, though. He votes. I know so many people that just don't care.

[stivalineri.livejournal.com]

I don't think McCain would be as bad as Hitler, and as liberals, we really have to be careful about using Fascist analogies with Republicans, because it'll just make them tune right out. (It's the same as if Republicans call Liberals "pinko-commies" or "unpatriotic" because then they can just talk to the hand.)

McCain would just have to be as bad as Reagan to do irreparable harm. When I hear a Republican justifying a vote for McCain, then I ask them "Do you make over 250K a year?" because if you don't , your taxes will stay the same. And if you do make over $250K then you should pay more taxes.

[qnetter]

Well, that's certainly not in any way going to win over most people who do make over $250k. And at least 30% of the people I spend my days with do.

[stivalineri.livejournal.com]

Only 1.5% of the US population makes more than 250K a year, and as wealthy people they certainly know that with great wealth comes great responsibility. They also know that the USA affords them the opportunity to make great wealth, and has a much lower tax rate than any other industrialized country. If they're going to decide a political candidate on the basis of a 3% rise in rates on taxable income, then they aren't obliging nobles, instead they're miserly skinflints, and their Republican support is a badge of shame.

[moofedma.livejournal.com]

What about "Anybody but McCain"?

Maybe not...or maybe so...

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

Anybody but Bush didn't work.

it has to be I AM GOING TO VOTE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE IN NOVEMBER.

[moofedma.livejournal.com]

Yeah...Well I'm not about to break my record of noting non-Republican any time soon. For some reason, my mother scratches her head at that, though.

[pklexton.livejournal.com]

Hopefully Hillary will be true to her word and try her best to convince people not to do that. Given the lack of significant policy differences between Clinton and Obama it is surprising that so many people feel this way. I have a lesbian friend who says she is going down to City Hall to change her voter registration to independent, and both she and my partner say they will not vote for President in the fall or will vote for a minor party candidate. I am hoping it's just an emotional thing that will recede by November and the reality of McBush sets in. I agree that a lot of Obama supporters were over-the-top nasty about Hillary, but if you look at what the candidate himself has done I don't think he has treated her unfairly (though I'm sure there are lots of LJers who will disagree with that, I honestly believe it) . I also think the "I'm just not going to vote" approach (or a vote for a minor candidate) is, in a sense, a half-vote for McBush. Just my opinion.

[qnetter]

You don't just vote for policy -- and, in fact, sometimes policy isn't even anywhere near the top of the list. The "keep us safe" argument is one clear exception. My concern about Obama is that the whole notion of a charismatic leader turns me so far off that it's difficult even to listen to his policy stands. I want a manager who knows how to work the system, not an orator who is going to bump up against the system and get nothing done.

An example is today's mail from Howard Dean and the DNC. Hurray, whoopie, you're not going to take contributions from lobbyists or PACs. Unfortunately, I think most people's reasonable concerns are only heard once they're aggregated via lobbyists and PACs.

[pklexton.livejournal.com]

Well, I guess we differ. I'm from a school that believes policy should be number one, or at least co-equal with character. To say policy isn't anywhere near the top of the list is frankly a little frightening to me. And come on, charisma isn't necessarily a bad thing. Heck, I wish I had it. Granted, it is never in itself enough. But personally I have to credit him for keeping his cool and not once as far as I can see allowing himself to be baited into showing "scary black dude," which I'm sure was what some of his opposition has been hoping for. We've had such crap for politicians for the last 40 years that I think we've forgotten what a statesman looks like.

He doesn't have a huge track record, obviously, but frankly I think he has at least proved that he can manage one heck of a campaign for U.S President, no mean feat especially given what he was up against. In contrast to some of his more outrageous supporters, he himself seems to be pretty drama-free and level headed. Anyway, I'm sorry you have so much antagonism against the guy. There are some real bad folks out there in politics, and I honestly don't believe he is one of them. If you really think McCain is a better alternative, that's certainly your prerogative.

[qnetter]

No, I don't think McCain is a better alternative. I think we have a choice between a guy who will do wrong and a guy who is likely to accomplish nothing, and the latter is probably safer. Obama might be able to prove himself -- but he's starting from near-zero for me. I'd rather see a real dirty-hands politician with decent policies.

[pklexton.livejournal.com]

A reluctant vote is better than nothing for me, for now ... Here's to hoping you might even feel good about it eventually ... cheers :)

[septimuswarren.livejournal.com]

Amen, sister. It's like the Log Cabins. What the fuck are THEY thinking?

[nlotic.livejournal.com]

I give it two weeks to blow over before people come to their senses.

[sierrabiker.livejournal.com]

If I had a friend voting for McCain, he likely wouldn't be one after that.

[broduke2000.livejournal.com]

When I wuz a kid growing up, my introduction to the gay community was from ads in the paper. Most all the ads were identical: "GWM seeks SAME." In other words, Blacks need not apply.

In the 70's, when I moved to SF, there was one Black gay bar, and 198 White gay bars. Generally, if a Black wandered into a White gay bar in the Castro or Polk, he better be dressed to perfection and/or have a White friend in tow, or he'd be waiting a long time for service.

Folsom was a little more liberal.

But the fact is, quite a few of our gay "brothers" are some of the most racist dudes on the planet.

[hereticsoul.livejournal.com]

I'm hopeful this will all blow over. Another reason why I'm glad this fight has finally gotten resolved so the party can mend and be of one accord in retaking the White House.

What I would respectfully say to HRC supporters who are of a mind to hold a grudge against Obama all the way to November is this...don't vote McCain. Vote for Clinton. You can write her in. This is precisely what I was planning to do to support Obama if HRC had won the nomination.

Withhold your vote if you must. Write Hillary in if you like. But please, for the love of country don't cast a vote for McCain because you're pissed that your fave didn't win.

What's in a name?

[kroyd.livejournal.com]

I once knew a delightfully gay friendly straignt man in Austin many years ago. He was in a band and they had to get "noise permit" from the city in order to practice where they could be over heard by others. On the form was a blank for "Organization name." He had taken to putting "Gay Jewish Nazis for Christ" in that blank. I feel like your fucked-up or at the very least confused if you are a gay republican, or a messianic jew. But then I have a similar reaction to things like "turkey ham" or "tofu turkey." Which way is updown? LOL The only way I can rationalize gay republicans or gay roman catholics is by saying "oh well, we need friends on the inside of these organizagions too." I do feel that Republicans did the gay momvement a favor by being homophobic. It united us on one side (well for the most part). This is thanks to Pat Buchanan in his 1992 keynote speech at the Republican National Convention. I vowed to never vote for ANY republican until I hear a gay-supporting statement from the same podium. I've lived up to that vow thus far. I'm still waiting.

Re: What's in a name?

[low-fat-muffin.livejournal.com]

Gay republicans simply confuse me - and I don't buy the 'friends working from the inside' because they are single digit minorities in both the GOP and the Catholic Church. To support financially a party or a church that practices open social/cultural/political warfare with the gay community - often using us as bait to raise the ire of their base audience - is unconscionable. there simply is NO excuse for doing so as a gay person.