First Republican Senator comes out in favor of marriage equality!!!

[TX-Beau]

Libertarian is not in ANY way centrist. On fiscal issues, they are further right than the GOP. They're just socially liberal....

(emphasis mine)

Don't bet on it. There are plenty of regressive, bigoted Libertarians. They did after all nominate http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Barr this guy for President in '08.

If anything I'd say a bunch of them are social policy selfish. They don't want the Gov regulating themselves but are perfectly fine with repression that doesn't affect them.

[Rolyo85]

Haha, never mind then.

[TX-Beau]

I've always kinda associated Bob Barr with trench-coats and screaming women for some odd reason!

[GiancarloC]

Bob Barr? He had something to do with the writing of DOMA right? Yeah... good fucking jobs libertarians. Can't be further away from being centrist. Anyone who claims libertarianism is a centrist or moderate belief system needs a reality check.

[scream4ever]

Bob Barr has since come out in opposition of DOMA and supports the Respect for Marriage Act.

[GiancarloC]

Meh... he's irrelevant. Just look at the rest of his views.

[TX-Beau]

LOL Bob. Is ANYONE in here SERIOUSLY going to be his white knight?

I bet even Kuli who is a Libertarian isn't going to go that far.

[TX-Beau]

And anyway when the Libertarians nominated him he hadn't taken the road to Damascus quite yet, and for all they knew he remained a rabid homophobe.

[TX-Beau]

Any bets what he'd be saying if the political climate wasn't swinging away from right wing crazy? Even a 'phobe can see the writing on the wall. Honestly, one of the saddest things about our plight is gay people defending and applauding 'phobes who deign to hate us a little less when it suits their politics. Just what kind of defense do we owe to the AUTHOR of DOMA?

...but but but he changed his mind!!! YAY BOB!

Great, I'll forgive him when he can undo the damage he's done. Or hell, even sincerely apologizes for it.

[Ninja108]

Throw Clinton in there too. I realize he was in a tough spot but his reasons for not vetoing DOMA have come across as hollow.
As for Portman,whatever we want to say,at least his son is better off then some of the other Republicians that have shared their viewpoints since then.
Hate to sound like a broken record but for many families,having a child who is gay doesn't change a damn thing.

[TX-Beau]

Clinton did far more damage with media deregulation than DOMA. Clinton is responsible for Fox News.

[Ninja108]

Say what you will but he still showed guts. Already the backlash from the Religious Reich is growing and many people have already stated they won't vote for him again.
He has lost support he will never get back from parts of the base that elected him and he could get primaried. Something he knew when he came out and said what he did.

[TX-Beau]

Yeah he should have shown some guts 2 years ago when his son came out. Why is it exactly that we should be championing a guy who did just as much damage as the people who won't "vote" for him now?

Expedient, is the word that comes to mind, and if te Mittens had won the race, and the polls said something different, where oh where would his contrition be?

It's very nice he changed his mind, and we will certainly take the suppoirt, but I'll save my praise for people who stuck with us when we actually needed them.

[TX-Beau]

Ya know, I am not going to disrespect the people who stood with us when it was monumentally unpopular, and when it was difficult, to fucking fellate some Johnny come lately not so right wingers who would be fucking hating still if they could get away with it.

If they want to help, let them prove themselves BEFORE I suck that cock.

[Zingerific]

News became Infotainment when OJ was on trail and it has just gotten worse.

News was infotainment for a lot longer than that. Hearst and Pulitzer come to mind.

As usual I'm late to the party, but I have two things on this issue I'd like to add:

1) For as long as I can remember (which is too long to contemplate) one of the main arguments to convince people to come out is that it's the best way to convince people who otherwise would be homophobic (or indifferent) to support gay rights. Some even went so far as to claim that gay folks had a duty to do so. That the ultimate vindication of this strategy is met with derision is at the very least puzzling.

2) Vilifying the converted for their former position is a terrible way to run a movement. In fact it may have a chilling effect on others contemplating such a move.

