Former RNC Chair Ken Mehlman comes out — he needs to bring Aaron Schock and Mark Kirk with him
Aaron Schock and Mark Kirk are two Republican men in elected office who are gay.
Very much gay, though not quite fabulous.
They’re a sort of Kevin Spacey level of gay, with Schock getting a light sprinkling of Neil Patrick Harris cuteness.
We’ve personally seen Aaron Schock hanging out in a gay bar here in Boystown called MiniBar, over the extended Pride weekend last year, being very cozy and chummy with several hotties the Chicago Young Republicans set him up with around the time of their big membership event that year. It was most definitely Schock, as he was still wearing the white polo and khakis he wore to an event a few hours before, thinking no one in Boystown would know who he was.
We know of several young Republicans here in Chicago who fooled around with Schock, during other visits he made to the city. It’s as easy to find these guys as it is to find young professionals working in the Loop who got their first jobs after messing around with Rahm Emanuel for a while. We wouldn’t even call this sort of thing an open secret, because there’s nothing “secret” about it. Closeted gay Democrats do it. Gay Republicans do it. Gay movie stars, actors, writers, producers, and, yes, presidents, do it.
Everyone in the GOP here in Illinois knows about Schock, just as they know about Mark Kirk being gay as well. Though, in Kirk’s case, anyone possessing a functioning pair of eyes can tell he is gay, just by looking at him. He has the most clear and extreme case of gay face we’ve seen since Liberace.
Kirk’s ex-wife was recently interviewed by Gay Chicago Magazine for something and went on record saying that Kirk told her, point blank, that he’s lying about his stance on DADT during his campaign because he wants to win election, and that his plan is to support the repeal of DADT after he’s in office. “I’m tricking them,” he apparently giggled, “cause I’m such a good trickster. I fool everybody!”.
The wife, when pressed about whether Kirk was gay or not himself, took a very Byzantine, and lawyerly, path around answering that question directly. She said something to the fact of, “Well, look at him, look at his face, the way he talks and acts, the fact he wasn’t married until his late 40s, that he has no children, so those are the kinds of things that people associate with a gay man”. Then she just stared blankly at the reporter and waited for the interview to be finished. She may have pretended to fall asleep, or die, so no one would ask her any more questions.
It was hilarious reading, because if Kirk was straight, his ex-wife would have answered the question by saying: “My ex-husband, Mark Kirk, is straight. He is not a gay man. He is a heterosexual”.
She could have then inserted affirmations of his He-Man, Woman-Loving, Cowboy-Meets-Caveman-By-Way-Of-NBA-Star Sexual Prowess, if she so chose, as the case may have been.
Instead, the gentle, lulling sound of crickets was evidently more appropriate.
Ex-Mrs. Kirk didn’t want to lie, so she didn’t say Kirk is straight (when he is not), and instead did what all of us do whenever anyone asks if we think they are fat:
“Well, I think you’re full of life, and your personality fills a room, and you have such pretty eyes, and the reason people might say you are fat is because your clothes are too tight and maybe you would be considered obese if you took one of those tests on the computer, with your weight and your height, so those are the kinds of things that people associate with someone they would call fat”.
If you weren’t fat, and you asked us directly, we’d say you weren’t fat, DIRECTLY. If you were fat, and we didn’t want to tell you that, we’d tapdance around the fat question and say a bunch of noncommittal nonsense you could take as you liked it.
Republicans just don’t understand how dangerous it is for them to keep putting closeted gay men into elected offices, when anyone who is paying the least bit of attention knows they are gay.
Schock and Kirk are known to be gay by both Democrats and Republicans. Democrats love gay Republicans because they can so easily be blackmailed. If you notice, the State Media never touches Kirk, so long as Kirk toes the line and does what the Left wants. During this campaign, however, Kirk started speaking out against DADT repeal and so a gay filmmaker came forward with his tales of Kirk going to gay cocktail parties in Washington, pinching young waiters on the butt, and generally ogling attractive males in the room like Hugh Hefner at the Playboy Mansion chasing his bunnies. We’ve seen Kirk behave like this here in Chicago, at the cocktail parties the Romney Republican, cucumbers-and-mayonnaise crowd love so damn much. Literally, like in a bad movie, if a hot waiter or bartender walks by in his tuxedo shirt and tight black pants, Kirk’s tongue rolls out of his mouth, his eyes bug out, he loses his train of thought, and he watches the young man walk across the room. “Hate to see you go, but sure love to watch you walk away” is what he seems to be thinking.
It is as clear as day for anyone who wants to see this.
