Tea Party ‘Diversity’ Rally Attracts Gay Teabaggers


On Saturday, the Uni-Tea rally took place in Philadelphia. It was meant to demonstrate the "diversity" among members of the Tea Party, TPM reports:

"Apparently, Uni-Tea wasn't only bridging the racial gap. Brendan Kissam and Matt Hissey wandered into the event carrying signs that said 'proud gay conservative' and 'freedom is fabulous.' They said they were 'the Gayborhood's envoy to the tea party.' The pair said the tea party is welcoming to their minority group, too. 'The Tea Party is accepting of everybody,' said Hissey, adding that 'Skin color diversity — that's not real diversity. Everyone here has a different life experience.' Hissey recognized that the tea party 'might be against gay marriage,' but that's ok, he said, because he is too."

Apparently, with fewer than 500 in attendance and few non-Whites to be found, it was a major fail: "If you're the kind of tea partier who'd like to see that abounding not-racism result in some actual demographic diversity in the movement, the Uni-Tea rally appeared to be a borderline disaster."


  1. Brendan says

    I usually try to respect other people’s opinions, but in this case, I second the fuckwits motion.

  2. Matt says

    UGH! Morons!

    Yes, lets bond and associate ourselves with a group of people that by large loath gay people and do everything in their power to suppress ANY form of gay rights or protections!

  3. says

    ‘Skin color diversity — that’s not real diversity. Everyone here has a different life experience’

    That quote disturbs me. Take out the words “skin color” and replace it with “sexual orientation” or “gender” or “socio-economic status” or “religion” and it’s just as disturbing.

    I absolutely hate it when white people disregard my skin color as just genetics and nothing more. With any skin color comes a host of prejudice, bigotry and hate, culture, history, and pride. My skin color as well as my sexual orientation and my gender and my religion and my nationality along with a host of other things too varied to list here are all part and parcel of who I am as an individual. Don’t write off a part of me simply to make yourself feel better.

  4. Philo says

    “Brendan Kissam and Matt Hissey wandered into the event …”

    These are made up porn names, no?

  5. RyanInSacto says

    OK, the moronic gay homophobes aside, the most significant thing being illustrated here is that, in a city that is only 42% white, the Tea Party was still unable to display the diversity that it claims to possess. That’s why you have to say things like, “Skin color diversity — that’s not real diversity. Everyone here has a different life experience.”

    (Demographic Source: http://factfinder.census.gov)

  6. Clay says

    Kissam? An uncommon name and that of one of America’s oldest wealthy families, the In-Laws of the Vanderbilts. Google of news reports of the vent suggests this guy is supposedly a student/bartender though.

  7. ChristopherM says

    I think they should have been honest and said, “We’d like marriage equality, but we’ll give it up so long as we don’t have to pay our taxes or be around brown people.” Because frankly, that’s what they meant. Anyway, as I said earlier about GOProud, thanks for posting these photos so that we all know who not to sleep with.

  8. Tim W says

    Kissam on one of his Facebook profiles says he’s a bartender at Tavern on Camac one of my favorite bars in Philly. Hopefully they have more than one bartender next time there. Wouldn’t want to tip a jerk like this.

  9. Larry says

    Kissam and Hissey? SRSLY? Wonder if they can name anybody from the “gayborhood”. Sounds like a set up to show how “welcoming” the tea baggers are….and if it is found out to be a ruse then the name choices are very homophobic.

  10. Brendan Kissam says

    Firstly, thank you all for the supportive comments. I truly cherish them. Now, a few things. Before slandering a whole movement, try attending one of their events first. There was no one at the rally who was rude or unkind to Matt and me. In fact, more than a dozen men and women, black and white, came up to us and thanked us for attending. These thanks were often followed by supportive stories of gay and lesbian friends and family. Secondly, I’m a barback, not a bartender; so, Tim, you don’t have to worry about me waiting on you. Thirdly, Clay is right; Kissam is one of America’s oldest, yet least common, surnames. Have a great day!

  11. LincolnLounger says

    Look, I can’t stand the Tea Party crap either, but there needs to be political diversity among the gay community, too. We’ve been the Hallelujah Chorus for the Democrats for too long. They take us for granted (except when they need $$), and the Republicans have no reason to talk to us.