On a side note: I don't really care what Portman's motivation is. People's motives are opaque and obscure, often even to themselves. To say that conservatives are motivated by this one thing while liberals are motivated by something else is laughingly simplistic. Besides, whether motives are the purest of the pure or the basest of the base, ideas and actions need to be judged on their own merits regardless.

[rareboy]

Jack I swear not five minutes before I opened this thread my friend offline said "hey guess what idiotic thing they're saying over at Fox.."

Would I be able to tell what you post right before you post it by watching Fox? My guess is yes.

Springer keeps swearing that he doesn't watch FOX, yet 99% of his posts and threads are right from their talking points. So he must just pick them up second hand from whatever 'news' feed he's glued to all day....like Breitbarf.

[Ninja108]

Have to throw in my two cents on your points above ZInger.

1) The only issue I have is that coming out is a very personal choice. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I get all the reasons why it's important for someone to come out but it should be their choice unless they are a bigot working to make others second class citizens.

2) ITA with you on that one. My parents and siblings were behind me 100% when I came out. Others...not so much at first but are fully behind me now. My family is deeply Catholic and it took some time for them to come around because of their upbringing but they did.
I fully get the anger and bitterness but I've come to the conclusion that they are on our side now. It will do now good to fight and attack them when others are still working to make us second class citizens.

[eastofeden]

On a side note: I don't really care what Portman's motivation is. People's motives are opaque and obscure, often even to themselves. To say that conservatives are motivated by this one thing while liberals are motivated by something else is laughingly simplistic. Besides, whether motives are the purest of the pure or the basest of the base, ideas and actions need to be judged on their own merits regardless.

If equality under the law for gay people was my sole concern then I would probably be alot happier. I am glad for the extra vote but no applause because people who don't beleive in equality will turn their attention to somone else...that is not OK with me.

[CowboyBob]

Lovable Phyllis Schlafly says the RNC should ignore him and continue on with their prejudice.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2907553.html

There are still a lot of dinosaurs roaming around, and they're all in the conservative wing of the republican party.

[Ninja108]

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/conten...y-announcement

Just in case people want to bash Portman,at least he supports his son. Phyllis Schlafly is still a hateful bitch at 88 years old and having a son who is gay hasn't changed her vileness one bit.

[Rolyo85]

Well, I hope she dies in some disgraceful seizure or something ^_^

[Ninja108]

And she's among the nicer ones. Others are urging him to reject his son,force him into therapy or tell him to live a life of celibacy. He might not be up for reelection for another four years but the threats of making sure he doesn't get reelected are already out in full force.
Say what you will but Portman knew full well the backlash he would get,and chose to stand up for his son.

[Jack Springer]

Springer keeps swearing that he doesn't watch FOX, yet 99% of his posts and threads are right from their talking points. So he must just pick them up second hand from whatever 'news' feed he's glued to all day....like Breitbarf.

I use my own brain. I don't rely on any specific news source for information.

You might try that.

[Rolyo85]

I use my own brain. I don't rely on any specific news source for information.

You might try that.

That was a lie.

[Ninja108]

All due respect,this thread is about Portman. Please don't hijack it like so many others.

[MisterB]

I use my own brain. I don't rely on any specific news source for information.

You might try that.

Cue the music from the Wizard of Oz...IF I ONLY HAD A BRAIN...

[Jack Springer]

Yes ... I have a brain and use it.

Check to see if you're made out of straw.

[MisterB]

Yes ... I have a brain and use it.

Check to see if you're made out of straw.

Um no Mr. Springer, it is your tedious arguments that are made out of straw.

[CowboyBob]

I use my own brain. I don't rely on any specific news source for information.

You might try that.

This is about the biggest lie you've ever told.

[JB3]

Why should we celebrate and why should we care? If he had done it on his own, purely out of a change of heart and a realization of the damage he has wrought, that would be one thing. The only reason he's doing it, though, is because he has a son who's gay. He's doing it purely for selfish reasons. It is not hard to imagine that if his son had never come out, he wouldn't have chosen this path. That alone makes his announcement and his support inconsequential.

