Readers swear they're not closet homosexuals

Recently, Candorville brought up something that's become a phenomenon: stridently anti-gay Republican politicians who turn out to be gay themselves. Some readers responded to that as people often do -- with irrational fear.

From a very religious Candorville reader (an excerpt):

I oppose same-sex marriage and I believe my reasons are very logical and not hypocritical at all, but I doubt you'd agree. In every society, every culture, every country, throughout all time, marriage has been commonly accepted as being between a man and a woman and usually involving procreation. Same-sex marriage, then, is an aberration, something unnatural and abnormal. It messes with the basic building blocks of humanity--the nuclear family--which therefore also makes it dangerous. I don't oppose it because I'm against homosexuals having fun or being happy, I oppose it because I'm convinced it's damaging to humanity. For me to hold that belief and not do anything about it, THAT would be hypocritical. I'm sure I've enraged you by now, but I sincerely believe that with my whole heart. And I'm not a closet homosexual.

I could respond to this by saying that someone who's a closet homosexual, by definition, is not going to admit he's a closet homosexual, but that would be kind of flippant. I could respond by saying there's no actual data to show same-sex marriage impacts "the nuclear family" in any way (I could add that gay people aren't going to stop being gay and become Ozzy and Harriet, no matter how many anti-gay laws are passed). But people ruled by fear are rarely moved by data, or by its absence. I could argue that "common acceptance," no matter how deeply rooted, doesn't dictate what's natural or normal, since slavery, for instance, was commonly accepted for millenia. But that risks becoming an argument about analogy, and all analogies break down at some point.

The notion that gay people enjoying the same rights the rest of us enjoy would somehow harm us and "mess with" the nuclear family is based on nothing but fear, and it's just plain ridiculous that people are fixated on that when there are so many more real threats to the nuclear family out there. Crime, unemployment, housing costs, health insurance, presidents who don't think poor KIDS should have health insurance...

Steve and Jamaal choosing to marry each other doesn't affect my marriage, your marriage, or anyone's marriage, but the financial, security and political dangers arrayed against us do. Poverty, or even milder financial insecurity, tears marriages apart. Domestic violence and crime tear marriages apart. You want to worry about something, worry about that.

But that argument turns into a rant and I'm sure "common acceptance guy" would just turn off halfway through. Maybe I'll just let the guys from one of my favorite shows respond for me. I think they know better than I do how to tell homophobes that there are far more tangible threats on which they should focus their fears.



•
•
•

Um... sorry, wrong clip. Here's the one I meant to post:

Same movie, different actors

I don't know about you, but I'm sick of remakes. I don't quite get the purpose of remaking old films with different actors. They remade "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" for no damn reason, Keanu Reeves is remaking the classic "The Day The Earth Stood Still," again for no damn reason. They're remaking "The Hulk" just three years after the last time they released it. And is it just me, or have we already seen this movie:

Israel believes that North Korea has been supplying Syria and Iran with nuclear materials, a Washington defense official told the New York Times. “The Israelis think North Korea is selling to Iran and Syria what little they have left,” he said.

The official added that recent Israeli reconnaissance flights over Syria revealed possible nuclear installations that Israeli officials estimate might have been supplied with material from North Korea.
More...

If only there were some way to know when it's real and when it's fiction. If only we had some sort of, oh, I don't know, let's call it "News Media" for lack of a better term, that would reliably and doggedly seek out the truth and tell us what they've found. Somebody should invent something like that.

Tim Hardaway and the Senseless Crowd

Tim Hardaway can't stand gay people. Sensible people can't stand Tim Hardaway. Unfortunately, there are an awful lot of senseless people in this world.

Look for cartoons on this next week here, or in your Candorville-carrying local paper.

Fox's Obama obsession: If it walks like racism and talks like racism...

I saw something on YouTube the other day (I've posted it below) that I found disturbing. But luckily, I had the foresight to pull out and leaf through my tattered copy of The Modern American's Guide for Interpreting Other People's Behavior: Women/Minority/Gay Edition™. I carry it with me everywhere I go. It comes in handy in department stores, for instance.