The problem here in Illinois is that the GOP establishment is very “it’s his turn”. The reason Mark Kirk is the GOP nominee for Senate is because:
(1) The GOP seems to believe that his being gay is not a big deal, because Democrats won’t out him unless he goes against a gay issue, so they’ll just have Kirk vote “present” on anything gay to not draw their ire. Kirk, they feel, can be controlled because he wants to keep pretending he is straight, so maybe the RNC blackmails guys like this as much as the DNC does. But, the man smells like lavender hand soap. He has the handshake of a dead fish. We’d be surprised if his ringtone WASN’T something from the Justin Beiber oeuvre. Republicans just don’t seem to understand that this is all a potential problem waiting to explode, because Kirk’s not just quietly gay, in a way that’s never going to lead to scandal. Mark Kirk is Larry Craig, Mark Foley, and Eric Massa gay. If you see him in action, the way he looks at guys, you see a yearning that’s inside of him, a volcanic need for his true self to burst out…and if indeed he does make it to the Senate, and gets to feel all that power, we can very easily see him doing something incredibly stupid at an all-male pool party, in a restroom, or at a bathhouse in DC or Chicago. Something Democrats will immediately know about, record, document, and save for their blackmail file…to be used in the leadup to 2012 just as the Foley and Craig scandals were used to help Democrats in 2006. For whatever reason, the GOP does not prevent these sorts of himbo eruptions from happening…even though they are telegraphed YEARS ahead.
(2) The GOP in Illinois, and possibly nationally, is riddled with gay staffers who are very high up. Here in Chicago, if you are gay and want to get into politics, you join the GOP, not the Democrats, because there are many more opportunities for advancement in the Republican ranks than the Democrat ones. Take the Log Cabin Republican organization here in Chicago (please). It’s chronically known as a disorganized, rudderless, collection of putzes. A smart gay man, with actual skills and talent, can join something like this, prove his competence, and within a year or two become president of the organization…because there is no one of any talent there to compete with or oppose him. Established in this regard, the guy can then climb the ranks in the GOP organization itself, gaining paid positions. Alternatively, if he wants to stay open-secret-in-the-glass-closet, he can rise through the GOP ranks by being a plaything of men like Kirk or Schock, or more revolting types, earning chits and favors and winning promotions he doesn’t really deserve based on his actual resume (but are dependent heavily on his prowess in other areas of his life…as performed in the dark, with as little clothing as possible). Because so many of these gay staffers comprise the GOP, and they are successfully pulling off their closet balancing acts, they don’t see a problem with guys like Schock and Kirk doing this too, though they are more public, and are actually lying to voters with their charades. More so than this, since these gay staffers were probably helped in their advancement by Kirk and Schock, they are then Kirk and Schock loyalists, and will do whatever they can to help those who got them to where they are.
It’s a pretty vicious cycle, this business, because you have Democrats actively helping men like Schock and Kirk advance in the Republican ranks because Democrats know they have a kill-switch built into them that Democrats can pull whenever they need to take them out or damage Republicans generally. At the same time, closeted gay Republicans at high levels in the GOP make sure Schock and Kirk keep advancing, and are pushed for things like this 2010 Senate run in Kirk’s case, because these staffers owe these men a lot for their promotions and internal connections.
A third thing that’s happening here is the GOP at large being afraid of muscling Schock or Kirk out because they don’t want to be seen as anti-gay, and are afraid of being called bigoted by the Left. So, gays, and blacks too, come to think of it, know that if they are in the GOP, no one will touch them because they do not want to set-off a culture war scandal involving sexuality or race. Republicans have been trained by the Left to run in terror from the words “bigot” and “racist”, so it’s no surprise they can’t seem to think clearly when it comes to the “it’s his turn” pushing of closeted gay men like Aaron Schock and Mark Kirk.
A few weeks ago, we actually had a brief meeting with Alexi Giannoulias, after being introduced to him by someone here in Boystown who had asked us to come out for an event. That was the first time we’d actually met Giannoulias, though we’re pretty sure he knew who we were, and knew we weren’t a fan of his. “So you think I’m a putz, huh? Well, I am a putz. Can’t help it. I’m funny-looking, too, and I can’t help who my family are”. He was actually a very nice guy, which surprised us.
We told him there was just no way we could ever support a man who was so connected to the mob and to so much corruption and garbage. He didn’t try to deny any of that, and he didn’t try to make any excuses for himself. All he really said was, “At least I am honest about who I am, and when I say I’m going to vote one way on something, I promise that I will actually do that. I’m a lot of things, but not a liar”.
He’s totally a putz. His family is mobbed up. He’d be an absolute embarrassment as a United States Senator.
But, to be honest, we didn’t DISLIKE the guy after meeting him. He’s greasy, sweaty, and gross, and we swear we can smell corruption OOZING out of the man (which is much like meeting Mayor Daley, actually), but we have to tell you that when you stand in front of him, you realize he is indeed who you think he is, who he projects himself to be. He’s got more dirty laundry than he could ever deal with, but it’s all out in the open. He is not hiding anything. Not even the fact that he’s a putz.
