Atrios and some of you in the comments have noted that Rob Portman is now supporting gay marriage after his son came out. Good for him. Perhaps if we could get the Republican caucus to adopt gay, black hispanic illegal immigrant children, who will grow up to be denied insurance due to pre-existing conditions, we’d make some more social progress, because that seems to be the only way a motherfucker can get some empathy from those heartless fucks.
Reader Interactions
97Comments
Comments are closed.
Trackbacks
-
[…] via mistermix […]
Corner Stone
“I love my dead gay son!”
Jerzy Russian
Seen recently on a bumper sticker: “Your child may be a honor roll student, but you are still an idiot.”
Just Some Fuckhead
I actually prefer the assholes that disown their gay children. At least they have the courage of their convictions.
taylormattd
I had a bunch of friends in my facebook feed praising this guy. But I kind of want to tell him to fuck off.
Cassidy
Call me when he starts voting and calling out his asshole peers.
shortstop
aimai got it right in the last thread. Portman fucked up twice: first, by ever being against marriage equality, and now, by pretending that now that he’s for it, it’s a “conservative” viewpoint. Fuckers.
kerFuFFler
So, how can we go about getting republicans to relate to victims of gun violence and support gun control legislation? Hmmm…. (Don’t ask Woodward this—–he’d call it a threat.)
Friend of Hermes
“heartless fucks”…funny. He waited til after the election and I don’t believe him when he says it wasn’t a deal-breaker with Romney. It was a total deal-breaker for that chicken-shit Mormon coward.
Schlemizel
someone needs to post the dictionary definition of sociopath. I believe it is someone who does not feel others pain but only their own.
This is the very definition of the modern GOP
Maude
@Schlemizel:
And they don’t care who gets hurt, as long as it isn’t them.
Tonybrown74
@taylormattd:
I feel the same way.
Sure I’m glad we got a new ally, and we need as many as we can get. But all that time we’ve been telling people like him all the shit we go through, and NOW he believe us because has a family member in this game?
Like we’re supposed to pat him on the back and say good job and shit …
Chris
And this explains the sudden reversal of society on gay rights, from sixty years ago when hardly anyone was seriously talking about it to today when a thin majority actually approves gay marriage.
If being black was something random that could happen to anyone’s kids instead of being inherited from your parents, you can bet race-based slavery and segregation would’ve been overturned a lot sooner – heck, would probably never have become a thing in the first place. (You can’t “come out of the closet” about your skin color, after all).
Tonybrown74
@taylormattd:
I feel the same way.
Sure I’m glad we got a new ally, and we need as many as we can get. But all that time we’ve been telling people like him all the shit we go through, and NOW he believe us because has a family member in this game?
Like we’re supposed to pat him on the back and say good job and shit …
Chris
And this explains the sudden reversal of society on gay rights, from sixty years ago when hardly anyone was seriously talking about it to today when a thin majority actually approves gay marriage.
If being black was something random that could happen to anyone’s kids instead of being inherited from your parents, you can bet race-based slavery and segregation would’ve been overturned a lot sooner – heck, would probably never have become a thing in the first place. (You can’t “come out of the closet” about your skin color, after all).
Tonal Crow
This is why elected Republicans need to be forced to spend at least half of each year homeless in Harlem, with new identities and no access to their assets and friends in high places.
Tonal Crow
This is why elected Republicans need to be forced to spend at least half of each year homeless in Harlem, with new identities and no access to their assets and friends in high places.
cmorenc
@mistermix:
The GOP does have some members who grew up poor and worked their way to success, thinking that their example proves that if they can do it, so can everyone else, without any insight that they are the “winning” Darwinian exceptions, not the vastly overwhelming rule. Some of the most cold-hearted bastards who bear the most resentment toward those who have failed to economically or socially prosper in society are those who beat the odds through successfully working their way up to upper-income affluence. The message they take from surviving tough, modest circumstances to make successful large climbs in upward mobility is to resent anyone who can’t successfully tough it out like they did, not acknowledging that their success almost inevitably turns out to include, in addition to their bona fide hard work, the accumulation of some lucky breaks or fortuitous help from some well-placed people along the way.
Raven
Sometimes it takes losing a friend or family member to turn against a war too.
comrade scott's agenda of rage
Markos sums it up well:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/03/15/1194295/-If-only-Republican-children-could-come-out-poor?detail=hide
Heartless, gutless fucktard.