Just a few months ago at Target, I found myself wondering why a security guard seemed to be following me at a distance as I perused the cargo shorts aisle. I started to feel nervous. I kept walking, and the nerves turned to incredulity, the kind where the world sort of slows down and you start to feel detached, like your'e watching something absurd instead of living it. I saw his eyes poke around the corner behind the socks to look at me looking at black boxer briefs. I started to feel my ears burn as the detachment faded into anger. That's when the manual saved me. It was right there on page 92, under "The Target Security Guard." It said "He's not suspicious of you because you're Black/Mixed/Whatever-the-hell-you-are, he's suspicious of you because you're a teen-ager." That would've made sense years ago, when I first bought the manual, but what the hell, I'm not old yet. It could still apply.

Now that was a relief. Life is easier with the manual. People seem much less ridiculous. Sunsets are rosier. The air even smells fresher, somehow.

So when I saw a link that had the words "Fox" and "Obama" in the same sentence, I immediately reached again for that manual. I sure am glad I did. Watch this clip, and then I'll tell you how The Modern American's Guide for Interpreting Other People's Behavior: Women/Minority/Gay Edition™ helped me put it all in perspective:



Now, according to The Modern American's Guide for Interpreting Other People's Behavior: Women/Minority/Gay Edition™, there was absolutely nothing racist about any of this. Here's what it said, right there on page 18,978:

Clip from Fox News' allegedly satirical take-off on The Daily Show: "The 1/2 Hour News Hour"
1. Time index 01:01- Masses of dancing Africans are shown while Fox mentions Barack Obama supporters.
This is not - we repeat, NOT - Fox News intentionally trying to scare White viewers with the thought of hordes of unruly dark people taking over the streets. They probably just couldn't find any other footage on such short notice.

2. Time index 01:14- "BO Magazine"
This is not Fox using racial code words & concepts in an ongoing campaign to help as many of their viewers as possible get back in touch with their inner bigots. This is not - we repeat, NOT - Fox News dredging up the age-old stereotype about Black people smelling bad. That stereotype hasn't been widely used for at least several decades. Several years. Well, at least several months. So it's unreasonable to think anyone at Fox has heard of that stereotype, much less that anyone there would intentionally employ it.

2. Time index 01:37- "Organize Your House - and your Senate"
Fox News is not trying to conjur up the image of a Black housekeeper. In fact, this is more evocative of magazines aimed at housewives. So maybe they're complimenting Barack Obama's wife. Have you ever stopped to think of that?

2. Time index 01:46- "Barack vs. Tiger Woods: Who's More Diverse? "
This is not an example of Fox News mocking the very existence of mixed-race Americans in order to reinforce deep-seeded White resentment. They're actually praising diversity - showing how grateful they are that we live in a country where anyone can marry and raise kids with whomever they want ('long as they're not queer).

2. Time index 02:03- "Don't tell Mama, I'm for Obama"
Nothing to see here.

Thanks for making life more bearable, The Modern American's Guide for Interpreting Other People's Behavior: Women/Minority/Gay Edition™!

Fox News: Barack Obama, Sex Offender?

Faux News affiliates sure are subtle, aren't they?



Don't think subliminal crap like this works? Take a look at how well it works even on people who make their living at it (watch it through to the end for the payoff):

Washington Times disavows Insight over Obama story

Like alcoholic parents trying to disavow their crack-whore son, the Washington Times is attempting to distance itself from the bogus Obama-madrassah story -- a story that they and Fox News had amplified.

The Washington Times, which is also owned by the Unification Church, but operates separately from the Web site, quickly disavowed the article. Its national editor sent an e-mail message to staff members under the heading “Insight Strikes Again” telling them to “make sure that no mention of any Insight story” appeared in the paper, and another e-mail message to its Congressional correspondent instructing him to clarify to Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama that The Washington Times had nothing to do with the article on the Web site.

“Some of the editors here get annoyed when Insight is identified as a publication of The Washington Times,” said Wesley Pruden, editor in chief of The Washington Times.