We hear from Republicans all the time that we should stop talking about Mark Kirk being gay because “no one wants Senator Giannoulias”. We’re told all the time that we need to just let Mark Kirk win, and that we need to stop talking about how crooked Mark Kirk’s people are in Illinois, and how Lee Roupas and the rest of Mark Kirk’s team in Cook County are involved in all sorts of nastiness. “It’s his turn” and “he can win this” if we all just shut up and look the other way and pretend Mark Kirk is something he is not, just so Democrats lose this seat in Illinois.
Personally, sometimes we think that if Giannoulias wins, he’ll be indicted for something in a year or two, or otherwise be forced to resign, so Governor Bill Brady will be able to appoint whomever he wants to the Senate (we’d hope for Cedra Crenshaw). Republicans would lose this one seat breifly, but we don’t see how a putz like Giannoulias, with so much dirt in his laundry, could last a full term in the Senate, or be re-elected in the future.
Sending Mark Kirk to Washington is sending a Larry Craig-grade scandal waiting to happen into the GOP’s future. Republicans in Illinois can pretend that’s not true all they want, and they can continue to attack us for speaking the truth about this, but we’ve seen how this man checks out guys’ butts, and it’s like something out of Tex Avery cartoon. That is not going to end well.
And there is going to be a massive buyers’ remorse amongst Republicans when Kirk becomes a Senator and starts voting the way Democrats tell him to vote — like FOR DADT repeal when he promises right now to vote against it — because Kirk would not Democrats to expose him for who he really is and end his time in the Senate.
ACTUALLY, come to think of it, this is a likely scenario a year or two from now as well, with Governor Bill Brady having to appoint Mark Kirk’s successor…after the Left decimates Kirk for going against them on something. We can see this happening easily in the leadup to 2012, with Kirk having to step down because the Democrats aimed the expose-o-ray at him and he was forced to jump squealing out of his closet.
So, really, our gut is that no matter if the putz or the closet-case wins, whichever of these fools Illinois is stuck with in the end will be only a temporary Senator until either an indictment or a sex scandal removes them, respectively.
We saw all of this coming a long time ago, as longtime readers will attest. Because we tried to warn Republicans about what was coming down the pipe, Mark Kirk’s people had Fran Eaton at Illinois Review publish one of our real names as punishment for talking about Kirk being gay (and actually claiming that we “started rumors” about Kirk being gay, when we heard Kirk was gay before we ever knew who he was…and those parties he was ogling boys at in Washington happened years before we ever stepped into politics, with this site, or our own private lives).
Instead of dealing with problems like Kirk (or the problem that Aaron Schock will become once Republicans run him as an “it’s his turn” candidate in 2014 against Dick Durbin), the GOP just attacks the truthtellers and anyone who dares to expose the establishment’s nonsense and self-inflicted upcoming disasters.
It’s a weird, backwards, group-thinking, boys’ club, this GOP here in Illinois…and nationally, it seems.
With Ken Mehlman coming out today, we just had to re-emphasize all of this because Mehlman, like Kirk and Schock, was one of the high-ranking Republicans we were always told is gay…but which the Republican Party always went to great lengths to deny. A former Republican governor here in Illinois is also gay. There are wealthy Republican male donors who are known cross-dressers. There’s a rabidly anti-gay, super-wealthy Republican who loves tossing around the word “faggot” at those cocktail parties who likes sleeping with young black men. We wonder if he shouts the word “n*****” when he’s with them, just to be consistent. It’s so very, very ridiculous.
And it’s a damn shame that conservatives don’t wise-up and clean up this establishment.
We are gay men here in Boystown TELLING YOU that closeted gay men in the Republican Party are a threat to this nation, because they are not only so ripe for blackmail, but they are so obsessed with keeping their secrets and doing favors for anyone helping to protect them that no effort at all is ever put into working for the needs of voters and fighting the latest craziness from the Left.
If only Republicans would start running men and women who openly stand in front of voters as the people they really are — with no secrets, no blackmail payments, no lies — then just imagine how much these conservatives could accomplish…with all that extra time they’d have not having to devote so much of their resources to closet protection.
Now, in comments, we’re sure there will be more of the usual “if someone’s gay, it’s nobody’s business” nonsense we always get when we write about Schock and Kirk. Please spare us that meme, because if you read anything in this essay, we want you to read this line, in bold: It matters that Mark Kirk and Aaron Schock are gay because being closeted gay males makes them blackmail candidates for the Left, and that means these men are in office with guns to their heads, doing what the Left wants, and not what voters sent them to do. These should not be men the GOP pushes for high office, because electing them to the Senate is no better than sending a putz of a Democrat there. They will vote the same, but at least having a Democrat in the seat means the GOP won’t have another Lindsey Graham on its hand, to embarrass the party whenever Democrats pull his own gay blackmail strings.
We don’t know how else to say this. The reason we keep talking about it is because these guys are Trojan Horses in GOP ranks and they are a clear and present problem for ALL AMERICANS that should be dealt with by dragging them out of their closets and forcing them to be honest about who they are SO THE LEFT CANNOT BLACKMAIL THEM INTO DOING HARMFUL THINGS TO THE COUNTRY.
