Charlie Crist | Elections | Florida | I'm Not Gay | Mark Foley | News | Republican Party

Opponent Outs Florida Gubernatorial Candidate Charlie Crist

Looks like the Foley scandal may be starting to uncover the skeletons buried in the Republican backyard.

Independent Gubernatorial Candidate Max Linn took the bold step of calling out Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist on his sexuality during a radio interview on National Coming Out Day, according to reports.

Speaker_cristSaid Linn, who is running against Crist for Governor in the November election: "Charlie come out, come out from wherever you are." Linn reportedly said that "it is common knowledge in Tallahassee that Crist is gay" and it is time that his opponent acknowledged it.

Crist's office had no comment, and neither did the Democratic candidate, US. Rep Jim Davis.

It's not the first time Crist has been questioned about his sexuality. He was asked in an August radio interview, and replied, "The point is, I'm not. There's the answer. How do you like it? Not that there's anything wrong with that, as they say on Seinfeld. But I just happen not to be."

We also reported on a call Crist made to a radio interview back in January 2005 when he was asked "Are you a homo?" At that time, Crist replied, "No, man. No. I love women. I mean, they're wonderful."

Opponent Outs Florida GOP Governor Candidate [tr]

You may have missed...
Woman Lover Charlie Crist is Not Gay [tr]

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Floriduh is perhaps THE most hateful place to live for gay people. With the pitifully small exception of Ft. Lauderdale which is a modern day Warsaw Ghetto. Politicians who are in fact gay, yet continue to vote and govern in ways that deny gay people equal rights under the law, are no better than collaborators who were traitors against their own people with the Nazi's.

    And yes, yes, I know, there are a bunch of "Mitches" and Republicunts out there who will scream at my misguided moral equivalency in associating Republicunts to Nazi's. But, go back and look at history, this is how it starts. Republicunts are hypocrites, motivated only by greed of power and money. We have followed them like lemmings, and now we are losing our rights, we have wrongfully invaded the wrong country for no good reason, and 650,000 people are dead. We are becoming the Nazi's of the 21'st Century by following these attrocious Republicunts.

    Posted by: Crixi Van Cheek | Oct 13, 2006 9:59:17 AM

  2. how exactly does his sexuality have anything to do with the topic of his election? should gay men not be running?

    Posted by: Tim | Oct 13, 2006 10:10:43 AM

  3. He's cute...for a internally homophobic b*tch ass. Eh, wouldn't push 'em out of bed but I wouldn't vote for him either. Florida does kinda suck to be gay in, which is wierd cuz when I lived there it was full of 'mos. But one thing I noticed when I was at FSU in Tallahassee was that both the blacks and the gays seemed to be rather complacent with their belittled social standing. It was wierd.

    Posted by: Derrick | Oct 13, 2006 10:17:13 AM

  4. The guy opposes gay marriage and adoption? Talk about self-loathing.

    Posted by: Aaron | Oct 13, 2006 10:43:02 AM

  5. This whole thing is so loathsome. Who would you rather vote for, a possible self-loathing, closeted Republican, or a jerky Independent who thinks that outing his opponent (or, possibly worse, making false accusations about his opponent's sexuality) is a good way to win an election?

    Posted by: Matt | Oct 13, 2006 10:58:28 AM

  6. Once again, the point is missed.

    The issue here is not sexual orientation but dishonesty and hypocrisy, two issues that are most definitely relevant in a political campaign; especially when the politician's platform has anti-gay planks.

    If Charlie Crist is a gay man that doesn't believe that gays should be allowed to marry OR adopt children, that is his right. But he should not be promoting the demonization and marginalization of gay people, which has become so popular in his party, from the safety and security of a closet.

    Jim McGreevy (a DEMOCRAT) is a perfect example of this. He spoke against gay marriage when he was governor of NJ and said it was his moral conviction. Upon his being outed we discovered that it was not his moral position at all, but rather his politically expedient position.

    If a politician were a major stock holder and a member of the board of Phillip Reynolds and owned a chain of smoke shops but ran a campaign against smoking and tobacco companies; would you be offended if his tobacco connections were exposed?

    If a woman politician who had multiple abortions and owned an abortion clinic ran a “Right to life” campaign and promised to pursue legislation to deny other women the right to choose if elected; would you be offended if her hypocrisy was exposed?

    It’s the same thing with closeted gay politicians who support legislation to limit or deny rights to gays and lesbians.

    I really don’t understand why people have such a hard time getting their heads around this.

    I for one can’t stand hypocrisy and dishonesty in a politician, regardless of his party affiliation. If someone knows facts about a politician that would expose his/her hypocrisy and dishonesty, I think they should ALWAYS sing like a bird.

