Dan Savage on Tyler Whitney
Here's an anonymous comment (#2, 24 June, 2007 09:03):So why did you highlight Tyler Whitney? What was his crime that he needed to be held accountable for? That he was an anti-war republican working for a pro-war republican candidate? You think it is a better situation that republican candidates surround themselves with no one who could influence them against Iraq or future conflicts? This site needs to stop pretending to be anti-war. It is only anti-republican.
From OYE: We've asked the author of the Tyler Whitney post to comment; here are some general comments:
Tyler Whitney can speak for himself. We welcome his comments, including whether he describes himself as an "anti-war Republican." Click here. Meanwhile, here's what Dan Savage (above) says about Tyler Whitney (scroll down to second item):
Someone who's 18 and gay is old enough to drive, join the army, vote, and come out. Someone who's 18 and gay and not ready to come out is old enough to know better than to march with assholes carrying "Straight Power" signs at antigay rallies. And someone who's 18 and gay and politically active, as Whitney is, is politically savvy enough to know that working for antigay politicians makes him a prime outing candidate. [Emphasis added.]
Along the same lines, healthy military-age males working for pro-war politicians are prime candidates for the attention of Operation Yellow Elephant. Frankly, if the Republican Party really wanted to Support Our Troops, they would join with the Democrats to get rid of the anti-gay "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, to ensure that our military has the well-qualified volunteers it so desperately needs.
OYE Response to your specific comments: This blog has not taken a position on the war, so we can't "pretend to be anti-war" or pro-war, for that matter. We're Pro-America because we want Our Country, led by Our President, to succeed.
It just so happens under our Constitutional system that one party controls the White House. Until recently, it also controlled both Houses of Congress. With power and authority come responsibilities. That said, we have also Asked The Question of pro-war Democrats. We asked Senator Joseph Lieberman [CT] whether he personally knows any enlisted servicemembers or junior officers; he hasn't replied.
posted by OYE @ 6/29/2007 11:03:00 AM
2 comments
2 Comments:
I'm the author of the original Tyler Whitney article, which was crossposted to OYE by a co-blogger of mine at All Spin Zone. My response:
What was his crime that he needed to be held accountable for? That he was an anti-war republican working for a pro-war republican candidate?
The only place I've seen any reference to Whitney being "anti-war" has been from anonymous comments here on OYE. If he's working for Tancredo, and both gay and anti-war, then young Tyler has sold out on at least TWO major issues. In the process of doing so, he's undoubtedly hurt a lot of people. If his tender sensibilities are inflamed because there are those of us who feel he should be participating in the war of choice perpetrated by his "party", then he needs to grow some skin.
Based on my own personal experience in the military, signing enlistment papers would help him toughen up.
And Dan Savage's response is just about right.
"What was his crime that he needed to be held accountable for? That he was an jewish republican working for Farrakhan? You think it is a better situation that anti-Semitic candidates surround themselves with no one who could influence them against Iraq or future conflicts?"
People need to get real. It is even hard to make an analogy to the hypocrisy of Tyler Whitney because it is so extreme. Not even David Duke opposes Blacks adopting children or marrying. But if a young Black man was working for David Duke, would the African-American community give him a pass? Hell no. Only the gay community is supposed to constantly embrace backstabbers and people who literally cash in as spectators to gay bashing - totally disgusting. Think about it.
Post a Comment
<< Home