    It always makes me laugh that this community preaches tolerance until it comes to gay Republicans or conservatives.

  12. dave says

    brendan, since you posted… i’d like to ask… and this is genuinely a question i have for all gay republicans…

    how can you be gay and support groups that want to limit your rights? don’t you want to legally marry someone someday?

  13. yonkersconquers says

    He doesn’t want full equality (including the right to marry) for gay people. That’s the only way this could work. I expect he’ll be back in a moment to tell us why we shouldn’t ask for the moon when we can have the stars.

  14. Brendan Kissam says

    Crispy, I hope you get a life.

    Dave, thanks for asking. I’m not a one issue voter, first off. My views on most things line up much better with conservatism and libertarianism.

    On the topic of marriage, here’s my view. Marriage’s purpose is to provide a social contract between man and wife, so that their children can benefit from having both biological parents around. Granted, not all couples with children marry, not all married couples have children, and gay couples can raise children, too.

    Marriage, though, should be a private and religious/social affair, not a governmental one. We should revamp the tax code to have everyone file singly. As for visitation, pension beneficiaries,et al, we need to go to contract law. The government should uphold any contract that two people willingly enter together, including setting up power of attorney and inheritance.

    For a movement that wanted government out of their bedrooms, Gay Inc. sure does seem all too eager to have Uncle Sam back in there.

  15. yonkersconquers says

    It’s not true, btw, that the gays are knee-jerk democrats. Just, they’re (for the most part, saving exceptions like the ones being contemplated here) not stupid.

    The Tea Party, insofar as it has a gay rights platform, stands in complete ideological opposition to our very existence (as if to be gay was an ideology and not a fact of life).

    You have to be thick as a row of planks to join them. And of course some are.

  16. jamal49 says

    Gee, Brendam, I have attended tea-party events. And, they are mostly white, overweight and clueless. The tea-party isn’t a movement, dear. It’s a tantrum. “Gay conservative” is an oxymoron. I mean, if you want to parade around with tea-bags dangling from your lavender visor, well, go for it, girl! But, if you want respect, you’d better come up with some good reasons for hanging out with the very people who would kill you given half the chance.

  17. Billy says

    Well at least they tried. If the Tea Party focused on reversing the SOCIAL Conservative image of the GOP, maybe they could attract more diverse people.

  18. says

    Problem is many ignorant people dont accept power of attorney, its like trying to use an American Express card in a place that only takes Visa or Mastercard. Marriage is like a VISA card where its accepted in more places than an American Express card.

    And even when people say oh they will be happy with Civil Unions, they end up rejecting Civil Unions (see Hawaii).

  19. crispy says

    My apologies, Brendan. I take back what I said. Rather, I hope that one day you fall in love and your partner is gay bashed. And you are refused visitation.

  20. Brendan Kissam says

    Crispy, why are you so hateful? Do I know you, or have I wronged you? Try a little civility, sometime. You’ll find it refreshing.

  21. says

    Brendan, maybe you should open a couple of history books and participate in that magical thing called research before blathering on about things you don’t know anything about. Marriage has never been a “private and religious/social affair” in either the North American British colonies or the United States.

    During Colonial days marriage was a very public affair. Prior to marrying, couples either had to publish banns for several weeks (an announcement of the upcoming marriage posted in a public place) or apply for a license. This was done so that anyone with objections to the marriage (for instance, if one knew someone was already married), that they could protest the union. A noted genealogist writes: “Whatever religious significance they attributed to marriage, all the colonies recognized it as a civil contract based on mutual consent of both parties.”

    One of the reasons slaves were not allowed to marry was because they had no legal rights- their owners made all decisions for them.

    Marriage in North America has always been a contractual agreement. The government has always been involved.

    Maybe you have the money to hire a lawyer to write contracts for you. I don’t. Most of my friends don’t. Why should we have to spend our money on the same things that the government gives out for free to straight couples.

    Truly, if you aren’t a fuckwit you must be a fucking spoiled brat.