© 2010, HillBuzz. All rights reserved.
Also Recommended:
- What Chicago Democrats are planning to do to out Republicans Mark Kirk and Aaron Schock
- Mike Rogers from the movie Outrage and Mark Kirk
- Another reason Mark Kirk should not be the Republican nominee in Illinois: his staff are Eeyores
- Mark Kirk outed by filmmaker Mike Rogers — just as we told you this would happen. Waiting for response from Fran Eaton and Illinois Review.
- Republicans need to dump Mark Kirk, or it's going to be Senator Giannoulias next year
Latest Buzz:
Help HillBuzz by Shopping Amazon
"Bee" Advised!
I look forward to your comments. Please follow these simple guidelines:
- Please do not complain about your comment not yet showing up
- Stay on topic of the article ("This is OT, but..." = bad!)
- I will STING if you troll, spam, bait, swear or attack someone
Just one more thing…
It’s not just the left that can blackmail a person with a “secret”. The Russians love secrets, too. So do Chinese spies. So do union thug bosses like SEIU. So do terrorists.
Right you are. This can turn into a national security matter if the wrong people find out and decide to use that info. Better to be honest, hide nothing– if you have nothing to hide, you cannot be blackmailed like that.
When I was getting my clearance, the security people were very clear on this point.
…I saw the Atlantic article covering this posted at Lucianne.com for about 5 minutes, but before I could make a comment, Lucianne.com had sent it down the ‘memory hole’….
….maybe Lucianne is a BFF of Beth Christie????
…to reply to myself, wonder if Lucianne.com is part of history’s “Operation Trest”..?
Lucianne has strict guidelines as to what can be posted on her website, unless you get the permission of the staff before posting. It’s a rare day when at least one posting isn’t sent down the memory hole. There’s also a “time limit” ~ things that are more than about 48 hours old won’t last, either, or if something has previously been posted, the second posting will hit the dust bin.
….it was more like 48 minutes…
….reminds me of the ‘excellent’ damage control in Illinois over the recent ‘the Prophet’ excesses….
What I meant to say was that if the article was “news” more than 48 hours ago, they won’t let it stand. BTW, I was just on her website at around 9:40, and not only is the article still there, posting has not been stopped. Not sure what you saw, but the article from the Atlantic is up and comments are allowed if you are a registered poster.
….the posting I saw was about 3/4 hour before the one that has ‘stuck’ to the Lucianne.com site…
….maybe they realized that the dam had broken..?
I didn’t see what you saw on Lucianne.com . . . however, Lucianne does not allow multiple postings of the same article. When there is a duplicate, the thread gets stopped.
Lucianne Goldberg is NOT anti-gay. I have been in email contact with her on numerous occasions, using both my real name and online handle “qr4j” each time. She gets a kick out of the qr4j business . . . Queer Republicans for Jesus. (The name ticks off rabidly Democrat Episcopalians–something bomb-toting Islamicists could never do!!!)
Lucianne Goldberg happens to be an Episcopalian . . . but she’s a smart one. And that’s something I try to be myself!
You should sent them a copy of “Advise and Consent”, a 1959 political novel by Allen Drury. Maybe they would get the picture.
I read that years ago. Probably when it first came out.
I don’t, however, remember anything about it other than that it was political.
Perhaps it’s time to check it out of the library and read it again.
Sometimes, good books are even better the second time around. (Of course, it’s been so long that it’ll be sort of like reading it the first time – unless I start remembering it when I start reading.)
There is a good reason that the various intelligence agencies subject their covert people (and most overt) to regular polygraph sessions; and ask about any and all sexual liasons the subject may have ever had – of *any* nature.
It’s not to weed out sexually different people; but is, rather, to be aware of anything for which the agent could be blackmailed – and help the person prepare for and/or avoid such an event.
I’m reminded of a friend who engaged in a “torrid” affair with a young East German lady, who turned out to be a “Honey Trap”. When he was confronted with the photographic proof of his sexual shenanigans by the E.German/Russian intelligence agents – in an effort to “turn” him and have him become a double agent – he surprised them by asking if it would be possible to get 8X10s of the best shots. Otherwise, his wife and friends would never, otherwise, believe that such a beautiful woman had picked him up and done such wonderfully bizarre things with him.
Such men are rare, indeed.
CMDR Solaratov:
….your ‘story’ of ‘your friend’ is simply a ripoff of a real cold war event….
…such men that give credit where credit is due ARE rare, …..indeed…..
…the real world ‘friend’ was French, BTW….
Nooo. That actually did happen to an associate of mine – and he was an American. And it happened in the early 70s.
And, it also happened to another guy in Southeast Asia in the late 60s.
Not just intelligence agencies. They went through my life and were very clear about “look, we don’t care about your debts and affairs. What we care about is you being blackmailed. Be honest with us, we can help you, and keep you from getting into really bad trouble.”