The Moar You Know
@Tonybrown74: We don’t. He’ll just find another way to assrape the less fortunate who cross his vile path.
When he goes to reciprocate, he’ll be “patting you on the back” with a knife.
These guys don’t change just because they find a group to exempt from their predation.
Chris
@cmorenc:
This.
Someone yesterday was saying “everybody should work for some time in the service industry and they’d never treat the help the same way again.” Unfortunately, I can think of at least one conservative acquaintance who spent a year or two in that kind of job, and spent pretty much the entire time bitching about how much all her colleagues (especially the nonwhite ones, by coincidence) sucked. She’s now employed in a government office and repeating that procedure with her current Useless Bureaucrat colleagues. If anything, people like that think their past makes them more entitled to shit all over These People. (These Other People, you understand. They’re still a special snowflake).
Not to say that there isn’t a ton of people who vote Republican who will change their votes based on a personal experience like that. But there’ll always be a hardcore (shall we estimate 27%?) for whom it only makes them more intransigent.
Oh, ETA –
And in most cases, they’re lying anyway when they claim to have gotten there “on their own two feet with no handouts” (Medicaid, food stamps, public schools, government scholarships, even those who use the military as a way to climb up the ladder work as an example of Big Government providing opportunities that would never have been there otherwise).
MrSnrub
He supports gay marriage, but not the Employment Non-Discrimination Act
Maybe he will if his son is ever fired for being himself.
Supernumerary Charioteer
I’d take any convert we can get, especially if it gets the Red State crowd screeching about how they need to make natural-law-based marriage arguments even harder.
MattR
@cmorenc: I made a similar comment in the previous thread. I find Andrew Sullivan to be a perfect example. He was bullied as a child for being gay, but he feels that he survived it OK. Therefore there is no need to put legislation into place that will protect future kids from being bullied for being gay.
amk
nimby until it’s imby.
Fuck this faker. Bet that coward mittbot ditched him because of this.
MrSnrub
Lost the link. FYWP.
Salon
eemom
Is this self-serving, self-aggrandizing asshole anything other than a marginally less ghoulish incarnation of Undead Cheney? What am I missing here?
hal
Portman still thinks marriage is a state by state issue and did not sign on to the recent endorsement of gay marriage by other “prominent” Republicans. It’s a good move but the reaction from some that this is a sea change is really over the top.
The prophet Nostradumbass
@Corner Stone: I just knew someone would say that eventually.
Patricia Kayden
Mistermix, you are a great comedian. Hilarious! But probably true.
Corner Stone
“In other news today, Rob Portman Democratic Senator from Ohio, announced that he…”
Biff Longbotham
It’s the Cheney GOP Rule in action: It’s hard to hate ’em when you’re related to ’em.
Lee Rudolph
@Chris:
There was that whole “passing for white thing”, you know. More than one apparently-White entertainer was “known” by the Black community (correctly or not) to be “passing”, back in the 1950s; and some members of that community were known to wish that some such people would, indeed, “come out of the closet”. (Or so my sources have told me; I know nothing about this firsthand, nor do I know if there were any examples of involuntary “outing”.)
Ted & Hellen
Yeah, these sociopathic fuckers can’t relate to anyone’s pain or experience but their very own.
Pathetic.
ericblair
@cmorenc:
Very true; I’ve listened to a lot of success stories over rubber chicken dinners, and you can usually spot the multiple times that things could have gone either way for them and it came up roses. A lot of these people (senior executives and the like) are smart and driven, but you’ve got to have some lucky breaks to get to the top of the pile.
I think this explains a lot of idiotic, catastrophically risky decisions that our betters keep making. To get them where they are, things have almost always worked out, and taking risks has either paid off or not mattered to their careers. If it didn’t work out, someone else would have been in their place. So, damning the torpedoes and not worrying about failure has always worked for them in the past.
It’s like putting thousands of people in a stadium and have them flip ten coins, and gathering the couple of people who flipped ten heads in a row. Then get them to flip another coin and bet on the outcome. What, they’re good at flipping heads, and it’s always worked in the past, right?