But can the Washington Times disavow itself?

Barack Obama announced last week he was forming an exploratory committee to explore whether he can really be as fabulous as the media say. And happily the answer is: Yes. He is young, gifted and black, and white and Hawaiian and Kansan, and charismatic and Congregationalist, and Muslim. He rejects the way "politics has become so bitter and partisan," he represents "a different kind of politics." He smokes, which is different.
He was raised in an Indonesian madrassah by radical imams, which is more than John Edwards can say.

...

The madrassah stuff was supposedly leaked to Insight Magazine by some oppo-research heavies on Hillary Rodham Clinton's team. If true, that suggests Hillary is losing her touch. It's certainly the case that a foreign education doesn't always assist in electoral politics: John Kerry didn't play up the Swiss finishing school angle. But look at it from a Democratic primary voter's point of view, the kind who drive around with those "CO-EXIST" bumper stickers made up of the cross and the Star of David and the Islamic crescent and the peace sign. Your whole worldview is based on the belief that deep down we would all rub along just fine and this neocon fever about Islam is just a lot of banana oil to keep the American people in a state of fear and paranoia. What would more resoundingly confirm that view than if the nicest, most nonbitter, nonpartisan guy in politics turns out to have graduated from the Sword of the Infidel Slayer grade school in Jakarta?

Maybe someone at the Washington Times needs to circulate another memo.

CNN, through the rare implementation of something called "journalism," debunked this nonsense last week::

Lib'ral Media Covers Up for Obama

Nice try, Chicago Sun-Times:

Barack Obama's week-old presidential campaign has been hit with a smear. Hillary Clinton's White House bid, launched Saturday, has been attacked with an unfounded accusation.

Contrary to what was reported in Insight magazine and then repeated on Fox News and in other news outlets, including a column that ran in the Sun-Times by free-lancer Mark Steyn, Obama was not educated in a radical Islamic school when he was an elementary student in Jakarta.

And there is no evidence whatsoever that Clinton's campaign had anything to do with spreading the damaging rumor that Obama hid a Muslim background.

The source for both slurs started in a report posted on the Web site of Insight, a conservative magazine published by the Washington Times. The article with no named sourcing alleged that researchers connected to Clinton dug up information about Obama as part of a "background check."

You mean Obama didn't attend a radical Islamist madrassa when he was six? Are they trying to tell us he didn't plot the destruction of America between nap-time and Play Doh lessons? Next the Lib'ral Media's going to try telling us he never actually burned the flag while cross-dressing when he ran that abortion clinic in San Francisco. They must think they're dealing with idiots.

Has Sean Hannity Gone Crazy?

OK, let me get this straight: If you criticize Sean Hannity and call for the impeachment of George W. Bush, that makes you an "Enemy of the State." (I know, I know, Hannity and his kind confusing a man - whether himself or the President - with "the State" isn't anything new).

I don't know what's worse -- the fact that Hannity chose to name a segment of his show after the favorite phrase of every dictator from Caesar to Hitler, the fact that anyone is actually watching that show, or the fact that I'm wasting my time commenting on it. At this point, commenting on the irresponsible behavior of the Fox News personalities may be no more necessary than pointing out how water is really, really wet.

October Surprise: the Saddam Death Sentence

October Surprises happen in November these days. After being delayed for nebulous reasons, the Iraqi court trying Saddam Hussein (a court whose logistics are largely controlled by agents of the United States) has decided to announce its verdict this Sunday, two days before the U.S. Congressional elections.

As President Bush faces mounting criticism over the war, a guilty verdict announced two days ahead of tight U.S. congressional elections on November 7 could reflect positively on him as a vindication of his policy to overthrow Saddam.

U.S. officials deny Washington had any say over the timing of the verdict or the court's decisions, saying the American role was limited to logistics and security.
-More...

Of course Washington had nothing to do with this timing. They'd never politicize something as important as this. Not this White House.

•
•
•

I'm sorry about what you said I said.