[JockBoy87]

Why should we celebrate and why should we care? If he had done it on his own, purely out of a change of heart and a realization of the damage he has wrought, that would be one thing. The only reason he's doing it, though, is because he has a son who's gay. He's doing it purely for selfish reasons. It is not hard to imagine that if his son had never come out, he wouldn't have chosen this path. That alone makes his announcement and his support inconsequential.

A lot of people are saying this too, but the celebration seems to not stem from the question of why.

It could not have been easy to be the first GOP Senator.

[Zu-Mendel]

Better a fair-weather friend than an avowed enemy.

[Kulindahr]

1) For as long as I can remember (which is too long to contemplate) one of the main arguments to convince people to come out is that it's the best way to convince people who otherwise would be homophobic (or indifferent) to support gay rights. Some even went so far as to claim that gay folks had a duty to do so. That the ultimate vindication of this strategy is met with derision is at the very least puzzling.

2) Vilifying the converted for their former position is a terrible way to run a movement. In fact it may have a chilling effect on others contemplating such a move.

That's what was bugging me earlier! Thanks!

[Zingerific]

It is not hard to imagine that if his son had never come out, he wouldn't have chosen this path. That alone makes his announcement and his support inconsequential.

If that's true, than the (presumably) millions of people who decided on exactly the same basis are inconsequential as well.

It seems like you're not going to be satisfied unless people pass some sort of purity test or something -- you're like that old joke about people who can't take yes for an answer.

[Kulindahr]

Why should we celebrate and why should we care? If he had done it on his own, purely out of a change of heart and a realization of the damage he has wrought, that would be one thing. The only reason he's doing it, though, is because he has a son who's gay. He's doing it purely for selfish reasons. It is not hard to imagine that if his son had never come out, he wouldn't have chosen this path. That alone makes his announcement and his support inconsequential.

I could reduce anyone's motive for coming out to selfishness, which would reduce all coming out to "inconsequential".

[Kulindahr]

If that's true, than the (presumably) millions of people who decided on exactly the same basis are inconsequential as well.

It seems like you're not going to be satisfied unless people pass some sort of purity test or something -- you're like that old joke about people who can't take yes for an answer.

Kinda like in the GOP . . . .

[JB3]

A lot of people are saying this too, but the celebration seems to not stem from the question of why.

It could not have been easy to be the first GOP Senator.

Oh I agree. I guess I am just not buying into some of the rose-colored views of why he did it. I'm not sure I believe that he actually has changed his stance. I do believe he loves his son very much, so much so that he is willing to support equality for him.

[T-Rexx]

Why should we celebrate and why should we care? If he had done it on his own, purely out of a change of heart and a realization of the damage he has wrought, that would be one thing. The only reason he's doing it, though, is because he has a son who's gay. He's doing it purely for selfish reasons. It is not hard to imagine that if his son had never come out, he wouldn't have chosen this path. That alone makes his announcement and his support inconsequential.

Yes, exactly!

While I welcome Portman's support, it is essentially a selfish act on his part. He is not backing gay marriage because it is good for America. He's doing it because it's good for Rob Portman. I am doubtful his new position will be very persuasive to other Republicans. But at least it's better than his previous unrelenting hatred.

[GiancarloC]

I see both sides to the argument on whether he had a real change of heart or not. The question is what will this do to his political career? If he is up for re-election, I'm sure he'll be made a target by other republicans... if others choose to run against him.

[JockBoy87]

Oh I agree. I guess I am just not buying into some of the rose-colored views of why he did it. I'm not sure I believe that he actually has changed his stance. I do believe he loves his son very much, so much so that he is willing to support equality for him.

If a father is that willing to go against his own conscience and to put himself out like that in front of his anti-gay peers for his son, isn't that worthy of recognition?

I'm quite sure my dad changed his opinion because of me, although I'll never really know for sure. I think he is proud of me, and I am proud of him. It's the strongest bond I have in my life besides my partner.

A good dad-son relationship has that kind of power.