Roger Moore
@kerFuFFler:
Well, I know what it was that made Diane Feinstein a committed proponent of gun control…
askew
OT – This might be the saddest and funniest thing I’ve read in ages:
Southern Beale
You know, the more I think about this Rob Portman thing, the more pissed off I get. Read on the WaPo this morning that apparently Portman’s son came out to him two fucking years ago. And Portman was on Romney’s “short list” to be VP, and Portman told the Romney camp “everything.” So I’d say this was one major factor that kept Portman off the ticket and who knows, there were probably others, I’m just saying, Portman could have come out in support of same sex marriage back during the campaign when Romney was doing the flip-flop double talk on the issue, after all, Portman “tirelessly campaigned” for Romney. But he kept his mouth shut until it became more politically convenient to do so. I wonder if Romney-Ryan had won, if Portman would be so vocal now?
And then there’s this:
Wow. THAT might have been a good time to announce your change on the gay marriage issue. Hmm. How … odd. He goes on to say:
There is some kind of empathy gene missing with these people. Even with his own personal experience, even with his son being gay, he still didn’t change his mind until it became politically less toxic. This guy gets zero points from me.
Ruckus
@MattR:
My impression is he didn’t survive it OK. Unless he was an asshole before that. Because he sure is one now.
Roger Moore
@Chris:
Some people actually could. That most blacks in America have at least some white ancestors is well known, but it’s less well known that a lot of whites have at least some black ancestors. There’s a long history of biracial people passing as white even though they were legally black under the “one drop” doctrine.
rikyrah
@Friend of Hermes:
never thought of it from that angle
Ruckus
@ericblair:
People asked me just before I started my last business(2 yrs to the month before the recession hit) how could I take the risk. My answer was how can you not? If it doesn’t work out I’ll be in the shit, which is basically where I was. If it works then I look like the smarty.
Shit isn’t always that bad.
OK, yes it is.
Roger Moore
@cmorenc:
And a lot of them got help along the way the same government programs intended to help the poor and disadvantaged that they’re trying to dismantle today. There’s a reason that the motto of the Republican party really ought to be “I Got Mine, Fuck You!”
scav
@Southern Beale: Why does that sort of tactical career-based positioning remind me of Il Papa Francis? hmmmmm. Remind me again of your basis in superior ethical overarching values-based high ground.
rikyrah
@Roger Moore:
folks need to ask Orange Julius…
his mother and sister have more Negroid features than half my Black family
Hill Dweller
In other awesome news, Senate wingnuts have quietly inserted lots of kooky pro-gun legislation in the continuing resolution. Most of it undermines the ATF’s ability to actually do it’s job. Senate Dems agreed to it, because the House pro-gun stuff is even crazier.
The NYT has a complete rundown of the crazy.
r€nato
This lack of empathy among conservatives extends to everything. If they don’t think it will happen to them, fuck everyone else.
SB1070? Fine with them, they will never admit this but they are OK with it because they believe it will only affect brown people. When white people get pulled over all the time by the cops with some small infraction of traffic laws as the pretext, only then will things change.
I seem to recall that a few years back, a presidential candidate got himself elected in no small part due to saying endlessly that it’s the government’s job to ‘keep us safe’, and many heads nodded in agreement.
But now the TSA wants to body scan me and inspect my carry-on with a fine toothcomb whenever I travel? Fuck Obama and Janet Napolitano! Only suspicious non-white people should be inconvenienced when they fly, not me!
SatanicPanic
I suppose he wants a cookie now
Ruckus
@Southern Beale:
Assholes don’t change their stripes.
They may dress them up a bit or whatever but underneath they are still assholes.
Roger Moore
@SatanicPanic:
Nah, he just wants teh ghey to vote for him.
El Cid
Maybe this will teach all the damned gays to be a little more careful about choosing who they’re born to.
If they’d picked more of our conservative politicians from which to be descended instead of going with all the communist atheistic types, they’d have had more rights by now.
Chris
@Roger Moore:
Okay, here’s a random question about that subject. I read up about the real life Frank Hopkins some time ago (after watching “Hidalgo,” yes) and read, on the one hand, that he was indeed supposed to be part-Indian, but on the other hand, that there were a lot of people who claimed that he wasn’t and that it was just a story he told.
If the latter is true, then I’m confused: why would you want to invent a story about being biracial in a time like that? Someone who’s biracial pretending not to be, yeah, I can totally see that, but someone who isn’t pretending that he is? How does that make sense?
DPS
Admitting that you determine what is fair or just or good policy on the basis of whether a close relative is affected by it is admitting that you have no business serving as an elected representative. It’s not as striking as saying that you take your positions on the basis of bribes, but it’s the same general idea. Either a policy is good or it isn’t; whether it affects your wallet or your son shouldn’t come into it.
