Collecting Scalps
All the ladies at the salon can’t stop chittering and chattering about the latest piece of gossip. You can catch up on all the latest buzz here :
In case you hadn’t heard, Jeff Gannon was a man-whore. If you listen carefully through the screams of “HYPOCRITES!!!!” you might be able to hear my voice saying “Big @%$#@ deal”. On a personal level, my response to this situation (gay or straight) would be “Ewww…”, but I don’t know the guy and I really don’t see what the hell this has to do with him being a White House propagandist who might have facilitated the leak of Valerie Plame’s identity. That’s a big deal….being slutty is his business.
And I’m really tired of seeing my fellow liberals gleefully outing conservatives while hiding behind the motive of exposing “hypocrisy”1. The link above is just as tawdry as anything the in Starr Report and has as little to do with Gannon’s role as a White House shill as the Clinton impeachment had to do with perjury. The obvious goal of these outing campaigns isn’t about ensuring the ideological purity of the right, but using their perceived homophobia against them. But if you really feel (like I do) that homosexuality isn’t a big deal, why work overtime to portray it as something that should bring shame?
Another reason why this whole “hypocrisy” line stinks is that it’s so often untrue. Now I haven’t followed this story as closely as many, but has Gannon been quoted saying something virulently homophobic? If so, I’ll concede that this is a genuine case of a hypocrite being exposed. On the surface, however, this seems to be yet another case in which a closeted gay man’s tangential relationship to homophobes (in this case, being members of the same party) is construed to mean that he’s an “Uncle Tom” (a phrase I’d love to see die, BTW). For all I know, Gannon agrees with every tenet of the GOP agenda except homosexuality. Does that mean he’s a “hypocrite” for not putting his sexual issues above every other aspect of his political life?
Our side likes to pat ourselves on the back for being more open-minded than conservatives, but isn’t the ultimate test of that boast whether or not you’re willing to tolerate those who disagree with you? I’m willing to accept that not all gay people are going to feel strongly enough about gay issues to leave the Republican party. Lack of concern for the issues important to the GLBT community doesn’t make anyone less gay than opposition to affirmative action by African-Americans automatically lightens their skin.
Here’s the thing that has me worried about this whole story. What happens if the GOP and the public just doesn’t give a shit about the revelations? Where does that leave us? On one side we’ll have the shrill Democrats trashing a guy for being gay and on the other side we’ll have a Republican party who, despite their anti-gay rhetoric, has a big enough tent to accept anyone. From then on, any further discussion about White House propaganda is tinted with the aura of sexual hysteria.
Like Kevin Drum said yesterday “The politics of personal destruction…is tremendously helpful to [Conservatives'] cause…Liberalism simply doesn’t thrive in this kind of atmosphere.” The prurient aspects of this saga can easily overtake this story’s importance and make everyone on the left look like a bunch…get ready for this, “hypocrites” who only care about gay people as long as they’re on our side.
That said, it’s out there now. My hope is that the trashy revelations provide the level of sleaze necessary to get people to pay attention to the real story here. The important thing now is to make sure any discussion of Gannon’s prostitution is accompanied by questions about his access to the President, his role in the Plame outing, and the connections between Talon News, GOPUSA, and the White House.
1: Not that there aren’t exceptions to this rule. Religious broadcaster Paul Crouch, who has spent years decrying the “homosexual agenda” with his fellow televangelists at the Trinity Broadcasting Network, was recently revealed to have paid hush money to a former lover. Couch’s central role in one of our country’s predominant purveyors of Puritanical propaganda makes the revelations about his affairs (and the ensuing coverup) fair game in my eyes.
15 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
While I wish the non sexual elements were the bigger part of this story, I’m having a good time watching right wingers squirm after years of doing shit like this to us. Maybe it is scorched earth, but I think after the last election, America has shown once and for all what it takes to piss us off: Somebody who isn’t us getting some.
But seriously, I say let the knives come out. The politics of personal destruction might be shallow, but they’re effective.
Comment by Ross A Lincoln — February 14, 2005 @ 2:44 pm
And, by the way, excellent Zelda reference.
Comment by Ross A Lincoln — February 14, 2005 @ 3:08 pm
i know that there is a small part of me that agrees with you, but however, this does seem to go against all the “moral values” that this president ran on, especially if the connections between him & scottie turn out to be true. connect the moral values, the poor vetting (poor use of homeland security), and the release of classified documents, and you may just have the trifecta if you can pull it off. remember, it’s almost never the big crimes that bring presidents down, it’s the small things that count.
Comment by cali_ — February 14, 2005 @ 3:24 pm
There are also hints that one of the reasons he got his White House press pass so quickly (something like 3 or 5 days after Talon News’ web site went up) was that he had the goods on a few closeted staff.
In that case, the sexual angle is slightly more important.
And, yes, he has written many anti-gay articles (including one defending Santorum’s “man on dog” comment).
Comment by Uncle Mike — February 14, 2005 @ 6:48 pm
And, yes, he has written many anti-gay articles (including one defending Santorum’s “man on dog” comment).
Which have evidently now been purged from Talon’s website.
Comment by Geoduck — February 14, 2005 @ 7:05 pm
Lighten up!
As a bona fide, certified, verified, pure-bred huma-sexhual, I am slapping my sides with laughter at each new Gannon revelation. As to my creds, I was PC before it was PC to be so, and I was marching in gay-rights parades back when they were still entertaining. I’ve known men who are into the same stuff Gannon/Guckert sold, and I’ve known men who’ve sold it. Some of them are my friends.
This wonderful affair does not have to be about disparaging gay people or sex workers. The key matter is that a bunch of journalists worked alongside an ill-credentialed puppet for a period of months, and nobody noticed the difference! The fact that we now get to kick the term “media whores” into popular awareness is just gravy.