What I learned this week:

1. John Kerry inadvertently insulting the intelligence of the troops is far worse than George Bush getting those troops stuck in Iraq without adequate manpower, armor, or planning. It's certainly far worse than Mr. Bush and his Congressional rubber stamps not having any plan (or intention, it seems) of getting our troops out of that bloody civil war he created.

2. Although John Kerry was a highly educated soldier who served with other highly educated soldiers, and has spoken on and on (and on and on and on) about the intelligence, nobility and capability of modern soldiers for more than thirty years, his one botched joke yesterday proves he thinks soldiers are morons.

3. John Kerry's gaffe is more newsworthy than 104 Americans dying in Iraq in one month.

4. It doesn't matter whether Kerry was joking about Bush or attacking the troops. He should apologize for what the Bush White House says he meant, whether he meant it or not.

5: The "I'm not going to stand for anyone distorting my awful, bungled jokes" Kerry is far more inspiring than the guy who ran for President in 2004:

Clinton on Faux: How could Roger Ailes be so confused?

There's been so much whine coming from the direction of the "Fair & Balanced" network that you'd think they were based in Napa. "Boo hoo, Bill Clinton raised his voice! Waaaah, Bill Clinton looked at me angry! Mommy! Mommy! Mommmmyyyyyy!" Today, Fox even tried to portray Clinton's forceful response to their interviewer as an attack upon all of journalism. Why Ailes confused Fox News with journalism, I have no idea.

To hear them tell it, Clinton ripped off his shirt, turned lime green and feasted on poor Chris Wallace's intestines before relieving himself on the First Amendment. That's not exactly how it happened.

Meanwhile Keith Olberman has a different take on it:

Clinton Unloads on Faux News

As anyone who's seen a brilliant trailer and then gone to find out that the movie was total crap knows, it's easy to give a false impression with a few simple editing tricks. For the past couple days, the Drudge Report and other right-wing sites have been downright orgasmic over a 50-second clip that they claimed showed Clinton coming unhinged and being forced by Fox News to admit he failed to prevent 9-11. Watch a longer version of that interview, which has just a little bit more substance following the "I failed" part than the Fox promo would suggest.

Is the Boogeyman dead?

First the crocodiles are denied their chance to bring Steve Irwin to justice, and now this...

The information purporting the death of the world's most sought after terrorist is based on what the newspaper calls "a usually reliable source," stating that Saudi intelligence sources "are convinced" of bin Laden's death.

The French intelligence report goes on to say, still according to the French daily, that bin Laden died in Pakistan on August 23 after suffering "from a severe bout of typhoid fever," and a bacterial infection provoked a paralysis of his lower body.

The Saudi intelligence report states that bin Laden's geographic isolation "rendered all medical assistance impossible. Indeed, U.S. intelligence sources have long believed bin Laden was hiding in remote parts of Pakistan, close to the border with Afghanistan, areas where sophisticated medical help would be difficult to obtain.

The news of bin Laden's death reached the Saudi capital, Riyadh, on Sept. 4. If confirmed, that, in part, might explain the complete absence of Osama bin Laden from making any appearances on the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon just outside Washington, DC.

The U.S. is skeptical, of course, as this wouldn't be the first time OBL has been reported to have gone to find his 72 virgins in the sky.

Foiled Terrorist Plot Doesn't Help Republicans

Dick Cheney and others in the G.O.P. (which, for all intents and purposes, includes Joe Lieberman), are trying to use the recently-foiled, alleged terrorist plot for partisan gain. According to them, Connecticut Democrats who voted against Lieberman last week are America-hating, terrorist-supporting surrender monkeys. The G.O.P. is blanketing the nation with the message that Democrats -- who keep suggesting that Bush obtain warrants before prying into Americans' private lives in violation of the Fourth Amendment -- oppose policies like the ones that foiled the recent terrorist plot. I suppose that means policies such as Bush's illegal domestic surveillance programs.