SatanicPanic
@Roger Moore: Is it just me or is gay men going to be the next Republican target for outreach? The Evangelicals must know they’re on the wrong side of history on that issue, so they’re going to sweep it under the rug like they did with divorce. The Republicans will try to pretend that the gay marriage issue is in the past and that gay men should be at home in a low tax party. We already had a gay Republican mayoral candidate here in San Diego.
canuckistani
I’m willing to grant a certain amount of leeway. I was an asshole until a close friend came out and prompted enough self-criticism to become a better person. (I hope)
David Hunt
@Schlemizel:
I know they look that way on first impression, but I don’t believe that it’s technically true. Portman’s change (if sincere) would be explicitly due to empathy for his son’s plight. My guess is that the problem with fuckers like this is that they don’t have whatever it takes to expand their shriveled up empathy attribute beyond their circle of close family and friends. Nebulous others simply don’t trigger compassion in them. They have to be able to place a face of someone they care about on an oppressed group before they can care about them.
I don’t think that can quite be called an absence of empathy. It’s that their since of tribalism has conditioned them to not care at all about those outside of the Tribe. When Portman found out his son was gay, he could either have tossed him out of the Tribe in his mind or realize (at least to some extent) that gay people were not the Other. It’s good that he did that, but it evokes the idea of an arsonist joining the fire department to me…
scav
@SatanicPanic: Well, the Eastern Slavs and Italians were once not considered sufficiently white and were a threat (in immigration and otherwise), so yeah, they might be opening themselves to a statistically high-earning demograph, oh! the shock. Catholics were similarly absorbed when needs must.
moda31
Wonkette’s post on this, says everything that needs to be said about Portman & his change of heart. They won the internet with this one:
? Martin
Cleek needs to expand his definition slightly:
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@Just Some Fuckhead: Thanks. That’s what I’m thinking a lot of other people here think as well. I totally understand the “can’t stand bigots”; I can’t understand the “can’t stand the guy who finally corrected himself” even if it took someone close to him.
MikeJ
This is why I think that people who look to social issues keeping the Republicans out of power forever are deluded. In ten years gay marriage won’t be an issue, it will be a fact.
jl
Oh, the puzzles of GOP outreach. Trump calls for more European immigrants at the CPAC circus.
So, is this an example of bigotry that is a setback to GOP efforts at inclusion. Or the next step in ‘understanding’ and opening up to diversity: taking the high risk chance that some Europeans are not completely debauched by their communism, and might be salvageable for a productive live of freedom in the US?
Trump: Let In More (White) Immigrants
Pema Levy, TPM
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/03/trump-white-immigrants-cpac.php
‘ “Now I say to myself, why aren’t we letting people in from Europe?” Trump continued. “Nobody wants to say it, but I have many friends from Europe, they want to come in.”
Trump expanded on this argument, describing personal friends who were educated at American universities and using those skills to help spur the economies of other countries.
“Tremendous people, hard-working people,” ‘
Edit: the last bit (“Tremendous people, hard-working people,”) suggests it is the latter. Some ‘good’ Europeans have not been completely destroyed and debauched by communism, and might still be a credit to their continent, if only given a chance.
Roger Moore
@Chris:
I can think of a couple of possible explanations:
1) Even though being biracial was generally looked down on, it might help in some specific cases. In Hopkins’ case in particular, Plains Indians had an especially good reputation as horse riders, so he might have seen it as good enough advertising to be worth any social stigma attached.
2) Not all racial mixes were equally stigmatized, so he might have claimed Native American ancestry to hide a different biracial ancestry that was considered worse. I’ve heard that this is the origin of a lot of the family stories about having an ancestor who was a “Cherokee Princess”. The people who made this kind of claim had obvious non-white ancestry and preferred to claim that it was from a “civilized” Native American tribe (and from somebody of high status within the tribe) than admit to being part black.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@? Martin: I would say this affects the media definition of “moderate” more than conservative. Portman is now Jake Tapper’s/Chuck Todd’s/ Candy Crowley’s go to moderate, as in “even moderate Republicans like Rob Portman think Obama should approve the pipeline…”
? Martin
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
He didn’t correct himself. There’s no integrity in what he did. He changed the rules of the game only when it suited him. That someone outside of his family benefits is, for all we know, completely unintentional. This is no different than any of the abortion cases where the abortion protestor shows up with their daughter to get an abortion and then returns to the picket line the next day because “my daughter’s situation was exceptional”. Or the deficit crusaders that defend governments spending, but surprisingly only when that spending happens in their district.