  22. pParkerT says

    I think that “famewhore” is more accurate than “fuckwit”. YMMV.

    And, you know, most of a marriage happens outside the bedroom, Brendan. Anyone can fuck, but two people who want to commit to each other? That happens in the living room, the dining room, on the bus, at the bank and in the hospital & the mortuary. It isn’t about the dangly bits; it’s about trusting someone to make decisions when you can’t.

  23. JTlvr says

    @ Brendan Kissam: I applaud you for standing up for what you believe. A diversity of opinion is healthy. But racism is an ugly stain on American society, and it goes hand-in-hand with homophobia. I’d hope you do some self-reflection as to why you’d support such a repugnant group (and not just spout common ideology).

    But you’re young and idealistic, and when you step back and mature, you’ll realize that this group you want to identify with so badly, actually wants nothing to do with you and people like you. They’d rather you didn’t exist.

  24. Broseppi says

    I think the real answer is they will sleep with gay men, but they are married to white male privilege.

  25. says

    @ Brendan Kissam: I don’t know if this is you or not, Brendan. After all, you could be anyone posing as Brendan. But if you are, I want to draw your attention to my previous post in this thread and a statement your (I am assuming) partner made that disturbs me greatly:

    ‘Skin color diversity — that’s not real diversity. Everyone here has a different life experience.’

    I went into further detail in my previous post and won’t rehash it here. But what I will do is ask you and your partner to please not be so quick to dismiss skin color as just chance genetics and “not real diversity.” While it is true we all have different life experiences, me being an American who happens to be black gives me a rich culture and history which should never be so quickly dismissed as “not real diversity.”

  26. ravewulf says

    I don’t support Democrats because I love them, I support them because I dislike them the least. Republican and Tea Party platforms are absolutely repulsive on every single issue. Doesn’t help that they are backed by powerful corperations run by some of the wealthiest 2% who want to rob the poor and middle class for their own profit.

  27. TANK says

    Goodness, why bother even acknowledging people like Brendan? They’re just really stupid and ignorant, and don’t have a lot of experience thinking for themselves. Even if they eventually come around and understand what a sound argument is, it doesn’t matter…because they’re still stupid. I mean, I once talked to someone like brendan who said something like, “you can’t be moral if you’re not a christian”…I laughed, and walked away. To take that seriously would be to acknowledge the existence of someone with a particularly low IQ, or someone suffering from delusions…either way, why bother? It would be ridiculously simple to categorically refute these people, but it’s much more entertaining to watch them crash and burn with their ideologies (and they do, eventually)…and the fallout from that…than to waste time correcting them in public.

  28. Ian says

    Well, the gay community is certainly diverse. It includes moronic racists who would say things like. ‘Skin color diversity — that’s not real diversity…’ Wow. True, racial diversity is only one kind of diversity, but still an important one. Also, to think that being denied the liberty to marry the one you love increases ones liberty or that because one does not wish to marry at this time, no one should be able to marry, is truly perverse. Um, I think liberty includes the freedom for individuals to make their own life decisions for themselves.
    Fuckwits indeed.

  29. MikeyDallas says

    Dear Brendan,go ask your tea party friends, any of them, if they support taking the government out of marriage so everyone can have the same contractual agreement. If you come back and say they have agreed to put that in their platform, I will appologize in any way you like. If they don’t, and you still support them, then frankly my dear, you are a fuckwit.

  30. says

    So, Brendan, if I read your above comment correctly, you believe that marriage is a “social contract” (whatever the hell that is) to benefit straight people’s children, but not your own, should you ever decide to have children. And you think you’re going to convince straight people that the big bad government should get out of their marriages, thereby making the 1000+ benefits and protections they currently take for granted vanish into thin air. Straight people would rather hire those fabulous lawyers to handle all those contract details?

    Good luck with that! Because currently marriage IS a government contract, (one from which there is no rational basis to exclude gay couples), not a religious one, and I can’t see most straight people ripping up their government-issued marriage/divorce contracts any time soon. They’re kinda attached to them.