So c’mon, work it girls!
Comment by CupaJoe — February 14, 2005 @ 7:46 pm
Gotta love the salaciousness of the this though! I believe Gannon is in fact quoted as saying rather hypocritical things regarding homosexuality.
I thought that I’d heard that in this AirAmericaradio unfiltered podcast.
Hey, enjoy this folks. We’ve lost on every front, now is the time to sit back and enjoy the show!
Comment by Reality Bites — February 14, 2005 @ 9:23 pm
Sorry the URL didn’t come up properly. Why does the message board hate HTML?
http://www.walgran.com/aar-uf.xml
Why does the message board hate HTML?
Air America mp3 file link.
Comment by Reality Bites — February 14, 2005 @ 9:29 pm
I think there is a lot more to the hypocrisy charge than you say. You pretend that homosexuals happen to disagree with Republicans on homosexuality but that is just one issue among many. You describe as if it were the same as being pro-environment and voting Repubican. That is simply not the case. A vocal and powerful proportion of the Republican party thinks homosexuality is evil and wrong. They think homosexuals should rot in hell. They despise homosexuals because of who they are. Its not a simple disagreement on an issue. Of course not every Republican feels that way, but the Republican party has done nothing to distance itself from this stance and is very close to embracing it. A homosexual republican is akin to a black person who is in the KKK because they agree with some of their positions. Not the hating blacks and wanting them to burn in hell part, of course. But the other positions.
Comment by TJonBergman — February 15, 2005 @ 6:03 am
The guy was a prostitute. That’s illegal, moral considerations put aside for the moment. He got a job as a “reporter” and within 5 days was covering the Press Room, having been denied credentials on Capitol Hill. So from prostitute to White House reporter in literally weeks. He was at the very least a security risk. The facts suggest that his very presence at the WH was part of a quid pro quo bargain, or the result of blackmail.
One comment he made was that John Kerry would be America’s first gay president. He also was behind the story that Drudge ran suggesting an affair with an intern by Kerry. So he was not above using potentially damaging sexual information as a weapon.
It would have been bad enough had he been a licentious closet case passing opprobrium on his out brethren. The fact that he was a paid escort, a whore, a criminal (in the eyes of the law), a perhaps mentally unbalanced individual, blithely hanging out with the White House press corps, winning favor from the WH Press secretary is at least shocking, at best scandalous. Get over your squeamishness, the Repubs set it up this way, and now it’s their turn to reap what they sew. They were the ones attacking the gay community. Need I remind you of the Florida couple denied adoption rights recently, BECAUSE they were gay, though they were foster parents for years to the child in question.These and others like them are the real victims, paying the real consequences of the damaging Bush policies toward ALL minority communities, not just the gay community. If one on their side gets their hair mussed and has to go back to turning tricks for a while, so be it, I won’t feel pity.
Just who are you trying to advocate for? I’d suggest picking a better battle, this one is a no-brainer.
Comment by Mr Blifil — February 15, 2005 @ 6:53 pm
It’s not the “gay prostitute” thing, it’s the “prostitute” thing — he’s the ultimate “media whore”. It’d be the same scandal if it were a female, straight, prostitute with special access. It’d probably be less fun though.
Regardless, we need to get over our squeamishness about using the same tactics as the right — there is no reason to fight this fight with one hand tied behind our backs. The high road doesn’t seem such a great place to be when you’re lying face down in a pool of blood on it. That’s where we are now…
Comment by Sean — February 15, 2005 @ 9:35 pm
WHO? WHO is “trashing” Gannon for being gay? Is it Americablog? Cuz I sure as hell don’t see it there. There’s the revelation and the website, but I don’t think exposing the site is “trashing” Gannon. Who the hell is warranting a statement like this: “But if you really feel (like I do) that homosexuality isn’t a big deal, why work overtime to portray it as something that should bring shame?” What? Prostitution shouldn’t bring shame? I agree that there’s nothing shameful about being gay. Tell me where I have to go to find the liberals who disagree with us.
If you think that there is nothing remarkable about an impressively sympathetic, conservative “journalist” lobbing softball questions to the White House by day and actually prostituting himself at night, then yeah I guess you are genuinely more “open-minded” than I am. But the singular conservative response to this is to argue that we’re being “hypocrites.” You say that you haven’t seen anything virulently anti-gay written by Gannon (well, it probably doesn’t help that Talon has erased everything he ever wrote)? Well I haven’t seen anything virulently anti-gay written by ANYBODY on the left. Why does Gannon get the benefit of the doubt from you but you’ll but the conservative straw man hook, line and sinker.
I’m liberal, and I genuinely hope that republicans become more accepting to homosexuals. I’d love it if they had a big enough tent to “accept everyone.” Hell, they wouldn’t really be Republicans anymore then, would they?
Comment by Cody — February 15, 2005 @ 9:43 pm
I agree, I couldn’t care less about this guy’s personal habits. The real story is the TREASONOUS aspects that are becoming buried by the other crap. We need to focus on the important facts.
A CIA deep-cover operative was outed by the american media. Someone moved that information, was this person involved? If so, how? There’s the story.
Comment by carson — February 16, 2005 @ 5:14 am
Also, this is the perfect opportunity to make large parts of the Republican party go on record as saying there is absolutely nothing wrong with being gay. That is not going to sit well with other parts of the party. They have been using Divide and Conquer for decades. Its time we used it against them. There is a real incompatibility among parts of the Republican party. Exploit it.
Comment by TJonBergman — February 16, 2005 @ 5:47 am
Zelda 1 ruled!
Comment by Mikhail Capone — February 16, 2005 @ 8:59 am