I’m not saying its not a welcome change, but it required no courage at all. It reflects no change in civic responsibility. Shows no advancement in thinking about the rights of others. For all we can tell, it’s just another installment of FYIGM. It’s just that last week he didn’t have a gay kid, and this week he does. If it was a principled stand he’d have extended his thinking to rights that don’t apply to him directly, and I see no evidence of that taking place. And if he did have an honest conviction about the issue prior to his kid coming out, then he’s a fucking coward for hiding it and denying everyone the right just for political expediency for himself personally.
SatanicPanic
@MikeJ: Racism still will be a social issue in 10 years
Chris
@David Hunt:
Yeah, I agree with that – there’s definitely a mentality out there that’s “lots and lots of empathy, but only for those I consider mine.” Suppose it’s the “Hitler was nice to his dog” thing, whatever the scientific term for that is…
@Roger Moore:
Thanks, that does make sense – both things that I hadn’t considered before.
? Martin
@Chris:
In this country, even among conservatives, coming from native american lineage is akin to saying your ancestors came over on the Mayflower, or (reaching here) saying that your ancestors were slaves.
There’s a certain ‘ownership’ right to this nation for those that descend from the founders and original settlers, as well as for those that were oppressed in that process. Our attitudes toward native americans are sufficiently complex that at the same time that we treat them like shit in social policy, we herald their ancestors by naming sports teams after them, retaining indigenous names for landmarks and cities, referencing them for tourism and other reasons.
So, in a way, there’s a credibility to be gained by descending from native americans, provided you stuff enough whiteness in your gene pool to still be considered part of the majority today. We’re kind of fucked up that way. We’re also pretty unaware that we’re fucked up that way.
Roger Moore
@SatanicPanic:
I’m sure they’re going to be doing outreach to a lot of groups whom they’ve been pissing off with their regressive social agenda, and the rich people wing of the party is going to start the outreach long before the godbotherer wing has given up demonizing them. That’s basically what the Log Cabin Republicans, GOProud, the Black Chamber of Commerce, etc. are about. I suspect that they’re going to have more luck with rich gay men than most of those other groups, though.
Mnemosyne
@Chris:
It depends on the field you went into — “Iron Eyes” Cody successfully claimed for most of his life that he was Native American, but he was actually 100 percent Sicilian. It helped him get acting work, and no one particularly cared.
It’s actually a really interesting story because he seems to have convinced himself that he was really a Native American and went on to marry a Native American woman, adopt children who were Dakota-Maricopa, be very active in the civil rights movement for Native Americans, etc.
John Biles
Conservatives tend to have stronger in-group/out-group boundaries than liberals; this kind of thing happens because when someone in their in-group suddenly turns out to have out-group qualities, they have two responses: 1) kick the person out, 2) change their opinion on what constitutes the boundary. So it’s not really surprising that you get people who change their mind of single policies in this kind of thing because they aren’t so much buying into new logic as shifting their in-group boundary.
grape_crush
> Perhaps if we could get the Republican caucus to adopt…
“Eventually one of these Republican congressmen is going to find out his daughter is a woman, and then we’re all set.”
(h/t to that Maddow blog for mentioning it)
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@? Martin: That’s a great observation from where you’re standing/sitting, but from his POV, and more importantly, those around him, it’s a pretty big leap. I know he’s got a ways to go. Right now he’s on square 1, but the change from 0 to 1 is pretty significant: “I’m the fastest evolving former bigot in congress.” Having had to watch people slowly evolve on issues like this, very few just come out and rewrite their entire psyche in one shot.
I’m imagining the Fox news story if they were to talk about it: “Both liberals and conservatives condemn Robert Portman for his changing views on homosexuality.”
Even Homer Simpson went from learning to like one gay man to moving in with a couple.
GregB
I am all for wingnuts getting religion and changing their minds on this issue but I call bullshit and fuck that to the endless calls from nitwits on the right claiming this is a conservative political position.
Fuck ’em, they are becoming more liberal on the issue. They are abandoning conservative dogma and adopting a newer liberal position.
I have already witnessed conservatives in NH claiming credit for the NH marriage law. Nope, they had nothing to do with it and the conservatives almost overturned marriage equality.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@Roger Moore: We know Sullivan is looking to move back into the party.