    Since your gayness seems to have no influence on your views whatsoever, I’m not sure what diversity you’d bring to a Tea Party Rally, unless they have an orgy. Seems like the only thing you have in common with other gay men is the desire to suck cock, so I’m guessing “skin color diversity” is more real than what you and Miss Hissey bring to the sad proceedings.

  31. BobN says

    Matt Hissey? Of the famed Philadelphia Hissey-Fitz?

    Sorry, always looking for good drag names.

    Brendan and Matt may long for the day when America is a land without civil marriage and only the churches care, but here’s a hint, guys. NOT IN YOUR LIFETIMES. So, in the meantime, work for your rights, not against them. And be careful not to fall in love with a foreign national with kids, lest you end up living the hell you think is all we deserve.

  32. says

    “Skin color diversity — that’s not real diversity.” I can’t tell you how often I’ve heard that sentiment out of the mouths of conservative white students at my college. They think you could have great diversity in a group of all rich white WASP New Englanders — as long as they have a “diversity of ideas” — like, maybe, some of them read the Federalist Papers and others are fans of John Roberts, as opposed to Glenn Beck. Or maybe they’d prefer the “diversity” of having rich white people from California, Texas, and Vermont. These people are usually clueless. Smart ones (young & fresh out of conservative families) can get it, if you explain it to them. Stupid ones like these boys, probably not.

    And there can be lots of political diversity among people who care about gay issues: Democrats, Progressives, far left, and radical queers who disapprove of the marriage struggle for good reasons. These boys don’t really care about gay issues. It’s not that they’re “not one-issue voters” — they probably are, and that issue is keeping their money. They’re definitely “non-gay-issue-voters.” If they vote, that is… So why bother even mentioning that they’re gay?

  33. missanthrope says

    I’d rather have no such thing as marriage at all. Or at least as we have it right now.

    It privileges some relationships over others with a plethora of civil and social rights and privileges. I’d rather see it abolished than to enter into a marriage myself.

    It’s a way for society to regulate what is an “acceptable” or “respectable” relationship through government agency.

    P.S. I’m a leftist/socialist, not an idiot teabagger.

  34. yonkersconquers says

    Christ Stephen, its sad to think he’s never even heard of James Baldwin or read a line of Langston Hughes. The former was the reason I moved to the U.S. The latter is an inspiration to all who know him.

    I’m amazed at your patience and embarrassed that you actually had to outline why racial diversity is real diversity, ffs.

    Gays who don’t know their own history, or America’s, actually threaten the freedoms they are claiming to protect.

  35. Philo says

    The Tea Party is nothing more than a reincarnation of the states’ rights movement (aka the “Tenth Amendment Sovereignty Movement”). Brendan should go read the history of “states’ rights” movements (e.g. the John Birch Society, the Dixiecrats, Wallace Independent Party, etc.) in the past and see what they stood for, and what it means now for gay people, women, minorities, etc.

  36. Luminum says

    Oh right, I completely forgot that you’re not diverse until you’re completely respectful of other people’s need to be racist and homophobic. “If you’re really pro-diversity, you’ll also support anti-diversity.” What a joke.

    And who better to claim that racism isn’t an issue or that it’s “just skin color” than a privileged white male and a party born out of the outrage of a perceived decline in white male power?

    And you’re not one to talk about Gay Inc. wanting Big Government int heir bedrooms when you support a party of politicians who only want Small Government in their business and finances and emphatically support Big Government for all other social issues that they disagree with. “Small Government” my ass…

  37. Gregoire says

    Why don’t you throw yourselves into the midst of the tea partiers instead of standing to the side? Let’s see you really take on the movement and try to become part of it. I’ll bet you’ll learn really fast that they have none of your interests in mind.

  38. says

    The tea party movement generally doesnt give a shit about our equality. When the head of the Pasadena California Tea Party movement sent me a email about the guy who wanted to usurp DeeDee Schzoforva in NY23 with a wingnut he took me off his email list.

  39. says

    I am gay and a founding member of the Baton Rouge Tea Party. I spoke about gay inclusion at the New Orleans tea Party event a year ago where several thousand were in attendance. I was warmly welcomed and had some great discussions as a result. The tea party is only fiscal in nature – it hsa no opinion on gay marriage or other social issues.

