Activism | Gay Rights | Minneapolis | Newt Gingrich

Watch: Newt Gingrich Hit by Glitter Attack from Gay Protester

Glitter_gingrich

At a book-signing last night, a gay activist poured a bucket of glitter over Newt Gingrich and his wife as they sat at a table at a Minnesota Family Council event, ABC News reports:

Newt_glitterThe glitter culprit is Nick Espinosa, a 24 year old unemployed non profit worker turned social activist from Minneapolis, Minn.  Espinosa worked with a non-profit helping unemployed people for two years before being laid off due to budget cuts.  His encounter with Newt on Tuesday was in protest to Gingrich’s stance on gay marriage.

“Today, I invited Newt to feel the rainbow because he decided to bring his anti-gay politics to my state,” Espinosa told ABC News Tuesday night.  “Newt has a long history of anti-gay politics and has chosen to focus on divisive social issues instead of working to fix our economy.  I don’t think a free will adulterer like Newt has any ground to stand up while telling others who they can and can’t love.”

Said Espinosa during the glitter bomb: "Feel the rainbow Newt. Stop the hate. Stop the anti-gay politics. It's dividing our country and it's not fixing the economy."

Said Newt after the attack. "Nice to live in a free country."

As Espinosa was kicked out, Newt's flunkey said: "So goes you, goes the rotting of our country. Have you ever seen us attend one of your events? Have we disturbed your events? Never. Peace be with you."

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. How has no one commented on just how f'ing creepy that security dude was? "So goes you, so goes the rotting of our country." Who the f says that? And so calm... I think he totally has a career as the voice for Disney villians.

    Posted by: JonB | May 18, 2011 11:33:45 AM


  2. I thought it was funny! Then again.. we've thrown pie in the face of a Prime Minister up here north of the border before.. haha.

    Maybe next time.. use some glue?

    Posted by: NorthoftheBorder | May 18, 2011 11:50:09 AM


  3. "But u gotta give Espinosa credit: Glitter was probably classier and more message-based."

    Why, because we're all fairies?

    Posted by: nodnarb | May 18, 2011 11:58:50 AM


  4. Typical how the attitude turns from aggressive anti-gay propaganda to a victim type attitude when confronted.

    Posted by: macscruff | May 18, 2011 12:11:07 PM


  5. Ugh... glitter... way to reinforce a cliché.

    Posted by: Craig | May 18, 2011 12:36:20 PM


  6. Gay glitter? Didn't realize there was such a thing. If you cannot debate and verbally make a point, don't throw anything.

    Posted by: jakeinlove | May 18, 2011 1:17:12 PM


  7. I somehow don't think this would turn away our supposed fence-sitting suporters. If anything, after all we have been put through --day after day, year after year, election after election-- they should applaud our creative, non-violent protests of these outright hate mongers.

    Posted by: castaway | May 18, 2011 1:35:09 PM


  8. Newt's got that glitter on his eyes..a protester up his side.

    Posted by: Erick | May 18, 2011 3:39:13 PM


  9. Since when does glitter represent gays? Some, maybe, but not the majority. I find it offensive because newt was not speaking about gays, the topic was not gays, and Newt said at a republican meeting in New Orleans last year that we need everybody in the republican tent. He specifically meant gay people. Very inclusionary. And he has a sister that is gay. Why didn't the advocate just self-glitter? No one would notice a difference? A stupid thing to do, not brave, not outre'.

    Posted by: ted | May 18, 2011 5:14:30 PM


  10. ""So goes you, goes the rotting of our country. Have you ever seen us attend one of your events? Have we disturbed your events? Never. Peace be with you."

    No, you only try and pass laws that make it as difficult as possible to live my life.

    This isn't a policy debate, it's my life.

    Posted by: missanthrope | May 18, 2011 5:16:30 PM


  11. Yes, glitter and, hell yes, faeries! Showering Newt with glitter isn't reinforcing cliche, it's attempting to shift the power of a symbol (given it's relationship with fairies) from a tool used to oppress and marginalize to a tool used to fight that oppression and marginalization. You may disagree on this particular tool's usefulness in this particular situation, but a look back at the queer-story of Queer movements and the movements of other marginalized/oppressed peoples shows that the toolbox this tool comes from is an important and useful one, when combined with other tools from other toolboxes. A look back also shows a grim and sad picture for people who seek liberation under the umbrella of assimilationist ideas/politics. I/we, as a human/humans, deserve to be free from oppression and marginalization regardless of how much I am/we are like heterosexuals and/or how much I/we buy into their often oppressive institutions and norms.

    Posted by: GMT | May 18, 2011 5:37:26 PM


  12. Did you just attempt to change "history" to "queer-story"? LAME

    Posted by: nodnarb | May 18, 2011 6:39:19 PM


  13. NODNARB: Did you just attempt to rebut my argument by 1) picking at the choice of one word, which is used in the spirit of my argument, and 2) using an offense and derogatory word (i.e., lame)? While, in the end, I may not (fully) agree with them, there are certainly intelligent and (possibly) interesting opposing arguments about the issue to be made. To call something lame is not one of them. That, to me, is ineffectual and unsatisfactory. Nonetheless, may your heart and life be filled with love and joy.

