Gay Rights | John McCain | News | Republican Party

McCain Couldn't Pick a 'Pro Gay Rights' Running Mate

In an interview about potential running mates with The Weekly Standard, John McCain said he'd consider a running mate (like former Pennsylvania governor Tom Ridge) who's pro-choice, but not somebody like NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who's for gay rights:

Bloomberg_mccain"I think it's a fundamental tenet of our party to be pro-life but that does not mean we exclude people from our party that are pro-choice. We just have a--albeit strong--but just it's a disagreement. And I think Ridge is a great example of that. Far more so than Bloomberg, because Bloomberg is pro-gay rights, pro, you know, a number of other issues."

This is a man who doesn't even know what the acronym LGBT stands for. He also doesn't really believe in gay adoption, supports a ban on gays in the military, is worried if his clothing looks too gay, isn't sure if condoms stop the spread of HIV, thinks same-sex marriage ceremonies are okay as long as they're just pretend, and has promised right-wing religious groups that he'll start speaking out more vocally against LGBT causes.

It's astonishing that some gays (14% according to this poll) will not only support him, but fund his campaign.

(via think progress)

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. After the way McCain betrayed Mark Bingham it is truly shocking that any gay person could support McCain. They are weasles of the worst sort. Unimaginable idiots.

    Posted by: Hephaestion | Aug 14, 2008 6:48:34 PM

  2. GAWD...can't that man loose the election already so that he can hush his mouth and go away.

    Posted by: Bojo | Aug 14, 2008 6:52:29 PM

  3. I appreciate the editorialized content, Andy. what a perfect opportunity - and you're saying volumes in just a few short, effective words.

    I love your website for the mix of content and the briefly summed-up stories, with links to the whole kit and caboodle, but I'm glad you're taking a few minutes every once in a while to stand up against McCain. Even beyond all the things you mentioned, imagine the effects of picking two more conservatives on our court and how that would effect our community and many ally communities.

    Suffice it to say, it's more imperative than ever that we win back the White House.

    Posted by: Ryan | Aug 14, 2008 7:02:46 PM

  4. "We" win back the white house? You know that Obama insinuated in the Advocate that most gay men proselytize, gay-baited to win the South Carolina primary, considers homophobia a legitimate position so long as it is couched in religious belief, supports giving taxpayer money to religions whose affiliates refuse to hire gay people, and opposes gay marriage...right?

    Yes, McCain's positions are more draconian. But frankly I'm kind of sad that more gay people don't tell both of these candidates to go f*ck themselves.

    Posted by: dk | Aug 14, 2008 7:19:31 PM

  5. It really does make you wonder when a man has such issues with homosexuality.

    Posted by: JR | Aug 14, 2008 7:24:07 PM

  6. It's indeed astonishing that any gay person could support McCain, yet they come out of the woodwork in every political post, and all the concrete reasons why McCain would be a horrible president for gay people fail to convince them. Either they ignore logic (Obama's not for gay marriage either!) and whitewash the disgraceful Republican record or say that the "gay agenda" (as a certain Manhunt owner put it) isn't really high on their list of priorities. So, come November, that 14% will probably still be pulling the lever for the guy who thinks you are unworthy of basic human rights.

    Posted by: Ernie | Aug 14, 2008 7:30:12 PM

  7. Most people don't know what "LGBT" stands for because we keep changing the damn acronym. Btw - its GLBT in this neck of the world. Or GLBTQ. Or GLBTQA. Or how bout alphabetic order like BGLT? That would be only fair wouldn't it?

    (oh and 'L' is redundant, 'B' is just G is waiting, and 'T' have different legal and social issues than 'G')

    Let the rants begin.

    Posted by: yoshi | Aug 14, 2008 7:31:27 PM

  8. I won't vote for McCain. I think he panders to the Right and supports discrimination against law-abiding American gay citizens. But I won't be voting for Obama, either. Obama is representative of the bisexual double standard that is endemic in liberalism. Girl-girl is hot, guy-guy is gross - that's the basis for liberalism.