CaptMaggie
I’ve always maintained the definition of Republican is “It hasn’t happened to me yet”.
Del
This guy sounds a lot like my uncle. My entire childhood was spent listening to him rant against “communists” and “the AIDS carriers” and I stayed quiet at family gatherings (we all did) because it was understood that politics and religion weren’t discussed (except by him, because he couldn’t shut it). Then I moved away, met my future wife, and brought her home for Christmas. I’ve never seen a man change his position so fast. I still can’t stand him and think he’s a royal prick, but I’ll take what little progress I can get.
Chris
@SatanicPanic:
The trouble is that evangelicals are still a critical part of the Republican base. It’s not just about voters – the church network also provides them with the one of the biggest Get Out The Vote machines that allows them to translate public sentiment into actual votes.
I think they’ll be very reluctant to abandon one of their pillars like that, because they’re not at all certain that they’ll be able to win over enough gay people and social liberals to make up for what they’d lose in evangelical votes. As with immigration, they’ll probably continue trying to talk out of both sides of their mouths.
TooManyJens
@Chris:
Yes, it’s often the case that people who are genuinely the nicest, most generous people in the world to those they consider within their circle are the most regressive when it comes to policies that affect the people outside that circle. I never quite know what to do when I encounter someone like that.
SatanicPanic
@Chris: Could be. Divorce isn’t a perfect analogy. They’re probably running the numbers on accepting gays, and if and when acceptance of gay rights shifts into the positive column, all but the most hardline churchs will flip. It’s all about the Benjamins.
Roger Moore
@SatanicPanic:
I’m not sure if Republicans actually run numbers; they don’t strike me as the most numerate types. I think what’s actually happening is more like the stories of penguins trying to figure out if there are predators in the water. None of them want to be the first one in the water for fear of being eaten. Only when one of them gets shoved in and comes up with a belly full of fish do the rest of them decide it’s safe to get in.
Republican politicians are all terrified of being eaten alive by Evangelicals. Only when one of them takes the plunge, supports gay rights, and comes up with a bunch of votes will the rest of them have the courage to do the same. But once they all start jumping in, the Evangelicals won’t have enough energy to pursue all of them.
Chris
@SatanicPanic:
Yeah, and here’s another thing too: just because most people now accept gays doesn’t mean that most people consider that a make-or-break issue at the ballot box. I can think of at least a few Republicans and “moderates” I know personally who do support gay marriage in the abstract, but for whom tax cuts are more important, so when push comes to shove, they’ll hold their nose and vote for homophobia. Same as Paultards who think the wars should end and the security state should be reined in, but at the end of the day 90% of them hold their nose and vote for fascism, because again, it’s fascism with tax cuts.
Republicans aren’t going to seriously consider abandoning evangelicals until their stance on gay rights is actually an overall negative.
brantl
@David Hunt: No, he cares because it’s his son, not because it is a person.It’s still ownership.
? Martin
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
No it’s not. You’re assuming that he can go further than this position out of conviction, and there’s two possibilities here:
1) He was okay with it before his son came out. which implies he doesn’t have the courage of his convictions.
2) He was okay with it because his son came out, which implies he can only change when he has a personal connection to the issue.
The former suggests they’re all fucking cowards. The latter suggests that the only way progress can be made on these issues is if we force black/gay/transgendered/latino/immigrant/poor/disabled/pre-existing condition/laborers/raped/muslim/hiv+/batteredspouse/whatevergroupimmissing individuals into every single Republican household. And most GOP households have several of those, I promise you, and yet that still wasn’t enough.
So, okay, we got one guy to move on one issue because it impacted him personally. How the fuck does that get repeated for the other 100 million conservatives in this country that don’t give a shit about their out-groups? The fundamental problem remains, and Portman if anything is the exception that proves the rule, rather than any sort of progress on the rule. He’s an outlier and probably one that won’t bring any meaningful change because the GOP is going to kick his ass out of any legislative club because of this change. Whatever authority he had with the party last week is gone today.
And I’m not convinced that if his term was up in 2014 that he’d even have said anything, fearing a primary from the right. But he’s up in 2016 and the calculus suggests that the issue will have become sufficiently mainstream by then that he’ll escape it. I’m not usually this cynical about things, but people are crediting him with some integrity here when I see no evidence of that. This was selfish at every turn. Good on him for standing up – no question, and good on him to support his son this way, and good for every Ohionan for now having two Senators supporting gay marriage, but that doesn’t mean it will go one inch past this point.
toujoursdan
@SatanicPanic: Doubtful. These churches “run the numbers” on many other social issues have have hardly budged. May consider their contrarian stand to be proof that they don’t follow the societal lead. They continue to grow because there are still plenty of people who are against women’s equality, LGBT equality, contraception, etc.