    Posted by: GMT | May 18, 2011 7:06:13 PM


  14. @GMT: Assimilation should be a goal of any equality movement, because it recognizes the fact that minorities are just like other people. Gay people (not "queer") aren't inherently different from heterosexual people apart from our sexual preference.

    Posted by: I'm God | May 18, 2011 7:37:31 PM


  15. Well said, TNT. I mean, I don't buy into stereotypes, but I think it's poor to be afraid of playing off of them or to condemn others who want to. I mean, yeah, it's kinda like that lame skittles joke--the drive by, ha. Dumb, but haha ok. But here this kid DID it, and while it's nothing most of is would ever do (for all the obvi reasons), it was distinctly a kid in distress, trying to find a voice, trying to prove to newt and team, whatever it takes, that he as a gay person is affected.

    Now, of course that's not the way to really get things dome. Duh. But no one is saying it is reAlly. Instead, his act (done already, not beyond the pale, and his own innovation) seems a symbol: that this kid felt there was no way I'm heck he'd get a hearing from newt in any real sense, and that naively or not, here he was showing himself. I'm willing to see admirable bravery in it--different from seeing it as the way to do things. The kid was mad as heck, and do u really blame him? Yeah, he could have channeled, but he obvi was in a moment. I can't with good conscience sit in smug judgment of him.

    My point is that HE felt that was what it took, so he did it. Bravo. (even if a little Charlie sheen of him, sheen himself is not lacking his own bizarre brand of admirableness. :)

    Posted by: Just_a_guy | May 18, 2011 7:54:05 PM


  16. If, I'm God, you mean we are all the same, as humans, I completely agree. We are all the same. We are all one, and that extends beyond humans. Beyond that, I disagree. We do not all socially construct our lives in the same way, and, to me, that is what makes being alive so exciting and interesting and fascinating. Yes, SOME gay people are/socially construct their lives "just like" heterosexual people. That's great, for them, and I would never want to deny them that. In fact, I celebrate it, if that is what makes them happy.

    However, some gay and queer - as I and many others prefer to identify because it (tends) to be a (re-appropriated) term that can be broader and more encompassing than gay, and the (gender and sexual) normativity gay has come to imply and encourage - people are not. That, too, should be fine, and others should not want to deny them that or suggest somehow it is not an acceptable or appropriate identity. Queer or non-mainstream/non-assimilationist LGBT people, who are often seen as and called "freaks" and other derogatory terms, even by some gays and lesbians, do not neatly fit into the binary boxes of gender and sexuality that overlap with social class and race and don't desire to be apart of some (or all) of the institutions and norms created and maintained by straight (and often gay) society. Therefore, they cannot assimilate without hiding (read: closet) certain aspects of themselves (e.g., preforming gender "appropriately" or structuring their relationships "appropriately"). The point is, there is a big, wide range of people/identities/experiences - gay, straight, trans, queer, faerie, etc. - and we should all be free of oppression and marginalization and celebrated regardless of how much we fit or don't fit into another identity or peoples' idea of who they should be or what is appropriate (within the bounds of hurting/harming others). That, to me, is truly celebrating diversity of identity and the lived-experience. And that, to me, is what the LGBTIQ(etc.) movements should be striving for.

    Posted by: GMT | May 18, 2011 8:41:19 PM


  17. REGARDING "NEWT'S FLUNKEY" COMMENT AT THE END : "So goes you, goes the rotting of our country. Have you ever seen us attend one of your events? Have we disturbed your events? Never. Peace be with you."

    UM...HELL YES I'VE SEEN YOU DISTURBING OUR EVENTS...WHAT... ARE BIG HUGE SIGNS SAYING "GOD HATES FAGS" NOT "DISTURBING?"

    AND... EVEN IF YOU WEREN'T "DISTURBING OUR EVENTS" IT'S ONLY BECAUSE YOU'RE TOO BUSY WRITING HATEFUL LEGISLATURE OR BLOGGING OR HAVING RALLYS OR HAVING MEETINGS OR BOOK SIGNINGS ABOUT YOUR SUB HUMAN INFERIOR CRO MAG LIKE BEHAVIOR AROUND PEOPLE THAT, GOD FORBID ARE DIFFERENT FROM YOU....
    ~ MATT CORNWALL

    Posted by: matt cornwall | May 19, 2011 10:51:27 AM


  18. LOL- that was funny- the guy by the elevator door was one of the pod people from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers"

    Posted by: jaragon | May 19, 2011 11:29:02 PM


  19. If you want to be honest, the glitter represents the bouncer/security guy more than anyone else in this video. I think the security guy is representative of only a minority of gay men who are...fey...verging on femme.

    Posted by: Phil | May 20, 2011 12:41:47 AM


  20. « 1 2

Post a comment







Trending


« «Rhode Island House Panel Votes 9-3 to Advance Civil Union Bill« «