    No I am not racist. I beleive in freedom, which is what Tea Party is all about. The abuse heaped upon Mr. Kissam and Hissay here is contemptible. No one asked you to report on their tea party activities or sit in judgement of them.

    The Tea Party is diverse, and describing 500 attending any tea party rally as a “major fail” is cutesy libspeak for “Jesus Christ they are making this happen!!!”

  40. Pinky Pumps says

    @Ted Baldwin,

    If Hillary Clinton, and or John McCain would have been at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

    There would be no GOD DAMN TEA PARTY…..PERIOD

    So in actuality it is about RACE! SORRY GIRL FAIL!

    And also we wouldn’t be bored with those Dicki-Leaks bio’s that MichaelLeoanard@Matlovich.com bores us with all the time.

  41. Laizden says

    Hmmm I wonder if Ted Baldwin will now become the focus of this discussion.

    Eh just an amusing thought that popped into my head as I’ve been reading all the comments, which have greatly entertained me. I don’t even feel like these two even deserve mention. They are just two Tea-Party members who happen to be gay, they are no more stupid or uninformed than the rest of the tea party. Depending on who you are that is either a grievous insult or a badge of honer. I tend to think of it as the former. lol.

  42. TANK says

    yeah, ted…it’s contemptible to condemn a gay person who is against gay rights. You cheapen the discourse. Vanish, useful idiot!

  43. Matt Hissey says

    Alright guys, for 1, we are both gay, that should be clear before i move on. So i did not go to this event blindly supporting everything republicans and conservatives stand for. I am a hard core libertarian. When it comes to marriage, get the government out of the picture completly. Abolish government marriage licences, and replace them with civil unions for everyone. Men and men, women and men, women and women. The republican party will never go along with this idea. they claim they want small government and all that, but when it comes to marriage it is their right, as if they think they are above us. The government should be minimally involved in the entire proccess. If i want to spend the rest of my life with a man, i want to be able to propose to him, ask them to marry me, and have a wedding at a church. But when it comes to the government recognizing our partnership, my husband and i will have identical rights to a straight couble. there will be no difference at all. The constitution provides the right for citizens to contract freely, and the legalities of marriage are a contract. So lets utilize that enumerated power in the constitution, and then the government is out of the marriage equation completly. The republicans will never go along with this, and i am aware that a lot of the people who are involved in the tea party movement identify with republican ideology, but they are not grasping the concept of what the tea party is all about. It is about living a moral and free life. Making responsable decisions as to your lifestyle by yourself or with those you love. whatever sex they may be. The government over the last 10 years has been slowly encroching on our autonomy becuase they do not believe the american people are intelligent enough to make their own life choices. Guys im all about gay rights, im all about gay pride, and i have a rainbow flag and equality sign on my wall in my room. I hate the mainstream republicans, and i want the government to not interfere with my life and allow me to live it the way i see fit, as long as i am not causing harm to society. so i am sorry if i offended anyone by goign to this event, but if you look at the true message of american conservatism, you may be suprised at how much you identify with it.

  44. just a guy says

    i fear that u “conservative” gays just stick your heads in the sand. yeah, conservative straights do too.

    but conservativism today is about conserving/preserving white straight male privilege, i.e. preserving non-white or lgbt or female-and-truly-independent legal inferiority. little else.

    support a moderate (i.e. fiscally sensible and honest) pro-marriage equality democrat. that’s sense. think about it.

  45. Matt says


    Apparently you didn’t grasp the fact that my statement was dripping with sarcasm!

  46. Tim W says

    @Matt Hissey and Ted,
    Here’s a clue. The Tea Party caucus in Congress was started by no other than Michelle Bachmann. Sarah Palin has been pushing the tea parties as well as Fox News. Now you can pretend it’s something else but come on either you are really stupid or you think we are really stupid. The tea party is nothing more than a front for the Republican party. All you need to do is look at the list of politicians that have spoken at these rallies. It is a who’s who of the right wing of the Republican who are extremely anti-gay. Just because you put it your name to that just proves what has been said in previous comments.