Of course, when they went through my life, they found out that I was a bookish, mousy girl with no social life and only medical bills and student debt. Really boring for them, lol!
so Mehlman finally “came out”. Cripes, just ONCE I would love for someone to come out that I had NO clue was gay. I remember WAY back when another blog I used to follow was a decent place (not anymore, the fellows that ran it turned into Barky O’blah blah’s hand maidens)everyone was screaming for ol’ Miss Ken to grow a set and come out, sure took him long enough. This was several years ago. Who will be my next surprise, Lindsey Graham? YAWN! LOL!
Some of us (i.e. me) have almost no gaydar and I am almost always surprised. Kinda embarassing, actually!
This has been common knowledge in Republican circles for many years now. He really wasn’t hiding it all that carefully but it is good for him that he made a public statement about it. Good for him, I wish him well.
Gentlemen, you seem to have a firm grip on this reality. If you say there are all these gays in the GOP – Infiltrated, you said – then I will accept that there are. What is the appropriate response from here? Should I write to these men and tell them it is perfectly okay with me if they are gay, only they should BY GOD CUT BACK ON THE DAMN GOVERNMENT!
Why not take on some gay liberals? I mean, If you can out any closeted gay liberals in office, I will write them and tell them that IF I CATCH ONE OF YOU FUCKING FAGGOTS ALONE, I WILL BEAT YOU INTO THE CEMENT!
Whatever it takes.
(I’ll be honest and tell you that I’m writing this partly to see what it takes to get automatically shitcanned here.)
The gay liberals vote for the Left anyway. It is expected they do so.
Kirk and Schock are problems..graham too… Because they are needed to and are expected to vote against the Left but time and again they break ranks out of nowhere like kirk on cap and tax.
That is why they an issue…when the Left gives them an order under duress they follow it when that is NOT what voters hited them to do.
I get it.
What could one best say or do to these people to remove/protect against the duress? Are they, God forbid, closet liberals? I mean, would they vote for cap and tax even if they were out of the closet, or not even gay?
Probably Kirk would still do that. He is only GOP because he saw that as a path to election. If he could have been elected as a Dem he would have a D after his name. Same with Charlie Crist.
That’s why Arlen Specter was a “republican” all these years. Dem path was blocked.
Well then you people in Illinois are screwed. Doesn’t matter if Kirk is outed; doesn’t matter if Kirk is elected.
I won’t bother trying to persuade Kirk to come out of the closet.
“Kirk and Schock are problems..graham too…”
I’m not sure how much of a problem Graham’s obvious gayness would be. What actually happens if they out him? “Ooh, look honey – that camp man who lives with his mother and goes to gay bars is gay. Shocking, isn’t it?” And I think he’s aware of that.
A greater problem is that Graham is a conniving little so and so. He has managed to make himself the go-to guy for giving legislation a bipartisan edge, which gives him power over the Dems, maybe while letting them think they have something on him.
In essence, the problem is that he’s only a Republican because he’s running in South Carolina and he wants power. Gay is the least of his worries. (Doesn’t he get on with Rahm Emanuel, as a point of interest?)
Do you have pics of Schock and Kirk like you did of Crist in a strawberry daquiri?
One thing I’ve wondered about, though, is WHY would someone put themselves in that position? If they’re gay, and if they’re still in the closet, and if they don’t want to come out — WHY would they run for an office where they stand a really big chance of exposure or blackmail?
It’s not as though whatever they’ve done with someone is not known to others.
Now, I guess I can see trying to stay closeted a bunch of years ago, when people had different attitudes about these things.
But – and I could be wrong about this – it seems to me that people are much more accepting of homosexuality in general these days. That it’s not the “career killer” that it once was.
I don’t see people who are openly gay getting involved in a lot of “scandals” (well, OK, barney frank). It’s always the person who has tried so hard to hide it and pretend to be straight.
I’d think that that alone would encourage someone to be more honest about his/her orientation.
What bothers me about all of these things is not that the guy turns out to be gay – but that he’s lied about it and played these huge hypocritical games. If he’s not honest about that – what else is he not honest about? And why should I trust him?
1. <3 HB
2. Lessee, I'm nearly 43, single male, have a cat (when a 12# tabby adopts you, you have no choice, and he's so cute), beautifully decorated my condo in a sort of British empire style (lots of red, dark brown, gold, cherry wood, etc. – no white surfaces at all), no kids, no ex-wife, and live in Noe Valley, S.F. Sh*t, I must be gay.
3. By now, I feel like I know Boystown better than the Castro, and I live up the street from the Castro (ok, I know the Mexican, Thai, and Chinese restaurants here better). Of course, I have no reason to frequent gay bars here, unless I'm scoping out fairy princesses – and I prefer my princesses in a corset and big ballgown, preferably dancing with me – so probably not going to find that in gay bar (as a GG anyway).