[Rolyo85]

I think it's a parent's duty to do that. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't recognize when a parent does his duty, especially when it means such professional risk for him.

I have to wonder though, why didn't he do this before the election?

[T-Rexx]

The question is what will this do to his political career? If he is up for re-election, I'm sure he'll be made a target by other republicans... if others choose to run against him.

I don't think it's going to hurt him. (And neither does Portman, or he wouldn't have done this).

Ohio is socially conservative, but not in the crazy, Tea Party way. I think Republicans here will accept this as a personal gesture of Portman to his son. I don't think Republicans here believe that Portman actually thinks it is okay for anyone other than his own son to be gay. It is significant that fellow Cincinnatian and Portman friend John Boehner has said he would not support gay marriage even if his own son was gay.

The one way in which the Portman defection from Republican doctrine may be helpful, however, is that it may make it a little bit easier for the next Republican to come out in favor of gay marriage.

[T-Rexx]

Excellent editorial on Rob Portman's turnabout on gay marriage in The Miami Herald today:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/03/1...-marriage.html

So one can’t help but be frustrated and vexed by the senator’s inability to “get it” until “it” included his son. Will explained to him that his sexuality “was not a choice?” Lovely. But was the senator not listening when all those other gay men and lesbians tried to tell him the exact same thing?

Apparently not. Like Dick Cheney, father of a lesbian daughter, Portman changed his view because the issue became personal. Which suggests a glaring lack of the courage and vision needed to put oneself into someone else’s shoes, imagine one’s way inside someone else’s life. These are capabilities that often seem to elude social conservatives.

[JB3]

If a father is that willing to go against his own conscience and to put himself out like that in front of his anti-gay peers for his son, isn't that worthy of recognition?

I'm quite sure my dad changed his opinion because of me, although I'll never really know for sure. I think he is proud of me, and I am proud of him. It's the strongest bond I have in my life besides my partner.

A good dad-son relationship has that kind of power.

I am unconvinced. The length that he has known and done nothing raises suspicion.

Also, don't mistake this for not welcoming his support. As a Senator, we'll need him. But I just think people should be a bit more cautious about celebrating him.

[MisterB]

I caught a quick interview on the morning news where Senator Portman was asked if the Romney campaign was made aware of these issues during his vetting process about his gay son and resultant upport for gay marriage.

He laughed, and said oh yes, that they were very thorough in their vetting. I have to wonder if he was not picked as the VP because of this issue.

If he had been on the ticket and this news had gotten out before the election, I wonder...

[CoolBlue71]

I'm adding this to the discussion…



Among G.O.P. Voters, Little Support for Same-Sex Marriage

By Nate Silver
March 15, 2013 | http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...-sex-marriage/

[Ninja108]

in 2011 when Republicians in CO killed the Civil Unions bill,it was later revealed two of them had gay sons. They were praised for following the wills of the voters in denying their children votes.
One can simply look at his facebook page to see the backlash he's gotten from conservative Christians over this. He will have a tough fight but he will make it in Ohio. If it was elsewhere I highly doubt it.

[rareboy]

I use my own brain. I don't rely on any specific news source for information.

You might try that.

Oh come on. Your nose just grew three inches longer.

The overwhelming response that I'm seeing out there in the media though is that while it is nice that this guy supports his son.....why is it that Republicans consistently only support things that affect them personally?

It tends to taint the quality of the support. What we need are Republican politicians with straight kids who come out in favour of gay marriage.

[TX-Beau]

I think it's a parent's duty to do that. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't recognize when a parent does his duty, especially when it means such professional risk for him.

I have to wonder though, why didn't he do this before the election?

You have to ask? Polls say increasing support for Gay Marriage the last election pissed on right wing crazy and their Sharia law - it's just a matter of time before that becomes a big liability for bigots, his base is ancient for the most part and dying, the GOP is fracturing, the slightly right don't care about Gay Marriage, do the math.

[Ninja108]

The only one I know of is right here in Upstate NY named Richard Hanna,who will no doubt be facing a primary challange next year. ANd keep in mind he represents some liberal and very conservative parts of NY.