SatanicPanic
@Chris: @Roger Moore: What I’m getting at though is that I think Evangelicals will flip. I know they pretend to be all literal in their Bible interpretations, but at heart fundie churches are businesses. If they need to be cool with gays to bring in more $$$, they’ll do it.
? Martin
There are no numbers to run that we can see. The GOP are opposing gun positions that 90% of the public including 80% of conservatives agree with. There’s are always other factors at play with policy other than public opinion.
Chris
@SatanicPanic:
Ohhhh.
Okay, sorry. I see what you’re saying. And I even agree with it. But, if the history of the civil rights struggle is any indication, I believe that while evangelical churches probably will flip, it’ll be long after the point where their opinion no longer matters (because society’s overruled it).
Pat Robertson was still looking at Apartheid South Africa and saying that he didn’t think “one man one vote” democracy would be “wise,” as late as the 1980s. The Southern Baptist Convention didn’t publicly admit that they were wrong about slavery until 1995. Bob Jones University maintained a ban on interracial dating all the way until the year 2000. Yes, they eventually changed their minds. And now they’re all about the wide-eyed “who US? We TOTALLY supported civil rights! Didn’t you know MLK was a preacher, just like us?” But only long after the civil rights battles had been won.
So I guess the TL/DR is “you’re right, but by the time they change, it won’t matter anymore.”
SatanicPanic
@? Martin: Sure, but we know why Republicans are going against public opinion on guns- because the gun industry wants them to. Sure, Republicans are going to get pressure from the fundies, but I suspect (and this is just my opinion) that the fundie churches will flip, possibly before the Republican party does. They’ve already more or less done this on divorce, and the Mormons have flipped on all kinds of things when it became convenient. I think public opinion is moving very fast on this issue and if the churches want to stay in business, they’ll drop their homophobia.
SatanicPanic
@Chris: That’s true. And some of the old guard is going to have to kick the bucket before things really change. If anything, I think sexual orientation in the USA is going to stop being a big deal long before race does.
Gex
@SatanicPanic: I think they will. I think we as a society will get over the gay thing before we get over the race thing. And honestly, sometimes being a white man trumps everything else. Why else would LCR or GOProud exist?
SFAW
@CaptMaggie:
Good way of putting it.
Over the years, although she is generally in very good health, Mrs. SFAW has had, from time to time, various medical issues. None has been life-threatening (praise Jeebus or FSM), but each has been psychologically and emotionally draining in its own way. During these periods, she has sometimes talked with her younger sisters. The response from the youngest sister has typically been on the order of “Quit whining! You’re making a mountain out of a molehill. Stop feeling sorry for yourself” and so on.
This response typically upsets my wife, but REALLY pisses me off. Of course, what usually happens is that, two or three years later, this same sister ends up going through the same damn problem. THEN she wants to commiserate with my wife about it – sort of like “Now I understand!”
Which she promptly forgets until the next time a problem happens to her.
Now, can anyone tell me on which side of the political spectrum Youngest Sister’s views fall? Class? Bueller? Anyone?
? Martin
@SatanicPanic:
But that’s true of every issue. Why does the gun industry wield influence here disproportionately to, say, immigration where Republicans at least suggest some support. There’s not enough money coming from the gun industry to explain it.
SatanicPanic
@? Martin: Gun industry $$$ and the nuts in their base. I’m just saying I think the fundie nuts are going to flip on gays faster than the racists will flip on race or the gunners will flip on guns. It’s an easier flip-flop really, because like Gex says, it involves mostly white men.
Chris
@SatanicPanic:
Oh, for sure. James Dobson, among other people, is going to have to die first – homophobia is that man’s entire career, can you imagine him going back on it?
LanceThruster
Conservatards regularly bombast those celebrities who adopt a disease as a pet cause when they or someone they know get it, but using their fame to publicize something to create greater awareness is not the same as lobbying actively against working to cure these diseases prior to their participation.
I fully agree with the poster that said Portman should have made his political decisions with people other than his immediate family in mind. Someone should ask that POS if he thinks his boy can be ‘cured’ of teh ghey.