The discussion here brings to light the fact that GOP closet cases are likely closet liberals, as well. It doesn’t matter whether they are out, or outed, or neither; they are voting their hearts. In the end, if they are unmarried and not into young men, there will not be any major scandals. Kirk has stayed out of trouble so far while in Congress and in connection with his service in the Navy Reserve. Not an ideal candidate, but who is? I disagree with the notion that the GOP “runs” candidates. Ben Quayle, 33, won the AZ primary nomination out of a field of some 10 candidates, many of whom had supposedly waited their turn to run against an 8-term incumbent. My point is, Kirk is the IL nominee, not because he was “run,” but because not enough better candidates stepped up to the plate to oppose him. The same is true for Giannoulias. Instead of complaining, conservatives with insight and ambition should get out there and run for office. It’s happening across the country elsewhere.
Bozy, since you’ve actually met Alexi G., what vibe did you get from him? I’ve been thinking that he and O are quite a bit more than mere partners on the basketball court; is that likely?
Sorry, that should be “Boyz,” obviously.
Alexi Giannoulias is straight.
100%.
He is definitely not gay, not in the least.
AND, this is going to shock you, because it shocked us, but after meeting him, and seeing him in person in a room, we have to tell you that if we knew the guy in social circles, we actually might be able to call him a friend.
He’s loud, obnoxious, and a putz…but in a way that’s not 100% completely repulsive.
Does that make sense?
We have a couple of straight guys in our lives that we know who are like this. They are boyfriends of girls we know, and they are total frat boys, and they’re crude and vulgar and whatever, but they are still kind of fun to be around. Once in a while.
That’s the vibe we get off Giannoulias.
He knows who he is.
He is not pretending to be anything else.
We’d never vote for him for dog catcher, but in terms of vibes we get off him, we don’t think he’s evil, we don’t think he’s a bad guy…but he’s just the scion of the mob’s banking family and part of the corruptocrat machine here.
Which he freely admits.
So, voters have that choice to make, whether they want to send this to the Senate.
Unlike with Mark Kirk, who pretends to be all sorts of things he is not, and lies about not only who he is but things he’s accomplished and what he will do when he takes office.
Giannoulias has a lot of warts and puts them on display. Kirk covers all of his with a Walgreens full of Max Factor.
Both men should be honest about who they are, and then maybe we would think they were both okay guys, just with fatally flawed problems as candidates.
Oh well, I suppose I’ll have to stop making jokes about Alexi and O his “ball buddy,” then …
Regarding your question about your reaction to him, why yes it does. Which would make him something of a rarity among the donkey congresscritters, current or prospective (I have a hard time imagining that the same could be claimed of Mistress Nancy or of Lurch, for instance).
One thing I’m wondering: given that the choice will be between Alexi G. and Kirk, what’s the likelihood that much of the electorate in Illinois simply refuses to vote for either one?
Amsterdam,
People muscle-memory vote in this state.
Millions are well-trained to just pull the Dem lever, without caring who is on the ballot.
It’s like zombies voting…and in Chicago, the dead DO indeed still vote, so that’s more apt than initially intended.
Too bad we cannot keep what we do in the bedroom.. in the bedroom where it belongs.
Because this is not about what people are doing in their bedrooms.
This is about who people ARE in every room they walk into.
Being gay does not stop in the bedroom. It impacts things you say, do, and believe all day long.
Just as being Catholic does. Or being white or black. Or being tall, fat, short, whatever.
It is part of who you are, and it impacts how you are going to vote on some issues, especially if there is someone hiding behind the curtains forever whispering to you that if you don’t do what they say, then they are going to expose all of your lies and bring you down.
The public does not have a problem with someone being gay — the public hates LIARS.
It would be the same thing if someone was walking around in black face. Even if it was an unconvincing makeup job, but people still bought into it and convinced themselves this person was black, if one day someone who didn’t get their blackmail payment decided to douse this person with a big bucket of water…to wash the makeup away…and reveal that person to have been masquerading the whole time…the public would never trust that person again.
Kirk, Schock, Graham, Rahm Emanuel, and the current “president” are all engaged in masquerades. They are all gay men who pretend to be straight, because to advance their careers and make lots of money that’s what they decided to do.
They are all wearing stage makeup, which people who have seen others do this for years can spot a mile away.
Every last one of these guys needs to be dragged out of the closet so the people hiding behind the curtains manipulating them can no longer have the power to do that.
All of this is particularly ridiculous with men like Kirk and Graham, because their makeup jobs are so terrible. The two of them are gayer than Sigfried & Roy when standing near one another.
But, then again, there’s a large swath of America that didn’t realize Seigfried & Roy were more than just “best buds” either.
I think the most damaging bit is how it makes Republicans look. The Dems can go around screwing over the LGBTs, because the GOP does a very good impression of not wanting them (even though they’d be the better party on things like immigration, security and the economy.)
Yes, about 60% of Republicans disapprove of homosexuality, but the same proportion of blacks do, and the Dems have no problem taking their votes. I don’t think most people would have a problem with gay people representing them, as long as they’re competent. Those that do aren’t going to vote for someone unless they’re virulently anti gay, in which case normal people won’t vote for you.
