Log Cabin Republicans: Back to the Future
Wow. This is getting serious.
The Log Cabin Republicans, which the AP has described as "a Republican gay rights group" (I thought it was a club for gay-hating gays that funnels their money to gay-hating GOP candidates, myself, but whatever), are taking the government to court over the constitutionality of DADT! Yikes! End times, y'all!
Apparently the impetus for action was not so much the nearly two decades of civil rights abuses, the over 13,000 troops discharged for no good reason, or the estimated $400 million wasted. No, the real problem is... Obama.
Well, I mean, they are still Republicans. Hey, whatever it takes.
It's actually a welcome return to the roots of the modern conservative movement (and the drapes definitely don't match the carpet here). As Andrew Sullivan recounts:
When Bill Clinton botched the question of gays in the military in1993, [ultraconservative Übermensch] Barry Goldwater quipped: “Everyone knows that gays have served honorably inthe military since at least the time of Julius Caesar.” He added: “You don’t have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight.”Even Reagan went out on a limb and spoke out against gay discrimination as he launched his first campaign for President, using what amounts to the essentialist argument that has today won wide currency among gay rights groups.
Since then there's been a lot of backsliding, and the LCR hasn't done a lot to counter it.
So, Log Cabinites: welcome to the future — or, since you guys are conservative, should I say "past"?
I've actually been to a few Los Angeles Log Cabin events over the years. At one gathering at The Abbey in West Hollywood, I met the then incoming Executive Director, Patrick Guerriero. You may recall him as mayor of Melrose, House Representative, and a runner for Lt. Gov. under Jane Swift. Regrettably I wasn't impressed by his blandness, although he may have been a good politico for the Bay State. He seemed more interested in filling up his resume than addressing any burning issues. And during the Prop. 8 debacle, he served as head of the No on 8 campaign. Under his leadership, all GLBT Californians know where that subject went.
Though Log Cabin started in L.A. (as did that Roman Catholic apologist group, Dignity...is there a trend here?), it clearly has support somewhere. I invited the group to register voters at an GLBT event at which I vetted vendors and other organizations. After much deliberation they declined citing lack of funds. Even though it was 2004, a presidential election year, I can tell you it wasn't lack of funds, but merely their failure to want to reach out to persons beyond their cozy club. This particular event was for a international gay sports group which has a fair amount of conservative-minded members, and, though mostly non-political, hardly a hotbed of Democrats. I even invited the Stonewall Democratic group just to be even-handed.
Perhaps Log Cabin is more open today. At that time the L.A. group did not post its upcoming events on its website. How was one to know where and when? The president at that time told me of the great need for privacy, and, anyway, speaking entre nous, he added, it's important we know who you are when you become a member. I suggested to him that a group which is solely political had no need for privacy in the U.S. Unless it was masquerading as a social club. I suppose my frankness did not endear me to the L.A. Log Cabinistas.
Reply to this
Your experience jibes with my impression of the LCR as a social club, although I have to admit I don't think I've ever met a Log Cabinista in the flesh. Somehow, even though the old Marxist (Groucho, not Karl) adage about never joining a club that would have me as a member clearly doesn't apply here, I've never been tempted to join a club like this that wouldn't.
Reply to this
I've met a couple of these creeps over the years and they are just what you imagine - upper middle class white suburbanites who don't want to pay taxes or have the government provide social services to "those people." They are the worst kind of Republicans in every way except for their sexuality, which seems to haunt each and every one of them like a demon.
Reply to this