09/19/2005
A 21-year-old carpenter, who five years ago accused a Massachusetts politician of humiliating him by showing him gay porn, is speaking out as the candidate attempts another run for office. "The TV had a gay porn on it. He was standing there looking at me. He didn't say anything, he just gave me a look to see if I approved of it. I didn't say anything. He quickly went over and turned the TV off. Then there was kind of a silence. He broke the silence with a comment about the weather." George Rogers, then a Massachusetts state representative, was acquitted of the charges and is now running for New Bedford City Council.
POLL: 24.2% "embarrassed" by "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. "The study surveyed a sample designed to match the characteristics of a cohort of new US military recruits. 53.1% were Republicans, 17% were Democrats, 81.6% were male, 18.4% were female, and all were between the ages of 18 and 24." A polling spokesman said, "The fact that even conservatives are embarrassed by the gay ban suggests that the policy is harmful to the military’s reputation."
The Phelps gang protests at Rehnquist funeral: photos at Raw Story.
Posted 10:24 AM EST by Andy in Elsewhere | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Phelps and his brood have finally devolved into complete incoherency. Rehnquist consistently voted to uphold sodomy laws. The inbreeding in the Phelps clan is starting to become apparent, I think.
Posted by: Glenn | Sep 19, 2005 10:36:31 AM
1. The young man is looking for his moment in the spotlight. He walks in on a mans private moments and five years later is still using it to make himself known to the world.
2. When I was in the Marine Corps we all had to hide who we were. The "Don't ask Don't tell" policy only makes people have to hide even more from their own government.
3. We all know Phelps and his family are nuts. What needs to be done is to ignore them. As long as the media makes then news they will be making trouble. Stop giving them free media coverage. Make them pay for the advertisement of the idiocy they do.
Posted by: Bear | Sep 19, 2005 11:02:46 AM
Uh, the 21-year old was 16 at the time events took place. Also, the then 66-year old made "inappropriate" advances.
So, what's the truth in this? Did the kid just walk in and find this? Why was he there? And, what the hell is a 66-year old doing making moves on a 16 year old kid?! Come on, if you're watching a porn and a kid walks in, wouldn't you run to turn it off if you didn't have ulterior motives?
Posted by: jack | Sep 19, 2005 1:38:39 PM
Couple of things re: the accusations. First, this story is in the Boston Herald -- an avowedly conservative-slanted paper, and not a very good one. Kinda like reading this in the NY Post. Doesn't mean it's not true, but consider the source.
Second, the "inappropriate advances" is the reporter's characterization. Read the story. Other than the porn tape thing, 2 other facts are mentioned: the older guy called the younger one "buff" once or twice, and once grabbed his hand (not, apparently, during the porn tape incident). "Inappropriate advances" is a pretty severe characterization of that, if that's all there is.
My guess is, to be honest, Rogers would have loved nothing better than to have the then-16-year-old see the gay porn, go "Cool!" and start taking his clothes off. But by the kid's own words, when that didn't happen, the older man "quickly" turned it off. Can't see much to this story, if that's the case.
Posted by: Glenn | Sep 19, 2005 1:55:34 PM