    The bisexual double standard is the defining hypocrisy of liberalism.

    Posted by: jason | Aug 14, 2008 7:37:14 PM

  9. I've stopped caring about what John McCain has to say. This quote only proves his narrow-mindness and inability to accept other peoples's views. To exclude a person who has pro-gay views only exposes the homophobia and double standard of John McCain, a belief that is out of step of the current times.

    Posted by: Peter | Aug 14, 2008 7:45:17 PM

  10. Are you MANHUNT apologists listening? McCain doesn't want you to have the same rights as everyone else! Defend *that*, idiots!

    Posted by: peterparker | Aug 14, 2008 7:50:16 PM


    Posted by: 24play | Aug 14, 2008 8:07:14 PM

  12. we all know mccain is an idiot..lets face it hes a moron..that shouldnt be a reason to allow Obama, a man with not one senate achievement, a man with no solid feasbale ideas on cleaning up Bush's mess be President of the unites states, ok sure

    Posted by: daveynyc | Aug 14, 2008 8:33:28 PM

  13. I don't understand on one hand you have McCain claiming the republicans have a fundamental belief in the sanctity of marriage, but he started dating his current wife while he was still married.... Then you have Obama saying he does not support gay marriage, but some form of domestic partnership... is he not aware how "separate but equal" did not work.

    Posted by: Jeremy | Aug 14, 2008 8:39:41 PM

  14. YOSHI,

    you have to actually be CLEVER to be considered clever. this not a rant.

    Posted by: nic | Aug 14, 2008 8:48:09 PM

  15. The hypocrisy of both McCain and Obama is mind-boggling, and a testament to how politics has been corrupted by pandering. McCain is clearly pandering to the Right. But it is Obama who deserves to be exposed for his backdowns on gay rights issues. Obama used a tactic that is common amongst liberals - early in the primaries, put out signals that you're gay-friendly but, when it's the serious end of the campaign, recoil from your previously held views.

    Obama is as much a phony as McCain. Obama does not deserve one gay vote.

    Posted by: jason | Aug 14, 2008 8:51:31 PM


    Posted by: 24play | Aug 14, 2008 8:58:01 PM

  17. McCain:

    * Opposes employment protections

    * Opposes hate crime legislation

    * Supports "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

    * Supports the Defense of Marriage Act

    * Opposes civil unions

    * Opposes domestic partnerships

    * Favors state constitutional amendments banning marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships at any level of government, as well as recognition of any of these from other states.

    * Favors state constitutional amendment that would ban public entities -- local governments, agencies, public universities and hospitals, etc., from providing health insurance and other benefits to the domestic partners of their workers, students, etc.

    * Opposes adoption by gay couples

    * Supports the ban on HIV-positive immigrants and backed a Jesse Helms measure blocking HIV prevention aimed at gay men

    * Supports the nomination of strict constructionist judges who reject "judicial activism," which is essentially anything that limits the elected branches' ability to trample on gays.

    Posted by: David | Aug 14, 2008 9:06:50 PM

  18. Forget what I said earlier. Like 24PLAY, I hereby cast off the evils of Liberalism. Unless bisexual boy-boy action is inserted into the Democratic platform, I will not vote for that phony Obama who, aside from his positions on the issues, is exactly like McCain!

    Posted by: Ernie | Aug 14, 2008 9:10:06 PM

  19. Gay Republicans are such sensitive little flowers. You've got to be ever-so-careful around them. For it doesn't take much to get them to explode!

    And what a lovely sight that it.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Aug 14, 2008 9:13:09 PM

  20. DAVEY,

    you stupid, vacuous, vapid, inane partyboy!

    I suppose you think Hillary stealing the nomination in Denver will ensure a win for Democrats, right? I think Clintonistas forget that if Hillary has 18 million supporters so does Barack and they WILL NOT get behind a thief. Had she won the nomination rightfully it would have been different but such is not the case. Mark my words, if HRC takes this nomination in Denver her career in politics is OVER.