I’m curious, guys. Why is it such a big deal that Republican gays try to stay on the down low, but you seem fine with the fact that Democrat gays try to stay in the closet? Seems to me that indicates the Dem party is no more accepting of gays in positions of power than you claim the Repubs are. And it’s w-a-a-y more hypocritical, because the Dems claim to be so open and accepting of gays. If that were true, then Rahm and Barry and the rest of the boyz could just come out and be free to be who they really are!
Not sure what the Boyz think, but here’s my thought:
Combine what you said with that lame-o trend of “taking the high road” or whatever that too much of the establishment GOP seems to follow. You’ve got closeted people on both sides. Those on the Right will be blackmailed by the Left, and the rest of the Right will ignore it because. . . well, because they’re the Party of Stupid.
Those closeted on the Left will not be as prone to blackmail, because the Right doesn’t do that, in general. And the rest of the Left will support the closeting because they’re afraid to loose all the other voting blocks.
So, politically speaking, being a closeted homosexual on the left is just *shrug*, while being the same on the Right is a huge political liablility.
If someone on the left is forced out of the closet, well, it’s all the fault of those evil neo-cons! Even if it isn’t. If someone on the right is forced out of the closet, he’s an outright fraud and liar. (As though most politicians weren’t!)
Moreover, at this point, I think the Boyz aren’t in the business of trying to help the Dems, as much as they’re trying to shake some sense into the GoP. God Bless ‘Em for that. . .
DG in GA,
Do you read this site on a regular basis?
We talk about closeted gay Democrats we know of all the time.
We talk about the current “president” having spent a large amount of time here in Chicago at a gay bathhouse called Man’s Country.
We talk about Rahm Emanuel being gay and when he was in Chicago using his clout and position to get plenty of young guys into bed, because he promised to help them get jobs in big, fancy law firms after it.
We talk about all the closet cases we know of.
If you had either better reading comprehension or memory, you would acknowledge that.
I am always surprised when people give a crap with a capital S, when someone comes out! I mean this is 2010…I kinda thought we were over the whole GAY thing…Gay, straight, fat, skiny (no wait Michelle O has pitted us against the fatties again) Black, white, Hispanic…oh no wait we are supposed to hate Hispanics since we don’t want them crossing the border…
)
Young, old…no wait we will just let grammy die now since we can’t afford her medical care.
The Dems divide & conquer…I don’t care if a politician is a gay, fat, half black Mexican chinese chick who is old…as long as he/she has conservative values & wants to protect MY constitution.
Next time someone comes out lets all call & congratulate them!
thanks for letting me bitch!
Kim
P.S. I am a white , married no kids, 51 year old who could lose maybe 30 lbs. now with all the stress eating from this administration!
Love it here at Hill Buzz
what the heck…
as I just wrote, but my rant went away…sadly here I go again without saying B!tch.
I am always surprised that anyone makes a big deal of it when a politician comes out now days! I thought we were over that???
I mean who cares! we should all call & say way to go!
Gay, straight, Fat, thin (oh wait Michelle O has pitted us against the fatties again) balck, white, hispanic…wait, we aren’t supposed to like the hispanics now either…young, old opps! who needs grammie her healthcare is too expensive!
This admistration is pitting everyone against everyone! They are using divide & conquer so I suggest we all get together & decide we like everyone, as lonfg as the everyones don’t bomb us or yell mean things at us.
thanks for being here Hillbuzz, I love it here!
Kim
p.s. I am a 51, kinda old? white, married no kids, could lose 30 lbs. since I am stress eating since Obama took office, work at home lady…but still cute!
I give up…
now why did that post when my wonderful longwinded stuff did not…ahhhh technology…plus I did not use bad words or anything!
love ya guys….
kim,
We really, really hate when people take four or five posts to complain about WordPress not posting something.
Do you see what happens?
All of those posts do appear, and you look ridiculous because you started this rant about something not posting, yet, there they all are.
Please, everyone who does this, stop it. It only makes you look foolish in the end, and we hate seeing this garbage fill up a thread and derail it into more WordPress complaining.
Just stop doing this.
Thanks.
Boyz ~~ With all due respect, people are not going to ever stop complaining about “disappearing” posts. It’s just human nature.
And it seems that people who have used computers the most get the most upset whenever it happens. That’s probably because they’ve grown up around the beasties; and they have a certain inherent *trust* in the computer. When a post disappears, it’s a breach of that trust in the machine.
I am 65, and never touched a computer until just a couple of years ago; and I’m still at the point where, if the machine doesn’t explode when I turn it on, it’s a win – and I *know* that computers are EVIL. I know that it’s not your fault if a post disappears; and – if I say anything, it’s a quick joke about the gremlin eating it and we’ll just have to wait for it, and add lol — because I know that it’s not even the fault of my computer, your computer or even the “main server” somewhere in a vast mountain fortress in the Rockies (or Andes).
