hatepalin.com

In his Op-Ed piece for the New York Times, Frank Rich states that the ridiculous “Gathering Storm” anti-gay marriage ad, which was made and aired in response to Vermont’s legislature over-riding the Governor’s veto and passing a gay marriage law, marks a turning point. He also argues that because the Republican Iowa caucuses are controlled by the Evangelical Right, even moderate Republican candidates are forced to veer far to the right on the issue of same-sex marriage.

Far from terrifying anyone, “Gathering Storm” has become, unsurprisingly, an Internet camp classic. On YouTube the original video must compete with countless homemade parodies it has inspired since first turning up some 10 days ago. None may top Stephen Colbert’s on Thursday night, in which lightning from “the homo storm” strikes an Arkansas teacher, turning him gay. A “New Jersey pastor” whose church has been “turned into an Abercrombie & Fitch” declares that he likes gay people, “but only as hilarious best friends in TV and movies.”

Yet easy to mock as “Gathering Storm” may be, it nonetheless bookmarks a historic turning point in the demise of America’s anti-gay movement.

What gives the ad its symbolic significance is not just that it’s idiotic but that its release was the only loud protest anywhere in America to the news that same-sex marriage had been legalized in Iowa and Vermont. If it advances any message, it’s mainly that homophobic activism is ever more depopulated and isolated as well as brain-dead.

…

In 2008, 60 percent of Iowa’s Republican caucus voters were evangelical Christians. Mike Huckabee won. That’s the hurdle facing the party’s contenders in 2012, which is why Romney, Palin and Gingrich are now all more vehement anti-same-sex-marriage activists than Rick Warren. Palin even broke with John McCain on the issue during their campaign, supporting the federal marriage amendment that he rejects. This month, even as the father of Palin’s out-of-wedlock grandson challenged her own family values and veracity, she nominated as Alaskan attorney general a man who has called gay people “degenerates.” Such homophobia didn’t even play in Alaska — the State Legislature voted the nominee down — and will doom Republicans like Palin in national elections.

…

As marital equality haltingly but inexorably spreads state by state for gay Americans in the years to come, Utah will hardly be in the lead to follow Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa and Vermont. But the fact that it too is taking its first steps down that road is extraordinary. It is justice, not a storm, that is gathering. Only those who have spread the poisons of bigotry and fear have any reason to be afraid.

Please read the full article here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/19/opinion/19Rich.html?em&exprod=myyaho

o

In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network’s (CBN) David Brody, Palin broke from the position held by McCain and said that she supports a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

McCain clearly opted to shore up the far-right conservative Republican base with his choice of Palin.  Now that the McCain-Palin ticket is starting to face heavy odds and struggles to regain momentum and shrink the gap between themselves and Obama-Biden, it would appear that Palin may be starting to focus more on life after a possible defeat of her ticket by playing more to the right and breaking from McCain’s positions.  Given her history of – shall we say – slips of the tongue, it’s also possible that the comment was simply a statement of her own beliefs in an unguarded moment.

It’s also troubling to me that Palin, who has given fewer interviews to the legitimate media, chooses to speak with CBN instead of CBS, NBC, ABC, The New York Times or the Washington Post.

McCain got it right when he said about a constitutional gay marriage ban that it was “antithetical in every way to the core philosophy of Republicans.”  But I’m not sure if that was the principled McCain of a decade ago, or the opportunistic McCain of this campaign.

It certainly should surprise no-one that Palin supports a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.  This red-herring issue has long been a favorite of social conservatives.  So forget about “leave it to the states” – that’s only good for abortion, where that’s the only way the right sees that they can make progress on outlawing abortion.  Forget for the moment that it would be the first time  that we changed the constitution to deny civil rights to a group of people (which in itself ought to give any fair-minded person pause).  What is surprising is that with only a couple of weeks left before the election Palin would take positions different than McCain.  She had been in lockstep with him since her selection (with the exception of ANWR).  I think this very well could be the start of Palin staking out her own position within the party.

As I’ve written before, I don’t think that this approach will achieve what Palin hopes.  Even if she does solidify a position of prominence with hard-core social conservatives, if she does it by being a part of the team that loses the Presidency to the Democrats it will only accelerate a rush to the middle by mainstream Republicans. A civil war between economic and social conservatives has been kept at bay for a long time.  I think we will continue to see that coalition unravel with the loss of the Presidency and a smaller minority position in both houses of Congress after the 2008 election.  I don’t know who will win control of the Republican apparatus, but the ensuing internal fight will drain the party of its ability to compete.

I think that when the analysis has finally been done, it will be clear that McCain’s grand gesture of choosing Palin proved to be a lethal choice for his ticket.  And we can hope that the venom and politics of division practiced by Palin goes back to Alaska for a long hard deep freeze.