    Posted by: Zeke | Oct 13, 2006 11:01:59 AM

  7. They aren't false accusations any more than the accusations about Foley were false.

    And as for your question; I vote for the jerky Independent.

    Truth trumps dishonesty with me EVERY time no matter how "jerky" the truth might seem.

    Posted by: Zeke | Oct 13, 2006 11:05:49 AM

  8. Sing like a bird, indeed. Thank you, Zeke. Thank you and Amen!

    Posted by: George W. Tush | Oct 13, 2006 11:13:39 AM

  9. ^5 ZEKE

    well said

    Posted by: jimmyboyo | Oct 13, 2006 11:23:37 AM

  10. Oh Zeke Doll, I could jus' kiss ya!

    Posted by: Crixi Van Cheek | Oct 13, 2006 11:26:35 AM

  11. Everyone should just stop hiding under rocks and be who they are. The faster we (as gay men/women) do so, the faster we will get to sit at the table of equality.

    Posted by: Jonathan | Oct 13, 2006 11:37:05 AM

  12. Did I read on this blog that Crist and Foley were at one time lovers, or was that just a joke/rumor? Zeke, after reading all the other messages, I started thinking up something to say....but then I ran across yours and I was deflated....very good writing. And as for "republicunts"...those who are in power now are the extreme right neo-cons--a third party voted in under the guise of being Republican. They aren't Republicans. A case in point, if you watched the recent Goldwater documentary, Mr. Republican, himself, stated back in the 70's that history would report him as a liberal. Compared to the facists that are in power now, hOw prescient was that?

    Posted by: roger | Oct 13, 2006 11:54:17 AM

  13. It should be pointed out that Crist's Democratic opponent is firmly against gay marriage too.

    Is there a Libertarian candidate in this race? If so, given both major candidates unacceptable anti-gay positions...that's the guy that should get monolithic gay support in this election, IMO. To vote otherwise would be hypocracy.

    Posted by: Pompeius | Oct 13, 2006 11:59:48 AM

  14. I used to be a Republican believe it or not. THE HORROR! To be fair, I didn't know any better, having grown up in a very conservative religious Republican Mississippi family and the Republican Party didn't used to be as batsh*t crazy as they have become over the last 20 years. Thank god I saw the light. Now, I could best be described as a libertarian who's a registered Democrat.

    Frankly I’m disgusted with the Democrats these days too. I support them and vote for them ONLY because I see them as the only viable opposition party to challenge the current regime.

    As for Davis; you're absolutely correct about his position on gay marriage and I told his volunteer recruiter as much when he called me asking me to volunteer today. I told him that I didn't see one rat's ass bit of difference between Crist and Davis other than the fact that Davis does support gay adoptions.

    I think I got placed on the "Do Not Call" list!

    Oh well, if a Democrat, or anyone else wants my time, talents and money then they better damn well treat me like a full citizen of this country, deserving of all the rights, responsibilities and benefits that my hard work and taxes pay for!

    And as a 12 year veteran of the USMC, I think I'm more than qualified to ask for the rights that I risked my life to defend!

    Somehow I don't think I'm gonna get a lot of qualified politicians calling me here in the land of Jeb!

    That's OK; I can hold out as long as they can!

    Posted by: Zeke | Oct 13, 2006 2:33:23 PM

  15. Good for you zeke

    I to used to be a republican. Actualy one of those born again ,bible thumping ,self hating ,republicans who voted for bush in 2000 (sorry world)

    Finaly I guess I snapped and went crazy in a good way. LOL Actualy, it was ironicaly a trip to a desert monastery in Egypt to see the light. It was a reverse desert experience from a biblical perspective. I have since become an atheist with probably a dash of a pagan slant....a die hard revolutionary radical left wing environmentalist who closes his eyes and votes dem. The dems are the only valid oposition party at the moment, and not much of one at that.

    Toast to NOV 8th (results day) and hopefuly america has had its own epiphany as I once did.

    VOTE dem, NOV 7th Get out the vote

    Posted by: jimmyboyo | Oct 13, 2006 4:22:43 PM

  16. This is what it comes down to, in my far from humble opinion. First, please set your well-meaning fantasies aside—under present conditions, a vote for a progressive third party is a vote thrown away, and, worse still, as we saw in 2000, a de facto vote for the Republicans. More than anything else [and I agree there were other factors], Ralph Nader elected George Bush.