    Posted by: Jason | Aug 14, 2008 9:15:28 PM

  21. Well, Goddess forbid if someone in the gay community - which frequently pats itself on the back for embracing "diversity" - should vote her or his conscience and vote for someone other than the "approved" Presidential candidate.

    I guess "diversity" in the gay community means only including people who think just like you. And if you think differently you must be "self-loathing." Because, of course, gay people would have no experience with being stigmatized with labels of mental unfitness for being and acting differently from the way other people tell them they should behave.

    Posted by: LightningLord | Aug 14, 2008 10:05:13 PM

  22. Am I an Obama-apologist? Probably. But these assertions that Obama is "exactly like McCain" and "does not deserve one gay vote" are too much. To believe that these politicians score the same on gay issues I think you must be either an extremely radical (to the point of impracticality) gay activist or just plainly anti-Obama.

    DK, your specific representations are mostly misleading. Where does Obama charge that gays prostelyze? You are reaching. If you read the Advocate article, then you also found a thoughtful and thought-provoking response to the McClurkin brouhaha (though, to be sure, I am certain that you are one those who will never, ever budge on this issue). Whether you agreed with how he handled the controversy though, it is wrong to suggest that Obama agreed with McClurkin or suggested that his homophobic views were valid. Indeed, contrary to what you insinuate, Obama regularly challenges religious groups to address their homophobia and reconcile it to religious love and tolerance, even when these groups are openly hostile to gay rights. That takes bravery and isn't scoring easy political points with the Christians OR the gays (many of these commenters are case in point). And while Obama has said he does not "yet" support gay "marriage," he effectively does, since he supports "fully equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law." Yes, federal. He is also openly against the CA proposition that would take away gay marriage, so he is serious about the state-by-state definition of 'marriage,' unlike McCain. Of course Obama's "official" position on gay rights needs work, but to suggest that Obama = McCain is just plain delusional.

    P.S. My comment is really only intended for people who are not so cynical to be believe ALL politicans are EXACTLY the same. After 8 years of the Bush presidency, I think we should all be attuned to the very different ways a governement can be run (or run into the ground).

    Posted by: GBM | Aug 14, 2008 10:13:10 PM

  23. I find it amazing that any Gay person could even consider a vote for McCain. Forget the fact that his voting record on gay rights is awful, forget that he left a crippled wife for the drug addicted heiress, forget the fact tha he was nearly indicted for corruption as part of the Keating 5. The man is also a war monger who most certainly would get us into a war with Iran. Plus he is 72 damn years old. The reasons to vote against him are numerous and unless you are a bigot or just concerned for what you think are better tax policies (in actuality they are not)then you are simply a moron.

    Posted by: jeff | Aug 14, 2008 10:24:48 PM

  24. I live in California which will go for Obama, so I'll take this opportunity to vent as a former Hillary supporter: Obama is kind of full of shit on the economy, and his claim of superior judgment on Iraq is 1) a little specious, and 2) a moot point since it's pretty well established that we will be withdrawing in 16 months-ish as requested by the Iraqis. McCain, on the other hand, is bullshit on social issues- which is surprising and disappointing. If he can just come out as a real conservative, not a Reagan conservative, and say "I don't give a shit about your private lives-- it's your business, not the government's," it would be a huge step forward. With Hillary I had someone in between the two: less bullshit on the economy, and less bullshit on social issues. So, I'm pretty much out of it this time around. I don't like either candidate.

    Posted by: Bran | Aug 14, 2008 11:13:49 PM

  25. That 14% must be millionaires does that poll show the average income of those 14% that support him. The other day McCain spouted off about the Russia v Georgia conflict saying something to the effect of "We don't start wars in the 21st Century." My first thought when I heard this was does this man have shit for brains, has he forgotten about Iraq and just who started that war. I am not a religous person, but I pray to God that this man is not elected president. I am a gay man, but gay issues aside, America needs and inteligent President. Me and my lover have been together for 17 years now and have seriously discussed if McCain is elected President doing whatever it takes to move to most likely Vancouver.

    Posted by: Mike | Aug 14, 2008 11:41:08 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Space Porn: Star Wombs and Nearby Moons« «