Only one problem with that message: The British investigation didn't come across this plot through the wiretapping and datamining of millions of people. The British uncovered this plot because of a tip. In Britain, the authorities don't have to present a court with probable cause in order to obtain a wiretapping warrant. But in America, a tip like this would be all the probable cause a court would need to allow surveillance without violating the Fourth Amendment.

Far from rationalizing the White House's illegal surveillance programs, the thwarting of this alleged terror plot demonstrates why such illegal programs are unnecessary.

BE AFRAID! Plot to bomb planes thwarted!

Nabbing a few poor Black people from the projects who surprisingly aren't fond of the government wasn't scary enough. Neither was foiling a boneheaded plot to flood Manhattan by bombing the Holland Tunnel - a scheme that didn't take into account the fact that New York is above the water level (you never know when water's going to decide to flow up though, so thank God Homeland Security was on the ball on that one). No, the latest election-year scare has been ratcheted up severeal notches on the Rove scale.

If they've already pulled an international large-scale plot out of their hat in August, they're going to have to top themselves in coming months. Expect American and British intelligence to thwart an attack on Disneyland by aliens from the rings of Saturn around, oh I don't know, late October.

Still, this could all be real, of course. Even the boy who cried wolf was eventually eaten.

**UPDATE: Surprisingly, the White House is seeking to capitalize on the alleged plot.

"I'd rather be talking about this than all of the other things that Congress hasn't done well," one Republican congressional aide told AFP on condition of anonymity because of possible reprisals.

"Weeks before September 11th, this is going to play big," said another White House official, who also spoke on condition of not being named, adding that some Democratic candidates won't "look as appealing" under the circumstances.

Candorville lampoon of Senator Bunning "treasonous and traitor-like"

From yesterday's Lexington Herald-Leader:

Sen. Jim Bunning made newspapers across the United States again yesterday -- this time in the funny pages.

A national cartoonist with a reputation for wry political humor took a swing at Kentucky's Hall of Famer after Bunning called for The New York Times to be charged with treason.

Candorville, which runs in about 50 papers across the nation as well as another in Ecuador and the Pacific Stars & Stripes, featured a faux political commercial yesterday from "Senator Bunting." However, the face on the TV is that of Bunning, a Republican in his second term in the Senate and a pitcher in the Baseball Hall of Fame. The strip's main character, Lemont Brown, hears the ad apparently from the bathroom -- the third panel features a flush as "Bunting" denies that his attack on the "Candorville Chronicle" is politically motivated.

Cartoonist Darrin Bell said Bunning caught his eye last month after condemning the Times' report on the Bush administration's not-so-secret surveillance of international banking transactions.

"Senator Bunning at the time seemed to be the GOP's point man for the treason charge against The New York Times, so he was the logical one to use as a representative for the whole party," Bell said yesterday. The flush was "the most appropriate" activity that came to mind, he said.

He had not gotten any feedback yesterday from Bunning's office on Capitol Hill. "I don't really expect to. Somehow, I really doubt they read Candorville," he said.

Bunning's office did not return calls or e-mails seeking comment for this story.

Bell said he doesn't see his work as falling into either the Democrat or Republican camp. In the 1990s, he was called a fascist for picking on President Clinton.

"I just go after whoever's in charge," Bell said.

As for Senator Bunting, he could make a return appearance, but that depends on Bunning.

"He's got my attention," Bell said. "The next time he gives me material, I'm going to use it."

Apparently, one reader was not amused:

I have always thought political cartoons to be inherently anti-Republican, and this has gotten to be even worse with all the nationwide progress witnessed in the last 5 years. It's even possible that this drawn criticism has in fact lent itself to limiting the progress we have had...because it's so treasonous and traitorlike.
Posted by: Bill

This was one of the comments below the article (comments have since been removed, possibly because the argument got sort of heated. People stopped just short of burning each other in effigy. Barely.

The "treasonous and traitorlike" comment doesn't interest me as much as "limiting the progress we have had..." in the last five years. What progress is that, again? And if there is any progress, how can it be undone by a comic strip? If only Bill would have explained himself further. It would have been fascinating.