    Two: while we still don't have enough, there are more Dems on our side [and the side of reasonable, humane government generally] than Repubs, therefore, we are more likely to see the rest of the Dems eventually led to change than Repubs. If Blacks, disappointed, hell, rightfully outraged, sickened, by the number of Dems who were still supporting, hell, fighting for segregation and THEIR second class citizenship in the 60s had abandoned the Party, the racist Dems and Repubs would have won and segregation would still be legal. But not only did they wisely not do that, they did not stop putting pressure on the Party to do more, and while racism still exists, two DEMOCRATIC Presidents eventually backed their full LEGAL equality.

    We must do the same. I hated the fact that John Kerry & John Edwards [can I please fuck him now—in the GOOD way?] took a public stand against gay marriage, as many leading Dems still do, including Barack Obama whom I railed against in another thread. But they still supported us on more other issues than Bush [not just opinion but voting records], and, therefore, I believed their was more hope for our future—and, frankly, the World's—witht them than Bush. And I think that imbalance will remain in 2008 regardless of which of the likely Dem and Repub candidates get their Party's nomination. And, therefore, despite the fact that I am shocked and enraged by the number of Dems who are fanning the flames of homophobia by the reckless, shotgun way they have attacked Foley, I must believe that they have the capacity to grow, just as you, Zeke and JimmyBoyo did.

    I have probably recounted before how our most vocal and passionate straight supporter in the Senate, Ted Kennedy, was once mostly indifferent to our rights, and even homophobic in terms of believing that we were collectively sexual predators. What is most remarkable is that, as a Kennedy from Massachusetts, he does not need us to get reelected. Even if he did, he could just quietly vote the right way in the Senate on gay marriage and ENDA and the hate crimes bill and gays in the military and collect gay payback every six years. But he has chosen to do battle with the theocratic fascists in Washington, as passionately as gay Barney Frank in the House.

    In short, I long ago reluctantly stopped believing in perfect choices, but my olfactory lobe is still working just fine, and that is why I can smell a Republican a mile away.

    Posted by: Leland | Oct 14, 2006 12:43:41 PM

  17. For the record, I never vote for a third party candidate, because, as I mentioned earlier, the Democrats are the only VIABLE opposition party.

    And even though Dems drive me to the point of despair sometimes, I support their candidacies with my time, talents and money. However, I refuse to sit quietly in the corner when I disagree with a particular candidate’s positions even if he is a popular Democrat. That is how I, like Log Cabin Republicans, try to change my party from the inside.

    I most definitely believe that the Democratic Party is the superior party when it comes to supporting and fighting for equal civil rights for all Americans. However I honestly feel that it is my, and every Democrats', DUTY to challenge our “liberal” politicians every time they fail to act on or speak out for basic Democratic principles such as fairness and equality for ALL Americans.

    We have to educate ALL politicians, regardless of party affiliation, that our issues are American issues. Gay rights advancements protect, ensure and expand rights for ALL minorities. Our political opinions are influenced by our life experiences and our family’s needs and not our sexual proclivities. We ARE “values voters” just as much as those on the religious right are. We have families and we vote according to OUR FAMILY values.

    We have got to get the message out that, contrary to the popular myth perpetuated by the mainstream media, “values” and “family values” are not the exclusive domain of religious fundamentalist. We did not come from under a rock. We come FROM families and we HAVE families of our own which we hold together and in which we thrive WITHOUT the benefits and subsidies of marriage and without the unconditional support that our society bestows upon straight couples and their families. THAT requires REAL family values.

    I swear, deep in my soul, I feel that we in this country, and in many countries around the world, are on the verge of a MONUMENTALLY positive change in the gay rights dynamic. The desperation and viciousness of the religious right only reinforces my feeling that they are making a final desperate stand for gay oppression. They are loosing the “culture war” and they know it. Education, truth and honesty are defeating ignorance, hate and bigotry.

    In my opinion, the MOST effective political statement that ANY gay person can make is to come out. No amount of pride parades or circuit parties will ever have as great an effect as the opening of a single closet door. People have a real hard time hating, oppressing and discriminating against people who they know and love. That’s why the closet is SO important to our enemies. That’s why pushing as many of us back into the closet with “ex-gay” ministries is a critical part of their battle plan. The fewer average, tax paying, law abiding, family oriented gay citizens out there to influence friends, family, coworkers and friends, the easier their job becomes. The more of us who stand courageous, out, proud and vocal the quicker the inevitable demise of our enemy’s homophobic crusade happens.

    Remember how important segregation was to Southern racists. Segregation was to the racist what the closet is to the homophobe; an effective way to keep people from getting to know these people personally where they may find that they are more alike than different. As long as we hide in our closets the more our enemies are allowed to miss-define who we are, what we want, what we do and why we are gay. Don’t allow our enemies to define us to Joe Q America. Stand up, live respectably and let our lives be our message.