  47. says

    Okay, gay tea party defenders, please name all the political candidates supported by the tea party movement who are either working for gay rights, pushing for your government-free conception of marriage, or not in bed with the rabidly anti-gay anti-choice wing of the Republican party (i.e. pretty much the entire Republican party). I’m sure that list will be very long. We’re waiting . . .

    The problem with most libertarians is that when you scratch the surface, you’ll discover they’re not libertarians at all. (Rand Paul is a fine example.) They don’t even understand what true libertarianism is or what the Constitution means. They’re libertarian when it’s in their self-interest, and conservative Republican when it isn’t. It’s no coincidence that Brian Brown says he finds lots of sympathy for NOM (the very opposite of a libertarian organization) within the tea party movement, or that the president of a tea party branch in PA tried to censor a gay documentary.

    If you truly believe that government should be out of the marriage business then you better be out there every day convincing the straight married folks in the tea party movement that now is the time to start ripping up those marriage contracts and the 1000+ benefits that go along with them. Because you can’t really speak out against marriage equality for gay people until straight people are also willing to give up marriage for the “free” life.

    You boys have your work cut out for you. And, until you cut the tea party’s undeniable ties to racism and social conservatives, you’ll remain the lonely gay jesters at the tea party. We’re not offended that you’re cuddling with the tea partiers, we simply think you’re naive fools. So skip the hollow apologies.

  48. Gregoire says

    Whatever, these are just two goofballs who clearly don’t have a braincell to share between them. They’re just getting off on the attention and literally have no idea what they’re getting into. Better to just ignore these two twats and let their stupidity guide them on this magical journey.

    I prefer the gay idiots in our community to wear signs anyway, so they’re doing us a big favor.

  49. homoDM says

    I think someone just wanted to wear a cape.

    If the tea party is “taxed enough already,” they should be gladdened to hear that the overwhelming majority of Americans got a tax cut last year.

    (Unless this is actually about having a scary Islamist/socialist/fascist black man “other” in the White House.)

  50. says

    Hey, they could have showed the crowd how REAL tea baggin’ was done. I’m sure they would have appreciated that!

  51. TANK says

    Well, libertarianism isn’t about living a moral and free life, to be honest. The existence of the middle class in the united states came about solely because of government intervention and wealth distribution via taxation, pitting the libertarian platform against the existence of the middle class. Imagine an america without a middle class (because that’s happening right now as it is dying a protracted death…because the wealthiest one per cent no longer require the middle class to sustain their wealth). An america where there are only the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor…we could go to south america or africa for confirmation on how great life is for the vast majority on that score…and it’s not great, as the average standard of living is significantly below that enjoyed by the average american (in fact, it’s awful). And you are apparently opposed to giving the average person a reasonable shot at a decent standard of living. Further, nobel prize winning economists have concluded from studies that upwards of 90% of wealth accumulation, even amongst the super rich, is derived from social capital (government programs like public education, insuring predictable legal outcomes in relatively equitable court systems, wealth transference and protection, grants to pursue research and financial incentives to attend secondary school, etc).

    Most americans are not libertarian, as they do believe in things like public education, utlity companies, public universities, libraries, museums, police and fire departments, public parks and recreational areas, protected national wildlife perserves, road maintenance, social security and medicare. Most americans do believe that we have a duty to help those who can’t help themselves, and to improve the lives of the least amongst us (old people not starving to death or dying from exposure), and support a social arrangement (government) that can achieve this value more efficiently than no government at all. Most americans also believe in the rights conferred on married couples to encourage stable relationships, including such “government entitlement programs” as joint parenting and adoption, joint insurance policies for home, car and health; inheritance automatically conferred in the absence of a will; joint leases with automatic renewal rights; and immigration and residency for partners from other countries–just to name a few. You are opposed to these things, but admit that it has no practical place in political discourse given that your suggested alternative is overwhelmingly unpopular. In spite of the extreme unlikelihood of your ideals ever being realized in mainstream america, and further in law ( complete abolishment of the federal and state government) you are opposed to same sex marriage…when opposite sex couples already have that right, and that right is going nowhere, you are opposed to same sex couples having that right. So in the system we have, not the system you want, you are opposed to equality within it…regardless of your opposition to the current arrangement, you are opposed to equality within it. Your justification speaks past the point (that you don’t believe in the current arrangement for anyone doesn’t mean that given the current arrangement, equality for everyone isn’t to be preferred)…and can thereby be ignored as it is apprently self-contradictory.