It’s ALL of them! Computers are alive and evil and connected to each other and they’re plotting to rid the world of humans and connect with the mainframe computer on the Mother Ship so that they can control the galaxy.
So, I know that there’s nothing to be done with an eaten post but wait until the evil little monster that is the computer spits it back out. (Well, that and I figure the machine is just evil enough to eat my complaint, too – and then spit them both out at the same time just to make me look like an ass.)
At any rate, don’t get too frustrated with your base here.
Ken Mehlman coming out as gay really is the political equivalent of Ricky Martin doing so.
Oh, by the way, I could’ve sworn I saw the words “Lindsay Graham” in your article, but I can’t find them anywhere, not even in the blackmailing to vote properly section. Huh.
If you search for “Lindsay”, you won’t find “Lindsey”….
Funny, that.
Part of Kirk’s challenge, I believe, is that he is a member of the military. He is subject to DADT policy. Were he to “come out,” that would essentially end his service to the military and he would receive a less-than-honorable discharge. (I think he is in the Reserves or possibly the National Guard.)
When it comes to the so-called “moderate” Republicans (or RINOs!), I wish I had the chance to ask a question or two: When you vote against a commonsense conservative idea, are you voting on principle? (I am thinking of Kirk’s House vote in favor of cap-and-tax.) If so, what is the principle? Or are you voting for a political reason?
I am all for a Big Tent GOP, but I don’t like squishiness. So many of the “moderate” Republicans come off as squishy, not principled. The problem with squishiness is that you never know which direction someone or something is going to squish out.
What *exactly* is a RINO? Seems to me it’s a Republican who doesn’t vote the way you want them to. Take the every-so-often flag burning law Congress passes. In 1989 the S.C. struck it down as violating the 1st A. Scalia was in the majority, stating that the 1st A did not have a flag exception. Conservatives went nuts. Was his vote a RINO vote? Take marijuana (but not mine). It’s nationally illegal only b/c the Commerce clause. However, the argument that locally-grown and consumed pot does not involve I-C is a very conservative position, yet any Rep who voted in favor of federal decriminalization would be branded a RINO, no?
Stupid term b/c it’s generally meaningless.
I couldn’t agree more. It’s exactly what made Bill Clinton’s dalliances so dangerous…..blackmail endangers all Americans. These guys should come out. No one will criticize them for being gay, as everyone is afraid of being called a homophobe (in the same vein as everyone is afraid of being called RAAAAAACIST or Islamophobe). Start with a clean slate and honesty. This is 2010. People don’t lose elections because they are gay!
Yawn. People should be who they were born to be. ‘Nuff said. If you don’t lie no one can hold it against you.
The situation you chronicle in Illinois reminds me of a perpetual motion machine… ughh ! It just keeps going round and round feeding on and of itself.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo……he is my future husband! How COULD he be at a gay bar?! Suddenly I can relate to the wives in Brokeback Mountain.
And there are actually very openly gay conservatives, such as the blog GayPatriot. The GOP and Conservative movements are fast changing their views on those issues with the rise of the younger generation. So it won’t even matter if Schock does come out of the closet. Accept that means my heart will shatter to a million pieces……
There is at least one out, proud gay Republican running for office in Chicago: Wes Fowler for Cook County Commissioner
I understand the dynamics of hide and seek, deception and power…that enter into this stuff, but I discover again as I read this piece that I really don’t care one way or another who’s gay or who’s not.
I care about them being liars, but I don’t see that being specifically about sexual orientation; because I figure if they’ll lie about that, they’ll lie about other stuff as well.
As a politically right-wing Christian (dreaded fundamentalist) I am so sick and tired of being identified (by the political professionals, not by Hillbuzz) as one who will get hysterical everytime anyone’s sexual peccadillos are discussed or revealed. Both the libs and the RINOs play this game and I am so so so so sick of it. Grow up already.
My message to ALL of them: I’m not going to tell you about my sex life and I don’t want to hear about yours.
An excellent column, and well expressed, but… can I be the only one who kept giggling at “Kirk and Shock?” This old classic Trek fan kept thinking “Kirk & Spock” and so I was unable to stop giggling throughout!
Laura Bush will be coming to Illinois in September to fund raise for Aaron Schock
http://www.sj-r.com/breaking/x109281594/Laura-Bush-to-attend-Schock-fundraiser-in-Peoria
You are right on about the blackmail issue.
Keep telling the truth.
I’m going to disagree on just one thing in this post. Usually, the Dems who have closeted Republicans in their pockets do not lean on them on “gay” issues like marriage or DADT. That might be too revealing and it lessens the value of the outing threat. They let them, maybe even encourage them to take anti-gay positions, preferably discreditable and ugly ones in public. Telling the pol it’s good positioning and cover, but setting them up for a worse fall. They take their blackmail on issues that are actually more important.
Then out them anyway whenever a general disgrace to the party seems like a good idea.