    I guarantee you that THAT will positively and radically change the future for gay Americans more than walking in any parade or volunteering for any candidate.

    Parades and especially political activities should be and often are important tools in our struggle, but they should be secondary to simply living our lives respectably as OUT, proud and VOCAL, tax paying, law abiding, civic minded citizens.

    THAT is how we most effectively change the hearts and minds of those who are oppressing us.

    Having said ALL of that, consider volunteering for a gay positive candidate over the next few weeks and PLEASE vote on November 7th!

    Leland, I adore you my brother. Your passion and willingness to speak your mind is a true inspiration to me.

    There are many others that I admire here but probably too many to mention by name.

    Leland just stands out in the crowd.

    Posted by: Zeke | Oct 14, 2006 5:09:44 PM

  18. Well, since Leland and Zeke are such big supporters of the idea of sticking with the Democratic party in order to change it from within, I guess that's a call for gay economic conservatives and libertarians to become Log Cabin Republicans, and try to change that party's social positions from within as well.

    Posted by: Pompeius | Oct 15, 2006 1:37:10 PM

  19. Pompeius,

    I'm not exactly sure why you've developed such a hard-on for me lately but if you didn't notice I was being supportive of Log Cabin Republicans' efforts to change their party from within when I said,

    "I refuse to sit quietly in the corner when I disagree with a particular candidate’s positions even if he is a popular Democrat. That is how I, like Log Cabin Republicans, try to change my party from the inside."

    In case you missed the revelation in one of my other comments, I used to be a Log Cabin Republican.

    As for the "gay economic conservatives and libertarians" in the Log Cabin Republicans; they might better start with changing the current Republican Party's, anything BUT conservative, pork barrel obsessed, spend, spend, spend, economic (fiscal) policies before they can possibly hope to change their positions on gay issues.

    In fact, as a former “Goldwater Republican”, I can tell you that you might better start with changing the Republican Party back into a party of real REPUBLICANS before you take on the task of changing specific policies.

    If you want to discuss/debate traditional conservative ideology versus neoconservative hegemony (which you seem to support) with me, I would suggest that you be well read and educated in political history and prepared to defend the latter against the former.

    If you are of the opinion that Bush 43 is of a remotely similar political ideology as Bush 41, then, TRUST ME, you are not prepared for such a debate. I would hate to embarrass you my friend.

    Posted by: Zeke | Oct 16, 2006 12:59:25 AM

  20. Zeke, I consider myself a libertarian thru and thru, hence you'll get no spirited defense of neoconservatism from me. Sorry to disappoint you! :)

    Fact is, I'd actually consider voting Democratic...if I thought there was a way of changing THAT party's ECONOMIC policies from, convincing my new Democratic chums that wealth redistribution/class levelling is an illegitimate function of government.

    Yeah, i know...LOL! I'd sure be popular at your Democratic fundraisers, cocktail parties and social mixers, wouldn't I?

    Posted by: Pompeius | Oct 16, 2006 1:20:29 AM

  21. Pompeius,

    You might have noticed in my comment above,

    "Now, I could best be described as a libertarian who's a registered Democrat."

    that I too consider myself to be a libertarian.

    The problem with your argument is, there is absolutely nothing left in the current GOP that reflects libertarian ideology; ESPECIALLY as it relates to gay rights and civil liberties. Nor is the current administration's corporate welfare system consistent with libertarian principles of a free market economy.

    Even the CATO Institute is becoming disenchanted with the GOP and its current neocon/theocon manifestation.

    You can read more of my political philosophy and how my sexual orientation/family concerns influences it on the Condi Rice thread. You said you were unaware of me being rude or impolite to anyone at Towleroad? Unfortunately, you will find an example of where I lost my cool in that discussion. Fortunately you will also see how my apologizing and treating another commenter with respect turned the whole dialog into a productive discussion leading to greater understanding of “gay liberals”.

    You may notice that I attempt to stay as non-partisan as I possibly can in 99% of my comments throughout Towleroad. Most of my venom is reserved for the current administration and certain politicians for SPECIFIC POLICIES and not a free for all against the GOP or Republicans in general.

    You will also notice that I don't spare the Democratic Party or Democratic politicians my wrath, when I feel it's called for.

    Trust me, I give the Democrats fits too. Nobody gets a free pass with me.

    If you haven’t already, check out the Independent Gay Forum website, for some interesting and intelligent political essays and discussions from various gay writers representing a wide variety of political perspectives (liberal, conservative, libertarian, etc.) Quite a lot of libertarian ideology presented.

    Posted by: Zeke | Oct 16, 2006 4:49:24 AM

Post a comment


« «Getting an Answer from a Bush« «