    Libertarianism really does fall apart, however, when one considers what it amounts to. Here’s one thinker.

    “We are certainly responsible for evils we inflict on others, no matter where, and we owe those people compensation. Nevertheless, I have seen no plausible argument that we owe something, as a matter of general duy, to those to whom we have done nothing wrong.”

    Unregulated business interests do cause harm to others, but not according to libertarians…environmental, financial, and systemic…and these things directly impact people’s standard of living (pooerer people). So there really isn’t a point when people don’t “owe,” for every action one takes, and everything one decides to do with their money, is a choice of what not to do with their money, and that has just as much of an impact.

  52. Shaun says

    I know Brendan very well, and personally do not agree with his political views, however I do respect him for what he believes in and his views. I give him a ton of credit for standing up for what he believes in, for this is the United States of America and we should be proud to have such freedoms. Furthermore, I think it is inappropriate and gross for anyone to say that anyone should go to the oven. That is very disturbing! Be open-minded and as I have respect others based upon their sex, ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, political view etc. Instead of complaining on this forum rally for what you believe to be true. All in all I respect anyone who is true to themselves as these 2 gentleman are!

  53. TANK says

    And shaun is just repeating the meme that “belief in belief is good”. Belief in belief, however poorly thought out or indefensible, or morally repugnant the sense/content of said belief is…it’s apparently a good thing to believe in something, anything, and stand up for it according to this view. We can see how false that is on an objective level.

    Being open minded doesn’t entail that one shouldn’t be critical of any beliefs…or accept them all. Open mindedness as religionists or people with abhorrent political/social/economic/ethical views doesn’t mean that one shouldn’t criticize those views or the people who act on them…or accept them uncritically. In fact, to be open minded, one needs to be critical, for in order to be open to a belief or opinion, one needs to be able to assess it. The opposite view being paraded about is to accept, unconditionally, all views…which is indistinguishable from accepting none; and is the very definition of “closed mindedness” and thoughtless.

  54. ChrisM says

    I attended two tea-party events (as an observer). As a middle class middle age white male I was, I guess, assumed to be one of their own as I was unquestionably welcomed and accepted by other attendees.

    Believe me, the vast majority of teabaggers I encountered are in no way tolerant of any type of diversity. I have never in my entire life heard the number of racist and anti-gay remarks I heard during these two afternoons.

    While the event speakers were very careful to avoid references or terminology that would have ultimately been used against them the members of the crowd were not as cautious and had no problem with using either the “N” or “F” words.

    If the tea party movement is seriously interested in not being visualized as a cover group for racial hatred then they must make some very aggressive moves to disassociate themselves from those among who want exactly that agenda. Should they choose to do so they will see a huge decline in their already dwindling numbers. Don’t expect any changes – they are exactly what they want to be.

  55. Shaun says

    Tank…You obviously missed my whole point! It is America and people can think how they want and rally as they wish…and I don’t agree politically with Brendan. Disagreeing on the forum is fine! My point was to say someone belongs in an oven or there partner gay bashed is a horrible thing to say. I am very open-minded and have my views and rally when I feel it is the right thing to do.

  56. TANK says

    So in america, people can think how they want and rally as they wish…but that people shouldn’t say horrible things to people with horrible beliefs? Criticizing another’s use of free speech with a defense of the free speech of a select few of those you believe deserve it? Seems like you have a selective application of how we should be proud of such freedoms…to say what we want.

  57. Bear says

    Brendan Kissam and Matt Hissey
    Guys, guys guys guys! Why is it whenever a gay person does not fit the tired old profile and thinks differently you all have to Gay Bash them? Here we have two young men who decided to go to what has generally been an all white homophobic groups event and show themselves as truthfully being gay. Yes, in some Tea-Party gatherings they would have been ridden out on a rail or tarred and feathered, but they weren’t (this time). I’m sure when they continue to attend Tea-Party events, should they so choose, they will meet some of the various types of Party Members as described by some of you. But, until then, I would strongly urge you to slow down with your apparent hatred and stop acting very much like the people you are politically opposed to. Or at least the way you have been describing them.

    Now, lets give Brendan Kissam some credit here. He did politely answer your (not so polite) criticisms with honest answers. He and his friend like all of us in this supposed free country are entitled to their own opinion.
    However! There is another thought, and it applies to this situation entirely. Allow me to explain by a simple story.:
    Many years ago I was told to register as a Democrat. I was not asked my opinion or choice. I was in a Democrat State and being of proper age to first register to vote it was expected of me to be a Democrat. So, naturally I rebelled and said I might not. Again I was told I will. Off to the County Courthouse I went all set to register but by the time I got there I’d cooled off and decided I’d do as told, and register as a Democrat. Upon entry to the proper office and stating my business the lady gave me a paper to sign. I looked at it and to my surprise it was already filled out as a Democrat registration. I wanted to know why. The response was that “everybody here is a Democrat”. I asked what if I chose different. The reply was if I chose Independent I could only vote in Presidential elections. I asked “what about being a Republican.” You would have thought I’d produced a weapon and was ready to shoot everyone there the way they acted. So I did the right thing and registered as a Republican.
    Now some of you may think that is horrid and I’m crazy. Still to this day I’m registered as a Republican. In spite of this I feel I have done more good for the people as being one because I vote (and I do so at every election no matter how small the local election topics, issues, political position or person). I do this because I can vote against and campaign against the worst the Republican Party local or otherwise puts forth.

    “If you can’t beat-em, join-em.” and “Destroy them from within”

    However my voting is not straight down the line as all one party or another. I vote my true feelings on every issue. And back to my main point, perhaps this is precisely what Brendan Kissam and Matt Hissey are doing. I don’t know for sure nevertheless it just might be. Brendan certainly shows a probability.

  58. Philo says

    I think people are having fun with Brendan and Matt because the Tea Party is a crazy cult of dimwits. It’s like making fun of gay Scientologists. There was a Tea Party fifer and drummer duo on Rachael Maddow last night who are the quintessential dopey Tea Party members. They are splitting up since one guy wants to support a member of the Constitution Party and the other supports a Republican (or something), so there is an opening for another fifer and drummer dimwit duo to replace them.

  59. Milo says

    I think some facts are needed to add to this conversation.

    Here in Philly, we have seen Democrats and Republicans behaving differently than their stereotypes:

    1. In 2003, Republican candidate Sam Katz ran for mayor. Part of his platform was equality for sexual minorities.

    2. In 2007, the Philadelphia Gay News interviewed all of the candidates for mayor. The only candidate that did not support same-sex marriage was Democrat Michael Nutter…who won.

    According to research done by ABC News:

    3. “Ultimately, a statistical analysis indicates that the strongest predictors of supporting the Tea Party are views of Obama, ideology, partisanship and anger at the way the government is operating. Views on the extent of racism as a problem, and views on Obama’s efforts on behalf of African-Americans, are not significant predictors of support for the Tea Party movement.”

    Read the whole report here:


  60. tweedle says

    Gay tea-baggers…just when you thought that gay-republican had maxed out the oxymoron meter.
    Normally I eschew violence, but not this time. I would love to beat the crap out of both of them, then fuck ’em raw and leave them chained to a dungeon toilet for a few months.
    I do not believe that Brendan posted on this site. So whomever did, blow your “marraige should be a religious contract” shit out your ass and eat it.
    You both suck as humans. You both suck as organic matter.

  61. Gigi says

    @Brendan Kissam – So kind of you to respond to some of the comments. Any thoughts on your buddy Hissey saying last night, on camera, that he doesn’t “really like gay people?”. Nothing like a series of sweeping generalizations combined with a dash of homophobia to show your pride. GoProud!

  62. DMax says

    I think it is refreshing that Brendan and Matt are standing up for what really matters – being fiscally conservative. I would gladly delay equal social rights for the benefit of making some sound fiscal decisions.